Category: Political Parties

Source: ACT Party

The Haps

Sold out. Normally we’d be spruiking tickets for ACT’s State of the Nation event this Friday, but it sold out last week. Free Press will be reporting on the event next Monday.

The Regulatory Standards Bill

Over the summer the left have have got themselves into a lather about the Regulatory Standards Bill. As hard left Auckland Law Professor Jane Kelsey helpfully explained, the Bill is “basically about the protection of private property and wealth” (she meant this as a criticism).

The Herald helpfully ran an excellent column about the Bill by David Seymour on Friday. We thought it was worth reprinting here.

In a nutshell: If red tape is holding us back, because politicians find regulating politically rewarding, then we need to make regulating less rewarding for politicians with more sunlight on their activities. That is how the Regulatory Standards Bill will help New Zealand get its mojo back.

Sometimes New Zealand is all milk and honey. Other times you can sense widespread frustration that things could be better.

Our country is in one of those times where we need to choose how we proceed.

We cannot change our size, or the impact of the world’s largest economies. We can’t change our underlying history or culture, and we cannot quickly change our levels of education. What we can change is our policies.

As 1970s Labour Prime Minister Norman Kirk is often quoted, people everywhere need “someone to love, somewhere to live, somewhere to work, and something to hope for”. It is still good advice for the success of any country.

I believe people are leaving because they feel let down. They’ve done their homework, got the grades, worked hard and saved money. And yet, life remains harder here than other places they could be.

Bad regulation is at the heart of this. Make no mistake, in a country where you’re free to do as you please unless there’s a law against it, every extra law is a restriction on your basic freedoms, and I hear about it in nearly every field.

There are builders who’ll tell you it takes longer to get permission than to build something. One person recently wrote to me saying, “The thing that I have learned is that everything that we want to do is not trusted by the council, yet everything that the council does we are supposed to trust”. No wonder we are short of affordable housing.

New Zealand has lost a fortune to earthquake regulations in the past decade, because politicians thought, or should I say felt, more restrictions were the right thing to do after the Canterbury quakes.

And yet, fewer than 500 people have died from earthquakes in the history of our country. That’s about as many as die from cancer every three weeks, but we can’t afford all the drugs they need. Hmmm.

It will help us get our mojo back as a country, because we’ll be able to spend more time doing useful work, and less time complying with the powers that be for little reason.

It goes on, people in finance face endless red tape thought to prevent them from giving out loans to people who cannot repay them. Somewhere the regulators missed that the whole point of the finance industry is not to lose money by giving loans people cannot repay.

Educators say they only want to help children grow to their potential but spend far too much time on bureaucracy. Generations of politicians and bureaucrats with little understanding of their work felt making another rule was the right thing to do, and workers face the accumulation of their efforts.

Bad regulation doesn’t just add cost to the things we do, it stops us doing things we’d otherwise do.

Whole projects don’t happen because they’re just too hard. Property developers have told me they turn down proposals to build more homes after adding up the regulatory costs, and a shortage of housing is one of our biggest national problems.

It’s not just the workplace and the housing market that are affected by overregulation, it’s our culture.

At the school where Sir Edmund Hillary learned to climb, the climbing walls have health and safety notices saying “do not climb”. Much loved community events such as parades cannot go ahead thanks to the absurd cost of planning something that never caused a problem before.

Into all this comes the Regulatory Standards Bill.

It requires politicians and officials to ask and answer certain questions before they place restrictions on citizens’ freedoms. What problem are we trying to solve? What are the costs and benefits? Who pays the costs and gets the benefits? What restrictions are being placed on the use and exchange of private property?

The law doesn’t stop politicians or their officials making bad laws. They can still make rules that don’t solve any obvious problem, whose costs exceed their benefits, whose costs fall unfairly on some at the expense of others, and that destroy people’s right to property.

They can do all of that, but the Regulatory Standards Bill makes it transparent that they’re doing it. It makes it easier for voters to identify those responsible for making bad rules. Over time, it will improve the quality of rules we all have to live under by changing how politicians behave.

