MIL OSI

Police are asking for the public’s help finding Awheo, who has been reported missing from the Northcote area.

The 15-year-old was last seen at about 9.50am on Monday 13 April and was heading towards the Glenfield area.

He is described as about 188cm tall with curly light brown hair and blue eyes and was wearing a black hoodie and black Nike shoes with red detailing.

Police and Awheo’s family have concerns for his welfare and would like to find him as soon as possible.

If you have seen Awheo or have any information that might help us locate him, please call 105, quoting file number 260416/3163.

ENDS.

Holly McKay/NZ Police

MIL OSI

A homeless woman’s dog impounded during a police and council operation has been put down despite public offers to pay for his registration.

Tauranga City Council acknowledged there were offers but claimed the dog’s owner did not provide other registration details, and the dog was too aggressive to be rehomed.

Marley, a 10-year-old male hunting dog, was one of two dogs impounded due to being unregistered during the 13 April operation targeting people living in cars at Sulphur Point.

The council said this followed complaints about antisocial behaviour, illegal vehicles and dogs; as well as months of warnings.

Marley was living in a car with his owner, Samantha Bradley.

She and her liaison, Animal Justice Party Aotearoa NZ general secretary Danette Wereta, learned late last month that the council’s animal services team euthanised Marley on 23 April, 10 days after he was impounded.

In her role as a liaison for Bradley, Wereta said she contacted the council shortly after the impoundment and confirmed funds were available to pay all required fees.

She said she struggled to get the council to recognise her as an authorised liaison, but after repeated requests, animal services agreed to contact Bradley on 29 April.

“Shortly thereafter, Sam phoned me in severe distress, saying she had just been told that Marley had been killed.”

Wereta said the council then contacted her and told her authorisation had been received, and that Marley had been euthanised on 23 April because he had not been registered within seven days.

“I had confirmed multiple times that funds were available to pay all fees as soon as authorisation was formally acknowledged, something that was delayed solely by the pound’s obstacles.”

Wereta said she was told Marley had been deemed “vicious” and failed a temperament test.

She said there was “lots of online footage showing how social Marley is”.

Wereta has made an official information request seeking detailed information about the process the council took before euthanising Marley, “despite clear ongoing communication”.

She said she had also lodged a formal complaint.

“It is deeply upsetting that Marley ultimately lost [his] life due to human communication failures and procedural barriers.

“We should have been looking at the system and saying, ‘How do we use it to support Sam?’”

Supporter Victoria O’Sullivan said she was among those who offered to pay Marley’s registration.

“From Sam’s Facebook posts … I can see that he is very well-cared for.”

Bradley said in a public Facebook livestream on 5 May that she was “never going to register the dog”.

She acknowledged people offered to help with the fee, but said it was “irrelevant” because other local homeless people did not get the same offer.

Bradley said Marley was social and often played with children, and she questioned how he failed the temperament test.

She said she was seeking legal advice.

‘Exceptionally aggressive’

Tauranga City Council said in an unattributed statement that the Animal Services team approached the matter with care and compassion, and plenty of time was given to look at other options.

The council said Bradley and Marley became known to the team after repeated complaints about dogs at Sulphur Point.

It said dog owners there were given many opportunities to register their dogs.

“Marley had not been registered for around nine years.”

The council said when Marley was seized using a search warrant, a written notice was left explaining why he was taken, and that if he was not claimed and fees paid within seven days, the council could lawfully rehome, sell, euthanise, or otherwise dispose of the dog.

The council confirmed it received several offers from the public willing to help pay the outstanding fees.

“While these offers were well-intentioned, we could not accept them without the necessary information from Samantha to legally register the dog.”

The council said Bradley declined to provide that information or have Marley registered to someone else.

“She acknowledged the possibility that the dog could be rehomed or euthanised.”

Once the seven-day legal holding period had passed, animal services assessed if he could be safely adopted, but found he was unsuitable because he had “an exceptionally aggressive temperament”.

“After careful consideration, the decision was made to humanely euthanise Marley.”

The council said the decision was reviewed and carried out in line with the law, council policy and standard procedures.

“It was not a decision taken lightly.”

It said the public and government expected councils to use the Dog Control Act to manage aggressive dogs and ongoing non‑compliance, while also considering animal welfare and public safety.

“Balancing our enforcement responsibilities with compassion is something we take extremely seriously.”

It acknowledged the outcome would be “very upsetting for many people”.

The council said the animal services officers cared deeply about animal welfare and understood people’s emotional connection to their pets.

They encouraged dog owners experiencing hardship to contact the council early, and the team would try to find solutions.

The council did not respond to questions about what happened to the other dog taken in the 13 April operation, a puppy named Max.

Donations for registrations

Organisations working with homeless people in Tauranga have suggested anyone wanting to help can donate to the Community Vet Charitable Trust.

The trust was set up to provide animal care – vaccinations, desexing, flea and worm treatments – for people experiencing housing insecurity or financial hardship.

Under The Stars volunteer Ani Stace said the organisation worked with the trust, which recently started funding dog registrations.

“We respect that that is what the council requires. People should register their dogs.”

Stace said the trust received $700 of donations within the first 48 hours of asking its supporters.

Awhina House co-chairwoman Angela Wallace said this initiative was “a great outcome of this awful situation”.

Donations could help avoid pets being removed from homeless owners.

Wallace said a woman worried her two dogs would be taken after hearing Bradley’s story had received help to get them registered.

“It must be quite a lonely situation being homeless – having an animal, a companion animal, can offer a level of comfort,” she said.

A dog could also help with personal safety, especially for women.

– LDR is local body journalism co-funded by RNZ and NZ On Air.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

Police are appealing for information following a fatal crash last week in Burnside, Christchurch.

On Monday 27 April, emergency services were called around 10.50pm to the single vehicle crash on Grahams Road.

Sadly, the sole occupant of the vehicle died after being transported to hospital.

Enquiries into the circumstances of the crash are ongoing and Police are appealing for anyone who witnessed the crash or has information that could assist us to please come forward.

We especially would like to speak with a man in a white SUV, who initially stopped when the crash occurred but left prior to emergency services arrival.

Information can be provided through 105, either online or over the phone, referencing file number 260428/3012.

ENDS

Issued by Police Media Centre

MIL OSI

Led by Te Herenga Waka Centre for Justice Innovation, this research project will examine when and how remote participation should be used in criminal court proceedings, with the goal of supporting fairer and more effective justice processes.

The use of remote participation in courts refers to where one or more participants take part in court proceedings using audio-visual link (AVL) or audio technology, rather than appearing in person. Since the Covid-19 pandemic, remote appearances have become more common in courts around the world, but there is a need for more evidence about the impact on vulnerable defendants, victims, and the integrity of court processes.

“There are many barriers to participation in the court and those who are neurodivergent or have disabilities often require special accommodations. We need to know whether remote participation is a help or a hindrance for these people and determine how we know who is who, and who needs what to enable effective participation,” says retired judge John Walker, a co-director of the Centre, and project co-lead.

“There are many benefits of remote participation by AVL but we hope our research will enable decisions to be made which balance these benefits against the right to fully participate in court” he said.

The project, which is supported through a Michael and Suzanne Borrin Foundation grant with additional Ministry of Justice funding, will build an evidence base through empirical research with court users and stakeholders, along with a review of international experiences.

Research from this project aims to ensure that technology enhances people’s experiences of court systems and proceedings. “We will focus initially on the effects of remote participation on defendants, especially those who are neurodivergent, have mental health needs, or have intellectual disabilities. We will also examine the experiences of victims, impacts on Māori and Pasifika court participants, and consider the impact on those in custody, including the management of transitions from custodial settings to courtrooms via AV link,” explains John Walker.

