Agenda of Rural Advisory Panel - Friday, 16 May 2025

I hereby give notice that an ordinary meeting of the Rural Advisory Panel will be held on:

Date:

Time:

Meeting Room:

Venue:

Friday, 16 May 2025

12:30 pm

Room 1, Level 26
Te Wharau o Tāmaki - Auckland House
135 Albert Street
Auckland

Ngā Hui a te Rōpū Kaitohutohu Take ā-Taiwhenua / Rural Advisory Panel

OPEN AGENDA

MEMBERSHIP

Chairperson	Cr Andy Baker	Auckland Council
Deputy Chairperson	Alan Cole	Franklin Local Board, Auckland Council
Members	Mike Bramley	Dairy New Zealand
	Jesse Brennan	Federated Farmers of NZ
	Philip Elworthy	NZ Forest Owners Association
	Trish Fordyce	National Forest Growers Levy Trust
	Tim Holdgate	Rodney Local Board, Auckland Council
	Steve Levet	Rural Contractors New Zealand
	Andrew McKenzie	Beef and Lamb New Zealand
	Brian Mason	Landowners and Contractors Association (Wellsford)
	Annaliese Morgan	Young Farmers
	Linda Potauaine	Waitākere Ranges Local Board, Auckland Council
	Leanne Roberts	Horticulture NZ
	Cr Greg Sayers	Auckland Council
	Wayne Scott	Aggregate and Quarry Association
	Cushla Smith	Fonterra Shareholders Council
	Geoff Smith	Equine Industry
	Keith Vallabh	Pukekohe Vegetable Growers Association
	Glenn Wilcox	Māori representative

(Quorum 10 members)

Lexy Turner

Governance Advisor

13 May 2025

Contact Telephone: +64 27 246 4789

Email: lexy.turner@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

Terms of Reference

(Excerpt – full terms of reference available as a separate document)

The terms of reference set out the purpose, role and protocols of the Auckland Council Rural Advisory Panel for the 2019-2022 term of the council. Panel members must abide by the Code of Conduct for Members of Auckland Council Advisory Panels.

Purpose

As one of council’s engagement mechanisms with the rural sector in Auckland, the Rural Advisory Panel provides advice to the council within the remit of the Auckland Plan on the following areas:

· council policies, plans and strategies relevant to rural issues

· regional and strategic matters relevant to rural issues

· any matter of particular interest or concern to rural communities.

Outcomes

The panel’s advice will contribute to improving the outcomes of the rural sector as set out in the Auckland Plan. The panel will provide advice through its agreed work programme.

Work programme

The panel must develop a work programme for the term. The agendas should be focused and aligned with the Auckland Plan and the long-term plan.

Submissions

The panel cannot make formal submissions to Auckland Council on council strategies, policies and plans, for example, the annual plan. However, the panel may be asked for informal feedback during a consultative process.

In its advisory role to the council, the panel may have input into submissions made by the council to external organisations but does not make independent submissions, except as agreed with the council.

This does not prevent individual members being party to submissions outside their role as panel members.

Review

The form and functioning of the panel may be reviewed prior to or after, the end of the year 2022.

1 Ngā Tamōtanga | Apologies

2 Te Whakapuaki i te Whai Pānga | Declaration of Interest

Members are reminded of the need to be vigilant to stand aside from decision making when a conflict arises between their role as a member and any private or other external interest they might have.

3 Te Whakaū i ngā Āmiki | Confirmation of Minutes

That the Rural Advisory Panel:

a) whakaū / confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Friday, 14 February 2025, including the confidential section, as a true and correct record.

4 Ngā Pakihi Autaia | Extraordinary Business

Section 46A(7) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (as amended) states:

“An item that is not on the agenda for a meeting may be dealt with at that meeting if-

(a) The local authority by resolution so decides; and

(b) The presiding member explains at the meeting, at a time when it is open to the public,-

(i) The reason why the item is not on the agenda; and

(ii) The reason why the discussion of the item cannot be delayed until a subsequent meeting.”

