web analytics

Nats’ retrospective surveillance backdown

Written By: - Date published: 7:22 am, October 5th, 2011 - 27 comments
Categories: accountability, democracy under attack, law, national - Tags: , ,

The Nats most recent attack on democracy – the Video Camera Surveillance (Temporary Measures) Bill –  was outrageous in at least three respects. (1) It was an attempt to rewrite the verdict of the Supreme Court. (2) It was retrospective lawmaking which (except in benign cases such as validating legislation) is universally regarded as unacceptable.  (3) The Nats tried to (yet again) abuse urgency to ram it through without public scrutiny.

This authoritarian mess was almost universally condemned. Here for example is ex PM and constitutional law expert Sir Geoffrey Palmer:

Ex PM: ‘Fix it’ bill oppressive

The Government’s “fix-it” bill for police use of covert video surveillance gives police and all state agencies too much power, has insufficient checks and balances, and breaches constitutional principles, Parliament has been told.

Representatives from the Law Society, the Law Commission, the Criminal Bar Association and the Bar Association all rejected the Government’s Video Camera Surveillance (Temporary Measures) Bill in select committee submissions yesterday.

The bill would make legal covert video surveillance by state agencies on private property under a search warrant, a practice the Supreme Court has ruled was illegal. …

Former Prime Minister and constitutional law expert Sir Geoffrey Palmer was scathingly critical of the need for urgency and retrospectivity, which he said was unprincipled, oppressive and highly undesirable. “Laws should be prospective, open and clear … that is what fairness requires.”

Overturning the Supreme Court in this case was also a “constitutional perversion”, effectively elevating the Court of Appeal above the Supreme Court. … “If Parliament is to be supreme as the law-maker, then it needs to take principle seriously and not brush it under the carpet.”

After a brief select committee process Labour has secured significant concessions. Here’s Andrea Vance at Stuff:

Labour gains changes to surveillance bill

Labour has forced the Government to back down over controversial video surveillance laws.

After insisting the legislation go before a select committee before agreeing to support it, Labour has secured changes to more contentious aspects of the proposed law. … Labour will now lend its support after winning concessions from Attorney-General Chris Finlayson. It is understood ACT is also willing to support the revised legislation. The Green, Maori and Mana parties are all opposed to the legislation.

In pending cases, courts will be left to determine if evidence is admissible. To prevent convictions being overturned, the law that applied at the time of the verdict will stand. The legislation will only apply for six months – not one year as National hoped. …And only police and the Security Intelligence Service will be allowed to carry out “trespassory surveillance” – when a warrant is used to place secret cameras on private land in the investigation of serious crimes.

As Bryce Edwards puts it – “The Labour Party seems to have turned a very electorally-dangerous issue into a victory with its compromise agreement with National over the Police covert video surveillance fixit legislation … On a whole, National comes out of the whole saga looking weaker and less principled”.  Other positive coverage includes – Has Finlayson flunked?Goff hails victory in surveillance bill debate, and Govt waters down hidden camera bill.

For a much more critical analysis, however, see the always excellent Gordon Campbell at Scoop – On why the deal on Police covert video surveillance is a travesty (a piece which draws heavily from Andrew Geddis at Pundit).  Many of Campbell’s criticisms relate to the appalling process behind this Bill.  No argument there, but even so it was good to see Parliament work for once as it should, and at least partially check the Nats’ fondness for trampling on the democratic process.  The political Right like to vacuously accuse Labour of “arrogance”, but episodes such as this show all too clearly where the real arrogance lies.

27 comments on “Nats’ retrospective surveillance backdown”

  1. lprent 1

    Thanks for the links.

    Video evidence was always going to be a part of police work now that the tech is so cheap. The trick, like other forms of surveillance, was going to be to put its use under control rather than giving a carte blanche to any paranoid cop to trample over others privacy.

    So far, this act looks like step in the right direction. Whereas the origional one put up by Findlayson was a travesty. A supplication to the worst elements inside the police and a sop to the reflexive law’n’order voters that are a ban to the political process.