“We anticipate that the project findings will contribute to government and judicial decision-making regarding the scope of remote participation, such as the types of proceedings, rights protections, and procedures necessary now and in future,” says project co-lead, Professor Yvette Tinsley.

As an independent voice on justice issues, Te Herenga Waka’s Centre for Justice Innovation is well placed to lead this work. The Centre, based at Te Kauhanganui Tātai Ture—Faculty of Law at Te Herenga Waka—Victoria University of Wellington, brings together multidisciplinary expertise to support change in the way that justice is delivered in Aotearoa New Zealand.

The project will be led by the Centre’s co-directors, Professor Yvette Tinsley, John Walker, and conflict resolution practitioner, Everard Halbert (Rongowhakaata, Ngāti Tama, Ngāti Whiti), with support from colleagues across the Faculty of Law and wider university.

The Centre held a valuable forum in March, bringing together representatives from the disability and neurodivergence spaces, justice sector agencies, and the judiciary, for a conversation about the challenges and benefits of utilising remote participation for defendants facing barriers to participation.

“The forum raised issues that will guide us in the areas we need to concentrate on in our research”, says John Walker.

A summary report of this forum is now available on the Te Herenga Waka Centre for Justice Innovation website and is the first of a series of publications from the project.

“We are grateful for our funders’ support of this project, and for the Michael and Suzanne Borrin Foundation’s ongoing support of the Te Herenga Waka Centre for Justice Innovation’s work in addressing cross-cutting justice issues,” says Professor Tinsley.

Website: https://www.wgtn.ac.nz/cjinz

Direct Link to Remote Participation Project: https://www.wgtn.ac.nz/cjinz/research/remote-participation-criminal-proceedings

MIL OSI

Attorney-General Chris Bishop today announced the appointment of Nischal Hasmukhlal (Nick) Malarao as an Associate Judge of the High Court.

Associate Judge Malarao graduated from the University of Auckland in 1999 with a Bachelor of Laws and a Bachelor of Commerce and began his career at Chapman Tripp.

In 2000 he joined the Auckland Crown Solicitor’s Office, Meredith Connell, and in 2002 to 2003 Associate Judge Malarao was based in London, working in the litigation department of Lloyd’s of London. 

He returned to Meredith Connell in 2003 and appeared in trial and appellate courts on civil and commercial matters and prosecuted criminal trials. He was appointed to the partnership in 2010 and subsequently a Senior Litigation Partner in the firm’s Commercial Litigation Division, leading a number of different teams.  He also served as head of the firm’s Regulatory and Insolvency Practice Group and was a member of the firm’s Management Board.  

In July 2024, Associate Judge Malarao moved to the independent bar practicing out of Richmond Chambers in Auckland, with expertise across civil, commercial, tax, and regulatory disputes.  He specialises in company and insolvency law, particularly in the area of directors’ duties.

Associate Judge Malarao’s appointment will take effect on 8 June 2026 and he will sit in Auckland. 

MIL OSI

Attorney-General Hon Chris Bishop announced today that an appointment round for King’s Counsel will take place in 2026.

King’s Counsel are appointed by the Governor-General on the recommendation of the Attorney-General and with the concurrence of the Chief Justice. The Governor-General retains the discretion to appoint King’s Counsel in recognition of their extraordinary contributions to the law in fields other than advocacy.

“The Solicitor-General will consult with the New Zealand Law Society and the New Zealand Bar Association regarding the candidates. This is important input into final decisions that I recommend to the Governor-General. I value the input of the profession into these appointments,” Mr Bishop says. 

The Guidelines (and an application form) are available at www.crownlaw.govt.nz and set out the criteria for appointment and other information about the appointment process.

Applications for appointment as King’s Counsel open on 25 May 2026. Applicants must use the application form which should be sent electronically to the Crown Law Office no later than 22 June 2026.

It is expected appointments will be made in October 2026.

MIL OSI

A van driver has been seriously injured in a crash with a train north of Kaikōura on Friday.

Emergency services were called to the crash between Hapuku and Waipapa Bay shortly before 10am.

Firefighters helped to free the person from their van.

A local resident said she saw a courier van on the railway tracks that looked like it had been torn apart.

Police said State Highway 1 was open but there could be delays.

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

A man has pleaded not guilty to murdering a mother and her two children following an incident at a property in Hastings.

A homicide investigation, dubbed Operation Train, was launched after emergency services were called to a property on Avenue Rd East, Hastings about 6am on 19 April, after reports of several people being seriously injured.

Three people died – a woman and her two children, a 3-month-old girl and a 17-month-old girl.

A 36-year-old man has been charged with murdering them.

The man appeared in the High Court at Napier on Friday before Justice Karen Grau.

Through his lawyer he pleaded not guilty to the charges. A trial date has been set for three weeks from 30 August 2027.

Justice Grau continued an interim suppression order until his next appearance on 9 July.

The man was remanded in custody.

Do you know more? Email sam.sherwood@rnz.co.nz

Coroner Bruce Hesketh earlier granted an interim non-publication order in relation to the names, or any particulars likely to lead to the identification, of any of the four people.

That order was to lapse on Monday at 5pm.

On Monday, Coroner Ruth Thomas extended the interim non-publication order until any suppression orders were lifted in the criminal proceedings and any application for the continuation of the order filed by the family of the deceased, and any responses in opposition have been heard and ruled on in the Coroners Court.

The family earlier said in a statement they were “heartbroken and devastated by the tragic loss of our loved ones”.

“We are struggling to come to terms with the senseless violence that has taken three beautiful lives far too soon.

“They were deeply loved and will be missed beyond words.”

The family asked for privacy “as we grieve together and support one another”.

“We would also like to thank the emergency services, investigators, and the wider community for their care, compassion, and support during this unimaginable time.”

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

A Whakatāne man and his cat were sleeping in their campervan when they were woken by a person getting into the driver’s seat and driving off.

His shouts at the driver to get out were ignored and he phoned police as he and his cat involuntarily headed east, towards Ōhope.

Acting Eastern Bay of Plenty area commander Inspector Phil Gillbanks said it was a dangerous situation and the 111 call taker kept the man calm.

“He didn’t have a seatbelt, so the call taker worked with him to find the most stable place to keep him safe. In this case, that meant he sat on the bed and held onto the sink. It’s not ideal, but it was the least worst choice available.”

Gillbanks said the man’s safety was the biggest concern.

Police followed from a distance until the campervan came to a stop on Wainui Rd, just south of Ohiwa Harbour.

“If there’s one piece of advice we can give people, it’s to make sure your vehicle is fully secure, regardless of whether you’re staying in it or not.

“But I want to acknowledge the victim for keeping a cool head through all of this – waking up to find your camper moving would be unsettling to say the least.”

A 28 year-old Whakatāne woman is in custody and is due back in court next month.

The man and his cat were unharmed.

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

A Bay of Plenty resident had a rude wake-up this week, when his camper was stolen while he and his cat were asleep inside.

The incident began unfolding about 8.50pm on Wednesday, near Seaview Road in Whakatāne when a person unlawfully entered a camper that was parked out by the heads. However, much to the surprise of the alleged thief, they had passengers.

Woken by the activity up front, the man told the uninvited guest to get out, but instead of listening, the person drove off in the camper, with both man and moggie still in the rear sleeper section. He called Police immediately and units closed in as the camper headed east towards Ōhope. The Police call taker stayed on the line, keeping the man calm and using his information to update responding officers.

