What you need to know about the proposed freshwater reforms
As part of its overhaul of the Resource Management Act, the government has launched consultation on a proposal to shake up the management of freshwater in Aotearoa. Here's a quick(ish) rundown.
What's all this then?
Yesterday, the government released three discussion documents proposing changes to the 'national directions' of three areas: infrastructure and development, the primary sector, and freshwater. 'National direction' refers to various rules and policies that sit under the Resource Management Act (RMA) and inform how councils develop local rules and plans.
Sorry but this all sounds deeply boring.
I hear you, but as Bluey's mum says, boring things are still important. The RMA, which was passed in 1991, governs how we interact with the environment. For some years there's been broad agreement across much of the political spectrum that the complex web of planning rules sitting under the RMA are overly restrictive and contributing to our housing crisis and infrastructure deficit. There's been less consensus on what should replace it though: the Labour government did repeal and replace the RMA in 2023, but the new coalition government repealed that replacement and embarked on its own overhaul.
Right, so this new announcement is the replacement of the replacement?
Nope – that was announced in March and is coming later this year by way of two new laws that 'clearly distinguish between land-use planning and natural resource management, while putting a priority on the enjoyment of private property rights'. Yesterday was all about the aforementioned ' national directions ', which comprise national policy statements, national environmental standards, national planning standards and regulations made under section 360 of the RMA.
The three discussion documents released yesterday propose reforms to 12 different 'instruments', as these sets of rules are called, as well as the introduction of four new instruments. Most of these fall under the primary sector and infrastructure and development categories, so let's start with freshwater, where, mercifully, just two instruments are involved.
Phew. Tell me more.
With pleasure. Two sets of rules are set to be replaced: the National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management 2020 (NPS-FM) and the Resource Management (National Environmental Standards for Freshwater) Regulations 2020 (NES-F). Replacing NPS-FM was promised in the National-Act coalition agreement.
NPS-FM, NES-F… not exactly catchy names. Is that why they're for the scrapheap?
Not as such. When it comes to freshwater, the current rules are 'too complex, too expensive, and too often ignore the practical realities of landowners', said agriculture minister Todd McClay yesterday, in a press release announcing 'practical, farmer-focused reforms' that he said would 'restore confidence and reduce red tape, while still delivering environmental gains'.
Farmer-focused, you say?
Yep. The current freshwater management rules, part of a 2020 reform package aimed at halting the degradation of our waterways, put controls on certain high-risk farming practices. The government thinks they've been too onerous on farmers and rural communities, and reforms are needed to 'restore balance' so that 'the interests of all water users, including farmers, growers, and rural communities, are properly reflected'.
There's particular concern with Te Mana o Te Wai, the concept underpinning the NPS-FM that sets a hierarchy of obligations for authorities to prioritise in consenting: at the top is the health and wellbeing of waterways, then the health needs of people (such as drinking water), followed by 'the ability of people and communities to provide for their social, economic, and cultural well-being'. It also emphasises that tangata whenua should be involved in decision-making around freshwater management.
The government was so concerned by this framework that it passed the Resource Management (Freshwater and Other Matters) Amendment Act late last year to exclude consideration of the hierarchy from resource consenting while the replacement for the NPS-FM was worked on.
What was the hurry?
Act has long been critical of Te Mana o te Wai, which it considers a form of its bête noire, co-governance – and one that relies on ' vague spiritual concepts ' to boot. National has been less openly scathing – it was a National government that first enshrined the concept in the NPS in 2014, after all – but just before the 2023 election the party announced its intention to 'rebalance' Te Mana o Te Wai to better reflect the interests of all water users. This is the line that made it into the National-Act coalition agreement.
In the press release yesterday, associate minister for the environment Andrew Hoggard (an Act MP) said Te Mana o te Wai had 'caused frustration across rural New Zealand, with some councils applying it in a way that sidelines the very people working to improve water outcomes'. National's McClay, interestingly, was more forthright, saying, 'We won't stand by while councils weaponise Te Mana o te Wai, to push ideology over common sense.'
