Latest news with #TheBulletin
The Spinoff
2 days ago
- Politics
- The Spinoff
Are regional councils on the chopping block?
With new planning laws set to centralise environmental decision-making, ministers are openly debating whether regional councils still serve a purpose, writes Catherine McGregor in today's extract from The Bulletin. Are regional councils' days numbered? The future of New Zealand's 11 regional councils is under intense scrutiny, with senior government figures questioning whether they should exist at all, reports Adam Pearse at the Herald. Leading the charge is regional development minister Shane Jones, who last week asked bluntly: 'What is the point of regional government?' He has accused councils of stifling economic growth and claimed they were being co-opted into co-governance arrangements, describing the Waikato regional council as an 'iwi back office'. Prime minister Christopher Luxon didn't go that far, but said disestablishing regional councils was 'something we can explore' as part of the sweeping Resource Management Act (RMA) reforms, which aim to replace the existing legislation with two new laws intended to standardise planning decisions and reduce reliance on complex, locally issued resource consents. With key powers centralised, regional councils risk being sidelined altogether. Local government minister Simon Watts is keeping his cards close to the chest, only saying the future would 'look differently than what it is'. What regional councils do Regional councils were created in 1989 as part of a sweeping local government overhaul that replaced hundreds of small boards with 86 authorities, including 13 regional councils (now 11). Their purpose was to manage land, water and air resources under the then-new RMA. These days, their responsibilities include environmental monitoring, flood control, biodiversity, biosecurity, public transport and natural hazard planning. They also play a core role in building resilience to climate change, according to Local Government New Zealand. In some parts of the country – including Auckland, Gisborne and Nelson – these duties are handled by unitary authorities, which combine regional and territorial (ie city or district council) responsibilities. The post-RMA reckoning In a column on Scoop, former United Future leader Peter Dunne argues the government's plan to replace the RMA has reignited National's long-held discomfort with regional councils. After National took office in 1990, it 'wound back the powers' the Labour government had assigned to the councils, leaving them 'largely toothless', Dunne says. 'For the last 35 years they have therefore remained an awkward anomaly, with little public understanding of their purpose.' With the RMA now set to be replaced by new laws focused on national standards and streamlined consenting, the government appears to be questioning whether regional governance is still necessary, reports The Post's Anna Whyte (paywalled). Or, as David Seymour put it, 'maybe the next logical question is, do we need that extra layer of government?' If you're thinking about a new career as a regional councillor, maybe think again, advises Dunne. 'With the way things are currently swirling, those considering running for regional councils ought to be watching National's musings about the future of regional government very carefully.' Amalgamation enters the frame While most regional councillors are – unsurprisingly – against the idea of their roles being scrapped outright, many are open to the idea of amalgamation. In a column for The Post (paywalled), Greater Wellington Regional Council chair Daran Ponter suggests regional councils could be 'building blocks' for a streamlined system, but argues that we shouldn't throw the baby out with the bathwater. 'Environmental regulation is a part of any modern western democracy and essential to New Zealand trade,' he writes. 'If it's not your regional council doing this work, then it will be a government agency or your local council.' His call for amalgamation has won support in neighbouring Hutt City Council, which will vote today on whether to include a question on the topic in this year's election ballot papers. Further south, Christchurch mayor Phil Mauger is also open to combining functions into a unitary authority. But Environment Canterbury chair Craig Pauling tells David Hill at The Press (paywalled) that rushing into amalgamation isn't the answer. 'We agree the current structure and funding is unsustainable, but it is not simple and … just about scrapping regional councils and creating unitary authorities.'
