Newsletter

“Seymour's Neoliberal Power Grab: How the Regulatory Standards Bill Weaponizes State Power Against Māori” - 11 July 2025

The Corporate Constitution - How ACT Plans to Lock in Neoliberal Hegemony Forever

Ivor Jones The Māori Green Ltn

11 Jul 2025 — 15 min read

Greetings whānau, tangata whenua, tangata tiriti, and all who care about the future of Aotearoa.

Today we must confront one of the most insidious pieces of legislation to ever slither through our Parliament - David Seymour's Regulatory Standards Bill. This is not merely another bureaucratic reshuffling; it is a calculated assault on Māori sovereignty, environmental protection, and democratic decision-making, wrapped in the false promise of "better regulation."

This essay exposes how Seymour's Regulatory Standards Bill represents nothing less than an attempt to constitutionally enshrine corporate power over collective wellbeing, deliberately exclude Te Tiriti o Waitangi from future lawmaking, and create financial incentives for governments to prioritize private property rights over environmental protection and indigenous rights. With select committee hearings complete and overwhelming opposition from submitters, Seymour continues to push this dangerous legislation forward, demonstrating his complete contempt for democratic input and Māori voices.

https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/566580/analysis-where-next-for-regulatory-standards-bill

Background Context: ACT's Twenty-Year War Against Democratic Governance

To understand the true nature of this bill, we must recognize that this is ACT's fourth attempt since 2006 to impose what scholars call "neoliberal constitutionalism" on Aotearoa. Each previous iteration has been consistently rejected by Parliament because the consequences would be devastating for public welfare and democratic sovereignty.

The bill's origins trace directly to Roger Douglas's neoliberal revolution of the 1980s, when the fourth Labour government began dismantling the welfare state and deregulating the economy. As noted by constitutional expert Jane Kelsey, this bill seeks to "bind governments forever to the neoliberal logic of economic freedom" by embedding market fundamentalism directly into our legislative framework.

What makes this attempt different is that ACT has managed to secure coalition agreement support from National and New Zealand First, giving Seymour unprecedented power to advance his extremist agenda while serving as Deputy Prime Minister.

The Māori Green Lantern fighting misinformation and disinformation from the far right

Corporate Rights Trump Everything Else

The Regulatory Standards Bill masquerades as a technical improvement to lawmaking processes, but its true purpose is far more sinister. At its core, the bill establishes a set of "principles of responsible regulation" that prioritize individual property rights and economic efficiency above all other considerations.

These principles deliberately exclude Te Tiriti o Waitangi entirely, despite constitutional experts warning that this represents a fundamental breach of our founding document. When challenged on this exclusion, Seymour dismissed Treaty inclusion as merely "spiritual" rather than practical, revealing his profound ignorance of constitutional law and Māori rights.

The bill's most dangerous provision is the "takings or impairment principle," which creates an expectation that companies receive compensation whenever new laws affect their property rights. This means polluting industries could demand taxpayer payouts when governments pass environmental protections or public health measures.

The Waitangi Tribunal's Damning Verdict

The extent of this bill's constitutional vandalism is confirmed by the Waitangi Tribunal's scathing interim report, which found that advancing the bill without meaningful Māori consultation constitutes a clear breach of Treaty principles. The Tribunal specifically noted that the Crown's failure to engage with Māori on legislation of constitutional significance violates the principles of partnership and active protection.

This finding is particularly damning because it exposes Seymour's hypocrisy - while claiming to promote "transparent" lawmaking, he has deliberately excluded Māori from the development process and dismissed over 22,000 public submissions opposing the bill, with only 0.33 percent supporting it.

Environmental Destruction as Government Policy

From an environmental perspective, this bill represents nothing less than legislative ecocide. By elevating corporate property rights above environmental protection, the bill would create powerful disincentives for governments to pass climate action measures, biodiversity protections, or pollution controls.

Public health experts warn that the bill's narrow focus on economic measures could be used to undermine environmental health protections and prioritize industry profits over community wellbeing. Medical oncologist Associate Professor George Laking noted that the bill appears designed to elevate efficiency as the "be all and end all" rather than considering broader public health impacts.

This reflects the broader pattern of neoliberal environmentalism, where market-based approaches to environmental protection consistently fail to address structural causes of ecological destruction while providing new opportunities for corporate profit.

Corporate Power and the Compensation Principle

The bill's most insidious feature is how it weaponizes compensation principles to protect corporate interests. While Seymour claims compensation requirements are non-enforceable, constitutional experts understand that embedding such principles in law creates powerful political and legal precedents.

As Emeritus Professor Jane Kelsey explains, the bill "includes a frightening principle that sets the stage for corporate interests to trump all public and Indigenous rights." This analysis is supported by environmental groups who warn that the bill could require compensation payments to dairy corporations if future governments pass regulations to protect rivers from pollution.

This represents a fundamental inversion of justice - instead of polluters paying for environmental damage, taxpayers would compensate polluters for their lost "right" to destroy the environment. Such provisions mirror the investor-state dispute settlement mechanisms in international trade agreements that have been used by multinational corporations to sue governments for billions of dollars.

Te Tiriti Exclusion: Constitutional Racism in Action

Perhaps the most offensive aspect of this bill is its deliberate erasure of Te Tiriti o Waitangi from the regulatory framework. This exclusion is not accidental - it represents a calculated attempt to normalize constitutional arrangements that ignore Māori sovereignty and rangatiratanga.

The principles of Te Tiriti establish clear obligations for partnership, active protection, and equity in Crown decision-making. By excluding these principles, Seymour's bill creates a framework where future governments would be encouraged to ignore Māori rights in favor of individual property rights and economic efficiency.

