Pike River Agency CEO liable if re-entry goes wrong

Andrew Little and Labour intend handing over responsibility of whether a Pike River re-entry attempt is made to the Recovery Agency they are setting up, and if re-entry is attempted and something goes wrong the agency chief executive will be liable. I suspect that applicants for the job may be limited.

Stuff:  Pike River Recovery Agency chief executive liable if re-entry goes wrong, not Andrew Little

The chief executive of the Pike River Recovery Agency will be held responsible if anything goes wrong with the re-entry of the drift.

Last month, the Prime Minister and Andrew Little – the Minister Responsible for the Pike River Re-entry, announced the Government would establish a government department by the end of January 2018 to assess the risk associated with a manned re-entry, and the best way to carry out the entry.

The entry of the mine’s drift, and the recovery of any remains of the 29 men killed in 2010, would be completed by March 2019.

Both Jacinda Ardern and Little said there would be risk involved with a manned re-entry, but it was up to the agency to assess the risk and to mitigate it, and if the level of risk was acceptable, go forward with the re-entry.

Despite promises by Winston Peters and Labour that there would be re-entry into the mine they are handing over responsibility to someone else.

At the time of the announcement, Little said the agency – Te Kahui Whakamana Rua Tekau ma Iwa (The Empowering Voice for the Pike 29) – would answer to him, and as the minister in charge, he would have the final decision.

Apparently not now.

He refused to respond to questions on who would be held liable, under New Zealand health and safety laws, if something went wrong.

However, documents relating to the establishment of the agency show the chief executive of the agency would be held legally responsible if something went wrong.

So Little wasn’t prepared to be up front about what he is organising, and is also handing over both the ultimate decision plus liability to someone else.

A ministerial briefing paper from November 3, said the liability would rest with those instructed by the minister, not the minister.

In order to remove that legal liability, health and safety laws would have to be changed – something the Government decided not to do.

Establishing an independent decision maker from the outset, would provide clarity on who was accountable for the decisions around safety, the briefing document said.

“It sets a clearer level of expectation around single focus and impartial decision making.

“If you wished to retain a departmental model to keep the entity closer to government, then the chief executive … could be given the statutorily independent role of determining whether re-entry should go ahead.

“In addition, without legislation, the Minister could potentially be exposed to accessorial liability in the event that something goes wrong in the course of re-entry activities.”

“A decision about safe re-entry will be best achieved by ensuring the decision-maker is independent,” the document said.

The decision-maker should be responsible for developing “a robust and credible plan” for safe recovery of the drift, including engaging fully with the Pike River families and their experts, and then charged with implementing this plan.

“This provides clear lines of accountability, with the decision maker and implementer of the decision being the holder of the key duties of care around ensuring health and safety.”

Gobsmacked.

December 2016: Winston Peters says Pike River re-entry is bottom line to election deals 

Winston Peters says re-entering Pike River mine is a “bottom line” to any election deal made next year.

In interviews this morning, Peters also reiterated his claim that he will enter the mine himself.

“I’m making no bones about it, we’ll give these people a fair-go, and yes this is a bottom line, and it shouldn’t have to be”.

Any political party seeking New Zealand First’s support to form a government in the 2017 election will have to commit to re-entering the mine.

September 2017: Pike River families give their blessing to Jacinda Ardern as she visits region where Labour started

Ardern met with family members at the Pike River memorial on the West Coast to re-state her commitment to re-enter the mine in which 29 miners died following explosions in 2010.

“After all this time, the least we can do is the right thing,” she told them.

Anna Osbourne, whose husband Milton was among those killed, said she was hoping for a change of Government to ensure the re-entry went ahead.

“We’ve had lies, we’ve had broken promises, so I’m hoping for a change of Government,” Osbourne said.

October 2017: Winston Peters meets Pike River families

Families spokesman Bernie Monk told media in Wellington they knew they had Mr Peters’ support.

“He’s a man of his word, and we’re going to support him the whole way… We’ve got full faith in Winston Peters and what he’s going to do.”

Asked if reentering the mine was still one of NZ First’s bottom lines, Mr Peters responded: “What do you think? How many times do I have to tell you?”

The Labour-NZ First Coalition Agreement specifies: “Commit to re-entry to Pike River”.

October 2017: Pike River manned re-entry possible early next year – Little

The minister responsible for re-entry into Pike River, Andrew Little, hopes to get people in to the mine by April next year.

