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.

On the 24th of April 1915, the Ottoman Empire began systematic massacres and mass deportations of indigenous Armenians, killing between 1 and 1.5 million and displacing 100,000's more - over 90% of the Ottoman Armenian population.[1,2] The Ottoman Empire also targeted other Indigenous minorities at the same time, killing up to 500,000 Assyrians and 350,000 Greeks and displacing 100,000's more.[3] Historians and genocide scholars overwhelmingly agree that the Ottoman Empire's actions constitute a genocide.[4] But over 100 years later, New Zealand still has not officially recognised this history.[5] By refusing to acknowledge the atrocities of the past, New Zealand sets a dangerous precedent. In the years after the Armenian Genocide, many European countries turned a blind eye and believed in Turkey's genocide denial, allowing a new wave of genocidal leaders to take charge.[6] Adolf Hitler himself justified his invasion of Poland in 1939 by saying, "Who, after all, speaks today of the annihilation of the Armenians?".[7] More recently, in 2022-3, Azerbaijan blockaded and invaded the ethnically Armenian territory of Artsakh and ethnically cleansed over 100,000 indigenous Armenians.[8,9] New Zealand's only response was to sign a joint statement in the UN expressing "deep concern" and (unsuccessfully) asking Azerbaijan to comply with international law.[10] When we do not acknowledge history, we are doomed to make the same mistakes and allow atrocities to continue around the world. Over 30 countries, including the United States, Canada, Mexico, France, Germany, Sweden, and Switzerland, as well as the European Parliament and Latin American Parliament, have all taken this essential step of formally recognising the Armenian Genocide.[11] How can New Zealand claim to be a world leader while falling behind on such a basic benchmark? Our government is doing a disservice not only to the Armenians of New Zealand but to everyone. If we don't have the spine to recognise a genocide from 1915, how are we to recognise and fight against genocide today? Together we must stand up for the truth. This Armenian Genocide Remembrance Day, we call on New Zealand to formally recognise the Armenian Genocide and make a commitment to uphold its responsibility to the international community. References:  1. https://www.theguardian.com/news/2015/apr/16/the-armenian-genocide-the-guardian-briefing 2. https://www.britannica.com/question/What-were-the-consequences-of-the-Armenian-Genocide 3. https://worldwithoutgenocide.org/genocides-and-conflicts/the-ottoman-christian-genocide#:~:text=Between%20250%2C000%20and%20500%2C000%20Assyrians%20and%20around,Genocide.%20Hundreds%20of%20thousands%20more%20were%20displaced. 4. https://genocidescholars.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/Scholars-Denying-Armenian-Genocide-.pdf 5. https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/124109301/anzacs-and-atrocities-will-new-zealand-ever-recognise-the-armenian-genocide 6. https://www.armenian-genocide.org/recognition.html 7. https://genocideeducation.org/more-resources/hitler-and-the-armenian-genocide/ 8. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/aug/22/inside-nagorno-karabakh-blockade-armenia-azerbaijan 9. https://freedomhouse.org/article/new-report-azerbaijani-regime-ethnically-cleansed-nagorno-karabakh-according-international 10. https://allinnet.info/news/a-joint-statement-regarding-the-situation-in-nagorno-karabakh-was-presented-at-the-un-human-rights-council/ 11. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armenian_genocide_recognition Image: Armenian Deportees, November 1915. United States Holocaust Memorial Museum Photo Archives. Courtesy of Sybil Stevens (daughter of Armin T. Wegner). Wegner Collection, Deutsches Literaturarchiv, Marbach & United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/photo/armenian-deportees

The changes proposed erode Aotearoa’s longstanding commitment to fundamental human rights and humanitarian principles. It is clear that the effect of the changes proposed will have a significant, negative impact on everyone, all visa holders, but especially people seeking asylum, refugees and the broader refugee protection framework in Aotearoa. It will affect: 1. Their right to stay if they find love or are offered a job. 2. Their rights to appeal to stay on humanitarian grounds. 