MPs clash over ‘move on orders’ targeting beggars as young as 14

Thursday, 21 May 2026

About 100 people watched Parliament debate Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith's Move On Orders Bill, which passed its first reading despite fierce opposition.

The bill would allow police to issue move on orders to people as young as 14 for begging or rough sleeping in public spaces.

The Justice Committee must report back by September 3, ahead of the November election, reducing public consultation time on the controversial legislation.

Around 100 people arrived to watch Parliament debate a bill to ban begging and rough sleeping, which ended with a fiery back-and-forth between MPs who accused each other of “gas lighting”, scaremongering and betrayal.

Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith’s “Move On Orders Bill” passed its first reading, and would be fast-tracked through the select committee process.

He asked the Justice Committee to report back by September 3, ahead of the November election, as “this Government wants to get on with this”.

That reduced the opportunity for the pubic to give their views on the bill so Green MP Tamatha Paul encouraged people who opposed the bill to “fill the gallery”.

Just over 100 people were in the public gallery to see the debate, which was more than a usual Thursday afternoon but not full.

Paul told supporters to be in Parliament by 3pm, but the debate about move on orders was delayed thanks to a prolonged debate about changing eligibility for Disability Support Services. That bill would reverse a recent Supreme Court decision recognising some family carers as employees.

It wasn’t until 4:30pm that Parliament started to consider the move on orders. When the debated concluded, about an hour later, about half of the crowd had left.

During an impassioned speech, Paul argued these orders would be used against vulnerable people, including victims of crime, who needed social support rather than fines or imprisonment.

“It affects people as young as 14. Where exactly are these kids meant to go? Would you like them to go sleep in a bush? Would you like them to go and sleep under a bridge?

“They have nowhere to go, they have no parents, they have no responsible adults, and now they will be caught up in the justice system for the rest of their life. How dare the minister get up and say that they care about victims,” she said.

Goldsmith’s amendment to the Summary Offences Act would apply to anyone aged 14 years or older. It would not impact protesters or charity workers asking for money.

It would create a new offence for those found to be behaving in a disorderly, intimidating, threatening or disruptive manner, breaching the peace, obstructing access to businesses, or begging or rough sleeping.

Goldsmith and other Government MPs argued the bill would not “criminalise homelessness”. ACT’s Simon Court lashed out at Green and Labour MPS who said so, saying they were undertaking “an exercise in the most disgusting act of political gas lighting”.

Their argument was that homelessness itself wasn’t illegal, but the act of refusing to comply with a move on order was the offence. Police could issue move on orders to rough sleepers.

Court said he saw a lot of intimidating behaviour when he used to work in Auckland City.

“You are denying the lived reality of young people I have worked with in the central city, in K Rd and other areas, who told me they were too scared to come to work until it was light,” he told the Opposition.

He said that intimidation came from “people half-clothed who defecated in doorways”.

“And those are the actual lived experiences of people I worked with,” he said.

Labour’s Camilla Belich said MPs concerned about human rights, such as freedom of movement and expression, could not vote for the bill. The Attorney General’s Bill of Rights Act report said it would breach those rights.

Addressing ACT, she said: “It is very disappointing to hear from what was once a libertarian party, saying your freedom of movement can only be where we say it can be in public spaces.”

She said the bill would punish people for being hungry.

“The definition of begging in this bill is asking for food. Our response to someone asking for food, to being hungry, madam Speaker, under this Government, is to issue them with a move on order.

“It is often said that society should be judged by the way we treat our most vulnerable, and this is a shameful way to treat our most vulnerable,” she said.

Goldsmith said the orders would make cities safer. Responding to fears about children being caught up by the orders, he said that would be an issue for Oranga Tamariki.