‘New Security Service' For Parliament Would Have More Powers
Parliament's security guards will receive training later this year to prepare for potential additional powers.
The Parliament Bill is up for a second reading and would give the guards statutory powers of 'consent search, denial of entry, temporary seizure of specified items, and temporary detention.'
Parliamentary Services chief executive Raf Gonzalez-Montero told the Governance and Administration scrutiny hearing yesterday they were taking that responsibility 'very seriously'.
Police and the Ministry of Justice were assisting with the training, which is expected to begin in December, with the first guards certified around March or April next year.
As part of the hearing – which allows MPs to scrutinise funding decisions – Gonzalez-Montero mentioned the Parliamentary Service focusing on embedding the 'new security service' for members.
During the election they trialled that service, which he said was 'well-received'.
It was now an established service and they will have staff that are able to travel with MPs when they have functions or gatherings 'just to keep them safe', Gonzalez-Montero said.
He said a review of the security system overall will also be taking place, with some gaps between 'when a member is a member, and when a member is a minister'.
'There are things that need to be tightened up in that ecosystem.'
Gonzalez-Montero told MPs the parliamentary service was also investigating options to increase the ability to monitor social media to address what had been seen this year, which was 'digital harm' against MPs.
He said he wanted to make sure whatever service was chosen to respond the issue was 'fit for purpose' for members.
Other issues in Parliament
Other questions in the hearing focused on the issue of infrastructure and accessibility, as well as Parliament's capacity to fulfil its democratic responsibilities.
The Greens' Lawrence Xu-Nan asked about a key lift in the Parliament building, which, when out of order, means a key route for wheelchairs is inaccessible.
Gonzalez-Montero said he agreed, if the lift was out of service, 'that would be a big problem for us.' He said he would love nothing more than to fix those things, but it required funding. He had a wish list to create a ramp for the entry to Parliament, rather than just having the stairs, or having to use different lifts.
'Unfortunately, those things are very expensive, and we haven't yet had the money to fix those things.
'We'll keep it on our radar, keep doing the things that we can within the budget that will allow us.'
He pointed out they'd received funding this year for the infrastructure of the buildings, 'so the sprinkler systems, things that fail, things like the lift.'
But he said last year was the lift's 'end of life' and it hadn't previously been budgeted as something that needed fixing, 'we were lucky this year we got funding.'
'That is the juggling we do all the time.
'So we've got a list of things that we focus on fixing, and then something pops up, and then we say, well, something's going to have to come out of that list for us to fix the lift.'
The funding the service had been receiving was at 2005 levels, he said, and things go up in price and 'every year we're able to do less.'
He said a lot more upgrades in terms of infrastructure will be needed in future. The Beehive needed a lot of work, 'it's a very old building,' he said.
'Pretty much all the buildings here are in in dire need of fixes, strengthening and upgrading.'
Clerk of the House of Representatives Dr David Wilson also fronted the committee and was asked by Labour's Glen Bennett about parliament's 'ability to operate'.
Bennett noted the Office of the Clerk had said there were 'a lot of challenges in terms of workload' and asked how that was being managed in order to provide MPs with what they needed, as well as the public when it came to 'scrutiny and transparency'.
Wilson said he was confident the Office of the Clerk would be able to do that. The increase in funding they'd received wasn't a 'vast sum of money' he said, but it did 'make a difference.'
'It enables us to retain the staff that are hard to attract, but also to take on additional staff when we need to, for example, when we have bills with large numbers of public submissions, we can temporarily embrace the workforce to deal with that.'
This was notable during the submissions to the Treaty Principles Bill, where the committee received 300,000 online submissions, half of which were received on the last day. Submissions were re-opened due to technical issues so people who had issues were able to submit.
Some complaints have been made during the submission process to the Regulatory Standards Bill this week. Wilson told RNZ they were aware of a technical issue with the Parliament website, which was being worked on.
