Written By:
- Date published:
11:11 am, January 17th, 2026 - 10 comments
Categories: auckland supercity, chris bishop, Christopher Luxon, housing, local government, uncategorized -
Tags:
The Herald may have to reconsider the awarding of Chris Bishop of the mantle of being the politician of the year.
Because he has just had his arse handed to him by Christopher Luxon who has reversed Bishop’s proposed Plan Change 120 allowing for significant intensification in Auckland.
From Jonathan Killick at the Post:
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon is understood to have watered down controversial plans championed by Housing Minister Chris Bishop to intensify Auckland’s gentrified inner suburbs.
In a statement, Bishop confirmed “the Government is considering a range of options around housing capacity targets for Auckland and as Minister of Housing I will have more to say soon.”
The radical policy has been a bone of contention with National’s Auckland MPs, sparking fiery public meetings and opposition from some of the party’s staunchest supporters.
Auckland councillor – and former National MP Maurice Williamson – described it as a choice between “a lethal injection and a firing squad”.
In the background, sources say, have been secret negotiations involving Auckland mayor Wayne Brown and dissatisfied local MPs and coalition partners.
It comes as Aucklanders have submitted in droves on the controversial government mandated Plan Change 120 that would see zoning changes in the city to permit an additional two million homes – many of those in the previously-protected wealthy central suburbs.
One source close to the Government told The Post the backtrack was a Captain’s call by Luxon and reflected the pressure National’s Auckland MPs were feeling over the issue. Luxon was both “stamping his authority within the party” and demonstrating he had listened to Aucklanders.
Matthew Hooton has also commented on the issue and has this rather nuanced take on the politics:
National strategists say they realise the two million figure has become a lightning rod for criticism. They say a live option is to allow Auckland Council to include new capacity in the CBD, which is excluded for complicated legal reasons, in its growth projections. That, they argue, would have the net effect of lowering the intensification required in the suburbs and requiring it more in the areas that most people agree makes greatest sense. Others suggest that plans to extend the city’s boundaries with more greenfield developments are also likely to be dropped.
National and Wayne Brown would then be able to position intensification as being mainly about the central city’s rejuvenation when the new City Rail Link opens later this year – the construction of which has done so much to trash the central city’s economy and community over the last decade.
I suspect that Bishop’s attempted coup on Luxon last year is a major part of the motivation for Luxon’s captain’s call. Publicly humiliating an opponent and showing him who is boss always goes down well with National leaders.
Act’s campaigining against the proposal was also a factor. Ceding further ground to them in Auckland would not help National’s prospects.
And Act’s position is deeply cynical when you think about it. After all in the coalition agreement Act agreed to increase the housing supply and says that it is a supporter of property rights and an opponent of red tape. Except it appears when it affects property values in the inner city.
Auckland’s problem is that it resembles a donut with intensification happening in the poorer parts of the city well away from the centre and where density in the leafy inner suburbs is low. Bishop on this particular occasion is right in that major intensification around train stations in the inner city should occur. Well constructed cities are more sustainable and cheaper to run.
The announcement is particularly bizarre in that Auckland Council has been consulting on Plan Change 120 and feedback has just closed. I have not seen any analysis of the submissions received so far.
And Auckland Councillors have no idea what is going on and so far have been kept completely in the dark.
It is only four months ago that the Government legislated to allow Auckland Council to withdraw Plan Change 78. This plan change was introduced in August 2022 and was based on the Labour National urban development agreement reached in 2020 which National then welched on.
The situation is really messy. And Bishop’s reputation has been really dented.
I do not expect that Bishop will be ranked as politician of the year at the end of this year. Nor be a Minister.
Goodness me – a bunch of Remuera types suddenly discover that they have rail stations and high use bus roads.
Media reporting Luxon's reshuffle coming up means Bishop will lose some portfolios because he's overworked. Wondering if it will be Housing? Another (unsubstantiated) rumour I heard was Luxon was considering making Bishop Finance Minister. Shudder. Should be an interesting week but right now, all we can bet on is Luxon saying "Fixing the Basics, Building the Future" 100 thousand times as he gives his State of the Nation speech in that well known workers' hall, the Auckland Convention Centre.
Thanks I have seen that rumour about Willis. Would be good to verify.
Out in the West, we just want to see fairness. Thousands of intensified
Buildings have taken place, roads are now clogged with cars from owners and tenants who do not have garages.
We urgently need attention to the Glen Eden rail crossing used by thousands every day. The Fire Station, school and kindy are on the other side of the track. A list came out recently of safety treatments for rail crossings. Glen Eden did not even make the list.
If intensification continues as it is, we want the infrastructure to go wit it. It is all about being fair. I wonder if any Councillors and M.Ps from the West were at the secret meetings?
As one of the lowest density cities in the world with a very high rate of homelessness, it is the suburbs along the rail lines and Arterials that desperately need this plan change.
The astounding moral laziness of Auckland Council was only briefly tested under Ardern's massive public housing initiatives.
We built the rail stations. Now developers and their banks need the plan change signal to re-start the building of apartments and units by the tens of thousands.
May not be enough, but there's still building of apartments and townhouse-like blocks around Mt Eden. Some blocks within easy walking distance of Mt Eden Village eg in Grange Rd. There's an apartment block/s plus a commercial precinct being built on the corner of Valley & Dominion Roads.
This Omnishambles rolls on at NZ's expense.
New ferries would've been arriving, how many extra public houses would we have and in the places that help mitigate akl's congestion. facepalm.
I don't really know Auckland particularly, but….
Surely, we should have professional urban planners/ designers doing this stuff, NOT developers and politicians?
Europe has some really well designed cities, done by experts, where infrastructure, community facilities, transport, green spaces are all included. Oh, I wish.
I think it's prob a concerted, yet quiet, pressure campaign from the moneyed in Eastern suburbs and Grammar zones.
I think this is more a result of the need to win Auckland in the election, than it is any kind of 'utu' (as you call it).
Lux knows that in this game to succeed you have to keep your friends close and your enemies closer. He is not going to pick a fight with the guy who was almost universally considered the politician of 2026.
This is all about removing a potential attack line in this year's Auckland campaign, and as you have noted really blunts ACT's view on this.