    It would have simply wound up with further abuses of the legal processes with insubstantial charges laid on the basis of quantity of evidence rather than the quality of it. The operation 8 charges show how the nutters in the police can use evidence gathered without a substantial process into a personal abuse of process. It has been a screwup from start to its eventual finish.

    • aerobubble 1.1

      The change is just as bad, from the fake outrage of too much judicial activism we’ve
      moved to too much judgical discretion in what amounts to reasonable searches.
      Given the lower courts are liable to favor full fair trials. But then there’s is the
      death to out liberty clause, the no appeals for overt surveilance.

      How is this any different!!! This is just as bad, no worse, because now it looks
      like parliament consents to this slippery slope theory of justice.

      Its wrong to collect too much information because invariably you will find
      a false positive that gets blown out of proportion and leaves citizens out of
      pocket, a large part of their lives fighting court cases based on bad policing.
      It does happen, police are human they make mistakes, and when they do we
      forgive them because they are human, and that’s why you need HIGH
      standards to keep human error at bay.

      This debate has been deplorable, its smacks of the worst kind of fascism
      to push through legal law changes at the 11th hour. Especially when the
      court case is ongoing that we all can’t talk about that eefective is being
      used to club us into consenting to this shit.

      If you spend you life fearful, building man traps, training, for the day
      Police come to arrest you, like they did your ancestors, then of course
      your activities should be investigated??? Or should Police wait until
      they have a drugs warrent to walk into a powder cake??? Do we have
      the right to do martial arts training, then reenact the battle of gettesburg
      with our mates and family???? Blow off a few fireworks, study political
      strife in the past? Is this all legal, where is the line to be drawn?

      Do Police have to have a lawful reason, accredited, sure hell yes,
      but should they also be limited in how they choose to measure, hell
      yes. If you have the choice of devices to use, the placement of
      them, the spectrum they collect, then each increasing diminsion
      of freedom implies a greater level of standard that must be operating.
      Because not all surveilance is the same, the more choice police have
      the higher the bar they need to reach.

      Pictures are worth a thousand words, so they should have a
      thousand times the restrictions of a audio bug, similarly if
      the Police are ‘fishing’ then they should be forced to tell the
      judge how the covert surveilance is to be set up, to avoid
      the dreaded unreasonable search.

      If I had a dollar for everytime a political activist set off alarm
      bells in agents of the state I’d be a very rich man, its not
      very hard at all to read too much into a heated political
      debate of radicals and then connect the dots up wrong.
      We’re in Iraq precisely because rats in washington decided
      to use 9/11, the three thousand dead, to invade a country.
      The billions spent on the militrary complex and private armies…

      • lprent 1.1.1

        I agree with you. But I think that you are missing the point of the whole search and surveillance debate.

        The police need to be able to carry out surveillance as part of their work. This needs to be both to get evidence about crimes committed and also preventative to stop crimes being committed. It isn’t hard for anyone to think of instances where that is required. The question is when and how should they be able to do so.

        The courts already had law in place via the evidence act which was that the crime had to be severe enough to justify unlawful acts in the collection of evidence. The supreme court reaffirmed that collecting evidence on private property without the owners permission was unlawful (with comments about similar questions). But the courts were and did look at the admissibility of the evidence.

        The problem is that the police collected the evidence unlawfully in the first place. They can argue all they like about how they thought that the current law applied. But essentially they are lying when they try to say that the courts would treat the evidence that was thrown out in this case as being anything other than unlawful.

        So who goes into the gun for collecting evidence unlawfully? Both in this case, in previous cases, and in subsequent cases? And what is the mechanism to do something about such events?

        Well there isn’t one and nothing is going to happen to the police who acted unlawfully. The missing part in the police/public system at present is that there are effectively no constraints on the police apart from what they choose to enforce against their own, and the rather feeble admonishments of the IPCA.

        That is the missing part. The police can literally do whatever they feel like to anyone under the current surveillance and search laws and the worst that will happen to them in the system outside of the police is that they will get told off by the IPCA. Inside of the police acting unlawfully usually seems to result in promotion as far as I can see.

        The only effective response or route that the public has is to start a civil court proceeding that will take years and cost 10’s of thousands of dollars. Not to mention that in the event that you win, you are unlikely to get a award that will cover your costs and it can be appealed.

