Family First New Zealand

Family First New Zealand

Whānau Tahi Aotearoa
Logo of Family First
Formation	2006;19 years ago (2006)
Founder	Bob McCoskrie
Founded at	Auckland
Type	Nonprofit NGO
Legal status	Trust
Purpose	Influencing public policy affecting families.
Headquarters	Manukau, Auckland
Region served	New Zealand
National Director	Bob McCoskrie
Key people	Board of Reference: Ian and Mary Grant, Sue and Jim Hickey, Nick and Vasa Tuitasi, Stu and Chris Hight, Dr Mary Daly and Chris Martin, Anthony and Shannon Samuels, Tony and Kay Jurgeleit [1]
Website	https://familyfirst.org.nz
Remarks	Conservative Christian lobby group
Formerly called	Family First Lobby

Family First New Zealand is a conservative Christian lobby group in New Zealand. It was founded in March 2006 by former Radio Rhema talkback radio host and South Auckland social-worker Bob McCoskrie, who continues to be its National Director.

Family First have been described as "New Zealand's most formidable conservative campaigners", ^[2] and have campaigned to influence public policy in a number of areas, including lobbying against abortion, binge drinking, cervical cancer vaccines, drug decriminalisation, gambling, pornography, prostitution, comprehensive sex education in schools, and issues affecting LGBTQ rights. ^{[3] [4] [5] [6]}

Family First lost its charitable status in 2022, after its removal by the Charities Registration Board was upheld in the Supreme Court. In its decision, the court ruled Family First's activities were not charitable due to their lack of "fairness, balance, and respect", and that its published research lacked the balance needed to be educational. ^[7]

Background

Family First was founded in March 2006 by Bob McCoskrie, a former church leader and talkback host on Radio Rhema who serves as its National Director, ^[8] with the objective to "seek to influence public policy affecting the rights and protection of families and promote a culture that values the family". ^[9]

McCoskrie founded the group out of a "burning need" to be vocal on certain issues. He denied the group was funded or influenced by international groups, but acknowledged links to the local branch of Focus on the Family, an American fundamentalist group. Within its first two-year, the group received almost $410,000 in donations from groups and individuals, and had put out over 200 press releases. ^[8]

Family First rose to prominence in 2007, during their campaign against Sue Bradford's "anti-smacking bill" and its subsequent referendum; Paul Morris, a religious studies professor at Victoria University, said the group had "successfully broaden[ed] the Christian agenda in New Zealand politics in a way never seen before". ^[8]

Loss of charitable status

Family First was established by a trust deed under the Charitable Trusts Act 1957 in 2006 and was registered as a charity in 2007. In 2010, it was granted continued charity status following a review. ^[6]

In May 2013, the independent Charities Registration Board determined the group did not "further religion or education, nor promote a benefit to all New Zealanders" and held that Family First did not qualify for charitable status. In its media statement and within the online copy of its decision, the Charities Registration Board held that Family First's objectives were primarily political and not the provision of social, educational or other charitable services as defined under the Charities Act 2005. ^{[10] [11]}

McCoskrie challenged the decision, saying it was a ploy to "shut them up" and argued that their opposition to same-sex marriage had been the reason for their degistration. ^[3] He expressed concern about the group's future if the de-registration remained in place, including their income tax exemption and donations to Family First no longer qualifying for a rebate. ^[12] On 30 June 2015, in response to an appeal lodged by Family First, the High Court directed the Charities Registration Board to reconsider the case, in light of a recent Supreme Court decision that recognised Greenpeace political advocacy as a charitable act. ^{[13] [6]}

On 21 August 2017, the Charities Registration Board released its reconsideration and again decided that Family First did not qualify for charitable status on the grounds that the group's activities could not be classified as being charitable for the public benefit. ^{[14] [15]} On 30 April 2018, the High Court in Wellington heard Family First's second appeal, ^[16] and released its decision on 7 September 2018 to uphold the Charity Board's decision. ^[17]

The revocation was later overturned on 27 August 2020 by the Court of Appeal, who ruled in Family First's favour. ^[18] In mid December 2020, the Attorney General David Parker, appealed the Court of Appeal's ruling to the Supreme Court. ^[19]

On 28 June 2022 the Supreme Court ruled that Family First did not qualify for charitable status, concluding that its research lacked the balance needed to be educational. The Supreme Court also held that group's activities were not charitable on the grounds that it lacked "fairness, balance, and respect." ^[7]

