May 22, 2025 • 9 mins
The Finance Minister says refusing unemployment benefits to teenagers is about helping parents.
This Budget makes 18 and 19-year-olds ineligible for JobSeeker, if their parents can support them.
Nicola Willis says the Government has the same expectations as most parents.
"I have met parents who say - look, I've got a 19-year-old who spends all day on the couch playing PlayStation and it's pretty difficult because you, the Government, send them a check each fortnight."
LISTEN ABOVE
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:02):
How is the economy shaping up? Who is raking in
the cash and who will be disappointed?
Speaker 2 (00:07):
In time to crunch the numbers and find out how
it affects you. Unit's heaven. Duthless Yellen drive live from
Parliament for Budget twenty twenty five with one new zealft
use dogs have been right, good afternoon to the budget.
You are going to have to contribute more to your key.
We say that the government will put in less teenagers
(00:28):
will no longer be able to get the doll and
we now know that the pay Equity Scheme rejig has
saved nearly thirteen billion dollars. The government has managed to
deliver seven billion more for health tax incentives for businesses
to buy new equipment, plus two hundred million dollars to
find some new gas. Nikola Willis is the Finance Minister
and with us now Nikola, Hello.
Speaker 1 (00:45):
Hello here, that's great to be with you in person.
Speaker 2 (00:47):
It is lovely to have you. Thank you and thank
you very much for racing through your speech to be here.
Where's the growth in the growth budget? Where is it?
Speaker 1 (00:54):
Well? The growth is coming this year and accelerating into
next year and beyond, averaging two point seven percent over
the next little while and much faster than we've had it.
Speaker 2 (01:03):
This is the export is doing it, and they going
to do it. Whether you are there or not. What
are you doing at the well?
Speaker 1 (01:08):
This investment boost policy is going to lift growth and
it is going to lift GDP because what it says
to every business about one percent over the next twenty years,
but half of that over the next five years. Combine
that with our other reforms, whether it's RMA reform, setting
up invest New zealand encouraging foreign investment, We're doing things
that are going to generate measurable growth. But Investment Boost
is really important because what it says to every business
(01:30):
listening right now is if you make an investment in
a new as set, we are going to deduct the
cost of that from your tax bill twenty percent deduction.
So that's going to help your cash flow now. And
if you are thinking about making an investment, do it
because we're going to help you out, because that would
have cost more than eight and a half billion dollars
a year.
Speaker 2 (01:49):
Are you sure because that number is That is.
Speaker 1 (01:51):
The advice that I received from Inland Revenue, and I
trust them that I'm more some of the bush costings
that are out there at the moment not have paid
for its Well, no, the advice was that it wouldn't
because what it starts to do is incentivize investments that
wouldn't stack up otherwise. Our advice was twenty percent is
the sweet spot. That's where you get the most value
(02:11):
for each dollar of tax revenue that you're losing. Go
higher than that and you're not getting quite as much
bang for back because.
Speaker 2 (02:18):
Okay, so Trump himself did one hundred percent, Rishi Snack
did one hundred percent. The business community has called for
accelerated depreciation, which I totally take is not exactly the
same thing. But they want fifty percent. If all of
this is above what you're doing. If you find out
that twenty percent is not enough, will you rejig it.
Speaker 1 (02:35):
Well, these are the same people I think you'll find here,
the who say get the books back and balance, and
that is what we have to do. We have to
get that balance between making sure there's a good tax
incentive there but also being prudent about the fact that
New Zealand has been in deficit since twenty nineteen. Debt
has blown out by an extra hundred billion dollars, So
I need to do all of this within it.
Speaker 2 (02:54):
If you're doing little back percent. The point of the
twenty percent is to try to get people investing. If
it doesn't work, there's no point doing it. So would
you rejig it?
Speaker 1 (03:01):
Well, the advice that I've received is that it will
get people investing, that it's enough to make a meaningful difference.