3. Everyone's right to live free from being required by Immigration Officers to provide ID on request in the community, at home or at work. New ICE-style Powers for Immigration Officers to Request ID on suspicion: We are alarmed by the new powers proposed for Immigration Officers to request identification documents from people they suspect could be liable to deportation or in breach of visa conditions because: • In practice, it is clear that these powers are likely to extend to people who are in Aotearoa legally, such as people seeking asylum and refugees but also residents or citizens, and will be used disproportionally against people based on their race, ethnicity or country of origin. • It will be particularly harmful to people seeking asylum and refugees, many of whom have experienced heightened and harmful government monitoring in their countries of origin. • Rather than fostering a sense of safety and belonging, these provisions risk increasing existing vulnerabilities and erode trust in public institutions. • It risks vulnerable populations going further into the shadows. Individuals may avoid seeking medical care or even reporting crimes, like workplace exploitation or domestic violence, for fear of immigration enforcement and deportation. Ban on alternative visa pathways for people who withdraw their asylum claim • It is cruel to ban people seeking asylum who withdraw their claim, because they have fallen in love, married or are in a settled relationship with a New Zealand partner, from being eligible for an alternative visa such as a Partnership Visa • It is cruel to ban people seeking asylum who withdraw their claim from being eligible for an alternative visa such as a Skills or Job specific Work to Residence Visa because they have been offered employment. Limitation on humanitarian appeal rights • The limitation on humanitarian appeal rights will reduce access to independent, experienced oversight at a critical point in the immigration system.These oversight and appeal rights are an important safeguard, particularly for individuals with complex or evolving humanitarian needs, including those facing serious harm if returned.  • Limiting appeal rights could also be unduly harsh on the children of those liable for deportation. Currently, many deportation cases regarding temporary visa holders (such as those who have sought asylum here over many years) involve families with children in school who have spent the majority of their lives in Aotearoa New Zealand. Deportation can have major, adverse impacts on children’s health and well-being, notably through family separation, disrupted education, and being returned to an unfamiliar country where they may not speak the language.  • Retaining the right to appeal deportation is an important avenue for protecting children’s rights and upholding New Zealand’s obligations under the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. Conflation of people seeking asylum, seeking safety, with criminals • This Bill and its public introduction by the Minister makes a problematic conflation between serious criminal offending by long-term residents and measures targeting asylum claimants, packaging both under the framing of "Enhanced Risk Management."  • These provisions address entirely different populations with entirely different legal statuses. One group has been convicted of serious crimes; the other is exercising a fundamental right recognised under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Refugee Convention.  • Grouping them in a single legislative instrument, such as this Bill, undermines public understanding of what the asylum process is and reinforces a damaging association between asylum seeking and criminality that is neither accurate nor justified, putting communities at risk. We therefore call on this Bill to be scrapped. For more about Asylum Seekers Support Trust: Website: asst.org.nz Facebook: facebook.com/ARCI.NZ Instagram: @asylumseekersnz

Aotearoa New Zealand should be a country where everyone can thrive and workers are respected and treated fairly. But right now migrant communities are left vulnerable by the profound power imbalance of our immigration system leaving them unprotected from exploitation. “"Every person in New Zealand, regardless of their visa status, deserves the right to safe work, decent pay, dignity and the freedom to speak up without the threat of deportation hanging over them. When your ability to stay in the country is controlled by your employer, raising concerns about safety or wage theft becomes a risky choice. This system is designed to silence people, leaving them isolated and at great risk of abuse."” — Mandeep Bela, President, Union Network of Migrants (UNEMIG) The 12-month stand-down period compounds this injustice by creating conditions that can destabilise families and increase migrants’ vulnerability. While some families may leave Aotearoa together when a visa ends, there are real situations where separation becomes unavoidable—particularly when one partner is able to secure employment and transition to a new visa, such as an Accredited Employer Work Visa (AEWV), but cannot meet the requirements to support their dependents. At the same time, for those on capped or lower-skilled visa pathways, the pressure to avoid the stand-down period can drive migrants into precarious or informal arrangements with employers, increasing the risk of exploitation or agreements made solely to extend their stay. Rather than providing stability, the stand-down period