
TTPP Costs Climb Again – But Commissioners' Fees Forecast To Drop
24 April
Hearing Commissioner costs for the West Coast's new District Plan are still running ahead of budget - but their bill for the year now looks set to be less hefty than predicted.
A meeting yesterday of the Tai o Poutini Plan committee yesterday heard that Commissioner costs were running more than half a million dollars over the year-to-date budget of $142,667.
Consultant planners and contractors' fees were also over budget by $241,000.
But project manager Jo Armstrong said she now expected the Commissioner-related costs to be nearly $450,000 less than forecast by next June.
'I have highlighted for most of the year that there would be insufficient budget for that Hearing Commissioner fee item…but I do think the full year forecast that I put forward earlier may have been overstated…so that's good news.'
And [council] employee costs for the period were down by $92,000 - less than half the budget forecast.
There has never been a fixed budget for the Plan.
The West Coast Regional Council was ordered by the Local Government Commission to administer the lengthy process and has had to forecast costs as best it can, rating and borrowing to cover them as they arise.
The TTPP committee's response to the 'good news' this week was muted.
Its members - council leaders and iwi - were rocked last month by estimates that the 'one plan to rule them all' will have cost West Coasters more than $8 million by the time it's released in September.
The independent commissioners who heard all the TTPP submissions and drove the length and breadth of the Coast to do it, are now working their way through its chapters, finalising the rules and writing their reports.
The added expenses for the period had come about because of extra work and services that were unforeseen, Ms Armstrong explained.
Media costs for advertising, expected to cost about $8000, had climbed to nearly $20,000.
That was down to the need to notify a variation to the Natural Hazards chapter and call for further submissions after changes to the maps following a Lidar survey.
And legal expenses, although less than predicted, came to $62,000 .
'We've been taking a lot of legal advice on different topics that the Hearings Commissioners requested …to make sure their recommendations are well-grounded,' Ms Armstrong said.
A number of builders and developers around the West Coast are awaiting the release of the 'Decisions' version of the Plan in spring, with zoning changes expected to open up new areas of land for housing.
One of the larger projects waiting for the green light is a 200-lot subdivision at Moana, that was submitted to the Grey District Council several years ago as a private plan change, but withdrawn in anticipation of the new Plan.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Newsroom
32 minutes ago
- Newsroom
The science sector sounds the alarm
New Zealand's science sector, once hailed for its agility and ingenuity during the pandemic and natural disasters, is now grappling with what researchers say is a crisis of confidence, fuelled by shrinking budgets, unstable funding pathways, and policy decisions that increasingly favour commercial returns over long-term public good. Last month, a total of $212 million was cut from the science sector in this Budget, which reprioritises existing research funding towards commercially focused science and innovation. A sizeable portion goes to Invest NZ and a new gene tech regulator. The Government says it backs the sector and is prioritising industry partnerships, private-sector investment, and 'innovation outcomes with measurable economic impact.' While officials insist the move reflects 'fiscal discipline and real-world alignment,' many in the sector say it amounts to a dismantling of the research base. Newsroom political journalist Fox Meyer tells The Detail 'the scale of the cuts is not great for the sector, but it's also more about the lack of investment'. 'It's one thing to have cuts and reprioritisation, but people have been calling for more of just anything for some time now. Now, there is a lot of frustration. 'Science funding has been stagnant or declining for years now, and a decision to reprioritise stuff is not necessarily going to put money in the Government's pocket like they think.' With a focus on the bottom line, is this the Government pulling off a Sir John Key 'show me the money' moment, with a scientific bent? 'That actually goes both ways,' says Meyer. 'Scientists are looking at the Government saying, 'Show me the money if you want me to produce more money', and the Government is looking back at the scientists and saying, 'Well, you show me the money, what are you bringing in, how are you lifting your weight?'. 'That is going to be a hard one to reconcile unless the Government is willing to pony up and make the investment.' He worries the fall-out will include a 'brain drain' with our country's brightest and best scientists and researchers opting to take up positions overseas. 'My connections in the science world – plenty of them – have moved. 'The chief science adviser for the Department of Conservation has moved to Australia … that's an expert in a cutting-edge field that we have lost to a company in Australia. 'And it's not the only example of this sort of thing. We invest so much in training up these scientists, and they are very skilled scientists, and then to not give them what they are asking for and what they need, I feel it falls short of our own investment.' In fairness, it is not all doom and gloom. 'So, the positives, there is a new funding pool for Māori-related science, that's a good thing. There's the sector-wide report that has come out, which has given us a good look at the sector. We know more now, that's a good thing. And the chief science adviser has been appointed, and the panel around him has been appointed, that's a good thing there.' Meyer says the sector is crucial to all parts of New Zealand. 'The science sector is about answering questions. If you have questions, science is a method, and it is used to answer a lot of those questions … the more money that we put into this sector, the more questions we can answer. And the more questions we can answer, the more answers we can sell. 'If the Government is worried about economic growth, and they want to champion this sector, then you've got to put your money where your mouth is. 'I am going to be curious to see how they can steer the ship of science, when maybe what they are most suited for is selling the fruits of science.' Check out how to listen to and follow The Detail here. You can also stay up-to-date by liking us on Facebook or following us on Twitter.