The Spinoff
3 days ago
- Business
- The Spinoff
The draft plan to finally fix New Zealand's broken infrastructure
The Infrastructure Commission says we're spending more than most developed countries on infrastructure – while getting some of the worst returns, writes Catherine McGregor in today's extract from The Bulletin. A scathing review of infrastructure failures New Zealand's infrastructure is in crisis, and the Infrastructure Commission's draft National Infrastructure Plan doesn't mince words. The 30-year strategy, unveiled at yesterday's infrastructure symposium in Wellington, paints a picture of underinvestment in maintenance, chaotic project selection and dismal returns. New Zealand spends more of its GDP on infrastructure than any other OECD country, yet ranks in the bottom 10% for return on that investment. The report calls out successive governments for favouring headline-grabbing glamour projects over essential maintenance, leading to schools with leaking roofs, hospitals with sewage issues, and NZDF homes rife with mould. The commission found that ministers repeatedly rushed to announce projects before establishing whether they were actually achievable. 'Half of the large projects seeking funding through central government's annual Budget lack business cases to demonstrate that they're ready to fund,' according to the draft plan. Short-term thinking and policy flip-flops have created a wasteful cycle of boom-and-bust in the construction sector, the report argues, making infrastructure builds more complicated and expensive than they need be. Welcome to the era of user pays Among the plan's most contentious recommendations is a greater reliance on user-pays systems to fund infrastructure. 'New Zealanders will soon see that rolling out in, for instance, water metering in pretty much every district, the tolling of new highways, and time-of-use charges starting on Auckland's roads,' writes Newsroom's Jonathan Milne. Infrastructure Commission CEO Geoff Cooper emphasises this isn't about making every project pay for itself, but finding a more sustainable and equitable funding model. While social infrastructure – like schools or hospitals – is likely to remain fully publicly funded, Cooper is calling for user-pays to become the default wherever it makes sense. 'You can have urban roads that are subsidising rural roads, same with electricity transmission and distribution, but the network as a whole should cover its own costs through those user charges,' Cooper told Oliver Lewis at BusinessDesk (paywalled). The 17 priority projects Out of 48 submissions, just 17 projects made it onto the first round of the commission's Infrastructure Priorities Programme, a key feature of the draft plan. Six of them relate to much-needed upgrades of Defence Force housing and facilities, such as new barracks at Linton Army Camp and the regeneration of the Devonport naval base. These projects won praise from Cooper for being well-scoped, achievable and urgent. Also endorsed was the Reserve Bank's vault upgrade and the redevelopment of Hawke's Bay Regional Prison. A major urban project to make the cut was Christchurch's 22km Mass Rapid Transit line, which aims to connect Hornby and Belfast along a 21-station route. The commission stressed that inclusion on the list doesn't guarantee funding but provides a clear signal that the project is of national significance. What missed out High-profile proposals that didn't make the list include KiwiRail's Marsden Point Rail Link and Auckland Strategic Rail Programme, both of which are being reworked or resubmitted. Corrections saw three prison redevelopment projects rejected, despite one – the Christchurch Men's Prison redevelopment – being underway via a public-private partnership. A multi-user ferry terminal for Cook Strait ferries, put forward by the Greater Wellington Regional Council, was also omitted. As Lewis writes, reasons for rejection ranged from lack of readiness to insufficient national relevance. Some proposals – like a maglev rail system for the Waitematā Harbour crossing – were more aspirational than realistic. The commission is currently reviewing 70 additional submissions for the second round of the programme. For many in the infrastructure community, including rail minister Winston Peters, the rejections no doubt stung. 'We expect the Infrastructure Commission will see the light,' he said of the Marsden Point project, 'and if they don't, we will have some serious questions.'
The Spinoff
4 days ago
- Business
- The Spinoff
‘Short-term pain' and long-term fallout as Kāinga Ora scraps thousands of state homes
Nearly 3500 planned homes have been cut from the pipeline in a sweeping overhaul aimed at restoring the agency's finances, writes Catherine McGregor in today's extract from The Bulletin. Thousands of state homes scrapped If you missed the news of massive cuts to the state house building programme, that's understandable – it came on Thursday, just as the country was powering down for the Matariki weekend. As the Herald's Lane Nichols reports, Kāinga Ora is cancelling 212 planned housing projects which would have delivered almost 3500 state homes, with 20% of the agency's vacant land holdings to be put up for sale. The rest will be land banked for 'possible future development', Kāinga Ora chief executive Matt Crockett said. The decision means the agency will need to write down between $190 and $220 million in sunk costs for scoping and planning work. Both Crockett and housing minister Chris Bishop said the cancellations were a tough call, but necessary to restore fiscal discipline to the troubled agency. 'We need to bite the bullet on this' said Crockett. 'There is often some short-term pain that comes with the resetting of past decisions, but it needs to be done.' Impact across the regions The cancellations are widespread but will hit hardest in Auckland, Palmerston North, Christchurch and Whangārei. In Auckland, Onehunga lost 259 new homes across multiple developments, while a $100 million, 16-storey tower in central Manukau has been shelved. Over in Mt Wellington, the Rowlands Ave redevelopment – planned to replace 60 demolished units with 180 new homes – has also been abandoned. In Palmerston North, 245 homes across nine projects have been cut, and in Whangārei, 322 new builds have been cancelled. A planned 108-home village in the Christchurch suburb of Sockburn has also been scrapped. Auckland councillor Josephine Bartley, who worked with residents in Jordan Ave and Rowlands Ave before they were relocated, tells Newsroom's Jonathan Milne many families were promised the right to return. 'I just don't understand it,' she said. 