Here are the key things you need to know before you leave work today (or if you work from home, before you shutdown your laptop).
MORTGAGE RATE CHANGES
Resimac cut all its fixed rates 1-3 years and raised them for longer fixed terms today. All rates are here.
TERM DEPOSIT/SAVINGS RATE CHANGES
WBS cut its 9 month rate to 4.80%. And SBS Bank said it was ending its attractive 5.35% six month rate a eob today. All updated term deposit rates less than 1 year are here, for 1-5 years, they are here.
RENTS FLAT
Housing rents were flat as a pancake in 2024 with just a few exceptions. Landlords will be lamenting the lack of rental growth while tenants got some relief from rising rents.
FOOD PRICES RISE
Food prices had their largest monthly spike January since July 2022, jumping +1.9% and led by grocery prices.
WHO HAS THE POWER?
Of all the other prices monitored monthly, petrol prices were up just +1.2% from a year ago, and diesel was down -4.3% on that same basis. Domestic airfares were up +15.5% but international airfares fell -0.9% (revealing the difference between monopoly pricing power, and competition).
FACTORY MOOD CHIRPY
Even though it is to a modest level, there was something of a surprisingly positive shift in the factory PMI for January. It lifted sharply into expansion after 22 long months in contraction. It’s a positive start to 2025, with the manufacturing sector shifting out of reverse. But we should note that of all the things that make up this PMI, new orders were the weakest of them.
NZX UPDATE
The NZX50 is up +0.4% in 3pm trade, up +0.4% from this time last week, and up +0.5% from a month ago. There are 52 gainers today, led by Synlait's +5.3%, Fletcher's +2.0%, Spark's +1.8% and Skellerup's +1.6%. There are 26 decliners, dragged lower by Vector's -2.2%, Mercury's -1.4%, Goodman's -1.2% and Tower's -1.0%. Market heavyweight F&P Healthcare is up +1.2% so far today.
SINGAPORE SHINES BRIGHTER
Up from +1.8% in 2023, Singapore's economy grew +4.4% in 2024 on the back of stronger-than-expected rebounds in exports and tourism. This was an upward revision from the preliminary +4.0% rate reported by them earlier. By itself, Singapore's Q4 rose at a +5.0% rate.
SWAP RATES PROBABLY LITTLE-CHANGED AGAIN
Wholesale swap rates are likely to be little-changed, but keep an eye on our chart below which will record the final positions closer to 5pm. The 90 day bank bill rate was unchanged on Thursday at 3.84%. The Australian 10 year bond yield is down -7 bps at 4.47%. The China 10 year bond rate is up +1 bp at 1.64%. The NZ Government 10 year bond rate is down -6 bps at 4.68% while today's RBNZ fix was at 4.59% and down -10 bps. The UST 10yr yield is now just on 4.53% and down -9 bps from this time yesterday. Their 2yr is also down -4 bps at 4.31%, so that positive curve is now flatter at +23 bps.
EQUITIES MOSTLY HIGHER
The NZX50 is up +0.4% in late Friday trade. The ASX200 is up +0.5% in afternoon trade. Tokyo is down -0.5% in early Friday trade. Hong Kong is up +1.4%, but Shanghai is dow a minor -0.1% its open. Singapore has opened down -0.2%. Wall Street closed its Thursday trade with the S&P500 up +1.0% with a strong close.
OIL UP
The oil price is up +US$1 from this time yesterday, now just under US$71.50/bbl in the US, and at over US$75/bbl for the international Brent price.
CARBON PRICE UNCHANGED AGAIN
The carbon price is still within its tight range, today still at NZ$63/NZU. The next release of units at the official auction is on March 19, 2025. See our new daily chart tracker of the NZU price for carbon, courtesy of emsTradepoint.
GOLD FIRMER
In early Asian trade, gold is up +US$18 from this time yesterday, now at US$2925/oz.
NZD FIRM
The Kiwi dollar has risen +40 bps from this time yesterday, now at 56.8 USc. Against the Aussie we are up +10 bps at 89.9 AUc. Against the euro we are unchanged at 54.3 euro cents. This all means the TWI-5 is now just under 67.1 and up +20 bps.
BITCOIN SLIPS
The bitcoin price is down -1.3% from this time yesterday, now at US$96,806. Volatility of the past 24 hours has been modest at just on +/- 1.4%.