I mean, think about it. If you're a trading and
you go and buy a ute tomorrow, you've now got
a twenty percent deduction on the cost of that against
your text bill. You'll be paying less tax this year.
That's good news.
Speaker 2 (03:16):
Okay, why not cut the government contributions to everyone's KEII
saber altogether because it's done its job, hasn't it?
Speaker 1 (03:22):
Because our judgment was that on balance, that contribution is
enough to give some people the nudge into saving who
might not otherwise, and it keeps people in the scheme
even if they go through a period where they can't
afford to make their own contributions. Knowing that the government's
going to give them that extra cash.
Speaker 2 (03:36):
Helps the moloyment. The employer's contribution.
Speaker 1 (03:39):
Do that, yeah, But to get the employer contribution, of course,
you have to make your own contribution, and some people
will for a time withdrawal from the scheme or stop
their own contributions, but on balance they might keep going
if that subsidy is there. Look, basically, we thought that
if you keep it there at that level, there's still
a little nudge to keep people in, but it's a
much more affordable.
Speaker 2 (03:58):
Scanning one hundred and seventy nine thousand dollars a year
doesn't need a government contribution, do they.
Speaker 1 (04:02):
Well, we cut it off at one hundred and eighty.
If you're sending one hundred and eighty or more, you
will now not get that contribution at all, and everyone's
contribution is halved. We think it's about right.
Speaker 2 (04:12):
Okay, now on the kids off the doll. You'll take
the teenagers off the doll, but you're going to do
a parental test. What's the test.
Speaker 1 (04:18):
Well, we are still finalizing the details of the policy,
but the basic concept is that this is actually about
helping parents because I have met parents who say, look,
I've got a nineteen year old who spends all day
on the couch playing Keep It, playing PlayStation, and it's
pretty difficult because you the government send them a check
each fortnight. So we've got the same expectation most mums
(04:39):
and dads do, which as kids should be in training,
in an apprenticeship, or in work and if they're not,
they can't get the USA.
Speaker 2 (04:45):
And it makes perfect sense. But how are you going
to test the parents? What is it?
Speaker 1 (04:48):
Is it?
Speaker 2 (04:49):
Well, it means is it income?
Speaker 1 (04:50):
We except there will have to be some exceptions where
for whatever reason, there's been a family break down and
so it's not reasonable to expect that the parents are
in a position to support their teenager. But we are
going to work on the details of that and we're
looking forward to making more announcements.
Speaker 2 (05:04):
But how are you going to income test? Is that
what it's about?
Speaker 1 (05:06):
Well, that might be part of the test, but we
need to make sure it's tight enough that not everyone's
getting an exception because we genuinely want to get those
kids into work in training. We know that if you
start on a benefit at that age, on average, you're
going to spend more than fifteen years on a benefit,
So that is bad news for everyone.
Speaker 2 (05:25):
So these kids, they manage to get the doll right,
so they don't get they're off the doll of the
single but if they get married or in a civil union,
or in a de facto relationship, they will continue to
get the dolls. They're just going to get the girlfriend around,
aren't they.
Speaker 1 (05:36):
Well, I don't know. I don't think you'll find that
many of these young people will be jumping into marriage.
Speaker 2 (05:41):
No, but they don't have to be very nicola. They
just have to be in a de facto relationship.
Speaker 1 (05:44):
Well, look, all of these are the things that we're
going to test with the policy. We need to move
in with you absolutely right. Hither we need to make
sure that this policy sends very strong signals and that
we get the details right. And I've got faith in
Louise Upstince she'll do that.
Speaker 2 (05:56):
Are you going to change the rules about the de
facto stuff.
Speaker 1 (05:58):
Then, well, we're going to make sure that this policy
incentivizes teenagers to get into work or education, and we'll
do what we have to do with the roles to
ensure that's the case.
Speaker 2 (06:06):
Okay, Now you have saved in this financial year five
billion dollars. Why not take that money and put it
towards the debt and pay down the.
