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.


History

27 comments on “Nats’ retrospective surveillance backdown”

  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


History

  • Correction over Talley’s statement
    Labour’s Workplace Relations spokesperson Iain Lees-Galloway has been advised by AFFCO Ltd that AFFCO is not advertising for staff in the Manawatu through MSD as stated in a press statement released earlier today.  “I have been advised by AFFCO that ...
    2 days ago
  • Minister, cut your losses – withdraw this doomed Bill
    Local Government Minister Sam Lotu-Iiga’s request for a five month extension on the report back date for the Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill (No 2) is an admission that the Bill is fundamentally flawed, says Labour’s Local Government Spokesperson ...
    2 days ago
  • Coleman’s cuts create crisis
    Mental health services in New Zealand are in a state of crisis with Youthline saying that calls for extreme depression doubled last year, says Labour’s Associate Health spokesperson Dr David Clark.  “About 150 young Kiwis are missing out on help ...
    2 days ago
  • Government helping Talley’s to break workers
    The Ministry for Social Development appears to be assisting Talley’s-Affco replace experienced workers effectively locked out by the company, say Labour’s Social Development spokesperson Carmel Sepuloni and Workplace Relations spokesperson Iain Lees-Galloway. “MSD is advertising for meat processing workers for ...
    2 days ago
  • Electives lag due to $1.7 billion hole
    The lag in hip and knee replacements is a direct consequence of the Government’s $1.7 billion underfunding of health, says Labour’s Associate Health spokesperson Dr David Clark.  “A comprehensive study by the University of Otago says that the rate of ...
    2 days ago
  • Speech to Master Builders’ Constructive conference
    Today’s all about being Constructive. And that is good because I believe there is a hunger out there for positive solutions. We must be able to believe there can be a better future. ...
    2 days ago
  • Māori Party housing plan complete failure
    The Māori Party’s housing plan to put more Māori into more homes has been a complete failure with fewer than five loans granted per year, says Labour’s Maori Development spokesperson Kelvin Davis. ...
    3 days ago
  • Fund IRD better to go after tax avoiders
    National’s Tax Working Group used the following graph (p30) in 2010 as part of their justification to cut the top tax rate. The big peaks around the top tax threshold were evidence of a suspiciously high number of taxpayers ...
    GreensBy robert.ashe
    3 days ago
  • Pasifika youth ignored by the Government
    The Adolescent Health Research Group’s new report on the wellbeing of young Pacific people shines a spotlight on the Government’s failure  to deliver any “brighter future” for them, says Labour’s Pacific Island Affairs spokesperson Su’a William Sio.  “Their research shows ...
    3 days ago
  • Police in the provinces are dissatisfied
    Police in the cities of Gisborne, Napier and Hastings are a lot more unhappy than their big city cousins says Labour’s Police Spokesman Stuart Nash.     “In fact the top four districts for enjoyable work within NZ Police are ...
    3 days ago
  • Govt action needed after Wheeler holds
    The Reserve Bank Governor’s warning that “excessive house price inflation” is posing a risk to financial stability puts the pressure back on the Government to take action to address the housing crisis, says Labour’s Finance spokesperson Grant Robertson. “Graeme Wheeler’s ...
    3 days ago
  • Minister confirms – new ministry only about abuse
    ...
    4 days ago
  • Silver Ferns Farms decision a tragedy
    The rubber stamping by the Overseas Investment Office of the Shanghai Maling buyout of Silver Fern Farms is a sorry day for the once proud New Zealand meat sector, says Labour’s spokesperson for Primary Industries, Damien O’Connor.  “Generations of Kiwis ...
    4 days ago
  • Benching Nick Smith first step to Kermadec solution
    Side-lining Nick Smith must be the first step in sorting out the Government's Kermadec debacle, says Labour's Fisheries Spokesperson Rino Tirikatene. “Last week Labour called for Nick Smith to be removed from further negotiations with Te Ohu Kaimoana over the ...
    5 days ago
  • Parents, schools, teachers oppose bulk funding
    Overwhelming opposition to the National Government’s school bulk funding proposal is unsurprising and Hekia Parata should now unequivocally rule out proceeding with the idea, Labour’s Education spokesperson Chris Hipkins says. “Bulk funding could only lead to bigger class sizes or ...
    5 days ago
  • MBIE gives up on enforcing the law
      The Government must provide labour inspectors with the resources they need to enforce basic employment law after reports that MBIE is only prosecuting the worst cases, says Labour’s Workplace Relations and Safety spokesperson Iain Lees-Galloway.  “Today’s news that MBIE ...
    5 days ago
  • West Coast population declines amid bleak economic forecast
    Despite the country experiencing record population growth, the number of people living in the West Coast fell, highlighting struggles in the region from low commodity prices and a poor economic forecast, says Labour’s Economic Development spokesperson David Clark. “The latest ...