Responses to the Supreme Court's decision

Charities researcher Dr Michael Gousmett welcomed the Supreme Court's ruling on the grounds that Family First discriminated against some people, Charities Law director Sue Barker expressed concern that the revocation of Family First's charitable status could set a precedent for targeting charities with dissenting views. Barker also called on the New Zealand Government to clearly define charitable purposes as part of their review of the Charities Act. ^{[20] [21]} Before forming a Government in October 2017, both New Zealand Labour and Green parties had said they would reform the Act by "updating and widening rather than narrowing the definition of charitable purposes" so that NGOs would be "encouraged rather than penalised for their advocacy". The bill to revise the act is expected to be introduced in 2022. ^{[22] [23]}

Views and activities

Electoral campaigning

Family First has produced "Value Your Vote", a brochure and accompanying website which were voting guides primarily concerned with each party's or candidate's record and opinions on issues which it saw affecting the family, such as civil unions, same-sex marriage, prostitution, brothels, abortion, unborn child rights, embryonic stem cell research, anti-smacking, gender identity, abstinence-based sex education, parental notification, palliative care, public indecency, drinking age, alcohol outlets, Easter trading, loan sharks, gambling, welfare vouchers, affordable housing, GST on rates, facilities for families, paid parental leave, assisted suicide and euthanasia, medicinal and recreational cannabis and decriminalisation of all drugs. ^[4] The guides were published for the 2008 general election, ^[24] the 2010 Auckland mayoral election, ^[25] the 2011 general election, ^[24] the 2013 Auckland mayoral election, ^[26] the 2014 general election, ^[27] the 2017 general election, ^[28] the 2020 general election ^[29] and the 2023 general election. ^[30]

100,000 of the guides were printed and distributed in 2023. ^[31]

Smacking referendum

See also: 2009 New Zealand citizens-initiated referendum

In 2007, Family First supported a petition for a citizens-initiated referendum to overturn the 2007 amendment act which replaced Section 59 of the Crimes Act 1961, ^[32] which had allowed for a defence of reasonable force in child abuse cases based on corporal punishment. The petition gained 324,316 signatures although only 285,027 were required for a referendum. When checked for invalid signatures there was a shortfall of 15,000 signatures. ^[33] Sufficient signatures were then obtained, and a postal ballot taking place between 30 July and 21 August 2009. Family First criticised the decision to spend $8 million on the postal ballot, rather than including it in the 2008 General Election or simply amending the law. ^[34]

The referendum's wording, "Should a smack as part of good parental correction be a criminal offence in New Zealand?", was criticised by many for being confusing and poorly worded, ^{[35] [36] [37]} and that using a value-judgement like "good" before "parental correction" was leading. ^{[38] [39] [40]}

Voter turnout for the referendum was 56.1%. Despite a result of 87.4% voting "no", the Government said they did not intend to change the law. ^{[36] [41]}

In 2016, the group published a report saying that the law had "failed to reduce child abuse"; former-MP Sue Bradford, ridiculed the report for suggesting that a "law to protect children from physical violence [would] solve the problem of child violence". ^[42]

Pornography and censorship of explicit media

Pornography

In 2010, after Minister Shane Jones controversially admitted to using his ministerial credit card for pornographic films, ^[43] Family First wrote about what it viewed as the damaging effects of pornography on families and marriages, and promoted research showing negative effects of children being exposed to pornography. ^[44]

In 2015, it petitioned to have lad magazine Zoo Weekly banned from Countdown supermarket shelves, picking up a campaign in Australia targeting Countdown's parent company Woolworths. ^[45]

In 2017, Family First presented a 22,000 written signature petition to Parliament against pornography, promoted research showing the harmful effects of porn being a public health issue, and called for an investigation into the destructive effects of pornography. ^[46] The media reported that the petition even had the support of "outspoken left-wing feminist parliamentarians". ^[47]

Into the River

On 6 September 2015, Family First successfully appealed a decision by New Zealand's classification office to lift an R14 restriction on the New Zealand author Ted Dawe's Into the River , a young adult novel about a Māori youth named Te Arepa Santos' experiences at an Auckland boarding school. Since its publication in 2012, Into the River had drawn controversy for its explicit description of sex, drugs, and coarse language. As a result of the appeal, the book was placed under an interim restriction order under New Zealand's Films, Videos and Publications Classification Act 1993, banning it completely from being sold or supplied in New Zealand. ^[48] This was the first time a book had been banned in New Zealand in 22 years. ^{[49] [50] [51]}