Speaker 1 (06:16):
Debt Because the price that every New Zealander would have
to pay for that is fewer health services, schools getting
cuts to their funding, and real terms, I wouldn't have
money to pay teachers more, the police wouldn't get the
resources that they need to keep our community safe, and
our defense force would continue its slide to becoming that
(06:38):
more sold to a back. So there are investments that
need to be made hither and we are funding them
from savings. That's the responsible way.
Speaker 2 (06:46):
Have you cut the final year free tertiary education yet?
Speaker 1 (06:50):
No? We have? Why not because we had a coalition
commitment between the three parties that we would keep it
for the final year.
Speaker 2 (06:57):
Who wants it? Well?
Speaker 1 (06:58):
I think New Zealand first were pretty keen on it
staying there. And look, it's a much narrower policy than
it was here. It used to be that everyone was
getting a free first year.
Speaker 2 (07:07):
To have a plus. It's a waste of money now now.
Speaker 1 (07:09):
Only get it if you get all the way to
the end of your degree. You've finished your degree and
you get that final.
Speaker 2 (07:13):
So you could have saved that money. You could have
put that towards something else like paying the debt and
paying down the debt. You could have not done the
tweaks to the working for families. It's a bunch of
stuff you could have done.
Speaker 1 (07:21):
I'm really proud. Actually last budget we delivered twenty three
billion dollars worth of savings. This budget twenty one billion
dollars worth of savings.
Speaker 2 (07:28):
Our budget at all.
Speaker 1 (07:29):
But our budget is being funded from savings, whereas we
had a government over the past six years. In twenty
twenty two spent more than nine billion dollars.
Speaker 2 (07:37):
Do you worry about reminding us how crappy they is?
Speaker 1 (07:40):
So we are really bringing things much tighter and what
we're showing in our boxes that we're going to get
them back in balance. We're going to be bringing spending
government spending down as a proportion of the economy. We're
going to be bending that debt.
Speaker 2 (07:50):
But you are not bringing down government spending. You continue
to spend. In every single day that you continue to spend,
you are adding to our national debt.
Speaker 1 (07:57):
But we're putting dollars in the right places because there
are some vis months that if we make them today,
are going to make us more productive tomorrow. I take
the education system as an example. If kids are achieving
more at school, they are going to be better workers.
I look at the health service. If we don't have
good health services for people. Then that's actually a real
push push factor that is going to be a problem
for many New Zealanders. So always striking that balance. How
(08:19):
can we make sure we're funding the public services that
are needed, but we're also keeping the books in order.
Of course, the alternative, Heather, there is an alternative. That's
my friend, mister Hipkins. He thinks what we should do
is get rid of all ideas that there is a
limit to debt and we should just borrow, borrow, borrow, tax, tax, tax,
and that'll mean everything's okay and it's rainbows and uniforms. Well,
(08:39):
we're rejected that approach.
Speaker 2 (08:41):
That's for sure. Luxon has labeled in mister Bojangles.
Speaker 1 (08:43):
He has indeed labeled because he's a flip flopper. He
just goes from one foot to the next. You know,
one day he's all raging, wanting to bring back the
old paquity regime. The next day he's not so sure
and maybe he needs to change. One day he's saying
that Barbara Edmonds is a great finance spokesperson, the days
throwing her under the bus and saying that we shouldn't
listen to her when she talks about deep fiscal plans
(09:04):
or anything, and.
Speaker 2 (09:05):
We're here to talk about you today. Thank you. I
appreciate it very much. Thank you for your time, and
thanks for coming.
Speaker 1 (09:10):
In great to be on the show.
Speaker 2 (09:10):
Here they thank Alliverlas, the Finance Minister. For more from
Hither Duplessy Allen Drive. Listen live to news talks. It'd
be from four pm weekdays, or follow the podcast on iHeartRadio.
How is the economy shaping up? Who is raking in
the cash and who will be disappointed?
