Category: Radio New Zealand

Source: Radio New Zealand

The FBI could get hold of masses of personal information about New Zealanders, a lawyer has warned MPs.

The Justice Select Committee has been hearing submissions on the Policing Amendment Bill, which would extend police powers to gather intelligence and give them expanded powers to close down public places in case of actual or anticipated disorder.

But Lloyd Gallagher – from the Law Association’s technology and law committee – told MPs on Monday that the bill had too few protections around the data, especially with the spread of AI.

“With the collaboration that we’re now doing with the FBI etc internationally, we run a risk of that information no longer being able to be within our control,” said Gallagher.

“Once it’s in the US’s hands under the Patriot Act etc, there’s a massive amount of risk of that data being put into databases and miscommunicated.”

The government has said the bill would restore police powers rather than giving them new ones.

But most of the groups that appeared at the select committee rejected that and laid out fears this was police “over-reach” – that the Bill was too vague and broad; set few limits on collecting data or what the personal information could then be used for; and that it would undermine trust in police, especially among Māori and Pasifika.

“The Bill’s intelligence-gathering powers will have a far greater impact on the privacy interests of the community at large than any other kind of information-gathering power currently available to law enforcement agencies,” Nick Chisnall KC of the Law Society told MPs.

Thomas Beagle listed technologies the Council for Civil Liberties believed police would deploy much more if the bill passed – facial recognition, automated number plate recognition, drones, live surveillance and gate analytics.

“Everything’s allowed by this Bill.

“There are really no limits,” Beagle said. He said there was also no oversight or appeal rights for people targeted.

“The Bill embodies the view police will never misuse or abuse their powers.”

Retail NZ and the Police Association spoke up in support of the Bill’s two parts.

Retail NZ cited rising violence in stores, and the Police Association’s Steve Watt said it gave clarity and the right tools.

“Police will actually have a firmer idea of what and where they can do things as we progress into the future,” said Watt.

The Bill’s second part – which would introduce infringements and arrest powers when places were declared off-limits – would help keep people safe, Watt said.

But prison reformer Cosmo Jeffrey said the Bill lacked a framework to control how police used or retained people’s data – including their photographs, which could be used over and again in facial recognition systems.

He had been in Twizel on his Ducati recently when a patrol officer pulled him over, Jeffrey said.

“He asked for my licence. Within seconds he brought up my history, started talking about something that happened 25 years ago and I was left standing there wondering, ‘Haven’t I done time, shouldn’t I be allowed to get on with my life?’.

“And I’m just wary of collecting information on people that can be called up in seconds and used against them.”

The Bill was put together under time pressure and without public consultation, the documents allied to it said. The consultation of agencies such as the Justice Ministry and Te Puni Kokiri suggested more safeguards.

Māori were not consulted, even though the Bill was designed to give police “certainty” to take images of people in public again. A widespread practice before a 2020-22 investigation ruled it was unlawful and had especially targeted rangatahi.

Shaymaa Arif – from BIPOC Legal Collective Aotearoa – told the committee they must insist on the systemic oversight lacking from the Bill, “before another generation of tamariki end up in a database”.

“The people that are most impacted and affected by this bill are not in this room with us,” Arif said. “They are Māori teenagers, they are children of colour, they are whānau at Friday prayers.”

Police would combine the intelligence gathering and expanded closure powers to turn public gatherings into surveillance areas using facial recognition, she warned.

Anjum Rahman said the Bill was a push towards a US-style over-securitisation that had not worked to prevent gun violence over there, and would not work here. The over-securitisation of New Zealand mosques after the March 2019 did not make them safer, because a shooter could simply target people as they left, she said.

The “powers in this Bill will make that worse” and target political protesters, while other initiatives could build societal trust, she said.

Several submitters questioned why the Bill was so vague in not defining the “functions” and “activities” that police could use to justify taking photos or videos, or for the first time without a warrant being able to gather intelligence in a private place that was not related to why they were there in the first place.

It was “just bad law” to leave it up to junior officers to decide for themselves whether what they were doing was justified on the grounds the intel might come in useful even if only in future, said Craig Clarke of Community Law Centres Aotearoa.

Year 13 Wellington High student Miro Thomas Ireson asked the committee to at least require police to use dedicated surveillance devices and not their Apple iPhones, which he believed might expose people’s data to America’s Cloud and Patriot Acts.