Family First's actions were criticised by Dawe, the book's publisher Penguin Random House, poet C. K. Stead, and several librarians as amounting to censorship. In response to public criticism, McCoskrie asserted that his organisation had not called for the book to be banned but had merely wanted censors to reinstate the book's R14 rating and require that copies of the book carry a warning sticker. In addition, McCoskrie also called for a wider film-like sticker rating system for books citing parental concerns and age appropriateness. Family First also claimed that the Classification Office had received 400 letters about the book from concerned parents. ^{[52] [53]} In a press statement, Family First also argued that the New Zealand Bill of Rights stated that "freedom of expression" and "freedom to access information" did not trump censorship laws aimed at protecting the "public good". ^[54]

On 14 October 2015, the Film and Literature Board lifted the interim ban on Into the River; ruling by a majority that while aspects of the book were offensive it did not merit an age restriction. In response, McCoskrie accused the board of succumbing to book industry pressure despite what he alleged was the book's "highly offensive and gratuitous language, adult themes and graphic sexual content". ^[55]

LGBTQ Issues

Same-sex marriage opposition

In July 2012, Family First established "Protect Marriage", a website set up to oppose the legal recognition of same-sex marriage in New Zealand after Louisa Wall's private member's bill was drawn from the ballot. In January 2013, Family First presented a petition with 72,000 signatures to Parliament opposing same-sex marriage. ^[56] Although multiple polling showed majority support in favour of the bill, Family First said a final poll they commissioned before the passage of the bill showed the country was split on the issue, and that their campaign had swayed public opinion. ^{[57] [58]}

McCoskrie resigned as a legal marriage celebrant at the end of 2013 in protest of the new law. ^[59]

Anti-transgender campaigns

Family First have run a number of campaigns advocating against transgender rights in New Zealand, and have been accused of transphobia by many LGBTQ advocates. ^{[60] [61]}

In 2017, Family First launched a campaign called "AskMeFirst" to stop transgender women using female-only facilities like toilets and changing rooms. Family First drew media attention when it released a video entitled "Ask Me First About School Toilet Privacy: Laura" which focused on a high school girl and her mother's opposition to a transgender student using the female toilets at her school. ^{[61] [62] [60]} Tranzaction and RainbowYouth criticised Family First for promoting transphobia. ^{[60] [61]}

In 2018, Family First objected to the New Zealand Government's proposal to ease the process for changing one's gender on their birth certificate. While applicants wanting to change the gender on their birth certificate then had to go through a lengthy process in the Family Court, the Government proposed a simple statutory declaration. Family First Director McCoskrie claimed that changing birth certificates would promote "unscientific gender ideology" and tell medical professionals "that they got it wrong at time of birth." ^{[63] [64]} In 2021, the Births, Deaths, Marriages, and Relationships Registration Act 2021 became law and allows people to change the sex or gender on their birth certificates without having to physically change their sex. It also allows the guardian of a child under 16 to change their child's nominated sex, and 16 or 17-year olds to change their nominated sex by statutory declaration without the consent of their legal guardian. ^{[65] [66] [67]}

Prior to the 2023 general election, Family First launched a campaign and website centred around the question "What is a woman?" with an online petition asking "that 'woman' is to be defined as 'an adult human female' in all our laws, public policies and regulations". ^[68] Conservative groups criticised the decision by three media outlets to not run full-page newspaper ads from the campaign; ^[69] political party NZ First said the outlets were curtailing freedom of speech. ^[70]

The Advertising Standards Authority ruled that a complaint against a billboard from the campaign was "upheld in part" and "not upheld in part". They said the identity of the advertiser was not easily recognised, and that while some consumers would be offended by the ad it was not likely to cause harm or serious offence. ^[71] Earlier in the year, following a similar question of UK Labour leader Keir Starmer, Prime Minister Chris Hipkins had struggled to answer radio host Sean Plunket's question to "define a woman". ^{[72] [73]}

