MinterEllisonRuddWatts

Send us your feedback
In this final episode of the Election 2026 podcast series, Solicitor Michael O’Brien is joined by Partner Briony Davies and Special Counsel Daniel Fielding to discuss what happens after New Zealanders cast their votes. Their discussion explores the constitutional, legal and political processes that take place between election day and the formation of a new government, including coalition negotiations, the role of the Governor-General, and what businesses and stakeholders should be watching during this period.
[01:36] Briony and Daniel explain what elections do from a legal and constitutional perspective, the distinction between Parliament and the executive government, and the political, legal and constitutional conventions that shape government formation.
[04:32] The conversation moves on to discuss what happens immediately after election day, including preliminary and official election results, the caretaker convention, the Governor-General’s role, and how confidence in the House ultimately determines who forms the next government.
[11:13] Michael then turns to coalition negotiations under MMP, covering how parties negotiate policy commitments, ministerial responsibilities and support arrangements, as well as the different structures governments can take, from formal coalitions to confidence and supply arrangements.
[16:18] Briony and Daniel examine how coalition and support agreements can provide valuable insight into a new government's priorities and discuss what stakeholders should look for when assessing likely policy direction.
[17:46] They next explore the role of the public service during coalition negotiations, including how negotiating parties can access information and analysis, and the safeguards in place to preserve political neutrality.
[20:41] The discussion turns to what happens once a government is formed, including the swearing-in of ministers, the Speech from the Throne and Briefings to Incoming Ministers, and why each provides important signals about the government's priorities and legislative agenda.
[24:30] Briony explains the reinstatement of parliamentary business and what it means for unfinished legislation, petitions and other matters before Parliament, highlighting why this process is particularly important for organisations with an interest in law reform.
 
Information in this podcast is correct as at the date of recording, 17 June 2026.

Please contact Briony Davies, Daniel Fielding, or a member of our Public Law team if you need legal advice or guidance on any of the topics discussed in this episode.
Don’t forget to rate, review or follow MinterEllisonRuddWatts wherever you get your podcasts.
You can also email us directly at website.enquiries@minterellison.co.nz and sign up to receive election updates via your inbox here. 
Additional resources
We're proud to again support Policy.nz – a free, independent, non-partisan platform that helps voters compare parties and policies in one place. The site has the latest election information, making it easier to cut through the noise and understand where parties stand on the issues that matter most.
For show notes and additional resources visit minterellison.co.nz/podcasts

Send us your feedback
In this episode, privacy experts Richard Wells and Suzy McMillan discuss key privacy law obligations when engaging service providers, including who remains responsible for personal information under the Privacy Act 2020, the often-overlooked requirements of IPP 5, and practical steps organisations should take to manage security risks.
[01:18] Richard and Suzy discuss who remains responsible for personal information when it is handed over to a third-party service provider. Suzy explains that, under section 11 of the Privacy Act, organisations generally retain responsibility for personal information, even when it is stored or processed by a third party on their behalf.
[05:47] Suzy explains the requirements of IPP 5(a) and (b), which require organisations to implement reasonable security safeguards to protect personal information and to take reasonable steps to prevent its unauthorised use or disclosure by service providers.
[08:25] They discuss security safeguards organisations should implement in practice, covering not only technical measures such as access controls, multi-factor authentication and monitoring, but also organisational controls. They highlight the importance of thorough procurement due diligence, robust contractual protections, ongoing governance and oversight, privacy impact assessments, and embedding privacy-by-design principles throughout the project lifecycle.
[12:03] Suzy highlights that, to meet their IPP 5 obligations, organisations must independently verify a service provider’s security controls rather than relying solely on marketing claims or assurances. While certifications such as ISO 27001 can provide useful evidence of a provider’s security posture, she notes that they are only one part of the picture and should be supported by ongoing due diligence and regular verification.
[16:22] They consider some practical steps organisations can take to strengthen IPP 5 compliance, including mapping suppliers that hold or process your organisations personal information, reviewing contracts, understanding breach notification processes, independently verifying security controls, and conducting regular reviews.
[18:26] Lastly Richard highlights the importance of organisations maintaining a tested incident response plan so they can respond quickly and effectively if a privacy incident occurs.