Section 46A(7A) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (as amended) states:

“Where an item is not on the agenda for a meeting,-

(a) That item may be discussed at that meeting if-

(i) That item is a minor matter relating to the general business of the local authority; and

(ii) the presiding member explains at the beginning of the meeting, at a time when it is open to the public, that the item will be discussed at the meeting; but

(b) no resolution, decision or recommendation may be made in respect of that item except to refer that item to a subsequent meeting of the local authority for further discussion.”

Rural Advisory Panel

16 May 2025

Ballance Farm Environment Award

File No.: CP2025/07226

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To congratulate Peter and Michelle Pan of Healthy and Fresh, supreme winners of the Auckland Region Ballance Farm Environment Award 2025.

2. To receive a presentation from Peter and Michelle Pan about their indoor commercial vegetable production.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

3. Peter and Michelle Pan founded their family-owned company, Healthy and Fresh, in 2008 and have since grown it into a leading supplier of fresh produce and ethnic foods to supermarkets across New Zealand. In March, they were named Auckland 2025 Supreme Winners Ballance Farm Environment Awards.

4. Their 28-hectare farm features 15 greenhouses that span 60,000 square meters and specialise in leafy greens and melons, cultivating 30 different varieties.

5. In 2020, the company embarked on an ambitious project to establish the largest hydroponic farm for leafy greens in New Zealand.

6. The hydroponic system uses a highly efficient, closed water reticulation system that recycles water and nutrients to maximise production, while reducing waste, and using a fraction of water and nutrients required for a typical outdoor vegetable production system.

7. Only 5% of nutrients are used, and Healthy and Fresh’s annual water use equals just one day’s use required in typical outdoor vegetable production.

8. They embrace a continuous learning approach, using trends, data, and science to tailor international knowledge to their local conditions and growing techniques, ensuring production efficiency and business success.

9. Their aim is to achieve a consistent supply of safe and healthy vegetables that is less dependent on weather conditions. They believe this will enhance New Zealand’s food security and contribute to a more sustainable food system.

10. In awarding the Regional Supreme Award, the judges identified Healthy and Fresh as a standout operation employing advanced growing techniques to mitigate climate risks, minimise waste and ensure a steady supply of high-quality produce.

11. They also won the following awards:

· Balance Agri-Nutrients Soil and Nutrient Management Award

· Bayley’s People in Primary Sector Award

· Hill Laboratories Agri-Science Award

· Norwood Farming Efficiency Award

· New Zealand Farm Environment Trust Innovation Award.

12. New Zealand Farmer Environment Trust’s video on Healthy and Fresh can be found on their YouTube channel.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendations

That the Rural Advisory Panel:

a) āhukahuka / acknowledge and congratulate Peter and Michelle Pan of Healthy and Fresh, Auckland Regional Supreme Winners of 2025.

b) whakamihi / thank Peter and Michelle Pan for their presentation.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author	Leanna Birch - Manager Wai Ora Rural Partnerships
Authoriser	Victoria Wicks-Brown - Principal Advisor Panels

Rural Advisory Panel

16 May 2025

On-site wastewater plan change to the Auckland Unitary Plan

File No.: CP2025/07404

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek the views of the Rural Advisory Panel members on the proposed approaches being developed for the on-site wastewater plan change.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Operational issues have been identified with the Auckland Unitary Plan (AUP) Chapter E5 provisions which manage on-site wastewater systems. The key issues identified relate to:

· references to an outdated technical guidance document;

· issues and opportunities with the operation and maintenance standards; and

· a lack of clarity on how upgrades to existing systems should be managed.

3. Staff are preparing an on-site wastewater plan change to address the operational issues with Chapter E5. This plan change preparation work includes engagement with stakeholders and technical experts.

4. If panel members wish to provide feedback, it should be provided to katie.auckram@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz by 30 May 2025.

Introduction

5. There are approximately 48,000 on-site wastewater systems in Auckland and the majority operate as permitted activities under the AUP. To ensure that on-site systems do not result in the pollution of streams, lakes and coastal areas, they must be designed, operated and maintained appropriately for the site and level of use.

6. Issues and opportunities for improvement have been identified with the AUP Chapter E5 provisions which manage on-site wastewater systems. The key issues identified relate to references to an outdated technical guidance document, issues and opportunities to improve the operation and maintenance standards, and a lack of clarity on how upgrades to existing systems should be managed.

