“The change would align the law with what we’ve been telling our kids for a long time: that you need positive consent before sex, each and every time, rather than presuming it,” Goldsmith, the party’s justice spokesman, said.

“That means silence is not consent. A person who doesn’t say no has not said yes. And consent given once is not consent forever. A previous relationship, or a previous encounter, does not change that.”

Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith says Ministry of Justice officials should be involved in developing the policy. Photo / Mark Mitchell

However, both Labour and the Greens responded to the announcement by saying National already had the support of their parties to progress changes, and it should get on and do so.

Belich said on Tuesday that the issue was raised with the cross-party Commonwealth Women Parliamentarians Committee, which sought to look into legislation that would make changes to how consent is considered.

But Belich said National decided to go its own way, which she called a “shame” as “it’s quite difficult to find issues which are appropriate for bipartisan work”.

“I think when you’re talking about something as serious as consent for sexual activity and obviously looking at preventing sexual violence, then that’s an issue I think people would want there not to be politics around.”

Different versions of a member’s bill that would enshrine affirmative consent were produced, including by Belich and by National’s Vanessa Weenink.

Goldsmith on Tuesday said the Government had “done a huge amount in the sexual violence space” and believed it appropriate for the consent work to be done as a Government bill – as opposed to being a member’s bill – next term.

“We’d struggle to get on to it before the House rises in eight weeks. We’ve got a lot of justice legislation already. We literally have a very packed agenda,” he said.

The Herald asked if all of the justice legislation currently before the House was more important than sexual consent changes.

“I think it’s a very difficult thing to talk about, things not being important. What I can talk about is the fact that in two-and-a-half years, this Government has done more in the sexual violence space than any previous,” Goldsmith said.

“We’ve passed stalking legislation. We’ve changed name suppression laws. We’ve sorted out a sentencing framework. We’ve got rid of this culture of excuses that we inherited. We’ve made good progress and what we’ve indicated is that we’ll get onto the next step if we’re re-elected.”

He wouldn’t be drawn on whether other specific legislation – such as the move-on orders or the Serious Fraud Office Amendment Bill – were more important than modernising sexual consent.

“Everything is important in the justice space and we’ve indicated a process that we’re working through. Yes, restoring order in our streets is important. Also changing the sexual consent laws is important and we’ve indicated that comes next.”

Goldsmith has also previously pointed to the benefit of having the Ministry of Justice involved in fully developing the policy as a Government bill.

“Yes, there’s been draft members’ bills and there’s a National member’s bill in the ballot already, but this is an important area of law that you need to get right. So I’ll be tasking my officials, if re-elected, to do a full policy process.”

Prime Minister Christopher Luxon said it was a "traffic management issue". Photo / Mark Mitchell

Asked why sexual consent changes weren’t higher up the priority list, the Prime Minister told the Heraldthe Government has had “a lot on our programme”.

Luxon then diverted to criticising Labour for not changing the law itself when it was in office.

“It’s just a question of timing between, yes, we’ve announced policy that we want to go to the election on and get a mandate for, and it’s great that there’s bipartisan support for it. As I said, a bit interesting they didn’t do it themselves.”

Luxon said it was an “important issue”, but there were only eight weeks to go before Parliament lifts.

“We’re a Government that’s been passing a huge amount of legislation. It’s just purely a traffic management issue. It’s not a commitment issue. The fact that we are talking about it, it’s wonderful that the other parties want to come on board.”

Belich saidthere was a way to get a member’s bill with the sexual consent changes on to Parliament’s agenda quickly. That would involve at least 61 non-executive MPs indicating support for it.

“If they really thought that this issue was something that needed to change within New Zealand, if the reasons that the minister outlined and it seemed genuinely about why our laws are not currently appropriate, then the quickest way and the way to ensure that it is an enduring change that makes a better law for all New Zealanders is through a bipartisan mechanism.”

She said the Ministry of Justice could become involved through the select committee process.

Jamie Ensor is the NZ Herald’s chief political reporter, based in the press gallery at Parliament. He was previously a TV reporter and digital producer in the Newshub press gallery office. He was a finalist in 2025 for Political Journalist of the Year at the Voyager Media Awards.