Coming Up: New Threats in Draft

Bad bills don’t rest. And neither will we. The next round is already brewing — be ready to challenge, reject, and rewrite the future.

Serious Fraud Office Amendment Bill – Efficiency or Expanded Power?

Enforcement agencies require authority, but that authority must be balanced with safeguards. Power without oversight risks misuse.

This bill is presented as improving effectiveness, but its real impact may be expansion of investigative powers. Without clear limits and accountability, this shifts the balance toward enforcement over rights.

When powers increase without proportional safeguards, trust declines. Oversight must grow alongside authority.

Strong enforcement requires equally strong restraint.

Submission deadline: 08 June 2026 – 11:59 pm

Bills Open for Public Submission – Core Issues

Corrections (Management of Prisoners, and Prisoners’ Property) Amendment Bill – Management or Control?

Corrections law must balance security with dignity. Any change must respect basic human rights while maintaining order.

This bill focuses on management powers, but risks expanding control over prisoners and their property. Without clear safeguards, this may reduce protections and increase discretionary authority.

When control expands without accountability, dignity is reduced. Systems of custody must not become systems of unchecked power.

How a system treats those in its custody defines its integrity.

Submission deadline: 10 June 2026 – 11:59 pm

Social Security Amendment Bill – Fiscal Sustainability or Punishing Hardship?

Welfare reform must protect public resources, but it must not do so by pushing vulnerable people further into hardship. Savings made from poverty often return as greater social costs.

This bill tightens access to Jobseeker Support and emergency assistance for young people aged 16 to 19. Many young people in this age group do not have safe, stable, or realistic family support. Restricting access may increase homelessness, exploitation, debt, family pressure, and long-term dependency.

The bill also changes Accommodation Supplement thresholds for some homeowners. This risks harming people who may own a home on paper but still struggle with mortgage pressure, low income, age, disability, or rising living costs.

A fair welfare system should reduce hardship, not administratively hide it. Any tightening of support must include strong safeguards, hardship exemptions, independent oversight, and clear evidence that vulnerable people will not be left worse off.

A society cannot balance its books by unbalancing the lives of its most vulnerable.

Submission deadline: 10 June 2026 – 11:59 pm

Residential Tenancies (Registration of Boarding House Landlords) Amendment Bill – Accountability or Burden?

Housing law must ensure safety, fairness, and access. Regulation should protect tenants while remaining workable for providers.

This bill introduces registration requirements, but risks increasing compliance burden without addressing core housing issues. Administrative measures alone do not improve quality or affordability.

When regulation focuses on process rather than outcome, the underlying problem remains. Tenants need real protection, not only formal systems.

Systems that record problems are not the same as systems that solve them.

Submission deadline: 10 June 2026 – 11:59 pm

Ngā Hapū o Te Iwi o Whanganui Claims Settlement Bill – Historical Redress or Constitutional Drift?

Historical grievances deserve acknowledgment and resolution. But public settlements must also protect democratic accountability, equal citizenship, and transparency over public assets and governance.

This bill would transfer properties, establish new governance arrangements, create rights of first refusal over Crown assets, and formalise statutory recognition and authority structures connected to Ngā Hapū o Te Iwi o Whanganui.

While presented as a settlement of historical claims, the bill also contributes to a wider long-term constitutional shift occurring incrementally across New Zealand through separate legislation, boards, consultation rights, and co-governance frameworks.

Many New Zealanders are increasingly concerned about the cumulative effect of these arrangements. Public land, reserves, and governance powers are gradually being moved into structures with reduced direct democratic oversight and enduring statutory protections that future governments and ordinary citizens have limited ability to revisit.

The bill also raises concerns around equal treatment under law, preferential commercial rights, public ownership of shared assets, and the continuing expansion of parallel governance models based on ancestry and Treaty status.

Reconciliation should unite New Zealanders under transparent and accountable public institutions. Constitutional change of long-term national significance should occur openly, democratically, and with broad public consent — not incrementally through fragmented settlement legislation.

Justice must heal history without weakening the shared civic foundation of the future.

Submission deadline: 11 June 2026 – 11:59 pm

Disability Support Services Bill – Support Framework or Managed Withdrawal of Responsibility?

A disability support system should strengthen dignity, independence, and protection. It must not quietly shift responsibility away from the State and onto already exhausted families and whānau.

This bill creates a new legislative framework for Disability Support Services, but it also raises serious concerns about the future direction of disability rights and support in New Zealand. While presented as improving “fairness”, “consistency”, and “transparency”, the bill openly states that one of its purposes is responding to Crown fiscal and litigation risk following the Supreme Court decision in Fleming v Attorney-General.

That raises an important public-interest question: is this reform primarily about improving support for disabled people, or reducing the Government’s future legal and financial obligations?

The bill also states that responsibility for the care of disabled people rests with family and whānau “where appropriate”. This wording is broad and undefined. Without strong safeguards, it risks increasing pressure on families to provide unpaid care while reducing practical State responsibility.

Many disabled people do not have safe, financially stable, or realistic family support available. Many families already carry enormous emotional, physical, and financial burdens. A modern disability system should not rely on hidden unpaid labour to remain financially sustainable.

The bill further acknowledges that important protections such as safeguarding, appeals, complaints processes, and information-gathering powers will only be addressed in a later phase. Creating a new framework before establishing full protections and accountability mechanisms creates significant risk for disabled people and carers.

Disability support should be based on rights, dignity, autonomy, and genuine human need — not administrative containment, fiscal pressure, or legal risk management.

A society is judged by how it supports those who need care, not by how efficiently it transfers that burden onto others.

Submission deadline: 12 June 2026 – 1:00 pm

Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Amendment Bill – Regulatory Improvement or Reduced Precaution?

Laws governing hazardous substances and new organisms exist because mistakes in these areas can cause long-term and irreversible harm. Environmental contamination, toxic exposure, and biological release cannot always be undone once they occur.

This bill proposes to “streamline” application processes, introduce more “risk-proportionate” decision-making, and expand compliance and enforcement powers under the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act 1996.

While efficiency and consistency are important, the public should ask an important question: does streamlining environmental protections increase the risk of weaker scrutiny and faster approvals for potentially harmful substances and technologies?

Terms such as “streamlining” and “risk-proportionate” often sound administrative and harmless. In practice, they can reduce precaution, narrow public participation, and shift decision-making power further toward regulators and applicants.

New Zealand’s biodiversity is globally unique and ecologically fragile. Once hazardous substances enter ecosystems or new organisms are released into the environment, the consequences may be difficult or impossible to reverse.

The bill also raises concerns about whether economic and commercial interests may increasingly outweigh long-term environmental caution and public health considerations. Large industries and multinational corporations often possess far greater resources and influence than ordinary citizens, local communities, or independent researchers.

Although the bill refers to supporting public participation, reforms of this nature can sometimes reduce meaningful public influence through shorter processes, technical barriers, or expanded delegated decision-making behind closed administrative systems.

Expanded monitoring and enforcement powers also require careful scrutiny. Regulatory authority should always remain balanced with transparency, accountability, and clear safeguards against misuse or overreach.

Environmental protection laws should prioritise precaution, independent science, transparency, and long-term public wellbeing over administrative speed. Efficiency must never become a justification for lowering safeguards around substances and technologies capable of causing lasting harm.

A society cannot restore a poisoned ecosystem as easily as it can approve a faster application process.

Submission deadline: 15 June 2026 – 11:59 pm

Agricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines Amendment Bill – Modernisation or Reduced Safeguards?

Efficient regulation matters, but efficiency must never come at the cost of public health, environmental protection, animal welfare, or democratic oversight.

This bill is presented as a technical reform to “streamline” and modernise New Zealand’s agricultural compounds and veterinary medicines system. However, reforms framed around efficiency and regulatory simplification often reduce scrutiny, weaken precautionary protections, and increase reliance on administrative discretion.

Agricultural compounds and veterinary medicines directly affect food safety, waterways, soil health, ecosystems, animal welfare, and long-term public trust in New Zealand’s farming system. Any reduction in independent oversight or public participation carries serious long-term risk.

The bill also raises concerns about whether regulatory pathways may increasingly favour large commercial interests over small farmers, independent producers, regenerative agriculture, and lower-input farming approaches. Compliance systems that appear “efficient” on paper can still create unequal outcomes in practice.

New Zealand’s environment is uniquely vulnerable. Once harmful compounds, residues, resistant organisms, or ecological damage spread through waterways, soils, or food systems, the consequences can be difficult or impossible to reverse.

There are also broader concerns around transparency. Regulatory reforms sometimes expand commercial confidentiality protections while reducing public access to safety data, adverse effects information, and independent scrutiny. Public confidence depends on openness and accountability, not merely administrative efficiency.