        So regardless of the laws that parliament passes about search and surveillance there is nothing stopping the police collecting information on you. What parliament is concentrating on is what evidence will be admissible in court.

        • aerobubble 1.1.1.1

          If police find a video surveilance system then the footage would be inadmissable
          under normal circumstances unless the video evidence ‘detrimential’ to justice
          if not allowed. How Police ever got the idea that covert surveilance, the
          active positioning of a recording device was the same as happenstance
          finding video footage at the scene of crimes. You are wrong to say Police
          ever had authority to use footage from covert video because its so aggrievous
          to justice. Filming a murder might just be an ban of actors, filming a
          political meeting that gets heated people and get called aside by an
          under cover agent in line of the covert video.

          False positives are a reality, Police will proactively select to their biases and
          we will see more ‘terror’ raids when already a dozen people have been
          messed around for four years with nothing to show for it. Even if
          admitted such evidence is just as likely to be thrown out by juries
          insensed by the invasion of privacy. Justice cannot be rushed by
          parliament, or by Police ‘needing’ fishing excusions which will only
          enrage and push political actvists under ground.

          You see that’s he benefit of Human rights, they cost society less, and
          have a habit of letting views get aired before they turn into militant groups.
          Oh, but that’s the problem we have a parliament that like tail wags the dog.

  2. g says 2

    i seem to be missing something here, i thought the tories where all for less (nanny) state in our lives and yet we get this legislation.
    equally i see a major left wing party struggling to get traction in polls, rushing to the aid of the tories to help them push thru this disgusting piece of lawmaking.
    it has helped to decide where this one will vote come november and it aint gonna be for the nat lite crew. sorry guys.
    peace.

    • aerobubble 2.1

      Medical dope, Brash never said those words, every gang leader is now cheering
      how Brash has put himself at the table and wont talk any sense. Its obvious
      we need to move to cheaper alternatives for the aging population and this
      will harm gang income, so WTF ACT come out and dump pooh on the issue.
      An think about it, gangs are very freedom focused and also very threatening,
      just like ACT, who love liverty but come down hard on those they don’t like.
      Is ACT the front party for the gangs?

  3. TEA 3

    Never mind guys after the elections the torries will have free range to do what they want sad to say eh !

  4. KJT 4

    Labour should have filibustered this one. It is an even more important removal of our rights than the VSM bills trampling on the rights of students, to have a democratic vote on VSM.

    I too am getting frustrated by Labour’s own goals.

    This election will decide if we have a future. Either retaining enough assets to own our own economy or 3 more years of repressive laws and theft under National.

    A Government that will reverse the last 35 years of Neo-Liberal IMF dictated failure is essential.
    Three more years of the same disaster will leave New Zealand in an almost unrecoverable position.

    If all Labour are offering on this sort of decisions is slight variations on National’s theme. Why should anyone vote for them.

    • Lanthanide 4.1

      Labour was only able to filibuster VSM because of the particular rules around parliament for that bill. It was really a happy coincidence that they were able to do it for so long.

      That situation wouldn’t have existed with the new bill, and even more importantly since it is intended to be passed under urgency the filibuster could’ve lasted a couple of hours at most. That wouldn’t have achieved anything.

      • KJT 4.1.1

        Point taken.

        However sometimes it is important, simply, to register your disgust with removals of our rights.

        To follow principles rather than pragmatism.

        • Lanthanide 4.1.1.1

          They did. They achieved a select committee where all of the experts were 100% negative and against what National were trying to do. That in itself is pretty embarrassing for them (even the police wouldn’t comment on the “40 trials underway” bollocks that Key was trying to spin). Then they got the bill amended to get rid of the worst of it; only one concern remains as noted by micky at #6.

          It’ll be replaced by the proper search and surveillance bill early next parliament anyway.

  5. felix 5

    Disappointing, Labour. Not surprising though.

    I CAN HAZ OPPOSITION PARTY NAO PLZ?

  6. Charles Chauvel in particular did well in obtaining significant concessions from the tories.  I suspect that they thought they would get ACT to support.  But the ACT MPs, bless their cotton socks, rediscovered principle.
     
