Government To Stop Council Plan Changes
The Government will stop councils wasting their officers' time and their ratepayers' money on plan changes in advance of the new planning system coming into force, RMA Reform Minister Chris Bishop says.
'The Resource Management Act (RMA) has crippled New Zealand for decades, and the Government's planning system reforms are well underway to make it easier to get things done in New Zealand,' Mr Bishop says.
'We've already made a series of quick and targeted amendments to provide relief to our primary sector and passed the Fast-track Approvals Act to speed up the consenting process for projects with regional or nationally significant benefits. We've also opened consultation on sweeping changes to the regulations that sit under the RMA, and next month our second RMA Amendment Bill is expected to pass into law which will make important changes in the short-term to make it quicker and simpler to consent renewable energy, boost housing supply, and reduce red tape for the primary sector.
'Later this year the Government will introduce two new Acts to completely replace the RMA – one Act to focus on land-use planning and the second to focus on the natural environment. The new system will provide a framework that makes it easier to plan and deliver infrastructure as well as protect the environment.
'The existing RMA mandates that councils review their plans and policy statements every ten years. This has led to a situation where, even though councils know the RMA's days are numbered, many are required to continue with time consuming, expensive plan-making processes under the RMA.
'Much of this planning work won't be completed or implemented by the time the new system takes effect in 2027. Even if it were, it would need significant changes in the next couple of years to comply with the new planning laws.
'So rather than let these pricey, pointless planning and policy processes play out, the Government will be giving councils clarity on where to focus their efforts while they await the new planning system.
'The Government will suspend councils' mandatory RMA requirements to undertake plan and regional policy statement reviews every ten years, and the requirement to implement national planning standards. We will also extend the restriction on notifying freshwater planning instruments which we put in place last year.
'Councils will be required to withdraw plan reviews and changes that have not started hearings as soon as possible and within 90 days of the law coming into effect. Any rules that have immediate legal effect will continue to apply until the plan review or plan change is withdrawn by councils and then those rules will no longer apply. We will also stop new plan changes and reviews from being notified, except where there is good reason for them to continue.
'This decision has been made after careful consideration, and a recommendation from an Expert Advisory Group (EAG) that the Government relieve some of the workload of councils in the lead up to the new resource management system.
'The Government's intention is that stopping plan requirements for councils will enable them to focus on critical work to prepare to transition to the new system.'
Exemption pathways and notification
'Plan reviews and changes will be stopped through an Amendment Paper to the Resource Management (Consenting and Other System Changes) Amendment Bill, which is expected to become law next month.
There are a limited number of plan changes that will be automatically exempt from the stopping of a plan change. Examples of automatic exemptions include Streamlined Planning Processes and private plan changes (which are initiated by landowners and developers).
'The Government believes it's also important that councils can continue work on proposed plans, or parts of proposed plans, that relate to natural hazard management as well as for plan changes required by Treaty settlement agreements. Proposed plans that address these matters will be subject to an exemption.
'The proposed amendment also allows councils to apply to the Minister for the Environment for an exemption to continue or notify a new plan change.
