“Police National Headquarters needs to explain why it is requiring police officers to undertake training on identifying and responding to ‘hate speech,” says ACT’s Justice spokesperson Todd Stephenson.

“As highlighted by the Free Speech Union, officers must complete a short course on identifying and responding to ‘hate speech’ and ‘hate crime’.

“Some of the examples used in the training material include, ‘There are only two genders’, a placard that says ‘Free speech’, and a billboard that reads ‘Kiwi not iwi.’

“Some of the other examples are distasteful, but they come nowhere near the threshold of criminality.

“Even more concerning is the report from an anonymous police officer that:

‘…staff have been directed that any reported incidents of hate speech that are not offences must still be recorded as "hate incidents". The test of what is considered a hate incident, according to policy, is anything the complainant feels is hateful towards them as a member of a minority group.’

“If it is true that police officers are being directed to record incidents which are not crimes, it is deeply concerning. Freedom of expression is a fundamental freedom afforded to New Zealanders and they have a right to say things that others may find offensive without having it recorded by authorities.

“All of this highlights the fundamental problem with hate speech laws: it is completely subjective.

“Parliament rejected tougher hate speech laws after a long campaign by ACT.

“The last case of a successful prosecution under New Zealand’s existing hate speech laws was in the 1970s. The threshold for prosecution is extremely high.

“ACT has a great deal of respect for the men and women of the New Zealand Police. We want to see them supported to protect New Zealanders from serious crime.

“PNHQ needs to explain what is going on here.”

© Scoop Media