New Zealand Law Commission

I think this concept that we've had the last few years, which is we'll just sit back and see what happens with AI is not the right approach to take.

And so we want to see the Law Commission looking at reviewing things like human right to review around how government uses AI and how private companies use AI as well.

and in what circumstances we need different risk thresholds.

So I think we should approach it cautiously, but it doesn't mean we can't embrace innovation and try and lean into it.

I think on the first part, realistically, I think the class actions will continue to be driven by our courts in New Zealand, and, and that really means funders are taking those actions.

There was a New Zealand Law Commission report in twenty twenty-two which was issued, a very long report.

It was issued after a lot of consultation with law firms, funders, and members of the public, and that recommended a statutory class actions act.

It recommended a formal certification process for class actions, and it also recommended the regulation of litigation funding.

And it possibly comes back to your question about evidence as well.

I remember going on a professional development course on evidence-based policy when I was working at the Law Commission.

And public servants have a lot of opportunity for that sort of training, but MPs don't necessarily get much institutional support in the substantive governing part of their jobs.

At the Greens, it was something that I tried to set up for our incoming MPs.