Author: MIL-OSI Publisher

Source: Buy NZ Made

Buy NZ Made says local councils are dragging their feet on procurement reform, a year after central government overhauled its own rules to give New Zealand businesses a fairer shot at public contracts – and did nothing to bring councils along with it.

The 5th edition of the Government Procurement Rules came into force on 1 December 2025, introducing a mandatory economic benefit to New Zealand test and a clear expectation that lower-value contracts go to capable local suppliers. It was a hard-won admission that decades of procurement practice had treated New Zealand businesses as an afterthought.

However, local councils, which between them control billions of dollars a year in ratepayer money on everything from civil works to professional services, are not covered by the new rules.

Procurement at the council level is still set by each authority's own policy under the Local Government Act, and Buy NZ Made's engagement with members over the past year shows the vast majority have made no move to apply anything like the same test.

The result is a public procurement system running on two different sets of values at once: one that increasingly backs New Zealand businesses, and one – closer to home, spending ratepayers' own money, in their own communities – that still doesn't ask the question at all.

“Central government worked out that shovelling public money offshore while local firms go under is a bad look and bad economics,” Buy NZ Made executive director Dane Ambler says.

“Councils are some of the biggest buyers in their regions. Every contract they hand to an out-of-town or offshore supplier by default, without even weighing the local benefit, is ratepayer money that could have kept a local business, and local jobs, alive.”

In the latest horror story, Buy NZ Made has uncovered councils moving ahead with the purchase and installation of container-mounted shelters supplied by companies importing Chinese-made shelters.

Many firms present themselves as “NZ Made” when they are, in fact, only New Zealand-owned. Councils must take note of this important distinction: NZ ownership does not mean a product is made in New Zealand.

Buy NZ Made is not asking councils to abandon value for money or open competition. It is asking them to stop pretending local economic benefit is someone else's problem. That means adopting an economic benefit test equivalent to central government's, publishing how local benefit is weighed in tender evaluations, and stripping out the compliance barriers that quietly favour large out-of-town incumbents over capable local and New Zealand-owned suppliers.

Source: Federated Farmers of New Zealand

Federated Farmers congratulates those councils that seized the chance to help steer local government reorganisation that works best for their districts and ratepayers.

“Change on the scale the Government is pursuing is necessary and overdue – but it’s nevertheless unsettling and challenging for councillors, and for those they represent,” Feds local government spokesperson Sandra Faulkner says.

“Federated Farmers encouraged councils to put in high-level proposals before the 9 August ‘Head Start’ deadline.

“These big decisions, especially when opinions among residents are split, take courage.

“But it’s far better for councils to hold the pen and help write the next chapter of their future than leave it to the Government to call all the shots,” Faulkner says.

In multiple regions, including the Waikato, Canterbury, Wairarapa, Otago and Southland, plans have been submitted.

They include options for a significantly reduced number of new unitary councils, separated along metropolitan and provincial lines.

“This is the blueprint Federated Farmers has consistently backed,” Faulkner says.

“City and provincial areas have different needs and priorities.

“This model allows each council to focus their efforts and maximise savings and gains, without seriously diluting provincial representation and residents’ connection with their council.

“Federated Farmers now strongly urges the Government to recognise the logic of that separation, honour those councils’ wishes, and work with them as we enter the detailed design phase.”

Federated Farmers applauded the Government announcement last year that New Zealand’s 11 regional councils would be disestablished from 2028 in a drive to eliminate duplication, improve efficiency and reduce costs.

To speed up council discussions on forming new unitary councils, Ministers Watts and Bishop set the clock ticking three months ago by naming 9 August as the deadline for merger proposals.

“Councils that failed to propose streamlined arrangements would be put into a post-2028 backstop, with the Government deciding their future.

“That backstop could well be mega councils covering the entire boundaries of current regional councils, and leaving provincial areas outvoted and sidelined by the big cities,” Faulkner says.

Several Head Start proposals from the Waikato were tabled.

Hauraki, Matamata-Piako and Thames-Coromandel agreed to form a Waihou-Piako-Coromandel Unitary Authority.

Waitomo and Ōtorohanga proposed a new King Country Unitary Council. This leaves Taupō as a potential new unitary and question marks over the future of the lower Waikato.

Waikato Federated Farmers supports a disaggregated model with new unitary councils for the King Country and Waihou-Piako,” Faulkner says.

“Added to this would be a new unitary that combines the current Waipa and Waikato districts, and a standalone Hamilton City Unitary.

“The needs of Hamilton, serving a population of more than 190,00, would completely dominate decision-making, to the detriment of the districts.