John Gregson of the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists called for an across-government assessment of how the Bill combined with move-on orders would impact the most vulnerable people. Mentally ill people would fall foul by behaving like they were resisting the officers who got to make the call on cementing their biometric data into the state system, he said.

Specific safeguards needed to be added, plus a full Te Tiriti assessment done.

However, as it stood, the Bill had “zero protections for tamariki”, he said.

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

Source: Radio New Zealand

The number of New Zealand students studying on Massey Univeristy’s campuses is rising after halving over the past 10 years, it says.

Meanwhile, a union leader says the university’s Albany, Palmerston North and Wellington sites feel like ghost towns.

Official figures showed Massey had 12,345 equivalent full-time domestic students in 2025 including 4770 on-campus and 7575 studying remotely.

The number studying remotely was one of the highest on record and nearly 2000 more than in 2016, but the on-campus figure was the lowest point in a steady decline from a high of 9705 in 2016.

The university also had 4040 full-time equivalent international students giving it a total of 16,385 EFTS last year – slightly more than in the previous two years but about 2500 fewer than in the years prior to the start of the Covid-19 pandemic in 2020.

The university’s annual report showed its Albany and Palmerston North campuses had nearly 2900 full-time equivalent students each last year and Wellington had 1997.

The university recorded a financial surplus for the year and the report said it had reduced its floor space by 23 percent since 2023.

Tertiary Education Union Massey branch co-chair, Te Awatea Ward, said staff were very aware of the decline in on-campus enrolments.

“They’ve noticed. Particularly last year and the year before there was a great concern at how empty our campuses were, particularly the Albany campus,” she said.

“This year staff have got very excited from the orientation day and seeing more students on campus… that lasts for about two or three days, and then it goes back to a ghost town.”

She said there were a lot of theories about what was to blame.

Ward said Massey had emphasised its online courses and staff noticed the contrast with Canterbury University, where domestic enrolments were well up.

“If you want students on campus, you have to provide courses on campus. If you’re wanting to have the maximum number of students qualify or complete with the least amount of financial input you have online courses,” she said.

“There’s definitely a competition for students between the eight universities.”

Ministry of Education figures showed nationally the number of on-campus students grew four percent last year to 104,420, slightly more than in 2016.

There were 13,905 full-time equivalent domestic students studying remotely, fewer than in recent years but 60 percent more than in 2016.

In a statement, Massey University said its drop in on-campus domestic students “reflects a combination of sector-wide shifts and changes in student behaviour – particularly over the pandemic when campus-based students shifted online (which has consistently grown), as well as a move back to campus learning at a time when our portfolio was changing”.

It said the university was “moving into a growth phase” by refreshing existing programmes and introducing new ones.

“We are already seeing positive indicators in our pipeline with new domestic on-campus learners up by 4.3 percent year on year, particularly in the Manawatū,” it said.

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

Source: Radio New Zealand

Some University of Auckland students are questioning whether they can afford to continue their studies, after the government has announced it is scrapping the fees-free university scheme.

“I don’t speak for every student here, but I would not be surprised if a lot of students felt like leaving,” Joseph told RNZ.

“I was hoping it could be free, but I guess I’m more motivated now to make some money again.”

On Friday, Winston Peters revealed it would be scrapped in the upcoming Budget.

Finance Minister Nicola Willis later confirmed that to RNZ.

The scheme covered up to $12,000 for first-time tertiary students in their final year of study.

It was introduced by the former Labour government in 2017 as a first-year fees-free scheme, beginning from 2018, before the National-led coalition shifted it to the final year from 2025.

The announcement has hit current second-year students particularly hard, as many missed out on getting their first-year free and would now also miss out on the final year.

Student Coco told RNZ that she enrolled in university with the understanding that she would get a year for free.

“And then I just also think with the degree that I’m doing, I’d get paid better in Aussie, so it’s just even less incentive to stay here.”

Eva, who is in her second year of a Bachelor of Arts, said many students in her cohort felt misled.

“Personally, for me, I was lucky enough where it doesn’t necessarily affect me, but I know so many people that they only made the decision to come to uni based on the fact that they would only have to pay for two years,” she said.

