One of our members made the following submission on the Planning Bill and the Natural Environment Bill – which, if passed, will replace the Resource Management Act.
It’s not too late to make your own submission! The deadline is 4.30pm on Friday, 13 February 2026.
The separation of the RMA into 2 bills is liable to create conflicts between criteria.
In general I am worried by the reduced emphasis on environmental harm , including biodiversity issues, and exclusion of Mana Whenua concerns. Iwi and hapu hold local knowledge which may not be available to developers.
I applaud the clarification and imposition of limits to the effects of conctruction, eg noise, vibration, etc. However I am troubled that equally significant environmental and cultural issues are ignored.
The onus on local Councils is excessive – I have a concern about Council’s financial capacity to provide ‘relief’ to landowners if they impose protections to prevent development – such as biodiversity loss or serious impact on the character of land. Furthermore this provision could open the way for developers to profit from dishonest applications, and for Councils to be frightened into approvals. The idea is unjust, unfair and dangerous to the environment. New Zealanders should not have to pay to prevent harm to nature .
I disagree with the proposed limitation of notification of applications and consents to local stakeholders. When the applications have national impact it is appropriate for national notifications to be issued and input taken into account
Without clearer guidelines on environmental harm, and national input, the decision about what is a minor rather than a significant adverse effect may well be ill considered. Environmental law should have clear, direct rules that restrict damaging activities . There are clear science-based lits on the level of harm an environment can take, and we should not encourage lowering these limts.
My/our recommendations
I strongly recommend these bills be amended to include a strong focus on environmental and Mana Whenua considerations. I want to see science-based national perspectives on harm to nature from development in bills supporting development, and support of input from Mana Whenua.
I also strongly recommend the removal of requirement on Councils (ie local ratepayers) to provide compensation for refusals or curtailment of developments. I oppose the compensation regimes in both bills (Clauses: NEB 111 and 122; Planning Bill 92 and 105) and recommend they be removed entirely.
I oppose all barriers in the National Envionment Bill that make it hard for Councils to use direct rules, including clause 86 . I oppose the ecouragement to councils to set lower limits.
I propose inclusion of a method to curtail developments that are proving to be harmful once they are under way.
The Green Party has a submission guide you can use.