    There is one dead rat in the legislation, the right to appeal because of Hamed has been taken away.
     
    Previously an appeal could be lodged on the basis that the decision in Hamed represents a change in the law. Generally the chances of an appeal succeeding are poor, it has to be shown that there was a miscarriage of justice. As shown in Hamed the Court has a discretion to admit otherwise improperly acquired evidence, that the evidence would otherwise have been excluded, and that the totality of the evidence was not sufficient to maintain the conviction.
     
    There is no indication about how many appeals were possible and I would have thought this would be the first piece of information to justify such a decision.
     
    So there is still retrospective effect but it is minimal.
     
    I think the Nats wanted to tar Labour as being “unprincipled”.  Labour achieved significant changes and almost had the bill complying with constitutional principles.  But there is still this one blemish, of perhaps nil effect, but there may be a person or persons whose appeal rights have been taken away.
     
    Of course the tories should be held to blame for this.  It is just another example of their wanting to play politics with our constitution.

     
     
     
     

  7. queenstfarmer 7

    Good, looks like a fairly sensible compromise in the circumstances. Should be the last we hear about this – I can’t see the Nats or Labour wasting much campaign time on what is now settled.

    • lprent 7.1

      Not really. It is a short term fix. It will rise again next year when the search and surveillance bill finally comes though (after what 5 years?).

      It also leaves the issue of police accountability hanging out there to come up again after the operation 8 cases go through. Quite simply some police knowingly acted unlawfully in the way that they collected evidence. They used that evidence to puff paranoid delusions and mount a massive search and seizure exercise against people for no obvious reason. They appear to have knowingly falsely arrested and held people in prison, caused them to incur massive legal bills, and disrupted their lives in forcing them through a 4 year court battle. All because a few cops in Otahuhu have paranoid fantasies and a fetish for collecting evidence unlawfully.

      Obviously the police aren’t likely to do much about those cowboys and the IPCA is ineffectual. I think we will have a rather large and long civil court case going ahead against the police. Hopefully it will also be against the individual officers like Aaron Pascoe who look like they acted well outside the bounds of their duty.

  8. Lanthanide 8

    I’m not quite sure why everyone keeps using the term “retrospective”, when the correct term is really “retroactive”.

    Retrospective (from Latin retr, “look back”) generally means to take a look back at events that already have taken place. For example, the term is used in medicine, describing a look back at a patient’s medical history or lifestyle.

    An ex post facto law (from the Latin for “from after the action”) or retroactive law is a law that retroactively changes the legal consequences (or status) of actions committed or relationships that existed prior to the enactment of the law.

    • Blighty 8.1

      because the law ‘looks back’ at events in the past before it was passed.

      It’s the universally used legal term.

      • Lanthanide 8.1.1

        I can’t find much one way or the other, and google results for “retroactive law” and “retrospective law” are very close.

        Did find this, though:
        “The term is used in situations where the law is changed, making a previously committed lawful act now unlawful. Sir Stuart Bell used the term “retrospectivity” to describe the Thomas Legg audit of MPs’ expenses. Usually the terms ex post facto law or retroactive law are used. “

  9. Nick K 9

    Micky is right. Chauvel and Act (Hide mostly) worked together to get these changes. That’s the beauty of MMP. Hide’s departure is going to be a huge loss to this parliament.

    • Lanthanide 9.1

      Well not really.

      What is going to be a huge loss is Hide being replaced by Banks and possibly Brash. Just Hide leaving by himself though is no real loss.

  10. deemac 10

    looks like the compromise that Labour got was the best that could be achieved under the circs. Some people seem to forget that an Opposition has very limited powers. Plus this was a necessary temporary fix until the next Parliament looks at the matter in detail.

    • aerobubble 10.1

      I think its all suspect. Gangs will realize they are being filmed covertly, then
      they will act up to create a false trail that bungs up the courts for years.
      How parliament doesn’t get this aspect of reality, that the way you choose
      to measure dictates the outcome. Video found at a scene is pure luck if
      it shows guilt, that’s a whole different story in choosing the positioning
      of covert video equipment.

  11. BLiP 11

    Labour? The last bastion of civil liberties? FAIL.

  12. Jenny 12


    The Moderately Exciting Adventures of Middle Man

    If they bring a knife to the fight – – I bring a Reasonable Bipartisan Compromise!

  13. The end result was due to input from a number of parties and individuals, and a pragmatic correction by National.

    Peter Dunne:
    The outcome on this Bill is a good one. Once the original proposals were made public, it became obvious that the provisions regarding retrospective application and the twelve month temporary life of the Bill were not going to fly with the public, and that change was required.

    Although I was not part of the select committee which gave brief consideration to the legislation I did have a number of discussions with my Ministerial colleague the Attorney-General (whose office just happens to be next to my mine, so our conversations were frequent). We agreed from a very early stage that the best outcome would be to drop the retrospective provisions and to limit the life of the Bill to just 6 months, provisions which have ultimately come to pass.

    While it may not suit some people’s preferred narrative of these events, the Herald’s editorial is a fairly accurate summary of what happened.

    There’s a lot that goes on behind the scenes in government, and a lot of false assumptions and flakey claims made on blogs.

    • Pete this bill was an abomination and raised such a stink from the Law Profession that the Government had to back down. 
       
      And Pete the Poodle’s claims that he somehow influenced the legislation to improve it is a joke.  He pledged support from the start. 
       
      It is only the actions of the other parties, including ACT, that meant that the most appalling provisions were toned down.
       

      • Pete George 13.1.1

        Can you back up your claim or are you making it up?

        Dunne’s claims are backed up by this:

        Editorial: Surveillance law shows MMP’s worth

        Its partners, Act, United Future and the Maori Party, hesitated to grant police retrospective authority….

        These concessions, sufficient to win the support of Labour, Act and United Future…

        As the Herald says (and I have said previously) – this was a good example of MMP at work, something flawed (and neglected for over a decade) became the best possible compromise due to the input of multiple parties, law groups and individuals.