The bill should be carefully examined for:

• Reduced approval thresholds or faster approval pathways
• Expanded ministerial or regulatory discretion
• Weakened public consultation or appeal rights
• Reliance on overseas regulatory approvals
• Environmental monitoring and enforcement gaps
• Potential impacts on organics and regenerative farming
• Biosecurity and ecological risks
• Animal welfare implications
• Transparency and access to safety information

Strong agricultural systems require more than productivity. They require public trust, ecological responsibility, transparency, and protection of long-term national wellbeing.

A safe food and farming system is built through caution and accountability, not simply through faster approvals.

Submission deadline: 15 June 2026 – 11:59 pm

Drug Overdose (Assistance Protection) Legislation Bill – Saving Lives or Normalising Harm?

No person should be afraid to call emergency services when someone is dying from an overdose. Protecting life matters. But legislation created during moments of crisis must still be examined carefully.

This bill would provide protection from prosecution for certain low-level drug offences when emergency medical assistance is sought during a drug overdose or adverse drug reaction. The protections would apply not only to the person seeking help and the person overdosing, but also to others present at the scene.

While presented as a public health and harm-reduction measure, the bill raises important questions about where legal accountability begins to weaken and how broadly these protections may eventually be interpreted in practice.

The wording surrounding people “incidentally present” is particularly concerning. Without strict legal limits and precise definitions, this could create uncertainty around enforcement, responsibility, and the practical boundaries of immunity protections.

The bill also extends protections to some people on parole with drug-use conditions. While overdose prevention is important, this creates tension between emergency protections and the integrity of rehabilitation and parole frameworks designed to reduce substance dependency and reoffending.

More broadly, the legislation focuses heavily on emergency response while doing far less to address the deeper causes of addiction itself: trauma, mental illness, social isolation, housing instability, poverty, and the growing accessibility of harmful substances.

A compassionate society should save lives. But compassion must not become a substitute for prevention, recovery, accountability, and long-term rehabilitation.

If protections are introduced, they should be tightly drafted, independently reviewed, and paired with serious investment in addiction treatment, mental health services, and recovery support — not simply legal immunity during crisis events.

A society should help people escape addiction, not quietly adapt itself around its permanence.

Submission deadline: 16 June 2026 – 11:59 pm

Financial Markets (International Money Transfers) Amendment Bill – Consumer Transparency or Expanding Financial Control?

People sending money overseas should know the true cost of a transfer. Hidden fees and exchange-rate margins have long disadvantaged migrants, workers, families, and small businesses. Transparency matters.

But transparency legislation must not become another layer of expanding financial regulation, compliance pressure, and administrative control that ultimately increases costs for ordinary people.

This bill proposes mandatory disclosure requirements for international money transfer services, including how fees, exchange rates, and total transfer costs must be presented before a transaction occurs. While presented as consumer protection, the bill also grants regulation-making powers allowing future governments and regulators to decide how and where this information must be displayed.

That raises important concerns about regulatory creep and the growing transfer of practical law-making power away from Parliament and into evolving regulatory systems.

Large banks and multinational financial institutions can usually absorb expanding compliance requirements. Smaller providers, community operators, and fintech competitors often cannot. Overregulation risks reducing competition and strengthening the dominance of the very institutions already controlling much of the financial system.

Increased compliance costs are rarely absorbed by corporations alone. They are often passed directly onto consumers through:

• higher transfer fees
• worse exchange rates
• reduced service availability
• less competition in the remittance market

International money transfers are not a luxury for many people. They are used to support parents, children, relatives, education, medical care, and survival overseas. Any reform affecting these services must be proportionate, carefully limited, and genuinely beneficial to consumers.

New Zealand should be cautious about creating financial systems that become increasingly centralised, compliance-heavy, and dependent on continuous regulatory expansion.

Transparency should empower people, not quietly expand the machinery controlling financial life.

Submission deadline: 18 June 2026 – 11:59 pm

Deepfake Digital Harm and Exploitation Bill – Protection from Abuse or Expansion of Digital Speech Control?

Synthetic sexual imagery can cause real harm. People should not be humiliated, blackmailed, exploited, or targeted through AI-generated intimate content created without their consent.

But laws created in response to fear and rapidly evolving technology must be drafted with extreme care. Once governments begin criminalising synthetic or altered imagery based on appearance and perception rather than reality, the boundaries of enforcement can quickly expand.

This bill broadens the definition of “intimate visual recording” to include images that are digitally created, altered, or synthesised to “appear” intimate. That wording raises serious concerns around vagueness, interpretation, free expression, satire, artistic works, parody, journalism, and future misuse.

Terms such as “appears to be” and “synthesised” are highly subjective in an era where AI tools can unintentionally generate resemblance to real people. Without strict safeguards, innocent users, creators, or researchers could become exposed to investigation or censorship simply because a complaint is made.

New Zealand already has laws covering harassment, harmful digital communications, privacy breaches, intimidation, and image-based abuse. The public should ask whether this bill fills a genuine legal gap, or whether it expands State control over digital expression under the justification of protection.

History shows that powers introduced for extreme cases are often expanded over time. Once legal mechanisms for regulating synthetic media become normalised, future governments may broaden them far beyond intimate imagery.

Any legislation in this area should contain:

• Very narrow and precise definitions
• Clear intent requirements
• Strong evidential standards
• Explicit protections for satire, journalism, parody, education, and artistic expression
• Independent oversight and transparency
• Safeguards against malicious or weaponised complaints

Technology changes quickly. Powers created in fear often remain long after the fear itself has changed.

Submission deadline: 19 June 2026 – 11:59 pm

Overseas Adoptions Legislation Bill – Child Protection or Expanded State Control Over Families?

Children must be protected from trafficking, exploitation, and abuse. But protection must not become a pathway for expanding State control over the recognition of families, parenthood, and citizenship.

This bill creates a new long-term framework for overseas adoptions in New Zealand. While presented as safeguarding children and aligning with international obligations, it also centralises significant power within Government ministries and executive decision-making.

The bill would allow the Governor-General, on the recommendation of the Minister of Justice, to designate which foreign countries are considered acceptable for overseas adoption arrangements. That means unelected officials may effectively determine which overseas family relationships New Zealand recognises and which it does not.

The bill also links overseas adoption recognition to immigration, visas, and citizenship pathways. This risks shifting adoption away from being primarily about family and child wellbeing and toward being treated as an immigration-control mechanism.

The legislation relies heavily on broad concepts such as the “best interests” of the child and whether foreign systems contain “sufficient safeguards”. While these phrases sound reasonable, they are highly subjective and may grant wide discretionary power to courts, ministries, and officials without strong independent oversight.

International adoption is already emotionally and legally complex. Greater bureaucracy, ministerial discretion, and administrative barriers may create uncertainty for genuine families while increasing dependence on State approval processes.

The bill also raises deeper cultural and ethical concerns. International adoptions can involve questions of identity, whakapapa, language, culture, poverty pressure, and separation from extended family networks. These matters require humility and caution, not merely administrative management.

A child should never become a transactional object caught between immigration systems, international agreements, and political discretion.

Family relationships should not exist only by permission of the State.

Submission deadline: 23 June 2026 – 11:59 pm

Local Government (Port Companies Accountability) Amendment Bill – Accountability or Political Interference in Strategic Infrastructure?

Ports are not ordinary council offices. They are strategic infrastructure, commercial gateways, employment centres, and essential parts of New Zealand’s supply chain. Accountability matters, but it must not be imposed in a way that weakens commercial strength, operational security, or national resilience.

This bill would remove existing exemptions for port companies and make them subject to the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987. It would also apply wider Local Government Act requirements, including obligations to act as a good employer and to show social and environmental responsibility toward the communities in which ports operate.

On the surface, this sounds reasonable. Publicly owned port companies should not operate without scrutiny. But the danger lies in applying council-style transparency rules to entities that operate in competitive, commercially sensitive, and strategically important environments.

Ports deal with freight contracts, infrastructure planning, shipping arrangements, procurement, employment matters, trade flows, security risks, and commercial negotiations. Broad disclosure obligations may expose sensitive information, slow decision-making, increase compliance costs, and give competitors access to information that should remain protected.

The bill also risks increasing political pressure over operational decisions. Ports require long-term discipline, commercial judgement, and infrastructure certainty. They should not be turned into another arena for short-term political management, ideological demands, or bureaucratic interference.

The phrase “social and environmental responsibility” may sound positive, but without clear limits it can become an expandable legal and political tool. It may shift port companies away from their core purpose and place them under vague obligations that are difficult to measure, challenge, or contain.

Strong accountability does not require exposing strategic infrastructure to unnecessary risk. Any reform must protect commercial confidentiality, supply chain security, employment stability, and operational efficiency. Public oversight should be precise, proportionate, and clearly justified.

Strategic infrastructure needs accountability, not political capture disguised as transparency.

Submission deadline: 02 July 2026 – 11:59 pm

Public Finance (Prohibition on Providing Public Funds to Gangs) Amendment Bill – Stopping Crime or Expanding Punishment by Association?

Public money should not knowingly fund organised criminal activity. But laws written in fear and political pressure can easily become broader than the public first realises.