It does that by requiring a rigorous statement setting out how a rule will meet the standards, or why it is being passed despite not meeting them.

People affected by bad laws will be able to appeal to a Regulatory Standards Board, made up of people who understand regulatory economics. That board will be able to make non-binding declarations on whether the law was made well, further turning up the heat on bad lawmaking.

It will help us get our mojo back as a country, because we’ll be able to spend more time doing useful work, and less time complying with the powers that be for little reason.

We’ll see more homes, more jobs, more community, and more hope – Kirk’s prescription for a better country.

Source: ACT Party

The following op-ed by Mark Cameron and Laura McClure is free for publication.

With Donald Trump heading back to the White House next week, much discussion has focused on the future of New Zealand’s trade relations with the United States. There has been less commentary on the implications for our national security.

ACT has consistently argued that New Zealand’s defence posture is overdue for a serious upgrade. We can no longer rely solely on goodwill and historic alliances, and it is time to strengthen our own defence capabilities.

ACT has proposed a commitment of at least two percent of GDP to Defence. We’re currently investing just 0.9 percent.

Leaders like Trump have sent a blunt message: allies who don’t pull their weight shouldn’t expect protection.

New Zealand has long enjoyed a benign state of relative isolation, protected by geography and our friends in the West. But that world is gone. Our neighbours in the Indo-Pacific are boosting their military budgets and global power shifts are becoming more unpredictable. We need to face a new global reality where threats could come from many directions and complacency is a luxury we cannot afford.

Our friends in Australia and Southeast Asia are already stepping up. Australia’s defence spending has now surged above two percent, heading to 2.4 percent by the end of the decade, recognising the strategic instability in the region. By failing to invest in our own defence, we risk not only our physical security but our position in the international community.

Trump’s return brings a stark, clear-eyed view of alliances: they’re built on mutual strength, not nostalgia or sentimentality. Whether we like him or loathe him, his vision demands that America’s allies bring real capability to the table. We can’t expect American protection just because we’ve been a good partner in the past. In Trump’s world, allies are only as good as what they can contribute when things get tough.

If we want to be taken seriously, we need to take our own defence seriously. That doesn’t mean buying flash toys; it means building a sustainable, credible deterrent that aligns with our strengths and values.

It means investing in the New Zealanders who are ready to put their lives on hold, and sometimes on the line, for our security. It means training them well, equipping them properly, and giving them meaningful roles.

Attrition in our Defence Force is already high – service members didn’t sign up to be shuffled into managed isolation facilities. They deserve to train and exercise with global partners, building skills and capabilities that will serve them throughout their careers.

From ACT’s perspective, this is not just about geopolitical prudence. It is about standing on our own two feet. Depending on others for our security is fundamentally inconsistent with values of self-reliance.

The political challenge with defence spending is that it may not feel urgent until it is too late. Inaction will be far more costly in the long run than the financial commitment needed today, and in previous alternative Budgets ACT has proposed a range of savings initiatives to make a real investment possible.

A credible plan to lift our defence spending to the two percent NATO benchmark will demonstrate that we are a serious ally worth defending. For our security and for our freedom, it is an investment we cannot afford not to make.

Mark Cameron is ACT’s Defence spokesperson and ACT MP Laura McClure (formerly Laura Trask) sits on Parliament’s Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade select committee.

Source: ACT Party

“The ACT Party has made a submission to the Justice Select Committee in support of the Treaty Principles Bill, joined by tens of thousands of New Zealanders who shared their views through ACT’s submission tool,” says ACT Leader David Seymour.

“This bill stands for universal suffrage and equality before the law – principles that are fundamental to New Zealand’s democratic tradition and consistent with the text of the Treaty itself. Dividing people based on ancestry has never been a path to success.

“New Zealanders have finally been given a voice in an important conversation that they have been locked out of for too long. Alongside those who submitted through ACT’s tool, thousands more made submissions directly through Parliament’s website, contributing thoughtful and compelling arguments. The calibre of submissions from New Zealanders like Elizabeth Rata, Ruth Richardson, and Tim Wikiriwhi demonstrates the depth of thought and passion behind the movement for equal rights.

