This year’s General Election provides a crucial opportunity to elect representatives who will take a stand for justice and be accountable to us, the people. Voters can use their power to demonstrate to political parties and candidates that those who enable or excuse Israel’s apartheid regime and genocide and ethnic cleansing of Palestinians will not be elected or re-elected. By signing this pledge, you are committing to make your vote count for Palestine. Together we will vote only for political parties and candidates that are committed to the liberation of Palestine, and will commit the next Government of Aotearoa New Zealand to: • Recognising Palestinian statehood • Sanctioning the occupation for its ongoing genocide and decades-long illegal occupation of Palestine • Creating special visa pathways for Palestinians wanting to come to Aotearoa New Zealand • Divesting public money from companies that uphold Israeli systems of apartheid and illegal settlements It is time for you to take the pledge and make your vote count for Palestine. JOIN A RALLY FOR PALESTINE ON 10 OCTOBER - FIND DETAILS OF THE ACTIONS IN YOUR AREA HERE.

Women and girls are already being secretly filmed, including in Aotearoa Smart glasses are entering a world where women and girls already experience voyeurism, sexual harassment and image-based abuse. The technology can make these forms of abuse easier to carry out discreetly. Overseas, men have used Ray-Ban Meta glasses to record encounters with women in public and post the footage on social media. Women have reported being filmed during everyday interactions, with videos attracting sexualised comments from strangers. Women working in massage parlours and the sex industry have also reportedly been filmed without their knowledge. In the United States, reports have described boys secretly filming girls with smart glasses and uploading footage to TikTok. There has already been a case in New Zealand. An Auckland man used Ray-Ban Meta glasses in an attempt to make an intimate visual recording of a sex worker without her consent. The case resulted in a guilty plea to attempting to make an intimate visual recording. It demonstrates how easily a device designed for everyday use can also be used to violate someone's privacy. The consequences can continue long after a recording is made. Footage can be uploaded, copied and shared beyond the control of the person recorded. An ordinary interaction can be presented to an online audience as entertainment, with the woman at its centre having no say in how she is shown. Children and young people face serious risks too. They should be able to attend school, socialise and spend time in public without having to wonder whether someone nearby is secretly recording them. NZ law does not clearly protect people from being secretly filmed in public New Zealand law can address some forms of harmful recording. The Crimes Act 1961 criminalises certain intimate visual recordings made without consent, and the Harmful Digital Communications Act 2015 can apply to the distribution of intimate recordings and other harmful digital communications. However, these protections have limits. Many reported incidents involving smart glasses concern fully clothed women filmed in public. A recording of that kind may fall outside the legal definition of an intimate visual recording, even if the footage is captured for sexual reasons and later used to humiliate or harass the person recorded. Other legal avenues may depend on the circumstances or require proof that is difficult to establish. Classification laws can prohibit material involving the sexual exploitation of children when it meets the legal test for an “objectionable” publication. But that test does not cover every harmful use of smart glasses. Livestreaming, AI alteration or sharing of footage can cause serious harm without the resulting material being legally “objectionable” under the Act. This means some harmful uses of smart glasses may fall outside the protection. The Privacy Commissioner has acknowledged the need to examine whether the current framework adequately addresses the risks. That review should include the responsibilities of companies that design, import and sell these products. Companies must take responsibility for harm that is easy to predict When companies introduce a new technology, they make choices about its design and what it can do. Those choices affect how easily the product can be misused and what happens to the information it captures. A small recording light, for example, offers limited protection if people nearby cannot see it or do not know what it means. Companies should not be able to shift responsibility for foreseeable harms onto customers by simply telling them to use a product responsibly. We have seen this pattern across the technology sector. Products are released and widely adopted, then the public is left to deal with the harms while the laws that protect us struggle to catch up. Women and girls are often expected to change their behaviour and remain alert to new forms of abuse. The companies profiting from the technology face far less pressure to prevent that abuse before it occurs. Recent events show why we cannot rely on individual retailers to make the right call. Kmart has now removed its Anko camera glasses from sale in New Zealand and Australia, amid growing privacy concerns. But more expensive camera-enabled glasses, including Ray-Ban Meta and Oakley Meta, remain available in Aotearoa through other retailers. A retailer’s decision to withdraw one product is welcome, but it is no substitute for enforceable safeguards that protect everyone, regardless of which brand is being sold. Smart glasses offer an opportunity to change that approach. Companies should be required to assess foreseeable risks before products reach the market and build effective safeguards into their design. That should include meaningful recording notifications and strict controls over how footage is stored, accessed and used by AI systems. Smart glasses also raise tikanga and Māori data sovereignty concerns  Smart glasses raise particular issues in contexts such as tangihanga and other culturally significant gatherings, where recording may conflict with tikanga relating to tapu, noa, whakapapa and the appropriate handling of images and voices. A device worn on the face cannot recognise or respect these contexts, and the person wearing it may not understand the tikanga involved. The ability to record, identify and store Māori faces and voices also raises concerns about Māori data sovereignty, particularly where biometric information is collected or processed without Māori control. A pause now lets us set the rules before covert filming becomes the norm Smart glasses can provide genuine benefits. For blind and low-vision people, AI-enabled glasses can help read signs, identify objects and navigate unfamiliar places. Regulation should protect those uses and access, including through appropriate exceptions or pathways for assistive technology. A pause on consumer sales would give New Zealand time to establish clear rules before these products become more popular. It would also send a clear message that companies must account for foreseeable harm when developing and selling powerful new technologies. The next Government has an opportunity to act on the concerns already raised by the Privacy Commissioner. We should not wait until covert recording becomes an ordinary part of public life, or until more people discover that footage of them has been shared without their consent.

