Bill to legally define 'man' and 'woman' passes first reading

Wednesday, 20 May 2026

David Seymour argues that terms like 'chest feed' deny basic biological reality, stating his new bill aims to ensure people can openly say there are two biological sexes, men and women, without being legally or socially suppressed.

A new bill defining gender has been advanced to the Select Committee, following rigorous debate in the House on Wednesday night.

NZ First MP Jenny Marcroft proposed a very short bill which would, across all legislation, define the meanings of “female” and “male” as “human biological female/male” and “woman” and “man” as “adult human biological female/male”.

The proposed law change imposes no obligation on anyone to change how they speak or identify themselves. It only provides a technical definition of gender, which could impact how courts interpret the law, as opposed to imposing obligation on how people choose to identify.

The bill was supported in its first reading by ACT and National, and opposed by Labour, the Greens and Te Pāti Māori.

NZ First MP Jenny Marcroft proposed a bill which would define the meanings of “male” and “female”.

NZ First leader Winston Peters in April explained the reason for the bill.

“This bill would ensure our country moves away from the woke ideology that has crept in over the last few years, undermining the protection, progression and safety of women,” he said.

“Our laws should reflect biological reality and provide legal certainty.”

Here is what the other parties had to say in Parliament on Wednesday night.

National

National MP for Selwyn and Minister for Women Nicola Grigg said while she had reservations about the bill, she supported people’s right to have a conversation about it.

She acknowledged the bill would be incredibly sensitive to many New Zealanders and questioned whether any meaningful change would come from it passing into law.

Labour MP Vanushi Walters called the bill irresponsible.

“New Zealand legislation has over time generally moved away from the use of gender specific language. Most laws apply to all people regardless of sex or gender, and therefore do not rely on terms like women or man in the first place,” she said.

“I’m not convinced this bill will advance the rights and opportunities or wellbeing for women or girls in any way, shape or form in New Zealand.”

Labour

Labour MP Vanushi Walters said the bill was irresponsible because it would create a platform for hate.

She said the party stood in support of New Zealand’s LGBTQIA+ community and that people wanted the government to focus on the cost of living, rather than bills that “encourage division”.

Greens

Green Party co-leader Chlöe Swarbrick said that like “millions around New Zealand and billions around the world”, she was tired.

“I’m tired of governments throwing minorities under the bus with one hand, and syphoning all of our community’s wealth to corporations and cutting public services with the other,” she said.

Act MP Karen Chhour said biological sex was important for matters of privacy and safety.

Swarbrick said Kiwis wanted “affordable groceries, affordable power bills [and] affordable housing”, as well as healthcare and education.

“If this government cared about women, they wouldn’t have surprised our 300,000 lowest paid women by cutting off their rights to pay equity… They would not be cutting funding to sexual violence prevention services now being forced to close their doors…They wouldn’t be forcing them into being financially dependent on their partners when they lose paid employment.”

Swarbrick questioned whether the government would have voted against apartheid South Africa, stood up to the US for a nuclear free pacific, or granted women the right to vote.

ACT

Te Pāti Māori MP Oriini Kaipara said that in te ao Māori, it was people that mattered rather than whether they were a man or a woman.

ACT Party MP Karen Chhour angled her debate on the right to free speech.

She said ACT supported the bill because people were denying the biological differences between men and women.

“For many New Zealanders the confusion is not about science, it’s about why speaking plainly about basic reality has suddenly become treated as offensive,” she said.

“Most people understand biological sex is real, it is observable at birth, and it matters in medicine, reproduction, sports, prisons and spaces where privacy and safety are important.”

Te Pāti Māori

Te Pāti Māori MP Oriini Kaipara said the Māori world didn’t acknowledge differences between men and women.

“In te ao Māori… it is tangata,” she said.

“One of the most prominent proverbs that we hear generation after generation hails from the Far North by a kuia. It has been twisted in context, but it has become what is known as a very profound proverb/whakatauki.

“He aha te mea nui o te ao? He tāngata, he tāngata, he tāngata. [What is the most important thing in the world? It is people, it is people, it is people.]”