The July newsletter focuses on local government amalgamation, the digitalisation of the transport system, as well as surveillance technologies being installed on and around roads.

Councils around the country are rushing to get their “Head Start” amalgamation proposals into Central Government before the 09 August 2026 deadline, as the wider amalgamation program faces increased criticism.

Hamilton City Councillor Graeme Mead provides an opinion piece on the new Peacocke suburb. He highlights the huge cost, the huge debt, the slim chances of recovering those infrastructure development costs, and the lack of accountability.

New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA) has a number of documents out for consultation, with feedback closing on early August (7^th and 12^th). The first set of documents are the draft standards and specifications for NZTA’s “intelligent transport systems” (ITS).

The general public is probably not the target audience for these technical documents, though they provide insight into the various cameras, sensors, and detectors being installed around New Zealand’s roads.

The second consultation is about proposals to “modernise NZTA services” and introduce digital driver licenses, as well as completely digital versions of various certificates, warrants of fitness, and vehicle registrations.

Concerns are growing in New Zealand about datacentres, especially as large facility has been approved to be built near Invercargill. The planned datacentre is expected to consume 280 MW of power from the grid.

For this month’s international perspective, we check back in on the growing opposition to Flock surveillance cameras in the United States.

Links are provided to other open consultations, petitions, and events at the end of this newsletter.

LOCAL GOVERNMENT AMALGAMATION REFORMS FACE TROUBLES

Councils around New Zealand are rushing towards the 09 August 2026 deadline for sending “Head start” amalgamation proposals into central government. Some councils are having their last discussions and/or votes on amalgamation proposals this week.

Although some neighbouring councils are keen on amalgamation, many others are opposed to either amalgamation or the rushed process…or both.

At a public forum on amalgamation, Waitomo Mayor John Robertson stated that Waitomo and Ōtorohanga were keen to merge due to shared history and being a similar size with existing shared services. (According to Robertson, both councils have a similar amount of debts at around $10 million each, in contrast to Hamilton City which is still approaching $1 billion… despite Hamilton transferring considerable debt to the new water CCO named IAWAI).

There are not going to be many Head Start proposals put into government by August 9 because it’s just too hard…

Waitomo Mayor John Robertson as quoted by Mary Anne Gill in Localism shapes reform, Cambridge News, 30 July 2026.

According to RNZ, Tararua Mayor Scott Gilmore clashed with Local Government Minister Simon Watts about whether central government was softening its stance towards forced amalgamations of councils, indicating that the “Back stop” will be a collaborative process.

The way that local government works best is when the people that are close to the action are participating in the decision-making. And you know, when you look at having a huge geographical area, a mass amalgamation, it’s going to be really difficult to put that in there.

Tararua Mayor Scott Gilmore as quoted by Russell Palmer in Minister shuts down mayor’s claim of softening stance on local body amalgamation, RNZ, 30 July 2026.

Dunedin City Council appears reluctant to merge with with other Otago councils… and the feeling appears to be mutual. The Upper Hutt Mayor Peri Zee does not want to join a Wellington supercity, with reports of a leaked email that likened the amalgamation to “co-opting them against their will”.

Selwyn Councillors are pushing back at central government, with the council appearing to favour being a standalone entity rather than being part of a larger merger.

There needs to be some pushback at the government, I feel it's an unmandated directive that's causing quite a lot of chaos and a lot of work for people.

Selwyn Councillor Denise Carrick as quoted by Anna Sargent in Govt’s amalgamation plans ‘causing quite a lot of chaos’ - Selwyn councillors , RNZ, 15 July 2026.

Selwyn Mayor Lydia Gliddon has expressed concerns with the short timeframe for proposals, the risk that the district could could be divided up between rural and urban areas, and the risk of the district’s fate being decided by others.

If we're not at the table we're on the menu and I'm not sure our community wants us to be on the menu. I think that we should be the maker and shaper of our own future.

Selwyn Mayor Lydia Gliddon as quoted by Anna Sargent in Govt’s amalgamation plans ‘causing quite a lot of chaos’ - Selwyn councillors , RNZ, 15 July 2026.

Central North Island iwi have proposed a merger and redrawing of council boundaries called “Te Kāhui Maunga”.

The iwi proposal, known as Te Kāhui Maunga, was developed by iwi that have settled their Treaty claims and covers the areas currently served by the Ruapehu, Whanganui, Taupō and Rangitīkei district councils.

The concept was presented to a council and iwi partners workshop last week and then formally introduced at community meetings in Raetihi and Taumarunui.

Presenting the proposal, Ruapehu district councillor Kuru Ketu described Te Kāhui Maunga (the cluster of mountains) as an iwi-led approach to amalgamation centred on the central plateau’s mountains, the rivers flowing from them, and the communities that rely on those landscapes.

Moana Ellis, Iwi proposal would reshape councils around mountains and rivers, RNZ, 28 July 2026.

RNZ released a roundup today, summarising where different councils have indicated they are heading regarding amalgamation proposals. It is looking complicated with many conflicting proposals from different councils which share the same regions.

The NZ Herald published a paywalled article from “former chief executive of the Free Speech Union (NZ), an Act Party supporter and donor” Jonathan Ayling. The article argues that amalgamation will not address one of the major problems with local government which he calls the “democratic void”.

Officials, regulators and privileged stakeholders do not formally make the decisions. But they often control the frameworks, procedures and acceptable options within which elected representatives operate…

…Structural reforms must therefore be accompanied by governance reform. Elected members need access to independent advice, genuine control over strategic priorities and the institutional capacity to challenge the options placed before them.

Much of this requires cultural reform, not simply policy change.

Jonathan Ayling, Who governs local government?, NZ Herald, 30 July 2026.

Hamilton City Council is holding a council meeting on 06 August 2026, to decide if they put in a “Head start” proposal. The two favoured options being put forward by staff appear to be “a West Waikato unitary proposal which includes the boundary areas of Hamilton City Council; Waikato District Council; Waipā District Council; South Waikato District Council; Ōtorohanga District Council; Waitomo District Council; Taupō District Council” or not putting in a “Head start” proposal and instead preparing for the “Back stop“ process.

The Thursday meeting agenda and amalgamation option documents for Hamilton City Council can be accessed here:

https://hamilton.govt.nz/your-council/meetings/calendar/detail/ordinary-council-202608060930

HAMILTON’S NEW PEACOCKE SUBURB AND THE HUGE CITY DEBT

Hamilton City Councillor Graeme Mead provides an opinion piece about the new Peacocke suburb built on the south-east side of Hamilton City.

OPINION: Peacocke — The Billion‑Dollar Suburb Hamilton Built Before the Houses Arrived

A significant portion of Hamilton City’s public debt is associated with the Peacocke suburb and it is a clear example of how the “growth will pay for growth” mantra is failing the City.

Hamilton built a bridge to a new suburb.
The suburb didn’t come. Peacocke once promoted as the city’s flagship growth area, was meant to deliver thousands of homes and pay for itself through development contributions and new rates. Instead, the combined cost of Council investment, Government support, and developer spending is now tracking toward $1 billion, while only a few hundred homes exist on the ground .

The infrastructure is real.
The cost is real.
The houses are not.

Hamilton City Councillor Graeme Mead, Peacocke — The Billion‑Dollar Suburb Hamilton Built Before the Houses Arrived, republished 01 August 2026.

CityWatch NZ has not yet published much on the Peacocke suburb, though contributors to the website have been collecting information and investigating the situation for many years. It is a major story at the intersection of may issues CityWatch NZ covers, including: 20-minute city designs, anti-motor vehicle road features, massive council debts, private land seizures, higher-density housing agenda, excessively expensive infrastructure, and lack of transparency (and/or deception). A case can be made that the extreme debt levels acquired to pay for Peacocke was used as a justification to force Hamilton City into transferring water services to the new IAWAI company.

Peacocke, our southern greenfield growth cell, saw significant infrastructure projects completed in 2024 with a new wastewater transfer station and the opening of Te Ara o Pekapeka bridge. These two projects are key to unlocking growth in the second and largest stage of the Peacocke growth cell.

In 2025, a total of 59 sections were consented across the growth cell (about 6% of all the sections consented across Hamilton). There were 100 new homes consented for Peacocke in 2025, above the average of 66 dwellings per year. Most of these dwellings were located in Peacocke Stage 1.

Peacocke will eventually be home to about 20,000 people. We expect about 6300 homes in the area by 2041, with capacity to grow to a total of 7400 homes by about 2050.

Page 36, 2025 Hamilton Annual Economic Report, Hamilton City Council

NZTA SEEKS FEEDBACK ON INTELLIGENT TRANSPORT SYSTEMS AND DIGITAL COMPLIANCE CHECKS

New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA) has a set of standards and specifications documents for its “intelligent transport systems” (ITS) and is requesting feedback on the draft versions.

The target audience for these technical documents is likely to be the installers and operators of various technologies.

However, the general public can comment on these documents. Feedback closes on 7 August 2026 and can be accessed at the link below.

https://nzta.govt.nz/partners/maintenance-and-operations/intelligent-transport-systems/its-s-and-s-documents-consultation

This could provide a opportunity to express your concerns about the increasing amount of surveillance technology being deployed in public areas as well as concerns regarding privacy violations, abusive uses of the technology, and cybersecurity vulnerabilities.

For those interested in the Internet of Things (IoT) and smart cities, these draft standards and specifications provide information about the official situation in New Zealand, and the various types of technologies being deployed. Sensors and detectors range cover a wide range of technologies and use cases, including air pollution monitoring and in-road sensors to detect vehicles stopped at traffic lights. Other detector technologies covered in the drafts include LiDAR, Radar, infrared, microwave, thermal cameras, automatic number plate recognition (ANPR) cameras, and sensors which detect Bluetooth signals from the devices of travellers. Some of these technologies can be associated with privacy concerns and potential for abuse.

Two of the draft documents were prepared by WSP (a multinational professional services firm, partner of the Helen Clark Foundation and The Spinoff, publisher of reports such as “20-min City in Aotearoa”). These two drafts are the “Detector Design Standard” and the “Communication Infrastructure Standard”.

The Australasian transport research entity named NTRO and an Australian consultant (ACAD Services) produced the “CCTV Camera Interface Standard” draft. Engineering consultancy firm BECA produced the “Programmable Logic Controllers (PLC) Specification” draft.

From the perspective of addressing privacy concerns, the documents are mixed. The draft documents do contain restrictions on retaining numberplate metadata, orders to disable the biometrics and facial recognition capabilities on cameras, cybersecurity hardening to reduce hacking risks, and mentions that the tracking of people’s Bluetooth devices is anonymised.

However, the draft documents also contain a number of concerning parts that indicate that privacy protections could be weak, conditional, and easily switched off. Number plate and vehicle metadata will be collected and stored from the cameras used for compliance enforcement. Bluetooth detectors will be used to analyse “origin–destination patterns”, meaning that they will be trying to track individual devices and the data can likely be used to find out where many individuals live and work. The firmware on detection sensors “shall be remotely upgradable” in the draft standard, which raises concerns that privacy protections could be one remote update away from being removed in the future.

The “Detector Design Standard” draft states that: “Any vendor labels or labels identifying the sensors on its exterior (such as brand, manufacturer name, or type) shall be removed or covered”. This raises concerns that the public will not easily be able to find out what technology is being installed, what capabilities and vulnerabilities are associated which that device, or which foreign governments might have backdoor access via the brand’s manufacturing and supply chain.

There is a reference in the “Detector Design Standard” draft to the need to protect detectors from wildlife, especially in “alpine locations“. This indicates that kea attacks might be a real threat to the cameras and sensors.

The “Detector Design Standard” draft also adopts a definition of “intrusive detectors” as sensors that are physically intrusive to pavement, rather than those sensors which are intrusive to the privacy of people. The older types of detectors installed on, or inside, the road such as induction loops, pneumatic tubes, and pressure sensors generally provide greater privacy than the higher-tech sensors mounted above the roads.

Intrusive vs non-intrusive

Intrusive detectors are sensors installed on or within the pavement such as loops and magnetometers.

Non-intrusive detectors are technologies that are installed on poles, overhead gantries, or mounted on the side of the road such as video, radar or microwave sensors.”

The “Communication Infrastructure Standard” draft contains details about how standard fibre optic data cables can be repurposed as acoustic sensors to measure noises near roadways. This technology is called Distributed Acoustic Sensing (DAS) and the benevolent use-case would be listening for early-morning truck crashes and promptly alerting ambulance and emergency crews. More malevolent use-cases might depend on whether the technology can also detect when footpath users are making comments that various politicians find unacceptable.

The other major NZTA consultations in August involve changes to driver licences as well as plans to offer more digital and online versions of NZTA services.

Feedback is open until 12 August 2026, links below:

https://nzta.govt.nz/projects-and-consultations/have-your-say/current-consultations/graduated-driver-licensing-system-requirements-for-supervised-driving-hours-for-time-reduction

https://nzta.govt.nz/projects-and-consultations/have-your-say/current-consultations/proposed-changes-to-modernise-nzta-services

The proposed changes to “modernise NZTA services” include:

• Online theory tests for driver licences.

• NZTA can request additional documentation for assessing overseas licence conversion applications.

• Electronic driver licenses will be issued and drivers will be able to present electronic licenses instead of physical licences.

• Removing “the need to display physical licences and labels on vehicles where checks can be done electronically”.

These reforms will be welcomed by those wishing that their “compliance status” will eventually be checked and confirmed digitally.

“The change won’t happen all at once. We’ll introduce electronic alternatives to licences and labels gradually. Until an electronic alternative for a licence or label is available, the physical licence or label must continue to be displayed.

These proposals do not change the requirement to register and licence vehicles or meet vehicle inspection requirements (WoF or CoF). What would change is how vehicle information is managed and accessed. Compliance status could be recorded, checked and confirmed digitally, rather than relying on a physical licence or label.

These changes offer more choice. You can continue to use a physical driver licence and display labels on your vehicle when the digital options become available.

Privacy protections remain in place, with strict limits on how information is collected, used, and shared.”

Consultation summary: Proposed changes to modernise NZTA services, NZTA, 16 July 2026.

CONCERNS ABOUT DATAGRID’S PLANS FOR A DATACENTRE NEAR INVERCARGILL

Concerns are growing in New Zealand about datacentres and the potential negative impacts. The Datagrid corporation has resource consents to build a large datacentre near Invercargill.

With the planned datacentre expected to consume 280MW of power, that represents approximately 8% of the South Island’s total electricity generation capacity. The large size of the permitted groundwater take for the datacentre has also caused concern, despite Datagrid claiming that they will use rainwater for cooling instead of groundwater.

“Singapore-based company Datagrid was given 10 resource consents this year for an AI factory in Southland, that included the ability to draw more than 600,000 litres of groundwater every day and to discharge some 5000 litres of treated wastewater.

Expected to open in 2028, the 78,000 square metre AI factory in Makarewa was tracking to become the second single biggest user of electricity behind the aluminium smelter at Tiwai Point, near Bluff.

Chairperson of a climate change research group at Water New Zealand, engineer Evan Vaughters, told Nine to Noon, the sheer scale of water the consents allow the data centre to use meant there could be long term unforeseen consequences and the consents did not provide for the kind of monitoring needed to assess this.

But Datagrid said it would not use any groundwater - preferring rainwater when needed. Vaughters agreed technologies pointed to the fact the centre would primarily use rainwater harvesting but he said it begged the question, why were the consents needed if that were the case.

The volumes consented for, 600,000 litres a day from a groundwater reserve was high, Vaughters said, and would be about the amount a town the size of Kaikōura would run on.”

Massive Southland data centre’s water consent concerns engineer, RNZ, 20 July 2026.

The Green Party has called for a one-year moratorium on new datacentres.

Southland Sustainable Resource Coalition, a local group opposing the datacentre, hoped that other parties would consider the same policy and look at this “humongous potential crisis”.

We don’t want something that is taking massive resources out of our community without putting anything back in, and it’s just the non-notified consent process where everybody finds out after the paperwork’s signed and sealed, it’s just not good enough,

Southland Sustainable Resource Coalition Organiser Kelly Blomfield as quoted by Samantha Gee in Data centre opponents welcome Greens policy, warn of ‘potential crisis’, RNZ, 27 July 2026.

BACKLASH AGAINST FLOCK SURVEILLANCE CAMERAS GROWS IN THE UNITED STATES

Over the last two years in the United States there has been a rapid increase in the installation of numberplate-reading surveillance cameras. Many of these cameras are systems and devices from the Flock company. City councils and local police departments install the cameras to watch roads and streets, logging vehicle movements.

In the US, these types of cameras are called Automated License Plate Readers (ALPRs) with AI-image analysis often used to log data about vehicle movements. In New Zealand the term Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) is more often used.

CityWatch NZ covered this issue in June 2025 and now it is time for an update on the situation.

Opposition to the ever-increasing surveillance system is growing in the United States. This is happening across the political spectrum with many groups involved in various campaigns against the surveillance cameras.

Deflock.org runs a website where individuals can help crowd-source a online map to track camera locations. They encourage people to “raise concerns in your community, build a group of advocates, and petition the city council not to extend the contract”.

Deflock.org highlights the following dangers of the surveillance system:

• “Privacy Violations: ALPRs track your movements and store your data for long periods of time, creating a detailed record of your location history”.

• “Risk of Misuse: Data from ALPRs has led to wrongful arrests, profiling, and stalking ex-partners by police officers.”

• “Limited Benefits: There’s no substantial evidence that ALPRs effectively prevent crime, despite Flock’s unethical attempts to prove otherwise.”

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the Electronic Frontier Foundation have reportedly joined a legal case against the City of Norfolk, Virginia using the Flock surveillance system to track drivers.

Others have been taking more direct action by removing, damaging, or destroying Flock cameras. This has also created a social media trend of videos where individuals sarcastically (or earnestly) explain in videos that you should not use the these specific tools and techniques against Flock cameras.

In 2025, the Flock CEO Garrett Langley described Deflock as a “terroristic organization” in an interview with Forbes. This comment by the CEO was specifically directed at an organisation providing information to the public and encouraging non-violent participation in city council meetings to advocate for the canceling of commercial contracts. The popular social media trend of destroying and disabling Flock cameras appears to have largely followed, not preceded, the CEO’s 2025 “terroristic organization” comments.

Langley offers a prediction: In less than 10 years, Flock’s cameras, airborne and fixed, will eradicate almost all crime in the U.S. (He acknowledges that programs to boost youth employment and cut recidivism will help.) It sounds like a pipe dream from another AI-can-solve-everything tech bro, but Langley, in the face of a wave of opposition from privacy advocates and Flock’s archrival, the $2.1 billion (2024 revenue) police tech giant Axon Enterprise, is a true believer. He’s convinced that America can and should be a place where everyone feels safe. And once it’s draped in a vast net of U.S.-made Flock surveillance tech, it will be.

Thomas Brewster, AI Startup Flock Thinks It Can Eliminate All Crime In America, Forbes, 03 September 2025.

OPEN INVITATION FOR OPINION PIECES

Do you have ideas to improve local government?

Are you part of a group that is pushing back against council overreach in your town or city?

CityWatch NZ is looking for articles on a range of issues and from around the country.

If you are interested in volunteering an opinion piece for CityWatch NZ, or know of someone who can write well, email content@citywatchnz.org for more information.

OPEN CONSULTATIONS, PETITIONS, AND EVENT NOTICES

“FRAMEWORK THAT FORMALLY ADDRESSES WILFUL DECEPTION BY ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES” PETITION

CLOSES 11:59PM MONDAY 10 AUGUST 2026

The petition can be found at this link…

https://petitions.parliament.nz/f9192080-e97d-4004-2981-08de6832301e?lang=en

The petition text is copied below…

Petition request

That the House of Representatives establish a framework that formally addresses wilful deception by elected representatives acting in an official capacity.

Petition reason

Public trust in democratic institutions depends on good faith communication by those exercising public power. While I think New Zealand maintains strong truthfulness standards across many areas of public responsibility, I believe there is no framework addressing situations where elected representatives, acting in an official capacity, knowingly provide false or materially misleading statements of fact. I feel Parliament should consider how that gap should be addressed to strengthen public trust.

NEW ZEALAND TAXPAYERS’ UNION’S “STOP DOUBLE-CHARGING AND KEEP ROAD TOLLING FAIR” PETITION

The petition can be found at this link…

https://www.taxpayers.org.nz/petition_tolling?

The petition text is copied below…

I call on the Government to amend the Land Transport (Revenue) Amendment Bill to clearly define corridor tolling, ensure road tolling only pays for new roads, and keep tolling fair, voluntary, and genuinely user-pays.

“INTRODUCE MANDATORY TRANSPARENCY AND REGULATION FOR POLITICAL LOBBYING IN NZ” PETITION

CLOSES FRIDAY 07 AUGUST 2026 AT 11.59PM NZST

The petition can be found at this link…

https://petitions.parliament.nz/22de6272-7c91-4bc2-2c80-08de8ead923a?lang=en

The petition text is copied below…

Petition request

That the House of Representatives pass legislation to establish a mandatory public register of lobbyists, require proactive disclosure of meetings with Ministers and officials, and implement a “cooling-off” period for former Ministers and senior officials.

Petition reason

NZ lacks a mandatory lobbying register, unlike many OECD countries. I feel a perceived “revolving door” between government and lobbying firms creates integrity risks and undermines public trust, while any hidden meetings between decision-makers and well-funded interests could create an unfair imbalance of influence. In my view, voluntary codes are insufficient, and a statutory framework is required to ensure consistent, mandatory accountability and transparency across the industry.

“CHANGE THE LOCATION OF THE PROPOSED SOUTHERN WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT” PETITION

CLOSES TUESDAY 22 SEPTEMBER 2026 AT 11.59PM NZST

The petition can be found at this link…

https://petitions.parliament.nz/0b4a606c-31be-4d00-82b8-08deccc5b9b0?lang=en

The petition text is copied below…

Petition request

That the House of Representatives urge IAWAI to change the location of the proposed Southern Wastewater Treatment Plant.

Petition reason

I believe that Hamilton City Council and IAWAI have ignored the voices of mana whenua and our local community directly affected. I disagree with the site preferred by IAWAI. In my view, relocation of the proposed plant is a necessary step towards preserving and protecting our environmental integrity, water, forest, both flora and fauna, local community, identity, history, cultural heritage, and historical site of Ngāti Ngamurikaitaua, Nukuhau Pā.

”INDEPENDENT REVIEW OF DIGITAL IDENTIFICATION SYSTEMS” PETITION

CLOSES WEDNESDAY 30 SEPTEMBER 2026 AT 11.59PM NZST

The petition can be found at this link…

https://petitions.parliament.nz/c0c80f58-f8c3-4ef8-21d6-08de036dbf3a?lang=en

The petition text is copied below…

Petition request

That the House of Representatives urge the Government to commission an independent review of privacy, security, and civil-liberty risks in digital ID systems, and to suspend plans for any centralised or mandatory digital ID until full public consultation occurs.

Petition reason

I believe that centralised digital IDs could enable tracking, profiling, or data misuse, threatening privacy, freedom, and resilience. In my opinion, an independent review should assess impacts under the Privacy Act 2020 and NZ Bill of Rights Act 1990. Until then, I believe the Government must pause any rollout or funding.

”DO NOT INTRODUCE DIGITAL ID CARDS” PETITION

CLOSES SUNDAY 04 OCTOBER 2026 AT 11.59PM NZST

The petition can be found at this link…

https://petitions.parliament.nz/050a6461-ddb5-4d68-f5de-08de02cc4270?lang=en

The petition text is copied below…

Petition request

That the House of Representatives urge the Government not to introduce a digital ID card system into New Zealand.

Petition reason

We believe a digital ID system would threaten Kiwi privacy, freedoms, and fairness by centralising sensitive data, and risking exclusion of the elderly, disabled, rural, and low-income communities. We think this would be a step towards mass surveillance and digital control, and that no one should be forced or financially coerced to register with a state-controlled ID system. We call on Parliament to reject digital ID which we believe would protect New Zealanders’ human rights and democracy.

Posting of event information, petition information, consultation viewpoints, or other content on the CityWatch NZ newsletter or website does not constitute endorsement of those views by CityWatch NZ or its editors. This section is often based on information readers have sent to us on issues they think are important or checks of government websites for broadly-relevant consultations.

If there is a political/regulatory consultation, petition, or event you think might be of interest to CityWatch NZ readers, email the details to contact@citywatchnz.org

Subscribe now

Share

This month’s newsletter is going to be shorter, and out sooner than usual because of two critical local government issues. The launch of the new waters companies and some council amalgamation consultations are scheduled to take place in early July.

The 1st of July is the official launch day for the new “Local Water Done Well” companies. New Council Controlled Organisation (CCO) water companies have been formed in many parts of the country, and on Wednesday they formally take control of water services, debts, and considerable amounts of council infrastructure.

We highlight two examples of the new water entities and cover the growing opposition to these waters companies.

IAWAI is the new water company scheduled to take control waters services and infrastructure from Hamilton City Council and Waikato District Council. The STOP IAWAI campaign has been raising awareness about the implications of the new waters company, issues with how it was created, and the officials withholding water charge increase projections past 2029.

Geoff Kreegher provides an opinion piece about water charges escaping the new rates capping legislation. John McDonald provides an open letter calling for the Minister of Local Government to intervene amid serious issues with IAWAI’s creation.

Tiaki Wai is replacing Wellington Water as the waters services CCO for the councils in the Greater Wellington Region. The STOP TIAKI WAI campaign is organising opposition in and around Wellington. The forecast of median household water bills of $6831 per year by 2036 and a more critical media in Wellington has led to greater coverage of Tiaki Wai when compared to the other new waters companies being formed around New Zealand.

Related to the formation of Tiaki Wai, we continue our recurring “Wellington Water Woes“ feature. This feature is typically a shameful list of recent water-CCO-related headlines arising from Wellington. June was another bumper month for generating headlines which highlight the problems with water-CCOs generally and Wellington in particular.

Councils consider amalgamation as central government has given them until August to develop proposals.

Hamilton City’s consultation regarding amalgamation is set to finish on 5 July. Waikato District Council’s similar consultation closes on 10 July. Wellington City'‘s consultation finishes on 19 July. Other similar consultations are taking place around the country, check your local council website as some closed in June.

Links are provided to other open consultations, petitions, and events at the end of this newsletter.

IAWAI ISSUES AND THE STOP IAWAI CAMPAIGN

The official website for IAWAI launched in late June with the two councils planning to formally transfer, staff, and infrastructure control to the new entity on 1 July.

https://iawai.co.nz/do-it-online

IAWAI decided to go with the launch slogan of “Kia ora, we're IAWAI. You might not know the name yet, but you will.“

IAWAI is currently recruiting about 13 office-based roles with job applications closing on the 1st and 2nd July, See link below

https://nz.seek.com/IAWAI-jobs/at-this-company

[Editor’s note: Given that critical information was withheld prior to the consultations and votes that led to the formation of IAWAI, job application covering letters may be an appropriate avenue to send your feedback to IAWAI. Getting an IAWAI salary of between $74,000 and $419,999 would also help most people pay their rapidly rising water bills into the future]

Geoff Kreegher provides an opinion piece on whether the new water bill will sit outside of the proposed new rates caps.

OPINION: Have IAWAI and NZ Water CCOs Been Given a Back Door Around Rates Caps?

The Government’s proposed rates-cap legislation is intended to restrain local government spending by limiting annual rates increases.

Yet available policy statements indicate that while general rates, targeted rates and uniform annual charges may be capped, water charges are expected to sit outside those restrictions. Commentary surrounding the policy repeatedly notes that water fees and other non-rates revenue streams would not be subject to the cap.

This distinction is critical.

If water services are delivered through a separate CCO, the organisation can levy water charges directly on consumers rather than relying on council rates. Those charges can then increase independently of any cap imposed on councils.

In effect, councils may face limits on raising rates while the water entities they own retain substantial flexibility to increase water bills.”

Geoff Kreegher, Have IAWAI and NZ Water CCOs Been Given a Back Door Around Rates Caps?, CityWatch NZ, 25 June 2026.

CityWatch NZ editor John McDonald has posted his open letters to the Minister of Local Government and Hamilton City Council requesting intervention to stop IAWAI taking control of Hamilton’s water services and to investigate wrongdoing during the formation of the joint CCO.

“Where Tiaki Wai released its household water charge projections out to 2036, IAWAI is not releasing their new projections past 2029 (claiming not to have even modelled such “price harmonisation” scenarios).

Extrapolating out the compounding increases, which can be calculated from data available in the WSS, we can estimate annual water bills for the median Hamilton City household at either $3,746 (incomplete “price harmonisation”) or $4,115 (complete “price harmonisation”). This still represents an annual water bill between $995 and $1,365 higher (+36-50%) than what was expected pre-IAWAI.”

Dr John McDonald-Wharry, Open letter to the Minister of Local Government, 26 June 2026.

OPEN LETTER: John McDonald’s A Request for Ministerial Intervention Regarding the IAWAI Water Company

The STOP IAWAI campaign is focusing on raising awareness about the issues with IAWAI and stopping the new company becoming entrenched. The campaign urges people in Hamilton City and Waikato District to contact their elected representatives (mayors, councillors, MPs) and the Minister of Local Government. People in parts of Waipā District soon to be annexed into Hamilton City may also want to contact their elected representatives as well.

The STOP IAWAI campaign can be found on Facebook at the link below and they have presented at a series of meetings in Hamilton with concerned residents.

https://www.facebook.com/people/STOP-IAWAI/61590619261373/

THE STOP TIAKI WAI CAMPAIGN

Highlighting the lack of transparency and the need for democratic accountability, the STOP TIAKI WAI campaign has gained considerable momentum with thousands of social media followers and large public meetings.

The STOP TIAKI WAI campaign can be found on Facebook.

https://www.facebook.com/people/STOP-TIAKI-WAI/61589767088223/

Living in Greater Wgtn has become financially unviable for many. The new water entity, Tiaki Wai will heighten the cost of living crisis. I say it needs to be paused until concerns are addressed & democratic controls are put in place.

Guy Nunns, STOP TIAKI WAI on Facebook

WELLINGTON WATER (TIAKI WAI) WOES

Wellington Water and Tiaki Wai CCOs continued to generate a bumper crop of worrying headlines in the media, including:

• Tiaki Wai wipes out Porirua council rates hike, but there’s a catch, The Post, 05 June 2026.

• Major Island Bay sewage spill caused by pieces of timber, Wellington Water says, RNZ, 08 June 2026.

• Surprise after $400m lumped on councils in Tiaki Wai’s 11th hour, The Post, 11 June 2026.

• Wellington’s $1b wastewater problem and it’s not Moa Point: Warnings over Seaview plant, RNZ, 12 June 2026.

• Wellington Water warns Moa Point repairs likely to increase odour today, RNZ, 12 June 2026.

• Lower Hutt mayor challenges Tiaki Wai critics to offer real alternatives, The Post, 14 June 2026.

• Residents furious at month of Wellington Water’s noisy overnight works, RNZ, 14 June 2026.

• Wellington’s new water entity estimates $25b over 30 years for safe water, clean beaches, RNZ, 16 June 2026.

• Wellington Water forges ahead month of overnight works on Holloway Rd despite opposition, RNZ, 16 June 2026.

• What will change for Wellington when Tiaki Wai takes over the delivery of water, RNZ, 18 June 2026.

• Infrastructure Commission head takes aim at Tiaki Wai’s water meter roll-out, The Post, 18 June 2026.

• Wellington and Porirua councils load hefty rates rises on new water utility Tiaki Wai, The Post, 18 June 2026.

• New Wellington water boss accused of working to discredit scientists over unsafe drinking water findings, The Post, 20 June 2026.

• ‘Gone too far’: Wellington Water traffic management under fire, RNZ, 21 June 2026.

• More sewage discharged into Wellington coastal waters, RNZ, 21 June 2026.

• Buildings flooded in central Wellington after pipe bursts (Editor’s note: It is not clear if this was a Wellington Water pipe or a private one), RNZ, 24 June 2026.

• Wellington City Council considers sweeping rates changes (Editor’s note: Wellington Council looking to exempt new water CCO Tiaki Wai from commercial rates), RNZ, 24 June 2026.

• New Wellington water bills land next month - see how much you’ll pay with Tiaki Wai calculator, NZ Herald, 24 June 2026.

• Sewage discharging into Wellington coastal waters again, RNZ, 25 June 2026.

• Tiaki Wai expands to new $600k-a-year waterfront office, The Post, 26 June 2026.

• Cause of unsightly Wellington wastewater blockage explained, RNZ, 28 June 2026.

• Withered on the vine’: Tiaki Wai spends as promised users’ group fades, The Post, 26 June 2026.

Back in April this year, Bryce Edwards published a review of Danyl McLauchlan’s featured story in the Listener. McLauchlan’s front page article about Wellington City Council was titled “How to absolutely, positively kill a well-resourced capital city”. Both Edwards and McLauchlan are asking the question “Where did the money go?” and are articulating the deeper problems within local government.

“McLauchlan’s strongest thread is the outsourcing story. In 2003, Wellington’s water services were handed to a council-controlled organisation (CCO) that eventually became Wellington Water. The theory was that specialisation would bring efficiency, but it produced the opposite.

When the CCO was formed, in-house engineering knowledge walked out the door. What stayed behind were the governance people, the stakeholder engagement people, the PR and marketing people. Wellington Water then subcontracted its own work to private firms, who hired additional subcontractors. According to McLauchlan, at every stage, another intermediary took a cut, making it progressively harder for the council to track where the money was going. Annual payments to Wellington Water and its predecessors rose from $1 million in 2004 to $114 million by 2025, and nobody could account for where it all went.

When the numbers finally came out, they were ugly. Deloitte found cosy relationships between Wellington Water and its contractors: competitive tendering replaced by long-standing deals with preferred suppliers. Project managers were managing projects in which they had a financial stake. Police confirmed receiving a report of suspected fraud. Infrastructure consultants Aecom found Wellington Water was paying three times what comparable councils paid for pipe maintenance. “The council was getting fleeced for money,” Tamatha Paul told McLauchlan.

McLauchlan’s framework comes from economist Mariana Mazzucato. Her book The Big Con argues that when government outsources core services to the private sector, it loses the ability to understand what it’s buying. It becomes, in Mazzucato’s phrase, a “dumb client.” The public still carries the costs and the risks. But the institution has hollowed itself out. If Mazzucato wanted a New Zealand example, this is it.”

Bryce Edwards, Democracy Briefing: Who really runs Wellington?, The Democracy Project, 12 April 2026.

SHORT WINDOWS FOR CONSULTATIONS ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT AMALGAMATION REFORMS

Councils around New Zealand are rushing through consultations on the creation amalgamation proposals.

Councils are looking at the voluntary “Head start” pathway where they can plan their own merger arrangements, instead of waiting for plans to be imposed from Central Government. Much of this needs to be completed before early August.

Below is a selection of consultations, some already closed. Check your local council’s website as soon as possible if you want to provide feedback (some survey’s closed in June).

Hamilton City Council’s consultation closes on 5 July.

It can be accessed here:

https://hamilton.govt.nz/your-council/reforms/reform

Waikato District Council’s consultation closes on 10 July.

It can be accessed here:

https://www.waikatodistrict.govt.nz/your-council/simplifying-local-government

Wellington City Council’s consultation closes on 19 July.

It can be accessed here:

https://www.letstalk.wellington.govt.nz/amalgamation

Christchurch City Council, District Council, and Waimakariri District Council reportedly ran surveys in early June with over 8500 responses recorded.

Waipā District Council’s consultation closed on 28 June

Taupō District Council’s survey closed on 17 June, reporting 1113 responses.

The Government is changing how councils are organised across New Zealand. We want to talk with you early about what this could mean for the Waikato district. No decisions have been made.

Right now, most parts of the country have two councils — a regional council (which looks after things like environmental management, public transport planning and flood protection) and a district or city council (which looks after roads, water, rubbish, libraries, parks and consents). The Government’s Simplifying Local Government programme aims to reduce duplication and cost, for example by combining the two into a single “unitary” council that does both jobs.

The Head Start pathway is a voluntary, faster option that lets councils that are ready put forward a proposal to government. Reform of local government is happening — these conversations are about helping shape what it looks like for our district, and that’s what we’d like your views on.

Waikato District Council Website, Simplifying Local Government, accessed 29 June 2026.

The New Zealand Initiative think tank published an opinion piece about council amalgamation in 2015.

https://www.nzinitiative.org.nz/reports-and-media/opinion/culture-of-co-operation-makes-more-sense-than-amalgamation/

When preparing for the consultations on amalgamation, Oliver Hartwich’s opinion piece is worth reading, as he notes that promises and theories about economic efficiencies and synergies often do not appear in practice. He also Alexis de Tocqueville and makes the case that council amalgamation “…will remove decision-makers from the people they are supposed to serve”.

OPEN INVITATION FOR OPINION PIECES

Do you have ideas to improve local government?

Are you part of a group that is pushing back against council overreach in your town or city?

CityWatch NZ is looking for articles on a range of issues and from around the country.

If you are interested in volunteering an opinion piece for CityWatch NZ, or know of someone who can write well, email content@citywatchnz.org for more information.

OPEN CONSULTATIONS, PETITIONS, AND EVENT NOTICES

SUMMARY OFFENCES (MOVE-ON ORDERS) AMENDMENT BILL

CLOSES 11:59PM THURSDAY 02 July 2026

The Justice Committee is calling for submissions on the Summary Offences (Move-on Orders) Amendment Bill.

The bill seeks to equip Police with new powers to address public disorder, where people are engaging in disorderly, and sometimes criminal, behaviour, especially around retail and hospitality premises. It would do so by amending the Summary Offences Act 1981 to introduce a new power for Police to issue move-on orders that require people who are engaging in disorderly or disruptive behaviour in public places to leave the area and not return for a specified amount of time. Disorderly or disruptive behaviour includes unreasonably obstructing entry to a trade or business, breaching the peace, begging, rough sleeping, or indicating an intent to inhabit a public place.

The bill would introduce a new power for Police to temporarily detain a person for the time necessary to obtain biographical details. It would create a new offence for failing or refusing to remain at the place where a person is detained, failing or refusing to provide biographical details, or providing false biographical details. The bill would also create a new offence for failing or refusing to comply with a move-on order, with a maximum penalty of 3 months’ imprisonment or a fine not exceeding $2,000.

Link to feedback page:

https://www3.parliament.nz/en/pb/sc/make-a-submission/document/54SCJUST_SCF_27DD41AB-ACD3-4AFA-A59F-08DEB151B1C7/summary-offences-move-on-orders-amendment-bill

LOCAL GOVERNMENT (PORT COMPANIES ACCOUNTABILITY) AMENDMENT BILL

CLOSES 11:59PM THURSDAY 02 July 2026

Have your say on the Local Government (Port Companies Accountability) Amendment Bill

The Transport and Infrastructure Committee is calling for submissions on the Local Government (Port Companies Accountability) Amendment Bill. A members bill in the name of Lemauga Lydia Sosene.

Currently port companies are exempt from the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 and from certain rules that apply to council-controlled organisations in the Local Government Act 2002. This bill would make port companies subject to the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987, and the requirements to act as a good employer, exhibit a sense of social and environmental responsibility by having regard to the interests of the community in which they operate found in the Local Government Act 2002.

Link to feedback page:

https://www3.parliament.nz/en/pb/sc/make-a-submission/document/54SCTIN_SCF_E8DDA0C4-0B96-4604-FED7-08DD98C831FD/local-government-port-companies-accountability-amendment

“FRAMEWORK THAT FORMALLY ADDRESSES WILFUL DECEPTION BY ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES” PETITION

CLOSES 11:59PM MONDAY 10 AUGUST 2026

The petition can be found at this link…

https://petitions.parliament.nz/f9192080-e97d-4004-2981-08de6832301e?lang=en

The petition text is copied below…

Petition request

That the House of Representatives establish a framework that formally addresses wilful deception by elected representatives acting in an official capacity.

Petition reason

Public trust in democratic institutions depends on good faith communication by those exercising public power. While I think New Zealand maintains strong truthfulness standards across many areas of public responsibility, I believe there is no framework addressing situations where elected representatives, acting in an official capacity, knowingly provide false or materially misleading statements of fact. I feel Parliament should consider how that gap should be addressed to strengthen public trust.

NEW ZEALAND TAXPAYERS’ UNION’S “STOP DOUBLE-CHARGING AND KEEP ROAD TOLLING FAIR” PETITION

The petition can be found at this link…

https://www.taxpayers.org.nz/petition_tolling?

The petition text is copied below…

I call on the Government to amend the Land Transport (Revenue) Amendment Bill to clearly define corridor tolling, ensure road tolling only pays for new roads, and keep tolling fair, voluntary, and genuinely user-pays.

“INTRODUCE MANDATORY TRANSPARENCY AND REGULATION FOR POLITICAL LOBBYING IN NZ” PETITION

CLOSES FRIDAY 07 AUGUST 2026 AT 11.59PM NZST

The petition can be found at this link…

https://petitions.parliament.nz/22de6272-7c91-4bc2-2c80-08de8ead923a?lang=en

The petition text is copied below…

Petition request

That the House of Representatives pass legislation to establish a mandatory public register of lobbyists, require proactive disclosure of meetings with Ministers and officials, and implement a “cooling-off” period for former Ministers and senior officials.

Petition reason

NZ lacks a mandatory lobbying register, unlike many OECD countries. I feel a perceived “revolving door” between government and lobbying firms creates integrity risks and undermines public trust, while any hidden meetings between decision-makers and well-funded interests could create an unfair imbalance of influence. In my view, voluntary codes are insufficient, and a statutory framework is required to ensure consistent, mandatory accountability and transparency across the industry.

“CHANGE THE LOCATION OF THE PROPOSED SOUTHERN WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT” PETITION

CLOSES TUESDAY 22 SEPTEMBER 2026 AT 11.59PM NZST

The petition can be found at this link…

https://petitions.parliament.nz/0b4a606c-31be-4d00-82b8-08deccc5b9b0?lang=en

The petition text is copied below…

Petition request

That the House of Representatives urge IAWAI to change the location of the proposed Southern Wastewater Treatment Plant.

Petition reason

I believe that Hamilton City Council and IAWAI have ignored the voices of mana whenua and our local community directly affected. I disagree with the site preferred by IAWAI. In my view, relocation of the proposed plant is a necessary step towards preserving and protecting our environmental integrity, water, forest, both flora and fauna, local community, identity, history, cultural heritage, and historical site of Ngāti Ngamurikaitaua, Nukuhau Pā.

”INDEPENDENT REVIEW OF DIGITAL IDENTIFICATION SYSTEMS” PETITION

CLOSES WEDNESDAY 30 SEPTEMBER 2026 AT 11.59PM NZST

The petition can be found at this link…

https://petitions.parliament.nz/c0c80f58-f8c3-4ef8-21d6-08de036dbf3a?lang=en

The petition text is copied below…

Petition request

That the House of Representatives urge the Government to commission an independent review of privacy, security, and civil-liberty risks in digital ID systems, and to suspend plans for any centralised or mandatory digital ID until full public consultation occurs.

Petition reason

I believe that centralised digital IDs could enable tracking, profiling, or data misuse, threatening privacy, freedom, and resilience. In my opinion, an independent review should assess impacts under the Privacy Act 2020 and NZ Bill of Rights Act 1990. Until then, I believe the Government must pause any rollout or funding.

