Canada's Emphasis On Infrastructure Delivery Provides Us Lessons
Toronto's health infrastructure delivery is one of the standout takeaways from Infrastructure New Zealand's just-released report, Building Strong Foundations: Canadian System Design and Infrastructure Delivery, following a high-level industry delegation to Toronto, Ottawa and Montréal in May.
'Canada isn't perfect when it comes to delivering infrastructure, but unlike New Zealand they've stopped chasing perfection,' says Leggett. 'Instead, they prioritise consistent delivery, ongoing improvements and progress, and the benefits of infrastructure across the lifetime of the asset. It's a mindset shift New Zealand must embrace.'
'Canada has shown what's possible when you maintain a credible and enduring pipeline of infrastructure projects. This consistency allows their industry to plan, invest and retain a skilled workforce – something New Zealand continues to struggle with due to the stop-start nature of our infrastructure planning.'
'After years of inconsistent investment and political priorities, our own infrastructure sector is struggling. Firms that have experienced a downturn in activity can't just switch capacity on like a tap.'
'While there are positive signals from the Government with $6 billion worth of upcoming projects, we need a more certain long-term pipeline of work to support capability and capacity within the infrastructure workforce.'
'Canada is also far better at selecting the procurement model that best fits the project. It's less ideological, more pragmatic – focused on what works.'
'Having a proper pipeline, like in healthcare, means Canadian providers can streamline delivery and gain efficiencies. Their approach focuses on de-risking early, collaborating across sectors and celebrating what infrastructure delivers for people – not just how much it costs.'
'In Canada, infrastructure is seen as nation-building – not just a line item. It's about growing the economy, building climate resilience and improving lives,' says Leggett. 'It's time we told this story in New Zealand.'
Key insights from the report include:
Canada completes a new hospital every six months – with a focus on people, outcomes and speed.
Delivery models are flexible and pragmatic, not ideological.
Lifecycle value and performance matter more than lowest upfront cost.
Political consistency, institutional maturity, and Indigenous partnerships underpin delivery success.
The delegation's findings call for New Zealand to develop a national infrastructure vision, reform procurement culture, and create a dedicated delivery agency to build capability and investor confidence.
'New Zealand can't afford to keep doing things the same way if we want to get better value from our infrastructure spend. This report is a blueprint for bolder infrastructure leadership,' says Leggett.
'So, let's stop talking and arguing, and instead focus on delivering the infrastructure New Zealanders need – consistently, and for the long term.'
Building Strong Foundations: Canadian System Design and Infrastructure Delivery - Summary Report is available at https://infrastructure.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/Infrastructure-NZ-International-Delegation-Canada-Summary-Report25-Digital-Single-Pages.pdf
Note:
Full report here.
Infrastructure New Zealand is Aotearoa's peak membership organisation for the infrastructure sector. We promote best practice in national infrastructure development through research, advocacy, and public and private sector collaboration. We promote public and media discussion on issues of importance to the infrastructure sector. Our membership is comprised of around 140 organisations, including government agencies, consultants, contractors, financiers, utilities, and academics. These organisations employ approximately 150,000 people in infrastructure-related roles and are united in their commitment to creating a better New Zealand through outstanding infrastructure.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scoop
an hour ago
- Scoop
Take That! Tourism Campaign A Hit With Aussies
Minister for Tourism and Hospitality The 'Everyone Must Go' campaign encouraging Australians to pick New Zealand for their next holiday has hit its results out of the park, bringing in thousands of visitors in a boost for regional economies and tourism operators. Tourism and Hospitality Minister Louise Upston says 'Everyone Must Go' was initially targeted at 6,750 additional arrivals over the autumn but ended up significantly exceeding expectations. ''Everyone Must Go' has been a winner,'' Louise Upston says. 'Tourism NZ stats released to me show it delivering an additional 7,981 visitors to smash its initial forecasts. It also attracted significant attention on both sides of the Tasman, and got Kiwis and Aussies talking about New Zealand as a destination. 'Tourism is a key part of our plan to grow the economy, create jobs, lift wages and help Kiwis get ahead. 'Everyone Must Go' is a great example of the sector and Government working together to achieve these goals. 'We knew Aussies would recognise it as a great opportunity. Just like they grabbed Phar Lap and pavlova, it's proved the same story with 'Everyone Must Go.' 'A key part of this campaign's success were the deals the tourism industry came to the party with. This team approach showed we can deliver great results for the sector when Government and industry are joined up and working towards the same goals.' More than 800 deals from 450 operators across accommodation, transport and experiences were available during the campaign. The initial $500,000 campaign spend delivered a solid return on investment, leading to an additional $300,000 to give the campaign a further boost. 