'We have so many people still on the Public Housing Register who need homes. Kāinga Ora's role should be about building homes – what else are they here for?' The big reset The cancellations form part of a wider turnaround plan for Kāinga Ora, which followed a review by former prime minister Sir Bill English amid cost blowouts and spiralling debt. In February, Bishop unveiled details of a 'reset' to refocus the agency on its core role as a landlord, not a developer. The plan also includes shedding hundreds of jobs and offloading high-value properties in affluent suburbs like Remuera. Bishop said the project cancellations and land sales are designed to free up funds to build homes in places where they are most needed. 'Meanwhile, over the next two years, Kāinga Ora is delivering over 2000 additional social homes as well as a big refit programme to bring older social homes up to scratch.' The government has also funded 2,000 homes through strategic partnerships with Community Housing Providers, 400 affordable rentals, and has established a 'housing flexible fund' which will enable 'up to 650-900 more social homes and affordable rentals', he added. The cost to communities As Milne writes in his excellent piece in Newsroom, the topline figures tell only a fraction of the story. Over the past seven years, around 5000 Kāinga Ora homes have been demolished – often with ambitious rebuild plans that never materialised. 'Amid the politics and policy and media discussions of where Kāinga Ora's money has all gone, few are asking where the people have gone,' Milne writes. In Onehunga, for example, where 62 state homes were flattened, the promised high-rise replacements were designed – twice – before being scrapped altogether. 'All these thousands of people moved out to make way for the promise of the new – but it's proved to be a hollow promise.' Those left behind are often confronted by daily reminders of what could have been. 'The last thing you want to see in your communities is big, massive, empty housing lots,' councillor Josephine Bartley said. 'It does something to the people that still live round there, the people that see that emptiness every day.'
The Spinoff
5 days ago
- Politics
- The Spinoff
Do David Seymour's ‘Victim of the Day' social media posts go too far?
As the deputy PM defends his controversial regulatory standards bill, his opponents say he's harassing critics and threatening academic freedom, writes Catherine McGregor in today's extract from The Bulletin. Mayor accuses Seymour of harassment over Facebook posts Wellington mayor Tory Whanau has asked prime minister Christopher Luxon to investigate David Seymour for what she describes as 'online harassment and intimidation' of academics, Stuff reports. In a letter to the PM, Whanau wrote that Seymour's conduct 'could incite behaviour that spills into real-world violence', is 'a blatant attempt to stifle academic freedom and any dissenting opinion' and breaches Sections 2.53 and 2.56 of the Cabinet Manual. At issue are Seymour's 'Victim of the Day' Facebook posts, which target individual critics of the regulatory standards bill by name and photo, accusing them of suffering from 'regulatory standards derangement syndrome.' Seymour, who is acting prime minister this week, has defended the posts, saying they highlight exaggerated claims and do not breach the Cabinet Manual. But Whanau argued that 'such behaviour by the deputy prime minister compromises the safety and wellbeing of the targeted individuals and sets a dangerous precedent'. Salmond: 'Trumpian rhetoric' used to target scholars Among those targeted is Dame Anne Salmond, the distinguished anthropologist, public intellectual and former New Zealander of the Year. In a column for Newsroom, she responded with alarm to Seymour's posts, calling them 'an online campaign of intimidation against university scholars'. She noted that the term 'derangement syndrome' is borrowed from 'Trump derangement syndrome', which the US president likes to accuse his critics of suffering, and compared Seymour's tactics to Trump's own attacks on academic institutions in recent months. 'This is a senior politician who has vigorously argued for freedom of speech in universities,' Salmond wrote, yet is now deploying 'Trumpian rhetoric' against critics of his own bill. She also said she would lodge a formal complaint with the Cabinet Office. In her original column about the bill, also published in Newsroom, Salmond described it as 'a dangerous piece of legislation' that 'expresses a contempt for collective rights and responsibilities, public goals and values, and liberal democracy'. She said the bill lacked a democratic mandate, centralised power in the hands of the minister for regulation (Seymour himself), and privileged private interests over public good. The compensation clause question One of Salmond's more contentious claims about the bill is that it could force governments to compensate corporations for loss of profit due to regulation. She warned that the legislation could require 'those who benefit from laws or regulations to compensate others for the losses of profit that may arise'. However, public law expert Eddie Clark has challenged that interpretation, pointing to explicit clauses that prevent the bill from creating legal rights or obligations. 'Absolutely nothing in the act can found litigation by a private individual,' he told Marc Daalder of Newsroom. While Clark acknowledged the principles in the bill may influence future legal or policy thinking, he said critics like Salmond – who is not a lawyer – had 'over-egged' the likely effects. Still, Clark agreed the bill reflected 'libertarian minimalist state principles' that could gradually shape lawmaking in favour of corporate interests. The 'bot' backlash Seymour has also stirred controversy by dismissing tens of thousands of critical submissions on the bill as the work of 'bots'. He claimed '99.5%' of submissions to an earlier discussion document were fake, the result of 'a smart campaign with a bot'. That's not exactly true. Speaking to RNZ's Ella Stewart, Otago University law professor Andrew Geddis called the term 'an incredibly dismissive way to refer to individual New Zealanders taking the time to actually engage'. In fact, most submissions used online tools created by groups like ActionStation, which allow people to easily send pre-written or lightly edited statements. These are not bots in the technical sense, but part of what Stewart described as 'digital democracy'. Clerk of the House David Wilson confirmed such practices are legitimate: 'It's happened for many, many years. It used to be photocopied forms. Now, often it's things online.' With submissions on the regulatory standards bill closing yesterday, we'll soon learn how many so-called bots submitted on the bill itself.