“A city of that size deserves its own council at any rate.”

In Bay of Plenty, a three-unitary council set-up – Western (Tauranga and Western BoP), Central (Rotorua alone) and Eastern (Whakatāne, Kawerau and Ōpōtiki) – has been proposed.

“Federated Farmers has strong misgivings about Western BOP being lumped in with Tauranga,” Faulker says.

“Again, in line with that metro-provincial split, Federated Farmers backs the proposal from Stratford and South Taranaki districts to form a new unitary, leaving New Plymouth as a separate council.”

Federated Farmers also supports the bid from Masterton and Carterton District Councils for a union with South Wairarapa District.

“A Wairarapa unitary council serving that large catchment makes far more sense than the Wairarapa being totally overshadowed by the huge new Wellington/Hutt Valley/Porirua metro to the south.”

Reorganisation in Canterbury is shaping up in a way that works for provincial/rural interests, Faulkner says.

“Hurunui and Waimakariri districts want to form a new North Canterbury unitary; Timaru, Mackenzie, Waimate, Waitaki and Ashburton could form a new southern council.

“Christchurch City and Selwyn could be stand-alone councils.”

Meanwhile, Otago’s rural councils favour a new unitary comprising Central Otago, Queenstown Lakes and Clutha councils.

In Southland, Federated Farmers continues to back the call for Invercargill to form one unitary, and the rest of the province another.

The Government is due to announce which Head Start proposals it accepts ‘in principle’ in September, with work continuing by councils on detailed design.

Final proposals are due to be submitted in March next year, with the Government – if it survives the November election – confirming proposals in May 2027.

“It is really positive so many rural councils have taken the initiative and proposed new unitary councils based off rural communities of interest.

“Federated Farmers will be calling on Government to approve these proposals.

“Whatever shape local government ultimately takes, Federated Farmers isn't going anywhere.

“We'll keep on working constructively with councils, through the transition and beyond, making sure the voices of rural communities are heard every step of the way.” 

Source: Waka Ama Aotearoa New Zealand

11 AUGUST 2026

Hundreds of kaihoe across Aotearoa prepare to take on the world stage as
teams unite in Singapore for the 2026 International Va’a Federation (IVF)
World Sprint Championships. More than 200 Aotearoa club-team entries have
qualified to compete at the Championships, alongside nationally selected
elite teams and individual V1 representatives.

The contingent will travel to Singapore for the championships at Marina Bay
from 17–31 August, bringing together 3,000 of the best paddlers from around
the globe for one of the biggest events on the international waka ama
calendar.

For Waka Ama Aotearoa NZ (WAANZ), the scale of the Aotearoa contingent
reflects the growth of the sport that is now drawing elite athletes,
rangatahi, kaumātua, whānau and club crews from communities right across
the country.

“This is a hugely significant moment for waka ama in Aotearoa, and the
first time our world championships have been held in Asia,” says Waka Ama
Aotearoa NZ Chief Executive Lara Collins.

“We are sending a contingent of 580 kaihoe to represent our sport. From
elite athletes who have committed to a 10-month high-performance campaign,
through to club crews who have earned their place in the national
qualifiers. They are carrying the aspirations of their clubs, their
regions, their whānau and Aotearoa with them – many of whom will be
travelling to Singapore to support them.”

The 2026 qualifying entries
<2026 qualifying entries>
include clubs from Te Tai Tokerau, Tāmaki Makaurau, Waikato, Bay of Plenty,
Tairāwhiti, Hawke’s Bay, Taranaki, Horowhenua, Te Whanganui-a-Tara and
beyond. Demonstrating the nationwide reach of waka ama and the strength of
the club system providing opportunities through the high-performance
pathway.

The current WAANZ qualifying roster records 210 club-team entries, compared
with 208 qualified club teams for the 2024 World Sprint Championships in
Hilo, Hawai‘i. That growth comes on top of the national elite programme,
which includes J19 Wāhine, J19 Tāne, Open Wāhine, Open Tāne and Para Mixed
teams.

Source: Federated Farmers of New Zealand

Federated Farmers is welcoming the Government’s new $1 million funding programme to support grassroots efforts to control wilding pines.

Announced by Biosecurity Minister Andrew Hoggard today, the fund will bolster community-led control projects on top of the Government’s $109 million investment over the next three years.

Federated Farmers meat and wool chair Richard Dawkins says the funding is a welcome boost for the people already putting in the hard yards to tackle wilding pines.

“Wilding pines are a huge threat to productive farmland, our water catchments and native biodiversity, and we need to be throwing everything we can at getting on top of them.