“To oppose the Treaty Principles Bill is to support Labour’s continued march toward separate political rights for New Zealanders based on ancestry. This is a critical moment to uphold the values of fairness and equality that unite us as a country.

“I want to thank everyone who has stood alongside ACT in favour of equal rights for all New Zealanders.”

Source: ACT Party

ACT MP Mark Cameron is calling on Parliament to thank farmers working through summer by reinstating provisions in the Resource Management Act that prevent regional councils from factoring climate change into their planning.

“While many Kiwis enjoy some time off work this summer, cows still need to be milked and crops still need to be watered. Farmers are sacrificing trips away from home to keep New Zealanders—and the world—fed.

“When the politicians get back to Wellington later this month, they ought to give farmers some proper thanks and respect. That starts by unwinding laws that have seen councils pile compliance costs onto farmers in the name of climate action.

“Currently, councils are allowed to use the Resource Management Act to impose a confusing array of restrictions on how New Zealanders use their land, supposedly to cut emissions.

“These changes were made by the previous government, essentially sacrificing property rights to the altar of the climate gods.

“It’s impractical to expect regional councils to tackle global climate issues. It’s an exercise in futility, especially since emissions are already managed at a national level through the Emissions Trading Scheme. If one council clamps down on emissions, it simply shifts high-carbon activities to another region. Plus, councils lack the capability to account for carbon offsets companies might have elsewhere in the country.

“I’ve introduced a member’s bill to bring back the ban on regional councils considering local greenhouse gas emissions.

“Local government should be focused on roads and rates, not on punishing farmers and growers to please a misguided environmental lobby.

“ACT has consistently advocated that the best approach to emissions management is through good science, sensible carbon pricing, and global cooperation – not through intricate land use regulations under the Resource Management Act.

“Kiwi farmers are the most efficient in the world, and my bill would be a helpful step to enable them to focus on what they do best: growing the food that fills our bellies and bringing in the money that keeps our economy ticking.”

You can read the Resource Management (National and Regional Emissions) Amendment Bill here.

Source: ACT Party

As New Zealanders enjoy time with friends and family this summer, ACT MP Todd Stephenson is calling for greater autonomy for terminally ill New Zealanders to choose when, and with whom, they spend their last moments.

Mr Stephenson is the sponsor of the End of Life Choice (Extended Eligibility) Amendment Bill, which would eliminate the need for a terminally ill individual seeking assisted dying services to prove they have only six months left to live, while maintaining all other protective measures.

“The holiday season has been a precious opportunity for Kiwis to gather together with their loved ones, share cherished memories, and create new ones,” says Mr Stephenson.

“As a supporter of end of life choice, I’ve been reflecting on how seriously ill New Zealanders deserve similar moments with their loved ones at the end of their lives.

“In the last three years, the End of Life Choice Act has given around 1,000 terminally ill New Zealanders the chance to decide how, when, and with whom they spend their final days. I’ve heard moving accounts of Kiwis choosing when to say goodbye, often at home surrounded by family. This has spared many from ending their days in impersonal settings like hospitals or care homes.

“However, due to political compromises, stringent eligibility criteria have barred some from this option simply because they couldn’t confirm a six-month prognosis. Yearly reports on assisted dying indicate that this six-month rule is the primary barrier for eligibility.

“Even those who qualify can find that six months is too brief for adequate personal contemplation, medical assessment, and the legal processes required to honour their wishes.

“In August, I was handed a petition from fellow New Zealanders asking that the six-month rule be lifted. I committed to do everything in my power as an MP to amend this law.

“I hope my bill will be drawn from the ballot in 2025 so Parliament has a chance to hear from New Zealanders and vote on a change to the law.”

Source: ACT Party

As many New Zealanders enjoy time off work this summer exploring conservation land, ACT Conservation spokesperson Cameron Luxton is promoting legislation that would ensure hunters and fishers have representation on the Conservation Authority.

