By Simon Court, ACT MP
Across Auckland’s northwest and the wider Helensville community, families are feeling the pressure of high housing costs, slow infrastructure delivery, and a planning system that too often says “no” before it says “yes.”
We talk a lot about the need to build more homes and deliver infrastructure faster. But if we are serious about that goal, we need to be honest about what is getting in the way.
One of the clearest recent examples of what can be achieved when unnecessary barriers are removed is the Northern Busway extension. The Government made the decision to fast-track this important project so Aucklanders could get the transport links they need without years of delay.
Recent headlines also show how contested the current settings have become. Groups such as the Voice of Taranaki Maunga have publicly expressed concern about proposed RMA reforms. But the real question for policymakers is practical: are our planning rules focused on managing real environmental effects, or are they layering additional process onto projects regardless of scale or impact?
When we streamline the process, projects move. Costs come down. Communities benefit sooner. But for most housing and development projects, the experience is very different.
I regularly hear from homeowners, builders, and small developers who find themselves navigating a complex web of additional reports, consultations, and fees that add little practical value but significantly increase time and cost.
Recently, a North Shore family contacted our office about a modest renovation to their existing 1970s home. The project would not expand the building footprint and would remain within an already developed residential site.
Despite this, they were told they needed to engage with multiple iwi groups as part of the resource consent process. One group sought a paid site meeting and report costing around $10,000. Then a second group also expressed interest in being consulted.
Whether or not each individual request is technically permissible under current rules is not really the point. The broader issue is that the system increasingly creates uncertainty, duplication, and cost for ordinary New Zealanders trying to improve their own property.
Every additional requirement adds friction. Every layer of process adds delay. And ultimately, those costs flow through to higher house prices, more expensive renovations, and slower infrastructure delivery.
This matters in places like Helensville and across the northwest, where growth is coming and communities need more housing, better transport, and more local investment. The current system too often applies blanket processes that bear little relationship to the scale or impact of the project involved.
We should be asking a simple question: does this requirement materially improve environmental or planning outcomes, or is it simply adding cost and delay? If we want more homes built and infrastructure delivered on time, we need a resource management system that is predictable, proportionate, and focused on real effects.
Fast-tracked projects like the Northern Busway show what is possible when we cut through unnecessary process. The challenge now is to bring that same discipline to the wider planning system. Because until we do, well-intentioned families, builders, and communities will keep paying the price.
