Manawatū Gorge Replacement Opens Toll-Free
Local Labour MPs Tangi Utikere and Kieran McAnulty wore their Toll-Free Tararua t-shirts to celebrate the opening of the new road without the National Government's proposed toll.
'It is such a relief for locals to have the Manawatū Tararua Highway open today, after years of work went in to replace the old Manawatū Gorge,' Labour transport spokesperson Tangi Utikere said.
'We had to campaign hard against a National Government that wanted to slap a toll on locals who had already waited a long time for this road to open.
'That was greedy and uncalled for, given the road had already been funded by Labour.
'It took a huge effort by locals, and strong support from people in surrounding areas who stood against National's toll.
'It's a beautiful new road, and I look forward to using it regularly to drive between the mighty electorates of Palmerston North and Wairarapa,' Tangi Utikere said.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
RNZ News
7 hours ago
- RNZ News
Te Pāti Māori, Greens outraged at 'marginalising' passport changes
Photo: RNZ / Mark Papalii Te Pāti Māori says the government's changes to passports are an attempt to whitewash the national identity. The government confirmed on Friday New Zealand's passport is being redesigned to place the English words above the te reo Māori text. The new look won't start being rolled out until the end of 2027. Since 2021, passports have had "Uruwhenua Aotearoa" printed in silver directly above New Zealand Passport. Internal Affairs Minister Brooke van Velden said the positioning of text on passports will change to reflect the government's commitment to using English first. She said the redesign - which would be unveiled later this year - was being done as part of a scheduled security upgrade, ensuring no additional cost to passport-holders. Te Pāti Māori co-leader Debbie Ngarewa-Packer said the change diminishes the visibility of tangata whenua. "Our passport is not just a travel document, it's a statement of who we are as a nation. So, the stripping down of te reo Māori, or marginalising our indigenous identity, reflects this government's sad obsession with erasing Te Tiriti o Waitangi and dragging us back to a monocultural past," she said. Ngarewa-Packer said the move undermined Aotearoa's reputation as a leading nation in recognising indigenous rights. "Restoring our reo took a long time. I mean imagine doing this in Ireland, imagine doing this to the Welsh. This was hard fought for. It's not re-ordering of words, the reformatting is deliberately done to undermine the mana [and] to sideline us tangata whenua." Benjamin Doyle Photo: RNZ / Samuel Rillstone Green Party MP Benjamin Doyle said the move is not what New Zealanders need from the government. "We are seeing day by day, the rights and dignities of minority communities being stripped away while they leave the majority of New Zealanders suffering under the government's current decisions," Doyle said. "This is not a positive vision for Aotearoa, this is not a positive step towards unifying kotahitanga and it's not benefiting anyone. Really, its just dog-whistling politics. It's the tail wagging the dog." The ACT Party celebrated van Velden's move on social media, saying the change would "restore English before te reo Māori - without costing taxpayers". The change comes as part of a deliberate push by the coalition to give English primacy over te reo Māori in official communications. New Zealand First's coalition agreement with National stipulates that public service departments have their primary name in English and be required to communicate "primarily in English" except for entities specifically related to Māori. It also includes an as-yet-unfulfilled commitment to make English an official language of New Zealand.
Otago Daily Times
a day ago
- Otago Daily Times
Seymour's 'dropkick' voters comment unhelpful: minister
By Giles Dexter and Tuwhenuaroa Natanahira of RNZ Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith says comments made by the Deputy Prime Minister - calling voters who enrol late "dropkicks" - are "unhelpful", as changes to voter enrolment are rolled out. Justice officials say closing enrolments ahead of advance voting could result in lower turnout and reduce confidence in the electoral system. And electoral law experts are also questioning why the changes need to stretch for the whole advanced voting period. As part of a suite of Electoral Act changes, same-day election enrolments are set to be scrapped. It reverses a change brought in for the 2020 general election, which allowed for enrolments and updating details up to and including on election day. It then goes even further, ensuring voters have to enrol or update their details before advance voting begins. The government is also legislating to require 12 days of advance voting. The changes are primarily being made to improve the timeliness of the official vote count, and so give voters certainty of a result. The growth in the number of special votes has been putting a strain on processing a result, with the timeframe for a final vote count stretching into three weeks at the last election. Goldsmith said the uncertainty could be avoided if more people enrolled in a timely manner. "We never know what the circumstances are going to be after an election. We don't know what pressure the country will be under. An extra week, extra two weeks, if we do nothing could be longer, then that just creates extra uncertainty that we can easily avoid by people enrolling in a timely fashion." On Thursday, Deputy Prime Minister David Seymour backed the changes, insulting the hundreds of thousands of people who enrolled or updated their address, and voted, during the advance voting period and on election day itself. "Frankly, I'm a bit sick of dropkicks that can't get themselves organised to follow the law," he said. "It's actually made so easy to do, they even have a little orange cartoon running around telling people to do it. And if you're too disorganised to do that over a thousand days