PSA say police commissioner’s ‘overreaction’ to Labour candidate will have ‘chilling effect’

Wednesday, 10 June 2026

Public sector union boss Fleur Fitzsimons says the police commissioner’s comments about a top cop joining the Labour Party list go too far.

Fitzsimons says the launching of a review into whether Superintendent Rakesh Naidoo handled sensitive information appropriately was an over-reaction and typical of public sector bosses not understanding that their employees enjoyed the same right to freedom of association everyone else did.

The stoush over Naidoo’s candidacy deepened on Wednesday as Labour’s Ginny Anderson accused Police Minister Mark Mitchell of pushing Police Commissioner Richard Chambers to criticise Naidoo.

The superintendent and career police officer has been put at 13 on Labour’s list, an essentially guaranteed entry into Parliament.

Read more:

• Police to review top cop’s handling of information since he began talking to Labour

• Commissioner 'very disappointed' he didn't learn of cop’s Labour hopes earlier

• Labour list rockets newbies to winnable slots ahead of current caucus

Labour leader Chris Hipkins has said that the party had talked to Naidoo in the last few months about potentially standing, but it was only last week that a firm decision was made ‒ which was when Naidoo told his supervisor.

This has angered both Chambers and Mitchell.

“In my view it is critical that the public can have confidence that police are politically neutral. The respectful and right thing to do would have been for Mr Naidoo to be transparent and disclose his intentions from the outset,” Mitchell said.

Chambers said he was “very disappointed” in the fact that he did not find out sooner and launched a review into whether any sensitive information Naidoo had access to had been handled properly

“That review will include meetings he was involved in as a senior police leader, the information he was privy to by virtue of his position, and whether anything was shared with any third party that should not have been shared,” Chambers said.

“As a senior police officer, Superintendent Naidoo was privy to sensitive information and I need to be reassured information he has been privy to through the course of his duties has been handled properly.”

Fitzsimons, who stood as a candidate for Labour at the last election, criticised the announced review.

“It was a total overreaction by the police commissioner with no evidential base. And this is what public sector employers do far too often when it comes to political rights because they misunderstand political neutrality obligations in your work with the right to be politically active outside of your work,” Fitzsimons said.

“Employers are not entitled to know whether public sector workers are members or active in political parties. Obviously, there are obligations to disclose if that turns into a candidacy,” she said.

“Fundamental rights around freedom of association are important and they shouldn’t be undermined by people acting without any proper understanding of the Bill of Rights Act.”

Fitzsimons credited former Public Service Minister Judith Collins with having a strong understanding of where the line was.

“She immediately understood the ability for public sector workers to be both politically neutral in their work and politically active outside of work.”

Hipkins has also criticised the review by Chambers.

“I think it’s very unfortunate that the police commissioner is choosing to make public comments with no evidential base whatsoever about an outstanding member of the police force.”

But he did not go as far as Anderson, who suggested on Newstalk ZB that Mitchell had put words into Chambers’ mouth ‒ a claim Mitchell immediately rejected.

Prime Minister Christopher Luxon suggested Anderson should withdraw and apologise for those remarks. Chambers did not wish to make any further comment.

Naidoo is on pre-planned leave from police.