”DO NOT INTRODUCE DIGITAL ID CARDS” PETITION

CLOSES SUNDAY 04 OCTOBER 2026 AT 11.59PM NZST

The petition can be found at this link…

https://petitions.parliament.nz/050a6461-ddb5-4d68-f5de-08de02cc4270?lang=en

The petition text is copied below…

Petition request

That the House of Representatives urge the Government not to introduce a digital ID card system into New Zealand.

Petition reason

We believe a digital ID system would threaten Kiwi privacy, freedoms, and fairness by centralising sensitive data, and risking exclusion of the elderly, disabled, rural, and low-income communities. We think this would be a step towards mass surveillance and digital control, and that no one should be forced or financially coerced to register with a state-controlled ID system. We call on Parliament to reject digital ID which we believe would protect New Zealanders’ human rights and democracy.

”MAKE SOUND EMITTERS MANDATORY ON ELECTRIC CARS TO WARN BLIND PEDESTRIANS” PETITION

CLOSES FRIDAY 31 JULY 2026 AT 11.59PM NZST

The petition can be found at this link…

https://petitions.parliament.nz/8b70bf69-2e54-4e55-89ce-08ddcfc45c03

The petition text is copied below…

Petition request

That the House of Representatives legislate to make cost-effective artificial sound emitters mandatory on all electric and hybrid vehicles sold in New Zealand to warn blind and low-vision pedestrians when the vehicles are near.

Petition reason

Silent electric cars are a serious risk to blind and low-vision pedestrians. Without sound, we don’t know the vehicles are coming. Other countries require warning sounds at low speeds — I believe that New Zealand should urgently do so too, before more lives are put at risk. In my view, sound emitters should be mandatory on new electric and hybrid cars so that current vehicle owners aren’t burdened with the cost.

AGM HAMILTON RESIDENTS & RATEPAYERS ASSOCIATION INCORPORATED

SATURDAY 18 JULY 2026

Notice of the ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING of the HAMILTON RESIDENTS AND RATEPAYERS ASSOCIATION INC.

This will take place on Saturday 18th July 2026

at St John’s Methodist Church Hall, Wellington Street, Hamilton East

Commencing at 10am.

You are reminded that only current financial members are able to vote at an AGM of the Association.

The annual membership subscription of $10 is now due.

Please pay as soon as posslble.

Posting of event information, petition information, consultation viewpoints, or other content on the CityWatch NZ newsletter or website does not constitute endorsement of those views by CityWatch NZ or its editors. This section is often based on information readers have sent to us on issues they think are important or checks of government websites for broadly-relevant consultations.

If there is a political/regulatory consultation, petition, or event you think might be of interest to CityWatch NZ readers, email the details to contact@citywatchnz.org

Subscribe now

Share

As the 1st of July deadline approaches for the new “Local Water Done Well” companies taking over water services, increased pressure is being put on the authorities by residents facing drastic increases in water bills.

Wellington’s new water company (Tiaki Wai) attracted negative media coverage, protests, and mayoral criticism which led to slight reductions to the projected price increases. The $590 million estimate to install smart water meters could be going ‘back to the drawing-board’.

Hamilton Residents and Ratepayers Association are hosting a public meeting on the 5th of June to discuss the planned transfer Hamilton’s water services to IAWAI.

Councils grapple with local government reforms, the tight timeframe, and the discussions around whether we have too many local councils.

The government’s plan to enable police to issue 24-hour move-on-orders faced criticism from many quarters. Critics have called it a harsh policy that will waste police time and simply relocate the problem of those sleeping rough in CBDs.

Wellington City is worried as the government has announced plans to reduce public sector jobs by 8700, targeting backroom roles. The prospect of AI replacing those jobs attracts wider concern.

Firefighters’ concerns about the shortages of working firetrucks were heard in Parliament.

We do a brief round-up of how various road and path designs have featured in the media in May. These include: a Rotorua school principle describing a a roundabout pedestrian crossing as a “recipe for disaster”, Wellington’s new cycleway may cost less than its $348 million budget, and roads open for Hamilton’s new peanut-shaped roundabout.

Links are provided to open consultations, petitions, and events at the end of this newsletter.

NEW WATER COMPANIES UNDER INCREASING PRESSURE

As councils in the Wellington region move to transfer water services from the Wellington Water CCO to the new Tiaki Wai CCO, concerns are growing and community backlash is putting pressure on the water company.

The Water Services Strategy for Tiaki Wai was released earlier this year and the transfer of water services and infrastructure is scheduled for 1 July 2026.

The estimated cost of $500-590 million to install 140,000 water meters caused much concern and outrage. According to RNZ reports, this resulted in the Wellington City Mayor declaring “I struggle to find those figures credible” and the recommending that Tiaki Wai “start from scratch on a business case”.

The forecast of median water bills of $6831 per year by 2036 have been reportedly reduced to $6206 per year, showing that applying pressure works…. somewhat.

Backlash Grows Towards Wellington’s New “Tiaki Wai” Water Company: May 2026 Media Coverage

Critics have highlighted the lack of transparency and accountability.

There have been protests, addresses to council forums, public meetings, and media coverage of concerns with Tiaki Wai during May 2026.

In late May, a minority of councillors in the wider Wellington region attempted to delay the transfer to Tiaki Wai. Some councillors supportive of the transfer said that taking water services out of the political arena was a good thing.

According to Stuff, council staff had warned councillors of “Crown intervention or legal action if the transfer falls through” prior to the votes.

Porirua City councillor Kathleen Filo, who voted against Porirua’s transfer agreement, believed having an extra year before handing over to Tiaki Wai could help councillors process details and get residents on-board.

Councillor Moira Lawler said there was a regional consensus that despite concerns of it lacking detail, the model under Tiaki Wai would stand a better chance than the status quo.

On a Wellington City Council meeting the same day, councillor Karl Tiefenbacher attempted to move an amendment to delay the transfer until March 1, 2027, which was called “incredibly reckless” by deputy mayor Ben McNulty and soundly defeated.

The council was being asked to hand over its water assets with no control over Tiaki Wai, Tiefenbacher said. “Tiaki Wai can charge what it likes and we have no control.”

Justin Wong, Wellington councils formalise water infrastructure and debt hand-off to Tiaki Wai, Stuff, 30 May 2026.

Wellington Water and Tiaki Wai continued to be prominent in the media, with recent headlines including:

• Commerce Commission wants to rachet up regulation on Tiaki Wai, BusinessDesk, 08 May 2026.

• Mounting confusion over new water bills looming for Wellington region residents, RNZ, 23 May 2026.

• Half a billion dollar price-tag for Wellington water meter roll-out not ‘credible’ -mayor, RNZ, 26 May 2026.

• Chris Bishop claims Wellington City Council offloaded Town Hall debt into water entity, council says ‘simply not true’, NZ Herald, 27 May 2026

• Tiaki Wai reduces short-term payment hit to Wellington homes, but concerns remain, The Post, 29 May 2026.

• Wellington residents facing slightly lower water bills after Tiaki Wai backs down, RNZ, 29 May 2026.

• Wellington councils formalise water infrastructure and debt hand-off to Tiaki Wai, Stuff, 30 May 2026.

• The $420,000 campaign to let you know Tiaki Wai exists, The Post, 02 June 2026.

The “Local Water Done Well” reforms are also impacting cities and districts outside of Wellington.

Despite many other councils planning to transfer water services to new entities on the 1st of Jul , recent coverage of situations outside of Wellington has been limited. A few examples include:

• Napier mayor says water deal is ‘amalgamation by stealth’ as councillors push it to next step, NZ Herald, 10 April 2026.

• Hastings councillor threatens legal action over water services entity plan, NZ Herald, 16 April 2026.

• Northland’s new regional water services company moves closer, NZ Herald, 8 May 2026.

• Central Districts Water plans charge ahead, The Post, 23 May 2026.

In April 2026, former Hamilton Mayor (and Helen Clark Foundation Honorary Senior Fellow) Paula Southgate commented on the lack of public awareness of the water reforms which are swiftly establishing “new council-controlled water organisations”.

Many ratepayers will be unaware of this. Since the October local elections, there has been scant public commentary from many mayors and councillors about the establishment of these new entities. Is it the calm before the storm? Or reluctance to be closely associated with inevitable price increases?

The fact is that the cost to users will rise. Some communities face steep increases over the next decade, with Water Services Plans projecting cumulative rises of 30 percent to more than 110 percent for fast-growing councils. For true transparency, this must be part of early conversations with ratepayers.

Former Hamilton Mayor Paula Southgate, How to make ‘Local Water Done Well’ more than a slogan, Newsroom, 04 April 2026.

When Mayor, Paula Southgate approved the formation of the new IAWAI water company with critical decisions made in December 2024 and May 2025.

Hamilton City and Waikato District residents were projected to have +238% change in median household water bills (from $1285 to $4347 per year) by 2034, according to the 2025 Water Service Delivery Plan. The release of the 2026 Water Service Strategy for IAWAI showed that annual water costs are projection to increase faster for Hamilton City connections when compared to Waikato District connections for the next three years. New projections for water bills past 2029 were withheld from the public in IAWAI’s strategy, so we can only speculate as to whether projected 2036 water bills in Hamilton are going to look similar to 2036 water bills in Wellington.

The Hamilton Residents & Ratepayers Association is hosting a Public Meeting about the new IAWAI water company. This meeting starts at 7:00pm, Friday 5th of June 2026, at the Chapel Hill Community Church Hall, 2 Cate Road, Rototuna.

Public Meeting about the IAWAI Water Company, Friday 05 June 2026 – Hamilton Residents & Ratepayers Association Incorporated

COUNCILS GRAPPLE WITH LOCAL GOVERNMENT REFORMS

Councils around New Zealand now have a short time frame of three-months to create amalgamation proposals.

Councils are looking at the voluntary “Head start” pathway where they can plan their own merger arrangements, instead of waiting for plans to be imposed from Wellington.

Central government’s desire to reduce the number of councils has prompted debate around whether New Zealand has too many councils.

It has been pointed out that Scandinavian countries have a lot more councils than New Zealand and the current proposal appears similar to the council amalgamations that took place in the British Isles since 1990.

Local Government Minister Simon Watts said 78 local authorities was high compared to Ireland and Scotland.

“It is the government’s view that New Zealand has too many councils for the size of our population and that simplifying local government will improve its efficiency.”

Norway has 15 counties and 356 municipalities, and Finland has 19 regional councils and 308 municipalities, which also run schools and healthcare.

Ireland has 26 county councils, three city councils, and two city and county councils following reform in 2014.

Reform in the 1990s reduced the number of local councils in Scotland to 32.

David Hill, ‘No solid evidence’: Questions over local government shake-up, RNZ, 07 May 2026.

WILL MOVE-ON-ORDERS ADDRESS PROBLEMS WITH HOMELESSNESS?

The government continues its plans to enable move-on-orders to be issued by police. Under the proposal, police will be able to issue move-on-orders to people over the age of 14, commanding them to leave a specific area for at least 24 hours. Those breaching the move-on-order will potentially face a $2000 fine or three-months in jail.

The move-on-order system appears to be targeted towards those rough sleeping, begging, impeding access to businesses, breaching the peace, and “displaying disorderly, disruptive, threatening or intimidating behaviour”. Auckland business leaders are reported to support the policy in order to make the CBD safer and more desirable, although some recognised that it is not a long-term solution and it will simply move the problem to another area.

The proposal has attracted criticism from many directions. Steve Watt of the Police Association says that there is “no doubt that it will have a drain on policing resources”, alluding to situations where police will not attend burglaries because they are relocating a beggar’s shopping cart of worldly possessions down the street. A veteran street-sleeper described the proposal as “a bully tactic”.

WILL ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE TURN WELLINGTON INTO A GHOST TOWN?

During May, the Minster of Finance Nicola Willis announced plans to reduce the size of the public sector by 8700 jobs and save the government $2.4 billion. The Minister’s justification is that core public service employees were historically around 1% of the population, which has recently risen to 1.2% due to the “largesse under the last government”.

Wellingtonians expressed particular concern after the announcement, with Mayor Andrew Little saying the last round of cuts “really took the wind out of the sails of Wellington” and local hospitality businesses fear the Wellington CBD will become a “ghost town”.

The Public Service Association held a protest against the job cuts which attracted “hundreds” and the MP for Wellington Central Tamatha Paul is reported as saying that the Finance Minister “doesn’t value the fabric that this city was built upon, which is the public service”.

Both proponents and opponents of the proposed cuts have linked them to the use of Artificial Intelligence in government to streamline systems.

The plan to replace public servants with AI is chaos dressed up as strategy.

...When workers are dismissed ... it can destroy people. It is traumatic and it takes a toll.

Public Service Association National Secretary Fleur Fitzsimons, as quoted by RNZ in Hundreds gather in Wellington for PSA protest against proposed public service cuts, 24 May 2026.

The public sector restructuring plans drew attention to the wider digital state agenda along with the issue of the government becoming dependent on foreign tech companies to supply artificial intelligence services and digital infrastructure. Two senior officials from the Internal Affairs department (the Chief Digital Officer and the Director of Strategy for the Digital Delivery Agency) were recently scheduled to visit Microsoft’s HQ for what RNZ describes as a “two-day executive briefing” where “Microsoft was paying some local expenses like meals and local transport, while DIA covered international travel and accommodation”. The “Digital Government Target State” operating model was also highlighted in this coverage.

The ‘Artificial Intelligence and the Future of Government: International Perspectives’ forum heard from Professor Martin Kment of the University of Augsburg that AI could be useful for many public services, although it was currently heavily subsidised by the big tech firms and they were certain to want to recoup their outlay at some point.

Kment said, while AI could be implemented to replace jobs, the question was should it.

Phil Pennington, ‘Future of work’ on agenda as NZ govt digital leaders head to Microsoft US HQ, RNZ, 23 May 2026.

FIREFIGHTERS GET THEIR CONCERNS HEARD BY PARLIAMENT

A select committee at Parliament held an inquiry into problems with the Fire and Emergency New Zealand (FENZ) fleet of firetrucks. According to RNZ, many submitters called for a wider inquiry. The Taxpayers’ Union criticised the management of assets, pointing to potential failures by the FENZ board and the Internal Affairs Department.

The parliamentary select committee inquiry was triggered by MPs who were angry at getting mixed messages from Fire and Emergency (FENZ) amid truck breakdowns and new trucks not being put on the road fast enough.

MPs told investigation needed into state of fire truck fleet, RNZ, 21 May 2026. May 2026.

A representative from the Professional Firefighters’ Union, explained that firefighters are trying working around the broken-down trucks though they are running out of options. As reported in April, the Union issued a cease-to-work notice on the grounds of “multiple faults/issues” with a fire appliance used in the Hutt Valley. The faults were well-documented and the Union claimed that these put fire crews at serious risk in hazardous situations.

THE MEDIA COVERS ROAD AND PATH DESIGNS

Wellington’s new coastal walking and cycle path has recently opened. Budgeted at $348 million, the project may have finished under budget. The four kilometre path along the Petone/Ngauranga coastline was effectively budgeted at around $87,000 per linear meter, though this does include seawall upgrades.

In Rotorua, a primary school principle has described a pedestrian crossing next to a busy roundabout as a “recipe for disaster”. The crossing was installed according to the “desire line” design philosophy were crossings are installed where path-users tend to want to cross the roads, rather than install the crossing at a safer location with better lines-of-sight and stopping distances. Those associated with the school report “the chaos” and near misses being a daily occurrence. However, a Rotorua Lakes Council manager provided crash data with a reduction in recorded crashes which “indicates that the changes made have improved safety overall”.

Hamilton’s peanut-shaped roundabout on Morrinsville Road neared completion in May and received positive coverage by RNZ, with Hamilton City Council claiming that the construction was completed early and under budget. Media coverage in January and March was less positive as locals were getting frustrated at the long detours due to road closures, with RNZ running with “commuter chaos“ in the headline. Reflecting the recent political shifts within Hamilton City Council, the construction featured flat signalised crossings on the main road instead of the raised crossing that were standard 3-years ago. However, it appears that raised crossings are still planned for some of the side roads.

OPEN INVITATION FOR OPINION PIECES

Do you have ideas to improve local government?

Are you part of a group that is pushing back against council overreach in your town or city?

CityWatch NZ is looking for articles on a range of issues and from around the country.

If you are interested in volunteering an opinion piece for CityWatch NZ, or know of someone who can write well, email content@citywatchnz.org for more information.

OPEN CONSULTATIONS, PETITIONS, AND EVENT NOTICES

SUMMARY OFFENCES (MOVE-ON ORDERS) AMENDMENT BILL

CLOSES 11:59PM THURSDAY 02 July 2026

The Justice Committee is calling for submissions on the Summary Offences (Move-on Orders) Amendment Bill.

The bill seeks to equip Police with new powers to address public disorder, where people are engaging in disorderly, and sometimes criminal, behaviour, especially around retail and hospitality premises. It would do so by amending the Summary Offences Act 1981 to introduce a new power for Police to issue move-on orders that require people who are engaging in disorderly or disruptive behaviour in public places to leave the area and not return for a specified amount of time. Disorderly or disruptive behaviour includes unreasonably obstructing entry to a trade or business, breaching the peace, begging, rough sleeping, or indicating an intent to inhabit a public place.

The bill would introduce a new power for Police to temporarily detain a person for the time necessary to obtain biographical details. It would create a new offence for failing or refusing to remain at the place where a person is detained, failing or refusing to provide biographical details, or providing false biographical details. The bill would also create a new offence for failing or refusing to comply with a move-on order, with a maximum penalty of 3 months’ imprisonment or a fine not exceeding $2,000.

Link to feedback page:

https://www3.parliament.nz/en/pb/sc/make-a-submission/document/54SCJUST_SCF_27DD41AB-ACD3-4AFA-A59F-08DEB151B1C7/summary-offences-move-on-orders-amendment-bill

BETTER REGIONAL BOUNDARIES BILL

CLOSES 11:59PM WEDNESDAY 24 JUNE 2026

The purpose of this bill is to ensure that, within five years, each government entity aligns boundaries and aligns them with local authority boundaries. This is intended to create clarity and consistency for New Zealanders. The bill seeks to drive regional approaches, with shared hubs in small towns where departments work together at a single point of access to serve communities. The five-year time frame is intended to give government departments and agencies time to align their approaches with the policy intent of this bill.

Link to feedback page:

https://www3.parliament.nz/en/pb/sc/make-a-submission/document/54SCGOA_SCF_D889CB7F-B87C-4E81-31DD-08DEA65CEA8A/better-regional-boundaries-bill

LOCAL GOVERNMENT (PORT COMPANIES ACCOUNTABILITY) AMENDMENT BILL

CLOSES 11:59PM THURSDAY 02 July 2026

Have your say on the Local Government (Port Companies Accountability) Amendment Bill

The Transport and Infrastructure Committee is calling for submissions on the Local Government (Port Companies Accountability) Amendment Bill. A members bill in the name of Lemauga Lydia Sosene.

Currently port companies are exempt from the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 and from certain rules that apply to council-controlled organisations in the Local Government Act 2002. This bill would make port companies subject to the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987, and the requirements to act as a good employer, exhibit a sense of social and environmental responsibility by having regard to the interests of the community in which they operate found in the Local Government Act 2002.

Link to feedback page:

https://www3.parliament.nz/en/pb/sc/make-a-submission/document/54SCTIN_SCF_E8DDA0C4-0B96-4604-FED7-08DD98C831FD/local-government-port-companies-accountability-amendment

SERIOUS FRAUD OFFICE AMENDMENT BILL

CLOSES 11:59PM MONDAY 15 JUNE 2026.

The Chairperson of the Justice Committee has called for public submissions on the Serious Fraud Office Amendment Bill. The Serious Fraud Office Act 1990 gives the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) powers to investigate and prosecute serious or complex fraud. The bill aims to help the SFO more effectively carry out its role and to address the most pressing issues with the Act in two areas: search warrants and evidence admissibility. The amendments would align the SFO Act with the more up-to-date provisions in the Search and Surveillance Act 2012 and the Evidence Act 2006.

The bill would amend the SFO Act to enable the SFO to obtain necessary digital evidence, more efficiently obtain warrants, and better manage search sites. The amendments seek to make investigations more effective. They would not change the existing notice-making powers.

The bill would also amend the SFO Act to enable courts to apply the more modern evidence test to determine admissibility of unlawfully obtained evidence. Under the proposed changes, a wider range of factors would be considered. They include the quality of the evidence, the seriousness of the offence, and whether urgency or safety was a factor in how the evidence was obtained.2028 to 2030.

Link to feedback page:

https://www3.parliament.nz/en/pb/sc/make-a-submission/document/54SCJUST_SCF_7F746346-FF5D-4FE8-54CC-08DEA1B2F231/serious-fraud-office-amendment-bill

NEW ZEALAND TAXPAYERS’ UNION’S “STOP DOUBLE-CHARGING AND KEEP ROAD TOLLING FAIR” PETITION

The petition can be found at this link…

https://www.taxpayers.org.nz/petition_tolling?

The petition text is copied below…

I call on the Government to amend the Land Transport (Revenue) Amendment Bill to clearly define corridor tolling, ensure road tolling only pays for new roads, and keep tolling fair, voluntary, and genuinely user-pays.

“INTRODUCE MANDATORY TRANSPARENCY AND REGULATION FOR POLITICAL LOBBYING IN NZ” PETITION

CLOSES FRIDAY 07 AUGUST 2026 AT 11.59PM NZST

The petition can be found at this link…

https://petitions.parliament.nz/22de6272-7c91-4bc2-2c80-08de8ead923a?lang=en

The petition text is copied below…

Petition request

That the House of Representatives pass legislation to establish a mandatory public register of lobbyists, require proactive disclosure of meetings with Ministers and officials, and implement a “cooling-off” period for former Ministers and senior officials.

Petition reason

NZ lacks a mandatory lobbying register, unlike many OECD countries. I feel a perceived “revolving door” between government and lobbying firms creates integrity risks and undermines public trust, while any hidden meetings between decision-makers and well-funded interests could create an unfair imbalance of influence. In my view, voluntary codes are insufficient, and a statutory framework is required to ensure consistent, mandatory accountability and transparency across the industry.

“CHANGE THE LOCATION OF THE PROPOSED SOUTHERN WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT” PETITION

CLOSES WEDNESDAY 14 OCTOBER 2026 AT 11.59PM NZST

The petition can be found at this link…

https://petitions.parliament.nz/4a5779c1-162c-49c4-9b20-08de0ac20f72?lang=en

The petition text is copied below…

Petition request

That the House of Representatives urge Hamilton City Council to change the location of the proposed Southern Wastewater Treatment Plant.

Petition reason

I believe that HCC has ignored the voices of mana whenua and our local community directly affected. I disagree with the site preferred by HCC. In my view, relocation of the proposed plant is a necessary step towards preserving and protecting our environmental integrity, water, forest, both flora and fauna, local community, identity, history, cultural heritage, and historical site of Ngāti Ngamurikaitaua, Nukuhau Pā.

”INDEPENDENT REVIEW OF DIGITAL IDENTIFICATION SYSTEMS” PETITION

CLOSES WEDNESDAY 30 SEPTEMBER 2026 AT 11.59PM NZST

The petition can be found at this link…

https://petitions.parliament.nz/c0c80f58-f8c3-4ef8-21d6-08de036dbf3a?lang=en

The petition text is copied below…

Petition request

That the House of Representatives urge the Government to commission an independent review of privacy, security, and civil-liberty risks in digital ID systems, and to suspend plans for any centralised or mandatory digital ID until full public consultation occurs.

Petition reason

I believe that centralised digital IDs could enable tracking, profiling, or data misuse, threatening privacy, freedom, and resilience. In my opinion, an independent review should assess impacts under the Privacy Act 2020 and NZ Bill of Rights Act 1990. Until then, I believe the Government must pause any rollout or funding.

”DO NOT INTRODUCE DIGITAL ID CARDS” PETITION

CLOSES SUNDAY 04 OCTOBER 2026 AT 11.59PM NZST

The petition can be found at this link…

https://petitions.parliament.nz/050a6461-ddb5-4d68-f5de-08de02cc4270?lang=en

The petition text is copied below…

Petition request

That the House of Representatives urge the Government not to introduce a digital ID card system into New Zealand.

Petition reason

We believe a digital ID system would threaten Kiwi privacy, freedoms, and fairness by centralising sensitive data, and risking exclusion of the elderly, disabled, rural, and low-income communities. We think this would be a step towards mass surveillance and digital control, and that no one should be forced or financially coerced to register with a state-controlled ID system. We call on Parliament to reject digital ID which we believe would protect New Zealanders’ human rights and democracy.

”MAKE SOUND EMITTERS MANDATORY ON ELECTRIC CARS TO WARN BLIND PEDESTRIANS” PETITION

CLOSES FRIDAY 31 JULY 2026 AT 11.59PM NZST

The petition can be found at this link…

https://petitions.parliament.nz/8b70bf69-2e54-4e55-89ce-08ddcfc45c03

The petition text is copied below…

Petition request

That the House of Representatives legislate to make cost-effective artificial sound emitters mandatory on all electric and hybrid vehicles sold in New Zealand to warn blind and low-vision pedestrians when the vehicles are near.

Petition reason

Silent electric cars are a serious risk to blind and low-vision pedestrians. Without sound, we don’t know the vehicles are coming. Other countries require warning sounds at low speeds — I believe that New Zealand should urgently do so too, before more lives are put at risk. In my view, sound emitters should be mandatory on new electric and hybrid cars so that current vehicle owners aren’t burdened with the cost.

Posting of event information, petition information, consultation viewpoints, or other content on the CityWatch NZ newsletter or website does not constitute endorsement of those views by CityWatch NZ or its editors. This section is often based on information readers have sent to us on issues they think are important or checks of government websites for broadly-relevant consultations.

If there is a political/regulatory consultation, petition, or event you think might be of interest to CityWatch NZ readers, email the details to contact@citywatchnz.org

Subscribe now

Share

The clock is ticking for direct council control of water infrastructure as mergers and transfers are underway in many areas around New Zealand. The new “Local Water Done Well” companies are scheduled to be given council water infrastructure at the start of July, leaving a few months to oppose these transfers of water services.

Wellington’s new water company (Tiaki Wai) is under increased pressure after it announced a 10-year plan to increase annual water charges for the average household to $6831, and then announced an estimated cost of $590 million to install smart water meters across the Wellington region.

Geoff Kreeger supplies an open letter about the problems with the new IAWAI water company set to take control of water infrastructure from Hamilton City Council and Waikato District Council. In an opinion piece, John McDonald highlights how the new water company is planning large increases in household water costs and that the official reports supporting the creation of the joint water company were missing important information (IAWAI withheld the 10-year household increase in their latest public strategy document, so we don’t know if the projections are as bad as Wellington’s).

After acknowledging that New Zealanders are not getting value-for-money from infrastructure spending, the Government is giving the Infrastructure Commission greater oversight over the country’s infrastructure projects and funding. John McDonald questions the independence of the Infrastructure Commission in an opinion piece and asks if this is putting the foxes in charge of the henhouse.

The Taxpayers’ Union released their 2026 Ratepayers’ Report, a collection of data about council finances, spending, average rates, and staffing levels on a searchable website.

Councils are being given a three-month window to pitch their amalgamation proposals, or else central government will do it for them.

Firefighters are raising serious concerns about the state of Fire and Emergency New Zealand and difficulties with dealing with high-rise fires. Mismanagement, lack of suitable equipment, poor treatment of frontline fire crews, shortages of working firetrucks, and issues with lithium ion batteries are all discussed.

Links are provided to open consultations, petitions, and events at the end of this newsletter.

WELLINGTON WATER WOES TO BECOME “TIAKI WAI” WATER WOES

As part of the “Local Water Done Well” reforms the much-troubled council-controlled organisation (CCO) Wellington Water is going to be rebranded as “Tiaki Wai”.

Wellington Water has attracted descriptions such as “dysfunctional”, “deeply problematic“, “a disastrous organisation“, and “plagued with failure”.

Under the new water company (named “Tiaki Wai”) the annual water bill for an average Wellington household is expected to be $2400 next year and rise to $6831 by 2036. Wellington residents and local mayors are concerned about the steep price increases and the Minister of Local Government has got involved.

Wellington Water (and Tiaki Wai) continue their bad headline streak as coastal communities still are suffering from the spill of “over six billion litres of raw sewage” in February, along with estimated water meter costs and those projections of extremely hight household water bills. Recent headlines include:

• Wellington council and Wellington Water at odds over Moa Point business relief fund, RNZ, 30 April 2026.

• Moa Point failure a ‘nightmare’ for Wellington businesses, group says, RNZ, 30 April 2026.

• New report shows Wellington rates now among NZ’s least affordable, RNZ, 7 April 2026.

• Wellington’s new water entity facing scrutiny from Commerce Commission over proposed bills, NZ Herald, 11 April 2026.

• New Wellington water entity Tiaki Wai defends salary spend for top officials, NZ Herald, 14 April 2026.

• ‘Squeeze across the whole country’: Where bills are increasing first under water shake-up, RNZ, 16 April 2026.

• Wellingtonians divided over paying higher water bills for improved infrastructure - survey, RNZ, 4 May 2026.

• Wellington water meters rollout cost balloons from $144m to $590m, NZ Herald, 4 May 2026.

• Nick Mills: Wellington cannot afford Tiaki Wai’s water meters, Newstalk ZB, 4 May 2026.

• Tim Brown on “nonsensical” Wellington water meter cost, Newstalk ZB, 4 May 2026.

Tiaki Wai has not been inspiring public confidence as it recently announced an estimate of over half a billion dollars to install smart water meters in the Wellington region. In 2020, the estimate for the water meter install was only $144 million.

There’s moments in this city where you stop, you look at the numbers, and you think — this cannot be real. And it happens too often.

This cannot be happening to us. And yet it is, here we go again.

A bill of half a billion dollars — possibly pushing $590 million — just to roll out water meters across the region.

Now think about that for a second, please.

This is not fixing the pipes. Not stopping the leaks.

Not upgrading the system that’s literally spilling out under our feet every single day.

No — just for water meters.

Nick Mills, Wellington cannot afford Tiaki Wai’s water meters, Newstalk ZB, 4 May 2026.

IAWAI’S WATER SERVICES STRATEGY FOR HAMILTON CITY AND WAIKATO DISTRICT

Public feedback closed in early April for the Water Service Strategy produced for the new IAWAI water company. IAWAI is set to be given control of water infrastructure from Hamilton City Council and Waikato District Council.

Geoff Kreeger supplies an open letter highlighting the problems with IAWAI’s Water Service Strategy in terms of fairness, transparency, complexity, confusion, and lack of democratic accountability. The recurring question is asked again; Will growth pay for growth?

OPEN LETTER: Submission to IAWAI on the Water Services Strategy 2026-2036

John McDonald provides an opinion piece on the three major public documents involved in creating IAWAI and makes the case to halt the transfer of water services to IAWAI based on the bad faith dealing and lack of transparency used in the creation of IAWAI.

OPINION: Bad Faith, a Missing Graph, and the Creation of the IAWAI Water Company

The three main documents, and some problems with each, are as follows…

1. The 2024 Business Case (which was missing the graph which indicated that keeping water services within Hamilton City Council would result in lower annual water charges for Hamilton households than forming a new joint water company).

2. The 2025 IAWAI Water Service Delivery Plan (which showed a plan to increase average household water costs by at-least threefold before 2033... this projection was released after the council’s vote to establish this new water company).

3. The 2026 IAWAI Water Services Strategy (which did not publicly release any projections for household water costs past 2029... Wellington’s strategy publicly released projections out to 2036 where they were $6831 per average residential per year).

John McDonald, Bad Faith, a Missing Graph, and the Creation of the IAWAI Water Company, 07 May 2026.

John Kenel’s Youtube discussion with Dr. Mike Schimdt on the water reforms and new water companies has also been recommended.

NZ Water Reform EXPOSED: Who Really Controls NZ’s Water Now?

INFRASTRUCTURE COMMISSION TO BE GIVEN MORE OVERSIGHT

The Minster of Finance Nicola Willis and Minister of Infrastructure Chris Bishop recently announced that they are "transferring responsibility for infrastructure project assurance from The Treasury to the independent NZ Infrastructure Commission".

RNZ described the move as “part of several changes to the investment management system, which informs how the government selects infrastructure projects”. In a speech on the day of the announcement Minister of Infrastructure, Chris Bishop, emphasised some of the issues identified in earlier reports about New Zealand’s infrastructure.

“New Zealand is in the top 10% of the OECD for infrastructure spending, but we are in the bottom 10% for what we get for our spend.

We rank fourth to last in the OECD for asset management.

Half of all capital-intensive central government agencies have reported that they do not have robust asset registers or adequate plans for looking after existing infrastructure.

And around half of all proposals for investment in the last five Budgets did not have complete business cases.

On top of this, Central Government agencies often don’t follow rules on basic investment management.

Since coming into Government, I have also been concerned about the quality and completeness of information Ministers receive to make billion-dollar decisions.”

Minister of Infrastructure Chris Bishop, Speech to New Zealand Infrastructure Commission Symposium, 22 April 2026.

John McDonald provides and opinion piece noting the “classic revolving door” which exists between the so-called independent Infrastructure Commission and the lobby group Infrastructure New Zealand. He questioned whether the Infrastructure Commission are the best people to help New Zealander get value from infrastructure budgets, given the decades of wasteful spending and the Commission’s focus on extracting more revenue from users.

OPINION: Is the Government Letting the Foxes Guard the Henhouse with Infrastructure Spending?

The Ministers are transferring responsibility for infrastructure spending oversight to the Infrastructure Commission; which is largely staffed by people who have worked for other organisations which have been highly-involved in decades worth of building and managing New Zealand’s infrastructure. Those other organisations (heavily represented in Infrastructure New Zealand’s membership list) are going to be partially responsible for the failing, dysfunctional, and eye-wateringly expensive infrastructure around this country.

Many generations of politicians and bureaucrats also share some of the blame for the misallocation of resources or failures to be honest with their electorates. The politicians and bureaucrats also should be protecting the interests of the public from commercial entities which have financial interests in profiting from wasteful spending on unnecessary/unwanted projects.

John McDonald, Is the Government Letting the Foxes Guard the Henhouse with Infrastructure Spending?, 05 May 2025.

2026 RATEPAYERS’ REPORT RELEASED

The Taxpayers’ Union released their 2026 Ratepayers’ Report.

This is a useful and searchable collection of data about council finances, spending, average rates, and staffing levels.

Tauranga City Council, Wellington City Council, and Hamilton City Council received special mention for topping the tables in terms of high staffing costs per household for metropolitan councils.

The 2026 Ratepayers’ Report – the local council league tables – shows that among New Zealand’s biggest urban councils, staffing costs have become a major burden on households.

While Auckland runs the country’s largest council machine in absolute terms, three other councils stand out for punishingly high staffing costs per household. Tauranga is costing households $2,047 in staff spending alone, Hamilton City $1,955, and Wellington City $1,919.

Across the five councils, at least 324 council staff are paid more than $200,000 a year, with 88 paid $256,800 - more than a Government minister (outside of cabinet)…

…Wellington has the densest workforce, at 19.3 FTE per 1,000 households, and the highest consultant-and-contractor spend per household at $736 per household.

This is 28 percent more than second-placed Hamilton City Council, which spent $575 per household.

Christchurch refused to declare their contractor cost, but spent $72,416,538 on consultants, at $436.20 per household.

Hamilton is the most top-heavy structurally, with 26.8 percent of staff in management/comms roles.

Auckland ratepayers are not just funding services; they are propping up a bureaucracy with nearly 948 managers and 77 communications staff.

Josh Van Veen, Council Payroll Blowout: Big Five Spend $1.3 Billion On Staff, Taxpayers’ Union, 04 May 2026

VOLUNTARY COUNCIL AMALGAMATION, OR ELSE…

Ministers have given New Zealand’s councils a three-month window to pitch their amalgamation proposals, or else central government will sort out their amalgamation. This is connected to wider reforms of local government and the RMA.

Following the announcement RNZ ran the headline ” Government gives councils amalgamation ultimatum”. Bryce Edwards went with the title of Central Government’s heavy and hasty reform of local government in his article covering the announcement and various reactions.

Gwynn Compton at Local Aotearoa gave his commentary on the reforms, stressing the need to strengthen local democracy, transparency, accountability, and regional coordination as well highlighting risks of rush decision-making, political opportunism, and institutional “patch protection”.

The direction is now clear. The clock is running. Councils have been given a blunt choice: lead your own reform, or have it done to you.

For communities, the test should be just as clear.

Simpler local government is worth pursuing, but the end result must be more than fewer councils on a map. It must deliver better governance, stronger regional coordination, more effective infrastructure, clearer accountability and transparency, a more sustainable financial base, improved outcomes for communities and the environment, and a local voice that still means something once new roles are allocated and boundaries are drawn.

Gwynn Compton ,The clock is ticking on local government reform, 05 May 2025.

FIREFIGHTERS RAISE SERIOUS CONCERNS

The Duncan Garner Podcast has recently featured a 40 minute interview where firefighters raise concerns at the state of Fire and Emergency New Zealand.

The podcast interview covers a lot of ground and provides insight into deeper problems within New Zealand as well as highlighting some growing risks in urban environments.

Key issues covered in the podcast.

• Damaged and ageing firetrucks, often broken.

• Auckland is short on working firetrucks, with trucks needing to be driven up from Hamilton to respond to large fires.

• Issues with lithium ion battery fires in high-rise apartments (e.g. e-scooters) and electric vehicles in multilevel carparks.

• Low wages for frontline fire crews.

• FENZ management and board are very well paid (What Duncan calls “Fatcat salaries”).

• FENZ management is getting better at “spin”, they lied at a select committee.

• Health & Safety “overkill” generally, yet lack of support and protection for firefighters (especially around trauma counselling and cancer risks).

The podcast video can be found on Youtube here…

‘We’re Going Backwards’: Firefighters Sound The Alarm On Pay, Resources

OPEN INVITATION FOR OPINION PIECES

Do you have ideas to improve local government?

Are you part of a group that is pushing back against council overreach in your town or city?

CityWatch NZ is looking for articles on a range of issues and from around the country.

If you are interested in volunteering an opinion piece for CityWatch NZ, or know of someone who can write well, email content@citywatchnz.org for more information.

OPEN CONSULTATIONS, PETITIONS, AND EVENT NOTICES

SALE AND SUPPLY OF ALCOHOL (IMPROVING ALCOHOL REGULATION) AMENDMENT BILL

CLOSES 11:59PM THURSDAY 14 MAY 2026

The Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Improving Alcohol Regulation) Amendment Bill aims to improve alcohol regulation and remove barriers to economic growth by amending the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act. It would do so by strengthening some areas of the Act to minimise harm while also providing certainty around the licensing process to benefit both businesses and consumers. The bill proposes to do this by:

• ensuring objections to licensing applications come from local communities and allowing licence applicants a right of reply to objectors

• allowing hairdressers and barbers to supply small amounts of alcohol to customers without a licence

• allowing breweries, meaderies, and distilleries to hold both an on- and off-licence and to charge for samples

• enabling the Governor-General, on the advice of the responsible Minister, to declare stand-alone licence exemptions for clubs and on-licensed premises when televising significant events outside of usual trading hours

• clarifying responsibilities for rapid delivery services to reduce the risk of delivery to intoxicated and under-age people

• allowing club and on-licenced premises to stock zero-alcohol drinks instead of, or in addition to, low-alcohol drinks and licensed supermarkets and grocery stores to display and promote an area for zero-alcohol alternatives

• allowing restaurants that prepare and sell food products from retail sites on the same premises to apply for an off-licence in addition to an on-licence and allow clubs to hold either a club licence or an on-licence.

Link to feedback page:

https://www3.parliament.nz/en/pb/sc/make-a-submission/document/54SCJUST_SCF_B98F4D35-D0BD-47AB-A326-08DE82FD2EBD/sale-and-supply-of-alcohol-improving-alcohol-regulation

MODERN SLAVERY BILL

CLOSES 11:59PM THURSDAY 28 MAY 2026

The Education and Workforce Committee is calling for submissions on the Modern Slavery Bill.

This jointly-sponsored Member’s bill seeks to implement a statutory framework to strengthen and coordinate actions to combat modern slavery. Its proposals include new requirements to report and track progress to combat modern slavery, and to consider whether support for victims is adequate as part of regular reviews of legislation and policy.

Link to feedback page:

https://www3.parliament.nz/en/pb/sc/make-a-submission/document/54SCEDUW_SCF_C9147CC0-7B48-41F2-F03D-08DE6840A08E/modern-slavery-bill

Link to Bill:

https://www.legislation.govt.nz/bill/members/2026/242/en/latest/#LMS1569561

SERIOUS FRAUD OFFICE AMENDMENT BILL

CLOSES 11:59PM MONDAY 15 JUNE 2026.

The Chairperson of the Justice Committee has called for public submissions on the Serious Fraud Office Amendment Bill. The Serious Fraud Office Act 1990 gives the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) powers to investigate and prosecute serious or complex fraud. The bill aims to help the SFO more effectively carry out its role and to address the most pressing issues with the Act in two areas: search warrants and evidence admissibility. The amendments would align the SFO Act with the more up-to-date provisions in the Search and Surveillance Act 2012 and the Evidence Act 2006.

The bill would amend the SFO Act to enable the SFO to obtain necessary digital evidence, more efficiently obtain warrants, and better manage search sites. The amendments seek to make investigations more effective. They would not change the existing notice-making powers.

The bill would also amend the SFO Act to enable courts to apply the more modern evidence test to determine admissibility of unlawfully obtained evidence. Under the proposed changes, a wider range of factors would be considered. They include the quality of the evidence, the seriousness of the offence, and whether urgency or safety was a factor in how the evidence was obtained.2028 to 2030.

Link to feedback page:

https://www3.parliament.nz/en/pb/sc/make-a-submission/document/54SCJUST_SCF_7F746346-FF5D-4FE8-54CC-08DEA1B2F231/serious-fraud-office-amendment-bill

NEW ZEALAND TAXPAYERS’ UNION’S “STOP DOUBLE-CHARGING AND KEEP ROAD TOLLING FAIR” PETITION

The petition can be found at this link…

https://www.taxpayers.org.nz/petition_tolling?

The petition text is copied below…

I call on the Government to amend the Land Transport (Revenue) Amendment Bill to clearly define corridor tolling, ensure road tolling only pays for new roads, and keep tolling fair, voluntary, and genuinely user-pays.

“INTRODUCE MANDATORY TRANSPARENCY AND REGULATION FOR POLITICAL LOBBYING IN NZ” PETITION

CLOSES FRIDAY 07 AUGUST 2026 AT 11.59PM NZST

The petition can be found at this link…

https://petitions.parliament.nz/22de6272-7c91-4bc2-2c80-08de8ead923a?lang=en

The petition text is copied below…

Petition request

That the House of Representatives pass legislation to establish a mandatory public register of lobbyists, require proactive disclosure of meetings with Ministers and officials, and implement a “cooling-off” period for former Ministers and senior officials.

