Category: Politics

Source: Radio New Zealand

Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith has batted away warnings from his officials that the government’s proposed ‘move-on orders’ could put vulnerable people at risk and pile hundreds more cases on the courts each year.

The powers announced in February would allow police to direct rough sleepers or beggars out of an area at threat of a $2000 fine or up to three months in prison.

Newly released advice from government agencies strongly urged against the move, warning the proposal would cause significant hardship for already vulnerable people.

Justice officials noted a “lack of empirical evidence” that the orders would reduce crime rates and said they were “highly likely” to merely shift begging or rough sleeping to different locations.

“Vulnerable individuals such as young people, disabled people, and people experiencing mental health issues, could experience a greater risk of safety from being moved out of city centres.”

Those people might also find it harder to access support networks or services, officials said, and that steep fines would either deepen cycles of poverty or just go unpaid, resulting in further involvement with the justice system.

They said the penalties were “disproportionately high” and in line with those for “much more severe behaviour” such as careless driving resulting in death, indecent exposure, or resisting police.

“Applying such significant fines to people who were issued an order for begging, rough sleeping, or creating makeshift dwellings (suggesting little to no income) is neither appropriate nor proportionate.”

Officials also said the evidence for a growing public disorder problem was limited, noting police data showing prosecutions for such offences had declined in recent years.

Modelling, referenced in the regulatory impact statement, suggested the policy could result in somewhere between 200 to 800 additional court cases.

Officials said the increase would increase costs to the Ministry of Justice and could slow the progress of cases through the District Court.

They estimated it could result in an extra six people being imprisoned each year, at a cost to the state of $120,000 a year each.

Corrections warned the prison network already had limited capacity, and even small increases in the prison muster could trigger the need for new infrastructure.

RNZ earlier reported that key ministries, including justice and housing, had opposed the policy.

In a fresh statement to RNZ on Friday, Goldsmith noted the advice from officials but said it was for the elected government to determine how it moved forward.

In a statement to RNZ, Goldsmith noted the advice from officials but said it was for the elected government to determine how it moved forward.

“Just like the gangs legislation, which prompted similar warnings, we have every confidence police can operationalise this in a way that’s highly effective.

“This is about reclaiming our streets and our city centres for the enjoyment of everybody who visits, works and lives there.”

Goldsmith stressed that only people who refused the orders from police would face prosecution: “A move-on order is not a criminal charge.”

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/2026/03/13/justice-minister-paul-goldsmith-dismisses-officials-advice-on-move-on-orders/

Source: Radio New Zealand

ACT MP Cameron Luxton is a self confessed good, keen fisherman. Asked about his biggest snapper, he recounts catching a 23-pounder (10.4kg) from a kayak.

“I tell you what, when I flipped that into the boat, I was bloody stoked.”

He seems to be angling for a few fishing votes as well. Ahead of the recent Auckland on Water boat show he put the call out on social media, asking to talk “to fishers about what they see happening on the water and what needs to change. If you’re there, come and have a chat.”

First Up took up the invitation, asking Luxton if fishing was a hot topic as he stepped off an exhibitor’s boat.

“It certainly seems to be, but it’s always been a topic that’s dear to me.”

Luxton’s not the only politician engaging with anglers. Sam Woolford, spokesperson for recreational lobby group Legasea, said he was definitely getting more attention from politicians.

“I think the easiest way to describe it is it must be an election year,” he said, “because, yes, it definitely feels like suddenly all of the political parties are a lot more attentive to what the public interests are.”

Ben Chissell organised last year’s One Ocean demonstration, protesting at some aspects of the Hauraki Gulf / Tīkapa Moana Marine Protection Bill, which allowed some commercial fishing in areas that prohibited recreational fishing. He also had a number of politicians getting in touch.

“Yeah, we’ve had a lot reach out. We’ve heard from Labour, National, ACT and New Zealand First.”

He said the parties were taking the issue very seriously.

“One of the two major political parties has put this between top three and top five on their manifesto for the election.”

