Latest news with #MinistryofRegulation
Otago Daily Times
a day ago
- Politics
- Otago Daily Times
The efficacy of a submission is dubious in this Bill's case
David Seymour. File photo: Gregor Richardson We can now see on the Ministry of Regulation website a "summary of submissions" as a result of a consultation on the proposed Regulatory Standards Bill. The summary is dated May 2025, so we cannot be sure as to when it was published. We do know that the Bill itself was given its first reading on May 19 and is now before the select committee. The minister in charge of the Bill would have us believe that there is both widespread support for a grave need to legislate a prescriptive standard for our laws and regulations to comply with, and also that his, or the Act New Zealand party's, formula for such legislation is that which the public was asked to make a submission on, in December 2024. On closer examination, the minister's pronouncements would appear to be somewhat of a stretch, or perhaps he is not familiar with the summary of the submissions made on the proposal and now published by his own ministry. The executive summary contained in the document records the receipt of "approximately 23,000 submissions" (1) and that "analysis showed that 20,108 submissions (around 88%) opposed the Bill, 76 submissions (0.33%) supported or partially supported it, and the remaining 2637 submissions (about 12%) did not have a clear position". It does not take a genius to conclude that by a huge majority of those that responded to the consultation, this Bill is not wanted nor seen as necessary. Less than a third of 1% of those citizens who knew or cared enough about this important issue expressed support for it. A summary of reasons for opposing the proposed Bill included that it would "attempt to solve a problem that doesn't exist"; "result in duplication and increase complexity in lawmaking"; "undermine future Parliaments and democracy"; "lack recognition and provision for the Treaty of Waitangi"; "prioritise individual property rights over the collective"; and "lead to worse social, environmental and economic outcomes". Notwithstanding this overwhelming expression of opposition to the proposed Bill, we find it introduced to the House with none of these matters having been addressed, the minister in charge (David Seymour) stating with confidence that it will be passed in the current session of Parliament and come into effect on January 1, 2026. That the minister, with the support of his coalition partners, can bring this Bill into law is not questioned. The question is whether it is in the interest of his major coalition partner to continue to support this Bill without, at least, addressing the issues that have been raised by an overwhelming majority of submissions in its consultation stage. These will no doubt be mirrored in the submissions to the select committee, charged with considering the Bill, as was the case with the Treaty Principles Bill. The potential negative effects of this Bill arguably outweigh those of the Treaty Principles Bill, which both National and New Zealand First did not support past the first reading. Historically, two National party-led governments have rejected legislation in the same form as now presented for very sound constitutional and political reasons. These reasons remain as sound and as pressing as ever. Our prime minister will be treading a very narrow path should he choose to overlook the historical rejections of this Bill by earlier National Party-led governments and enact legislation contrived and promoted by the founders of Act, which blatantly tips the balance in favour of the protection and enhancement of property rights over those of good governance and preservation of the common good. Such a step, in combination with the negative response to the recent unseemly passage of the Fair Pay Amendment Act 2025 and the excessive response by the coalition parties to the performance of Ka Mate in the House, could see dark clouds gather over the prospects of this coalition retaining the Treasury benches come November 2026. • Noel O'Malley is a Balclutha lawyer. He is a past president of the Otago District Law Society.
NZ Herald
22-04-2025
- Health
- NZ Herald
Early childhood education licensing criteria may be cut after Government review
They included criteria that ensured a service's curriculum 'acknowledges and reflects the unique place of Māori as tangata whenua' and 'respects and supports the right of each child to be confident in their own culture'. The proposed changes would also remove the need for centres to provide hygienic facilities designed to help prepare or clean up paint materials, a 'tempering valve' for hot water taps and an adult-suitable toilet. Seymour, in a statement, advocated for changes that would remove the requirement for centres to maintain a constant indoor temperature of 18C 'when common sense says a minor deviation from 18 degrees won't hurt anyone'. He also supported centres no longer holding immunisation records for children over 15 months of age, given the Ministry of Health already did so. Ministry of Regulation officials agreed, encouraging the Government to 'revoke it at the earliest opportunity'. 'The regulation's primary purpose was for outbreak management; however, an alternative non-regulatory mechanism now exists for that purpose that does not rely on ECE service providers holding immunisation records,' the review said. Seymour, also the Act Party leader and a long-time campaigner for deregulation, said 'graduated enforcement tools' would be used from mid-2026 to respond to breaches of the remaining criteria. 'The only enforcement tools previously available were the granting or removal of ECE licences, which is too blunt a tool for managing minor breaches and enabling early intervention. 'Graduated enforcement will give the regulator a range of enforcement measures. They will be able to respond proportionately to breaches, changing the sector's culture from a punitive approach to promoting quality.' He promised the proposed changes would 'reduce unnecessary compliance costs, remove duplication and streamline operational requirements'. To make the changes, the Government would introduce the Education and Training (Early Childhood Education Reform) Amendment Bill. Seymour expected the bill, likely to land in the House in July, would be passed by the end of the year.