Petition reason

NZ lacks a mandatory lobbying register, unlike many OECD countries. I feel a perceived “revolving door” between government and lobbying firms creates integrity risks and undermines public trust, while any hidden meetings between decision-makers and well-funded interests could create an unfair imbalance of influence. In my view, voluntary codes are insufficient, and a statutory framework is required to ensure consistent, mandatory accountability and transparency across the industry.

“CHANGE THE LOCATION OF THE PROPOSED SOUTHERN WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT” PETITION

CLOSES WEDNESDAY 14 OCTOBER 2026 AT 11.59PM NZST

The petition can be found at this link…

https://petitions.parliament.nz/4a5779c1-162c-49c4-9b20-08de0ac20f72?lang=en

The petition text is copied below…

Petition request

That the House of Representatives urge Hamilton City Council to change the location of the proposed Southern Wastewater Treatment Plant.

Petition reason

I believe that HCC has ignored the voices of mana whenua and our local community directly affected. I disagree with the site preferred by HCC. In my view, relocation of the proposed plant is a necessary step towards preserving and protecting our environmental integrity, water, forest, both flora and fauna, local community, identity, history, cultural heritage, and historical site of Ngāti Ngamurikaitaua, Nukuhau Pā.

”INDEPENDENT REVIEW OF DIGITAL IDENTIFICATION SYSTEMS” PETITION

CLOSES WEDNESDAY 30 SEPTEMBER 2026 AT 11.59PM NZST

The petition can be found at this link…

https://petitions.parliament.nz/c0c80f58-f8c3-4ef8-21d6-08de036dbf3a?lang=en

The petition text is copied below…

Petition request

That the House of Representatives urge the Government to commission an independent review of privacy, security, and civil-liberty risks in digital ID systems, and to suspend plans for any centralised or mandatory digital ID until full public consultation occurs.

Petition reason

I believe that centralised digital IDs could enable tracking, profiling, or data misuse, threatening privacy, freedom, and resilience. In my opinion, an independent review should assess impacts under the Privacy Act 2020 and NZ Bill of Rights Act 1990. Until then, I believe the Government must pause any rollout or funding.

”DO NOT INTRODUCE DIGITAL ID CARDS” PETITION

CLOSES SUNDAY 04 OCTOBER 2026 AT 11.59PM NZST

The petition can be found at this link…

https://petitions.parliament.nz/050a6461-ddb5-4d68-f5de-08de02cc4270?lang=en

The petition text is copied below…

Petition request

That the House of Representatives urge the Government not to introduce a digital ID card system into New Zealand.

Petition reason

We believe a digital ID system would threaten Kiwi privacy, freedoms, and fairness by centralising sensitive data, and risking exclusion of the elderly, disabled, rural, and low-income communities. We think this would be a step towards mass surveillance and digital control, and that no one should be forced or financially coerced to register with a state-controlled ID system. We call on Parliament to reject digital ID which we believe would protect New Zealanders’ human rights and democracy.

”MAKE SOUND EMITTERS MANDATORY ON ELECTRIC CARS TO WARN BLIND PEDESTRIANS” PETITION

CLOSES FRIDAY 31 JULY 2026 AT 11.59PM NZST

The petition can be found at this link…

https://petitions.parliament.nz/8b70bf69-2e54-4e55-89ce-08ddcfc45c03

The petition text is copied below…

Petition request

That the House of Representatives legislate to make cost-effective artificial sound emitters mandatory on all electric and hybrid vehicles sold in New Zealand to warn blind and low-vision pedestrians when the vehicles are near.

Petition reason

Silent electric cars are a serious risk to blind and low-vision pedestrians. Without sound, we don’t know the vehicles are coming. Other countries require warning sounds at low speeds — I believe that New Zealand should urgently do so too, before more lives are put at risk. In my view, sound emitters should be mandatory on new electric and hybrid cars so that current vehicle owners aren’t burdened with the cost.

Posting of event information, petition information, consultation viewpoints, or other content on the CityWatch NZ newsletter or website does not constitute endorsement of those views by CityWatch NZ or its editors. This section is often based on information readers have sent to us on issues they think are important or checks of government websites for broadly-relevant consultations.

If there is a political/regulatory consultation, petition, or event you think might be of interest to CityWatch NZ readers, email the details to contact@citywatchnz.org

Subscribe now

Share

Both Wellington City Council and Hamilton City Council have faced increased scrutiny over the last few months after audit reports were released on their contracting and procurement processes. Hamilton Councillor Mesh Macdonald provides a related opinion piece on the importance of “fixing the architecture that governs how public money is spent” and how substandard procurement systems lead to rates increases.

During March, the Office of the Auditor-General released its “Inquiry into sensitive expenditure and procurement” regarding the Chatham Islands Council. The report focuses on the far-flung Council’s Chief Executive, extravagant Council-funded spending on the Chief Executive’s house, as well as problems with “lack of transparency and accountability”.

The “Three Waters” “Local Water Done Well” reforms continue, with the release of Water Service Strategies in many parts of the country and plans to transfer water assets (and debts) to new council controlled organisations (CCOs) this year. Public feedback on Hamilton’s Water Service Strategy (and the new “IAWAI” water company CCO) closes soon (6 April 2026). Mesh Macdonald and John McDonald provide opinion pieces on the IAWAI Water Service Strategy. Wellington Water, the CCO which has been managing the water networks in greater Wellington, has had a disastrous start to 2026 and is the focus of this newsletter’s “Water Company Woes“ list of news headlines.

With the rising fuel prices and global supply chain issues, we provide a link to the National Fuel Plan prepared by the agency (NEMA) which was formerly NZ’s Civil Defence.

Links are provided to open consultations, petitions, and events at the end of this newsletter.

RELEASE OF AUDIT REPORTS FOR HAMILTON AND WELLINGTON CITY COUNCILS

Procurement is a major part of operations and spending for city councils, especially since external contractors and consultants do a considerable amount of work for councils. How contracts are tendered, awarded, and managed can have a large impact on how much councils (and ultimately local communities) pay for the infrastructure and services provided by councils.

The Post published an article by Andrea Vance which was titled ‘Poorly controlled’ and risky: Wellington City Council’s contract chaos which covered the latest internal audit of Wellington City Council.

A damning internal audit has labelled Wellington City Council’s contract management processes as “poorly controlled,” revealing systemic failures that expose ratepayers to significant financial and legal risks.

The report, conducted by Grant Thornton, confirms the troubling findings of a previous Deloitte probe which estimated that poor oversight could be costing the city tens of millions of dollars.

That report was commissioned in the wake of two blistering reports which revealed that the Capital’s ratepayers were paying nearly three times more for water repairs than in other parts of the country.

Andrea Vance, ‘Poorly controlled’ and risky: Wellington City Council’s contract chaos, 23 February 2026

During Hamilton City Council’s Finance and Assurance Committee on the 26th of February 2026, a 2024 KPMG audit report on procurement was put on the agenda and discussed. According to the Committee Chair Councillor Rachel Karalus, a summary of the KPMG report was presented to some councillors in September 2024, though elected representatives were not provided with copies of the full report in 2024.

Hamilton City Councillor Mesh Macdonald provides an opinion piece about the KPMG report and other challenges facing the City Council. She stresses the importance of financial discipline, “fixing the architecture that governs how public money is spent”, and rates increases are driven by weak procurement systems.

OPINION: When Weak Systems Make Rates Higher

Hamilton City councillors have pledged to overhaul procurement systems after an independent audit revealed $239.1 million in contracts were awarded without open tender between 2021 and 2023.

The KPMG review, commissioned in 2024, was formally discussed in council chambers yesterday, with elected members debating how to implement 35 recommended reforms over the next three years.

Deputy Mayor Geoff Taylor said he was “concerned”, “disappointed” and “disturbed” that the audit was not provided to all elected members under the previous council.

Tom Eley, Hamilton councillors back KPMG procurement reforms after $239m review, 27 February 2026

The review forms part of Council’s internal assurance work, where independent auditors periodically check whether governance systems are actually operating as intended.

The findings are blunt. And damning. The review identifies weaknesses in procurement processes, governance and oversight. In other words, the systems designed to ensure public money is spent carefully are not operating as they should be.

Procurement maturity underpins financial discipline. If the systems that control purchasing are weak, it becomes far harder to ensure value for money. Competitive tension can erode, costs can escalate, and informal practices can take hold.

The review does not point to widespread misconduct.

What it reveals instead is structural. Essentially, it sets out the architecture of waste.

Not waste caused by deliberate wrongdoing, but waste that emerges when the systems designed to control spending are not strong enough.

Mesh Macdonald, When Weak Systems Make Rates Higher, 03 April 2026

CHATHAM ISLANDS COUNCIL IN TROUBLE

Heavily-dependent on grants from central government, the Chatham Islands Council is regarded as being in a financially precarious position. In March 2026, the Office of the Auditor-General released the report for its “Inquiry into sensitive expenditure and procurement” regarding the Chatham Islands Council. The report focuses on Paul Eagle who was the Council’s Chief Executive.

Political analyst Bryce Edwards published a summary of the situation and his wider concerns around the lack of accountability for officials in New Zealand.

Paul Eagle has been found out. Not by the press, though journalists have been circling for months, but by the Auditor-General, whose inquiry report into the Chatham Islands Council was tabled in Parliament yesterday. It is one of the most damning official documents produced about a New Zealand public servant in years. And the man at the centre of it is not some anonymous council manager who got in over his head. He is a former Labour MP, a former deputy mayor of Wellington, and a political operator with decades of experience in public life.

The report lays out a pattern of conduct that goes well beyond poor judgement. Eagle oversaw a $460,000 renovation of the council-owned house he lived in. He hired consultants he already knew and arranged for his wife to be subcontracted. And when auditors came asking questions, he fabricated documents, copied a builder’s signature on contracts the builder had never seen, and denied it – before eventually admitting he had “panicked.”

Eagle resigned last month. But resignation is not accountability. The question now is whether anyone – the police, his former party, central government – will impose real consequences. Or whether, as happens so often in New Zealand public life, a quiet exit will be treated as punishment enough.

Bryce Edwards, Paul Eagle and the Chatham Islands integrity collapse, Democracy Project, 25 February 2026

PUBLIC FEEDBACK ON IAWAI WATER SERVICES STRATEGY

Those who live in Hamilton City or the Waikato District have until the 6th of April to provide feedback on the Water Service Strategy produced for the new water company named “IAWAI”.

Consultation closes 06 April 2026: Hamilton City Council’s & Waikato District Council’s (IAWAI) Water Services Strategy

Hamilton City Councillor Mesh Macdonald and CityWatch NZ editor John McDonald provide opinion pieces on the IAWAI Water Service Strategy. These are based on what they will be sending in for the public feedback.

OPINION: The Cost of Water is Being Set. The Limits are Not

OPINION: Feedback on the IAWAI Water Services Strategy (April 2026)

Similar “Water Service Strategy” documents have been published by many councils around the country and may be seeking public feedback, check your local council websites for details.

WATER COMPANY WOES (WELLINGTON EDITION)

Wellington Water (Wellington’s water service CCO) has had a bad few months in the news headlines, and Wellington residents, visitors, and ratepayers are also having a bad start to the year. Four major issues dominated the headlines about Wellington Water from January to March 2026:

1. The Seaview Wastewater Treatment Plant’s odour problems are still not fixed after many years of problems and complaints. The plant is operated by the French-owned, multinational corporation named “Veolia”, which is contracted by Wellington Water, which in turn is somewhat accountable to various elected councils in the greater Wellington region. The Seaview plant has also been failing by discharging partially-treated sewage into Wellington Harbour.

2. In early February, there was a massive spill of untreated sewage into Cook Strait after failures at the Wellington Treatment Plant (The Moa Point sewage disaster).

3. General pipes bursting in the streets and sewage exploding up into residential bathrooms.

4. Under the new water company (named “Tiaki Wai”) the annual water bill for an average Wellington household is expected to be $2400 next year and rise to $6831 by 2036.

Some prominent examples of articles about Wellington’s water company this year, include:

• Burst pipes leaves more than 100 Wellington homes without water, RNZ, 08 January 2026

• Seaview wastewater treatment plant stench likely to return this weekend, RNZ, 08 January 2026

• Warning after sewage leak into Wellington harbour, RNZ, 18 January 2026

• Burst water pipe sends silt into Wellington’s Oriental Bay, RNZ, 29 January 2026

• What you need to know about Tiaki Wai, the entity replacing Wellington Water, RNZ, 03 February 2026

• Wellington’s Moa Point Wastewater Plant floods, shuts down, fix could take months, RNZ, 04 February 2026

• 70 million litres of raw sewage flowing into Wellington sea, RNZ, 04 February 2026

• ‘Catastrophic failure’: Wellington mayor describes plant’s leak as environmental disaster, RNZ, 05 February 2026

• Wellington Water chair Nick Leggett resigns over Moa Point sewage disaster, RNZ, 15 February 2026

• Watermain breakage leaves Lower Hutt streets flooded, RNZ, 16 February 2026

• Expert warns lack of staff, experience and support will see future wastewater failures, RNZ, 19 February 2026

• Moa Point sewage failure to be independently reviewed, RNZ, 19 February 2026

• No guarantee Moa Point will be fixed soon - water chair, RNZ, 19 February 2026

• Overseas experts flown in to assess damage at Moa Point wastewater treatment plant, RNZ, 19 February 2026

• ‘It’s a catastrophe’: Wellington rages as millions of litres of raw sewage pour into ocean, The Guardian, 19 February 2026

• Wellingtonians disturbed by sewage exploding from toilets, RNZ, 20 February 2026

• Wellington business losing thousands after sewage leak restrictions, RNZ, 23 February 2026

• Hutt City Council seeks assurance after Wellington’s sewage treatment plant failure, RNZ, 26 February 2026.

• Residents remain cautious about Moa Point despite authorities’ all clear, RNZ, 26 February 2026.

• Another wastewater leak hits Wellington, RNZ, 03 March 2026

• Moa Point wastewater plant replacement equipment not yet ordered, Wellington Water says, RNZ, 05 March 2026

• Moa Point disaster exposes deeper problems, public health experts warn, RNZ, 07 March 2026

• ‘Trapped air’ flaw possible cause of Moa Point wastewater failure, 1 News, 20 March 2026

• New Wellington water entity Tiaki Wai opens books, warns of higher costs to households to boost investment, NZ Herald, 25 March 2026

• Wellingtonians face average $2400 water bill next year, massive increases to follow, RNZ, 25 March 2026

• Wellington water bills: Local Govt Minister Simon Watts steps in over higher-than-expected charges, NZ Herald, 25 March 2026

• Burst pipe cuts water to three Wellington suburbs, RNZ, 26 March 2026

• Wellington Water seeks tender for fixing smelly Seaview wastewater treatment plant, RNZ, 27 March 2026

• Tiaki Wai set to open in the red as councils shift $1.7b debt, The Post, 27 March 2026

• Water shift to Tiaki Wai won’t stop rates increases across Wellington, The Post, 30 March 2026

An extended version of this list of articles, a few quotes, and a link to an NZ Herald interview highly-critical of Wellington Water can be found on the CityWatch NZ website…

Wellington Water CCO: January-March 2026 Media Coverage

NATIONAL FUEL PLAN

With international fuel supplies and markets being impacted by conflicts in the Middle East, New Zealand is at Level 1 of 4. The four level system is based on the National Fuel Plan, published in 2024 by the National Emergency Management Agency (NEMA).

The 2024 Fuel Plan can be found here…

https://www.civildefence.govt.nz/strategy-capability/plans-strategies/national-plans/national-fuel-plan

An explainer about the levels was also provided by RNZ.

OPEN INVITATION FOR OPINION PIECES

Do you have ideas to improve local government?

Are you part of a group that is pushing back against council overreach in your town or city?

CityWatch NZ is looking for articles on a range of issues and from around the country.

If you are interested in volunteering an opinion piece for CityWatch NZ, or know of someone who can write well, email content@citywatchnz.org for more information.

OPEN CONSULTATIONS, PETITIONS, AND EVENT NOTICES

INQUIRY INTO FIRE AND EMERGENCY NEW ZEALAND’S FLEET MANAGEMENT AND RELATED ISSUES

CLOSES 11:59PM THURSDAY 30 APRIL 2026

The Governance and Administration Committee has formally launched an inquiry into FENZ’s fleet management to examine the current state, procurement challenges, and future needs of all types of fire appliances.

Public submissions are being called from interested individuals and organisations. Public submissions will be open until 11.59pm on Thursday, 30 April 2026.

Link to feedback page:

https://www3.parliament.nz/en/pb/sc/make-a-submission/document/54SCGOA_SCF_01702031-7B43-4D10-5BF6-08DE8F8E7A8A/inquiry-into-fire-and-emergency-new-zealands-fleet-management

DATA AND STATISTICS (CENSUS) AMENDMENT BILL & ELECTORAL (DISTRICT BOUNDARIES) AMENDMENT BILL

CLOSES 11:59PM WEDNESDAY 15 APRIL 2026 (FOR BOTH BILLS).

Data and Statistics (Census) Amendment Bill feedback page can be found here, where the bill is described as…

The Data and Statistics Act 2022 requires the Government Statistician to take a census of the population and dwellings of New Zealand in every fifth year after the last census. Although the Statistician has discretion to decide how they will take the census, the Act implicitly assumes that it will be a large-scale survey involving the total population of New Zealand.

The Data and Statistics (Census) Amendment Bill would amend the Act to update the Statistician’s census obligations under a modern, administrative-data-first census approach. Under this approach, future censuses would be taken using administrative data as the primary source, which would be supported with survey data. The bill’s other amendments include requiring the annual publication of census data and statistics and moving the next census from 2028 to 2030.

The Electoral (District Boundaries) Amendment Bill feedback page can be found here, where the bill is described as…

This bill seeks to address the electoral implications of the Government's work to modernise the census process. It would amend the Electoral Act 1993 to decouple the timing of electoral boundary reviews from censuses. From 2030, electoral boundary reviews would instead be tied to every second general electoral cycle.

NEW ZEALAND TAXPAYERS’ UNION’S “STOP DOUBLE-CHARGING AND KEEP ROAD TOLLING FAIR” PETITION

The petition can be found at this link…

https://www.taxpayers.org.nz/petition_tolling?

The petition text is copied below…

I call on the Government to amend the Land Transport (Revenue) Amendment Bill to clearly define corridor tolling, ensure road tolling only pays for new roads, and keep tolling fair, voluntary, and genuinely user-pays.

“CHANGE THE LOCATION OF THE PROPOSED SOUTHERN WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT” PETITION

CLOSES WEDNESDAY 14 OCTOBER 2026 AT 11.59PM NZST

The petition can be found at this link…

https://petitions.parliament.nz/4a5779c1-162c-49c4-9b20-08de0ac20f72?lang=en

The petition text is copied below…

Petition request

That the House of Representatives urge Hamilton City Council to change the location of the proposed Southern Wastewater Treatment Plant.

Petition reason

I believe that HCC has ignored the voices of mana whenua and our local community directly affected. I disagree with the site preferred by HCC. In my view, relocation of the proposed plant is a necessary step towards preserving and protecting our environmental integrity, water, forest, both flora and fauna, local community, identity, history, cultural heritage, and historical site of Ngāti Ngamurikaitaua, Nukuhau Pā.

”INDEPENDENT REVIEW OF DIGITAL IDENTIFICATION SYSTEMS” PETITION

CLOSES WEDNESDAY 30 SEPTEMBER 2026 AT 11.59PM NZST

The petition can be found at this link…

https://petitions.parliament.nz/c0c80f58-f8c3-4ef8-21d6-08de036dbf3a?lang=en

The petition text is copied below…

Petition request

That the House of Representatives urge the Government to commission an independent review of privacy, security, and civil-liberty risks in digital ID systems, and to suspend plans for any centralised or mandatory digital ID until full public consultation occurs.

Petition reason

I believe that centralised digital IDs could enable tracking, profiling, or data misuse, threatening privacy, freedom, and resilience. In my opinion, an independent review should assess impacts under the Privacy Act 2020 and NZ Bill of Rights Act 1990. Until then, I believe the Government must pause any rollout or funding.

”DO NOT INTRODUCE DIGITAL ID CARDS” PETITION

CLOSES SUNDAY 04 OCTOBER 2026 AT 11.59PM NZST

The petition can be found at this link…

https://petitions.parliament.nz/050a6461-ddb5-4d68-f5de-08de02cc4270?lang=en

The petition text is copied below…

Petition request

That the House of Representatives urge the Government not to introduce a digital ID card system into New Zealand.

Petition reason

We believe a digital ID system would threaten Kiwi privacy, freedoms, and fairness by centralising sensitive data, and risking exclusion of the elderly, disabled, rural, and low-income communities. We think this would be a step towards mass surveillance and digital control, and that no one should be forced or financially coerced to register with a state-controlled ID system. We call on Parliament to reject digital ID which we believe would protect New Zealanders’ human rights and democracy.

”MAKE SOUND EMITTERS MANDATORY ON ELECTRIC CARS TO WARN BLIND PEDESTRIANS” PETITION

CLOSES FRIDAY 31 JULY 2026 AT 11.59PM NZST

The petition can be found at this link…

https://petitions.parliament.nz/8b70bf69-2e54-4e55-89ce-08ddcfc45c03

The petition text is copied below…

Petition request

That the House of Representatives legislate to make cost-effective artificial sound emitters mandatory on all electric and hybrid vehicles sold in New Zealand to warn blind and low-vision pedestrians when the vehicles are near.

Petition reason

Silent electric cars are a serious risk to blind and low-vision pedestrians. Without sound, we don’t know the vehicles are coming. Other countries require warning sounds at low speeds — I believe that New Zealand should urgently do so too, before more lives are put at risk. In my view, sound emitters should be mandatory on new electric and hybrid cars so that current vehicle owners aren’t burdened with the cost.

Posting of event information, petition information, consultation viewpoints, or other content on the CityWatch NZ newsletter or website does not constitute endorsement of those views by CityWatch NZ or its editors. This section is often based on information readers have sent to us on issues they think are important or checks of government websites for broadly-relevant consultations.

If there is a political/regulatory consultation, petition, or event you think might be of interest to CityWatch NZ readers, email the details to contact@citywatchnz.org

Subscribe now

Share

This newsletter’s main photograph is the raised crossing originally featured in the February 2024 newsletter. After recent road works, the raised crossing is looking less crazy and has what appears to be a gentler slope. As well as commentary on recent shift in the design of features on Hamilton’s roads, this newsletter features opinions about the continued subsidising of an intercity passenger train, growing awareness of New Zealand’s infrastructure and corruption problems, landowners pushing back against compulsory land acquisition, and proposed changes to the rules around the use of cyclelanes, footpaths, and roads.

Geoff Kreeger provides an open letter he sent to Waikato Regional Council about the Hamilton-to-Auckland Te Huia train service receiving an extension, arguing that difficult decisions should not be delayed for another year when the train service is not viable without heavy ratepayer subsidies.

More public discussion is occurring about the deep problems in New Zealand. Political Analyst Bryce Edwards highlights the issue of New Zealand’s comms-driven politics and overpriced infrastructure. Professor Matevz Raskovic proposes New Zealand create a “central anti-corruption agency” and do more to “address monopoly power“.

After around a decade of legal disputes, landowners achieved a win at the Supreme Court regarding the process used in government efforts to compulsorily acquire land for the Mt Messenger Bypass roading project. This decision arrives as Parliament considers new legislation to “streamline“ the ability for the state (and certain corporations) to acquire private land while attempting to deny the people full access to the courts.

CityWatch NZ editor John McDonald provides a brief analysis on the good, the bad, and the ugly of recent road “upgrades“ in Hamilton City. It is getting better with fewer (and less crazy) raised crossings being installed. However, Council is still installing the concrete cyclelane barriers which are unpopular and known to cause issues such as accidents and restricting emergency vehicles.

Minister of Transport Chris Bishop is proposing changes to the road rules to permit e-scooter to use cyclelanes and children to bike on footpaths. Consultation is open until 25 March 2026 on these rule changes and further rule changes related to heavy vehicles.

Links are provided to open consultations, petitions, and events at the end of this newsletter.

TRIAL EXTENSION FOR TE HUIA TRAIN SERVICE

Geoff Kreeger shares an open letter he sent to Waikato Regional Council about their decision to extend the the trial of the Te Huia train service to July 2027.

OPEN LETTER: A Ratepayer’s View of the Te Huia Trial Extension

The Te Huia train service runs between Hamilton and Auckland is heavily subsidised by ratepayers and appears to lack the passenger number to be viable. Geoff Kreeger argues that

From a ratepayer perspective, the argument against extending the Te Huia trial is grounded not in opposition to public transport, but in a call for transparency, fiscal responsibility, and adherence to agreed‑upon processes.

The trial extension is flawed, not because rail is unworthy, but because the integrity of the trial—and the trust of the ratepayers funding it—depends on deciding at the time originally promised.

If anything, the extension of the trial invites a broader reflection on how regional projects are funded, evaluated, and communicated. Public confidence is not built through extensions and exceptions, but through clarity, consistency, and respect for the people footing the bill.

Ratepayers will be concerned about the level of Waikato Regional Council subsidy if Te Huia is made permanent, given the NZTA indicated subsidy of 51%.

Geoff Kreeger, A Ratepayer’s View of the Te Huia Trial Extension, 03 March 2026

COMMS-DRIVEN POLITICS AND CORRUPTION

Political analyst Bryce Edwards continues his commentary on “broken New Zealand“ with analysis of “comms-driven politics” and getting poor value-for-money from our country’s huge infrastructure spending. Bryce Edwards draws attention to the recently released National Infrastructure Plan and how columnist Danyl McLauchlan criticises a political system that operates on “the idea that the first question about any issue is not what’s right or necessary, but what can be announced next week and how it will look”.

But for my money, the most important thing written about the plan so far is Danyl McLauchlan’s Listener column this week, “All pitch, no policy”, which slyly turns the report into a takedown of how our whole political system now runs on PR, not on governing. It is the clearest, gutsiest take so far, of how we ended up spending more than almost any other rich country on infrastructure while our pipes, roads and hospitals fall apart around us.

I’ve been writing for years about the rise of spin doctors and the way professionalised politics has slowly eaten away at democratic accountability. What McLauchlan has done is take this big, technical, 226-page infrastructure report and read it the way citizens should: as “an autopsy of the past 30 years of New Zealand comms-driven politics”, as he puts it. Instead of treating the report as just another media item on the Beehive’s “comms grid”, he shows how that very grid – the machinery of political communications – is what has broken the system the report is describing…

…The Commission notes that New Zealand has been spending about 5.8 per cent of GDP on infrastructure – “the most on infrastructure of any OECD nation” over the last two decades – yet we rank near the bottom on value for money and asset management. “We spend the most but get the least,” as McLauchlan bluntly puts it. It is hard to imagine a more damning sentence about a country that likes to see itself as pragmatic and fiscally responsible. McLauchlan links this directly to the politics of announceables: we keep launching new things for the cameras while quietly failing to look after the assets we already have.

Bryce Edwards, How Comms-driven politics broke New Zealand, Democracy Project, 25 February 2026

In light of New Zealand’s decline in Transparency International’s Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI), Professor Matevz Raskovic proposes that the country creates a central anti-corruption agency, increases transparency, and addresses the problems with monopolies.

While the government pitches itself as “business friendly”, limited competition across retail, construction and banking helps explain why more business leaders feel the market is not working for everyone.

US academic Robert Klitgaard, a leading authority on anti-corruption, devised a simple formula: “corruption equals monopoly power plus discretion minus transparency”. By that equation, New Zealand would need to address monopoly power across several sectors, reduce ministerial discretion and fast-tracking processes, and increase political transparency.

In an election year, politicians should understand that the public’s satisfaction with the political system is mainly driven by the interplay between how well the economy is performing and perceptions of injustice and corruption.

Professor Matevz (Matt) Raskovic, NZ is slowly slipping on the global corruption index. Is it time for an anti-corruption agency?, 18 February 2026

SUPREME COURT WIN FOR LANDOWNERS IN MT MESSENGER DISPUTE

In December 2025, the Supreme Court ruled in favour of the Pascoe family in their legal battle over the Government trying to take their land for the Mt Messenger Bypass roading project.

The bypass project in plans to straighten approximately 6 kilometres of State Highway 3 on the route between Te Kūiti and New Plymouth. One of the options for the new stretch of road was to go through the Pascoe family farm.

The Government has made efforts to acquire a portion of the Pascoe land for building the road using the Public Works Act 1981 and compulsory acquisition powers. The Pascoes wanted to negotiate with the Minister. However, New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA) wanted them to negotiate with the company that they had contracted called The Property Group (TPG).

The court case was an appeal following approximately 9 years of legal disputes around the process being used to take land for the Mt Messenger Bypass project.

“I really hope it’s going to help a lot of people in this country because it’s been a decade of unlawful exercise of the Public Works Act against us.”

Tony Pascoe as quoted by Will Johnston in ‘This is huge’: Couple fighting to keep land win Supreme Court appeal, The Post, 19 December 2025

According to the December 2025 Supreme Court decision, the Minister (and/or officials at Land Information New Zealand, LINZ) did not follow the “necessary statutory processes” to give NZTA or TPG the “delegated authority” to negotiate with the Pascoes.

Further details about the case and links to long-form interviews about the case can be found at the link below.

Supreme Court rules in favour of landowners in Mt Messenger Bypass dispute

“NZ Transport Agency (NZTA) contractors were currently constructing the road from the southern and using a gondola to access the centre of the project because the Pascoe’s land had not yet been secured.

In its decision to allow the Pascoes leave to appeal, the Supreme Court said a central question would be to decide whether it was permissible for negotiations prior to the compulsory acquisition of the couple’s land under the Public Works Act to be undertaken by a contractor, rather than by the Minister for Land Information, Chris Penk, or his officials.

It would also examine whether outsourcing of negotiations to NZTA contractor The Property Group was consistent with the minister’s statutory duty “to make every endeavour to negotiate in good faith”.

Tony Pascoe, who owns a farm with his wife on the northern boundary of the project, said the decision to allow the appeal was significant for all landowners.”

Robin Martin, Supreme Court to hear Mt Messenger Public Works Act appeal, RNZ, 09 June 2025

Currently the Public Works Amendment Bill is being considered by the Transport and Infrastructure Committee in Parliament, this bill has the aim of “Streamlining land acquisition powers and processes” and intends to restrict the ability of people to object to the “taking of land” through a court process.

REDUCING THE RAISED PLATFORM PROBLEM, YET MORE WORK TO BE DONE ON HAMILTON’S ROAD DESIGNS

John McDonald provides an opinion piece on the state of the roading design in Hamilton City, noting the changes in the last few years and the shift away from installing raised platforms and in-lane bus stops.

OPINION: Promising Shift in Road Designs for Hamilton City

One of the raised crossing at Five Cross Roads has recently been altered during road resurfacing works. This removes the crazy brick crossing we featured in early CityWatch NZ articles, replacing it with an asphalt crossing and slope that will hopefully be less punishing on passing motorists.

John McDonald provides a mixed assessment of recent design choices, arguing the importance of concrete changes to a city’s roading. While the shift away from in-lane bus stops and raised crossings is promising, the concrete cycle lane barriers still being installed will cause accidents and other issues for years into the future.

CYCLE LANES FOR SCOOTERS AND FOOTPATHS FOR BIKES?

Minister of Transport Chris Bishop is proposing changes to the road rules. The changes relate to the use of lanes and footpaths.

“Allow children up to age 12 (inclusive) to ride their bikes on footpaths, helping keep younger riders safer and reflecting common practice;

Introduce a mandatory passing gap of between one and 1.5 metres, depending on the speed limit, to give motorists clearer guidance when passing cyclists and horse riders;

Allow e-scooters to use cycle lanes;

Require drivers travelling under 60 kilometres per hour to give way to buses pulling out from bus stops;

Clarify signage rules so councils can better manage berm parking.”

Should e-scooters be allowed in cycle lanes?, RNZ, 25 February 2026

Some of the Minister’s justifications for the proposed rule changes were covered by RNZ.

“We are fixing the basics by making sure the rules are clear, practical, and reflect how people actually use our roads every day...”

“...Bringing the law into line with reality, with appropriate guidance and expectations around responsible riding, will help families make safer choices...

... I acknowledge some pedestrians, including older people and members of the disability community, may have concerns. Education and clear guidance will be important, and parents and caregivers will need to ensure children ride at safe speeds and give way to pedestrians.”

Minister of Transport Chris Bishop as quoted in Should e-scooters be allowed in cycle lanes?, RNZ, 25 February 2026

As part of the same Beehive announcement, changes are proposed to the rules around heavy vehicles, including: changes to the weight limits for Class 1 and Class 2 licences specifically for zero-emissions vehicles (such as electric buses), enabling overseas heavy vehicle licence holders to convert their licences “by sitting tests or completing approved courses”, as well as other changes around permits for “High Productivity Motor Vehicle truck and trailer combinations” and load pilot vehicles signage.

Consultations on the proposed rule changes close on WEDNESDAY 25 MARCH 2026 links below:

https://www.nzta.govt.nz/about-us/public-consultation-hub/current-consultations/consultation-on-lane-use-improvements

https://www.nzta.govt.nz/about-us/public-consultation-hub/current-consultations/land-transport-rules-reform-heavy-vehicle-productivity-phase-2

Further details in the Open Consultation section at the end of this newsletter.

OPEN INVITATION FOR OPINION PIECES

Do you have ideas to improve local government?

Are you part of a group that is pushing back against council overreach in your town or city?

CityWatch NZ is looking for articles on a range of issues and from around the country.

If you are interested in volunteering an opinion piece for CityWatch NZ, or know of someone who can write well, email content@citywatchnz.org for more information.

OPEN CONSULTATIONS, PETITIONS, AND EVENT NOTICES

ENVIRONMENT (DISESTABLISHMENT OF MINISTRY OF THE ENVIRONMENT) AMENDMENT BILL

CLOSES 4:30PM WEDNESDAY 11 MARCH 2026.

The Deputy Chairperson of the Environment Committee is calling for public submissions on the Environment (Disestablishment of Ministry for the Environment) Amendment Bill.

This bill is the first step in the Government’s plan to combine the functions of four government agencies into a new Ministry of Cities, Environment, Regions and Transport (MCERT):

• ​the Ministry for the Environment

• the Ministry of Housing and Urban Development

• the Ministry of Transport

• local government functions of the Department of Internal Affairs.

This bill seeks to amend the Environment Act 1986. It would disestablish the Ministry for the Environment and transfer the Ministry’s existing functions to the statutory office of the Secretary for the Environment. The Government has stated that it intends that the chief executive of the new ministry would be the Secretary for the Environment.

The Ministry for the Environment was established by the Environment Act and can only be disestablished by Parliament. The other functions to be included in the new ministry were not created through legislation and therefore do not require similar disestablishment legislation. The Government has stated its intention to disestablish these, and transfer to the proposed MCERT, by secondary legislation made under the Public Service Act 2020.

This bill relates solely to the Ministry for the Environment, and the deputy chairperson is seeking submissions that focus on the transfer of environment-related functions covered by the bill, rather than general comments on the broader machinery of government changes.

Link to feedback page:

https://www3.parliament.nz/en/pb/sc/make-a-submission/document/54SCENV_SCF_27CAED65-2904-433F-F467-08DE6D0EB023/environment-disestablishment-of-ministry-for-the-environment

Link to bill text:

https://www.legislation.govt.nz/bill/government/2026/0249/latest/d2623996e2.html?

CONSULTATION ON HAMILTON TRADING IN PUBLIC PLACES BYLAW AND POLICY

CLOSES TUESDAY 24 MARCH 2026.

Council is proposing minor changes to the Public Places Bylaw 2016 and the Trading in Public Places Policy to improve clarity, consistency, and alignment with other Council policies. These changes aim to:

• clarify provisions for trading on parks and reserves

• improve transparency around fees and permit requirements

• allow businesses to place one footpath sign without a permit

• remove the requirement for businesses to hold public liability insurance for outdoor dining permits

• distinguish markets from other types of events

• support city activation by reducing regulatory barriers for busking.

Link to feedback page:

https://haveyoursay.hamilton.govt.nz/tradingpublicplaces

LAND TRANSPORT RULES REFORM: HEAVY VEHICLE PRODUCTIVITY PHASE 2

CLOSES 5:00PM WEDNESDAY 25 MARCH 2026.

Proposed Rule changes aim to reduce administrative requirements affecting heavy vehicles and use regulatory and enforcement resources more efficiently.

We’re proposing amendments to the following Rules for heavy vehicles:

• Land Transport Rule: Vehicle Dimensions and Mass 2016

• Land Transport Rule: Traffic Control Devices 2004

• Land Transport (Driver Licensing) Rule 1999.

This consultation covers:

• removing permit requirements for rental service licence holders: We’re proposing to remove the requirement for Heavy Vehicle Rental Service Providers to hold an overlength High Productivity Motor Vehicle permit for combination repositioning if they meet certain requirements.

• pilot vehicle signage: We’re proposing the addition of three new signs and enabling reverse-colour on all signs, and the removal of the requirement for a forward-facing load pilot warning sign for a rear pilot vehicle.

• driver licensing – class 1 and 2 weight thresholds and overseas licence conversion: We’re proposing to enable class 1 driver licence holders to drive zero emission vehicles with a gross laden weight of up to 7,500 kg and allow overseas heavy vehicle licence holders to convert their licence by undertaking approved courses

Link to feedback page:

https://www.nzta.govt.nz/about-us/public-consultation-hub/current-consultations/land-transport-rules-reform-heavy-vehicle-productivity-phase-2

CONSULTATION ON LANE USE IMPROVEMENTS

CLOSES WEDNESDAY 25 MARCH 2026.

We’re consulting on 5 proposed changes to improve the safe and efficient use of lanes and better align the rules with how people already travel.

They address issues raised by councils, road users, and enforcement agencies and reflect how current rules operate in practice.

We’re seeking feedback on proposals to:

• allow children aged 12 years and under to ride bikes on footpaths

• set a minimum passing gap for when vehicles pass other road users

• allow people to ride e-scooters in cycle lanes

• require drivers to give way to buses leaving bus stops

• clarify signage requirements for enforcing berm parking restrictions.

Link to feedback page:

https://www.nzta.govt.nz/about-us/public-consultation-hub/current-consultations/consultation-on-lane-use-improvements

DATA AND STATISTICS (CENSUS) AMENDMENT BILL

CLOSES 11:59PM WEDNESDAY 15 APRIL 2026.

Submissions can be made here, where the bill is described as...

The Data and Statistics Act 2022 requires the Government Statistician to take a census of the population and dwellings of New Zealand in every fifth year after the last census. Although the Statistician has discretion to decide how they will take the census, the Act implicitly assumes that it will be a large-scale survey involving the total population of New Zealand.

The Data and Statistics (Census) Amendment Bill would amend the Act to update the Statistician’s census obligations under a modern, administrative-data-first census approach. Under this approach, future censuses would be taken using administrative data as the primary source, which would be supported with survey data. The bill’s other amendments include requiring the annual publication of census data and statistics and moving the next census from 2028 to 2030.

Link to feedback page:

https://www3.parliament.nz/en/pb/sc/make-a-submission/document/54SCJUST_SCF_6D5DDB24-DA86-4DE8-C09D-08DE77FA96BE/data-and-statistics-census-amendment-bill

Link to bill text:

https://www.legislation.govt.nz/bill/government/2026/253/en/latest/

NEW ZEALAND TAXPAYERS’ UNION’S “STOP DOUBLE-CHARGING AND KEEP ROAD TOLLING FAIR” PETITION

The petition can be found at this link…

https://www.taxpayers.org.nz/petition_tolling?

The petition text is copied below…

I call on the Government to amend the Land Transport (Revenue) Amendment Bill to clearly define corridor tolling, ensure road tolling only pays for new roads, and keep tolling fair, voluntary, and genuinely user-pays.

NEW ZEALAND TAXPAYERS’ UNION’S “CAP RATES NOW” PETITION

The petition can be found at this link…

https://www.capratesnow.nz/

The petition text is copied below…

I call on Local Government Minister Simon Watts to cap rates increases to no more than annual inflation

“CHANGE THE LOCATION OF THE PROPOSED SOUTHERN WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT” PETITION

CLOSES WEDNESDAY 14 OCTOBER 2026 AT 11.59PM NZST

The petition can be found at this link…

https://petitions.parliament.nz/4a5779c1-162c-49c4-9b20-08de0ac20f72?lang=en

The petition text is copied below…

Petition request

That the House of Representatives urge Hamilton City Council to change the location of the proposed Southern Wastewater Treatment Plant.

Petition reason

I believe that HCC has ignored the voices of mana whenua and our local community directly affected. I disagree with the site preferred by HCC. In my view, relocation of the proposed plant is a necessary step towards preserving and protecting our environmental integrity, water, forest, both flora and fauna, local community, identity, history, cultural heritage, and historical site of Ngāti Ngamurikaitaua, Nukuhau Pā.

”INDEPENDENT REVIEW OF DIGITAL IDENTIFICATION SYSTEMS” PETITION

CLOSES WEDNESDAY 30 SEPTEMBER 2026 AT 11.59PM NZST

The petition can be found at this link…

https://petitions.parliament.nz/c0c80f58-f8c3-4ef8-21d6-08de036dbf3a?lang=en

The petition text is copied below…

Petition request

That the House of Representatives urge the Government to commission an independent review of privacy, security, and civil-liberty risks in digital ID systems, and to suspend plans for any centralised or mandatory digital ID until full public consultation occurs.

Petition reason

I believe that centralised digital IDs could enable tracking, profiling, or data misuse, threatening privacy, freedom, and resilience. In my opinion, an independent review should assess impacts under the Privacy Act 2020 and NZ Bill of Rights Act 1990. Until then, I believe the Government must pause any rollout or funding.

”DO NOT INTRODUCE DIGITAL ID CARDS” PETITION

CLOSES SUNDAY 04 OCTOBER 2026 AT 11.59PM NZST

The petition can be found at this link…

https://petitions.parliament.nz/050a6461-ddb5-4d68-f5de-08de02cc4270?lang=en

The petition text is copied below…

Petition request

That the House of Representatives urge the Government not to introduce a digital ID card system into New Zealand.

Petition reason

We believe a digital ID system would threaten Kiwi privacy, freedoms, and fairness by centralising sensitive data, and risking exclusion of the elderly, disabled, rural, and low-income communities. We think this would be a step towards mass surveillance and digital control, and that no one should be forced or financially coerced to register with a state-controlled ID system. We call on Parliament to reject digital ID which we believe would protect New Zealanders’ human rights and democracy.

”MAKE SOUND EMITTERS MANDATORY ON ELECTRIC CARS TO WARN BLIND PEDESTRIANS” PETITION

CLOSES FRIDAY 31 JULY 2026 AT 11.59PM NZST

The petition can be found at this link…

https://petitions.parliament.nz/8b70bf69-2e54-4e55-89ce-08ddcfc45c03

The petition text is copied below…

Petition request

That the House of Representatives legislate to make cost-effective artificial sound emitters mandatory on all electric and hybrid vehicles sold in New Zealand to warn blind and low-vision pedestrians when the vehicles are near.