Speaker 2 (00:07):
In time to crunch the numbers and find out how
it affects you. Unit's heaven. Duthless Yellen drive live from
Parliament for Budget twenty twenty five with one new zealft
use dogs have been right, good afternoon to the budget.
You are going to have to contribute more to your key.
We say that the government will put in less teenagers
(00:28):
will no longer be able to get the doll and
we now know that the pay Equity Scheme rejig has
saved nearly thirteen billion dollars. The government has managed to
deliver seven billion more for health tax incentives for businesses
to buy new equipment, plus two hundred million dollars to
find some new gas. Nikola Willis is the Finance Minister
and with us now Nikola, Hello.
Speaker 1 (00:45):
Hello here, that's great to be with you in person.
Speaker 2 (00:47):
It is lovely to have you. Thank you and thank
you very much for racing through your speech to be here.
Where's the growth in the growth budget? Where is it?
Speaker 1 (00:54):
Well? The growth is coming this year and accelerating into
next year and beyond, averaging two point seven percent over
the next little while and much faster than we've had it.
Speaker 2 (01:03):
This is the export is doing it, and they going
to do it. Whether you are there or not. What
are you doing at the well?
Speaker 1 (01:08):
This investment boost policy is going to lift growth and
it is going to lift GDP because what it says
to every business about one percent over the next twenty years,
but half of that over the next five years. Combine
that with our other reforms, whether it's RMA reform, setting
up invest New zealand encouraging foreign investment, We're doing things
that are going to generate measurable growth. But Investment Boost
is really important because what it says to every business
(01:30):
listening right now is if you make an investment in
a new as set, we are going to deduct the
cost of that from your tax bill twenty percent deduction.
So that's going to help your cash flow now. And
if you are thinking about making an investment, do it
because we're going to help you out, because that would
have cost more than eight and a half billion dollars
a year.
Speaker 2 (01:49):
Are you sure because that number is That is.
Speaker 1 (01:51):
The advice that I received from Inland Revenue, and I
trust them that I'm more some of the bush costings
that are out there at the moment not have paid
for its Well, no, the advice was that it wouldn't
because what it starts to do is incentivize investments that
wouldn't stack up otherwise. Our advice was twenty percent is
the sweet spot. That's where you get the most value
(02:11):
for each dollar of tax revenue that you're losing. Go
higher than that and you're not getting quite as much
bang for back because.
Speaker 2 (02:18):
Okay, so Trump himself did one hundred percent, Rishi Snack
did one hundred percent. The business community has called for
accelerated depreciation, which I totally take is not exactly the
same thing. But they want fifty percent. If all of
this is above what you're doing. If you find out
that twenty percent is not enough, will you rejig it.
Speaker 1 (02:35):
Well, these are the same people I think you'll find here,
the who say get the books back and balance, and
that is what we have to do. We have to
get that balance between making sure there's a good tax
incentive there but also being prudent about the fact that
New Zealand has been in deficit since twenty nineteen. Debt
has blown out by an extra hundred billion dollars, So
I need to do all of this within it.
Speaker 2 (02:54):
If you're doing little back percent. The point of the
twenty percent is to try to get people investing. If
it doesn't work, there's no point doing it. So would
you rejig it?
Speaker 1 (03:01):
Well, the advice that I've received is that it will
get people investing, that it's enough to make a meaningful difference.
I mean, think about it. If you're a trading and
you go and buy a ute tomorrow, you've now got
a twenty percent deduction on the cost of that against
your text bill. You'll be paying less tax this year.
That's good news.
Speaker 2 (03:16):
Okay, why not cut the government contributions to everyone's KEII
saber altogether because it's done its job, hasn't it?
Speaker 1 (03:22):
Because our judgment was that on balance, that contribution is
enough to give some people the nudge into saving who
might not otherwise, and it keeps people in the scheme
even if they go through a period where they can't
afford to make their own contributions. Knowing that the government's
going to give them that extra cash.
Speaker 2 (03:36):
Helps the moloyment. The employer's contribution.
