GDP grows 0.8% in March quarter
It followed a revised 0.5% increase in the December 2024 quarter.
Activity increased in the March 2025 quarter across all three high-level industry groups: primary industries, goods-producing industries, and services industries.
"At a more detailed industry level, nine of the 16 industries increased, with the largest rises in business services and manufacturing," economic growth spokesperson Katrina Dewbery said.
Activity picked up in the March 2025 quarter across all three high-level industry groups. (Source: 1News)
ADVERTISEMENT
An increase in the production of machinery and equipment led a rise in manufacturing.
The largest decreases were seen in arts and recreation services, and information, media and telecommunications.
Household expenditure rose by 1.4% this quarter, up from 0.1% last quarter.
Spending on services, durables, and non-durables were all up, with the increased services spending driven by rises in cultural services, other digital services imports, and accommodation services.
'Great news' - Willis reacts to 'surprise' GDP result
Finance Minister Nicola Willis said the "surprise" economic result was great news for workers, families and businesses.
ADVERTISEMENT
"This is the second consecutive quarter in which growth outstripped forecasters' assumptions and confirms the economy was gaining momentum late last year and at the start of this year."
She said New Zealanders should "take heart that the country is back on track" despite increases in global conflicts, the introduction of new tariffs, and what she called "six years of economic mismanagement" by the previous Labour government.
The morning's headlines in 90 seconds including what will happen to food after supermarket blaze, Trump's dithering over the Middle East, and winter car care tips. (Source: 1News)
"I know many households and businesses are still doing it tough but the steps the Government has taken to stop wasteful spending, grow the economy and provide more support to households are paying dividends. So are the efforts of the private sector."
Willis said the money was flowing through to businesses thanks to the steps the Government had taken to "reduce red tape, incentivise investment and boost tourism, and the export records being set by New Zealand farmers and growers".
"Inflation is down, interest rates are down, and many families have a little more money in their pockets."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NZ Herald
25 minutes ago
- NZ Herald
Qantas cyber attack: Kiwis cannot join Aussie legal complaint but can complain in NZ, expert says
Shaw added: 'In New Zealand if people were impacted by the breach by Qantas they would make a complaint to the Office of the Privacy Commissioner.' He said the office would consider the complaint and ask: 'Is this an actionable privacy breach in New Zealand?' Shaw said a privacy breach in this context meant a person had access to or misused personal information without consent. 'Then the question from there is, if it's a privacy breach, what has somebody suffered effectively?' The Office of the Privacy Commissioner would try to resolve that issue and ask if mediation was possible. 'Ultimately the Human Rights Review Tribunal considers it.' The New Zealand process for data breaches has generated some criticism. Consumer NZ chief executive Jon Duffy earlier this month said Qantas would face much stiffer penalties under Australian privacy regulations than it would if it were a New Zealand company. However, Shaw said the system in New Zealand could punish people or entities for data breaches. 'The system in New Zealand is good. The Privacy Commissioner and the act have real teeth. The criticism I would have is the delay, the delay in having the matter heard by the Human Rights Review Tribunal.' He said the tribunal could award substantial damages. Shaw said Lane Neave was not suing Qantas but New Zealand had some litigation funders and some no-win no-fee practitioners who might consider the case. The Office of the Privacy Commissioner has been approached for comment. Qantas said it was aware Maurice Blackburn in Australia had lodged a complaint on behalf of some affected customers in relation to the cyber incident. 'Our focus continues to be on supporting our customers and providing ongoing access to specialist identity protection advice and resources,' a Qantas spokesman said. 'In an effort to further protect our customers, Qantas has obtained an injunction in the New South Wales Supreme Court which prevents the stolen data from being accessed, viewed, released, used, transmitted or published by anyone, including by any third parties.' Maurice Blackburn said the complaint was made to the Australian privacy commissioner, who did not have jurisdiction over New Zealanders' personal information. Some 1.3 million residential or business addresses were among the affected Qantas data, including hotels for misplaced baggage delivery. Four million customer records stolen in the attack contained names, email addresses and Qantas Frequent Flyer numbers. John Weekes is a business journalist mostly covering aviation and courts. He has reported on Catholic Church abuse and the Abuse in Care Royal Commission of Inquiry since 2019 and on Dilworth survivors since 2021.