Acting Eastern Bay of Plenty Area Commander Inspector Phil Gillbanks says it was a dangerous situation, and a considered plan was implemented.

“Our main concern was the welfare of the person in the back, and in cases like this, planning is everything. His wellbeing would have been front and centre of our officers’ minds as they looked at how to safely stop the vehicle.

“It really was great teamwork between the victim and the call taker, through to the dispatcher and the units on the ground. Everyone was working together to bring this to a safe conclusion.”

Police monitored the vehicle from a distance before it came to a stop on Wainui Road, believed to be due to a mechanical issue caused by the alleged thief’s dangerous driving, Inspector Gillbanks says. 

Through all of that, the call taker kept talking to the man.

“He didn’t have a seatbelt, so the call taker worked with him to find the most stable place to keep him safe. In this case, that meant he sat on the bed and held onto the sink. It’s not ideal, but it was the least worst choice available.”

The camper came to a stop just before the State Highway 2 roundabout and the driver was taken into custody about 9.10pm. Thankfully, the man and his cat were unharmed.

A 28-year-old Whakatāne woman has been charged with failing to stop and unlawfully taking a motor vehicle. She appeared in Whakatāne District Court on 7 May and was remanded in custody to reappear on 10 June.

“If there’s one piece of advice we can give people, it’s to make sure your vehicle is fully secure, regardless of whether you’re staying in it or not. But I want to acknowledge the victim for keeping a cool head through all of this – waking up to find your camper moving would be unsettling to say the least.”

ENDS

Issued by the Police Media Centre

MIL OSI

Is New Zealand about to get its own version of a law that caused uproar in New South Wales, clashes in Sydney’s streets and that has now been thrown out?

The Law Society here is worried the Policing Amendment Bill which is making its way through Parliament with strong police backing will clamp down on political protest.

“It’s a clear parallel,” said Timothy Roberts, president of the New South Wales Council of Civil Liberties.

There is evidence behind the concern – the Independent Police Conduct Authority last year found police exhibited a lot of uncertainty and inconsistency about the limits of lawful protest and what the restrictions should be, and called for explicit laws to protect protesters’ rights.

But the government on Wednesday said: “Our police have a strong, long-standing track record of upholding civil liberties and human rights.”

Last month New South Wales’ top court threw out a law enacted after the Bondi Beach terror attack.

The public assembly restriction declaration or PARD scheme expanded police powers to restrict protests in certain areas.

In such a zone in Sydney in February, police clashed with people protesting the visit of Israel’s president.

The city’s mayor Clover Moore said, “Seeing the unrestrained force used to impose those demarcations was disturbing.”

Roberts said the new law had a lot to do with it.

“The police were completely inflexible. So they could have released the crowd to march on from the area peaceably. But because of the political pressure, the legislative framework, they didn’t.

“And that inflexibility led to some really serious violence,” Roberts told RNZ.

Like Roberts, Samantha Lee saw parallels between the PARD and the New Zealand bill. Lee is assistant principal lawyer at Redfern Legal Centre which is working to get criminal charges against Sydney protesters dismissed.

“What the court found is that this executive power is a breach of the constitution in terms of the political freedom of communication and that what it was really doing is stopping the right to protest,” Lee said.

“Protesting has a long history in Australia, as it does there in New Zealand. And the court did say a lot about that, that police should not remove a person’s ability to bring governments to account, even if they’re protesting against against matters that the police don’t like,” Lee said.

The NSW law was rushed in. The New Zealand bill was hurriedly drafted without public consultation.

Police Minister Mark Mitchell said he was open to feedback on any bill, “which is exactly why it goes through the select committee process so New Zealanders can have their say and ensure that it’s fit for purpose”.

The bill’s first part would expand police intelligence-gathering powers; its second part would expand their powers to declare areas off-limits ahead of time in case of imminent public disorder. It would extend the power beyond roads to many public places, and add an instant $1000 infringement fee for someone who entered or did not leave a zone, plus adding a new offence of failing to give police identifying details.

Most reporting has focused on the first part.

The Law Society is pushing the select committee to amend both parts of the bill.

“The difficulties in enforcement and the desirability of ‘closing’ a space are acknowledged, as is the prospect that disturbances may involve other areas (parks etc, other public spaces such as river beds) which are not roads,” it said.

“Against this, however, there are also valid concerns regarding the risks of undue expansion, in that political protests involving disorder may lead to closure of roads and accessible places, and thus prohibitions on entry and potential arrests.”

The bill made “vague” references to “public safety objectives” that could trigger closure, risking “creep in their use into the field of legitimate protest”, the society said.

Paul Rishworth KC helped write its submission.

“It needs to be reconsidered as to how it all applies to public protest,” Rishworth said.

“An example would be that if a protest of some sort is happening or is planned for the following day, and there is either actual counter-protest or the threat of counter-protest, that might be seen as producing disorder or likely to produce disorder, then that might be a reason for closing it down.”

There were existing powers police had to deal with boy racers, he added.

The bill was not a direct parallel with PARD but was in the same universe, and at the very least should be amended to require regular reporting back by police on how they were using the new powers, Rishworth said.

Also, the Law Society wanted preconditions on closures to be added, and the infringement offences removed since the offence of obstruction already existed.

However, Police Association president Steve Watt rejected that part two went too far.

“What it’s aimed to do is increase public safety around those public places where disorder and other events like boy racers might tend to congregate,” said Watt.

“The police are, you know, extremely well-versed when it comes to lawful protests from members of the public.

“I can’t see police using this law as a method of shutting down lawful protests.”

Mitchell said the bill as a whole was about “reinstating police’s ability to lawfully collect and record information to keep communities safe, not introducing new powers”.

“I’ve seen the concerns raised and will consider any sensible changes which improve clarity, but my focus is on restoring the tools police need to keep Kiwis safe.”

Police consulted about part one of the bill with the Office of the Privacy Commissioner, but not about part two.

The bill’s regulatory impact statement talked about police working through the issues as they implemented it.

Last year, after a two-year investigation, the Independent Police Conduct Authority found both the law, and police practices and understanding, were lacking around protesters’ rights.

It called for explicit legislation to protect them.

“Without such a legislative regime, the preservation of fundamental rights is likely to come under increasing threat,” it said.

Documents attached to the policing bill did not mention the IPCA investigation. The authority declined to comment while the bill was before Parliament.

The bill sees the IPCA and the Office of the Privacy Commissioner as the main watchdogs over how police used it.

However, the authority recently told MPs it lacked resources, and the Commissioner has put out several statements opposing the bill, saying the level of oversight was inadequate.

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

A law professor and a media expert say David Seymour has gone too far in public attacks against RNZ and TVNZ.

They’ve warned jabs at the media will continue as the election draws closer, and could erode public trust.

The deputy Prime Minister and ACT party leader spoke to The Platform last week, taking swings at both state broadcasters’ management.

He criticised the appointment of RNZ’s Morning Report host John Campbell and suggested RNZ’s chief executive Paul Thompson could lose his job, adding “it’s really critical that we are ensuring that we get better people on the board, and those people will change the management.”

He also accused TVNZ of being “politically motivated”.

Seymour is a shareholding minister in both RNZ and TVNZ, and the law says ministers cannot give direction to the state broadcasters.

Seymour told RNZ he had not done that.

“Decisions around staffing, presenter line-ups, and editorial matters are for boards and management. Anyone who thinks RNZ is taking editorial instructions from me clearly does not listen to RNZ.”

