Post-legislative scrutiny in New Zealand: Is a more formal mechanism necessary?

Abstract

This paper has considered what post-legislative scrutiny is and why it is necessary, and also considers New Zealand’s approach to ex post evaluation. While this paper does not argue against the proposition that better post-legislative scrutiny is necessary in New Zealand, it does argue that better post-legislative scrutiny is not going to be achieved by introducing a formal review process which engages an independent review body and undertakes standardised review of all legislation. This paper considers that the focus should instead be on the post-legislative scrutiny processes that are already in place in New Zealand and how those can be strengthened. In particular the focus should be on providing better guidance around the role of departments as regulatory stewards, creating better feedback loops between the ex ante and ex post stages of evaluation, and approaching regulatory management in an integrated way. This paper concludes that it is just not going to be politically feasible to introduce a formal and systematic approach to review when there are other, more cost effective measures that can be taken to improve post-legislative scrutiny in New Zealand.