A bill that would overhaul New Zealand’s workplace health and safety laws has been back in the headlines this week, with protesters rallying against its second reading in Parliament.

The Health and Safety at Work Amendment Bill, introduced by the right-libertarian ACT Party’s Brooke van Velden earlier this year, marks the largest reset of the country’s regime in a decade.

The government says the reforms will reduce compliance costs, increase certainty, and refocus health and safety requirements for businesses. For smaller operations, they would limit the core duty of actively identifying and managing hazards specifically to those deemed “critical risks”.

The bill has already drawn fierce opposition from unions, workplace safety advocates and families affected by the Pike River disaster in 2010, which resulted in the deaths of 29 miners.

Critics are concerned that, rather than reducing workplace harm, the law change will only raise the risk – something that could also result in higher workplace death, illness and injury rates.

But more broadly, the changes reflect a political shift in how workplace safety is framed in New Zealand.

Where the focus once centred on identifying and managing risk, attention has increasingly turned to the costs and burdens of regulation. What hasn’t changed, however, is that vital question of who should bear responsibility for keeping workers safe.

From prevention to prioritisation

New Zealand’s current health and safety regime........

© The Conversation