How should a select committee respond to a deluge of submissions? Does it matter if many submissions are part of a campaign playing on whipped up fears? 

Such questions now confront our select committees. A process-oriented Bill before Parliament has apparently attracted over 133,000 whipped up submissions.  

The Regulatory Standards Bill obliges Ministers to provide Parliament with specified important information when asking Parliament to pass laws and regulations. Parliament can do what it pleases with this information. It would be as free as now to pass, amend or reject any Bill, as it sees fit.  

From this perspective, the Bill is an administrative transparency measure. 

Not so for those opposing it. Hyperbole abounds. To Marama Davidson, Green Party co-leader, the Bill "seeks to destroy the very foundation of who we are". For Bryan Bruce, producer of film documentaries, it is "one of the gravest threats to our democratic life to ever come before our parliament". Last week, Bruce urged readers to "deluge" the select committee with more submissions. 

In my view, submitters' opinions should not be discounted because of misinformation or because they were part of a campaign. Individual dignity should be respected.  
Just as importantly, an orchestrated deluge of one-sided submissions does not measure the balance of public opinion. For that, ask a professional pollster to do a random survey.  

A focus on crude head counts of opinion invites the submission process to become an arms race charade for campaign organisers.  

A prime role of a select committee is to report back to the House on what changes to a Bill it recommends. Its reasons need to focus on what is likely to be best for New Zealanders overall. The House represents all New Zealanders.  

Two things follow. First, select committees should focus on identifying the reasons submitters are giving for their opinions. To do that properly they have to use AI when they have a deluge of submissions. Reporting on the thrust of the reasons needs to focus on tabulations, not the overall head count of opinions. 

Second, select committees must assess the quality of those reasons from an overall public policy perspective. They should tap into relevant expertise.  

In short, select committees should treat submissions respectfully, but focus on the quality of the arguments about each contended aspect of a Bill.  Rational deliberation needs to prevail over crude head counts.