Latest news with #LegislationAct2019
Scoop
a day ago
- Politics
- Scoop
Have Your Say On The Legislation Amendment Bill
The Justice Committee is calling for public submissions on the Legislation Amendment Bill. The bill seeks to promote high-quality legislation for New Zealand that is easy to find, use, and understand. It aims to do so by: requiring departments to electronically publish on their website (or another approved website) any secondary legislation they draft, along with related information providing for the New Zealand Legislation website, which the Parliamentary Counsel Office (PCO) maintains, to be a single point of access to legislation and information related to legislation providing rules, powers, functions, and duties for the PCO, the Attorney-General, and administering agencies to support the changes amending other legislation to support and promote consistency with the new publication requirements and enable an orderly transition to them improving tools for modernising and simplifying legislation and keeping it up to date repealing obsolete or redundant legislation that the PCO has identified as part of its functions under the Legislation Act 2019 refining provisions for confirming secondary legislation. Make a submission on the bill by 1.00pm on Thursday 28 August 2025.
NZ Herald
10-06-2025
- Business
- NZ Herald
Law & Society: Retroactive laws, real-time consequences
David Harvey: "Citizens lose confidence in the fairness and integrity of the legal system when laws can be changed after the fact to alter rights and obligations." Photo / Getty Images The courts and judges have come in for criticism of late. Roger Partridge of the New Zealand Initiative was critical late last year of recent decisions of the Supreme Court in a lengthy paper entitled 'Who makes the law?' – the obvious answer being Parliament. New Zealand First MP Shane Jones, likewise was personally critical of a High Court judge last year and 'had words' with the Attorney-General Judith Collins about his comments. Last month at a Law Association lunch, Jones criticised what he called the 'Americanisation' of the judiciary and of judicial activism, arguing it is Parliament that is sovereign. But what happens when Parliament itself travels outside its lane? What remedies are there for legislative overreach when Parliament is sovereign? An amendment to the Credit Contracts and Consumer Finance Act has been introduced. The act prescribes a number of circumstances where financiers have a duty of disclosure to customers. If disclosure rules are breached, the lender forfeits interest rates and fees on the transaction. Two banks, ANZ and ASB, failed to make proper disclosure and are subject to claims on behalf of 173,000 customers – a sizable cohort. Court proceedings are well under way. The amendment is retrospective in that it is designed to minimise the liability of the banks for actions that were unlawful at the time. So Parliament retrospectively cures their unlawful acts and the 173,000 potential claimants lose out. Parliament can do anything it likes, according to Jones. The only problem is there are rules about retrospective legislation. Section 12 of the Legislation Act 2019 states very simply: 'Legislation does not have retrospective effect.' The New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 also makes it clear there should be no retroactive penalties, though that rule is more applicable to criminal cases. The issue of whether laws have provided retroactive penalties have troubled judges, academics and law students in examinations for some years. One of the core principles of the rule of law is that individuals must be able to know in advance what conduct is legal or illegal. Retrospective laws can punish people for actions that were legal when committed, which violates this predictability. In the case of the Credit Contracts and Consumer Finance's Act, the retrospective law deprives 173,000 people of a remedy they would have had. Similarly, the retrospective changes to the pay equity process have halted 33 pay equity claims affecting many thousands of workers. Citizens lose confidence in the fairness and integrity of the legal system when laws can be changed after the fact to alter rights and obligations. This can foster fear and uncertainty. Some argue retrospective laws violate fundamental human rights and democratic principles, as they remove the ability of individuals to make informed choices based on existing laws. Although retrospective laws are generally discouraged, there are rare cases where they are justified – such as when correcting legal loopholes or addressing past injustices. However, they remain controversial and should be used with extreme caution. Is there a remedy for this overreach? No, other than by way of the ballot box. We have no overriding constitution. We have no court that can say Parliament is in breach of the rules and challenging a fundamental premise of the rule of law and that changes such as those to the credit act and pay equity regime are 'unconstitutional'. But perhaps the problem is deeper. Perhaps we rely on Parliament too much to solve our problems. When a problem comes up it seems the government is the first port of call. Perhaps if there was less reliance on Parliament 'fixing' things, the risk of retrospective laws would be much smaller.