Abortion law reform

In 2019, Family First opposed the Labour-led coalition government's new legislation to remove abortion from the Crimes Act 1961, to allow unrestricted access to abortion for the first 20 weeks of pregnancy and restricted access after 20 weeks. The group described the government's proposed legislation as "deeply anti-human rights." ^[74] In March 2020 the Abortion Legislation Act 2020 decriminalised abortion and allows women to choose a termination up to 20 weeks into a pregnancy, and terminate after 20 weeks with approval of a qualified health professional. ^{[75] [76]}

In 2022, after the US Supreme Court repealed long-standing Supreme Court decision Roe vs Wade that guaranteed nationwide access to abortion, Family First said the anti-abortion movement would continue to push future governments to restrict abortion in New Zealand and that the US decision was a "huge encouragement" for activists. ^[77]

Euthanasia and cannabis referendums

During the New Zealand general election 2020, separate referendums were held on the legalisation of euthanasia and recreational cannabis. Family First ran an extensive campaign in opposition to both issues, called "Know means No". The campaign included a 37-date national tour, and the distribution of 400,000 pamphlets. ^[2]

In the results of the referendums, 65.1 percent of voters ratified the passage of the End of Life Choice Act 2019, whilst 50.71 percent of voters opposed the legalisation of recreational cannabis. ^[78]

McCoskrie said that he was "pretty stoked" with the cannabis referendum results and that he believed New Zealanders "understood the perceived benefits of legalisation were not greater than the harms that were going to come on society". ^{[79] [80]}

After the referendums, Family First released research that they say showed a media bias existed in favour of cannabis legalisation. NewstalkZB radio broadcaster Mike Hosking repeated these figures, alleging that "36 percent of all headlines promoted yes, [and] 18 percent were for no", and that "the yes position was quoted twice as often as no". ^[81]