Daily exchange rates
Select chart tabs
Daily swap rates
Select chart tabs
This soil moisture chart is animated here.
Keep abreast of upcoming events by following our Economic Calendar here ».
70 Comments
Public Service sector 'not fit for purpose', new commissioner says
"Whether we like it or not, the guise of collaboration has driven us towards a consensus-based model, where we're essentially held ransom by the slowest participant or the poorest performer, and that has to be addressed."
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/541861/public-service-sector-not-f…
He sounds pretty reasonable, actually:
Despite criticism from previous Public Service Minister Nicola Willis of wasteful spending across government, Sir Brian did not believe it was at "any substantive scale", but the sector had built up elaborate sets or architecture that needed to be addressed.
"Every now and again, vacuum cleaners need to have their dust bag cleared, because they become more effective."
Sir Brian said ...the current model was too tied up in risk considerations and consultations, which he believed had become a mechanism to avoid decision-making.
I imagine some of that is related to gotcha reporting and the clogging of govt systems with OIA requests as a means of slowing govt down in the last decade.
Hence entered the consultant to format whatever project. Contracted with a disclaimer that exempts them from any liability. That way when said project goes pear shaped the council or government dept can blame the consultant and nobody at all can be held accountable. Said it before to say it again - a public service that is self serving, opinionated and unaccountable is a threat to society at large and democracy itself.
Seems realistic. If you look at division of people roughly half and half vote for Labour/National or other 2 party states around the world. Hence differing opinion on similar issues. Religion is the same. There’s a variety of differing religion that people on either side will always say the other is wrong. So if you build a larger public sector you raise the chances of differing opinions. If decisions are given a democratic type committee based process a larger group will have less chance of consensus. Whether the opposing group agrees or not we need decision making on issues. There’s always chance it will be wrong that’s what I’ve always assumed high salaries are for. Making decisions and taking the consequence either way.
AFR ‘Bin it’: Funke Kupper urges ASX to scrap diversity plan
The former chief executive of the ASX says new rules for listed companies to report on diversity should be thrown in the bin and the council which oversees them disbanded, as part of a battle to bring capital back to the public sharemarket.
Elmer Funke Kupper, a former chief executive of the ASX and Tabcorp and a current director of insurer Suncorp, was joined by the former Commonwealth Bank boss David Murray, a former chair of the Future Fund and AMP, to warn the current proposals go too far and should be scrapped.
Fascinating stuff by Wolfie Richter on the US consumer. And sorry to the DGMs, but some of the insights are quite incredibly positive. Recommended read.
- In P1Y, US disposable incomes rose at a faster pace than household debts.
- The resulting debt-to-income ratio of 82.0% in Q4 was the lowest ratio in the data going back to 2003, except for a few quarters during the free-money-stimulus era that had briefly inflated disposable income beyond recognition.
- Household debts that were 90 days or more delinquent by the end of Q4 inched up to 2.0%. Beyond the Free-Money era, we have to look back nearly 20 years to see a similarly low rate.
https://wolfstreet.com/2025/02/13/household-debts-debt-to-income-ratio-…
The data is sourced from the Fed. It is unlikely the data can be broken out by age, SEC, etc.
Anyway, total US h'hold debt to disposable income looks much lower - 80% - than in Aotearoa. The only data source I can find suggests household debt in Aotearoa was 167% of disposable income. But I think that is likely to be gross income, not disposable income.
Chris Trotter is an opinion author occasionally published on Interest.co, this is worth reading (worthy of submission to the TPB).
https://democracyproject.nz/2025/02/14/chris-trotter-visitors-with-vote…
I think I have to side with Seymour on the halal lunches. Food can be halal without being certified as halal. In Muslim countries, is every restaurant and food provider certified?
This is one of the many problems with schools giving lunches. Better for the parents to do it to their specifications instead.
We did, when we decided as a society if a kids parents are a disaster, since we are paying all this money to educate them we might as well pay for some food also so they can concentrate on the education provided, disrupt others less, and increase the systems chances of generating productive members of society.
It makes sense on a moral and economic level. Amazing that so many people think feeding hungry children is an outrage.
Its not all children, it all children in lower decile schools who want them. And that has nothing to do with shaming and everything to do with economies of scale and the impossibility of micromanaging a system like that in our country without great further cost...I am sure Act would have pushed for it if it was in any way feasible.
Even that left wing bastion, the USA, provides school lunches on a national level...