'The issue is affecting the whole website.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scoop
2 hours ago
- Scoop
'Silenced Before Anyone Can Hear': Youth MP Breaks Script To Challenge Alleged Censorship
Chris Hipkins' Youth MP made waves in Parliament on Wednesday, changing his approved General Debate speech last-minute to call out what he and others have described as censorship by the Ministry of Youth Development (MYD). Ryan Grant-Derepa, 17, represents the Leader of the Opposition in this year's Youth Parliament. Just hours before taking the floor in the Debating Chamber, he altered his speech to criticise MYD's handling of Youth MPs' contributions – claiming that while rangatahi are invited to share their voices, they're also being filtered in the process. 'But here's the irony: there's no livestream. No cameras. No public record. We're told to speak, but silenced before anyone can hear,' Grant-Derepa said in his speech. 'And if the government won't take action, our rangatahi will. We're not here half-hearted. We're not here half-asked. And we're not backing down. We are the future. And they are not ready.' His address was met with murmurs of support from peers across the House, and audible approval from ministers, whānau and observers in the public gallery. Youth MPs push back The three-day Youth Parliament kicked off with orientation on Monday, followed by two days of debate, questions and parliamentary working groups. But behind the scenes, controversy had already begun to build. An open letter published earlier in the week, signed by numerous Youth MPs – particularly those on the Opposition side – alleged that MYD staff were requesting significant changes to speeches, especially where they involved criticism of current government ministers or policies. A second open letter, released Thursday, included signatures from prominent voices outside the programme, including 2023 Young New Zealander of the Year Shaneel Lal, and mental health advocates Jazz Thornton and Genevieve Mora. The letters describe an environment where Youth MPs felt unable to speak freely – despite the purpose of the programme being to elevate youth voice in national politics. Speaking after his speech, Grant-Derepa said he changed course not for shock value, but because 'it was the right thing to do.' 'If MYD want us to share our voice, why should they also be stopping us at the same time? It doesn't make sense.' 'We're not given a chance to show people hope… show that we're working together, that we're not as polarised as people like to think. Yet somehow, we're still the ones causing the ruckus. Isn't that exactly what this government says it wants? Obviously not, right? They're scared of young people.' His shift in tone echoed earlier comments made by Labour leader Chris Hipkins, who, when asked on Monday about the speech review process, said: 'Any idea that they're being asked to submit their views in advance so that they can be censored, so that they can have critical comments about the government taken out of them, is just totally out of step with the spirit of Youth Parliament, which is hearing from young people.' The Ministry responds In a statement attributed to Minister for Youth James Meager, the Ministry of Youth Development strongly denied any form of censorship. 'MYD did not stop or censor any Youth MP's speech,' said Meager. 'The Ministry's suggested changes were just recommendations for the young people to consider. However, they acknowledge that recent feedback received from some of the young people is that this was not as clear as it could've been in every instance.' 'If Youth MPs felt like that amounted to censorship, that is unfortunate, because at all times the Ministry had their best interests at heart and repeatedly reminded Youth MPs that ultimately what they say and do is up to them… Many, if not most Youth MPs were grateful for the support and guidance provided by the Ministry, and made excellent, robust and challenging contributions to the debate.' He added that safeguarding participants was the Ministry's primary concern: 'MYD's number one priority throughout this programme was keeping all participants safe and protected as much as possible… and advising them on how to best express their views without falling foul of the law, the standing orders, or the horrible trolling which can occur online.' Addressing the decision not to livestream this year's proceedings, Meager said: 'Youth Parliament participants were told early on that the event would not be livestreamed, although all debates and speeches have been filmed – and will be provided in full for all participants to share as they please.' The statement did not mention the reason behind this decision, though an Instagram comment made by Green Party MP Benjamin Doyle says it was due to funding cuts. The Minister also addressed concerns over legal protections, noting that Youth MPs do not have parliamentary privilege: 'What Youth MPs say in the House will not be protected in this way. MYD reviews speeches to look for any aspects which could fall under defamation, copyright, privacy or contempt of court – which the Youth MPs may be unaware of.' 'This review is not about changing the content of speeches – it's about MYD being responsible organisers of an event that is predominantly made up of minors who may be unaware of such rules and laws.' Meager concluded by reaffirming the value of Youth MPs' contributions: 'The Youth Parliament speeches were full of diverse and differing points of view, which is the entire point of the event and democracy as a whole.' A growing call for transparency As debates wrap up and Youth MPs return home, questions remain about how best to balance safeguarding with free expression. For Grant-Derepa, this week's experience has been a turning point, one he says made him even more determined to challenge the status quo. 'We're told, 'Wait your turn.' But that's the problem. We have things to say now.'
