Greater Wellington Recommends Withdrawal Of Regulatory Standards Bill
Deputy Chair of Greater Wellington and Councillor for Wairarapa Adrienne Staples and Chief Executive Nigel Corry, speaking to its submission to the Finance and Expenditure Select Committee said the Bill raised a cluster of red flags.
'It constrains government and regulators from acting in society's collective interest, it undermines Te Tiriti o Waitangi and constitutes executive government overreach, it attempts to solve a problem that doesn't exist, it creates legal risks, inefficiency, complexity and increased costs for local government, its partners and communities. On top of all that it will lead to worse social, environmental and economic outcomes,' said Mr Corry.
'Parliament has already voted down the flawed and inflammatory Te Tiriti o Waitangi Principles Bill. Surely it did not intend that a second Trojan horse would be injected into the Parliamentary Chamber. New Zealanders deserve better political discourse frankly,' said Cr Staples.
In its submission, Greater Wellington highlighted the many, varied and adverse effects the Bill would have in the region and across New Zealand, specifically outlining the risks to core council functions:
Environment - conservation, biodiversity and pest control
The Bill's focus on short-term measurable benefit may impact Greater Wellington's ability to invest in innovative or long-term initiatives like predator control, replanting programmes, mātauranga Māori and mātauranga-ā-iwi driven conservation practices, or protection of taonga species with no immediate economic value.
Māori approaches to conservation including their right to exercise kaitiakitanga could be challenged by the Bill's focus on individual rights over collective obligations.
The restrictions on new regulatory powers could slow Greater Wellington's responses to unforeseen or emerging threats to biodiversity.
Environmental Regulation
The Bill's push for nationally consistent, minimal rules could constrain councils' discretion to use precautionary limits or adopt stricter standards in sensitive areas.
Efforts to regulate (e.g. high-emitting industries) might be challenged or require compensation for lost profits. Modern environmental law and policy is based on the 'polluter pays' principle - those causing pollution or environmental harm bearing the costs of remediation or prevention. The Bill's regulatory takings clause, however, reverses this principle. As an example, if a future government were to enact regulations to protect rivers, requiring a dairy corporation to reduce its pollution or stocking rates, and this action was deemed to impair the corporation's property, the Bill implies some form of compensation may be payable. This creates a perverse incentive structure where the public, through taxpayer funds, would effectively subsidise the costs of environmental protection, rather than the polluters.
Water
Greater Wellington could be constrained in restricting water use to restore the health of the waterways, or during drought or pollution events if such measures are judged as unfairly impacting certain users.
Attempts to uphold Te Mana o Te Wai or incorporate tikanga into freshwater regulation could be undermined by a framework that prioritises uniformity and individual rights.
Any efforts to address long-standing inequitable rights to water access for example, for Māori landowners or under-serviced rural communities, could be stopped, as inconsistent with the Bill's emphasis on formal equality, or identical treatment for all.
In the same way, the following could be challenged: partnerships with communities, iwi and hapū to govern and manage water, and Māori and public input into water planning if they are not considered 'materially affected'.
Climate change and infrastructure for resilience
In elevating a narrow economic reading of regulation with efficiency and cost-limitation tests, the Bill could put broad constraints on Greater Wellington's ability to invest in: long term resilience infrastructure upgrades, Māori-led climate initiatives, equity-based adaptation initiatives, low-emissions public transport, and progressive social procurement policies e.g. hiring locally, involving Māori suppliers and paying the living wage.
Transport
The Bill could curtail New Zealand's ability to expand public transport for the public good, including but not limited to: supporting community-led transport initiatives e.g. connecting to marae and papakāinga; cross-subsidising services in less profitable areas or where there is a higher need e.g. rural areas, disability access upgrades; and initiatives to reduce transport emissions.
These initiatives could be challenged as being 'unequal treatment', and/or inconsistent with centralised efficiency metrics or cost-benefit assessments.
Greater Wellington's free, frank and robust submission can be found here: Greater Wellington — Regulatory Standards Bill – Greater Wellington Regional Council Submission
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scoop
5 hours ago
- Scoop
Hipkins Needs Ideas That Don't Make Kiwis Poorer
ACT Leader David Seymour is urging Chris Hipkins to bring serious ideas to today's Labour retreat – because so far, Labour's only policies would make New Zealanders worse off. 'Chris Hipkins, the recidivist country-destroyer, has retreated to his lair, presumably to stockpile fresh petrol for the economic fire he was stoking just 18 months ago,' says Seymour. 'He moans about the people leaving New Zealand, even while proposing to tax the ones who stay harder – and ban the industries that could bring Kiwis back – just as the economy is turning the corner. 'Yesterday, Treasury confirmed what ACT said at the time: Labour ignored clear advice not to 'stimulate' the post-COVID economy with reckless spending. Grant Robertson did it anyway, ramping up the spending machine, flooding the economy with cheap money that pushed up debt, then inflation, then interest rates, and now unemployment. 'It was economic vandalism on an historic scale. Now, as we hose down the smouldering ashes of Labour's inferno, Hipkins cries 'austerity' – like an arsonist returning to the scene of the crime, asking for the matches back. 'Labour is a party out of ideas – and the vacuum will be filled by the Greens and Te Pāti Māori. That circus would plunge us into third world conditions: higher debt, crippling taxes, more division, and fewer reasons to build a life in New Zealand.'