How have councils 'weaponised' Te Mana o te Wai?
The press release mentions the government's 'decisive intervention' in 2024 to stop the Otago Regional Council from passing its land and water plan that would have increased freshwater environmental protections, and, according to McClay, 'would have imposed unnecessary costs and uncertainty on rural landowners'.
I see. So what changes are actually being proposed?
Some new objectives are suggested, including that councils should 'safeguard the life-supporting capacity of freshwater and the health of people and communities, while enabling communities to provide for their social, cultural and economic well-being, including productive economic opportunities'. These two things would have to be considered equally, with neither considered more important than the other.
Councils would also be required 'to consider the pace and cost of change, and who bears the cost'. The aim of this is to 'increase recognition that change takes time. Long timeframes for improving water quality have always been appropriate and are, in some cases, unavoidable.'
As for how exactly Te Mana o te Wai should be 'rebalanced', three options are proposed. First, the hierarchy of obligations would be removed and councils would be advised that Te Mana o te Wai shouldn't be used in planning decisions, but 'process steps for councils to apply Te Mana o te Wai – for example, by actively involving tangata whenua in freshwater management' would be retained. The second option is to reintroduce Te Mana o te Wai provisions from the 2017 NPS-FM, which essentially required councils to recognise the connection between water and the broader environment and engage with the community, including tangata whenua. The third option would ditch the concept entirely, removing all mention of Te Mana o te Wai from the NPS.
Anything else?
Yep – more flexibility for councils around monitoring and reporting requirements and the setting of limits for stuff like nitrogen and phosphorus levels from agricultural fertiliser runoff, E.Coli and stock units (eg how many cows) are allowed per hectare on a farm near a waterway. This includes the potential removal of 'bottom lines', minimum national standards for the likes of nitrate and ammonia toxicity.
Also, allowing commercial vegetable growing activities (which are high risk in terms of nitrogen leaching) to go ahead without resource consent, permitting the construction of off-stream water storage such as storage ponds on farms, allowing more farming activities near wetlands and removing the requirement for councils to map natural inland wetlands within 10 years.
Then there's simplifying fish passage regulations, reducing requirements for farmers to report on synthetic nitrogen fertiliser use, and introducing mapping requirements for drinking water sources, to name just a few.
Righto. What has the response been to these proposals?
The Green Party's environment spokesperson Lan Pham, formerly a freshwater commissioner, said the proposals painted 'a damning picture of a government hellbent on profit at all costs', adding that it was 'a dark day for rivers, lakes, streams, beaches, forests and all who enjoy and rely on these taonga across Aotearoa'.
Choose Clean Water spokesperson Tom Kay described the proposed reforms as 'a massive blow for the health of our water and the health of our communities', while Greenpeace said they would 'drive more dairy pollution at the expense of safe drinking water and swimmable rivers'. The Environmental Defence Society reckoned that 'the reprioritisation of freshwater objectives is likely to leave gaps, have cumulative adverse effects, allow more pollution and breach FTAs', while the rebalancing of the hierarchy of obligations of Te Mana o te Wai would 'significantly weaken protections'.
Federated Farmers, meanwhile, welcomed the proposals, with the group's freshwater spokesperson Colin Hurst particularly applauding the proposed rebalancing of the 'unworkable and highly problematic' Te Mana o te Wai. 'We believe it's worth considering whether Te Mano o te Wai [sic] is a concept that should be scrapped altogether, which is one of the options now on the table,' he said in a press release. Beef + Lamb New Zealand was also supportive of the proposals, noting its concerns around the 'unachievable numeric limits' set by the current regulations, but said further analysis was required before it would come out in favour of any of the options.
What happens next?
