The New Lynn Isis-inspired terror attack has sparked questions around whether New Zealand's anti-terror laws are fit for purpose.
The 32-year-old lone wolf attacker has been on a terror watch list since 2016.
University of Waikato law professor Alexander Gillespie says there was a gap in our anti-terror laws which the Government was working to close.
He says an omnibus bill is making its way through Parliament now and is aimed at adding several amendments to our existing anti-terror laws.
"This [the gap] was apparent from the middle of last year, about the planning or preparation for a terror offence... If you're convicted of that then you can go to jail for up to seven years with the proposed new law coming through," he said.
"So, they've identified the gap, planned out how to fix it and that law has now just gone past select committee."
"The question you want to ask is whether rather doing it as an omnibus, whether they should've dealt with this one aspect under urgency. Because, if it had been dealt with under urgency then maybe it would have been different. The big word here being, maybe."
"The legal problem is that even with this law, whether there would've been enough evidence to have shown that what he was about to do was a real possibility and not something that was too farfetched. So, even if you had the law it's not guaranteed it would've stopped him."
"It has to be something more than someone dreaming up something in their head."
"So, in theory, yes the law needed to be changed and they were changing it. Maybe they could've gone faster. But, even if they did there's no guarantee that would've stopped what happened."
National Party leader Judith Collins wants the Government to be able to strip citizenship or residency from those who have moved to New Zealand but then commit a violent act.
Gillespie said determining a "serious threat" could be difficult.
"That threat must be shown in court and must be assessed to a lawful due process," he said.
"The problem you've got there is that you've got to show what is serious. So, you've got to work out what that threshold is."
"It's difficult...Someone might be convicted for having Isis propaganda, but is that a serious threat to New Zealand security?"
"If you've got someone who's convicted of a terror attack, clearly that's a serious threat. But, someone who's found with propaganda? That's something people would argue back and forwards."
"We have the right to deport people anyway. The question around this person will be around status, their citizenship, and the immigration entry point that they came through on. Whether there's anything special about this person that made the authorities have restraint in not deporting them."
Judith Collins defends not fixing law years ago
Judth Collins has defended her decision in 2013 when, as Justice Minister, she removed a review of counter-terrorism laws from the Law Commission's work programme saying "there does not appear to be any substantial or urgent concerns arising from the operation of the [Terrorism Suppression] Act".
The gap in the law has existed across successive governments and has come under scrutiny in the wake of the terror attack in Auckland yesterday, when a terrorist attacked six people in a supermarket before being shot by police who were surveiling him.
The man, who cannot be named because of court orders, had allegedly been planning a knife attack earlier this year, but he couldn't be charged with planning a terrorist attack because it wasn't an existing offence.
It is, however, an offence in the Counter Terrorism Legislation Bill, currently before select committee, which the National Party supported at first reading.
Collins told RNZ this morning that she had texted Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern last night offering National's support to pass the bill into law under urgency.
Asked about her comments in 2013 about having no substantial or urgent concerns with New Zealand's counter terrorism legislation, she said it was "really unfair" to ask her about decisions from eight years ago.
"You are asking me to reach back without notes to go back and look at eight years ago at decisions made by the Cabinet," Collins told RNZ this morning.
She said she wasn't going to second-guess Cabinet decisions - which would have been made in a particular context, and following consultation - from eight years ago.