1. INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY
1.1 This submission on the Regulatory Standards Bill is made by The New Zealand Initiative (the Initiative), a Wellington-based think tank supported primarily by major New Zealand businesses. In combination, our members employ more than 150,000 people.
1.2 The Initiative undertakes research that contributes to developing sound public policies in New Zealand. We advocate for the creation of a competitive, open and dynamic economy and a free, prosperous, fair and cohesive society.
1.3 The Initiative’s members span the breadth of the New Zealand economy; transparent and accountable governance is essential for economic prosperity and public trust. The views expressed in this submission are those of the author rather than the New Zealand Initiative’s members.
1.4 The Regulatory Standards Bill represents an important step towards improving the quality of regulation in New Zealand. By establishing clear principles of responsible regulation and requiring transparency in legislative development, the Bill addresses longstanding concerns about regulatory quality that have contributed to significant national challenges.
1.5 The Initiative strongly supports the Bill’s objectives of enhancing transparency and accountability in law-making. However, we identify several critical areas requiring attention to ensure the Bill achieves its intended purposes effectively.
1.6 The New Zealand Initiative submits that the Bill should proceed, subject to the following recommendations:
• The composition of the Regulatory Standards Board must prioritise legal expertise to ensure credible and robust assessments of legislative consistency with the principles
• Clear and comprehensive guidance must be developed for government agencies on applying the principles of responsible regulation, particularly regarding property rights and compensation
• The Bill’s principles must be carefully integrated with existing regulatory frameworks, particularly the Resource Management Act, to ensure coherence across the regulatory system
• A public interest test should be incorporated for instances of property takings
• Compensation should aim to make the person whose legal rights have been taken or impaired no worse off than if this had not been done. In this sense it should be “full” rather than “fair” compensation.
• Additional safeguards should be included to strengthen rule of law protections
• The framework should be extended to local government regulation in future
• Implementation timelines should allow adequate time for developing guidance materials and establishing the Board before consistency assessment requirements commence
• The non-binding nature of the Board’s recommendations should be retained to preserve Parliamentary sovereignty while ensuring transparency