This bill would require the Crown and public agencies to ensure that funding does not directly or indirectly reach organisations that are “run, administered, or associated with gangs”. It would also create criminal liability for making funds available to gangs without a “reasonable excuse”.

The central concern is the wording “associated with gangs”. That phrase is broad, subjective, and open to political interpretation. Many rehabilitation programmes, addiction services, youth organisations, Māori community initiatives, and violence reduction groups work with gang-affected individuals precisely to reduce crime and help people leave gang environments.

Under this framework, organisations may face investigation, funding cuts, or reputational damage simply because they engage with high-risk communities. Agencies may avoid funding effective social programmes altogether out of fear of legal or political consequences.

The bill also risks normalising punishment based on identity, appearance, family connection, or alleged association rather than proven criminal conduct. A free society should punish crimes, not categories of people.

The proposed “due diligence” requirements may also expand surveillance, compliance monitoring, background investigations, and bureaucratic control over charities, iwi organisations, and community groups. Smaller organisations may struggle to survive under increased compliance pressure.

Existing laws already address organised crime, money laundering, fraud, criminal proceeds, and corruption. The question is whether this bill genuinely improves public safety, or mainly creates a broad symbolic enforcement framework with weak safeguards and undefined limits.

Laws created to target unpopular groups often become precedents for wider State powers later. Once governments establish punishment by association as a principle, the definition of who is considered undesirable can continually expand.

Justice must target criminal conduct precisely. When association becomes the offence, freedom and fairness begin to erode.

Submission deadline: 02 July 2026 – 11:59 pm

Conservation Amendment Bill – Protection of Nature or Development by Another Name?

Conservation land belongs to the public and must be protected for future generations. It should not be quietly reframed as land available for development, commercial concessions, visitor infrastructure, disposal, or exchange.

This bill would amend the Conservation Act 1987 by changing its purpose to enable more development on conservation land while still claiming to protect conservation values. That change is not minor. It risks shifting conservation law from protection-first to development-compatible management.

The bill also proposes a single National Conservation Policy Statement, streamlined concession processes, new visitor amenities areas, and looser rules for exchanging or disposing of Crown-owned conservation land. Together, these changes could make it easier for future governments, agencies, and commercial interests to reshape public conservation land without sufficient public scrutiny.

Once conservation land is opened to expanded infrastructure, concessions, land swaps, and disposal, the damage may be permanent. Public land can be lost piece by piece while still being described as “modernisation”, “access”, or “visitor enjoyment”.

Conservation must mean protection. It must not become a legal pathway for commercial development on land that should remain held in trust for the public, for ecosystems, and for future generations.

Conservation land is not spare land waiting for a business case.

Submission deadline: 02 July 2026 – 11:59 pm

Legislation (Definitions of Woman and Man) Amendment Bill – Legal Certainty or State-Imposed Identity Control?

Law should protect people with precision, fairness, and restraint. It should not use one rigid definition to override complex human realities across the entire statute book.

This bill would amend the Legislation Act 2019 by defining “woman” as “an adult human biological female” and “man” as “an adult human biological male”. It would also define “female” and “male” in biological terms. These definitions would apply wherever those words appear in law, unless another Act expressly says otherwise.

That is an extremely wide legal intervention. It may affect health, education, employment, sport, prisons, identity documents, public services, anti-discrimination law, and the rights of transgender, intersex, and gender-diverse people. A single universal definition may create more conflict, not less.

The bill is presented as protecting sex-based rights and legal certainty. But legal certainty must not be achieved by erasing people from recognition, dignity, or protection. Biological sex may matter in some legal contexts. That does not justify forcing one definition into every legal context.

The bill also risks conflict with the Human Rights Act 1993, the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990, and existing public-sector obligations around equality, dignity, and non-discrimination. It may invite litigation, administrative confusion, and social division.

Parliament should not turn the Legislation Act into a culture-war instrument. If sex-based protections need careful legal clarification, that should be done through targeted law reform, proper safeguards, and context-specific wording. It should not be done through a sweeping definition imposed across all legislation.

Law must protect rights without turning human identity into administrative exclusion.

Submission deadline: 02 July 2026 – 11:59 pm

Summary Offences (Move-on Orders) Amendment Bill – Public Safety or Criminalising Poverty and Public Presence?

Public safety matters. Genuine violence, intimidation, and harassment should be addressed. But public order laws must not become tools for removing vulnerable people from sight or expanding discretionary police power without strong safeguards.

This bill gives Police the power to issue “move-on orders” requiring people to leave public areas and stay away for a period of time. It also creates new detention powers and criminal offences for failing to comply or refusing to provide personal details.

The bill explicitly includes begging, rough sleeping, and even “indicating an intent to inhabit a public place” within the behaviours that may trigger enforcement. That raises serious concerns about criminalising homelessness, poverty, and visible hardship rather than addressing their underlying causes.

New Zealand is already facing housing pressure, rising living costs, mental health strain, and growing social inequality. Expanding police powers over people sleeping or existing in public spaces risks turning social hardship into a criminal justice issue.

The wording of the bill is also broad and subjective. Terms such as “disruptive behaviour”, “breaching the peace”, and “indicating intent” may allow inconsistent enforcement and excessive discretion. Laws written too broadly can disproportionately affect homeless people, young people, Māori, Pasifika communities, protesters, and vulnerable individuals.

The bill further allows temporary detention for obtaining biographical details. Failure to remain during detention or failure to provide details becomes a criminal offence punishable by fines or imprisonment. That represents a significant expansion of coercive state power over low-level conduct.

Public spaces in a democracy should remain genuinely public. People should not risk criminalisation merely for existing in visible poverty or being considered socially undesirable.

A fair society addresses hardship with support before enforcement. Public discomfort must not become a justification for expanding state power over vulnerable people.

Submission deadline: 02 July 2026 – 11:59 pm

#MoveOnOrdersBill #NZPol #HumanRights #Homelessness #CivilLiberties #PublicSpaces #PolicePowers #BillOfRights #SocialJustice #UkesBaha

My Previous Submissions:

NZ–Singapore Essential Supplies Treaty – Safeguarding Supply Chains or Surrendering Emergency Powers?

This treaty would prevent New Zealand from using a recognised international trade safeguard designed for critical shortages of essential goods. Covered products include fuel, medicines, medical equipment, construction materials, industrial inputs, and other strategic resources.

The Government's own National Interest Analysis confirms that New Zealand would forgo its ability to use the World Trade Organization's critical shortages exception for designated essential supplies. This would occur through a binding treaty obligation negotiated in response to lessons drawn from COVID-19.

During emergencies, governments must retain maximum flexibility to protect their own populations. Powers that may be unnecessary in normal times can become vital during pandemics, conflicts, cyber incidents, natural disasters, or major supply disruptions.

New Zealand has never previously used this emergency power. However, the purpose of emergency powers is not frequent use. Their value lies in being available when circumstances become extraordinary and unpredictable.

Resilience comes from sovereign decision-making, domestic preparedness, and strategic flexibility. New Zealand should not voluntarily surrender future options that may be needed to protect essential supplies during a national crisis.

Emergency powers exist for emergencies. Once surrendered, they may not be available when they are needed most.

Submission deadline: 29 May 2026 – 11:59 pm

Modern Slavery Bill – Administrative Expansion Framed as Moral Reform

Exploitation must be addressed through direct enforcement, meaningful protection for vulnerable workers, and clear accountability for proven wrongdoing.

This bill is presented as an anti-slavery measure, yet much of its structure centres on disclosure, reporting, monitoring, and due diligence systems rather than direct intervention against exploitation itself. It expands administrative obligations across supply chains while leaving key boundaries unclear.

The framework risks shifting responsibility away from focused enforcement and toward permanent compliance systems: annual reporting, supplier monitoring, procurement restrictions, and ongoing disclosure obligations. Large corporations may absorb these systems easily. Smaller operators, contractors, and ordinary businesses may not.

The bill also introduces broad procurement exclusion powers and undefined indirect liability. Businesses may face reputational and economic punishment extending far beyond direct wrongdoing or judicial penalties.

Modern slavery is a serious issue. But serious issues do not justify vague obligations, expanding compliance structures, or governance through endless administrative supervision.

Real protection requires:

• direct enforcement against exploitation
• clear legal thresholds
• proportionate penalties
• practical limits on liability
• support for vulnerable workers
• targeting actual coercion rather than expanding reporting systems

A framework built primarily around disclosure and procedural compliance risks creating visibility without resolution and bureaucracy without measurable improvement.

Recording exploitation is not the same as preventing it.

Submission deadline: 28 May 2026 – 11:59 pm

Trespass (Specified Retail Premises and Other Matters) Amendment Bill – Control or Fair Process?

Law should balance protection with fairness. Any expansion of power must be matched with clear limits, evidence, and accountability.

This bill is framed as addressing retail harm, but its real effect is to expand exclusion. It allows individuals to be banned without proven wrongdoing, across multiple locations, and for extended periods. It shifts decision-making from neutral authority to private actors.

