Category: MIL-OSI

Source: Radio New Zealand

New Zealanders’ biometric information and other sensitive data may be handed over to the United States government under a new border security agreement between the countries.

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade has confirmed officials were in talks with the US on the requirements and scope of an Enhanced Border Security Partnership (EBSP).

The US has given the 42 countries in its Visa Waiver Program – a reciprocal agreement that allowed citizens to visit for up to 90 days without a visa – until the end of the year to conclude EBSP negotiations or risk losing visa-free travel status.

Any information handed over to the US may end up with the country’s controversial Immigration and Customs Enforcement border force – or ICE as it is commonly known – and concerns have been raised about the opaque process, data sovereignity and surveillance overreach.

New Zealand’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade (MFAT) refused to clarify what safeguards were being considered to protect New Zealanders’ private information or if it was aware of any ICE personnel stationed in New Zealand at present.

Biometric sharing programmes already exist between Five Eyes countries (New Zealand, Australia, Canada, the United States and the United Kingdom) as part of Migration Five arrangements but typically operated on a ‘hit/no-hit’ basis where initial biometric checks provided minimal information, and further data requests were considered on a case by case basis.

But EBSPs could provide full automated access to other countries’ national databases, according to critics and minutes from European Union member state negotiations.

The US Department of Homeland Security’s own privacy assessment noted biometric information could be used to vet any individual “encountered” during border inspections or immigration investigations.

European regulators warned this could extend to minors, victims or witnesses to crime.

The New Zealand government had not stated what information might be shared, what safeguards would apply, or whether parliament or the public would be consulted before any agreement was finalised.

MFAT offered RNZ a one-line statement regarding the negotiations: “New Zealand officials continue to discuss the requirements and scope of an Enhanced Border Security Partnership with the United States.”

However, the ministry refused to respond to follow up questions including when negotiations began, what privacy impact assessments had been undertaken, what safeguards were being considered, and what limitations would apply to collection and use of data.

Foreign Affairs Minister Winston Peters’ office also declined to respond.

Green Party foreign affairs spokesperson Teanau Tuiono criticised the lack of information on the negotiations.

He wanted to see parliamentary oversight and public scrutiny of the agreement.

The government should also disclose details of any privacy assessments it had carried out, he said.

Aotearoa needed to urgently reassess its relationship with the US, Tuiono said.

“We are seeing that alarm right across the world with the direction the US is going under the Trump administration. This is not a time for us to be seeking closer engagement and relationships with the US,” he said.

Council of Civil Liberties chair Thomas Beagle said the proposed scheme was much more invasive than existing data-sharing arrangements and officials should consider the Trump administration’s approach to immigration during negotiations.

“The US is obviously struggling at the moment with the rule of democracy and rights-based society. They have government-sponsored gangs of people wearing masks who refuse to identify themselves disappearing people off the streets,” Beagle said.

“This is seriously in the direction of heading towards fascism – the idea that we’re then going to give these people access to our private data and even the private data of people associated with travellers is very, very concerning.

“Some people are still locked in the past where the US was a reasonably benign ally of New Zealand, and that’s becoming less and less true.

“We wouldn’t give other countries like China or Russia full access into our police and biometrics databases, would we?”

New Zealand’s regulations included the right to have data held by public agencies corrected if it was wrong and the disposal of data after a certain time.

“Once this data passes out of our control, we don’t have that ability anymore. It’s going to be there for five or 10 years and could come back and bite you years later.”

The risk also applied to New Zealanders living in the US, who could get caught up in “trawling expeditions”.

Beagle urged the government to be more forthcoming about the agreement.

A report by the European Data Protection Supervisor – the European Union’s independent data protection watchdog – emphasised the unprecedented nature of such an agreement.

It would be first providing large-scale sharing of personal and biometric data with a non-EU country, and would have a significant impact on privacy rights and the protection of personal data, supervisor Wojciech Wiewiórowski said.

He called on European Union negotiators to narrow the agreement’s scope to just travellers and require clear justifications for every query, among other protections.

The report warned sharing sensitive data could lead to the detention or imprisonment of individuals.

Māori data sovereignty expert Dr Karaitiana Taiuru said there were specific concerns for Māori in relation to DNA, which is considered a taonga.

“For Maori and for many other indigenous peoples, our DNA is sacred to us. It’s not just this generation’s knowledge, it’s our previous generations and our future generations, so it’s very sacred,” he said.

Sharing police databases raised particular concerns given the overpolicing, profiling and surveillance Māori were subject to in Aotearoa, he said.

“We know from reports over decades there has been an institutional racism issue in the past with the New Zealand Police. So automatically, that data is going to be biased, it’s going to be racist,” he said.

“There’s going to be some very sensitive information in those police files. What happens if someone has been proven innocent by the police? Would that data show up if it’s shared overseas, for example. What about survivors and victims of abuse? They’re entitled to privacy as well.

“Some major questions need to be asked about people’s privacy and our own laws.”

A spokesperson for New Zealand’s Privacy Commission declined to answer questions on whether it had been consulted, what safeguards or limitations were or should be in place and whether a Privacy Impact Assessment had been carried out.

They said the Privacy Act and the new Biometric Processing Privacy Code contained rules around the collection, retention, sharing and security of personal information, including sending material overseas, however, other legislation could take precedence.

Saira Hussain, senior staff attorney at US digital civil rights group Electronic Frontier Foundation, said there had been a marked change under the Trump administration about how much and what type of data agencies were collecting at the border on “threadbare justifications”.

There was a “let’s grab everything first and ask questions later approach, which is really, really concerning about how that information may end up being used, where it’s being stored, the retention period”, she said.

It increased the possibility of infomation being breached, shared with other goverments or used for unintended purposes, Hussein said.

She was “exceedingly concerned” about what information was changing hands, how US officials would be able to query databases, for how long, and if it was restricted to people who were traveling to the US, “which in and of itself is a very large ask, but the fact that it may be open to others beyond those traveling is seriously alarming.”

Auckland University law professor Gehan Gunasekara questioned how the information would be used.

“If it’s retained for border protection and visa status, that’s fine, but if it’s been shared for other ulterior purposes, maybe with ICE so that they can go after relatives of the people that are traveling or … to build up profiles of people who have relatives in the United States who may be then imperiled that’s where we need to get safeguards,” he said.

While he would like to see more scruntiny of the agreement, New Zealand was not in a strong position to assert itself in negotiations.

“Unfortunately, that’s the reality when you’re dealing with powerful government agencies, especially foreign ones,” Gunasekara said.

“It’s only the very large, powerful trading blocs like the European Union that are in a position to negotiate some kinds of safeguards and we know there’s been perennial conflict between the United States and the European Union when it comes to personal data.”

New Zealand’s intelligence agencies had oversight in the form of the Inspector General of Intelligence and Security, Gunasekara said, referencing a highly critical 2018 report that criticised the agencies over a lack of transparency and possible breaches in the way information was collected.

“At that point, safeguards were adopted, and some checks put on that in terms of the intelligence agencies,” he said.

“So if the intelligence agencies can be made to have certain kinds of checks put in those kinds of situations, then one would expect other government agencies to be even more robust in the controls and checks they have – but it seems either that’s not happening or we haven’t been told what those safeguards are.”

The UK has neither confirmed nor denied finalising a deal, but in 2022 US Department of Homeland Security representatives told the European Union home affairs committee three EU member states and the UK had signed on.

Israel signed an agreement in March 2022, entering the programme in 2023.

A DHS press release touted the signing of an agreement with Bahrain in late 2025, which it said would allow for “the automated exchange of biometric data”.

In December, the European Union formally approved negotiations for an overall framework, which allowed member states to negotiate their own agreements beneath the overarching framework.

Australia has not publicly announced negotiations, but has not denied them when asked.

Late last year, the Trump administration announced plans to require visitors from visa waiver countriesdisclose five years of social media history, email addresses from the past decade, five years of phone numbers, personal details of family members, face, fingerprint, DNA, iris and other data when using the Electronic System for Travel Authorization process – an automated system visa-waiver members use instead of applying for a visa.

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

LiveNews: https://nz.mil-osi.com/2026/02/26/government-deciding-whether-us-should-get-access-to-new-zealanders-biometric-data/

Source: Radio New Zealand

Fire and Emergency (FENZ) has had to be reminded it is not allowed to order up search and rescue helicopters off its own bat.

Papers released under the Official Information Act show St John told FENZ in 2024 to stop trying to directly order an air ambulance chopper for search-and-rescue (SAR) operations, with Health NZ doing the same last year.

Internal e-mails have showed tensions on the front line about how the situation has been playing out.

RNZ has obtained five e-mails related to one rescue – and four dealing with another rescue – involving up to 15 people, from the FENZ front line up to the head office.

Lines rescue teams and their managers at FENZ complained to headquarters in Wellington last year about having to go through police to access the helicopters, and also sometimes having to wait to be called on to help.

“This is a further instance where we have been delayed,” said one in Waikato in January.

“This has become a recurring issue,” emailed another in Auckland in June.

Others who worked in other parts of search-and-rescue echoed those comments.

“This is taking far too long now,” one told RNZ about a delay in getting police to authorise a helicopter.

Another said a team could have got to a rescue in December “a lot sooner” but “the big cogs” had to turn. “The police are the ones that make those decisions.”

But police said they were the lead authority for local SAR operations and “well equipped to make informed decisions on the use of aviation assets”.

FENZ had not raised any concerns with police, and the agencies regularly discussed incidents, they said.

“Any systemic issues are raised through the appropriate governance forums.”

FENZ told RNZ: “There are no communication challenges between our agencies, and we work well together.”

‘Are we able to reach agreement with the police?’

The rescue side of search-and-rescue is facing greater demands, as big storms become more frequent.

The co-ordination required across multiple agencies and volunteers is key, and most of that responsibility sits with police.

But a lot of co-ordination is left to FENZ. On 13 February – when a man in a ute died in floodwaters near Otorohanga – a volunteer fire crew asked for either “a chopper or Hamilton lines rescue team”, and a FENZ swift water team was sent.

The team have to go by road, with their raft.

But some on the front line have now begun questioning if the system was fast and flexible enough.

They are asking if police should be in charge so much of most SAR operations, when police’s strength was in “search” while FENZ’s strength was in “rescue”, when a person’s location was known.

This has crystallised around who authorises the use of helicopters, in particular air ambulance helicopters (AAH) – the most useful and most expensive choppers.

After a mistake by police at a cliff rescue of a girl at Hahei in January 2025 – where police thought the girl was dead, so forced a lines team to drive by road instead of fly in – a senior FENZ manager wrote to his headquarters.

“The use of AAH resources is essential as most of the helicopters available through our air desk do not have the ability to fly at night or in bad weather.

