Episode 33: Interview with New Zealand Deputy PM David Seymour

In this month's podcast, New Zealand Deputy Prime Minister David Seymour MP talks to Institute of Regulation Chair Marcial Boo about regulatory reform in New Zealand, including their Regulatory Standards Act, just passed. David, who is also Minister for Regulation, says that regulation must maximise benefit and minimise cost. This includes the option not to regulate. He argues that regulation has often increased costs in response to infrequent risks: the fear of earthquakes increases burdens on property developers, for example. His new law sets a more consistent framework, so that new burdens are not imposed on the basis of emotion, but through a transparent methodology, so that the impact of new regulations is known. He recognises that some politicians find it hard to apply regulatory discipline in practice when under pressure to 'do something'. So, he will incentivise good behaviour through a regulatory standards board to assess new regulations and make sure that additional checks and balances are put in place through regulation, actually bringing benefits. He says that the regulatory profession needs to look at itself in the mirror too, to assess whether the benefit of their work outweighs the cost imposed. David also discusses international collaboration and how countries can benefit by trusting the regulatory scrutiny and assurance of other jurisdictions to save time and money, although he accepts that taking rules from others can reduce the scope for domestic innovation. David ends by advising UK policymakers to look carefully at the costs and benefits of each additional rule to assess whether regulatory accretion is really worthwhile.

Keywords: regulatory reform, cost-benefit analysis, risk management, transparency, international collaboration, improving regulatory discipline

Transcript

00:46.60
Marcial
Okay. Welcome to the regulation podcast from the Institute of Regulation. My name is Marciel Boo, Chair of the Institute and a regulator myself. On this month's podcast, I'm delighted to welcome the Honourable David Seymour, New Zealand's Deputy Prime Minister, and perhaps more of interest to listeners here, their Minister for Regulation. Indeed, it's his second stint in government tackling rate regulation, having been the Undersecretary to the Minister for Regulatory Reform 10 years ago.

01:17.82
Marcial
David was first elected to Parliament in 2014 and is also the leader of act of the ACT Party, which is currently in coalition government with the National and New Zealand First Parties.

01:29.28
Marcial
David sponsored the End of Life Choice Act, a landmark assisted dying law passed by referendum in 2020. He's been involved in many other regulatory debates and he's currently sponsoring the Regulatory Standards Bill through the New Zealand Parliament.

01:37.53
D
Thank

01:44.48
Marcial
This aims to raise the standard of lawmaking and ah David is also overseeing the world's first Ministry ministry for Regulation, whose chief executive, Groenheim Moss, ah we have previously hosted on this podcast. So, safe to say we've never had a politician on this podcast with such deep experience of regulation. Welcome, David.

02:04.92
D
Hi, well, look, thank you so much, Marcial, and thank you for your kind comments about our work.

02:11.19
Marcial
that's that's That's great. Thanks for joining us too. i'm I'm fascinated to hear your views about regulation and the role it can play in 21st century societies and for us to discuss, you as a politician and me as a regulator, what good regulation looks like in practice.

02:25.55
Marcial
But first, as New Zealand's Minister for Regulation since 2023, can you start by telling us what good regulation means to you?

02:34.72
D
Sure. It is regulation that addresses genuine market failures. And by that, I mean yeah know the game theory outcome is not prior to optimal, not just I don't like what the market does.

02:49.36
D
You identify a genuine problem. You assess what the different mitigations are. You weigh up the costs and benefits and you choose the option that has the best cost benefits and the the lowest costs. Now, that often will be not to regulate.

03:08.90
D
So it begins with sound problem problem definition. It comes goes through cost-benefit analysis in the middle, and then it comes to a decision which is often not to regulate.

03:21.73
D
It also seeks to ask if there are losers who have their property rights severely imp impaired, should they be compensated?