Consultation runs until July 27, with the public encouraged to submit feedback on the proposals here. You can read the discussion document and the regulatory impact statements here, as well as find details for a series of webinars the Ministry for the Environment is running on the proposed changes. The government is also seeking feedback on whether to implement the reforms under the existing RMA (for 'immediate impact' or as part of the replacement legislation ('to have impact longer term'). A draft set of proposals will be released later in the year.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NZ Herald
14 hours ago
- NZ Herald
King's Birthday Honours list celebrates Kiwi achievers
Their achievements are elevated and are on par with sporting heroes and politicians, sometimes more deservedly. For some, the honours are less about keeping in step with British tradition and more about giving Kiwis the recognition they deserve. The debate goes back and forth over the honours system, with knight and damehoods having been famously scrapped in 2000 by Helen Clark's Labour Government, then reintroduced as the New Zealand honours system nine years later by Sir John Key. Next door, Australia's knight and damehoods became almost a tug of war within the Liberal Party. Prime Minister Tony Abbott reintroduced them in 2014, puzzlingly knighted Prince Philip, and they were removed again just over a year and a half later by the next Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull, and have been absent ever since. It's noted that both Clark's and Turnbull's decisions were approved by the Queen, who rarely got involved with government policy. More recently, the New Zealand Republicans have called for honours to be announced at Matariki, saying that recognising the King's birthday (which is not his real birthday) was not a relevant public holiday for the country. This year, however, it's status quo and today's list of recipients are all nominated by their communities and recommended to the King by the Government. Ranjna Patel, a prominent figure in the Auckland community, receives the New Zealand Order of Merit and becomes a Dame for services to ethnic communities, health and family violence prevention. Patel's CV reads like a veritable alphabet soup: ONZM, QSM and now DNZM. Her contributions to the Auckland health community are far too great to list. Millennials will recognise Suzy Cato on today's list. She is being made an Officer of the New Zealand Order of Merit for her services to music, television and education. Cato's melodic voice coached children through the Covid-19 lockdowns, producing online content such as storytelling, science experiments and musical activities for children. Cato's show You And Me was staple children's TV viewing in many Kiwi households. She was known by her trademark blonde hair and colourful selection of jumpers. No doubt her grown-up fans can still sing the theme tune It's Our Time by heart. BMX champion Sarah Walker, comedian Dai Henwood, TV personality and historian Jude Dobson, Louise Wallace, Black Fern Portia Woodman-Wickliffe and former All Black and rugby commentator Murray Mexted are other recognisable names on the list. But whether they have name recognition or not, we must take the time to honour and thank our high achievers for their invaluable contributions to society and their local communities – however we choose to celebrate them.
Scoop
2 days ago
- Scoop
Environmentalists See Forestry Changes As Dangerous Step For Tairāwhiti
Article – Zita Campbell – Local Democracy Reporter Gisborne residents call proposals 'a slap in the face' amid forestry concerns. Tairāwhiti environmentalists have called changes for commercial forestry under proposed Resource Management Act reforms 'a slap in the face' and a return to weaker forestry regulations. Local groups are preparing to make submissions on proposed changes to the way forestry is managed after consultation on the Resource Management Act opened on Thursday. The proposals would make it harder for councils to have their own discretion in setting stricter rules to control tree planting. Gisborne District Council (GDC) said the proposed changes grant both 'real opportunities' and 'some challenges'. The Eastland Wood Council (EWC) is still considering its options around submitting. Mana Taiao Tairāwhiti (MTT), the group behind a 12,000-signature petition that triggered the Ministerial Inquiry into Land Use (MILU) in Tairāwhiti and Wairoa, claimed the Government was relaxing 'already permissive forestry rules'. The inquiry, published in May 2023, followed the destruction caused by Cyclone Gabrielle and other major storms, when woody debris, forestry slash and sedimentation flooded the region's land, waterways and infrastructure. At the time of the inquiry's findings, the previous Government announced actions to reduce the risk of a Gabrielle repeat. MTT spokeswoman and Ruatōria resident Tui Warmenhoven said, 'We were promised stronger protections – what we're getting is deregulation dressed as reform.' The proposed changes were 'a slap in the face to the hundreds of whānau who've already paid the price for poor forestry regulations', said Warmenhoven in a group statement. Another part of the proposed changes will require a Slash Mobilisation Risk Assessment as part of all harvest management plans. It would also consider refining requirements to remove all slash above a certain size from forest cutovers. MTT welcomed the proposed requirement for Slash Mobilisation Risk Assessments, however, it warned 'this would be ineffective without enforceable planning requirements and local oversight'. 