The NZCTU opposes the Regulatory Standards Bill in the strongest terms.
The "principles of responsible regulation" set out in the Bill reflect the marginal and extreme worldview of libertarianism, which prioritises individualism and private property rights above all else. These principles are out of step with the values most New Zealanders hold and have no place in our constitutional settings.
If adhered to, the "principles of responsible regulation" will significantly undermine government's capacity to legislate in the public interest. For example, to abide by the "taking of property" principle, government would have to financially compensate individuals and corporations who may earn less profit due to necessary labour rights laws, public health measures, environmental protections, and measures to protect economic growth and stability. In many cases, government would be forced to choose between either not regulating in the public interest, because it would be too expensive to do so, or creating or maintaining legislation that is "inconsistent" with the "taking of property" principle. In the first case, New Zealand society would be worse off. In the second case, the government would be forced to waste precious time and energy justifying why it is breaking with this principle. In neither case would the quality of legislation be improved.
It is unacceptable that Te Tiriti o Waitangi, the founding constitutional document of the nation, is nowhere to be found in these principles. This means that Ministers, the Regulatory Standards Board, and government agencies would not be obliged to consider the consistency of new and existing legislation with Te Tiriti.
We expect the Bill will negatively impact regulatory quality, as reviews of new and existing regulation will not be required to cover many important aspects of legislative design, such as consistency with Te Tiriti o Waitangi, evidence-based policy, enforceability, adaptability, and equity.
The Bill also fails to meet its own standards of "good law-making" (principle 6). As made clear in the regulatory impact statement from the Ministry for Regulation, the Bill is not "expected to produce benefits that exceed the costs of the legislation to the public or persons"; nor do officials consider it to be "the most effective, efficient, and proportionate response to the issue concerned that is available".
Given these failings, it is unsurprising that the Bill is widely opposed. In the pre-legislative consultation, approximately 88% of submitters opposed the proposed Bill while only 0.33% supported it. The Ministry for Regulation has advised against the Bill, as have other public sector agencies. The Waitangi Tribunal considers the government to have breached several Tiriti/Treaty principles in pushing forward with the Bill. And the expert Legislation Design and Advisory Committee has also advised strongly against the Bill.
It would be highly irresponsible and undemocratic for the government to take this Bill any further in the face of such strong opposition. This is the policy of a minor coalition partner, for which there is no popular mandate - the tail must not be allowed to wag the dog here.