between two elections, then maybe you don't care that much." Speaking to RNZ's Morning Report programme today, Goldsmith was asked if the government did not care about those would-be voters because they were perhaps unlikely to vote for National or ACT. "That's not the case, and that, yeah, that was an unhelpful comment, frankly, from David Seymour," Goldsmith said. Officials warn of a barrier to participation In its Regulatory Impact Statement (RIS), the Ministry of Justice did not recommend the option of closing enrolment earlier. "Its impact on reducing special votes is uncertain, while its impact on democratic participation could be significant," officials said. Special votes take much longer to process than a standard vote as they need to go through a lot more scrutiny. Officials noted a positive aspect of closing enrolments earlier was it would mean enrolment processing was done by the close of polling, allowing special vote counting to begin promptly. The ministry acknowledged there was value in a timely and smooth transfer of power following an election, but it was uncertain whether any package of changes could reduce the count timeframes. The RIS acknowledged the growth of special votes in both volume and as a proportion of the total number of votes, with the largest proportion being those who were not enrolled or needed to update their details. About 300,000 to 350,000 people cast a special vote because they were not enrolled, or not enrolled at the correct address by writ day, or on the dormant roll. Māori, Asian, and Pasifika communities, as well as younger people, are more likely to cast special votes. "This option will create a barrier to participation and may be seen as a step backwards for accessibility, in light of changes to enable greater participation over recent elections. Closing enrolment earlier could harm confidence and trust if people are not able to vote because they missed the deadline or if more votes are disallowed," officials said. Goldsmith told Morning Report there would be campaigns to ensure every voter knew about the changes. "But they'll be told something different this time, which is to say there'll be clear campaigns all over next year saying, you know, you need to be enrolled before, early voting starts, and that means we can get the whole system much more efficient and take some pressure off the system that's under real pressure." At the 2020 election, the rules were changed to allow people to enrol to vote on election day, as they have been able during the advanced voting period since the 1990s. It was a response to what the then-government said was 19,000 voters feeling "disenfranchised" by being turned away in 2017. Goldsmith did not believe the new bill would mark a return to that disenfranchisement. "We've got to balance the fact that we want to have an outcome of an election in a timely manner. It does actually matter if we have an uncertain outcome. People don't start coalition negotiations until they know the final outcome, and if that's drifting into four weeks than that creates more uncertainty." Electoral law expert Graeme Edgeler doubted the changes would prevent people from knowing the outcome of an election, as the Election Night result usually gave a good indication of the make-up of the next government. "Two weeks or three weeks, does it really matter? There's nothing stopping the politicians who look like they've been elected from negotiation before the final special votes are out," he said. "The results, we know they tended to change one or two seats or something like that. The time delay just doesn't seem like a particularly good reason for this." Edgeler did not think removing the ability to enrol on election day would not make too much of a difference, as it had only been in place for two elections. But he was concerned at closing the enrolment period before advanced voting started. "Requiring people to have a think about the election two weeks before the actual vote happens is probably more of a big change than the same-day enrolments." Goldsmith told Morning Report it did not seem to be a problem in the past. "I've got every confidence that New Zealanders will be able to figure that out and do it… It always was the way up until five years ago before Labour made the change that you weren't able to vote [sic] on election day and our democracy didn't collapse at that point, and it won't collapse... "All I'd say [is] we're asking for something that's perfectly reasonable. In the UK it's 12 days and Australia it's 26 days before the election. It's not an unreasonable thing." Opposition concerned people will be locked out On Election Day 2023, 110,000 people enrolled or updated their details. Labour's justice spokesperson Duncan Webb questioned whether the trade-off to get votes counted faster was worth it. "Counting the vote took an extra week last election. I think 110,000 votes are worth it. I think every single New Zealander is entitled to have a voice in who represents them in this place. If it takes another week, that's OK by me because democracy is worth waiting for," he said. Celia Wade-Brown, the Green Party's spokesperson for democracy and electoral reform, said it would lead to fewer people participating in democracy. "This government is reducing the number of people, particularly those who are mobile, who move around, who change addresses, and preventing them from voting. This should be a government for all New Zealanders." Parties not consulted on the Electoral Act changes University of Otago law professor Andrew Geddis said some parts of electoral law, such as changing the voting age or the term of Parliament, were protected by entrenchment provisions, requiring a 75% majority of MPs or a referendum. Everything else was left to a simple majority of votes in Parliament like any other piece of legislation. "Because the government has a majority in Parliament, if it wants to do this, it can. It's just a question of whether it's the right thing to do," he told RNZ's Checkpoint programme yesterday. "Democracy is more than just