“National coordination and significant investment are important, but so is backing the people on the ground who know their own patch best.

“Farmers, landowners, volunteers and community groups have been doing huge amounts of work to control wilding pines, often with limited resources.

“This funding will help turn more of those local efforts into action, which is a really positive step.”

The Government’s funding boost shows it understands the scale of the problem.

“We have a big job ahead of us, but with $109 million going into the national programme and now another $1 million available to support community-led work, we have a real opportunity to make a serious dent in this problem.

“We welcome the Government recognising that local people need to be part of the solution.”

Wilding pine control is such a serious issue that Federated Farmers has made it a priority in its 2026 election platform, Dawkins says.

“We’re calling for whoever forms the next government to allocate a 10-year funding stream to control wilding pines.

“We also want to see 100% of International Visitor Levy funding used for conservation and tourism projects, as it was intended.

“This problem isn’t going away and it will just get worse unless we hit it head on, which requires reliable, long-term funding.”

Dawkins says another weapon in the battle against wildings is the use of low-impact stock grazing on conservation land.

“That costs absolutely no money to the taxpayer but actually works, as having sheep and cattle on that land keeps weeds and pests at bay, including wilding pines.

“That’s why we’ve asked in our election platform for 500,000 hectares of Department of Conservation land to be restored to grazing.

“Many Kiwis don’t see the scale of the wilding pine problem, but I can tell you that these destructive trees are rapidly spreading their way across good, productive land.

“Now is the time to hit them hard with every tool in the toolbox.”

Source: Solomon Islands Government Ministry of Rural Development

MONDAY 10TH AUGUST, 2026

The Ministry of Rural Development (MRD) is one of the 24 ministries within the Solomon Islands Government (SIG) machinery. MRD is established on the 28th September, 2007.

Its core mandates as contained under Legal Notice 164 in accordance with the Constitution of Solomon Islands is to oversee the effective planning and implementation of Government’s Rural Development Policies.

Our vision is to ensure all rural Solomon Islanders become meaningfully participated in development activities to improve their social and economic livelihood.

Minister for Rural Development Honourable Daniel Waneoroa says the Ministry's policy intentions and reforms are aimed at empowering rural constituencies and communities, central to building national resilience and inclusive growth.

“Our rural communities are where the majority of our people live and build their livelihoods,” he said.

Speaking in Parliament last week, Waneoroa said strengthening communities and families through development interventions has a strong correlation to a stronger, peaceful and prosperous nation.

“In undertaking these interventions, implementation of the Constituency Development Funds Act 2023 is paramount to ensure legitimacy for the systems of delivery, including efficiency and effectiveness,” he said.

On capacity, Waneoroa said the Ministry continues to prioritise developing the capacity of constituency officers, including at community level, to ensure the legislative and administrative reforms under the CDF are well understood.

He added that information sharing is also important, noting that keeping constituents informed on projects around the country is key to ensuring all citizens are included.

“In ensuring information is passed down into our communities throughout the country, MRD continues to implement its civic and community awareness program through community visits, as well as other media, including our weekly radio program and social media,” he said.

Source: Solomon Islands Government Ministry of Rural Development

MONDAY 10TH AUGUST, 2026

The Ministry of Rural Development (MRD) is one of the 24 ministries within the Solomon Islands Government (SIG) machinery. MRD is established on the 28th September, 2007.

Its core mandates as contained under Legal Notice 164 in accordance with the Constitution of Solomon Islands is to oversee the effective planning and implementation of Government’s Rural Development Policies.

Our vision is to ensure all rural Solomon Islanders become meaningfully participated in development activities to improve their social and economic livelihood.

The Ministry of Rural Development (MRD) has begun developing a policy framework to establish Constituency Economic Growth Centres (CEGCs) at strategic sites across Solomon Islands.

Minister for Rural Development, Hon. Danial Waneoroa, announced the initiative in Parliament last week.

“In further support for rural development, it is earmarked under my Ministry to work towards establishing Constituency Economic Growth Centres in strategic sites in our constituencies throughout Solomon Islands,” he said.

Minister Waneoroa said the initiative is grounded in the principle that development must be equitable, benefiting the majority of the population rather than a select few.

“All citizens of this nation aspire for a good life — the role of government is to facilitate and create the conducive environment for this to take place,” he said.

He confirmed that MRD has already begun work on the policy framework, which will guide the rollout of CEGCs nationwide.

“The policy framework intends to provide the guidelines and clarity on how this is to be rolled out in the constituencies, and giving clear policy definitions on what CEGC entails.”

Minister Waneoroa called on the Government and all constituencies to support and work with MRD to implement these activities and processes in 2026.