reinforces uncertainty, undermines family unity, and places already vulnerable workers in situations where their rights and wellbeing may be compromised. This lack of fairness extends to rigid and overly high English testing standards, which often do not reflect a person's proven ability to communicate in day-to-day conversation to work, contribute, and integrate. When a migrant is already employed and performing their role safely and effectively — as a bus driver, for example, demanding they pass an academic English test for a further visa makes no sense. Fairness demands reasonable, role-appropriate requirements, not one-size-fits-all barriers. Previous Work-to-Residence (WTR) settings proved that a worker's experience should be sufficient proof of competency, allowing for employer letters to confirm English proficiency. VOICES FROM THE COMMUNITY: “On Tied Visas: “My boss knew I couldn’t leave. He charged me a premium for a job offer and paid me half of what was in my employment agreement. I felt completely powerless. I had to choose between speaking up and losing my visa or staying silent and watching my savings disappear while living in financial and emotional hardship. I felt invisible, like my dreams and my dignity didn't matter.”” — Mary (name changed for protection), former hospitality worker “On the Stand-Down Period: “We arrived with nothing but hope. For three years, we worked from dawn till dusk, saved every dollar, and our daughter, who was born here, is now 2 years old. My employer wants to keep me on, but AEWV conditions state that I must leave the country for a year after my visa ends. We live in constant anxiety about being torn away from the life we’ve built. Our hearts are breaking.”” — Maria and Michael (names changed), migrant workers “On English Language Requirements: “I have been driving buses in New Zealand for around 3 years. I know the routes, keep passengers safe, communicate with my depot and with passengers every single day. My employer has no issues with my work and performance and wants to keep me. But Immigration New Zealand requirements are that I must achieve an unreasonably high academic English test score which is very difficult for many migrants. It feels like a trap, not a fair requirement.”” — Raj (name changed for protection), bus driver currently working in New Zealand on a temporary visa CONCLUSION “"We have an opportunity to build an immigration system rooted in fairness and respect. By ending punitive policies and adopting reasonable standards, we can ensure New Zealand truly values the people who contribute their labour, their talents, and their lives to our country. Political parties must now show where they stand."” — Mandeep Bela, President, Union Network of Migrants (UNEMIG) We, the undersigned, call on all political parties to adopt these three asks in their immigration policies: Union Network of Migrants (UNEMIG) International Migrants Alliance (IMA) Aotearoa Migrante Aotearoa Migrant Action Trust Gabriela Aotearoa Soil of Cultures Anakbayan Aotearoa United Filipino Bus Drivers in New Zealand Filipino Careworkers United Migrant Rights Network NZ Banyuhay Aotearoa Migrant Workers Association Asians Supporting Tino Rangatiratanga

Most people in Aotearoa want to support peace and justice in the world and see action to protect international law.  The New Zealand Defence Force (NZDF) is deeply embedded with the US military now and regularly conducts training to ensure the 'interoperability' of NZ troops into US combat operations.  This is despite the US and Israel waging an aggressive war against Iran and bombing countries without provocation. Aggressive war is often referred to as the "supreme international crime" because it encompasses the planning, initiation, and waging of war in violation of international law. This concept was notably established during the Nuremberg Trials, where leaders were held accountable for such actions. [1] The US is deeply complicit in war crimes and crimes against humanity for the funding of the genocide in Gaza over the past 2+ years. Furthermore, the current commander in chief has threatened to commit war crimes in Iran by 'bombing it back to the stone age.' [2] The New Zealand Army is talking with its United States counterparts about having American troops train regularly on Kiwi soil. [3] New Zealand should have nothing to do with war criminals and those who actively destroy international law.  The NZDF should operate with countries that uphold international law and do not wage aggressive wars.  References 1. https://www.nurembergacademy.org/research/projects/the-crime-of-aggression 2.https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/4/2/bomb-back-to-the-stone-age-us-history-of-threats-and-carpet-bombing 3. https://www.thepost.co.nz/politics/360781349/nz-army-talking-us-about-regular-training-kiwi-soil