what a current government wants it to be. It has to be, what is the best rules for our polity, us as a group, to choose our leaders." Geddis said the growth in special votes had been causing strain, but questioned why the government had taken this option. "The government's response has essentially been to bring down a guillotine and say, 'well tough.' All of those people who haven't enrolled or changed their details before voting starts, 'tough. Your votes just won't count. We're just not going to listen to you.'" Automatic enrolment updates get a tick While officials did not recommend closing the enrolment period, they were in favour of introducing automatic enrolment updates. This option has formed part of Goldsmith's package of reforms and would allow the Electoral Commission to update people's enrolment details using data from other government agencies. The option would make it easier for electors to keep enrolments up to date, and reduce the number of special votes over time. It was something Edgeler was in favour of. "Allowing the government to do the work for you in that area, you've told one government department you've moved and got a new address, allowing that to be used for election purposes as well will hopefully mean that fewer people need to update their enrolment details during the election period itself." He said there would need to be a significant publicity campaign from the Electoral Commission reminding people of the deadlines. While that would be up to the commission in how that was communicated, Goldsmith said they had received more funding at the Budget. "Their core role up to now is to encourage people to enrol. But they've also been saying 'but by the way, you don't really need to, you can just rock up and enrol on election day.' "And so we've now got a clear message: get yourself organised, get enrolled, make sure you're enrolled before election day starts."
Otago Daily Times
a day ago
- Otago Daily Times
'Dropkick' voters comment not helpful, says minister
By Giles Dexter and Tuwhenuaroa Natanahira of RNZ Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith says comments made by the Deputy Prime Minister - calling voters who enrol late "dropkicks" - are "unhelpful", as changes to voter enrolment are rolled out. Justice officials say closing enrolments ahead of advance voting could result in lower turnout and reduce confidence in the electoral system. And electoral law experts are also questioning why the changes need to stretch for the whole advanced voting period. As part of a suite of Electoral Act changes, same-day election enrolments are set to be scrapped. It reverses a change brought in for the 2020 general election, which allowed for enrolments and updating details up to and including on election day. It then goes even further, ensuring voters have to enrol or update their details before advance voting begins. The government is also legislating to require 12 days of advance voting. The changes are primarily being made to improve the timeliness of the official vote count, and so give voters certainty of a result. The growth in the number of special votes has been putting a strain on processing a result, with the timeframe for a final vote count stretching into three weeks at the last election. Goldsmith said the uncertainty could be avoided if more people enrolled in a timely manner. "We never know what the circumstances are going to be after an election. We don't know what pressure the country will be under. An extra week, extra two weeks, if we do nothing could be longer, then that just creates extra uncertainty that we can easily avoid by people enrolling in a timely fashion." On Thursday, Deputy Prime Minister David Seymour backed the changes, insulting the hundreds of thousands of people who enrolled or updated their address, and voted, during the advance voting period and on election day itself. "Frankly, I'm a bit sick of dropkicks that can't get themselves organised to follow the law," he said. "It's actually made so easy to do, they even have a little orange cartoon running around telling people to do it. And if you're too disorganised to do that over a thousand days between two elections, then maybe you don't care that much." Speaking to RNZ's Morning Report programme today, Goldsmith was asked if the government did not care about those would-be voters because they were perhaps unlikely to vote for National or ACT. "That's not the case, and that, yeah, that was an unhelpful comment, frankly, from David Seymour," Goldsmith said. Officials warn of a barrier to participation In its Regulatory Impact Statement (RIS), the Ministry of Justice did not recommend the option of closing enrolment earlier. "Its impact on reducing special votes is uncertain, while its impact on democratic participation could be significant," officials said. Special votes take much longer to process than a standard vote as they need to go through a lot more scrutiny. Officials noted a positive aspect of closing enrolments earlier was it would mean enrolment processing was done by the close of polling, allowing special vote counting to begin promptly. The ministry acknowledged there was value in a timely and smooth transfer of power following an election, but it was uncertain whether any package of changes could reduce the count timeframes. The RIS acknowledged the growth of special votes in both volume and as a proportion of the total number of votes, with the largest proportion being those who were not enrolled or needed to update their details. About 300,000 to 350,000 people cast a special vote because they were not enrolled, or not enrolled at the correct address by writ day, or on the dormant roll. Māori, Asian, and Pasifika communities, as well as younger people, are more likely to cast special votes. "This option will create a barrier to participation and may be seen as a step backwards for accessibility, in light of changes to enable greater participation over recent elections. Closing enrolment earlier could harm confidence and trust if people are not able to vote