“So the fact that the first year was made third year already eliminated so many people from at least trying to go to university, and then now that it’s just gone completely, particularly with not even being rolled in, it’s just already been taken away from students that were relying on it, is pretty gross and tricked.”

First-year student Najesty believed that was unfair.

“I definitely think they should have waited for the people who were going into that year to finish it.

“I think it would have been fair for them because now they have to figure out a way to pay for it because it’s gone.”

Another first-year student, Samantha, agreed.

“It makes it, like, unaffordable.

“It was like a driving force for, like, you know, getting through university and now it’s, like, an extra cost that we all have to, like, bear.”

Speaking to Morning Report on Monday, Prime Minister Christopher Luxon said the scheme had been “quite a failure”.

But student Matt disagreed.

“It takes away so many opportunities for people who can’t afford it, who need that third year free.

“I personally am not affected because I have StudyLink and I have those options, but it’s still irritating that it’s gonna put extra financial stress on me in the future when this is supposed to be one of the main encouragements for people gaining higher education and for building a better future for New Zealand.”

Student Adam said it sent the wrong message at a time when youth unemployment and disengagment was high.

The NEET – not in employment, education, or training – rate for young people was 14.4 percent in the March 2026 quarter.

“I personally think that it’s quite an unnecessary discouragement of higher education,” he said.

“I think that’s an important part of New Zealand society in general. I think we should pride ourselves on having a good higher education in this country, and I don’t think cutting away third year free tuition is a good idea.”

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

Source: Radio New Zealand

A proposed restructure of police’s media and communications team is focusing on ways to use their own platforms to “overcome the depleted media landscape”.

An internal document says this gives organisations an opportunity to “control their narrative ensuring the public are exposed to the fundamentals of the organisation rather than the distorted angles sometimes presented by external media sources”.

RNZ revealed last week police were reviewing the operating model of their media and communications team.

Police’s executive director media and communications Cas Carter said the work was not related to the review into how police managed media and communications engagement in relation to the Tom Phillips documentary.

Since then RNZ has seen the design proposal that has been sent to staff.

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

The proposal says several roles are to be disestablished including the director of media and strategic communications which is held by Juli Clausen, who the OIA revealed had messaged Dame Julie Christie – the chief executive of a documentary production company – while on board a flight to Hamilton to give her a “heads up” that Phillips had been shot.

The role’s accountabilities would be transferred to a proposed head of strategic and district communications and head of content, channels and media positions. Both roles would report to Carter.

Other roles proposed to be disestablished include the brand and marketing manager, whose accountabilities would be transferred to the head of content and manager of design, content and delivery positions. There is also a proposed reduction in the existing number of senior media advisors.

Several vacant positions are also proposed to be disestablished.

The revised proposal also includes a “strengthened” Auckland media and communications hub, retention of district communications capability and “clear accountability for internal communications”.

The document – sent to staff last week by Carter – follows an initial proposal sent to staff which led to 44 responses.

“The feedback received was comprehensive, candid, and honest, reflecting strong support for the need for change balanced with a desire to carefully consider differing perspectives before final decisions are made,” Carter said.

“I have listened to that feedback and the high-level themes that emerged. This has informed adjustments to refine and improve the original proposal. Today, I am sharing these proposed refinements and initiating an additional two-week consultation period.”

The proposed structure is open for consultation until 22 May.

Carter said the proposed changes were about “the structure and positions, not about the people in the roles”.

“We started by examining how our operating model needs to evolve for the future, and the proposed restructure reflects that shift, not individual capability or contribution.”

She said that since the team structure was last reviewed there had been “many changes in the way we all communicate” including digital transformation and the “proliferation of misinformation”.

“Globally, trust is increasingly fragile, and scepticism is rife as audiences face misinformation and information overload. Trust and confidence is a main driver for New Zealand Police, and our media and communications team work hard to lift public and staff trust and confidence by being transparent, authentic and consistent.

“To do this effectively, we must have an operating model that ensures our ability to do this now and in the future.”

Carter also referred to the media landscape and said the number of journalists had fallen from over 4000 in 2006 to about 1300 with “major cuts across all media outlets”.

“When communities lack vital local information, it gives rise to misinformation. To counter this, many organisations are focusing their communications on their own channels, developing them as trusted sources and providing news releases, video content and longer form stories.

