June 17, 2026 • 21 mins
For years, New Zealand has spent big on infrastructure without always getting the results to match.
Now, the Government's vowing to change that.
It’s supporting all 16 recommendations in the Infrastructure Commission's National Plan – a blueprint for how the country plans, funds, and delivers the things we all rely on.
The 30-year plan includes a review of the Land Transport Fund and requires Crown entities to publish long-term investment plans.
Labour and the Greens are also backing it -- but the question remains whether this is the beginning of real reform, or just another ambitious plan on paper.
Today on The Front Page, Infrastructure NZ Chief Executive Nick Leggett joins us to discuss what it all means.
Follow The Front Page on iHeartRadio, Apple Podcasts, Spotify or wherever you get your podcasts.
You can read more about this and other stories in the New Zealand Herald, online at nzherald.co.nz, or tune in to news bulletins across the NZME network.
Host: Chelsea Daniels
Editor/Producer: Richard Martin
Producer: Jane Yee
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Listen
Watch
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:06):
Kiota.
Speaker 2 (00:06):
I'm Chelsea Daniels and this is the Front Page, a
daily podcast presented by the New Zealand Herald.
Speaker 3 (00:16):
For years, New.
Speaker 2 (00:17):
Zealand has spent big on infrastructure without always getting the
results to match. Now the government's vowing to change that.
It's supporting all sixteen recommendations in the Infrastructure Commission's National Plan,
a blueprint for how the country plans, funds and delivers
the things will rely on.
Speaker 3 (00:38):
The thirty year.
Speaker 2 (00:39):
Plan includes a review of the Land Transport Fund and
requires Crown entities to publish long term investment plans. Labor
and the Greens are also backing it, but the question
remains whether this is the beginning of a real reform
or just another ambitious plan on paper. On the front Page,
(01:01):
Infrastructure and Said Chief Executive Nick Leggett joins us to
discuss what it all means. First off, Nick, tell me
what even is this plan?
Speaker 1 (01:14):
Well, the National Infrastructure Plan is a thirty year plan
that is developed by the Infrastructure Commission, and it really
is about projecting how we plan, fund and ultimately build infrastructure.
It's not simply a list of projects. It's the way
the system and all parts of the system prioritized, assess,
(01:40):
and then ultimately procure and get projects going. At the moment,
we've got this habit of really letting the politicians drive
that through election cycles. So every three years government gets
elected and says we're going to do this, and we
get very down into the detail, We get very granular
about well you should do this project and not that project.
(02:03):
What the Infrastructure Plan is looking at is where's our need,
not just today but tomorrow. Where have we not invested
and where are the investment priorities for the future. And
that is lifting up a lot of these discussions that
ultimately will try and take it out of political as
(02:25):
much political discussion and sort of try and orientate it
more in evidence and need, which is when usual needs
to be if we're going to do this better and
ultimately get more value for the money that we spend
on our infrastructure.
Speaker 3 (02:38):
Right.
Speaker 2 (02:38):
So I saw that the government has said yep, all
good on the sixteen recommendations. I mean, what are some
of those recommendations.
Speaker 1 (02:46):
Yeah, I mean there are lots of good system stewardship
stuff there. I think the important recommendations are around particularly
investment planning, so understanding the need that we're going to
have as a society for different arts of infrastructure. Where's
(03:09):
the population going to be that drives the building of schools,
the building of hospitals, where are the transport connections going
to need to be? And I think that so that
long term investment planning is really important. Proper asset management reporting,
so understanding the assets we've already got, because New Zealand
(03:32):
is quite good at building, set forget and then just
walking away and forgetting about maintaining our assets. And we've
talked a lot about the infrastructure deficit, and the Infrastructure
Commission has put a sort of a figure on that
of about two hundred billion dollars. When we talk about
a deficit, what most people think, well, that's infrastructure that
(03:55):
we need to build that we haven't Sixty percent of
that two hundred billion is actually money that we haven't invested.
We failed to put back in to maintain and renew
the assets that we've already got.
Speaker 3 (04:07):
And I think key we feel this in.
Speaker 1 (04:10):
Leafy classrooms, damp hospitals, poorly maintained roads, poorly maintained railway tracks.
We know that we're not looking after what we've got
at the moment, as well as we should be. So
I think that is that's going to be really important.
And that multi year budgeting that the government agreed to
in principle is vital because it allows understanding of assets
(04:35):
to occur.
Speaker 3 (04:36):
But then the planning.
