Labour Will Repeal Regulatory Standards Bill
'The Regulatory Standards Bill has no place in a fair and democratic New Zealand and Labour is committed to repealing it in our first 100 days if elected next year,' Labour justice spokesperson Duncan Webb said.
'This Bill is another concession by Christopher Luxon to ACT that puts corporate interests ahead of the public good, making it harder to pass laws that protect people and the environment.
'Under the Regulatory Standards Bill, laws that would keep people healthy and safe, like requiring landlords to heat homes, limiting the sale of vapes, or keeping our air and water clean would be at risk.
'It allows David Seymour to create his own hand-picked 'appeals body of regulatory economists' to criticise laws that are out of line with his minority views.
'Put another way, it takes power away from communities and hands it to corporate friends of the ACT Party.
'Christopher Luxon was too weak to stand up against it, but Labour will repeal it,' Duncan Webb said.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Otago Daily Times
2 hours ago
- Otago Daily Times
Exploring diligently throughout Question Time
When I get back from leave, I am going to have to find out if the HR department is in cahoots with the government. The two occasions I took a break last year coincided with one of Prime Minister Christopher Luxon's two visits to Dunedin, and the other with Health Minister Simeon Brown's trip to town. So naturally as soon as I headed out the door last week Mr Brown was back in Dunedin again for another hospital announcement — one slightly more palatable than the last one. I still have some way to go to beat my much-respected former boss Audrey Young: her holidays had such a spooky habit of coinciding with party leaders being rolled that it came to be known as "the curse of Audrey" — but it's still a little frustrating. So having missed all the fun, let's go back in time to Parliament's last sitting week, and Wednesday's Question Time, which may have set a record. Of the 12 questions, a quarter were asked by southern MPs ... although maybe only a third of those elicited anything which might have been of any interest to their constituents. First up was Act New Zealand Southland list MP Todd Stephenson, who got to ask the acting Prime Minister — who, coincidentally, just happened to be his party leader David Seymour — the hardy perennial of whether he stood by all his government's statements and actions? Spoiler alert: yes, he did ... particularly the NZ Infrastructure Commission's freshly announced National Infrastructure Plan. Mr Stephenson followed up by asking about access to new medicines — which the man who is also an associate health minister with responsibility for drug-buying agency Pharmac was more than happy to talk about — and then GPs (ditto). It was going so well, but Mr Stephenson then incurred the Speaker's wrath by asking his leader to comment on comments made once upon a time by the little-remembered Labour MP Charles Chauvel about the Regulatory Standards Bill. "No, that's not something you [Mr Seymour] can make any comment on whatsoever. So sit down and have another go at the question," the Speaker harumphed. Fair play to Mr Stephenson; he found a cunning way around the Speaker's edict by asking if the acting PM agreed with any statements that he had recently seen in relation to the Regulatory Standards Bill. "Well, I do, as a matter of fact," Mr Seymour replied with glee, before embarking on the sort of answer which makes Gerry Brownlee turn puce. Q10, from National Waitaki MP Miles Anderson, was much more benign, as he asked Agriculture Minister Todd McClay about the government's plan to ban full farm-to-forestry conversions — as covered in last week's Southern Say. No alarms and no surprises here, as Mr McClay gave a suitably apocalyptic answer to Mr Anderson's question: "What is the impact on rural communities of whole farm-to-forest conversions?" Q11, from Labour Taieri MP Ingrid Leary to Associate Housing Minister Tama Potaka on proposed changes to the Retirement Villages Act, was when things got really interesting. She wanted to know if the draft legislation would include "provisions for repayments but not mandate them". This is a topic close to Ms Leary's heart (she has a member's Bill in the ballot on just this subject), not to mention thousands of retirement village residents and their families affected by the issue. Most villages operate under an occupation rights (ORA) agreement system, whereby residents buy the right to live in what might well be their final home, but not ownership of it. That sum is then held until the ORA ends. An ORA does not come cheap — in the realm of hundreds of thousands of dollars. Which is high, true, but which may also be fair enough in some circumstances: villages are expensive to build and costly to run. But an ORA comes with associated bonds and fees, and gruesome tales abound of residents, or their families, being obliged to pay fees after moving to a higher-care unit or dying. Also problematic is the process of getting out of an ORA. The village will usually claim a portion of the ORA as an "exit fee" and then resell the ORA. However, that right may well have accumulated a considerable capital gain in the intervening period — something that the former ORA owner cannot benefit from. Many, and Ms Leary is one, think this effectively means villages are enjoying an interest-free loan from their residents — albeit that they receive a secure and comfortable lifestyle and residence for their golden years. Consumer has been running a campaign for years on the issue of what it sees as unfair retirement village contracts; Mosgiel's Brian Peat, president of the Retirement Village Residents' Association, has also been hot on the topic for a number of years. Mr Potaka has bad news for Ms Leary, saying that the Northern Advocate article on which she has based her question had been incorrect Undeterred, she then asked if Mr Potaka would commit now to mandating fair repayment times and terms. "There are a number of matters that we are considering as part of a broader reform of this matter, including dispute resolution protections, and a wide range of consumer protections and various matters, including those that the member referred to, will be considered and are still under active consideration," Mr Potaka replied reassuringly ... but not reassuringly enough for Ms Leary, who pointedly followed up with: "What other sectors are there where people have no control over when someone pays them back their own money?" That was quite a broad and open question, Mr Potaka replied, but he could say that the government was "responsibly reviewing" a wide variety of matters, including consumer protections for elderly folks living in retirement villages. Would that include, perhaps supporting a law change which would require operators to give residents their money back within three months, Ms Leary wondered, knowing full well that such a Bill existed. "If the member is asking me to jump in front of Cabinet and make decisions by way of a question and answer session, I will not be doing that," Mr Potaka said. "What I will be doing is diligently and professionally undertaking my responsibility as associate minister of housing to explore these issues and bring these matters through the policy decisions and, ultimately, to this fine chamber." But whether that exploration makes anyone happy is a question for another day.
