The Bill is part of ACT Party leader David Seymour's coalition agreement. Photo: RNZ Graphic / Nik Dirga
The Regulatory Standards Bill will stop lawmakers from taking broader public health considerations into account, warns a leading cancer specialist.
ACT Party leader David Seymour said the Bill - part of its coalition agreement with the National Party and New Zealand First - was about requiring governments to be more "transparent" about the financial impact of legislation.
However, Auckland University associate professor George Laking, a medical oncologist and clinical Māori director in the Centre for Cancer Research, said the real intent seemed to make economic factors the only measure.
"We already have transparency around lawmaking - that's why we have regulatory impact reports," he said. "This seems more like an attempt to narrow the frame for what's considered to count as being relevant in that type of decision."
He joined other public health and legal experts, who have criticised the bill (in its current form) as allowing tobacco, alcohol industries or environmental polluters to seek compensation, if future legislation costs them profit.
Associate professor George Laking from Auckland University. Photo: Supplied
"You wouldn't want your surgeon to operate with a blunt instrument, but that's exactly the approach the Regulatory Standards Bill takes to the health needs of our society," Laking said.
"I acknowledge ACT's faith in market-based solutions, but it is well known that markets fail. That's why the government should be very careful about market deregulation, when human health is at stake."
The Bill also appeared to be a covert attack on the principles and articles of te Tiriti o Waitangi, he said.
"The situation we have is quite inequitable in terms of distribution of wealth and power in society, and that's a big reason why government needs to be able to take into account a wider set of principles, than rather just the narrow, market-based, productivity-based ones that ACT likes to focus on.
"The definition of 'liberty' begs the question of whose liberty - the ability to pollute the environment, to get people hooked on addictive substances, that's one side of the liberty coin.
"The pursuit of short term economic gain is not necessarily the recipe for an harmonious society."
A spokesperson for David Seymour's office said in response the "alarmism is unfounded".
"What the bill actually says is that if a politician or government department wants to pass a regulation that infringes on your private property rights, they'll need to justify why. Inconsistency with the principles does not prevent any new legislation from being passed. All it requires is transparency to the taxpayer. That's not radical, it's democratic accountability. If a policy is justified, it will stand up to scrutiny," the spokesperson said.
"I think people are a bit sick of the fearmongering and misinformation being spread and just want to know what the bill means for them. The Regulatory Standards Bill will help New Zealand get its mojo back. It requires politicians and officials to ask and answer certain questions before they place restrictions on citizens' freedoms. What problem are we trying to solve? What are the costs and benefits? Who pays the costs and gets the benefits? What restrictions are being placed on the use and exchange of private property?
"This Bill turns 'because we said so' into 'because here's the evidence.' So if a politician wants to tax you, take your property, or restrict your livelihood, they should be able to show you their work. Some academics think they know best and have a problem with this, but ultimately it's about transparent lawmaking, less red tape, and better lives. All New Zealanders benefit from these principles."
Public submissions on the Regulatory Standards Bill close at 1pm Monday, 23 June 2025.
Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