Petition reason

Silent electric cars are a serious risk to blind and low-vision pedestrians. Without sound, we don’t know the vehicles are coming. Other countries require warning sounds at low speeds — I believe that New Zealand should urgently do so too, before more lives are put at risk. In my view, sound emitters should be mandatory on new electric and hybrid cars so that current vehicle owners aren’t burdened with the cost.

Posting of event information, petition information, consultation viewpoints, or other content on the CityWatch NZ newsletter or website does not constitute endorsement of those views by CityWatch NZ or its editors. This section is often based on information readers have sent to us on issues they think are important or checks of government websites for broadly-relevant consultations.

If there is a political/regulatory consultation, petition, or event you think might be of interest to CityWatch NZ readers, email the details to contact@citywatchnz.org

Subscribe now

Share

This special edition represents the end of the second year of CityWatch NZ newsletters and the start of a new year.

2026 is going to be a significant year for local government politics with central government elections and major legislative reforms.

We also highlight various issues and trends which could be significant for New Zealand’s urban areas in 2026. These issues include rushed decision-making and slow implementation, the push for implementing artificial intelligence, increased use of the phrase “managed decline“, fast-track projects, and solar storm preparations.

More legislation was being pushed through Parliament late last year. This has resulted in public consultations finishing in February for a number of bills before select committees. These bills include:

• The two acts intended to replace the Resource Management Act. These are the “Planning Bill” and the “Natural Environment Bill“ with consultation closing on 13 February 2026.

• The “Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Bill” with consultation closing on 16 February 2026.

• The “Infrastructure Funding and Financing Amendment Bill” with the feedback window extended to 20 February 2026. The bill contains the switch from developer contributions to developer levies, which has implications for council finances and off-the-books borrowing.

The public feedback for the review of the 2025 Local Elections closes on 27 February 2026. It is an opportunity to share your views on topics such as postal voting, phone voting, election integrity, and “misinformation“ related to council elections.

Links are provided to open consultations, petitions, and events at the end of this newsletter.

The newsletter is running later than usual this month, Substack has been having some technical issues which have contributed to the delays.

[Correction: The feedback about the 2025 Local Election closes on 27 February 2026, an older version of this newsletter contained the incorrect date]

ISSUES TO WATCH IN 2026

Similar to last January’s newsletter, in this newsletter we highlight issues and trends expected to be important in over the next 12 months. Some of these issues will be carried over from 2025, and we will include some commentary on what has occurred over the last year and the implications of those occurrences over the upcoming year.

• New Councillors and Mayors get to work.

After the local elections in October 2025, there were many new councillors and mayors elected around the country. About half of councils had new mayors elected, with many mayors who had pushed for double-digit rates increases not being re-elected. The new-elected representatives had various inductions, briefings and onboarding training in late 2025 before council meetings ceased over the December-January holiday season.

2026 will be critical for those new elected representatives as they start trying to make changes.

Will they be able to deliver on election promises?

Will they experience cooperation or resistance from the bureaucracy?

Will institutional inertia delay, or prevent, the changes those elected representatives are hoping to implement?

• Rushed decision-making and slow implementation.

As legislation is being pushed through at the central government level, the reforms appear both rushed and slow. There are limited windows for public consultations and Parliament has been acting under urgency. This gives the impression of predetermined decisions and tokenistic requests for public feedback. Despite rushing through consultation and decision-making processes, the implementation process for many changes is expected to take many years. The rates capping recently imposed on councils by central government will have a “transition period starting from 1 January 2027”.

In November 2025, all the political parties in Parliament voted to pass the “Land Transport Management (Time of Use Charging) Amendment Bill”. That bill enables congestion charge schemes to be implemented, though only takes effect after November 2026.

• Big spending by water companies.

With the Local Water Done Well reforms underway, council-owned water corporations are preparing for major spending programmes. The reforms have increased the local government debt limits for waters-related spending, enabling water companies (or in-house waters departments) to borrow up to 500% of annual revenue. New water companies are likely to go on spending sprees, enabled by these higher debt limits and new management systems.

Some spending will be on much needed (and long-deffered) infrastructure maintenance and renewals. Making up for decades of neglect of critical municipal infrastructure.

Other spending will be less necessary, with expensive ‘think big’-style infrastructure projects and installing smart water meters being proposed in many cities.

As the new water companies are established we are also seeing job ads for executive-level bureaucrats with $200,000+ salaries to staff these new water companies.

• Fast-track projects and streamlined land acquisition

The Coalition Government has pushed for over a hundred projects to be fast-tracked under a scheme largely focused on building more infrastructure and housing. The Beehive press-release for the scheme claimed it will use expert panels which will function in a similar way to Labour’s COVID-19 Fast Track legislation.

The fast-track process and some of the fast-track projects are controversial, especially with the short time to evaluate environmental impacts and concerns about the concentration of decision-making power. Newer legislation is also streamlining the process for governments (and utility corporations) to acquire land while denying landowners their ‘day in court’.

• Greater use of terms such as “managed decline”

Locally and internationally we have seen increased use of the term “managed decline”, a phrase being used across the political spectrum to describe discontent with governments. Andrea Vance used the term in a 2025 review article in the The Post, and political commentator Bryce Edwards is pushing the related term “Broken New Zealand“. Kiwiblog recently featured a guest post titled “The managed decline of the New Zealand economy” which criticised a range of areas including the tax system favouring property investments, low workplace productivity, lack-of-vision with infrastructure, long-term problems with public-private partnerships, lack of ambition, and a “system wired to say no“. A 2025 report into the health of the New Zealand population (commissioned by a medical union) also had “managed decline” as the title. The term “managed decline” gained increased prominence in late 2024 when British PM Keir Starmer criticised civil servants for being “comfortable in the tepid bath of managed decline”. The term has also been used to describe the broader situations in the United Kingdom, Australia, Canada, and the United States.

Ironically, “managed decline“ was once intended to be positive term referring to a de-growth strategy to achieve some sort of equitable utopia which aligns with social justice. Others will view the term as a euphemism for a situation where ‘the lives of most people will be getting materially worse, while being burdened by more bureaucratic management‘.

• More Local government reform and a General Election

Local government reforms continue with a wide range of legislation being moving through Parliament. This has included rates capping, enabling granny flats, road pricing, and replacing the Resource Management Act.

There is general election scheduled for 7 November 2026.

The coalition government has repealed and replaced many of Labour’s attempted local government reforms. Even when acts of Parliament have been passed, the implementation of those reforms is often scheduled to take many years. Depending on the general election result, the current round of local government reforms could be modified, reversed, or revised.

• Artificial Intelligence and Digital Transformation

The trend of using artificial intelligence in local government continues. Providers of software packages and cloud-based services are including AI functionality so the capability is entering the public sector in a major way, even without the approval of specific AI projects.

“AI is no longer just an emerging technology for local government. For many councils, it’s starting to become part of the operating model. The real risk now is not experimentation– it’s the gap between ambition and execution.

We also heard clearly that all of this is playing out against real constraints – rates caps, long-term plan cycles, funding pressure and workforce shortages – which is why councils are being deliberate, not reckless, in how they adopt AI.”

Redefining the everyday with AI in local government, Datascape (Datacom)

Time will tell whether applying AI in local government actually improves efficiency and provides more reliable improvements than new problems.

There are wider discussions as to whether AI is an over-hyped bubble heading towards major failures. Others contend it is a transformational technology which is here to stay.

The promise of AI – the promise AI companies make to investors – is that there will be AI that can do your job, and when your boss fires you and replaces you with AI, he will keep half of your salary for himself and give the other half to the AI company.

That is the $13tn growth story that Morgan Stanley is telling. It’s why big investors are giving AI companies hundreds of billions of dollars. And because they are piling in, normies are also getting sucked in, risking their retirement savings and their family’s financial security.

Cory Doctorow, AI companies will fail. We can salvage something from the wreckage, The Guardian, 18 January 2026

The excitement surrounding AI is built on the belief that it is a new technological paradigm, like the internet or electricity, that will drive transformative change and a new long-term economic cycle. AI has the potential to transform how the world works, creating new industries and reshaping old ones. While history tells us that periods of rapid innovation often bring pockets of excess, several factors suggest today’s AI surge is grounded in reality, not speculation.

Roger Garrett, AI bubble or boom? What the evidence says about the AI investment cycle, Newsroom, 23 December 2025

• Digital identification, digital currency, digital government, and digital sovereignty

The digital transformation of governments in New Zealand is going to be a major topic in 2026 with new legislation enabling more digital identification systems, electronic road user charges, digital licences, and heavier reliance on digital transactions.

Many of these changes are controversial, with some opposition taking the form of petitions (see last section of this newsletter for details and links).

The concept of “digital sovereignty” is becoming more prominent, especially in the European Union. European governments and institutions are concerned about their over-reliance on USA-based corporations as the providers of information technologies and cloud-based services. The dominance of large USA-based tech corporations has lead to concerns around customer privacy breaches, anti-competitive practices, tax evasion, and strategic reliance on foreign-controlled digital infrastructure. Public disagreements between various European governments and the US Government of President Trump, appear to be driving increased interest in “digital sovereignty” within Europe Union.

“In a world increasingly run by software, countries around the world are waking up to their dependency on foreign services and products. Geopolitical shifts drive digital sovereignty to the top of the political agenda in Europe and other regions. How can we ensure that regulations protecting our citizens actually apply? How do we guarantee continuity of operations in a potentially fragmenting world? How do we ensure access to critical services is not held hostage in future international trade negotiations?

Building resilience against those undesirable scenarios calls for more locally run critical infrastructure and services. Open Source software has a key role to play there, for three reasons. First, it is made available to everyone and can be used for any purpose, which means that we can build on top of the existing commons, rather than start from scratch. Second, its transparency allows us to trust the software does what it says it does and is compliant with local regulations. And last but not least, Open Source enables a community-based development model that allows multiple organizations to work together toward the same, interoperable software stack.”

Thierry Carrez, Open Source: A global commons to enable digital sovereignty, 24 November 2025

There appears to be both centralised and decentralised versions of the “digital sovereignty” movements in European countries.

The decentralised version is European countries adopting, adapting, and sharing open source software. This could be the “building homegrown tech” version of “digital sovereignty”. Governments in Austria, Germany, and Denmark have been reported to be moving away from Microsoft products and towards Linux and LibreOffice.

The more centralised version (with more emphasis on control) is represented by the views of European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen in a 2020 State of the Union Address and opinion piece titled “Shaping Europe’s digital future“. The European Union has been described as a “regulatory hegemon”… with some wider debate as to whether the European Union should also be described as a “benign hegemon”.

Expect more discussions about New Zealand’s approach to digital sovereignty over the coming years.

• Solar events, impressive aurora, and preparations for power outages

2025 was the expected maximum of the 11-year cycle in sunspot activity on the sun. Near the peak of this cycle, there is increased risk of solar flares, coronal mass ejections, and geomagnetic storms. There will also be related aurora.

On the 7th of November 2025, the National Emergency Management Agency (NEMA formerly known as Civil Defence) held a space weather exercise in the Wellington bunker under the Beehive. During the exercise, a moderate-intensity space weather event impacted the Earth, no major impacts were reported in New Zealand. In late November, Airbus grounded around 6,000 aircraft to update computer systems. Airbus claims to have discovered a vulnerability where solar weather and cosmic rays can corrupt data for altitude calculations in navigation computers.

NEMA predicts that there will be increased risk of intense space weather events in the years following the peak of the 11-year cycle. A six-day power grid outage could be used in efforts to protect New Zealand’ electricity grid in the event of extreme solar weather event. NEMA advises people to prepare for such power outages.

THE CITYWATCH NZ WEBSITE

The CityWatch NZ website has been a volunteer effort and has published over 237 posts since its creation. A special thanks to all the volunteers who helped with content, editing, and the distribution of pamphlets. We would also like to thank those that contributed donations, both small and large, which covered the printing of pamphlets and bumper stickers.

CityWatch NZ is an issue-focused website rather than a news-focused website. The website is designed to be a searchable archive of content which can be sorted by region or a specific issue. We have an aim of holding local government to account and provoke well-informed public discussions of important issues. We see our role as boosting transparency, educating the politicians, and informing the people.

News websites tend to focuses on the “who“, “where“, “when“, and “what“ for an issue or event. CityWatch NZ focuses more on the “how“ and the “why“ an issue or event. Having an awareness about “how“ and “why“ something is occurring, puts people in a better position to effectively intervene and make changes.

Our newsletter archive can be found here.

https://citywatchnz.substack.com/t/newsletters

The CityWatch NZ website (https://www.citywatchnz.org/) is organised into topics and is searchable. It is there for people to find information on issues rather than keeping up with the news.

OPEN INVITATION FOR OPINION PIECES

Do you have ideas to improve local government?

If you are interested in volunteering an opinion piece for CityWatch NZ, or know of someone who can write well, email content@citywatchnz.org for more information.

CONSULTATION ON RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ACT (RMA) REPLACEMENT

CONSULTATIONS CLOSES 4:30PM FRIDAY 13 FEBRUARY 2026 for both the “Planning Bill” and the “Natural Environment Bill“ as they are being considered at the Environment Committee.

These bills represent major changes to the regulatory environment and a replacement of the 1991 Resource Management Act (RMA).

Link for making submissions on the bill: https://www3.parliament.nz/en/pb/sc/make-a-submission/document/54SCENV_SCF_BA467863-D6B0-4968-1027-08DE369D9192/planning-bill-and-natural-environment-bill

Link to The Planning Bill

https://www.legislation.govt.nz/bill/government/2025/0235/latest/LMS1035807.html

Link to Natural Environment Bill

https://www.legislation.govt.nz/bill/government/2025/0234/latest/LMS1520775.html

This is how the bills and request for feedback is presented on the Parliamentary web page…

The Environment Committee is issuing a joint call for public submissions on two bills:

The Planning Bill; and

The Natural Environment Bill.

Submissions cover both bills

The committee acknowledges that the two bills are closely related, and that many submitters will likely wish to comment on both bills. As such, the committee has taken the approach of issuing one joint call for submissions. Submissions made through this portal can discuss one or both bills. You do not need to make a separate submission on each bill. All submissions will automatically be counted against both bills.

Suggestion for structuring submissions

If commenting on both bills, a useful way to structure submissions could be to have “parts” in your submission. For example:

• part 1: canvass high-level views on the policy intent of the overall reform package

• part 2: comments on any shared provisions in the bills

• part 3: comments specific to the Planning Bill (with clause numbers if appropriate) and

• part 4: comments specific to the Natural Environment Bill (with clause numbers if appropriate).

This is a suggestion only. Committee members look forward to receiving public feedback on the bills, regardless of how you choose to structure your submission.

About the bills

Together, the Planning bill and Natural Environment bill would repeal and replace the Resource Management Act 1992, and aim to:

• reduce the number of consents needed by narrowing the type of effects that are regulated;

• make it easier to build homes and infrastructure by enabling the establishment of a clear set of rules under each law to guide councils and decision makers;

• increase consistency between council plans across the country through greater standardisation;

• reduce the number of council plans by providing for 1 plan per region that implements national direction and includes spatial, natural environment, and land-use plans in 1 place;

• safeguard the natural environment and human health by introducing an environmental limits framework covering air, water, land, soils, and indigenous biodiversity, and setting out a regime to manage resource use within these limits;

• make better use of data and technology to enable faster, more consistent planning decisions and make it easier to monitor performance and outcomes

INQUIRY INTO THE 2025 LOCAL ELECTIONS

CLOSES 11:59PM FRIDAY 27 FEBRUARY 2026

The Justice Committee has opened an inquiry into the 2025 Local Elections and is now seeking public submissions. The committee has issued the following terms of reference for the inquiry.

The inquiry will examine the law and administrative procedures for the conduct of the 2025 Local Elections with a particular focus on:

voting processes, including:

• reports of people being removed from rolls or switched between them

• the number of disallowed special votes

• outcomes of recent changes to the delivery of voting papers and returns, such as increased use of DX mail and orange bins in supermarkets

• use of telephone dictation voting for voters who are blind, vision-impaired, or physically unable to mark their voting paper

• the appropriateness of the use of mobile voting booths.

• electoral integrity, including disinformation or misinformation

• consideration of the role of councils and their staff when determining voting arrangements, and their relationships with the electoral agencies responsible for conducting the voting.​

Link to feedback page:

https://www3.parliament.nz/en/pb/sc/make-a-submission/document/54SCJUST_SCF_0073EC30-328F-4732-B45E-08DE17494B72/inquiry-into-the-2025-local-elections

OPEN CONSULTATIONS, PETITIONS, AND EVENT NOTICES

BUILDING (EARTHQUAKE-PRONE BUILDINGS) AMENDMENT BILL

CLOSES 11:59PM MONDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2026.

Submissions can be made here, where the bill is described as...

The Chairperson of the Transport and Infrastructure Committee has called for public submissions on the Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Bill. The bill aims to establish a regulatory system for managing earthquake-prone buildings that is more risk-based and proportionate.

Changes include:

• earthquake ratings will no longer be used in the earthquake-prone building system, and the Bill introduces tiered mitigation requirements based on the risk of individual buildings

• only regulating high-risk types of building in high- and medium-risk earthquake zones

• all buildings in low-risk zones (Auckland, Northland, and the Chatham Islands) and buildings in other areas that are not high-risk building types will no longer be able to be designated earthquake-prone

• coastal Otago (including Dunedin) and part of Stewart Island will be reclassified from a low seismic risk area to a medium seismic zone, to reflect the greater understanding of seismic hazard in that area

• to ensure that building owners have sufficient time to carry out remediation, territorial authorities will be able to grant seismic work deadline extensions of up to 15 years

The bill text can be viewed at this link:

https://www.legislation.govt.nz/bill/government/2025/0231/13.0/whole.html#LMS1531170

INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDING AND FINANCING AMENDMENT BILL

CLOSES 11:59PM FRIDAY 20 February 2026

“The purpose of this bill is to improve infrastructure funding and financing tools to support urban development. Submissions were initially scheduled to close on 23 January 2026 but have now been extended until 20 February 2026.

Link to feedback page:

https://www3.parliament.nz/en/pb/sc/make-a-submission/document/54SCFIN_SCF_328F446A-D8F8-466A-BA46-08DE2C75A6E0/infrastructure-funding-and-financing-amendment-bill

Link to bill text:

https://www.legislation.govt.nz/bill/government/2025/0231/13.0/whole.html

Editor’s note: This bill also deserves close attention given the overview below on the bill itself. Establishing developer levies, enabling more off-balance sheet borrowing by Councils, more recovery options to be used against landowners.

The Infrastructure Funding and Financing Act 2020 (the IFF Act) provides a mechanism to fund and finance infrastructure that supports urban development. The IFF Act was introduced to help deliver infrastructure projects free from local authority funding and financing constraints.

Through the IFF Act, a special purpose vehicle (an SPV), rather than a council or other infrastructure authority, is used to fund infrastructure. Finance raised using an SPV is excluded from councils’ balance sheets, ensuring that it doesn’t affect their debt limits. SPVs will repay any finance raised by charging a levy on those who benefit from the infrastructure (for example, landowners in the area serviced by the new infrastructure).

Changes are needed to help improve the usability of the IFF Act as an infrastructure funding and financing tool to support urban development. This Bill removes unnecessary barriers to using the IFF Act, improves the viability of the IFF Act for a range of infrastructure projects, and makes the levy development and approvals process simpler and more streamlined.

NEW ZEALAND TAXPAYERS’ UNION’S “STOP DOUBLE-CHARGING AND KEEP ROAD TOLLING FAIR” PETITION

The petition can be found at this link…

https://www.taxpayers.org.nz/petition_tolling?

The petition text is copied below…

I call on the Government to amend the Land Transport (Revenue) Amendment Bill to clearly define corridor tolling, ensure road tolling only pays for new roads, and keep tolling fair, voluntary, and genuinely user-pays.

NEW ZEALAND TAXPAYERS’ UNION’S “CAP RATES NOW” PETITION

The petition can be found at this link…

https://www.capratesnow.nz/

The petition text is copied below…

I call on Local Government Minister Simon Watts to cap rates increases to no more than annual inflation

“CHANGE THE LOCATION OF THE PROPOSED SOUTHERN WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT” PETITION

CLOSES WEDNESDAY 14 OCTOBER 2026 AT 11.59PM NZST

The petition can be found at this link…

https://petitions.parliament.nz/4a5779c1-162c-49c4-9b20-08de0ac20f72?lang=en

The petition text is copied below…

Petition request

That the House of Representatives urge Hamilton City Council to change the location of the proposed Southern Wastewater Treatment Plant.

Petition reason

I believe that HCC has ignored the voices of mana whenua and our local community directly affected. I disagree with the site preferred by HCC. In my view, relocation of the proposed plant is a necessary step towards preserving and protecting our environmental integrity, water, forest, both flora and fauna, local community, identity, history, cultural heritage, and historical site of Ngāti Ngamurikaitaua, Nukuhau Pā.

”INDEPENDENT REVIEW OF DIGITAL IDENTIFICATION SYSTEMS” PETITION

CLOSES WEDNESDAY 30 SEPTEMBER 2026 AT 11.59PM NZST

The petition can be found at this link…

https://petitions.parliament.nz/c0c80f58-f8c3-4ef8-21d6-08de036dbf3a?lang=en

The petition text is copied below…

Petition request

That the House of Representatives urge the Government to commission an independent review of privacy, security, and civil-liberty risks in digital ID systems, and to suspend plans for any centralised or mandatory digital ID until full public consultation occurs.

Petition reason

I believe that centralised digital IDs could enable tracking, profiling, or data misuse, threatening privacy, freedom, and resilience. In my opinion, an independent review should assess impacts under the Privacy Act 2020 and NZ Bill of Rights Act 1990. Until then, I believe the Government must pause any rollout or funding.

”DO NOT INTRODUCE DIGITAL ID CARDS” PETITION

CLOSES SUNDAY 04 OCTOBER 2026 AT 11.59PM NZST

The petition can be found at this link…

https://petitions.parliament.nz/050a6461-ddb5-4d68-f5de-08de02cc4270?lang=en

The petition text is copied below…

Petition request

That the House of Representatives urge the Government not to introduce a digital ID card system into New Zealand.

Petition reason

We believe a digital ID system would threaten Kiwi privacy, freedoms, and fairness by centralising sensitive data, and risking exclusion of the elderly, disabled, rural, and low-income communities. We think this would be a step towards mass surveillance and digital control, and that no one should be forced or financially coerced to register with a state-controlled ID system. We call on Parliament to reject digital ID which we believe would protect New Zealanders’ human rights and democracy.

”MAKE SOUND EMITTERS MANDATORY ON ELECTRIC CARS TO WARN BLIND PEDESTRIANS” PETITION

CLOSES FRIDAY 31 JULY 2026 AT 11.59PM NZST

The petition can be found at this link…

https://petitions.parliament.nz/8b70bf69-2e54-4e55-89ce-08ddcfc45c03

The petition text is copied below…

Petition request

That the House of Representatives legislate to make cost-effective artificial sound emitters mandatory on all electric and hybrid vehicles sold in New Zealand to warn blind and low-vision pedestrians when the vehicles are near.

Petition reason

Silent electric cars are a serious risk to blind and low-vision pedestrians. Without sound, we don’t know the vehicles are coming. Other countries require warning sounds at low speeds — I believe that New Zealand should urgently do so too, before more lives are put at risk. In my view, sound emitters should be mandatory on new electric and hybrid cars so that current vehicle owners aren’t burdened with the cost.

Posting of event information, petition information, consultation viewpoints, or other content on the CityWatch NZ newsletter or website does not constitute endorsement of those views by CityWatch NZ or its editors. This section is often based on information readers have sent to us on issues they think are important or checks of government websites for broadly-relevant consultations.

If there is a political/regulatory consultation, petition, or event you think might be of interest to CityWatch NZ readers, email the details to contact@citywatchnz.org

Subscribe now

Share

Similar to last year, we are publishing one newsletter to cover both November and December.

This newsletter features a wide range of topics from Police corruption and space weather emergency exercises through to a number of important local government reforms in Parliament with public consultations that finish in January 2026.

Central Government has announced proposed changes to local government. This includes the removal of regional councillors and rates capping.

Hamilton Councillor Andrew Bydder provides an opinion piece about the reforms and the prospect of amalgamation of smaller councils. John McDonald provides an opinion piece about some of the proposed changes where he criticises the removal of elected representatives when the larger problem is the bureaucracy.

Governance and Public Management Consultant Kathryn Ennis-Carter provides an opinion piece for our “Fixing Councils“ series. She emphasises the need for better civics education to increase public involvement in local government and awareness about the how the three branches of government should function.

With the recent criminal conviction of a former Deputy Police Commissioner and the exposure of a related cover-up, there was more public debate about the use of the word “corruption“ in New Zealand. Political analysts and commentators discussed the official reluctance to use the word “corruption” in New Zealand and the wider difficulties in terms of holding public officials accountable for wrongdoing.

Civil Defense (renamed the National Emergency Management Agency, NEMA) held a space weather emergency exercise under the Beehive in November at the same time that an actual solar event (coronal mass ejection) of moderate-severity reached Earth.

More legislation was pushed through Parliament over the last few months. This has resulted in public consultations finishing in January and February for a number of bills before select committees, including:

• The “Land Transport (Revenue) Amendment Bill” is legislation to enable: digital road user charges, more public-private partnerships, and more revenue extraction using toll roads.

• The “Building and Construction Sector (Strengthening Occupational Licensing Regimes) Amendment Bill” and the “Building and Construction Sector (Self-certification by Plumbers and Drainlayers) Amendment Bill” make significant changes to the way various tradies are regulated and licenced.

• The “Public Works Amendment Bill” which aims to streamline “land acquisition powers and processes”.

• The “Infrastructure Funding and Financing Amendment Bill'“, which contains the switch from developer contributions to developer levies, which has implications for council finances and off-the-books borrowing.

Links are provided to open consultations, petitions, and events at the end of this newsletter.

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT PROPOSES REMOVING ALL REGIONAL COUNCILLORS AND INTRODUCING RATES CAPPING

Central Government has announced proposed changes to local government, including the removal of all regional councillors and rates capping.

Hamilton Councillor Andrew Bydder provides an opinion piece about the regional council reforms and the prospect of amalgamation for smaller councils.

OPINION: The End of Regional Councils?

Andrew Bydder explains how the proposed reforms for are tied to Resource Management Act (RMA) reforms, commenting that “The RMA started out as a pretty good concept, but it became an industry dedicated to a gravy-train for bureaucrats and consultants amid ever-expanding regulations”. He also predicts that combined services or council amalgamation is on the horizon.

National’s proposal to place regional councils under the control of mayors of the local councils has two purposes. Initially, it is to allow local councils to enable more productivity by giving them the ability to direct and coordinate regional functions to work better with local development, hopefully removing some of the roadblocks and delays that are costing society too much.

The second purpose, which is unstated, is a big step towards amalgamation of local councils.

The first purpose could have been achieved by pulling apart regional functions and allocating them to local councils, but the regional entity is being retained and local mayors are required to work together.

My prediction is that the regional entity will become a hub for many local services being combined, and that local councils will end up smaller, in much the same way as has been done with water services. Libraries, roads, and building consents are ripe for picking. There is simply no need for every local council to duplicate library management and overheads, so cost savings can be achieved through economies of scale.

Andrew Bydder, The End of Regional Councils?, November 2025

CityWatch NZ editor John McDonald provides an opinion piece about some of the proposed changes to regional councils.

OPINION: Regional Council Reforms Should Focus on Reducing Bureaucracy not Reducing Democracy

John McDonald criticises the removal of elected representatives when the larger problem is the bureaucracy. He argues that fewer elected representatives watching over multiple large bureaucracies could make it easier for council staff and consultants to get more bad projects past the mayors and councillors.

It is traditionally the role of the elected representatives to restrain the tendencies of the executive branches of governments. Left unchecked, the executive branch will tend to gather more revenue, obtain more powers, perpetrate more abuses using those powers, and shield itself from effective accountability. In the postmodern age, the executive branch is mostly a sprawling bureaucracy which can include associated corporations and public-private partnerships.

Despite the ‘bureaucracy is crazy’-type rhetoric from the Ministers and their acknowledgement of the need for change, the proposals reduce the numbers of elected representatives. All the regional councillors are to be removed as a priority, while “regional council operations” will continue unchanged in Step 1 of the proposed reforms. Council operations means the bureaucracy, as well as the frontline staff or contractors that do the physical things such as carry out maintenance.

Apparently regional councils as distinct democratically-elected organisations will be disbanded, while regional councils as larger bureaucratic organisations will be maintained (at least until Step 2 of the proposed reforms).

The mayors of local councils will form the proposed new “Combined Territories Board” in order to provide some level of democratically-elected governance in the proposed reforms. The mayors may also be able to appoint their city or district councillors to committees for the regional council.

This will effectively make the elected representatives for city councils and district councils responsible for monitoring/governing two large bureaucracies, instead of one. If you think that part of the problem with local government is that council staff are sneaking extravagant spending and unpopular projects past councillors, then reducing the numbers of elected representatives will make that aspect of the problem worse.

John McDonald, Regional Council Reforms Should Focus on Reducing Bureaucracy not Reducing Democracy, 04 December 2025

Central Government imposing rates capping was officially announced on the 1st of December 2025. Local Government Minister Simon Watts announced that 4% would be the maximum increase, unless councils apply for exception circumstances to the regulator. The transition period for the new rules would start in early 2027, according to the Minister.

“Analysis suggests a target range of 2 to 4 per cent per capita, per year. This means rates increases would be limited to a maximum of 4 per cent,” Mr Watts says.

“A minimum increase is necessary so councils can continue to provide essential services like rubbish collection, council roads maintenance and the management of parks and libraries.”

The cap will apply to all sources of rates – general rates, targeted rates and uniform annual charges – but will exclude water charges and other non-rates revenue like fees and charges.

Councils will not be able to increase rates beyond the upper end of the range, unless they have permission from a regulator appointed by central government. Permission will only be granted in extreme circumstances, such as a natural disaster, and councils will need to show how they will return to the target range.

Where councils need to raise revenue to pay for things outside of extreme circumstances, such as catching up on past underinvestment in infrastructure, they will need to apply to a regulator for approval. Again, councils would need to provide justification and explain how they will return to the target range over time.

“These new rules will be a big change, and many councils will need time to adapt, which is why there will be a transition period starting from 1 January 2027,” Mr Watts says.

Local Government Minister Simon Watts, Beehive press release titled Getting rates under control for ratepayers, 01 December 2025.

THE ‘FIXING COUNCILS’ SERIES

We have put an invitation out to a wide range of commentators on the topic of “Fixing Councils”.

Our second opinion piece received is by Governance and Public Management Consultant Kathryn Ennis-Carter.

OPINION: A Failure of Education and a Failure of Governance

Kathryn Ennis-Carter covers some of the deficiencies in civics education in New Zealand and the lack of understanding about the three branches of government (Executive, Legislative, and Judicial). Confusion with electoral systems and low voter turnout are also covered.

It is also clear that many people do not understand the mechanisms built into the system for citizens to participate in governance between elections through the process of making submissions to Select Committees considering various legislation. At central government level, the general pattern on numbers of submissions on various subjects is usually less than 10,000 (that is, less than 0.2% of the adult voting public). That trend generally only varies when the media has significantly featured the issue – such as the Treaty Principles Bill. Many people simply do not know how to make submissions, write to Cabinet Ministers or otherwise take part in governance processes other than voting every three years.

At local government level, the number of submissions to Council and participation in Council ‘consultation’ is abysmally even lower – unless, again, there is a community issue that has attracted a lot of media coverage.

And most recently, when the Government announced planned changes to regional councils, it became abundantly clear that many people do not understand the functions of regional councils at all, including media commentators who were obviously floundering in presenting what the changes might mean. Again, it became clear that many in the general public do not even realise how they are paying for regional councils through their rates paid to city and district councils.

So what is the reason why our national education system has failed to educate decades of students about the governance system that we are all a part of and which affects all of us?

Some would cynically say that it’s because an un-educated population is a compliant and politically inactive population. Or maybe it’s just laziness and lack of political awareness on the part of the education sector in making civics education part of the basic curriculum. Or perhaps it’s just more interesting for teachers to send kids out on climate change protests than it is to educate them about our governance system and the realities of how to really influence government decisions.

Kathryn Ennis-Carter, A Failure of Education and a Failure of Governance, 04 December 2025

THE USE OF “THE C-WORD“ FOR SENIOR POLICE LEADERSHIP AND BEYOND

The New Zealand Police have faced considerable public scrutiny this year with an number of scandals being published widely in the media.

Sam Sherwood’s article in RNZ, featuring an interview with Police Commissioner Richard Chambers, mentions the prominent news stories from the last year. These stories included: “about 130 police officers under investigation for falsely recording breath tests”, how a “directive was sent to staff about not investigating retail crime below certain thresholds”, and the Independent Police Conduct Authority (IPCA) releasing “a scathing report into police’s handling of allegations” made about McSkimming which found “serious misconduct at the highest levels of police”.

Chambers wants to reinforce that what happened involved a small group of the most senior leaders of police, and did not reflect the rest of the organisation.

Several c words have been used to describe the IPCA report, from collusion, to cover-up and corruption.

Asked where he stood, Chambers said everyone had their own opinion.

“The word corruption is a very strong word, but, you know, I have heard a number of people use that word to describe this. I want to be able to move on from using certain words that might describe this behavior.

“I want to focus on leading the organisation forward and doing the right thing being positive about what we are doing. We’ve already made significant changes. I want this chapter, if there’s a c word, I want that chapter to be book ended, and then we can move forward and do all the things that the public expect us to be doing as senior leaders and as an organisation and working hard for victims, which has always been a priority. I said that on day one, and this chapter is one that has led a lot of people down.

Sam Sherwood quoting Police Commissioner Richard Chambers in, Inside Police Commissioner Richard Chambers’ first year and how he plans to rebuild trust, RNZ, 3 December 2025

Media and officials have been debating whether to use the “C-word“ for this scandal involving the police’s senior leadership. This debate has prompted many political analysts and commentators to provide insight into how corruption is defined in New Zealand and how such wrongdoing is handled by the system. The reluctance to use the word “corruption“ appears strongly associated with a lack of accountability for wrongdoing.

Political Analyst and Director of the Democracy Project, Bryce Edwards, provides an overview of the situation in one of his Democracy Briefings.

New Zealand is in the midst of a debate over a single word: “corruption.” The explosive police cover-up scandal involving former Deputy Commissioner Jevon McSkimming and then-Commissioner Andrew Coster has rattled public trust. But is it corruption?

In a country that prides itself on being “least corrupt”, many leaders are tripping over themselves to avoid the term. This reluctance at the top is now part of the scandal’s fallout, raising deeper questions about our national psyche and whether we can confront ugly truths about power and accountability in New Zealand...

…As Amelia Wade observed in the Sunday Star-Times, the official finger-pointing and semantic deflections (“passing the blame, protecting the badge”) reveal an institutional instinct to shield the system’s reputation. Everyone from police leadership to oversight bodies seemed more comfortable calling it a lapse or failure, rather than the dreaded C-word…

…Outside the halls of officialdom, however, a very different narrative is taking hold. A growing number of commentators, legal minds, and public figures have effectively said: Stuff the semantics and call it what it is. They argue that New Zealand’s squeamishness over the term “corruption” is obstructing honest accountability.

National Party-aligned commentator David Farrar encapsulated this view succinctly. On Kiwiblog he wrote that by any common-sense definition, the McSkimming affair “was clearly corruption. It was clearly dishonest behaviour by people in authority.”

Farrar pointed to the Oxford Dictionary definition of corruption as dishonest or illegal behaviour by people in authority. Under that plain meaning, how could anyone deny the label? Top police bosses secretly burying complaints, misleading watchdogs and ministers, and orchestrating an outcome to protect their own. It checks every box for dishonest behaviour by those in power.

Bryce Edwards, Democracy Briefing: Calling the C-word in the Police cover-up scandal, The Democracy Project, 17 November 2025

New Zealand Initiative co-founder and constitutional law commentator, Rodger Partridge also provides insight into the New Zealand situation regarding official wrongdoing. His article (published in the NZ Herald and his personal Substack) explains how New Zealand is different to many other Commonwealth nations because our government abolished “misconduct in public office” as a criminal offence in 1961. He argues that in the UK such criminal misconduct can carry a sentence of life imprisonment and that incentives matter.

“Instead of a broad duty-of-office standard, we adopted narrow corruption provisions requiring proof of bribes or explicit deceit.

What remains are narrow offences such as conspiring to defeat justice or attempting to pervert the course of justice. But those generally only apply once an investigation is underway or clearly in contemplation. They struggle to reach senior officials who suppress complaints before any investigation begins – which is where most institutional burying occurs. New Zealand’s decision to abolish misconduct in public office left an accountability hole that has never been filled. The worst outcome for burying serious allegations is early retirement with full entitlements.

Roger Partridge, Why Burying Beats Exposure: A Structural Flaw in New Zealand’s Public Service Architecture, Plain Thinking, 21 November 2025)

Regarding local government issues, allegations of corruption are rarely and reluctantly use.

However, over the last year we have seen the conviction of a Watercare engineer for fraud and New Zealand’s first criminal cartel prosecution for a contractor rigging bids for some Auckland transport projects.

A significant cultural change could be happening in New Zealand regarding how the country recognises and deals with corruption.

CIVIL DEFENCE HOLDS SPACE WEATHER EMERGENCY EXERCISE UNDER THE BEEHIVE

On 07 November 2025, the National Emergency Management Agency (NEMA formerly known as Civil Defence) held a space weather exercise in the Wellington bunker under the Beehive.

National Emergency Management Agency on Space Weather (2024 Plan and 2025 Exercise)

RNZ reported on the “simulated emergency response to solar storm” held under the Beehive and also reported on an actual solar storm hitting Earth at the time of the exercise.

NEMA published the the National Space Weather Response Plan about a year earlier in November 2024. The plan covers New Zealand’s national response to space weather events such as solar flares, coronal mass ejections, and geomagnetic storms.

To protect New Zealand’s electricity grid Transpower plans to disconnect vulnerable parts of the grid (such as transformers). This protective measure could result in parts of the country being without power for up to 6 days. Without such protective measures, serious damage to sensitive parts of the electricity grid infrastructure could result in outages that last a month or much longer.

Back in January 2025 CityWatch NZ newsletter we highlighted the dangers of solar activity in our “Issues to Watch in 2025” section, noting that the sun is now near the maximum of its 11-year sunspot cycle and how “vulnerable will our high-tech infrastructure and smart cities be to major solar storm impacts” such as the 1859 Carrington Event.

Space weather has potential impacts on how our increasingly digitalised cities will function into the future.

DIGITAL ROAD USER CHARGES AND CHANGES TO ROAD TOLLS

As part of the larger agenda to replace fuel taxes with universal road pricing or time-of-use charging , more legislation is working its way through Parliament.

The Select Committee is taking feedback on the “Land Transport (Revenue) Amendment Bill” until 11:59PM THURSDAY 08 JANUARY 2026.

Submissions can be made here, where the bill is described as...

“This bill seeks to ensure that key revenue tools effectively support a user-pays basis for funding land transport. It would do so by:

• ​creating a more flexible and responsive tolling framework to support investment in roading infrastructure

• modernising the road user charges system, and remove barriers to the future transition of all light vehicles from fuel excise duty to road user charges.”

A summary of the bill and related links can be found on the CityWatch NZ website…

Consultation Closes 08 January 2026: “Land Transport (Revenue) Amendment Bill”

The current bill weakens the restrictions that forbid the government turning existing roads into toll roads. This would allow existing roads close to a new toll road to be made part of the tolling system.

The bill also appears to weaken the current restrictions that require toll roads to have a feasible, untolled alternative route. It appears to target only “classes of heavy vehicles”, effectively allowing the Minister of Transport to coerce such heavy vehicles to use the toll road with threats of fines if they use alternative routes.

The bill generally facilitates more public-private partnerships. For-profit, private entities will be enabled to operate toll roads with government support and also operate the systems used to monitor vehicle travel collect digital road user charges.

Under the bill, the price of tolls are set to automatically increase each year to match Consumers Price Index inflation, just like everyone's annual income.

OPEN INVITATION FOR OPINION PIECES

Do you have ideas to improve local government?

If you are interested in volunteering an opinion piece for CityWatch NZ, or know of someone who can write well, email content@citywatchnz.org for more information.

CHANGES TO THE WAY TRADIES ARE REGULATED AND LICENCED

CONSULTATIONS CLOSES 11:59PM THURSDAY 08 JANUARY 2026 for two “Building and Construction Sector” amendment bills before the Transport and Infrastructure Committee.

These bills appear to making some far-reaching changes to how tradies are regulated. More powers are being given to licencing boards and board registrars to determine which complaints are investigated and the bill enables new codes of ethics to be enforced.

Links to the two bills and where to give feedback are detailed below:

Building and Construction Sector (Self-certification by Plumbers and Drainlayers) Amendment Bill

The bill is intended to introduce an opt-in scheme to allow qualified plumbers and drainlayers to self-certify that their work complies with the terms of a building consent. This is intended to remove the need for a building consent authority inspection. The bill is an omnibus bill that would amend the Building Act 2004 and the Plumbers, Gasfitters, and Drainlayers Act 2006.

Link to feedback page:

https://www3.parliament.nz/en/pb/sc/make-a-submission/document/54SCTIN_SCF_1C7FDACD-9D4E-4DD6-6C2D-08DE20B5B51D/building-and-construction-sector-self-certification-by

Link to bill text:

https://www.legislation.govt.nz/bill/government/2025/0221/9.0/LMS1543137.html

Building and Construction Sector (Strengthening Occupational Licensing Regimes) Amendment Bill

“The bill is intended to strengthen occupational licensing regimes in the building and construction sector. It is an omnibus bill that would amend the Building Act 2004, the Plumbers, Gasfitters, and Drainlayers Act 2006, and the Electricity Act 1992.

It would achieve its objectives by:

• clarifying the functions of regulatory boards and registrars, and expanding registrars’ powers to deal with complaints

• enabling the making and enforcement of codes of ethics for licensed plumbers, gasfitters, and drainlayers

• allowing the Building Practitioners Board to enforce training orders

• improving the licence renewal process for licensed building practitioners

• increasing the membership of the Plumbers, Gasfitters, and Drainlayers Board

Link to feedback page:

https://www3.parliament.nz/en/pb/sc/make-a-submission/document/54SCTIN_SCF_51E2D885-F3B4-4AD9-6C2E-08DE20B5B51D/building-and-construction-sector-strengthening-occupational

Link to bill text:

https://www.legislation.govt.nz/bill/government/2025/0224/6.0/LMS556533.html

OPEN CONSULTATIONS, PETITIONS, AND EVENT NOTICES

INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDING AND FINANCING AMENDMENT BILL

CLOSES 11:59PM FRIDAY 23 JANUARY 2026

The purpose of this bill is to improve infrastructure funding and financing tools to support urban development.

Link to feedback page:

https://www3.parliament.nz/en/pb/sc/make-a-submission/document/54SCFIN_SCF_328F446A-D8F8-466A-BA46-08DE2C75A6E0/infrastructure-funding-and-financing-amendment-bill

Link to bill text:

https://www.legislation.govt.nz/bill/government/2025/0231/13.0/whole.html

Editor’s note: This bill also deserves close attention given the overview below on the bill itself. Establishing developer levies, enabling more off-balance sheet borrowing by Councils, more recovery options to be used against landowners.