The CDGCs are envisioned as decentralized administrative, commercial, and industrial hubs designed to bring governance, social services, and economic opportunities closer to the rural populace. To ensure a structured, transparent, and sustainable rollout of these centres, MRD has identified the development of a comprehensive CDGC Policy Strategy and Implementation Framework as a key policy priority for 2026, and has already commenced work on it.

Source: Consumer New Zealand

11 August 2026

As rising power bills put pressure on household budgets, New Zealanders searching for savings are increasingly focusing on just two electricity retailers, according to Consumer NZ’s Powerswitch data.

Record numbers have been using Powerswitch, and almost 28,000 have initiated a switch on the service this year.

The data shows Electric Kiwi and Genesis have dramatically increased their share of consumer interest since March, while several other major retailers have seen significant declines.

Of the Powerswitch initiated switches in July, 55.5% were to Electric Kiwi (up from 37% in March) and 17.4% to Genesis (up from 3.8% in March).

Meanwhile, Contact’s share of Powerswitch initiated switches fell from 26.9% to 11.4% and Mercury’s from 12.3% to 4.1%. Powershop dropped from 11.6% to 5.2% after thousands took leave after its new app rollout. Powershop app rollout information

Consumer NZ’s Powerswitch manager, Paul Fuge, says the data shows New Zealanders are becoming far more focused on a small number of retailers when looking for better deals.

“What stands out is how concentrated consumer movement has become recently. Nearly three out of every four of those switching through Powerswitch in July went to either Electric Kiwi or Genesis.

“People are clearly responding to offers that deliver meaningful savings. In a market where power prices have risen sharply, households are paying closer attention to who is offering the best value. The data shows they are now more inclined to take action.”

Fuge says the figures should serve as a reminder that sticking with the same retailer year after year can be costly.

“Electricity retail is more of a revolving door than a pecking order. Retailers rise, fall and fight their way back again as they compete for customers. The retailer topping the rankings today can quickly find itself chasing the pack tomorrow.

“Power prices are already high, up 20% in the past two years alone. Don’t add a loyalty tax on top. The average annual saving for people who switch on Powerswitch this year is now around $479.”

Powerswitch, which recently celebrated its 27th birthday, is Consumer NZ’s free and independent electricity price comparison service, helping households compare plans and identify potential savings through switching retailers.

Notes for editors

Analysis is based on Powerswitch switching data from March to July 2026.

Electric Kiwi’s share increased from 37.0% in March to 55.5% in July.

Genesis increased from 3.8% to 17.4% over the same period.

Contact dropped from 26.9% to 11.4%, Mercury from 12.3% to 4.1%, and Powershop from 11.6% to 5.2%.

Electric Kiwi and Genesis accounted for 72.9% in July.

The average annual saving for consumers who switch using Powerswitch this year is approximately $479.

About Consumer

Consumer NZ is an independent, non-profit organisation dedicated to championing and empowering consumers in Aotearoa. Consumer NZ has a reputation for being fair, impartial and providing comprehensive consumer information and advice.

Source: Waipapa Taumata Rau, University of Auckland

MONDAY, AUGUST 10, 2026

Researchers at Waipapa Taumata Rau, University of Auckland, are developing an obesity treatment that may offer a new approach to weight loss, backed by nearly $1.2 million in Health Research Council funding.

A groundbreaking weight-loss drug that could help people shed kilos without losing muscle is being developed at Waipapa Taumata Rau, University of Auckland.

Unlike existing weight-loss drugs that work by reducing appetite, the new treatment targets fat storage and could help people lose weight without sacrificing the enjoyment of food, says Peter Shepherd, Professor of Cell Signalling in the Department of Molecular Medicine and Pathology at the Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences.

The University researchers received $1.198 million in Health Research Council funding over three years to advance the treatment, which targets the body's fat-storage processes rather than suppressing appetite.

“We've found this pathway inside cells that ultimately affects fat storage, and made a drug that targets that pathway,” Shepherd says.

“We're the first in the world to be developing this type of treatment. Unlike GLP-1 medications such as Wegovy, which reduce appetite and food intake, the treatment aims to prevent fat accumulation.

“Preclinical data suggest it's safe to target this mechanism long term, and we are getting weight loss at least as good as would be expected with Wegovy.”

While Wegovy is typically administered by injection, the new treatment is being developed as an oral pill.

In preclinical studies, the drug has not reduced appetite or food intake, suggesting people may continue to enjoy eating while still losing weight, Shepherd says.

Researchers also believe the approach may avoid one of the key drawbacks of other weight-loss medicines.