Political leaders set an example for society, including young people. How they campaign shapes what we see as acceptable in public life. We’re calling for political parties and candidates to uphold honesty, respect, transparency and integrity, and to campaign in ways that strengthen rather than undermine our democracy. 

We see the impact of economic abuse and family violence in our day-to-day work. We support victim-survivors and try to mitigate the harm caused by people who perpetrate economic abuse. But we often fight losing battles, because New Zealand’s systems allow economic abuse to happen, all too often with no recourse for addressing the harm caused.  Economic abuse is a form of family violence that uses coercive, controlling, and threatening behaviour to restrict or remove a person’s financial freedom, autonomy, and security. It is experienced in close personal relationships, particularly intimate partner relationships, and often occurs alongside other family violence behaviours. Research shows that 15% of ever-partnered women have experienced economic abuse. [1] Despite the prevalence of economic abuse, it is rarely recognised and responded to as a form of family violence. Yet the impact can be devastating. Without access to money, victim-survivors lack resources to escape violent partners and remain independent. We estimate it costs around $10,000 to separate from an abusive partner [2]. Even if they can escape, when faced with the threat of poverty, women may choose to stay.  When victim-survivors are able to leave, many are forced to carry coerced debt, ruined credit and financial harm long after the relationship ends. This is violence. We need to stop treating it like a hardship or budgeting problem. New Zealand laws and systems that don’t acknowledge and respond to this form of abuse adequately are lagging behind other countries. The United Kingdom and Australia have focused on amending legislation, policies, and processes to better support victim-survivors of economic abuse over the last five to ten years [3]. In contrast, Te Aorerekura and its associated Action Plans to date have no mention of, or response to, economic abuse [4]. Economic abuse is a form of family violence under the Family Violence Act 2018, but this only applies to the granting of a protection order (and ancillary property or furniture order) [5]. Economic abuse is not an isolated issue; it is a long-term driver of gender inequality and intergenerational harm in Aotearoa and needs to be treated as such. Policy recommendations have been developed in close partnership with the National Collective of Independent Women’s Refuges, and are endorsed by around 80 other organisations from across the family violence, financial, and gender equity sectors. For the full list of policy changes recommended, see our website at https://thisisviolence.co.nz References: 1. Economic Abuse by An Intimate Partner and Its Associations with Women’s Socioeconomic Status and Mental Health, by Brooklyn M. Mellar, Janet Lynn Fanslow, Pauline J. Gulliver, and Tracey K. D. McIntosh. Economic Abuse by An Intimate Partner and Its Associations with Women’s Socioeconomic Status and Mental Health - Brooklyn M. Mellar, Janet Lynn Fanslow, Pauline J. Gulliver, Tracey K. D. McIntosh, 2024 2. Financial barriers to exiting abusive relationships, by Good Shepherd NZ Report: Financial barriers to exiting abusive relationships - Good Shepherd NZ 3. For example: Family Violence Flexible Support Packages. Family Violence Flexible Support Packages | vic.gov.au 4. Te Aorerekura Action Plan 2025-2030, Breaking the Cycle of Violence. The Centre for Family Violence and Sexual Violence Prevention.  Breaking the Cycle of Violence | The Centre for Family Violence and Sexual Violence Prevention 5. See Family Violence Act 2018, 11(e). Family Violence Act 2018 | New Zealand Legislation 