The Infrastructure Funding and Financing Act 2020 (the IFF Act) provides a mechanism to fund and finance infrastructure that supports urban development. The IFF Act was introduced to help deliver infrastructure projects free from local authority funding and financing constraints.

Through the IFF Act, a special purpose vehicle (an SPV), rather than a council or other infrastructure authority, is used to fund infrastructure. Finance raised using an SPV is excluded from councils’ balance sheets, ensuring that it doesn’t affect their debt limits. SPVs will repay any finance raised by charging a levy on those who benefit from the infrastructure (for example, landowners in the area serviced by the new infrastructure).

Changes are needed to help improve the usability of the IFF Act as an infrastructure funding and financing tool to support urban development. This Bill removes unnecessary barriers to using the IFF Act, improves the viability of the IFF Act for a range of infrastructure projects, and makes the levy development and approvals process simpler and more streamlined.

PUBLIC WORKS AMENDMENT BILL

CLOSES 11:59PM TUESDAY 27 JANUARY 2026

This bill proposes to amend the Public Works Act to improves the Act’s efficiency, effectiveness, and clarify land acquisition, objections, and compensation functions in the Act.

Link to feedback page:

https://www3.parliament.nz/en/pb/sc/make-a-submission/document/54SCTIN_SCF_889C8A52-0438-4B4B-FD0C-08DE2ADC1AF7/public-works-amendment-bill

Link to bill text:

https://www.legislation.govt.nz/bill/government/2025/0230/31.0/whole.html

Editor’s note: This bill also deserves close attention given the following subheadings the bill’s Explanatory note.

“Streamlining land acquisition powers and processes”

“Providing targeted improvements to objections proceedings”

“Supporting effective, equitable, and fair compensation settings”

“Enabling timely recovery from emergencies”

INQUIRY INTO THE 2025 LOCAL ELECTIONS

CLOSES 11:59PM FRIDAY 27 FEBRUARY 2026

The Justice Committee has opened an inquiry into the 2025 Local Elections and is now seeking public submissions. The committee has issued the following terms of reference for the inquiry.

The inquiry will examine the law and administrative procedures for the conduct of the 2025 Local Elections with a particular focus on:

voting processes, including:

• reports of people being removed from rolls or switched between them

• the number of disallowed special votes

• outcomes of recent changes to the delivery of voting papers and returns, such as increased use of DX mail and orange bins in supermarkets

• use of telephone dictation voting for voters who are blind, vision-impaired, or physically unable to mark their voting paper

• the appropriateness of the use of mobile voting booths.

• electoral integrity, including disinformation or misinformation

• consideration of the role of councils and their staff when determining voting arrangements, and their relationships with the electoral agencies responsible for conducting the voting.​

Link to feedback page:

https://www3.parliament.nz/en/pb/sc/make-a-submission/document/54SCJUST_SCF_0073EC30-328F-4732-B45E-08DE17494B72/inquiry-into-the-2025-local-elections

”NEW ZEALAND TAXPAYERS’ UNION’S “CAP RATES NOW” PETITION

The petition can be found at this link…

https://www.capratesnow.nz/

The petition text is copied below…

I call on Local Government Minister Simon Watts to cap rates increases to no more than annual inflation

“CHANGE THE LOCATION OF THE PROPOSED SOUTHERN WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT” PETITION

CLOSES WEDNESDAY 14 OCTOBER 2026 AT 11.59PM NZST

The petition can be found at this link…

https://petitions.parliament.nz/4a5779c1-162c-49c4-9b20-08de0ac20f72?lang=en

The petition text is copied below…

Petition request

That the House of Representatives urge Hamilton City Council to change the location of the proposed Southern Wastewater Treatment Plant.

Petition reason

I believe that HCC has ignored the voices of mana whenua and our local community directly affected. I disagree with the site preferred by HCC. In my view, relocation of the proposed plant is a necessary step towards preserving and protecting our environmental integrity, water, forest, both flora and fauna, local community, identity, history, cultural heritage, and historical site of Ngāti Ngamurikaitaua, Nukuhau Pā.

An earlier and related petition, posted by Te Kopa King, on change.org by can be found at this link…

https://c.org/QzLtt5Wb5p

”INDEPENDENT REVIEW OF DIGITAL IDENTIFICATION SYSTEMS” PETITION

CLOSES SATURDAY 31 JANUARY 2026 AT 11.59PM NZST

The petition can be found at this link…

https://petitions.parliament.nz/c0c80f58-f8c3-4ef8-21d6-08de036dbf3a?lang=en

The petition text is copied below…

Petition request

That the House of Representatives urge the Government to commission an independent review of privacy, security, and civil-liberty risks in digital ID systems, and to suspend plans for any centralised or mandatory digital ID until full public consultation occurs.

Petition reason

I believe that centralised digital IDs could enable tracking, profiling, or data misuse, threatening privacy, freedom, and resilience. In my opinion, an independent review should assess impacts under the Privacy Act 2020 and NZ Bill of Rights Act 1990. Until then, I believe the Government must pause any rollout or funding.

”MAKE SOUND EMITTERS MANDATORY ON ELECTRIC CARS TO WARN BLIND PEDESTRIANS” PETITION

CLOSES FRIDAY 31 JULY 2026 AT 11.59PM NZST

The petition can be found at this link…

https://petitions.parliament.nz/8b70bf69-2e54-4e55-89ce-08ddcfc45c03

The petition text is copied below…

Petition request

That the House of Representatives legislate to make cost-effective artificial sound emitters mandatory on all electric and hybrid vehicles sold in New Zealand to warn blind and low-vision pedestrians when the vehicles are near.

Petition reason

Silent electric cars are a serious risk to blind and low-vision pedestrians. Without sound, we don’t know the vehicles are coming. Other countries require warning sounds at low speeds — I believe that New Zealand should urgently do so too, before more lives are put at risk. In my view, sound emitters should be mandatory on new electric and hybrid cars so that current vehicle owners aren’t burdened with the cost.

Posting of event information, petition information, consultation viewpoints, or other content on the CityWatch NZ newsletter or website does not constitute endorsement of those views by CityWatch NZ or its editors. This section is often based on information readers have sent to us on issues they think are important or checks of government websites for broadly-relevant consultations.

If there is a political/regulatory consultation, petition, or event you think might be of interest to CityWatch NZ readers, email the details to contact@citywatchnz.org

Subscribe now

Share

With the 2025 Local Government Elections over, we provide a brief summary of the results in the major cities and some general trends from around the country.

Wayne Brown was re-elected as Mayor of Auckland Council and he is continuing his mission to bring Auckland Transport back under democratic control.

In Hamilton, Tim Macindoe was elected Mayor and half of the new council are new councillors. This marks a major shift for Hamilton City.

Wellington City elected Andrew Little as its new Mayor. The former Mayor Tory Whanau only ran for the Māori Ward seat this election, and after losing to Matthew Reweti is no longer part of Wellington City Council.

Christchurch re-elected Phil Mauger as Mayor and 11 of the 13 incumbent councillors were also re-elected. After the election, Christchurch City Council announced that its plan to keep water services in-house and under the Council’s control was accepted by central government.

For Mayor of Dunedin, Jules Radich was replaced with Sophie Barker. Jules Radich will still be on Dunedin City Council having won a seat as a councillor .

Around the country, mayors who instituted double-digit rates increases (and/or were senior figures in LGNZ) were often replaced in this October’s elections.

We cover the negative responses to the “Ratepayer Protection Pledge” campaign from Taxpayers’ Union. In an opinion piece, John McDonald describes the campaign as “an important example of what not to do” if you are “an activist group trying to make a good impression on local government politics”. Wayne Brown’s response to the “Ratepayer Protection Pledge” campaign was much shorter. This newsletter will contain a few examples of politicians using expletives.

We continue to highlight issues with the new water companies and the “Three Waters” “Local Water Done Well” reforms.

Re-elected Hamilton Councillor Andrew Bydder provides an opinion piece about the raised platforms, shared paths, and public consultation for “Morrinsville Road fit for purpose upgrades” project. The proposed project is open for consultation until 09 November 2025.

Links are provided to open consultations, petitions, and events at the end of this newsletter.

AUCKLAND COUNCIL’S ELECTION RESULTS AND WAYNE BROWN TAKING ON AUCKLAND TRANSPORT

Final results (based on information from the Auckland Council website)

Mayor:

Wayne BROWN (re-elected).

Councillors Elected for the Albany Ward:

Victoria SHORT and John WATSON.

Councillors Elected for the Albert-Eden-Puketāpapa Ward:

Julie FAIREY and Christine Elizabeth FLETCHER.

Councillors Elected for the Howick Ward:

Bo BURNS and Maurice WILLIAMSON.

Councillors Elected for the Manukau Ward:

Alf FILIPAINA and Lotu FULI.

Councillors Elected for the Manurewa-Papakura Ward:

Daniel NEWMAN, and Matt WINIATA.

Councillors Elected for the North Shore Ward

Richard HILLS and John GILLON.

Councillors Elected for the Waitākere Ward

Shane HENDERSON and Ken TURNER.

Councillors Elected for the Single-Seat Wards

Andy BAKER (Franklin Ward), Josephine Ruth BARTLEY (Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Ward), Desley SIMPSON (Ōrākei Ward), Greg SAYERS (Rodney Ward), Mike LEE (Waitematā & Gulf Ward) and Sarah PATERSON-HAMLIN (Whau Ward).

Voter Turnout:

Officially reported as 29.3% (down from 35.5% in 2022 and 35.3% in 2019)

Wayne Brown versus Auckland Transport… Round Two

In his post-victory comments Wayne Brown was focused on bringing Auckland Transport (AT) back under Council’s control, mocking the large organisation and promising to “fix it“.

On Saturday, the often blunt and combative engineer stormed home to win a second term, comfortably beating his main challenger, Kerrin Leoni, by about 90,000 votes…

…“The public voted for me because, unlike governments, they know where they are going,” Brown said.

There would not be any surprises, said Brown, whose focus over the coming months would be on trying to understand what Auckland Transport actually does, “so I can fix it”.

“It’s like a black box. Answers come out of AT all wrong, and no one in there can tell me how they got to those answers. I will continue asking questions and getting stupid answers until I get good answers.”…

…Asked what he hoped to achieve by the end of his second term, Brown said his priorities included embedding a business like approach to council spending, fostering a culture of efficient service, and encouraging Aucklanders to focus more on the city’s future rather than daily frustrations with Auckland Transport.

Bernard Orsman in Auckland Mayor Wayne Brown outlines goals before Christmas break, focusing on Auckland Transport and tech, NZ Herald, 13 October 2025

Wayne Brown has spent years working to have AT “stripped of its decision-making powers“ and to “restore local democracy to Auckland”. This includes allowing local boards to make some decisions around issues such as “whether or not the car parks outside the local dairy should be removed or should stay“. In December 2024, central government sided with Wayne Brown and is changing the legislation for Auckland Transport. Now the re-elected Mayor will be able to use those changes to reform how transport decisions are made in Auckland City.

HAMILTON CITY COUNCIL’S ELECTION RESULTS

Final results (based on information from the Hamilton City Council website)

Mayor:

Tim MACINDOE (replacing Paula SOUTHGATE who did not run for re-election).

Councillors Elected for the East Ward:

Rachel KARALUS, Andrew BYDDER, Anna CASEY-COX, Jamie STRANGE, Leo LIU, and Sue MORONEY.

Councillors Elected for the West Ward:

Geoff TAYLOR, Sarah THOMSON, Graeme MEAD, Mesh MACDONALD, Angela O’LEARY, and Emma PIKE.

Councillors Elected for the Maaori Ward:

Maria HUATA and Robbie NEHA.

Voter Turnout:

Officially reported as 33% (up from 29.4% in 2022, lower than 39.4% in 2019)

Maaori Ward Poll:

KEEP Maaori wards: 19,190

REMOVE Maaori wards: 16,320

Second-placed Hamilton mayoral candidate Sarah Thomson, who sat on a council that hiked rates more than 41 percent over three years, perhaps says it most bluntly: “To be completely frank, it’s been a really shitty time with rates increases, and the cost pressures on local government, and I’m not surprised by some of the results,” she tells Newsroom.

Thomson, a lawyer and climate activist, was comprehensively beaten to the Hamilton mayoralty by former National MP Tim Macindoe.

“On our council, there’s been a shift to the right,” she says. “Those who have come in on a lower rates platform are going to find it really challenging to make a meaningful dent in rates because of the cost of water infrastructure.”

The political shift in Hamilton is one repeated around the country.

Jonathan Milne quoting Sarah Thomson in Ratepayers rout mayors who imposed big rises, Newsroom, 11 October 2025

WELLINGTON CITY COUNCIL’S ELECTION RESULTS

Final results (based on information from the Wellington City Council website)

Mayor:

Andrew LITTLE (replacing Tory WHANAU who did not run for re-election).

Councillors Elected for the Takapū/Northern Ward:

Ben MCNULTY, Tony RANDLE, and Andrea COMPTON.

Councillors Elected for the Wharangi/Onslow-Western Ward:

Diane CALVERT, Rebecca MATTHEWS, and Ray CHUNG.

Councillors Elected for the Pukehīnau/Lambton Ward:

Geordie ROGERS, Afnan AL-RUBAYEE, and Nicola YOUNG.

Councillors Elected for the Motukairangi/Eastern Ward:

Karl TIEFENBACHER, Sam O’BRIEN, and Jonny OSBORNE.

Councillors Elected for the Paekawakawa/Southern Ward:

Nureddin ABDURAHMAN and Laurie FOON.

Councillor Elected for the Te Whanganui-a-Tara Māori Ward:

Matthew REWETI.

Voter Turnout:

Officially reported as 49.99% (up from 45.41% in 2022 and 40.12% in 2019)

Maaori Ward Poll:

KEEP the Māori Ward: 52,677

REMOVE the Māori Ward: 24,365

CHRISTCHURCH CITY COUNCIL’S ELECTION RESULTS

Final results (based on information from the Christchurch City Council website)

Mayor:

Phil MAUGER (re-elected).

“I wanna tackle debt…The main thing is to keep Christchurch’s momentum going and tackle debt… and see if we can get a few more bob back in the Council coffers…

…We just kept our head down and kept doing the good work we have always been doing. And I new I would come out in the end as it’s common sense and we are heading in the right direction.”

Re-elected Christchurch Mayor Phil Mauger, interviewed on Chris Lynch Media, 11 October 2025

Councillors Elected for Ward Seats (Unopposed):

Aaron KEOWN (Harewood Ward), Sam MACDONALD (Waimairi Ward), and Mark PETERS (Hornby Ward).

Councillors Elected for Ward Seats:

Victoria HENSTOCK (Papanui Ward), David CARTWRIGHT(Fendalton Ward), Pauline COTTER ( Innes Ward), Kelly BARBER (Burwood Ward), Celeste DONOVAN (Coastal Ward), Andrei MOORE (Halswell Ward), Tyla HARRISON-HUNT (Riccarton Ward), Melanie COKER (Spreydon Ward), Jake MCLELLAN (Central Ward), Tim SCANDRETT (Cashmere Ward), Yani JOHANSON (Linwood Ward), Nathaniel HERZ JARDINE (Heathcote Ward), and Tyrone FIELDS (Banks Peninsula Ward).

Voter Turnout:

Officially reported as 38.12% (down from 43.31% in 2022 and 41.10% in 2019)

DUNEDIN CITY COUNCIL’S ELECTION RESULTS

Final results (based on information from the Dunedin City Council website)

Mayor:

Sophie BARKER (replacing Jules RADICH who will now be serving as a Councillor).

Sophie Barker listed these ten priorities on her election campaign website…

PRIORITIES

1. Create Bold, Unified Dunedin Vision

2. Reclaim Democracy

3. Implement Financial Discipline

4. Action-Oriented Leadership

5. Drive Economic Growth

6. Cut Red Tape, Roll Out Welcome Mat

7. Raise Performance Standards

8. Ensure Value for Money

9. Advocate for Dunedin

10. Support Local Business

“My Plan for Dunedin” on the Sophie Barker Dunedin City Councillor webpage

Councillors Elected for At Large Seats:

John CHAMBERS, Christine GAREY, Doug HALL, Marie LAUFISO, Cherry LUCAS, Russell LUND, Mandy MAYHEM, Benedict ONG, Jules RADICH, Andrew SIMMS, Mickey TREADWELL, Lee VANDERVIS, Steve WALKER, and Brent WEATHERALL.

Voter Turnout:

Officially reported as 45.47% (down from 48.22% in 2022 and 45.6% in 2019)

NATIONWIDE LOCAL ELECTION RESULTS AND TRENDS

The mayors who instituted double-digit rates increases, and/or were senior figures in Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ) tended to be replaced in October’s elections around New Zealand.

Residents of up to half the country’s cities and districts will have new mayors this coming week, after turning against almost all those who imposed high rates rises.

Newsroom projects that in 66 mayoral races, at least 31 communities have elected new mayors, with two more in the balance…

… it’s a swing to the right, with David Seymour’s Act Party electing up to 10 candidates in its first foray into local politics.

But perhaps more than just a swing to the right, it’s a reflection of the impact of rates rises on cost of living. Of 18 councils that imposed double-digit rates rises this year, 13 have elected new mayors – and a 14th, Whakatāne, hangs in the balance.

Jonathan Milne in Ratepayers rout mayors who imposed big rises, Newsroom, 11 October 2025

Sam Broughton is a clear example of these trends, having lost to Lydia Gliddon in the election for Mayor of Selwyn, and now resigning as President of LGNZ (a role reported to pay $102,215 a year). Newsroom Pro’s managing editor Jonathan Milne makes links to LGNZ being under pressure and facing criticism.

Former Selwyn mayor Sam Broughton will step down as president of Local Government New Zealand following his landslide loss.

The three-term incumbent was earlier this month ousted as mayor by Lydia Gliddon, who won almost three-quarters of the vote…

….Broughton had come under fire as ratepayers faced repeated double-digit rate rises.

Parts of Sam Broughton steps down as president of Local Government New Zealand, RNZ, 20 October 2025

As LGNZ president, Sam Broughton publicly promoted a range of policies including: “double-digit rates rises”, having “Government pay rates on all Crown land”, “congestion charging”, “bed taxes”, “tourist levies”, and four-year terms for elected members on councils.

“A 4-year term of local government would also make a dramatic improvement in productivity across councils and provide certainty. This would in turn create a longer-term pipeline of work for the private sector to partner with councils and deliver for Aotearoa New Zealand”

Sam Broughton as quoted in Councils need more levers to raise funds, LGNZ, 18 December 2023

The newly-elected Mayor of Selwyn, Lydia Gliddon, stated policies during the election campaign involved working with the “community to strengthen trust and transparency in council decision making, while focusing on practical, affordable solutions for Selwyn’s future.”

My priorities

1. Empower community voices. Decisions made with you not for you, authentic consultation and real input.

2. Deliver fiscal responsibility. Focus on essentials, ensure value in the dollar and that growth pays.

3. Restore open council. Clear communication and full transparency to rebuild trust in local government.

Lydia Gliddon’s candidate page on policy.nz

Candidates who were former MPs won a number of mayoral seats around the North Island. Former Green MP Nandor Tanczos was voted in as Mayor of Whakatane, former Labour MP Andrew Little was voted in as Mayor of Wellington City, former National MP Tim Macindoe was voted in as Mayor of Hamilton, and former National MP Nick Smith was re-elected as Mayor of Nelson.

NEGATIVE RESPONSES TO THE “RATEPAYER PROTECTION PLEDGE“ CAMPAIGN

The Taxpayers’ Union (TPU) is an activist group which self-identifies as the “most popular campaign group championing fiscal conservatism and transparency in New Zealand”. For the 2025 local government election campaign the TPU emailed many candidates a “Ratepayer Protection Pledge” certificate. The TPU’s offer to candidates was this… Tick and sign the Pledge certificate, email it back to the TPU and then they will endorse you to the 200,000+ people on their mailing list and on their website.

However, TPU went beyond this simple offer in its treatment of candidates. TPU members around country were encouraged to email candidates and “encourage“ those candidates to sign the pledge. The TPU (and the related Auckland Ratepayers’ Alliance) also portrayed candidates who did not sign the Pledge as actively supporting large rates increases and being anti-transparency. This appears to be where the troubles started for the TPU.

Wayne Brown’s response to the “Ratepayer Protection Pledge” campaign was short and attracted many headlines in the media. His public scrap with the TPU did not stop Wayne Brown winning a second term.

Auckland Mayor Wayne Brown’s inbox was bombarded by 1500 emails from a lobby group to sign a pledge on rates that sparked a profane two-word response.

Brown made headlines yesterday when he told the Auckland Ratepayers’ Alliance (ARA) to ‘f*** off’ in response to supporters asking him to sign its “Ratepayer Protection Pledge” to keep rates down.

The mayor was sent an ARA email with the headline, “Is Wayne Brown planning a rates blow-out?”, to which he sent his blunt response.

Ratepayers’ Alliance supporters sent 1500 emails to Wayne Brown’s office before ‘f*** off’ reply, NZ Herald, 03 October 2025

The mayor has labelled the pledge “gimmicky”, and said his focus was keeping rates down and stopping wasteful spending.

“From the moment I took office, I have worked extremely hard to keep rates down. We have the best track record of any urban Council this term,” Brown said.

“We’ve done that by tackling the real problem, wasteful spending and excessive costs. It’s not glamorous, but it’s the only way to deliver real results for households.”

Brown said he had delivered, despite dealing with rampant inflation.

Auckland mayor Wayne Brown hits back at claims he’s planning a rates hike after dropping f-bomb, RNZ, 03 October 2025

In Golden Bay, some Community Board candidates criticised the Pledge campaign on the grounds of not contacting candidates with one candidate accusing the TPU of “false advertising”.

“It’s just not the truth that’s being portrayed there…

…I have a strong feeling that is an unethical thing to do.”

Golden Bay Community Board candidate Axel Downard-Wilke as quoted in Rates survey criticised after candidates not contacted, Nelson Mail, 10 October 2025

The TPU’s website put red crosses next to the names of every candidate who did not sign the pledge, and strongly implied that those red crosses represented policy positions that were hostile to ratepayers and transparency.

In his opinion piece, CityWatch NZ editor John McDonald asks “Were over 83% of Hamilton’s 2025 mayoral candidates hostile to Hamilton ratepayers? …or is it more likely that the Taxpayers’ Union was being false and misleading?”.

Only two Mayoral candidates in Hamilton received positive green ticks from the Taxpayers’ Union; Jack Gielen and Rudy Du Plooy.

The rest of the mayoral candidates (including myself) received angry red cross from the Taxpayers’ Union, implying that we all want higher rates increase, all support unelected appointees on council committees, and all oppose transparency measures. In many cases those implications were false and misleading…

…The Taxpayers’ Union has done some good work in the past. The ratepayersreport.nz website is a valuable resource and I respect the amount of research, design work, planning, and official information (LGOIMA) requests to needed to create that website.

The “Ratepayer Protection Pledge” campaign may have been a sincere attempt to inform the public, increase engagement in local elections, and make elected representatives more accountable. However, the campaign became a cause of confusion and frustration among both voters and candidates.

I am not angry with TPU over their Pledge campaign… just disappointed.

If you are an activist group trying to make a good impression on local government politics, then the 2025 “Ratepayer Protection Pledge” campaign provides an important example of what not to do.

John McDonald, OPINION: Taxpayers’ Union Misrepresented Candidates’ Views with the “Ratepayer Protection Pledge” Campaign, 01 November 2025

MORE WATER COMPANY WOES

Recently, S&P Global reported that the ‘off-the-books’ borrowing councils are hoping to achieve with their new “Local Water Done Well” companies will likely impact their credit ratings. Councils might still be treated as having a “contingent liability” for their water company’s debts.

Higher debts can lead to lower credit ratings, and lower credit ratings can lead to higher interest costs on council debt.

October 2025 Coverage of S&P’s “New Zealand Water Reforms Don’t Guarantee Rating Relief For Local Councils” Report

The issue though, from a council’s credit rating perspective, is if something goes wrong with that water entity, and we’ve seen this around the world, that means that councils are on the hook…

…They can’t back out…

…And while some officials might say, well, that’s never going to happen, I’ve just mentioned, we have seen that happen around the world, and councils can get into a lot of financial stress when they’re guaranteeing entities.

S&P Credit Analyst Anthony Walker as quote in Proposed government water reforms will cost ratepayers more – report, RNZ, 31 October 2025

Wellington councils are planning to replace their existing water company, “Wellington Water”, with a new “Local Water Done Well” water company named “Tiaki Wai Metro Water”. An article in The Post stated how the new water company “will have greater borrowing power to get on top of the region’s water infrastructure woes”.

Earlier article in The Post reported on a paper where Metro Water is expected to require $25 billion in infrastructure investment over 30 years. This was reported as $6.8 billion more investment than expected over the next 10 years, though it was argued that these costs are still “less than continuing with the status quo”.

“The metropolitan area is facing a significant and escalating bow wave of investment need and due to affordability challenges faced by the councils, many high-cost and high-risk investment requirements were excluded from the councils’ LTPs,” the paper said. It estimated by 2034, the average household annual water bills would cost between $4800-5700, up from $2100 today.

Justin Wong, New water utility Metro Water stares at $2.6 billion hole, The Post, 13 August 2025

The board of directors of the new Tiaki Wai Metro Water company were identified as “Will Peet, Jon Lamonte, Elena Trout and Adrian Wimmers” in The Post article with Jon Lamonte being the “former Watercare chief executive”.

Watercare is still discharging wastewater into the Mahurangi Harbour and causing serious contamination issues for local Oyster Farmers. On the 30 October 2025, RNZ reported on the “biggest wastewater spill into the Mahurangi River this year” with oyster farms facing a “28-day harvest closure” . According the Mahurangi Oyster Association, sewage overflow issues have been happening for seven years, and could happen for another two years until Watercare’s new treatment plant is operational.

HELP SHAPE THE MORRINSVILLE ROAD UPGRADES

Re-elected Hamilton Councillor Andrew Bydder gives his opinion on the “Morrinsville Road fit for purpose upgrades”

OPINION: Safety or Ideology?

Details for the consultation are shown below.

CONSULTATION CLOSES SUNDAY 09 NOVEMBER 2025

Morrinsville Road fit for purpose upgrades

Location

Both sides of Morrinsville Road, between Cambridge Road and Matangi Road.

Aim

Make it safer and easier to walk, scooter, and cycle, especially for:

• School children.

• Uni students.

• Casual and commuter cyclists.

Detailed information

• Physically separated on-road cycle lanes on both sides of the road.

• Safe, raised crossings at Mullane Street, Morris Road, and Berkley Avenue side road entrances.

• Improvements to the existing signalised crossing on Morrinsville Road.

• Energy-efficient LED streetlights.

• Adjusting some bus stop locations to achieve more efficient spacing of around 400m (see Proposed Upgrade Plans for details).

Link: https://haveyoursay.hamilton.govt.nz/morrinsville-rd-upgrades

OPEN INVITATION FOR OPINION PIECES

Do you have ideas to improve local government?

If you are interested in volunteering an opinion piece for CityWatch NZ, or know of someone who can write well, email content@citywatchnz.org for more information.

OPEN CONSULTATIONS, PETITIONS, AND EVENT NOTICES

LOCAL GOVERNMENT (AUCKLAND COUNCIL TRANSPORT GOVERNANCE) AMENDMENT BILL

CLOSES 11:59PM SUNDAY 09 NOVEMBER 2025

This bill aims to address to increase democratic accountability for transport decision making in Auckland and ensure a long-term cohesive view shared between central government, Auckland Council, and agencies delivering transport services.

It will do this by:

• repealing the legislation that established Auckland Transport and re-establishing a council-controlled organisation that will be responsible solely for delivering public transport services in Auckland

• transferring most transport and policy planning decisions from Auckland Transport to Auckland Council

• allocating transport decisions on local roads to the relevant local boards

• establishing the Auckland Regional Transport Committee, a statutory committee that will consist of ministerial appointees, elected council representatives, and an independent chair. This committee will develop the Auckland Regional Transport plan and provide direction for the development of land transport in Auckland while aligning the transport priorities of the government and Auckland Council.

Link:

https://www3.parliament.nz/en/pb/sc/make-a-submission/document/54SCTIN_SCF_29BDF1A7-369D-4BB3-C15F-08DDEC037A0C/local-government-auckland-council-transport-governance

”NEW ZEALAND TAXPAYERS’ UNION’S “CAP RATES NOW” PETITION

The petition can be found at this link…

https://www.capratesnow.nz/

The petition text is copied below…

I call on Local Government Minister Simon Watts to cap rates increases to no more than annual inflation

HAMILTON’S SOUTHERN WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT

The city council is running “community information sessions“ for the proposed treatment plant to be sited south of Hamilton City.

We are pleased to share that we will be holding two community information sessions in November at the JetPark Hamilton Airport Hotel & Conference Centre. These will be held on:

Wednesday 5 November from 4pm – 7pm

Thursday 6 November from 4pm – 7pm.

These sessions are a chance for the community to meet the project team, learn more about the project and about modern wastewater treatment plants, ask questions and understand the process and timelines for this project.

All are welcome to attend.

There will be other opportunities to meet the team.
We’ll have more information to share with you as the project progresses.

There are currently two petitions to change the site selected for the proposed plant

“CHANGE THE LOCATION OF THE PROPOSED SOUTHERN WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT” PETITION

CLOSES WEDNESDAY 14 OCTOBER 2026 AT 11.59PM NZST

The petition can be found at this link…

https://petitions.parliament.nz/4a5779c1-162c-49c4-9b20-08de0ac20f72?lang=en

The petition text is copied below…

Petition request

That the House of Representatives urge Hamilton City Council to change the location of the proposed Southern Wastewater Treatment Plant.

Petition reason

I believe that HCC has ignored the voices of mana whenua and our local community directly affected. I disagree with the site preferred by HCC. In my view, relocation of the proposed plant is a necessary step towards preserving and protecting our environmental integrity, water, forest, both flora and fauna, local community, identity, history, cultural heritage, and historical site of Ngāti Ngamurikaitaua, Nukuhau Pā.

An earlier and related petition, posted by Te Kopa King, on change.org by can be found at this link…

https://c.org/QzLtt5Wb5p

”INDEPENDENT REVIEW OF DIGITAL IDENTIFICATION SYSTEMS” PETITION

CLOSES SATURDAY 31 JANUARY 2026 AT 11.59PM NZST

The petition can be found at this link…

https://petitions.parliament.nz/c0c80f58-f8c3-4ef8-21d6-08de036dbf3a?lang=en

The petition text is copied below…

Petition request

That the House of Representatives urge the Government to commission an independent review of privacy, security, and civil-liberty risks in digital ID systems, and to suspend plans for any centralised or mandatory digital ID until full public consultation occurs.

Petition reason

I believe that centralised digital IDs could enable tracking, profiling, or data misuse, threatening privacy, freedom, and resilience. In my opinion, an independent review should assess impacts under the Privacy Act 2020 and NZ Bill of Rights Act 1990. Until then, I believe the Government must pause any rollout or funding.

”MAKE SOUND EMITTERS MANDATORY ON ELECTRIC CARS TO WARN BLIND PEDESTRIANS” PETITION

CLOSES FRIDAY 31 JULY 2026 AT 11.59PM NZST

The petition can be found at this link…

https://petitions.parliament.nz/8b70bf69-2e54-4e55-89ce-08ddcfc45c03

The petition text is copied below…

Petition request

That the House of Representatives legislate to make cost-effective artificial sound emitters mandatory on all electric and hybrid vehicles sold in New Zealand to warn blind and low-vision pedestrians when the vehicles are near.

Petition reason

Silent electric cars are a serious risk to blind and low-vision pedestrians. Without sound, we don’t know the vehicles are coming. Other countries require warning sounds at low speeds — I believe that New Zealand should urgently do so too, before more lives are put at risk. In my view, sound emitters should be mandatory on new electric and hybrid cars so that current vehicle owners aren’t burdened with the cost.

Posting of event information, petition information, consultation viewpoints, or other content on the CityWatch NZ newsletter or website does not constitute endorsement of those views by CityWatch NZ or its editors. This section is often based on information readers have sent to us on issues they think are important or checks of government websites for broadly-relevant consultations.

If there is a political/regulatory consultation, petition, or event you think might be of interest to CityWatch NZ readers, email the details to contact@citywatchnz.org

Subscribe now

Share

As we approach the last week of the local election season, this newsletter will mainly cover a variety of candidate opinions and election information.

CityWatch NZ election pages have been updated with some useful websites for evaluating candidates, providing various opportunities to hear how candidates respond to questions and see their views on various issues.

All contactable Hamilton City Council candidates were invited to provide an opinion piece to CityWatch NZ. Opinion pieces were received and published for Lawrence Jensen (Kirikiriroa Maaori Ward candidate), Horiana Henderson (Hamilton East Ward candidate), Rachel Afeaki (Hamilton East Ward candidate), Graeme Mead (Hamilton West Ward candidate), Stuart Aitken (Hamilton East Ward candidate).

Three candidates standing for both the Hamilton City Mayoral seat and Hamilton East Ward provided opinion pieces; Rachel Karalus, Rudi du Plooy, and John McDonald.

Links to the three candidate opinion pieces from the last CityWatch NZ newsletter are also provided in this newsletter highlighting the views of Roger Stratford (Mayoral Candidate), Mesh Macdonald (Hamilton West Ward candidate) and Roderick John Young (Hamilton West Ward candidate).

In September, Taupō District Council received approval of its plan to keep its ‘three waters’ services in-house. Alternatives to the Council Controlled Organisation are still viable options for water services.

For a perspective from Auckland we link to various articles by NZ Herald reporter Bernard Orsman. In his reports about Auckland Council, he covers speed bumps, rates increases, underhanded council behaviour, urban housing intensification, and locals pushing back.

Jean Dorrell provides a commentary which addresses the many reasons why people don’t vote. She stresses the importance of voting and counters many common arguments for not voting in local body elections.

Roderick John Young (Hamilton West Ward candidate) also provides recent commentary on the mood of voters in Hamilton’s Western suburbs, making some bold predictions of what could happen if new voters can turn sentiment into action.

The petition to “Stop New Zealand’s Electronic Road User Charges (eRUC) Surveillance System” has now received over 29,690 electronic signatures.

Links are provided to open consultations, petitions, and events at the end of this newsletter.

ELECTION COVERAGE

Our overall 2025 Local Election page contains links to useful election websites such as Policy.nz and ‘It’s in the Ballot’ and we have a questions & answers article about the STV system.

2025 Local Government Elections

Q & A: The Single Transferable Vote (STV) System in Local Elections 2025

The Hamilton Elections page has be refocus on content feature candidate views now the most of the campaign trail events are over.

Hamilton City Election 2025 Events & Opinion Pieces

We also have an Auckland Elections page…

Auckland Election 2025 Events

We still have our Open Invitation for Candidate Opinion Pieces and candidates are welcome to sent opinion pieces in over the next week. However, there is no guarantee we will get those opinion pieces published on the website before election day.

HAMILTON CITY COUNCIL CANDIDATE OPINION PIECES

All contactable candidates were invited to provide opinion pieces, these those which have been received and published. Those listed in last month’s newsletter are also listed here as well. Candidates are list under wards in the order opinion pieces were received and published on the CityWatch NZ election page.

Hamilton Mayoral Candidates:

CANDIDATE OPINION: Roger Stratford

CANDIDATE OPINION: Rachel Karalus

CANDIDATE OPINION: Rudi du Plooy

CANDIDATE OPINION: John McDonald

Kirikiriroa Maaori Ward Candidates:

CANDIDATE OPINION: Lawrence Jensen

Hamilton West Ward Candidates:

CANDIDATE OPINION: Mesh Macdonald

CANDIDATE OPINION: Roderick John Young

CANDIDATE OPINION: Graeme Mead

Hamilton East Ward Candidates:

CANDIDATE OPINION: Horiana Henderson

CANDIDATE OPINION: Rachel Karalus

CANDIDATE OPINION: Rachel Afeaki

CANDIDATE OPINION: Stuart Aitken

CANDIDATE OPINION: Rudi du Plooy

CANDIDATE OPINION: John McDonald

TAUPŌ DISTRICT COUNCIL’S IN-HOUSE WATER PLAN IS APPROVED

Taupō District Council has recently received approval of a plan to keep its ‘three waters’ services in-house. This demonstrates that alternatives to joining a Water CCO are possible under the “Local Water Done Well“ system.

Government accepts council’s Water Services Delivery Plan

UPDATE: 19 SEPTEMBER 2025

The Government has accepted Taupō District Council’s Water Services Delivery Plan, which sets out how the council intends to deliver water services over the next 10 years.

Find out more

Local Water Done Well is a central-government mandated initiative to address concerns about Aotearoa New Zealand’s water infrastructure and water quality.

Taupō District Council webpage, archived on 19 September 2025

Coverage of the decision in May and June 2025 is worth reading for those interested in ‘Three Waters‘ issues:

• Taupō opts for water done by itself, Cambridge News.

• Taupō opts out of Waikato Water Done Well - for now, Waikato Times.

• Taupō District Council adopts in-house model for water services, Waikato Waters Ltd.

• Taupō still in water done well equation, Cambridge News.

SOME MEDIA ARTICLES OF POTENTIAL INTEREST

Bernard Orsman, Auckland Reporter at the NZ Herald, has produced many interesting articles on local government issues over the last three months. Although focused on Auckland Council, the following selection of articles have relevance to cities around New Zealand which are dealing with speed bumps, rates increases, underhanded council behaviour, and urban housing intensification.

• Resident encounters 22 speed humps on the drive home in new suburb north of Auckland NZ Herald.

• Developer’s consultant criticises Auckland Transport over Milldale speed bumps, AT points says Fulton Hogan responsible NZ Herald.

• Auckland man disputes Auckland Transport report after house cracks blamed on speed hump. NZ Herald.

• Law student wins court case against Auckland Transport over ‘unlawful’ speed bumps, NZ Herald.

• Auckland Council denies misleading rural Rodney ratepayers on hikes, NZ Herald.

• Steep rate increases for Auckland’s rural communities amid cost-of-living crisis, NZ Herald.

• Auckland Council faces anger over steep rate rises for rural residents, NZ Herald.

• Remuera residents push back on Auckland intensification plan at public meeting, NZ Herald.

• Auckland Council maps show rezoning for more intensive housing in suburban areas, NZ Herald.

• Auckland Council approves first step for two million new homes, higher building density, NZ Herald.

Some other recent articles of potential interest include:

• Problem punters could be barred from council contact, Waikato Times.

• Mood of the Boardroom: CEOs back local government reform as survey rates councils as ‘broken’, NZ Herald.

• Open mayoral races create uncertain ‘power vacuums’, Newsroom.

• Another local election, another low turnout? Synching local and general elections could be the answer, The Conversation.

THE IMPORTANCE OF VOTING

Hamilton ratepayer and regular contributor Jean Dorrell provides an opinion piece addressing the many reasons why people don’t vote.

OPINION: Why Bother Voting?

The full article is copied below…

“It won’t make any difference. Councils don’t listen to what people want. They just do what they want to.”

If you believe this (which I agree with to some extent in regard to the current Hamilton City Council) then you need to vote for a changed council. If you believe some or all the current councillors aren’t interested in what you want (whether it is lower rates, higher rates, a decent playground in your area or a cycle lane in your street), then you need to vote for different councillors.

Do some research and find out which of the candidates who are standing are interested in what is important to you. Contact them to find our more. The candidates are listed on council websites, and a list of candidates will be included with your voting papers. Candidates can also be found on social media.

Hamilton candidates: https://hamilton.govt.nz/elections2025/candidates

“I don’t pay rates, so the Council doesn’t affect me.”

If you live in Hamilton or own property in Hamilton, you are impacted by rates and the services (or lack thereof) provided. If you pay rent, your landlord pays the rates to the Council, and this is charged to you as a part of your rent. If you own property, you pay these directly.

“I’m OK with everything as it is. Other than paying rates, the Council doesn’t affect me.”

I was once like this. Big sigh! I enjoyed reading the many books I borrowed from our fabulous libraries, running and cycling along the scenic river path and walking my dogs in various well-maintained parks. I was oblivious to how much damage a Council can do to a person.

I had exciting plans in 2022. As part of these plans, I was about to put my house on the market, when HCC bizarrely designated my house part of a proposed historic heritage area. The heritage designation made my house unsaleable at anything near market value and dashed all my plans. Some of the Councillors I spoke to offered sympathetic noises but did nothing else. Most ignored me. No one cared. Evidently the elected members did not believe that their Council would or could recommend a heritage designation on a property without evidence. They did! (This was the Council elected in 2019.) While the designation was removed 18 months later, this was only after many submissions, and many tears and sleepless nights.

https://www.citywatchnz.org/opinion-ask-not-what-your-council-can-do-for-you-but-what-it-can-do-to-you/

“They are all the same anyway.”

This could not be further from the truth. The mainstream media coverage of councillors in Hamilton in the past few years has largely painted councillors as either bland or controversial. The current councillors and the current candidates are a diverse group of people. The media (and the candidates themselves) sometimes describes them with political labels (“fiscally conservative” or “left”) but there is more to a councillor than that.

Personally, I want councillors who actually listen to people. I want a council that genuinely consults the public before making decisions and who are transparent about what is done. I want a council who prioritises essentials over nice-to-haves. But that is just me. You may want something else and that is why it is important to vote.

“Voting is complicated.”

I agree that STV (Single Transferable Vote) is complicated. I recently learned that what I did last election (rank every candidate) was not smart voting. I learnt that if you don’t like a candidate, you shouldn’t rank them. Leave the box blank.

https://www.citywatchnz.org/q-a-the-single-transferable-vote-stv-system-in-local-elections-2025/

“I can’t find a post box to post my vote.”

I hear you. As well as NZ Post shops and those rare mailboxes on the street, there will be voting boxes at Council locations such as pools, libraries, Hamilton Gardens and the Hamilton Zoo (https://hamilton.govt.nz/elections2025, FAQs Q48)

“Whatever! Who cares! It seems like a waste of time.”

Can you please hold my coffee while I step up onto my soapbox? Thanks.

The right to vote is an important right in a democratic society. Originally the only people who could vote in NZ were wealthy British men over the age of 21. I have voted in every election since I turned 18 because I’m not a wealthy white man and I feel I owe it to the women who campaigned so hard to get the law changed so that my right to vote is a given right.

Jean Dorrell, Why Bother Voting?, 6 September 2025

WILL NEW VOTERS MAKE THE DIFFERENCE IN HAMILTON’S WESTERN SUBURBS?

Hamilton West Candidate Roderick John Young provides his colourful commentary on how the election is shaping up in Hamilton’s western suburbs and makes some interesting predictions in terms of potential outcomes. With early voter returns sitting between 2019 and 2022 levels 8 days out from the close of voting, we will soon see how accurate his “weather report” is regarding higher than usual voter turnout and its impact on the election of six West Ward councillors.

OPINION: A Surge of New Voters can Reset Hamilton’s West — Here’s How

…the story of this election may not be the candidates at all—it may be the voters who didn’t turn up last time.