 Aotearoa New Zealand is at a turning point in the future of its public health system. The decision to outsource ophthalmology services is not a routine administrative step. It is a significant policy shift away from public provision. Under current proposals, private providers may take over core hospital functions, including diagnostics, treatment, planned eye surgeries, and the management of patient pathways and waitlists. This is not simply supporting the public system. It risks replacing it. Public hospitals are also the primary training ground for future ophthalmologists and other specialists. Ophthalmology, like other medical disciplines, relies on an apprenticeship-style model in which trainees gain supervised experience within public hospital services. Shifting core services into private settings risks undermining this training pipeline, weakening the development of the future specialist workforce and further entrenching long-term capacity issues. We are concerned that Privatisation undermines public healthcare. Outsourcing core services shifts control away from public hospitals and into private hands, changing incentives, accountability, and the long-term direction of the system. It will worsen workforce shortages. International evidence shows outsourcing draws clinicians into private practice, weakening the public system rather than fixing capacity issues. At the same time, removing services from public hospitals reduces opportunities for training and mentorship, further constraining workforce development. Equity will suffer. Māori, Pacific, disabled, rural, and low-income communities already face barriers to care. Private delivery models are not designed to meet equity obligations or uphold culturally safe care grounded in Te Tiriti o Waitangi. There has been no meaningful consultation. Decisions of this scale require transparent public engagement and genuine partnership with communities, health workers, and iwi Māori. This has not occurred. There has been no adequate consultation and no meaningful engagement with Te Tiriti o Waitangi obligations. It sets a dangerous precedent. Normalising private delivery in ophthalmology opens the door to broader privatisation across the health system. We believe Health is a right, not a market commodity. A strong, publicly delivered health system is essential to ensuring universal and equitable access to care. We call on the Government to •  Stop the outsourcing of ophthalmology services immediately •  Invest in rebuilding public health capacity, including workforce development, training pathways, fair pay, and retention •  Ensure services are publicly delivered as the default •  Uphold Te Tiriti o Waitangi through genuine partnership with Māori •  Commit to a health system that prioritises equity, access, and public accountability over private profit We also call on all political parties, in this election year, to publicly commit to halting the privatisation of ophthalmology services and to protecting a fully publicly delivered health system for Aotearoa New Zealand. What is at stake This is about more than eye care. It is about the future of public healthcare in Aotearoa New Zealand. If left unchecked, this shift will accelerate privatisation and reshape the system in ways that are difficult to reverse — including undermining the training of future specialists and the sustainability of the public workforce. We stand for a health system that serves everyone, not private interests.

The Waitakere Ranges are precious.  They provide Auckland with fresh air and clean water.  They provide us with serenity and artistic inspiration.  They have been described as “the lungs of Tamaki Makaurau” and Te Wao Nui o Tiriwa is a very effective sequesterer of carbon.  To address threats to the Ranges, the Waitakere Ranges Heritage Area Act was passed in 2008.  It has worked well at holding development pressures at bay and maintaining the beauty and uniqueness of the Ranges.  Law changes now before Parliament risk gutting the protections in the Waitākere Ranges Heritage Area Act 2008. The Heritage Area Act cross-references the Resource Management Act. But the Government is replacing the RMA with the Planning Bill and the Natural Environment Bill without updating those references — which would render large parts of the Heritage Area Act meaningless. That would strip consent processes, Regional Spatial Plans and Land Use Plans of their duty to protect the Ranges. In short: the Ranges could be weakened by a thousand cuts. Subdivision of the Ranges would be more likely and decision makers would not have to have as one of their guiding principles the protection of the Ranges. The Bill is reported back to Parliament on June 26. Urgent action is needed if we are to fix this before then.   Together we can protect the Waitākere Ranges Heritage Area for future generations. Please sign and share this petition with friends and family. For more information please refer to this Environmental Defence Society article in the Herald and the Waitākere Ranges Local Board's submission can be read here.

