Resource Management Act Reform
The Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) has long been criticised for its complexity, its difficulty in supporting development, and its failure to deliver improved environmental outcomes. Local government, which carries much of the responsibility for implementing the RMA, has widely acknowledged the need for reform.
In December 2025, the Government introduced two new bills in Parliament to replace the RMA laying the groundwork for a planning framework expected to be enacted by mid-2026.
The reforms represent one of the most significant system overhauls with wide‑ranging implications for local government.
Key proposals
1. Two new laws to replace one
The reform introduces two separate pieces of legislation intended to replace the Resource Management Act 1991 by mid‑2026:
The Planning Bill: sets out how land can be used, developed, and planned for, including housing growth and infrastructure needs. It provides the core rules for land‑use planning and manages how councils prepare and implement planning instruments.
The Natural Environment Bill: focuses on managing the use of natural resources and ensuring environmental protection. It contains environmental limits and requirements for safeguarding air, water, soil, and ecosystems.
Together, these laws form a planning system that partially separate land‑use planning from environmental regulation, with both Bills introduced to Parliament on 9 December 2025 and expected to be enacted in mid-2026.
2. Shift to fewer, standardised regional plans
Under the proposed reform, the current structure of more than 100 regional and district plans and policy statements will be consolidated into 17 Combined Regional Plans, with one plan per region.
This shift is intended to create a more unified planning framework, where councils across New Zealand operate under consistent approaches and criteria. Combined plans are expected to take around two years to develop after the legislation is implemented.
Standardisation will also be supported by:
- National template zonings and rules, meaning councils will select from predefined zone types rather than create bespoke zones.
- National standards and national direction, which will provide greater direction for councils.
3. Streamlined consenting system
The reform proposes significant changes to how resource consents are handled:
- The number of activities that require consent will be reduced, with more activities permitted by default.
- Consent categories will be simplified, moving from the current broader system to four standard categories.
- Consent conditions will be required to be necessary and proportionate, supporting a more consistent and predictable process.
- Several types of effects currently considered such as internal building layout or effects on trade competition will no longer be in scope for consideration under the new system.
- These updates create a planning environment where fewer matters need formal approval, and where the process for obtaining any required approvals is more uniform across the country.
Council's submission
Council has made a submission to the Government on the proposed reform. We are broadly supportive of the reform but has made a submission highlighting areas requiring refinement. We emphasised the need for realistic timeframes, clarity around compensation and safeguards to ensure that local issues are not unnecessarily regionalised.
Key recommendations
1. Improve and clarify the goals and hierarchy of the new planning system
- Clearer wording in the Planning Bill to avoid litigation around what “unreasonable effects” mean.
- Separation of environmental limits from efficient resource use in the Natural Environment Bill to ensure both are addressed properly.
- Stronger national guidance tools (binding rulings or determinations) to ensure consistent interpretation of national instruments across all regions.
2. Strengthen how spatial and land‑use plans are created and governed
We support spatial planning and standardised land‑use planning, but the legislation leaves too many practical gaps.
We recommend:
- Clear rules for who must sit on spatial planning committees and how disagreements between councils will be resolved.
- More realistic timeframes and proper consultation for creating standardised plan content.
- A more flexible hearings process so local issues can still be decided locally, rather than defaulting everything to regional panels.
3. Fix weaknesses in the proposed compensation (regulatory relief) framework
The submission highlights major risks for councils if compensation is required for planning decisions made at regional or national levels.
We recommend:
- The entity that pays for regulatory relief must also be the entity that makes the decision that triggers it or must have the power to reject such provisions.
- Councils shouldn’t be financially liable for decisions made by panels or committees they do not control.
4. Implementation will be highly demanding and requires better support and timing
Council warns that the implementation timeframe is extremely tight and will heavily strain planning resources nationwide.
We recommend:
- Greater upfront national standardisation of technical processes to reduce costs and duplication.
- Alignment of new levies, requirements, and processes with local government funding cycles to avoid unnecessary administrative costs.