Speaker 1 (04:38):
Of the remedial or the renewals or the maintenance. When
you know you've got money in five years time, it's
much easier to plan all that out. That also allows
the infrastructure industry to have clarity around what's coming down
the track, and it allows whether it's contractors or engineering
consultants to have the right team members with the right
(04:58):
skills in place to howl deliver whether it's a new
project or renewing an old project. And at the moment
we spend enough on infrastructure per capita. We're in the
sort of we're above average and the OECD rankings, but
we're in the bottom two where it comes to getting
(05:20):
the value out of our spend that we should and
that's really bad news. And that's because we are far
more on this kind of reaction, the sort of I
call it a windscreen wiper that just goes across the
screen every time there's an election and it just wipes
all the projects away.
Speaker 3 (05:38):
We never get down to.
Speaker 1 (05:41):
Looking taking a calm look at what's coming down, what
we need to build, what we need to maintain, and
putting that money not just in this year's budget, but
in the budget perhaps five or ten years down the track,
because we've got to maintain those assets that we've already got,
and so the changes that are outlined around that, understanding
(06:05):
the assets we've got, planning for them, renewing them properly,
those changes if there agreed to. So yeah, a government
or an opposition in this case, both of them can
agree to something in principle and say that's lovely, but
what we actually need is action. We need to go
to say right, this is budget and they're doing it
for Kiwi Rail. Interestingly, for next year we're going to
(06:27):
have three years we're going to guarantee the program of
spending for Kiwi Rail. We're going to guarantee it across
three budgets. That allows Kiwi Rail this year to go
off and actually start planning the stuff that reduces waste
and improves confidence and it helps both the asseid I
own a k We Rail and the infrastructure industry deliver
better and it gets you Ultimately, it gets you towards
(06:48):
securing that better value for money.
Speaker 2 (06:50):
Yeah, I was going to ask you about that, so
that in principle, I mean, it's all well and good
to do a massive report like this and be like, yeah,
we're all on board for this thirty year plan. We
all agree that the infrastructure in this country is bad.
We don't repair it as often as we should. But
the end principle does that just negate everything you know
said before.
Speaker 1 (07:10):
That, No, it doesn't, but ultimately it could. We Ultimately
what we want to see is action taken right. That
means that this government or the next is able to say, Okay,
we know that the schools, the education buildings are with
(07:35):
however many billion dollars every year, we're going to put
aside in our budget, in the budget of a country,
some money that seeks to maintain and improve those rather
than reacting to it. There'll actually be a plan across
the long term that takes discipline and you know you'll
get this, Chelsea, as I do. Because politicians love opening
(08:00):
something new. They I just love it or.
Speaker 2 (08:07):
Shut you know what are they called that when they get.
Speaker 1 (08:12):
Turn turn the first side, they and that that is
actually that that's what drives a lot of our infrastructure behavior.
Speaker 3 (08:24):
And you know, I had a there's a guy.
Speaker 1 (08:26):
In the UK and infrastructure expert recently who said New
Zealand's like the only country left in the world where
politicians decide what projects get built. And you know, and
what we're trying to do is flip this around here.
That's what this whole infrastructure National Infrastructure Panel is about.
It's about and this is how we know if there's
been some success, that the system offers up the projects
(08:50):
based on a decent funded pipeline, not just a wish list,
but a funded pipeline based on evidence.
Speaker 3 (08:57):
And so if a politician and the camp pain or at.
Speaker 1 (09:00):
Any times say hey we need to build you know,
a bridge and it should go here, our collective reaction
to that should not be oh great, you know, it
should be well, what does the Infrastructure Commission say about that?
Speaker 3 (09:15):
Have they evaluated that project? Is that?
Speaker 1 (09:17):
Would you put that as your priority or would you
put other things as a priority. And that's the sort
of maturity we need to get to. We have politicized infrastructure.
We're being driven by politicians, you know, and this is
the reality as well. Like you can promise stuff, you
can even fund it as a politician, But infrastructure takes
(09:38):
so long it's often that it'll be your opponents that
open it. The challenge we've got though, and I think
New Zealanders like good infrastructure. They like things, you know,
they like you bits of infrastructure, but they also want
things to work. There hasn't been reward or even the
warm feeling for maintaining what we've got. People you know,
(10:01):
began I think it's three or four years ago to
see on our state highways what neglect had looked like
because money was taken out of maintenance to build roads
of national significance by the national government before this one
that wasn't properly restored by the following labor government. This
government's done quite a lot in terms of potholes, their
(10:23):
Popthole restoration project. It's a bit more sophisticated that, but
they have put more money in to rehabilitate roads. But
there isn't there just isn't those rewards, like if stuff works,
Like if you send your kids to school and the
classroom isn't leaking, it's kind of functional and it's warm,
and they're other getting a good education because the classroom works.
(10:44):
In the school, playground in the fields work. You don't
feel that's just what you expect. That you don't feel
any particular great deal of gratitude.
Speaker 3 (10:54):
Towards the government of the day.
Speaker 1 (10:57):
And so there hasn't been that same drive by the
system or by political leaders to to to to actually
get the money back into renew and maintain.
Speaker 3 (11:11):
And Chris Bishop has been a very expletter about.
Speaker 1 (11:16):
That that that we need to change that discipline, and
it is going to take time to turn the ship around.
These are problems, you know, many years in the making,
probably decades in some cases, but there's a start, and
it is going to take money without the associated political payoff,
if you know what I mean, to get our assets
the money they need on a yearly basis. I mean.
Speaker 3 (11:37):
Another good example of that, of course, is water.
Speaker 1 (11:40):
You know, pipes leaking waste water pipes in different parts
of the country that just haven't been renewed. Money has
been spent by counsels sometimes on other fancier things above
the ground, but reality is, you know, has dawned and
will continue to dawn for some time to come until
we get our act together, get the right kind of
(12:01):
investment through these new water organizations separate from councils that
actually own the assets as well and can borrow to
improve and build new ones. We're just we're quite a
young country.
Speaker 3 (12:16):
We're quite new.
Speaker 1 (12:17):
A lot of our infrastructures being you but the chickens
are kind of coming home to roosts in some areas.
So we need to get on top of this. Strengthen
the system, strengthen the advice, make it really transparent. But
the public need to be part of that, you know, citizens,
We need to be part of that as well. And
that is having good expectations that when something's built, it's
maintained and renewed, so we get the value for money
(12:39):
that it lasts longer rather than just fails and everybody
complains and then we've got to throw even more money
at it. And that's another reason why we don't get value,
because we react, and when you react rather than mindfully
maintaining things end up costing war.
Speaker 4 (13:02):
We love a one lane bridge in this country, maybe
too much. We have more than seven and a half
thousand of them. Put them together, they'd stretch from open
to corimandel. But our partisan politics, though, that's the longest
one lane bridge of them all. For decades we've been
stuck with a one lane bridge of mentality about what
moves and when first one party then the other hogs
the right of way. Essential projects started from either direction
(13:25):
just sit there, idling and sucking up fumes.
Speaker 2 (13:30):
Well, given the cross party support for this report already
or this plan, how likely is it that this plan
will actually survive future changes of government.
Speaker 1 (13:42):
I think I've got some hope there, I do, because
this stuff shouldn't be fundamentally political. We've got the evidence,
we've got the Infrastructure Commission coming up with a very
good national infrastructure plan. But ultimately it's got to take
political discipline. But once again, some of them, expectation is
(14:03):
going to be part of that. So if the coalition's
re elected or there's a different government, we've all got
a whole We've got to collectively hold their feet to
the fire to say, hang on, you kind of agree
in principle or in some cases more than principle to
doing this, let's make sure that it actually happens now.
And it's got to be reward for doing things properly.
(14:24):
We've got to be focused on getting things right. So
I'm optimistic, I know because we infrastructure New Zealand. Every
year we take a group of infrastructure leaders from both
the public and private sector to look at other countries
and the way they do things. I know that we
can improve this. I am optimistic. I'm positive about the
(14:47):
fact we can do better. We can get better value
for money, we can get better at funding a pipeline,
at maintaining our assets, better at using infrastructure more effectively
to power the country, to power the economy than we
do currently.
Speaker 2 (15:04):
When you go to those conferences overseas, and presumably you're
seeing international counterparts over there, when they ask you questions,
is it a bit embarrassing?
Speaker 1 (15:14):
Sometimes most people have got a fairly favorable view of
New Zealand as a country, and we're so small and
kind of isolated that I'm not sure many of them
have looked that deeply at what we do. But as
I mentioned to you that person in the UK who said,
you know, we're the only country in the world where politicians,
you know, go through go through We'll do that. No,
(15:36):
we don't want to do that.
Speaker 3 (15:37):
One.
Speaker 1 (15:38):
That's just not how good decisions are made. It's not
that politicians shouldn't have responsibility ultimately for financial decisions on
behalf of taxpayers.
Speaker 3 (15:48):
But the system should.
Speaker 1 (15:51):
Be strong to support the government of the day, and
the system should be the thing that throws up the
priorities and how things are going to be done and
what needs to be done at the moment.
Speaker 3 (16:07):
It's politicians that drive that.