'This campaign was the first Tourism Boost initiative, and these positive results show that with the right investment in the right markets we will drive economic growth. 'Every one of those Australian visitors who ate at cafes and restaurants, visited tourist attractions and shopped in our towns and cities has helped the New Zealand tourism sector grow, and boosted the Kiwi economy in the process,' Louise Upston says. Notes: The Autumn campaign targeted an additional 6,750 visitors (above baseline growth) from Australia between March and May and delivered an additional 7,981 arrivals over the period. 6,804 arrivals were directly attributable to bookings made via the campaign and an additional 1,177 arrivals were from the indirect halo effect of conversion activity in market over and above the campaign. The additional 7,981 visitors generated an estimated $22M in incremental visitor spend (29 per cent ahead of the campaign target of $17M). Across Autumn 2025, the total number of visitor arrivals from Australia increased by more than 24,000 – up from 307,338 last year to 331,571 this year. These additional 24,233 visitors generated an estimated $67M in visitor spend. The campaign had support from the industry including: strong collaboration with airlines, hotels, travel agencies and online travel platforms; 450 tourism operators providing 800 deals on TNZ's
Newsroom
3 hours ago
- Newsroom
Who Benefits: The power of the farm lobby, part one
Who Benefits is a year-long project tracking and disclosing lobbying and influence, starting with the agriculture sector. The project is supported financially by a grant from The Integrity Institute. Newsroom has developed the subject areas, will be led by what we uncover and retains full editorial control. If you know where influence is being brought to bear, email us in confidence at: trublenzOIA@ Part two of Who Benefits, published on Friday, zeroes in on the freshwater policy under fire from the agricultural lobby: Te Mana o Te Wai. When Christopher Luxon wanted to declare an end to Labour's 'war on farming' he joined lobby group Federated Farmers on a three-stop tour. 'There is nothing more important to New Zealand than the rural sector,' the Prime Minister told the 800-strong crowd at Mystery Creek, in Waikato, last November, flanked on stage by huge 'Restoring Farmer Confidence' signs. A story in Farmers Weekly – written by Federated Farmers itself – carried comments from Te Aroha dairy farmer Carla De Wet. 'It's pretty impressive to find out the Government has already achieved nine of the 12 things Federated Farmers asked for before the election.' De Wet added: 'I think it's bloody awesome to have ticked off so many things in such a short period of time. That just goes to show how influential that farming voice really is.' (In a circular moment, the lobby group's 2023 election policy document was called 'Restoring Farmer Confidence'.) It was Federated Farmers president Wayne Langford who said the 'nine out of 12' line at Mystery Creek. Luxon thought it was so good, though, he repeated it the next day on The Country radio show. 'The other three are still in motion,' the Prime Minister said. Radio show host Jamie Mackay asked if the Federated Farmers-organised tour – to Waikato, Canterbury and Southland – was like preaching to the choir. (For some, it would have confirmed the old adage Federated Farmers is the National Party in gumboots.) Luxon, the National Party leader, said he wanted farmers to know the Government backed them and would work with them. 'That's how it should be. You should have government and industry as adult-to-adult partners working together on the challenges but also the huge opportunities we've got.' The question is, though, where do politicians draw the line? Political parties are elected on a mandate but discrete partnerships can benefit some groups over others. They can even override the broader public interest. Close relationships also raise questions over influence by vested interests, access to power, and, crucially, who benefits. 'Too complex, too expensive' One of Federated Farmers' 12 policy pre-election demands was 'fix our unworkable freshwater rules'. In May this year, the Government proposed an overhaul of freshwater management which has provoked fierce criticism from environmental groups, Māori and others. (Submissions on the proposals close on Sunday.) Agriculture Minister Todd McClay, of National, said the Government wanted to 'restore balance' in freshwater policy, while Act's Andrew Hoggard – the associate environment minister and a former president of Federated Farmers – said existing rules were too complex, too expensive and often ignored 'practical realities'. Absent from the press statement was Environment Minister Penny Simmonds. The economy was front and centre. Agriculture Minister Todd McClay, left, with the Prime Minister at Fieldays this year. Photo: Christopher Luxon/Facebook A discussion document covering the proposals opened with this line from Resource Management Act Reform Minister Chris Bishop: 'This Government is committed to enabling primary sector growth as a key driver of both the New Zealand export sector and prosperity in the wider economy.' The Government is in a hurry to increase economic activity. But there are concerns freshwater protections will be bulldozed to boost exports when many