Scoop
an hour ago
- Scoop
EDS Submissions Highlight Serious Concerns Over Government's Resource Management Changes
The Environmental Defence Society (EDS) has today filed its very extensive submissions on the Government's review of national direction under the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA). The proposals, which are spread across three packages of Infrastructure and Development, Primary Sector and Freshwater, present an overwhelming shift towards prioritising use and development at the expense of the natural environment. National direction is the 'engine room' of the RMA. Regional policy statements and regional and district plans must 'give effect' to it and decision-makers on resource consent applications must 'have regard' to it. It therefore has significant ramifications for resource management decision-making. 'Taken together, the changes set out pose a significant risk to indigenous biodiversity, freshwater, wetlands, elite soils and the coastal marine environment. They will result in more inappropriate and environmentally damaging activities occurring in New Zealand's most sensitive places,' says EDS Chief Operating Officer and lawyer, Shay Schlaepfer. 'The environment is not in a healthy state. Monitoring shows ongoing declines in freshwater quality, more threatened and at risk species, a reduction in food producing land, continued loss of remaining wetlands and a marine environment under threat. 'The proposals are wilfully ignorant of that context. They are being pushed through under a 'growth at all costs' mentality that will result in more pollution for longer and more destruction of nature. This is not what the RMA provides for. 'EDS's key concerns with the proposals are: 1. Forestry review too narrow: The proposed changes fail to address systemic issues with forestry regulations which are resulting in extensive and damaging slash and sedimentation mobilisation events with corresponding devastating impacts on receiving environments and communities. 2. Infrastructure proposal lacks environmental considerations: The Government's expansive vision for infrastructure and development comes with no corresponding focus on protecting the natural environment. 3. Increased mining and quarrying in sensitive areas: The proposed changes will facilitate more mining and quarrying activities, directly threatening New Zealand's indigenous biodiversity, vulnerable wetlands and highly productive land. 4. Freshwater management at risk: The proposed changes would unwind decades of freshwater management progress, undermining hard-won legal protections in favour of short-term economic interests. 5. Natural hazards not taken seriously: A gaping hole in the proposals is any regulation to stop building in high hazards areas. If New Zealand is to get real about climate adaptation it needs to prioritise not making the situation worse in the first place. 'The review of national direction is being undertaken before replacement resource management laws are enacted in 'phase 3' of the Government's programme of RMA reform. Progressing substantial national direction review under a regime that is to be replaced, and then implementing those new instruments in a new regime which Ministers describe as being radically different, is a confusing, unstructured and backwards approach. 'This has been exacerbated by Minister Bishop's recent 'plan stop' announcement which has compounded uncertainty about how the package of national direction changes will be implemented. The Government needs to stop rushing and progress resource management reform on a more strategic, coherent footing. 'Most importantly, Government needs to acknowledge that economic growth and good environmental outcomes are both achievable. EDS's submissions propose changes to the policy settings which would bring the instruments into a more acceptable and lawful outcome,' concluded Ms Schlaepfer. Environmental Defence Society EDS speaks for the environment. It has influence. Since 1971, EDS has been driving environmental protection in Aotearoa New Zealand through law and policy change. That's why it's one of this country's most influential non- profit organisations when it comes to achieving better environmental outcomes. EDS has expertise in key disciplines including law, planning, landscape and science. It operates as a policy think-tank, a litigation advocate, and a collaborator – bringing together the private and public sectors for constructive engagement. EDS runs conferences and seminars on topical issues, including an annual Environmental Summit and the Climate Change and Business Conference. EDS is a registered charity and donations to it are tax-deductible.