In conversations across Nawton, Dinsdale, Frankton, Whitiora and beyond, I keep hearing the same thing: “We didn’t vote last time, but we’re paying attention now.” If that feeling becomes action, the maths gets interesting fast. Using the scenario outlined in recent analysis: if 70% of last election’s non-voters show up and half of last time’s voters stay home, turnout jumps to roughly 64.2%. That means about 77% of ballots would be from ‘new’ voters and only 23% from repeat voters.

Under STV, that matters twice—first for first-preferences and then for transfers. When the centre of gravity shifts toward new voters, late momentum and practical, basics-first messages tend to do well. Incumbents who are broadly liked will still make it; marginal incumbents are the ones who risk falling short as transfers drift toward credible alternatives…

Roderick John Young, A Surge of New Voters can Reset Hamilton’s West — Here’s How, 02 October 2025

PETITION AGAINST ELECTRONIC ROAD USER CHARGES AND THE SURVEILLANCE SYSTEM

The petition to “Stop New Zealand’s Electronic Road User Charges (eRUC) Surveillance System” has received over 29,690 signatures.

Petition to “Stop New Zealand’s Electronic Road User Charges (eRUC) Surveillance System”

The petition is related to the Government announcement of a Electronic Road User Charges (eRUC) system to replace fuel taxes.

Excerpts from the text of the petition are copied below. The full petition can be found at this link.

What’s at Stake? The upcoming electronic Road User Charges (eRUC) system will use GPS and digital tracking to monitor vehicle movements for charging purposes. This means the government will collect detailed data on where, when, and how far every vehicle travels—affecting every driver in New Zealand…

…By signing this petition, you stand up for your right to privacy, freedom from constant government surveillance, and fair treatment in fuel and road user charges. Together, we can demand a safer, fairer road user charging system that respects New Zealand values.”

“Stop New Zealand’s Electronic Road User Charges (eRUC) Surveillance System” Petition.

OPEN INVITATION FOR OPINION PIECES

Do you have ideas to improve local government? Are you a candidate for a council with an opinion? Do you have some wisdom to pass on to aspiring councillors? Do you want to give the newly-elected councillors some advice on what to watch out for once they get into council?

If you are interested in volunteering an opinion piece for CityWatch NZ, or know of someone who can write well, email content@citywatchnz.org for more information.

We are inviting commentators, candidates, and newly-elected representatives to provide opinion pieces.

OPEN CONSULTATIONS, PETITIONS, AND EVENT NOTICES

SUMMARY OFFENCES (DEMONSTRATIONS NEAR RESIDENTIAL PREMISE) AMENDMENT BILL

CLOSES 2:00PM MONDAY 06 OCTOBER 2025

At present, the law does not provide a clear statement about the relevance of privacy in the context of protests and other demonstrations. Article 17 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights affirms the right to be free from arbitrary or unlawful interference with one’s privacy, family and home. The bill would amend the Summary Offences Act 1981 to create a new offence for engaging in a targeted and disruptive demonstration near residential premises. It aims to ensure that the law appropriately balances a person’s right to privacy with the rights and freedoms affirmed by the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990. This includes protecting the public’s ability to protest.

Link:

https://www.parliament.nz/en/pb/sc/make-a-submission/document/54SCJUST_SCF_B49E7971-0040-4D7E-2B43-08DDDDD857FA/summary-offences-demonstrations-near-residential-premises

INQUIRY INTO PUBLIC PERFORMANCE REPORTING AND PUBLIC ACCOUNTABILITY

CLOSES 11:59PM WEDNSDAY 29 OCTOBER 2025

The Finance and Expenditure Committee encourages submitters to engage with a discussion document it has prepared. The discussion document contains questions for submitters, outlines a problem definition, and lists some of the policy areas the committee is considering.

Link:

https://www3.parliament.nz/en/pb/sc/make-a-submission/document/54SCFIN_SCF_5926B4CC-201C-4516-5958-08DD4AEF532B/inquiry-into-performance-reporting-and-public-accountability

LOCAL GOVERNMENT (AUCKLAND COUNCIL TRANSPORT GOVERNANCE) AMENDMENT BILL

CLOSES 11:59PM SUNDAY 09 NOVEMBER 2025

This bill aims to address to increase democratic accountability for transport decision making in Auckland and ensure a long-term cohesive view shared between central government, Auckland Council, and agencies delivering transport services.

It will do this by:

• repealing the legislation that established Auckland Transport and re-establishing a council-controlled organisation that will be responsible solely for delivering public transport services in Auckland

• transferring most transport and policy planning decisions from Auckland Transport to Auckland Council

• allocating transport decisions on local roads to the relevant local boards

• establishing the Auckland Regional Transport Committee, a statutory committee that will consist of ministerial appointees, elected council representatives, and an independent chair. This committee will develop the Auckland Regional Transport plan and provide direction for the development of land transport in Auckland while aligning the transport priorities of the government and Auckland Council.

Link:

https://www3.parliament.nz/en/pb/sc/make-a-submission/document/54SCTIN_SCF_29BDF1A7-369D-4BB3-C15F-08DDEC037A0C/local-government-auckland-council-transport-governance

”NEW ZEALAND TAXPAYERS’ UNION’S “CAP RATES NOW” PETITION

The petition can be found at this link…

https://www.capratesnow.nz/

The petition text is copied below…

I call on Local Government Minister Simon Watts to cap rates increases to no more than annual inflation

”MAKE SOUND EMITTERS MANDATORY ON ELECTRIC CARS TO WARN BLIND PEDESTRIANS” PETITION

CLOSES FRIDAY 31 JULY 2026 AT 11.59PM NZST

The petition can be found at this link…

https://petitions.parliament.nz/8b70bf69-2e54-4e55-89ce-08ddcfc45c03

The petition text is copied below…

Petition request

That the House of Representatives legislate to make cost-effective artificial sound emitters mandatory on all electric and hybrid vehicles sold in New Zealand to warn blind and low-vision pedestrians when the vehicles are near.

Petition reason

Silent electric cars are a serious risk to blind and low-vision pedestrians. Without sound, we don’t know the vehicles are coming. Other countries require warning sounds at low speeds — I believe that New Zealand should urgently do so too, before more lives are put at risk. In my view, sound emitters should be mandatory on new electric and hybrid cars so that current vehicle owners aren’t burdened with the cost.

Posting of event information, petition information, consultation viewpoints, or other content on the CityWatch NZ newsletter or website does not constitute endorsement of those views by CityWatch NZ or its editors. This section is often based on information readers have sent to us on issues they think are important or checks of government websites for broadly-relevant consultations.

If there is a political/regulatory consultation, petition, or event you think might be of interest to CityWatch NZ readers, email the details to contact@citywatchnz.org

Subscribe now

Share

With local election season in full swing, the CityWatch NZ election pages have been updated with some useful websites for evaluating candidates.

All contactable Hamilton City Council candidates were invited to provide an opinion piece before the election in October. The first three opinion pieces supplied are published and listed in this newsletter; Roger Stratford (Mayoral Candidate), Mesh Macdonald (Hamilton West Ward candidate) and Roderick John Young (Hamilton West Ward candidate). Further candidate opinion pieces are expected before the next newsletter and we have an open invitation for opinion pieces nationwide.

As the “Three Waters” “Local Water Done Well” reforms are pushing ahead, most Council’s are forming new water services companies. We continue covering the wide range of issues with water companies around New Zealand. Issues with both the newly formed companies and the well-established companies such as Watercare.

A local community in Waipa District started organising opposition to the site selection for Hamilton’s new wastewater treatment plant. They launched their “Stop the Stink“ campaign with a well-attended meeting at a nearby school hall.

Graeme Mead provided two opinion pieces in August. The first one on Hamilton City Councillors getting free tickets to events, the second one on why Rifle Range Road is being ripped-up again.

The media outlet Newsroom covered the '“Building Nations” conference in Wellington and how “the great privatisation“ is now being pushed for infrastructure in New Zealand.

As part of our ‘Fixing Councils‘ series, Graham Medcalf provides an opinion piece on a digital transformation of local government in New Zealand. The article covers a range of ideas for improving councils and draws on examples from Estonia, Taiwan, and Singapore.

John McDonald provides part two of his point-by-point rebuttal of LGNZ’s ‘mythbusting’ webpage.

A petition to “Stop New Zealand’s Electronic Road User Charges (eRUC) Surveillance System” received over 26,000 signatures in three weeks. We briefly cover the Government’s related announcement on road user charges and remind readers about the larger plan for “Smart RUC” that can be found in a New Zealand Initiative publication from 2024.

Links are provided to open consultations, petitions, and events at the end of this newsletter.

ELECTION COVERAGE

Our overall 2025 Local Election page has been (links to useful election websites such as Policy.nz and ‘It’s in the Ballot’ have now been added)

2025 Local Government Elections

Two key election pages on CityWatch NZ are an open call for candidate opinion pieces nationwide and some question & answers about the STV system.

Open Invitation for Candidate Opinion Pieces

Q & A: The Single Transferable Vote (STV) System in Local Elections 2025

Hamilton Elections page…

Hamilton City Election 2025 Events & Opinion Pieces

Auckland Elections page…

Auckland Election 2025 Events

HAMILTON CITY COUNCIL CANDIDATE OPINION PIECES

All contactable candidates were invited to provide opinion pieces, these are the first three received.

Hamilton Mayoral Candidates

CANDIDATE OPINION: Roger Stratford

Hamilton West Ward Candidates

CANDIDATE OPINION: Mesh Macdonald

CANDIDATE OPINION: Roderick John Young

We are expecting more candidate opinion pieces over the next month. Check the CityWatch NZ website for more of these as they are published. Those opinion pieces received in time will be listed in the next newsletter.

WATER COMPANY WOES

In May 2025, Hamilton City Council and Waikato District Council decided to create a new water company, to manage three waters services (drinking water, wastewater, and stormwater). The new Council-controlled Organisation (CCO) has been named “IAWAI – Flowing Waters” and was incorporated in July 2025.

On 26 June 2025, a draft “Water Services Delivery Plan” was made public for the new water company. This plan contained a projection that the average household water cost would increase from $1,285 (in 2024/2025) to $4,347 (in 2033/2034).

(See page 343 of the 26 June 2025 Council Agenda for the projection table).

This projected increase would raise water costs from 1% of median household income to 2.6% of median household income according to the “Water Services Delivery Plan”. The writers of plan for the new water CCO have decided that “that 4.5% of median household income represents a reasonable affordability benchmark”.

Household Water Costs in Hamilton City Projected to Triple within 9-years under New Water Company

Another recent Newsroom article, titled “Go-it-alone councils brace for ministerial intervention in water services”, confirms a long-suspected rumour. The “Local Water Done Well” reforms have a coercive element, much like Labour’s “Three Waters” reforms before it was stopped by a general election result.

Forming a joint water company is voluntary… until you don’t do what the government wants…and then it becomes less voluntary.

Continuing our coverage of how the well-established water CCOs are fairing, Auckland’s Watercare generated the following news headlines since our May 2025 newsletter:

• Almost 50 sewage overflows into Auckland creek in one year, 1 News.

• Watercare secures $3.4b debt, separates from Auckland Council, NZ Herald.

• Watercare blames suppliers for catastrophic failure of its own controls, Newsroom.

• Auckland oyster farmers hope Fisheries Minister Shane Jones will save their industry, RNZ.

• 'We're cleaning up their mess' - oyster farmers want Watercare to deal with sewage overflow, RNZ.

• Mahurangi oyster farmers apprehensive about accepting mysterious $10,000 payments, RNZ.

• Problems with Auckland's Watercare bills after more than 13,000 smart meters not working, RNZ.

• Woman had to beg to pay hefty Watercare bill in instalments after issue with faulty smart meter, RNZ.

• Faults with a third of Watercare's smart meters, RNZ.

• Mahurangi oyster saga: Watercare reveals vandalised pipe, RNZ.

“STOP THE STINK“ CAMPAIGN LAUNCHED

A local community south of Hamilton started organising opposition to the site selection for a new wastewater treatment plant. Having launched their “Stop the Stink” campaign with a school hall meeting in August, the local community is determined to challenge the site selection process and the lack of consultation about the new plant.

While technically still in Waipa District, the community face the prospect of a wastewater treatment plant being constructed to serve Hamilton City and the new “IAWAI – Flowing Waters” Council-controlled Organisation.

Community Organises Opposition to the Site Selection of the Wastewater Treatment Plant Proposed for Southern Hamilton

GRAEME MEAD ON HAMILTON CITY ISSUES

Hamilton West candidate Graeme Mead provided two opinion pieces in August. The first covers the issues of elected officials getting free tickets to events and the stadium, cricket ground, and Claudelands Event Centre. The second article covers the latest developments on Rifle Range Road.

OPINION: Free Tickets and Foggy Justifications

OPINION: When Will Someone Say STOP?

Hamilton ratepayers might be surprised to learn that elected councillors are regularly attending events like The Wiggles, Jimmy Carr, and Michael McIntyre, TNT fight night, LAB, Crowded House, Blackcaps Cricket, Rugby, and the list goes on, courtesy of complimentary tickets reserved under Council’s hospitality and entertainment policy. On paper, this policy is grounded in principles lifted from the Auditor-General’s good practice guide. The idea that any spending or access should have a dominant business purpose. That includes building relationships, advancing commercial objectives, representing the organisation, or reciprocating hospitality. But here’s the rub, how does attending a comedy gig or children’s variety show meet those standards?

Graeme Mead, Free Tickets and Foggy Justifications, 08 August 2025

It’s election year in Hamilton, and the question every ratepayer should be asking is: when will someone inside the elected Council finally say enough is enough?

We’ve had two terms of spending under the current majority-voting Council. The results are plain to see, rushed projects, poor coordination, and infrastructure that’s already failing. Rifle Range Road is the poster child for this mess. Council admits they couldn’t do everything properly due to time-limited government funding, so they only did “some” of it and are going to rip up the road again. Now businesses and residents are left dealing with the consequences, over and over again. This time it’s another 5-6 months of construction work planned on the road and cycleway. And if you think it’s just Dinsdale, take the time to look around the city and at the lack of maintenance, potholes, speed humps and roundabouts full of million dollar mess ups. And the debt grows, over 1 billion dollars now and climbing every day.

Graeme Mead, When Will Someone Say STOP?, 18 August 2025

NEWSROOM COVERS “THE GREAT PRIVATISATION” AND THE “BUILDING NATIONS“ CONFERENCE

On the 5th of August 2025, Newsroom published an article on the “Building Nations” conference in Wellington and “the great privatisation”. The “Building Nations” event is the “flagship annual conference” for the industry advocacy group called Infrastructure New Zealand. Jonathan Milne (managing editor at Newsroom Pro) authored the article. It highlighted view which were mostly supportive of privatisation, asset sales, and “asset recycling”.

Newsroom covers the Building Nations conference and “the great privatisation”

Personnel from KPMG and WSP are quoted and paraphrased in the Newsroom article. The article failed to mention that “the great privatisation“ and the related taking points are directly from the KPMG International Publication titled “The Great Reset: Emerging trends in infrastructure and transport”.

To critics, it’s an unashamed fire sale of critical public assets. Even its champions call it ‘the great privatisation’.

But ministers at this week’s Building Nations conference in Wellington will hear a strengthening call for what’s now known as ‘asset recycling’ of public infrastructure.

And this is more than a euphemism.

Jonathan Milne, Infrastructure leaders push Govt to deliver ‘the great privatisation’ Newsroom, 05 August 2025

Samograd says: “Governments are sitting on a treasure trove of assets. Indeed, a study of 38 countries by the IMF found more than US$100 trillion worth of assets on government books, including key infrastructure such as bridges, roads and utilities.

“And institutional investors are sitting on a treasure trove of capital. The world’s top 500 asset managers collectively manage more than US$128 trillion. The alignment is obvious.”

Until recently, he says, most governments had remained reluctant to transfer assets to the private sector, despite unsustainable levels of public debt. Many considered infrastructure to be the remit of the public sector. And they worried about the impact of privatisation on service quality, access and affordability

“Simply put, governments recognise the solution but are wary of pursuing it.”

Jonathan Milne quoting Jamie Samograd of KPMG Canada in Infrastructure leaders push Govt to deliver ‘the great privatisation’ Newsroom, 05 August 2025

THE ‘FIXING COUNCILS’ SERIES

We have put an invitation out to a wide range of commentators on the topic of “Fixing Councils”.

The first opinion piece received is by Graham Medcalf. The article covers a range of ideas for improving councils and draws on examples from Estonia, Taiwan, and Singapore.

OPINION: Transforming New Zealand’s Local Government

New Zealand’s local councils stand at a crossroads. While they remain the essential backbone of community life, delivering water, transport, and public spaces that shape daily experiences, mounting pressures reveal a system struggling to meet contemporary challenges. Funding constraints strain household budgets through ever-rising rates, yet infrastructure demands continue growing.

Meanwhile, an increasing disconnect between councils and communities undermines the democratic foundations that should make local government the most responsive tier of governance. Rather than accepting incremental fixes to a fundamentally outdated model, New Zealand has the opportunity to pioneer a transformation that positions local government as a global exemplar of innovation, equity, and resilience.

This transformation begins with recognising that effective local government in the digital age requires more than traditional bureaucratic structures. The most successful governance innovations worldwide share common threads: they embrace technology not as an end in itself, but as a means to deepen human connection and democratic participation. They balance efficiency gains with authentic community voice. They generate sustainable funding while maintaining public trust.

Drawing from Estonia’s digital governance revolution, Taiwan’s groundbreaking participatory democracy experiments, and Singapore’s data-driven urban planning, New Zealand can forge a uniquely Kiwi approach while creating councils that truly serve their communities.

Graham Medcalf, Transforming New Zealand’s Local Government

Current councilor and Hamilton East Ward Candidate Andrew Bydder’s prepared a guide to reforming councils earlier this year. It can be found at this link below.

OPINION: How to Fix Councils

MORE ‘MYTHBUSTING’ WITH LGNZ

CityWatch NZ editor (and Hamilton East candidate) John McDonald provides part two of his point-by-point commentary and rebuttal of LGNZ’s “Common myths about councils” webpage. The LGNZ ‘mythbusting’ webpage presents itself as an effort to counter all the “misinformation“ and “myths“ being spread about councils.

OPINION: LGNZ is Confusing Myth and Truth (Part 2)

Part 1 of this series largely covered the financial claims made on the LGNZ website. It is relatively simple to ‘debunk’ Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ) when they are trying to convince us that ‘councils wasting money’ is a myth, and that “Every dollar of rates goes back into your community” is the truth.

Part 2 needs to go into more controversial territory as lower half of the LGNZ webpage covers a broad range of topics including: “Council consultation is fake”, “Councils are trying to trap people into 20 minute cities”, “United Nations”, “World Economic Forum”, “Councils are borrowing money against your home”, “Property revaluations are a council cash grab“, and “Councils aren’t real legal entities”.

In his article, John repeatedly raises the case of the Mangawhai sewerage system, which includes: project budget blowouts, reckless borrowing, and bad management by Kaipara District Council. Eventually the courts found that rates demands by Kaipara District Council were unlawful, and then Parliament leaped to the defence of the Council (siding against the defiant residents and ratepayers).

PETITION AGAINST ELECTRONIC ROAD USER CHARGES AND THE SURVEILLANCE SYSTEM

The petition to “Stop New Zealand’s Electronic Road User Charges (eRUC) Surveillance System” receives over 26,000 signatures in three weeks.

Petition to “Stop New Zealand’s Electronic Road User Charges (eRUC) Surveillance System”

The petition is related to the Government announcement of a Electronic Road User Charges (eRUC) system to replace fuel taxes.

Excerpts from the text of the petition is copied below. The full petition can be found at this link.

What’s at Stake? The upcoming electronic Road User Charges (eRUC) system will use GPS and digital tracking to monitor vehicle movements for charging purposes. This means the government will collect detailed data on where, when, and how far every vehicle travels—affecting every driver in New Zealand…

…By signing this petition, you stand up for your right to privacy, freedom from constant government surveillance, and fair treatment in fuel and road user charges. Together, we can demand a safer, fairer road user charging system that respects New Zealand values.”

“Stop New Zealand’s Electronic Road User Charges (eRUC) Surveillance System” Petition.

In contrast, Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ) came out in support of the new eRUC system.

Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ) says councils are welcoming the Government’s proposed move to an electronic system for road user charges (eRUC), and the opportunity it provides to better fund the country’s local roading networks.

This follows yesterday’s announcement that the Government is working on changes to the system, with an intention to replace the current fuel excise tax with electronic road user charges (RUCs) on all light vehicles. A new digital system is expected to be in place by 2027.

LGNZ’s Transport Forum Chair Neil Holdom says that the Government will need to work closely with local authorities on the design and implementation of eRUC, in order for it to reach its full potential.

“eRUC a welcome step towards fair and sustainable transport funding”, LGNZ, 07 August 2025

It is worth restating that a report published by the New Zealand Initiative in July 2024 views “replace fuel excise duty” as one of the first steps toward more sophisticated “Smart RUC“ road pricing schemes… and challenging our “long-held assumptions” about our “right” to drive.

“New Zealand has an opportunity to lead the world in transport funding by transitioning to a comprehensive, distance-based Road User Charge (RUC) system. This innovative funding model, called Smart RUC, would apply to all vehicles and gradually replace fuel excise duty (FED) over a five-year period. Smart RUC, in conjunction with electronic tolling and congestion charging, would shift transport funding to a pure user-pays model. Under this system, road users would be charged based on mileage, time of use, route and vehicle type and weight.”

Page 22

“Perhaps the greatest challenge will be one of political will. Moving to a comprehensive road pricing model will require firm leadership and a willingness to champion a policy that, while in the long-term public interest, may be initially unpopular. It will require a sustained effort to shift the public narrative, to challenge long-held assumptions about the “right” to drive, and build a shared understanding of the need for change. But the potential rewards are substantial. Smart RUC promises not just a transport network that is adequately funded and efficiently managed, but one that is safer, cleaner and more equitable. By sending clear price signals about the real costs of road use, it can incentivise a shift towards more sustainable transport modes, helping to decarbonise our transport sector and improve air quality in our cities.”

Page 32

Matthew Birchall, “Driving Change – How road pricing can improve our roads”, The New Zealand Initiative

OPEN INVITATION FOR OPINION PIECES THIS ELECTION SEASON

Do you have ideas to improve local government? Are you a candidate for a council with an opinion? Do you have some wisdom to pass on to aspiring councillors? Do you want to give the newly-elected councillors some advice on what to watch out for once they get into council?

If you are interested in volunteering an opinion piece for CityWatch NZ, or know of someone who can write well, email content@citywatchnz.org for more information.

We are inviting commentators and candidates to provide opinion pieces over the next two months.

OPEN CONSULTATIONS, PETITIONS, AND EVENT NOTICES

ANTISOCIAL ROAD USE LEGISLATION AMENDMENT BILL

CLOSES 1:00PM TUESDAY 30 SEPTEMBER 2025

The single broad policy of the bill is to deter antisocial driving behaviour that negatively affects road and community safety. This includes fleeing from the Police, illegal street racing, dirt bike gatherings, frightening or intimidating convoys, and excessive noise. The bill seeks to implement the policy by giving the Police and the courts greater powers. It would also create new offences and strengthen penalties associated with the antisocial behaviours.

Link:

https://www.parliament.nz/en/pb/sc/make-a-submission/document/54SCJUST_SCF_F26FE692-C4D8-41D0-423E-08DDCD89E002/antisocial-road-use-legislation-amendment-bill

LOCAL GOVERNMENT (SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS) AMENDMENT BILL

CLOSES 11:59PM THURSDAY 02 OCTOBER 2025

The Regulatory System (Transport) Amendment Bill is an omnibus bill that would amend land transport, maritime, and aviation legislation. It is intended to make small regulatory fixes to deliver benefits to the transport system.

Editor’s Note: Despite this bill’s boring title and very brief description on the Parliament website, it is worth a closer look for those interested in government powers over transport and digital ID-type issues. The bill’s aims include:

• giving NZTA“broader powers to close parts of the State highway network due to safety concerns”,

• “creating new powers for the Director of Land Transport to respond to emergency and time-critical events”,

• ”enabling the future use of digital driver licences”,

• “enabling the electronic issuing of infringement and other regulatory notices“,

• giving NZTA powers “to declare certain vehicles or types of vehicles not to be motor vehicles” (this appears to mostly increasing the motorised power threshold from 600W to 2000W)

…among numerous other aims and clauses.

Link:

https://www.parliament.nz/en/pb/sc/make-a-submission/document/54SCTIN_SCF_77F9069C-1C77-48F4-0125-08DDDAC05555/regulatory-systems-transport-amendment-bill

SUMMARY OFFENCES (DEMONSTRATIONS NEAR RESIDENTIAL PREMISE) AMENDMENT BILL

CLOSES 2:00PM MONDAY 06 OCTOBER 2025

At present, the law does not provide a clear statement about the relevance of privacy in the context of protests and other demonstrations. Article 17 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights affirms the right to be free from arbitrary or unlawful interference with one’s privacy, family and home. The bill would amend the Summary Offences Act 1981 to create a new offence for engaging in a targeted and disruptive demonstration near residential premises. It aims to ensure that the law appropriately balances a person’s right to privacy with the rights and freedoms affirmed by the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990. This includes protecting the public’s ability to protest.

Link:

https://www.parliament.nz/en/pb/sc/make-a-submission/document/54SCJUST_SCF_B49E7971-0040-4D7E-2B43-08DDDDD857FA/summary-offences-demonstrations-near-residential-premises

MEET THE CANDIDATES – HAMILTON RESIDENTS AND RATEPAYERS ASSOCIATION

7:00PM WEDNESDAY 10 September 2025

Waikato Regional Council and Mayoral candidates – Meet the Candidates Evening

Date: Wednesday, 10 September 2025

Time: 7:00pm

Location: Agora Café, Frankton

This final HRRA Meet the Candidates evening will begin with presentations from Waikato Regional Council candidates, followed by mayoral candidates.

As a departure from the normal proceedings, the mayoral candidates will be quizzed by other council candidates before questions being opened to the public.

Come along and bring a friend

Organised by Hamilton Residents and Ratepayers Association Inc.”

Link: https://www.citywatchnz.org/meet-the-candidates-10-september-2025-hamilton-residents-ratepayers-association-incorporated/

BETTER WAIPA- FUNDRAISING MOVIE NIGHT

5:30PM SATURDAY 11 SEPTEMBER 2025

Better Waipa candidates stand for a 'back to basics' approach, with accountability and shared dialogue.

A screening of the movie adaptation of George Orwell’s classic 1984 - followed by a Q&A with regional election candidates.

Tickets only $10

Book in advance

https://events.humanitix.com/betterwaipa-co-nz

Regent Theatre Te Awamutu

235 Alexandra Street, Te Awamutu,, New Zealand

”REQUIRE A VOTE IN PARLIAMENT OF 75% TO APPROVE THE USE OF URGENCY” PETITION

CLOSES FRIDAY 12 SEPTEMBER 2025 AT 11.59PM NZST

The petition can be found at this link…

https://petitions.parliament.nz/c9194f5c-e810-4b70-2c93-08dd90d84c50

The petition text is copied below…

Petition request

That the House of Representatives amend the Standing Orders to require that a vote must be taken on the use of urgency or extraordinary urgency, and a threshold of 75% must be met before urgency or extraordinary urgency is accorded.

Petition reason

Parties on all sides of the political spectrum have complained about the use of urgency. We believe urgency is a valuable tool when truly necessary, but it can also be anti-democratic. Urgency can mean Select Committees don't hear from the public, experts or government agencies, and can deny the public a say on important issues. In our view, urgency does not support good lawmaking. We think it should be restricted to truly urgent situations, as decided by a Parliamentary majority of 75%.

”MAKE SOUND EMITTERS MANDATORY ON ELECTRIC CARS TO WARN BLIND PEDESTRIANS” PETITION

CLOSES FRIDAY 31 JULY 2026 AT 11.59PM NZST

The petition can be found at this link…

https://petitions.parliament.nz/8b70bf69-2e54-4e55-89ce-08ddcfc45c03

The petition text is copied below…

Petition request

That the House of Representatives legislate to make cost-effective artificial sound emitters mandatory on all electric and hybrid vehicles sold in New Zealand to warn blind and low-vision pedestrians when the vehicles are near.

Petition reason

Silent electric cars are a serious risk to blind and low-vision pedestrians. Without sound, we don’t know the vehicles are coming. Other countries require warning sounds at low speeds — I believe that New Zealand should urgently do so too, before more lives are put at risk. In my view, sound emitters should be mandatory on new electric and hybrid cars so that current vehicle owners aren’t burdened with the cost.

Posting of event information, petition information, consultation viewpoints, or other content on the CityWatch NZ newsletter or website does not constitute endorsement of those views by CityWatch NZ or its editors. This section is often based on information readers have sent to us on issues they think are important or checks of government websites for broadly-relevant consultations.

If there is a political/regulatory consultation, petition, or event you think might be of interest to CityWatch NZ readers, email the details to contact@citywatchnz.org

Subscribe now

Share

Bucking the general trend in New Zealand, Whanganui District Council receives positive news coverage for having the smallest rates increases in the country. The District’s Mayor shares his advice on how to increase efficiency and “keep costs under control”.

Internal Affairs has recently released its first set of council performance metrics. Though designed to help people compare councils ahead of the local government elections this October, the released performance metrics were missing important details.

Horiana Henderson provides a perspective on the upcoming Hamilton City Council election as rates increases hit hard. Her opinion piece is neatly captured by its subheadings “Moved… Out of Our Homes?“, “Moved… Into Gridlock”, and “Moved… to the Ballot Box”.

Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ) is under growing pressure. Waikato Regional Council recently voted to leave LGNZ and we look into why seven councils have decided to leave the organisation since 2023. LGNZ’s annual conference was held in July, and we cover the related propaganda war between the Taxpayer’s Union and LGNZ on the issue of capping rates increases nationwide.

John McDonald provides part one of his point-by-point rebuttal of LGNZ’s new ‘mythbusting’ webpage where the organisation tries to convince people that wasteful council spending is just “myths” and “misinformation“.

Rob Pascoe provides an update on Hamilton City’s new theatre, detailing the millions in grants, loans, and subsidies provided by the City Council. Russelle Knapp provides an open letter, dating back from the attempts to save Hamilton’s old Founders Theatre from demolition.

Geoff Kreegher covers the history of Hamilton’s Claudelands Events Centre. He details how the planned $43 million refurbishment of the “community-based” venue was transformed into the building of a “commercial model” venue costing over $70 million. Despite the marketing hype about the venue becoming a commercial success, its accumulated operating losses now exceed the final build costs.

Jean Dorrell provides a commentary on the mysterious decisions to install courtesy crossings on roundabouts and the associated safety issues.

Michael West provides his analysis of the new “Waters Done Well“ company for Hamilton City Council and Waikato District Council.

Links are provided to open consultations, petitions, and events at the end of this newsletter. This includes a feedback opportunity on the legislation before Parliament to remove the four well-beings (social, economic, environmental, and cultural) from the Local Government Act 2002.

WHANGANUI MAYOR GIVES ADVICE ON HOW TO AVOID LARGE RATES INCREASES

With much of New Zealand struggling with large rates increases, Whanganui District Council is reported to have “achieved the lowest rates rise in the country”, with an average rates increase of only 2.2%.

Local Democracy Reporting and RNZ have recently run a series of positive articles about the situation in Whanganui District, and the advice of Whanganui Mayor Andrew Tripe.

Low rates increases achieved at Whanganui District Council – RNZ reports

RNZ reported on Mayor Tripe’s advice for maintaining core services and investing in infrastructure while achieving minimal rates increases. They quote the Mayor as saying “All we have done is been more efficient with what we’ve got – doing more with less”.

RNZ paraphrased the Mayor, stating “Tripe said the council has focused on doing the basics well, investing in core infrastructure, and involving the community in decision-making”. They also report that Whanganui District Council is also increasing its loan repayments and plans to “Pay off an additional $590,000 of debt”.

"Early on in my mayoralty I realised that things were going to get tough... along with my chief executive, I sent him away to put together a five point plan, he came back with a six point plan to find cost savings and efficiency, so we went hard, went early on this - it's no fluke…

…All we have done is been more efficient with what we've got - doing more with less"

Mayor Andrew Tripe as quoted by RNZ in Whanganui mayor's advice after achieving lowest rates rise in New Zealand, 15 July 2025

Tripe reiterated that cost saving cuts - apart from a minor change to library opening hours - were not made to council facilities.

He said his advice to other councils was to stop making excuses and come up with a solid plan.

"I've got a saying - no result plus a good excuse equals no result. For me, don't make excuses, get on with it and put a very very solid plan together.

Whanganui mayor's advice after achieving lowest rates rise in New Zealand, RNZ, 15 July 2025

INTERNAL AFFAIRS RELEASES COUNCIL PERFORMANCE METRICS

In December 2024, the then Minister for Local Government Simeon Brown promised to release council performance information before the 2025 local government elections.

Internal Affairs has now released its first set of council performance information which can be downloaded at https://www.dia.govt.nz/local-government-performance-metrics

Council Performance Information Released by Internal Affairs

Most of the released council performance information was already publicly available in published council plans, though there is value in a centralised location for obtaining the data to rapidly make comparisons between councils.

Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ) has responded to the release claiming that “the metrics only provide part of the story” and that “Key local context is also important; is the council high growth or inundated with tourists”.

The first set of council performance metrics is missing some of the key information that Local Government Minister Simeon Brown was expecting in December 2024, such as “amount of rates levied per unit”, “forecast change in rates over the next 10 years”, “forecast change in rates over the next 10 years”, “percentage change in council debt since the previous year”, and “road condition”.

The ratepayersreport.nz website run by the Taxpayers’ Union has had more detailed (and arguably more useful) information about council finances and spending.

MOVED…OUT OF OUR HOMES?, MOVED… INTO GRIDLOCK, AND MOVED… TO THE BALLOT BOX

Hamilton East candidate Horiana Henderson provides a perspective on the upcoming Hamilton City Council election.

OPINION: A City on the Move — But Not in the Right Direction

Horiana captures and articulates the major issues facing the people of Hamilton: rates increases, council spending, growing debt, and engineered congestion.

“Are Hamiltonians being priced out of their own city? Year after year, council decisions have caused rates to soar. I’ve spoken to long-time, faithful ratepayers—many on fixed or low incomes—who now fear they won’t be able to stay in the homes where they raised their children and hoped their grandchildren would one day visit.

Submissions to last year’s Long-Term Plan told a clear and painful story: a council that spends first and asks ratepayers to pay later. Renters feel it. Homeowners feel it. And still, the spending continues…

…But this isn’t only about affordability—it’s about accessibility. About how we move around our city. Or increasingly, how we can’t.

Hamilton’s recent transport policies have created what I’ve called council-created congestion. We aren’t reducing traffic—we’re bottlenecking it, jamming it up, and then wondering why emergency vehicles can’t get through…

…And so now, it’s time to move in the one way that truly counts: to the ballot box. This election isn’t about party lines—it’s about principles and priorities.

If we want to stay in our homes without dreading the next rates bill…

If we want to move freely across our city without being stuck in engineered gridlock…

Then we must elect a mayor and council who understand what it means to live within our means—and who believe in building a city that works for everyone, not just for ticking ideological boxes.”

Horiana Henderson, A City on the Move — But Not in the Right Direction

LGNZ UNDER GROWING PRESSURE

Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ) is a membership body for councils in New Zealand, and they describe themselves with the line “We are local democracy’s vision and voice”.

For the 2024 year, LGNZ reported an annual revenue of $8,963,070. Just over $4,000,000 of that revenue came from council subscription fees and $1,233,399 was identified as “Annual Conference Income”.

This June, Waikato Regional Council decided not to renew their LGNZ subscription. This would have made the Waikato Regional Council the eighth council to leave LGNZ. However, in late July the decision to leave was revoked in a split vote, with the Chair reported to have broken the tie in favour of remaining with LGNZ.

Since Auckland Council exited the LGNZ in 2023, the following councils have also decided to leave the organisation: Christchurch City Council, West Coast Regional Council, Grey District Council, Kaipara District Council, Westland District Council, and Western Bay of Plenty District Council.

Elected officials who have voted to leave LGNZ have criticised the organisation for “lacking professionalism”, being “left-leaning”, being too partisan, being too district-focused, “largely, although not entirely, pushing a certain agenda“ at conferences, and the excessive alcohol consumption at LGNZ conferences. The purported benefits of leaving LGNZ have included saving on subscription fees and having more direct communication with central government.

Why are Councils Leaving LGNZ?

The 2025 LGNZ Conference, titled “SuperLocal: Brilliant Basics and Beyond”, was held in Christchurch this July.

The Taxpayer’s Union attended the LGNZ Annual Conference to protest rates increases and promote their “Cap Rates Now” campaign with an associated petition.

Prior to the conference , LGNZ circulated a “Rates capping AGM paper” to councils where they propose that LGNZ’s “advocacy needs to step up a gear” to “prevent rates capping” and they directly mention the campaign from The Taxpayer’s Union.

The LGNZ rates capping paper was made public by a Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (LGOIMA) request. The document outlines LGNZ’s campaign strategy to oppose rates capping regulation, which the Taxpayer’s Union described as a “plan to spend ratepayer money to fight ratepayers”.

“To argue that councils are better placed than central government to make rates decisions, we must boost public trust and confidence in local government. This would be one prong of our campaign, including highlighting popular council services and infrastructure that would be threatened by rates capping. A campaign centred on what the public would lose to a rate cap – and who has the right to decide – is more likely to succeed than one focussed on technicalities…

…We also need to consider what political consequences might result from strongly and vocally opposing rates capping. Misinformation about LGNZ’s political neutrality already exists. While we do (and will continue to) work closely with the Government on many other policies and portfolios, opposing specific proposals gains more attention.”
Rates capping AGM paper, LGNZ 2025

This year is a local body election year and LGNZ has published a “Common myths about councils” webpage. The LGNZ ‘mythbusting’ webpage presents itself as an effort to counter all the “misinformation“ and “myths“ being spread about councils.

“But some questions come from misinformation or confusion – often sparked by things people see on social media. Other times, they’re completely made up.

That’s why it’s important we clear a few things up. Because once a myth spreads, it can cause real worry for people, and undermine trust in the work councils do every day to support our communities.

Let’s bust a few common ones.”

“Common myths about councils” webpage, LGNZ 2025

The LGNZ webpage makes a series of claims about what is “myth“ and what is “truth“ on a range of local government issues, for example: “Myth: Rates are a rip-off and councils waste the money. Truth: Every dollar of rates goes back into your community and councils are accountable for how it’s spent”.

CityWatch NZ editor (and Hamilton East candidate) John McDonald provides part one of his point-by-point commentary and rebuttal of LGNZ’s ‘mythbusting’ efforts.

OPINION: LGNZ is Confusing Myth and Truth (Part 1)

Some of John’s responses are quoted below, these responses are focused on challenging LGNZ’s claim of “Truth: Every dollar of rates goes back into your community and councils are accountable for how it’s spent” .

“Rates income can go to a range of consultants and contractors who are not always part of the local community…

…Many people are of the view that they are not getting value-for-money from their rates and that councils are wasting funds. Those are opinions and values judgements, not “myths”.

There are broadly two types of council waste:

1. Projects that the community largely agree are needed, though council chooses to install an expensive, extravagant, or inefficient option. An example would be when the community agrees that more rubbish bins are needed, though would view spending around $2900 for each 60-litre rubbish bin as a waste of money (Costs taken from Hamilton City Council LGOMIA 422930, via Graeme Mead).

2. Projects that the community largely agree are not needed, not wanted, or not the role of the council to fund. An example would be a raised crossing, costing around $500,000, for a community that mostly travels by car and will not appreciate another speed bump being installed on a major road.

The extremely high costs for various projects also makes people wonder about how much wasteful spending results from bad contract negotiation practices or outright corruption.

John McDonald, LGNZ is Confusing Myth and Truth (Part 1)

HAMILTON’S THEATRES AND CITY COUNCIL FUNDING

Former Councillor Rob Pascoe provides an update on the recent history of spending on Hamilton City’s new regional theatre. After the controversial closing of Hamilton City’s “long-serving Founders Theatre”, Hamilton City Council committed to “contributing $25 million the development, plus $1.1 million a year for 20 years in operating costs” to support building the new theatre.

Rob provides and update detailing the millions in extra spending by the City Council to support the project.

OPINION: Hamilton’s New Theatre — A Recent History

“But as we approach the theatre’s completion, ratepayers have already contributed more than originally expected:

Here’s a breakdown of the city’s financial contributions to date:

1. $25 million – the original grant.

2. $6–7 million – site work improvements around Embassy Park and Sapper Moore Jones Place to provide theatre access.

3. Development contribution reductions – waived fees that would normally apply to such a project.

4. $6.5 million loan – from the Municipal Endowment Fund in late 2024 to cover a budget shortfall. Supposedly at “commercial rates”, specific details are vague. The loan appears to be unsecured, interest free with unspecified repayment dates. It seems doubtful if the loan could be repaid in from the theatre’s operating budget. Maybe both Council and the Theatre Trust expect the loan will be written off.

5. $70,000 – for the theatre’s opening ceremony and celebrations.

6. $1.3 million – for movable seating at the front of the theatre. This was drawn from the annual operating grant even though it was originally intended to start only once the theatre opened.”

Rob Pascoe, Hamilton’s New Theatre — A Recent History

On a related theatre issue, Russelle Knapp provides an open letter detaining the efforts to save Hamilton’s Founders Theatre from demolition.

This letter from before the demolition outlines the case for keeping the old theatre and transferring it to a trust which would refurbish the venue. Hamilton City Council instead chose to demolish the old theatre at an estimated cost of $3.7 million.

OPEN LETTER: Russelle Knaap – Save The Founders Theatre

THE HISTORY OF CLAUDELANDS EVENT CENTRE

Using news media and official information requests, Geoff Kreegher presents a history of Hamilton’s Claudelands Events Centre, detailing what he describes as a “Tumultuous Journey from Historic Showgrounds to a Questionable Commercial Venture”.

The History of Claudelands Events Centre – A Questionable Commercial Venture

The planned refurbishment started as a “community-based” model in 2004, and was transformed into a “commercial model” around 2007. The estimated project cost increased from $43.8 million to a final build cost which was over $70 million in 2011.

“The Claudelands Event Centre in Hamilton was funded by debt and the City Council has cumulatively incurred $25,370,806 in interest and losses of $97,998,358 to 30 June 2024 (36% and 140% respectively of the $70.19 million build cost). Council could give it away – save the annual losses then only have the interest to fund.

The Claudelands development has been plagued by a series of persistent challenges and systemic failures, spanning from its project conception and financial management to community relations and accountability.

Persistent Challenges Summarised:

• Escalating Costs and Budget Overruns

• Overly Optimistic Financial Projections

• Revenue Shortfalls and Operating Deficits

• Community Concerns

• Competition with Existing Venues

Systemic Failures:

• Flawed Project Model Change (2007)

• Disconnect in Financial Planning and Advice

• Lack of Learning from Past Experiences

• Inadequate Planning and Due Diligence

• Incompetence and Arrogance of Officials

• Absence of Blame and Accountability

• Reduced Transparency in Financial Reporting.”

