Seymour’s Regulatory Standards Bill: The Left’s Hissy Fit Falls Flat
If the critics had a shred of intellectual honesty, they’d engage with the actual substance of the bill instead of flinging mud at Seymour.
The chattering classes are at it again, clutching their pearls and wailing about David Seymour’s Regulatory Standards Bill like it’s the end of civilization as we know it. According to the hand-wringers over at RNZ, the bill is a radical shake-up of how laws are made, and—shock horror—it might just make life easier for businesses and ordinary Kiwis. The nerve of that man! But let’s cut through the noise and get to the guts of it: the opposition to this bill is a masterclass in incoherent, knee-jerk whining, and it’s going nowhere fast.
The Regulatory Standards Bill, for those who’ve been living under a rock, is ACT’s push to force lawmakers to think twice before drowning us in red tape. It’s about making sure regulations are clear, necessary, and don’t trample on property rights or personal freedoms. Sounds like common sense, right? Not if you’re one of the bill’s critics, who’ve spent more time hurling insults than making a case. They’ve called it everything from “ideological extremism” to a “threat to democracy,” but when you press them for specifics, it’s all hot air. No one—not one—has managed to articulate a sane, cogent argument against it. Instead, we get pejorative attacks, trite slogans, and a pathological hatred of anything with David Seymour’s name on it. It’s opposition for opposition’s sake, and it’s pathetic.
Little wonder, then, that Seymour’s brushing off their submissions like dandruff on a suit. Why should he take them seriously? The critics have offered nothing but noise—no substance, no logic, just a tantrum because their sacred cows might get a bit of scrutiny. And here’s the kicker: the bill’s going to pass. Why? Because it’s part of the coalition agreement, something the naysayers conveniently forget while they’re busy hyperventilating. National, ACT, and NZ First hashed this out when they formed the government. That’s how MMP works, folks—deals get made, and this is one of them. If you don’t like it, take it up with the voters who gave Labour and the Greens the boot.
Speaking of the Greens and Labour, it’s rich to hear them cry about “minority party ideology” when their own track record is a laundry list of niche agendas. Labour’s been shoving union demands down our throats for years, while the Greens dress up their Marxist fantasies as environmentalism. But when ACT negotiates a policy that actually cuts through bureaucratic nonsense, suddenly it’s an outrage? Spare me. This is MMP in action—parties negotiate, priorities get set, and the government moves forward. The same people who cheered when Labour rammed through half-baked laws are now clutching their smelling salts because ACT’s got a seat at the table. Hypocrisy, thy name is the Left.
The real irony here is the opposition’s strategic blunder. They’ve spent all their energy tilting at windmills over Seymour’s Treaty Principles Bill, which was never going to pass. They rallied, they marched, they screamed into the void—and they got nowhere. Now, faced with the Regulatory Standards Bill, they’re shell-shocked and out of steam. It’s like watching a toddler throw a tantrum after losing their favourite toy—they’re too knackered to put up a real fight. And that’s why this bill’s sailing through. The coalition’s got the numbers, the agreement’s locked in, and the opposition’s got nothing but empty rhetoric.
Look, the Regulatory Standards Bill isn’t perfect—nothing is. But it’s a bloody good start to reining in the regulatory monster that’s been strangling Kiwi businesses and homeowners for decades. If the critics had a shred of intellectual honesty, they’d engage with the actual substance of the bill instead of flinging mud at Seymour. But they won’t, because that would require effort and a functioning argument. So, they’ll keep bleating, Seymour will keep laughing, and the bill will keep moving forward. Good. It’s about time someone put common sense back on the table.