“Hunters and fishers have a deep connection to nature and the environment. We enjoy being in the great outdoors, and we’re instrumental in conservation efforts. Every weekend this summer season, thousands of us are out in the bush, and many will contribute to conservation work that would otherwise cost the Department of Conservation and taxpayers billions,” says Mr Luxton.

“From managing deer populations to setting traps for pests, hunters nationwide are active in controlling introduced species, and our activities are influenced by decisions made about the DOC estate.

“Currently, hunters lack representation on the New Zealand Conservation Authority, which comprises 13 members, including representatives from iwi, the Royal Society, Forest and Bird, and Federated Mountain Clubs. Deerstalkers Association members alone dedicate about 184,000 hours annually to conservation activities like habitat restoration, planting, pest control, organized culls, and maintaining backcountry huts and tracks. This is on top of the conservation benefits provided by recreational hunting as a method for game animal management.

“I’ve lodged a bill in Parliament’s ballot that proposes that the Minister of Conservation appoint two additional members to the board—one recommended by the New Zealand Deerstalkers Association, and another after consultation with both Fish and Game and the Game Animal Council.

“ACT believes that effective management of DOC lands requires input from those who are boots-on-the-ground, passionate about conservation. Take the Wapiti Foundation, for example, which manages an introduced species in Fiordland, while also maintaining huts, setting traps, and supporting high-value tourism. Giving hunters a stronger voice on the Conservation Authority could foster more beneficial partnerships for both our natural environment and the taxpayer.

“I hope this bill will gain cross-party support in Parliament.”

You can read the full text of the Conservation (Membership of New Zealand Conservation Authority) Amendment Bill here.

A video where Cameron Luxton discusses this bill is available here.

Source: ACT Party

“Westies and Southlanders trying to buy alcohol for New Year’s or going to the pub this summer deserve the same choice and freedom afforded to the rest of the country,” says West Auckland-based ACT MP Simon Court.

Mr Court is promoting a member’s bill aimed at dismantling New Zealand’s last liquor monopolies.

“In West Auckland, along with Invercargill and Mataura, the only entities allowed to operate liquor stores, taverns, and licensed hotels are the licensing trusts. These monopolies, a relic from the nanny state era of the 1970s, restrict choices and drive up prices,” Mr Court explains.

“My bill wouldn’t eliminate the Licensing Trusts, but it would end monopoly powers and allow local entrepreneurs to sell alcohol under the same regulatory framework as the rest of the country.

“West Auckland’s population is booming, yet there are just eight venues licensed as taverns or hotels for 296,000 people – that’s one for every 37,000 residents. Compare that to the rest of Auckland, where there’s one for every 3,900 people.

“This scarcity leaves the community underserved. Residents are either deprived of the conveniences enjoyed by other Aucklanders or forced to spend their money out of their area, which could be spent locally during this summer’s festivities.

“The existing system is a confusing jumble. In West Auckland, you can operate a hotel, but you’re not allowed a bar or room service. Supermarkets can’t sell alcohol, yet it’s deliverable to your doorstep. It’s just absurd.

“A common justification for these monopolies is that profits go back into the community, but in reality, 80% of the profits in West Auckland come from pokies, and around 60% in Southland.

“Another claim is that by monopolising and restricting alcohol sales, there’s less harm. However, there’s no solid evidence suggesting that West Auckland has less alcohol-related harm due to these monopolies.

“Passing my bill would inject some much-needed vibrancy, diversity, and life into these communities by allowing more bars and eateries to flourish, providing a broader selection for those looking to dine and drink out.

“The economic benefits would extend to other local businesses, drawing more people to the town centres and boosting areas that aren’t burdened by these outdated constraints.”

“Removing monopolies is the right principled starting point. Ultimately, consumers can decide whether to support the Trusts. They will continue to have a vote – that vote is with their dollar.”

You can find Simon Court’s Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Repeal of Licensing Trust Monopolies) Amendment Bill here.