See also

• Christian politics in New Zealand
• Christian right

References

1. "Family First Board of Reference". Family First New Zealand. Retrieved 2 July 2022.
2. Braae, Alex (25 September 2020). "A night in Gore with New Zealand's most formidable conservative campaigners". The Spinoff . Retrieved 17 June 2025.
3. "Family First fights for charity status". 3 News NZ. 27 May 2013. Archived from the original on 26 December 2013. Retrieved 27 May 2013.
4. "Value Your Vote". valueyourvote.org.nz. 2011. Retrieved 3 December 2011.
5. McCoskrie, Bob (20 January 2009). "Is Gardasil a Godsend?" (PDF) (Press release). Family First NZ.
6. "Family First appeals deregistration". The New Zealand Herald . 22 June 2015. Retrieved 22 June 2015.
7. "Court Judgement" (PDF). Courts of NZ. 28 June 2022. Retrieved 22 August 2022.
8. "Who is Family First?". Stuff . 31 January 2009. Retrieved 4 July 2022.
9. "Introducing the Family First Lobby" (PDF). Family First New Zealand. 31 March 2006. Archived from the original (PDF) on 15 October 2006. Retrieved 5 February 2008.
10. "Family First no longer a charity". 3 News NZ. 6 May 2013. Archived from the original on 21 February 2014. Retrieved 27 May 2013.
11. Charities Registration Board: Decision D2013-1: Family First New Zealand: (CC42358): http://www.charities.govt.nz/assets/docs/registration/deregistration/Family-First-New-Zealand.pdf Archived 2013-06-12 at the Wayback Machine
12. "NZ organisation deregistered as charity for views on marriage" Christian Today (Australia): http://au.christiantoday.com/article/nz-organisation-deregistered-as-a-charity-for-views-on-marriage/15346.htm Archived 27 December 2013 at the Wayback Machine
13. Wong, Simon (1 July 2015). "Family First charity status to be reconsidered". 3 News . Archived from the original on 15 April 2017. Retrieved 10 July 2015.
14. "Charities Registration Board strips Family First of charitable status". Stuff . 22 August 2017. Retrieved 31 August 2018.
15. "Family First stripped of charity status". The New Zealand Herald . 21 August 2017. Retrieved 31 August 2018.
16. "Family First goes to court in hopes of regaining charity status". Radio New Zealand . 30 April 2018. Retrieved 31 August 2018.
17. The Panel (7 September 2018). "Family First loses charitable status". Radio New Zealand . Archived from the original on 29 October 2020. Retrieved 11 July 2020.
18. "Family First New Zealand qualifies to register as charity, court rules". Radio New Zealand . 27 August 2020. Archived from the original on 11 May 2021. Retrieved 28 June 2022.
19. "Family First charity status: Leave to appeal granted". Radio New Zealand . 18 December 2020. Archived from the original on 28 June 2022. Retrieved 28 June 2022.
20. "Family First does not qualify for charitable status, Supreme Court rules". Radio New Zealand . 28 June 2022. Archived from the original on 28 June 2022. Retrieved 28 June 2022.
21. "Traditional values advocate Family First loses argument that it should be a registered charity". Stuff . 28 June 2022. Archived from the original on 27 June 2022. Retrieved 28 June 2022.
22. "2017 08 Green, Labour, Maori, National, TOP responses ELECTION 2017" (PDF). ComVoices. Retrieved 4 July 2022.
23. "Charities Act changes to benefit NZ Communities". The Beehive. Retrieved 4 July 2022.
24. "Press release: 'Value Your Vote' Website Launched for Families". scoop.co.nz. 2011. Retrieved 3 December 2011.
25. "Press release: Super City Mayoral Candidates Questioned on Issues". scoop.co.nz. 26 May 2010. Retrieved 3 December 2011.
26. "Value Your Vote". valueyourvote.org.nz. Archived from the original on 25 January 2022. Retrieved 3 July 2022.
27. "Voters Wanting To Know Values of Candidates". Family First NZ. 18 August 2014. Archived from the original on 4 July 2022. Retrieved 3 July 2022.
28. "Value Your Vote - 2017 General Election". valueyourvote.org.nz. Retrieved 3 July 2022.
29. "Value Your Vote 2020 - Out Now!". Family First NZ. 16 July 2020. Retrieved 3 July 2022.
30. "Value Your Vote - Election 2023". Family First NZ. 20 August 2023. Retrieved 24 October 2023.
31. "$2m surge in election campaign spending by third-party groups". RNZ. 26 February 2024. Retrieved 17 June 2025.
32. Laugesen, Ruth (27 January 2008). "Petition organisers close to target". Sunday Star Times.
33. Johnstone, Martin (30 April 2008). "Petition for anti-smacking law referendum 15,000 short". The New Zealand Herald .
34. "Govt Can Save $8m By Fixing Smacking Law Now". Voxy. 7 May 2008. Retrieved 7 May 2009.^{[ permanent dead link ]}
35. "Bradford introducing bill on referendum wording". The New Zealand Herald . NZPA. 17 June 2009. Retrieved 30 October 2011.
36. "Key, Goff won't vote on smacking referendum". The New Zealand Herald . 16 June 2009. Retrieved 30 October 2011.
37. Trevett, Claire (23 June 2009). "Key sees merit in Greens' referendum bill". The New Zealand Herald . Retrieved 30 October 2011.
38. "Anti-smacking debate goes to referendum". 3 News . 15 June 2009. Archived from the original on 3 March 2014. Retrieved 30 October 2011.
39. "Caritas says child discipline referendum will not provide clarity", Press release, 15 July 2009.