“Are we able to reach agreement with the police that if we use an AAH for a rescue, then we will pay for it, as cost seems to be the reason our requests get declined?”

‘To try head off any further requests’

While Fire and Emergency has lines rescue teams ready to be deployed quickly – and recently added swift water rescue teams that travel by road – it has much less ability than police to get helicopters for them.

In the Hahei incident, fire-fighters knew the girl was alive, but had to pass their chopper request through St John to police, who admitted they failed to ask enough questions.

FENZ did not sign up to a 2022 agreement between police, ambulance and other SAR agencies, which made it clear that police were in charge of co-ordination.

“Previously, co-ordination agencies contacted providers directly,” Health NZ told RNZ.

The 2022 agreement talks about being flexible while heading off any “sub-optimal” responses or “duplication”.

“The agency receiving that [initial] notification should take initial action with the aim of preserving life, and then must immediately contact the agency with responsibility,” it said. That agency is usually the police.

Health NZ said the routing of all air asset requests through the SAR lead agency – usually police – ensured clear command, effective risk management, and oversight of personnel in “often high-risk operations”.

But two years later, fire-fighters were still trying to order up choppers themselves to carry lines rescue teams.

In April 2024, St John sent FENZ a memo “to try head off any further requests putting the [St John] team in an awkward position of having to decline the AAH to a fellow emergency agency”.

Health NZ followed this up at a May 2025 meeting with FENZ, the OIA showed.

“The issue of cost and scarcity of rotary wing air ambulances was raised [in May 2025] because there are alternative helicopter options for SAR,” HNZ told RNZ.

The ambulance choppers were “the most expensive helicopter option and should be reserved for when their capability is essential to the SAR operation”.

‘Delays of up to one hour or more’

There were two flurries of e-mails within FENZ either side of that May 2025 meeting, concerning the Hahei rescue and another in June 2025 at Musick Point, near Bucklands Beach in Auckland.

At the Musick Pt rescue, a badly injured woman who fell on to rocks was flown out by rescue chopper without lines rescue getting involved – but the FENZ crew were upset at being sidelined, according to e-mails. There was no evidence of the rescue being delayed.

A manager discussed with St John a procedure for getting an early heads-up in event their expertise came in handy.

They also raised it with local police, and said police had acknowledged that fire-fighters’ lines rescue was ready to go quickly, while police SAR were “usually on-call having to come from home or off the road, prepare and load gear, then respond to the incident which could have delays of up to one hour or more, depending on the location”.

In December, non-FENZ responders raised questions after police twice stood down air ambulance choppers already alerted by St John, at Lake Taupō and at Whangaparāoa.

In the Lake Taupō case, a teenager had leapt off a burning boat.

When the chopper was reactivated after a 20-minute stand-down, it spotted him in the water. The teen was not injured.

Meanwhile, police had been talking about helping with the rescue with a non-AAH chopper company, based alongside the AAH one at Taupō airport.

“Cost was not a factor,” they told RNZ. “Depending on the nature of a call and which emergency service receives it, police will also consider local aviation assets, which may be able to deploy faster, with operators who know the area, and any associated risks, well.”

‘The AAH was stood down’

At Whangaparāoa after Christmas, St John’s national airdesk was ready to send out an air ambulance on behalf of police for a man trapped on rocks as big waves came in, but police stood it down.

“Police advised via phone call that they did not need an AAH response, therefore the AAH was stood down by the national air desk and returned to base.”

When RNZ asked why, police said: “Given the information was that there was a person in immediate distress, a Category 1 rescue was initiated, with Auckland Maritime assuming incident control.

“Staff in the Police Eagle helicopter, which was responding, observed that the person was stuck on rocks, not otherwise in further distress. A surf lifesaving jetski assisted in bringing the man to shore.”

The Eagle is usually a surveillance helicopter, not a rescue chopper.

‘Prioritises preservation of life’

When police approve a chopper for a search and rescue operation, they pay for it.

Police told RNZ their response to all emergency calls “prioritises preservation of life above all else”.

They routinely debriefed after rescues and regularly discussed operational matters in a leadership group that included FENZ, St John and NZDF. Maritime NZ’s Rescue Co-ordination Centre (RCC) – which co-ordinates the bigger rescues – was also part of that.

But a source with experience of air ambulances and SAR told RNZ the system was “a bit of a mess” and “fragmented”.

In the Musick Pt e-mails – which circulated among 15 FENZ lines rescuers and managers in June 2025 – they talked about “recurring” problems swiftly getting the right chopper when they needed it.

After Hahei, a group manager asked headquarters “that our process is promptly reviewed, clearly clarified and cemented for all involved so when we are called upon to rescue and save lives, it isn’t delayed and declined by others out of our organisation due what is perceived to be cost”.

FENZ national manager of response capability Ken Cooper – in a 2025 e-mail – said he would meet partner agencies “with the intent on resolving the matter”.

‘No patch protection’

Cooper told RNZ this month FENZ’s standard procedure for a technical rescue was to pass all information to police to co-ordinate.

It had “reaffirmed” that police were responsible for “requesting our assistance” in a SAR operation, he added.

After Musick Pt, a FENZ assistant commander’s e-mail said there was “no patch protection, no animosity, everyone pitching in together for the best result of the customer”.

Two front-liners expressed alarm that their bosses seemed happy for police to have more say over lines rescue.