With three major parties now supporting affirmative consent law reform, Parliament has a genuine opportunity to act before the election. Last week, National announced its support, joining Labour and the Greens in recognising that New Zealand’s consent laws need to change. There is already draft legislation and enough support to progress it. With only limited sitting dates remaining, delaying reform risks treating the safety and dignity of victim-survivors as an election issue, rather than the humanitarian issue it is. We want an Aotearoa where every person, especially our rangatahi, grows up understanding that consent is not silence, uncertainty or the absence of resistance. It is something freely and voluntarily given, actively communicated, and grounded in mutual respect. For too many victim-survivors, sexual violence is not a single moment that simply passes. Its effects can reach into how people feel in their bodies, relationships, schools, workplaces and communities for years afterwards. It can affect mental health, trust, education, whānau relationships and a young person’s understanding of what they are entitled to expect from others. Our laws should reflect the seriousness of that harm and the basic truth that every person has the right to sexual autonomy. New Zealand’s criminal law does not currently contain a positive statutory definition of sexual consent. The Crimes Act identifies some circumstances where consent is absent, but it does not clearly say what consent is. This gap leaves room for outdated and harmful assumptions: that someone must fight back, say “no” in a particular way, or that silence, hesitation, intoxication, a past relationship or simply being there can be treated as agreement. A clear affirmative-consent framework would help shift the focus to communication, mutuality and respect. It would make clear that consent cannot be presumed, while supporting the conversations our young people need to have about healthy relationships, boundaries and care for one another. This reform would not weaken the fundamental protections of the criminal justice system. The prosecution would still have to prove every element of an offence beyond reasonable doubt. It is about ensuring the law is clear, fair and capable of reflecting what we now understand about sexual autonomy and harm. The call for change has been building for years. In 2022, more than 12,000 people signed the Consent Law Reform campaign petition. In 2023, the Justice Committee unanimously recommended that Parliament re-examine the law on consent. Victim-survivors, rangatahi, whānau, advocates, community organisations and legal experts have continued to call for change. This is not a party-political issue. It is about whether Parliament is prepared to put dignity, safety and wellbeing ahead of election politics. No young person, victim-survivor or whānau should have to wait through another election cycle for the law to catch up with what we know about consent, safety and healthy relationships. Parliament has a practical pathway and sufficient support to act. It should do so now. References and supporting information • Justice Committee report on the Petition of Layba Zubair: Review of Sexual Consent Laws • Consent law reform could pass now, says legal expert • National promises stricter rules on sexual consent | RNZ