Mr Little told Newhub’s The AM Show today that he had two comprehensive reports and he believes manned entry is entirely achievable.

“There are risks – but there’s risks [in] doing anything.

“So lets clear all that stuff out of the way, lets look at what we know is there, what we know that the technology and the science tells us is possible, and work up that plan.”

The plan seems to be to make someone else make a decision on re-entry and to be liable if anything goes wrong.

4 December 2017: Pike River Recovery Agency chief executive liable if re-entry goes wrong, not Andrew Little

Ardern was asked whether she was comfortable with the legal liability resting on the shoulders of the chief executive.

“I’m confident that we’re going to go through a process that means we’re going to dot all of our i’s and cross all of our t’s,” she said.

“We’ve given ourselves enough lead time to make sure we do this properly.

“But the point ultimately is whether or not we’re doing right by families and that’s what we’ve undertaken to do.”

Gobbledegook and duckingdeduty.

NZ First hiding the past of all their new MPs

Greens have been under fire for not fully disclosing the past of one of their MPs.

NZ First are being more blatant, and hiding the pasts of all their MPs.

See their website: http://www.nzfirst.org.nz/ (you won’t see much).

Party websites post-election

An odd thing about the Labour Party website. Under Team / Labour MPs  they only show 28 of their 46 MPs. It appears to be the MPs who have returned to Parliament, with none of their new MPs there.

Their ‘Latest’ news is Our first two weeks, posted over two weeks ago.

I guess they have been busy negotiating and then getting their Government on the road.

NZ First has nothing at the moment:

Website Down for Maintenance

Please follow us on Facebook or party leader Winston Peters on Twitter for updates.

– NZ First

Greens are up to date with their ‘Our People’ page.

An interesting thing with their home page photo:

James Shaw is currently sole leader of the Greens.The will decide on their new female co-leader in April, eight months after Metiria Turei stepped down.

Marama Davidson was placed second on the Green Party list for the election, but she wasn’t given ministerial responsibilities, with Julie Anne Genter, Eugenie Sage and Jan Logie all preferred over her. She is relatively inexperienced, becoming an MP just under two years ago (filling Russel Norman’s place via the list).

The photo shows Shaw and Davidson together in the front and middle. The party PR department doesn’t get to decide leaders, the members do, but this is suggestive of someone’s leadership preferences.

In contrast to the three parties in Government the National party website has been churning out the ‘News’ with often a couple of posts a day. They have more time available to do this in Opposition. I’m not sure that a photo of English with Angela Merkel is a positive given her problems trying to form a government.

National’s ‘Our Team’ page has been fully updated with their new MPs and their new responsibilities.

Remember ACT?

They have an odd home page – they get around the fact that they still only have one MP by showing David Seymour in duplicate.

Promoting his book. I guess they are a party of free enterprise.

The Maori Party website looks little changed from the election campaign. They have only three posts since the election, but have said they will try to come back in 2020. Much will depend on how well Labour do for Maori this term – if they don’t front up then the Maori Party could have a chance, but it will be difficult with no MPs.

The United Future website is still standing. The party isn’t. Their last post: UnitedFuture proud of it’s history, but all good things must end.

 

From centre stage to Where’s Winston?

Following the election two months ago Winston Peters was at the centre of the political stage, demanding and getting most of the spotlight up until he anointed Labour as the lead party in the new Government.

Since then Peters has all but disappeared from media radar.

His appointment as Minister of Foreign Affairs meant that a lot of his time and attention would be out of the country. He was propelled almost immediately onto the international stage at APEC in Vietnam, but he had to be in Prime Minister Ardern’s shadow.

Little has been seen or heard of him since.

Claire Trevett asks (and answers) Where’s Winston Peters?

One of the more peculiar fates of a Foreign Minister is to act as a Prime Minister’s hand maiden on overseas trips.

The job is to be seen but not heard.

That’s a big change from being the big cheese in his own party, and then a month of being the big decider.

There was wall-to-wall coverage of Peters in that long month between the election and forming a government, but since then Peters has all but disappeared.

The only sightings, until this week, were at Ardern’s shoulder as her eye candy in Asia. The “be seen but not heard rule” undoubtedly suited Peters, fed up after the post-election scrutiny.

Peters gets fed up by scrutiny all the time, but may have had no need for media attention once he had won his government prize.

He left the country before his lawyers served papers on those he suspected of involvement in leaking his superannuation overpayment issues, so missed much of the initial heat of that.