03:32.65
D
Because frequently politicians go on all sorts of boondoggles where instead of going through the the relatively mature checks and balances around you know raising taxes, which over hundreds of years have have become quite sophisticated, ah there is not really much check or balance around the fiscal impacts that is brought about by impairing other people's property. And people say, oh, well, hang on a minute. I mean, fiscal means taxing and spending. Well, yes, but I say there's a fiscal illusion where often ah politicians go about, you know, fulfilling their desires or their voters' desires by putting costs onto other people's property. well We could talk about lots of examples of that,

04:21.75
D
um New Zealand's earthquake regulations are very topical and and very good example.

04:27.79
Marcial
Right, okay. And so um ah in and analyzing the cost of benefits, ah presumably risk comes into that calculation because lots of regulation is about assessing risks. The earthquake example, I'm sure, is ah is relevant there. So so ah where do you and judge that ah regulators should um approach risk? how do you How do you think that they should think about risk in the way that they regulate and therefore the way that politicians set the boundaries for what's acceptable and what's not?

04:58.40
D
Well, in a perfect world, they'd be completely agnostic about risk and simply look to weigh up the costs and benefits in the long term and on average.

05:09.75
D
ah Now, we know that there's a bunch of reasons why people will assess some risks differently from others. People ah dread things, things that are dreaded, things that are mysterious, things that are lumpy, where the risk materializes in one big catastrophe.

05:27.10
D
And that's why for example, people will be very skeptical about things like nuclear technology or genetic technology, ah whereas something that is familiar and just sort of kills a lot of people over a long period of time, such as cigarettes, um people will be less concerned about relative to the harm it causes.

05:50.66
D
um Earthquakes in New Zealand are a perfect example of that. Our country is on a geos ah geological fault line. It has a reputation for being the shaky isles.

06:03.90
D
And yet in the history of our country, fewer than 500 people have actually died ah from earthquakes. the The biggest earthquakes occurred in 2010, 11, or certainly the most deadly.

06:16.47
D
And as a result of those, we put tens of billions of dollars of cost onto property owners, heartbreaking stuff. ah And the current government is now removing that law after 10 years of imposing those costs.

06:32.96
D
um But it's a very good example of where Because the risk of an earthquake is lumpy, because people dreaded it, because we had a recent memory of of New Zealanders being killed by an earthquake, ah we decided to be very subjective and you know objective analysis went out the window and we are all the poorer for it.

06:54.15
Marcial
That's ah very interesting. and So you're saying, rightly, that that there are conflicting views about these issues and sometimes events take place and people's reaction, politicians' reaction, in in response to people's reaction, is to impose burdens, to create regulations, to make people feel safer.

07:12.62
Marcial
um and And rightly, after time, you need to assess that to see whether they're still relevant or not. so and So obviously there are conflicting views on all of these issues um and they change over time, as you say.

07:24.36
Marcial
um And so we need to handle these conflicts, um yourselves as politicians and us as regulators in ah in a different way, because we all in our own ways do things or make decisions that aren't liked. and And as you say, some people chafe against being regulators, others want more protection at different moments. So whether to protect themselves or to um worry less about the future.

07:46.38
Marcial
So both politicians and us as regulators must balance these conflicts. How do you want to do that in New Zealand?

07:54.25
D
Well, it's helpful to have a framework. I always think it's more civilised and more collegial to have an agreed framework. What our government is attempting to do by ah introducing and and hopefully soon passing through Parliament a regulatory standards bill is to set out in statute what that framework is.

08:15.16
D
ah So it's most of the things I've mentioned. ah Good common law principles. Are liberties at stake? Do you restrict someone's liberty um beyond what is necessary to secure the same liberties for themselves? so obviously Very comfortable with a prohibition on, say, theft.

08:36.65
D
That is a restriction on liberty. However, the benefits are mutual and the obligations are reciprocal ah because we all face a reciprocal obligation and we all benefit mutually for doing it.

08:48.50
D
ah There is restrictions on the severe impairment of property. So, you know, the earthquake is just the perfect example of that. Land use planning has massively impaired people's property rights.

08:55.95
Marcial
Thank

08:59.28
D
And I believe that has led to a generation who are disenchanted with our society because they see such inelastic supply of housing.

