Looking at government's bid to overhaul the country's health and safety laws, it's tempting to look at the matter and say any measure - no matter how radical - that makes the workplace less dangerous is a good thing.

It's even easier when the particular legislative sea change is fronted by a tragedy.

That's presumably why the government and Labour Minister Simon Bridges have inextricably linked the biggest change to health and safety law in the past two decade to the 29 miners who lost their lives in Pike River explosion three years ago.

Last month the Health and Safety (Pike River Implementation) Bill got its first reading in the house, and if all goes to plan, by December 2014 New Zealand's workplaces will operate under a completely new set of rules.

The plan is to repeal the current Health and Safety in Employment Act, and replace it with the new regime that shifts the focus from tick box compliance to a regime where everyone - from a director to a cleaner - is responsible for health and safety in the workplace.

The bill will set up a new regulatory body, Worksafe New Zealand, to police employers, and any breaches will be met with stiff fines and penalties across the board, which have been broadly doubled from where they are currently.

The new body will be funded by a 3c hike in the ACC levies, taking them to 8c per $100 of wages on a phased basis.

So, all-in-all, it sounds like a good deal: It's relatively cheap, makes everyone in an organisation responsible for health and safety, and creates a new watchdog enough teeth to scare wayward companies into line.

If only it were that simple.

Once you dig into the detail you quickly find the argument for the change only stacks up if you ignore the hidden costs and risks associated with a major regulatory shakeup like this.

The scheme is a virtual carbon copy the so-called Model health and safety laws in Australia, which were introduced to unite disparate legislation across the seven states.

That's not a disqualifying characteristic, but the legislation has only been in place since 2011 - hardly a reasonable period to assess whether the scheme is working as envisaged.

Secondly, the change was brought in under the auspices of "one law to rule them all". We in New Zealand already have a single system.

Even more concerning is that our policymakers have only tallied the numbers on what it will cost the government to administer, with very little detail on what the compliance costs will be for business - something that has been done in Australia.

A PricewaterhouseCoopers report on the impact of the Australian Model law will have on the state of Victoria makes for sober reading.

The advisory firm estimated adoption costs will come in at around A$3.4 billion (NZ$3.8b) over five years in present value terms.

These costs will primarily be borne by small firms that employ less than 20 people (who make up 90 per cent of the business landscape) because they will need to hire external consultants to advise them on how to be compliant.

PwC concluded that should the Model package be introduced in its full form, the overall impact would have a negative effect on the Victorian economy.

Now consider that New Zealand workplace injury rates, as measured by ACC claims, have been steadily declining for years, dropping from 132 per 1,000 fulltime equivalent (FTE) jobs in 2005 to 97 per 1,000 FTEs in 2011.

That's still too high, but it suggests the current regime is working for the most part, and what we need is progressive tinkering, not a rewrite of the rule book.

Our policymakers need to resist the urge to reach for the regulatory equivalent of a sledgehammer every time they come across a serious but niche problem that requires a delicate bit of surgery.

We should be weaving the elements of the Australian system that have been proven to work -  such as making everyone in the workplace responsible for safety - into our policy structure, not proverbially throwing the baby out with the bath water.

Yes, the Pike River tragedy could have been avoided with better health and safety practices and oversight, but it does the legacy of the 29 people who died no service if their names are attached to a piece of law that's going to severely shackle the performance of our economy.

Source: Pike River no excuse for bad regulation