Geoff Kreegher, The History of Claudelands Events Centre – A Questionable Commercial Venture

WHY ADD COURTESY CROSSINGS TO ROUNDABOUTS?

Jean Dorrell’s opinion piece this month covers the issue of putting courtesy crossings on roundabout. This is an urban road design practice that Hamilton City Council has embraced with a number of installations.

OPINION: Roundabouts, Crossings and Common Sense (or Lack Thereof)

Jean covers the official rules and guidelines for courtesy crossings, noting that NZTA states: “Courtesy crossings are intended to facilitate eye contact between pedestrians and drivers resulting in a mutually negotiated position over who goes first”.

Is exiting a roundabout a good time for drivers and pedestrians to make eye-contact and enter into a non-verbal negotiation?

Is it possible, or wise, to safely stop on a busy roundabout?

Jean also covers the issues of poor-quality crossing signage in Hamilton, while also commending the easy-to-read signage used by Whanganui District Council.

“Road safety is important. I’m confident that no one will dispute this. People need to be able to move around the city safely and efficiently whether walking, cycling or driving.

Courtesy crossings are great if they are positioned well. The courtesy crossing on Linden Court (between Chartwell Library and Chartwell Westfield) works well. Drivers can see any pedestrians from a distance. Pedestrians can also easily identify whether a vehicle is slowing down to stop or not.

Where common sense disappears is with roundabouts with courtesy or pedestrian crossings on them. Roundabouts are intended to improve traffic flow. Pedestrian and courtesy crossings are intended stop traffic flow for the safety of pedestrians. These are opposing intentions.

Why does Hamilton City Council (HCC) think that mixing roundabouts with pedestrian/courtesy crossings increases road safety?”

Jean Dorrell, Roundabouts, Crossings and Common Sense (or Lack Thereof)

CONCERNS WITH THE NEW HAMILTON/WAIKATO COUNCIL-CONTROLLED WATER COMPANY

Hamilton West candidate Michael West provides his analysis of the new water company to provide water services for Hamilton City Council (HCC) and Waikato District Council (WDC).

In an article first published on Better Hamilton, Michael focuses on analysing the expected future spending by the new water company and predicts large increases in water charges to support the billions in expected borrowing.

OPINION: Water is Life – But Can You Afford It?

“While the name ‘Water done Well’ suggests improvements we only need to look to the Hawke’s Bay, where household water rates are set to potentially soar to around $7,400 per year in ten years. Yes, that is Just Water. So how will Hamilton City Council manage ‘Water done Well’? Looking at the early indications does not instil a great deal of confidence. The fact that the establishment costs of our local controlled water organisation have already blown out by 20% does not fill me with hope.

On 24th June 2025, a Hamilton City Council website notification titled “Growth driving water investment” outlined the newly announced Hamilton City Council (HCC) and Waikato District Council (WDC) combined waters entity, formed to manage 90,000 connections and invest in water and wastewater services across Hamilton and Waikato. It tells us of the planned investment totalling $3.6B over 10 years, of which $2.4B will be driven by growth. Growth is forecast as a 22% increase in households or businesses needing water services.

I’ve done a few sums around that, based on information from both HCC and WDC 2024 Annual Reports, and it makes for very scary reading. My own forecast (with a few assumptions that I have explained below) sees water rates increase by 143% per connection in the first 5 years alone, up from $1,413 to $3,429.”

Michael West, Water is Life – But Can You Afford It?

OPEN INVITATION FOR OPINION PIECES THIS ELECTION SEASON

Do you have ideas to improve local government? Are you a candidate for a council with an opinion? Do you have some wisdom to pass on to aspiring councillors? Do you want to give the newly-elected councillors some advice on what to watch out for once they get into council?

If you are interested in volunteering an opinion piece for CityWatch NZ, or know of someone who can write well, email content@citywatchnz.org for more information.

We are inviting commentators and candidates to provide opinion pieces over the next two months.

Given the number of elections running across the country, sending out personal invites to every candidate and processing the responses is impractical without more volunteers. If you can volunteer to coordinate some more comprehensive coverage of elections in your area, email contact@citywatchnz.org.

OPEN CONSULTATIONS, PETITIONS, AND EVENT NOTICES

LOCAL GOVERNMENT (SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS) AMENDMENT BILL

CLOSES 11:59PM WEDNESDAY 27 AUGUST 2025

The Governance and Administration Committee is calling for submissions on the Local Government (System Improvements) Amendment Bill.

The bill would seek to reduce pressure on council rates by:

• refocusing the purpose of local government; and

• better measuring and publicising council performance; and

• prioritising core services in council spending; and

• strengthening council accountability and transparency; and

• providing regulatory relief to councils.

The Bill proposes a range of amendments to the Local Government Act 2002 to meet its policy objectives.

Editor’s Note : This legislation seeks to remove the “social, economic, environmental, and cultural” well-beings from the Local Government Act 2002.

Link:

https://www.parliament.nz/en/pb/sc/make-a-submission/document/54SCGOA_SCF_CCEC6ABA-9FB7-4B54-F679-08DDC285D4B5/local-government-system-improvements-amendment-bill

GOING FOR HOUSING GROWTH: PROVIDING FOR URBAN DEVELOPMENT IN THE NEW RESOURCE MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS

CLOSES SUNDAY 17 AUGUST 2025

Overview

Te Tūāpapa Kura Kāinga – Ministry of Housing and Urban Development and the Ministry of Environment — Manatū Mō Te Taiao want to hear your views about the Going for Housing Growth Pillar 1 proposals and how they could work in the new resource management system.

The Going for Housing Growth programme is part of the Government’s broader plan to tackle Aotearoa New Zealand’s ongoing housing shortage. It’s structured around three pillars that make system changes to address the underlying causes of the housing supply shortage.

These are:

• Pillar 1: Freeing up land for urban development, including removing unnecessary planning barriers

• Pillar 2: Improving infrastructure funding and financing to support urban growth

• Pillar 3: Providing incentives for communities and councils to support growth.

Together, these three pillars have an objective of improving housing affordability by significantly increasing the supply of developable land for housing, both inside and at the edge of our urban areas.

We encourage you to read the discussion document and to share your views. Your feedback will help inform further policy development.

Link:

https://consult.environment.govt.nz/resource-management/going-for-housing-growth/

MEET THE CANDIDATES – HAMILTON RESIDENTS AND RATEPAYERS ASSOCIATION

7:00PM WEDNESDAY 06 AUGUST 2025

“Hamilton East Ward – Meet the Candidates Evening

Date: Wednesday, 6th August 2025

Time: 7:00pm

Location: Chapel Hill Community Church Hall, 2 Cate Road, Rototuna, Hamilton

Come along and bring a friend

Organised by Hamilton Residents and Ratepayers Association Inc.”

Link: https://www.citywatchnz.org/meet-the-candidates-06-august-2025-hamilton-residents-ratepayers-association-incorporated/

BETTER HAMILTON - PUBLIC MEETING

7:00PM THURSDAY 07 AUGUST 2025

“You are invited to an evening with Better Hamilton - A City that works for YOU

Thursday, August 7th at 7pm

Above the Classic Car Museum/Jukebox Dinner (11 Railside Place, Hamilton)

www.betterhamilton.co.nz”

LEGISLATION AMENDMENT BILL

CLOSES 1:00 PM THURSDAY 28 AUGUST 2025

“This bill seeks to promote high-quality legislation for New Zealand that is easy to find, use, and understand. It aims to do so by:

• ​requiring departments to electronically publish on their website (or another approved website) any secondary legislation they draft, along with related information

• providing for the New Zealand legislation website, which the Parliamentary Counsel Office (PCO) maintains, to be a single point of access to legislation and information related to legislation

• providing rules, powers, functions, and duties for the PCO, the Attorney-General, and administering agencies to support the changes

• amending other legislation to support and promote consistency with the new publication requirements and enable an orderly transition to them

• improving tools for modernising and simplifying legislation and keeping it up to date

• repealing obsolete or redundant legislation that the PCO has identified as part of its functions under the Legislation Act 2019

• refining provisions for confirming secondary legislation.”

Link: https://www.parliament.nz/en/pb/sc/make-a-submission/document/54SCJUST_SCF_68B1C63B-8347-4954-427B-08DD9263EE14/legislation-amendment-bill

BETTER WAIPA- FUNDRAISING MOVIE NIGHT

5:30PM SATURDAY 11 SEPTEMBER 2025

Better Waipa candidates stand for a 'back to basics' approach, with accountability and shared dialogue.

A screening of the movie adaptation of George Orwell’s classic 1984 - followed by a Q&A with regional election candidates.

Tickets only $10

Book in advance

https://events.humanitix.com/betterwaipa-co-nz

Regent Theatre Te Awamutu

235 Alexandra Street, Te Awamutu,, New Zealand

”REQUIRE A VOTE IN PARLIAMENT OF 75% TO APPROVE THE USE OF URGENCY” PETITION

CLOSES FRIDAY 12 SEPTEMBER 2025 AT 11.59PM NZST

The petition can be found at this link…

https://petitions.parliament.nz/c9194f5c-e810-4b70-2c93-08dd90d84c50

The petition text is copied below…

Petition request

That the House of Representatives amend the Standing Orders to require that a vote must be taken on the use of urgency or extraordinary urgency, and a threshold of 75% must be met before urgency or extraordinary urgency is accorded.

Petition reason

Parties on all sides of the political spectrum have complained about the use of urgency. We believe urgency is a valuable tool when truly necessary, but it can also be anti-democratic. Urgency can mean Select Committees don't hear from the public, experts or government agencies, and can deny the public a say on important issues. In our view, urgency does not support good lawmaking. We think it should be restricted to truly urgent situations, as decided by a Parliamentary majority of 75%.

Posting of event information, petition information, consultation viewpoints, or other content on the CityWatch NZ newsletter or website does not constitute endorsement of those views by CityWatch NZ or its editors. This section is often based on information readers have sent to us on issues they think are important or checks of government websites for broadly-relevant consultations.

If there is a political/regulatory consultation, petition, or event you think might be of interest to CityWatch NZ readers, email the details to contact@citywatchnz.org

Subscribe now

Share

Candidate nominations for the 2025 Local Government Elections are opening in July, and CityWatch NZ will be featuring more election-related content and coverage. Key election dates are provided along with a Q & A on the STV electoral system. Don Hewison provides his Layperson’s Guide to the Local Government Act 2002 as a useful educational resource for aspiring candidates and concerned residents.

In late June, Hamilton City Council’s Finance and Monitoring Committee voted in support of two recommendations from Council staff. The committee first decided not to increase the Council’s debt limit to 350% of total revenue. The second recommendation was to put $500,000 into the next stage of forming a new finance company. This proposed new finance company would offer loans to ratepayers who cannot afford rates and developer contributions. Mark Flyger gives his opinion on the scheme, which he describes as a potential “debt-trap” for struggling homeowners.

Mike West provides the “Pipes or Pipe-dreams“ article about infrastructure from his 2016 election campaign, with an updated preface about how Hamilton City is still facing the same issues today.

Jean Dorrell provides another commentary this month where she asks if potholes are yet another traffic calming measure.

John McDonald provides feedback on the Public Works (Critical Infrastructure) Amendment Bill currently before Parliament, describing it as an attempt to allow authorities to take land from people by “executive decree” and denying people their right to a court hearing.

For this month’s global perspective we summarise how people and organisations in the USA are resisting the expanding surveillance systems of number plate recognition cameras, vast databases, and the associated AI processing.

The Coalition Government is pushing forward with major reforms to the Resource Management Act, with significant consultations taking place in July.

Links are provided to open consultations and petitions at the end of this newsletter.

2025 LOCAL GOVERNMENT ELECTIONS

Councils in New Zealand are holding local government elections this October (with the exception of Tauranga City Council).

The important dates for the election process are listed below.

Candidate Nominations Open: 4 July 2025

Candidate Nominations Close: Noon, 1 August 2025

Voting Opens: 9 September 2025

Close of Voting: Noon, Saturday 11 October 2025

CityWatch NZ’s main 2025 election page is online and linked here. It will be updated with links to other more specific election pages over the next few months.

Questions often arise about the complicated Single Transferable Vote (STV) system. Voters have concerns about how to make sure their vote counts and how to avoid their vote being wasted. We have posted a Q & A article based on the information available on the Department of Internal Affairs website.

The article can be found at the link below.

Q & A: The Single Transferable Vote (STV) System in Local Elections 2025

In the STV electoral system you rank candidates with numbers in your order of preference. “1” being your first preference, “2” being your second preference, “3” being your third preference, “4” being your fourth preference choice, and so on.

Which councils are using STV in the 2025 elections?

Dunedin City Council, Far North District Council, Gisborne District Council, Greater Wellington Regional Council, Hamilton City Council, Kāpiti Coast District Council, Marlborough District Council, Nelson City Council, New Plymouth District Council, Otago Regional Council, Palmerston North City Council, Tauranga City Council, Porirua City Council, Ruapehu District Council, Wellington City Council, Whangarei District Council

The Department of Internal Affairs website is one of the most reliable sources of information on which councils are using the STV system in this election.

https://www.stv.govt.nz/index.shtml

Q & A: The Single Transferable Vote (STV) System in Local Elections 2025

These two quotes below Department of Internal Affairs website should help resolve some of the common misunderstandings with STV.

“You can vote for as many or as few candidates as you like.”

How to vote using STV, The Department of Internal Affairs

“The transfer of votes is done in order of voters' preferences. This means that surplus votes are not "wasted" but are available to help other candidates to get elected.”

How candidates are elected, The Department of Internal Affairs

There are concerns about how votes can be wasted in an STV system due to lack of education about how the system works. The Q & A article addresses those issues.

How do I stop my vote being wasted in STV?

1. Make sure you vote and get your ballot paper returned before voting closes (That is before noon on 11 October 2025).

2. Make sure you rank (with numbers) all the candidates that you want to have on your local council (or board).

3. Avoid your vote becoming an “Informal” vote. The “Informal” votes are not counted toward any candidate. To avoid your vote becoming an “Informal” vote in an STV system, use the number “1” once, don’t use ticks, and don’t use the same number more than once.

4. Ranking multiple candidates can reduce the chances your vote will be wasted. Your 2^nd, 3^rd_, 4^th_, 5^th and 6^th (and so on) preferences can be counted and can be important. If you only give a ranking number to one or two candidates, your vote can be wasted if those candidates win easily or are eliminated early in the counting. When multiple seats are available in an STV election the surplus or ‘spill over’ votes can be important in determining which candidates win seats in the council chamber (or on the board).

Q & A: The Single Transferable Vote (STV) System in Local Elections 2025

A LAYPERSON’S GUIDE TO THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT

CityWatch NZ contributor and adult educator Don Hewison (ScEdD, ChEdD) is making available his latest version of “Investigating New Zealand’s Local Government Act 2002 - A Layperson’s Guide’”.

Investigating New Zealand’s Local Government Act 2002 – A Layperson’s Guide

The document is intended as a starting point for existing councillors, aspiring candidates, council staff, and concerned people to explore the basis of local government in contemporary New Zealand.

“The writer of this report is experienced in adult education, and is not a lawyer, accountant, or social scientist. The methodology, outcome of the investigation, literature review, discussion, and findings are presented from the viewpoint of encouraging people to think, listen to and discuss issues with others. The focus should be on how we can work together to rebuild the democracy we ought to have.

The study leading to the production of the Layperson’s Guide only covers those parts and sections of the Local Government Act considered to be necessary to help someone gain an understanding of the structure of local government, and the methodology of interpretation. Once an introduction to the understanding and interpreting of legislation is developed, then it should be possible to continue deeper into the Local Government Act 2002, and other legislation.”

Don Hewison, Investigating New Zealand’s Local Government Act 2002 - A Layperson’s Guide

HAMILTON CITY COUNCIL REJECTS DEBT-LIMIT INCREASE

In a somewhat unexpected development, Hamilton City Council staff recommended the council not apply for a debt limit increase with the Local Government Funding Agency (LGFA). On the 24th of June 2025, Hamilton’s Finance and Monitoring Committee voted unanimously to support the staff recommendation.

In the past, Hamilton City Council has welcomed more relaxed debt-limits and the opportunity to grow the Council’s total debt.

Most councils in New Zealand borrow from LGFA, and each council is “currently able to borrow up to 285% of its revenue based on the LGFA’s current financial covenants policy”.

The LGFA has recently approved a “bespoke Net Debt/Total Revenue covenant for high growth Councils” offering those councils an opportunity to increase their debt limit to 350% of total revenue.

Hamilton City Council votes to reject increasing its debt-to-revenue limit to 350%

Does this indicate a shift to greater financial discipline within the Council?

Does the Council feeling more comfortable because the new water company is taking on a large amount of debt and that company will start with a higher debt-to-revenue limit of 500%?

…Or are they aware of growing concerns within the local community about the debt levels and the risk of further downgrades of Council’s international credit rating?

THE PROPOSED NEW FINANCE COMPANY SEEKS COUNCIL FUNDING

Hamilton’s Finance and Monitoring Committee has also recommended that the Council borrows $500,000 to “invest“ in developing the “Ratepayer Assistance Scheme” (or “The RAS”). The proposal did not have unanimous support, as Councillors Bydder, Pike, Taylor, Wilson, and Huata voted against the recommendation.

Hamilton City Council votes to fund work towards creating new multi-council finance company

The proposed new RAS finance company will be a Council Controlled Organisation (CCO). The Local Government Funding Agency (LGFA), Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ), Cameron Partners, and “a group of metro councils” are all developing the proposal.

The RAS would largely function to loan out money so that ratepayers can cover the costs that their council has imposed on them. Essentially these would be reverse-mortgages to people struggling to pay their rates. It also plans to loan out money for “property improvements” and developer contributions/levies.

The RAS is expected to benefit from a high credit rating due to its “structure” and ability to “impose a ‘rates-like’ levy”.

Mark Flyger gives his opinion on the scheme (originally published at Better Hamilton).

OPINION: Hamilton’s proposed “Ratepayer Assistance” Scheme Risks Becoming a Debt Trap

Mark raises a number of concerns, both for the struggling homeowners and for Council transparency more generally. The new finance company has a potentially murky governance structures and is deliberately structured to sit “off balance sheet” as an entity. This has implications for the oversight of Council’s finances.

“But behind the glossy branding lies a plan that risks pushing already struggling homeowners further into debt.

Marketed as a solution to the cost-of-living crisis and housing affordability, the scheme’s reality is far less reassuring.

At its core, it operates like a reverse mortgage—offering financial assistance now in exchange for long-term debt repayments later, secured against a ratepayer’s property.

This is not genuine support. It is deferred debt disguised as help.

Under the proposal, a newly created Council-Controlled Organisation (CCO) would lend money to homeowners to cover their rates. Repayments would be made later through levies on the property—effectively saddling vulnerable households with growing financial obligations.

Presumably the CCO board will also extract directors’ fees and the like, paid for by our poorer ratepayers.”

Mark Flyger, Hamilton’s proposed “Ratepayer Assistance” Scheme Risks Becoming a Debt Trap

ARE POTHOLES FOR TRAFFIC CALMING?

Jean Dorrell’s opinion piece this month covers the issue of potholes.

“I was driving, looking for a street I hadn’t been to before on the west side of the river when I noticed that the driver in front of me was zig-zagging across the road like he was on a slalom course. I was concerned he may be intoxicated so I slowed down to increase the distance between us. He slowed down as well.

Then bang! And thump! My head almost hit the car roof as my car went down and up and down and up. I realised the driver in front of me was not drunk. He just knew the best driving path to avoid the worst of the potholes. And I realised that I also drive like this on Heaphy Terrace and Hukanui Road, two roads which I frequent often enough to know all the potholes (although new ones appear regularly and the abundance of road cones mean I am always zig-zagging anyway).

Ironically, potholes actually work quite well as traffic calming measures. If there are enough of them, all local drivers will drive at 30 kmph or less. And non-local drivers will be slowed down by the folk who know the road and want to protect their car. Maybe this is the HCC plan.

I have noticed many potholes appearing near the speed bumps, especially the new speed bumps. The car goes up, the car goes down. If you’re looking for a secure profession in Hamilton, I would suggest considering wheel alignment.”

Jean Dorrell, Potholes as a Traffic Calming Measure?

“PIPES NOT PIPE DREAMS” AND ONGOING SPENDING ISSUES

Mike West wrote an article back in 2016, for his Hamilton City Council election campaign. He has provided that article to CityWatch NZ with an updated introduction. Nine years later, it reflects persistent issues in Hamilton City. Other councils around New Zealand share similar issues.

“When I stood for Council in 2016, I was passionate about many issues that our Council wasn’t addressing. A huge concern for me then was the amount of money being spent on vanity projects and the lack of infrastructure spending.

Below is an article I published during my 2016 election campaign when I used the slogan "Pipes not Pipe Dreams". Interestingly, a developer I know who owned an inner-city property with the intention of developing it into residential dwellings was recently denied consent from council as the wastewater pipes in the area aren't up to standard. And from what I have been told there are many other development ready projects in the same boat. If only council had focused on pipes and not pipe dreams.

Sadly, since then the situation has only gotten worse. Hamilton City Council along with other councils around New Zealand, have done such a poor job of investing in our water infrastructure that Central Government wants it taken out of their hands. The potential for this to burden ratepayers with even more costs is frightening. The creation of Council Controlled Organisations (CCO’S) to manage our water could cost us dearly, especially if the remaining functions that Council performs go unchecked and Councils unquenchable thirst for spending isn’t reined in. It's of grave concern that rates are currently projected to double in the next five years, but on top of that how expensive will water be?

Please read my 2016 article below as very little has changed….”

Mike West, updated introduction to Investing in Infrastructure to Support Hamilton’s Growth

Mike West’s full article can be read at this link below.

OPINION: Investing in Infrastructure to Support Hamilton’s Growth

CRITICISM OF THE PROPOSED PUBLIC WORKS ACT AMENDMENTS

John McDonald provides his critical feedback on the Public Works (Critical Infrastructure) Amendment Bill. This was sent to Parliament’s Transport and Infrastructure Committee on 13 June 2025.

OPEN LETTER: John McDonald – Feedback on the Public Works (Critical Infrastructure) Amendment Bill

John McDonald raised a number of concerns about the bill which would allow a minister, or a council Chief Executive, to take private land for “fast track” projects without going through a court process. These concerns include how the bill appears to give “arbitrary powers” to council chief executives “in a dubious way with minimal scrutiny”. Impacted landowners receive a threatening notice from the authorities. This “Notice of intention to take land for critical infrastructure project” letter only gives them 10 day’s notice to respond.

He also raised the issue of the lines between public works and for-profit corporate ventures being blurred. The recent trends towards public-private partnerships, toll roads, and privatised utilities are blurring the lines between public good and private benefit. He asks whether we will be treated as “equal before the law” when a government has partnered with another entity operating for private gain?

“This bill is a threat to private property rights and appears to be an attempt to enhance the ability for governments to take land in a non-consensual fashion by what is effectively executive decree…

…Removing the ability for victims of government ‘land taking’ schemes to object to the Environment Court is concerning from the perspective of maintaining well-established rights to due process and natural justice.”

John McDonald, feedback on the Public Works (Critical Infrastructure) Amendment Bill.

GROWING RESISTANCE TO NUMBER PLATE RECOGNITION CAMERAS IN THE USA

A broad range of individuals and groups from across the political spectrum are mobilising against the growing use of AI and camera surveillance for vehicle tracking in the USA.

In New Zealand the term Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) is used, the term Automated License Plate Readers (ALPRs) is more commonly used in the USA.

Opposition activity has included:

• The “DeFlock” online map has been created for those concerned with the growing surveillance network to record the location of cameras and raise awareness of the issue.

• The Institute for Justice has been filing lawsuits on issues of “privacy and government overreach” as “a civil liberties organization”. The Institute claims that the City of Norfolk’s surveillance system is unconstitutional under the Fourth Amendment. They describe the system’s impact on city residents is an “AI-assisted database that enables the warrantless surveillance of their every move”. The Institute for Justice is expecting a trial date late in 2025 and promises “to fight for the right of every American to travel without being tracked by government surveillance”.

• A wide range of groups from the libertarian magazine Reason through to the San Diego Chapter of the Democratic Socialists of America are covering the scandal where immigration enforcement agents unlawfully gained access to ALPR data.

• The Secure Justice organisation has reported that “There is no statistical evidence that ALPRs are effective at giving law enforcement investigative leads” and “There is not even a moderate correlation between ALPRs and stolen vehicle recoveries” based on analysis of 16 years of police data from Piedmont in California.

• Over 16 US states have passed privacy rules restricting the use ALPR cameras or limiting the storage of the data, with more states legislating on the issue.

RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ACT REFORMS

A large amount of consultation is taking place around Resource Management Act reforms. The consultations that close in July and August are over at the Ministry of the Environment and make up the first two large entries in this newsletter’s Open Consultation section.

Wide-reaching would be an understatement when describing the scope of these reforms.

Key documents for the first consultation finishing on 27 JULY 2025 include:

• Attachment 1.1: Proposed provisions – New National Policy Statement for Infrastructure

• Attachment 1.2: Proposed provisions – Amendments to the National Policy Statement for Renewable Electricity Generation 2011

• Attachment 1.3: Proposed provisions – Amendments to the National Policy Statement on Electricity Transmission 2008

• Attachment 1.4: Proposed provisions – Amendments to the Resource Management (National Environmental Standards for Electricity Transmission Activities) Regulations 2009

• Attachment 1.5: Proposed provisions – Amendments to the Resource Management (National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities) Regulations 2016

• Attachment 1.6: Proposed provisions – New National Environmental Standards for Granny Flats (Minor Residential Units) Regulations

• Attachment 1.7: Proposed provisions – New National Environmental Standards for Papakāinga

• Attachment 1.8: Proposed provisions – New National Policy Statement for Natural Hazards.

Those interested in plans to install larger or taller cell towers, the installation of many small 5G units in urban areas, and permitted distances from “sensitive activities“ (schools, residential buildings, etc) should look at Attachment 1.5 on Telecommunication Facilities.

Those interested in putting multiple dwellings on land should look at Attachment 1.6 on Granny Flats and Attachment 1.7 on Papakāinga.

Those interested in risk modelling and managed retreat issues should look at Attachment 1.8 on Natural Hazards.

OPEN CONSULTATIONS, PETITIONS, AND EVENT NOTICES

INFRASTRUCTURE, DEVELOPMENT, AND PRIMARY SECTOR NATIONAL DIRECTION CONSULTATION

CLOSES SUNDAY 27 JULY 2025

Overview

The Government is calling for feedback on proposals to change and inform development of national direction under the resource management system.

Package 1: Infrastructure and development

The Government’s aim is to make it easier for councils to plan and deliver infrastructure. This package contains proposals for four new national direction instruments and amendments to four existing national direction instruments.

Instruments in Package 1: Infrastructure and development:

• New National Policy Statement for Infrastructure

• Amendments to the National Policy Statement for Renewable Electricity Generation

• Amendments to the National Policy Statement on Electricity Transmission (change title to the National Policy Statement for Electricity Networks)

• Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Electricity Transmission Activities (change title to National Environmental Standards for Electricity Network Activities)

• Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities

• New National Environmental Standards for Granny Flats

• New National Environmental Standards for Papakāinga

• New National Policy Statement for Natural Hazards

Links:

https://consult.environment.govt.nz/resource-management/infrastructure-development-primary-sector-nd/

GOING FOR HOUSING GROWTH: PROVIDING FOR URBAN DEVELOPMENT IN THE NEW RESOURCE MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS

CLOSES SUNDAY 17 AUGUST 2025

Overview

Te Tūāpapa Kura Kāinga – Ministry of Housing and Urban Development and the Ministry of Environment — Manatū Mō Te Taiao want to hear your views about the Going for Housing Growth Pillar 1 proposals and how they could work in the new resource management system.

The Going for Housing Growth programme is part of the Government’s broader plan to tackle Aotearoa New Zealand’s ongoing housing shortage. It’s structured around three pillars that make system changes to address the underlying causes of the housing supply shortage.

These are:

• Pillar 1: Freeing up land for urban development, including removing unnecessary planning barriers

• Pillar 2: Improving infrastructure funding and financing to support urban growth

• Pillar 3: Providing incentives for communities and councils to support growth.

Together, these three pillars have an objective of improving housing affordability by significantly increasing the supply of developable land for housing, both inside and at the edge of our urban areas.

We encourage you to read the discussion document and to share your views. Your feedback will help inform further policy development.

Links:

https://consult.environment.govt.nz/resource-management/going-for-housing-growth/

INQUIRY INTO PORTS AND THE MARITIME SECTOR

CLOSES 11:59 PM SUNDAY 13 JUNE 2025

“Transport and Infrastructure Committee opens inquiry into ports and the maritime sector

Parliament’s Transport and Infrastructure Committee has formally launched an inquiry into the nation’s ports and the maritime sector. The committee is acutely aware that, as an island nation with a trade-dependent economy, efficient and competitive ports and marine industries are essential to sustaining economic growth and prosperity.

Andy Foster, chair of the Transport and Infrastructure Committee said: “From the first explorers, Polynesian and European, the sea has always been vitally important to New Zealand. We are a trading nation. Our ports are critical to exports and imports alike. Having myself visited most of our ports already, I am very aware of the diversity of our ports. They are of widely differing scale. They have different functions in the national maritime system. They compete and they collaborate. They serve quite different regional economies, and have varying maritime focus, and both unique and shared opportunities and challenges."

“The Government is very focused on lifting productivity and economic performance. That is essential to lifting every New Zealanders standard of living. To this end, through this inquiry we will be seeking opportunities to help raise the performance of our ports and maritime sector and therefore help benefit our export producers and importers alike.”

The committee has established this Inquiry to examine the current state of play, challenges, and future opportunities within the ports and maritime sectors. This includes key connections to the ports’ respective land and maritime hinterland economies, their transport connections and inland ports.

The committee intends to meet with key players and interested parties across the sector and to undertake site visits as appropriate to further its understanding.

Public submissions are also being called from interested individuals and organisations. Public submissions will be open for six weeks and will close at 11.59pm on Sundayy, 13 July 2025.

The committee’s intention is to follow up on submissions where these will add to our understanding of the sector.”

Link:

https://www.parliament.nz/en/pb/sc/make-a-submission/document/54SCTIN_SCF_F19A28C1-EA97-4872-F4C0-08DD9CAD7DC9/inquiry-into-ports-and-the-maritime-sector

OVERSEAS INVESTMENT (NATIONAL INTEREST TEST AND OTHER MATTERS) AMENDMENT BILL

CLOSES 11:59 PM WEDNESDAY 23 JULY 2025

“This bill proposes a range of amendments to the Overseas Investment Act, including to:

• change the purpose statement of the Act

• consolidate the national interest, benefit to New Zealand, and investor tests into a single test

• require the regulator to grant consent within 15 working days unless there are reasonable grounds to consider that a risk to national interest exists

• create a new regulation-making power enabling regulations to specify new classes of screened transactions that must undergo a national interest assessment.”

Link:

https://www.parliament.nz/en/pb/sc/make-a-submission/document/54SCFIN_SCF_4037AD39-37ED-4000-8F97-08DDADDD4180/overseas-investment-national-interest-test-and-other-matters

”REQUIRE A VOTE IN PARLIAMENT OF 75% TO APPROVE THE USE OF URGENCY” PETITION

CLOSES FRIDAY 12 SEPTEMBER 2025 AT 11.59PM NZST

The petition can be found at this link…

https://petitions.parliament.nz/c9194f5c-e810-4b70-2c93-08dd90d84c50

The petition text is copied below…

Petition request

That the House of Representatives amend the Standing Orders to require that a vote must be taken on the use of urgency or extraordinary urgency, and a threshold of 75% must be met before urgency or extraordinary urgency is accorded.

Petition reason

Parties on all sides of the political spectrum have complained about the use of urgency. We believe urgency is a valuable tool when truly necessary, but it can also be anti-democratic. Urgency can mean Select Committees don't hear from the public, experts or government agencies, and can deny the public a say on important issues. In our view, urgency does not support good lawmaking. We think it should be restricted to truly urgent situations, as decided by a Parliamentary majority of 75%.

“SAVE THE CHATEAU TONGARIRO HOTEL” PETITION

CLOSES SUNDAY 31 AUGUST 2025 AT 11.59PM NZST

The petition can be found at this link…

https://petitions.parliament.nz/c9ffd862-08cd-46a0-5a8d-08dc72d04919

The petition text is copied below…

“The future of the Chateau Tongariro Hotel hangs in the balance, with negotiations underway and decisions pending from government officials. There is a strong desire from the local community, as well as from people across New Zealand and around the world, to see this iconic building saved. By imploring the Government to act with urgency to save the Chateau, we seek to preserve a treasured piece of our cultural heritage along with the economic prosperity and tourism excellence that it represents.”

Posting of event information, petition information, consultation viewpoints, or other content on the CityWatch NZ newsletter or website does not constitute endorsement of those views by CityWatch NZ or its editors. This section is often based on information readers have sent to us on issues they think are important or checks of government websites for broadly-relevant consultations.

If there is a political/regulatory consultation, petition, or event you think might be of interest to CityWatch NZ readers, email the details to contact@citywatchnz.org

Subscribe now

Share

Communities are successfully pushing back against council policies around the country. Recently, residents have successfully petitioned the Whanganui District Council to get speed humps removed and a Christchurch community board was able to stop a planned cycleway which would have removed 170 carparks.

For the May newsletter, Jean Dorrell provides commentary on Hamilton’s new electronic payment system for car parking and asks why has it been made so difficult to access “free parking”.

Hamilton City Councillor Andrew Bydder contributes two opinion pieces. His first piece is on Council’s questionable spending decisions around Hamilton’s new regional theatre and the second piece is on the rapidly growing debt levels in a rapidly growing city. The Council’s “growth pays for growth“ mantra is looking more like wishful thinking than a sound financial plan.

Both Hamilton City and Waikato District councils have agreed to form a new water company. This occurred in the same month when Auckland’s well-established water company faced a flood of troubling media coverage.

For a global perspective we summarise a publication from KPMG International, which was released earlier this year and titled "The Great Reset: Emerging trends in infrastructure and transport”. This publication explains how governments struggling with “unsustainable levels of public debt“ are seen as a “treasure trove of assets” for “institutional investors” and international “asset managers” to acquire.

We also highlight two failed attempts by governments (or more specifically their bureaucratic institutions) to suppress criticism. Councillors at Environment Canterbury rejected a proposal from their organisation’s communication staff to restrict public comments from Councillors. The Down to Earth Kiwi economics blog announced it was closing this month amid threats from political parties and big business interests. Ironically, its impending closure has resulted in the blog’s critical ideas reaching new audiences.

June 2025 is looking like another busy month for Parliament’s select committees with a number of important bills being open for public feedback. Some bills could have major impacts on local communities and people’s property rights. The Regulatory Standards Bill and the Public Works (Critical Infrastructure) Amendment Bill being notable examples, with the latter designed to streamline the Government’s “land acquisition process“ for “Fast-track” projects and “Roads of National Significance”.

Links are provided to open consultations at the end of this newsletter.

COMMUNITIES SUCCESSFULLY OPPOSE SPEED BUMPS AND CARPARK REMOVAL

According to reports in the Whanganui Chronicle, local residents collected over 250 signatures on a petition to have speed bumps removed from outside Aramoho Shopping Centre.

Whanganui Chronicle reports that Aramoho speed bumps were removed following community-led petition

Local residents had a number of concerns with the speed bumps, including being woken by trucks in the early mornings, pedestrians having difficulty judging traffic flow and vehicle speeds, driver frustrations, possible suspension damage, increased congestion, and the impact on response times for emergency services.

“…we acknowledge that there have been some negative side effects, which the petitioners have brought to our attention,” Langford said.

“We’ve listened to the community and the speed humps have been removed.”

Whanganui District Council Chief Executive David Langford as quoted by Fin Ocheduszko Brown in the Whanganui Chronicle

According to a report by Chris Lynch Media, Christchurch residents successfully stopped a planned cycle lane which would have removed 170 carparks along Glandovey Road and Idris Road. Residents expressed opposition through public submissions and presentations to community board meetings; this was successful in making Christchurch City Council revise plans to redevelop the roads.

“Local residents know their communities best. I am pleased we could stop this excessive removal of carparks. Communities need to feel and see action that Council is listening and we have achieved that here.”

Fendalton Community Board Member David Cartwright as quoted on chrislynchmedia.com

HAMILTON’S NEW ELECTRONIC PARKING SYSTEM

Over the past few years Hamilton City Council has introduced an electronic payment system for parking in the Central Business District.

Hamilton resident Jean Dorrell provides a short account of using the app to access the “free parking“.

Why do they make this so complicated if the Council is genuinely trying to encourage people to spend time in the CBD?

OPINION: Why Make Things Simple When You Can Make Them Complicated?

“You need to record your vehicle on either a kiosk or the PayMyPark App.

The HCC website has instructions on how to use a kiosk. There are nine steps (and that is after you have found a kiosk).

The App (assuming that you have downloaded it) requires you to state where you are…

…Then there is a message that free parking will be applied at the end. The next screen stated $3.00 per hour for the first 2 hours. And states 60 free minutes apply. This is all accurate information, but it is not intuitive. The app is no simpler than the nine-steps required to use the kiosk…

…When the kiosks were first introduced, I would find that every time I went to enter my details, there was a person standing there trying to work out if they had actually done what they were supposed to do.”

Jean Dorrell, Why Make Things Simple When You Can Make Them Complicated?

MORE FUNDING FOUND FOR THE NEW REGIONAL THEATRE AND HAMILTON CITY COUNCIL’S GROWING DEBT

Hamilton City Councillor Andrew Bydder’s first opinion piece covers the recent vote to give an extra million dollars to an organisation building the new regional theatre.

This is on top of tens of millions in other loans, gifts, grants, and/or subsidies from ratepayers to support the new theatre.

Andrew Bydder voted against the extra funding and explains how $1 million dollars equates to the annual rates contributions from over 300 average Hamilton homes.

OPINION: I Am Not a Number!

In his second article, Andrew Bydder explains how Hamilton City Council is borrowing to support the City’s growing population. However, the additional rates revenue from population growth will struggle to even cover the interest on the extra debt.

OPINION: Council Growth Financial Model 2019-2025

With Hamilton City Council debt levels reaching $20,000 per household (and climbing rapidly), the City is in for a troubled future. That is even if the budget surpluses in the Long-Term Plan (LTP) actually eventuate.

“Mathematically, rates need to increase to cover operating expenses. This is a problem if people cannot afford higher rates. However, council has committed to a series of increases that generate a surplus (assuming nothing changes) from 2027. History suggests the balancing of the books will continue to be pushed out and the surplus will be spent. A change in council governance is needed.

Philosophically, we should stop growing. Council has limited control over this because government policy is to grow the region. 11% of the Hamilton workforce is employed in construction which requires growth.

The cost of growth must be reduced. This is the only practical answer. We know NZ’s infrastructure cost is 4 x the OECD average. The way infrastructure is delivered needs to be changed. Private Developer Agreements (PDAs which allow developers to use their own contractors and project managers) in Rotokauri and Rototuna have delivered infrastructure at half council’s budgeted cost. It is achievable, and it must be done.

Council has operated without a business case, and is simply providing the infrastructure to its own specification to meet the demand without a cost-benefit analysis, and without consideration of affordable alternatives to different specifications. It is like a family that wants a new car so buys the latest model from a dealer on hire-purchase instead of a second-hand car that meets their needs….

…The operating surplus is what repays debt. Individual loans may be repaid, but it is done by rolling over the debt with another loan. Instead of setting aside money for depreciation of assets, we fund renewals. This means we will need more borrowing to replace existing infrastructure at the end of its life, so intergenerational borrowing never ends.

Even with surpluses from 2027, the LTP projects principal debt growing at a faster rate than the surplus. Debt is currently $20,000 per household. While intergenerational debt is OK, the accumulated debt from excess operating expenses should be repaid, and there is currently no ability to do so.”

Hamilton City Councillor Andrew Bydder, Council Growth Financial Model 2019-2025

WATER COMPANY WOES

On the 29th of May, Hamilton City and Waikato District councils agreed to form a water company.

“Hamilton Mayor Paula Southgate and Waikato District Mayor Jacqui Church say unanimous decisions this week from both councils to form a council-controlled organisation (CCO) to build and manage water infrastructure are “legacy decisions that will impact generations.”

“This is a fundamental change to the responsibilities of local government.”

Hamilton City Councillors today (29 May) said yes to forming a joint water company with their neighbours to manage 90,700 water connections (including non-residential connections) and invest around $3.3 billion on water infrastructure over the next decade. Their decision follows the unanimous decision by Waikato District Council on Tuesday (27 May) to join with Hamilton in forming the CCO.”

Water company decision ‘historic': Mayors, Hamilton City Council, 29 May 2025

The new organisation managed to achieve a budget blowout almost immediately as indicated by this Waikato Times article.

“Consultant Peter Winder, the CCO programme manager for both councils, explained the jump in projected establishment costs from $6 million to $7.35 million mostly related to a fresh assessment of digital technology-related costs. Just over $2 million was budgeted for these costs now.”

Thumbs up from Hamilton for joint waters body with Waikato, Waikato Times, 29 May 2025

CityWatch NZ editor John McDonald notes that Council’s December 2024 Business Case indicated that extra costs for forming the joint CCO will be much higher. This includes an estimated $2 million each year for the company’s board and new Chief Executive. Additional operating costs for the new corporate entity will total approximately $10 million per year (as estimated before any further budget blowouts occur).

The drive to create new water companies is part of the “Local Water Done Well” reform which replaced Labour’s attempted “Three Waters” reform. Both reforms are about transferring water infrastructure and water services to larger corporate entities, which can then take on larger amounts of debt. The “Local Water Done Well” reform is expected to be more voluntary and have less iwi co-governance than the “Three Waters” reform. However, there is speculation that those key differences may not exist in practice.

In other water CCO news, Auckland’s Watercare had another bad month in the news headlines. Prominent examples of articles about the water company included:

• Auckland Watercare engineer pleads guilty to $1m fraud, faces up to seven years in prison, NZ Herald.

• Watercare spends $11m on consultants for delayed Huia treatment plant project, NZ Herald.

• Constraints on Watercare infrastructure could push up prices, RNZ.

• "No accountability": Oyster farmers hit out at Auckland Council, Watercare for contaminated waters, Newstalk ZB.

• NZ’s sewage crisis: dozens of livelihoods threatened on oyster farms, Newsroom.

• Warkworth oyster farmers call for urgent solution to sewage overflowing into Mahurangi River, RNZ

• Auckland oyster farm closes due to sewage contamination, The Post.

• Cut back on showers, Aucklanders warned, as drought plan activated, MSN

Auckland Council’s communication and public relations team self-published positive-sounding headlines such as “Watercare completes new $115m watermain 20% under budget”. However, the established media did not appear keen to promote the story.

It has not been a good year for Watercare in terms of media coverage. In March they had bad press with NZ Herald running the headline “Auckland’s Huia water treatment plant cost blows out from $420m to $1.1b”. Also Newsroom interviewed the new Watercare Chief Executive Jamie Sinclair in a story which foreshadowed massive debt increases alongside large increases in water charges for consumers.

“That will mean going to the markets for money, and will require increasingly aggressive leverage of revenues. Sinclair says Watercare will raise its debt levels to $9.9b.