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

  • Private schools beneficiaries of extra cash
    Plans to give more taxpayer money to private schools at a time when state schools are struggling to make ends meet says everything about the National Government’s twisted priorities, Labour’s Education spokesperson Chris Hipkins says. “Not only did this year’s ...
    4 hours ago
  • Inequality getting worse under National
    Inequality is getting worse under National with almost 60 per cent of the wealth in this country concentrated in the hands of the top 10 per cent according to Statistics NZ figures released today, says Labour’s Finance spokesperson Grant Robertson. ...
    7 hours ago
  • Government freezes elderly out of insulation subsidy
    Government cuts to the Warm Up New Zealand insulation subsidy means it will now only be available for rental properties and could leave many elderly homeowners cold this winter, Opposition Leader Andrew Little says. “In this year’s Budget the Government ...
    1 day ago
  • Shewan report delivers rebuke to National
    John Shewan’s report into foreign trusts is a rebuke to John Key and the National Party who have protected an industry that has damaged New Zealand’s reputation, says Labour’s Finance spokesperson Grant Robertson. “Three years ago the Inland Revenue Department ...
    1 day ago
  • Auckland Airport rail analysis must be made public
    The Government should publicly release its detailed analysis of rail to Auckland Airport before it closes off options, so the public can have an informed debate, says Labour’s Auckland Issues spokesperson Phil Twyford. The Transport Agency today said it is ...
    1 day ago
  • Minister approved OIO consent despite death and investigations
    Louise Upston must say if she knew Intueri was being prosecuted for the death of a student and under a funding investigation when she approved its overseas investment consent to buy another education provider, says Labour’s Land Information and Associate ...
    2 days ago
  • Brexit vote costs NZ effective EU voice
    Despite being extremely close the result of the referendum in Britain reflects the majority voice, Labour’s Foreign Affairs spokesperson David Shearer says. “While we respect the decision to leave the EU, it goes without saying the move will usher in ...
    4 days ago
  • Pasifika Education Centre doomed
    The Pasifika Education Centre appears doomed to close down this December, says Labour’s Pacific Island Affairs spokesperson Su’a William Sio  “In a written question I asked the Minister whether he would put a bid in for more money. His answer ...
    4 days ago
  • Onetai Station review a shameful whitewash
    A report released today on the Overseas Investment Office’s (OIO) good character test is a whitewash that does nothing to improve New Zealand’s overseas investment regime, says Labour’s Land Information spokesperson David Cunliffe. “The review of the good character test ...
    4 days ago
  • We need a national strategy to end homelessness now
    Long before I entered Parliament, housing and homelessness were issues dear to my heart. I know from personal experience just how hard it is to find an affordable home in Auckland. In my maiden speech, I talked about how when ...
    GreensBy Marama Davidson
    4 days ago
  • Capital feels a chill economic wind
      Wellington is on the cusp of recession with a sharp fall in economic confidence in the latest Westpac McDermott Miller confidence survey, says Labour’s Regional Development spokesperson David Clark.  “Economic confidence amongst Wellingtonians has dropped 12% in the past ...
    5 days ago
  • Dive school rort took six years to dredge up
    News that yet another private training establishment (PTE) has rorted the Government’s tertiary funding system since 2009 shows that Steven Joyce has no control of the sector, says Labour’s Associate Education (Tertiary) spokesperson David Cunliffe. “Like Agribusiness Training and Taratahi, ...
    5 days ago
  • National’s housing crisis hitting renters hard
    National’s ongoing housing crisis is causing massive rental increases, with Auckland renters being hit the hardest, says Labour’s Housing spokesperson Phil Twyford. ...
    5 days ago
  • A Day with the PSA
    This week, along with Labour MP Kris Faafoi, I accepted an invitation to spend a day working alongside the good folk at the Public Service Association in Wellington. As the Workplace Relations and Safety spokesperson for the Greens, I was ...
    GreensBy Denise Roche
    5 days ago
  • A Day with the PSA
    This week, along with Labour MP Kris Faafoi, I accepted an invitation to spend a day working alongside the good folk at the Public Service Association in Wellington. As the Workplace Relations and Safety spokesperson for the Greens, I was ...
    GreensBy Denise Roche
    5 days ago
  • Government holds Northland back
    New information shows Northland remains the most economically depressed region in New Zealand, says Labour’s Regional Development spokesperson David Clark. “The latest Westpac McDermott Miller regional survey found that more Northlanders believe their local economy will deteriorate this year than ...
    5 days ago
  • Rebstock report into MFAT leaks a disgrace
    An Ombudsman’s report on the Paul Rebstock investigation into MFAT leaks shows the two diplomats at the centre of the case were treated disgracefully, says Labour’s State Services spokesperson Kris Faafoi.  “The Ombudsman says one of the diplomats Derek Leask ...
    5 days ago
  • More families forced to turn to food banks for meals