Speaker 1 (16:09):
And it's not that politicians are intelligent people who have skills,
it's just they're not infrastructure experts. And three year election
cycles are the very worst way to do infrastructure because
the chopping and the changing. I mean hundreds of millions
of dollars was spent on let's get well into moving
an Auckland light rail and indeed that irex very project.
(16:31):
Now that's not a commentary on whether they were the
right project or not, but in two out of three
of those cases, money was spent developing the case, but
there was no money to actually do.
Speaker 3 (16:41):
The work to build the project.
Speaker 1 (16:44):
It's all tops intervy, and it's all because politicians have said,
oh yeah, look we should do this. There needs to
be a more coherent approach. I've got some hope that
I think that the second Orpland Harbor crossing maybe a
different model. We don't know, but I think that more
care has been taken and I'm really hopeful that that
is the case, because we need to have a new
(17:05):
way of prioritizing our major projects as well.
Speaker 2 (17:10):
Right, So what happens next.
Speaker 1 (17:12):
Well, there's going to be an election and we're going
to talk about things a whole lot more, and parties
are going to make promises. But look, there's a consewarence
this constrained fiscal environment, aren't we and that tempers I
think a lot of promise making that might otherwise be occurring,
so that let's use that to our advantage.
Speaker 3 (17:31):
I don't think we should be.
Speaker 1 (17:34):
As constrained fiscally as we are at the moment forever,
but I think we need to keep reinforcing the messages,
keep talking about these issues throughout the election, because if
to fix infrastructure in New Zealand, the first thing we've
got to fix is the system, and most people's eyes
(17:54):
glaze over that it's the boring stuff. Unfortunately, that makes
the difference how we fund and find out its infrastructure,
how we better planet, how we prioritize it, how we
ensure there's a funded pipeline. So we can look you
and I can look in two or three years and go, oh,
they're going to build.
Speaker 3 (18:10):
This bridge here.
Speaker 1 (18:13):
In four years time, and they're going to improve that
piece of railway track there. Oh, there's a whole school
building program that's going to go across ten years and
this is where it's starting. That's the kind of clarity
we need. And frankly, it's as I said earlier, it's
(18:33):
taking it. It's taken a long time again get us
into this position. It's going to take a while to
build out. But ultimately it's small steps at a time,
and Chris Buship has shown that the system leadership. He's
been supported by Karen McNulty and now Duly and Gender
of the Greens. I think there was some pretty broad
agreement that this could all be done better. But ultimately
(18:54):
the test will be when the Minister of Transport on
them of rail has an option in front of them
that they pause and they say no, we've got to
let the system decide the priorities.
Speaker 3 (19:09):
We'll back the priorities, we will drive it, we will
hold the system to account.
Speaker 1 (19:12):
We can set a bit of a direction, but ultimately
let the system trail it up and do its work.
That's when we'll know that when that did that political
discipline is established across more than one government, will know
that we are on the way there. The second part
of that is will know that when a Minister of
Finance gets up in Parliament to deliver their budget, that
(19:34):
they say, and we are allocating this amount of money
across each asset owner of government to invest in renewing
the assets we already own.
Speaker 3 (19:45):
And we might have to start really small.
Speaker 1 (19:47):
It will take time to build up to that, but
when we do that, we'll know that we're going to
get better value and that ultimately New Zealand isn't going
to the experience they have with you, whether it's transport,
whether it's going to the hospital, achieve a part of
the public service that they're dealing with, that the infrastructure
(20:09):
involved is is good and is delivering service that they
ultimately need to love their lives.
Speaker 3 (20:17):
Thanks for joining us, Nick, Thank you, Chelsea.
Speaker 2 (20:23):
That's it for this episode of the Front Page. You
can read more about today's stories and extensive news coverage
at enzidherld dot co dot nz. The Front Page is
hosted and produced by me Chelsea Daniels.
Speaker 4 (20:37):
Caine.
Speaker 2 (20:37):
Dicky is our studio operator, Richard Martin, our producer and editor,
and our executive producer is jane Ye. Follow the front
page on the iHeart app or wherever you get your podcasts,
and join us next time for another look beyond the headlines.
Kiota.
Speaker 2 (00:06):
I'm Chelsea Daniels and this is the Front Page, a
daily podcast presented by the New Zealand Herald.
Speaker 3 (00:16):
For years, New.
Speaker 2 (00:17):
Zealand has spent big on infrastructure without always getting the
results to match. Now the government's vowing to change that.
It's supporting all sixteen recommendations in the Infrastructure Commission's National Plan,
a blueprint for how the country plans, funds and delivers
the things will rely on.
Speaker 3 (00:38):
The thirty year.
