National, Labour agree changes needed for weather-event buyouts
Photo:
Tim Cuff / POOL
The two major political parties want a bipartisan approach towards dealing with climate adaptation and property buy-outs during weather events.
Last week, an independent reference group made recommendations for climate adaptation legislation, including that people
should not expect the government to buy out
severely weather-damaged homes.
The group, set up by the Ministry for the Environment, recommended after a 20-year transition period, homeowners whose houses are flooded or damaged by weather events should not expect buyouts.
It said individuals should be responsible for knowing the risks and making their own decisions about whether to move away from high-risk areas.
no captoin.
Photo:
RNZ
The group also recommended that funding for adaptation measures, such as flood schemes, sea walls and blue-green infrastructure, should follow a 'beneficiary pays' approach in most cases.
While the government is yet to formally respond to the report, Prime Minister Christopher Luxon said in principal, the government
won't be able to keep bailing people out
.
He said Climate Change Minister Simon Watts had been working hard to get a bipartisan view on how to deal long term with these weather events.
"This is a long term issue. We need a proper framework in place to work out whether its landowners, councils, whether its central government, banks, insurers that actually have to create a framework for dealing with these weather events an how we handle them going forward."
Hipkins agreed that the frame work needs to be worked through on a bipartisan basis so the issue doesn't become a "political football".
"We have to be realistic. Government is not going to be an insurer by default, but there are decisions that governments has taken, whether it's local government or central government, where houses can be built and there is some consequences for that," Hipkins told
Morning Report.
"We have a share of the liability here, but it doesn't mean we have all of the liability."
While Hipkins would not say whether he agrees in principal to phase out the buyouts, he said whatever we come up with needs to be fair and consistent.
"Fairness has to be at the heart of it," he said.
Labour leader Chris Hipkins.
Photo:
RNZ / Mark Papalii
Finance Minister Nicola Willis told
First Up
the government is working to ensure councils are clear about natural hazard risks when they allow people to build.
Willis said authorities must strike a balance between identifying hazard risks, and ensuring sufficient investment in infrastructure to prevent catastrophic damage.
"You come to this question of when people know that they are building on a flood plain, or they know that the area they're building on is at very high risk, is it fair to ask tax payers to always bear the costs of that? And those are some of the questions that this independent have been working through," she said.
Willis said extreme climate events are increasing and we can expect that to continue as a result of climate change.
She said it is going to be important for New Zealand that we carefully plan where housing development occurs, what kinds of infrastructure we build and what investment we make into adaptation such as stopbanks.
"We need to have frameworks as a country that work not just as an ad-hoc basis, but to the extent possible, can endure from one Parliament to the next because these are long-run issues, so long-run incentives are needed."
Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero
,
a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
Hashtags

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


NZ Herald
24 minutes ago
- NZ Herald
Prime Minister Chris Luxon faces questions on building product investment, immigration numbers
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon will face questions this morning on the latest boost for builders, the Foreign Minister's concerns on immigration numbers and the new road cone hotline. He will join Newstalk ZB's Mike Hosking at 7.30am. It comes after Luxon said the Government would be increasing the number of building products available in New Zealand, including plasterboard, cladding systems, external doors and windows. He made the announcement at the weekend with Building and Construction Minister Chris Penk, who said thousands of overseas building products had been given the green light for construction. '[This ends] costly monopolies on a small number of products that are currently used in New Zealand,' Penk said. 'It is 50% more expensive to build a standalone home in New Zealand than in Australia. That is frankly outrageous.' Luxon is also expected to face heat this week from NZ First leader Winston Peters, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, over his concerns about the number of migrants entering New Zealand. Peters said he is observing an 'alarming development' overseas where 'careless immigration policies' are 'transforming cities' and 'changing centuries of development and social life'. He referred to his party as 'nationalist' while his coalition partners are 'globalists', and believes Kiwis are increasingly worried about immigration issues. 'We intend to turn that problem into a success story, so people do understand that, when you're coming here, there are some fundamental things you need to sign up to,' he said. 'If you don't want to sign up to it, don't come.' Meanwhile, Luxon's new hotline to curb overzealous road cone use has come under scrutiny, with a chief executive of a traffic management company saying he is very doubtful it will work. Traffic management planning company Parallaxx helps train WorkSafe staff for the hotline, but chief executive Dave Tilton is sceptical of the concept, partly due to the number of people a report needs to go through before action is taken. 'We absolutely have oversupply [of road cones] beyond the minimum without question ... but I'm very doubtful that this particular thread [the hotline] is going to bear fruit in fixing it.'