He said editorial independence did not, however, mean “freedom from accountability”, adding ministers are entitled to comment “when publicly owned media organisations are losing audience, relevance, or public confidence”.

Media commentator and former New Zealand Herald editor Gavin Ellis said Seymour crossed the line, and while it may not have been explicit direction, it was against the spirit of the law.

“He is effectively telling Radio New Zealand who they should employ in an editorial role, and that is simply not for him to do,” Ellis said.

“He should back off.”

Seymour’s comments came in the wake of a tumultuous couple of weeks for the relationship between the coalition government and the media.

Ellis warned there would be more to follow.

“The closer the call at the election, the more likely it is that we will see attempts to exert a chilling effect on media … to get them to stay clear of the contentious stuff, because … they’re under pressure,” he said.

He was confident the media would not bow to any pressure, but said it would not help with public trust.

AUT’s annual media trust survey last month found 37 percent of respondents trust “most of the news, most of the time” – up from 32 percent last year.

It found RNZ was the country’s most trusted news brand, followed by the Otago Daily Times and TVNZ.

“It’s a very, very delicate situation, and it won’t take very much to push that that trust level back down again, which is another reason why politicians should refrain from doing so,” said Ellis.

“It is in nobody’s interest to have low trust in media.”

Otago University law professor Andrew Geddis said Seymour appeared to indicate he wanted to stack RNZ’s board to his advantage, which was legally questionable and undermined his claims he wants to rebuild public trust in RNZ.

“It’s very hard to see how the public can trust a public broadcaster when you have a politician saying, ‘I’m putting my people in charge of it, to get the people and the presenters telling you the news that I want them to tell’,” he said.

Geddis also suspected the coalition would continue its criticism of the media.

“There’s a rule in politics, that when politicians start attacking the media, they know they’re losing,” he said.

“They know that they’re going down in the polls, and they’re trying to find someone to blame.”

‘Entirely inappropriate’

Labour’s media spokesperson Reuben Davidson said Seymour’s comments “were entirely inappropriate and but not surprising, coming from a government that’s become very anti media.”

He added it was particularly concerning given the government planned to scrap the Broadcasting Standards Authority and not replace it with an independent regulator.

Green Party co-leader Chloe Swarbrick said Seymour’s comments set a “deeply dangerous precedent” with a member of Cabinet challenging editorial independence.

“We just simply can’t have ministers threatening our publicly funded news agencies because they don’t like what is being said about them or what’s being reported on,” she said.

“This is a really problematic pattern of behaviour that’s been exhibited by members of this government for not only the past few weeks, but the past few months and the past few years.”

In response to Seymour’s comments, RNZ’s board chair Jim Mather defended its editorial independence and warned against political interference.

TVNZ said it did not have a view.

Media minister Paul Goldsmith said ministers cannot get involved in operational matters.

He said the government’s role is to appoint the board and set expectations about financial sustainability, growing audience numbers and improving trust levels.

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

• Court ruling shows Ministry of Social Development was not following its own policy when it turned down abuse in care compensation claims
• Lawyer who took court action says the decision is vindication for survivors unable to tell their stories
• Ministry says it is considering the court judgment.

A senior human rights lawyer has welcomed a court ruling that found a government department responsible for considering claims for abuse in care is not following its own assessment policy correctly.

Justice Dale La Hood has ruled the Ministry of Social Development (MSD) was wrong to strike out at the first hurdle claims for compensation for abuse suffered by three people, after the trio had come to the attention of social workers as youths.

The three, who have name suppression, say they were subjected to physical or sexual abuse and the former Department of Social Welfare did not act when concerns were raised.

Lydia Oosterhoff, principal at Wellington law firm Cooper Legal, sought a judicial review of the ministry’s decisions and said Justice Le Hood’s ruling, which came after a hearing in the High Court at Wellington, was extremely significant for people who had previously had the door slammed shut in their faces.

“Outside of the three plaintiffs, this is an issue that we’ve come up against time and time again.”

Claim rejections ‘unlawful and invalid’

The three said Social Welfare failed to look into the abuse they suffered, in the 1990s and 2000s, when it became aware of concerns.

Two of the three were in the youth justice system. One said he suffered physical abuse and neglect at home, and the second said he was abused physically at home by his father and later abused sexually by a “sexual predator”. The two say Social Welfare was informed of what was happening, but did not investigate.

The third person said he was sexually abused by people in positions of influence or control when he was a child. He said Social Welfare was told about the abuse and, again, did not act.

The three filed claims for redress in 2023.

Justice La Hood ruled the ministry’s decisions to decline to even consider the applications were “unlawful and invalid”. He has ordered the ministry to now consider them.

He said the decisions reached by the ministry that the claims should not be investigated were at odds with its own guidelines on settling claims.

Applications were considered in two parts. For the first, claimants needed to show they had been in the care or custody of Social Welfare, or had come to its attention. For the second they needed to have believed they were harmed as a result.

The ministry was interpreting this harm as having to be attributed to Social Welfare’s actions – or lack of action – but Justice La Hood said this was not correct and was at odds with the department’s own policy.

Judgment ‘a vindication’

Oosterhoff said at least 29 of the firm’s other clients would be covered by Justice La Hood’s ruling, as they had had claims turned away at the first hurdle.

The Royal Commission into abuse in care had described survivor stories of abuse and neglect as taonga.

“What we’ve said to the court is these individuals are coming to MSD, holding their taonga, and MSD is not opening the gate to them,” Oosterhoff said.

She assumed people not represented by lawyers would have also had their claims turned away in the same circumstances, so Justice La Hood’s ruling could affect a large number.

“This judgment is a vindication not only for the three applicants, but for every person who has gone to MSD in an attempt to tell MSD about their experiences when they were known to, or in Social Welfare care, which they believe caused them harm… and have been told, ‘We’re not listening to you, go away.’”

Oosterhoff said the decisions to not even consider applications for redress were made by people who were not trained social workers or lawyers, but they were affecting people’s legal rights.

“[The court ruling] says that they now had the right to go through the gate. They have the right to tell MSD why they considered that they are eligible for redress.”

RNZ asked the ministry if it would appeal the ruling and what the effect of it would be.

“We have received the High Court’s decision and are considering it,” said Linda Hrstich-Meyer, its general manager for historic claims.

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

The ACT Party has overtaken Labour as the party that recorded the second largest amount in donations, with the Electoral Commission releasing the 2025 donation and loans returns.

National was once again far out in front when it came to total donations.

Since 2023, parties have had to report the names of donors and contributors who gave more than $5000, down from $15,000 in previous years.

This has changed to $6000 since 1 January 2026, but that will not be seen until next year’s publication of returns.

The figures, which make up the 2025 calendar year and must be filed by 30 April 2026, show the parties received these amounts:

• National: $6,275,234.46
• ACT: $2,445,225.79
• Labour: $2,403,241.93
• Green Party: $1,848,678.65
• NZ First: $1,360,272.56
• Opportunity Party: $179,401.24
• Te Pāti Māori: $141,986.50
• Animal Justice Party: $12,707.95
• Women’s Rights Party: $9650.50
• Conservative Party NZ: $9519.73
• NewZeal (no longer registered): $8,796.00
• Vision New Zealand: $6718.43
• Aotearoa Legalise Cannabis Party: $336.00
• NZ Outdoors and Freedom: $270.00

The largest recorded donation was to National, with $210,000 coming from the late Nelson philanthropist Robert Wares.

