Critics dominate first Regulatory Standards Bill hearings
Critics lining up to oppose David Seymour's anti red-tape Bill rolled out props, poetry, and protest on the first day of the hearings. Giles Dexter reports.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
RNZ News
an hour ago
- RNZ News
Gentailers squashing competition leading to soaring power prices, group says
Power prices in New Zealand soar as the Prime Minister blames Labour's oil and gas ban. Photo: RNZ / Nate McKinnon Big and small energy consumers are calling for an urgent reform of the sector as soaring power prices undermine confidence and productivity. The group's open letter to Prime Minister Christopher Luxon said many consumers were struggling to keep the heat on this winter, while the wholesale costs for many businesses had more than doubled. "Regional employers are shutting their doors, with hundreds of jobs and decades of investment lost," it said. "Families and communities are being left behind." The government had commissioned an independent high level review of the energy sector , but the group was looking for more than incremental changes. The letter takes aim at the four big power generation companies Genesis, Contact, Mercury and Meridian, also referred to as gentailers, because they compete at the retail level. "When a handful of companies control both generation and retail supply, the competitive pressures that should attract new investors and drive innovation, efficiency, and fair pricing are severely diminished," the letter said. The letter was signed by groups representing big and small energy users, small retail energy suppliers, and a cross-section of industry organisations representing a broad range of sectors. Consumer NZ chief executive Jon Duffy said the state of the energy sector was at odds with Luxon's economic vision. "We're never going to grow the economy if people can't afford the inputs for growth," he said. "What we are concerned about is a lot of people and an increasing number of people are being faced with pretty stark choices about whether they can heat their home or put food on the table. Those sort of tough decisions." Duffy said energy consumers were on the same page when it came to the call for reform. Among the key issues was the speed of development. "Investment in new generation is being delayed, sustaining high prices, and contributing to the energy supply crisis we now face," the letter said. "Our dysfunctional electricity market is holding back New Zealand's productivity, restricting our international competitiveness, and driving up the cost of living." It said the government needed to undertake a comprehensive reform of the sector. "The time for incremental adjustments has passed," it said. "Level the playing field. Put protections in place for consumers and businesses alike. "Unlock investment in low-cost, renewable generation. Put forward an energy strategy that all political parties can sign up to." It said the reforms needed to address the immediate supply challenges as well as the underlying structural problems that created them. "We're running out of gas, and new electricity generation just isn't being built at the rate we need." The group wanted the Prime Minister to make the most of New Zealand's natural resources to create a secure, affordable, renewable electricity system. Luxon told Morning Report's Corin Dann the crux of the problem came down to New Zealand not having enough gas after the former Labour government banned new oil and gas exploration. "We need to have abundant, affordable energy to grow the economy. We need it to make sure Kiwi power bills are lower. "We're repealing the oil and gas ban this quarter. We've got our fast-track regime to get doubling of renewables in place and we're replacing the RMA [Resource Management Act]..." When asked if the government would break-up the gentailers Luxon said the single biggest issue was a supply problem because New Zealand didn't have access to gas "which we desperately need when we don't have enough wind, rain or sun". "We are the only country I know of, Corin, in the whole world that is making the rather unique transition from domestic gas to imported coal. "That is insane, because of an oil and gas ban from the Labour guys and so we are reversing that. That's the single biggest thing we can do." The Prime Minister said gas had been powering mills, manufacturing plants and much of the country's heavy industry. He said the government was doing everything it could to double renewable energy projects including consenting them faster under fast-track legislation. Luxon said the government was "pulling all of those levers" to get electricity bills down. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
Scoop
an hour ago
- Scoop
Focus Taiwan Summit To Explore Trade And Investment Opportunities
The New Zealand Taiwan Business Council, in partnership with the Taiwanese Business Association of New Zealand (TBANZ), is proud to announce Focus Taiwan 2025, a flagship trade and investment forum set to take place on Monday, 28 July 2025 at the Ellerslie Events Centre in Auckland. In the midst of a highly volatile global trading environment, the summit brings together senior trade officials, business leaders, and innovators from both New Zealand and Taiwan to explore bilateral growth, sector-specific export strategies, and emerging market opportunities. The morning session will feature strategic insights from Kendra Chen (Director General, Taipei Economic and Cultural Office Auckland), Howard Song (Director, Economic Division, Taipei Economic and Cultural Office Wellington), and keynote addresses from Charles Finny (Chairman, New Zealand Trade and Enterprise) and Mayor Tania Tapsell of Rotorua. The session will explore Taiwan's economic outlook in the face of looming US tariffs, trade restrictions and geopolitical tensions, and how New Zealand exporters can best navigate these challenges. The afternoon session will focus on sector specific opportunities for New Zealand companies in Taiwan, including Māori-led businesses. A high-profile speaking panel including Wayne Mulligan (CEO, NZ Bio Forestry Ltd), Joshua Tan (Executive Director, ExportNZ), and Steven Chang (Wealth Adviser, JBWere) will present case studies and insights across science and technology, Māori-led sustainability, food and beverage, and AI investment trends. The summit will close with a curated display of premium New Zealand and Taiwanese products alongside afternoon tea, networking and informal business matchmaking. " Focus Taiwan 2025 will address some of the most important challenges that New Zealand exporters have had to face in a very long time," says Chris Tse, Chair of the NZ Taiwan Business Council. "The present international trading environment is one of the most volatile we have ever experienced, with tariffs and trade restrictions set to disrupt supply chains and trade flows. How can island economies such as Taiwan and New Zealand, which rely heavily on export growth for prosperity, find opportunities amongst the uncertainty?" Focus Taiwan 2025 is open to exporters, entrepreneurs, investors, academics and policymakers with an interest in engaging with one of Asia's most dynamic markets. Register now to secure your place at this pivotal event and be part of shaping the future of New Zealand-Taiwan economic cooperation.
