ACT Welcomes Draft Plan To End Infrastructure Whiplash
ACT is welcoming the release of the draft National Infrastructure Plan today by the New Zealand Infrastructure Commission.
"This plan is a game-changing step toward getting the best-value infrastructure projects built, at the right price and on time," says ACT Leader David Seymour.
"A fundamental problem with our approach to infrastructure planning has been a political cycle shorter than the project cycle. When decision-makers change, infrastructure priorities are jerked around by political whiplash, leading to costly stops and starts on major initiatives like Auckland rail projects, roading, schools, and hospitals.
"The plan, once finalised, will deliver exactly what ACT has campaigned on: long-term infrastructure planning and prioritisation, smarter funding and financing, efficient delivery of critical projects, and better maintenance of assets.
"Instead of going back to the drawing board every time there's a change of political guard, future governments will be able to draw from an established pipeline of planned and costed projects.
"New Zealand ranks in the top 10% of OECD nations for infrastructure spending but the bottom 10% for outcomes. The infrastructure industry has been denied the certainty needed to bring in the investment, equipment, and talent they need to get the big stuff built efficiently.
"This plan aligns with ACT's coalition commitment of regional deals between central and local government to ensure funding certainty. Meanwhile, Simon Court has advanced the refresh of the Public-Private Partnership policy and introduced a new strategic leasing policy so that once projects are identified the private sector can play its part in finance and delivery.
"Simon's work to replace the Resource Management Act with a less bureaucratic system based on property rights also feeds in to make development faster and more affordable. Without ditching the RMA, projects will continue to be held up for years of arguments about effects that we already know how to manage well.
"Crucially, the Infrastructure Minister is seeking cross-party engagement on the Plan. I hope all parties will engage in good faith, because cross-party agreement means certainty for industry, which in turn means more projects get built on time and New Zealand becomes a richer, more industrious, more prosperous place to live."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scoop
7 hours ago
- Scoop
Solomon Islands: HKH Constituency 2025 Development Pathway Targets Empowering Communities
The Hograno-Kia-Havulei (HKH) Constituency is charting a development pathway aimed at empowering communities through strategic investments in the productive sector. Utilising the Constituency Development Funds (CDF), the initiative seeks to stimulate the local economy, improve livelihoods, and elevate socio-economic conditions at the rural level. HKH Constituency Development Officer (CDO), Apollos Manegere underscored this vision during a recent meeting with community-based Constituency Development Committees (CDCs) in Kaevanga and Kia, Isabel Province. Accompanied by a team from the Ministry of Rural Development (MRD), Mr. Manegere outlined a holistic approach to rural development, integrating social, economic, and environmental components with a focus on sustainability, community-driven solutions, and infrastructure improvements. "Enabling local communities to identify their needs and implement solutions is vital for ownership and long-term success," Mr. Manegere said. "Our constituency office will continue to engage with the CDC to ensure the effective implementation of the 2025 CDF program." The HKH Constituency has prioritised the productive sector, allocating 40 per cent of its 2024 budget of $3.88 million to projects that generate economic returns. "We have abundant resources in fisheries, marine, agriculture, and forestry. By leveraging CDF support, we aim to inject investment capital into rural areas, reduce poverty, and enhance livelihoods," Mr. Manegere explained. 'Investments in agriculture and fisheries are expected to increase incomes and improve the quality of life for constituents. This aligns with our vision to foster economic growth and self-reliance," he added. Under the new CDF Act 2023, the HKH Constituency is committed to ensuring the efficient and effective delivery of development programs. The Act introduces key changes, including the establishment of CDCs, which play a pivotal role in coordinating, endorsing, and monitoring CDF projects. "The CDCs are critical stakeholders in this process, with clearly defined responsibilities under the new law," Mr. Manegere emphasised. CDC functions include: • Coordinating constituency development programs. • Approving annual budgets. • Managing CDF funds in consultation with the Member of Parliament and the Constituency Office. • Monitoring and supervising project implementation. • Engaging with communities to develop tailored development plans. MRD's Principal Legal Officer, Ms. Diana Alasia who was also part of the team, highlighted the CDF Act's emphasis on transparency, accountability, and community participation. "The law mandates inclusive decision-making, requiring at least two women to serve on each CDC. It also ensures project recipients uphold their commitments through legally binding agreements," she said. Mr. Manegere expressed gratitude to the Solomon Islands Government and the Ministry of Rural Development for their unwavering support of the CDF program. "This national initiative enables constituencies to access vital funds for development, directly benefiting our rural people," he noted. The Constituency Development Program, administered by MRD, is implemented across all 50 constituencies in the Solomon Islands to improve socio-economic outcomes nationwide.