“If police were to wrestle the [lines rescue] capability from Fire’s hands ultimately there will be poor outcomes for the public,” one wrote.

RNZ approached most of the people in the FENZ e-mail chain. While the majority did not respond four did – two said they were not aware of wider problems like this, while two said it was very much an ongoing, wider problem.

Health NZ is another gatekeeper in its role commissioning air ambulance choppers, including for ACC.

Because the country had no dedicated search-and-rescue fleet, AAH choppers spent about four percent of their time on SAR operations, it said.

The constraint on who can order one for a rescue was a legal one reinforced by the 2022 agreement to ensure “all assets attending SAR incidents are under the oversight of the SAR co-ordinator”.

The rising cost of air ambulance choppers and how to co-ordinate them efficiently has been an issue for years.

“These aircraft are scarce and high-cost resources, so their deployment is carefully managed to ensure they are used where the greatest clinical benefit can be achieved,” Health NZ said.

Maritime NZ, which runs the RCC, said it was not involved in the rescues that sparked concerns. “Questions on processes and systems relating to specific SARs should be directed to the agency that co-ordinated the response,” it said.

The NZ Search and Rescue Council said it had no mandate over operational matters or co-ordinating operations.

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

LiveNews: https://nz.mil-osi.com/2026/02/26/who-can-order-a-rescue-chopper-tensions-rising-on-the-front-line/

Source: Radio New Zealand

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

LiveNews: https://nz.mil-osi.com/2026/02/26/epic-elvis-presley-in-concert-isnt-just-one-for-the-fans/

Source: Radio New Zealand

Residents of Wellington’s Lyall Bay fear a neglected property in the seaside suburb‘s Queens Drive is in such a bad state it is a danger to people passing in front of the building.

Those fears had heightened since a severe storm struck the city more than a week ago, tearing roofing iron from the two-storey building and breaking windows and weatherboards.

Residents said the house had been the subject of multiple complaints over many years and now looked like it was just one wind-gust away from collapse.

At ground level the more than 100-year-old house is boarded up – with windows and what may have been shop frontage covered in painted plywood.

On the second level glass-less windows left the building open to elements and extensive graffiti could be seen across the internal walls.

On the building’s frontage a veranda – blackened with dirt – hung above the pavement. Beneath it a supporting pillar bulged outward at its base.

Emma Dee said the sight of the dilapidated structure made her “hands shake” because her Rongotai home was struck by roofing iron from a different house during the recent storms.

“We had a neighbour – who lived five houses down from us – lose their roof and it took out part of our house while we were in there with with our kids. It’s so amazing to me that nobody was injured by shrapnel or killed or worse.

“I’m shaking. There’s a little bit of PTSD there,” Dee said.

‘One gust of wind away from falling down’

Michelle, a Lyall Bay resident for the last 20 years, said she was surprised the building survived the recent gales.

“There was previous storms where the fire brigade had been called and they had commented on how rickety the roof was when they went up to secure the tiles.

“I was kinda surprised to see it still standing though because over the last six to 12 months the centre beam in the shop window has started to bow quite badly. So surprised that the veranda’s still there but it’s quite dangerous. I really think that council should be looking at stopping people walking underneath it in case an accident happens.

“It’s not somewhere you’d dawdle around under now. It’s one gust of wind away from falling down I’d say,” she said.

Neighbour Jo Maunder said the structure’s deterioration over the last two years had heightened concerns about hazards on the property.

“It’s a safety thing for the community that worries me. There’s so many people going past that building everyday to get their coffee or go to the beach and lately there’s been young people using it as a bit of a club house I think – coming and going – and the police have been involved in trying to secure it better.

“We keep an eye out. We’re just worried about their safety and the safety of anyone else ’cause sooner or later that [beam’s] going to go,” Maunder said.

Several times a year people knocked on her door keen to contact the owners with a mind to purchasing the property but, as of yet, nothing had changed.

“Doesn’t it seem mad that a property like that would sit empty? The building’s gone to rack and ruin but what a great place to live. It upsets me because we need more housing and, you know, it just seems mad,” Maunder said.

Beside the building rope and hastily-nailed planks held together a sagging fence in front of a small garden swamped with six-foot-high weeds.

Maunder said the garden had become so overgrown someone had started stashing stolen items in the overgrowth.

“We just thought ‘what’s all that noise?’ one day and there were all these police cars outside. [They] were going into the property and pulling out brand new bicycles and tyres and kegs of beer,” Maunder said.

Wellington police confirmed they had been called to the house at least five times in the last two years over problems with people entering and damaging the building.

They said they had been in contact with a relative of the owners and had provided “routine prevention advice”.

The home is listed as being owned by Eva Shue and Jan Meng Shue.

RNZ had attempted to contact the Shue family but had not received a response.

Property records showed the Shues were also listed as the owners of a property in Newtown’s Millward Street which burnt down in suspicious circumstances in 2013.

At the time of the fire that house had also been unoccupied for some time – although Detective Sergeant Glenn Barnett said there was evidence of people “dossing down” in the building illegally.

Complaints date back nearly three decades

In a statement Wellington City Council said it had been receiving complaints about the condition of the Lyall Bay building since 1997.

It said – following complaints about the building’s veranda between 2002 and 2006 – an engineer advised that the structure was not dangerous.

The council made further attempts to contact the owners and their son in 2017 and, following additional complaints, between 2022 and 2025.