ACT’s largest donation in 2025 was $200,000 from tech entrepreneur Brian Cartmell, who also donated $201,993,91 to National, and $204,999 to New Zealand First.

RNZ has earlier reported Cartmell donated $100,000 to the Opportunity Party, though this was received this year and so is not disclosed on the 2025 donations return.

Labour’s largest donations came from the Mills Family Trust, which donated $125,000.

Trustee Phillip Mills, founder of gym chain Les Mills, made personal donations to Labour and the Greens as well.

The largest donation to the Greens in 2025 was $132,000, from entrepreneur Robert Morgan.

Te Pāti Māori president John Tamihere was his party’s largest donor, donating $60,000.

Broadcasting allocations released

The Commission has also released its decision on broadcasting funding allocations for election year.

Those allocations go towards election advertising on radio, television, and online.

The allocation is decided based on votes at the previous election, the number of MPs a party has, the relationships that exist between parties, indications of public support such as opinion poll results and party membership, and the need to provide a fair opportunity for each party to convey its policies to the public.

It means National has the largest allocation this year, with $1,079,519.

Labour follows on $913,435, the Greens have $394,438, ACT has $332,158, New Zealand First has $290,639, and Te Pāti Māori has $228,359.

For parties outside Parliament, the Opportunity Party leads with $114,179, with New Zealand Loyal behind it on $83,040 despite currently being an unregistered party.

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

A 30-year-old is facing murder charges in relation to the December deaths of Brendon and Trina Cole.

The bodies of 56-year-old Brendon Leigh Cole and 54-year-old Trina Michelle Cole were found at a rural property in Ruatiti, west of Ruapehu, on 13 December.

On Thursday, Detective Inspector Gerard Bouterey said the arrest represented a “significant milestone” in the investigation.

“While this is great result, considerable work remains and investigators will continue to pursue all outstanding lines of enquiry.

“We acknowledge that there are members of the public who may have information relevant to this investigation that has not been shared with us.

“We strongly encourage anyone who has information or knowledge of this incident, including the events, movements, or items involved, to contact us if they have not yet done so.”

During the investigation, police had determined that a semi-automatic shotgun was missing from the Coles’ address.

It has yet to be located, with investigators believing it has likely been modified – with the end of the barrel cut down.

Bouterey said finding this firearm remained a priority.

A search of the Murumuru Road scene continues, he said.

“We want to reassure the community that this investigation is ongoing and remains active.

“The cooperation shown by the community has been invaluable during our investigation, and we thank them for their support.

“We continue to follow all lines of enquiry and carefully assess information as it is received. We are committed to ensuring the safety of the wider community and at this stage, there is no information to suggest any ongoing risk to the general public.”

The accused is due to appear in Whanganui District Court today on two counts of murder.

Information for police could be provided through 105, either online or over the phone, referencing file number 251213/6207 or Operation Murumuru.

Alternatively, people could provide information anonymously through Crime Stoppers on 0800 555 111.

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

A police recruit asked unsolicited sexual questions of another recruit and showed them pornographic material on his phone while masturbating, the police watchdog has revealed.

The Independent Police Conduct Authority (IPCA) released a summary of a police investigation the Authority oversaw into the recruit on Thursday.

The IPCA said the allegations were that a recruit asked unsolicited sexual questions of another recruit and then showed them pornographic material on his cell phone while masturbating.

“The two recruits were off-duty and alone inside a vehicle parked on the side of a public road, late at night, in the greater Wellington area.”

Do you know more? Email sam.sherwood@rnz.co.nz

The IPCA said police initially decided against a criminal investigation, saying it was unnecessary and instead began an employment process.

“We asked police to reconsider and undertake a criminal investigation, as the complaint suggested a criminal offence, but they did not.

“Police progressed their employment process for the recruit and upheld the allegations made against him as serious misconduct. The Authority wrote to police stating that while we agreed with their finding and outcome for the employment process, we did not agree with the decision not to undertake a criminal investigation.”

Police then began a criminal investigation into the complaint.

“We oversaw this investigation. Police found there was insufficient evidence to establish a criminal offence. In our view, Police conducted the criminal investigation appropriately and we agree with the conclusion reached.

“During the criminal investigation, police identified another complainant who alleged that the same recruit showed this recruit pornographic material. Police assessed this incident as part of the criminal investigation and found insufficient evidence of criminal offending.”

A further employment process was then carried out and the recruit resigned before it was completed.

“Nonetheless, police concluded their investigation and did not uphold the further allegations.

“Contrary to agreed process, police only informed the Authority of the outcome after police finalised matters with the recruit. We were therefore not provided with an opportunity to provide feedback on the proposed police finding.”

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

News this week that the High Court at Auckland had ruled against ANZ in a class action over breaches of the Consumer Contract and Credit Finance Act was the latest move in a long-running saga.

But considering that no customers were left out of pocket by the bank’s errors, how and why could they be set to get more money?

What happened?

Between 2015 and 2019, the law said that a lender that was in breach of its disclosure requirements had to repay borrowers all the interest and fees they were charged during the time when they were not compliant with the rules.

Those disclosure requirements include that when a lender makes a change to a loan contract, it has to ensure that the full details are provided to the borrower.

ANZ provides loan variation letters when customers made changes to their loans.

But in 2015, it used a third-party developer to design and make changes to a software package that allowed it to generate these letters. This involved a loan calculator working out what the customers’ repayment amounts and loan terms would be.

But due to a coding error this calculator did not include interest that had accrued but not yet been charged when calculating new repayment amounts or loan terms, and so most letters contained incorrect information.

The bank said customers were undercharged about $2 a month.

In his judgment, Justice Geoffrey Venning acknowledged that it resulted in people paying less than they would otherwise have had to.

“To the extent their obligations were affected ANZ has compensated them for that. As a result, the plaintiffs are effectively better off than if the error had not occurred.”

What did the bank do to remedy it?

The bank fixed the problem in 2016 and reported it to the Commerce Commission in June 2017.

It also wrote to 101,535 affected customers and paid them a total of $5.591 million.

It entered a settlement agreement with the Commerce Commission and paid affected customers a total of $35.032 million, including the $5.591m it had already paid.

Starting in April 2020, ANZ wrote to affected customers informing them of the further payments to be made in relation to the error and paid out a further $29.44m.

So if people have ended up better off, why does it matter?

Economist Shamubeel Eaqub, who gave evidence as part of the action, said it was important that banks had systems that customers could rely on.

He told the court that a lender’s failure in this regard could erode trust in the market and made it harder to compare products, which reduced competition.

What will customers get?

The High Court said ANZ was required to refund the representative plaintiffs $32,728.42. They had borrowing of $650,000.

The plaintiffs were acting on behalf of about 17,000 customers who received inaccurate letters because of the error.

The bank has estimated it could have a maximum potential liability of $125m.

Earlier, ASB agreed to pay $135.6m to settle a class action against it for similar breaches. It said that each payout was either $571.82 or $285.91, depending on their circumstances.

Could this apply to other banks?

A change to the Credit Contracts and Consumer Finance Act means that rather than requiring full repayment of the cost of borrowing in cases of a breach, in future the court would be allowed to decide what compensation was just and equitable.

That means that other banks would not be affected in the same way but the action against ANZ has been exempted from the change.

ANZ said it was considering an appeal.

Sign up for Money with Susan Edmunds, a weekly newsletter covering all the things that affect how we make and spend money

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

A Police Tactical Dog Team was on the scent of fleeing youths last week, tracking them through Northland bush for over a kilometre.

Just after midnight on 2 May, Police received reports of a group attempting to steal vehicles in Kerikeri and Whangārei.

