Source: Radio New Zealand
File image. Supplied / Transpower
The national grid operator says it will probably have to use a streamlined public works act a lot more in future to get land and access to expand the electricity transmission system.
A select committee is hearing submissions on the Public Works Amendment Bill that aims to streamline land acquisition powers and compensation.
Transpower’s Matt Fanning told MPs the last time they did it was for three properties in 2014 and it could take at least two years, sometimes more, if landowners appealed.
But it was now facing having to deliver an “unprecedented” amount of infrastructure both now and for the next 30 years with demand forecast to grow more than 60 percent by 2050.
“We are likely to need to use the PWA a lot more with that increasing work programme and that build and upgrade programme that we’ve got,” said Fanning.
“So we really need the Public Works Act to be fit for purpose and to enable us to deliver the much needed electricity transmission infrastructure at pace.”
The state-owned enterprise’s written submission said it backed the bill because it could cut a year off the standard timeline of two to five years to get property rights for projects.
‘Last resort’
Transpower later told RNZ it would be a “last resort” to use the Public Works Act to get an easement to build infrastructure including to connect new generation to the grid.
“We expect the significant majority of that land access to be negotiated on a commercial basis with landowners,” it said in a statement.
This was its usual process.
The bill would align it with what the New Zealand Transport Agency and KiwiRail already could do to acquire land, it said.
“Our preference is to negotiate land access with the landowner – and acquiring land access through the PWA is the last resort.
“It’s really important to us that we build and maintain effective long-term relationships with the people who host New Zealand’s grid assets on their land – we will be working together for generations.
“This gives Transpower added incentives to work constructively and for mutual benefit with landowners.”
Transpower said its track record showed it was typically considered good to work with.
About 30,000 New Zealanders had its assets on their land and 91 percent were satisfied or very satisfied with that in its last survey in 2024.
“We note that any decision to compulsorily acquire land access will remain with the minister – the legislative change under consideration would streamline the early stages of the process.”
It also wanted easier access to land for surveys and investigation.
Several submitters backed the bill’s intent to deliver infrastructure more efficiently but said it got the balance wrong.
Law Association property lawyer Phil Shannon said: “We took the overall view that the balance has been shifted too far by the amendment, too far towards speed and executive power and away from independent oversight of the courts and procedural fairness.”
The bill changes what the Environment Court would consider if a landowner appealed against an acquisition order.
The Public Works Act has had no significant reform since the 1980s, and before that the 1920s.
Shannon said the association believed it needed rewriting, not just amending.
The bill would update compensation payments and extend who was eligible such as where there were multiple owners, and introduce an incentive payment of 10 percent of land value up to a max of $100,000 for a quick agreement to sell.
Last August, a sibling bill was passed: The Public Works (Critical Infrastructure) Amendment Act 2025 created a fast-tracked acquisition pathway for designated critical projects, most of them roads, setting up bonus payments for land owners who sold quickly.
The bill before the committee now is more broad-brush; it is also among others that seek to fast-track infrastructure rebuilds after disasters, including the Planning Bill and Natural Environment Bill and Emergency Management Bill that have also been before select committees recently.
It would cut negotiation requirements and limit submissions by landowners, among other measures, after a disaster.
Water New Zealand stressed the bill had to match up with the other bills.
It said it should allow six years, not two, to respond to a disaster because fixing things took time.
It also sought a change so that climate change could be factored in by local authorities looking at acquisition.
A note on the bill said it “supports the government’s infrastructure delivery priorities, as set out in the government’s economic strategy ‘Going for Growth’”.
Along with several other submitters, Transpower wanted changes to the bill to introduce extra protections for Māori land.
Anaru Begbie of Raukawa Charitable Trust in south Waikato said the bill contained no express reference to Te Tiriti and should have, and should offer explicit protection for their land to avoid the unilateral decision-making of the Crown in the past.
“Treaty settlement redress land should not be subject to compulsory acquisition under this bill,” Begbie told the committee.
“Voluntary agreement should always be possible. Compulsory takings should not.”
Contractors who build infrastructure told MPs they backed the bill but needed to take care about conflict with local communities.
Fraser May of Civil Contractors NZ said: “If we streamline the process so much that the public has not had a good conversation with the client around why the project is going ahead, so the need for the project and what the project will involve for their land, then it can often be the contractor on the front line dealing with the angry community.”
Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand
