Implications and opportunities for New Zealand’s Planning system following the new Coalition Government’s policy reform

After over four years of reform and considerable efforts across New Zealand implementing national direction under the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA), the new Coalition Government has signalled a significant change in direction for the planning system. Some key policies in the coalition agreements and the ‘100-day plan’ released on 29 November 2023 include:

• Repeal of the Natural and Built Environment Act (NBEA) and Spatial Planning Act (SPA) in the first 100 days of Government.
• Extensive and urgent reviews and amendments to existing national direction instruments, including freshwater, indigenous biodiversity, plantation forestry and renewable electricity generation.
• Streamlined Schedule 1 process for preparing plans under the RMA.
• Simplified planning system, including related statutes (such as the Reserves Act and Public Works Act).
• Amendments to the RMA to make it easier to consent infrastructure, renewable energy, farming, housing, and primary industries.
• Review of Section 8 of the RMA and the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi[1], replacing these with ‘specific words relating to the relevance and application of the Treaty’ or repealing the references entirely[2].
• Replacement of the RMA with new resource management laws “premised on the enjoyment of property rights as a guiding principle”.

Clearly this is an ambitious (and somewhat unclear) programme of work that has the potential to deliver some ‘wins’ for key sectors, such as infrastructure and renewable energy generation. However, this policy programme also needs to be carefully designed and implemented to deliver improved outcomes for the economy and the environment, while also avoiding taking backward steps on important environmental matters for New Zealand.

The desire to elevate property rights within the planning system is concerning for many reasons and warrants further consideration over a longer timeframe.

The need for certainty

Many in resource management and the planning profession in New Zealand may feel despondent at yet another (potentially transient) set of resource management reforms. While ongoing RMA amendments are certainly familiar to those working in the planning profession, there has been considerable work designing the ‘new’ resource management system which is now to be repealed only months after being enacted.

For the planning system to operate efficiently for all parties, certainty is needed. Ongoing changes to the resource management system and national direction require plans and policy documents to be re-reviewed (at significant cost) and add more uncertainty in the long term for developers (as the policy and rule framework under which they need to operate changes). Central Government should improve the RMA where needed, but not create more complexity or undertake reforms which will not stay the course in the long term.

There is also a need to improve the way national direction is developed and implemented to ensure it is more responsive able to be efficiently implemented by all parties.

Opportunities for improvement

Within this context, there has already been commentary along the lines of “don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater” with this next set of reforms, which we agree with. There are significant opportunities to draw on learnings from the development of NBEA and SPA (and the limitations of the existing RMA national direction) to improve the planning system, while addressing key areas of focus for the new Government. This appears to be recognised at least in part by the new Government, which will introduce a new fast-track consenting regime for new major infrastructure within its first 100 days following repeal of the NBEA.

In our view, when making amendments to the RMA and national direction, as signalled above, the new Government should consider the following:

• Focusing the planning system on achieving outcomes.
• Ensuring new and amended national direction (in the absence of a ‘National Planning Framework’,) improves integration, addresses inconsistencies (e.g. pathways for specified infrastructure), and better resolves conflicts upfront.
• Developing a more streamlined process for giving effect to national direction through plans, and ensuring this can more effectively influence consenting decisions.
• Drawing on learnings from recent policy development and engagement with industry, particularly on national direction for infrastructure and renewable energy.
• Including mechanisms for upholding obligations under te Tiriti o Waitangi through the resource management system.
• Requiring long term spatial planning, that is integrated with infrastructure planning.

We are continuing to stay well informed of the changes to the legislation and national policy, and are able to provide more detailed advice on implications and opportunities to our clients.

If you would like to discuss further, please reach out to Jerome Wyeth or Joanna Laurenson.

[1] Except if deemed to be “related to, or substantive to, existing full and final Treaty settlements”.

[2] It is worth noting that regardless of any amendment to section 8, the obligations on the Crown arising from Te Tiriti o Waitangi will be unchanged. The coalition agreements also commit the Government to honouring exiting Treaty settlements.