When process is weakened, fairness does not remain intact. It is replaced by discretion. Discretion without safeguards leads to inconsistency, overreach, and harm to those who have not acted wrongly.

A system that does not distinguish between mistake, suspicion, and serious conduct is not balanced. It is blunt.

When exclusion becomes easy, fairness becomes optional.

Submission deadline: 05 May 2026 – 11:59 pm

Health and Safety at Work Amendment Bill – Clarity or Reduced Protection?

Health and safety law exists to prevent harm before it occurs. Any amendment should strengthen the duty to protect workers, not reduce it.

Although this bill is framed as improving clarity and reducing compliance costs, its real effect is to narrow responsibility. It weakens the reach of core duties, especially for small PCBUs, and shifts the law away from universal prevention toward selective compliance.

When legal protection is reduced, the burden does not disappear. It is shifted onto workers through injury, illness, and avoidable risk. Workplace harm is not theoretical. It is lived.

Safety standards are usually written in response to harm. Weakening them risks repetition.

Submission deadline: 18 March 2026 – 11:59 pm

Environment (Disestablishment of Ministry for the Environment) Amendment Bill – Reform or Institutional Retreat?

Disestablishing the Ministry for the Environment is not administrative tidying. It alters how environmental oversight, accountability, and long-term stewardship are structured.

The question is not efficiency alone. It is whether environmental protection is being strengthened through reform or diluted through fragmentation and reduced independence.

“When oversight is weakened, consequences do not disappear. They are delayed.” – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 11 March 2026 – 11:59 pm

Inquiry into the 2025 Local Elections – Structural Repair or Narrative Control?

Low participation is not a technical failure. It is a warning. It signals erosion of trust in process, neutrality, and accountability.

If this inquiry concentrates on delivery mechanisms, administrative workflow, and surface compliance while avoiding structural legitimacy, it risks managing perception rather than restoring confidence.

Electoral systems are not sustained by bins, mail routes, or software. They are sustained by public belief that participation influences outcomes, that rules are applied neutrally, and that removal or exclusion is subject to strict due process.

Disengagement grows when citizens conclude that consultation is symbolic, oversight is internal, and accountability is circular.

“Democracy weakens when participation becomes ritual rather than influence.” – Ukes Baha

This inquiry must examine whether administrative design has drifted away from civic standing. Otherwise, it becomes an exercise in procedural reassurance.

Submission deadline: 27 February 2026 – 11:59 pm

Infrastructure Funding and Financing Amendment Bill – Growth Today, Burden Tomorrow?

This Bill expands levy powers, embeds infrastructure debt into water charges, and allows repayment periods of up to 50 years. It shifts long-term financial risk from the state to landholders and future homeowners.

Affordability analysis can be bypassed. Remission and postponement may be removed. Penalties of up to 21% per year may apply. Accelerated recovery provisions allow forced sale of undeveloped land.

“Infrastructure must serve communities — not bind them to hidden debt.” – Ukes Baha

Public submissions close: 20 February 2026 – 11:59 pm

Social Security (Accident Compensation and Calculation of Weekly Income) Amendment Bill – Clarification or Retrospective Validation?

This Bill does more than clarify policy. It retrospectively validates decisions that may have been unlawful and overrides recent court rulings. It shifts the cost of administrative delay onto injured and vulnerable people.

By requiring backdated ACC payments to be allocated to earlier periods, it enables recalculation of past entitlements and supplementary assistance. It prioritises administrative alignment over legal certainty and lived fairness.

“When the State corrects its own errors by rewriting the past, accountability weakens.” – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 20 February 2026 – 11:59 pm

Arms Bill – Public Safety or Expansion of Executive Control?

The Arms Bill repeals and replaces the Arms Act 1983, establishing a new centralised regulatory regime under an autonomous Arms Regulator. While presented as a public safety reform, the Bill significantly expands executive discretion, regulatory reach, and criminal liability.

The legislation introduces broader infringement powers, extended suspension and revocation mechanisms, expanded data-sharing through the national arms registry, and the ability to redefine key classifications by Order in Council. These changes shift the framework from targeted risk management to a system of ongoing administrative control.

Law-abiding licence holders face increased compliance obligations, heightened penalties, and wider enforcement powers. At the same time, the Bill offers limited evidence that these structural expansions will meaningfully address organised crime, illicit trafficking, or the root drivers of violence.

“When regulation becomes perpetual oversight, trust erodes faster than risk declines.” – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 16 February 2026 – 11:59 pm

Crimes Amendment Bill – Protection or Overreach?

This Bill expands criminal liability through elastic language and layered offences. It increases maximum penalties, elevates selected victim classes, widens trafficking definitions, and introduces executive control over certain prosecutions.

Several provisions rely on subjective thresholds, including “limited opportunity to defend”, “abuse of vulnerability”, and theft committed in an “offensive, threatening, insulting, or disorderly manner”. Criminal law must be clear and predictable. Vagueness shifts power from courts to discretion.

The Bill also restricts proceedings against undercover officers unless the Attorney-General grants leave, with conclusive certification by the Commissioner of Police. This raises separation-of-powers concerns.

“Criminal law must be precise, proportionate, and exceptional — not elastic.” – Ukes Baha

The question is not whether harm should be addressed. It is whether expanded coercive power, offence duplication, and broader discretion will strengthen justice or weaken legal certainty.

Submission deadline: 16 February 2026 – 11:59 pm

Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Bill – Regulatory Rollback in the Name of Proportionality?

Narrows the scope of earthquake-prone buildings, removes low seismic zones from designation, and allows compliance deadlines stretching decades. Public risk remains while obligations are deferred.

“When safety is stretched across decades, the risk does not disappear — it settles.” – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 16 February 2026 – 11:59 pm

Emergency Management Bill (No 2) – Preparedness or Permanent Powers?

This Bill replaces the Civil Defence Emergency Management Act 2002 and reshapes New Zealand’s emergency governance framework following the North Island severe weather events inquiry.

While presented as resilience reform, it expands Ministerial rule-making powers, compliance orders with strict liability offences, and civil immunities. The risk is not preparedness — it is permanence.

“Emergency powers should expire — not settle in.” – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 15 February 2026 – 11:59 pm

Planning Bill and Natural Environment Bill – Reform or Reset Without Consent?

These bills centralise planning authority while diluting local democracy and iwi partnership. Environmental protection is reframed as a negotiable balance rather than a duty.

“Nature does not negotiate with economic targets.” – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 13 February 2026 – 11:59 pm

Budget Policy Statement 2026 – Discipline or Austerity?

The statement prioritises fiscal restraint and debt metrics over prevention, social resilience, and long-term wellbeing. Structural harm and inequality are deferred in favour of short-term balance-sheet discipline.

“Budgets reveal values more clearly than promises ever do.” – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 04 February 2026 – 11:59 pm

Commerce (Promoting Competition and Other Matters) Amendment Bill – Reform or Permission?

Despite pro-competition framing, the bill enables permission-by-silence, long exemptions, and expanded secrecy. Entrenched market power is managed rather than dismantled.

“Competition that avoids power is not competition at all.” – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 04 February 2026 – 11:59 pm

Public Works Amendment Bill – Efficiency at the Cost of Rights

This bill expands compulsory acquisition powers while narrowing objection rights, weakening judicial oversight, and diluting protections for Māori land. Administrative speed and infrastructure delivery are prioritised over consent, proportionality, and Te Tiriti obligations.

“Public works must not become a vehicle for dispossession.” – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 27 January 2026 – 11:59 pm

Agreement to Establish the Pacific Resilience Facility – Solidarity or Financialisation?

While framed as climate resilience, the agreement lacks enforceable community safeguards. It risks debt-driven responses that undermine Pacific sovereignty and indigenous leadership.

“Resilience must be built with communities, not on them.” – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 21 January 2026 – 11:59 pm

Telecommunications Amendment Bill – Connectivity or Control?

This bill expands regulatory and ministerial power over telecommunications infrastructure with insufficient privacy, proportionality, and civil liberties safeguards. It risks normalising surveillance-capable systems through infrastructure law rather than democratic mandate.

“Infrastructure power is political power.” – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 14 January 2026 – 11:59 pm

Telecommunications and Other Matters Amendment Bill – Technical Fixes, Hidden Reach?

Framed as technical alignment, this omnibus bill bundles unrelated provisions in ways that reduce parliamentary and public scrutiny. Executive enforcement powers are expanded through legal and technical complexity rather than transparent policy debate.

“Complexity is often where accountability disappears.” – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 14 January 2026 – 11:59 pm

Meteorological Services (Acquisition and Policies) Legislation Amendment Bill – Public Science for Sale?

This bill risks commercial and ministerial capture of publicly funded weather and climate data. Public safety, scientific openness, and long-term resilience are subordinated to pricing discretion and executive control.

“Weather data is public safety infrastructure.” – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 14 January 2026 – 11:59 pm

Education and Training (System Reform) Amendment Bill – Streamlining or Standardising Children?

The language of system reform masks a shift toward centralisation, compliance, and market-style governance. Local decision-making, professional judgment, and relational education are displaced by metrics, contracts, and executive control, weakening genuine Te Tiriti partnership.

“Education is a relationship, not a production line.” – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 14 January 2026 – 11:59 pm

Racing Industry (Closure of Greyhound Racing Industry) Amendment Bill – Ethics Without Transition?

Although addressing animal welfare, the bill lacks binding, funded guarantees for the long-term care of displaced animals and affected workers. It relies on administrative assurances rather than enforceable protections.

“Ending harm requires responsibility, not abandonment.” – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 09 January 2026 – 11:59 pm

Land Transport (Revenue) Amendment Bill – User Pays or Public Burden?

Framed as funding reform, this bill shifts transport costs onto users while failing to ring-fence revenue for equitable public transport outcomes. It risks regressive impacts on low-income and rural communities and entrenches road-user charging without transparent accountability.

“Revenue mechanisms shape behaviour — and inequality.” – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 08 January 2026 – 11:59 pm

Building and Construction Sector (Strengthening Occupational Licensing Regimes) Amendment Bill – Safety or Gatekeeping?

While presented as consumer protection, this bill raises barriers to entry, centralises control, and favours large operators over small, Māori, and regional tradespeople. It risks credential inflation without addressing systemic construction failures.

“Licensing should protect skill — not entrench power.” – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 08 January 2026 – 11:59 pm

Building and Construction Sector (Self-certification by Plumbers and Drainlayers) Amendment Bill – Trust or Conflict of Interest?

This bill expands self-certification without adequate independent oversight, creating conflicts of interest and weakening consumer protection. Liability risks are shifted onto homeowners rather than addressed through robust inspection regimes.

“Self-certification without scrutiny is deregulation by stealth.” – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 08 January 2026 – 11:59 pm

Life Jackets for Children and Young Persons Bill – Safety or Overreach?

Presented as a “simple safety measure,” this bill in fact duplicates existing Maritime Rules, removes parental and skipper discretion, and imposes a one-size-fits-all national mandate on families already practising safe behaviour. It replaces local authority, judgement, and Te Tiriti-based decision-making with centralised regulation that adds no proven safety benefit.

“Good safety law supports families and communities — it does not replace them.” – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 11 December 2025 – 11:59 pm

Why this Bill is unnecessary and overrides family and community authority | Read the full submission

Financial Markets Conduct Amendment Bill – Transparency or Concealment?

Presented as a “simplification” of climate reporting, Amendment Paper No. 446 in fact legalises unsubstantiated climate statements, removes independent verification, and exempts most major companies from disclosure entirely. These changes weaken financial-market integrity and enable high-pollution and extraction industries to operate without scrutiny.

“A disclosure system that permits concealment is not transparency — it is corruption by design.” – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 4 December 2025 – 11:59 pm

Why this Amendment enables concealment and weakens accountability | About Scott Simpson | Read the full submission

Redress System for Abuse in Care Bill – Redress or Restriction?

Presented as a framework for justice, this Bill in fact creates exclusions that deny redress to many survivors, protects the Crown through legally hollow apologies, and contradicts the Royal Commission’s survivor-centred recommendations. Those most harmed by State care — especially Māori and care-experienced survivors who later offended due to trauma — face new barriers instead of recognition.

“Redress cannot heal when it begins by excluding the very people the State harmed.” – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 26 November 2025 – 11:59 pm

Why this Bill restricts redress and protects the Crown | About Erica Stanford | Read the full submission

Fast-track Approvals Amendment Bill – Fast-track or Fast-bypass?

Marketed as a fix for supermarket prices, this Bill in fact weakens environmental safeguards, reduces public and Māori participation, and expands ministerial influence over project approvals. It speeds up development by slowing down scrutiny — and hides systemic restructuring behind a popular issue.

“Fast-track should never mean bypassing the safeguards that protect people and place.” – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 17 November 2025 – 2:00 pm

Why this Bill expands power and weakens safeguards | About Chris Bishop | Read the full submission

Local Government (Auckland Council) (Transport Governance) Amendment Bill – Democracy or Direction from Wellington?

Presented as “greater accountability”, this Bill in fact recentralises Auckland’s transport under ministerial control, gives ministers voting power over local plans, and allows vetoes on Auckland’s own road and funding decisions. It replaces one unaccountable body with another — and calls it reform. While it promises efficiency, it mainly entrenches political control and silences local democracy.

“Localism without power is illusion.” – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 09 November 2025 – 11:59 pm

Why this Bill centralises power and weakens Auckland’s voice | About Chris Bishop | Read the full submission

Inquiry into Performance Reporting and Public Accountability – Accountability or Illusion?

Framed as a “review of reporting frameworks”, this inquiry exposes how New Zealand’s performance system has become fragmented, opaque, and short-term. Instead of connecting public money to public value, it produces thousands of pages that few can interpret. True reform requires a Performance and Accountability Act, independent outcome verification, and Treaty-centred reporting that makes government results visible and fair.

“Accountability without clarity is illusion.” – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 29 October 2025 – 11:59 pm

Why reform is essential to restore trust | Read the full submission

Animal Welfare (Regulations for Management of Pigs) Amendment Bill – Validation or Violation?

Presented as a “transition for farmers”, this Bill quietly legalises practices a court already ruled unlawful, delays welfare reform until 2035, and removes independent checks from animal-welfare law. It uses legal wording to hide a political act — rewriting history instead of fixing cruelty. While it claims to “support welfare”, it mainly protects industry interests and weakens the rule of law.

“You cannot make justice by declaring illegality valid.” – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 23 October 2025 – 5:00 pm

Why this Bill rewrites the law and delays change | About Andrew Hoggard | Read the full submission

Taxation (Annual Rates for 2025–26, Compliance Simplification, and Remedial Measures) Bill – Simplification or Favouritism?

Sold as “simplification”, this Bill quietly hands more control to Inland Revenue, lets Ministers share taxpayer data across agencies, and changes tax rules after the fact. It’s full of technical wording that hides big shifts in power — away from Parliament and toward unelected officials. While the name suggests help for taxpayers, most of the real benefits go to large companies and government departments, not ordinary New Zealanders.

“Simplification must not become a cover for privilege.” – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 23 October 2025 – 11:59 pm

Why this Bill expands control and weakens privacy | About Simon Watts | Read the full submission

Retail Payment System (Ban on Merchant Surcharges) Amendment Bill – Hiding Costs, Hurting Small Businesses

Framed as “consumer protection”, this Bill bans visible surcharges — forcing all consumers to pay blended prices that hide real costs and disadvantage small merchants. It rests on contested data, grants sweeping delegated powers, and risks eroding transparency, fairness, and competition in New Zealand’s payment system. What appears as fairness is, in reality, a quiet shift from visibility to concealment — from open pricing to hidden burden.

“When truth in price disappears, fairness soon follows.” – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 12 October 2025, 11:59pm

Why this Bill hides costs and harms fairness | About Scott Simpson | Read the full submission

Summary Offences (Demonstrations Near Residential Premises) Amendment Bill – Criminalising Dissent Under the Mask of Privacy

This Bill is presented as a balance between privacy and protest, but it creates a new criminal offence for “unreasonable disruption” — a vague, subjective test that can be used to silence peaceful protest. It duplicates existing offences, introduces imprisonment for lawful assembly, and was drafted with no public or Māori consultation. What is framed as protection of privacy is, in truth, a quiet erosion of the right to dissent.

“When expression is filtered through comfort, democracy forgets its pulse.” – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 06 October 2025, 2:00 pm

Why this Bill threatens the right to protest | About Paul Goldsmith | Read the full submission

Defence (Workforce) Amendment Bill – Power Concentration Under the Guise of Efficiency

This Bill is presented as an “administrative clarification” for Defence workforce management, but in reality it centralises power in one Minister, weakens parliamentary oversight, and allows armed forces to replace civilian staff during lawful strike action. It erodes labour rights, blurs the boundary between military and civilian authority, and sets a dangerous precedent for executive overreach — all while omitting Te Tiriti and equity impact analysis. What is framed as flexibility is in fact a shift toward secrecy and militarisation of civilian functions.

“Democracy falters when power hides behind uniforms and silence.” – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 05 October 2025, 11:59 pm

Why this Bill erodes democracy and rights | About Judith Collins | Read the full submission

Regulatory Systems (Transport) Amendment Bill – Omnibus Overreach Disguised as Tidying

This Bill claims to deliver small “regulatory fixes,” but in fact it bundles changes across land transport, maritime, and aviation law, masks substantive reforms as minor edits, expands closure and investigatory powers without safeguards, and shifts compliance to electronic-only in ways that risk exclusion. Oversight and consultation are weak, Treaty and equity impacts are ignored, and the result is erosion of clarity, accountability, and public trust.

“A tidy-up that hides real change isn’t tidy — it’s erosion.” – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 02 October 2025, 11:59pm

Why this Bill erodes transparency and accountability | About James Meager | Read the full submission

Carter Trust Amendment Bill – Rewriting a Will by Statute

This Private Bill overrides Charles Rooking Carter’s will to force a six-month wind-up, earmarks $50,000 to a single parish, hands the balance to the Carter Society without purpose lock-ups, and limits Public Trust’s liability to dishonesty/gross negligence while deducting undefined “reasonable expenses.” Oversight is after the fact, not before; the normal cy-près court pathway is bypassed; and ministerial checks on the Society’s rule changes are stripped away. This is not stewardship — it is legislative overreach that erodes donor intent, transparency, and public confidence in charitable bequests.

“When Parliament rewrites a will without independent guardrails, charity is the first casualty — and trust is the next.” – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 02 October 2025, 11:59pm

Why this Bill erodes donor intent and accountability | About Mike Butterick | Read the full submission

Antisocial Road Use Legislation Amendment Bill – Punishment Disguised as Safety

This Bill claims to deter dangerous behaviour, but instead it embeds mandatory vehicle forfeiture and destruction, expands pre-conviction seizure powers, compels registered owners to disclose identifying information under threat of forfeiture, and gives Police wide closure powers that can penalise residents and bystanders. What looks like safety reform is actually overreach that erodes rights, chills assembly, and disproportionately harms Māori, Pasifika, youth, and low-income communities.

“A law that punishes beyond its target ceases to protect — it erodes trust.” – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 30 September 2025, 1.00pm

Why this Bill erodes rights and fairness | About Chris Bishop | Read the full submission

Clean Vehicle Standard Amendment Bill (No 2) – Climate Loopholes Disguised as Flexibility

The Clean Vehicle Standard was meant to drive down emissions. This Bill instead extends carbon credit lifespans, removes barriers between new and used import credits, lets polluters borrow against the future, grants ministerial power to weaken standards by regulation, and even manipulates credits so one credit can equal two or half depending on transfer. What looks like technical adjustments is actually a rollback that delays action, hides emissions, and locks New Zealand into a dirtier transport future.

“A true standard drives real change. A loophole only changes the numbers.” – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 26 September 2025, 11:59 pm

Why this Bill erodes climate action | About Chris Bishop | Read the full submission

Review of Standing Orders 2026 – Constitution Eroded by Procedure

Presented as efficiency and modernisation, this review entrenches Executive dominance, weakens select committee scrutiny, sidelines Te Tiriti o Waitangi, enables abuse of urgency, and silences public voice. What appears to be procedural housekeeping is in fact constitutional erosion — reshaping the very rules that decide whether Parliament serves the people or the Government of the day.

“Standing Orders are the constitution at work. When they privilege speed over scrutiny, the public pays the price.” – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 25 September 2025

Why this review erodes scrutiny and voice | About Parliamentary Practice in New Zealand | Read our full submission

Kororipo Pā Vesting Bill – Return in Form, Erosion in Mechanism

Returning Kororipo Pā to Ngāti Rēhia as kaitiaki is right in principle. But this Bill achieves it by ousting court review, making an amendable deed effectively supreme over Parliament, disapplying conservation and planning safeguards, preserving Crown-era concessions and bylaws, and even allowing transfer of the fee simple away from Ngāti Rēhia. What looks like a simple return risks fragmenting Ngāpuhi’s settlement and constraining hapū authority from day one.

“A true return empowers guardianship. A legal shortcut only changes the lock.” – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 25 September 2025, 11:59 pm

Why this Bill erodes safeguards | About Paul Goldsmith | Read the full submission

Regulatory Systems (Internal Affairs) Amendment Bill – Erosion Disguised as Housekeeping

Framed as a “regulatory tidy-up,” this omnibus bill bundles sweeping changes across births, deaths, marriages, charities, gambling, censorship, identity, fire levies, inquiries, and archives. It extends executive discretion, weakens privacy, enables the sale or amendment of public records, and breaches Te Tiriti protections. What looks like administrative efficiency is in fact the quiet dismantling of safeguards that protect rights, taonga, and public trust.

“Archives are the spine of a free society – when governments can sell, amend, or conceal them, truth itself is put up for auction.” – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 24 September 2025, 11:59 pm

Why this bill erodes trust and taonga | About Brooke van Velden | Read our full submission

Constitution Amendment Bill – Altering the Rules of the Game

Framed as “tidy-up” continuity, this bill extends ministerial and under-secretarial power beyond parliamentary mandate, relies on weak caretaker conventions, and incentivises election delays. It makes foundational constitutional changes without full public mandate, bypassing the robust democratic process required for reform. The result: concentrated power, loopholes for unelected office-holders, and weakened public trust.

“A constitution is the people’s contract – it must not be rewritten in the backroom.” – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 15 September 2025, 1:00 pm

Why this bill erodes accountability | About Paul Goldsmith | Read our full submission

Electoral Amendment Bill – Democracy Narrowed by Design

Marketed as “efficiency,” the bill instead disenfranchises all sentenced prisoners, authorises roll changes without consent, validates irregularities by executive order, and politicises polling operations. It suppresses participation — especially Māori — and risks skewing outcomes against fair representation.

“Election law should protect the vote, not those in power.” – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 11 September 2025

Why this bill erodes democratic rights | About Paul Goldsmith | Read our full submission

Patents Amendment Bill – Corporate Lock on Innovation

Marketed as “technical harmonisation,” the bill instead rewrites rules retrospectively and embeds higher hurdles that favour large patent holders. It risks stifling small inventors, universities, and community innovators while narrowing public access to knowledge and essential technologies.

“Patents must serve fairness and innovation — not hindsight.” – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 4 September 2025

Why this bill undermines fairness and innovation | About Scott Simpson | Read our full submission

Education and Training (Early Childhood Education Reform) Amendment Bill – Market Before Children

Marketed as improving “effectiveness” and “reducing burden,” the bill instead centralises power in a Director of Regulation and reframes early childhood education as labour-market support. It expands intrusive data powers, permits delegation of core regulatory functions to private actors, and favours large commercial providers while eroding community-led, kaupapa Māori, Pasifika, and rural services.

“Education must serve children and communities — not markets.” – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 1 September 2025

Why this bill undermines child-centred education | About David Seymour | Read our full submission

Public Service Amendment Bill – Centralised Control Disguised as Reform

Marketed as improving “performance,” the bill recentres power in the Public Service Commissioner and Prime Minister’s Department. It politicises hiring, weakens staff protections, embeds secrecy powers, and expands immunities — shifting the public service away from neutrality and into ministerial alignment.

“A politicised public service serves politics, not the public.” – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 31 August 2025

Why this bill erodes neutrality and accountability | About Judith Collins | Read my full submission

Legislation Amendment Bill – Omnibus Power Grab

Bundles multiple law changes into a single bill, bypassing proper scrutiny of each measure. It centralises legislative control in the Attorney-General, expands exemptions from oversight, absolves the PCO of liability, and introduces fees and levies for law-making functions. Behind the guise of “tidying up” statutes, it enables quiet erosion of rights and parliamentary accountability.

“When many doors are opened at once, watch what slips through.” – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 28 August 2025

Why this bill erodes parliamentary safeguards | About Judith Collins | Read my full submission

Local Government (System Improvements) Amendment Bill – Central Government Takeover of Councils

This bill hands Ministers and officials direct control over council rules and reporting, narrows the purpose of local government to “core services” and economic growth, and allows developers to shift infrastructure costs onto ratepayers. It erodes transparency, overrides local priorities, and converts councils into centrally directed delivery arms.

“Local government is not a branch office of central power — it is the community’s voice.” – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 27 August 2025

Why this bill takes over councils | About Simon Watts | Read my full submission

Anti-Money Laundering and Countering Financing of Terrorism (Supervisor, Levy, and Other Matters) Amendment Bill – Centralising Control, Expanding Intrusion

This bill replaces multi‑agency oversight with a single supervisor under the Prime Minister’s authority, enables sweeping rule‑by‑notice changes, authorises entry into dwellinghouses, and introduces an industry levy steered by ministerial strategy. It weakens parliamentary control and civil safeguards.

“Efficiency without safeguards is a shortcut to abuse.” – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 21 August 2025

Why this bill centralises and intrudes | About Nicole McKee | Read my full submission

Healthy Futures (Pae Ora) Amendment Bill – Centralising Control, Weakening Partnership

This bill rewires our health system — removing sector principles, diluting Te Tiriti mechanisms, embedding private providers, and centralising ministerial control. It weakens independent oversight and shifts focus from equity and partnership to political direction and target-chasing.

"Public health must be guided by equity, transparency, and genuine partnership — not centralised control and target-chasing." – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 18 August 2025

Why this bill threatens public health | About Simeon Brown | Read my submission

#ProtectPublicHealth #DefendTeTiriti #HealthEquityNow #StopHealthErosion

Online Casino Gambling Bill – Normalising Harmful Gambling

This bill legitimises and expands one of the most harmful forms of gambling by creating a licensing regime for online casinos, permitting advertising, and allowing offshore operators into New Zealand’s market. It risks increasing addiction, debt, and social harm while making the government financially dependent on gambling revenue.

"Access to health and wellbeing is not served by legitimising harmful gambling products." – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 17 August 2025

Why this bill threatens public health | About Brooke van Velden | Read my submission

#StopGamblingHarm #ProtectCommunities #GamblingReformNZ #PublicHealthFirst

Legal Services (Distribution of Special Fund) Amendment Bill – Diluting Justice Access

This bill weakens the Special Fund’s purpose by expanding ministerial discretion and allowing funds to be spent on vague “support” activities instead of guaranteed front-line community law services. It risks diversion of money away from those most in need, with no added transparency or Te Tiriti safeguards.

"Access to justice is not served by vague funding powers." – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 14 August 2025

Why this bill threatens community legal services | About Paul Goldsmith | Read my submission

#ProtectLegalAid #DefendCommunityLaw #JusticeForAll #StopFundDiversion

Employment Relations Amendment Bill – Competitiveness at the Cost of Fairness

This bill dismantles core employment protections, removes grievance rights for higher-income earners, expands contractor loopholes, and weakens procedural fairness. It shifts New Zealand toward a “fire-at-will” culture that undermines job security for all.

"Employment law exists to prevent arbitrary power — not enable it." – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 13 August 2025

Why this bill erodes worker rights | About Brooke van Velden | Read my submission

#ProtectWorkerRights #FairnessNotFireAtWill #StopMisclassification #DefendDueProcess

Online Harm Inquiry – Safety Framed, Freedom Endangered

This inquiry repackages digital censorship, state-corporate alliance, and vague threat narratives as “protection for youth.” It risks entrenching surveillance culture, silencing dissent, and outsourcing public policy to unaccountable tech actors.

"If the power to define harm isn’t shared — it will always be abused." – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 30 July 2025

Why this inquiry threatens digital freedom | Read my submission

#FreedomNotFilters #ProtectSpeech #StopDigitalCensorship #YouthDeserveTruth

Immigration System Integrity Bill – Control Expanded, Rights Eroded

This bill disguises power centralisation, migrant surveillance, and fiscal extraction as “sustainability.” It turns immigration into a system of monitoring, monetisation, and ministerial override — not fairness or integrity.

"When the law sees you as a cost — you’re no longer protected by it." – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 28 July 2025

Why this bill erodes rights and due process | About Erica Stanford | Read my submission

#NoSurveillanceState #RightsNotTags #StopThePowerGrab #TreatyAppliesToAll

Overseas Investment Amendment Bill – Sovereignty Sold, Scrutiny Silenced

This bill fast-tracks foreign acquisitions, merges protective tests, and hands unchecked power to Cabinet — all while ignoring Te Tiriti and public interest. It’s not oversight — it’s surrender.

"You don’t protect national interest by making it easier to sell the nation." – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 23 July 2025

Why this bill endangers public assets | About David Seymour | Read my submission

#ProtectOurAssets #NoFastTrackSales #TreatyNotTrade #SeymourSellsUsOut

Game Animal Council Amendment Bill – Conservation Compromised

This bill rewrites the National Parks Act to protect invasive species, centralises decision-making in a single Minister, and opens our most sensitive public lands to political and recreational manipulation. It’s not conservation — it’s concession.

"You don’t preserve the wild by protecting the invaders." – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 24 July 2025

Why this bill threatens biodiversity and law | About James Meager | Read my submission

#ProtectTheParks #NoTrophyZones #NatureNotNegotiable #GameOverMeager

Ports and Maritime Inquiry – Control Framed as Coordination

This inquiry positions ports as productivity assets while ignoring Treaty rights, community voice, and environmental integrity. It opens the door to privatisation, centralised control, and worker displacement — under the guise of “sector performance.”

"You don’t protect a nation by selling off its gateways." – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 13 July 2025

Why this inquiry threatens public ownership | Read my submission

#PortsForPeople #ProtectPublicAssets #TreatyWaters #StopPortPrivatisation

Climate Change Response Bill – Forests Restricted, Pollution Protected

This bill caps climate-positive land use while shielding high-emissions agriculture. It imposes ballots, bureaucratic filters, and mapping hurdles — turning carbon sequestration into a privilege, not a right.

"You don’t fight climate change by handcuffing carbon sinks." – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 07 July 2025

Why this bill undermines climate justice | About Simon Watts | Read my submission

#LetForestsGrow #StopLandControl #ClimateTruth #TreatyLandRights

Public Finance Amendment Bill – Nicola Willis’s Model: Wellbeing Out, Power In

This bill removes wellbeing obligations from fiscal policy, expands secrecy around risks, and centralises control over public funds — turning the Budget into a tool of numbers without people.

"A healthy balance sheet must include the health of its people." – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 07 July 2025

Why this bill endangers fiscal justice | About Nicola Willis | Read my submission

#ProtectWellbeing #FiscalTransparency #TreatyMatters #StopMinisterialOverreach

Financial Markets Amendment Bill – Criminalising Ethical Banking

This bill forces financial institutions to serve all customers regardless of ESG or climate concerns — or face jail time. It punishes banks for refusing harmful industries and undermines responsible lending.

"You can’t legislate ethics out of finance without opening the door to corruption." – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 04 July 2025

Why this bill enables harmful industries | Read my submission

#StopForcedFinance #EthicalBankingMatters #ClimateIntegrity #RejectBadBills

Valuers Bill – Restructuring Behind Closed Doors

Amendment 286 quietly rewrites the rules of land valuation — expanding board control, removing experience thresholds, and risking the politicisation of a crucial public-interest profession.

"A fair valuation system needs independence — not silent rewrites that serve hidden agendas." – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 27 June 2025

Why this bill undermines valuation integrity | About the Minister | Read my submission

#DefendProfessionalIntegrity #ValuationMatters #StopRegulatoryOverreach #TreatyImpactsIgnored

Judicature (Timeliness) Legislation Amendment Bill – Efficiency Over Justice

Restricts access to civil claims, weakens appeal rights, and permits the quiet closure of coroners’ inquiries — all in the name of “timeliness.”

"Justice must be timely — but even more, it must be true, transparent, and accessible." – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 25 June 2025

Why this bill erodes public justice | About the Minister | Read my submission

#AccessToJustice #StopSilentShutdowns #ProtectAppealRights #JusticeNotControl

Building and Construction (Small Stand-alone Dwellings) Amendment Bill – Deregulation Disguised as Housing Help

Removes building consent for small dwellings without defining the rules — opening the door to unsafe builds, council bypass, and silent regulatory creep.

"Consent can't be removed without clarity. Transparency is not optional — especially in law." – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 23 June 2025

Why this bill removes vital safeguards | About the Minister | Read my submission

#ProtectConsent #StopQuietDeregulation #BuildResponsibly #ConsentMatters

Financial Markets Conduct Amendment Bill – Power Without Public Safeguards

Expands regulator powers while stripping away the checks that protect people’s rights, transparency, and Treaty-based accountability.

"Market control without public oversight is not reform — it's erosion." – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 23 June 2025

Why this bill expands unchecked power | About the Minister | Read my submission

#StopUnaccountablePower #ProtectPublicOversight #TreatyMatters #NoToMarketCapture

Financial Service Providers Bill – Corporate Systems Prioritised

Reshapes regulation to favour financial institutions — reducing transparency and weakening fair dispute processes.

"Fairness is not a market preference — it's a public right." – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 23 June 2025

Why this bill favours corporations | About the Minister | Read my submission

#DefendPublicAccess #StopCorporateCapture #FairFinanceNow #NoToOpaqueSystems

Small Dwellings Bill – Consent Removed, Conditions Hidden

Lets buildings go up without consent — but hides the rules. Risks safety, transparency, and future misuse.

"Consent can't be removed without clarity. Transparency is not optional — especially in law." – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 23 June 2025

Why this bill is dangerous | About the Minister | Read my submission

#ProtectConsent #StopQuietDeregulation #BuildResponsibly #NoBlankCheques #WatchThePattern

Credit Contracts Bill – Borrower Rights Gutted

Removes borrower protections. Replaces oversight with deregulated market tools. Prioritises lenders over people.

"Finance should serve people — not exploit them." – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 23 June 2025

Why this bill is harmful | About the Minister | Read my submission

#DefendBorrowerRights #ProtectConsumers #NoToFinancialErosion #StopMarketCapture

Regulatory Standards Bill – Law by Minister, Not by Parliament

Gives Ministers power to rewrite rules behind closed doors. Overrides Parliament. Blocks courts. Ignores Te Tiriti. A full legal bypass dressed as “efficiency.”