This is an equity issue The fuel crisis does not impact all New Zealanders equally. Low-income families are the least able to absorb rising transport costs. The Spinoff has reported that the Government’s own fuel relief package leaves out half of the children living in material hardship. Both urban and rural families face similar challenges - being able to afford to get their kids to school.  “She said attendance was already dropping at some schools, with parents unable to afford to drive children to class. ‘The impact of the fuel disruption on schools is much broader and more complex than attendance figures suggest; however, attendance will absolutely be affected and is already showing signs of pressure in our communities.’” - Lysandra Stuart, New Zealand Principals’ Federation, 25 March 2026 (NZ Herald). University students, especially those in their first year of independence, are similarly challenged. Many have no car and rely entirely on public transport to reach their campuses. A sudden fare increase is not just an inconvenience to them, it is a barrier to their education and their future.  New Zealand has long held the view that education is a right not a privilege. That principle is meaningless if young people cannot afford to get to where their education takes place.  A compounded crisis for rural communities The fuel crisis is hitting both urban and rural families hard. Rural children and young people have no public transport alternatives, they often live far from school, and over the past two years, the Government has systematically cancelled the school bus routes they depend upon. The current fuel crisis has exacerbated these challenges.  The scale of the challenge is significant. The Ministry of Education reviewed 290 school bus routes in 2024, cancelling or amending 39 of them. By September 2025, a total of 66 rural routes were cancelled. Some of these impacted communities included Te Pōhue, Eskview, Clive, Central Hawke’s Bay, Northland, Gisborne and Manawātū. In Gisborne alone, more than 100 students faced losing their transport to school. These cancellations did not happen because the routes were unnecessary, it was because the Government’s eligibility threshold of eight students per route failed to reflect the realities of small, dispersed rural communities.  “In some areas, these cuts are proving absolutely devastating for the communities, it means some people are seriously considering selling their properties and moving closer to town or into town so their children can access education. In rural areas, there’s no public transport options, there’s no footpaths or cycleways, our roads are not safe for kids to be biking to school. There’s a whole raft of issues, and not all parents in rural communities are self-employed. They can’t take an hour off in the morning or change around their day to take kids to school.” - Gill Naylor, Rural Women New Zealand President, 15 October 2024 (NZ Herald/RNZ).  We, the undersigned, are not only calling for free fares on existing urban public transport networks but for a broader commitment to rural school transport. This includes the restoration of cancelled bus routes, an urgent review of the eligibility criteria, and guaranteed funding for school bus services. Ensuring no child or young person in Aotearoa loses access to education regardless of their circumstances or where they live. Full letter can be read here from 12pm Monday 6 April 2026

Every whānau in Kāpiti should have a decent and stable home – one that is warm, dry, accessible, affordable, and secure. A home that allows people in our communities to stay healthy, keep children in school, contribute to our community, and plan for the future. Decent homes should not be a luxury or a market reward. They are essential infrastructure for care, connection, and contribution. Housing changes lives. But right now, Kāpiti is facing a severe and growing housing crisis, with Ōtaki experiencing the highest housing stress in the district.  Private rentals are unaffordable and unavailable in our community. Only 20% of Ōtaki renter households are able to afford the median market rent[1] and there are so few available at a price people can afford. Public and community housing supply is far too low, making up only a small percentage of our housing stock[2]. People experiencing homelessness are increasingly invisible, living in cars, garages, overcrowded homes, boarding houses, or temporary accommodation.  