SeaFood New Zealand recently told members seafood, commercial fishing and marine sustainability was becoming an election issue. CEO Lisa Futschek said it was in ongoing talks.

“So we have had discussions with the National Party, with the Labour Party, with ACT, with New Zealand First, with the Greens as well. We haven’t at this stage had success in meeting anyone from Te Pāti Māori.

“Our conversations and our engagement across the political spectrum is ongoing. And obviously, given that it’s election year, will be wanting to maintain those connections on a regular basis.”

Two weeks ago while out fishing, Luxton filmed a commercial vessel targeting a school of jack mackerel and skipjack tuna, describing the fish being encircled by the net.

“They’ll all be gone by Friday afternoon, all that bait,” he said in the video posted on his Facebook page.

“We’ve seen manta rays and stuff here on Friday afternoon, but who knows what’s in there at the moment”

But Luxton was not biting when asked if he had any concerns about commercial catchers.

“I think that New Zealand’s got to have adult conversations about the way we manage the marine resource. And, you know, I think a lot of people have seen things on the ocean that worry them.”

Seafood New Zealand has also been keeping an eye on Luxton’s posts.

“Yes, we have seen those posts” Futschek said, “and we have tried to understand if there was a particular issue or particular conversations that needed to happen between the recreational sector and the commercial fishing industry in Cameron’s electorate.”

Last month, Conservation Minister Tama Potaka indicated National would remove commercial fishing from Hauraki Gulf high protection areas if re-elected.

Labour would do the same. In a statement, Labour’s acting oceans and fisheries spokesperson Priyanca Radhakrishnan said: “Oceans and fisheries are hugely valued sectors to New Zealand and certainly an area we are actively engaging in. A key focus for Labour is around sustainability of the sector, and ensuring it can grow to create skilled, well-paid jobs, while also protecting the health of our oceans.”

The debate around fishing policy was set to intensify, with a proposed amendment to the Fishing Act expected before Parliament this month.

Shane Jones is the architect of the bill, but was not available for comment – fuel, rather than fishing, his priority this week.

Futschek said the commercial fishing industry was supportive of the reforms.

“They are essentially common sense changes and updates to an act which has been around now for 30 years.”

Legasea though believed the changes were weighted far too heavily in favour of the commercial sector.

“We’re talking about legalising dumping and discarding the fish at sea, or allowing the fishermen to actually turn off cameras at transition periods, or even the most ridiculous one, which will actually make it illegal for future ministers to take into consideration the impacts of fishing techniques when setting allowances.”

Politicians from across the divide are keen to ensure this election issue will not be the one that got away.

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/2026/03/13/fishing-for-votes-fishing-regulations-and-the-balance-between-recreational-and-commercial-interests-are-shaping-up-as-an-election-issue/

Source: Radio New Zealand

A letter obtained by RNZ shows the Consulate General of India in Auckland supported visa applications for more than two dozen people as part of an “cultural delegation” that attended a Holi event in Auckland last month.

The delegation travelled to New Zealand for an international cultural programme titled “Community Holi Celebration with Shibani Kashyap”, according to the letter.

Immigration New Zealand said Tuesday it was trying to locate almost a dozen cultural performers believed to have overstayed their visas after arriving for the event.

Eighteen people from the group arrived in New Zealand. Of those, three have since left the country and 15 remained in the country, according to Immigration New Zealand.

Four held valid visitor visas, the agency said.

The agency confirmed to RNZ it had received a support letter for 29 visa applicants from the Indian diplomatic mission in Auckland.

The letter said Delhi-based CD Foundation was working with the consulate and spearheading the “cultural diplomacy initiative”.

Founded by Charu Das, CD Foundation has previously been involved in cultural exchanges between New Zealand and India.

RNZ has approached CD Foundation, the Indian Consulate and the Indian High Commission for comment.

In August, CD Foundation organised a New Zealand chapter of the “World & Us” cultural exchange series in Auckland, Hamilton and Whangārei.

