‘Just let them do it' an ideological attack on regulations
For a Bill set to transform New Zealand into a libertarian nightmare, it has an extremely boring name.
The Regulatory Standards Bill (RSB) sounds like one of those pieces of legislation debated on a dreary Thursday afternoon in an almost empty House of Representatives. Not because anyone in particular wants it, but because those whose job it is to monitor the efficacy or otherwise of government regulations declares it to be necessary.
MPs protesting to their respective party whips that they know absolutely nothing about this sort of Bill's content are told that participation in such debates is good for them. Speaking for 10 minutes about something one knows absolutely nothing about is key political skill. Without it, no politician should expect to do more than shepherd boring Bills through a nearly empty House for the rest of their (short) political career.
The RSB may sound like one of those Bills, but it is anything but. According to one critic, the Bill will "neuter the ability of lawmakers to consider anything outside of individual liberty and property rights".
That this proposed piece of legislative dynamite is the product of the Act New Zealand party is entirely unsurprising.
David Seymour and his caucus are the most disciplined band of ideologically driven politicians in our Parliament. Liberty and property are their twin lodestars, and by them they navigate the choppy seas of New Zealand's resolutely non-ideological politics.
Knowing exactly where they want to go has made it much easier for Act to determine, often with alarming and near-revolutionary clarity, what they ought to do. Boiled down to its essence, Act's political mission is captured in the French expression laissez-faire — loosely translated as "let them do it".
If the actions of individuals cause no harm to others — let them do it.
If those actions involve only their own property — let them do it.
Contrariwise, if some individuals seek to compel other individuals for any reason other than preventing them from causing harm to others, then don't let them do it.
And if that compulsion involves regulating the use of other individuals' private property, then definitely don't let them do it.
Understandably, socialists are not (and never have been) great fans of laissez-faire. The collective welfare is (or used to be) their lodestar.
Individuals determined to put themselves, and their property, ahead of measures designed to serve the common good should not be allowed to do it.
Obviously, a great deal rests on how "harm" is defined.
If your dairy farm is polluting the streams and rivers that others are accustomed to fishing and swimming in, does that constitute harm?
If it does, then, surely, the state is entitled to regulate your farming practices? To restrict the ways in which you can legally use your private property.
Alternatively, if a friend undertakes to sell you a few grams of cannabis, what business is it of the state's? Why should smoking weed, which most medical scientists have determined to be essentially harmless, be punishable by law?
Why aren't individuals, if they're old enough to assess and accept the consequences of using cannabis, and it causes others no harm, allowed to do it?
If pressed, Act will always put the rights of individual New Zealanders, and the sanctity of their private property, well ahead of the nation's collective welfare. These twin principles are what, with National's and New Zealand First's backing, Act intends to enshrine in the RSB.
If it becomes law, then all regulatory legislation will be weighed carefully by an appointed board against the rights of liberty and property.
If Parliament, in its wisdom, elects to override those rights, then the citizens required to surrender them must be fairly compensated.
Naturally, environmental groups, iwi, trade unionists and the overwhelming majority of the inhabitants of NGO-land regard the RSB with horror and dismay. They no doubt believed that, having been soundly defeated several times already, such libertarian legislative forays were things of the past.
The Left, generally, is flabbergasted and outraged that the coalition remains committed to the RSB's passage.
Boy, are they making a fuss. To hear them talk, the Bill might have been co-sponsored by Sauron and Voldemort.
But, don't be alarmed. One parliament cannot bind another. If the RSB looks like transforming Aotearoa-New Zealand into Mordor, then the next government can simply repeal it.