This exclusion also violates the Crown's established Treaty obligations for consultation and partnership. As the Waitangi Tribunal found, Treaty principles have evolved through decades of judicial and tribunal interpretation to provide meaningful protections for Māori interests and rights.

Winston Peters: The Kingmaker's Last Stand

The bill's political future may ultimately depend on Winston Peters and New Zealand First, who have expressed concerns about the legislation despite their coalition obligations. Peters has described the bill as "a work in progress" and indicated his party seeks changes, though he has not specified what those changes might be.

This creates an intriguing political dynamic, as NZ First historically opposed the exact corporate power that this bill would entrench. Less than a decade ago, Peters introduced the "Fighting Foreign Corporate Control Bill" specifically to prevent multinational companies from suing governments for compensation - precisely what Seymour's bill would enable.

Whether Peters will maintain his opposition remains unclear, but political analysts suggest that blocking this bill could provide Peters with an opportunity to position himself as defending New Zealand sovereignty against corporate capture.

The Ministry's Opposition: When Government Opposes Government Policy

One of the most revealing aspects of this entire debacle is that Seymour's own Ministry for Regulation opposes the bill. The Ministry has argued that existing regulatory quality mechanisms are sufficient and that the bill's approach would be less efficient than current alternatives.

Even more damning, Treasury's quality assurance assessment found that the bill only "partially meets" quality criteria and noted that "the specific legislative changes sought in this Cabinet paper are unlikely to be the most efficient approach to pursuing the stated objectives."

This represents an extraordinary situation where the supposedly independent public service is actively warning against a minister's pet project, yet Seymour continues to push forward regardless. Such behavior demonstrates his authoritarian tendencies and complete disregard for expert advice.

Locking in Corporate Rule Forever

The broader implications of this bill extend far beyond immediate policy impacts. If passed, it would represent a fundamental shift toward what scholars call "neoliberal constitutionalism" - the embedding of market fundamentalist ideology directly into the constitutional framework.

This approach has been tried elsewhere with devastating results. International evidence shows that neoliberal environmental policies consistently fail to protect ecosystems while providing new opportunities for corporate profit-seeking. Such frameworks also systematically disadvantage indigenous peoples by prioritizing individual property rights over collective rights and traditional governance systems.

For Māori specifically, this bill represents an attempt to reverse decades of progress toward meaningful Treaty partnership and constitutional recognition. By excluding Te Tiriti principles and prioritizing individual rights over collective rights, the bill would create a regulatory environment hostile to Māori aspirations for tino rangatiratanga.

Prediction: The Bill Will Pass Despite Opposition

Despite overwhelming opposition and serious constitutional concerns, this bill is likely to pass. Unlike the Treaty Principles Bill, National has committed to supporting the Regulatory Standards Bill as part of their coalition agreement with ACT. This commitment extends to New Zealand First, though Peters' recent comments suggest some internal resistance.

The select committee is scheduled to report back in late September 2025 2, with Cabinet expected to consider the committee's recommendations in October-November. Given Seymour's position as Deputy Prime Minister and ACT's disproportionate influence in the coalition, the bill will likely pass with only minor amendments.

The only realistic chance of stopping this legislation would be if Peters decides to collapse the coalition over the issue, but political considerations make this unlikely. As noted by political analysts, such a move would likely damage NZ First's electoral prospects, making it politically irrational despite the policy concerns.

Call to Action: Resistance Through Multiple Strategies

While the parliamentary path may be blocked, we cannot allow this assault on democracy and indigenous rights to proceed unchallenged. Our resistance must operate on multiple levels, drawing on the wisdom of our tīpuna and the power of collective action.

First, we must continue highlighting the bill's constitutional illegitimacy and its violation of Te Tiriti principles. The Waitangi Tribunal's findings provide powerful ammunition for legal challenges and ongoing political pressure.

Second, we must prepare for the bill's implementation by building alternative frameworks for decision-making that center Māori values and environmental protection. This includes supporting iwi and hapū to develop their own regulatory frameworks and governance systems that prioritize collective wellbeing over individual profit.

Third, we must expose the corporate interests behind this legislation and their connections to international networks of climate denial and neoliberal policy promotion. Groups like the New Zealand Initiative that support this bill are part of a global movement to entrench corporate power at the expense of democratic governance.

Finally, we must prepare for the long-term struggle to repeal this legislation once a more progressive government takes office. This will require sustained organizing and coalition-building across environmental, indigenous rights, and social justice movements.

The fight against Seymour's corporate constitution is ultimately about what kind of society we want to live in - one that prioritizes profit over people and planet, or one that centers collective wellbeing and ecological sustainability. The choice is ours, but only if we organize to defend it.

The Māori Green Lantern humbly asks readers who find value in this analysis to consider supporting this work through a koha/donation to HTDM: 03-1546-0415173-000. Please only contribute if you have the capacity and wish to do so during these challenging economic times for whānau.

Kia kaha, kia māia, kia manawanui. The struggle continues.

https://www.treaty.nz

"PAPERS PLEASE: How Mark Mitchell, Paul Goldsmith, and Simeon Brown Are Building a Police State That Only Arrests the Poor — and Māori First" - 27 March 2026

"STANFORD'S COLONIAL CLASSROOM: How the Luxon Government Is Dismantling Māori Education" - 26 March 2026

"THE EMPTY TANK: How a White Supremacist Neoliberal Government Left Its Carers on the Side of the Road to Die" - 26 March 2026

“The Pātaka Beside the Strait” - 25 March 2026