logo
Cabinet signs off on proposal for Regulatory Standards Bill

Cabinet signs off on proposal for Regulatory Standards Bill

RNZ News06-05-2025
ACT leader David Seymour, as Minister for Regulation, is responsible for the bill that was part of the National-Act coalition agreement.
Photo:
MARIKA KHABAZI / RNZ
ACT leader David Seymour says the Regulatory Standards Bill will "help New Zealand get its mojo back", as Cabinet signs off on a "detailed proposal" for the legislation he says will shine a light on bad lawmaking.
It comes days after an urgent
Waitangi Tribunal claim regarding the Bill was accepted
, with claimants saying the Bill - if enacted - would breach Te Tiriti and cause significant prejudice to Māori.
Seymour, as Minister for Regulation, is responsible for the bill that was agreed to in the National-Act coalition agreement. The legislation has been 20 years in the making, and comes after three failed attempts to make it law.
Read more:
His proposal announced on Wednesday outlined the bill's intention, which he said was to "improve the quality of regulation" by codifying principles of "good regulatory practice".
"In a nutshell, if red tape is holding us back, because politicians find regulating politically rewarding, then we need to make regulating less rewarding for politicians with more sunlight on their activities."
The bill would create a "benchmark for good legislation" through those principles, he said. And it would require those making legislation to openly assess how that legislation is consistent with the principles.
It would create a Regulatory Standards Board that would independently consider whether current and future legislation is consistent with the principles. The Board would also assess complaints independently or at the direction of the Minister. It will be able to make non-binding recommendations.
The principles themselves were proposed as the rule of law, liberties, taking of property, taxes, fees and levies, the role of the courts, and good law-making.
Seymour said the Bill required politicians and officials to "ask and answer" questions before placing "restrictions on citizens' freedoms".
"What problem are we trying to solve? What are the costs and benefits? Who pays the costs and gets the benefits? What restrictions are being placed on the use and exchange of private property?"
Where inconsistencies are found, the responsible Minister must justify that departure from the set principles, Seymour said.
The proposal stated the bill would also give the Ministry of Regulation new powers, as it aimed to bring the "same level of discipline to regulatory management" the Public Finance Act brings to public spending. It said the ministry will play a role similar to that of the Treasury, but in relation to regulation.
The ministry would also be required to produce a regular report for the minister on the state of the Regulatory Management System.
The ministry would have the power to require public service agencies to provide information to support that requirement, and it would have information-gathering powers to enable it to conduct regulatory reviews.
These powers would not override restrictions on information sharing already set in law.
Seymour said this would not stop politicians or officials making bad laws, but it made it "transparent that they're doing it."
"It makes it easier for voters to identify those responsible for making bad rules. Over time, it will improve the quality of rules we all have to live under by changing how politicians behave."
The bill would now be drawn up by the Parliamentary Council Office, and Seymour would take that to Cabinet for consideration on the 19th May, seeking approval to introduce it to the House.
Just last week the group behind last year's Hīkoi mō Te Tiriti was granted an urgent hearing at the Waitangi Tribunal regarding the Regulatory Standards Bill.
The claim alleges that - if enacted - the bill would breach Te Tiriti and cause significant prejudice to Māori.
Toitū te Tiriti spokesperson Eru Kapa-Kingi told RNZ the lack of information around the bill was itself a source of anxiety for Māori.
From Toitū te Tiriti's perspective the Regulatory Standards Bill seems like the "more covert, but more aggressive version of the Treaty Principles Bill," which was voted down at Second Reading, he said.
Seymour said he would be interested to hear if the group had a problem with what he was proposing, which was to make lawmaking more transparent.
"But I suspect this is just another publicity stunt from a Māori Party protest group."
Consultation on a
discussion document about the bill
had been gaining increasing public interest earlier this year in the wake of the Treaty Principles Bill.
The Ministry of Regulation received almost 23,000 submissions, around 80 percent of them in the final four days of the consultation period.
The legislation itself has a long history. A report written by Dr Bryce Wilkinson for the Business Roundtable, now the New Zealand Initiative, became the foundations for one of the earlier versions of the bill.
Wilkinson said economists believed good quality regulation was where the "benefits to people who are affected by it exceed the costs to people who are affected by it".
"So it's regulation which makes people better off."
Emeritus Professor Jane Kelsey had long opposed the intention of the legislation, saying it was "basically about the protection of private property and wealth."
She said the ACT Party's priority for private property rights excluded balancing considerations, things like social or environmental factors, and Te Tiriti o Waitangi.
"All of those things ... will be subordinated, if not, deemed irrelevant, in the policy and legislative making processes," said Kelsey.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Regulatory Standards Bill hearing, day one: Former PM says ‘no chance' of bill working
Regulatory Standards Bill hearing, day one: Former PM says ‘no chance' of bill working

