Use of Artificial Intelligence in European Union Elections: Lessons for New Zealand.

My article with Dr Nicky Gillibrand, Use of Artificial Intelligence in European Union Elections: Lessons for New Zealand, has been published in the New Zealand Journal of Public and International Law.

The article examines the European Union’s regulatory response to the use of artificial intelligence in the 2024 European Parliament elections and considers what that experience might mean for New Zealand.

We look at both the risks associated with AI-generated political content and the limits of treating all uses of AI as equally problematic. The European experience suggests that extensive regulation does not necessarily prevent deliberate misuse, while it can impose significant compliance obligations on legitimate political actors. For New Zealand, more targeted measures around transparency, disclosure and accountability may offer a more proportionate response.

The article grew out of conversations after Nicky and I presented separate papers at the ICON-S conference in Madrid in 2024. Our work brought together Nicky’s focus on the intersection of constitutional theory and artificial intelligence and my interest in electoral law, political practice and the design of workable regulatory responses.

AI politicking isn’t coming – it’s already here, and proving hard to regulate

Artificial intelligence is already shaping election campaigns. Europe’s experience shows that heavy regulation alone has limits, but doing nothing is not a viable response. In this piece for Newsroom https://newsroom.co.nz/2026/02/13/ai-politicking-isnt-coming-its-already-here-and-proving-hard-to-regulate/ I discuss the early findings of my research with Dr Nicky Gillibrand subsequently published and discussed further at: https://www.marcusganley.com/content/use-of-artificial-intelligence-in-european-union-elections-lessons-for-new-zealand

I also discussed this research with Emile Donovan on RNZ Nights https://www.rnz.co.nz/national/programmes/nights/audio/2019023263/are-we-ready-for-ai-this-election-year

Comparative legislative speed in the Aotearoa New Zealand and Australian (Federal) parliaments

This is a working paper first presented at the ICON-S conference in Madrid on 8 July 2024.

This paper begins by discussing the importance of legislative speed, examining its impact on deliberation and public engagement. The rationale for selecting Australia as a comparator for New Zealand is then explored, highlighting key similarities and differences between the two legislative systems. The analysis proceeds with a detailed examination of legislative speed in Australia, illustrated through recent examples. This is followed by an exploration of legislative speed in New Zealand, including an analysis of the time taken for bills to progress through various stages. The paper then delves into the explanations for the differences in legislative speed between the two countries, focusing on procedural conventions, public engagement expectations, and mechanisms for expediting legislation. The concluding section summarizes the findings, discusses their implications for legislative efficiency and public engagement, and suggests areas for further research.

The role of New Zealand Parliament in the Treaty of Waitangi settlement process

In this paper presented to the Australasian Political Studies Association Annual Conference, 24 September 2001, Parliament House, Brisbane I analyse the role of New Zealand Parliament and its select committee system in the Treaty of Waitangi settlement process.

Select committees and their role in keeping Parliament relevant: do New Zealand select committees make a difference?

Paper presented to the Australasian Study of Parliament Group National Conference: 14-16 July 2000 Customs House and Queensland Parliament Brisbane, Qld, Australia.

Also published in Australasian Parliamentary Review, Spring 2001, Vol. 16(2), 140–50.

Public Perceptions of the New Zealand Parliament (1999)

This paper was initially presented to the the Australasian Study of Parliament Group 1999 National Conference at the New South Wales Parliament. This was subsequently published in volume 14 of Legislative Studies (now rebranded as the Australasian Parliamentary Review) and republished in the NZ Parliament and Business Trust Information Bulletin 2000 edition 3.

What the Australian Senate can learn from NZ's House of Representatives

This paper, presented to the 1998 Australasian Political Studies Association conference in Christchurch, explores how the changes to the New Zealand Parliament’s Standing Orders made in preparation for the move to proportional representation could provide lessons for Australia.