Scoop
13 hours ago
- Scoop
One Bad Rainstorm Away From Disaster: Why Proposed Changes To Forestry Rules Won't Solve The ‘Slash' Problem
Article – The Conversation Even when forestry companies fully comply with current standards, slash discharge and erosion can happen. New rules must set size and location limits on clear-felling. The biggest environmental problems for commercial plantation forestry in New Zealand's steep hill country are discharges of slash (woody debris left behind after logging) and sediment from clear-fell harvests. During the past 15 years, there have been 15 convictions of forestry companies for slash and sediment discharges into rivers, on land and along the coastline. Such discharges are meant to be controlled by the National Environmental Standards for Commercial Forestry, which set environmental rules for forestry activities such as logging roads and clear-fell harvesting. The standards are part of the Resource Management Act (RMA), which the government is reforming. The government revised the standards' slash-management rules in 2023 after Cyclone Gabrielle. But it it is now consulting on a proposal to further amend the standards because of cost, uncertainty and compliance issues. We believe the proposed changes fail to address the core reasons for slash and sediment discharges. We recently analysed five convictions of forestry companies under the RMA for illegal discharges. Based on this analysis, which has been accepted for publication in the New Zealand Journal of Forestry, we argue that the standards should set limits to the size and location of clear-felling areas on erosion-susceptible land. Why the courts convicted 5 forestry companies In the aftermath of destructive storms in the Gisborne district during June 2018, five forestry companies were convicted for breaches of the RMA for discharges of slash and sediment from their clear-fell harvesting operations. These discharges resulted from landslides and collapsed earthworks (including roads). There has been a lot of criticism of forestry's performance during these storms and subsequent events such as Cyclone Gabrielle. However, little attention has been given to why the courts decided to convict the forestry companies for breaches of the RMA. The courts' decisions clearly explain why the sediment and slash discharges happened, why the forestry companies were at fault, and what can be done to prevent these discharges in future on erosion-prone land. New Zealand's plantation forest land is ranked for its susceptibility to erosion using a four-colour scale, from green (low) to red (very high). Because of the high erosion susceptibility, additional RMA permissions (consents) for earthworks and harvesting are required on red-ranked areas. New Zealand-wide, only 7% of plantation forests are on red land. A further 17% are on orange (high susceptibility) land. But in the Gisborne district, 55% of commercial forests are on red land. This is why trying to manage erosion is such a problem in Gisborne's forests. Key findings from the forestry cases In all five cases, the convicted companies had consents from the Gisborne District Council to build logging roads and clear-fell large areas covering hundreds or even thousands of hectares. A significant part of the sediment and slash discharges originated from landslides that were primed to occur after the large-scale clear-fell harvests. But since the harvests were lawful, these landslides were not relevant to the decision to convict. Instead, all convictions were for compliance failures where logging roads and log storage areas collapsed or slash was not properly disposed of, even though these only partly contributed to the collective sediment and slash discharges downstream. The court concluded that: Clear-fell harvesting on land highly susceptible to erosion required absolute compliance with resource consent conditions. Failures to correctly build roads or manage slash contributed to slash and sediment discharges downstream. Even with absolute compliance, clear-felling on such land was still risky. This was because a significant portion of the discharges were due to the lawful activity of cutting down trees and removing them, leaving the land vulnerable to landslides and other erosion. The second conclusion is critical. It means that even if forestry companies are fully compliant with the standards and consents, slash and sediment discharges can still happen after clear-felling. And if this happens, councils can require companies to clean up these discharges and prevent them from happening again. This is not a hypothetical scenario. Recently, the Gisborne District Council successfully applied to the Environment Court for enforcement orders requiring clean-up of slash deposits and remediation of harvesting sites. If the forestry companies fail to comply, they can be held in contempt of court. Regulations are not just red tape This illustrates a major problem with the standards that applies to erosion-susceptible forest land everywhere in New Zealand, not just in the Gisborne district. Regulations are not just 'red tape'. They provide certainty to businesses that as long as they are compliant, their activities should be free from legal prosecution and enforcement. The courts' decisions and council enforcement actions show that forestry companies can face considerable legal risk, even if compliant with regulatory requirements for earthworks and harvesting. Clear-felled forests on erosion-prone land are one bad rainstorm away from disaster. But with well planned, careful harvesting of small forest areas, this risk can be kept at a tolerable level. However, the standards and the proposed amendments do not require small clear-fell areas on erosion-prone land. If this shortcoming is not fixed, communities and ecosystems will continue to bear the brunt of the discharges from large-scale clear-fell harvests. To solve this problem, the standards must proactively limit the size and location of clear-felling areas on erosion-prone land. This will address the main cause of catastrophic slash and sediment discharges from forests, protecting communities and ecosystems. And it will enable forestry companies to plan their harvests with greater confidence that they will not be subject to legal action. Disclosure statement Mark Bloomberg receives funding from the government's Envirolink fund and from local authorities and forestry companies. He is a member of the NZ Institute of Forestry and the NZ Society of Soil Science. Steve Urlich does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Scoop
