Sign in Subscribe

A Submissions Guide For The Chaos Coalition's Horrific Legislative Blitzkrieg

Emily Writes

Emily Writes

— 16 min read
A Submissions Guide For The Chaos Coalition's Horrific Legislative Blitzkrieg
If you do a submission I'll never use Canva again to make a bad banner for this newsletter.

Unfortunately, because of this government's ongoing commitment to attacking Aotearoa's most vulnerable people, we all have to spend our Monday making submissions against various awful bills they're pushing through under urgency.

There's no time to spare, unfortunately - we have to get started right now. Here's a submission guide for all of the awful stuff we have to stop right ASAP.

The D*List is hosting submission writing sessions:

Come one! Come all! Bring your friends! Bring your laptop! Or use mine! Meet nice people!

Remember: Don't include your phone number with your submission contact details unless you're comfortable with it being made public.

Here is the latest Emily Josh Pod to listen to while you do it.

I realise there's SO MUCH here so please use the below links like a table of contents, to skip to the section of the newsletter that matters most to you:

Disability Support Services (nightmare bill targeting disabled people and those that care for them)
Changes to access to diabetes medication (nightmare bill removing diabetes medication access from vulnerable people)
Deepfakes and digital exploitation (an actual decent bill! but it needs a lot of work.)
Definitions of Man and Woman (deeply stupid, unworkable, unscientific nightmare bill designed by bigots specifically to destroy the lives of trans people)
Move on orders (nightmare bill targeting people without homes as young as 14)

Feel free to skip to the comments if you read this already in your email!

Skip to comments

Submit on: The Disability Support Services Bill

When are submissions due? 12 June.

What are the issues? There are so many! It's genuinely hard to include them all. But in short, this bill is a response to the Supreme Court decision to acknowledge the mahi of carers of their adult disabled children. Two brave parents fought for their rights and the rights of their children to have carers - and the government responded with a bill that allows unchecked power to a minister who seems to loathe disabled people and their carers. The bill allows the minister alone to introduce means and income testing for support services for disabled children and adults. It also requires families who are already far more likely to be living in poverty than families who don't have disabled children to provide all financial support for their child/sibling/parent indefinitely.

When someone is injured they go to ACC and they get a portion of their income to support them as needed for as long as needed. Yet, a family of a disabled child may have to prove they've set up a community crowd-sourcing fund, been given funds from extended family, friends, their iwi and neighbours, just to get a small amount of support. Does the Government have shares in Givealittle or something?

Submission Sunday - Disability Services Bill
The Disability Support Services Bill was introduced to Parliament on Monday 18 May 2026.
Dr Bex on Social Issues in Aotearoa NZDr Bex
  • Read more about the bill here:
Why Disabled People Need to make a Submission on the Disability Support Services Bill and a template attached
Dr Huhana Hickey
Huhana HickeyHuhana Hickey
Breaking: the Government is attacking disabled people and their carers. Again.
Late last night, the coalition government snuck through another bill attacking disabled adults, children, and their families. The bill, introduced without consultation or warning, paves the way for income testing and asset testing for disabled adults and children. It also narrows the ability of families to get support for their
Emily Writes WeeklyEmily Writes

Sign the petition here:

Stop the Discriminatory Bill Removing Disabled People’s Rights – Ensure Fair Due Process
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…
OurActionStation

No, actually tell me what I need to do:

  1. Click here.
  2. Say who you are: "I am disabled" / "My child/parent/sibling/loved one is disabled" / "I am a person who believes my tax dollars should go towards helping others, not harming them".
  3. Under "I/We wish to make the following comments" you can share any of the points below. Rather than picking all of them, pick the ones that most apply to you and your situation (or that of family or friends) and write something in your words that contains your personal story of how this will affect you/your child/your family

If you don't want to read the suggestions below, the incredible lawyer Dr Huhana Hickey has made a great template for you to save and attach to your submission. Thank you Dr Hickey.