“The Building Compliance and Building Resilience teams have continued to attempt to engage with the owner with no response. A requirement to undertake maintenance work under the veranda bylaw has been requested with a due date of May 2026. It is important to note that on no occasion has council received any response or communication from the owner,” the council said.

The Building Act 2004 defined a building as dangerous if it was likely to cause damage to other buildings or injury or death to any persons in it or on another property – whether by collapse, in the event of fire or otherwise.

“Council has access to very few powers until a building has reached this high threshold. Once it has reached the threshold of Dangerous or Insanitary there are a number of provisions under the Building Act that council could consider – noting that no matter which path council pursues all we can require of the owner is to address the dangerous or insanitary elements of the building. We cannot require a building owner to renovate the building, or even get it to a habitable state again,” the council said.

The council said compliance officers made regular monitoring visits and said “the building remains secure”.

Another resident in the area – who did not want to be named – said he had made multiple complaints to the council about the building over the last six or seven years.

He said his partner had spoken to a man who regularly accessed a nearby building on Rua Street understood to be owned by the same family, but he had reacted defensively and told her the structure was safe – a statement he took with a grain of salt.

“I don’t feel safe walking under the veranda and I purposely avoid it. Because I just don’t know how long it’s going to hold out.

“It’s very windy in the area and I can just imagine in a hot summer day – if a fire was to go on – it would definitely catch the neighbouring houses,” he said.

Council’s interpretation of Buildings Act may be impeding action – property lawyer

Property lawyer Kristine King said it could be a challenge to balance owner’s property rights against health and safety issues and neighbourhood concerns.

She said it was up to local councils to determine how they interpreted the definitions of an Insanitary or Dangerous structure under the Buildings Act.

“We’ve got these definitions – which are fairly broad – [but] it’s the policies, their own internal policies of how they’re interpreting that and then how they’re applying it in practice.

“It’s interesting that council is saying that’s a ‘high’ threshold when the definition of ‘dangerous’ just includes ‘injury’. It says ‘injury or death’. I understand entirely if their definition required ‘death’, that’s a very, very high standard, but ‘injury’ in of itself is a far lower bar so I think it comes back to council’s interpretation and their own policies and whether we need to be looking at some measure to get them to revisit their approach,” King said.

The owners/occupants of the buildings have been approached for comment.

Wellington City Council said it would respond to a request for comment about recent storm damage to the building under the terms of the Official Information Act.

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

LiveNews: https://nz.mil-osi.com/2026/02/26/lyall-bay-residents-fear-neglected-queens-drive-property-is-a-danger-to-passersby/

Source: Radio New Zealand

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

LiveNews: https://nz.mil-osi.com/2026/02/26/is-fafo-the-demise-of-gentle-parenting/

Source: Radio New Zealand

Volunteer firefighter Peter Ottley still remembers his world turning upside down.

Two weeks after a call out to a fatal bus crash, he said he lost the plot.

He has PTSD, but like all emergency volunteers, he is not eligible for ACC cover for mental injury.

Ottley was frustrated, because all they got were apologies.

“‘We’ll do our best’, but there is no best, because money is more important than life.”

Volunteers have been lobbying the government to change the legislation for years, in 2025 a petition with 36,549 signatures was unsuccessful.

Now Land Search and Rescue are pushing the government to reconsider saying January’s Mt Maunganui tragedy showed the level of trauma they were repeatedly exposed to with no long term protection.

Long time emergency volunteers Jarrad Scott and Peter Ottley were desperate for change.

“The fact that you can go out and be drunk and wrap a car around a power pole and be covered by ACC, but if you’re volunteering to save lives, you’re not covered.

“It’s ridiculous,” Scott said.

Under current legislation ACC could provide broad physical injury cover to volunteers – the same available to all New Zealanders. If a physical injury resulted in a mental injury that was also covered by ACC. But unlike employees, volunteers did not get any support for mental injury caused by what they saw on the job.

Or in other words, if you have not broken your leg or you were not being paid, ACC could not do anything to help mentally unwell volunteer emergency responders.

The cumulative load

“I was the guy that always thought I was strong and could deal with any situation. And then everything sort of accumulated where it sort of built up.”

Scott had 20 years with Land Search and Rescue (LandSAR). Two years ago that all stopped.

He was called out to a report of a missing person. At the briefing, he realised he knew the missing person quite well.

Scott said he was advised not to attend, but he insisted.

“I wasn’t forced to go, I wasn’t asked to go, I was told not to, and I still went against that.”

Why? The reason he volunteered in the first place.

“On the hope that he was okay and, you know, we could help him.”

The team could not help him, and Scott assisted in body recovery.

It was after this that Scott began to struggle. He admits some of this was his responsibility because he ignored LandSAR advice and went to the scene anyway.

LandSAR provided Employee Assistance Program (EAP) assistance, in person counselling and debriefs, before he was told to go to a GP.

The doctor tried to arrange psychologist treatment and filed an ACC claim – only for it to be turned down.

“I got a phone call from ACC and the lady said, really sorry to tell you, we know you’ve been through a horrible thing, but you’re not covered and your claim’s going to be declined … because I am a volunteer.

“I asked them … what about the guy standing next to me in the blue uniform doing the same job at the same time, same scene. Is he covered?

“And she said yes, because he’s being paid.”

At this point, Scott said his mental health was getting worse by the day.

“The constant flashbacks and daymares, I call them, it’s like a nightmare, but during the day, it’s just … insane.”

