Latest news with #TeanauTuiono
RNZ News
02-07-2025
- Politics
- RNZ News
Proposed changes to New Zealand dawn raid laws not enough, Pacific advocates say
(file image) Protesters part in the Savali Ole Filemu peaceful march in Central Auckland urging politcal parties to protect overstayers. Photo: Teanau Tuiono Pacific advocates in Aotearoa say a proposed law change for out-of-hours immigration visits - like dawn raids - doesn't go far enough. The contentious enforcement practice involves immigration officers searching homes for people they have reasonable grounds to believe are liable for deportation between 6pm and 8am. It has been criticised for targeting Pacific people, particularly in the wake of the dawn raids of the 1970s and 80s. In 2021, the then-government apologised for the Dawn Raids era. However, two years later, the plight of a Tongan man whose home was dawn raided while his children slept hit headlines. At the time, his lawyer Sione Foliaki described how police and immigration officers showed up at the family's South Auckland home at 5am. "The loud banging was heard first by the children. Of course they didn't know it was police. They were terrified ... and crying and very, very upset and scared," he told RNZ Pacific. "And the parents heard it from upstairs - it was that loud - and they looked out the window from upstairs and saw that it was police. So they ran downstairs to try and calm the children. The case prompted Immigration New Zealand to cease out-of-hours immigration searches, and an official review was ordered . Now, a bill has been brought before parliament seeking to incorporate the review's findings into law. If successful, it would result in extra checks being required before a raid is carried out, and sign-off from a district court judge. However, it does not go as far as banning dawn raids, something Pasifika advocates and leaders have long called for. No dawn raids have been carried out in the country for the past two years. Former National MP Anae Arthur Anae has said the practice was unnecessary. "They've now proved they can do it within the normal hours. They don't need to go and do what they were doing before." Anae has been a long-term advocate for visa-free travel between Pacific Island nations and Aotearoa. Of the 60 countries that have visa-free access, none are Pacific nations. Meanwhile, Australians, UK nationals, and European visitors all qualified for visa-free access. Anae said the double-standard against Pacific was part of the problem. "If you make it very difficult for people to come, when they come they're going to stay as long as they can because there's not guarantee they can come back tomorrow when they go back on time. "I think Immigration [NZ which] created all of this in my opinion should look at themselves and ask themselves these questions: 'Can we find a way of eliminating the need for people to overstay." Tongan community leader Pakilau Manase Lua agreed with Mr Anae and said New Zealand must face up to the bias in its system. He pointed to trends in immigration enforcement that showed Pacific people, and people of colour are overrepresented. "Why is it justified to target people who are here trying to find a better way of life," Pakilau said. "They're here in the country. In fact, they're actually paying taxes, and some of them are paying PAYE, Even though they're unlawful, they pay taxes by the fact …they're working." An overstayer who cannot be named for privacy reasons sharing his story at a public meeting in Ōtara on 6 May 2023 that was sparked by a recent dawn raid of Pasifika overstayer in Auckland. Photo: RNZ Pacific / Lydia Lewis Undocumented migrants also contributed via GST when they bought things like groceries and petrol, he said. Green Party immigration spokesperson Teanau Tuiono said an amnesty for overstayers was the right thing to do, particularly in light of the 2021 Dawn Raids apology. He supported outlawing out-of-hours immigration enforcement visits. "If they [Immigration New Zealand] have found a way to better engage with our communities, then why is this going to be on the statute books? Why is this going to be part of the rules? It should be removed because we know of the trauma that it does create," Tuiono said. Immigration New Zealand said in a statement that any out-of-hours compliance activity was rare and a last resort. Prior to the 2023 review, the enforcement tactic made up three percent of compliance visits. "While we retain the option of an out of hours visit it has so far not been judged necessary in an individual case," department spokesperson Steve Watson said. "We have also focused on visiting employers and since the…review we have put into practice an immigration infringement regime which allows us to sanction non-compliant employers." Watson also said the department would implement any changes that resulted from the proposed law changes. These were part of the government's wide-ranging Immigration (Fiscal Sustainability and System Integrity) Amendment Bill. The bill was at select committee stage. RNZ Pacific also sought comment from Immigration Minister Erica Stanford, but she did not respond before publication.
