Latest news with #CouncilOfTradeUnions
RNZ News
08-07-2025
- Politics
- RNZ News
Unions, former MPs, lawyers speak at Regulatory Standards Bill hearings
The second day of hearings on the proposed Regulatory Standards Bill has begun at Parliament. The first day saw a wave of opposition to the bill , but the Regulation Minister was dismissing concerns. While he had not watched all of the submissions from the first day, David Seymour said finding constructive criticism of the bill was like searching "for a needle in a haystack". Groups submitting on the second day of hearings will include Toitū te Tiriti, the Taxpayers' Union, the Council of Trade Unions, Business NZ and the Law Society. ACT leader and Deputy Prime Minister David Seymour. Photo: RNZ / Samuel Rillstone Individuals include former ACT MP Donna Awatere Huata, former Green MPs Kevin Hague and Eugenie Sage, lawyer Tania Waikato and retired judge David Harvey. Much of the criticism on the first day was on the principles in the bill, which critics said elevated ACT ideology above health or environmental concerns. The bill lists principles that Seymour believes should guide all law-making. These include: Ministers introducing new laws would have to declare whether they meet these standards, and justify those that do not. A new Regulatory Standards Board, appointed by the Minister for Regulation, could also review older laws and make non-binding recommendations. "This Regulatory Standards Bill does not prevent a government or a Parliament from making a law or regulation. What it does do is create transparency so that the people can actually watch and understand what their representatives are doing," Seymour said. But Sophie Bond, associate professor of geography from the University of Otago, said the principles would embed "libertarian ideology" at a constitutional level. "The bill would not withstand an evaluation under even its own narrow terms. It's ill conceived, poorly drafted and undemocratic," she said. Similarly, Kirsty Fong from Asians Supporting Tino Rangatiratanga said it would "embed the ACT Party values and principles that are rooted in libertarian ideology that elevates individualism and profit at the expense of wellbeing". Criticism was also directed at what was not in the bill: there is no mention of Te Tiriti o Waitangi. This led Rahui Papa from Pou Tangata National Iwi Chairs Forum to compare it to the Treaty Principles Bill, which was voted down at its second reading earlier this year. "We think this is a relitigation of the Treaty Principles Bill under another korowai, under another cover. So we say the attacks keep on coming." Unlike the Treaty Principles Bill, the Regulatory Standards Bill has more chance of success. National's coalition agreement with ACT contains a commitment to pass the bill through into law. Natalie Coates from the Māori Law Society said Te Tiriti could not be "unstitched" from lawmaking. "Its absence isn't, of course, a drafting oversight, but a deliberate omission that bucks a clear break from constitutional best practice and our treaty obligations." She doubted, however, whether adding a treaty clause would fix the rest of the "fundamental problems" she saw in the bill. Seymour said he was yet to hear an argument about why Te Tiriti should be included. "If you can find any person that would give me a practical example of how putting the Treaty into Regulatory Standards Bill would change the outcome in a way that's better for all New Zealanders, then I'm open minded. I have been the whole time," he said. "But so far, not a single person who's mindlessly said 'oh but it's our founding document, it should be there' can practically explain how it makes the boat go faster." He acknowledged there were existing tools like Regulatory Impact Statements and the Regulations Review Committee, but questioned whether they were effective. "What we're doing is taking things that the government already does in different ways, and we're putting them together in one black letter law that governments must follow so New Zealanders have some rights. There's nothing really new here," he said. While the majority of submitters were opposed to the legislation, Ananish Chaudhuri, professor of Experimental Economics at the University of Auckland spoke in favour. "It puts ideas of effiency and a careful weighing of the costs and benefits of proposed regulation at the heart of the legislative process," he said. Former Prime Minister and constitutional lawyer Sir Geoffrey Palmer was among the first speakers on Monday - arguing it's a bizarre and strange piece of legislation. "It is absolutely the most curious bill I've ever seen, but it's got a long history, you have to remember that this is the fourth occasion that this bill has been before Parliament," he told Morning Report. "I first encountered it in 2010 when I was president of the Law Commission and chair of the Legislation Advisory Committee. "We opposed it then and it didn't go any further then ... the thing about