
Keynote Speech: WasteMINZ Conference
The Canterbury and Kaikura earthquakes, recent cyclones, the Auckland Anniversary floods, and many other large-scale events have underscored the importance of resilient waste management and minimisation facilities and services.
Hon Penny Simmonds
Minister for the Environment
Kia ora tatou. My warmest greetings to you all.
It's a pleasure to be here with you at this year's WasteMINZ Conference — the flagship event for New Zealand's waste, resource recovery, and contaminated land sectors.
For over 30 years, this conference has been a space for industry leaders and innovators to come together — to be inspired, to share ideas, and to shape the future of this essential work.
Thank you for the opportunity to join you today.
As I begin, I'd like to acknowledge Parul Sood, Chair of the WasteMINZ Board, along with the board members, CEO Nic Quilty and her team, and all of today's delegates.
I also want to recognise the ongoing work of WasteMINZ members — your contribution to the sector is important and appreciated.
Today, I'd like to update you on several key areas I'm working on as Minister for the Environment.
Over the past year and a half, I've been focused on delivering the Government's priorities for waste, contaminated sites, and broader environmental challenges.
We know the waste sector has long-standing issues.
But these challenges come with opportunities to improve outcomes for both the natural world and our communities.
Before I expand on the Government's work on waste, I'd like to start with some announcements.
Last year, as part of Budget 2024, I announced the Government has changed the Waste Minimisation Act 2008 to allow the waste disposal levy to be spent on a wider range of activities.
As part of this, levy funds were allowed to support local authorities with the costs of managing waste from emergencies.
We know the frequency and magnitude of emergency events are increasing, partly due to the rise in severe weather events.
Emergency events often generate large volumes of waste, which needs to be dealt with quickly.
Today, I am pleased to confirm that we have now established emergency waste funding.
The funding will support councils with the cost of managing waste following an emergency, including repairing or replacing damaged waste infrastructure.
The Canterbury and Kaikōura earthquakes, recent cyclones, the Auckland Anniversary floods, and many other large-scale events have underscored the importance of resilient waste management and minimisation facilities and services.
So far, the costs of managing waste caused by these events have been dealt with on an ad-hoc basis, with no standing funds available to support councils.
The emergency waste funding will give councils timely access to funding to deal with waste in the aftermath of emergency events.
This will reduce the financial burden of these events on central and local government.
The simple application process means councils will be able to quickly and easily access funding.
Waste management in emergency events is a critical service to get up and running quickly, to reduce public health risks and support communities to get back on their feet.
This new funding will help councils and communities when they need it most.
Now, I would like to draw your attention to a new report on construction and demolition waste, which I know is a topic you will be keenly interested in.
Construction projects are essential to growing our economy.
However, they also leave behind a staggering amount of waste, which places a burden on New Zealand's landfills and the environment.
Yesterday, the Ministry for the Environment published the first national baseline report for construction and demolition waste.
This baseline measure is the first of its kind in New Zealand.
It will help us evaluate the state of construction and demolition waste, giving us a starting point for comparing changes over time.
The national baseline report provides an overview of how much construction and demolition waste New Zealand is sending to landfill, and what materials make up this waste stream.
The results show that construction and demolition waste is New Zealand's largest waste stream and highlight the significant role that surplus soil and rubble play.
To cover off a few key statistics from the report:
An estimated 5.25 million tonnes of construction and demolition waste was disposed at levied facilities (class 1-4) in 2023. This represents almost 70 per cent of all waste disposed at levied facilities.
Of all levied construction and demolition waste disposed, nearly 80 per cent of that waste is soil or rubble.
Of the remaining construction and demolition waste, timber, plastics, plasterboard and textiles (i.e. carpet) make up notable proportions of the overall waste stream.
Further to these findings, as many of you will know, last month I met with the WasteMINZ sector group on surplus soils.
This was to discuss the group's proposal to develop a national soils management framework through a Waste Minimisation Fund grant.
I would like to thank Nic Quilty, Parul Sood, Rod Lidgard and James Corbett for taking the time to meet with me to discuss this important issue.
I understand managing surplus soils is a long-standing challenge, with no national rules or clear guidance on how to reuse them.
The national baseline report highlights the scale of the problem.
Valuable soil resources are being lost to landfill, with clean or slightly contaminated soils often unnecessarily landfilled.
This contributes to landfill overuse, emissions, and high project costs.