Scoop
17-06-2025
- Business
- Scoop
ERA Changes Hurt Workers, Pander To Big Business
The Green Party says proposed changes to the Employment Relations Act announced today by the Government will further undermine workers' rights while pandering to big business. 'This cruel Bill will cut off our most vulnerable workers from the rights that belong to them,' says the Green Party spokesperson for Workplace Relations and Safety, Teanau Tuiono. "Our economy has been built by our workers - supporting them means supporting ourselves. For generations, workers' rights have been hard-won and should be protected as a cornerstone of a people-focused modern economy. 'Today, this Government has put forward a number of dangerous changes to the ERA, including redefining the roles of employees and contractors to allow gig economy companies like Uber to trample over the rights of their workers. 'The removal of automatic union membership on collective agreements will result in lower wages, and putting up barriers to raising personal grievances will entrench power imbalance and harm in our workplaces. 'All of this quite clearly plays directly into the hands of companies looking to cut corners and boost profit margins at the expense of our workers and communities. 'The Coalition has unapologetically pushed its anti-worker agenda this term - including gutting Pay Equity, scrapping fair pay agreements, reinstating 90-day trials, and introducing effective cuts to the minimum wage. 'A Green Government would undo the laundry list of attacks made by the current Government on the rights of workers,' says Teanau Tuiono.
Scoop
15-06-2025
- Politics
- Scoop
Concern Over Signs Govt Will Reduce Sick Leave For Workers
The Green Party is calling on the Prime minister to stand up for workers' rights for once and rule out reducing sick leave entitlements. 'This Government for the wealthy keeps finding new ways of eviscerating workers' rights and tilting power to employers,' says the Green Party spokesperson for Workplace Relations, Teanau Tuiono. 'Our economy is built upon the backs of our workers, so to erode their rights to sick leave is nothing short of an attack on the morale and productivity of our workforce. 'The Government is making a habit of revealing such changes at the start of Winter when seasonal illnesses, flu and Covid are placing many families under strain. 'Women workers in particular will be disproportionately affected by this cruel policy as they tend to take more sick leave because of childcare responsibilities. For the Government to be considering reducing sick leave is another way to attack women workers following its Pay Equity bombshell. 'The fact that the Prime Minister hasn't ruled out halving the number of sick days for part-time workers speaks to a pattern of decision-making of a Government that doesn't listen to, nor care about, workers. 'The Coalition has unapologetically pushed its anti-worker agenda this term - gutting the Pay Equity process, scrapping fair pay agreements, reinstating 90-day trials, and changing the law so that Uber and other gig work platforms can keep their workers from getting their entitlements in already precarious job arrangements. 'More must be done to support our workers. The Green Party campaigned on five weeks of annual leave for everyone so that people have more time to connect with their whānau, communities, and things that matter to them. 'The Green Party will keep fighting for everyone in Aotearoa to have access to strong rights, secure work, and decent pay, to ensure workers can thrive,' says Teanau Tuiono.
