The government has scrambled to coordinate a unified response to a scathing letter from the United Nations, after ACT leader David Seymour pre-emptively issued his response, prompting what appeared to be a reset behind closed doors.

Last month, the UN Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, Albert K. Barume, sent a letter to New Zealand government ministers raising concerns about a range of policy issues, including Seymour’s Regulatory Standards Bill, which Barume argued risked undermining Treaty of Waitangi obligations and sidelining Māori.

Rather than waiting for a coordinated reply, Seymour fired off a response of his own, dismissing the UN’s concerns as “insane.”

“I addressed the insane things the UN wrote about the Regulatory Standards Bill, because that’s my part of it,” Seymour said.

“As it turns out, I was a bit too efficient in my correspondence, so now we’re sending a single joint message.”

Seymour acknowledged he was called in to meet with Foreign Minister Winston Peters on Monday afternoon, who has since taken charge of drafting the government’s formal reply.

But Seymour rejected claims he was told off by the Prime Minister or the Foreign Affairs Minister.

“People would love that to be true, because people love drama, but no,” Seymour said. “Winston and I have fixed the problem. I’m going to withdraw my letter so the government can send one response. I expect that letter to make the same points.”

“Later that evening, I had a scheduled catch-up with Christopher Luxon, and what I took from it is they liked the message, but it’s better if the government sends one unified response.”

Prime Minister Christopher Luxon played down the situation but labelled the UN letter a “waste of time.”

“To be honest with you, the whole letter was a total waste of time,” Luxon said.

“We all read it and thought, there’s not much substance here. Winston Peters will coordinate our response. He’s the Minister of Foreign Affairs, and he manages our relationship with the United Nations.”

When asked whether it was embarrassing that ministers appeared confused over who should respond, Luxon brushed it off.

“I’ve made it clear that Winston Peters is the person responsible for engaging with the UN. We’ve got clear responsibilities in this government, and that’s his.”

But the muddled process has drawn scrutiny with Labour Leader calling it ‘downright embarrassing’ and ‘dysfunctional’.

“Most days, it doesn’t appear that Christopher Luxon is actually in charge of his own government. Winston Peters and David Seymour seem to do whatever they like.” Hipkins said.

Government not concerned

The Coalition government said, however, that not being able to coordinate who responds to a letter is not a concern

“I don’t think it makes a big difference to New Zealanders, what matters is the substance, that we’re tackling red tape and regulation,” Seymour said.

However, the UN’s letter raised more than just red tape.

It expressed concern that the Regulatory Standards Bill could erode Māori rights by promoting legislation that does not reference Treaty principles or Māori jurisprudence.

Asked what specifically was “insane” about the UN’s claims, Seymour said.

“Lots of important pieces of legislation in New Zealand’s constitutional architecture don’t reference the principles of the Treaty, and nor should they. If the UN understood that, they probably wouldn’t have made the points they did.”

Foreign Minister Winston Peters said the matter of who replied to correspondence from the UN had been resolved and said ‘experience’ matters in the business of diplomacy, and ‘fixed’ the issue after speaking to Seymour.

“I was preparing a response for all the affected Ministries for the 11th of August, which is the cut-off time, and I find out the other Ministers are involved, and I just put the system right,” Peters said.

He said he was still consulting affected ministries and would craft a response when that’s complete.

Regulatory Standards Bill Oral Submissions concluded last week

The Regulatory Standards Bill is currently before the Finance and Expenditure Select Committee, which last week heard oral submissions over four days. Only 30 hours were allocated for the hearings.

Out of 208 submissions presented, only 19 were in support of the Bill, with the overwhelming majority raising serious concerns about its impact on democratic lawmaking, Treaty obligations, and constitutional stability.

The Committee’s final report is due back to Parliament by 22 November 2025