The Spinoff
6 days ago
- Politics
- The Spinoff
NZDF rescue aircraft on standby as Middle East crisis deepens
New Zealand is preparing for a possible evacuation of citizens from Iran and Israel, while government ministers call for restraint, writes Catherine McGregor in today's extract from The Bulletin. Iran promises 'everlasting consequences' for US bomb attacks Iran has lashed out at the United States following yesterday's dramatic attack on three of its nuclear facilities, calling the bombing the first salvo in 'a dangerous war' and a 'barbaric violation' of international law. On Twitter/X, foreign minister Abbas Araghchi warned of 'everlasting consequences' and said Tehran 'reserves all options' in responding to the strikes on Fordow, Isfahan and Natanz. The International Atomic Energy Agency said there has been 'no increase in off-site radiation levels' after the airstrikes. The US attack, carried out with long-range B-2 bombers and massive 'bunker buster' bombs, was announced by Donald Trump on Truth Social, followed by a brief speech from the White House in which he claimed Iran's 'nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated'. The airstrikes came after more than a week of Israeli attacks on Iran's military infrastructure and amid growing pressure on Trump to take a harder line. Iran's response will determine whether the conflict expands further across the region. NZ prepares evacuation mission New Zealand's official response has been cautious. 'Diplomacy will deliver a more enduring resolution than further military action,' said foreign minister Winston Peters, adding that this was the 'most serious' crisis he had dealt with, reports Glenn McConnell in The Post (paywalled). Prime minister Christopher Luxon, speaking just hours before the airstrikes, stressed that 'negotiation and diplomacy' were essential, rather than 'more military action that's going to make the region more destabilised and cause more catastrophe and more human suffering'. Peters and defence minister Judith Collins announced on Sunday that an NZDF C-130 Hercules and consular personnel were being sent to the Middle East to assist in the evacuation of New Zealand citizens once airspace across the region reopens. Approximately 180 New Zealanders remain in Iran and Israel, with vanishingly few options to safely leave. New Zealand diplomats in Tehran have already left via a road convoy of diplomats from across the world into Azerbaijan, north of Iran, reports Thomas Manch in The Post (paywalled). Nato summit plans disrupted by Middle East crisis This week's Nato summit in the Netherlands is now overshadowed by the spectre of war in Iran. According to a report in Politico, world leaders had planned to present a new pledge to increase defence spending to 5% of GDP, giving Trump a major victory. Now the strike on Iran, just days before the summit, is likely to dominate discussions and potentially splinter consensus. Luxon is currently in Belgium and will attend the summit to represent New Zealand, which is a Nato partner, not member. He said New Zealand would continue to 'advocate our values' and said the right response to the crisis in the Middle East 'cannot be more military action'. Luxon's somewhat 'unlucky' China trip The escalation in the Middle East caps off a fraught fortnight for the PM, whose first official trip to China was beset by geopolitical tension and some unfortunate timing, notes RNZ's Craig McCulloch. 'Luck was not on Christopher Luxon's side', he writes, pointing to news of the Cook Islands funding row – in which China plays a key role – becoming public 'right on the eve of Luxon's big sit-down with President Xi Jinping'. The long weekend back home was more bad timing, with 'all travelling media [noting] the paltry audience interest in the stories filed as they landed on the afternoon of the public holiday Matariki'. While Luxon will no doubt hail the China trip as a success, differences between the two nations remain. One example is the status of the new China Eastern route via Auckland, which Chinese officials have described as the Southern Link, an important step in China's controversial Belt and Road Initiative that finally connects China with South America, reports Thomas Coughlan in the Herald (paywalled). Luxon rejected that characterisation, calling it a 'commercial deal' between the airline and Auckland Airport. Agreeing to disagree likely works for both sides, writes Coughlan. 'China gets to proclaim New Zealand's support for a BRI project, while New Zealand can tell BRI-sceptics like the US that it's just a flight.'