Information in this episode is accurate as at the date of recording, 23 September 2026.

Please contact Richard Wells, Suzy McMillan or our Data protection team if you need legal advice and guidance on any of the topics discussed in the episode.
You can also email us directly at techsuite@minterellison.co.nz and sign up to receive technology updates via your inbox here. 
 
Additional resources
Privacy Act 2020
For show notes and additional resources visit minterellison.co.nz/podcasts

Send us your feedback
In this episode of Level Playing Field, Sports Law Partner Richard Wells and Senior Associate Sarah Redding move from the theory behind New Zealand's major events framework to the practical realities of how it operates on the ground. Building on the first episode in this two-part series, they explore how the Major Events Management Act 2007 (MEMA) protects sponsors, event organisers and government investment through ambush marketing restrictions, clean zones and enforcement mechanisms. Richard and Sarah also discuss how the major events regime has evolved since the 2011 Rugby World Cup and the balance that has emerged between commercial protection and legitimate business activity.
[01:04] Sarah explains how MEMA creates a protective commercial and physical “bubble” around major events. She outlines the two key pillars of the regime: restrictions on unauthorised associations with events and the use of clean zones and transport routes to protect official sponsors and event partners.
[03:34] Richard and Sarah discuss how MEMA extends beyond traditional intellectual property protections. They examine the use of protected event words, logos and emblems, and reflect on how the legislation provided powerful protections during the 2011 Rugby World Cup.
[06:04] The discussion turns to clean zones and clean transport routes. Richard explains how these controls operate in practice, why they are important for sponsors and broadcasters, and the logistical challenges involved in creating commercially exclusive event environments.
[09:49] Looking at how the regime has evolved over time, Sarah reflects on how major events have moved away from the broader protections seen during Rugby World Cup 2011 towards a more targeted and balanced approach focused on venues and core event branding.
[11:58] Richard and Sarah explore enforcement. They discuss the significant powers available under MEMA, including warnings, seizure powers and penalties, and how advances in technology have enabled a more proportionate approach to compliance and enforcement.
[15:11] Sarah outlines the Act’s escalation process, from informal warnings through to civil remedies and criminal penalties. She also discusses the protections afforded to enforcement officers who exercise their powers reasonably and in good faith.
[17:39] The pair examine some of the practical challenges that arise when applying the legislation, including the tension between broad protections and exceptions for media reporting, personal opinions and legitimate business activities.
[19:36] Richard and Sarah discuss the complexities of clean zone boundaries, visibility issues, private land exceptions and billboard advertising, highlighting some of the challenges event organisers and businesses face during major events.
[21:04] Bringing the series to a close, Richard reflects on how MEMA sits alongside New Zealand’s wider intellectual property framework. He explains how the regime has matured over time and how a more balanced approach can benefit event organisers, sponsors, sports and the wider community.

Information in this episode is correct as at the date of recording, 7 September 2026. 

Please contact Richard Wells, Sarah Redding or our Sports Law team if you need legal advice or guidance on any of the topics discussed in this episode. And don't forget to rate, review or follow MinterEllisonRuddWatts wherever you get your podcasts. You can also email us directly at website.enquiries@minterellison.co.nz and sign up to receive Sports law updates via your inbox here.
For show notes and additional resources visit minterellison.co.nz/podcasts