I grew up in a single parent household and would have loved to have lunches provided. We were not poor to the point where we had empty cupboards (though did not have money to buy canteen food at school), but dad would leave to work early and being teenage boys my brother and I were pretty useless and packing something substantial or that didn't get squashed in our bags. Most lunchtimes I remember being so hungry that I would do my friends' homework in exchange for sandwiches or bread rolls. This was at a mid to high decile school so luckily there were enough spoiled kids with lunches they didn't want.
Now 25 years later as a teacher I see kids acting just like I used to. It's not all about poverty, but rather the fact that kids need a good structure to their meals. Having the lunches takes a bit of pressure of families as well, especially as it is often the middle class ones who have two parents working long hours.
Good to see a comment about real life experiences which are sorely lacking in this blog. Too much stale theoretical speculation and too few accounts of real life financial impacts. Inotherwords, more of the 'concrete' and less of the 'abstract'; it would make for more interesting reading.
We could start teaching home economics again.
But it’s a more difficult subject now.
Cooking and sewing ain’t enough. The numbers don’t add up.
The clothes are now made in china and bought at the warehouse. The food….who’s got time cause the partners pay can’t pay the rent… and they have left
the kids are all f..cked up because the parents are too
the Ritalin can’t help because the parents do lines with it
rich or poor
Maybe add subjects such as “managing government assistance”, being a beneficiary of a trust and trust law, receiving child support from partners
that would help
but still the numbers dont add up
2025 NZ
I think the changes to the school lunch program have been bad.
If we are going to give kids school lunches, we may as well give them good quality lunches that are going to be eaten and provide solid nutritional value rather than (based on the photos I've seen) what appears to be slop you wouldn't feed your dog, such as "stinky toilet python on rice" and "pavement vomit casserole". I don't think I've ever had an airplane meal that looks as bad as the photos of the post-Seymour lunches, apart from perhaps the one time I ate a dodgy breakfast on the now-defunct Continental airlines and proceeded to do a fecal Jackson Pollock in Sydney airport after leaving me writhing in agony for half the flight.
The problem now seems to be that the food is so rubbish many are choosing not to eat it. So we are paying but wasting more ... is that really a meaningful saving? That is the worst of both worlds. A 'cost vs value' argument.
At this point we may as well make it a targeted thing and get over the fact that some kids will be singled out for having deadbeat parents who can't provide lunch, but at least make sure they get a good meal that is miles better than what they'll get at home.
However, I also don't think the taxpayer has any duty whatsoever to fund lunches that comply with anybody's religious beliefs. I fail to see how that's the government's responsibility in what is ultimately a secular society.
I think the opposite - if you are hungry, a jam sandwich should do.
Currently I am paying for my kids to have a decent school lunch (our school isn't quite poor enough but must be close), and other kids that aren't mine to have a decent school lunch. I am happy to make sure the other kids don't go hungry, but that stops at a basic sandwich. Before Seymour got involved I was paying more for some other kids lunch than I was for my own.
What you and others have not considered is that for many kids going to school they arrive hungry and the lunch might be the only food they get that day. More often than not there is no food in the house - none. There is no magicing up a jam sandwich - no bread, no jam. Dinner if they are lucky might be some take out. Food is often not prepared in these homes as there are no utensils to cook with let alone a stove that works. The parents are not at home when the kids go to school and they are often not at home when it is time for bed - working two jobs to pay the rent.
I am happy for the state to provide a jam sandwich. Drop off a few dozen loaves of budget bread and some jam to each low decile school, total cost a few cents per child. But Labour were paying something like $7 per child, that is more than I pay for my own lunch.
I don't think your argument stacks up. If both parents are never home because they are both working two jobs, they are pulling in some good money, even at minimum wage. If it only covers the rent, they must be living in Remuera or better.
Here is a real life example Jimbo. One kid used to walk over an hour to school each way. His mum was a drug addict and he had been sent to live with his dad who lived quite far from the school and worked 2 jobs to support both himself, his kids, his parents and his brother's kids (the brother has died and the mum had become an alcoholic).