09:09.64
D
Every time the demand goes up, the price goes up and they don't see a future for themselves. ah So we need to ask ourselves, who's having their property impaired? And is there a compensation for property impairment? Often if you really believe that it's in the public interest to impair someone's property, you should at least be prepared to raise the taxes and pay them for the imposition.

09:29.64
D
ah Then there's the question of proper cost-benefit analysis and the identification of winners and losers. There is problem definition. Is there a genuine market failure here?

09:41.85
D
And is it consistent with the rule of law? are we Are we acting in a way that you can read and I can read the same law and we can both judge how to comply and what consequences we might face if we we're found guilty of violating it?

09:54.91
D
And you know what would we... how would we defend ourselves against an accusation?

09:57.54
Marcial
Thank

09:59.89
D
If you get liberties, property rights, the rule of law, ah and cost-benefit analysis and problem definition, right, then you've got a framework that allows you to step back and say, okay, let's not you know do this on the basis of raw emotion, because that's often a way to rack up massive costs, ah which you know we might subsequently regret. And over 10 years, New Zealand has gone through that with this earthquake example.

10:25.53
Marcial
Yeah, okay. um So you mentioned the Regulatory Standards Bill. ah We're recording this podcast in late October 2025. So maybe you could just say a word or two about about that more broadly. You said that it needs to set a framework. I think that's a great thing for governments to do, for parliaments to do, to set out the framework within which the regulation should be assessed.

10:47.05
Marcial
what What else are you trying to do through the bill?

10:49.84
D
It's fundamentally about increasing the transparency of the executive to Parliament. So it requires what's called a consistency accountability statement, which is a statement of whether a regulatory initiative, be it primary or secondary legislation, you know a statute or a regulation, I'm not familiar with all the terminology you use in the UK, but I'm sure you have a similar hierarchy of instruments,

11:14.52
Marcial
Yeah, we do. Yeah. yeah

11:15.48
D
um You know, that the the the Parliament should have visibility through a consistency accountability statement of, well, what are the violations of property rights and liberties? What what what it analysis really has been done to get to this conclusion?

11:29.55
D
um but Those are the sorts of questions that that should be asked and answered in a transparent way. Now, it doesn't ah affect parliamentary sovereignty. Parliament can steam through and and pass laws.

11:40.99
D
But we want to create a norm that if you have a initiative that is supposedly in the public interest that comes at the expense of private liberties, then you need to at least be clear that you're doing it.

11:56.84
D
We've had a lot of success with this kind of thing in New Zealand. Our Fiscal Responsibility Act, which requires... Full cost accounting, the books of the government to be published right before an election.

12:08.88
D
ah That's had a really big effect on on incentives and behaviour. ah So has our independence of our Reserve Bank, where New Zealand pioneered the world. So ah this is really about allowing voters in Parliament to be informed about regulatory initiatives or specifically the impact of those initiatives on their livelihoods. And that ultimately is a very democratic project.

12:31.89
Marcial
Yes, absolutely. Well, we have something similar here in the UK in a regulatory policy committee that assesses new regulations in the same way. We spoke to its chair, Stephen Gibson, on this podcast.

12:46.79
Marcial
um And the the problem that we've encountered here in the UK with these mechanisms is that sometimes ah ah civil servants, officials in government, and don't take them as seriously as they should.

12:58.11
Marcial
um And sometimes the scope, that the breadth of regulations that are coming forward is just too much for a ah mechanism such as this. so So in New Zealand, how are you thinking that this is going to become an effective tool to improve the quality of regulation?

13:13.16
D
Yeah, that's a great question. It's the old case of everyone wants to go to heaven, but nobody wants to die just yet. And as a result, it's not difficult to find politicians and governments that are committed to regulatory reform. It's very hard ah to find politicians who will apply regulatory discipline to their current ah regulatory initiative, which you must understand is so important as to deserve an exemption.

13:39.52
D
from this otherwise noble principle.

13:41.96
Marcial
Exactly.