it is it is very divisive, the number of submissions against it is extraordinary, it challenges the numbers that came out against the minister's Treaty Principles Bill." Palmer said the Regulatory Standards Bill is just as unsound as that was. He said the bill upsets the way Parliament currently operates and that is based on the ability to interfere with the present legislative process "by putting a supremo minister over the top of it". The bill takes away the capacity of portfolio ministers to be responsible for the regulatory features of bills that they design, introduce and administer, Palmer said. "That in turn, reduces the accountability of those ministers and splits it between them and this other supremo minister and it is going to be a complete shambles. "It is going to make the job of the Parliament much more difficult than it is now." Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
RNZ News
07-07-2025
- Politics
- RNZ News
Regulatory Standards Bill: Unions, former MPs, lawyers and retired judge to submit
ACT leader and Deputy Prime Minister David Seymour. Photo: RNZ / Samuel Rillstone The second day of hearings on the proposed Regulatory Standards Bill will get underway at Parliament later on Tuesday morning. The first day saw a wave of opposition to the bill , but the Regulation Minister was dismissing concerns. While he had not watched all of the submissions from the first day, David Seymour said finding constructive criticism of the bill was like searching "for a needle in a haystack". Groups submitting on the second day of hearings will include Toitū te Tiriti, the Taxpayers' Union, the Council of Trade Unions, Business NZ and the Law Society. Individuals include former ACT MP Donna Awatere Huata, former Green MPs Kevin Hague and Eugenie Sage, lawyer Tania Waikato and retired judge David Harvey. Much of the criticism on the first day was on the principles in the bill, which critics said elevated ACT ideology above health or environmental concerns. The bill lists principles that Seymour believes should guide all law-making. These include: Ministers introducing new laws would have to declare whether they meet these standards, and justify those that do not. A new Regulatory Standards Board, appointed by the Minister for Regulation, could also review older laws and make non-binding recommendations. "This Regulatory Standards Bill does not prevent a government or a Parliament from making a law or regulation. What it does do is create transparency so that the people can actually watch and understand what their representatives are doing," Seymour said. But Sophie Bond, associate professor of geography from the University of Otago, said the principles would embed "libertarian ideology" at a constitutional level. "The bill would not withstand an evaluation under even its own narrow terms. It's ill conceived, poorly drafted and undemocratic," she said. Similarly, Kirsty Fong from Asians Supporting Tino Rangatiratanga said it would "embed the ACT Party values and principles that are rooted in libertarian ideology that elevates individualism and profit at the expense of wellbeing". Criticism was also directed at what was not in the bill: there is no mention of Te Tiriti o Waitangi. This led Rahui Papa from Pou Tangata National Iwi Chairs Forum to compare it to the Treaty Principles Bill, which was voted down at its second reading earlier this year. "We think this is a relitigation of the Treaty Principles Bill under another korowai, under another cover. So we say the attacks keep on coming." Unlike the Treaty Principles Bill, the Regulatory Standards Bill has more chance of success. National's coalition agreement with ACT contains a commitment to pass the bill through into law. Natalie Coates from the Māori Law Society said Te Tiriti could not be "unstitched" from lawmaking. "Its absence isn't, of course, a drafting oversight, but a deliberate omission that bucks a clear break from constitutional best practice and our treaty obligations." She doubted, however, whether adding a treaty clause would fix the rest of the "fundamental problems" she saw in the bill. Seymour said he was yet to hear an argument about why Te Tiriti should be included. "If you can find any person that would give me a practical example of how putting the Treaty into Regulatory Standards Bill would change the outcome in a way that's better for all New Zealanders, then I'm open minded. I have been the whole time," he said. "But so far, not a single person who's mindlessly said 'oh but it's our founding document, it should be there' can practically explain how it makes the boat go faster." He acknowledged there were existing tools like Regulatory Impact Statements and the Regulations Review Committee, but questioned whether they were effective. "What we're doing is taking things that the government already does in different ways, and we're putting them together in one black letter law that governments must follow so New Zealanders have some rights. There's nothing really new here," he said. While the majority of submitters were opposed to the legislation, Ananish Chaudhuri, professor of Experimental Economics at the University of Auckland spoke in favour. "It puts ideas of effiency and a careful weighing of the costs and benefits of proposed regulation at the heart of the legislative process," he said. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
RNZ News
02-06-2025
- Business
- RNZ News
WorkSafe changes will deter employees from raising concerns
Worksafe HQ in Wellington Central Photo: RNZ / Angus Dreaver The Council of Trade Unions says proposed changes to WorkSafe shifts rights away from workers and to their employers. The government is shifting WorkSafe's priorities from enforcement, to giving more advice . The safety regulator is getting a new letter of expectations, having its finances rearranged, and it's main purpose re-defined in legislation. The changes would not come with any new funding. Council of Trade Unions president Richard Wagstaff told Morning Report the changes will deter employees from raising concerns, out of fear of being blamed. "What we need is a culture where workers are able to talk about what needs to be done on the job and what needs to be made safe, not one where they can be blamed for [it]," Wagstaff said. "I think it just reflects a government and a minister who sees everything as needing rebalance and she tends to rebalance things towards employers..." The existing system needs to be strengthened not weakened, he said. While he did support making advice clearer and more available, Wagstaff said WorkSafe was under-resourced. "And I think WorkSafe understands that... what they need is resources to develop that guidance and promote it." Workplace Relations and Safety Minister Brooke van Velden said she expected the regulator to review its enforcement and prosecution decision-making to focus on "clear breaches and causation", and being even handed. This would include "strengthening its approach to worker breaches of duty". "I've been hearing there is a real culture of fear of people around WorkSafe, and I want people to feel like if they ask for help they will get that help - and so for any business or any worker who wants to know what it is that they should be doing to keep their workers safe, they will know where to go," Van Velden said. Prime Minister Christopher Luxon speaks to media in New Delhi, India on 19 March 2025. Photo: RNZ / Marika Khabazi She denied that this could mean slowing down the rate of prosecutions. Wagstaff said WorkSafe needs to have a reputation that it will enforce the law when required. "This really signals it's not intended to do so anymore." Council of Trade Unions was not properly consulted on the changes, he said. Christopher Luxon told Morning Report just being an enforcement agency wasn't the right approach. "What we're wanting to do is rebalance it so it puts more of its effort on guiding those businesses to help manage their critical risks, what we don't want is lots of rules that actually people in businesses are struggling to navigate and as a result don't focus on the critical things that actually cause harm at work," Luxon said. "At the moment you just don't want to have a whole bunch of guidance and rules out there everyone's trying to navigate and work out what the hell it all means. "We actually want small businesses focused particularly on the things that will hurt their employees." Luxon said the government hoped the number of people dying at work decreased. Asked why the responsibility was shifted away from bosses to employees, Luxon said it was "rebalancing it". Everyone needed to take individual responsibility, he said.
RNZ News
15-05-2025
- Politics
- RNZ News
Midday Report Essentials for Thursday 15 May 2025
Pacific children 6 minutes ago In today's episode, the Minister for Workplace Relations and Safety Brooke van Velden has refused to have regular meetings with the Council of Trade Unions and has ruled out undoing the Pay Equity Changes, Labour is defending not condemning a newspaper column about pay equity which used the c-word in reference to female ministers, a new report has revealed New Zealand has the highest suicide rate for children out of the world's wealthy countries, at a rate of almost three times higher than the average, the C-Word has taken up a lot of attention in the last 24 hours after the workplace relations minister Brooke van Velden enunciated in Parliaments debating chamber, and a year on from the New Caledonia deadly riots the country faces deep division over the territory's political future.
RNZ News
15-05-2025
- Business
- RNZ News
Workplace Relations Minister refuses regular meetings with union
employment 27 minutes ago The Minister for Workplace Relations and Safety Brooke van Velden has refused to have regular meetings with the Council of Trade Unions and has ruled out undoing the Pay Equity Changes. New Zealand Council of Trade Unions president Richard Wagstaff spoke to Charlotte Cook.
