Key Takeaways
- Police have delayed the final phase of their Mental Health Response Change Programme, saying it will proceed only when it is safe to do so.
- Phase 4, which was to shorten Emergency Department (ED) handovers to 15 minutes and alter welfare‑check responses, remains undefined in timing.
- Health‑worker unions, mental‑health advocates and emergency‑medicine clinicians warn that removing police welfare checks without reliable alternatives could endanger vulnerable people and increase assaults on staff.
- The Public Service Association (PSA) calls the delay an admission that the withdrawal plan was poorly implemented, while police and government ministers stress that caution reflects a commitment to safety.
- Recruitment of the extra 40 FTE mental‑health crisis‑team positions announced last year is ongoing, but exact fill rates are undisclosed.
Background of the Police Mental Health Response Change Programme
The Mental Health Response Change Programme was launched in late 2024 as a phased effort to reduce police involvement in mental‑health‑related call‑outs. Initial goals included transferring certain non‑emergency responses to health agencies, improving ED handover times, and freeing police resources for other duties. The programme was originally slated for completion by September 2025, with four distinct phases designed to be rolled out only after each step was evaluated for safety and effectiveness.
Delay of Phase Four Announced
Assistant Commissioner Tusha Penny confirmed that progress to phase four will occur only “as soon as it is safe to do so,” noting that police cannot yet provide dates or specifics. Phase four had been envisioned to cut ED handovers to 15 minutes and to change how police conduct welfare checks, but the timeline has been pushed back because the earlier phases are still under review. Superintendent Bronwyn Marshall added that measuring time spent in EDs is complex, prompting a careful reassessment of how the implemented changes are functioning in practice.
Concerns from Health Workers and Unions
Health‑worker representatives have expressed worry since the programme’s start, particularly as assaults on staff have risen. Helen Garrick, a mental‑health nurse and NZNO delegate, warned that without reliable agencies to perform welfare checks, people in extreme distress could be left unattended, increasing the risk of overdose or self‑harm going unnoticed. She urged a full review of the programme, arguing that the current patchwork of responsibilities leaves both patients and frontline nurses exposed.
Potential Risks to Welfare Checks
Garrick emphasized that welfare checks are a vital safety net; removing them without a credible substitute could create a “worst‑case scenario” where individuals experiencing acute mental‑health crises remain at home without intervention. The PSA’s national secretary, Fleur Fitzsimons, echoed this, stating that the delay signals an acknowledgment that the original withdrawal plan lacked proper systems and processes. She welcomed the pause as a necessary step to prevent harm to both the public and health‑service workers.
Impact on Emergency Departments
Emergency‑medicine clinicians have also raised alarms. Dr Michael Connelly, chair of the Australasian College for Emergency Medicine’s New Zealand branch, cautioned that a blanket 15‑minute ED handover target overlooks the variability of patient acuity and could jeopardize staff and patient safety. He acknowledged that police’s cautious approach is prudent, especially for higher‑risk patients who need more coordinated care. Rotorua ED nurse Lyn Logan added that EDs already strained by staffing shortages could “boil over” if police withdraw further without adequate backup, endangering both clinicians and vulnerable individuals seeking care.
Statements from Ministers and Health NZ
Mental‑Health Minister Matt Doocey said Health NZ officials have informed him that no serious incidents have been directly linked to the programme’s changes, including the assault on a mental‑health worker reported last November. He stressed that each phase is reviewed regularly and that the delay in phase four reinforces the principle of advancing only when safety is assured. Health NZ’s director of specialist mental health and addiction, Karla Bergquist, added that any unintended impacts identified would be promptly addressed, and the agency continues to monitor the situation closely.
Recruitment of Mental‑Health Crisis Teams
In response to growing demand, the government announced an extra 40 full‑time‑equivalent (FTE) positions for Mental Health Crisis teams nationwide last year. When RNZ inquired about how many of these roles have been filled, the Minister’s office referred the question to Health NZ, which replied that recruitment is underway but could not disclose exact numbers. This lack of transparency makes it difficult to assess whether the alternative workforce promised to replace police welfare checks is materializing at the needed scale.
Government and Police Responses to Criticism
Police Minister Mark Mitchell defended the delay, arguing that it demonstrates ongoing care and commitment rather than an admission of failure. He characterized the PSA’s claim that the pause signals a poorly thought‑out programme as “misleading and baseless,” insisting that police and health partners are prioritizing patient and staff safety at each stage. Mitchell reiterated that the goal remains to implement each phase only when it can be done without compromising safety, a stance echoed by both police leadership and Health NZ officials.
Conclusion and Outlook
The postponement of phase four of the police mental‑health withdrawal programme highlights the tension between operational efficiency and safety in a sector already grappling with rising assaults on health workers and stretched emergency services. While police and government officials frame the delay as a responsible, safety‑first measure, unions, nurses, and emergency‑medicine clinicians warn that without robust alternative arrangements—such as fully staffed mental‑health crisis teams—the removal of police welfare checks could leave vulnerable individuals at risk. Continued monitoring, transparent reporting on recruitment, and a thorough review of the programme’s impact will be essential to determine whether the revised approach can achieve its intended goals without compromising care.