Scoop
16-05-2025
- Politics
- Scoop
Public Submissions Are Now Being Called For The Valuers Bill And Amendment Paper 286
Have your say on the Valuers Bill The Deputy Chairperson of the Primary Production Committee is calling for submissions on the Valuers Bill with a closing date of 11.59pm on Friday, 27 June 2025. The Valuers Bill would re-enact the Valuers Act 1948. The Act provides for the registration of land valuers and the establishment of the New Zealand Institute of Valuers. This is a revision bill. Revision bills are used to re-enact legislation in an up-to-date and accessible form. They may not change the effect of the law (except as authorised by section 96(3) of the Legislation Act 2019). This bill would not make any substantial policy changes to the Act. It would make minor changes to the Act to correct inconsistencies and omissions. It is intended to rewrite the law using plain language and modern drafting style. The scope of the changes the committee can recommend on this bill is narrow. Have your say on proposed amendments to the Valuers Bill The Primary Production Committee is also considering Amendment Paper 286 alongside this bill. An Amendment Paper is a document that gives notice of proposed amendments to a bill. Amendment Paper 236 would amend the Valuers Bill and proposes more substantial policy changes. Amendment Paper 286 would make changes to the Valuers Bill, including: increasing the penalties for offences removing the requirement for a person to be at least 23 years old to become a registered valuer expanding the Valuers Registration Board's disciplinary powers. The Attorney-General has presented a Section 7 report to the House on the Valuers Bill. The report highlights that the current age restriction appears to be inconsistent with the right to freedom from discrimination under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990. The Section 7 report is also linked below. If you would like to make a submission on the Valuers Bill or the proposed changes to the bill in Amendment Paper 286, please do here on the Parliament website. If you have any questions about your submission or the submission process, please contact the committee secretariat through the contact details on the left-hand side of this page. What you need to know for making a submission: Submissions are publicly released and published to the Parliament website. Only your name or organisation's name is required on a submission. Please keep your contact details separate, as if they are included on the submission they will become publicly available when the submission is released. If you wish to include information of a private or personal nature in your submission you should discuss this with the committee secretariat before submitting. If you wish to speak to your submission, please state this clearly. Further guidance on making a submission can be found from the 'How to make a submission' link in the 'Related documents' panel at the bottom of this page. Related links panel:
Kiwiblog
07-05-2025
- Politics
- Kiwiblog
A less simplistic bill would be good
Winston Peters announced: New Zealand First has today introduced a Member's Bill that would ensure the biological definition of a woman and man are defined in law. The Legislation (Definitions of Woman and Man) Amendment Bill will provide clarity and consistency in New Zealand law by defining 'woman' as 'an adult human biological female' and 'man' as 'an adult human biological male' in the Legislation Act 2019. I think this bill would have unfortunate unintended consequences. But, a simple amendment, could improve it. I'm all for having the law allowing sporting events, facilities to restrict entry to those who are biologically women. But I'm also for allowing facilities to have entry based on gender identity, if that is what they want to do. Trans NZers should be able to have their gender identity recognised in law. But the law should also recognise that this doesn't replace biological sex. The health system, for example, needs to know your biological sex, but I'm not sure the Department of Conservation does. So what I would do is have the law define both sex and gender. It could be along the lines of. When referring to sex: a 'woman' is 'an adult human biological female' a 'man' is 'an adult human biological male' When referring to gender: a 'woman' is 'an adult who identifies as a female' a 'man' is 'an adult who identified as a male' When laws are passed, the laws could refer to either sex or gender, as is appropriate. In the absence of a specific reference, the assumption would be it is biological sex that is being referred to.
Scoop
05-05-2025
- Politics
- Scoop
Majority Support For Bill Defining ‘Woman' & ‘Man'
ONLY 29% OPPOSITION TO THE BILL A new poll has found majority support for a Member's Bill that would ensure the biological definition of a woman and man are defined in law according to biology, with two in three voters of the coalition government parties in support. The Legislation (Definitions of Woman and Man) Amendment Bill will provide clarity and consistency in New Zealand law by defining 'woman' as 'an adult human biological female' and 'man' as 'an adult human biological male' in the Legislation Act 2019, and was introduced by NZ First. In the independent polling commissioned by Family First NZ and carried out by Curia Market Research, 1,000 respondents were asked 'A Member of Parliament has proposed a law that would define a woman as an adult human biological female and a man as an adult human biological male regardless of gender identity. Would you support or oppose this proposed law?' 52% of respondents said they support the proposed law and only 29% oppose it. (A further 19% were unsure). Women net support was +4% with a further 27% unsure, but men were strongly in favour with net support +42%. Net support by age is +19% for under 40s, +22% for 40-59 year olds, and +26% for over 60s. In terms of party vote, ACT voters were most supportive (72%) followed by NZ First (68%) and National (64%). Undecided voters were 54% in favour. Labour were 35% for and 44% against, Greens -15% net support and TPM -13%. The nationwide poll was carried out between 30 April and 4 May and has a margin of error of +/- 3.1%. Family First's Bob McCoskrie says: 'Given the recent decision by the UK Supreme Court, it's time that NZ's Government also removes the confusion and returns to simple biological reality. Family First is calling on both the National Party and the ACT Party to fast-track NZ First's Member's Bill and adopt it as a Government bill. It's clearly supported by 2/3'rds or more of your voters. Contrary to media and left wing commentary, this is not a negative 'populist' proposal. This is a very popular proposal!'
