And round we go again...

One of Labour's few achievements last term was to finally move on RMA reform. Following an independent review and a select committee review of an exposure draft, both aimed at ironing out bugs and producing a compromise most people could live with, Labour passed the Natural and Built Environments Act just before the 2023 election. And then National immediately repealed it. Since then they've been picking holes in the legacy RMA regime to advantage their donors and cronies. And now they've announced grand plans to replace the entire Act again:

The Government has revealed its plans for a permanent replacement for the Resource Management Act, the 1991 law that has, for more than a decade, been a piñata of blame from politicians who accuse it of failing to adequately protect the environment while stifling development.

[...]

The coalition Government resurrected the RMA last year and today announced plans to kill it once again and replace it with two new pieces of legislation, which will be focused on allowing people to enjoy property rights. RMA Reform Minister Chris Bishop and Under-Secretary to the Minister Responsible for RMA Reform Simon Court said the replacement would be passed before the next election.

Which probably sounds great to them and their donors and cronies. The problem is that the next government, can, will, and should immediately repeal it and revert to the old regime, just as National did. The development focus and the obvious role of corruption in the process makes its survival untenable, and its repeal by the next government a basic act of political hygiene.

(...and the same goes for practically every other significant policy of this government. Given its naked corruption, repealing everything they have done on day one and replacing it with SFO investigations into every donor and lobbyist who benefited is vital. Anything less sends a message that corruption pays).

If National wanted lasting policy change in this area, they'd be doing what Labour did, and setting up a multi-year programme of review and inquiry and compromise to build consensus. Instead, they're just pulling some rabid propertarian weirdo shit from a bunch of foreign billionaire-funded thinktanks and trying to impose it by fiat. Anyone who thinks such policy can or should last is either a fool, or trying to sell you something.