7. On Thursday, 10 April 2025, the Policy and Planning Committee resolved to approve the staff recommendation to prepare a council-initiated plan change to the AUP to address issues with the provisions for on-site wastewater.

8. Staff are now undertaking plan change preparation work, including engagement with stakeholders. Once prepared, the draft plan change will be brought back to the Policy and Planning Committee for the committee to decide whether to notify the plan change.

9. This plan change relates to operational issues with Chapter E5. Further changes to Chapter E5 are possible through the freshwater plan change that is required to be notified by the end of 2027 to implement the National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management (NPS-FM). However, any further changes are likely to be limited to area-specific controls, if required to address any significant water quality issues.

Current Auckland Unitary Plan approach.

10. The control of discharges of contaminants into or onto land, air, or water and discharges of water into water, is a function of regional councils under section 30(1)(f) of the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA). Section 15 of the RMA provides further requirements around the discharge of contaminants into the environment.

11. The AUP manages discharges from on-site wastewater systems through rules and standards in Chapter E5. Chapter E5 provides a permitted activity regime for on-site wastewater systems, where discharges from new and existing systems are a permitted activity if the relevant standards are met.

12. Different permitted activity rules and standards apply to discharges on small / constrained sites, sites without a permanent power supply (such as on Aotea / Great Barrier), large sites, and discharges from existing systems.

13. A discharge that cannot meet the site area to wastewater discharge volume ratio that applies under the large site rule, might be able to meet the permitted activity standards for the small site rule, where secondary treatment is required to account for the smaller site size. Resource consent is required for discharges that cannot meet the standards of any of the permitted activity rules.

14. The current standards rely on Auckland Regional Council Technical Publication No. 58 On-site Wastewater Systems: Design and Management Manual (3^rd edition, 2004) (TP58). TP58 is referred to in the Chapter E5 general standards regarding system maintenance. It is also referred to in the permitted activity standards relating to the design of new on-site wastewater systems.

15. The council has historically had little regulatory oversight of on-site wastewater systems in Auckland due to the permitted activity regime. The Safe Septic compliance programme now has a database of systems and the ability to receive and track maintenance records.

Key issues and approaches

Issue 1: References to outdated technical information.

16. TP58 was published in 2004. Since the AUP became operative in part in 2016, Council has published new guidance for on-site wastewater management ‘On-site Wastewater Management in the Auckland Region. January 2021. Guideline Document 2021/006. Version 1’ (GD06). GD06 has been published online but marked ‘draft’, to avoid confusion in the interim period while the AUP contains references to TP58.

17. GD06 builds on and provides an update of the material covered in TP58. GD06 provides increased clarity on matters that significantly influence the effectiveness of an on-site wastewater system and corresponding risks of on- and off-site effects. For example, while TP58 referred to setbacks from ‘surface water’, GD06 is more explicit on what surface water is and the different setbacks appropriate for different types of surface water.

18. Updating the AUP to reflect GD06 will provide more clarity in the design specifications for on-site wastewater systems and reduce uncertainty for wastewater designers and landowners on when a resource consent is required. Clarifying the provisions will improve the cost efficiency of consenting by reducing ambiguity in the provisions.

19. GD06 has more stringent expectations than TP58 for some design aspects. For example, the maximum slope gradient recommended for various land application systems is more stringent in GD06 than TP58 due to improved understanding of the risks associated with steep slopes. Updating the AUP to reflect GD06 will therefore make some permitted activity standards more onerous and could trigger a new resource consent requirement for some sites, when a new system is designed.

20. Updating the AUP so that on-site wastewater systems are designed and maintained in accordance with GD06 ensures that the AUP standards align with the council’s current guidance on best practice.

21. The AUP will continue to provide specific permitted activity rules and standards for discharges on small sites, large sites, and for existing discharges. Where these rules currently rely on TP58, they would be updated to reflect the design standards in GD06. Consideration is being given on whether a specific rule is still required for sites without a permanent power supply.

Issue 2: Issues and opportunities with the operation and maintenance standards.

22. The AUP requires that on-site wastewater systems are regularly maintained to ensure their on-going performance.

23. Issues and opportunities for improvement have been identified with the Chapter E5 general standards for on-site wastewater system operation and maintenance, to improve system performance and support council compliance monitoring implementation.

24. Chapter E5 requires that owners retain and make their maintenance records available on-site for inspection by the council or their agents. This is inconsistent with the more efficient Safe Septic compliance monitoring approach, which is to request that owners send their maintenance records to the council. The existing standard leaves compliance monitoring practices open to challenge. Healthy Waters and Flood Resilience and Compliance staff have noted that the current AUP wording has created debates and inefficiency with some on-site system owners.

25. Other opportunities to strengthen the operation and maintenance standards to support compliance monitoring and improve system performance have been identified. For example, additional standards or amendments to standards could be made to:

· prevent rainwater entering on-site wastewater systems;

· specify maintenance frequency for system types not currently specified in the plan; and

· bring in reference to maintenance contracts.

26. The preferred option to address the identified issues is to amend the E5.6.1 general standards to strengthen the operation and maintenance requirements and align with compliance monitoring practices.

Issue 3: A lack of clarity on how upgrades to existing systems should be managed.

27. There is not a clear or consistent approach for consent staff or landowners, on how Chapter E5 applies to the upgrade of existing on-site wastewater systems. This reduces the efficiency of the provisions for all users.

28. Chapter E5 provides for existing discharges that were a permitted activity prior to the AUP becoming operative to continue as a permitted activity under rule E5.4.1(A2). On-site wastewater systems established prior to the AUP may not meet the design standards of the AUP that apply to new on-site wastewater systems.

29. It is not clear to what extent system ‘upgrades’ can be undertaken under rule E5.4.1(A2), when property owners want to upgrade or replace all or part of an old system with a better performing one, while not seeking to change usage, loads or flows.

30. The cost of a resource consent can deter owners from undertaking upgrade works. Consideration is being given to how to clarify this rule and support property owners who would like to upgrade their system but may not be able to meet all the permitted activity standards required for a new system, e.g., due to having a smaller site size, or not being able to meet setbacks from waterbodies.

31. Potential options include:

· Requiring system upgrades or replacements to meet the permitted activity standards required for new systems / discharges, or to apply for a resource consent.

· Providing a specific permitted or controlled activity pathway for system upgrades or replacements (where the original maximum potential design flow and the activity remains the same).

· Investigating non-regulatory methods to facilitate upgrades e.g., discounted resource consent fee.

Next steps

32. Members of the Rural Advisory Panel are invited to provide feedback on these three issues. Additionally, if you have any comments on the above options please email katie.auckram@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz by 30 May 2025.

33. We will be seeking feedback from technical experts and relevant industry groups. The draft plan change will be reported back to the Policy and Planning Committee, and if approved, it will be publicly notified for submissions.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendations

That the Rural Advisory Panel:

a) kohuki / consider the overview of the approaches being developed for the on-site wastewater plan change.

b) tuku / provide any feedback on the approach for the on-site wastewater plan change at the Rural Advisory Panel meeting or by sending an email to katie.auckram@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz by 30 May 2025.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Katie Auckram - Policy Planner

Authorisers

Kath Coombes - Team Leader - Regional Planning

Victoria Wicks-Brown - Principal Advisor Panels

Rural Advisory Panel

16 May 2025

Regional Pest Management

File No.: CP2025/07136

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To update the Rural Advisory Panel on Regional Pest Management activities that may impact rural Auckland and to offer opportunities for further engagement about them.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Funded by the natural environment targeted rate, council is currently delivering a range of biosecurity projects which protect rural industries and communities. In addition, work is underway, through the Regional Pest Management Plan review, to determine the shape of future biosecurity delivery.

Regional Pest Management Plan review

3. Engagement has commenced in advance of the 2030 – 2040 Regional Pest Management Plan review. An updated plan is due in 2030.

4. Early public consultation was conducted on key topics, including responsible cat ownership measures, marine and freshwater biosecurity, predator free islands, and pest control for climate change resilience.

5. A summary of feedback is available online. We found that there is substantial support for the mandatory desexing, microchipping, and registration of cats and a moderate level of support for keeping cats to private property. Marine and freshwater proposal received between 67-80% support, and 71% of respondents expressed general support for increased climate change resilience initiatives.