'A slash assessment without an afforestation plan is meaningless – it's a partial fix that ignores the root of the problem,' said Warmenhoven. 'We've already seen what happens when forestry is left to regulate itself and the problems with planting shallow-rooting pine on erosion-prone slopes. We are also concerned about the removal of references to woody debris, given that whole pine plantations collapsed during Cyclone Gabrielle and still line many waterways in the region.' Last September, EWC chairman Julian Kohn said forestry firms were 'bleeding money', with many companies finding Gisborne too costly to invest in. Speaking with Local Democracy Reporting, Kohn said EWC was still considering whether to submit its own response or work with other council members to make submissions. 'We've been working closely with the minister and advocating for what we see needs to be real change in respect of some of the causes in the NES-CF [National Environmental Standards for Commercial Forestry],' said Kohn. 'Our real concern is that the way the council is treating many of these consents and these enforcement orders are literally sending these forest companies to the wall.' He said forestry companies would close if things continued the way they were, which would leave forests unmanaged and unharvested. 'Next time we have a rain event, then some of those trees which have been locked up are going to come down the waterways, which is exactly what everybody wants to try to prevent.' GDC's director of sustainable futures, Jocelyne Allen, said the consultation documents came 'as no surprise' as they were broad and aligned with what the council had seen in the Cabinet paper and Expert Advisory Group report. 'The packages cover infrastructure, the primary sector, freshwater, and urban growth, all areas that matter deeply to our region. 'There are real opportunities here, but also some challenges, and we're taking the time to work through both carefully,' she said. The council intends to submit a response and will be taking a strategic and collaborative approach to doing so, including engaging with tangata whenua, whānau, hapū and iwi across the region and working through its sector networks, particularly the Local Government Special Interest Groups and Te Uru Kahika, said Allen. Before the announcement of the proposed changes, in an email to Local Democracy Reporting on Monday, Primary Industries and Forestry Minister Todd McClay said forestry played an important role in the economy and provided many jobs on the East Coast. 'The Government is working closely with the GDC and respected members of the forestry industry, farming and iwi to manage and reduce risk through better and more practical rules rather than blanket restrictions or bans.' He said they are reviewing slash management practices and will amend the NES-CF so councils can focus on the most at-risk areas, lower costs and deliver better social and environmental outcomes. 'We want them to focus on high-risk areas, which is what GDC is currently doing, rather than suggesting that there should no longer be any forestry in the Tairāwhiti region,' he said.
Scoop
2 days ago
- Scoop
Worsening Poverty And Social Misery In New Zealand
Last week New Zealand's Treasury released a Child Poverty Report, which forecast that the proportion of children living in poverty will increase from 17.7 percent in 2024 to 18.4 percent in 2029. The report was released along with the National Party-led government's austerity budget, which starves public services, while cutting workers' wages, reducing government contributions to retirement savings and barring thousands of unemployed teenagers from welfare. The government is seeking to solve the worsening economic crisis by ramping up the exploitation of the working class, while protecting the fortunes of the super-rich. Asked by a TVNZ interviewer why the government had not done more in the budget to address child poverty, Finance Minister Nicola Willis declared: 'there is not actually a magic money tree that allows me to show such generosity that I can solve every problem at once.' Year after year, successive Labour and National Party governments have trotted out this refrain, even as they have handed tens of billions of dollars to the corporate elite through tax cuts, subsidies and bailouts, and spent billions on the armed forces. The National-led coalition government—with the support of the opposition Labour Party—will spend an extra $13 billion over the next four years as part of its plan to double the size of the military and integrate New Zealand further into US-led imperialist wars. Sarita Divis of the Child Poverty Action Group, a non-government organisation, pointed out in a New Zealand Herald column last month that the $3 billion annual increase in defence spending is exactly what the