Sure, MMP makes for a more diverse government, but the buck stops at the quality of a politician’s coalition bargaining skills. Perhaps there’s a good reason why lawyers have been traditionally overrepresented in government.
Secondly, the bill’s content is obviously problematic insofar as it proposes to rewrite the country’s founding constitutional document and how it’s interpreted.
Finally, there’s the hilarious irony of seeing the brutal force of popular opinion breaking the official government website – even despite the Government’s pledge to improve the efficacy of the public sector.
The blind ambition to pass a bill that’s so profoundly unpopular only makes sense to me if it was designed to distract the masses. Instead, you’d expect traditionally controversial legislation to go by the wayside, or be considered reasonable by comparison.
Let’s look at some of 2024’s legislative highlights (or rather, lowlights).
One ideology to rule them all
There’s the Regulatory Standards Bill, which David Seymour says will “improve the quality of regulation”.
Together with the Treaty Principles Bill, they essentially attempt to embed Act’s libertarian philosophy into New Zealand’s constitutional framework by stifling regulatory limits, executive decision-making, and judicial interpretation.
At the heart of the bill is an ideological framework in which individual and property rights reign supreme above all other legislation, such as the Treaty of Waitangi, the Human Rights Act, or international legal obligations.
For context, the Legislative Advisory Committee and Treasury criticised a former iteration of the bill in 2011. Seymour also tried and failed to introduce the bill in 2021.
Moving on to the Crown Minerals Amendment Bill, which was introduced under urgency. As an aside, in the Government’s first 93 days, 13 bills were passed entirely under urgency.
Between 1987 and 2010, a 2011 study found 10 bills, on average, were passed under urgency entirely, per three-year term. Hell, if it’s good enough for the Human Rights Commission to come out swinging in favour of proper parliamentary debate, consultation, and due process then I’m all for it.
Back to minerals. Introduced by Shane Jones (another general election outlier), the bill aims to remove the ban on new petroleum exploration permits beyond onshore Taranaki, improve investor confidence, and ease the Crown minerals regime. Essentially, the clean, green New Zealand brand will soon be a thing of the past.
Similarly, there’s the Fast-track Approvals Bill, which passed its third and final reading in December despite thousands of public submissions opposing it or the conflict of interest issues behind it.
The “one-stop-shop” consenting regime means some projects (including mining) will no longer need to adhere to traditional consenting methods and environmental protections. It’s bad, but it could be worse – three ministers were originally slated to be at the helm of the decision-making. The move was scrapped at the last minute, thank hell.
It takes a village and yet…
Submissions on the Oranga Tamariki (Responding to Serious Youth Offending) Amendment Bill also closed last week. Although the bill pledges to reduce youth offending, it codifies military boot camps and allows for the use of seclusion and “reasonable physical force”.
Although the bill pledges to reduce youth offending, evidence on boot camps suggests “scared straight” programmes have been shown to increase crime.
Not convinced? Last year’s release of the Abuse in Care Inquiry report into the Te Whakapakari Youth Programme said: “Research demonstrates that ‘boot camps’ and other harsh ‘short, sharp, shock’ interventions are ineffective at reducing repeat offending.”
The inquiry’s 138 recommendations were released just days before the launch of Te Au rere a te Tonga youth justice residence, a boot camp for young offenders. I’d argue the Government’s official apology was offensive at best.
Crackdown on crime, cracked in the head
We also saw new gang legislation come into force in November. The legislation essentially makes gang membership an aggravating factor at sentencing and criminalises the display of gang insignia in public.
You’re right in thinking the legislation is ideologically at odds with the right wing’s love of “freedom of expression” – it’s one of the reasons why the Government backtracked on reforming hate speech legislation.
Yet, the bill became law despite the aforementioned obvious (Attorney-General Judith Collins even weighed in) and evidence suggesting prison-trigger-happy policy actually feeds gang recruitment. And lest we forget about the costs associated with a punitive approach to justice, which I’ve harped on about to the point of insanity.
Speaking of insanity, the Arms (Shooting Clubs, Shooting Ranges, and Other Matters) Amendment Bill was introduced in September. Championed by former gun lobbyist Nicole McKee, the bill reduces oversight of shooting clubs and ranges. Enough said.
I could go on about the conflicts of interest or the Government’s wilfully blind attitude toward research, due process, New Zealand’s history, and its people. Instead, here’s to a new year and better decision-making.