Foreign Minister Winston Peters says he was under no obligation to consult with Cabinet before making an offer to Pacific Island Forum (PIF) member nations to host the annual leaders meeting in 2027.
It comes after Treasury released documents showing, in March, they advised Finance Minister Nicola Willis to gut Peters’ NZ$30 million proposal to fund PIF, saying the “value for money of the bid is not clear.”
It was noted that this, in part, was because “Cabinet approval was not sought before announcement of the hosting initiative,” and therefore it was “more difficult to assess the strategic alignment” with the government’s wider ambitions to cut down the size of the public service.
The offer to host PIF was made to Pacific countries in August.
Peters told RNZ Pacific that he gave Prime Minister Christopher Luxon a mid-year heads up, and had no reason to tell Cabinet at that point.
“Treasury can write what it likes,” the minister said.
“You don’t know whether or not [PIF] are going to be taking up your offer. So, what would you discuss with Cabinet, unless the Forum first agrees?”
He also noted that hosting obligations were on a rotating basis between PIF members, and that it was New Zealand’s turn.
“Every Cabinet minister should understand that, even if they weren’t told.”
Documents showed Willis had sought an “inflation adjusted” figure to host PIF, and offered Peters NZ$10m – comparable to the cost of hosting in 2011. A figure of $20m was ultimately agreed by May.
“Treasury can write their papers as they do about every other portfolio, but in the end it’s about the Ministerial negotiations, Minister by Minister,” Peters said.
“They’re not in charge of foreign policy, we are – and our reach overseas depends upon the skills of our foreign policy team, and the resources we give it.”
RNZ Pacific reported in July that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade (MFAT) had planned for operating costs of $30m – the same as the original bid.
This was noted as a specific fiscal risk in MFAT’s submission, but was not disclosed in Treasury’s Budget Economic and Fiscal Update.
Peters would not say what was likely to go as a result of the cutback.
“We were always going to be very cautious about our expenditure … you can easily waste money in these circumstances.
“Our plan is to have a very efficient, very meaningful PIF hosting experience in this country using all of our past knowledge, and make sure that when it’s over, we have done our responsibility to the max.”
Treasury wrote that the final amount was ultimately agreed on “to reflect that the Forum has increased in scope and importance since 2011”.