'I want to be clear that stopping plan changes does not mean stopping progress on work that supports the Government's priorities in areas like housing, intensification and urban development, and councils will have pathways to continue with work that unlocks housing growth,' Minister Bishop says.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
RNZ News
4 hours ago
- RNZ News
Environment Canterbury's chair rebuffs government's directive to stop planning
Environment Canterbury (ECan) chairperson Craig Pauling. Photo: David Hill / North Canterbury News Councils have been urged "not to stop the planning" despite the government saying plan changes are a waste of ratepayers' money . Environment Canterbury (ECan) chairperson Craig Pauling said the work of local government still needs to continue . ''At ECan we've already been impacted by stops to planning and I am personally disappointed some good things in our Regional Policy Statement, which would have made a difference, can't happen.'' The policy statements provide an overview of resource management issues in a region. Resource Management Act (RMA) Reform Minister Chris Bishop this week announced the government would halt changes to district and regional plans . It comes ahead of a shake-up of the RMA, which is expected to come into effect in 2027. Pauling made his comments during a panel discussion at the Local Government NZ conference on Thursday, July 17. ''I would encourage you not to stop the planning. Don't stop thinking. You've got to do the analysis. ''Keep the thinking going, so when things do land you are in the best position.'' ECan voted in November to put its RPS on hold until January 2026, while it awaits more certainty with RMA reform. It has been unable to adopt a plan change to fix issues in the Canterbury Land and Water Regional Plan, following a Supreme Court decision on a water bottling plant in Christchurch in 2023. Environment Canterbury chairperson Craig Pauling (second left) and on screen takes part in a panel discussion during the Local Government NZ conference. Photo: David Hill / North Canterbury News There has been speculation the RMA reform could lead to regional councils being scrapped, but both Bishop and Deputy Prime Minister David Seymour said no decision had been made. Bishop, who met with regional council chairs during the conference, indicated an announcement was likely by the end of the year. Pauling said it made sense to consider the shape of local government alongside the RMA reform, as regional councils came into being in 1989, in anticipation of the RMA, which was enacted in 1991. He admitted there were flaws with the present model, as local and regional councils didn't always work together. ''My personal view is separating land-use between city and regional councils was wrong. We've had so many occasions when land-use has been consented non-notified and then it needs water table allocations (from the regional council).'' LGNZ passed a remit at its annual general meeting calling for a review of local government functions and governance arrangements. Its chief executive Susan Freeman-Greene said local government needed to be proactive and lead the changes required. Under existing legislation there are only two alternatives for regional government - regional councils and unitary authorities. Speaking to Local Democracy Reporting, Pauling said more options were needed, as different regions had different challenges. Canterbury is much larger than other regions, has more braided rivers and catchments, a centrally located population and sparsely populated districts such as Kaikōura, Hurunui, Mackenzie and Waimate. ''We need to be having the conversation and asking the questions. Would Kaikōura and Waimate survive as unitary authorities?'' Splitting the region into three - North, Mid and South Canterbury has been mooted - but Pauling thinks it would be ''problematic''. South Canterbury would likely be the largest unitary authority in the country in terms of geography, but with a population of only 60,000. The Hurunui district alone is the same size as Taranaki and half the size of Auckland, but with a much smaller population. A Christchurch or Greater Christchurch unitary authority has also been mooted, but questions have been raised about whether the rest of Canterbury would have a sufficient ratepayer base to manage regional council functions. Pauling said he believed it would be ''unworkable''. Another option, which ECan councillors considered at a recent workshop, was a Canterbury or South Island Assembly. This was based on the Greater Manchester model, where the existing local councils could continue and the mayors or council representatives and Mana Whenua representatives could form an assembly to make regional decisions. Whatever is decided, Pauling said local communities need to be involved in the decision making ''or it wouldn't fly''. LDR is local body journalism co-funded by RNZ and NZ On Air.
NZ Herald
5 hours ago
- NZ Herald
Proposed Working for Families changes may leave some worse off, FinCap warns
There is almost $300 million owed in Working for Families debt. A discussion document, on which submissions were sought, said the Government's current thinking was that a quarterly assessment of Working for Families eligibility could strike the right balance between responsiveness, certainty and recipient effort. This would adjust what people were paid much more frequently. But Fleur Howard, chief executive of FinCap, said in a submission in response that she was worried that some families could be left without enough money. A shorter quarterly assessment period would be an improvement, Howard said, but it needed to be refined. 'Aspects of the proposed design appear to suit some whānau situations better than others. We are concerned that in its current state, this design would have a disproportionally negative impact on those who are already experiencing financial instability due to more fluctuations in payment amount.' Howard said FinCap's internal data showed most financial mentor clients had a weekly budget deficit even after they had received help. 