He used to get to school having only eaten what some teachers had brought in for him the day before. This was not the most extreme example in the school. How do you expect that kid to concentrate and learn, by having one jam sandwich a day? Do you think that high carb high sugar snack is going to be conducive for that kid being calm in class or would he be hit with a sugar rush and cause disruption to all the other kids. And then what should the teachers do? Spend all their time managing behaviour or actually teaching? The kid was a lovely boy, despite the tragic personal circumstances and whilst he was never going to be a brain surgeon, with a bit of support he could plausibly pull himself out of poverty with a bare minimum education. Your jam sandwich would essentially means he would never get a decent education. And why? To save a few dollars on food that basically makes the investment in schools and teachers redundant. It's shit poor policy and a waste of my taxpayer money.
I suggest people like you are part of the problem. You have no experience of the actual reality, yet you are quite happy to be super confident on the right thing to do about these problems.
Let’s make it unlimited jam sandwiches. And a piece of fruit.
We had kids like that at my school too, and likewise teachers chipped in. More than happy for the state to instead. But we are talking $7 meals for many kids.
And it’s not just me paying for it; there are poorer working class parents at my kids decile 6 school that can’t provide such a good lunch for their kids yet are paying for someone else’s. I don’t image they are too chuffed.
I just don’t understand how people can believe this socialist dream where everyone gets a top quality life and yet some other idiots still bother working hard to pay for it.
Yep I’m a bit odd. My opinions change on a daily basis too!
Everyone is a result of their parenting. I had one parent who instilled the need for hard work and sacrifice and hates bludgers. And the other who was a modern parent that made me realise that the old ways are not normally the best. So I think that has made me progressive but not socialist.
Many schools already do. Breakfast clubs, was sponsored by Fonterra, not sure how it has been continued, maybe out of the lunch budget. Despite the exaggeration of sushi etc ( which is actually cheap to make), most schools were providing basic but nutritious food.
My main complaint now would be it doesn't look overly nutritious.
My oldest daughter makes a mean sushi roll, happy to make my lunch as she makes hers. Its real cheap like she can make for four people and its not $28... we normally make big dinners and the two kids take leftovers to school the next day, want to make this work better have microwaves at school kids can use... way cheaper then 120 days x $7
Nah JJ, when I look at the various areas govt waste money, including the insane amount of roadworks at the moment I would far rather a chunk of that went to giving kids a decent feed for lunch, and some morning tea, hell I would be rapt if we could get kids uniforms/shoes/jackets for winter and all the necessary stationery they require. If possible subsidise sports fees and kit for those who need it.
If we can give every kid a fair start it has to help, yep a heap of them will still blow it but if a few of them do well from being in class in the right clothes with the right gear and a full belly and they grow up to be the parents who provide for their children then maybe the cycle starts to break.
I've got three kids and keeping them fed and watered costs a lot I agree, but I would've happily forgone my tax cut if it went to something like this, it might just sound like leftist social policy bulls*t but I think its a lot better than paying for prison for them later maybe eh.
However, all that being said...I do think that if little Timmy has specific dietary requirements, especially for religious beliefs then it might fall into the "you need to provide your own lunch" bracket so I'm on your side there.
Real poverty is not getting a $7 lunch? In that case I live it daily.
Does the nation want a welfare system that guarantees the bare necessities, or one that guarantees a good quality of life? If it is the latter, I’m quite happy on the dole in a nice state house in Piha while my kids get a quality education and free school lunch. So how are we going to pay for it when no one needs to work?
The $7 lunch is the price we have to pay for not addressing poverty. If the kids weren't living in poverty they could quite feasibly be able to access lunches for less, like my kids do. I 100% do not resent money being spent feeding hungry kids, even if it means sometimes some kids who don't really need a lunch get fed. Especially when the evidence is that this is a massively positive investment.
It takes a village to raise a kid. We are the village
Agreed there.
Nothing more than a means for businesses to have the taxpayer subsidize their inability to pay living wages. Adjust the lower tax bracket(s) downwards instead.
Get rid of that, and the accommodation supplement (i.e. landlord subsidy) while we are at it.
We already have enough people on welfare, before you start adding in all the companies, rentiers etc who are dependent on other forms of it.
It actually was about $8.60 I just read. Surely it would be a lot cheaper to drop off basic ingredients (bread, fruit, spreads, etc) and let them make their own.
I do agree that it is a better investment than most welfare is. But that doesn’t mean it needs to be gold plated. And like all welfare it’s really unfair on some people that do try hard. There are plenty of poor families at my kids school that have to provide their own kids lunch simply because other families in the area pull up the average wage.
Whose lived experience? Jimbo's? He's said as much before.
