Source: Radio New Zealand
The New Zealand Herald front page the morning after the government announcement. New Zealand Herald
“Last week was not a particularly fun time for the government,” The Post’s deputy political editor Henry Cooke said in his weekly wrap of the week’s politics for Stuff.
Cooke cited bad Post poll results, “coalition squabbling” scuppering a four-year term referendum, and bad headlines about possible road tolls and Wellington tunnels.
“It’s no surprise that the governing parties have been focusing on their comfort food – policy areas where they feel supremely confident,” Cooke said.
Such as… law and order.
Last Sunday the PM announced new powers for police to move on city centre rough sleepers and beggars.
That came hard on the heels of rolling back plans to intensify housing in Auckland.
Christopher Luxon told Newstalk ZB’s Mike Hosking the new move-on powers came after listening to Aucklanders’ concerns. RNZ / Marika Khabazi
Christopher Luxon told Newstalk ZB’s Mike Hosking last Monday that change came after listening to Aucklanders’ concerns. But in the same interview he said he would not take on board objections to the announcement about where people without homes should live.
Earlier the Police Association leader Steve Watt had told Newstalk ZB moving rough sleepers and beggars on was not the best use of police time.
“You sound like a social worker,” presenter Mike Hosking told Watt, who had just explained that that was the position police officers did not want to be in – dealing with beggars and rough sleepers.
Time to set the news agenda
“It’s been announced on a Sunday because the government thinks it’s a winner. It sets the political agenda. Sunday night’s news is still the most watched night of the week,” former Green MP Gareth Hughes said on RNZ’s Nine to Noon last Monday.
“The decision was made by Cabinet in December and they chose to roll out this policy at the weekend after that spat over housing intensification in Auckland,” The Post’s national affairs editor Andrea Vance said on the RNZ’s political show The Whip.
On RNZ’s Focus on Politics, reporter Giles Dexter said it had been in the political pipeline since October last year, after city business owners and workers’ complaints about anti-social behaviour.
Business group Heart of the City “reluctantly” released a scathing survey and put a full-page open letter in the Herald urging government to act.
And if leading the news last Monday was the idea, that clearly worked.
“While politics eases into a quieter phase with Parliament in recess, the week started off on a strong note for the government with an announcement on move on orders,” The Post said on Monday.
But it also drew strong criticism from social agencies and welfare experts – and some journalists.
Pushback against orders
The plan is to tweak the Summary Offences Act so police could move on those over 14-years-old displaying disorderly, disruptive, threatening or intimidating behaviour.
It would also apply to all forms of begging and rough sleeping – and even behaviour “indicating an intent to inhabit a public place”.
Those moved on would then have to leave yet-to-be specified area for 24 hours by “a reasonable distance” which would be specified by police – or face fines of up to $2000 or three months in jail.
“I think it’s a cruel policy. The police and the social services have said that it won’t fix anything,” The Post’s Andrea Vance said, condemning it as “PPP – purely performative politics”.
Former National Party minister Wayne Mapp. Pool / Fairfax Visuals
But fellow Whip guest Wayne Mapp – a former National Party minister – argued people occupying prime CBD space was not fair on other people – and those trying to do business there.
“I just think that this is an extra power that police can use in the Summary Offences Act when they really need it. And by golly, I’ve seen situations where it would be handy.”
The previous government was also on shaky ground.
In 2023 its associate minister for housing Marama Davidson rounded on then-opposition MP Nicola Willis when she said women feared people the streets of Wellington. But Davidson hadn’t produced a single report, briefing paper or press release on the topic.
Jenna Lynch – the political editor at Newshub – subsequently revealed her ministerial diary had only two entries related to housing for the past three months.
This week the PM copped flak for citing the sensibilities of “Chuck and Mary from the US on the cruise of a lifetime pulling into Auckland” and visitors to the just-opened Auckland Convention Centre.
Others cited the soon-to-open CRL stations – and the long suffering businesses near them who are still open.
The Prime Minister, Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith and Police Minister Mark Mitchell all said it would be up to police officers to make this work – like the gang patch ban the same ministers all cited as well.
But while wearing a gang patch is a simple judgement for police officers to make, move on orders would apply to some people who haven’t committed an offence.
The Summary Offences Act already outlaws disorderly, threatening and offensive behaviour.
“Toughen up laws and you will be amazed how quickly the problem gets solved,” Hosking told his listeners, citing the decline in ramraids over the past year.
Maybe – but only if the problem is only outside businesses in our CBDs.
Move where?
If the people with problems are moved on, the problems are likely to go with them to streets and communities and businesses further afield.
“There are large encampments now outside of town centres all over the US – and I really don’t think that’s the sort of thing that New Zealanders want to see,” Community housing Aotearoa Chief Executive Paul Gilbert told ZB news.
ZB Drive host Heather du Plessis-Allan. NZME
But ZB Drive host Heather du Plessis-Allan seemed okay with it.
“Irritate them till they find somewhere like a cemetery to go and sit where the rest of us don’t want to be. Do you know what I mean? So they can go and camp somewhere by themselves and the rest of us can use Karangahape Road,” she said this week.
Homeless encampments in city cemeteries is not quite the intensification of accommodation that anyone else had in mind.
The bigger, tougher picture.
When TVNZ’s 1News at 6pm led with the move on orders last Sunday, they noted the government had already cut the numbers of people in emergency housing and motels last year – and restricted eligibility for it.
“The National Homelessness Data Project showed homelessness in Auckland more than doubled in a year, from around 400 in 2024 to more than 900 in 2025,” viewers were told.
On his own outlet The Kaka Bernard Hickey zeroed in on the potential cost if the law change is enforced.
“Removing 3,500 people from emergency accommodation at a cost of $233 per person per night saved $156 million a year over the last 18 months for the government,” Hickey calculated.
People living and working in Auckland’s central city protesting the move to force out homeless people. Supplied
New accommodation has been built, he said, but much of it is behind bars.
“According to Corrections, the government has helped fund and organise the creation of an extra 2,000 prison beds. They cost $552 per night. And various budget announcements in 2024 and 2025 have led to the delivery of 420 new homes and an extra 120 or so Housing First places,” Hickey said.
The Herald called the move on orders “at best a temporary fix”, which could also increase the burden on our justice and correction systems.
And it will fall to local councils and charities to cater for rough sleepers moved out of town and city centres (unless they are jailed).
Councils have already been told by the government to focus on the basics – and with future revenue restricted by capped rates.
After 8am on Wednesday morning, both RNZ’s Morning Report and the Mike Hosking Breakfast on Newstalk ZB had National and Labour MPs head-to-head arguing about who was really to blame for increased homelessness and disorder – in spite of fresh statistics showing crime and disorder was down for all of Auckland (if not just the CBD).
On his Blue Review blog, pundit Liam Hehir said the law change would move on people who are homeless, but not threatening or intimidating people – and not just in our three biggest city centres.
And police would exercise discretion in ways that inevitably won’t be consistent.
“The real task is to distinguish between conduct that threatens others and conduct that reflects hardship. The current proposal blurs that distinction and that invites uneven enforcement and erodes confidence in the law,” Hehir wrote.
It was just one opinion among many written or aired this past week – but one with a fair chance of ageing well if the suggested law change takes effect.
Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand
