IN THE MATTER OF:

Introduction

I write to express my strong and unequivocal opposition to the proposed Regulatory Standards Bill. While the Bill purports to enhance regulatory quality, its provisions and underlying philosophy pose severe risks to New Zealand’s democratic values, legal commitments, and societal equity. The following points outline the reasons for my opposition:

Reasons for Opposition

• Neglect of Public Welfare: By framing regulation primarily as an economic burden, the Bill disregards the essential role of regulation in safeguarding the public, protecting the environment, and ensuring fair outcomes for all citizens. Regulations are not obstacles to progress; they are the frameworks that underpin a just and functional society.
• Undermining the Treaty of Waitangi: The Treaty of Waitangi is not merely a historical agreement but a foundational constitutional document that enshrines principles of partnership, protection, and participation. The Bill’s failure to explicitly acknowledge the Treaty demonstrates a profound disregard for these principles. Furthermore, the Treaty embodies values of communal stewardship and sustainability—values that resonate deeply with Māori culture and have universal relevance in addressing modern challenges such as climate change and resource management. Ignoring this perspective undermines the shared heritage and future of all New Zealanders.
• Erosion of Democratic Accountability: Placing significant authority in an unelected Regulatory Standards Board risks centralising power without corresponding public oversight. This is anti-democratic and incompatible with New Zealand’s traditions of participatory governance. Regulatory decisions must remain subject to the will of the people through transparent and accountable processes.
• Facilitation of Deregulation: The Bill’s emphasis on efficiency and economic impact creates a framework ripe for the erosion of critical protections. Weakening regulations under the guise of promoting business interests endangers public health, environmental sustainability, and social equity. History has repeatedly demonstrated that unregulated markets fail to account for externalities that harm society at large.
• Practical Inefficiencies and Bureaucratic Overload: The introduction of additional assessments and evaluations will overburden regulatory processes, creating delays and inefficiencies that hinder timely governance. This is particularly concerning in areas requiring urgent action, such as climate change mitigation and public health emergencies.
• Exclusionary Stakeholder Engagement: The consultation mechanisms proposed in the Bill fail to ensure equitable representation, risking the marginalisation of underrepresented groups. Effective regulation requires the inclusion of diverse voices, particularly those historically excluded from decision-making processes.

Conclusion

The Regulatory Standards Bill is a deeply flawed proposal that prioritises narrow economic considerations over the broader needs of society. It undermines New Zealand’s constitutional commitments, erodes democratic accountability, and risks creating a regulatory landscape that is inequitable, ineffective, and unsustainable. I urge the government to withdraw this Bill and instead pursue a regulatory framework that genuinely reflects the values, aspirations, and diversity of New Zealand.