■Chris Trotter is an Auckland writer and commentator.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scoop
a day ago
- Scoop
Pacific News In Brief For 20 June 2025
New Caledonia - cocaine The French Directorate General of Customs says 67 kilograms of cocaine has been seized in New Caledonia between April and May this year. Local media reported the operation resulted in the discovery of more than 500 kilograms of narcotics at various ports across the region. New Caledonia and French Polynesia Customs took part in a joint operation with the Australian Border Force, New Zealand Customs, the US Homeland Security Investigations and Jamaica. At the end of March this year, 142 kilograms of cocaine was seized in French Polynesia. It was found packed in insulation panels of a refrigerated container bound for Australia. Fiji - domestic violence Fiji police have reported 105 cases of family violence against women and children for May 2025. More than 200 women had crimes committed against them - 11 percent of these were sexual offences and 89 percent were assault-related. Seventy-two of those crimes were from a spouse or partner. One hundred and 14 children had crimes done against them and more than two-thirds of those were sexual offences. Five police officers were charged with offences during the month - including one facing charges of unlawful supply and import of illicit drugs. Police said there was a 14 per cent reduction in overall crime which is ahead of its 10 per cent target. Fiji - election workers The Fijian Elections Office says FJ$44,000 - about US$20,000 - in temporary worker payments from the 2018 General Election remain unpaid. FBC reported this has come to light during the Public Accounts Committee submission on the election office's 2021-2022 Audit Report. The election office's financial controller said the delay was caused by incomplete employee information for some of the 12,000 temporary election workers. The office said they are closely coordinating with the Fiji National Provident Fund to verify the remaining employee data to fast-track this process. Papua New Guinea - mining The mining company New Porgera is celebrating achieving its production targets, despite the impact of continuing lawlessness and a devastating landslide in the region. The new company, run by Barrick Gold, but with a significant PNG Government shareholding, replaced the former company after a lease dispute shut it down for more than three years. The Porgera region of Enga Province experienced the devastating Mulitaka landslide, which claimed many lives and shut the main road link out of the district. There have also been extensive law and order issues that resulted in a state of emergency being implemented, and dozens of arrests being made, many for illegal mining within the mine pit. Papua New Guinea - prisons The Papua New Guinea Correctional Service has signed an agreement with the Department of Education which will see education and training programmes rolled out in jails across the country. NBC reported that the memorandum highlights the vital role education plays in restoring dignity, instilling hope, and creating opportunities for those seeking a second chance. The rollout of structured learning and skills training within prisons is expected to transform lives behind bars. Acting corrections commissioner Bernard Nepo called the initiative a lifeline for inmates.
Newsroom
a day ago
- Newsroom
Seymour's ‘light up' message alarms tobacco researchers
Deputy Prime Minister David Seymour's comments to a London audience calling smokers 'fiscal heroes' – and declaring people should 'light up' to save their government's balance sheet – are reprehensible and make light of addiction, tobacco researchers say. Seymour largely stands by his remarks, arguing smokers are a net economic positive through tobacco tax and reduced superannuation from early deaths – but has conceded he was wrong to describe as 'quite evil' the Labour government's plan to create a smokefree generation. Early in its term, the coalition Government sparked controversy by repealing a law that would have banned the sale of tobacco to anyone born after January 1, 2009 and dramatically reduced both the number of outlets able to sell tobacco and the nicotine levels in cigarettes. Seymour spoke about the decision following a speech to the Adam Smith Institute, a neoliberal think tank based in London, during a visit to the UK this month. Asked about the smokefree generation concept, which has been taken up by the British government, Seymour said the New Zealand policy had been 'quite evil, in a way' and described smokers as 'fiscal heroes'. 'If you want to save your country's balance sheet, light up, because … lots of excise tax, no pension – I mean, you're a hero,' he said to laughter from the audience. Seymour told Newsroom his remarks were based on arguments he made before about the role of the Government when it came to smoking. 'I'm not seriously suggesting that we should encourage people to smoke to save the Government money. It's clearly an absurd statement, but you do have to have a bit of a sense of humour in this life, otherwise it would be too dull.' The state should make sure the public was aware of the dangers of smoking, while stopping smokers from doing harm to others (such as through second-hand smoke) and ensuring they did not impose financial costs on others. 'As far as I can tell, that condition is well and truly satisfied: I mean, the Government gets $2 billion of tax revenue from about, what is it now, 8 percent of the population?' (The Customs Service collected $1.5b in tobacco excise and equivalent duties in 2023/24, while that year's NZ Health Survey reported a daily smoking rate of 6.9 percent.) Seymour said it was 'just a sad fact' that smokers were also likely to die younger, reducing the amount of superannuation they collected, while he was unconvinced their healthcare costs would be markedly higher than those who died of other illnesses. 