13:41.94
D
ah' That's what we face. ah The original Regulatory Standards Bill was based on ah a regulatory responsibility bill dating back to 2006. ah This was largely the work of an economist called Bryce Wilkinson who set about trying to design institutions for regulatory restraint at the beginning of the century.

14:04.36
D
um Bryce's original bill actually had recourse to the court so you could seek a non-binding declaration that regulatory impact analysis had been done poorly. Over the subsequent 15 years or so,

14:19.78
D
since the the Regulatory Standards Bill was developed out of the Regulatory Responsibility Bill, ah it's fair to say that the relationship between the executive and the judicial branch has soured somewhat, and there's been several skirmishes where the Parliament has ah legislated over the courts, and the courts have have retaliated, and the Parliament's legislated again,

14:45.39
D
over a series of bills. and um None of that detail really matters for this conversation, but ah needless to say, it led to the executive of the current government being hesitant to give the the courts an expanded role in interpreting its activities.

15:03.26
D
um Because of that, we still needed to find another mechanism to incentivise good behaviour here, you know, because turkeys don't vote for an early Christmas.

15:14.13
D
And so that comes in the form of a regulatory standards board, ah which is appointed by the Governor-General at the advice of of Parliament.

15:14.31
Marcial
you

15:23.26
D
And that board will be made of regulatory economists and lawyers. who can analyse whether a consistency accountability statement has been properly prepared and add further incentive or further information for the public to make up their mind on ah so that we actually do get you know some discipline ah despite the the executive and being unwilling to to discipline itself sometimes.

15:51.50
Marcial
Well, very interesting. I'll look with interest at how that works in practice because I'm i'm a great believer in that kind of scrutiny. and I used to be a director of the National Audit Office here in the UK, which...

16:03.51
Marcial
tries to do that same thing in financial matters to government officials. But it's hard, as you say, to do in practice. so So coming on to something slightly different, um because regulators, like all public bodies, mostly public bodies, are facing lots of challenges.

16:18.77
Marcial
um And I'm not just thinking about the the politics and the money, but um the changing technology that they're working within, the way that social norms are evolving. But um the use of data in AI is obviously changing the way that all public bodies have to work, including regulators.

16:34.95
Marcial
um ah Good leaders in the public sector are hard to build and keep. um So what else, apart from the legislation that you're taking through Parliament, do you do you think regulators ought to be focusing on now in order to meet these challenges?

16:52.86
D
Well, you know, frankly, I think there's a much bigger problem before us, which is that the ROI, the return on investment for the last 30 or 40 years of regulating has been abysmal.

17:05.49
D
um And I'll give you an example. I know a guy who does... coastal ah subdivisions, so you know residential developments on the coast.

17:16.36
D
They're quite complex, they often involve canals which are dug from the the sea to the and inland and the houses are on the canals, so it's all very nice. When he built his first one in the late eighty s He engaged four experts, engineers and surveyors and so on, and he had to apply for eight permits or resource consensus, we call them. His last one few years ago involved a total of 26 experts and 37 permits.

17:53.56
D
Now what's so interesting about this is that um the the original one is still there. It's a very exclusive and desirable location to live. People pay an awful lot of money to live in this environment.

18:05.58
D
And yet there is no evidence that for all the complications and all the analysis and all of the checks and balances that have been put in place in the last 35 years,

18:16.67
D
that we've got a better outcome because you can actually visit both places and just ask yourself, you know, and you can't say, oh, well, itll something will go wrong in the future because it it very clearly hasn't.

18:21.31
Marcial
Yeah.

18:26.75
Marcial
But presumably these these like and these additional regulations have been put in place as a response from parliament to whatever you know changes that they they thought at the time were necessary.

18:26.73
D
um

18:39.24
Marcial
so So these are all parliamentary strictures, surely.

18:39.25
D
Well, I'm not sure that

18:42.39
D
I'm not sure that they have. um The underlying legislation is the Resource Management Act, and you're right to say that that legislation, I think, but was born at about 400 pages and we're just about to execute it.