because they missed the deadline or if more votes are disallowed," officials said. Goldsmith told Morning Report there would be campaigns to ensure every voter knew about the changes. "But they'll be told something different this time, which is to say there'll be clear campaigns all over next year saying, you know, you need to be enrolled before, early voting starts, and that means we can get the whole system much more efficient and take some pressure off the system that's under real pressure." At the 2020 election, the rules were changed to allow people to enrol to vote on election day, as they have been able during the advanced voting period since the 1990s. It was a response to what the then-government said was 19,000 voters feeling "disenfranchised" by being turned away in 2017. Goldsmith did not believe the new bill would mark a return to that disenfranchisement. "We've got to balance the fact that we want to have an outcome of an election in a timely manner. It does actually matter if we have an uncertain outcome. People don't start coalition negotiations until they know the final outcome, and if that's drifting into four weeks than that creates more uncertainty." Electoral law expert Graeme Edgeler doubted the changes would prevent people from knowing the outcome of an election, as the Election Night result usually gave a good indication of the make-up of the next government. "Two weeks or three weeks, does it really matter? There's nothing stopping the politicians who look like they've been elected from negotiation before the final special votes are out," he said. "The results, we know they tended to change one or two seats or something like that. The time delay just doesn't seem like a particularly good reason for this." Edgeler did not think removing the ability to enrol on election day would not make too much of a difference, as it had only been in place for two elections. But he was concerned at closing the enrolment period before advanced voting started. "Requiring people to have a think about the election two weeks before the actual vote happens is probably more of a big change than the same-day enrolments." Goldsmith told Morning Report it did not seem to be a problem in the past. "I've got every confidence that New Zealanders will be able to figure that out and do it… It always was the way up until five years ago before Labour made the change that you weren't able to vote [sic] on election day and our democracy didn't collapse at that point, and it won't collapse... "All I'd say [is] we're asking for something that's perfectly reasonable. In the UK it's 12 days and Australia it's 26 days before the election. It's not an unreasonable thing." Opposition concerned people will be locked out On Election Day 2023, 110,000 people enrolled or updated their details. Labour's justice spokesperson Duncan Webb questioned whether the trade-off to get votes counted faster was worth it. "Counting the vote took an extra week last election. I think 110,000 votes are worth it. I think every single New Zealander is entitled to have a voice in who represents them in this place. If it takes another week, that's OK by me because democracy is worth waiting for," he said. Celia Wade-Brown, the Green Party's spokesperson for democracy and electoral reform, said it would lead to fewer people participating in democracy. "This government is reducing the number of people, particularly those who are mobile, who move around, who change addresses, and preventing them from voting. This should be a government for all New Zealanders." Parties not consulted on the Electoral Act changes University of Otago law professor Andrew Geddis said some parts of electoral law, such as changing the voting age or the term of Parliament, were protected by entrenchment provisions, requiring a 75% majority of MPs or a referendum. Everything else was left to a simple majority of votes in Parliament like any other piece of legislation. "Because the government has a majority in Parliament, if it wants to do this, it can. It's just a question of whether it's the right thing to do," he told RNZ's Checkpoint programme yesterday. "Democracy is more than just what a current government wants it to be. It has to be, what is the best rules for our polity, us as a group, to choose our leaders." Geddis said the growth in special votes had been causing strain, but questioned why the government had taken this option. "The government's response has essentially been to bring down a guillotine and say, 'well tough.' All of those people who haven't enrolled or changed their details before voting starts, 'tough. Your votes just won't count. We're just not going to listen to you.'" Automatic enrolment updates get a tick While officials did not recommend closing the enrolment period, they were in favour of introducing automatic enrolment updates. This option has formed part of Goldsmith's package of reforms and would allow the Electoral Commission to update people's enrolment details using data from other government agencies. The option would make it easier for electors to keep enrolments up to date, and reduce the number of special votes over time. It was something Edgeler was in favour of. "Allowing the government to do the work for you in that area, you've told one government department you've moved and got a new address, allowing that to be used for election purposes as well will hopefully mean that fewer people need to update their enrolment details during the election period itself." He said there would need to be a significant publicity campaign from the Electoral Commission reminding people of the deadlines. While that would be up to the commission in how that was communicated, Goldsmith said they had received more funding at the Budget. "Their core role up to now is to encourage people to enrol. But they've also been saying 'but by the way, you don't really need to, you can just rock up and enrol on election day.' "And so we've now got a clear message: get yourself organised, get enrolled, make sure you're enrolled before election day starts."