    Increasing numbers of families are having to go to food banks just to put a meal on the table, according to a new report that should shame the Government into action, says Labour’s Social Development spokesperson Carmel Sepuloni. ...
    5 days ago
  • We have a housing emergency in New Zealand
    Auckland, New Zealand, where house prices have risen 20 percent in the last year alone We have a housing emergency in New Zealand.  Like many people we are ashamed and angry that in a wealthy country like ours, we have ...
    GreensBy Eugenie Sage
    6 days ago
  • We have a housing emergency in New Zealand
    Auckland, New Zealand, where house prices have risen 20 percent in the last year alone We have a housing emergency in New Zealand.  Like many people we are ashamed and angry that in a wealthy country like ours, we have ...
    GreensBy Eugenie Sage
    6 days ago
  • Aussie reforms signal trouble ahead for school funding plan
    Plans by the Government to return to bulk funding are likely to see increased class sizes and schools most in need missing out on much-needed resources, Labour’s Acting Education spokesperson Grant Robertson says. “The signaled return to bulk funding is ...
    6 days ago
  • Toxic Sites – the down low on the go slow
    In  2011, I negotiated an agreement with the National Government to advance work on cleaning up contaminated sites across the country. This included establishing a National Register of the ten worst sites where the creators of the problem could not ...
    GreensBy Catherine Delahunty
    6 days ago
  • Aucklanders face new motorway tax of up to $2500 a year
    The Government wants to tax Aucklanders thousands of dollars a year just to use the motorway network, says Labour’s Auckland Issues spokesperson Phil Twyford. “Officials estimate the average city commute is 11.8km. This means for the average Aucklander commuting five ...
    6 days ago
  • 15 corrupt bank managers identified in student fraud
    New information show 15 bank managers in India have been identified by Immigration New Zealand as presenting fraudulent documents on behalf of foreign students studying here, Labour’s Immigration spokesperson Iain Lees-Galloway says. “Documents obtained by Labour under the Official Information ...
    6 days ago
  • National leaves Kiwi savers the most vulnerable in OECD
    News last week that Israel’s Finance Minister will insure savers’ bank deposits means New Zealand will be left as the only country in the OECD that has no deposit insurance to protect savers’ funds should a bank fail. Most Kiwis ...
    GreensBy James Shaw
    1 week ago
  • Comprehensive plan for future of work needed
    A Massey University study showing many New Zealanders are unaware of the increasing role of automation in their workplace, highlights the need for a comprehensive plan for the future of work, says Grant Robertson, Chair of Labour’s Future of Work ...
    1 week ago
  • Another National Government failure: 90 day work trials
    On Friday last week, the Treasury released a report by MOTU economic consultants into the effectiveness of the controversial 90-day work trial legislation. The report found that there was “no evidence that the policy affected the number of hires by ...
    GreensBy Denise Roche
    1 week ago
  • Iraq mission extension case not made
    The Prime Minister has not made the case for extending the Iraq deployment another 18 months nor the expansion of their mission, says Opposition Leader Andrew Little.  “Labour originally opposed the deployment because the Iraqi Army’s track record was poor, ...
    1 week ago
  • Denial is a long river
    William Rolleston from Federated Farmers made the absurd claim on RNZ on Saturday that “we actually have very clean rivers”. This statement doesn’t represent the many farmers who know water quality is in big trouble and are working to clean ...
    GreensBy Catherine Delahunty
    1 week ago
  • Denial is a long river
    William Rolleston from Federated Farmers made the absurd claim on RNZ on Saturday that “we actually have very clean rivers”. This statement doesn’t represent the many farmers who know water quality is in big trouble and are working to clean ...
    GreensBy Catherine Delahunty
    1 week ago
  • Melanoma deaths could be avoided by an early access scheme
      The tragic death of Dunedin’s Graeme Dore from advanced Melanoma underlines the cruelty of this Government in promising a treatment but delaying for months, says Labour’s Health Spokesperson Annette King.  “Graeme was diagnosed with Melanoma last year. He used ...
    1 week ago
  • Assessing the Defence White Paper
    The Government’s recently released Defence White Paper has raised questions again about New Zealand’s defence priorities, and in particular the level and nature of public funding on defensive capabilities. The Green Party has a longstanding belief that priority must be ...
    GreensBy Kennedy Graham
    1 week ago
  • Kiwis’ confidence drops again: Economy needs a boost
    Westpac’s consumer confidence survey has fallen for the seventh time in nine quarters, with middle income households ‘increasingly worried about where the economy is heading over the next few years’, says Labour’s Finance spokesperson Grant Robertson. “This survey is a ...
    1 week ago
  • Relocation grant simply kicks can down the road
    The response by state house tenants and social agencies to the Government’s rushed plan to shift families out of Auckland tells us what we already knew – this is no answer to the chronic housing shortage, Opposition Leader Andrew Little ...
    1 week ago
  • Peace hīkoi to Parihaka