waterways already have poor quality, principally because of intensive farming. In many cases degraded rivers, streams and lakes are still deteriorating. Problems with groundwater can affect drinking water, as shown by problems experienced in Gore. (Strengthening drinking water protections in planning and law was done after the Havelock North campylobacteriosis outbreak that made thousands sick and led to four deaths.) If ministers opt for the more extreme options in the freshwater policy overhaul it may encourage more intensive farming, opponents say, and worsen pollution of waterways. Today's political leaders face the same conundrum their predecessors did over decades: If they don't act now, how much more costly will the clean-up be in 10, 20 or 30 years? Dairy giant Fonterra made an after-tax net profit of $1.17 billion in the 2024 financial year. Photo: David Williams The proposals weren't magicked out of thin air, of course. Ministries for the Environment and Primary Industries met selected groups between October last year and February to float ideas and gather feedback on changes to the national policy statement for freshwater management (NPS-FM) and associated environmental standards. Concern is now being raised about the structure and nature of that pre-consultation, and what emerged in the discussion document. Figures provided to public health researcher Marnie Prickett and Newsroom show agricultural groups were consulted in dedicated meetings more often, and for more hours, than local government, central government agencies, and environmental non-government organisations combined. 'I'm concerned at the amount of time that these agencies have spent with the agricultural sector, given that the agricultural sector is one of the biggest polluters of our freshwater resources,' says Prickett, a research fellow at the University of Otago, Wellington's department of public health – and a member of advocacy group Choose Clean Water. Consultation with the primary sector spanned 34.5 hours over 24 meetings, while 18 dedicated meetings were held with agencies, councils and environmental non-government organisations. Over the pre-consultation period there were also an estimated 12 regular inter-agency meetings – held fortnightly for 30 minutes – taking the total to 31 hours. (The most consulted sector in the target consultation was Iwi/Māori. More on that in part two.) There's also a skew in ministerial time. A diary search of key ministers for official meetings, video conferences, events, and functions (including in other portfolios) spanning this parliamentary term shows 98 meetings with Federated Farmers, Beef + Lamb, Dairy NZ, and eight with environmental groups EDS, Forest & Bird and Greenpeace. Obviously, that list excludes ministerial meetings with other groups such as the Meat Industry Association, Dairy Companies Association of NZ, Horticulture NZ, Irrigation NZ, and Fish & Game. Prickett says agricultural groups have a commercial interest in limiting regulation. 'I'm concerned that that means the Government is not operating in the public interest but rather prioritising polluting commercial interests.' The country can have productive agriculture, she says, but within environmental limits. Prickett is concerned that diluting freshwater protections would lead to dramatically more degradation, and make it harder to reverse existing problems. Removing these protections would, she says, be similar to decisions favouring the tobacco industry over the public interest. 'The issue is imbalance' Marie Doole, a researcher of environmental strategy and regulation, says lobbying is an important part of democracy, and regulated parties should be consulted on changes affecting them. 'Here, though, the issue is the imbalance,' she says. 'One of the red flags of excessive influence [is] targeted engagement focused mainly on vested interests.' About the time the targeted freshwater consultation started, Victoria University of Wellington's Policy Quarterly magazine published an article 'Navigating murky waters – characterising capture in environmental regulatory systems'. Doole was its lead author. She tells Newsroom skewed consultations favour parties with greater resources and deeper pockets as they're the most invested in moulding a favourable regulatory environment. Christopher Luxon on the 'Restoring Farmer Confidence Tour' with Federated Farmers in the Waikato. Photo: Christopher Luxon/Facebook 'Government's job is to moderate influence, and they do that by fair and balanced consultation and engagement. If they're not doing it, they're not doing the job.' Environmental Defence Society attended pre-consultation meetings with the environment ministry. Chief executive Gary Taylor defends officials, saying they did a good job 'subject to the directions that they've received from ministers'. He identifies various issues – such as who sets environmental limits, 'simplifying' wetlands and fish passage provisions, 'enabling' commercial vegetable growing – that, in his opinion, shouldn't have made the final cut. 'It's fair to say the Government does seem to be unduly influenced overall by the agricultural sector,' Taylor says. 'This Government is a farmers' government, and they are in there all the time. They're in there with Hoggard, they're in there with Bishop, and in spite of several requests, we're halfway through the term and we've yet to have a dedicated meeting with Bishop, who's driving all this. 