The cynical amongst us, and there are many when it comes to Peters, might wonder if the timing was very deliberately designed to avoid heat. Peters loves applying the blowtorch to others, but isn’t so keen on being on the receiving end.

Peters proved an important accessory for Ardern — he has experience in the role and Ardern does not have the personal relationships Key built up over the past nine years.

In fact, Peters’ interactions with the US may end up being more important than those of Ardern. He had two meetings with US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson over matters ranging from North Korea to Myanmar.

It’s quite likely that Trump would prefer to be dealing with someone of a similar vintage to himself rather than a woman just a little more than half his age.

Peters was back on home soil this week and once again speaking in the media.

Did he say anything of note? If so I must have missed it.

It took the resignation of Robert Mugabe in Zimbabwe to break his vow of silence.

Despite speculation Peters will be dispatched to North Korea to single-handedly halt its nuclear weapon programme, his next international deployment is understood to be to the hot spot of Rarotonga in January — to attend Shane Jones’ wedding rather than sorting world peace.

Then he faces the hard grind of government, and especially for him the relentless travel, trickiness and tribulations of Foreign Affairs.

Ardern will continue to get most of the local media attention. And unusually for NZ First, MPs other than Winston may be seen and heard much more than him. Jones in particular.

This may go against Winston’s grain, or it could be a part of his plan to hand over party power.

It will be a demanding term for Peters, and an interesting one for NZ First. The first post-election polls show a slip in support, down to that all important threshold:

  • Election result: 7.2%
  • Roy Morgan October poll: 6.5%
  • Roy Morgan November poll: 5.0%

NZ First with Winston in Government could struggle next election. Without him they could easily be history.

A billion or half more trees

National MP Simon Bridges has accused the Government of halving it’s tree planting plan. Yesterday a press release from Simon Bridges: So, half as many trees then?

Regional Development Minister Shane Jones is already backtracking from his promise to plant a billion trees in 10 years, National Party Economic Development Spokesperson Simon Bridges says.

“From his statements earlier today it appears he’s realised that the pledge of a billion new trees is entirely unachievable and now he’s attempting to back away from it,” Mr Bridges says.

“His problem is that the target is recorded unambiguously in both the Labour-New Zealand First coalition agreement and the Speech from the Throne on the new Government’s programme.

“Now he wants to count around 50 million trees that are already planted every year, about half of the billion he’s committed to over a decade. These are happening regardless of his slush fund or the kind of Government in power.

“So his first action is to cut his target in half. Not exactly impressive.

“He needs to immediately stop using his slogan of 1 billion trees to be planted because it’s completely untrue. He should also stand up in Parliament and correct the Speech.

“This backsliding is becoming a pattern for this Government. They want to count trees that are already being planted in their tree target and houses already being built in their housing target. It’s all very underwhelming.

Included in the Labour-NZ first coalition agreement:

Coalition Priorities

In this parliamentary term, New Zealand First has a number of priorities to progress which Labour will support alongside its policy programme. These include the following goals:

Regional Economic Development and Primary Industries

  • $1b per annum Regional Development (Provincial Growth) Fund, including:
    • Planting 100 million trees per year in a Billion Trees Planting Programme.

That implies a Government Fund for a Billion Trees Planting Programme.

From the Speech from the Throne:

The New Zealand Forestry Service will be re-established and located in regional New Zealand. This government is committed to a new planting programme, planting 100 million trees a year to reach a billion more trees in ten years.

That says “a new planting programme”.

But news reports had made it clear the plan was to double existing tree planting numbers.

Newshub on 25 October: Revealed: Shane Jones Minister for 100 million trees, $1 billion regional fund

Shane Jones will be the Minister responsible for spending $1 billion a year on New Zealand’s regions.

Newshub has also learned that Jones will also be in charge of the new Forestry Service, which will plant 100 million trees a year – with the goal of planting a billion over 10 years.

It is understood that about 50 million trees are already planted in New Zealand each year, meaning the new Government’s planting will double that.

That clearly says doubling to 100 million trees a year, or to 1 billion trees in total.

Labour leader Jacinda Ardern told the AM Show on Wednesday the fund will help grow the regions.

“Labour went to the election with a $200 million fund. NZ First came to us and made the case strongly for greater regional investment, particularly around infrastructure. So this fund will include, for instance, a number of regional rail projects,” she said.

“It will include an extensive planting regime for forestry. Our intention is to double the amount of planting that goes on in forestry right now.”