1News
2 hours ago
- 1News
Chinese consulate asks NZ film festival to can Philippine doco
Chinese officials have asked that a Filipino documentary be removed from future screenings at the New Zealand Doc Edge Festival, saying doing so would be in the interest of Chinese-New Zealand relations. The documentary, Food Delivery: Fresh from the West Philippine Sea, had its world premiere on June 30 at The Capitol Cinema in Auckland — after being withdrawn from screenings in its home country. The film was scheduled to premiere at the Puregold CinePalo Film Festival in Manila was pulled from the line-up days before it aired over what the film creators described as "external factors" earlier this year. It was then selected by New Zealand's Doc Edge Festival — the first to be able to do so. But, this week, festival organisers were asked to do as the Filipino counterparts had and cut the doco from its schedule. In correspondence seen by 1News, the Chinese Consulate requested the festival refrain from all future screenings — if it wanted to act in the "interest of public and China-New Zealand relations". The correspondence pointed out that New Zealand Prime Minister's Christopher Luxon's recent visit to China had been "fruitful". ADVERTISEMENT Festival organisers said the written request followed several calls to ticketing staff and board members, requesting that the screenings be pulled. "The documentary... is rife with disinformation and false propaganda, serving as a political tool for Philippines to pursue illegitimate claims in the South China Sea. Its screening would severely mislead the public and send the wrong message internationally," the email from the Chinese Consulate read. "This documentary disregarded history and facts, and is designed to amplify the Philippines' wrong position on the issue concerning the South China Sea and deliberately distort and hype up the maritime situation." Doc Edge general manager Rachael Penman said they've refused the request and willingly stand by all their filmmakers. "We are a voice for independent filmmakers," she said. "We programmed a film that we felt was really important to be seen and brings up a conversation with so many people. I hope that everyone does go and see this now, and has their own opportunity to make their own decisions about this film." 1News has reached out to both the Chinese Embassy and the Chinese Consulate via email and phone with questions around its specific concerns with the film and why it was appropriate to exert political pressure in such a way. While it didn't address those specific questions, the Chinese Embassy said as a "matter of principle we hope that publicly promoted content would reflect realities rather than spreading mis or dis-information". ADVERTISEMENT It also called for disputes to be peacefully resolved and expressed its desire for "countries outside the region to play a constructive role in this regard instead of doing the opposite". The Philippine Embassy declined to comment other than to say "it is aware" of the situation. Directed by Filipino filmmaker Baby Ruth Villarama, the tells the stories of local fishermen, the national Coast Guard, and the Navy as they work in the South China Sea – with a particular focus on the area around the Scarborough Shoal. Contained within the Philippines' Exclusive Economic Zone, China's had de-facto control of it since 2012 and has refused to accept an international ruling that said its claim over almost the entirety of the South China Sea has no legal basis. University of Otago senior lecturer in politics Nicholas Khoo said there is "absolutely no ambiguity" and the Scarborough Shoal is "Filipino territory". "The challenge is that China doesn't respect the Filipino position, nor does it respect the international legal issue that is at stake here." He said the situation "underlines the importance of New Zealand standing up for the international legal order" and for it to continue to "reassert our interest in freedom of navigation", adding that "there should not be an aggressive use of force to attempt to solve issues". ADVERTISEMENT Khoo said the film clearly contradicts China's narrative and that will be why officials are working to prevent its screening. New Zealand's Ministry of Foreign Affairs responded on behalf of government officials and said it fully supports freedom of expression. In relation to the territorial disputes, it said New Zealand does not take a position on individual claims in the South China Sea, but did want disputes resolved peacefully via diplomacy and in accordance with international law, in particular the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. In China the film has also been heavily criticised. Commentators with its state-run network described it as revealing a "pattern of selective storytelling that serves broader political interests" and a "propaganda piece" that "dodges the gritty geopolitics of the region and the realities of the territorial issues and maritime disputes". Villarama told 1News today she had deliberately chosen to shine the lens on the people rather than the politics. "Because we really want to celebrate us as people, without politicising the issue. We want to diplomatically reach out and share our personal stories, because the more personal we go, the more authentic we can be with others." She said she held no animosity towards China, and invited those opposed to her documentary to go and watch "so they can know the truth about our people". ADVERTISEMENT "We don't have any agenda. There is no 'Western influence'."
RNZ News
11 hours ago
- RNZ News
Prime Minister's office only given hour's notice before Winston Peters' speech dismissing 'trade war'
Christopher Luxon and Winston Peters. Photo: RNZ / Samuel Rillstone The Prime Minister's office was only given an hour's notice of the contents of a speech by the Foreign Affairs minister, in which Winston Peters criticised the language used by politicians regarding a "trade war." While Peters did not name Christopher Luxon in his speech, it was seen as a veiled swing at a series of phone calls the Prime Minister made to other world leaders over US tariffs , and the lack of notice he had been given ahead of a Foreign Policy speech by the Prime Minister a few days earlier. Correspondence first obtained by Newsroom and also released to RNZ show the communications Peters' office had with officials ahead of the speech in Hawai'i, and the notice it gave the Prime Minister's office. On 10 April, the Prime Minister delivered a speech to the Wellington Chamber of Commerce, in which he said free trade was "worth fighting for" and raised the idea of CPTPP and European Union nations working together to champion rules-based trade. He also announced his intention to speak to other world leaders about trade, amid the tariffs which had then-recently been announced by US President Donald Trump. The same afternoon, Peters told reporters at Parliament such remarks were "all very premature," and confirmed the Prime Minister had not discussed with him the idea of getting CPTPP and EU nations together. A day later, Peters was in Tonga, and during a press conference advised politicians to "tone down" and wait for the dust to settle. "Markets lose their nerve. Share market speculators lose their nerve. Politicians should not lose their nerve." He also said the Prime Minister should consult with him. "He didn't check it out when he made that speech and made those phone calls. And so I hope that he'll get my message and he'll call me next time." From there, Peters was off to Hawai'i, and delivered a speech in Honolulu. He told a gathering at the East-West Centre the "tendency to hype up a debate about how international trade works into a black-and-white, polarising issue has been unfortunate and misguided" and criticised "military language" like "trade war" and the "need to fight." Peters said such language "has at times come across as hysterical and short-sighted." WhatsApp messages show Peters' senior foreign affairs adviser Michael Appleton informed staff in the Prime Minister and Trade Minister's offices about the quote Peters had given reporters at Parliament about the Prime Minister's idea to get the CPTPP and EU together to talk trade being "premature", as well as the responses he gave reporters in Tonga about the tariff approach. On 12 April, he also gave the group a heads up that Peters would be giving a speech in Honolulu, and that they would get an advance copy once it was finalised. In a separate WhatsApp group with Ministry of Foreign Affairs officials, Appleton informed them Peters had "decided" to "deliver brief (5-10 minute) remarks" about the US/NZ relationship in Hawai'i. Appleton said he would work on a draft on the six-hour flight to Honolulu, using the "existing briefing/comms pack" and Peters' instructions as a guide. "But warning you I'll want some reactions to a draft text later today once we have arrived in Honolulu," he said. The responses to Appleton's message were redacted. Via email, Appleton informed senior diplomats and officials of Peters' intention to deliver the speech on US/NZ relations, and sent them a draft. "It has been written to his instructions, and he has signed it off (subject to same [sic] final tweaking tonight). So the scope for further edits is limited." The recipients included the Secretary of Foreign Affairs and Trade Bede Corry, the US Ambassador Rosemary Banks, MFAT's deputy secretary for trade and economic Vangelis Vitalis, its deputy secretary for the Asias and America Grahame Morton, Americas divisional manager James Waite, and Pacific divisional manager Sarah Lee. Appleton told the group Peters' office would alert the Prime Minister, the Trade Minister, and the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet "to the fact of this speech, and then provide an advance copy one MFA has finished his tweaking. "So no need for you to do any coordination on that front." The advance copy was sent to the offices via WhatsApp an hour before Peters delivered the speech. Following the speech, Luxon said coverage had been a "media beat-up" and insisted that he and Peters were actually on the same page. "We both agree that tariffs and trade wars are bad. We both think cool, calm and collected approaches are what is needed from ourselves and from our partners. We'll continue to build out our US relationship, and we're strengthening our bilateral ones," he told Morning Report . "So from our side, whether it's Winston and I, whether it's the five ministers dealing with it, and frankly, our whole cabinet, we're very aligned on our approach." Asked on Friday about the released of the communications and the notice his office was given, Luxon told reporters he had said all he wanted to say on the matter. "I've spoken about that ages ago, I've got nothing further to say about it. As you know, we're just making sure we're upholding the rules-based trading system." Peters' office did not wish to comment further. "We have nothing to add on this issue, which was well traversed at the time." Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