For these reasons, I am pleased to confirm today that I support the WasteMINZ proposal to fund a national soils management framework.
Ministry for the Environment officials will be working with WasteMINZ to develop a phased approach for addressing these issues.
Details are still to be finalised, and the sector will be kept updated.
Following these announcements, I'd like to now move on to our waste strategy and work programme.
You may be aware that I recently launched the Government's strategy to reduce waste and improve how it's managed in New Zealand.
The strategy sets out the Government's approach to reducing the environmental and economic harm caused by waste.
Alongside that, I confirmed a comprehensive waste work programme to implement the strategy's goals.
You'll be aware of some changes made late last year to existing waste policies.
We're reducing costs to ratepayers by leaving decisions about kerbside collections, including food scraps, up to local councils.
The Waste Minimisation Fund will continue to support councils that choose to adopt these services.
We've also removed the 2025 deadline to phase out all PVC and polystyrene food and drink packaging.
We have had a positive response from industry on this decision as it gives them more time to adopt alternatives, while ensuring that new regulations are practical and workable.
These adjustments support our waste strategy while minimising cost-of-living pressures.
Our waste work programme is well underway, and I'd like to start by highlighting the proposed amendments to our waste legislation.
These changes would replace the Waste Minimisation Act 2008 and the Litter Act 1979, with the aim of reducing inefficiencies and providing greater clarity around the roles of central government, local government, and the wider waste sector.
We recently consulted on these proposals, which aim to make the legislative framework clearer and more effective.
Consultation closed on 1 June, and I want to sincerely thank everyone who took the time to make a submission.
Officials are now carefully considering that feedback to help inform the policy development.
The aim is to introduce the new legislation before the next general election.
We also recently asked New Zealanders to share their views on proposed regulations to improve the way waste from commonly used farm plastic products is managed.
We're proposing new regulations to support a national product stewardship scheme covering agrichemical containers and other farm plastics, such as bale wrap.
As someone who has lived on a farm almost all my life, I know how important this is.
It would bring together the services of existing schemes Agrecovery and Plasback, simplifying recycling and disposal for farmers and growers, and expanding access into a nationwide service.
This scheme would be funded through an advance disposal fee and offer free, nationwide take-back services.
And it won't just benefit farmers—sectors like forestry, tourism, hospitality, and manufacturing could also participate.
We have had strong engagement and feedback throughout the consultation process.
Thank you to everyone who shared their valuable insights.
In addition to the consultation on farm plastics, I'd like to provide a brief update on the progress of other product stewardship schemes.
Product stewardship schemes are designed to ensure everyone in a product's life cycle shares responsibility to reduce its environmental impact at the end of its life.
The Tyrewise scheme is a strong example of this principle in action.
Tyrewise addresses the estimated 6.5 million tyres that reach end of life in New Zealand each year.
Since going live last September, the scheme has collected and repurposed more than 2.8 million tyres into fuel and other useful products.
It is also on track to exceed its first-year targets – an incredible achievement.
I commend everyone involved in the development and daily operation of the scheme for their dedication and impact.
I also want to acknowledge the efforts of everyone involved in the accredited synthetic refrigerants scheme, known as Cool-Safe.
This scheme has been operating since 1993 and has now successfully collected over 600,000 kilograms of synthetic refrigerants, significantly reducing their environmental impact.
We are actively working with this scheme and the wider industry to support the responsible end-of-life management of these gases.
Earlier this year I received the Plastic Packaging Product Stewardship scheme co-design recommendations report.
I want to sincerely thank everyone who contributed to this report – it represents the culmination of over two years of dedicated work.
We will carefully consider the recommendations and continue to work with stakeholders to plan the next steps in developing this important scheme.
Work is also progressing on electrical and electronic products (e-waste).
I'm aware safe battery disposal is a growing concern for the sector, as improperly disposed of batteries pose significant fire risks.
There is currently a high level of activity in the battery space, with multiple stakeholders across industry and government actively engaged.
This momentum is encouraging, and I look forward to seeing continued progress toward a safe, more sustainable approach to managing e-waste in New Zealand.
Another area of focus focuses is remediating contaminated sites, including historic landfills vulnerable to weather events.
Historic landfills can be compromised by erosion, storm surges, rainfall events, high river levels and flooding.
There are hundreds of historic landfills and contaminated sites around New Zealand vulnerable to severe weather.