Northland District Prevention Manager, Inspector Dean Robinson, says the youths were allegedly travelling across the region in a stolen Toyota Aqua while targeting other vehicles.    

“A short time after receiving these reports, a vehicle of interest was observed in Whangārei, and officers signalled for it to stop.

“The driver ignored instructions and began driving dangerously to avoid Police,” he says.  

Due to the manner of driving, Police have not pursued the vehicle.

The vehicle was soon sighted travelling north on Mangakahia Road.

“Spikes were successfully deployed on State Highway 15 near Kaikohe, causing the vehicle to significantly slow,” Inspector Robinson says.

As the vehicle was safely brought to a stop, the five occupants fled.

One male was promptly apprehended, while the other four fled into nearby bush and the Tactical Dog Team (TDT) was deployed to locate them.

“The TDT began tracking the other suspects and identified two males 200 metres from the vehicle.

“Both were located by Delta and arrested,” Inspector Robinson says.

With three of the five in custody, the TDT was redeployed to find the two outstanding occupants.

“The suspects were tracked for 1.3 kilometres, across challenging terrain and over river crossings, before they were located in a farm paddock.

“The pair attempted to flee but were arrested,” Inspector Robinson says.

Senior Sergeant Christian Stainton, Tactical Operations Coordinator, credits this result as a coordinated response between the Tactical Dog Team, Northland Police, and Northern Emergency Communications and Dispatch.

“These five offenders have been actively offending across the Northland district, and if not safely arrested, they would have undoubtedly continued to offend.”

Five males aged 13-17 have been referred to Youth Aid.

ENDS

Frankie Le Roy/NZ Police

MIL OSI

Attributable to Inspector Matenga Gray, Area Commander Manawatu

A man is in court this morning following a Police stop which found him in possession of a pistol, drugs and a large amount of cash.

Just after 11.30pm last night, Police were patrolling on Hobson Street in Feilding and observed a man loading plywood onto a trailer parked on the roadside.

While talking to the man, Police noticed and located a pistol in the driver’s footwell of the vehicle, which resulted in the officers conducting a search.

The male was detained, and police located methamphetamine, drug utensils, ecstasy tablets, and a quantity of cannabis.

A subsequent search of the man located approximately $4,000 in cash strapped to his leg.

The pistol, which was secured in a holster, was later confirmed to be an imitation firearm.

A 42-year-old local man is due in Palmerston North District Court today, charged with unlawfully possess an imitation firearm, possess methamphetamine, possess drug utensils, possess cannabis plant and ecstasy, and fails to carry out obligations in relation to a computer search.

ENDS

Issued by Police Media Centre

MIL OSI

A 30-year-old is facing murder charges in relation to the December deaths of Brendon and Trina Cole.

The bodies of 56-year-old Brendon Leigh Cole and 54-year-old Trina Michelle Cole were found at a rural property in Ruatiti, west of Ruapehu, on 13 December.

On Thursday, Detective Inspector Gerard Bouterey said the arrest represented a “significant milestone” in the investigation.

“While this is great result, considerable work remains and investigators will continue to pursue all outstanding lines of enquiry.

“We acknowledge that there are members of the public who may have information relevant to this investigation that has not been shared with us.

“We strongly encourage anyone who has information or knowledge of this incident, including the events, movements, or items involved, to contact us if they have not yet done so.”

During the investigation, police had determined that a semi-automatic shotgun was missing from the Coles’ address.

It has yet to be located, with investigators believing it has likely been modified – with the end of the barrel cut down.

Bouterey said finding this firearm remained a priority.

A search of the Murumuru Road scene continues, he said.

“We want to reassure the community that this investigation is ongoing and remains active.

“The cooperation shown by the community has been invaluable during our investigation, and we thank them for their support.

“We continue to follow all lines of enquiry and carefully assess information as it is received. We are committed to ensuring the safety of the wider community and at this stage, there is no information to suggest any ongoing risk to the general public.”

The accused is due to appear in Whanganui District Court today on two counts of murder.

Information for police could be provided through 105, either online or over the phone, referencing file number 251213/6207 or Operation Murumuru.

Alternatively, people could provide information anonymously through Crime Stoppers on 0800 555 111.

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

Police can confirm a 30-year-old man has been arrested and charged in relation to the deaths of Brendon and Trina Cole on Murumuru Road in December 2025.

Detective Inspector Gerard Bouterey says this arrest represents a significant milestone for the investigation team and Police are pleased to have this result for the Brendon and Trina’s families.

“While this is great result, considerable work remains and investigators will continue to pursue all outstanding lines of enquiry.

“We acknowledge that there are members of the public who may have information relevant to this investigation that has not been shared with us.

“We strongly encourage anyone who has information or knowledge of this incident, including the events, movements, or items involved, to contact us if they have not yet done so.”

As part of enquiries, Police have identified that a semi-automatic shotgun should have been at the Murumuru Road address, but this was not located during the initial scene examination or in subsequent searches. Investigators believe the firearm may have been modified, with the end of the barrel cut down.

While Police have not yet located the shotgun, the recovery of this firearm remains a priority.

Police are also in the process of completing a search at the Murumuru Road scene as part of the ongoing investigative work.  This activity is being conducted to ensure all potential evidential opportunities are thoroughly examined as the investigation progresses.

“We want to reassure the community that this investigation is ongoing and remains active.”

“The cooperation shown by the community has been invaluable during our investigation, and we thank them for their support.

“We continue to follow all lines of enquiry and carefully assess information as it is received. We are committed to ensuring the safety of the wider community and at this stage, there is no information to suggest any ongoing risk to the general public.”

The 30-year-old man is due to appear in Whanganui District Court today charged with two counts of murder.

Information can be provided through 105, either online or over the phone, referencing file number 251213/6207 or Operation Murumuru.

Alternatively, you can provide information anonymously through Crime Stoppers on 0800 555 111.

ENDS

Issued by the Police Media Centre

MIL OSI

Explainer – You’re reading this in English right now – but should English be an official language? Parliament is soon set to decide.

A long-running debate on the status of the most commonly spoken language in New Zealand is nearing its climax in Parliament, as the English Language Act works its way through the House.

During a fiery debate in Parliament back in February at the first reading, New Zealand First leader Winston Peters made his case for the bill while many opposition MPs firmly denounced it.

Peters called it a “common sense idea” and has said it fills an anomaly where Māori and English Sign Language are already both codified as official languages in New Zealand, but English is not specifically.

Others disagree. “Language is being used as a political football here,” said Dr Sharon Harvey, an associate professor specialising in applied linguistics at Auckland University of Technology.

The bill is currently before select committee with a report due to be presented on 3 September. The next step is a second reading of the bill and it’s likely it would come to a final vote before November’s election.

But what would the bill actually do? Here’s what you need to know.

What does the bill say?

Bills are often pretty darned long, but this one can actually be summed up right here – it’s only five lines.

It calls for Parliament to enact the English Language Act 2025, and says, “The purpose of this Act is to provide legislative recognition of the status of English as an official language of New Zealand” and that the Act would bind the Crown.

That’s it.

What would the bill actually do?

“The bill is so short because it doesn’t actually have any legal effect that needs spelt out in detail,” University of Otago law professor Andrew Geddis said. “It will have literally no practical consequences at all.

“That isn’t an exaggeration – it will change absolutely no aspect of Aotearoa New Zealand’s current legal rules, practices or procedures. It’s the linguistic equivalent of passing an Act of Parliament that says: ‘The official colour of the New Zealand Rugby Team’s home jersey is black.’”