Scoop
a day ago
- Scoop
Regulatory Standards Bill Could Be Barrier For Māori Housing
The Ministry of Housing and Urban Development has warned that the Regulatory Standards Bill could stymie progress in enabling papakāinga, or Māori housing, documents show. A ministry official also flagged concerns the legislation could make it harder for ministers to do their jobs, and warned the reach of the proposed law - and the minister-appointed board - seemed "disproportionate to the authority of Parliament". Regulations Minister David Seymour rejected the criticism, saying the ministry should be "leading the charge to cut through this bureaucracy so more homes can be built". The Regulatory Standards Bill is non-binding on Parliament but proposes a set of principles MPs and officials would have to consider when designing regulation. It also would set up a board, appointed by the minister, to examine current and future laws' consistency with those principles, as well as requiring regular reviews of all regulations. In its feedback, the housing ministry raised concern about the potential for individual property rights to be elevated over and above collective rights. "...the lack of provision for collective rights/rangatiratanga and the indicated shift towards Individual rights, in a way that is not currently in New Zealand's constitution, could impact the way we can develop policy and legislation with significant negative impacts on Māori housing outcomes," it said. The ministry said one of the proposed principles - dealing with taxes, fees, and levies - could hinder progress on Māori-led housing projects. "If this principle is imposed over regulation, we are concerned it could be misaligned with the current approaches to whenua Māori, lead to greater fragmentation of land/whenua Maōri, be a barrier to pooling resources for collective good and further entrench the negative housing outcomes that currently exist." The government in May announced plans to make it easier to consent papakāinga. However, funding for the Whai Kāinga, Whai Oranga housing fund has also been cut. In a statement to RNZ, a spokesperson for Seymour said if the Regulation Standards Bill had been in place years ago, it could have prevented "much of the pointless red tape" that slows down building and consenting. "New Zealand faces a serious housing crisis. Anyone who has tried to build a home knows the delays and costs caused by red tape," the spokesperson said. "I'd have thought the Ministry for Housing would be leading the charge to cut through this bureaucracy so more homes can be built." An FAQ document prepared by Seymour's office also rejected the idea that the bill would favour individual rights over collective ones, saying it preserved the status quo "that collective Parliamentary law can trump all individual rights to personal autonomy and possessions". The document did not specify, however, how individual property rights would be considered compared to collective property rights by officials operating under the new regime. The housing ministry also warned that requiring reviews of all secondary legislation in reviews - without exemption - would add to the government's workload. To that, Seymour was unapologetic: "We're aware the public service doesn't like this law. Yes, it makes more work for them, justifying laws that interfere in people's lives. Here's the thing: If the public service think being required to justify their laws is a faff, imagine what it's like for the public they have to serve who are obliged to follow them." The ministry also made the case that the Treaty of Waitangi "should be featured as a relevant consideration" among the principles. But the FAQ, from Seymour's office, said the Treaty was excluded because the bill was focused on the quality of regulations, not Treaty obligations. "As with compliance with international obligations, legal obligations under Treaty settlements are a given. A central part of the RSB is to protect existing legal rights from unprincipled appropriation," it said. The ministry also said the ability for the proposed Regulatory Standards Board - appointed by the Regulations Minister, currently Seymour - to carry out reviews of regulations ahead of agencies' own regular reviews of legislation "would not be the most effective use of the board's time". Seymour has previously defended the extra cost and workload, saying the cost was about 2 percent of the policy work currently done across the government. "If it costs $20 million just to check the regulations, imagine the cost to all the poor buggers out there who have to comply with all this crap," he said. Concerns raised by official over 'disproportionate' powers In preparation for providing feedback on the Cabinet paper in October, an MHUD official warned that giving the Regulation Minister power to