A clear statement of intent to double the number of trees currently being planted.

Ardern responded to Bridges accusations yesterday – 1 billion-tree aim ‘always a joint goal’

But Ardern told reporters yesterday the Government was never going to plant 1 billion trees on its own.

“We’ve always been really clear. We see a role for the Forestry Service to work alongside those in the private sector to ensure we’re supporting the planting of those trees.”

She pointed to Air New Zealand’s announcement on Tuesday to work with the Ministry for the Environment and the Ministry for Primary Industries to fund tree-planting over up to 15,000ha in return for carbon benefits.

“Overall our goal is a billion trees being planted. It would be splitting hairs trying to decipher whether or not that [tree] was solely Government [or] solely private sector … this is a collaborative approach.”

Labour and NZ First may be guilty of not being absolutely clear about their intent on tree planting in their agreement and in the Speech from the Throne, but it seems clear from other reports that they intended to double plantings to 100 million a year.

I think to most people both half a billion and a billion trees is a lot, and they won’t care (if they notice) whether it is a doubling of planting or additional.

Bridges needs to be careful he doesn’t inherit the ‘barking at every passing car’ syndrome.

On this he looks a bit pedantic and guilty of petty nitpicking.

Government supported in latest RM poll

The November Roy Morgan poll suggests a shift in support towards Labour and Greens since the election, but NZ First has slipped.

National are still slightly ahead of Labour, but have dropped.

  • National 40.5% (election 44.45%, October 46%)
  • Labour 39.5% (election 36.89%, October 31%)
  • Greens 10% (election 6.27%, October 11%)
  • NZ First 5% (election 7.2%, October 6.5%)
  • ACT 0.5% (election 0.5%, October 0.5%)
  • TOP 2% (election 2.44%, October 2%)
  • Maori Party 1.5% (election 1.18%, 1.5%)
  • Other 1% (election 1.07%, October 1.5%)

Labour+Greens are 49.5%, and Labour+NZ First+Greens are 54.5%, the highest

This is early days for the new Government but indications are that there is general support for it.

The October poll was taken not long after the September election and during coalition negotiations, which may explain it’s swings, especially for Labour.

A poll at this stage doesn’t mean a lot but is of some interest as it indicates that the Labour led government seems to be generally well supported.

Electors were asked: “If a New Zealand Election were held today which party would receive your
party vote?” This latest New Zealand Roy Morgan Poll on voting intention was conducted by
telephone – both landline and mobile – with a NZ wide cross-section of 887 electors during
October 30 – November 12, 2017. Of all electors surveyed 2% (down 1.5%) didn’t name a party.

 

Summary: New PM Jacinda Ardern drives surge in New Zealand Government Confiden

Detail: Tableau PDF

NZ First want to see CPTPP final deal

Labour is obviously keen to get the CPTPP trade deal done, and with promised support from National they have a large majority in Parliament for it. ACT will presumably also support it.

Greens remain ‘strongly against’ pretty much any real world trade agreement – see Greens confirm CPTPP sideline opposition.

Despite Winston peters being close to the recent action in Vietnam NZ First has indicated it wants to see the details before deciding whether they will support it or not, but they are probably bound to vote for it anyway through Cabinet responsibility.

Newshub:  NZ First support for TPP not guaranteed

Labour may have to pass the CPTPP into law with the support of National and ACT – and without its Government support partners.

Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern says New Zealand First won’t make a decision on whether it backs the CPTPP (the rebranded Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement) through Parliament, until it’s seen the final deal.

Speaking from the Philippines, Ms Ardern said, despite New Zealand First having Cabinet responsibility, it also had the ability to agree to disagree.

“We won’t have a conversation about where party support will fall, until we have a final agreement,” she said. “I absolutely understand parties in some cases will wait until the final deal’s on the table.”

From time to time, Labour, New Zealand First and the Greens will take differing positions, she said.

Ms Ardern has had ongoing conversations about the deal with NZ First leader Winston Peters.

So Peters should be up with the play as well as anyone, but the NZ First party may have  a tricky decision to make – how to vote for a trade deal that may be unpopular with many who voted for them.

Out of whack Mack on the ‘far right’

I don’t know who Ben Mack is, apart from ‘columnist for the New Zealand Herald and associate editor of Villainesse’ (Lizzie Marvelly’s  blog), but he seems seriously out of whack in a column that somehow got published by Washington Post – How the far right is poisoning New Zealand

But for all the excitement around Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern and her new government, the real power lies with the far right. And, more terrifying: The far right seized power by exploiting the very system meant to be a fairer version of democracy.