Treasury itself estimated it would cost to halve the level of child poverty by 2028. The government's Child Poverty Report actually understates the extent of child poverty. Its data is more than a year old, covering the period from July 2023 to June 2024. Over the past year, the number of people in full-time work has fallen by 45,000 as unemployment increased from 4 to 5.1 percent, and living costs have continued to rise while wages stagnated. Moreover, the government defines poverty as less than 50 percent of the median household income after paying for housing costs—an extremely low bar. While the percentage of children below this poverty line was unchanged in the year to June 2024, the number of children living in 'material hardship'—the poorest of the poor—increased by almost a third between 2022 and mid-2024, from 10.5 percent to 13.4 percent. 'Material hardship' is defined as lacking access to six or more 'essentials,' such as decent housing, heating, healthy food, warm clothes and shoes, etc. Another survey, by the Ministry of Health, found that last year 27 percent of children 'lived in households where food ran out often or sometimes,' up from 21 percent the year before. Numerous reports illustrate an increasingly severe social crisis. The Christchurch Press wrote on May 22: 'Some families have moved into one heated room to keep warm, while others are taking out loans to pay their power bills as costs rise and temperatures drop.' It noted that last year, 'Consumer NZ estimated 140,000 households had to take out a loan to pay their power bill, and a further 38,000 households had their power cut at least once as they couldn't pay their bill.' In Wellington, the Post reported on May 10 that 'Food charities are facing an unprecedented surge in demand from struggling middle income earners.' In February, one soup kitchen 'served 7930 meals, 1200 more than across the same month in 2024.' Nationwide 500,000 people, one tenth of the population, relies on food banks on a regular basis. Homelessness continues to become more visible in every major centre. The government has boasted about reducing the number of emergency housing places from 4,000 in September 2023 to around 500 in December 2024—despite the 2023 census finding that 112,496 people, or 2.3 percent of the population, are 'severely housing deprived' (up from 99,462 people in 2018). According to government data cited by the Press, 'the number of emergency housing special needs grants, which fund temporary accommodation for people in need, have dropped from 8873 in July 2023, to just 1338 in March 2025.' Growing social misery and hopelessness is reflected in an unprecedented surge in the use of dangerous drugs. In Northland, the poorest region, as well as Southland and Otago, wastewater testing shows methamphetamine use has tripled in the past year. Nationwide, the amount of meth consumed between October and December 2024 was 78 percent higher than the average over the previous 12 months. There is also a profound mental health crisis, particularly affecting young people. A May 14 report by UNICEF revealed that New Zealand had the worst youth suicide rate of the 36 countries in the OECD, with 17.1 suicides per 100,000 people aged 15 to 19 (based on data from 2018–20). UNICEF appealed to the government to increase welfare payments for families with children and to address food insecurity by expanding the provision of free school lunches. The government has made cruel cuts in both areas. The government has deflected blame for young people's poor mental health onto social media. It is seeking to ban under-16-year-olds from social media platforms. This has nothing to do with protecting children but is aimed at strengthening state control over the internet and stopping teenagers from accessing political material, especially socialist articles explaining the real causes of inequality, poverty and war. While the Labour Party has criticised the latest budget cuts, this is entirely hypocritical. Homelessness, child poverty and the cost of living all became worse during the 2017–2023 Labour government, which is why it lost the 2023 election in a landslide. Labour transferred tens of billions of dollars to the super-rich through corporate bailouts, subsidies and quantitative easing measures during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. Last year's National Business Review Rich List, profiling more than 100 of the country's richest individuals and families, showed that their collective wealth increased from $72.59 billion to $95.68 billion in just one year. More than half of this figure, over $50 billion, was held by just 10 billionaires. This enormous wealth, accumulated by exploiting the labour of working people, must be expropriated, along with the money being wasted on war, so that it can be used to eliminate poverty, expand schools and hospitals and meet all other social needs. The task facing workers and young people is to reject all capitalist parties, including Labour and the Greens, and the union bureaucracy which has suppressed any resistance from workers to the government's attacks, and to take up the fight for the socialist reorganisation of society. By Tom Peters, Socialist Equality Group 30 May 2025