'More often than not, this deficit is due to whānau trying to pay for essentials, and commonly going into debt to do so. 'This, among other markers, points to the fact that government support is not currently adequate to cover living expenses. We have concerns that some of the proposed changes would exacerbate income inadequacy in certain scenarios, particularly for whānau who need that money week to week.' Howard said an example used in the discussion document, outlining a situation where a woman on the sole parent benefit went into additional work for a short period of time, highlighted a potentially unacceptable outcome. In that case, the woman's Working for Families credits would be reduced by $130 a week for the quarter after her temporary work, even though she was no longer in work, because the calculation was based on the higher income from the previous quarter. 'We can see that the 'lagged income' mechanism makes sense from the perspective of achieving accuracy, however the potential for a decreased payment below what a whānau is entitled to poses real risk for wellbeing and social participation. 'There is also a real concern over the dynamic whereby a quarterly period of higher income followed by a quarterly period of low income would see increased hardship within the low-income period, due to those payments reflecting the past higher income. 'While this could be squared up during the end of year process, our data tells us that most whānau living week to week need that money as part of their weekly payments.' Howard said mentors were also concerned something similar could happen if someone lost a job and went on the benefit, because their reduced income would not show up in the Working for Families calculation for another quarter. 'Whānau need every cent they are entitled to in a timely manner when events such as job loss occur.' A solution could be for the quarterly assessment period to look forward, rather than backwards, she said. – RNZ
Scoop
9 hours ago
- Scoop
Mediawatch: Ministers' 'Helpful' Handouts Go Multimedia
, Mediawatch Presenter "Dear Prime Minister: the rise in crime and antisocial behaviour since COVID 19 struck is stark and confronting. We ask that you please take urgent action to support recovery and retain our reputation as a safe city and country." That was the message of a full-page ad in the Weekend Herald placed by groups representing Auckland businesses, accusing the government of failing to act on past promises. It was almost identical to a similar plea to a previous PM four years ago. The following day the current PM was the target of another open letter advert in the Sunday papers. This one - placed by electricity retailers, users and Consumer NZ - called on him to fix "a broken energy sector". That campaign also featured on TVNZ's Q+A show the same day, and in a front-page New Zealand Herald story the next day, the Minister of Energy - the aptly named Simon Watts - acknowledged our electricity market was "not functioning as well as it should". But it's not the first time that he's been singled out by a lobbying campaign in public. In June, pro-electrification group Rewiring NZ deployed AI animation to turn him into a superhero in ads that urged the public to make it an election issue - and it used a billboard near the Beehive to make sure that he didn't miss it. TVNZ's Q+A said lobby groups like Federated Farmers and the Sensible Sentencing Trust had used the same spot for the same reason in other campaigns. But do ministers targeted by these ads even notice them? "Yes, I do. On the way to the airport, out of Parliament and down onto the quays there - it's pretty hard to not to," National's Chris Bishop told TVNZ's Whena Owen. But are campaigns singling out individual politicians in public really effective? Most ministers are also lobbied behind the scenes by the same special interest groups. Being hectored publicly as well could make them more inclined to dig in rather than give in. "Lobby groups have always taken out ads in newspapers. Now they're moving it to digital billboards which can be up longer and can be cheaper," said Dr Claire Robinson, the author of Promises, Promises: 80 years of Wooing New Zealand Voters. "They can be located at traffic lights where ministerial cars have to stop. It's probably a really good way of getting something under the nose of a cabinet minister who may not open the newspaper anymore in the morning to see it there." "If you want to lobby a minister now you've got not only print, radio and TV - and you've got your own channels, social media and even LinkedIn posts. There's a complete industry in being able to disseminate your messages, hoping that one of them is going to get through," Dr Robinson told Mediawatch. Politicians going multimedia Politicians aren't shy about getting their own messages out to the media either - and have specialised staff to do it. Journalists' email inboxes are clogged with media statements from ministers and MPs hoping that their comments will make it into the media's coverage. And now they are going multimedia too. Last weekend reporters got video of the US Secretary of State Marco Rubio greeting Winston Peters, along with a media statement, after an ASEAN Foreign Ministers' Meeting in Malaysia, which was attended by Peters. NZ First posted that footage on Facebook on the day of the meeting - and then there was another version last Tuesday featuring Peters looking statesmanlike, with a TikTok-type soundtrack added. The same day the streaming show Herald Now ran the Rubio footage during an interview with Peters. Should media be wary of airing images hand-picked by ministers' staff? "Yes, because by using it they're essentially using party generated pictures and feeding the beast - and exacerbating the rule-breaking of political parties," Dr Robinson told Mediawatch. "Anything that is generated through party social media channels really needs to be stopped at the door. "But at the same time the media loses all perspective when a PM or foreign minister meets a US president or Secretary of State. In 2014, photos of John Key playing golf with Obama were splashed across the