RNZ News
10-06-2025
- Politics
- RNZ News
'Where was the care of thought?': Greens criticise ministers over pay equity advice
Teanau Tuiono. Photo: RNZ / Samuel Rillstone Government ministers did not get advice on what the changes to pay equity would mean for specific claims in their portfolios, ahead of the legislation that would discontinue the claims being introduced. The Green Party said it is another example of the lack of consultation over the changes, with thousands of workers blindsided by the government. But the government maintains it made the changes to deliver clarity and certainty to workers, and the changes will improve the design and overall process for raising and resolving claims. Thirty-three unsettled claims were halted by the changes passed through Parliament last month, and will need to start again under the new threshholds, due to the legislation applying retrospectively. Review clauses under existing settled claims have also become unenforceable. Affected workers and the wider public were not consulted on the changes ahead of their announcement, there was no Regulatory Impact Statement for the bill, and with the legislation going through under urgency there was no opportunity for a select committee process. Through written questions, the Greens' workplace relations and safety spokesperson Teanau Tuiono asked ministers what advice they received prior to the introduction of the legislation, about specific claims under their portfolio coverage. Tuiono sent the questions to: Brown, Collins, Doocey, and Upston told Tuiono that advice they receive is available on their relevant ministry's or agency's website, but they did not refer to pay equity at all in their responses. Seymour said in his capacity as an associate minister, he had not received advice, but as a Cabinet minister participated in Cabinet discussions on pay equity. Chhour, Mitchell, Potaka, Reti, Simmonds, Stanford, and Watts confirmed they had not received advice related to specific claims. Grigg told Tuiono the changes "do not halt claims," and claims can still be raised "in a manner that is more robust, more sustainable, and more workable to address sex-based discrimination in the workplace." She said she was involved in conversations about the legislation, including policy discussions, and consultation on the Cabinet paper where advice was provided by officials. Stanford's response said the advice she received was regarding policy changes to address historical sex-based discrimination for women overall, and was "not limited" to particular sectors or claims. "This government is committed to addressing sex-based discrimination in the workplace," she wrote. Tuiono said the ministers' responses showed the government had not shown any thought towards the impact the changes would have on the thousands of workers going through a claim. "I thought there would at least be some sort of analysis being done by each of those ministers to determine 'this impacts workers within my portfolio area, what does that actually mean?' But none of that has been done, they've just discarded people's roles and jobs and treated them with the utmost disrespect," he said. "Where was the thought? Where was the care of thought for the impact on these people as well? Why was there no analysis done on what the ongoing impacts would be?" The Public Service Association's national secretary Fleur Fitzsimons said it showed arrogance in developing the changes. "This government promised evidence-based policy, but is not even interested in seeking the views of their own agencies when coming after pay equity," she said. Fitzsimons said it was ironic, given the ACT Party's principles around regulatory standards. "It is hypocritical from the ACT Party to introduce a Regulatory Standards Bill which includes elements of consultation better than they've done when it comes to New Zealand women and pay equity." Since making the announcement last month, the government has defended the lack of consultation, and has been at pains to stress the changes do not get rid of equal pay or pay parity. On Sunday, the Prime Minister again defended the approach. "We moved very quickly, under urgency. We could have done it a different way... and put a lot of people and claimants into limbo for some time. We didn't think that was fair," Christopher Luxon said. "We think we need one system, not two systems... you can argue if you've got a different view on that, but we made a decision that we wanted clarity and we wanted certainty, and that's why we did it the way we did it." Van Velden, the minister who introduced the legislation, told RNZ the changes were not in response to any particular sector or claim that was underway. Brooke van Velden. Photo: RNZ / Samuel Rillstone "This is a policy that I said at the start of my term I was interested in pursuing. It became really clear this year that my Cabinet colleagues wanted me to work on this as quickly as I could. I am a team player and so I did my job," she said. "The ACT Party would love strong regulatory standards that is core to who we are as a party, but I was asked by my Cabinet colleagues to do this and I did it for the government." In her responses to Tuiono, van Velden gave him a list of the formal advice she had received on pay equity from February to April, including reports from Treasury, the Public Service Commission, and the Ministry of Business, Innovation, and Employment. They included papers on possible legislative approaches and key questions, as well as the Cabinet papers. She also confirmed neither she nor her office had communicated with any employer parties or their representatives regarding the changes, and no lobbyists or consultants were consulted. But she said officials did consult other officials in the public service in the development of the changes, including some in their capacity as employers, referring to a Reviewing Policy Settings Cabinet paper. The paper was developed by the Ministry of Business, Innovation, and Employment, the Treasury, and the Public Service Commission. The Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, and the Crown Law Office were consulted on the paper, while the Ministry of Education and Health New Zealand were consulted on the proposals. The paper also explained why van Velden did not make any announcements on the changes until the bill was introduced, saying she was "cognisant" of the risk announcing the changes before the bill could prompt pay equity claims being filed and potentially determined by the Employment Relations Authority under the then-existing Act. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
