On 1 October, Parliament officially dissolved. At that point, there was a lot of legislation ‘on the books’, much of which was at the very early stages and some of which was in front of select committees.

What happens to these bills?

This article sets out the process the next Parliament will undertake - and outlines what is sitting in the list to be considered.

Parliament chooses which bills to reinstate

Dissolution ends the parliamentary term, rather than simply pausing its work. All unfinished bills still before Parliament, including those before select committees, have “lapsed”, meaning they are no longer before Parliament for consideration.

But this does not necessarily mean those bills are gone for good.

After the election, the Governor-General summons the new Parliament to meet. The newly elected House of Representatives (House) can then vote to bring back unfinished bills and other business items. The business picks up where it left off, rather than starting again. The motion is moved by the new Leader of the House and debated in the House.

This process, called “reinstatement”, usually happens within the first week of Parliament sitting after the general election. Reinstatement is not automatic - it is up to the new House to decide which unfinished business to bring back. In practice, that means Governments can pick and choose which bills to revive, reflecting both changes in policy priorities and the need to make room for new legislative commitments.

Recent elections show how much this approach can vary:

• After the 2017 election, the Government changed and five bills were not reinstated. One of them was controversial. Three other bills were proposals from the previous governments since 2011 that had been sitting on the Order Paper for at least two years; and the remaining bill had simply been overtaken by time.

• After the 2020 election, the reinstatement debate saw the Autonomous Sanctions Bill dropped from the Order Paper. That bill, which sought to allow the government to impose its own sanctions independently of the UN Security Council, had sat on the Order Paper for three years without progress, and remained a live political issue.^[1]

• After the 2023 election, the reinstatement notice bucked that trend. Despite a change of Government, every Bill on the Order Paper when Parliament dissolved was reinstated. But that was a much easier call to make: only around 15 Government bills were on the final Order Paper for that Parliament, four of which were Treaty settlement bills and therefore almost certain to be reinstated.

Reinstatement after this election is likely to be different

This time, the incoming Government will inherit a significantly larger and more contentious legislative programme. There were 92 bills before the House, including 60 government bills, when Parliament was dissolved. Several are closely tied to the coalition agreements struck after the last election.

Given these numbers, the incoming Government will need to make more decisions than usual when deciding what to reinstate, while also aligning the parliamentary agenda with its own election promises and coalition priorities.

Why this election will likely see more selective reinstatement

What is reinstated will be driven by the composition of the next Government and the priorities of incoming Ministers. It is also likely that the stage reached by the individual bill will impact on its chances of survival.

A significant number of the bills before the House depend on the coalition that put them there

A number of bills reflect the priorities of the current governing parties, and the deals they struck with each other in 2023. Their continued progress is likely to be directly affected either by a change in government or a different coalition arrangement after this election, or by disagreement between the current coalition partners even before then.

• The Term of Parliament (Enabling 4-year Term) Legislation Amendment Bill is a useful illustration: the National-ACT coalition agreement committed only to passing the Bill through its first reading within 15 months, while the National–New Zealand First agreement committed only to supporting the Bill to select committee. Neither committed to its full passage or to a referendum. In February 2026, the Government deferred the Bill’s second reading and abandoned plans for a 2026 referendum, saying it would only consider progressing the legislation further if re-elected.^[2] At the minor party leaders’ debate on 13 October 2026, ACT and New Zealand First both expressed support for a referendum on the matter.^[3]

• The three bills amending or revoking the references to the Treaty of Waitangi in legislation are a further example, implementing specific commitments in the National-NZ First coalition agreement.^[4]

• A Bill need not await a change of government to stall, either - a coalition partner’s objections can be enough. The Gene Technology Bill illustrates this. New Zealand First has withheld its support for the Bill, opposing the general release of genetically modified organisms into the environment on the basis that it could affect New Zealand’s reputation as GE-free.^[5] The Bill remained at its second reading when Parliament dissolved.

Two bills affecting local government are worth watching

Two bills before the House when Parliament dissolved concern local government, and both have attracted controversy.

• The Local Government (Rates Capping) Amendment Bill would introduce an annual target range of two to four per cent for increases in councils’ non-water rates revenue. It passed its first reading, with Labour backing its progress to select committee despite reservations, while the Greens and Te Pāti Māori opposed it, arguing it would only push costs onto council fees instead of rates.^[6] Local Government New Zealand has also criticised the Bill, warning that a 4 per cent cap would constrain councils’ ability to invest in infrastructure and services while their costs rise faster than that.

• The Local Government (Management of Local Authorities) Amendment Bill, a member’s bill in the name of Stuart Smith, MP for Kaikōura, has attracted opposition from the local government sector. Local Government New Zealand has recommended the Bill not proceed, saying its governance provisions either restate the existing law or introduce unhelpful uncertainty, without clearly strengthening council governance.

Neither Bill gives effect to a specific coalition agreement commitment, so coalition dynamics may be less decisive than they are for some other bills. The Local Government (Rates Capping) Amendment Bill is nevertheless more likely to be reinstated if the current Government is returned and continues its present local government policy. Given the Local Government (Management of Local Authorities) Amendment Bill is a member’s bill, it will likely be reinstated but whether it passes will depend more broadly on whether it retains sufficient support in the new House.

The preferences of incoming Ministers will matter

A Minister taking on a large existing legislative programme may decide not to pursue every inherited Bill, particularly if parliamentary time is tight and they want to pursue their own priorities instead.

The Justice portfolio is a good example: of the Government bills before the House when it dissolved, the Justice portfolio was responsible for roughly 20% of all the government bills. On current polling, it seems likely that there will be a new Minister of Justice, even if the current Coalition is returned. A new Justice Minister may well choose to let a number of Bills lapse to leave space for the new Minister to pursue their own agenda instead.

A relatively large number of Bills have not yet even had their first reading

An unusual number of Bills were introduced shortly before Parliament was dissolved and have not had their first reading. The Broadcasting (Disestablishment of Broadcasting Standards Authority) Amendment Bill and the Research, Science, Innovation, and Technology Bill (which gives effect to the restructuring of Crown research institutes and the disestablishment of Callaghan Innovation) are both examples: both were introduced only in the final days before dissolution and had not reached their first reading.

Bills at this early stage are exposed to being left out of any reinstatement motion if political priorities shift. This can be highly problematic if much of the reform has taken place in advance of the Bill being passed - as has happened with the Research, Science, Innovation, and Technology Bill.

Bills already before a select committee are the exception

Bills that have reached select committee are generally in a stronger position and are more likely to be restored. Reinstatement motions typically allow them to resume at the stage previously reached and set a new report-back date for the committee.

But that procedural advantage does not completely insulate a Bill from changing political priorities or continuing controversy. The Conservation Amendment Bill and the Fisheries Amendment Bill illustrate the point and if there is a change of government, it is highly unlikely that either Bill will be restored.

If you have already made a submission on a Bill that was before a select committee when Parliament dissolved, you do not need to do anything further for now. Your submission is held securely, and will be passed on to the new select committee - if the Bill is reinstated once Parliament resumes.

Equally, you can still make a submission on a Bill that was open for submissions when Parliament dissolved.

Special thanks to Will Harvey for his assistance in writing this article.