“Our drug strategy overcomes some of the problems that are associated with Mounjaro and Wegovy, which result in loss of muscle mass,” says Dr Chris Hedges, an investigator in the studies.

“Muscle loss is particularly dangerous for older people and is associated with poorer health outcomes as people age,” Hedges says.

“It can lead to frailty, increasing the risk of falls and fractures and reducing the ability to recover strength.”

The study will compare the drug to GLP-1 weight-loss medicines in terms of effectiveness and potential advantages.

Professor Rinki Murphy, an endocrinologist and co-investigator, says the research is exciting because it could open the door to testing new approaches to obesity treatment.

“As obesity is driven by multiple biological pathways, there is real potential to combine medicines that work in different ways to achieve greater weight loss while preserving muscle mass and improving long-term health outcomes,” Murphy says.

Researchers have concluded the laboratory phase of the project and are now moving into preclinical development to prepare the treatment for human clinical trials.

Shepherd and colleagues are seeking investors for a biotechnology company to bring the technology to market.

“The market for weight-loss drugs is currently around US$50 billion a year, and if we could get even a small percentage of that for drugs of our type, it would represent a really large economic opportunity for New Zealand,” he says.

Source: Waipapa Taumata Rau, University of Auckland

TUESDAY, AUGUST 11, 2026

Understanding how Big Tech became so powerful starts with understanding corporations themselves, says Professor Susan Watson in a new paper.

When it comes to the unchecked growth and dominance of corporate titans, we’ve failed to learn the lessons of history, argues University of Auckland Professor Susan Watson in an article examining how Big Tech companies have accumulated power increasingly akin to that of governments.

In her paper Reining in Big Tech Corporations: Why Platform Governance Requires Structural Regulation<https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=6850220>, the Auckland Law and Business School academic says companies such as Amazon, Meta and Google no longer compete within markets. Instead, they own essential digital infrastructure, control platforms on which people and businesses depend, and set many of the rules for operating within them.

Corporations, says Watson, are often misunderstood as essentially private businesses, when in fact they are legal entities created and empowered by States. She says that misunderstanding has helped obscure the source of Big Tech’s power and contributed to the failure to adequately rein it in.

She argues the process of incorporation creates what the law treats as an artificial legal person, with its own legal status and powers. When a business is incorporated, it can own property, enter contracts, make its own internal rules and continue to exist even as the people behind it change. It can also hold onto invested money and use it to generate more wealth over time.

“Capitalism is both one of humanity’s greatest inventions, the greatest source of prosperity the world has ever seen, and a menace on the verge of destroying our planet and destabilising society,” she says. “Big Tech corporations are the latest and most potent manifestation.”

The paper, which will form part of a Cambridge University Press collection edited by Professor Alexandra Andhov, draws parallels with earlier periods when a few businesses became extraordinarily powerful.

The English East India Company was granted powers normally associated with governments, including the ability to make laws in territories where it held monopoly trading rights and, later, the right to collect taxes in India.

In the late 19th-century United States, corporations came to control key infrastructure such as railways and oil and, by 1890, three-quarters of the country's wealth. That growth was eventually reined in through the 1890 Sherman Act, the first US competition law, and corporations controlling key infrastructure were broken up by the State.

Watson argues today's tech titans represent a new version of this concentration of corporate power, but on digital rather than physical territory.

Their influence can also extend to governments: they lobby against laws that could restrict their activities and increasingly position governments as customers or partners for their technology.
Her paper proposes several possible approaches. Banning surveillance-based business models, limiting Big Tech companies' claims over data, and requiring major platforms to be licensed, with conditions attached to their continued operation.

Another possibility is giving people affected by these companies a greater say in how they are governed. Watson points to New Zealand’s Whanganui River, which was given legal personhood as part of a system allowing different groups to share responsibility for its governance. She suggests a similar idea could be applied to major technology platforms, with governance rights given to people affected by them and public regulators and the State providing oversight.

Watson says the people who interact closely with these companies, particularly their employees and users, could reasonably expect their interests to be considered.

“Corporations have been likened to Frankenstein’s monster. They are artificial persons created by man. Just as we make them, we can unmake them, or reform and re-form them in a way that serves us all rather than just the gilded few.”

Watson will continue the conversation about Big Tech’s power at a New Zealand Centre for Leadership and Governance panel discussion on Wednesday 12 August 2026, alongside Honorary Associate Professor Jonathan Hardman and tech researcher Matt Bartlett.

The panel will explore how Big Tech accumulated its power, what today’s laws get right and wrong in responding to it, and what a fairer digital future could look like for regulators and everyday users.