In Aotearoa, tāngata whaikaha (disabled people) experience significant inequalities in healthcare access and quality compared to non-disabled individuals across all stages of life [3]. Similar inequalities are seen within policing systems, where tāngata whaikaha face inadequate support and discriminatory practices [4]. In a report by the Health Quality & Safety Commission Te Tāhū Hauora [3], it was found that:  • Disabled people die from treatable conditions at five times the rate of non-disabled individuals. • Māori disabled people die from treatable conditions at nearly ten times the rate of non-Māori, non-Pacific, non-disabled individuals. • These inequalities are intensified for people with multiple disabilities and for Māori and Pacific disabled people. • Disability is largely absent from health data, as most major health datasets in Aotearoa do not record disability status. Research from the Donald Beasley Institute regarding policing delivery for tāngata whaikaha [4] found that:  • Police in Aotearoa often lack the training to identify and respond to disability (including neurodivergence, psychosocial disability and learning disability). • Disabled people often feel their disclosures of disability are not believed or are ignored by police. • Some disabled people experience escalation of police contact, including use of force due to misinterpretation of disability. • Disabled people may be criminalised for disability-related behaviour instead of receiving appropriate health or disability support. No society should tolerate preventable harm caused by systematic failure. Tāngata whaikaha have a right to be treated with dignity, safety, and respect across all services. References 1. https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/547526/11-year-old-put-in-mental-health-facility-given-two-doses-of-antipsychotics-minister-says  2. https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/556934/misidentified-11-year-old-injected-with-drugs-rarely-given-to-children-review-finds  3. https://www.hqsc.govt.nz/resources/resource-library/a-window-on-disability/ 4. https://www.donaldbeasley.org.nz/our-projects/understanding-policing-delivery-takata-whaikaha-ddeaf-and-disabled-people 

We’re food producing champions. We should be able to feed our people. Too many children go to school hungry. Too many people are skipping meals because the money runs out before the week does. Too many of us are making tough choices between nutritious food, rent, power, health care, fuel and other essentials. As a nation, we’ve never been short of ingenuity when something needs fixing. Our food system needs redesigning, and we all need to work together to find the solutions. We need a commitment to a long term plan to deal with the underlying causes of food insecurity, rather than just muddling along with an increasing amount of hungry families needing foodbanks. We are everyday people: iwi, hapū, whānau members, mums and dads, aunties and uncles, farmers, fishers and food producers, health workers, community groups, educators, businesses, organisations, and eaters. No matter who we are or where we are from, we all agree food is not getting the serious political attention it deserves, and that needs to change. We can do better. We are calling on all political parties to make a genuine commitment to a food system that works for everyone. We want to see this commitment before the election so we can support those with the best solutions. Specifically, we want to see: A long-term plan. Affordable, healthy kai for everyone. Farming and food that looks after animals, the land and the ocean. A fair go for local producers, manufacturers and food businesses. Good food environments for our tamariki / children. A food system grounded in Te Tiriti o Waitangi. Communities having a decision-making role in their kai / food system. Celebration and protection of our food cultures. We believe Aotearoa New Zealand can become a place where everyone has access to good food, where local kai systems thrive, food producers are valued, communities are resourced and exports are a vital part of our economy. We’re not asking political parties to agree on everything but access to kai is fundamental. By signing this pledge to vote for kai you are sending a message to political parties across the spectrum that you expect to see robust policies that will strengthen our food systems. We will update everyone who signs this pledge about what commitments each political party makes in relation to our demands. 