Led by veteran politician Winston Peters — who has made racist comments toward immigrants and people of Asian descent and Trumpian abuse of the press — New Zealand First has traditionally been an afterthought in New Zealand politics. That all changed this past September, when the two largest parties finished close enough in the general election that whichever party New Zealand First decided to enter a coalition with would control enough seats in New Zealand’s German-style MMP (mixed-member proportional) parliament to govern.

In other words, a far-right party that received just seven percent of the vote had the power to decide who would rule.

That’s nonsense on multiple counts. NZ First is faar from ‘far right’. They have some fairly rightish policies, but far from all. Winston Peters has been campaigning against capitalism and for far greater state intervention.

Greens and their leader James Shaw are regarded as fairly left wing generally, and in his opening speech in Parliament Shaw said “Our parties, as has been documented, do not agree on everything, but we do agree—as has not been documented—on far more than we disagree”. That is far from ‘far right’ agreement.

If that wasn’t appalling enough, Peters and New Zealand First held the country for ransom, repeatedly delaying the announcement of their decision for several weeks as they extracted more and more concessions from suitors.

There is little evidence of anything like that, and negotiations involving both national and Labour lasted less than two weeks.

When Peters finally declared on Oct. 19 that New Zealand First would go into a coalition with Ardern and her Labour Party, it was only because Ardern had kowtowed the most to his increasingly extreme demands.

There’s little evidence of that either. In fact Labour negotiated successfully against NZ First’s more extreme policies like ditching the Maori seats and the anti-smacking law and slashing immigration.

The effects of the far right’s influence are already being felt. Amid pressure from New Zealand First, the government has vowed to slash immigration by tens of thousands by making it harder to obtain visas and requiring employers to prove they cannot find a qualified New Zealand citizen before hiring a non-citizen.

Labour had already vowed to cut immigration a bit, they stated that their policy stood after negotiations, and have decided to act cautiously – Ardern: No cuts to immigration coming just yet:

Ardern said the minister for immigration is working through various proposals but she does not expect any announcement soon.

“That was never within our 100 day plan, there were other priorities around housing, around health, around incomes that we were much more focused on,” she said.

The Prime Minister added that it absolutely bothers her that some have drawn parallels between her and US President Donald Trump, who came into office on a pledge to toughen immigration policies.

“For me, it’s a slight on New Zealand’s reputation to suggest that we are anything other than humanitarian, outwardly focused and built on the hard graft and work of migrants in New Zealand,” said Ardern.

That doesn’t sound anywhere near ‘far right’.

Like American white supremacists in the age of Trump, bigots in New Zealand have also been emboldened by New Zealand First’s success into taking action beyond ranting on Internet message boards and social media. In late October, clashes erupted when white supremacists rallied in front of Parliament.

From the link “Only a handful of members of the group, which preaches that diversity equals white genocide, showed up for a planned rally today.” No evidence the protest planned weeks in advance had any link to anything NZ First have done.

Threatening fliers have also appeared in public, calling on white people to “unify” in order to “preserve identity.”

Auckland University Students Association president (from the linked item): “Groups like that were gaining confidence and legitimacy after Donald Trump’s presidential win in the US”.

“It was the second similar controversy on the university’s campus, after another incident several weeks ago” – before the government was formed.

All this flies in the face of Ardern and her “more compassionate” government’s outward progressiveness. But Peters — who took the roles of deputy prime minister and foreign minister as a condition of working with Ardern — and New Zealand First can end the coalition agreement, which would trigger the need for new elections.

Put simply, while Ardern may be the public face, it’s the far right pulling the strings and continuing to hold the nation hostage.

Put simply, that’s nonsense, there’s no evidence of anything like that. There is evidence that Ardern is in charge and calling most of the shots.

What’s happened in New Zealand isn’t just horrifying because of the long-term implications of hate-mongers controlling the country, but also because it represents a blueprint that the far right can follow to seize power elsewhere.

New Zealand’s political situation under MMP and with long time politician  Peters leading a minor party in government for the third time in twenty years is a blueprint for nothing elsewhere.

Appealing to ethnically homogenous, overwhelmingly cisgender male voters with limited education and economic prospects who feel they’re being left behind in a changing world is nothing new for the far right.