Because of his volunteer status, not only was he declined ACC care, but also salary compensation.

Eventually Scott was diagnosed with PTSD and LandSAR was able to fund specialist treatment EMDR (Eye Movement Desensitisation and Reprocessing) which helped dramatically.

He said LandSAR had done everything it could to support him, but the legislation continued to hurt.

“It’s too late really to help me, but I want people going forward to be covered.

“The system’s so flawed that you’ve got a whole nation that runs on volunteers, and none of us are covered. St John’s and Fire, Coast Guard, but none of them are covered, and they all see horrific stuff.”

Rescuing their own

LandSAR chief executive Wendy Wright agreed the legislation fell short.

“When we look at the reliance we have as a country on volunteers across emergency services and search and rescue, 95 percent search and rescue workforce are actually volunteers.

“They do it because they want to serve their community.”

And that was part of the pressure.

“When you have in a situation like you do at Mount Manganui, that is the local Tauranga volunteers and they’re … supporting their own community.”

She said sometimes it was the cumulative effect that created a mental injury. Other times, just one event like the Mauau landslide would be enough.

The cost of volunteering

Peter Ottley was also familiar with this battle. He did not know if he would ever be able to return to work again.

His wife worked two jobs to keep them afloat.

Ottley was a volunteer fire fighter in Kingston for 13 years, but in December 2024 his life changed after attending a bus crash.

“I turned the world a little bit upside down and lost the plot.”

It was PTSD. He became incredibly angry, irritable, and anxious.

“Didn’t want to be around people … my anxiety was going through the roof.”

Like Scott, Ottley’s PTSD was not from one event but built from 13 years serving the community.

Fire and Emergency New Zealand (FENZ) said crew safety was a top priority and it provided comprehensive support, including free counselling and psychological support.

He said FENZ was doing what it could and funding EMDR sessions, but it did not have a system for people like him.

Government sympathetic, but doesn’t want change

Parliament has shown little interest in making changes to the system, despite the fact volunteers made up 86 percent of the front-line workforce of Fire and Emergency.

In late 2025 Parliament agreed volunteer firefighters offered vital services to New Zealand, but it did not want to change the legislation over fears of setting a precedent.

“We do not consider it practical for all types of volunteers to be provided with ACC workplace coverage.”

It said the estimated cost of providing equitable cover for FENZ volunteers at $244,533 per year, or roughly $20 per volunteer firefighter annually.

The Minister for ACC, Scott Simpson, said his focus was on ensuring the scheme was sustainable for future generations, not expanding.

Labour’s ACC spokesperson Camilla Belich had a different view.

The party was so compelled by the examples in last year’s petition it created a Members Bill asking for volunteer firefighters to have the same cover as their paid counterparts.

“We haven’t been approached by other occupations to date, but we’ll be happy to consider those alongside this change if necessary.”

She said Labour would have a full ACC policy going into the election.

Volunteers a ticking time bomb

Both Scott and Ottley knew they were not the only ones.

“I’ve got no doubt that there’s volunteers out there that have been suffering through PTSD, potentially taking their own lives, but there’s just no need for it,” Scott said.

Around 25 Fire and Emergency volunteer firefighters responded to the Mount Maunganui landslide.

“You don’t get a choice of where you go or what you’ve got to do. We [volunteers] go and do what we have to do, we’re more often than not there well before the full [paid] people … sometimes it’s at least an hour to two hours before anyone else comes to help or support us … and the volleys pretty much are out straight away, bang,” said Ottley.

Ottley said it was unbelievable volunteers could get paid time off for a broken leg, but their minds were not valued the same.

“It should be automatic that, if someone needs help or whatever it is that, it’s done … but money is more important than life.”

He said emergency volunteers were a ticking time bomb, seeing trauma after trauma, waiting to go off.

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

LiveNews: https://nz.mil-osi.com/2026/02/26/volunteer-firefighters-renew-calls-for-acc-mental-health-cover/

Source: Radio New Zealand

Legal and social services experts say sweeping the streets of vagrants won’t make them less homeless – and we should be ashamed of the way we’re treating society’s most vulnerable New Zealanders

Cities worldwide have a habit of clearing out their homeless in advance of big events – think Atlanta, Moscow, Los Angeles, Rio, Tokyo and Paris, ahead of hosting Olympic Games.

2026 is supposed to be Auckland’s year, according to Heart of the City boss Viv Beck.

“And the government’s talked about that too,” says RNZ political reporter Giles Dexter. “You’ve got the CRL [City Rail Link} coming on, the brand new convention centre … cruise ships coming in … we’ve got the State of Origin next year.

“All these things that are happening to Auckland, and first impressions count.”

By the end of this winter, new legislation will have been passed that gives, according to government politicians, “another tool” to police to deal with what’s become an increasingly sad and scary problem in the central city – rough sleepers, abusive vagrants, homeless people who are frightening off shoppers, workers and tourists.

It comes in the form of a ‘move-on’ law, which enables officers at their discretion to shift people away from their trouble spot for 24 hours. The Summary Offences Act will be amended to provide police with the power to issue these orders against people who display disorderly, disruptive, threatening or intimidatory behaviour; obstructing or impeding someone entering a business; breaching the peace; all forms of begging; rough sleeping; and behaviour “indicating an intent to inhabit a public place”.

The law will apply nation-wide, not just in Auckland where the biggest problems are.

There have been widespread complaints about the plan, with people in the social services sector calling it “criminalising homelessness”.