'On the basis of my experience with successive governments over many years, that's an extraordinary failing, and a deeply troubling asymmetry of influence.' In response to a Newsroom request under the Official Information Act, Jane Chirnside, the Ministry for Primary Industries' director of resources and rural communities, says the agency led targeted engagement with the primary sector over proposed changes to the national policy statement. 'We met with individuals in their capacity as farmers and/or members of local catchment groups, to understand at a practical level the impact that the NPS-FM has at farm and catchment scale. 'We used existing MPI networks to identify participants and tried to get representatives across regions and farm types, who had an interest in freshwater management, or were involved in catchment groups.' Ministers intervened to add options Prickett, of University of Otago, says a straight line can be drawn between what agricultural groups have asked for and what's in the public discussion document. A November 14 letter to ministers McClay, Hoggard, and Simmonds, written by Federated Farmers vice president and freshwater spokesperson Colin Hurst, said national bottom lines for water quality were, in some areas, 'unachievable', because of, for example, climate change, naturally occurring processes, population growth, land use, and legacy effects. 'Our recommendation is that national direction focus on what outcomes regional councils should seek to achieve, but that targets and timeframes are set at the catchment level, by regional councils, based on the social, economic, environmental and cultural needs of the local community.' In March, after targeted consultation had finished, ministers Bishop, McClay, and Hoggard stepped in to ensure local decision-making would appear in the discussion document. The intervention was recorded in an interim Regulatory Impact Statement – in which officials assess the effects of policy changes. Associate Environment Minister and former president of Federated Farmers Andrew Hoggard says existing rules are too complex, too expensive and often ignore 'practical realities'. Photo: Supplied The additional option was councils should be given flexibility to deviate from national bottom lines when achieving them 'has a high social, cultural or economic cost'. An interim Regulatory Impact Statement (there were several) said giving councils this flexibility 'will address key concerns, including those raised in the Beef + Lamb NZ report about natural variation, and the need to vary by region'. (Prickett, the public health researcher, says talk of local decision-making is, to her, shorthand for decisions made or influenced by polluting commercial interests.) At the March 4 meeting, officials were also directed to add other options to the discussion document: removing Te Mana o Te Wai (a decision-making hierarchy putting the health of water and ecosystems first), or considering a name change; and scrapping the 190kg per hectare cap on synthetic nitrogen fertiliser. Hurst's letter from November told ministers there should be 'no hierarchy of obligations' – a direct assault on Te Mana o te Wai – and asked for a refreshed NPS to balance environmental values with cultural, social and economic purposes. The South Island's biggest irrigation company, Central Plains Water, writing on December 2, three days after its consultation meeting, said many of the problems arising from the national policy statement stemmed from 'how Te Mana o te Wai is framed'. The hierarchy needs 'replacing in its entirety'. The company supported locals deciding if water quality and quantity should be maintained or improved, with the caveat: 'It is based on clear direction set in a NPS'. Directions on nutrient management 'do not need further strengthening', the company said. However, officials noted there would also be an increased risk of 'debate and litigation'. Another passage of the regulatory impact statement quoted a Beef + Lamb report. 'There is also concern from the primary sector that it is not possible to meet water quality bottom lines within the timeframes anticipated to be set, and 'trying to meet them will decimate farming and rural communities'.' (Doole, the independent researcher, says an explosion in catchment groups and community volunteering over the past 10 years suggests people in rural and urban environments are far more aware of their environmental impact. She struggles to reconcile that awareness with ardent advocacy to deregulate with farmers, and a 'weird binary of farmers versus environmentalists' which just feels 'exhausting and boring'.) Freshwater ecologist Mike Joy gave expert opinion evidence in the Ngāi Tahu trial on the extent to which freshwater in the takiwā is degraded, and the causes. Photo: Supplied Freshwater ecologist Mike Joy, a senior research fellow at Victoria University of Wellington's school of geography, environment and earth sciences, shared his submission to the consultation with Newsroom. The submission said councils already had flexibility to deviate from bottom lines – something noted on the environment ministry's website. Joy added there was already an 'out-clause' for waterways affected by naturally occurring processes. There was, he wrote, no justification for not applying national bottom lines. Attempts to weaken freshwater regulation were being disguised, Joy said, by using words and phrases such as 'rebalancing', 'providing flexibility' and 'simplifying'. 