Remediating these sites is vital for protecting our environment from harm.
No-one wants a repeat of the Fox River landfill event in 2019.
Communities should not be left dealing with the aftermath of old landfill breaches.
Acting early to remediate these sites also saves money in the long run.
Councils have been asking for more support – and now they have it.
Last year, I opened the new Contaminated Sites and Vulnerable Landfills Fund, a $20 million fund to support councils and landowners.
This fund replaces the previous Contaminated Sites Remediation Fund and significantly increases support.
Regional, unitary and territorial authorities can now apply.
The Ministry is actively supporting councils with applications.
There has been great progress already, like the remediation project at Tāhunanui Beach in Nelson where $2.9 million of Government support has helped remove more than 10,000 cubic metres of contaminated material from underneath the beach carpark.
This project is a great example of what this new fund can support.
More information is on the Ministry for the Environment website.
I would like to now move onto our work in improving recycling.
Standardising the materials accepted in kerbside recycling was a vital first step — sending a clear signal to businesses and households about what can be recovered through kerbside systems across New Zealand.
Thank you to everyone who helped develop this policy.
There is still work to do, but the new Recycling Leadership Forum is a great next step.
The forum is exploring challenging kerbside issues, including the tricky items that don't currently fit the system.
I'm watching their work with interest and expect to receive their first report on potential solutions soon.
Plastic is part of daily life, and while it has benefits, it creates far-reaching waste problems.
On the international stage, New Zealand is playing a part in negotiating a treaty to tackle plastic pollution globally.
Our delegation is heading to the next round of negotiations in Geneva in August.
Domestically, we continue to reduce waste and support recycling innovation.
The latest Our Environment 2025 report shows that our landfills received 11 per cent less waste per capita in 2023 than the peak in 2018.
The Waste Minimisation Fund is providing grant funding to upgrade resource recovery centres, transfer stations, and materials recovery facilities to increase the volume and quality of recovered plastic materials.
The fund is also supporting the construction of processing infrastructure to facilitate the reuse of this recovered material, stimulating the local economy and reducing our reliance on overseas markets.
We're managing hard-to-recycle plastics and working with industry to move away from problematic packaging like PVC and polystyrene.
Thank you for your efforts.
I understand that tomorrow, Ministry for the Environment officials will be speaking to the waste work programme in more detail.
I encourage you to attend and ask any questions you may have.
In closing, I want to thank you for your time, for your contributions, and for your commitment to innovation. Your leadership matters.
Together, we are building a more resilient and sustainable New Zealand—for our people, our economy, and our environment.
I wish you all the very best for the rest of the conference.
Thank you.
Hashtags

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


NZ Herald
an hour ago
- NZ Herald
NZ Herald Live: PM Christopher Luxon and MP Erica Stanford speak to the media
Foreshore and seabed bill to pass and cyber security concerns | NZ Herald News Update The Government plans to pass the Marine and Coastal Area Bill despite Supreme Court ruling and growing concerns over New Zealand's cyber security. Video / Herald NOW

1News
3 hours ago
- 1News
Curriculum changes delayed after feedback from teachers
The Government has delayed introducing the new senior secondary school curriculum after feedback from teachers. The change followed warnings the new curriculums were being rushed, and coincided with the Government's announcement this week that the NCEA qualification would be phased out from 2028. The Government had originally told schools they would have to teach the new English and maths curriculums for intermediate and secondary schools from the start of next year and new curriculums from other subjects from the start of 2027. But this week the Ministry of Education dropped that timeline and introduced a staggered start. The 2027 date would apply only for students up to Year 10. Those in Year 11 would be taught the new curriculums from 2028, Year 12 from 2029, and Year 13 from 2030. ADVERTISEMENT Teachers spoken to by RNZ welcomed the delay, but said work on a new qualification to replace NCEA should wait until after the curriculums were in place. The morning's headlines in 90 seconds, including privacy concerns over road user charges, possible changes to Wellington's waterfront, and one of the biggest sports memorabilia heists ever. (Source: 1News) Association of Teachers of English president Pip Tinning said she was happy the curriculum would be phased in. "It is really important to allow teachers time to get their heads around the changes and what's going to need to happen." Auckland Secondary Principals' Association president Claire Amos said teachers were feeling overwhelmed by all of the changes the Government was making. She said the Government should delay consultation on a new qualification to replace NCEA until work on the curriculums was complete. "We're expected to comment on whether we think an assessment framework change is the right change when we have no idea what it will be assessing." "It's really hard for us to be consulted on the way we might assess something that is invisible to us at the moment."