The Spinoff
an hour ago
- The Spinoff
30 things I learned from 30 hours of Regulatory Standards Bill hearings
It's pretty confusing on the surface, but if you had 30 hours to spare, you would have learnt a lot about the Regulatory Standards Bill from its week in the select committee. The finance and expenditure committee's hearings on the Regulatory Standards Bill (RSB) came to a close on Friday, following four days, 30 hours, 208 submissions and a whole load of takes. Submissions spanned perspectives from the environment and energy sectors to individuals living with disabilities or in poverty. It's a contentious bill whose name and purpose tends to return puzzled looks, because really, what does it all mean? There's been much to say about the public perception of the bill and its many vocal opponents from its architect, deputy prime minister David Seymour. There's been 'so much misinformation' despite it simply setting out a framework for better regulations, Seymour reckoned on Monday, though his accusations of the bill's opponents having some kind of 'derangement syndrome' haven't really been helpful, either. Meanwhile, opponents have been campaigning against the bill with the same ferocity shown in the lead up to the justice committee's hearings on the Treaty principles bill earlier this year. While the emphasis on property and individual rights have raised immediate alarm bells, there's also a lot of interpretation about what the bill could do, like giving corporations the power to take the government or the little guy to court when they believe their property rights have been impeded on. Realistically, the truth is somewhere in between. Because elements of the RSB are so vague – its scope, its principles and its purpose – it's hard to tell what Aotearoa will look like after the bill comes into full force on July 1, 2026. Ideally, this select committee process will take into account the concerns shared by submitters, and shape the bill into something we can visualise a little better. Until then, here's everything that I learnt about the bill and its submitters from these hearings: If oral submissions are anything to go by, most of the public opposes this bill. But there's also a decent chunk sitting on the fence because, yeah, Aotearoa does need improved regulations, but there's sufficient doubt that the RSB will actually achieve this. Subpart 5 of the RSB clarifies that the bill does not impose legal rights nor does it require compliance. Despite this, many submitters who opposed the bill feared it could give large corporations too much power in the court room, like in the case of Phillip Morris (tobacco) v the Australian government over plain packaging legislation. There is a genuine argument that the longer this bill stays in statute, the more influence it could gain over time, and the more likely certain courts may look to its principles as guidelines. There's often a lot of dissonance between the way the courts have interpreted the law and how parliament interprets it. If a Phillip Morris v Australia situation played out in Aotearoa because of the RSB, parliament could just draft an amendment to make the bill's legal restrictions tighter. And Seymour can very easily claim no blame for what the courts have done. But there's also the potential of the RSB becoming like the Bill of Rights Act, which is a part of our unwritten constitution but is more-so quasi-constitutional: it's not entrenched in law, but it's been around long enough – and has enough influence – to impact on the law-making process. There is a genuine case for including the Treaty in the bill. Seymour and the man who dreamt up the bill's blueprint, Dr Bryce Wilkinson, both claim there's nothing in the bill that wouldn't uphold Māori rights, but it's a bit deeper than that – the principles of responsible regulation just don't align with a te ao Māori worldview. The principles of responsible regulations do need a broader appeal if we want legislation that will actually improve our regulations, not a law that will be chucked out when the next Labour government is elected. Only applying the bill's principles to primary legislation will make this palaver far less of a headache. Treating everyone as 'equal' under the law is actually not a great way of helping our most vulnerable communities. Essentially everything in your life is regulated, from the air you breathe to the clothes you wear and the home you return to every night and what you're eating when you get there. Maybe this is a pretty juvenile thing to realise at the ripe age of 25, but it's also not something the layman often thinks about. Regulations aren't necessarily a bad thing, either – they can keep us alive. Certain industries, such as the energy sector, are set to benefit a lot more from the RSB than others. Much of what the proposed regulatory standards board will do is already covered by the regulatory review committee. The Clerk of the House can submit on bills, though this typically only happens once or twice a year, and in the form of written questions. When deputy clerk Suze Jones showed up to the RSB hearing on Wednesday, Labour's Deborah Russell (who joined parliament in 2017) claimed it was the first time she had seen the Clerk submit to the select committee in person. Geoffrey Palmer likes to be punctual – he showed up an hour early for his submission. Russell has a PhD in political theory. And is familiar with Jean Rousseau. Donna Huata, founding member of the Act Party, has some shame about what the party has become. Most submitters show up just before their allotted speaking time and leave right after, but there was one submitter who stayed for hours to hear multiple perspectives: Tex Edwards, of Monopoly Watch NZ. Trickle down economics is like pissing on people and telling them it's rain. Ministers aren't supposed to attend select committees unless they're invited, which is why you can't really blame Seymour for not showing up. But, it makes a big difference to a submitter to have the committee actually show up. Holding the RSB hearings in a non-sitting week meant the MPs were all back in their electorates and listening on Zoom, and this didn't go down smoothly with a few submitters who hoped they could make their case face-to-face. You probably won't get a heads up that no one's in the room if you're showing up to parliament to submit, either. The online discourse around this bill is already having real life implications, with lawyer Tania Waikato needing a security escort to make her submission at parliament. The select committee can play pretty fast and loose with allotted speaking times, like cutting some submissions short, or letting others stretch past their allotted time, as was allowed for the NZ Initiative. Even our politicians forget to turn the mute button off/on. It's not just you. The administrative staff who run these hearings are very lovely people. They didn't have to answer stupid questions from journalists (or a single journalist, aka me) but they did anyway. It's possible for something to have the potential to be both really good, and really bad.