This was followed by an Indian chapter in January, where a 30-member Māori delegation participated in cultural exchanges across Delhi, Telangana and Odisha.

Meanwhile, members of the Indian community in Auckland said some performers had sought help after arriving in the country.

Licensed immigration adviser Jagjeet Singh said two men had approached him, seeking advice about applying for asylum.

“I met two guys who were walking outside Sikh temple, and someone told them about my office,” Singh said.

Singh said both men were on limited visas and he advised them to return to India.

He said the pair had paid about 20 lakh rupees (around $40,000) to come to New Zealand.

Singh said the two men had told him they were travelling by bus to Whangamatā.

He believed they intended to stay longer in New Zealand and that the money they paid was for a pathway that they thought would eventually lead to a work visa and residency.

A South Auckland lawyer said he had also been approached by several members of the delegation.

Raj Pardeep Singh, a principal barrister and solicitor at Legal Associates in Papatoetoe, said four people visited his office seeking advice.

Singh said he encouraged them to consider legal migration pathways such as student visas or options under New Zealand’s Green List.

“It is important for people to follow their visa conditions,” he said.

A community leader from the Indian state of Haryana said he had also been contacted by several individuals for help to remain in the country.

Sunil Kumar initially agreed to meet the group because they were from his home state in India.

“I met a few people who were seeking help to stay in New Zealand while they still had a valid visa, but I advised them to go back and told them that this is not the right way to stay in New Zealand,” Kumar said.

Kumar said the group told him they had been duped by agents in India who took advantage of them coming from a less-developed part of Haryana.

Meanwhile, Bollywood singer Shibani Kashyap distanced herself from the overstayer issue.

“I’m very upset that my name has been dragged into this without any clarification from me,” Kashyap told RNZ from India.

Kashyap said she travelled alone for the event and did not bring musicians or performers with her to New Zealand.

“It was a solo performance. I had no team or performers travelling with me for the event in Pukekohe last month,” she said.

“Visas and tickets are highly expensive, so I never travel with a group of musicians to countries like New Zealand because it’s next to impossible.”

Kashyap said the event was organised by CD Foundation.

“CD Foundation, Charu Das’ foundation, was spearheading the whole thing,” she said. “What the foundation does, who she calls and what she’s doing – that’s not my responsibility.”

Asked about the performers who had overstayed, Kashyap said she had no knowledge of them.

“I have no clue who those people are,” she said. “I had only come for my performance and to launch and unveil World & Us documentary.”

CD Foundation also released a statement, saying Kashyap was the sole featured artist of the Holi celebration in Pukekohe.

“She is in no way responsible for, connected with, or associated with any individual members of the wider cultural delegation, other than her professional engagement with CD Foundation as a featured artist for the programme, with CD Foundation being the organising body coordinating the event,” the statement said.

The statement did not include any reference to those who had overstayed their visas.

Kashyap has previously appeared at several CD Foundation events and has been described as a cultural ambassador for the organisation.

She has also performed in countries such as the United Arab Emirates, Vietnam and New Zealand as part of CD Foundation programmes.

RNZ understands many of the visas for the delegation were approved by Immigration New Zealand on 20 February – a day before the event was scheduled to take place.

Immigration New Zealand told RNZ that some applications take longer to process “which may mean that they are decided close to the intended travel date”.

“Our ambition is to provide a trusted and effective immigration service,” said Jack Gilray, director visa at Immigration New Zealand.

“We aim to strike the balance between facilitating visitors and protecting New Zealand from immigration risk.”

The agency told RNZ that investigation teams would review information relating to the visas issued to the cultural performers.

Immigration New Zealand also said it was unable to reveal details about asylum claims.

“We cannot confirm whether asylum claims have been received from any members of this cohort, as, under section 151 of the Immigration Act 2009, the identity and details of refugee and protection claimants, or even the fact that a person has claimed asylum, must be kept confidential at all times,” Gilray said.

