“Labour’s Natural and Built Environments (NBE) Act and Spatial Planning Act are a retread of the Resource Management Act. They even dusted off the same guy who did the RMA to design them,” says ACT Leader David Seymour.
“Labour’s Natural and Built Environments (NBE) Act and Spatial Planning Act are a retread of the Resource Management Act. They even dusted off the same guy who did the RMA to design them,” says ACT Leader David Seymour.
“Like Labour’s healthcare, polytechnic, and three waters reforms, the reforms are more focused on the administrative structure for Government employees than the outcome for people. Taking 100 plans down to 15 sounds great, but the content of these plans will be little changed because we are saying a change in administration rather than a change of principle.
“Centralisation is unpopular because it often fails. The reality of this reform is that a new and more centralised bureaucracy will write plans with different headings but the same basic content. Little really changes from the point of a property owner.
“Resource management is fundamentally flawed. It means the council decides what you do on your own land, so you’re always asking permission. Not much ends up getting done because there’s too much confusion over who has the right to develop and use which property.
“Too many people can object to too many things on too many grounds, even if they are not directly affected. For example Ports of Tauranga’s expansion is stalled by a cultural report. Yet according to Labour and National’s housing deal a three storey house can pop up next door with a floor to ceiling window on the third floor looking into your kid’s bedroom, and you can’t do a thing about it.
“ACT says that what we need is a property rights based system. The only rights people should have to object is if someone else’s actions are affecting your own property.
“Change is long overdue. The 900-page RMA is the single biggest obstacle to building the infrastructure for a better New Zealand.
“Unfortunately, the NBE Act repeats the mistakes of the past. It is not clear who has the right to do what on their land and who has the right to object. That means projects will still be held up by years of hearings, appeals, consultants’ reports, and iwi consultations.
“In the exposure draft of the NBE outcomes as vague and subjective as ensuring “the mana and mauri of the natural environment are protected and restored” are to be considered before issuing consents. Who gets to decide whether something you’re doing on your own private land is affecting the mana and mauri of it?
“Infrastructure providers spend almost $1.3 billion every year on consenting. That’s just for the consents, without building anything. For the average smaller project, like fixing a dangerous road, consenting costs account for almost 16 per cent of the total budget.
“If we want to get cheaper goods to market and more houses built for the next generation, we need to reduce government interference and allow Kiwis to maintain property rights. That is the only way we will realise our economic potential.”