"News and information you can trust," says the voiceover before each RNZ news bulletin. Unfortunately, it seems the same couldn't be said for the state broadcaster's internal accounting.
Author
- Peter Thompson
Associate Professor in Media and Communication, Te Herenga Waka — Victoria University of Wellington
RNZ's 2025-26 annual report , released on November 9, revealed a NZ$11.8 million deficit - well in excess of the projected $470,000 loss in its earlier statement of performance expectations .
The accounting discrepancy (now subject to an independent review ) is a huge embarrassment for the RNZ board and executive team. The consequences for RNZ's ability to fulfil its public service remit are potentially dire.
Management and board were apparently unaware of the problem until the sudden resignation of the chief financial officer in early October.
A subsequent external audit of the accounts found multiple accounting errors relating to land sales, the Auckland office relocation, operational expenses, and personnel and redundancy costs.
A $5 million loan facility was also found to have been set up without ministerial approval, in breach of the Crown Entities Act .
These anomalies raise serious questions about the integrity of RNZ's financial governance, including the role of the board and its audit and risk committee. But the backdrop to the budget blowout is, if anything, of even greater concern.
Huge workforce cuts
As RNZ's statement acknowledged, the errors were not picked up in time to take corrective action during the financial year, meaning "RNZ did not reduce its cost base as it needed to in response to a 7% reduction in baseline funding".
That refers to the government's 2025 budget, which cut RNZ's annual funding by $4.6 million a year, to $62.3 million - a reduction of $18.4 million over four years. The 2026 budget further reduced RNZ's budget by $1.4 million.
In response, RNZ had already planned to cut 20 to 30 positions by mid-2027 ( 18 of which had already been agreed through a voluntary process).
But the unexpected $11.8 million shortfall is now projected to mean the loss of 58 positions by next March - roughly 16% of the workforce - along with at least a 5% cut to operating expenditure.
RNZ maintains it has adequate reserves to sustain it through a period of transition. But it projects a further $7.8 million deficit in the 2026-27 financial year, after which it will return to a sustainable footing.
As board chair Brent Impey has indicated, the crisis is not an existential threat to RNZ: the $11.8 million deficit mainly comprises one-off losses , including office relocation expenses and wrongly-accounted land sales.
But if the board's plan is to balance the books by the 2027-28 financial year, the concern is surely the impact this has on RNZ's role as a public service media operation.
Political hostility
In contrast to its financial management, RNZ's actual performance has been very positive.
In line with its letter of expectations from shareholding ministers, it has increased its online and linear audiences, reaching 83% of New Zealanders aged 18-plus each month. The 2026 JMAD Trust in News report ranked RNZ the most trusted New Zealand news source.
RNZ also played a civil defence role in 26 emergencies. It shared news content with dozens of other news media (within New Zealand and in the Pacific), and supported the expansion of the Local Democracy reporting scheme to 22 regional reporters.
According to a survey quoted in its annual report, 79% of New Zealanders agreed it is important for the country to have a public media organisation.
In this light, it's also important the apparent failure of financial governance not be conflated with wider criticism of RNZ as an essential civic institution.
But the latest budget shock has undoubtedly played into the hands of government politicians whose open hostility towards RNZ is well known.
New Zealand First leader Winston Peters (at the time also deputy prime minister) directly threatened the organisation's funding . Meanwhile, ACT's David Seymour (a shareholding minister of RNZ) criticised presenter appointments, alleged political bias and suggested cuts to RNZ's budget. He also called for an overhaul of the board and management.
Tempting as it may be for RNZ's ideological critics to point to recent financial failings as vindication of their concerns, it does not logically follow that RNZ's performance as a public media operation is in question.
On the contrary, what does merit review is the previous coalition government's decision to repeatedly cut RNZ's budget at the same time as demanding constant improvements in its programming performance.
An obvious solution
Whatever the complexion of the new government, a bailout would likely be a politically untenable response to a crisis ostensibly of RNZ's own making.
But that is not necessary anyway. As Impey has noted, the sale of a transmitter site in Auckland is due to bring in $51 million in the next financial year. The only question is how much of this revenue RNZ will be permitted to retain by the Treasury.
Even a quarter of that sum would be sufficient to offset the $11.8 million deficit. If that were permitted, there would be no need for additional redundancies and operational cost-cutting. RNZ could continue to deliver the services for which it is justifiably funded.
There is therefore an obvious solution and a straightforward political decision to be made. But it will require the support of RNZ's incoming shareholding ministers.
Regardless of which parties comprise the next government, they have a responsibility to ensure RNZ's civic, democratic and cultural functions are not undermined.
Peter Thompson has previously undertaken commissioned research on behalf of the Ministry for Culture and Heritage, NZ On Air, the Department of Internal Affairs, The Broadcasting Standards Authority, SPADA, and the Department of Canadian Heritage. He is a founding board member of the Better Public Media Trust and is an affiliate member of the Public Media Alliance.