  • This bill continues the government's approach to introducing legislation and changes without proper consultation that negatively impact the disabled community and breach the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD),  Enabling Good Lives principles and Te Tiriti o Waitangi.
  • This bill was written and introduced under urgency which excludes the community it impacts. Louise Upston told opposition MPs just one hour before the bill and disability organisations and advocates were not told in advance of the announcement. The Select Committee process and rushing this bill through stops proper consultation with those impacted. Article 4.3 of the CRPD requires governments to “closely consult with and actively involve” disabled people and the organisations that represent them. A shortened select committee period excludes many disabled people and their carers from being able to make submissions.
  •  I stand strongly against clause 8: “Families First” Principle (Care Without Limits) alongside the disabled community and carers. Putting 'family support' into legislation as a way to reduce or deny public funding, without any corresponding obligation to support, sustain, or even assess the family carer who is being relied upon, will cause untold harm to both the disabled adult or child and their family. Disabled adults have the right, under the CRPD, to live independently within their communities. The government cannot re-write this and put them into a position of dependence on family care indefinitely as a way to remove publicly funded support. This clause further harms carers who have already suffered greatly under this government, with supports removed without notice, then reinstated without apology amid massive confusion.

Specific concerns about clause 8 taken from Dr Rebekah Graham's excellent submission guide.

• There is no requirement to assess the sustainability or wellbeing of the family carer before their resources are relied upon.

• There is no floor below which Crown support cannot be reduced by reference to family resources.

• There is no definition of what “appropriate” family contribution looks like, or when it ends.

• There is no independent mechanism to challenge an assessment that over-relies on family support.

• The principle applies permanently - there is no point at which a family’s contribution is deemed to have been fulfilled.
  • The bill puts forward the ability for the minister to say who is eligible for support in the disabled community and how funding is allocated, and used rather than through Parliament. This gives far too much power to the minister and does not require any consultation with those directly impacted by the removal of support. There is no complaints or appeals process. A minister cannot and should not decide who is disabled 'enough' to be supported and how they should be supported.
  • Clause 11(3) of the Bill is the basis for introducing (f) income-based criteria; and (g) asset-based criteria by stealth. Access to disability support has always been based on the severity of a person’s disability and their direct need, not by their finances or their families. This bill paves the way for the minister to introduce income and asset testing without public consultation or parliamentary debate. Hospital care, ACC, and specialist education are not means-tested; this could set a dangerous precedent while actively harming disabled people and their families.
  1. Under "I/We wish to make the following recommendations" you can share any of the points below, writing your own version of them helps, but if you don't have time then just copy and paste.
From disability advocate Dr Rebekah Graham's submission guide:
• An extended Select Committee process with proactive outreach to disabled people and carers, including regional hearings
• Removal of parts of the legislation that are inconsistent with disabled people’s rights to choice and control
• Amendment to require that any assessment of family resources must include an explicit, documented assessment of carer wellbeing, capacity, and sustainability
• A non-regression principle for secondary legislation - a floor below which DSS cannot be reduced on the basis of family resources alone
• Clear legislative guidance on the limits of family responsibility, including in relation to adult disabled people with limited decision-making capacity
• Implementation of an independent mechanism to challenge unfair decisions
• Removal of Clauses 12-15 that limit complaints processes.
• Removal of Clauses 12–15 in their entirety. The discrimination complaints bar is not justified by the fiscal urgency that motivates the rest of the Bill
• Replacement of the extinguishment of pending claims (Clause 10) with a structured settlement process for affected claimants
• An obligation on MSD to actively monitor and respond to situations where family carers are providing hours significantly beyond funded levels to ensure that family carer human rights are not being breached.
Removal of Clauses 11(3)(f) 
A genuine te Tiriti analysis to be commissioned and published before the Bill proceeds.

Submit on: Changes to access to diabetes medication (GLP1-RA special authority changes)

When are submissions due? 5pm Thursday 28th May. THIS ONE IS URGENT!

What are the issues? The Aotearoa Diabetes Collective have been all over this. Check out their Instagram page but put in the simplest terms:

The changes will remove access for life-saving and life-extended medication for diabetics who need them most. It's ideological BS from David Seymour as per - removing access criteria for Māori and Pacific communities without consultation.

No, actually tell me what I need to say:

Here's a template for you created by the Aotearoa Diabetes Collective.

Here's a template if you work in health created by the Aotearoa Diabetes Collective

You can click copy+paste and then email it to consult@pharmac.govt.nz.

If you found this guidance useful please consider becoming a paid subscriber or giving a koha. It's how I'm able to do this mahi and support my family.

Thank you so much.