The Spinoff
7 hours ago
- The Spinoff
Labour plots its next move – but still no sign of any policy
With the government not exactly coasting, spirits were high as Labour MPs converged on Christchurch for their caucus away day. In one sense, Labour has been in campaign mode for the 2026 election ever since the party lost in 2023. Labour's 2024 conference made a big pitch to Auckland, and New Zealand's biggest city clearly remains a focus. But the focus switched south for a caucus away day in Christchurch today, Friday August 8, which was preceded by MPs making visits to Dunedin, Queenstown and Nelson too. 'Our three key priorities are jobs, health and homes,' said party leader Chris Hipkins as the gathering kicked off at a hotel conference centre. After some comments about the National-led government's failure to act on any of these priorities, Hipkins referenced the policy that Labour has, by and large, not announced since they left government. 'We give [New Zealanders] not just a reason not to vote for the current government but a really compelling reason to vote for us,' he said. 'We're gathered today to get ourselves in winning shape for the next election. We start that by winning the Tāmaki Makaurau byelection,' Hipkins continued. Peeni Henare, who is campaigning to regain the seat he lost by 42 votes in 2023, looked up from his seat. Thus concluded the public part of the gathering, and the handful of journalists left the room. No major policy announcements, just a quiet conviction that, as Hipkins said, 'the next election could see New Zealand's first one-term National government'. While MPs were reluctant to comment on any specifics of policy discussed, the mood was optimistic; laughter and clapping could be heard coming from the conference room where they were holed up. This could have something to do with the governing coalition not exactly riding high in the polls or in public sentiment currently. At a morning tea break, most MPs made a beeline for their phones, which had been left outside to keep the meeting secure. Hipkins, meanwhile, was handed a Diet Coke can by a Labour staffer. At a midday stand-up, Hipkins weathered questions about whether Labour was committed to bipartisan policy-making, following reporting that the party's education spokesperson Willow-Jean Prime hadn't engaged with requests from education minister Erica Stanford to discuss NCEA reform. 'Willow-Jean Prime indicated that she wanted to meet with the stakeholder groups before meeting with the minister. I don't think that's unreasonable. I did indicate to her, though, I think it would have been better if she'd gone back to the minister and told her that that was what she was doing,' Hipkins said, simply laughing in response to David Seymour suggesting that Prime should be sacked. Hipkins also refused to make a commitment about when Labour's 2026 tax policy would be announced and whether a capital gains tax would be part of that policy. This was perhaps unsurprising, but a comment made in a speech to Queenstown Business Chamber the day prior hinted at the possibility: 'We have an overemphasis on the housing market,' said Hipkins. 'We can't get rich as a country just by buying and selling houses from one another, we need to invest in the productive economy, and our over emphasis on the housing market as our primary source of investment has meant that we haven't been.' On other law, though, Labour has indicated that it wants to cooperate with the government. 'We want to work with the select committee to make the big RMA reform as stable as it can be,' said Rachel Brooking, Dunedin MP and Labour's environment spokesperson. 'If it goes where Act want that will be impossible, but if you go where some of the expert advisers [want], that's possible. We want to work in good faith and stop the flip-flopping – we won't be precious about it.' Overall, though, Brooking said that the National-led government's track record on the environment, especially issues like freshwater pollution, was disappointing. 'Everything is very short-sighted, it's about getting rid of red tape rather than 'what are the health impacts of not being able to swim in a river? Or have clean drinking water?' There are costs associated with that.' Duncan Webb, Christchurch Central MP and Labour's spokesperson for the Natural Hazards Commission, said that National's economic plans didn't make sense. 'We believe in productivity. For this government, productivity means driving down wages, but we want higher wages and better-value products coming out of New Zealand services.' Positioning mining and resource extraction wasn't a solution, either. 'We cannot have a carbon-based economy in the future.' While Labour might not have any definitive policies they're taking to the next election just yet, the party is not shy about stating what they would do differently to the current government. The Spinoff asked Megan Woods, a senior MP, what she made of the wave of submissions against the Regulatory Standards Bill, the Fast-track Approvals Bill and the Treaty principles bill, with volumes exceeding that of most previous legislation. 'If the government is going to try and pass unpopular laws, then people are going to want to have their say,' she said. When facing that volume of submissions, she said it was essential for select committees to have more time to hear from people, but that consultation had to be broader. 