News

The Health and Safety at Work Amendment Bill took a significant step forward today. On 16/06/2026, the Education and Workforce Select Committee reported the Bill back to Parliament, recommending it be passed. For the thousands of businesses across Otago and Southland trying to balance safety with the day to day realities of running a business, this matters.

Here is where things stand, what is changing, and what it means if you employ a smaller team.

Where the Bill is in the process

The Bill is not law yet. It has cleared two of the stages it needs to pass through:

• First reading (12/02/2026): done
• Select Committee (reported back 16/06/2026): done
• Second reading: next step
• Committee of the whole House: to come
• Third reading: to come
• Royal assent: to come

The Government has signalled it wants the Bill passed before the November 2026 general election. If it does pass, most of the changes are set to take effect from 1 November 2026. Until then, the current Health and Safety at Work Act 2015 continues to apply in full, so there is nothing you need to change today.

What the Bill is trying to do

The core idea is to refocus the system on the risks that matter most. Instead of treating every possible hazard with equal weight, the reforms ask businesses to concentrate their effort on critical risks, the things genuinely capable of killing or seriously harming someone. Alongside that, the Bill aims to clarify confusing wording, strengthen the role of approved codes of practice, and sharpen what the regulators focus on.

What it means if you employ fewer than 20 people

This is the change most of our members will feel. The Bill creates a category called a small PCBU, a business with fewer than 20 workers. Seasonal operations are covered too, based on the number of workers you reasonably expect across the year.
If you are a small PCBU:

• Your core duties (the primary duty of care and related duties) would apply only in relation to critical risks.
• You would still need to manage the everyday, non-critical risks in your workplace. The difference is that failing to prioritise them would not be an offence.
• One specific duty around providing a safe environment continues to apply in full.

In plain terms: the law would expect you to focus your formal effort on the serious stuff, while still running a sensible, safe operation. It is a narrowing of duties, not a free pass.

A word of caution worth holding onto: the relief depends on correctly identifying what counts as a critical risk in your business. Getting that judgement wrong is where the real exposure sits, so it is worth a conversation with a health and safety adviser if you are unsure.

A clearer definition, and a few useful exceptions

The Select Committee made several practical improvements:

• Critical risk is clearer. The test now asks whether serious harm would result if the risk occurs, rather than how probable the risk is to happen in the first place. That removes a genuine source of confusion.
• Mental health is in scope. Where a workplace hazard could lead to serious harm, harm to mental health can be considered as part of that risk.
• Shared worksites. There are clearer rules on how smaller and larger businesses co-operate when they share a duty on the same site, which helps construction, property and contracting members in particular.
• Two targeted exceptions. Relief around seismic risk for tenanted premises, useful for property owners and tenants, and relief around recreational access across open land, useful for farming and tourism operators who allow public access.

What Business South said, and where it landed

Business South made a submission on behalf of members, drawing on what you have told us through our Quarterly Business Survey. Compliance complexity and regulatory uncertainty have come through as persistent pressures, so we backed reform that focuses effort on real risks while keeping the system practical for smaller teams.

Several of the points we raised were taken up in substance:

• We asked for the critical risk definition to be made clearer. The Committee reworded the test to address exactly the uncertainty we flagged.
• We asked that compliance with other laws should not be allowed to weaken health and safety protection. The Committee tightened that provision so an unrelated regime cannot displace the Act unless it actually manages the risk.
• We asked for more lead in time and guidance. The deferred start date and the expectation that WorkSafe guides before it enforces both reflect that.

Two of our asks remain on the table, and we will keep pushing:

• A standing review cycle for approved codes of practice, so the guidance businesses rely on keeps pace with automation, new technology and AI.
• Clear, sector specific guidance so smaller businesses do not mistake reduced duties for a blanket exemption.

What to do now

There is no need to act today, but a little preparation before 1 November 2026 will pay off:

• Have a look at your operation and note where your genuinely serious risks sit.
• If you employ close to 20 people, or your numbers move seasonally, keep an eye on that threshold.
• Watch for WorkSafe guidance as it is released, and use the lead in time rather than leaving it to the last minute.
• If you are unsure whether a risk is critical, get advice early.

We will keep members across each step as the Bill moves through its remaining readings, and we will publish a practical explainer on the 20-worker line closer to the start date.

If this reform affects your business and you would like to share your experience, we would like to hear from you. Your voice is what makes our advocacy real.