The bill doesn’t lay out any instructions, punishments or restrictions on other languages. It would add English as an official language alongside Te Reo Māori – which was designated in the Māori Language Act in 1987 – and English Sign Language, designated in the New Zealand Sign Language Act of 2006.

“While the bill is pretty slim in terms of its content it does serve symbolically at least to cast in legislation the pre-eminence of the already dominant and majoritarian language of NZ: English,” Harvey said.

Legislatively, it would not affect Māori and ESL, Geddis said, as they have “separately guaranteed (but limited) rights to use those languages”.

“Legislative language recognition was hard won for both Māori and the deaf community and so the English Language Bill also minimises the historical and contemporaneous importance of those difficult and long language struggles,” Harvey said.

As written, the bill wouldn’t even affect, for instance, signs that include Chinese language at some popular tourist spots, Geddis said.

“That legislative recognition does not add anything to English’s existing legal role and usage. You can use English for any official, public business now. If this bill passes, you will continue to be able to do so. Nothing will have changed.”

Watch: Winston Peters introduces the English Language Act.

[embedded content]

If nothing will change, why was this bill introduced?

Making English an official language was part of the coalition agreement between National, NZ First and ACT back in 2023.

Former NZ First MP Clayton Mitchell put forth a similar member’s bill in 2018 but it was never drawn from the ballot.

New Zealand First has pushed for such recognition for some time.

Did you know that English is not an official language? Well, we’re changing that by delivering on a key campaign promise – we are making English an official language of New Zealand. We will continue to fight for common sense ideas and work in the interests of all New Zealanders. pic.twitter.com/ki3dDh8tDI

— New Zealand First (@nzfirst) December 14, 2023

In introducing the current bill, Peters said that it’s correcting an “anomaly” that English is not included with the other two official languages.

“It has never been formally recognised in statute as an official language. This bill seeks to correct that anomaly, providing consistency in legal framework and clarifying the status of all three official languages in legislation.

“The bill does not diminish the status of other official languages, te reo Māori and New Zealand Sign Language, but rather complements them, acknowledging the linguistic reality of our nation.”

Peters said the bill is “affirming the value of English as a shared means of communication used by the mass majority of the population – I’ll say it again quietly: used by the mass majority of the population.”

Although his name is actually on the bill as the MP in charge, Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith previously told RNZ that it wasn’t a top priority for National and did not speak at the first reading.

“It wouldn’t be the top priority for us, absolutely not. But it’s something in the coalition and it’s getting done.”

Peters has said that the rise in te reo Māori has “has created situations that encourage misunderstanding and confusion for all, and all for the purpose to push a narrative”.

“We have some very real situations now where communications and names of important services are using te reo as primary names and language, and the room for confusion and miscommunication is huge.”

He cited the possibility of confusion where places have had primary names in Māori.

“First responders, on their vehicles and in communications, being unable to get to places because they don’t know where they’re going; transport services with important road signs – they have all announced that.”

Harvey disagreed, saying the dynamic of Māori and English is what makes New Zealand special.

“Te reo Māori only exists in ANZ and so if it does not survive and flourish here it will not survive.”

“Most of us would recognise that Te Whatu Ora means health especially if it’s heading a letter with health information or is signage on a public hospital,” she said.

“There is no ‘danger’ to English now or in the future. Apart from anything else it is the pre-eminent global language.

“It would be so much better for NZ if we could all gain high proficiency in te reo Māori (as well as English) and if schools could be proactive in supporting students’ home languages, as well as teaching a variety of languages.”

Is English language use becoming a “culture war” issue?

Well, people on both sides of the debate of the current bill have accused the other of “virtue signalling.”

In Parliament, Peters said that “This bill won’t solve the push of this virtue signalling narrative completely, but it is the first step towards ensuring logic and common sense prevails when the vast majority of New Zealanders communicate in English and understand English in a country that should use English as its primary and official language.”

“The (bill) is virtue signalling to a small, monolingual in English, sector of the voting public by NZ First,” Harvey said. “It’s a waste of public money and time and should never have been agreed to as part of the National-NZ First coalition agreement.”

Debate at the first reading was equally heated.

“The English language is not under threat,” said Green Party co-leader Chlöe Swarbrick. “We are literally speaking it and debating in it right now. This is a bill which is an answer to a problem that does not exist.”

“The government wants to stoke a fight between te iwi Māori and Pākehā, and they want that fight to be the focus of this election,” she claimed.

At the debate, National MP Rima Nakhle called for calmer temperatures.

“We’re only making English official. It’s not the end of the world.”

Geddis said “the bill seems to be motivated by an odd form of linguistic jealousy – something akin to ‘it’s not fair that those languages get called official in a statute, but English doesn’t!’”

New Zealand First’s 2023 coalition agreement with National also stipulated that public service departments have their primary name in English and be required to communicate “primarily in English” except for entities specifically related to Māori. It has been seen in changes to how agencies such as the New Zealand Transport Agency or Health New Zealand are referred to.

Peters has also been vocal about the use of “Aotearoa” to refer to New Zealand by other MPs.

Other countries like Australia and the United Kingdom do not have any official laws on the books declaring English an official language, although it has de facto official status in government, courts and education.

In America, Donald Trump signed an executive order last year “designating English as an official language of the United States.” But as the decision was not passed by Congress and is an executive order, it doesn’t have the power to change existing federal laws and statutes. Around 30 US states also have proclaimed English the official language.

Will the English Language Act pass?

It’s unclear. It is part of the coalition agreement so National and ACT may be obliged to support it.

“Being that we are an English-speaking country, it is bizarre that we have to do this, but this is how far this extremism has taken our country,” Peters said in 2023 before the last election as he pledged to pass the bill that may finally be law soon.

“The bill very well may be rushed into law during the inevitable end-of-term use of urgency in the House,” Geddis said.

“Given current frosty relations between National and NZ First, there could well be some coalition partner reluctance to give NZ First time in Parliament to proceed with what really is nothing more than a form of legislative virtue signalling to its support base,” he said.

“Although National have publicly said they’re not concerned whether the bill passes or not, I think there is every chance it will pass which will be a great shame for NZ,” Harvey said.

“It’s a waste of the government’s time and considerably sets back New Zealand’s progress in righting the wrongs of our violent, colonial past.”

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

The Government is moving to permanently shut down loopholes that allowed children adopted overseas to be brought into unsafe homes, says Associate Justice Minister Nicole McKee.

The Overseas Adoptions Legislation Bill is being introduced to Parliament today and replaces last year’s temporary suspension with a stronger, enduring system that puts child safety first.

“We acted urgently last year because our laws were being exploited and children were being put at risk,” Mrs McKee says.

“Many of the international adoptions each year saw children adopted into loving families, but our laws lacked basic safeguards. That meant some children were adopted into homes where they were neglected, abused, or exploited. That is simply unacceptable.

“Like most New Zealanders, I was disgusted to learn the system allowed people with known criminal or care and protection histories to adopt children overseas and bring them here.

“The safety and wellbeing of children must always come first. I’m a mum of four, so when I saw what was happening and knew I could act, I did.”

McKee says last year’s urgent law change under the Adoption Amendment Act 2025 was always intended as a temporary fix.

“That law stopped the immediate harm. This Bill delivers the long-term solution by closing the loopholes for good,” says McKee.

“The Bill will clarify when New Zealand recognises adoptions made in overseas courts, and the circumstances in which adopted children become New Zealand citizens or gain access to immigration pathways to enter New Zealand.

