The interview I am responding to features New Zealand economist Geoff Bertram, whose insights on the Regulatory Standards Bill (RSB) resonated deeply with me. I offer these thoughts as a concerned member of the public committed to equity, democracy, and the public good.

The RSB has an attitude of a profit-driven logic behind public services:

Bertram points out that the RSB promotes a model in which government departments and services are pushed to act as profit-making entities, rather than as vehicles of public good. He uses the example of NZ Post, originally created not for profit but to serve the people. Today, it’s being reshaped into a “profitable business,” even though its true value lies in accessibility and service—not profit.

This logic is already damaging services like electricity provision, and poses a real threat to entities like Oranga Tamariki, which should never be run on a profit-first model. Reducing essential services to profit-generating units erodes their ability to serve those most in need and contradicts the very idea of a welfare state.

The RSB is a dangerous shift toward Capitalist Individualism:

The bill embodies a libertarian, capitalist, and individualistic ideology. It seeks to minimise regulation, prioritise private property rights, and shield commercial interests from democratic oversight. Public health, education, environmental protections, and social equity—all cornerstones of a functioning society—are at risk when profit becomes the primary policy filter.

Paralysis by Analysis – A Bureaucratic Straitjacket:

Bertram warns of the “paralysis by analysis” built into the bill. The RSB will require public entities to go through extensive bureaucratic justifications for any regulatory proposal, stifling action and innovation. Elected officials, entrusted with public mandates, will be subjected to an unelected Regulatory Standards Board that can obstruct progressive regulation.

This isn’t democratic accountability—it’s micromanagement, and it will weaken government capacity to respond to pressing issues like inequality, climate, and housing.

The RSB seeks to protect monopolies and penalise regulation:

A shocking feature of the bill is the compensation clause: if the government limits a monopoly’s ability to profit—for example, by regulating supermarket prices—it must compensate that monopoly for its “loss.” This turns regulation into a financial liability, essentially penalising the state for protecting the public good.

The result? A chilling effect on any policy that challenges powerful corporate interests. The public would not only miss out on fair pricing or environmental protections—they might end up paying monopolies for the attempt.

Fairness Undefined, Equity Ignored:

The bill’s failure to define key terms like “fairness” or “person” in its compensation clauses is deeply concerning. This opens the door to prolonged litigation, further entrenching power in the hands of those who can afford to take the state to court.

It also reflects a deeper problem: the bill ignores equity. It treats everyone as equal before the law, ignoring material inequality and systemic disadvantage. This is eerily like the logic behind recent attacks on the Treaty of Waitangi, which promote superficial equality while ignoring historical and structural injustice.

The True Value of the Public Good Cannot Be Monetised:

Bertram makes a crucial point: not everything valuable can be priced. Clean rivers, biodiversity, cultural respect, and minority protections cannot be measured in dollars. They are invaluable aspects of a just society.

The RSB’s obsession with cost-effectiveness and profitability ignores this. And in a society as unequal as ours, market prices are a flawed guide. For someone in poverty, $1 may mean survival. For a millionaire, it means nothing. To use market value as a universal yardstick is both illogical and unethical.

Reclaiming Democracy and the Public Good:

Ultimately, Bertram argues – and I agree – that government is not for sale. It exists to serve the collective, not to maximise profit. Taxation, especially progressive taxation, is a moral imperative. The redistribution of wealth through taxes isn’t theft – it’s the foundation of a society where all people can participate as full citizens.

The RSB would enshrine a system where profit trumps people, private rights overpower public needs, and bureaucracy replaces democracy.

Conclusion: Why I Oppose the RSB:

This bill is not about accountability or fairness. It is about protecting wealth and power, even at the expense of democracy, the environment, social equity, and Māori rights under Te Tiriti o Waitangi.

I oppose the Regulatory Standards Bill because:

• It promotes corporate profit over public welfare.
• It stifles democratic decision-making.
• It punishes regulation meant to protect people.
• It entrenches inequality under the guise of neutrality.
• It undermines the spirit and obligations of Te Tiriti o Waitangi.

Instead of passing this bill, we should be empowering the public sector, honouring the Treaty, taxing the rich, and cantering collective wellbeing over private gain.

A “thank you” to Adham Harash for sending this letter to The Upper Hutt Connection.

23/06/25