Written By:
- Date published:
11:47 am, December 10th, 2025 - 13 comments
Categories: uncategorized -
Tags:
Opinion/Analysis:
Last night, I watched incredulously as former Newstalk ZB Political Editor Jason Walls provided the filing on Chris Bishop’s “once in a lifetime” RMA reform for 1News.
I thought it was a lightweight report from start to finish, sounding more like a government press release than anything resembling journalism. Very little substantive information was proferred, and precisely zero air time was given to opposition leaders for comment, including Marama Davidson, Chlöe Swarbrick and Chris Hipkins. (In contrast 3 News offered time for all)
But it was when Jason Walls came fully on screen that it hit me. This wasn’t journalism. This was full on propaganda.
Walls enthusiastically touted the so-called benefits of the RMA, citing paid for consultancy Infometrics (home of market adherent and one time National Party MP aspirant Brad Olsen) on cost savings, touted as $3 billion a year.
He spent limited, valuable air time to get excited about the # of pages in the RMA (744) and the number of press releases Bishop issued on the day to help journalists absorb it – as if that was supposed to meaningfully inform Kiwis on anything at all.
Walls sidestepped the significant issues at play, including passing elements of the bill under urgency with effectively negligible time for opposition parties to review and react – nor for experts to provide meaningful feedback – despite its bulk and significance.
And how it would effectively intimidate and hamstring Councils into non-action. Our biodiversity and the natural environment will likely be big losers, while developers and big money will hold sway.
The RMA effectively breathes ACT’s damaging, American style Regulatory Standards Bill into life.
The law and details, as issued, is also peak Chris Bishop.
Conceal details. Control the narrative. Issue large amounts of information to ensure your points are repeated by media. Gain favourable attention while people around scramble to understand the details and impacts.
Bishop did the same for his “Kāinga Ora reset plan” which by the time journalists had time to filter through it all, equated to an effective fire sale of state assets and cessation of state house builds while 20,000 languish on the register.
To ensure I wasn’t being unduly unfair in my assessment, I watched the Stuff/3 News broadcast as a contrast – and it was a much more well rounded, robust and informative piece.
In my opinion, Jason Walls isn’t demonstrating that he is in any way attempting to undertake journalism, and his presentations consistently sound more like National Party favourable press releases than any genuine attempt to inform the public, to me.
I didn’t expect a lot from a former Newstalk ZB Political Editor who unrelentingly supports Israel and Chris Bishop and frequently badgered and attacked Ardern over Covid, but I couldn’t be more disappointed – he’s turned 1News business reports into Newstalk ZB quality.
And that’s not good for us.
One of the touted benefits of the new RMA is that it will do away with “unnecessary consents” but as The Post reports:
The law as it is, is already very permissive, with almost 99% of activities in certain years non-notified (i.e. do not need to be publicised and are fast-tracked through the consenting process).
Today’s rules could even double the number of activities that are non-notified, which “won’t just have environmental consequences, but also cultural and social consequences for those people who will never get to even hear about the developments that are being proposed”..
Bishop’s manipulative manner of controlling information, and then rushing it under urgency, is fundamentally anti-democratic because it leaves Kiwis with inaccurate impressions and little to no recourse in genuine understanding/exploring.
An unscientific survey on Stuff showed 39% of respondents said they were still trying to understand what it all meant, but 43% believing it was already a “good thing”.
We often criticise or laugh at propaganda countries which control media outlets and information.
But in New Zealand, politicians like Chris Bishop ensure it is done by stealth.
One of the most frequent criticisms of the damaging, far reaching Regulatory Standards Bill was that it would chill good law making, hamstring Councils and governments, and give property rights precedence over community, people culture, and the environment.
Its fundamental principle is that property owners have foremost rights. That effectively means for example, Peter Thiel’s next bunker is unstoppable, McDonalds can build wherever they want whenever they want (and they know it), and developers can run quite roughshed over Councils, communities, environment, people, and Māori rights. i.e. it significantly expands their powers.
During the RSB process, David Seymour and his supporters frequently challenged arguments from individuals such as Jane Kelsey and Dame Ann Salmond who pointed out that regulatory takings i.e. compensating property owners should their rights be impinged, would become a reality.
They said that no such provision applied, and indeed Newsroom even quoted law academic Eddie Clark echoing that sentiment (Note: Clark did strongly oppose the RSB, but did not believe the RSB explicitly spoke about compensating property owners. I disagreed with Clark at the time.)
Now, as we can we see in the RMA, Chris Bishop breathes the entire supposedly non-existent condition – and the full spirit of the Regulatory Standards Bill – into life via this RMA
Councils will likely have to compensate property owners if their development is impinged or inhibited.
Think of Auckland Council having to pay if they declined the Mowbray’s helicopter pad, or Queenstown Council compensating Peter Thiel and McDonalds.
The law provides scope to force councils to compensate forestry owners if they are made to clear slash etc.
Dystopia is here, and it’s as quiet as a whisper. It’s not so much that we can’t have changes that push us towards American market values and ideas of liberty if Kiwis so wanted, and efficiency/common sense is always valued, but the nefarious, secretive ways in which it has been conducted, is both irksome and highly troublesome.
The use of urgency is abuse by National.
It’s hard to discern whether Labour’s response is because it’s masked by figures such as Jason Walls, who is undeniably Newstalk ZB style in my view, or if Labour’s desire for maturity and appearing reasonable has tempered its style.
Hipkins may be “safe” as the Labour leader, as reported on TVNZ last night, and I appreciate his thoughtfulness and intelligence and that he has shepherded Labour well, unitedly, and strongly through tempestuous waters, but Labour, the Greens and even the beleaugured Te Pāti Māori party leaders should be front and centre with information that helps counter the misleading statements of this government – and to help explain the impacts of this law.