“The reforms to the system will mean there are two pathways for children adopted overseas by New Zealand citizens to automatically become New Zealand citizens, either under the process in the Hague Convention, or in the New Zealand Family Court.” 

Further pathways for entering New Zealand will be available through the immigration system, with appropriate checks, for children adopted overseas who are: 

Migrating to New Zealand with their parents, or

The children of New Zealand expatriates, or
Adopted in an overseas court in a designated country. 

The Bill will be referred to the Justice Select Committee for public submissions following its first reading.

“I encourage anyone with an interest in adoption law to have their say. But one principle will not change – the safety of children comes first,” says McKee.

“I expect this Bill to pass before the current temporary measures expire in July 2027, ensuring New Zealand has a system that properly protects children.

“Anyone considering an international adoption should seek expert legal advice about their specific circumstances.”

The Overseas Adoptions Legislation Bill is expected to be available on the legislation website later today.

Process maps setting out the international adoption processes under the new law are attached.

MIL OSI

Surf lifeguards at Auckland’s notoriously dangerous Piha beach have raised questions with police about possible delays in activating rescues at the drowning blackspot.

One spoke up about worries over helicopters being delayed, or the police Eagle chopper coming in place of the better-equipped Westpac rescue one, or a road ambulance being sent instead, if at all.

The questions at the front-line in Piha sparked a meeting seven months ago between Surf Lifesaving New Zealand and police.

Both agencies were insistent to RNZ that they cooperated well and that the meeting was part of how they learn from debriefs.

This has come to light after lifeguard Antony Smith heard RNZ reporting on firefighters and search-and-rescue volunteers having problems with police control over air ambulance helicopters. It seemed to him lifeguards were facing similar problems.

“I volunteer my time to do this. Why are you not giving me the best or why am I having to be concerned?

“One of the things that myself and a few others have observed is what used to be quite a simple workflow … simple communications flow, has become more cumbersome, more procedural, more red tape.”

Smith, a long-time volunteer patrol captain at Piha, said he felt sort of obliged to speak up – his late father Warren Smith helped set up Auckland’s Westpac Rescue Helicopters and is described online as the “glue” that held it together.

“I don’t mind if someone yells at me or tells me I’m wrong,” said his son.

‘Someone could die’

Speaking for himself and not the club, Smith said he welcomed recent changes to improve rescue coordination but hoped he could spur on more.

He first got worried three years ago when he said he couldn’t get an air ambulance helicopter to come for a man suffering an asthma attack on the beach.

His team called it in to Surf Lifesaving’s Surfcom line which linked to Hato Hone St John ambulance which in turn is guided by what police direct.

“He was clearly not getting better with the treatment that we were providing.

“I’m talking back to Surfcom to say, ‘Hey, look, you know, it’s summertime, it’s a busy day, the nearest ambulance is in west Auckland which on a good day is still a 45- to 55-minute drive out. Yeah, we’d really like to have the Westpac helicopter come and pick this guy up’ …

“Unfortunately, I noticed there was a bit of apprehension about that request … We were told, no, they are unavailable. No reason given.”

An ambulance came by road 50 minutes later. The rescue chopper would have shaved valuable time off that, Smith said.

“That 40 minutes didn’t need to happen for both him or his partner.

“And to be fair, my team didn’t need to be put in that situation where they thought someone could die for want of not the best and most quickest asset being sent.”

He said later he asked some crew he knew at Westpac if they’d been too busy to come, but was told no and that that they didn’t hear about the job.

Smith said other colleagues at Piha had subsequently shared similar concerns, and raised them with the club, such as about the trouble communicating with the police Eagle chopper; or the Eagle – designed for crime-spotting but with some rescue capabilities – landing to offer help even though it cannot transport a patient and has way less medical expertise than the Westpac air ambulance/rescue helicopter.

“You do start second guessing, what asset is coming – is it the one that’s going to be able to look at lots of things or is it the one that’s going to be able to help?”

Four other sources familiar with Auckland west coast rescues, anonymously and independently of each other spoke of sometimes confusing, “hit-and-miss” or red tape-heavy approaches by police.

Questions after September 2025 rescue

Northern Rescue, operators of the Auckland Westpac rescue helicopters, told RNZ it was “aware that questions have been raised regarding the coordination and response to West Coast beaches”.

Those questions reached Surf Lifesaving’s operations team after a rescue seven months ago.

“After a rescue operation at Piha on 21 September 2025, the SLSNZ operations team met with lifeguards … to debrief. In that debrief, lifeguards raised a series of general questions about possible delays in activation on the west coast,” the organisation told RNZ.

In the September rescue, two swimmers had inhaled water and were brought to shore after 3pm.

The police log showed they and St John twice asked each other if a chopper was needed but none was sent, and instead half an hour later, an ambulance arrived by road.

Surf Lifesaving raised the lifeguard’s questions with police – the Tamaki Makaurau Police Maritime Unit – and they met at police’s instigation.

‘Surf Lifesaving New Zealand staff were encouraged to speak’ up – police

That meeting in November before the busy summer season came up with 10 pointers to help with shared operations – such as about what comms channels to use to talk from beach-to-chopper – that was circulated to lifeguards. United North Piha, and Karekare clubs were invited but in the event two members of Piha and the northern region ops manager met police.

“If it feels like there has been a delay on either side, let’s make sure we look into this straight away,” one pointer said.

Police said they took issues raised about the effectiveness of their partnerships seriously.

Surf Lifesaving stressed to RNZ how strong its cooperation with police was. “We have had a couple of great multi-agency training exercises recently, one in Tekapo and one in Bay of Islands.”

Smith said it was good to see them being proactive.

Police said since the November meeting no further concerns had been raised.

Piha club would not talk to RNZ. Its volunteers do up to 150 lifesaving rescues a year.

The Auckland region has the highest number of fatal drownings.

Surf Lifesaving estimated it had saved over 9000 lives in the last decade nationwide. Its Surfcom line got real-time information from patrols to find out what was going on and let other agencies know.

“Piha is a hot spot for rescues and medical incidents and, like in other remote coastal locations, there can be delays. We work closely with all agencies to ensure the safest outcome,” its national search-and-rescue manager Matt Cairns said.

‘A misunderstanding’

Matthew Williams was chief executive of Surf Lifesaving’s northern region, covering the Auckland western beaches, for nine years up till October 2023.

He said he had his ear close to the ground and nothing was ever raised with him about chopper delays, and in fact police had really developed, adding more rescue capabilities to complement the Westpac choppers.

But on the other hand with 16,000 lifesaving volunteers on the ground, sometimes it might look like there were delays.

“While I was in the role of working in the search and rescue sector, there was often conversations about one party on the ground not believing they had access to the assets that they required, but often a very good reason for why that was – about other things that may have been going on or protocols or processes,” Williams said.

“And often it may have come down to a misunderstanding.”

The core question was if the systems that had evolved to support command-and-control – such as of police – also served the rescue coalface or needed to change, Williams said.

All the input RNZ has had on its series of reports on problem rescues had emphasised the job was getting more complex; it is clear from documents that systems such as for incident management reporting have struggled to keep up.

Northern Rescue said: “As with any complex emergency response environment, there are always opportunities to strengthen how agencies work together in the interests of patients and the wider community.”

Nationally, the whole system for coordinating search and rescue helicopters and planes has now begun to be overhauled and is aimed at Maritime New Zealand’s Rescue Coordination Centre taking more of a front-seat compared to police, who still insisted they expected to manage 2000 operations a year.

St John was approached for comment.

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