1News
an hour ago
- 1News
Big, awkward, neglected: Auckland scores poorly on international report
The recent report comparing Auckland to nine international peer cities delivered an uncomfortable truth: our largest city is falling behind, hampered by car dependency, low-density housing and 'weak economic performance'. Timothy Welch reports. The Deloitte State of the City analysis was no surprise to anyone who has watched successive governments treat the city as a problem to manage, rather than an engine to fuel. The report's findings were stark: Auckland rates 82nd out of 84 cities globally for pedestrian friendliness, and its car-dependent transport system is more carbon-intensive and slower to decarbonise than peer cities. (Source: This is the direct result of decades of planning failures, including what urban researchers call the 1970s 'great down-zoning' which halved central Auckland's housing capacity. ADVERTISEMENT This isn't just Auckland's problem. When we mismanage what geographers call a 'primate city,' it reveals our fundamental misunderstanding of how modern economies work. The concept of the primate city was formalised by geographer Mark Jefferson in 1939. Such cities are defined as being 'at least twice as large as the next largest city and more than twice as significant'. Auckland fits this definition perfectly. With more than 1.7 million people, it is over four times larger than Christchurch or the greater Wellington region. The city accounts for 34% of New Zealand's population and is projected to hit 40% of the working-age population by 2048. The morning's headlines in 90 seconds, including Hulk Hogan dies, sentencing for a New Zealander who assaulted two airline stewards, and a big accolade for Te Papa. (Source: 1News) Auckland contributes 38% of New Zealand's gross domestic product and its per-capita GDP is 15% higher than the rest of the country's. Its most productive area, the central business district, enjoys a 40% productivity premium over the national average. To economists, these numbers represent the 'agglomeration benefits' research shows primate cities generate. It is the economic effect of combining businesses, talent and infrastructure. Yet New Zealand systematically underinvests in the very place generating this outsized economic contribution. ADVERTISEMENT A pattern of infrastructure failure Auckland's infrastructure deficit follows a predictable pattern. The City Rail Link, while progressing, has grown from an initial budget of NZ$2-3 billion to $5.5 billion, with opening delayed until 2026. The first train to be tested in Auckland's City Rail Link travels through Maungawhau in February. (Source: City Rail Link) Light rail was cancelled entirely after years of planning. A second harbour crossing has been studied for decades without a shovel hitting dirt. Each represents billions in opportunity costs while congestion worsens. This goes well beyond project mismanagement. It is a deep structural problem. The Infrastructure Commission-Te Waihanga identifies a $210 billion national infrastructure shortfall, with Auckland bearing a disproportionate burden despite generating a disproportionately high level of revenue. International research by the OECD shows successful countries treat metropolitan regions as engines of national growth, not a burden. ADVERTISEMENT The 'Wellington problem' Public policy expert Ian Shirley called it the 'Wellington Problem': the way Auckland's governance became an obsession for politicians and bureaucrats based in Wellington. The tension dates to 1865 when the capital was moved from Auckland to Wellington, establishing a pattern where political power was deliberately separated from economic power. Parliament (file image). (Source: 1News) Auckland loses an estimated $415.35 million annually in GST collected on rates. This goes to Wellington and into government revenue rather than being reinvested locally. Central government properties in Auckland, worth $36.3 million in rates, are exempt from payment while still using Auckland's infrastructure. When Auckland speaks with 'one voice' through its unified council, Wellington responds with legislative overrides. The recent National Land Transport Programme, for example, cut Auckland's transport funding by $564 million. Mayor Wayne Brown said the government's transport policy 'makes zero sense for Auckland'. ADVERTISEMENT Learning from others The contrast with international approaches reveals just how counterproductive New Zealand's approach has been. London has an integrated Transport for London authority with congestion charging powers, generating £136 million annually for reinvestment. Paris is investing more than €35 billion in the Grand Paris Express transit project. Paris: city of trains (Source: Japan's 'Quality Infrastructure Investment' principles include ¥13.2 trillion in regional infrastructure investment. Australia's A$120 billion infrastructure programme explicitly recognises its largest cities contribute over 50% of GDP and require proportional investment. Research has shown excessive urban concentration in one country can create problems. But denying the primate city resources only leads to a 'deterioration in the quality of life' that drags down the entire national economy. The solution lies in making strategic investments that maximise the benefits of agglomeration while managing any negative costs to the national economy. ADVERTISEMENT Growing pains Auckland isn't a problem to be managed, it is an asset to be leveraged. Every successful developed economy has learned this lesson. Paris generates 31% of France's GDP and gets treated accordingly. Seoul produces 23% of South Korea's output and receives massive infrastructure investment. Tokyo drives Japan's economy. The international evidence is unambiguous: countries that strategically invest in their primate cities achieve higher productivity growth and maintain competitive advantages. Auckland doesn't need sympathy or special treatment. It needs what every primate city in every successful economy gets: infrastructure investment proportional to its economic contribution, governance structures that reflect its scale, and political leadership that understands agglomeration economics. The question isn't whether Auckland is too big. The question is whether New Zealand is big enough to nurture its primate city. Timothy Welch Senior Lecturer in Urban Planning, University of Auckland, Waipapa Taumata Rau This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons licence.