The far right in New Zealand appeal to very few people. Peters is a populist politician who is adept at attracting minority votes but whose Opposition bark is far worse than his Government bite.

But what is new is its savvy at exploiting democracy by doubling down on these voters while mostly allowing larger political parties to attack each other on their own, thus positioning themselves as “kingmakers” who can demand concessions from those larger parties before carrying them into power.

New since we changed to MMP in 1996, when Peters chose to go into Government with National. I’m, not sure what Mack is getting at here – that smaller parties should have no say?

Then, they can rule from the shadows by threatening to leave the government at any time and plunge the country into chaos when things don’t go their way.

There is little to no risk of that. It hasn’t happened before and it is widely regarded as suicide option for a small party.

It’s a dangerous tactic that could prove brutally effective in other parliamentary systems like New Zealand’s if the far right is not confronted early for its bigotry, regardless of how marginal its support may seem.

The handful of people from the far right were confronted at their protest and shouted down and chased away by the left, who can be intolerant of different views as the right. But that had nothing to do with NZ First or the Government.

If she truly wants New Zealand to be a more tolerant place for all and to set a worldwide example that hate is not acceptable, it would be best for Ardern to end her unholy alliance with New Zealand First and the far right, even if it meant she might not return as prime minister. As long as the far right has power, bigotry and hate will continue to fester in Middle-earth.

This seems to be suggesting that Ardern plunge the country into chaos because things aren’t going Mack’s way.

The most likely outcome would be a genuine move to the (centre) right with a return to a national led government, quite possibly a single party government.

It’s embarrassing for New Zealand that Washington Post has published this out of whack Mack crap.

The column has been severely whacked on Twitter:

Parliament’s seating plan

Here is the new seating plan in Parliament.

ParliamentSeating2017Nov

https://www.parliament.nz/en/mps-and-electorates/house-seating-plan/

Interesting to see NZ First to the left of Labour – this allows Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern to sit beside Deputy Prime Minister Winston Peters, while remaining opposite Leader of the Opposition, Bill English.

The Greens are to Labour’s right amongst Labour back benchers.

Labour has nine on their front bench, compared to National’s thirteen.

Duncan Webb, new Labour MP for Christchurch Central, has been plonked on his own on the National side behind their bank benchers.

52nd Parliament opens this week

New Zealand’s 52nd Parliament opens this week, with the Commission Opening of Parliament on Tuesday (MPs sworn in and Speaker appointed), and the State Opening of Parliament on Wednesday.

Coloured outlines of people with text

The Opening of Parliament consists of three key events. The Commission Opening of Parliament begins at 11am on Tuesday 7 November. This is when Parliament is formally opened by three Commissioners representing the Governor-General. Each MP is sworn in by the Clerk, and the Speaker of the House is elected. Then the Confirmation of the Speaker takes place at Government House.

The State Opening of Parliament begins at 10.30am on Wednesday 8 November. This is when the Governor-General gives the Speech from the Throne, which outlines the Government’s legislative policy and plans for the next three years.

People with special roles take part in the ceremonies, which will be attended by dignitaries, MPs and their families.

Check out our Opening of Parliament section to find out more.

Don’t miss out on witnessing this historical event – put the Opening dates in your diary today.

Commission Opening of Parliament

Tuesday 7 November 2017, 11.00am

State Opening of Parliament

Wednesday 8 November 2017, 10.30am. (You can start watching from about 9.45am, when the dignitaries and special guests start arriving.)

View the State Opening Facebook event here.

 

The incoming Government, led by Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern, has committed to a buy first 100 days – see Taking action in our first 100 days – New Zealand Labour Party.

To achieve this, according to 1 News, Parliament to sit until close to Christmas so Government can push through ‘first 100 days’ agenda

In an unusual move, Parliament will sit until a couple of days before Christmas, so the new coalition Government can pass legislation to push through its ‘first 100 days’ agenda.

There are also a number of reviews and inquiries that need to get underway if the February 3 deadline is to be met.

That includes an inquiry into the abuse of children in state care, establishing a tax working group and an independent climate commission.

“We have until February third to deliver on things like our policies around education and making sure we get more young people into training. But I am confident we can achieve those goals,” said Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern.

“Everything we’ve said in the first 100 days is an ambitious set of targets, an ambitious set of goals.”

The Government will need to hit the ground running, they will be need to be well organised and well coordinated between the three parties involved, Labour, NZ First and Greens.