6. Mana whenua engagement on pest management is ongoing.

7. The next steps are to engage with stakeholders including industry, local boards, and subject matter experts to inform the draft new plan.

8. The proposed new regional pest management plan will then be open for public consultation in early 2027, in line with the long-term plan consultation. Following submissions analysis and any consequential changes to the proposed plan, the new plan will be made operative by 2030.

Existing projects

Low-incidence Pest Plants (LIPP)

9. Auckland Council delivers pest management on low-incidence pest plants of particular concern, including species that are managed due to their impacts on agriculture. Council’s regional coordination role attempts to prevent or slow the regional establishment and impact of these species that pose a high potential threat to the region’s primary sector. Examples include management of Chilean needle grass, wild broom, velvet leaf, and Noogoora bur.

10. Chilean needle grass impacts farm productivity and the sharp seeds can affect animal wellbeing. Auckland Council has eradicated Chilean need grass from one site, is continuing to manage the weed at two sites, and monitor post-control at one further site.

11. Wild broom reduces pasture and plantation productivity. Wild broom appears to have been successfully eliminated at six sites, is being managed at two sites, and is being monitored post-control at a further two sites.

12. Velvet leaf is highly invasive, competes with crops for space and resources, and can persist on farms for up to fifty years. Auckland Council collaborates with other regions to fund a North Island Velvet Leaf Coordinator to provide advice to farmers to minimise the risk of velvet leaf spread

13. Noogoora bur is a fast-growing summer annual that is highly competitive and can cause significant crop losses. The seeds are held in burs which spread by animals, clothing, and machinery. Auckland Council is actively managing Noogoora bur at two sites, with a further two sites under monitoring post-control.

14. Other species being managed through the low incidence pest plants programme, such as African feather grass (17 eradicated sites, five active, and four under monitoring) and Manchurian wild rice (two eradicated sites, one active, and one under monitoring), also have agricultural pest potential.

Keeping freshwater clams out of Auckland

15. Freshwater gold clams (Corbicula fluminea) are a significant problem overseas; they build up to very large numbers, blocking infrastructure such as pipes and irrigation systems, and smothering native species.

16. The potential environmental and economic impact of gold clams for NZ are serious, including significant impact on water infrastructure and displacement of native species like the freshwater mussel (kākahi).

17. Gold clams were found in a stretch of the Waikato River in 2023 but are believed to have been present for 3 years prior. Watercare have detected clams in Tuakau, where it takes water directly from the Waikato River; however, water treatment processes filter out clams and larvae preventing them from entering the Auckland water supply. To date, none have been found in Auckland.

18. Most of NZ’s rivers and lakes are considered potentially habitable for gold clam.

19. Clam-specific cleaning procedures (‘check, clean, dry’) have been developed and Auckland Council is sharing these to relevant stakeholders to ensure that people effectively clean their boats and equipment between freshwater sites.

Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza (HPAI / Bird flu)

20. Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza (HPAI, H5N1) is a serious contagious disease that primarily affects birds, resulting in a range of symptoms, including mass mortality in some species. Poultry are particularly badly affected.

21. While mainly a bird disease, it can also more rarely infect some mammal species, including humans. In America it has also been affecting dairy cows.

22. There has never been a case of H5N1 in New Zealand, although the Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI) recently successfully eliminated an outbreak of another HPAI strain in a South Island poultry farm. Because H5N1 is spreading globally and in locations that our migratory birds visit, it is considered likely to reach New Zealand via the natural dispersal of infected wild birds.

23. MPI have determined that this likelihood has increased since 2020 but currently remains low. Should the virus spread to Australia or the Pacific, this likelihood will increase further.

24. The national response will, in the first instance, be led by the Ministry of Primary Industries (MPI) with the Ministry of Health and Department of Conservation playing key roles. This includes the dissemination of important information to affected communities. MPI’s website is particularly useful: www.mpi.govt.nz/hpai

25. Auckland Council will have a regional role, particularly in supporting national communications and managing public safety and indigenous species on council-managed land. The council will also have a role in managing sick and dead birds in public spaces managed by council.

26. Since June 2024, a cross-council HPAI Steering Group have been working on early preparedness actions. Preparations have included contingency, communications and health and safety planning; liaison with relevant agencies; the purchase and distribution of personal protective equipment to key locations; staff and contractor briefings; and some wild bird outbreak response scenario planning.