'If some of that happens before you drop a bill on people, there's actually conversations which can happen,' she said. While Labour lost many marginal seats in the South Island at the last election, it's clear the party is trying to position itself as a party for the bigger island. 'The South Island has been feeling neglected under this government for some time,' said Hipkins at his stand-up. He didn't have any South Island-specific policies to share, although Labour MPs had been attending events in Queenstown, Nelson, Christchurch and Dunedin prior to the caucus retreat. 'Christchurch has always been important for the Labour Party,' said Webb. The party is affiliated with local election ticket The People's Choice. 'I think they have a really robust selection process – there should be some tussles in Christchurch Central [the council ward] with five candidates.' Woods, who is the MP for Wigram in south-west Christchurch, said she'd been getting involved with The People's Choice. 'I've been out there putting up billboards and door knocking and enrolling voters to support those candidates.' What all MPs were keen to emphasise was that the biggest problems in New Zealand, south or north, were best tackled by Labour. What exactly are those problems? No surprises there. 'The cost of living issue is a critical piece,' said Woods, and Webb, and Hipkins. A June poll saw Labour move ahead of National in terms of who New Zealanders consider best placed to tackle the cost of living for the first time since 2021. Clearly the party wants to keep beating the butter drum, all the way to the 2026 election.
Otago Daily Times
8 hours ago
- Otago Daily Times
Hipkins labels Covid spending criticism 'Treasury spin'
By Craig McCulloch of RNZ Labour leader Chris Hipkins is dismissing what he calls "Treasury spin" after its analysts said the last government overspent during the Covid-19 pandemic against official advice. Treasury's 2025 Long Term Insights Briefing, released this week, calculated the total cost of the pandemic at about $66 billion, or roughly 20.4 percent of GDP. Previous govt spent too much during Covid: Treasury The report said Treasury advocated for more targeted support in late 2020 into 2021 and explicitly warned "against any further stimulus" by Budget 2022. But responding to questions from RNZ on Friday, Hipkins was unapologetic about his party's economic response to Covid-19. "We prioritised keeping people alive and keeping people in jobs," he said. "I'm never going to claim that we got everything perfect... but prioritising jobs and prioritising lives was the right thing to do." Hipkins claimed other countries also spent up large with the same objectives, but Treasury said New Zealand was near the top of the chart when considering spending as a percentage of GDP. "If you listen to the Treasury spin, then you're going to get one view," Hipkins told RNZ. "If you speak to other economists, you'll get a different view. "Our job was to support New Zealanders through the global pandemic, making sure that we saved lives and kept people's jobs, and we were very successful in doing that: one of the lowest death rates in the world, one of the lowest rates of unemployment in the world, and one of the fastest rates of economic growth in the world." About half of the total Covid-19 response cost was directly tied to the pandemic, such as the wage subsidy scheme, or health initiatives like vaccination, contact tracing and quarantine. The remainder went to a wide range of initiatives like: "tax changes, training schemes, housing construction, shovel-ready infrastructure projects, increases to welfare benefits, the Small Business Cashflow Scheme, Jobs for Nature, additional public housing places and school lunches". Treasury said that had "a lagged impact on the economy and proved difficult to unwind in later years". But Hipkins said Treasury had mischaracterised some of that spending, such as the provision of distance-learning for school students. "Making sure that kids could keep learning while they were at home during lockdown was an essential Covid-19 expense," Hipkins said. The report comes during a prolonged economic downturn, with both the government and opposition parties trading blame over its cause. Finance Minister Nicola Willis was quick on Thursday to wield Treasury's findings as evidence that Labour had been undisciplined in its spending, driving up inflation, and fuelling a cost-of-living crisis. "Treasury's language is spare and polite, but its conclusions are damning," she said. "New Zealanders are still paying the price of the previous government extending a big-spending approach initially intended for a pandemic response. "The lesson from Labour's mishandling of the Covid response is that while there are times when governments have to increase spending in response to major events the fiscal guardrails should be restored as soon as possible." To that, Hipkins scoffed: "By comparison to this government's track record, I'll take our one any day". Hipkins said Willis should stop blaming others and instead accept the consequences of her government's spending cuts. "The wreckage that she is leaving in her wake at the moment is obvious for all New Zealanders to see. Unemployment is going up," he said. "Economic growth has collapsed. Essential services that the public rely on a daily basis are falling into disarray, and this is all on Nicola Willis' watch."