'There is, however, no recognition of the fact that water quality has been declining for many decades, thus the regulations they are wanting to weaken are already not strong enough.' A 2020 state of the environment report said more than 90 percent of rivers in urban, pastoral, and exotic forest areas have water quality below recommended guidelines, 76 percent of native fish were threatened with, or at risk of, extinction, and 90 percent of wetlands had been drained. Prickett, the University of Otago researcher, says rebalancing Te Mana o Te Wai would continue the primacy of polluting commercial interests over freshwater policy, which has been happening for decades and has led to declines of water quality and quantity. This degradation, she says, suggests freshwater protections have never been good enough. This despite numerous surveys showing high public concern over freshwater – that they want to be able to swim and fish in rivers and lakes, and drink high-quality water from their taps. National direction policy flood The freshwater overhaul that landed in May was part of a torrent of consultation over national direction unleashed by the coalition Government. Changes are proposed to 12 existing instruments and four new ones, with a focus on freshwater, infrastructure and development, and the primary sector. Environmental lobby group Greenpeace Aotearoa accused the Government of stripping freshwater protections to bolster corporate profits, while Federated Farmers suggested the Government had to pause freshwater rules. What are farmer groups saying now, particularly about their influence on political parties, and accusations of undue influence over that of the public interest? Hurst, of Federated Farmers, says it's 'entirely appropriate' for the Government to engage regularly with farmers and the wider primary sector, 'particularly when you consider the potential impact and cost of these rules'. Farming rules should be practical, affordable and fair, he says. 'We also want to make sure any regulation will actually be effective and achieve better environmental outcomes. 'It's important we get these rules right, particularly when you consider the huge economic contribution of agriculture for the country.' DairyNZ's David Burger, the general manager of farm solutions and policy, says it engages constructively with the government of the day on matters affecting dairy farmers 'and appreciates that other groups do the same'. Kate Acland, the chair of Beef + Lamb NZ, says farming impacts on freshwater need to be managed but there were significant issues 'and massive implications' under the previous government's approach. 'It's critical that ministers and officials first understand the issues, but also critical that they spend time with the sector to ensure rules are practical and workable.' Acland notes anyone can make a submission on the consultation, which will go through parliamentary processes, including a select committee. Ministers respond Newsroom asks ministers McClay, Hoggard, Bishop, Simmonds, and Associate Agriculture Minister Nicola Grigg for comment. Bishop responds, but he's silent on ministerial meetings and the influence of agriculture. We'll quote his comments in full – the reason for which will soon be apparent. 'The current public consultation on freshwater national direction, which runs for eight weeks closing on 27 July, has been shaped by feedback received from a wide range of groups during the targeted engagement phase.' (Prickett points out this selected group didn't include non-polluting commercial interests like the tourism industry.) Bishop continues: 'During targeted engagement, some groups sought to discuss specific matters of interest or asked to continue discussions at additional meetings. 'Officials from the Ministry for the Environment accommodated these requests wherever possible, and the number and duration of meetings varied as a result. 'All submissions received during the public consultation period will be considered, along with feedback from the ongoing engagement, before progressing any freshwater national direction changes. 'Note that there will also be a second phase of public submissions later this year, when exposure drafts will be released for further consultation.' (Exposure drafts are the raw wording of legislation, released to identify potential problems before it's introduced to Parliament. This seems like a concession by the Government to environmental groups.) A day after Bishop's comments were sent, the Ministry for the Environment provided Newsroom with this statement, attributed to Nik Andic, the manager of freshwater natural environment policy: 'The current public consultation on freshwater national direction, which runs for 8 weeks and closes on 27 July, has been shaped by the feedback we received from a wide range of groups during targeted engagement. 'During targeted engagement, some groups sought to discuss specific matters of interest or asked to continue discussions at additional meetings. Officials from the Ministry for the Environment accommodated these requests wherever possible, and the number and duration of meetings varied as a result. 'We will consider all submissions received during the public consultation period, along with feedback from ongoing engagement, before providing advice to ministers on any freshwater national direction changes. 'Note that there will also be a second phase of public consultation on freshwater national direction changes later this year, when exposure drafts are released.' Farming groups' influence on Government policy might be a concern but at least the public can be assured the minister and ministry are singing from the same hymn sheet.