27. Some of the biggest impacts in New Zealand are likely to be on commercial poultry. Overseas outbreaks in commercial poultry sheds are usually managed by complete depopulation of those sheds, as was used in the recent South Island outbreak. MPI have led the preparatory work with the commercial poultry industry to date. Council has done some work on disposal options and consenting requirements but would be open to further direct engagement with the poultry industry if that would be of benefit.

28. While councils will manage sick and dead birds in public spaces, landowners / occupiers will be responsible for managing them on their own land. This may be of particular concern to rural landowners who own their own poultry flocks, or whose properties are visited by large numbers of waterfowl. The MPI website has good advice for landowners.

Canada geese

29. Canada geese are a widespread problem across multiple regions, affecting water quality, agriculture, public spaces, and aviation.

30. Auckland Council supports Auckland Airport to track geese movement to determine their flight range and moult locations to aid control operations.

31. Council also participates in national conversations with regional councils and central government, seeking more effective alignment of management across regional borders. This is important given that geese are highly mobile; for example some flocks move between the Auckland and Waikato regions.

Other Regional Pest Management Activity

32. Auckland Council manages a range of other pest species in areas of high biodiversity value or to prevent the wider spread of those pests. Many of these programmes are done mostly in rural areas. Examples include possums, deer, feral pigs, feral goats and a range of pest plants.

33. We also support a huge and growing amount of landscape-scale community groups such as Forest Bridge Trust and Te Ara Hikoi, and umbrella groups such as Restore Rodney East. Some excellent work is being led by community groups to manage pests, fence off and plant riparian areas, and provide training and advice through local events.

34. We would welcome any feedback or questions that the panel may have about these other activities also.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation

That the Rural Advisory Panel:

a) Whiwhi / receive the information on Regional Pest Management activities in rural Auckland.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Dr Sarah Killick, Principal Advisor Biosecurity

Dr Imogen Bassett, Head of Natural Environment Specialist Services

Phil Brown, Head of Natural Environment Delivery

Authorisers

Samantha Hill, General Manager Environmental Services

Victoria Wicks-Brown - Principal Advisor Panels

Rural Advisory Panel

16 May 2025

Southern Rural Strategy

File No.: CP2025/08420

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To provide an update on the Southern Rural Strategy (the strategy) adoption.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The need for a rural strategy, starting with the southern rural area, is identified in the Future Development Strategy 2023-2053.

3. Growth in the southern rural area is expected to account for approximately 15 per cent of Auckland’s overall population growth over the next 30 years. The council’s Auckland Growth Scenario anticipates an increase of 89,500 people, 39,100 households, and 16,600 jobs in the rural south by 2052.

4. The purpose of the strategy is to provide a long-term vision and framework for guiding growth in Auckland’s rural south over the next 30 years. It seeks to balance development pressures with the need to support liveable communities, sustain rural production, and build resilience.

5. The southern rural area includes the entire Franklin Local Board area with the addition of small adjacent areas of rural land within the Howick, Manurewa, and Papakura Local Boards (see Attachment A).

6. The draft strategy was developed with engagement and support from the Franklin Local Board and members of the Rural Advisory Panel, ongoing engagement with mana whenua entities with customary interests in the rural south, and consultation with a range of interest groups, including:

· local community organisations

· business associations

· representatives from rural and other industry sectors

· government agencies

· council-controlled organisations

· developers.

7. Public consultation of the draft strategy took place between 29 October and 1 December 2024, under the Special Consultative Procedure. The public feedback summary can be found in Attachment B.

8. All feedback has been considered, and the strategy has been reviewed and amended accordingly.

9. The final strategy was adopted by the Policy and Planning Committee on 15 May 2025. The final strategy can be found in Attachment A.

10. The structure of the strategy has two key components: the strategic framework (Part 4) and the spatial response (Part 5). The strategic framework outlines a long-term vision and direction to guide future growth and development in the southern rural area organised around five interconnected themes. The spatial response demonstrates the future role and function of settlements, as well as the high-level land uses of rural areas beyond these settlements.