14 hours ago
- Scoop
One Bad Rainstorm Away From Disaster: Why Proposed Changes To Forestry Rules Won't Solve The ‘Slash' Problem
The biggest environmental problems for commercial plantation forestry in New Zealand's steep hill country are discharges of slash (woody debris left behind after logging) and sediment from clear-fell harvests. During the past 15 years, there have been 15 convictions of forestry companies for slash and sediment discharges into rivers, on land and along the coastline. Such discharges are meant to be controlled by the National Environmental Standards for Commercial Forestry, which set environmental rules for forestry activities such as logging roads and clear-fell harvesting. The standards are part of the Resource Management Act (RMA), which the government is reforming. The government revised the standards' slash-management rules in 2023 after Cyclone Gabrielle. But it it is now consulting on a proposal to further amend the standards because of cost, uncertainty and compliance issues. We believe the proposed changes fail to address the core reasons for slash and sediment discharges. We recently analysed five convictions of forestry companies under the RMA for illegal discharges. Based on this analysis, which has been accepted for publication in the New Zealand Journal of Forestry, we argue that the standards should set limits to the size and location of clear-felling areas on erosion-susceptible land. Why the courts convicted 5 forestry companies In the aftermath of destructive storms in the Gisborne district during June 2018, five forestry companies were convicted for breaches of the RMA for discharges of slash and sediment from their clear-fell harvesting operations. These discharges resulted from landslides and collapsed earthworks (including roads). There has been a lot of criticism of forestry's performance during these storms and subsequent events such as Cyclone Gabrielle. However, little attention has been given to why the courts decided to convict the forestry companies for breaches of the RMA. The courts' decisions clearly explain why the sediment and slash discharges happened, why the forestry companies were at fault, and what can be done to prevent these discharges in future on erosion-prone land. New Zealand's plantation forest land is ranked for its susceptibility to erosion using a four-colour scale, from green (low) to red (very high). Because of the high erosion susceptibility, additional RMA permissions (consents) for earthworks and harvesting are required on red-ranked areas. New Zealand-wide, only 7% of plantation forests are on red land. A further 17% are on orange (high susceptibility) land. But in the Gisborne district, 55% of commercial forests are on red land. This is why trying to manage erosion is such a problem in Gisborne's forests. Key findings from the forestry cases In all five cases, the convicted companies had consents from the Gisborne District Council to build logging roads and clear-fell large areas covering hundreds or even thousands of hectares. A significant part of the sediment and slash discharges originated from landslides that were primed to occur after the large-scale clear-fell harvests. But since the harvests were lawful, these landslides were not relevant to the decision to convict. Instead, all convictions were for compliance failures where logging roads and log storage areas collapsed or slash was not properly disposed of, even though these only partly contributed to the collective sediment and slash discharges downstream. The court concluded that: Clear-fell harvesting on land highly susceptible to erosion required absolute compliance with resource consent conditions. Failures to correctly build roads or manage slash contributed to slash and sediment discharges downstream. Even with absolute compliance, clear-felling on such land was still risky. This was because a significant portion of the discharges were due to the lawful activity of cutting down trees and removing them, leaving the land vulnerable to landslides and other erosion. The second conclusion is critical. It means that even if forestry companies are fully compliant with the standards and consents, slash and sediment discharges can still happen after clear-felling. And if this happens, councils can require companies to clean up these discharges and prevent them from happening again. This is not a hypothetical scenario. Recently, the Gisborne District Council successfully applied to the Environment Court for enforcement orders requiring clean-up of slash deposits and remediation of harvesting sites. If the forestry companies fail to comply, they can be held in contempt of court. Regulations are not just red tape This illustrates a major problem with the standards that applies to erosion-susceptible forest land everywhere in New Zealand, not just in the Gisborne district. Regulations are not just 'red tape'. They provide certainty to businesses that as long as they are compliant, their activities should be free from legal prosecution and enforcement. The courts' decisions and council enforcement actions show that forestry companies can face considerable legal risk, even if compliant with regulatory requirements for earthworks and harvesting. Clear-felled forests on erosion-prone land are one bad rainstorm away from disaster. But with well planned, careful harvesting of small forest areas, this risk can be kept at a tolerable level. However, the standards and the proposed amendments do not require small clear-fell areas on erosion-prone land. If this shortcoming is not fixed, communities and ecosystems will continue to bear the brunt of the discharges from large-scale clear-fell harvests. To solve this problem, the standards must proactively limit the size and location of clear-felling areas on erosion-prone land. This will address the main cause of catastrophic slash and sediment discharges from forests, protecting communities and ecosystems. And it will enable forestry companies to plan their harvests with greater confidence that they will not be subject to legal action. Disclosure statement Mark Bloomberg receives funding from the government's Envirolink fund and from local authorities and forestry companies. He is a member of the NZ Institute of Forestry and the NZ Society of Soil Science. Steve Urlich does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