Give a koha

Submit on: Deepfake Digital Harm and Exploitation Bill

When are submissions due? Friday 19 June

What are the issues?

Ok, so we actually need this bill! Huge thanks to Dr Cassandra Mudgway for all of her mahi on this bill and for sharing all of this info with me!

This year, New Zealand saw its first prosecution involving the sharing of a sexualised deepfake under section 22 of the Harmful Digital Communications Act 2015. While this demonstrated that existing provisions may capture some conduct, it also exposed the limitations of the current framework. Section 22 requires prosecutors to prove that the defendant intended to cause serious emotional distress, that the communication would likely cause serious emotional distress, and that serious emotional distress was actually suffered. This creates unnecessary evidential barriers for victim-survivors.

Those barriers are especially problematic because the current law was not designed with synthetic sexual imagery in mind.  Victims of “real” intimate-image abuse benefit from clearer statutory protections than victims of synthetic sexual abuse, despite the harms often being materially similar.

For these reasons, legislative reform is necessary. The law should make clear that the non-consensual creation and distribution of sexualised deepfakes constitutes a serious form of image-based sexual abuse regardless of whether the image is “real” or AI-generated. The central issue is one of consent.

No, actually tell me what I need to say:

  1. Click here.
  2. Under "I/We wish to make the following comments" you can share any of the points below, writing your own version of them helps, but if you don't have time then just copy and paste.
  • I support this bill due to the real harm caused by deepfake pornographic images. (See commentary above for more info).
  1. Under "I/We wish to make the following recommendations" you can share any of the points below, writing your own version of them helps, but if you don't have time then just copy and paste.
  • The Bill should remove the “knowledge” wording and focus on consent alone. A person may know a deepfake is being made but never consent to it. Knowledge is not the same thing as consent, so the present wording risks excluding conduct that should plainly be covered.
  • The Bill should reconsider the phrase “appears to show the person”. That language creates scope for arguments about realism, stylisation, or whether the image is “really” of the victim. The better focus is whether the image sexualises an identifiable person’s likeness without consent.
  • The Bill should not be confined to completed publication or distribution. The harm of image based sexual abuse often begins with a threat. A threat to make a deepfake or share the image online.
  • The committee should consider an additional offence of threatening to make an intimate visual recording (Crimes Act) or sharing an intimate visual recording (HDCA) without consent. A person who threatens to generate or distribute a sexualised deepfake may inflict substantial harm before any image is ever uploaded or circulated.
  • Limiting criminalisation to completed creation or distribution risks failing to capture the anticipatory and coercive dimensions of this abuse. This would be a benefit to victim-survivors of all image based sexual abuse, not just deepfakes. 

Please please share this and encourage people to make submissions!!

Submit on: (Definitions of Woman and Man) Amendment Bill

When are submissions due? 2 July

What are the issues?

The Legislation (Definitions of Woman and Man) Amendment Bill imposes a single biological definition of "woman" and "man" across every Act of Parliament in New Zealand. It overrides the legal recognition trans, intersex, takatāpui and non-binary New Zealanders have relied on for twenty years.

There is literally no reason for this bill - other than to harm trans people, perpetuate cruel transphobic myths made up by sick, obsessed bigots, and distract you from the fact that this government doesn't care about the cost-of-living crisis and the unemployment rate keeps increasing and your life keeps getting worse.

It is imported culture war garbage that is causing direct harm to intersex and trans folks. It's not just a "distraction."

It will also cause harm to cisgender women as it seeks to narrow and focus the 'definition' of woman and enshrine it into law to better cause targeted harm to girls and women. Women under the age of 20 may not be able to access abortions, for example, because the relevant act allowing abortions references "women", and the law says if the age of maturity is not specified, it means someone under 20.

But most importantly, this coalition has consistently and relentlessly attacked trans people for three years. They've tried to make you believe that trans people have caused the cost-of-living crisis and unemployment and the fuel crisis and that every doctor wants to lop off your tits and stop you from breastfeeding. The politicians supporting this know the harm they're causing and they know they're spreading misinformation that will cause enormous serious harm. They don't care. They know that plenty of people are stupid enough to believe it.

It's cruel, dangerous, and a huge waste of money. Any politician who supports this bill is a rancid piece of shit. This government, and losers who hate trans people, don't get to decide how you define and talk about your body.

