Media Council upholds ferry project ‘over budget’ claim complaint
Monday, 4 May 2026
The NZ Media Council has upheld a complaint by Rt Hon Winston Peters, the Minister for Rail (Mr Peters) against The Post over reporting that claimed the Cook Strait ferry replacement project was $167 million “over budget,” finding the headline and article were inaccurate and misleading.
The ruling relates to The Post’s article published on March 11 2026 headlined “Cook Strait ferry project $167m over budget – and key port deals still unsigned”. The story relied on Treasury and Ferry Holdings Ltd documents released in March 2026, reporting that a “current cost estimate” of $1.867 billion exceeded the $1.7 billion Crown contribution and was therefore “over budget.”
Mr Peters complained that this framing was factually wrong. He argued the article misunderstood the difference between the total programme budget and the Crown’s capped contribution. As announced by the Government in November 2025, the total cost of the project is $1.867 billion, with the Crown contributing $1.7 billion and the remaining $167 million to be met by port companies for assets they will own.
The Post’s editor rejected the complaint, saying the article correctly reported that total estimated costs exceeded the Crown’s confirmed funding and that additional contributions from port companies were required to keep the project within its funding envelope. She described the dispute as one of interpretation rather than factual error and said describing the project as “over budget” was consistent with standard infrastructure reporting.
The Media Council found there was no evidence the project was over budget, noting that the $1.867 billion figure cited in The Post was exactly the same total programme cost originally announced by the Government.
The Council said the article appeared to conflate the Crown’s share with the total project budget and stated that while it is true the project relies on contributions from port companies, that does not mean it is over budget.
The Council ruled that readers would reasonably understand the headline and article to mean the project had exceeded its approved budget, when in fact the budget remained unchanged. Presenting the gap between the Crown’s contribution and the overall programme cost as an overspend was therefore misleading and as a result, both the headline and the article breached Principle (1) Accuracy, Fairness and Balance and Principle (6) Headlines and Captions.
The Council did not find a breach of balance in The Post’s reliance on official documents and noted the Minister had been offered a right of reply. However, it concluded the central claim in the article and headline was inaccurate.
The full Media Council ruling can be found here.