The Government is progressing a Bill through Parliament that aims to limit the rights of transgender, non-binary, and intersex New Zealanders in the name of cis women, by defining “man” and “woman” (along with “male” and “female”) in legislation as “adult human biological male” and “adult human biological female”. This bill is nonsensical - it doesn’t define “biology”, and nor is “biology”, “male”, or “female” defined in New Zealand legislation. The Attorney General has raised concerns because the bill could impact on access to reproductive healthcare for cis women under 20, and there are so many pieces of law that become nonsense when “woman” is turned into “adult human biological female”. The bill won’t make cis women safer - because our law already allows places like women’s refuge to exclude trans women if they need to. They choose not to, because they see trans women impacted by the same misogyny-fuelled violence that all women face.  However, what the bill will do is cause confusion about how the law applies, and expose trans, non-binary, and intersex people in Aotearoa to more harm. The bill doesn’t give the clarity they say it will - instead it’s a meaningless attack on an already marginalised population - in our name. We reject the discrimination and attempts at exclusion of trans people in the name of our safety. For decades, biology has been used by politicians as an argument to deny women the vote, to deny gay couples’ right to be together, to control women’s bodies, and to deny people their basic freedoms. We refuse to be divided by arbitrary definitions - and we refuse to be reduced to our “biology” or our reproductive capacity. We believe that the government should be focusing on real issues women are facing such as the gutting of pay equity claims and the defunding of sexual violence agencies.  Those who continue to target trans people in Aotearoa don’t do so in our name. We feel strongly that this Bill does not speak for the vast majority of cisgender women in Aotearoa - they do not speak for us! We’re asking cis women in Aotearoa to sign this petition calling for all parties to vote against the Legislation (Definition of Woman and Man) Amendment Bill at its second reading, and to make it clear: transgender women are women, and we stand alongside them - against this bill and against all attacks on trans people. What else can we do? Submissions to the Select Committee are now open - it’s important that as many people as possible make a submission to show clear opposition to this bill. Signing this petition is not making a submission! Here is a submission guide you could use. You can also request to meet your local MP, or email MPs - particularly the MPs sitting on the select committee 

These cuts will hit hardest for: • people struggling with the rising cost of living; • workers facing redundancy or employment issues; • tenants dealing with housing insecurity; • migrants and former refugees; • disabled people, older people, and students; • whānau experiencing hardship or isolation. Citizens Advice Bureau Wellington provides vital free information, advice, and support including budgeting advice to more than 11,000 people every year. With the impacts of the high cost of living, continuing public service cuts, and growing job losses in Wellington, the support CAB provides is more critical than ever. Wellington CABs are powered by over 125 dedicated volunteers, but volunteers alone cannot sustain the service. Continued funding is essential to maintain physical spaces where people can access in-person support, and to retain the small team of staff who coordinate services, train volunteers, and ensure the CAB service remains accessible and effective. Wellington CABs need every cent of the approximately $240,000 per annum they have been receiving from Council to support Wellingtonians. Yet Council has slashed that funding to just $100,000. This puts at risk the survival of the CAB service in Wellington. For decades, CABs have helped people navigate tenancy issues, employment disputes, immigration processes, financial hardship, family challenges, and access to government, council and community services. CAB services are free, confidential, independent, and available to everyone. At a time when community need is increasing, Wellington City Council should be strengthening this essential service – not undermining it. This includes other community groups that we work alongside. We ask Wellington City Council to: • Reverse the funding cuts to Wellington CABs • Commit to a sustainable long-term funding partnership for CAB services in Wellington. Removing this funding will not remove the need. It will simply remove one of Wellington’s most trusted and accessible sources of support.  Sign the petition and call on Wellington City Council to restore full funding for Wellington Citizens Advice Bureau.  Please share widely. References  • PwC, Service Review Citizens Advice Bureau Wellington (December 2018) • ImpactLab, Citizens Advice Bureau North Shore Incorporated Relationship-related Enquires ImpactLab GoodMeasure Report (October 2022) - showed CAB services provided a $1:$13.20 social return on investment. Other ways you can help • Contact the Mayor and your local Councillors to tell them you oppose the cut to Wellington CAB funding and ask them to fully reinstate the funding and provide long term funding for the CAB.  Find details about your local councillor here https://wellington.govt.nz/your-council/about-the-council/mayor-and-councillors/councillors  • Spread the word to friends, whānau, and your community. • Help people who are digitally excluded to sign the petition here or in person at their local CAB.

