Five Million Voices

Should legal aid funding be removed for cultural reports prepared under section 27 of the Sentencing Act?

The bill amends legal services law to remove legal aid funding for a report or statement prepared by a person called by an offender under section 27 of the Sentencing Act 2002. Section 27 reports themselves remain available, but would no longer be funded through legal aid.

⚡ Taken under urgency

Parliament advanced this bill under urgency (committee of whole house, first reading, second reading, third reading) — moving it through faster than usual, with less time than normal for public submissions.

MPs’ arguments for and against the bill

Why support it
  • Supporters argued the change ends taxpayer funding for the reports to deliver an election commitment within the Government's 100-day programme.
  • Supporters noted that section 27 reports remain available to the court and that only the legal-aid funding for them is being removed.
  • Supporters characterised the funded reports as an unfair use of taxpayer money, citing savings of around $7 million.
Why oppose it
  • Opponents argued that without legal-aid funding only those who can pay privately will obtain the reports, creating unequal access to justice.
  • Opponents said the reports help sentencing judges understand mitigating factors such as poverty and language barriers, particularly for Māori and Pasifika offenders.
  • Opponents argued the bill was passed under urgency without consultation with Māori, the legal profession, or victims, and that officials warned it could increase justice-system costs.

These are claims MPs made in Parliament’s debate — not verified facts.

Full bill summary & link to official bill page

This bill amends legal services law to remove legal aid funding for a report or statement prepared under section 27 of the Sentencing Act 2002 — often called a “cultural report.” Such a report lets an offender bring information to sentencing about their personal, family, cultural and community background, and any systemic factors, so a judge can weigh possible mitigating circumstances. The bill leaves section 27 itself intact, so these reports can still be prepared and presented — but they would no longer be paid for through legal aid. It affects legally aided offenders, the providers who prepare the reports, and sentencing judges who rely on them.

The change reflects a coalition commitment and was framed as a cost-saving measure, with the funding involved estimated at around $7 million. Supporters argue public money should not fund reports they see as inconsistently used to reduce sentences. Opponents argue it undermines equal access to justice, since poorer defendants — disproportionately Māori — may no longer afford reports that help courts understand deprivation and background.

See the Parliament.nz ↗ site for the full bill.

Oppose (No) Support (Yes)

Legal Services Amendment Bill · Third Reading, 5 Mar 2024
Parliament voted 68–54 — it passed.