Abstract:
Aspects of design and process used to develop, test and publish subordinate instruments have been criticised through inquiries of the Regulations Review Committee and by academics and commentators. In particular, there is a perception that the level of parliamentary scrutiny of subordinate legislation is insufficient, ineffective and inefficient. This paper considers if these criticisms are valid for aspects of a discrete regulatory regime such as the land surveying (cadastral survey) regime – a regime that underpins the land registration system in New Zealand.
Considering the roles of the Executive, Parliament and the Judiciary, the paper proposes the ‘ideal’ decision-making and review process for cadastral survey rules. It shows that improvements in scoping, developing, testing, consulting and information-sharing could restore confidence that:
• There are adequate checks and balances in the regulatory regime for land surveying.
• There is adequate scrutiny of legislative proposals given effect through subordinate instruments with considerable technical content.
This paper reflects the author’s opinions and suggestions and does not represent Government policy or the views of Land Information New Zealand, other government agencies or organisations.