    5 days ago
  • Recovery roadblocks cause for concern
    Strong pressure on mental health services, a flagging local economy and widespread issues with dodgy earthquake repairs are all causes for concern for people in Canterbury according to a new survey, says Labour’s Canterbury spokesperson Megan Woods. “Today the CDHB’s ...
    5 days ago
  • Motel purchase must not kick people onto the street
    The Government’s purchase of a South Auckland motel to house the homeless must come with a promise that the current long term tenants will not be kicked out onto the streets, says Labour’s Housing spokesperson Phil Twyford. “It is bizarre ...
    6 days ago
  • Not everyone singing along to so-called rock star economy
    The Westpac McDermott Miller Confidence Survey shows there is serious unease about the economy’s ability to deliver benefits to many New Zealanders, despite the Government trumpeting headline figures, says Labour’s Finance spokesperson Grant Robertson. “According to this survey a significantly ...
    6 days ago
  • Youth no better off under National’s “guarantee”
    John Key’s Youth Guarantee is such a spectacular failure that those who undertake the programme are more likely to end up on a benefit and less likely to end up in full-time employment than those who don’t, Leader of the ...
    7 days ago
  • More low-skilled students becoming residents
    New figures showing international students now make up nearly 40 per cent of all principal applicants approved for New Zealand residency and that their skill level has fallen dramatically, are further evidence that National’s immigration system is broken, says Labour’s ...
    1 week ago
  • 35% of offshore speculators paying no tax
    Offshore investors are aggressively exploiting tax breaks to pay no tax on their rental properties according to IRD data released by Labour’s Housing spokesperson Phil Twyford. “35% of offshore investors are paying no tax on their properties, and are pocketing ...
    1 week ago
  • Friday fish dump stinks
    This government has dumped bad news on a Friday to try to avoid political scrutiny in Parliament, says Labour’s Environment spokesperson David Parker. ...
    1 week ago
  • OECD report card: National must try harder
    The OECD report on education shows there’s much more to be done for young Kiwis, Labour’s education spokesperson Chris Hipkins says. ...
    1 week ago
  • Kermadec stoush shows Maori Party double-standards
    The Māori Party’s reaction to the trampled Treaty rights and the Government’s lack of consultation on the Kermadec Ocean Sanctuary reeks of the same arrogant mismanagement of the unpopular Maori land reforms, Ikaroa-Rāwhiti MP Meka Whaitiri says. ...
    1 week ago
  • Flawed fish dumping calls
    The finding that MPI failed to properly enforce the law even when it had evidence of fish dumping seriously damages the trust and credibility of the Ministry, the industry and this Government, Labour's Fisheries Spokesperson Rino Tirikatene says. ...
    1 week ago
  • Sidestepping Smith should be side-lined
    Nick Smith's arrogance and disrespect towards Māori is putting the future of the Kermadec Ocean Sanctuary at risk and he needs to excuse himself from further negotiations with Te Ohu Kaimoana, Labour's Fisheries spokesperson Rino Tirikatene says. ...
    1 week ago
  • Government must respond to cash for jobs scam
    Urgent Government action is required to halt  the emerging cash-for-jobs immigration scandal that is taking hold in New Zealand says Labour’s Immigration Spokesperson Iain Lees-Galloway.  “Stories of rogue immigration agents scamming thousands of dollars from migrant workers are just further ...
    1 week ago
  • Government dragging its feet on surgical mesh
    Jonathan Coleman is dragging his feet over any action to protect New Zealanders from more disasters with surgical mesh, says Health Spokesperson Annette King.  “The Government’s pathetic response is to claim all will be fixed by a new regime to ...
    1 week ago
  • Labour’s baby number app goes gangbusters
    An interactive tool that celebrates Labour’s achievements in health over the decades has become an online hit, says Labour’s Health spokesperson Annette King.  “Since the tool was launched last night, 18 thousand people have used it to find their baby ...
    1 week ago
  • Real disposable income falls in last three months
    Kiwis are working harder than ever but real disposable income per person fell in the last quarter thanks to record population increases, Labour’s Finance spokesperson Grant Robertson said. ‘In Budget 2016 the National Government said that what mattered most for ...
    1 week ago
  • Baby number app celebrates Labour achievements
    Labour has launched an interactive tool that allows New Zealanders to take a look back at our achievements in health over the decades, says Labour’s Health spokesperson Annette King.  “Today is the 78th anniversary of the Social Security Act 1938, ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Legal experts unpick Māori land reforms
    One of New Zealand’s top law firms has joined the chorus of legal experts heavily critical of the controversial Te Ture Whenua Maori Bill, adding more weight to the evidence that the reforms fall well beneath the robust legal standards ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Industries most reliant on immigration worst offenders