Questions have been raised about where people will be moved on to, and how they can be helped, when the relevant services just aren’t there.

Today on The Detail, Dexter explains what’s behind the move-on move, and what it’s expected to achieve.

It’s been in the pipeline since about October last year, sparked by increasing complaints from city business owners and workers about anti-social behaviour. The number of rough sleepers in Auckland has nearly doubled in the last two years.

“The government had been hearing from business communities that despite some of the interventions already in place, this was still a problem,” he says.

In November the Prime Minister told journalists a law was under consideration but they had to look at what supports were in place when people are shifted.

Christopher Luxon says other measures, such as extra police on the beat and a new station in the city have been effective in bringing victimisation numbers down. He told Morning Report the government spends $550 million a year with different social service organisations to support the homeless, $5b on housing support, and has taken 6000 people off the social housing waitlist and out of emergency housing situations.

“They’ve mentioned that there has been more investment in Housing First solutions,” says Dexter. “So they opened up 300 more places specifically for homeless people and they’ve not all been taken up. But some of those development organisations you speak to, and City Missions, will say they just need more resources. They cannot at the moment cope with the way things are.”

The details of the legislation will be worked out in the legislative process, and the law is likely to be pushed through before the election.

“We’re not going to know what happens to these people until this legislation comes through,” says Dexter.

‘There are no options for places to take them’

Carmel Claridge is the co-ordinator for the New Beginnings Court, Te Kooti o Timatanga Hou, in central Auckland. Low-level offenders are referred there by the judiciary, and they’re put through a programme aimed at getting their lives back together. By its definition, a lot of those going through it are homeless.

“These are the people who are regularly turning up in our courtrooms, and are regularly coming to the attention of police,” she says.

“The simple fact is there are no options for places to take them. So it’s all very well to say, ‘oh police can issue a removal order and if someone fails to comply they can take them to a social service … I’d like to know which one the political commentators have in mind.”

She says there simply are no beds for people with complex needs, such as those seen often in the type of people who live rough.

Auckland University family law academic Professor Mark Henaghan says homelessness is one issue, and people who are violent or threatening on the streets is a different one – and it’s one that already has legal measures in place to deal with.

“You should feel safe on the streets,” he says. “If someone punches someone, the police can’t just walk by and ignore it … they may happen to be homeless but that’s not the real issue here. Any threatening behaviour, that’s already in the Crimes Act, it’s very clear – they’re offences. That’s been there for a long time and so it should be, our physical security is very important.”

Henaghan says we need other solutions.

“You can’t just say [to Parliament] ‘don’t do it’, because that doesn’t give them other solutions. One of the things I have found quite surprising in the statements and interviews with ministers [is that] they don’t seem to have any options. You move them on but what happens next? And they say ‘oh, well something will happen’. Very vague.

“I’d have thought if you’re moving people on you’d be moving them on to a social service that will actually help them but it’s all very vague and I don’t think they’ve corresponded with social services.

“It’s always bad law if you react very quickly to something and try and pass something through very quickly in election year so you can say ‘we’re at least doing something in this situation’ … I think that’s not good.

“Passing a law doesn’t solve the problem. It doesn’t make people less homeless. It just makes them more vulnerable actually.”

Check out how to listen to and follow The Detail here.

You can also stay up-to-date by liking us on Facebook or following us on Twitter.

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

LiveNews: https://nz.mil-osi.com/2026/02/26/shifting-the-homeless-problem-to-somewhere-we-cant-see-them/

Source: Radio New Zealand

Kiwis who reflect the “heart and soul” of Aotearoa have been named as finalists for New Zealander of the Year.

Thousands of people were nominated but the choice came down to three individuals who stood out for the judging panel.

They are Dame Julie Chapman, Sir Richard Faull and Sir Rod Drury.

Dame Julie leads organisations Kidscan and Pet Refuge, while Sir Richard is a neuroscientist whose expertise have helped better understand the human brain.

Sir Rod is the founder of Xero and works to “shape Aotearoa New Zealand’s technology landscape through innovation, investment, and mentorship”.

Kiwibank New Zealander of the Year Awards patron Miriama Kamo said the three finalists “reflect the heart and soul of Aotearoa over the past twelve months – people leading with purpose, courage and heart”.

“Across every category, we see service, innovation and kaitiakitanga in action: protecting people and the planet, strengthening communities,

advancing equity, and shaping bold solutions for the future.

“Together, they remind us that real leadership is grounded in compassion – and that when we care deeply and act bravely, we can change lives.”

Kiwibank chief executive Steve Jurkovich said the finalists were leaders who were shaping the future of New Zealand in very different ways.

“From protecting our most vulnerable tamariki (children) and whānau (family), to driving innovation and backing the next generation of Kiwi enterprise, to advancing life changing neuroscience research.

“Their impact reaches from our local communities to the global stage.”

Jurkovish said it was a privilege to celebrate the finalists.

Finalists for six other categories have also been announced.

The awards will be held on 19 March in Auckland.