newspapers . . . and nobody asked who took the photos back then." MPs offering mp3s Recently reporters have also received sound bites from ministers along with standard media statements. Last week, Associate Minister of Justice Nicole McKee announced anti-money laundering law changes to make managing property easier through family trusts. The release included a minute-long MP3 clip of her reading out some of the key points - and 'video on request'. In June her office also sent three separate sound bites about the 'Three Strikes' law coming into force. Why send selected comments rather than allow reporters to record their own in a media conference in the usual way? "Quite often we'll put out a media release, then we get all the phone calls looking for a grab. Why not give a grab ourselves?" McKee told Mediawatch. RNZ's reporters in the press gallery in Parliament told Mediawatch they wouldn't use audio supplied under those circumstances. "I believe it has been picked up by a couple of radio stations but I haven't actually tracked it myself." ACT leader David Seymour has spoken about bypassing the media because they "abuse their power to edit" and refused to allow ACT's ministers to appear on RNZ's Morning Report. He's even appealed for funds from ACT supporters to fund his own online media channels. Is McKee supplying audio comments as a substitute for interviews or media conferences at which she could be challenged or questioned by reporters? "That's not the reason. It's actually realising that our media are quite stretched - for time and for people," McKee told Mediawatch. On that issue of the family trusts and anti-money laundering laws, McKee was interviewed by RNZ news after sending out the statement and audio. "I've always made myself available to the media. Should they want a sound grab directly, I'm happy to give it. We just thought that this would help the media, especially if they do have those tight deadlines. And of course some have less staff now." "It doesn't take me long to add a couple of 10-second sound bites to the media releases we put out. And of course if it is being picked up then it is useful to some. So we'll continue to do it." McKee says she hasn't tracked which media outlets have used the supplied audio. Another minister handing out sound bites with media statements lately is Associate Minister of Transport James Meager. "Now is the perfect time to look ahead toward building a resilient maritime economy for future generations," he said in mid-June, announcing pumped-up investment in navigation services for shipping. One week later, Meager sent out three more sound bites, about a funding boost for lifesaving. Meager credits his press secretary, former Newstalk ZB journalist Blake Benny. "He came to me with the idea that if we include some audio grabs with our press releases, it makes the job of producers and radio reporters so much easier," Meager told Mediawatch. If so, it might mean not having to answer questions about contestable claims made in statements - or confront contradictions? "There's always the option for journalists who want to ring up and press on some of the details in those press releases. I'm always happy to take interviews. The only time I decline would be if it's outside my portfolio or if I literally can't do them." Few ministers ever issue statements on matters outside their portfolio - and Meager declined to say which outlets had broadcast his recorded statements. More to come? Before he became an MP, he set up an online archive of political ads - - with partner Dr Ashley Murchison, an expert who wrote a PhD about responses to political ads. Some of Nicole McKee's recent media statements said video was available on request as well. Meager doesn't offer that - yet. "But if we had the resources and that made people's lives easier then it might be something that we look into. I used to work as a press secretary and I think I wish I'd been smart enough to think of this six years ago," he told Mediawatch. But he says he and other ministers will be offering the media more multimedia stuff in future. "I'm doing a couple (of soundbites) this weekend for a couple of announcements we're making in the top of the South so hopefully they'll be picked up. In the weekend when staffing levels are lower, that might be a little bit helpful too." Exploiting a week spot "Political parties have always used new technology to try and get their messages across - even going back to Michael Joseph Savage in 1938 when he used film, which was a new technology back then," Dr Claire Robinson told Mediawatch. "I think that the politicians hope that the time-poor media will just insert (the content) into coverage. But there's something deeper going on here because they're exploiting the whopping decline in journalism employment," said Dr Robinson, who is also the current chief of Toi Mai / the Workforce Development Council, which published a development plan for journalism in 2024. "That decline is because of government-enabled inaction or policies that have seen that advertising money that used to sustain news media organisations go offshore. In the old days (they) would have more scrutiny and political parties are now exploiting that gap and creating their own media." Bending the rules for funding the ads In a recent piece for The Post, Dr Robinson said the public pays for political parties' digital media messaging - but shouldn't be paying for some of it. "The rules are really clear. You can only electioneer using public funds in the three months prior to an election campaign. The rest of the time parties are enabled to create information, but not to electioneer with social media," Dr Robinson told Mediawatch. She says the NZ First party publishing footage of Winston Peters in Malaysia as foreign minister on social media is an example of the problem. "It has their party logo and is using Peters' role in his capacity as Minister of Foreign Affairs for party purposes. It doesn't say 'Vote for NZ First' but the boundaries are blurred. It is really saying our leader is a great leader because he can create amazing relationships with people."