NZ Herald
4 hours ago
- NZ Herald
Rate hikes and reforms force councils into tough decisions
The sector faces unprecedented fiscal pressure – and ratepayers are running out of patience. This is not business as usual. Come October, newly elected mayors and councillors will inherit this perfect storm. But unlike their predecessors, they are running out of road – growth in debt is becoming unsustainable and the Government is taking an ever-closer interest in council performance. The next three years will demand brutal choices: which services to cut, which projects to abandon, and how to navigate the most sweeping government reforms in decades. Those who succeed will need more than management skills. They will need the political courage to tell their communities hard truths. The financial reckoning is stark. Department of Internal Affairs benchmarks published last week reveal dramatic disparities between councils in rates per household, debt per capita and capital spending. In many cases, debt is rising faster than revenues. Some councils face massive infrastructure deficits while pursuing new facilities. Others watch transport and water project costs blow out while basic maintenance gets deferred. Across the country, councils with grand ambitions are being mugged by grinding reality. Making matters worse, the 2025-28 council term coincides with multiple central government reforms that will reshape local government's foundations. First comes the Resource Management Act replacement. The new system will shift responsibilities from individual councils to regional entities and national standards. While potentially streamlining planning processes, the transition will demand new skills and complex co-ordination, along with significant upfront costs. Then there is water reform. The coalition's 'Local Water Done Well' leaves councils responsible for delivering viable water services alone or through shared entities. By September, every council must produce a Water Services Delivery Plan that satisfies the new water regulator and the Commerce Commission. Some councils are pursuing joint ventures with neighbours, hoping to achieve economies of scale. Others are establishing at-arm's-length, council-controlled organisations, seeing it as the best way to maintain local control while meeting new standards. Still others plan to soldier on in the status quo, somehow convinced they can manage the regulatory burden in-house. Each path has its challenges. The Local Government (System Improvements) Bill adds another layer of change. It scraps councils' broad 'wellbeings' mandate – the ability to promote spending on loosely-asserted social, economic, environmental and cultural benefits – in favour of the Prime Minister's 'doing the basics brilliantly'. The bill prioritises core services, introduces new financial performance measures, mandatory disclosure of contractor and consultant spending and standardised codes of conduct. Most controversially, it opens the door to rates capping, which the minister says is being developed 'at pace'. Capping rates is appealing to angry ratepayers, but international experience shows it can be a blunt instrument. Councils in capped jurisdictions often defer maintenance, cut core services or find creative workarounds that cost more. Ratepayer referendums on major non-core projects could prove more effective, giving communities direct say over expensive projects while preserving councils' ability to fund essentials. Newly elected mayors face tough choices on services and projects due to unsustainable debt growth. Photo / NZME Democratic decay compounds these challenges. Voter turnout at local elections barely reaches half that of national elections. Despite last-minute surges, some councils couldn't fill all seats. Several mayoralties attracted just one candidate. This reflects decades of centralisation that have hollowed out local government's relevance. Why would talented people seek office when councils control less and matter less? Why would voters care? The erosion shows in public discourse. Councillors face increasing criticism and abuse, much of it personal and vitriolic. Social media amplifies every rates increase, every pothole, every perceived failure. Yet councils desperately need capable people who can absorb regulatory complexity, scrutinise multi-million dollar infrastructure proposals, and communicate financial realities to their communities. Those elected in October face three immediate priorities. Cost growth must be controlled without gutting essential services, a delicate balance requiring financial acumen and political skill. Reforms will test their ability to shape change rather than resist. Most importantly, they must rebuild trust with communities exhausted by rate hikes and service failures. Ratepayers being mugged by reality should be watching closely. They should not accept more empty promises, excuses, delays or double-digit rate increases. Success in the next council term will require a different kind of leadership. The old model, where councils could muddle through and keep hiking rates, is dead. The new environment demands leaders who can make hard choices quickly, communicate them clearly, and stick to them despite the inevitable backlash. This means not making their own costly promises, being prepared to say no to others' dreams and schemes, and telling uncomfortable truths about what councils can and cannot afford. The question is whether enough of them have stepped forward – and, crucially, whether enough voters will notice and reward them.