18:47.70
Marcial
Right.

18:58.20
D
um take it to the gallows at 900 pages. So it certainly you know could have done with a bit of it a Zempick along the way. um But it's not only that, it's also the practices that have grown up ah in the councils who are the administrators of of this particular law.

19:18.63
D
ah So I think you're you're partly right. But even if Parliament did it, ah that doesn't mean that it is good for the welfare, because the average New Zealand is just sitting there saying, I want my kids to afford a house.

19:30.62
D
I don't really care whether it was Parliament or the Council that's made that impossible. I want someone to make it possible. And so I would say before we get into, you know, society's changing and there's AI and it's all just so terribly difficult, the regulatory profession, such as it is, needs to take a look at itself in the mirror and say, what has been the ah ROI on the infrastructure and the rigmarole that we have built in the past 30 or 40 years? Because I would make the argument that that it has got much, much more difficult for, certainly for New Zealanders, I won't speak for others, but I suspect it's very similar.

20:07.23
D
It's got more difficult for New Zealanders to provide for themselves and have some hope for their future. And yet, ah we have not got the promised environmental or social outcomes, if anything, the opposite.

20:19.68
Marcial
Right. OK. Well, um it's it's all tricky stuff, isn't it? And I'm sure you're right also. i mean, obviously, um that the imp the way regulations are implemented can accrete over time.

20:31.32
Marcial
And ah people working in regulatory organisations, including councils and their regulatory responsibilities, can sometimes um go to town a little bit. um and and go beyond the intention and certainly there's a role both for parliament and for regulators I'm sure too to cut down the unnecessary stuff that that gets put out on people so um good luck with that as well. i I want to move on to something else now which is um in the international context because um many of us here in the UK have been looking at New Zealand as ah an international leader in areas of public administration for decades. And you mentioned ah yourself the independence of your bank as an example.

21:12.60
Marcial
You've established the world's first Ministry for Regulation. um So what do you think, you know, accepting obviously that your... you know you're there in New Zealand and you understand that context of course ah much much better than I do um and but but nonetheless for us outside New Zealand what do you think your country's experience has to teach us in terms of regulatory matters particularly when we need to collaborate on on on areas such as trade and finance the internet social media environment etc etc are there is there a need for more international rules compliance and how can New Zealand help us to to do the right thing

21:49.07
D
Well, New new Zealand um is probably most interesting to because of its tiny size and the fact that it has nonetheless attempted to replicate all of the regulatory infrastructure that every other country has. So, for example, um we have, and the Ministry for Regulation in the um you know, 18 months that it's existed has been trying to count the number of regulatory systems in New Zealand. So far, we're up to 250, but we're not convinced we've found them all.

22:24.72
D
ah So for example, I'm sitting here in Auckland. If I rush to the airport tonight, I can probably make a flight to Sydney. where I can go to any pharmacy and buy anything on the shelf up to three months' supply, go back to the airport, fly to New Zealand, perfectly legally bring three months' supply through, um but I can't put those medications on the shelf in a New Zealand pharmacy.

22:50.44
Marcial
Right.

22:50.51
D
Now, this is crazy. ah you know we've We've managed to, you know, we we should have a common, in theory, we have a common market for that stuff, but due to labeling provisions, we don't. And I could give you many examples of where New Zealand's will to replicate it's ah other countries' regulatory options Building materials is another classic. I mean, 97% of plasterboard in New Zealand comes from one company ah because it's the only one that's been widely consented by the 67 different building consent authorities. I mean, you can't make this stuff up.

23:27.61
D
So you know the the the ah the one thing that I think we're we're trying to get across here is that you can often trust ah similar jurisdictions.

23:38.97
D
So for example, we're we're now going to say that If a medication has been approved in two other peer jurisdictions, such as the UK or the States or Canada, then ah you can automatically use it here or nearly automatically use it here.

23:58.07
D
So I think you know replication, open markets, um I guess affirmation or or trust is is something that that we are learning, probably I would say, the hard way. um and I'm sure is is somewhat applicable ah to larger jurisdictions like the UK.