“This gives organisations an opportunity to control their narrative ensuring the public are exposed to the fundamentals of the organisation rather than the distorted angles sometimes presented by external media sources.”

Police invested “significant resources” into responding to media requests, Carter said.

“It is important for this to remain to ensure we continue to be, and be seen as, a transparent and authentic organisation that the public can trust.

“However, there is a balance between this and the opportunity to use modern technology and overcome the depleted media landscape to build our own stories across the country through our own channels.”

The media and communications team was the “single point of truth for our organisation”.

“One voice that provides authentic and honest information tailored to our audiences. We strive to be innovative, ahead of the game, and provide everyday New Zealanders an insight into how we work for them.”

Carter also provided a summary of feedback received saying many supported the “overall intent of the original proposal”.

“Particularly the move to better integration, prioritisation of police-owned channels, and a more future-focused communications approach”.

However, there were also “strong and repeated concerns” that elements of the proposal did not reflect operational realities.

The most common concern was around media capacity and resourcing.

This included submitters saying “media work is inherently reactive, unpredictable and high-risk”.

Reductions in media staffing or hours risked “delayed responses, loss of narrative control, increased stress and burnout, flow on effects to front-line policing”.

Some were opposed to disestablishing the director of media and strategic communications role as it was seen as “essential for senior decision-making, risk mitigation, executive engagement”.

Carter said most of the proposed media team changes were paused pending further engagement with the media team.

Other submitters focused on the importance of local media leadership as well as the need to “clearly protect specialist capability”.

There had also been some feedback regarding changing the name from Media and Communications as it “may no longer fully reflect the breadth of our group’s role, particularly as our work increasingly spans digital channels, content creation, internal communications, and strategic advice”.

Carter said no change to the name was proposed, however she was interested in views on whether the name was “fit-for-purpose”.

“Any feedback provided on this topic will be treated as exploratory and informational only and will not result in an immediate decision or change.”

In response to questions from RNZ on Monday, Carter said proposed changes to the Media and Communications operating model had been shared for “internal consultation”.

“No final decisions have been made.”

Police said they were unable to say how many roles were proposed to be disestablished.

Carter earlier confirmed the media and communications team had been “assessing the way it operates to ensure we are set up in a way that is effective for the future”.

“We are reviewing how we operate which includes if we are resourced in the right places. Any proposed redesign will be shared with the team first for their feedback.”

Carter said it had been eight years since the operating model had been reviewed.

“In that time there have been many changes in communication through digital transformation, shifting stakeholder expectations, changes in media and the proliferation of misinformation.”

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

Source: Radio New Zealand

The Education Review Office [ERO] has released a new guide to help parents understand what makes a good school.

The Guide to Schools provides practical advice on choosing a school and understanding performance, asking questions and raising concerns.

ERO acting chief review officer Tim Fowler said more informed and engaged parents help their children get more from their education, which leads to better outcomes.

“ERO reviewers are in schools across the country every day and our researchers are analysing and reporting on what works and what doesn’t.

“We know that parent and whānau involvement in their children’s education makes a huge difference,” Fowler said.

“As we developed and tested our new school reports with parents and whānau across the country, they told us that they wanted to understand more about what makes a great school.”

The guide sets out 14 key areas that matter most for education quality and features suggested questions for parents to ask, for example when they visit schools, as well as who and how they should ask.

The 14 key areas are:

• Student achievement
• Student progress
• Reading and writing and foundational literacy
• Mathematics and foundational literacy
• Attendance
• Engagement and belonging
• Equity
• Leadership
• Teaching
• Curriculum
• Assessment
• Provision for students with additional needs
• School improvement
• Governance and the school board

“We know that many parents and whānau want to be engaged in their child’s learning – but that they face barriers. They told us that they are worried about asking questions and need clearer information about what they can ask and who they should ask.

“Equally, principals said they welcome parents being actively involved and interested and would like parents to be better informed on how they can approach schools constructively,” Fowler said.

The guide also has information on where to find ERO’s schol reports and other resources that are helpful for whānau and has been designed to accompany ERO’s new School Review Reports.

“Parents’ decisions and involvement with their child’s school makes a big difference. This guide will help parents talk to their child’s school, about what matters most,” Fowler said.

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