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

LiveNews: https://nz.mil-osi.com/2026/03/13/indian-consulate-backed-visas-for-performers-who-overstayed/

Source: Radio New Zealand

Shane Jones is continuing to make a case for why the Marsden Point refinery should have been saved, but his coalition partner David Seymour says the economics don’t stack up.

The debate over whether the now-defunct refinery would have left New Zealand less vulnerable to supply chain issues played out extensively in Parliament on Thursday.

It comes after government ministers met on Wednesday night to discuss the country’s fuel security as the ongoing war in Iran puts pressure on supply.

Currently the country has about 52 days worth of fuel supply either in country or en route.

Jones, the associate energy minister, first blamed the previous Labour government for allowing oil companies to give up storing fuel here in favour of a ‘just-in-time’ model relying on multiple import sources, in an interview with RNZ’s Morning Report on Thursday.

Responding to that criticism, Labour leader Chris Hipkins said Jones is being dishonest by blaming the previous government for current fuel resilience woes.

Hipkins told RNZ the closure of Marsden Point was a business decision, made by its private owners, and not a government decision.

“Ultimately Shane Jones is being very dishonest in the way he’s presenting that.

“Marsden Point refinery was processing oil that was imported from offshore. To say by importing the oil already processed, that somehow fuel security in New Zealand is less because of that, is just wrong.”

But Jones has doubled down saying the previous government fatally wounded the country’s fuel security in its decisions around Marsden Point, and says a 2021 Cabinet paper proves it.

The paper, which RNZ has a copy of, shows the Labour government considered providing a loan to Marsden Point but ultimately the then-Minister of Energy Megan Woods said there was not a strong case.

Hipkins says if Marsden Point would be useful as a storage option then “the tanks are still there and [the coalition] can have that conversation”.

It’s unlikely to get wide support at the coalition cabinet table however, with Act leader David Seymour declaring it a bad idea.

Seymour used to work at the refinery and his grandad helped build it in 1962.

“Let’s get a few things straight, first of all the shareholders chose to close it down. It was a commercial decision because it was costing more to refine there than elsewhere.”

To justify subsidising the refinery now to have it open would require a public benefit, he said.

“Once you go through the arguments it doesn’t actually stack up.”

When RNZ put to Seymour that it was his coalition partner, Jones, who was making the arugments to keep it open, he responded: “Well look, economics is not a gift given to everybody”.

Jones, however, has pointed to the 700 million litres of storage capacity at the refinery and the benefits that would bring if it was available today.

On Seymour’s criticism of his economic credibility, Jones said, “the leader of the Act party can say what he likes”.

“Sadly I was unemployed when that decision was made for the closure, and it would never have happened if me and my leader were around.”

Finance Minister Nicola Willis, who is chairing the ministerial group overseeing fuel security, said there was no question if Marsden Point was up and running today it would make the country more resilient.

“That’s a simple fact.

“Now the circumstances under which it closed is for the previous government to answer to, they were in the hotseats at the time,” she said.

Recommissioning it now isn’t an option, according to Willis.

“I’m focussed on what we can do here and now, not looking back in anger, but of course those who observe we’d be more resilient if it was still up and running, they’re right.”

‘Hard to say’ – fuel supply expert

Consultant Andreas Heuser, a fuel supply expert at Heuser Whittington, helped author a fuel security study last year, which found reestablishing the refinery would bring only a little more resilience at a very high cost.

“The study did conclude that re-establishing Marsden Point was by far and away the most costly option, and the resilience benefits that it did offer were relatively small compared to other resilience options, such as increasing tankage, transitioning to EVs, improving the fleet of fuel trucks that drive around the country.”

Heuser told RNZ it was “hard to say” whether it would help much now even had it remained open, given the refinery processed Middle Eastern crude.

“It might be marginally more secure. But also, given that it processed a lot of Middle Eastern crude, there’s definitely a case to say we’d be less resilient.”

Heuser said Jones did have a point that the refinery would have given New Zealand a “larger crude storage buffer”.

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/2026/03/12/should-marsden-point-refinery-have-been-saved-shane-jones-and-david-seymour-cant-agree/