24:08.88
Marcial
and

24:16.06
Marcial
That's very interesting, um because that leads to thoughts about supranational um regulatory arrangements ah to deal with the problem of the of the pharmautical pharmaceutical products that you've just mentioned there, David, and um and other things besides, obviously, because ah you as a small country are are grappling with this in a way that here in the UK perhaps we haven't yet, because...

24:38.26
Marcial
Brexit aside, ah where we've had some of these debates, um you know we obviously ah are assessed setting up all of our own regulatory systems um you know in the belief that we need to do it here ourselves rather than rely on and trust the regulatory processes of another body.

24:55.38
D
Well, I think you should seek to have and, and rather than either or rules around different regulatory systems. So for example, FASANs or the Food Safety Australia New Zealand is a supranational regulatory body for food safety.

25:17.32
D
And it is um basically a council of states. So New Zealand, for all intents and purposes, is is treated like a state of Australia, like New South Wales or Victoria ah Queensland.

25:31.12
D
And um we get a lot of benefits because we have a common market. But it also makes it harder for us to innovate. So right now the Ministry for Regulation is carrying out what we call a sector review into the the sector of labelling of all sorts of products. It turns out New Zealand has 36 different regulatory systems, 36 of our 250 discovered so far, ah which which are focused on checking that products have the correct labels.

26:02.28
D
Now, we want to innovate here. We want to ah start allowing products with QR codes because then you can geolocate, and if you scan the QR code in New Zealand, you get New Zealand-relevant information.

26:14.20
D
Far better than what you sometimes see in New Zealand stock shops where they've actually put a sticker on each product product, which is is ridiculous.

26:21.90
Marcial
Yeah. Yeah. yeah

26:23.23
D
um However, our relationship with Phys-Ands, while we're very grateful and respectful of our Australian cousins and and seek to work with them wherever possible, it does put a little bit of um inertia on both sides.

26:37.24
D
Now, if we could say, look, We're grateful to be part of this. But, you know, you you guys can can do whatever you want in Australia, including our agreed Fizan standard, so long as we can, for example, um invite Japanese retailers into New Zealand if we wanted to and say, look, we accept...

26:58.53
D
we we choose we we We share a regulatory system like you, but we reserve the right to acknowledge other regulatory systems ah from other jurisdictions in our and our territory.

27:10.39
D
That, that i think, is the ideal.

27:13.03
Marcial
Well, um I think that's a great ah ah goal to aim for personally, you know, to work with colleagues in other jurisdictions to benefit the consumers and the citizens that you're um elected to ah represent. and So, yeah, good luck with that. um I think that there's something here for us as well here in the UK, not... not not only working with you and learning from you and um and Australian cousins, but um but thinking about how we can um ah regulate in a way that is efficient, but also respect respectful of different cultures and different political jurisdictions, as you say.

27:50.32
Marcial
So we're nearing the end now. So um I just want to ask you to leave us with some tips, if you if you might, for those of us here in the UK, both both regulators and perhaps politicians too, who want to improve regulation, benefit citizens and businesses.

27:59.63
D
Thank you.

28:05.24
Marcial
and so So what are the things that you've found out over the last decade or so working in in this area as a senior politician to help us to improve the quality of our regulation here in the UK?

28:18.68
D
Well, I think first of all, recognize where we are. um There's a crisis of confidence amongst Western nations. There's a lot of, shall we say, volatility politically, particularly in the UK right now.

28:29.83
Marcial
Thank you.

28:33.33
D
ah Productivity growth is in the tank. The younger generation is is quite disillusioned with the future that they see. And you can either accept those things and and seek to change,

28:46.22
D
or watch others do it and you probably won't like watching others do it so we might as well ah take the stance that there is some real difficulty things we've been doing for a long time aren't working and we we need to change i could talk about government as an owner i could talk about government as a spender i i think change is needed in those areas But I mainly focus on government as a regulator.