'If anything, smokers are probably saving other citizens money.' However, he backtracked on his suggestion the last Government's smokefree generation plans were 'quite evil', saying: 'I'm not sure that was the right word, on reflection. 'I certainly think the idea that, in 30 years' time, someone's going to have to prove that they're 49 rather than 47 does seem draconian – it seems almost a bit of an Orwellian situation.' While the Adam Smith Institute's event page billed Seymour as the Deputy Prime Minister, he said his speech was delivered in a private capacity rather than on behalf of the Government, while he had not used taxpayer money for his travel (he also confirmed the Institute did not cover any of his costs). Labour health spokesperson Ayesha Verrall says the last Labour government's smokefree policy was fundamentally based on humanitarian grounds. Photo: Marc Daalder Labour Party health spokesperson Ayesha Verrall told Newsroom the minister's remarks showed the Government had the wrong priorities when it came to its smokefree policy. 'They are prioritising balancing the books on the misery done to smokers due to the harms of tobacco.' Verrall said there was clear evidence of tobacco's cost to the health system, and the last government's smokefree generation policy had been 'fundamentally based on humanitarian grounds'. 'This is an addictive product: it is unique in that it kills half the people who use it. It's not like the more nuanced debates we have about … social media for kids.' University of Otago associate professor Andrew Waa told Newsroom Seymour's 'perverse' arguments were further evidence of the Government placing tobacco tax revenue over other concerns. 'It's literally blood money: it's money that the Government taxes on a deadly product, and yet they're still treating it as a profit margin for them.' Waa said the minister's comments ignored the social costs of tobacco, and would only help an industry 'intent on exploiting addiction at whatever cost'. 'I don't know if it's naive, or if it's [his] ideology that it's all personal choice – there's no choice when it comes to smoking some of these things. 'There's a reason why certain communities are more likely to smoke, because they get tobacco products shoved in their face all the time; by the time they decide to think that they don't wanna use the stuff, it's too late.' Janet Hoek, the co-director of tobacco control research partnership ASPIRE Aotearoa, told Newsroom that the comments were 'really ridiculous and reprehensible'. 'It just seems incredibly disappointing that Mr Seymour apparently thinks it's amusing to suggest that addiction, and early and often painful death, are a good way to generate government revenue.' Hoek said the environmental and productivity costs associated with smoking also needed to be taken into account, as did the social harm done to communities when their loved ones died prematurely. While some politicians dismissed public health experts as 'muppets … living in ivory towers', the suggestion that smokers were making an informed choice was itself out of touch with reality.
Scoop
2 days ago
- Scoop
Three Major French Investors Reject Deep Sea Mining
Three major French financial institutions, including two of the country's largest banks and the state's public investment arm, have announced their rejection of deep sea mining during the United Nations Ocean Conference (UNOC) last week in Nice. The three institutions are: BNP Paribas - France's largest and Europe's second largest bank. BNP Paribas confirms it does not invest in deep sea mining projects due to the intrinsic environmental and social risks involved. Crédit Agricole - The second largest bank in France and the world's largest cooperative financial institution. Crédit Agricole stated it will not finance deep sea mining projects until it has been proven that such operations pose no significant harm to marine ecosystems. Groupe Caisse des Dépôts - The public investment arm of the French Government, which also holds a majority stake in La Banque Postale. The Group has pledged to exclude all financing and investment in companies whose main activity is deep sea mining, as well as in deep sea mining projects. Amundi Asset Management also made a statement that it seeks to avoid investment in companies 'involved in deep sea mining and/or exploration'. This now brings to 24 the number of financial institutions who exclude deep sea mining in some form. Deep Sea Mining Campaign Finance Advocacy Officer Andy Whitmore says: 'This is a truly significant outcome from UNOC. Until recently no French financiers had matched their Government's position calling for a ban. This UN Ocean Conference, co-hosted by France, was the perfect opportunity for the most important national players to step up and be counted' These financial announcements are a sign of global concern pushing itself on to the agenda. World leaders renewed calls for a global moratorium on the dangerous industry, with French President Emmanuel Macron denouncing it as 'madness', with UN Secretary-General António Guterres responding to recent announcements from President Trump by warning that the deep sea 'cannot become the Wild West.' Slovenia, Latvia, Cyprus and the Marshall Islands also announced their support for a moratorium or precautionary pause, bringing the number of like-minded countries to 37. Andy Whitmore concluded 'the events at UNOC have added further momentum to the financial establishment rejecting deep sea mining. The recent unseemly rush to mine is creating push-back from the financial world, as much as from governments and civil society.'