To put that in perspective, it’s nearly three times the current debt of $3.6b. It’s more than the debt of all four big power gentailers, combined. And its finance team don’t yet know what water users will pay to service that borrowing.

The $13.8b investment is a 40 percent increase on the previous plan, made just four years ago – but it’s deemed absolutely necessary, driven by the cold, hard scrutiny forced upon water service providers by the previous government’s Three Waters reform programme, and disasters like the main sewer line collapse in Parnell.”

Jonathan Milne, New Watercare boss to borrow $10b for ageing pipes and plants, Newsroom, 26 March 2025

KPMG INTERNATIONAL IS PUBLISHING ON THE “GREAT RESET” AND “THE GREAT PRIVATIZATION“ OF PUBLIC ASSETS

KPMG International published a document in February 2025 titled “The Great Reset: Emerging trends in infrastructure and transport”. The document identifies ten trends with each trend covered by different KPMG personnel.

“We are in the midst of a Great Reset. Protection of national interests are at the top of the agenda. Economies are being reshaped. Alliances and supply chains are being rewired. The frequency and severity of weather events are increasing. And social expectations and norms are being revised.”

Foreword: Reset 2025, The Great Reset: Emerging trends in infrastructure and transport, KPMG

The KPMG document covers a range of topics, with a heavy focus on technologies such as digital twin simulations, artificial intelligence (AI), automation, drones, and Internet of Things (IoT) sensor networks.

Another prominent topic in the document is “the Great Privatization“ where governments with “unsustainable levels of public debt“ are seen as a “treasure trove of assets” for “institutional investors” and international “asset managers” to acquire, with “bridges, roads and utilities” appearing to be some of the prime targets.

“Governments are trying to balance a range of funding priorities and that is reducing their fiscal capacity for infrastructure. At the same time, demand for new and more resilient infrastructure is climbing, driven by economic, environmental, technical and social pressures. Closing the gap will be a key priority for governments around the world.

Frustratingly, the solution to closing this gap has been obvious for some time. Governments are sitting on a treasure trove of assets. Indeed, a study of 38 countries by the IMF found more than US$100 trillion worth of assets on government books, including key infrastructure such as bridges, roads and utilities. And institutional investors are sitting on a treasure trove of capital. The world’s top 500 asset managers collectively manage more than US$128 trillion. The alignment is obvious…

…In this environment, governments will need to start assessing their portfolios of assets to understand what can be brought to market, what assets require more support to become commercially viable and what assets must remain on the government books. And they will want to provide some guidance to investors around the types of assets they will bring to market and associated timelines. Messaging to citizens and to national pension funds and institutional investors will also be key.

For their part, institutional investors will need to become more proactive as a gradual increase of new assets comes to market, likely sector by sector. Given the complexity of the transactions and the quantum of investment required, institutional investors would be wise to start identifying targets and asset classes that align to their investment strategies and begin their due diligence, outreach and internal discussions as soon as possible.

The Great Privatization is coming. Preparation will be key.”

Funding: The Great Privatization, The Great Reset: Emerging trends in infrastructure and transport, KPMG

KPMG New Zealand gave their local take on the publication from KPMG International. It had considerably less emphasis on open and direct asset sales. Congestion charging and road tolls are mentioned along with proposed changes to developer contributions.

“As demand for high-performing infrastructure is increasing, infrastructure is competing with other sectors for scarce funding. The Government is right to ‘sell’ New Zealand as an investment destination through the Global Investment Summit, but we need more than private capital. We also need to be able to pay back that capital, which requires new sources of funding. Initiatives such as the increased use of tolls and congestion charging and the recent announcement to improve local authority options to fund growth infrastructure (by replacing Development Contributions with levies) will help. However, other countries have and are increasingly looking for more flexibility around the use of the public sector balance sheet.

We see merit in New Zealand developing a more sophisticated understanding of whether the current assets held by central and local government are the best use of funds relative to the new infrastructure we need. That said, one of the lessons of asset recycling overseas is that the benefits are maximised when combined with strong consumer protections such as a sophisticated regulatory regime that can drive long term performance and asset quality”.

2025 Emerging trends in infrastructure and transport, KPMG New Zealand

The term “debt recycling” is used by Hamilton City Council staff. Sometimes a council never really pays back a specific infrastructure loan and instead they effectively refinance the loan into the ever-growing sum of intergenerational debt. Andrew Bydder describes this kind of practice in one of his articles in this newsletter.

The term “asset recycling” sounds like a reference to a system where governments sell some assets to buy or support other assets. Given their history, a council will likely build or keep loss-making “assets” (such as a poorly-performing stadium overdue for expensive upgrades). Other assets such as roads and utilities would be targeted by foreign institutional investors as an opportunity to make steady profits. Income streams from core infrastructure assets and monopolies will be less impacted by ‘belt-tightening‘ behavioural changes in a population facing economic hardship. Controlling and exploiting such assets is likely to have significant strategic value for institutional investors.

New Zealand currently has regulatory barriers and political resistance to officially privatising core infrastructure such as water utilities and roads. However, there are other ways that foreign investors can gain considerable levels of control over New Zealand’s infrastructure assets, and secure a steady stream of rent-extraction, without those assets officially being sold.

We should also be asking tough questions such as:

• Why do we have unsustainable levels of public debt?

• What happened to the ‘pay-as-you-go’ system that previous generations used to fund core infrastructure?

• Where did all the money go; the money collected from developer contributions and taken from generations of ratepayers in the name of asset depreciation?

GOVERNMENTS TRY TO SUPPRESS CRITICISM AND FAIL

Environment Canterbury Councillors recently voted down a “public statement” policy proposal from Council staff. Chris Lynch Media reported that some Councillors considered that the policy would limit “…elected members’ ability to freely express their views on social media and in the media“. Councillors were vocal in expressing their concerns with the proposed policy with some likening it to “a gag order“ and something out of George Orwell’s “1984”.

The proposed “public statement” policy was voted down 10-to-6, the council chamber debate can be viewed at this link. The proposed policy was explained by the Council’s Director of Communications and Engagement using language such as “safe space“.

The economics blog called “Down to Earth Kiwi” announced it was shutting down due mounting pressure on its main author Professor Robert MacCulloch.

Robert MacCulloch’s hard-hitting ‘sign off’ post has been widely circulated and has helped the blog’s critical messages to reach a much wider audience. Coverage has included an interview on the Platform and an article in the NZ Herald.

“National, Labour and Big Business NZ have begun to complain & threaten me at the highest levels about my writings. The game has become clear. Continue doing so and it will mean the end of your future in this country. DownToEarth.Kiwi has been told in no uncertain terms that for me, as principal writer, due to this commentary, I've been wiped for consideration from top public & private appointments. So good luck to NZ. Good luck to maintaining the status quo of the same old people, in the same old big jobs, who together with their same old mates have driven NZ into division and economic decline. As for me, taking a fresh perspective & offering different solutions to the tired old, failed approaches of the past - the ones our two main political parties & their buddies in corporate NZ promote to protect their territories - is something I no longer wish to do. It would be good for them to be required to wear their gang patches announcing to Kiwis who and what they truly represent, rather than hiding in shadows. A lack of imagination threatens our future. Good luck and good night.”

Professor Robert MacCulloch, Down to Earth Kiwi

An archived version of the Down to Earth Kiwi blog can be found using the following link.

https://web.archive.org/web/20250521233702/https://www.downtoearth.kiwi/

OPEN CONSULTATIONS

PUBLIC WORKS (CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE) AMENDMENT BILL

CLOSES 11:59 PM FRIDAY 13 JUNE 2025

“This bill proposes to streamline the land acquisition process under the Public Works Act 1981 for:

-infrastructure projects listed in Schedule 2 of the Fast-track Approvals Act 2024

-Roads of National Significance (RoNS) outlined in the Government Policy Statement on Land Transport 2024”

Links:

https://www.parliament.nz/en/pb/sc/make-a-submission/document/54SCTIN_SCF_B435B605-2CE8-44E0-68F8-08DD90F2AB46/public-works-critical-infrastructure-amendment-bill

View the current bill at this link

https://legislation.govt.nz/bill/government/2025/0149/latest/whole.html?search=ts_act%40bill%40regulation%40deemedreg_public+works_resel_25_a&p=1#LMS1438592

REGULATORY STANDARDS BILL

CLOSES 1:00 PM MONDAY 23 JUNE 2025

“The bill aims to support Parliament’s scrutiny of legislation, and its oversight and control of the use of delegated powers to make legislation. The bill would achieve these objectives in four ways.

First, it would introduce a set of regulatory principles that new and existing regulations would be measured against. These include the rule of law, personal liberties, taking of property, taxes, fees, and levies, and the role of courts.

Responsible Ministers, administering agencies, and other makers of legislation would be required to assess the consistency of proposed and existing legislation against these principles. Ministers, as well as makers of secondary legislation, would be required to publish or present to the House of Representatives the results of those assessments.

The bill would also establish a Regulatory Standards Board to independently consider the consistency of legislation with the principles. The members of the board would be appointed by the Minister for Regulation. The board would carry out inquiries into whether legislation is inconsistent with the principles following a complaint, at the direction of the Minister, or on its own accord.

Finally, the bill would strengthen the regulatory oversight of the Ministry of Regulation by requiring the Ministry to report on the overall state of the regulatory management system. It would empower the Ministry for Regulation to require agencies to supply information as a part of its oversight of the regulatory management system. This would include public service agencies, makers and administrators of secondary legislation, and agencies and contractors that perform a statutory function.”

Links:

https://www.parliament.nz/en/pb/sc/make-a-submission/document/54SCFIN_SCF_E22299B3-B67B-4F74-023D-08DD9688D2C5/regulatory-standards-bill

View the current bill at this link

https://www.legislation.govt.nz/bill/government/2025/0155/latest/whole.html

BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION (SMALL STAND-ALONE DWELLINGS) AMENDMENT BILL

CLOSES 11:59 PM MONDAY 23 JUNE 2025

“The chairperson of the Transport and Infrastructure Committee is now calling for submissions on the Building and Construction (Small Stand-alone Dwellings) Amendment Bill

This bill would amend the Building Act 2004 to allow small stand-alone dwellings ("granny flats") to be built without needing a building consent, as long as certain conditions are met”

Link:

https://www.parliament.nz/en/pb/sc/make-a-submission/document/54SCTIN_SCF_EEBF1E27-E084-4CD3-FED9-08DD98C831FD/building-and-construction-small-stand-alone-dwellings

VALUERS BILL

CLOSES 11:59 PM FRIDAY 27 JUNE 2025

“The Valuers Bill would re-enact the Valuers Act 1948. The Act provides for the registration of land valuers and the establishment of the New Zealand Institute of Valuers.

This is a revision bill. Revision bills are used to re-enact legislation in an up-to-date and accessible form. They may not change the effect of the law (except as authorised by section 96(3) of the Legislation Act 2019).

This bill would not make any substantial policy changes to the Act. It would make minor changes to the Act to correct inconsistencies and omissions. It is intended to rewrite the law using plain language and modern drafting style. The scope of the changes the committee can recommend on this bill is narrow.

The Primary Production Committee is also considering Amendment Paper 286 alongside this bill

An Amendment Paper is a document that gives notice of proposed amendments to a bill. Amendment Paper 236 would amend the Valuers Bill and proposes more substantial policy changes.

Amendment Paper 286 would make changes to the Valuers Bill, including:

increasing the penalties for offences

removing the requirement for a person to be at least 23 years old to become a registered valuer

expanding the Valuers Registration Board’s disciplinary powers.”

Link:

https://www.parliament.nz/en/pb/sc/make-a-submission/document/54SCPRIP_SCF_4A681E46-1BB1-4372-68F7-08DD90F2AB46/valuers-bill

Posting of event information, petition information, consultation viewpoints, or other content on the CityWatch NZ newsletter or website does not constitute endorsement of those views by CityWatch NZ or its editors. This section is largely based on information readers have sent to us on issues they think are important.

If there is a political/regulatory consultation, petition, or event you think might be of interest to CityWatch NZ readers, email the details to contact@citywatchnz.org

Subscribe now

Share

This month’s newsletter focuses on Hamilton neighbourhoods being allocated into Historic Heritage Areas. We have an opinion piece and open letter to the Council by homeowner Jean Dorrell who details the saga of going through the heritage designation process. Even Kāinga Ora is challenging Hamilton City Council’s decisions around assigning heritage status to many properties and neighbourhoods.

Property developers gave critical feedback to Hamilton City Council at a recent committee meeting about the sewage pipe network’s overloading problems. Consents for building new housing in some older suburbs are being declined due to "wastewater network constraints". We have also posted a formal complaint from Colin Jones, where he criticises many years of Council’s flawed modelling around “infrastructure pinch points” and other constraints on infill housing.

Don Hewison looks into the problem of ”ghostbuses” in a short opinion piece. He estimates how many trees would be needed to offset the carbon dioxide emissions from the largely empty buses routinely circling around the streets where he lives.

The bill to legalise congestion charges is still working its way through Parliament. CityWatch NZ Editor John McDonald provides an opinion piece covering ‘six major reasons to oppose road pricing schemes’. We also have more international perspectives on the issue, with a ‘media coverage summary’ for New York’s recently introduced congestion charging scheme.

In other news, locals opposed to tolling sent over 10,000 responses into a NZTA consultation and the new Manawatū-Tararua Highway is no longer becoming a toll road. Due to a disagreement between neighboring community boards on installing speed humps, Christchurch City’s planned $590,000 raised crossing will now be flat on one side of the road, and raised on the other side.

Links are provided to relevant events, in-progress petitions, and open consultations at the end of this newsletter.

HAMILTON’S PLAN CHANGE 9 AND HISTORIC HERITAGE AREA

Hamilton resident Jean Dorrell provides an open letter and an opinion piece, covering the process when your street is being turned into a Historic Heritage Area, without any evidence of heritage being provided. It started with a letter from the council in June 2022 informing her about the proposed heritage designation. She started requesting and analysing expert reports from Council and began a quest to challenge the ‘fake history’ that said she was living in a historic railway cottage.

OPEN LETTER: “HeritageGate” – The Problems with Hamilton’s Plan Change 9

OPINION: Ask Not What Your Council Can Do For You, But What It Can Do TO You.

“The imposition of a heritage designation on a property results in increased costs[1], it generally decreases the property value[2] and places restrictions on the home owner[3]. These are serious impositions and should not be placed on a property without strong evidence.”

Jean Dorrell, “HeritageGate” – The Problems with Hamilton’s Plan Change 9

The process in Hamilton City has lasted at least 2.5 years and is still ongoing with appeals.

Kāinga Ora filed an appeal to the Environment Court in March 2025, claiming that Hamilton City Council has declared too many properties, streets, and neighbourhoods as having heritage status under Plan Change 9. Specific properties are identified as “Built Heritage items” and streets (or in some case almost entire suburbs) are put in “Historic Heritage Areas” for protection.

“The Decision affords protection to typical examples of the State House programme that has occurred overtime, rather than identifying those areas of the City that hold a significant historic heritage value (such as Hayes Paddock). In doing so, the provisions unreasonably restrict the ability of Kāinga Ora to appropriately use, manage and redevelop it’s housing portfolio to meet the changing needs for public housing within Hamilton.”

Notice of appeal by Kāinga Ora – Homes and Communities against Decision 4 by Hamilton City Council on Plan Change 9 (Historic Heritage and Natural Environment) to the Operative District Plan, 21 March 2025

The Kāinga Ora maps show large blocks of Hamilton set to become Historic Heritage Areas. The HCC website might be able to provide up-to-date maps.

Plan Change 9: Kāinga Ora appeals against large blocks of Hamilton becoming Historic Heritage Areas

It would be inaccurate to refer to the process of giving properties heritage status as being 'thorough'. However, the process is definitively 'voluminous' with many days of hearings, thousands of pages of documents, many hundreds of thousands spent on experts, and multiple revisions of the plan change.

HAMILTON DEVELOPERS CONCERNED WITH INSUFFICIENT INFRASTRUCTURE IN THE CITY

Hamilton City Council faces a crisis as property developers are getting consents declined due to the sewage pipe network being at capacity in some suburbs.

Concerns that areas of Hamilton are “wastewater network constrained”

On the 8th of April 2025, Hamilton City Council held a Strategic Growth and District Plan Committee meeting.

The meeting’s public forum was unusually well-attended with a number of concerned people speaking to the agenda item of “Wastewater Capacity – ‘State of the Nation'”.

Many public forum speakers were property developers and builders who were concerned that resource consents were being blocked in some suburbs due to the risks of the existing sewage network being overwhelmed.

Hamilton City Council staff described the situation as…

“14. There is a high level of awareness amongst developers of these constrained areas, which has significantly impacted the number of proposed developments taken forward to the consenting stage in those areas.

15. Since March 2023, Council has received over 1,600 wastewater capacity queries for brownfield development areas. Of those, 46% (754) have been advised of network constraints, and subsequently no development has taken place. No resource consents have been granted in constrained areas in this time, beyond those Council had previously committed to. In the same period, Council has consented over 2,150 new lots/dwellings in other parts of the city, with around two-thirds of those being infill developments.”

Page 37-38 of Strategic Growth and District Plan Committee Agenda 8 April 2025- OPEN

Colin Jones has spent many years investigating Hamilton City Council and expressing concerns about serious inaccuracies in the modelling being used by Council. He provided CityWatch NZ with a copy of his complaint against Hamilton City Council Mayor and CEO from 28 June 2023.

His complaint centres around flaws and omissions in the City Council’s modelling of “commercially feasible“ housing development capacity in the City. It appears that “infrastructure pinch points” and other constraints on infill housing such as covenants were being overlooked in the modelling.

OPEN LETTER: Colin Jones – Formal complaint against Hamilton City Council Mayor and CEO

OFFSETTING THE CARBON EMISSIONS OF “GHOSTBUSES”

Don Hewison looks into the issue of the empty buses without passengers that travel the bus routes near his home. He and his wife call them the ”ghostbuses”. In his latest opinion piece, Don Hewison estimates how many trees would be needed to offset the carbon dioxide emissions from these largely empty buses.

OPINION: Are There Ghostbuses Running Amuck In Our City?

…the trees required to offset the pollution from buses travelling down the length of our street, as part of scheduled timetable, over the time of one year, often carrying no passengers is approx. 31 of these large trees.

If the whole Rototuna Circular Bus route is considered, at a distance of 21 km, the number of trees needed to offset the carbon emissions is at least 540 of these large trees. Even to plant trees now, we need to realise that this tree in Christchurch is 100 years old.

Admittedly, buses need to run regularly, but where are the trees required to reduce/cancel out carbon emissions?

Don Hewison, Are There Ghostbuses Running Amuck In Our City?

CONGESTION CHARGES AND THE TIME-OF-USE BILL

The bill currently before Parliament is designed to legalise time-of-use charging and congestion charging, allowing councils to turn existing roads into sophisticated toll roads. The new charges will likely be variable and change due to the time-of-day. Official documents indicate plans to expand the schemes into the future.

The Land Transport Management (Time of Use Charging) Amendment Bill is currently be evaluated by the select committee. Public feedback to the select committee closed on Sunday, 27 April 2025.

CityWatch NZ Editor John McDonald wrote an opinion piece outlining the reasons to oppose congestion charges and time-of-use charging schemes.

OPINION: Six Major Reasons to Oppose Road Pricing

He highlights the UK case of people opposing Manchester Council’s attempts to introduce congestion charging and then a Clean Air Zone . This case is recommended reading for those looking to oppose road pricing schemes in New Zealand. It is a good lesson in both tactics and resolve.

What Has Been Happening with Number Plate Recognition Cameras in Manchester, UK?

“2025 will be a critical year as moves to legalise road pricing schemes are currently underway in Parliament. The congestion charging schemes will involve additional surveillance technology being used to monitor vehicle movements and a billing system which effectively turns existing public roads into toll roads. A combination of charges, fees, permits, and fines are used in the schemes to collect revenue and penalise private motor vehicle travel.

Surveillance technologies often involve automatic number plate recognition cameras (ANPR) or radiofrequency identification checkpoints (RFID). The more ambitious schemes being proposed involve nationwide tracking of all vehicles on all roads using compulsory GPS-type devices, with this being promoted as a future replacement for fuel taxes and road-user charges…

…This article will cover six major reasons to oppose road pricing, covering both the current bill before Parliament and proposed schemes into the future.

1. Additional taxes and charges

2. Changing the existing ‘social contract’ around toll roads, rights, and freedom of movement.

3. Additional costs to society in the set up and running of the schemes.

4. The use of incrementalism and gradualism to undermine opposition.

5. Social engineering and future ideological uses of the schemes.

6. Expanding the surveillance state and enabling ‘turnkey totalitarianism’.

The Ministry of Transport acknowledged many of these concerns when briefing Cabinet in 2024, even mentioning the potential “totalitarian” aspects.”

John McDonald, Six Major Reasons to Oppose Road Pricing

CityWatch NZ’s ongoing coverage of congestion charging can be found using the following link

https://www.citywatchnz.org/category/transport/road-pricing-congestion-charges/

NEW YORK’S CONGESTION CHARGING SCHEME

New York has been running a congestion charging scheme since early January 2025. The scheme is regarded as the first of its kind in the US and uses number plate recognition cameras to apply charges to vehicles entering lower Manhattan. The New York case provides yet another example of congestion charging and the controversial nature of the road pricing schemes. It could also be seen as a case where a national government is coercing an urban authority. This coercion can be done through providing funding to a city with conditions or the central government threatening to remove funding for non-compliance.

New York Governor and the “Feds” clash over Manhattan’s new congestion charges

Earlier proposals for this scheme were going to charge private passenger cars $15 and trucks up to $36 per trip. New York Governor Kathy Hochul, who has been heavily promoting the scheme, reduced the prices of the tolls before the scheme was launched.

“The MTA’s congestion pricing tolls went live on Jan. 5. Here are key aspects of the tolling scheme south of 60th Street in Manhattan:

• A $9 fee on passenger vehicles from 5 a.m. to 9 p.m. on weekdays and from 9 a.m. to 9 p.m. on weekends.

• A 75% discount for all vehicles during the overnight hours, putting the after-hours toll at $2.25.

• A $14.40 toll for smaller trucks, such as box trucks.

• A $21.60 toll for large trucks, including big rigs.

• A $4.50 toll for motorcyclists.

• Yellow and green taxis receive an additional 75-cent surcharge.

• For-hire vehicles such as Uber and Lyft receive an additional $1.50 surcharge.

• Both taxis and app-based for-hire vehicles pass the cost of the tolls onto passengers.

• Drivers who do not use E-ZPass when entering the congestion zone pay an extra 50%.”

Feds threaten NYC highway money if MTA doesn't shut down congestion pricing. The Gothamist, 21 April 2025

US Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy has declared the scheme illegal and has demanded the tolling cease. US President Trump has vowed to stop the scheme. The scheme has already been challenged in court cases with future legal challenges expected.

Governor Hochul held a 21 March 2025 press release/conference stating:

“…just walk around and talk to people, ask if their lives are more enriched, whether they have more time with their families if they're a commuter, whether or not they're finally realizing that we have the world-class public transit system but we need to keep it world class by raising the revenues to invest in it as well, that is essential.

So, today is an important day. The cameras are staying on.”

New York Governor Kathy Hochul, 22 March 2025”

Earlier in March 2025, poll results gauging New York State voters’ opinion on the scheme showed that 40% “believe it should be eliminated” and only 33% “believe it should remain”. Opposition towards the scheme appeared stronger in a December 2024 survey and remains stronger in areas outside of the inner city.

Most drivers pay $9 during peak hours to drive south of 60th Street in Manhattan. Since Jan. 5, when the toll first started, through March 31, it has brought in close to the $160 million in revenue it budgeted for, according to Metropolitan Transportation Authority data released Monday.

The MTA runs the city’s transit system and implements the program, which is expected to raise $500 million this year. It plans to borrow against the revenue source and raise $15 billion to upgrade infrastructure.”

NYC’s Congestion Toll Raised $159 Million in the First Quarter, Bloomburg, 29 April 2025.

LOCALS OPPOSE TOLL ROAD, HUGE OPPOSITION TURNOUT IN NZTA CONSULTATION

The new Manawatū-Tararua Highway, due to open in mid-2025, is no longer becoming a toll road.

No tolls on the new Manawatū Tararua Highway, public feedback was 90% against the proposed tolling

NZTA received over 12,000 responses from the public and 22 submissions from “key stakeholder groups”. Over 90% of the respondents did not support a toll on the Manawatū Tararua Highway.

Most “key stakeholder groups” also opposed the proposed toll. The opposition included all the iwi/ hapū groups, health care providers, and education providers involved in the consultation. Most of the local councils, transport associations, and community & church organisations also opposed the tolling.

The only named “key stakeholder groups” in the consultation who supported the toll were South Taranaki District Council (STDC), National Road Carriers Association, and Infrastructure New Zealand.

In December 2024, the Minister of Transport announced that the Manawatū – Tararua Highway will not become a toll road (3 other new roads became toll roads in the same announcement).

ONE OF CHRISTCHURCH’S PLANNED RAISED CROSSINGS WILL NOT GO ACROSS WHOLE ROAD

Christchurch City Council was planning to install a raised pedestrian crossing across Deans Ave at an estimated cost of $590,000.

Funding is to be sourced from the Christchurch Regeneration Acceleration Facility (CRAF), which is post-quake Central Government funding.

Deans Ave is the boundary between the Waipuna Halswell-Hornby-Riccarton Community Board on the west and the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board in the east.

The two community boards each voted to support different crossing plan options in the joint meeting on 27 March 2025. The result of the conflicting votes is a plan to only have the raised platform speed bumps on the eastern side of the road, according to Star News. The situation was described by current board member (and aspiring council candidate) Ali Jones as "Monty Python-esque".

Christchurch’s planned $590,000 raised crossing will only cross part of road due to disagreement between community boards

OPEN CONSULTATIONS, PETITIONS, AND EVENT NOTICES

MEETING NOTICE: 03 MAY 2025 – HAMILTON RESIDENTS & RATEPAYERS ASSOCIATION INCORPORATED

Date: Saturday, 3rd of May 2025

Time: 2:00pm-4:00pm

Location: Fellowship lounge, The Link, 4 Te Aroha Street, Hamilton

Discussion Topic: Transport

As part of our public meeting schedule for this election year, the Hamilton Residents and Ratepayers Association Inc. are inviting current councillors and prospective candidates to a public discussion on the topic of transport.

They have been asked to present their views on this topic and email hamiltonratepayers@gmail.com before the 30th of April 2025 to be listed as a scheduled speaker.

They will be given 2-3 minutes each to present their views and policies, followed by a public question & answer session.

NOTE: We ask that if you know of any prospective candidates to please pass this invitation on to them.

NEW CONSULTATION ON URBAN CONNECTORS

CLOSES 5:00 PM WEDNESDAY 14 MAY 2025

“NZTA has opened new speed reviews on 16 sections of state highway that are categorised as urban connectors, and is currently consulting between 2 April and 14 May 2025 to seek local road user and community feedback on proposals to re-set lower speeds in each location.

Speed limits in each of these locations were lowered in recent years (since 2020), however a new requirement under the Land Transport Rule: Setting of Speed Limits 2024 (the Rule) means that each of these urban connectors are now required to automatically reverse back to their previous higher speed limit by 1 July 2025.

Following publication of NZTA’s list of auto-reversal locations in January 2025, NZTA has received feedback on a number of urban connectors where the community is strongly in support of keeping the current lower speed limits, instead of seeing them reverse.

Following careful consideration of this feedback and past evidence of community support, NZTA has now opened formal review of speed limits on these sections of road. These new speed reviews acknowledge that under the Rule, on 1 July 2025, these locations must reverse back to higher speeds (for eg, 70km, 80km or 100km, depending on where they are). In light of this, these new speed reviews are proposing to change back these locations’ speeds immediately following this change in July (eg, back to the lower speed they have today).”

Link: https://www.nzta.govt.nz/safety/driving-safely/speed/state-highway-speed-management/new-speed-reviews-under-the-2024-rule/new-consultation-on-urban-connectors/

PLAIN LANGUAGE ACT REPEAL BILL

CLOSES 11:59 PM WEDNESDAY 14 MAY 2025

“The Governance and Administration Committee is calling for submissions on the Plain Language Act Repeal Bill. If passed the bill would repeal the Plain Language Act 2022”

Links:

https://www.parliament.nz/en/pb/sc/make-a-submission/document/54SCGOA_SCF_056F85E8-A3B3-4124-7DA9-08DD6A63478A/plain-language-act-repeal-bill

View the Plain language Act 2022 at this link

https://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2022/0054/latest/whole.html?

EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS (TERMINATION OF EMPLOYMENT BY AGREEMENT) AMENDMENT BILL

CLOSES 11:59 PM THURSDAY 22 MAY 2025

“The Chair of Parliament's Education and Workforce Committee is calling for submissions on the Employment Relations (Termination of Employment by Agreement) Amendment Bill. The closing date for submissions is Thursday, 22 May 2025.

The bill would allow for protected negotiations to occur between an employer and employee to terminate the employee's contract.”

Links:

https://www.parliament.nz/en/pb/sc/make-a-submission/document/54SCEDUW_SCF_FCF6F0EA-1D44-45AF-CFFF-08DCFEB826C6/employment-relations-termination-of-employment-by-agreement

HAMILTON CITY COUNCIL: COBHAM DRIVE SPEED INCREASE 60KM/H BACK TO 80KM/H

CLOSES WEDNESDAY 30 APRIL 2025

“We want your feedback on the proposal to keep the 60km/h speed limit on a section of Cobham Drive, between the intersection of Normandy Avenue and Tristram Street, for safety. The central Government’s new speed limit rules will increase this speed limit to 80km/h by 30 June 2025 if this proposal is not approved.

Keeping the 60km/h speed limit supports the safety of all road users. This section of Cobham Drive is a busy road which connects the central city and Hamilton south. An average of 23,000 vehicles use this road every day, and it provides access to key destinations such as Hamilton Gardens, Waikato Hospital and PAK’nSAVE.

Crash data shows a 70% decrease since the speed limit was lowered in June 2023.

Retaining the speed limit means no changes to the road are needed. If the speed limit increases to 80km/h, the new signage required on this road (speed limit signs and curve advisory signs) is estimated to cost $20,000.”

Link:

https://haveyoursay.hamilton.govt.nz/cobham-drive-speed-limit-reduction

“SAVE THE CHATEAU TONGARIRO HOTEL” PETITION

CLOSES SUNDAY 31 AUGUST 2025 AT 11.59PM NZST

The petition can be found at this link…

https://petitions.parliament.nz/c9ffd862-08cd-46a0-5a8d-08dc72d04919

The petition text is copied below…

“The future of the Chateau Tongariro Hotel hangs in the balance, with negotiations underway and decisions pending from government officials. There is a strong desire from the local community, as well as from people across New Zealand and around the world, to see this iconic building saved. By imploring the Government to act with urgency to save the Chateau, we seek to preserve a treasured piece of our cultural heritage along with the economic prosperity and tourism excellence that it represents.”

Posting of event information, petition information, consultation viewpoints, or other content on the CityWatch NZ newsletter or website does not constitute endorsement of those views by CityWatch NZ or its editors. This section is largely based on information readers have sent to us on issues they think are important.

If there is a political/regulatory consultation, petition, or event you think might be of interest to CityWatch NZ readers, email the details to contact@citywatchnz.org

Subscribe now

Share

April is looking like a busy month for consultations on local government issues. Water service reforms and speed limit changes are taking place at many councils. Many significant bills are also being progressed through Parliament.

The bill to legalise congestion charges is currently before a select committee, giving the public an opportunity to send feedback into Parliament. The bill will effectively turn existing roads into toll roads with a complicated, and expansion-ready, charging system. CityWatch NZ Editor John McDonald provides commentary on this bill and its implications in an opinion piece.

We have two opinion pieces from Councillor Andrew Bydder. One explains how councils list subsidies as income to increase their borrowing limits and get deeper into debt. The other opinion piece covers the issues with Hamilton City Council’s consultation document for changing speed limits.

The Coalition Government is in the process of reversing the Labour Government’s speed reductions. Councils are running consultations to keep the current speed limits or return them to the higher pre-Labour speed limits. Geoff Kreegher covers the results of the consultation on the proposed Wairere Drive speed limit reduction and Hamilton City Council’s use of ‘leading questions’ regarding the new supermarket’s resource consent.

Due to the “Local Water Done Well” reforms, councils are running consultation exercises before creating new Council Controlled Organisations. These new organisations may take over the management of local water services. John McDonald provides two opinion pieces related to the “Local Water Done Well” reforms and the associated problems.

Members of Parliament are currently considering a bill to enable a 4-year term between general elections, along with a bill changing how nationwide referendums are conducted.

Links are provided to relevant events, in-progress petitions, and open consultations at the end of this newsletter.

CONGESTION CHARGES AND THE TIME-OF-USE BILL

The Land Transport Management (Time of Use Charging) Amendment Bill is currently before Parliament. Public feedback to the select committee is closing 11.59pm on Sunday, 27 April 2025 and feedback can be sent via this webpage.

This bill is designed to legalise time-of-use charging and congestion charging, allowing councils to turn existing roads into sophisticated toll roads. The new charges will likely be variable and change due to the time-of-day or congestion levels. In official documents, bureaucrats and politicians have been planning future expansions of the schemes, including the charges increasing over time.

The Ministry of Transport summarised both sides of the arguments around this type of road charging scheme in their briefing to Cabinet in July 2024.

“The arguments against increased use of local variable charges include:

a. charges are regressive and inequitable and would fall disproportionately on low- income groups and the disabled. As such, the public transport system needs to be a credible alternative to cars before charging occurs.

b. increasing charges for those experiencing the most congestion would be unfair as they have already paid for these roads.

c. government tracking of movements is totalitarian and a risk to personal freedom and privacy.

d. the net benefits are marginal with considerable risk that actual costs will exceed the benefits.

The arguments for increased use of local variable charges include:

a. to be effective transport revenue tools need to reflect the costs that users impose on society.

b. pricing signals are needed as the existing average charge-based system is poor at identifying the true value at time.

c. it is unfair that users are not paying charges that reflect the actual costs of their network use.”

Cabinet Business Committee: Minute of Decision, Land Transport Revenue Action Plan: Time of Use Charging, 8 July 2024

The bill was supported by all political parties in Parliament during its first reading, with the exception of Te Pāti Māori who voted against it. Readers are welcome to guess for themselves which of the points on the above two lists will appeal to each political party.

CityWatch NZ Editor John McDonald provides commentary on the bill and related documentation. The current bill appears focused on Auckland’s congestion issues. However, the bill also deliberately enables the expansion of the schemes into a nationwide tracking and charging system.

OPINION: Commentary on the Time of Use Charging Amendment Bill

“The bill seems primarily aimed at enabling Auckland Council to set up a scheme on some of Auckland’s most congested roads. What we can expect from the initial scheme will be select roads/areas in Auckland City with ANPR cameras installed for monitoring entry and exit points, with the camera system supporting the issuing of charges and fines. However, the bill has been crafted with a longer-term view to enabling the larger agenda of a nationwide tracking system using in-vehicle devices (likely GPS or similar technology) and dynamic time-of-use charging. This longer-term plan will effectively turn all public roads into toll roads in an effort to replace the current road-user charging (RUC) system.”

John McDonald, OPINION: Commentary on the Time of Use Charging Amendment Bill

The opinion piece highlights other issues with the bill and similar road pricing systems internationally. This includes: high setup costs which tend to financially benefit multinational technology companies, the use of financial punishments to change travel behaviours, and how executives driving company cars benefit most in Sweden’s congestion charging system (at the expense of other road users).

The opinion piece finishes with the following questions of the proposed schemes and the role of local councils generally.

“Is it the primary role of local government to change your behaviour through incentives and punishments, or should they be instead focusing on providing services to the public?

Is it healthy to have your regular drive to work become a behavioural psychology experiment?

Is getting stuck in Auckland rush hour traffic not already punishment enough?

For these schemes to achieve their stated aims, will those extra charges be enough extra punishment to stop enough people travelling on the roads?

Even if those extra charges work to reduce congestion, is that a good thing for society?

Do the ends justify the means?”

John McDonald, OPINION: Commentary on the Time of Use Charging Amendment Bill

CityWatch NZ’s ongoing coverage of congestion charging can be found using the following link

https://www.citywatchnz.org/category/transport/road-pricing-congestion-charges/

HOW COUNCIL FINANCES WORK

Hamilton City Councillor Andrew Bydder uses the metaphor of buying a $1million, gold-plated Rolls Royce to explain the bizarre world of city council accounting practices.

The story offers insight into how council debt levels are rapidly increasing and why many extravagantly expensive projects are getting approved by councils around the country.

Because it has a high safety rating, The New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA, Waka Kotahi) offers you a free $500,000 (a 50% subsidy) to help you buy the metaphorical, gold-plated Rolls Royce. A new Toyota hatchback for $40,000 would also do the job well, but because of the magic of LGFA financing the council has a strong incentive to spend big and borrow even more.

“Unfortunately, you don’t have a spare $500,000. You are at your credit limit*, and your family business has been losing money for the last 20 years*. If you were a company director, you would have been jailed for trading while insolvent. Every year, you borrow more money to pay the interest on your current debt*. You have also done future budgets, and you cannot repay any debt for the next three years*. Assuming there are no problems, maybe sometime after that, you might be able to start repayments. Of course, history tells us there are always problems!

You go to your bank and claim NZTA’s $500,000 as annual income, not a gift. Your bank is special, so doesn’t have to consider your annual expenses or ability to repay debt, and doesn’t care what you spend it on, partly because you are a shareholder in the bank.

You have a deal with this special bank that it will lend you $2.80 for every $1 of income*. Using the NZTA offer to buy the Rolls that you don’t actually need will give you access to a whopping $1.4m. You can use $500,000 to complete the deal and still have an extra $900,000 to spend on whatever you want.

It is a fantastic deal, in the sense that it is a fantasy which no bank would ever consider. Yet the Local Government Funding Agency (LGFA) is the special bank and this is exactly what it does. It is a fantastic deal – as long as you have no intention of ever repaying the debt*. You have a secret contract with the bank that your customers guarantee the debt.”

Councillor Andrew Bydder, OPINION: Gold-plated White Elephants

Any * in the quote above indicates the current situation with Hamilton City Council’s finances.

SPEED LIMIT CHANGES AND MISLEADING CONSULTATION DOCUMENTS

The Coalition Government is in the process of reversing Labour’s broad speed limit reductions. This central government mandate is causing councils run consultations on the topic as to whether to keep the current speed limits, or alternatively restore the pre-Labour speed limits.

Andrew Bydder comments on a misleading Hamilton City Council consultation document which advocates for keeping lower speed limits on a few of the major roads in Hamilton.

The council staff are advocating for keeping the speed limit on Cobham Drive at 50km/h. They are trying to convince the public that increasing the speed limit to 60km/h would only provide 0.05 seconds worth of reduced travel time along a 1.5 km stretch of road.

“Increasing the speed from 50km/h to 60 km/h for the 1,540m length of road would save just a twentieth of a second per car, according to council staff. The direction to the public reading the consultation document is clear: it is so close to zero that it is not worth any risk at all. We may as well keep the 50 km/h limit.

When you have a speed and a distance, it is easy to work out the time. Even at a conservative 55km/h to allow for accelerating and braking at each end of the road, mathematics gives a very different answer, that is around 200 times larger than the staff figure. That is too big to be an error. It is deliberate, and it is insulting. We, the public, are not being consulted. We are being misled.”

Councillor Andrew Bydder, OPINION: Consult or Insult?

CityWatch NZ contributor Geoff Kreegher covers the results of the Wairere Drive speed limit reduction consultation and Hamilton City Council’s use of leading questions regarding the new supermarket’s resource consent.

Council Uses Leading Questions in Wairere Drive Speed Reduction Consultation

According to the Council, support for the proposed new 60km/h speed limit increased 20% (2021 consultation) to over 64% (2025 consultation). How did this happen?

Back in 2021, Hamilton City Council staff wanted the speed limit reduction considered independently of the resource consent for the new supermarket. In 2025, staff abandoned that principle and made the supermarket’s resource consent central to the consultation options and Council chamber debates.

“Option 1: Reduce the speed limit from 80km/h to 60km/h, or

Option 2: Retain the current 80km/h speed limit and do not make any changes.”

The 2021 consultation options, Page 32, Infrastructure Operations Committee Agenda, 7 December 2021

“Option 1: Reduce the speed limit from 80km/h to 60km/h and allow the PAK’nSAVE supermarket to be developed under the current resource consent.

Option 2: Keep the current 80km/h speed limit, do not make any changes and prevent the PAK’nSAVE supermarket from being developed under the current resource consent.”

The 2025 consultation options, Page 25, Traffic, Speed Limit and Road Closure Hearings Panel Agenda, 2 April 2025

Council staff have prepared a “Key Findings” slide based on the 2025 survey results. They are not being upfront that they change options for the latest survey’s main question. Those changes led the public into thinking that the supermarket development is not possible without the speed limit reduction. Resource consents can also be changed, which could avoid this dilemma.

CityWatch NZ contributors plan to attend the public forum to remind the council that it is possible to build large retail developments without needing to lower the speed limit and install more speed bumps.

“LOCAL WATER DONE WELL” REFORMS AND ISSUES WITH WATER SERVICES

Councils around the country are running consultations for the creation of new Council Controlled Organisations to manage their local water services. John McDonald provides two opinion pieces this month, which are based on the document he sent to a Parliamentary select committee for the “Local Water Done Well” reforms. The articles cover issues associate with both the past and future of water services in New Zealand.

One of the articles covers some of the recent history of council water services in New Zealand, including the Mangawhai sewerage system case with its massive cost blow-outs and the Kaipara District Council charging unlawful rates. In 2012-2013, Central government politicians sided with the Council against the ratepayers who challenged the mismanagement.

Other examples in the opinion piece include the notorious Wellington Water CCO and the decades of underinvestment (or funding misallocation) which is leading to the deterioration of water service infrastructure.

“In the past, they have tended to collect money from ratepayers to cover depreciation of their water infrastructure (as they’ve had to by law since 1996), but then they have spent much of that money on other stuff – from playgrounds to potholes…

…In the 2017 fiscal year, for example, only 81 per cent of depreciation was spent on water.

In some places, Wellington for example, the numbers were far worse. As Newsroom reported in 2021, the percentage of depreciation spent on drinking water supply in the capital in 2019 was 36 percent, the figure for wastewater was 51 percent, and for stormwater 44 percent. Under-funding had been going on for decades.”

Nikki Mandow, Why NZ (really) needs water reform – in five charts, Newsroom, 26 March 2023

The articles finishes with the following questions about the current water reform programme…

“Will the “Local Waters Done Well” bill’s proposed regulatory system be effective at stopping similar cost blow-outs from occurring?

Will the “Local Waters Done Well” reforms be effective at preventing “bad decisions, mismanagement, and incompetence” leading to huge debts and great burdens being placed on communities of ratepayers and billpayers?

Will the new regulatory system instead create new layers of bureaucracy where any effective accountability for wrongdoing becomes lost?”

John McDonald, OPINION: Serious Mismanagement and Lack of Accountability with Water Services