It’s not an easy job but someone’s got to do it, and what Kiwis seek is the formula of passion and intellect.
Thanks Mountain Tui for your comprehensive update on the RMA 'reforms' and related NAct1 ('government' by and for the sorted) propaganda. My focus is more on agriculture.
Tbh, I'm struggling with the notion of letting "farmers and growers get on with doing what they do best" "while protecting the environment."
I mean, we know that big bits of NZ Aotearoa's clean green 100% pure environment have been ruined by primary industries (#not_all_farmers), so I'm looking forward to seeing how the new bills will assist those industries to shrink their ecological footprints.
Bit of a dilemma though, ain't it – to shrink ecological footprints, and grow Grow GROW!
But who needs Ecan et al. anyway – bunch of green banshees! https://www.ecan.govt.nz/
https://maps.greenpeace.org/maps/aotearoa/know-your-nitrate/
https://www.auckland.ac.nz/en/news/2025/07/09/no-space-for-economic-growth-as-we-know-it.html
You can't have growth without trashing the environment. The government's reference to environmental protection is just window dressing.
NZ's environmental assets are public property, but the RMA reforms make private property rights sacred. But there is no need to be concerned about public property such as water because that will soon be privatised.
Thomas Keneally, in his book "A Bloody Good Rant" (Allen & Unwin, 2021) writes that in 2005 a development at all prices gang emerged in NSW's Labor Party. This group comprised ministers who would later be investigated, disgraced and (in some cases) jailed for corruption, Eddie Obeid being one. Obeid made $30 million from rigging mining licence tenders.
The stage is set for a similar play to be enacted in NZ.
Yeah, great stuff, when you join up 2 dots:
So grabbing the missing 1%, we get $3 billion a year. No wonder the treasury boffins got the Nat/Lab duo drooling in anticipation. Hipkins is likely to issue another "All good."
The old RMA was supposed to balance the interests of development with those of the environment.
It didn't.
It nade well planned large scale urban development the preserve of a super-rich elite and the state itself.
I'd like to build a deck without $50k of Resource Consent, and this enables it.
What must be killed is the Fast Track 2025 legislation. That shit is evil.
Mate, you are being ripped off if you pay $50,000 for a resource consent for a deck. Generally, there are lots of myths about the Resource Management Act causing delays and costs – look into it and often it is either scaremongering or the consequence of a poor application. Cheers.
That just hasn't been the experience of people I know. And I'm sure yours was smooth as silk and cheap as sacking.
In 2018 I applied for a Land Use Consent under the RMA. The most expensive part was the Architect who prepared the building plans and the land use plans. That had to happen anyway. There is an overland flow path on the site so I needed a Hydrology report from an Engineer.
I wrote my own Land Use application which was required because of the flow path and the fact that the site is in a Special Character Area. If I had employed a Planner to do it there would have been something over $1,000 for that work.
The Lodgment fee for Council Planning assessment was $2,500. That is the deposit with extra charged if the application takes longer to process.
I had the Land Use Consent processed in 11 days and I got a $900 refund on the Lodgment fee. I gave them everything they needed to do the process quickly with no requirement for additional information.
The Lodgment fee these days is $6,000, and again, the processing time determines the final cost. If you give the Planners and the Engineers everything they need and you are not in breach of half the Plan it can be done quickly.
The main complainers are those who don't do their research, employ non qualified people for their Planning work, and expect to be able to build Windsor Castle on a 700m2 site
Pleased to see someone else doesn't think much of Jason Wall. He's the new version of Jessica Mutch-McKay (shudder) arrived just in time to guide us through election year. Labour have a tough job ahead with such blatant COC cheerleading.
As for the RMA repeal, there appears to be nothing about neighbourhoods, communities, climate adaptation, civil defence, transport and infrastructure, community facilities or council responsibilities for these. Not that I have read the whole damn thing.
Private property doesn't exist as a silo!
It is part of a neighborhood, part of a community, the places that reflect our values back at us and how we connect and thrive together.
I just…. I just… it beggars belief.
Welcome to the libertarian way so people better pay attention or they'll end up with alot more then helicopters to contend with.
Hang on… if there’s a rates cap to be, who pays for all the court cases and compensation to the aggrieved opportunistics to paraphrase, “ What are you aggrieved about? “ “ Whatta got! “ offshore vastly wealthy entities. Well fuck them, it’s you and me and every poor bastard struggling to pay his rates. Bishop is a Trump like grifter, lining up the likeliest to fund Tory war chests.
The coalition is backed by Atlas and others seeking a return on their investment…. corrupt as bro.
I saw a hilarious comment on my SM feed regarding the abolition of the RMA. Apologies to whoever wrote it, I have lost the piece to give credit, but it's worth being spread.
Paraphrasing.
GREAT! Now I can go ahead and build my guillotine factory!!
Superb post Tui. Especially where you emphasize the planning provisions in Bishop's RMA replacement will enable the landowner compensation provisions contained in the RSB,
You are right that under the new planning laws Peter Thiel's bunker would sail through with no public input and no right of appeal.
But it is much much worse than that. Thiel could apply for several blocks of apartments on his sensitive lakeside land "carefully designed and sensitively located in the landscape"***
The Queenstown Lakes District Council would wave the apartments application through because the environmental rules in the new planning law are weak and because IF THEY REFUSED CONSENT THEY WOULD BE REQUIRED TO PAY THIEL $50-$100 MILLION IN COMPENSATION FOR REFUSING CONSENT,
The QLDC deputy mayor sfated publicly last week that the new planning legislation may well bankrupt the QLDC.
WHY IS NOBODY REPORTING THIS?
***They will stick a couple of shrubs in front and use schist features and claim ridiculously that the apartments will be almost invisible.