Otago Daily Times
3 hours ago
- Otago Daily Times
Better late than never
The government's reasoning for stopping late voter registration, including enrolling and voting on election day, is flimsy. Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith says allowing late enrolments, however well intentioned, has put too much strain on the system and it is taking too long to get the final vote count. He says this could worsen in future general elections, conveniently not mentioning the other delay to new government formation — protracted negotiations between political parties. There were multiple issues with the count in 2023, but should the blame for the time taken fall on late enrolled voters or a system which was poorly resourced, staffed and organised? The law was changed for the 2020 election to allow enrolment on voting day after 19,000 people who had turned up at the previous election to enrol and vote were disenfranchised. The Electoral Amendment Bill, introduced to the House last week, will not take the situation back to that which existed for years before 2020. Then, late enrolments could be accepted up until the day before the election. (That is the case for local elections, and officials have pointed out having substantially different deadlines for the two types of elections may confuse voters.) Now, for a vote to be valid in a general election, enrolment would have to be completed 13 days before the election; a day before advance voting starts. In his media release announcing the proposed change, Mr Goldsmith referred to the Australian law setting the enrolment deadline for 26 days before the Federal election. Whether he was trying to provoke an odd Trans-Tasman rivalry — anything the Aussies can do we can do in half the time — is not clear. It was a strange comparison to make because, unlike New Zealand, Australia has compulsory voting. He did not mention almost half of the states in the United States of America allow same day enrolment and voting, as does Canada. In our last election, special votes included more than 97,000 people who enrolled during the voting period and nearly 134,000 people who changed electorates during that time. Officials have suggested this gives some indication of the number of people who may be affected by this policy change, and the earlier the deadline, the more people who are likely to be impacted. Also, Electoral Commission data indicates special votes are more likely to come from areas with larger proportions of Māori, Asian and Pasifika, and younger people. We should be encouraging these voters, not putting obstacles in their way. When, traditionally, special votes have favoured the Left, this move by the current Right-leaning government looks self-serving. The argument that if people were taking their voting responsibilities seriously, they would ensure they were enrolled with up-to-date information well before voting begins, assumes everyone has an orderly and predictable life, and fully understands their obligations. For David Seymour to say he was "a bit sick of dropkicks that can't get themselves organised to follow the law" was another illustration of his failure to make the transition from shoot-from-the-lip party leader to the gravitas-requiring role of the deputy prime minister. Call us picky, but the special voters lodging votes on or close to polling day in the last two elections were not outlaws. Mr Goldsmith's description of Mr Seymour's comments as unhelpful was an understatement if ever there was one. Among other things, the Bill also proposes reintroducing a total ban on prisoner voting for those convicted and sentenced, something which is not a surprise from the government. It is more about cynically playing to those still convinced by its tired tough-on-crime mantra than considering its fairness or contravention of the Bill of Rights Act. It also is against the advice of the Ministry of Justice which supported giving all prisoners the right to vote. Whenever changes are proposed to electoral law, major consideration should be given to whether alterations might improve or dissuade participation from all parts of our society. In this instance, it is difficult to see what weight has been given to this for both prisoners and those who, for whatever reason, might not be up to date with their voter registration 13 days before an election.


NZ Herald
16 hours ago
- NZ Herald
Winston Peters immigration comments labelled ‘divisive rhetoric', ‘cynical politicking'
The remarks have not gone down well with two of the Opposition parties. The Greens' immigration spokesman Ricardo Menendez March said Peters' 'tired, decades-old playbook of blaming migrants' was a 'distraction' from other actions the coalition Government had taken, such as changes to pay equity rules and tightening emergency housing settings, which critics argue has led to an increase in homelessness. 'We aren't waiting for [Prime Minister Christopher] Luxon to show leadership and shut down this divisive rhetoric, which is why we are fighting to create 40,000 new jobs through a Greens Job Guarantee, build enough public housing and restore pay equity claims,' the Green MP told the Herald. 'We will also ensure every migrant worker is treated with respect and is free from exploitation.' The Greens' Ricardo Menéndez March was critical of the comments. Photo / Mark Mitchell Phil Twyford from Labour told Newstalk ZB it was 'cynical politicking' by Peters. 'Instead of focusing on the things that I think are important to New Zealanders, like the cost of living, they are resorting to imported culture wars that, frankly, New Zealand just doesn't need,' Twyford said. While he said there was always more to be done to improve the system, Twyford said New Zealand 'is completely reliant on immigration for our economy to work and for our society to work'. 'Migrants make a hugely positive contribution to this country. They enrich our communities. It's not helpful for politicians, for their own political purposes, to be trying to divide the community and turn one group of people against another.' Luxon on Sunday said it was important immigration was linked to 'our economic agenda and our ability to support immigration with good infrastructure'. 'Those are the three things that have to come together for any country, and certainly here in New Zealand as well,' the Prime Minister said. 'We have accelerated pathways for residency through the Green List for when we have got job shortages that we desperately need to get into our communities.' Prime Minister Christopher Luxon said immigration needed to be linked to the country's economic agenda. Photo / Mark Mitchell Peters told the Herald NZ First believed immigration should not be used as an 'excuse for our failure to train, skill and employ our own people'. That was one of the party's founding principles 32 years ago and remained 'as much a principle now as it was back then', Peters said. 'We, like wise countries, have always believed we should be training and employing our own people first and not use immigration as an excuse not to do that. That is still our plan.' He said New Zealand still didn't have strong enough initiatives to 'take people from secondary school into employment' and stressed the need for appropriate infrastructure to be in place to support migrants. 'There was a time when we were getting people from around the world putting down £10 to get here. They were coming to a job and a house and infrastructure, schooling, everything. Teachers and doctors and all sorts of people were coming here.' In the year to May 2025, there was a net migration gain of 15,000, driven by 140,000 arrivals and offset by 125,000 departures. The number of arrivals is down from a peak of roughly 235,000 in late 2023, but still above the long-term average of 119,000. However, due to the large number of departures, the net gain is below the average of nearly 28,000. Jamie Ensor is a political reporter in the NZ Herald press gallery team based at Parliament. He was previously a TV reporter and digital producer in the Newshub press gallery office. In 2025, he was a finalist for Political Journalist of the Year at the Voyager Media Awards.