40. "Citizens Initiated Referenda (Wording of Questions) Amendment Bill". Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand. Archived from the original on 23 July 2009. Retrieved 21 July 2009.
41. "The so-called 'anti-smacking' referendum - 2009 politics review". Newshub . Archived from the original on 21 August 2022.
42. Sachdeva, Sam (11 February 2016). "Anti-smacking law has 'failed to reduce child abuse': Family First report". Stuff . Retrieved 17 June 2025.
43. "Jones admits using credit card for porn". The New Zealand Herald . Retrieved 4 July 2022.
44. "Pornography is not a private issue". Otago Daily Times . 21 June 2010. Retrieved 4 July 2022.
45. Edwards, Jessy (14 September 2015). "Call for 'lad mag' Zoo Weekly to be pulled from supermarkets comes to New Zealand". Stuff . Retrieved 17 June 2025.
46. "Internet porn is damaging a generation". The New Zealand Herald . Retrieved 4 July 2022.
47. Mau, Alison (15 April 2017). "Alison Mau: Porn dependency should be treated as a health issue". Stuff . Retrieved 4 July 2022.
48. Simon Collins (7 September 2015). "'Will I be burnt next?' - Into the River author Ted Dawe on book banning". The New Zealand Herald .
49. McKirdy, Euan (8 September 2015). "New Zealand bans young adult novel; first book ban in 22 years". CNN . Retrieved 8 September 2015.
50. "New Zealand: Award-winning Into the River novel banned". BBC News. 7 September 2015. Retrieved 10 September 2015.
51. Ainge Roy, Eleanor (7 September 2015). "New Zealand bans award-winning teenage novel after outcry from Christian group". The Guardian . Retrieved 10 September 2015.
52. Cooke, Henry (7 September 2015). "Racy teen novel Into the River banned after Family First complaint". Stuff . Retrieved 10 September 2015.
53. "Family First president Bob McCoskrie: I never wanted Into the River banned". The New Zealand Herald . 8 September 2015. Retrieved 10 September 2015.
54. "Family group puts halt on explicit book". Family First New Zealand. 7 September 2015. Archived from the original on 23 January 2016. Retrieved 10 September 2015.
55. Groves, Nancy (14 October 2015). "Ban lifted on New Zealand young adult novel Into the River". The Guardian . Retrieved 15 October 2015.
56. 72,000 sign against gay marriage http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/politics/8210872/72-000-sign-against-gay-marriage
57. Shock poll over gay marriage bill http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10873630
58. Collins, Simon (13 February 2013). "Gay marriage fans on top in objector's poll". NZ Herald . Retrieved 17 June 2025.
59. "Family First head resigns as marriage celebrant". Otago Daily Times Online News. 9 February 2014. Retrieved 17 June 2025.
60. "Family First accused of transphobia with bathroom campaign". ZB. Retrieved 26 December 2022.
61. "Teen slams school's trans toilet policy". The New Zealand Herald . Retrieved 26 December 2022.
62. "Kiwi teen hits out over transgender toilet policy". Otago Daily Times . 21 February 2017. Retrieved 26 December 2022.
63. Chetwin-Kelly, Bridie (12 August 2018). "Family First slams 'disturbing' birth certificate changes". Newshub. Archived from the original on 31 August 2018. Retrieved 31 August 2018.
64. "MPs recommend easier process to change sex on birth certificate". Family First New Zealand. 11 August 2018. Archived from the original on 31 August 2018. Retrieved 31 August 2018.
65. "bdmreview - dia.govt.nz". www.dia.govt.nz. Retrieved 4 July 2022.
66. "Births, Death, Marriages, and Relationships Bill 2017: Bills Digest 2567 - New Zealand Parliament". www.parliament.nz. Retrieved 24 August 2022.
67. "Births, deaths, and genders: a quiet bill goes loud". RNZ . 12 August 2021. Retrieved 4 July 2022.
68. "What is a Woman". Family First NZ. Retrieved 24 October 2023.
69. Steenhof, John (3 August 2023). "Family First NZ campaign ads cancelled". HRLA. Retrieved 24 October 2023.
70. "Freedom of Speech Facing Biggest Threat". New Zealand First. 19 July 2023. Retrieved 24 October 2023.
71. "Advertising Standards Authority" (PDF). www.asa.co.nz. Retrieved 24 October 2023.
72. Manch, Thomas (3 April 2023). "Why Prime Minister Chris Hipkins was asked 'what is a woman?'". Stuff . Retrieved 24 October 2023.
73. "The PM was asked to define a woman. Here's his 60-second response". The New Zealand Herald . 24 October 2023. Retrieved 24 October 2023.
74. "Radical Abortion Law Reform Is Deeply Anti-Human Rights". Family First New Zealand. 4 August 2019. Retrieved 8 August 2019.
75. "New Zealand passes law decriminalising abortion". BBC News . 18 March 2020. Retrieved 4 July 2022.
76. "Abortion Legislation Bill 2019: Bills Digest 2599 - New Zealand Parliament". www.parliament.nz. Retrieved 4 July 2022.
77. "Family First: 'Nothing off the table' on abortion in NZ". 1 News. Retrieved 4 July 2022.
78. "Live: Referendum results - NZ votes yes on euthanasia, no on cannabis legalisation".
79. Whyte, Anna. "Chlöe Swarbrick optimistic in light of unsuccessful cannabis referendum". 1 News. Retrieved 2 July 2022.
80. "Cannabis referendum: The arguments for and against legalising recreational cannabis". Stuff . 23 July 2020. Retrieved 29 March 2021.
81. Hosking, Mike. "Mike's Minute: Media bias exposed in cannabis referendum coverage". ZB. Retrieved 12 March 2023.

External links

• Family First New Zealand