The Spinoff

timean hour ago

  • The Spinoff

Regulatory Standards Bill hearing, day one: Former PM says ‘no chance' of bill working

The bill dubbed the sibling to the controversial Treaty principles bill gets a whole week in parliament to have submissions heard. Read our explainer on the Regulatory Standards Bill here and our reporting on the urgent Waitangi Tribunal hearing on the bill here. A new day, a new controversial piece of legislation under scrutiny. After attracting a reported 150,000 public submissions, the Regulatory Standards Bill is having its week in the select committee, with all-day hearings from Monday to Thursday knocking out 30 hours' worth of oral submissions. Whatever the finance and expenditure committee hears could influence changes to the bill, but the passing of it is already a promise made in the National-Act coalition agreement. The inside of select committee room four was a ghost town on Monday morning, with all MPs on the committee's panel opting to join the hearing via Zoom, and most submitters doing the same. Lawyer Ani Mikaere was one of the first speakers of the day, and had some choice words about the bill and the government at large: 'National and NZ First currently face the spectre of this parliamentary term going down in history as the period when the Act Party governed – as coalition partners, you have been completely upstaged.' Adam Currie from 350 Aotearoa, who appeared via Zoom link, told the committee the bill can 'get in the compost heap' – then panned his camera over to his own compost heap for visual effect. 'Thank you Adam, very succinct,' committee deputy chair and National MP Ryan Hamilton replied. Former prime minister Geoffrey Palmer, who submitted against, labelled the bill the 'strangest piece of New Zealand legislation I have ever seen'. Palmer argued that regulation is necessary in many instances – like when he worked as a young lawyer on night clothes regulations, so that young children wouldn't be set alight by heaters while they slept. 'The idea that you would not allow parliament to protect the public from danger is just unreasonable,' Palmer said. Lawyer Sonja Cooper of Cooper Legal, which represents survivors of abuse in care, said she opposed the bill as it would allow abuse to continue. Cooper said she was concerned with the bill's principle that all are made equal under the law – her clients have a 'very distinct and urgent set of needs' which wouldn't be addressed if they were treated as 'equal', and with many of them being Māori, the bill's omission of the Treaty was a 'refusal to accept the needs for policies which may need to treat people differently to achieve equality'. When Act Party MP and committee member Mark Cameron questioned whether Cooper was telling the committee that laws should allow people to be treated unequally despite all people being 'created equal', Cooper replied: 'It's a nice thought that everyone is born equal, but that's not the reality.' Their back and forth made Palmer whisper 'oh, god' and at the end of it, he and Cooper just threw their hands in the air in disbelief. Human resources expert Chris Till supported the bill, but didn't support his 'undemocratic' five-minute submission time. After arguing that iwi have too much power over freshwater resources, and that the RSB would fix this 'racist, tribal and anti-democratic' system, Till continued to argue with Hamilton about his lack of time, so his submission was called off slightly early. Cameron, who had been waiting to ask a question, just gritted his teeth. Later, former Green Party MP Darleen Tana submitted against the bill, with the argument that it would 'constrain future governance, restrict public investment and sets up a narrow economic lens'. Also submitting against, Dunedin City Council's in-house lawyer Karilyn Canton said the council was concerned that the bill's omission of the Treaty would make it at odds with council obligations under the Local Government Act. She also highlighted the bill's requirement for review of secondary legislation (such as council bylaws, of which DCC administers about 40), and argued the Local Government Act already has sufficient provisions to the creation of these laws. Canton said it's also still unclear what falls into the scope of 'secondary legislation', and the likes of a district plan – which has the force and effect of a regulation under the Resource Management Act – would fall into this category. 'So the risk is that it creates disputes, creates costs and it creates uncertainty,' Canton said. Health Coalition Aotearoa's chair Boyd Swinburn opposed the bill, and told the committee the sector's already existing 'regulatory chill' – the absence of regulations which could protect young people from the likes of alcohol marketing – could turn into a 'regulatory freeze' if the bill passed. Swinburn pointed to the Australian government's years-long court case with tobacco giant Phillip Morris over plain packaging for cigarette cartons, which the company argued violated their property rights by confiscating property (their trademark) without compensation. 'It's very naive to think that the industry would not weaponise the privileging of its private property and rights,' Swinburn said. Far North district councillor Hilda Halkyard-Harawira began her submission against the bill by chucking on a pair of sunglasses, and letting the committee know that up in Northland, if someone speaks to you with their shades on, it's because you're telling a 'whole bunch of lies'. She said the bill amounted to 'historical amnesia', and said the uplifting of personal, economic and property liberties over collective rights was like experiencing a flood in your neighbourhood, and only having the local 'vape store' owner be saved. Raewyn Moss and Jo Mooar of Transpower, which controls the nation's energy grid, highlighted their concerns with clause eight of the bill, which highlights 12 principles of responsible regulation, including an emphasis on property rights. 93% of Transpower's overhead lines run on statutory rights under the Electricity Act, the committee heard, and Moss said there was concern that a review of the Act will result in Transpower paying compensation to permit them to use and maintain the land their grid rests on. They were also concerned that protections for these lines under the Resource Management Act would be overruled and ignored for new housing and developments, which could 'have a big impact on public safety'. Rock the Vote NZ deputy leader Daymond Goulder-Horobin said the party largely supported the bill, but they had some suggestions. For 'better optics', regulations minister David Seymour should share appointment powers of the regulatory standards board that will be born from the bill with other parties, so that the committee is 'balanced'. 'Every party is beneath 50% of the vote, so democratic legitimacy is always vested on [the voting of a bill],' Goulder-Horobin said. 'This does not have to be a bill that antagonises the left.' The finance and expenditure committee will resume oral hearings into the bill today at 8.30am.

