Labour Targets Cross-Party Help to Repeal the Regulatory Standards Act
The Labour Party has formally introduced a new member’s bill aimed at repealing the Regulatory Standards Act and has extended an invitation to New Zealand First to lend its support. The move underscores Labour’s strategy to build cross-party consensus on a policy that has stirred controversy since its inception.
Last week, New Zealand First leader Winston Peters signaled a willingness to campaign on repealing the Act ahead of next year’s political cycle. While Peters has historically positioned the party as a scrutineer of regulatory policy, his recent statements suggest a potential opening for collaboration with Labour on this contentious issue. The latest development places pressure on both major blocs to clarify their stance as the policy debate intensifies in the lead‑up to Election Year.
The Regulatory Standards Act, designed to streamline compliance and set nationwide regulatory benchmarks, has drawn critics who argue it imposes burdens on certain sectors while allegedly providing insufficient protections for others. Supporters, meanwhile, say the Act was a necessary tool for uniform standards and accountability across agencies. The bill to repeal it would mark a dramatic reversal, potentially reshaping the regulatory landscape and affecting businesses, consumer groups, and local governments.
What the New Bill Seeks to Change
The member’s bill proposes to remove the central provisions of the Regulatory Standards Act and revert to the framework that existed prior to its enactment. Advocates within Labour describe the repeal as a measure to restore proportionality and clarity in regulatory practices, arguing that the Act created ambiguities and uneven enforcement. Critics inside and outside Parliament argue that a repeal could strip away essential oversight mechanisms and complicate compliance for entities that had adapted to the new standards.
Labor’s approach appears to hinge on a pragmatic calculation: secure a majority by securing cross‑party buy‑in and minimize the risk of a partisan backlash. By inviting NZ First to back the bill, Labour is signaling its willingness to work with a broader coalition to shape regulatory governance in a way that reflects diverse viewpoints.
Implications for NZ First and Other Stakeholders
For NZ First, supporting a repeal would be a defining stance ahead of the next general election. It would align with the party’s long‑standing emphasis on regulatory responsiveness and national sovereignty, while also posing questions about the practical consequences for public administration, local councils, and sectoral compliance regimes. Stakeholders await further details on how the repeal would be phased in and what transitional arrangements, if any, would accompany the shift away from the Act.
Business groups, consumer advocates, and local governments are closely watching the dialogue. Business leaders often seek predictable regulatory environments, while consumer groups stress the need for safeguards to protect public interests. A repeal could trigger a cascade of regulatory reviews, pilot programs, or new temporary measures designed to bridge the gap between the old framework and whatever replaces it.
What Comes Next
Parliamentary process will determine the fate of the bill, including committee scrutiny, potential amendments, and voting patterns. Even with Labour’s invitation, there is no guarantee of NZ First support, and other parties are likely to weigh in with their own positions. Observers say that the outcome will depend on the specifics of the proposed repeal, including any sunset clauses, transitional rules, and the availability of alternative governance mechanisms to ensure accountability in the absence of the Act.
As next year’s campaign season approaches, the repeal debate is likely to become a defining moment in public policy discourse. Whether Labour can secure cross‑party consensus, and whether NZ First will align with the bid, will shape the regulatory policy debate and influence voter perceptions about how Parliament can respond to evolving governance challenges.