11. Most growth in the southern rural area during the next 30 years is anticipated in the future urban areas at Drury, Pukekohe, and Paerātā, as well as through intensification within Pukekohe’s existing urban footprint. Waiuku and Beachlands will continue to serve as key rural and coastal towns. Clevedon and Kingseat will serve as rural villages, supporting local communities with essential services. Smaller and more dispersed settlements will see limited or no growth and will remain reliant on the wider rural network for services. The rural area outside the settlements will continue to play an important role over the long-term, particularly for rural production.

12. Importantly, the strategy does not identify additional land for future urban zoning, nor does it change the timing of existing future urban zoned land in these areas.

13. The strategy recognises the important role that the rural area plays in contributing to the region’s environmental outcomes and lifestyle opportunities, but it also recognises its critical role in rural production for Auckland and New Zealand and seeks to continue to protect highly productive land.

14. As the first subregional strategy, the strategy is part of the Future Development Strategy. It will provide targeted guidance for growth management in Auckland’s southern rural settlements and wider rural area. The strategy will inform and guide future planning and investment processes such as the Auckland Unitary Plan, long-term plan, local board plans and Future Development Strategy updates.

15. The strategy is intended for use by rural communities, developers, Auckland Council, and council-controlled organisations, offering clarity on how future growth will be managed in the region.

16. Following adoption, the strategy outlines several key next steps, including progressing the Future Development Strategy review process, community adaptation planning, reviewing the Auckland Unitary Plan and Auckland Design Manual, and investigating rural road design standards.

17. Monitoring of the strategy will be integrated into the annual reporting process for the Future Development Strategy.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation

That the Rural Advisory Panel:

a) tuhi tīpoka / note the adoption of the Southern Rural Strategy.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	Southern Rural Strategy
b ⇨	Southern Rural Strategy - Summary of feedback report

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Eva Zombori - Senior Strategic Advisor

Claire Gray - Principal Advisor Growth & Spatial Strat

Authoriser

Victoria Wicks-Brown - Principal Advisor Panels

Rural Advisory Panel

16 May 2025

Freshwater regulatory instruments update

File No.: CP2025/07891

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To provide an update on central government’s reform of the freshwater instruments within the former Essential Freshwater programme and high-level implications for Auckland Council’s implementation of the various instruments involved.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The coalition government are committed to a significant programme of regulatory reform over its first term in office, including changes that directly affect four of the five regulatory instruments that formed the previous government’s Essential Freshwater package. This includes the:

· National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management 2020 (NPS-FM)

· National Environmental Standards for Freshwater 2020 (NES-F)

· Resource Management (Freshwater Farm Planning) Regulations 2023 (FWFP)

· Resource Management (Stock Exclusion) Regulations 2020 (Stock Exclusion).

3. Recent communications from central government (here and here) have provided further insight into the direction for regulatory changes including those affecting Essential Freshwater instruments with consultation on proposed changes forecast for mid-2025.

4. Central government’s decision to replace the Resource Management Act (RMA) with two new Acts has resulted in a rescoping of potential changes across national direction policies, with the government proposing to take a more targeted approach to changes across National Policy Statements (NPS), National Environmental Standards (NES), and associated RMA amendments with a bearing on freshwater outcomes.

National reforms of freshwater instruments

5. Central government continues to progress work across resource management reform and make policy changes to national direction. Since the last Rural Advisory Panel meeting there have been a few public announcements on progress being made across the resource management reform, including freshwater outcomes.

6. On 28 March 2025, the Minister responsible for Resource Management Reform, Hon Chris Bishop, spoke at the New Zealand Planning Institute Conference on the government’s work to reform the Resource Management Act (RMA). In his speech, the Minister indicated the government’s intention to:

a) separate the RMA into two new Acts:

· Natural Environment Act focused on the use, protection and enhancement of the natural environment.

· The Planning Act focused on land-use planning and regulation with a focus on the use, development and enjoyment of property rights.

b) simplify national direction with freshwater, indigenous biodiversity and coastal policy being covered under the Natural Environment Act;

c) narrow the approach to effects management including more clearly defining the types of effects that can be considered through consent processes and raising the thresholds for when these are required to be managed;

d) require a clearer legislative basis for setting environmental limits;

e) strengthen environmental compliance monitoring and enforcement through the establishment of a national compliance regulator; and

f) require a single plan per region, that includes spatial planning functions and regional environmental requirements, with chapters to cover each local authority.

