Beggars and rough sleepers are set to be targeted in new "move-on orders". Photo / Dean Purcell
The Government is giving police new powers to crack down on beggars, rough sleepers and people “displaying disorderly, disruptive, threatening or intimidating behaviour”.
Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith and Police Minister Mark Mitchell have today announced the new “move-on orders” and details around when they’ll be issued and who they will target.
Speaking to media in Auckland this morning, Goldsmith defended suggestions that it was unfairly targeting the most vulnerable.
“It certainly doesn’t criminalise poverty,” he said.
The penalty for breaching a move-on order will be a maximum $2000 fine or up to three months’ imprisonment.
“New Zealanders are fair-minded people, and our culture is one where we seek to help those who are in need, but that doesn’t mean we should accept our city centres, particularly our showcase tourist spots, becoming places of intimidation and dysfunction,” Goldsmith said.
“Our main streets and town centres have been blighted by disruption and disturbance. Businesses are declining as some bad behaviour goes unchecked. It needs to stop.”
However, Labour’s Auckland spokeswoman Carmel Sepuloni said the orders will penalise “those with the least” without having addressed the causes of homelessness.
“This is the National Government showing how little they care about Aucklanders who need support,” Sepuloni said.
Green Party co-leader and Auckland Central MP, Chlöe Swarbrick, also heavily criticised the law changes, comparing them to “Trump’s America” by “ignoring evidence and punching down”.
The Government has agreed to amend the Summary Offences Act to provide police with the power to issue move-on orders to people who are:
– Displaying disorderly, disruptive, threatening or intimidating behaviour
– Obstructing or impeding someone entering a business
– Breaching the peace
– Begging, in all forms
– Rough sleeping
– Displaying behaviour indicating an intent to inhabit a public place
When a police officer issues a move-on order, they’ll be required to warn the person that it is an offence to breach the order – unless the person has a reasonable excuse for being there.
If they continue to display the same behaviour at another location, they’ll be moved on from there too “until they get the message”.
“Currently, police officers have limited options to respond, particularly when it doesn’t reach the level of offending. It means many disruptive, distressing and potentially harmful acts can occur before officers have any means of intervention. It doesn’t make sense,” Goldsmith said.
“Our Government is committed to fixing the basics in law and order, and building a future where shoppers, visitors, residents and their families can feel safe in our communities.”
The new orders will require a person to leave a specified area for a specified amount of time, up to 24 hours.
They’ll also have to move on a reasonable distance from the area, as specified by the constable. It will apply to all people aged 14 or older and be issued in writing “as is operationally appropriate”.
“Naturally, every situation will be different,” Mitchell said.
“Some people may require support services, some may not. Police have the expertise to assess and determine what support is required, if any – they do this every day.
Mitchell also told media on Sunday morning that they shouldn’t assume that “all of these people are homeless”.
“Most of these people have got somewhere to go,” he said, saying the Government continues to see people “that choose to make the pavements somewhere they want to live”.
“Our police officers are familiar with the locations they work with and already have strong networks and partnerships with social and housing services. I expect police will work closely with these providers as they develop their operational guidance for the front line.”
Swarbrick has “implored” the Government to choose a solutions-based approach.
“Christopher Luxon’s Government chose to intentionally make homelessness worse, and now they’re criminalising the problem they have inflamed.”
“Not only is Luxon’s Government following Trump’s America in foreign policy, but they’re now copy-pasting that callous approach to local issues – ignoring evidence, punching down and relying on strong man words when the country needs genuine solutions.”
Swarbrick said it would also mean the economy would be hit.
“Now, instead of solving it, they’re going to push the problem around and throw good money after bad to lock up homeless people in prisons at a cost in excess of $200,000 a year, for worse and worse outcomes.”
Labour’s Sepuloni has labelled the move “disgraceful” and said moving people around doesn’t fix homelessness.
“This is the National Government showing how little they care about Aucklanders who need support. They’ve cut support to social services and access to emergency accommodation and failed to get people into homes .... Real solutions mean more homes people can actually live in, mental health and addiction support, opportunities to work and practical pathways off the street ... Out of sight is not out of mind,” she said.
Amendments to the Summary of Offences Act will be subject to a legislative process before coming into effect.
Auckland City Missioner Helen Robinson said while she understood the intent behind the order, she is “deeply concerned” with the way the plan is laid out.
“I agree we all need to promote good law and order but just moving people around is ineffective. We need to address the underlying causes of the symptoms.”
Robinson said there are 113,000 people “severely housing-deprived” and the only solution is more social housing.
“A lack of available housing has been a problem under multiple governments for the past 30 to 40 years.
“There are certainly some policies that make it harder for social housing [to exist], but it’s not the fault of just a single government.”
The order would apply to people 14 years old and above, which Robinson described as “very uncomfortable”, and said the potential fines of up to $2000 would be “pointless”.
“These are significant penalties that in reality just won’t be paid ... there will be a court process which will take up police and the courts’ time,” she said.
The Auckland Business Chamber welcomed the move, calling it a “sensible and necessary step to strengthen safety in the city centre”.
Chief executive Simon Bridges said the change fills a gap.
“For some time there has been a missing piece of the puzzle when it comes to safety in the CBD. This helps address that.
“We support the investment going into housing, mental health and outreach services. That work is important and it should continue. But keeping the city safe also requires practical enforcement tools. You need both.”
Bridges said businesses want a city centre that feels welcoming and secure for staff, customers and visitors.
“Many of our members have been frustrated by behaviour that falls short of a serious offence but still drives customers away and leaves staff feeling uneasy. Too often there has been little ability to intervene before situations escalate.
“Giving police the discretion to step in early is common sense. It protects the public, supports businesses and safeguards the reputation of our city.”
Bridges said a safe and confident central city is critical to Auckland’s economic future.
“Our city centre is the engine room of the region. If Auckland is going to succeed, our CBD has to be safe. These powers send a clear signal that intimidating and disruptive behaviour will not be tolerated.
“This is a firm and practical step in the right direction, and we strongly support it.”
Retail NZ chief executive Carolyn Young welcomed the news but said without wider, long-term social services available, she’s not convinced it will bring permanent change.
“Being able to have police move people on from an area where they are displaying antisocial behaviours and creating an unsafe environment for the public may be a useful tool to put a break the cycle.
“But we are cautious about the long-term solution, given that the order will be in place for only 24 hours and will require police resourcing to implement.”
Young said understanding the needs of homeless people to focus on solutions should be the end game.