Scoop
15 hours ago
- Scoop
Expert Commentary: NZ Privacy Commissioner Provides Clarity For Retailers On Facial Recognition Technology
Press Release – Optic Security Group Finding published yesterday by NZ Privacy Commissioner on supermarket facial recognition trial places retailers on notice, says FRT technology risk expert. Nicholas Dynon is Brand Strategy & Innovation Director at Optic Security Group. He is a certified security risk professional and counter terrorism practitioner. 'The inquiry report found that the live facial recognition technology (FRT) model trialed by Foodstuffs North Island Limited (FSNI) in 25 of its supermarkets complied with New Zealand's Privacy Act. While the Privacy Commissioner assessed the level of privacy intrusion as high due to every shopper's face data being collected, the privacy safeguards in the trial reduced it to an acceptable level. 'The outcome has been met with strong and immediate political support, with Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith lauding the result as 'great news' and stating that he now expects the Ministerial Advisory Group for Victims of Retail Crime to 'continue to look at this technology as an option to be used more widely'. 'The outcome also provides some much-needed clarity for retailers – and other organisations – who have held back on considering FRT as a potential solution to their security issues due to the fear of ending up on the wrong side of privacy legislation. But it's not a green light. 'The Privacy Commissioner has highlighted several changes that FSNI needs to make in order to make its trial permanent or to expand it to more stores. The Office of the Privacy Commissioner (OPC) has also set out nine key expectations for organisations that are considering using FRT. 'Compliant FRT deployment is about more than just the technology itself. Factors such as identifying and assessing the specific purpose for which you want to use FRT, maintaining watchlists, protecting the system from misuse and information breach, communications to customers, staffing and training, customer interventions, incident response, managing enquiries and complaints, and maintaining and monitoring the system, are all critical to compliance – and they involve significant research, planning, testing, and careful implementation. 'At the same time, retailers should be aware that the results of an OPC survey published just weeks ago demonstrate that many New Zealanders are not supportive of the use of FRT in retail stores. 'The survey of over 1,200 New Zealanders found that 41% of respondents are 'concerned' or 'very concerned' about the use of facial recognition technology (FRT) in retail stores to identify individuals. A total of 25% are neutral on the topic, 31% are either not so concerned or not concerned at all, and 3% are unsure. 49% of Maori respondents indicated concern over FRT in retail. 'For retailers considering FRT, this means not only ensuring all the privacy legislation boxes are ticked but also taking a step back and asking whether FRT is the most appropriate solution to your security problem. 'Inappropriate FRT deployment exposes an organisation not only to legal risk but also to significant reputational risk. Engaging with trusted experts to understand the privacy dimensions and factors influencing social licence to operate this emerging technology are critical.'


Scoop
16 hours ago
- Scoop
Expert Commentary: NZ Privacy Commissioner Provides Clarity For Retailers On Facial Recognition Technology
Press Release – Optic Security Group Finding published yesterday by NZ Privacy Commissioner on supermarket facial recognition trial places retailers on notice, says FRT technology risk expert. Nicholas Dynon is Brand Strategy & Innovation Director at Optic Security Group. He is a certified security risk professional and counter terrorism practitioner. 'The inquiry report found that the live facial recognition technology (FRT) model trialed by Foodstuffs North Island Limited (FSNI) in 25 of its supermarkets complied with New Zealand's Privacy Act. While the Privacy Commissioner assessed the level of privacy intrusion as high due to every shopper's face data being collected, the privacy safeguards in the trial reduced it to an acceptable level. 'The outcome has been met with strong and immediate political support, with Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith lauding the result as 'great news' and stating that he now expects the Ministerial Advisory Group for Victims of Retail Crime to 'continue to look at this technology as an option to be used more widely'. 'The outcome also provides some much-needed clarity for retailers – and other organisations – who have held back on considering FRT as a potential solution to their security issues due to the fear of ending up on the wrong side of privacy legislation. But it's not a green light. 'The Privacy Commissioner has highlighted several changes that FSNI needs to make in order to make its trial permanent or to expand it to more stores. The Office of the Privacy Commissioner (OPC) has also set out nine key expectations for organisations that are considering using FRT. 'Compliant FRT deployment is about more than just the technology itself. Factors such as identifying and assessing the specific purpose for which you want to use FRT, maintaining watchlists, protecting the system from misuse and information breach, communications to customers, staffing and training, customer interventions, incident response, managing enquiries and complaints, and maintaining and monitoring the system, are all critical to compliance – and they involve significant research, planning, testing, and careful implementation. 'At the same time, retailers should be aware that the results of an OPC survey published just weeks ago demonstrate that many New Zealanders are not supportive of the use of FRT in retail stores. 'The survey of over 1,200 New Zealanders found that 41% of respondents are 'concerned' or 'very concerned' about the use of facial recognition technology (FRT) in retail stores to identify individuals. A total of 25% are neutral on the topic, 31% are either not so concerned or not concerned at all, and 3% are unsure. 49% of Maori respondents indicated concern over FRT in retail. 'For retailers considering FRT, this means not only ensuring all the privacy legislation boxes are ticked but also taking a step back and asking whether FRT is the most appropriate solution to your security problem. 'Inappropriate FRT deployment exposes an organisation not only to legal risk but also to significant reputational risk. Engaging with trusted experts to understand the privacy dimensions and factors influencing social licence to operate this emerging technology are critical.'