Police Minister Mark Mitchell has defended the Government's latest pay offer to the country's police force that was firmly rejected by staff, lamenting the $8.5 billion spent on interest from the previous Government's spending that would have significantly helped the sector.

Meanwhile, Labour's police spokesperson Ginny Andersen has called Mitchell "tone deaf" and claimed he could do much more as a leader in his space.

The latest offer submitted to police was put to the vote on April 8, by the New Zealand Police Association (NZPA), giving members until 5pm yesterday to vote. A statement from the NZPA revealed more than 75 per cent voted against the offer.

As Mitchell revealed to Mike Hosking on Newstalk ZB this morning, the most recent offer included numerous lump sum payments, eye care and time-and-a-half overtime pay which would have been a sector first.

He was asked by Hosking if, hand on heart, the pay offer was a good offer.

"Absolutely," said Mitchell.

"Look, in terms of where we are at the moment as a country ... the fact that we're paying $8.5 billion in interest, I could increase our police service three times over with that money. And so we've put together a package that is a quarter of a billion dollars better than the offer that went forward in August."

Mitchell said the Government had done its best in what he said was a "very difficult fiscal situation" and pointed to his and Associate Police Minister Casey Costello's experience on the police force.

"We will fight and do the best we can for our police service. Casey was vice-president of the Police Association. So, look, we're doing everything we can, we respect the process and now it's going to final offer."

Hosking said NZPA's president, Chris Cahill, had accused the Government of not paying police as well as teachers and nurses, he asked Mitchell if Cahill had a point or just making things up.

Mitchell said, as a union, it was Cahill's job to push the Government for as much revenue as possible for the sector - and it was his job as a member of Cabinet to make responsible decisions for the country's future.

"Where the Government came in with $100 billion extra for additional borrowing on our economy, we have to be responsible," said Mitchell.

"We want a strong future for us as a country and that means making tough decisions - the fact of the matter is as I said to you, we're paying $8.5 billion in interest annually - I'd love to have some of that money to put towards a payoff for police."

Following news of the police rejecting the latest offer, Labour MP and former Police Minister Ginny Andersen hit back at Mitchell on X, formerly Twitter, saying he “talks a big game in opposition but has failed to deliver in Government”.

Talking to ZB Plus, Andersen spoke critically of Mitchell's leadership.

"[Mitchell] has shown he is tone deaf to the needs of police, and has been labelled a laughing stock – he could do so much more to be a leader in this space," she said.

"Police officers are expected to do more, including dangerously confiscating gang patches from gang members, but the Government will not pay them for it."

She also drew comparison between what her party had promised the police sector when it was in charge and what the current Government had offered.

"Labour offered police more money to be delivered over a shorter amount of time – and back pay was included in the offer that was provided by Labour. The Government has prioritised tax cuts for landlords. Labour would prioritise keeping communities safe, with well resourced, and fairly paid police."

When he put the offer to police, Cahill had made it clear to members that he believed it was the best the Government would offer in funding for the pay negotiations and arbitration would be the next step.

“If police and the Government genuinely value the role and commitment of officers, they need to lift their game in the remuneration stakes. They have one more chance to do that,” Cahill told the Herald.

"Our members were looking for a sincere effort by the Government to correct the crippling erosion of police living standards caused by the cost-of-living crisis and to recognise the increased challenges and dangers police officers face in keeping New Zealanders safe."