Speaker 1 (03:39):
Do that, yeah, But to get the employer contribution, of course,
you have to make your own contribution, and some people
will for a time withdrawal from the scheme or stop
their own contributions, but on balance they might keep going
if that subsidy is there. Look, basically, we thought that
if you keep it there at that level, there's still
a little nudge to keep people in, but it's a
much more affordable.
Speaker 2 (03:58):
Scanning one hundred and seventy nine thousand dollars a year
doesn't need a government contribution, do they.
Speaker 1 (04:02):
Well, we cut it off at one hundred and eighty.
If you're sending one hundred and eighty or more, you
will now not get that contribution at all, and everyone's
contribution is halved. We think it's about right.
Speaker 2 (04:12):
Okay, now on the kids off the doll. You'll take
the teenagers off the doll, but you're going to do
a parental test. What's the test.
Speaker 1 (04:18):
Well, we are still finalizing the details of the policy,
but the basic concept is that this is actually about
helping parents because I have met parents who say, look,
I've got a nineteen year old who spends all day
on the couch playing Keep It, playing PlayStation, and it's
pretty difficult because you the government send them a check
each fortnight. So we've got the same expectation most mums
(04:39):
and dads do, which as kids should be in training,
in an apprenticeship, or in work and if they're not,
they can't get the USA.
Speaker 2 (04:45):
And it makes perfect sense. But how are you going
to test the parents? What is it?
Speaker 1 (04:48):
Is it?
Speaker 2 (04:49):
Well, it means is it income?
Speaker 1 (04:50):
We except there will have to be some exceptions where
for whatever reason, there's been a family break down and
so it's not reasonable to expect that the parents are
in a position to support their teenager. But we are
going to work on the details of that and we're
looking forward to making more announcements.
Speaker 2 (05:04):
But how are you going to income test? Is that
what it's about?
Speaker 1 (05:06):
Well, that might be part of the test, but we
need to make sure it's tight enough that not everyone's
getting an exception because we genuinely want to get those
kids into work in training. We know that if you
start on a benefit at that age, on average, you're
going to spend more than fifteen years on a benefit,
So that is bad news for everyone.
Speaker 2 (05:25):
So these kids, they manage to get the doll right,
so they don't get they're off the doll of the
single but if they get married or in a civil union,
or in a de facto relationship, they will continue to
get the dolls. They're just going to get the girlfriend around,
aren't they.
Speaker 1 (05:36):
Well, I don't know. I don't think you'll find that
many of these young people will be jumping into marriage.
Speaker 2 (05:41):
No, but they don't have to be very nicola. They
just have to be in a de facto relationship.
Speaker 1 (05:44):
Well, look, all of these are the things that we're
going to test with the policy. We need to move
in with you absolutely right. Hither we need to make
sure that this policy sends very strong signals and that
we get the details right. And I've got faith in
Louise Upstince she'll do that.
Speaker 2 (05:56):
Are you going to change the rules about the de
facto stuff.
Speaker 1 (05:58):
Then, well, we're going to make sure that this policy
incentivizes teenagers to get into work or education, and we'll
do what we have to do with the roles to
ensure that's the case.
Speaker 2 (06:06):
Okay, Now you have saved in this financial year five
billion dollars. Why not take that money and put it
towards the debt and pay down the.
Speaker 1 (06:16):
Debt Because the price that every New Zealander would have
to pay for that is fewer health services, schools getting
cuts to their funding, and real terms, I wouldn't have
money to pay teachers more, the police wouldn't get the
resources that they need to keep our community safe, and
our defense force would continue its slide to becoming that
(06:38):
more sold to a back. So there are investments that
need to be made hither and we are funding them
from savings. That's the responsible way.
Speaker 2 (06:46):
Have you cut the final year free tertiary education yet?
Speaker 1 (06:50):
No? We have? Why not because we had a coalition
commitment between the three parties that we would keep it
for the final year.
Speaker 2 (06:57):
Who wants it? Well?