There are around 129 Kāpiti households on the housing register but there are many more whānau experiencing housing stress. Reductions in emergency housing numbers have not translated into permanent, secure homes. Instead we are seeing preventable harm from a lack of secure and genuinely affordable housing: poorer health, disrupted education, economic stress, and fractured communities. Despite the housing crisis deepening in our community, the National-led Government has cancelled new Kāinga Ora homes in Ōtaki and continues to under-resource hapū, iwi and Māori-led housing solutions.  It doesn’t have to be like this.  The Government can make the choice to increase funding for more public housing, support hapū and iwi housing, and reshape our housing system to be for living and not for profit. We call on all political parties to commit to: • Build enough public housing in Kāpiti — starting with Ōtaki: this includes resuming and completing cancelled or stalled Kāinga Ora developments. Then, committing to building at a scale that meets existing and projected needs, not just incremental growth. Kāpiti needs 129 homes to house the whānau on the housing register immediately. • Support community and iwi-led housing solutions: Partner with Ngā Hapū o Ōtaki to support papakāinga and Kaupapa Māori housing. Recognise community housing as an important part of the public housing system, not a silver bullet or stop-gap. • Treat decent homes as essential infrastructure: recognise housing as foundational to health, education, and employment outcomes. Make sure homes are warm, dry, accessible and meet people’s needs across their lifetimes. • Commit to long-term, cross-party solutions: support durable, bipartisan approaches to public housing so progress is not undone by political cycles, providing certainty to councils, iwi, and CHPs (Community Housing Providers) so they can plan and build with confidence. When people have decent homes, communities thrive. It means people are healthier, children learn better, whānau are more connected and economically secure, and our collective pool of resources shift from crisis response to crisis prevention. We already have the knowledge, skills, and partnerships to fix this. What is missing is political commitment at the scale required.  About us Our Ōtaki Public Housing Group has come together from a shared concern for the lack of public housing for people in our area. We believe this is a key election issue and want to raise public awareness and political commitment for more public housing. Our vision is "All whānau have decent housing because housing is a right and housing changes lives". We bring locally specific information and attention to Action Station's Public Housing Futures national campaign. Contact us via [email protected] References: 1. Not just a house, a life - Understanding housing need specific to Ōtaki, The Urban Advisory, September 2022  2. Our housing stock is approximately 220 Kāinga Ora homes (88 in Ōtaki), 50 from community housing providers, alongside 118 council units for older people (66 in Ōtaki) (see MHud Housing Dashboard).

Right now, our community is already enduring worsening air quality, and the Council is currently operating under an abatement notice for their ongoing failures at the plant. ​Instead of focusing 100% of their resources on fixing the root cause of the odour, the Council is spending millions of ratepayer dollars to investigate dumping partially treated wastewater directly into our ocean outfall. This is being looked at as a "Diversion Option" under their Pond Resilience Project.  ​We need to stop this for three main reasons: ​Trading One Crisis for Another: We cannot allow the Council to trade a devastating air quality crisis for a marine environmental disaster in Pegasus Bay. Pumping partially treated wastewater into our ocean is not a solution; it is a dangerous band-aid. ​Wasting Millions of Dollars: It is completely irresponsible to spend millions of dollars just to investigate a backup plan that the community vehemently opposes. That money needs to be spent on actual, permanent fixes at the plant itself. ​Enough is Enough for the East: The residents of Bromley and the surrounding areas have endured enough disruption and environmental stress. We are united in saying no to this outfall diversion, and we refuse to let this happen in our city. ​We need to send a loud, undeniable message to the Council before they vote on the Pond Resilience Project on April 1st. Sign this petition to demand they take the ocean outfall investigation off the table permanently and focus entirely on fixing the plant.   References [1] Christchurch City Council, "CWTP Odour Proposed Pond By-pass" briefing document, outlining the proposed secondary treatment bypass (Page 1). Available at: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1mydPWu6wWuGTF9NwmzmSj3EdTriFQxOm/view?usp=drivesdk