Auckland's Covid lockdown cut Northland off from rest of country, Royal Commission of Inquiry told
Auckland's Covid lockdown cut Northland off from rest of country, Royal Commission of Inquiry told

RNZ News

timean hour ago

  • RNZ News

Auckland's Covid lockdown cut Northland off from rest of country, Royal Commission of Inquiry told

NorthChamber president Tim Robinson at his business, Bernina Northland. Photo: RNZ / Luka Forman Northland's business community says Auckland was one of the region's biggest obstacles during the Covid-19 pandemic. The region's chamber of commerce was questioned as part of the Royal Commission of Inquiry into New Zealand's pandemic response . When the country went into a two-month lockdown in March of 2020, businesses like those owned by NorthChamber president Tim Robinson took it on the chin . Speaking to the Royal Commission of Inquiry on Monday, Robinson said Northland's business community accepted the lockdown was necessary. "Because of the nature of our business, there was nothing we could do until we came out of lockdown. We just had to sort of just accept that and just kind of, you know, carry on," he said. "All in all, I think all of us just sort of thought, yep, we're dealing with something brand new. The response was absolutely appropriate. It gave us a chance to sort of stop and then think, well, what's going to happen next and where are we going to head to next?" But when a second nationwide lockdown started in August of 2021, NorthChamber chief executive Leah McKerrow said the sentiment shifted. "A lot of fear existed. And fear is one of those core emotions that permeates through, and unless you can actually address that fear, then it is very difficult to help people shift," she said. "In that second lockdown, some of that fear was starting to be replaced with anger." That was compounded by a vaccine mandate that a number of New Zealanders found a step too far, she said. "It comes back to human beings and emotion. The fear that is driven through people who didn't want to be vaccinated and it started to, I think, unravel some of that community cohesion." Tim Robinson said the unrest made it difficult to do business. "You just never knew who was going to pop their hand up and say, 'this is ridiculous, I'm not going to buy into that. I'm never going to get vaccinated'. And somebody walking in the shop thinking, oh, yep, they're a kind, rational person, and next thing they're ranting and raving," he said. "And you've got to somehow deal with that and try and be polite and say, well, actually, those are the rules. I didn't make them." Robinson said Northland also faced unexpected challenges during Auckland's own citywide lockdowns. He said the supercity became a wall separating his region from the rest of the country. "A lot of companies started to make decisions based around 'how easy is it to transact in and out of Northland?' The overwhelming perception became, well, it's bloody hard," he said. "So many companies still see us as being very hard to do business with. You know, we had Covid, then we had the year of rain and the cyclones and the road closures, and people just going, 'you know what, it's just so hard'." Leah McKerrow agreed. "I think, for me, the biggest challenge for Northland was Auckland," she laughed. "But, you know, quite seriously, the fact is we have to drive through this place. And so finding a solution to that so that if Auckland, you know, does have some sort of disease in the future that we can at least drive through." She said maintaining road access to Northland should be a key lesson for the Royal Commission. The hearing continues. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store