No, actually tell me what I need to say:

Emily, I don't want to do any of this just give me an actual template - OK, this is a really good one. Thank you Liam and whoever made this amazing website.

Definitions of Woman and Man Bill (NZ) — Submit by 02 July 2026
Generate a personalised submission opposing New Zealand’s Definitions of Woman and Man Amendment Bill in under 60 seconds. Submissions close 02 July 2026.
definitionsbill.orgLiam Clarkin
  1. Click here.
  2. Under "I/We wish to make the following comments" you can share any of the points below, writing your own version of them helps, but if you don't have time then just copy and paste. Though it's tempting, don't swear and don't tell them they're transphobic pieces of flaming garbage who will go to Hell for what they're doing. If you do not have ties to the trans community you might like to just say 'I do not support this transphobic bill in any way, shape or form'.
  • I do not feel that attacking trans children and adults keeps me safe as a woman / I do not think attacking trans children and adults keeps the women in my life safe.
  • I do not need the government to define what is a woman. I know my gender and I trust other people in New Zealand to define their own genders as I literally do not care how people define their genders.
  • I do not trust this government to define my gender and I do not want them to.
  • I stand with and support the trans community.
  1. Under "I/We wish to make the following recommendations" you can share any of the points below, writing your own version of them helps, but if you don't have time then just copy and paste.
  • This bill will not support or advance the rights and opportunities or the wellbeing of women and girls in any way, shape or form. It is only designed to cause harm to the trans community. It should be scrapped entirely and every politician who supported it should apologise to the trans community.
  • This bill should be thrown out - it is outrageously transphobic and misogynistic.

For the love of God please get your friends to make a submission - please share!

Submit on: Summary Offences (Move-on Orders) Amendment Bill.

When are submissions due? 3 September

What are the issues? The Move-On orders are cruel and dangerous. The powers the coalition wants to introduce will mean police can "move on" people living on the streets who are as young as 14-years-old.

This government wants to effectively make living in poverty a crime during a cost-of-living crisis that they are doing nothing about. There are workable solutions to ending homelessness, but this government just wants to hide the issue.

You can't sweep human beings under the rug. This isn't the country I want to live in, if you feel the same, make a submission.

No, actually tell me what I need to say:

  1. Click here.
  2. Under "I/We wish to make the following comments" - honestly, this is one of the easier bills to respond to. How do you think homeless people should be treated? If your parent/sibling/child/friend became homeless - how would you want them to be treated by their country? How would you want to be treated?
  • Homelessness is not and should never be a crime.
  • We don't help people when we force them into the shadows, isolate them, and other them.
  • Homeless New Zealanders are precious. They need support and help, not to be treated like rubbish to be swept away.
  • Studies are very clear on this issue - the most effective way to fix so-called anti-social behaviour among the unhoused community is through 'Housing First' policies, proactive and continued outreach, and targeted mental health support, rather than punitive enforcement. The government should look to the success of Housing First in the UK.
  • Criminalising rough sleeping and anti-social behaviour associated with homelessness is an out-dated approach that does not and has never worked.
  1. Under "I/We wish to make the following recommendations"
  • Bring in 'Duty to Assist' legislation that has been successful in preventing homelessness overseas, through supporting people to remain in their housing and access the support services they need. 
  • Prohibit Work and Income NZ from turning people away when they are homeless and need housing assistance and support.
  • Invest in supports and emergency and affordable housing for all New Zealanders.
  • Stop all benefit sanctions against people who are homeless or at risk of homelessness
  • Involve organisations like City Mission and others on the front lines of supporting unhoused people in leading the response.
  • Look to overseas successes like Housing First in the UK and Duty to Assist in Wales.

Demand the Government support people experiencing homelessness

These submission guides take a HUGE amount of work. If it doesn't cause you any financial hardship, please become a paid supporter today.

Thanks so much for submitting on any or all of those issues. I'm so sorry - I know it's a lot of work and it's not what any of us want to be doing, but it's so important. Select committee submissions are one of the only ways we know for sure our voices are being heard, given the way this government rushes through horrific laws with no real consultations. Unless we get rid of them in November, we have to do this. Maybe that's a good incentive to organise to make sure we really do vote them out!

On that note, the Green Party have a training on how to change the government. The only way we can do this is by organising, so head along to learn how!

Leave a comment