Disabled people and their carers already face huge barriers just to live, work and care. This bill sets a dangerous precedent and strips away legal rights that other New Zealanders still have. It cancels existing court cases, shuts down claims that were filed properly and on time, and stops disabled people and their families from asking the courts to decide if they have been underpaid for years of essential care work. The bill will also prevent the Human Rights Commission and the Health and Disability Commissioner from taking action against the government for unlawful discrimination against people with disabilities and their whānau.  No other group of workers is being targeted and exploited in this way. If any other employer tried to pass a law that said “you can’t take us to court any more, and your current cases are wiped”, people would be outraged. Yet that is what this bill does to disabled people and their families, while politicians claim it 'changes nothing'. This is about whether disabled people and their carers are treated as equal under the law. We should not accept a two‑tier system where some people can still enforce their rights in court, while disabled people and their families are told their rights can be taken away by a fast‑tracked bill.  Disabled communities and their whānau are already facing unfair circumstances and enormous strains. Now, more than ever, we need your support to stop this government from weaponising our needs and making us feel less valued in society.  Make sure to sign up for further updates when you sign the petition so we can let you know the details of the select committee process. 

Health care in Aotearoa should be an inclusive and welcoming space no matter who you are or where you are from. Everyone should experience high quality treatment in a timely manner. Gender-affirming hormone therapy (GAHT) is life-saving care and the medications are well understood. Since the departure of the sole clinician initiating GAHT under their service, Student Health have thus far refused to implement a timely alternative. Trans students are instead left with no choice besides referral to Sexual Health. There was no need to do this; GPs are perfectly capable of administering these medications, their doing so is the norm in most of the country, and until recently this was done at Student Health itself without issues. GAHT initiation through a secondary service is not typical practice according to the findings from Counting Ourselves' 2022 Aotearoa Trans & Non-binary Health Survey. Other regions have seen a shift since the team's 2018 results, where initiation is more commonly maintained by primary care. However, Waikato continues to overuse Sexual Health Services, where the current wait for a first appointment is ten to eleven months. This exacerbates wait times and already strained resources, impacting the service's ability to adequately meet the demand of all patients. International students are also particularly impacted, as they have few other financially viable choices. Subsidised training is recognised and available through PATHA (Professional Association of Trans Health Aotearoa). Student Health clinical leads have been made aware of this, but have not followed through. Trans bodies and care are not a 'specialty', and do not necessitate a separate service to address GAHT initiation. Student Health has adopted what is in our opinion a 'matter of choice' belief in carrying out culturally competent practices for the community, perpetuating harm onto students as a consequence of not prioritising trans health needs in a primary care context. Together we can ensure that our trans students get the care that they need and deserve, care that is timely and that affirms their humanity and lived experience. Please share this petition far and wide, and help us to help our rangatahi thrive.

The BSA is the only real protection New Zealand has against the broadcasting of lies, abuse or misinformation. Since 1989, it has done an excellent job supporting our television and radio broadcasters to be responsible by providing an avenue for complaints from the public. The BSA upholds standards which all broadcasters must meet. These cover: • offensive and disturbing content,  • the interests of children,  • promotion of illegal or antisocial behaviour,  • discrimination and denigration,  • balance,  • accuracy,  • privacy, and   • fairness. Without these standards, New Zealand’s media cannot claim to be responsible and trustworthy. A different organisation called the Media Council regulates print and online media but it has no teeth. It can't force media organisations to be responsible if they go rogue. Moreover, if media like the Platform and Reality Check Radio don't join the Media Council (which they haven't), they're not within its jurisdiction and can be as irresponsible as they wish.  For years, many observers have been calling on the government to increase the BSA’s scope to include online media.  Instead, the government proposes to scrap the BSA and increase the Media Council to include radio and television. As a result standards will slide and NZ will drift inexorably towards a media system like we see currently in the US.