APIAPE: Agents of Private Interest, Architects of Public Erosion

Exposé File: Nicole McKee

ACT Party | Minister for Courts, Associate Minister of Justice

Nicole McKee: Minister of Loopholes, Enabler of Overreach

Guns, Deregulation, and the Quiet Dismantling of Oversight

Associate Minister of Justice · Sponsor of Vague Powers · Undermining Trust in Regulation

Nicole McKee, New Zealand Member of Parliament
Image source: Wikipedia (27 November 2023)

Current Portfolios

Nicole McKee fronts legislation that, in my view, erodes due process, weakens oversight, and consolidates authority under the guise of reform. From the Tribunals Amendment Bill to the Occupational Regulation Bill, and the sweeping Anti-Money Laundering Amendment Bill, McKee’s work advances centralised power at the expense of public protections.

Though party leader David Seymour authored the Medicines Amendment Bill and the Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi Bill, and Laura McClure carried the Employment Relations Amendment Bill, McKee remains the most persistent executor of ACT’s agenda. As Minister for Courts she sits at the crux of procedural reshaping — turning “tidying” into exclusion and consolidation.

Behind this sits a platform of exclusion and centralisation. In my assessment, McKee is not merely complicit — she is the legislative enforcer of ACT’s instincts, providing institutional weight and political cover for policies that undermine Aotearoa’s democratic and Treaty foundations.

The Tribunal Bill: Administrative Reform or Legal Subversion?

Marketed as streamlining, the tribunal package expands investigative reach, reshapes appointments with executive dominance, and introduces loose complaint mechanisms with thin safeguards. Coupled with vague cost-penalty provisions, it risks fairness in the very tribunals New Zealanders rely on for everyday justice.

McKee’s personal imprint is clearest in Part 4, amending the Private Security Personnel and Private Investigators Act 2010:

This is not mere “tidying”: it widens regulatory reach and normalises soft surveillance.

Formal Opposition Submitted By: Ukes Baha | Read the full opposition

The Occupational Regulation Bill: Soft Loopholes, Hard Consequences

Branded as efficiency, the Occupational Regulation Amendment Bill reduces transparency and increases discretion across legal services, real estate, and sex work.

The effect is more discretion for institutions, less recourse for the public.

Formal Opposition Submitted By: Ukes Baha | Read the full opposition

The AML/CFT Bill: International Compliance or Domestic Overreach?

Framed as a crackdown on crime and terrorism financing, the AML/CFT Amendment Bill (114–1) blends sensible clarifications with expansive controls that blur the line between necessary enforcement and financial surveillance.

The posture favours bureaucratic convenience and external compliance optics over constitutional care.

Formal Opposition Submitted By: Ukes Baha | Read the full opposition

Anti-Money Laundering and Countering Financing of Terrorism (Supervisor, Levy, and Other Matters) Amendment Bill (2025)

Pattern: centralisation of executive power, rule-by-notice, cost shifting to levies, and reduced consultation — embedding external (FATF) priorities over domestic parliamentary control.

Formal Opposition Submitted By: Ukes Baha | Read the full opposition

Legislative Pattern: Executive Control via Delegated Law-Making

This bill fits a broader pattern: concentrate power in a single supervisor, expand rule-by-notice to move obligations without debate, attach costs to a levy under ministerial strategy, and create generous exemption tools. The result is weaker parliamentary sovereignty and stronger executive discretion — especially over finance and data-rich sectors.

ACT’s Pattern of Power Without Accountability

In my view, McKee’s proposals are integral to a broader ACT blueprint: concentrating authority, bypassing safeguards, and sidelining dissent. Her tribunal bill reflects the party’s appetite for control; her occupational and financial legislation reinforce opaque authority and weakened checks.

The party has also faced scrutiny over its handling of matters involving former president Tim Jago, including extended name suppression and concerns about internal accountability (see public reporting and court records). Those episodes — and the silence around them — are inconsistent with a culture of transparency. (Add specific citations here.)

A Party of Projection, a Minister of Compliance

Elevated as a symbol of inclusion, McKee serves a political project that, in my assessment, prioritises exclusionary policy settings. Her presence may help deflect criticism, yet the policies she enables undermine communities she is expected to serve.

ACT has attacked Te Tiriti o Waitangi, championed property rights over people’s rights, and dismissed public accountability as “bureaucratic drag”. McKee may not be the architect — but she is its loyal builder. Representation without resistance becomes complicity.

This is how political erosion works: not always through aggression — often through obedience, polished rhetoric, and strategic silence.

Legislative Hyperactivity, Societal Restructuring

These bills are not isolated — they form a co-ordinated legislative offensive aimed at rewiring Aotearoa’s legal, cultural, and civic frameworks. In one parliamentary term, ACT has:

This isn’t busyness — it’s ideological transformation by stealth: replacing collective protections with market logic, and democratic safeguards with executive dominance.

McKee is a key vessel in this effort — alongside Laura McClure and David Seymour. Their roles are functional: the interface between authoritarian lawmaking and public legitimacy.

What You Can Do

Every case documented strengthens public memory — and demands accountability.
🔙 Back to APIAPE Index