    On Friday a Green crew walked with the peace hīkoi from Ōkato to Parihaka. Some of us were from Parliament and some were party members from Taranaki and further afield. It was a cloudy but gentle day and at one ...
    GreensBy Catherine Delahunty
    1 week ago
  • Children’s Commissioner right to worry about CYF transition
    The Government must listen to the Children’s Commissioner’s concerns that young people under CYF care could be ‘negatively impacted’ as the new agency’s reforms become reality, says Labour’s Children’s spokesperson Jacinda Ardern. “Dr Russell Wills has used the second annual ...
    1 week ago
  • Bill English exaggerates PPL costs to justify veto
    The Finance Minister has used trumped-up costings to justify a financial veto against parents having 26 weeks paid parental leave, says Labour MP Sue Moroney. “Bill English’s assertion on RNZ yesterday that the measure would cost an extra $280 million ...
    1 week ago
  • Government must refund overcharged motorists
    Labour is calling on the Government to refund motor registration fees to three-quarters of a million Kiwi motorists whose vehicles were wrongly classified under National’s shambolic ACC motor vehicle risk rating system, Labour’s ACC spokesperson Sue Moroney says.“Minister Kaye’s ridiculous ...
    2 weeks ago
  • 90-day work trials an unfair failure which must change
    A new Treasury report shows the Government’s 90-day trials haven’t helped businesses and are inherently unfair, Labour’s Workplace Relations spokesperson Iain Lees-Galloway says. “The Motu report found that 90-day trial periods had no impact on overall employment and did not ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Massey East houses a start but Nick Smith should think bigger
    The Massey East 196-home development is a start but the Government must think bigger if it is to end the housing crisis, Labour’s Housing spokesperson Phil Twyford says. “It is great the Government is finally realising it needs to build ...
    2 weeks ago
  • More changes needed to ensure fewer cases like Teina Pora’s
    Teina Pora spent 21 years behind bars for a crime he didn’t commit, shafted by a Police investigation that prioritised an investigator’s hunch over the pursuit of credible evidence. Yesterday’s announcement that the government is to pay him $2.5m in ...
    GreensBy David Clendon
    2 weeks ago
  • New Zealand Labour sends condolences to UK
    The New Zealand Labour Party is sickened and saddened by the murder of British Labour MP Jo Cox, Labour Leader Andrew Little says. “Ms Cox was killed in cold blood while simply doing her job as a constituent MP. She ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Shameful refugee quota increase still leaves NZ at the bottom of the list
    Minister for Immigration Michael Woodhouse announced this week that the government will put off increasing the refugee quota by 1000 places until 2018.  It’s a shameful decision that undermines the Government’s claim that it takes its international humanitarian obligations seriously, ...
    GreensBy Denise Roche
    2 weeks ago
  • Paula Bennett as a victim hard to swallow
    The National Party spin machine has gone into overdrive to try and present Paula Bennett as the victim in the Te Puea Marae smear saga, says Labour Housing spokesperson Phil Twyford. “Bill English in Parliament today tried valiantly to paint ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Voters to have the final veto on paid parental leave
    New Zealanders will have the final right of veto on a Government that has ignored democracy and is out of touch with the pressures and demands on families, says Labour MP Sue Moroney. “Today’s decision by National to veto 26 ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Collins should put Kiwis’ money where her mouth is
    Labour’s Police spokesman Stuart Nash is calling on anyone who has received a speeding ticket for going up to 5km/h over the 100km/hr open road speed limit to write to him and he will take it up on their behalf ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Where is the leadership on equal pay for work of equal value?
    The gender pay gap in the public service is worse than in the private sector. I’ve always found this particularly galling because I expect our Government to provide an example to the private sector on things like human rights, rather ...
    GreensBy Jan Logie
    2 weeks ago
  • Kiwis’ real disposable income goes nowhere for the year
    New Zealanders’ hard work for the last year resulted in no increase in real disposable income, showing Kiwis aren’t getting ahead under National, says Labour’s Finance spokesperson Grant Robertson. “Today’s GDP figures reveal that real gross national disposable income per ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Pora case a case to learn from
    Conformation that Teina Pora will receive $2.5million from the Crown for more than 20 years of wrongful imprisonment does not fix the flaws in our system that led to this miscarriage of justice, Labour’s Justice spokesperson Jacinda Ardern says. “The ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Government needs to start again with RMA changes
    The National Government’s proposed changes to the Resource Management Act have attracted more than 800 submissions, many of them critical of key aspects of the Resource Legislation Bill. There has been much criticism of the new regulation making powers given ...
    GreensBy Eugenie Sage
    2 weeks ago

Public service advertisements by The Standard

Current CO2 level in the atmosphere