Speaker 1 (06:58):
I think New Zealand first were pretty keen on it
staying there. And look, it's a much narrower policy than
it was here. It used to be that everyone was
getting a free first year.
Speaker 2 (07:07):
To have a plus. It's a waste of money now now.
Speaker 1 (07:09):
Only get it if you get all the way to
the end of your degree. You've finished your degree and
you get that final.
Speaker 2 (07:13):
So you could have saved that money. You could have
put that towards something else like paying the debt and
paying down the debt. You could have not done the
tweaks to the working for families. It's a bunch of
stuff you could have done.
Speaker 1 (07:21):
I'm really proud. Actually last budget we delivered twenty three
billion dollars worth of savings. This budget twenty one billion
dollars worth of savings.
Speaker 2 (07:28):
Our budget at all.
Speaker 1 (07:29):
But our budget is being funded from savings, whereas we
had a government over the past six years. In twenty
twenty two spent more than nine billion dollars.
Speaker 2 (07:37):
Do you worry about reminding us how crappy they is?
Speaker 1 (07:40):
So we are really bringing things much tighter and what
we're showing in our boxes that we're going to get
them back in balance. We're going to be bringing spending
government spending down as a proportion of the economy. We're
going to be bending that debt.
Speaker 2 (07:50):
But you are not bringing down government spending. You continue
to spend. In every single day that you continue to spend,
you are adding to our national debt.
Speaker 1 (07:57):
But we're putting dollars in the right places because there
are some vis months that if we make them today,
are going to make us more productive tomorrow. I take
the education system as an example. If kids are achieving
more at school, they are going to be better workers.
I look at the health service. If we don't have
good health services for people. Then that's actually a real
push push factor that is going to be a problem
for many New Zealanders. So always striking that balance. How
(08:19):
can we make sure we're funding the public services that
are needed, but we're also keeping the books in order.
Of course, the alternative, Heather, there is an alternative. That's
my friend, mister Hipkins. He thinks what we should do
is get rid of all ideas that there is a
limit to debt and we should just borrow, borrow, borrow, tax, tax, tax,
and that'll mean everything's okay and it's rainbows and uniforms. Well,
(08:39):
we're rejected that approach.
Speaker 2 (08:41):
That's for sure. Luxon has labeled in mister Bojangles.
Speaker 1 (08:43):
He has indeed labeled because he's a flip flopper. He
just goes from one foot to the next. You know,
one day he's all raging, wanting to bring back the
old paquity regime. The next day he's not so sure
and maybe he needs to change. One day he's saying
that Barbara Edmonds is a great finance spokesperson, the days
throwing her under the bus and saying that we shouldn't
listen to her when she talks about deep fiscal plans
(09:04):
or anything, and.
Speaker 2 (09:05):
We're here to talk about you today. Thank you. I
appreciate it very much. Thank you for your time, and
thanks for coming.
Speaker 1 (09:10):
In great to be on the show.
Speaker 2 (09:10):
Here they thank Alliverlas, the Finance Minister. For more from
Hither Duplessy Allen Drive. Listen live to news talks. It'd
be from four pm weekdays, or follow the podcast on iHeartRadio.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.
Amy Robach & T.J. Holmes present: Aubrey O’Day, Covering the Diddy Trial
Introducing… Aubrey O’Day Diddy’s former protege, television personality, platinum selling music artist, Danity Kane alum Aubrey O’Day joins veteran journalists Amy Robach and TJ Holmes to provide a unique perspective on the trial that has captivated the attention of the nation. Join them throughout the trial as they discuss, debate, and dissect every detail, every aspect of the proceedings. Aubrey will offer her opinions and expertise, as only she is qualified to do given her first-hand knowledge. From her days on Making the Band, as she emerged as the breakout star, the truth of the situation would be the opposite of the glitz and glamour. Listen throughout every minute of the trial, for this exclusive coverage. Amy Robach and TJ Holmes present Aubrey O’Day, Covering the Diddy Trial, an iHeartRadio podcast.