7. The Government intends to introduce the two Bills to Parliament before the end of 2025. The government expects to pass the Bills in 2026, with the new system coming into effect from 2027.

8. On 7 April 2025, the Government also released its Q2 2025 Action Plan, setting out priorities for the period 1 April to 30 June 2025. The Q2 Action Plan included:

a) beginning public consultation on National Direction to the Resource Management Act in infrastructure, housing and primary industries.

9. Central government have also reassessed the scope of potential policy changes across national direction. Given the extent of changes being proposed through RM reform, phase two will focus on more targeted changes across National Policy Statements (NPS) and National Environmental Standards that will flow through into the new resource management system in phase 3. For freshwater, elements in phase 2 are intended to include:

a) changes across NPS-FM, NES-F, FWFP, and Stock Exclusion.

b) changes to provide for vegetable production and water storage.

Changes to Part 9A Freshwater Farm Plans

10. Central government has recently provided greater detail on proposed changes to the FWFP regulations. These include:

a) reducing the number of farms required to have a farm plan (expected to be achieved through an increase in size thresholds across land use types);

b) changes to who needs to have their farm plans certified (potentially based on catchment status and land use activities); and

c) enabling Approved Industry Organizations to provide certifier and audit services.

11. The Ministry for the Environment (MfE) has indicated an intention to undertake further key stakeholder group engagement on the detail of proposed changes over the coming months, which council staff will be a part of.

12. It is now anticipated that roll-out of FWFP across Auckland Tāmaki Makaurau will not be possible until 2026.

Freshwater Farm Plans work programme

13. Staff continue to work on the development of a web-based platform for communicating Catchment Context, Challenges and Values (CCCV). The foundational architecture of a platform has been built with some early development user testing planned for the beginning of May.

14. Staff continue to engage with iwi representatives from multiple iwi entities to support and collaborate on the development of iwi/hapu specific content. This includes joint engagement with Northland Regional Council staff for three iwi entities plus dedicated CCCV engagement with at least five other iwi entities.

15. Staff are waiting for finalisation of the amendments to FWFP regulations before progressing wider workstreams under council’s FWFP implementation programme.

Guidance documents / reports published

16. Since the Rural Advisory Panel’s last meeting in February 2025, the Ministry for the Environment (MfE) have published several reports and factsheets relevant to the Essential Freshwater instruments. Council staff are not aware of any relevant publications from the Ministry of Primary Industries relevant to the Essential Freshwater instruments. The MfE publications are as follows:

· MfE – Our Environment 2025 report and supporting reports (published 8 April 2025)

o Our environment 2025: Technical annex

o Our Environment, our lives: The stories behind the numbers

· MfE - 2024 Update of the national groundwater quality indicator (published 8 April 2025)

· MfE - Factsheet - National Direction: Phase two of the resource management reform (published 28 March 2025)

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation

That the Rural Advisory Panel:

a) whiwhi / receive the Natural Environment Strategy staff update on central government’s reform of the freshwater instruments making up the former government’s Essential Freshwater programme.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Andrew Bird - Senior Analyst NES

Dave Allen - Manager Natural Environment Strategy

Authorisers

Louise Mason - General Manager Policy

Victoria Wicks-Brown - Principal Advisor Panels

Rural Advisory Panel

16 May 2025

Information Memoranda

File No.: CP2025/09517

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To supply the panel with information reports, provided for the panel’s interest.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The following items are attached for the panel’s interest:

i) Election Year Protocols

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation

That the Rural Advisory Panel:

a) whiwhi / receive the information memoranda

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	Sector Advisory Panels information memoranda - Election year policy
b ⇨	Elected Members Election Year Policy
c ⇨	Staff policy for election and political processes
d ⇨	FAQs Elected Members Election Year Policy
e ⇨	FAQs Staff policy for election and political processes

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author	Lexy Turner - Governance Advisor
Authoriser	Victoria Wicks-Brown - Principal Advisor Panels

Author	Phoebe Chiquet-Kaan - Governance Advisor
Authoriser	Victoria Wicks-Brown - Principal Advisor Panels