If Jimbo has good lived experience of the type of poverty I describe above he can sure as hell pipe up himself and call me out, he doesn't need Mr I've consistently voted for the party with the wrong policies for the last few years to speak up for him.
I’m a bit of a JK, grew up in a very poor area but with a very good mother. I also voted Labour at the last 4 elections. But mainly because the right wing are so backwards and useless.
But I’m also capable of applying logic. If the welfare system tries to provide the poor with the same (or better) quality of life as the middle class, why bother working hard to be middle class? So many people work hard so their kids have a good life, but now you have to provide them with a $8.60 lunch each day just to be status quo. My kids are now in poverty!
How about you don't need to work particularly hard to be middle class and those that want to work harder can and they can get a little bit more.
What's happening now is that the rich take 90% then the other 10% is split between the poor and middle class. And the 'middle class' gets sucked into the argument that it should be the poor who lose out so they can get 9% instead of 8%.
Great comment.
Its a cycle and the odds of breaking that cycle when they are at adulthood is close to zero...lets try and give these kids a chance and maybe a few of them will break that cycle...lots of commentators on here like talking about investments...the ROI on a kid from a sh*tty background doing well and being a functioning member of society, who pays their taxes, and provides for their kids one day is a pretty decent return I reckon 👌
Shit food is a drug, worse than any other drug seen before (due to the amount of users). You aren’t going to fix it by the state providing some good food.
Look at the US, very rich people eating very bad food. The real fix is to make it unaffordable through a calorie tax.
It’s not just what you eat/drink, it’s mainly how much. When I was a young kid milk came in a pint bottle, now it’s a 2l, coke came in a can, now a 2l. Fish and chips was simply a fish and a few chips, now it’s a potato fritter and a squid ring and a donut and heaps of chips cause they are cheap. We are pretty much all addicted.
Drop off a few dozen loaves of budget bread and some jam to each low decile school, total cost a few cents per child.
Shit food is a drug, worse than any other drug seen before
Lmao.
My view is as adults, we can probably put up with shit food options better than growing children can, and I wouldn't consider white bread and jam lunch. Kids only get one chance at good nutrition when they're young and if they miss out that has lifelong consequences.
The real fix is to not supply it. Demand didn't exist before the product did.
How to encourage capitalism to supply healthy affordable products? Look at cereal production. Cheap sugary options and expensive healthier options. Why doesn't the manufacturer do away with the unhealthy and apply economies of scale to reduce the price of the healthy options? Is any of it any good though when you add in the GMO and chemicals to grow the stuff?
You've gotta go upstream to the "investment", the demand for ROI, the share market, the demand for capital.
And the other catch 22. Yay higher Farmgate payouts to pay for the malinvestment in land and debt equals higher prices for food staples.
Everything that is lauded as wealth building and investment is the driver of the downstream issues. But it's the beneficiaries and lower class that needs a bigger stick.
And ya wonder why AI produces less than intelligent results.
Or we could pull the rich out onto the street and cut their heads off like the French did and split their wealth between the rest of us.
If we're going to come up with ridiculous extreme solutions I'm liking the French Revolution Guillotine more than the Nazi Germany sterilisation programmes.
I can’t think of anything better I would rather see my taxes go to, with the exemption of health & education then ensuring our youngest and most vulnerable are fed - hell it’s an extension of public education & I would wager the improved results and decreased deprivation is cost neutral if not a net benefit for society at large.
Seymour is the definition of the short sighted self indulgent privilege we need less of if we want to prosper as a society.
Who feeds these kids in the school holidays? You know, the 13 weeks a year the little poppets aren’t at school + weekends and public holidays. Time we moved to money on cards for beneficiaries to track what they are buying. Everyone in business needs to justify the monthly credit card statement. Should be no different when it’s the taxpayers footing the bill for beneficiaries.
Time we moved to money on cards for beneficiaries to track what they are buying.
Who is going to track them, the coalition is cutting all back-office government jobs.
I demand more regulation and oversight but I also demand less people employed to do regulation and oversight🙄
FACTORY MOOD CHIRPY
Even though it is to a modest level, there was something of a surprisingly positive shift in the factory PMI for January. It lifted sharply into expansion after 22 long months in contraction.
Not the way most would describe it. So lets not get too carried away.
If it holds for the next few months ... It could be said we're in positive territory.
We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment.
Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.