The New Zealand Professional Firefighters Union (NZPFU) has referred Fire and Emergency New Zealand (FENZ) to the Office of the Privacy Commissioner over what it says is inappropriate use of Auckland Transport CCTV cameras during industrial action.
In a statement dated Jan. 14, NZPFU national secretary Wattie Watson said the union had received information that members of FENZ’s executive leadership “asked or directed Auckland Transport CCTV operators to access cameras in Auckland in order to watch NZPFU members at their pickets in Pitt Street, in Karangahape Road, and at East Coast Bays.” Watson said the monitoring is alleged to have taken place from FENZ’s regional offices in Pitt Street, with other Auckland managers and representatives from other agencies present. The union also alleges that at least one Auckland senior manager went to the Auckland Transport control centre on a separate occasion and that their presence was described as being there “to spy on paid firefighters”, or words to that effect.
Watson said the NZPFU accepts that CCTV can be used to support emergency response, including during strike periods, for example, in relation to road incidents. However, the union contends that “accessing the cameras to watch striking firefighters, other NZPFU striking members, and public supporters is a gross breach of privacy” and believes the conduct would be inconsistent with CCTV access and use agreements and policy. The NZPFU has written to the Privacy Commissioner requesting an urgent investigation and has lodged Official Information Act requests seeking information on any CCTV access in Auckland and whether comparable activity has occurred in Wellington, Christchurch, or other centres during strikes.
The privacy complaint is unfolding alongside scrutiny of FENZ’s contingency arrangements after a commercial fire in Pakuranga on Jan. 9 that occurred during a one-hour national strike involving about 2,000 paid firefighters. FENZ said it received calls for 22 incidents between 12pm and 1pm that day, the eighth one-hour strike in the current dispute, with 12 incidents in areas affected by the stoppage. According to FENZ, these included five fire alarms that did not result in a fire, three notifications from the public that also did not involve fires, one police request that did not require attendance, a small shed fire extinguished by the owner before volunteers arrived, and a burn pile that was being managed by the landowner. The fire at a commercial premises in Pakuranga was the most serious incident reported in that hour.
FENZ said it was first notified of the commercial fire at about 12:07pm. Deputy national commander Megan Stiffler said that because of the location, it took 30 minutes for the nearest volunteer crews to reach the site, while a crew from the nearest paid station at Mt Wellington arrived within four minutes of the strike ending. “This is exactly why we have repeatedly asked the NZPFU to call off these strikes while we are in the process of facilitation with the Employment Relations Authority. We have previously sought to establish a process to which we can call on paid firefighters for more serious incidents and the NZPFU has rebuffed us. The NZPFU is the one gambling with the public’s safety,” Stiffler said. She thanked “our 11,800 volunteers across the country, and their employers,” as well as operational commanders and communication centre managers, and again urged the union to halt further one-hour strikes planned for January. The NZPFU has publicly rejected the suggestion that strike action is placing the public at undue risk, saying FENZ bears responsibility for ensuring service coverage during industrial action and that the dispute is rooted in unresolved issues around pay, staffing levels, equipment, and health and safety.
The strikes are part of negotiations over the collective employment agreement for paid firefighters. On Dec. 5, the Employment Relations Authority (ERA) referred the parties to facilitation, with sessions held on Dec. 9 and 10. That process is continuing. The union has stated that members have been working under an expired agreement and without a pay increase since mid‑2023. It has criticised FENZ proposals as not adequately addressing cost pressures, minimum staffing, workloads, fleet condition, and health, safety, and wellbeing concerns. FENZ, which has signalled a restructure that would cut roles, has said it must manage workforce claims within existing budget parameters and broader operational demands. Government ministers have called for the strikes to cease and have referred to the Pakuranga incident in public statements. The NZPFU has questioned those interventions while investigations into the cause of the fire remain ongoing.
For insurers and brokers, the dispute highlights the financial link between FENZ’s operations and insurance pricing through levies. FENZ is funded primarily via insurance-based levies, with about 95% of its operating revenue collected through charges on home, contents, and motor insurance policies, and the remainder sourced from other government and non-levy income. The organisation has a workforce of roughly 14,900 people, a fleet of about 1,300 fire appliances, and almost 600 stations nationwide, responding to around 89,000 incidents each year. The scale of the network means that changes in remuneration, staffing, fleet replacement, and technology can have material impacts on operating expenditure.
If bargaining outcomes or policy changes result in a sustained increase in FENZ’s cost base, this could, over time, lead to upward adjustments in fire and emergency levies that are passed through to property and vehicle policyholders. Any move in levy rates would intersect with existing pressures on insurance affordability, particularly in higher‑risk property segments and for customers already facing higher natural hazard and catastrophe-related pricing. Insurance professionals are likely to track both the industrial settlement and any findings from the Privacy Commissioner. An adverse privacy ruling could influence how FENZ and other agencies use third-party CCTV and data in incident management, with potential implications for liability exposure, data governance standards, and public trust – issues that are directly relevant for underwriting and risk advisory in professional indemnity, public liability, and cyber and privacy lines.