NZ Herald
4 hours ago
- NZ Herald
Northland business heavyweights pushing for $60b-a-year economy
Northland Corporate Group co-chairman and Northpower chief executive Andrew McLeod said the event was likely the first of its kind for any region and was a chance for Northlanders to stand in solidarity. 'It's a very positive chance for Northland to remind people what we do and what we're gunning for in the next 25 years,' he said. 'Everyone is standing up, to stand united in Parliament: that's a really cool thing.' The report was not about asking for a Government handout but to show what the north is capable of, encouraging confidence and private investment, McLeod said. However, there is also a need for central Government to play its part in planning for infrastructure, including ensuring there is a reliable road link from Northland to Auckland, he said. Northland Corporate Group co-chairman and Northpower chief executive Andrew McLeod says the regional solidarity shown in Wellington for the report's launch is unique for any region. Photo / NZME 'A reasonable state of infrastructure between Whangārei and Auckland is all that we're asking – it happens everywhere else in New Zealand.' Last year, Northland Corporate Group commissioned NZIER to investigate the benefits of a four-lane expressway from Auckland to Northland and it found it would boost GDP by $1.2b a year. A few months later, the coalition Government confirmed a four-lane highway to Whangārei, including over the Brynderwyn Hills. Companies have been asked to bid for a public-private partnership for the first stage. McLeod said the expressway report showed the importance of having analysis done and encouraged Northland Corporate Group to commission the new report. The report found Northland's GDP per capita is currently 30% below the national average but the region holds natural resource and geographical advantages. McLeod said all of the potential projects in the report have already been talked about, such as an energy precinct at Marsden Point, the Northport expansion and irrigation to encourage more horticulture. Northland Corporate Group includes Channel Infrastructure NZ, Culham Engineering, Marsden Maritime Holdings, McKay, Northpower and Top Energy, who employ a combined total of more than 3500 people. 'People don't realise Northland's economic muscle' McLeod said the report outlines the true impact of Northland's economy on Auckland and the rest of New Zealand, which may be a surprise to some. 'Typically, people think of us as a nice place to come on holiday but they don't realise our economic muscle.' Some facts about Northland highlighted in the report are: Channel Infrastructure supplies 40% of New Zealand's land transport fuel and 80% of the country's jet fuel, including the entire supply for Auckland International Airport. Culham Engineering is one of New Zealand's largest integrated engineering firms, providing fabricated steel for many large-span bridges and high-rise buildings. Golden Bay Cement in Whangārei is New Zealand's only domestic cement producer, manufacturing 60% of national demand for cement. Northland is a cornerstone of New Zealand's food system, including producing more than 90% of the country's kūmara and supporting high-value crops such as avocados. A large pipeline of renewable electricity generation projects in Northland scheduled for the next two years will be sufficient to make the region a net electricity exporter. Denise Piper is a news reporter for the Northern Advocate, focusing on health and business. She has more than 20 years in journalism and is passionate about covering stories that make a difference.