set the terms of regulatory reviews could interfere with the work of other ministers. "The power of the Minister of Regulation to initiate regulatory review and set terms of reference gives considerable power and will affect the ability of a portfolio minister to advance their work," the official said. "There should be elements of mutual agreement, or consultation required, or some detail about the threshold for the Minister to initiate a review (eg requiring an Order in Council)." The official also questioned whether a board chosen by the minister should have so much influence, saying it seemed "disproportionate compared to the authority of Parliament". They pointed out there was already a process - through the Regulatory Review Committee and the Legislation Act - that allowed MPs to examine regulations if concerns were raised. In response, Seymour's spokesperson said the bureaucrats "may want to familiarise themselves" with a set of rules, known as Legislative Guidelines, which departments are already required to follow, including the principles of property rights, individual liberty, and the rule of law. "The only difference is that under the Regulatory Standards Bill, these principles would become Parliamentary law, not just Cabinet guidance that some departments clearly ignore."
Otago Daily Times
a day ago
- Otago Daily Times
Cost-of-living pressures top of mind for govt: Luxon
By Lillian Hanly of RNZ The government has ticked off most of its action plan for the last quarter, as it turns to the next with a continued focus on the cost of living. In its report card for the last three months, two items were listed as 'in progress': - Take Cabinet decisions on capital markets settings to remove barriers to listing, reduce costs to firms and enable greater investment in private assets from KiwiSaver providers. - Publish the first Government AI strategy to help drive adoption of AI to boost productivity and grow the economy. The AI strategy is expected to be released in the coming weeks, and further decisions on capital market settings were expected in the next quarter. One change that has been made was to reduce the listing costs on firms by making the publication of their prospective financial information voluntary. Turning to the next quarter, a statement from Prime Minister Christopher Luxon said continuing to address cost-of-living pressures over the coming months was key. Luxon said the government was taking action on the cost of food, housing, banking and energy to "drive a better bargain" for New Zealand families. "While it's still tough out there for too many Kiwis, our Government's focus on unlocking economic growth is starting to show some promise with key indicators up across the board." He said it wasn't enough for businesses to grow and invest. "New Zealanders deserve an economy that works for them, with more competition and lower prices," Luxon said. The next quarter will see the repeal of the oil and gas exploration ban, next steps to improve supermarket competition and further changes to the RMA. Luxon said repealing the ban would "unleash the energy" the country needed to "keep the lights on and prevent power prices from skyrocketing in the years to come". "The cost of housing is also a priority, with significant improvements to the RMA enabling more construction in our biggest cities expected to become law," he said. The government will also look to publish the first standards allowing the use of overseas building products in the country. The Public Works (Critical Infrastructure) Amendment Bill will be passed, which will streamline the process to acquire land for big projects. Legislation will be introduced to "strengthen governance and planning arrangements" at Auckland Transport. Under law and order, the government will look to progress legislation that makes stalking an illegal offence, and introduce legislation that deters "anti-social road use." Changes to the electoral system are on the way, including introducing a ban on prisoner voting, and the government will begin delivering rehabilitation and reintegration services to remand prisoners. Cabinet will consider decisions on legislation to "affirm police's authority to collect, use and retain information about individuals in public places for lawful policing purposes". Other actions under better public services include starting to deliver additional elective procedures, and opening an expression of interest for 120 nurse practitioner training places. The government will also implement its funding increase for GP clinics and the first prototypes for the expansion of urgent care for rural and remote areas. Legislation that will give effect to the ECE Regulation Sector Review will be introduced and key policy decisions taken to tighten the eligibility for income support for 18/19-year-olds.