29:11.01
D
That is the ah the act of placing restrictions on the use and exchange of private property that the government ah doesn't own and hasn't taxed yet, i.e.

29:13.04
Marcial
Thank

29:20.57
D
what people still have. And yeah know over the last 30 or 40 years, by any measure, ah The number of regulators, the amount of compliance and administrative time, the number of pages of of regulatory instruments, I mean, it has all increased ah dramatically, if not exponentially.

29:38.33
D
And I think we need to ask ourselves, what is the ROI on that? And what can we do ah to ensure that it improves? My my analysis is that the... public choice, was that well my analysis a public choice analysis, is that there's always a political reward for making another rule ah because the costs the benefits are concentrated in the cost to disperse.

30:01.00
D
ah We need to flip that script by and by lowering the cost of information to voters who wish to monitor regulators and if we can do that, along with some mechanisms to retrospectively review some of the accretion that we face,

30:16.01
D
ah then I think the potential to unleash is is quite extreme. And it's not just the first order effects of time and and fees for regulation.

30:21.10
Marcial
Thank

30:25.85
D
it's it's It's not just the second order effects of projects going ahead that might have otherwise stalled. It's actually the third order effects of children growing up in a society where they have heroes who gave it a go and succeeded rather than being beaten down or suppressed.

30:44.13
D
And I'll leave you with ah an anecdote. um One of the strangest things I've done in my life, I was a child actor who portrayed Sir Edmund Hillary as a youth.

30:55.76
D
And um as part of my preparation for method acting, I saw the climbing walls at his school where he first climbed on rocks. and Now, it might interest you to know that those rocks today have fences up saying, do not climb.

31:11.57
D
And this is why it's so vital that we, and for for health and safety reasons, and this is why it's so vital that we get on top of this problem because you know New Zealand, I would argue, I mean i i met Sir Edmund Tullery, he's a personal hero, but I suspect that because we have let the regulatory state get out of control, we're now a country that could not produce one of, if not our greatest ever citizen.

31:11.99
Marcial
Oh, dear. Of

31:15.82
Marcial
of course.

31:34.49
D
And that is a real shame.

31:36.47
Marcial
Well, that's a really ah powerful ah statement. And thank you very much for that. And particularly so in in the week that the last, I understand, the last ah Sherpa who accompanied Sir Edmund Hillary died and last week.

31:51.01
Marcial
So that's ah it marks it marks that that fantastic achievement. So no, no, not hitting on him.

31:55.46
D
Really? Tendin Norgay? Oh.

31:58.74
Marcial
One of the parts of the team, there was a young apparently a young Sherpa who was 19 at the time.

31:59.08
D
Okay.

32:03.03
Marcial
ah when he when he went up to, to i think, the second or third camp, who happened to die. But but um that aside, um thank you so much ah for that. um I think that you are, in many ways, in New Zealand, leading the way.

32:18.36
Marcial
um And the examples that you gave of the holistic reviews of of regulatory areas, regulatory systems, including the labeling one you mentioned, I think that's um that's really something that other countries can look to, to um two to copy, to be perfectly honest. so So thank you very much again.

32:35.89
Marcial
ah The Honourable David Seymour MP, New Zealand's Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Regulation. um And good luck with the legislation that's going through the House. And as I say, I look forward to seeing how that goes.

32:48.13
Marcial
um And for anybody listening to this podcast, you want to find out more about that work, please visit the Ministry for Regulation website in New Zealand, which is regulation.govt.nz in the United States. Thank you also to our sound engineer, Neil Bowman from Bowman Audio Production.

33:06.28
Marcial
And if those of you listening have found this discussion interesting, please tell your colleagues, pass on the link um and listen to future episodes of this regulation podcast with me, Marci Albu, where we'll discuss more issues of interest to regulators. And there's more material events training on our Institute of Regulation website, ioregulation.org. So for now, thank you very much. Good luck with your own regulatory challenges and stay in touch to help UK regulation become the best it can.

33:35.54
Marcial
Goodbye.