"This isn’t a reform — it’s a regime. It lets Ministers write their own laws, answer to no one, and call it fair." – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 23 June 2025

Why this bill is harmful | About the Minister | Read my submission

#StopDeregulation #NoToMinisterRule #ProtectPublicRights #TreatyMatters #DefendDemocracy #NoRubberStampLaws #EndExecutiveOverreach

Vocational Education Bill – Corporate Control in Disguise

Disbands Te Pūkenga, replaces Treaty partnership with industry boards. Shifts education from public good to private gain.

"This bill dismantles the heart of vocational learning." – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 18 June 2025

Why this bill is harmful | About the Minister | Read my submission

#DefendVocationalEducation #TreatyPartnership #ProtectLearners #StopTheErosion

Public Works Bill – Land Grabs Disguised as Urgency

Redefines “critical infrastructure” to force land acquisitions. Caps compensation. Ignores Treaty protections. Silences Māori and local voices.

"This isn’t about infrastructure — it’s about eliminating resistance." – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 13 June 2025

Why this bill is harmful | About the Minister | Read my submission

#StopLandGrabs #ProtectCommunityVoice #RespectTeTiriti #NoToMinisterialOverreach

Education and Training Bill (No 2) – Control Over Care

Forces schools to chase numbers, not care. Silences teachers. Ignores Māori unless it helps the state.

"A polite plan to turn schools into factories." – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 12 June 2025

Why this bill is harmful | About the Minister | Read my submission

#StopEducationErosion #ProtectStudents #DefendFreedom #TreatyMatters

UAE CEPA Bill – Deals in the Dark

Lets UAE investors buy big NZ assets with no checks, no Treaty clause, no public say.

"This isn't trade — it's blind trust sold cheap." – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 23 May 2025

Why this bill is harmful | About the Minister | Read my submission

#StopInvestorPrivilege #ProtectNZAssets #TransparencyNow #TreatyFirst

Juries (Age of Excusal) Bill – Dignity Denied

Pushes elders to serve past 65. Ignores age, health, and care duties.

"Let seniors rest — they’ve done their part." – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 22 May 2025

Why this bill is harmful | About the Minister | Read my submission

#RespectOurElders #ProtectRetirementRights #DignityMatters

Sale and Supply of Alcohol Bill – Profit Over Pause

Lifts alcohol bans on sacred days. Undermines reflection and respect.

"Not every day is for drinking." – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 22 May 2025

Why this bill is harmful | About the Minister | Read my submission

#KeepAnzacSacred #RespectTheDays #ProfitCanWait

Anzac Day Amendment Bill – History Rewritten

Expands Anzac Day to future wars. Turns memory into marketing.

"Anzac Day must honour real sacrifice — not slogans." – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 22 May 2025

Why this bill is harmful | About the Minister | Read my submission

#KeepAnzacTrue #NoToFutureWars #TruthMatters

Employment Relations Bill – The Quiet Firing Bill

Legalises pressure-exits. Hides evidence. Gags workers.

"When workers are silenced, justice is lost." – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 22 May 2025

Why this bill is harmful | About the Minister | Read my submission

#StopQuietFiring #FairWorkMatters #SpeakUp

Medicines Amendment Bill – Health for Sale

Fast-tracks foreign drugs. Blocks scrutiny. Serves pharma, not people.

"Our health is not for sale." – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 19 May 2025

Why this bill is harmful | About the Minister | Read my submission

#StopMedicinesAmendment #PublicHealthFirst #SafeMedsNZ

Plain Language Repeal Bill – Silencing by Confusion

Ends the rule that government must speak clearly. Hurts access, hides truth, blocks understanding.

"No clarity, no trust. This repeal erases public voice." – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 14 May 2025

Why this bill is harmful | About the Minister | Read my submission

#PlainLanguageNow #ClarityIsPower #StopTheRepeal #FairCommunicationNZ

Land Transport (Time of Use Charging) Bill – The Toll Trap

Charges drivers without fixing transport. Tracks movement. Hits workers and small business hardest.

"This isn’t smarter travel — it’s silent surveillance for profit." – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 27 April 2025

Why this bill is harmful | About the Minister | Read my submission

#TollTrap #FairTransportNZ #PrivacyMattersNZ #StopTheToll

4-Year Term Bill – More Power, Less Accountability

Lets leaders extend their rule. Cuts voter voice. Weakens democracy.

"This isn’t stability — it’s a blank cheque for power." – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 17 April 2025

#NoTo4YearTerm #KeepThemAccountable #DemocracyMatters #StopThePowerGrab

Referendums Framework Bill – Vote Rigging, Legalised

Gives government full control over referendums. Blocks fair questions. Silences citizens.

"A law that fakes fairness to control outcomes." – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 17 April 2025

#DefendDemocracy #NoToFPP #LetThePeopleDecide #StopPowerGrabs

Auckland Future Fund Bill – Privatisation Pipeline

Enables asset sell-offs with weak oversight and no Treaty safeguards. Public wealth at risk.

"No checks. No voice. No future." – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 8 April 2025

#NoAssetSellOff #ProtectOurFuture #TeTiriti #TransparencyNow

Right to Repair Bill – Too Much, Too Fast

Good idea, bad law. Overcomplicates repairs, raises costs, and hurts supply without protecting consumers well.

"Balance matters — fairness needs fixing too." – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 3 April 2025

#RightToRepair #FairLegislation #ConsumerRights #BusinessImpact

Courts Amendment Bill – Secrets and Shortcuts

Reduces public access, hides jury processes, and expands unchecked powers. Justice without sunlight.

"Justice must be seen to be trusted." – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 3 April 2025

#StopJusticeErosion #CourtTransparency #FairTrialRights #NoSecretCourts

Tribunals Amendment Bill – Power Without Balance

Expands government control, weakens legal safeguards, and risks privacy. A quiet takeover of justice.

"Streamlining shouldn't steamroll our rights." – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 3 April 2025

#GovernmentOverreach #ProtectOurRights #JusticeReform #RuleOfLaw

Occupational Regulation Bill – Power Without Safeguards

Gives regulators more power with less oversight. Weakens industry standards, raises fines, and cuts accountability.

"It’s not reform — it’s unchecked control over every profession." – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 1 April 2025

#StopPowerGrabs #ProtectConsumers #FairRegulation #PublicTrust

AML/CFT Amendment Bill – Overreach Disguised as Safety

Burden on small business, unclear penalties, weak privacy rules. No transition plan. High risk, low fairness.

"Fighting crime shouldn't crush trust or business." – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 28 March 2025

#AMLReform #ProtectSMEs #PrivacyMatters #StopRedTape

Māori Purposes Bill – Control, Not Partnership

Centralises control over Māori governance. Legalises shady appointments. Shuts out rural voices.

"This bill speaks of support — but acts as suppression." – Ukes Baha

Submission deadline: 27 March 2025

#ProtectMāoriVoices #TeTiriti #StopOverreach #SelfDetermination

Customs Amendment Bill – Hidden Taxes, Heavy Hands

Raises levies, increases bureaucracy, and risks double-taxing. Bad for small business, worse for fairness.

"Another tax, dressed as reform — with no way out." – Ukes Baha

Submission date: 5 March 2025

#StopRedTape #FairTrade #ProtectSmallBusiness #NoToDoubleTax

Water Services Bill – Centralised Control, Local Silence

Takes water from local hands. Ignores Māori guardianship. Burdens communities with no real say.

"Water belongs to people, not power." – Ukes Baha

Submission date: 19 February 2025

#StopWaterCentralisation #MāoriStewardship #ProtectLocalVoices #TreatyOfWaitangi

BBNJ Treaty Agreement – Oceans for All, Not for Control

Risks global overreach on shared seas. Undermines Māori kaitiakitanga. Prioritises power over protection.

"Stewardship, not sovereignty, should guide the seas." – Ukes Baha

Submission date: 21 January 2025

#SharedOceans #BBNJAgreement #Kaitiakitanga #TreatyOfWaitangi

Climate, Trade & Sustainability Bill – Green Words, Risky Moves

Poorly designed. Undermines real sustainability. Ignores Māori voices. Promotes unstable, corporate solutions.

"Real climate care needs Indigenous wisdom and food security — not slogans." – Ukes Baha

Submission date: 15 January 2025

#ClimateJustice #MāoriGuardianship #TrueSustainability #TreatyOfWaitangi

Treaty Principles Bill – Rewrite by Force

Tries to fix in law what should grow in trust. Undermines partnership. Erodes Māori rights and public unity.

"The Treaty isn’t broken — but this bill would break its spirit." – Ukes Baha

Submission date: 13 January 2025

#HandsOffOurTreaty #CoDesignMatters #TruePartnership #WaitangiJustice

Regulatory Standards Bill – Deregulation in Disguise

Hands power to unelected boards. Prioritises profit over people. Cuts out Māori, community, and oversight.

"They call it efficiency. We call it erosion." – Ukes Baha

Submission date: 4 January 2025

#ProtectDemocracy #PublicWelfareFirst #NoToDeregulation #HonourTheTreaty