Send us your feedback
In this episode of Election 2026, Partner and Head of our IP team Christopher Young is joined by Daniel Fielding, Special Counsel, and Michael O'Brien, Solicitor, from our Public Law team to explore New Zealand's election advertising regime. They discuss the broad definition of election advertising, the intellectual property and advertising law issues that can arise during campaigns, and the key Electoral Act rules that political parties, candidates and third parties need to understand.
[00:10] Chris introduces the episode and its focus on election year advertising and the rules surrounding it. What is means, who can do it, and where people can get themselves into trouble.
[01:10] Daniel and Michael explain the surprisingly broad definition of election advertising and discuss why an advertisement can be captured by electoral law even when influencing voter behaviour was not its intended purpose. They also explore the policy reasons behind regulating political advertising, including its impact on democratic participation and public decision-making.
[05:21] Chris discusses the intellectual property issues that can arise during election campaigns, including trademarks, branding, copyright infringement and the use of music in campaign advertising. The conversation covers artist objections, moral rights, endorsement risks, and the lessons political parties can learn from previous disputes in New Zealand and overseas.
[14:28] They discuss the different complaint pathways available for election advertising, including the roles of the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) and Broadcasting Standards Authority (BSA). Daniel and Michael explain how complaints are assessed, discuss recent examples involving political parties, and consider how AI-generated campaign content may create new challenges in future elections.
[20:57] Daniel outlines some of the most important Electoral Act requirements affecting election advertising, including promoter statements, third-party promoters, campaign spending thresholds and election hoardings. They also discuss how local council bylaws interact with election signage and the compliance issues that can arise during the campaign period.
[28:12] They examine the rules governing election broadcasts outside the formal election period, the offence of publishing false statements immediately before election day, and the restrictions that apply to political advertising once voting is underway. The episode finishes with a discussion on social media, election day campaigning, and why some of New Zealand's electoral rules continue to generate debate.

Information in this podcast is correct as at the date of recording, 10 August 2026.
 
Please contact Christopher Young, Daniel Fielding, our Public law team, or our Intellectual property team, if you need legal advice and guidance on any of the topics discussed in this episode.
Don’t forget to rate, review or follow MinterEllisonRuddWatts wherever you get your podcasts.
You can also email us directly at website.enquiries@minterellison.co.nz and sign up to receive election updates via your inbox here. 

Additional resources
We're proud to again support Policy.nz – a free, independent, non-partisan platform that helps voters compare parties and policies in one place. The site has the latest election information, making it easier to cut through the noise and understand where parties stand on the issues that matter most.
For show notes and additional resources visit minterellison.co.nz/podcasts

Send us your feedback
In this episode, Financial Services Partner Jeremy Muir and Senior Associate Ken Ng discuss the Financial Markets Authority's (FMA) fintech regulatory sandbox pilot. Drawing on their insights advising several pilot participants, they explore the programme's key outcomes, lessons learned, and what comes next for fintech regulation in New Zealand.
[01:53] Jeremy and Ken discuss the purpose of the FMA’s regulatory sandbox pilot and why it was established, providing fintechs with a controlled environment to test innovative products and bespoke business models under regulatory oversight. Ken explains how the initiative sought to balance innovation with consumer protection, while enabling fintechs and the FMA to work collaboratively through regulatory uncertainty.
[04:17] They consider the diversity of the sandbox pilot’s six participating businesses (Homeshare, Emerge, Tandym, ECDD Holdings, Invest in Farming Co-op (IIF) and IndigiShare) and explain how each was seeking to bring a novel offering to market that sat at the edge of existing regulatory frameworks.
[10:50] Jeremy explains how regulatory uncertainty can slow innovation, increase costs and, in some cases, prevent promising ideas from reaching the market. He discusses how the sandbox pilot provided a structured way for innovators and regulators to better understand emerging business models and identify where existing regulatory settings may need to evolve.
[11:43] Ken and Jeremy consider some of the key lessons from the pilot, including how a one-size-fits-all licensing approach can create barriers to entry for startups and emerging fintechs. He also discusses how the programme gave the FMA valuable insight into the practical challenges faced by innovative businesses, while participants benefited from tangible outcomes such as exemptions, bespoke licences, and specific regulatory designations.
[14:18] Jeremy and Ken look ahead to the future of fintech regulation, with a particular focus on the FMA’s proposed on-ramp licensing regime. Ken explains how a graduated licensing framework could lower barriers to entry for startups, while Jeremy highlights other developments on the horizon, including payments modernisation, the use of AI in financial advice, and ongoing digital asset reform.

Information in this episode is accurate as at the date of recording, 11 September 2026.

Please contact Jeremy Muir, Ken Ng or our Financial Services team if you need legal advice and guidance on any of the topics discussed in the episode.
And don’t forget to rate, review or follow MinterEllisonRuddWatts wherever you get your podcasts. You can also email us directly at techsuite@minterellison.co.nz and sign up to receive technology updates via your inbox here.

Additional resources
FMA Report: Supporting innovation in New Zealand’s financial markets, May 2026
For show notes and additional resources visit minterellison.co.nz/podcasts