Go Media Young New Zealander of the Year

• Harlem-Cruz Ihaia
• Léon Bristow
• Lucy Blakiston

Ryman Healthcare Senior New Zealander of the Year

• Alan and Hazel Kerr
• Dame Claudia Orange
• Stewart Bull

2degrees New Zealand Innovator of the Year

• Craig Piggott
• James Hayes
• Jonathan Ring and Leatham Landon-Lane

Te Rūnanga o Ngāi Tahu New Zealand Sustainability Leader of the Year

• Mike Casey
• Russel and Teresa Trow
• Valerie Marie Ngaoa Teraitua

Tower New Zealand Local Hero of the Year

• Dr Jeremy Tātere MacLeod
• Māhera Maihi
• Terri Middleton

Mitre 10 New Zealand Community of the Year

• Hōhepa Hawke’s Bay
• Rei Kōtuku Charitable Trust – Children’s Palliative Care Service
• Safeguarding Children Initiative

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

LiveNews: https://nz.mil-osi.com/2026/02/26/new-zealander-of-the-year-2026-finalists-reflect-heart-and-soul-of-aotearoa/

Source: Radio New Zealand

Hutt City Council wants assurance that its own sea-side sewage treatment plant will not suffer the same disastrous failure as Wellington’s Moa Point plant.

It has asked Wellington Water whether the Seaview plant, near Petone, has the same equipment as Moa Point which flooded a room the size of an Olympic swimming pool 3-metres deep with sewage on 4 February.

The facility has been sending tens of millions of litres of raw sewage into Cook Strait each day since and an independent inquiry into the failure has been signalled from central government and Wellington City Council.

For years the Lower Hutt Seaview sewage plant has been an issue for locals particularly due to its odour, with it being reported in January 2024 that $40,000 worth of fines were dished out to the facility’s owners.

A week after the Moa Point failure Hutt City Council chief executive Jo Millar penned a letter to Wellington Water chief executive Pat Dougherty which requested the pair to meet.

Millar wanted to know how frequently the Seaview Wastewater Treatment plant and its 17-kilometre sewage outfall pipe were being inspected and monitored.

She also wanted Wellington Water to explain the processes it undertook to verify that Veolia’s maintenance and operational obligations were being met.

The council head also asked if similar equipment to Moa Point had been installed at Seaview in recent years, what that would be and whether it held any responsibility for what had happened at Moa Point.

She called for Wellington Water to outline its and Veolia’s plan if a similar failure happened.

“Including if this would lead to additional discharges into the Waiwhetū Stream and if an environmental assessment has been done on this including addressing the scale of any event.”

Hutt City Council told RNZ that the information had not yet been provided but a meeting between the two leaders was scheduled.

“Once council has received that briefing, elected members will be briefed, and we will then be in a position to respond further.”

It could not say when that meeting would be.

A Wellington Water spokesperson told RNZ it was entirely appropriate for Hutt City Council to request these assurances from the water company – particularly following an incident of the magnitude of Moa Point.

“Wellington Water welcomes the opportunity to engage with the council on this matter.”

Veolia referred RNZ to Wellington Water 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

LiveNews: https://nz.mil-osi.com/2026/02/26/hutt-city-council-seeks-assurance-after-wellingtons-sewage-treatment-plant-failure/

Source: Radio New Zealand

An immigration adviser took thousands of dollars from a migrant, in a “subterfuge” where he would pay for a fake job at her husband’s firm, a tribunal has heard.

It upheld complaints by six customers of Qian Yu, also known as Heidi Castelucci.

The Immigration Advisers Complaints and Disciplinary Tribunal said it was considering cancelling her licence and preventing her from reapplying when it ruled on sanctions next month.

She continued to work as an advisor after she was suspended in April last year, failing to submit a work visa for a Chinese man, who paid more than $1500.

“At the relevant time, she was engaged by Liberty Consulting Group Ltd trading as Liberty Immigration, of Auckland,” said the decisions. “She was also a contractor to New Zealand Language Institute and Foreign Exchange Program Ltd, of Hamilton and Auckland. Ms Yu’s husband, Toby Scott Castelucci, is a director and shareholder of both companies.”

Richard Wu, who worked for her and recorded Yu offering him residence in return for money after the company sacked him in 2024, paid an unlawful premium for his job.

The tribunal said he had paid about $22,000 which would be “extraordinarily high” if it was an immigration fee. She suggested he get paid cash-in-hand jobs alongside the fake job to hide what they were doing.

Façade

“She further told him about the subterfuge as to the paperwork of her husband’s company (in terms of the pay checks issued, which was money he was actually paying to her himself). She told him to pay his own tax, an obligation the agency had as his employer. The Tribunal finds that Ms Yu knew this advice was unlawful.

“The employment presented to Immigration NZ was a façade. There was no genuine job. It was a mechanism designed to obtain a work visa for the complainant (and ultimately residence) and hence a substantial premium for Ms Yu and her husband.”

Another client called and sent messages to her dozens of time, and unwittingly became an unlawful overstayer.

One woman had been applying for visitor visas for her relatives and said “the fraud had caused great loss to the family”.

“Ms Yu has not denied any of the allegations made against her,” said tribunal chair David Plunkett.

“As a professional person, she has a responsibility to engage in a disciplinary process. The tribunal draws an adverse inference from her failure to engage with either the authority or the tribunal. She has provided no explanation for the serious wrongdoing alleged against her.”

The tribunal heard she forged the signature of a client and fabricated an INZ letter, concealing decline decisions and not following up on information requests.

The Registrar of Companies has initiated action to remove Liberty Consulting from the register.

Qian Yu registered Global Pathways Consulting as a new limited company in February, with her husband Toby Castelucci as director and sole shareholder.

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

LiveNews: https://nz.mil-osi.com/2026/02/26/facade-subterfuge-fraud-immigration-advisers-string-of-upset-clients/