    The industries most reliant on immigration are the worst offenders when it comes to meeting their most basic employment obligations, says Labour’s Immigration spokesperson Iain Lees-Galloway.  “The industries that are most reliant on immigration are Hospitality, Administration, Agriculture, Forestry and ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Time to remove law that discriminates against sole parents
    It’s time to repeal a harmful law that sanctions those who do not name the other parent of their child, Labour’s Social Development Spokesperson Carmel Sepuloni says. “Every week, 17,000 children are missing out because their sole parent is being ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Government handling of Kermadecs threatens Treaty rights
    ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Prime Minister should give Police Minister some backbone
    The Prime Minister should condemn the ridiculously light sentence given to Nikolas Delegat for seriously assaulting a police woman, Labour’s Police spokesman Stuart Nash says. ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Government listens to Labour on family violence
    Labour is pleased the Government has finally acted on strengthening a range of measures against family violence, says Labour’s spokesperson on Family Violence Poto Williams.  “Some of the latest changes including a new family violence offence of non-fatal strangulation is ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Government must rethink paying for police checks
    National’s decision to ignore the concerns of charities will see the voluntary sector face hundreds of thousands of dollars in new costs if the Policing (Cost Recovery) Amendment Bill passes, says Labour's Community and Voluntary Sector spokesperson Poto Williams.  “National’s ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Seven months for families in cars to be housed
    Disturbing new figures show it is now taking the Ministry of Social Development an average of seven months to house families who are living in cars, Leader of the Opposition Andrew Little says.  “John Key made a song and dance ...
    2 weeks ago
  • North Korea test must be condemned
    The nuclear test by North Korea that registered 5.3 on the Richter scale needs to be condemned, says Labour’s Foreign Affairs spokesperson David Shearer. “This test, coming hard on the heels of a missile launch a few days ago, shows ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Tribe footing the bill for Maori Party?
     Waikato-Tainui deserve committed representation, yet the President of the Maori Party is muddying the waters by confusing the core business of the tribe with party politics, says Labour’s Hauraki-Waikato MP Nanaia Mahuta.  “The only way to fix this growing negative ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Schools set to lose millions
    Schools will start 2017 grappling with a $7.8 million funding cut, Labour’s Education spokesperson Chris Hipkins says. “Hekia Parata has been adamant changes to the way our schools are funded would see them better off. ...
    2 weeks ago
  • 70% of families in cold, damp homes powerless to fix them
    Shocking new figures out today show 70 per cent of the families living in cold, damp homes are powerless to make improvements because they are in rental properties, Labour’s Housing spokesperson Phil Twyford says. “The 2016 Household Incomes Report highlights ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Wealth inequality at record levels
    The housing crisis is making inequality worse, with housing costs in New Zealand now way out of proportion for those on the lowest incomes, according to the 2016 Household Incomes Report, says Labour’s Finance spokesperson Grant Robertson. “Most New Zealanders ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Migrant exploitation must be stamped out
    Migrant workers are being treated like slaves by rogue employers and the Government has failed to get on top of the issue, says Labour’s Immigration spokesperson Iain Lees-Galloway.“A report released by Caritas Aotearoa details ongoing exploitation of migrant workers such ...
    2 weeks ago
  • The Cooks embarrass New Zealand
    New Zealand is lagging behind the Cook Islands in ratifying the Paris Agreement on Climate Change but now the island state has surprised the world and cut its carbon emissions, says Labour’s spokesperson on Pacific Climate Change Su’a William Sio.  ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Minister negligent in ignoring Land Court judges
    Māori Development Minister Te Ururoa Flavell is negligent by refusing to engage with the Māori Land Court judges, who presented submissions on the Ture Whenua Bill at select committee today, Ikaroa-Rawhiti MP Meka Whaitiri says. ...
    3 weeks ago
  • Shambles sees National oppose affordable housing
    National’s shambolic handling of the housing crisis has today resulted in the Government opposing common sense measures to help more Kiwi families into homes, Leader of the Opposition Andrew Little says. “Despite knowing for the past three years the laws ...
    3 weeks ago


History


History


History