Speaker 2 (00:39):
Plan includes a review of the Land Transport Fund and
requires Crown entities to publish long term investment plans. Labor
and the Greens are also backing it, but the question
remains whether this is the beginning of a real reform
or just another ambitious plan on paper. On the front Page,
(01:01):
Infrastructure and Said Chief Executive Nick Leggett joins us to
discuss what it all means. First off, Nick, tell me
what even is this plan?
Speaker 1 (01:14):
Well, the National Infrastructure Plan is a thirty year plan
that is developed by the Infrastructure Commission, and it really
is about projecting how we plan, fund and ultimately build infrastructure.
It's not simply a list of projects. It's the way
the system and all parts of the system prioritized, assess,
(01:40):
and then ultimately procure and get projects going. At the moment,
we've got this habit of really letting the politicians drive
that through election cycles. So every three years government gets
elected and says we're going to do this, and we
get very down into the detail, We get very granular
about well you should do this project and not that project.
(02:03):
What the Infrastructure Plan is looking at is where's our need,
not just today but tomorrow. Where have we not invested
and where are the investment priorities for the future. And
that is lifting up a lot of these discussions that
ultimately will try and take it out of political as
(02:25):
much political discussion and sort of try and orientate it
more in evidence and need, which is when usual needs
to be if we're going to do this better and
ultimately get more value for the money that we spend
on our infrastructure.
Speaker 3 (02:38):
Right.
Speaker 2 (02:38):
So I saw that the government has said yep, all
good on the sixteen recommendations. I mean, what are some
of those recommendations.
Speaker 1 (02:46):
Yeah, I mean there are lots of good system stewardship
stuff there. I think the important recommendations are around particularly
investment planning, so understanding the need that we're going to
have as a society for different arts of infrastructure. Where's
(03:09):
the population going to be that drives the building of schools,
the building of hospitals, where are the transport connections going
to need to be? And I think that so that
long term investment planning is really important. Proper asset management reporting,
so understanding the assets we've already got, because New Zealand
(03:32):
is quite good at building, set forget and then just
walking away and forgetting about maintaining our assets. And we've
talked a lot about the infrastructure deficit, and the Infrastructure
Commission has put a sort of a figure on that
of about two hundred billion dollars. When we talk about
a deficit, what most people think, well, that's infrastructure that
(03:55):
we need to build that we haven't Sixty percent of
that two hundred billion is actually money that we haven't invested.
We failed to put back in to maintain and renew
the assets that we've already got.
Speaker 3 (04:07):
And I think key we feel this in.
Speaker 1 (04:10):
Leafy classrooms, damp hospitals, poorly maintained roads, poorly maintained railway tracks.
We know that we're not looking after what we've got
at the moment, as well as we should be. So
I think that is that's going to be really important.
And that multi year budgeting that the government agreed to
in principle is vital because it allows understanding of assets
(04:35):
to occur.
Speaker 3 (04:36):
But then the planning.
Speaker 1 (04:38):
Of the remedial or the renewals or the maintenance. When
you know you've got money in five years time, it's
much easier to plan all that out. That also allows
the infrastructure industry to have clarity around what's coming down
the track, and it allows whether it's contractors or engineering
consultants to have the right team members with the right
(04:58):
skills in place to howl deliver whether it's a new
project or renewing an old project. And at the moment
we spend enough on infrastructure per capita. We're in the
sort of we're above average and the OECD rankings, but
we're in the bottom two where it comes to getting
(05:20):
the value out of our spend that we should and
that's really bad news. And that's because we are far
more on this kind of reaction, the sort of I
call it a windscreen wiper that just goes across the
screen every time there's an election and it just wipes
all the projects away.
Speaker 3 (05:38):
We never get down to.
Speaker 1 (05:41):
Looking taking a calm look at what's coming down, what
we need to build, what we need to maintain, and
putting that money not just in this year's budget, but
in the budget perhaps five or ten years down the track,
because we've got to maintain those assets that we've already got,
and so the changes that are outlined around that, understanding
(06:05):
the assets we've got, planning for them, renewing them properly,
those changes if there agreed to. So yeah, a government
or an opposition in this case, both of them can
agree to something in principle and say that's lovely, but
what we actually need is action. We need to go
to say right, this is budget and they're doing it
for Kiwi Rail. Interestingly, for next year we're going to
(06:27):
have three years we're going to guarantee the program of
spending for Kiwi Rail. We're going to guarantee it across
three budgets. That allows Kiwi Rail this year to go
off and actually start planning the stuff that reduces waste
and improves confidence and it helps both the asseid I
own a k We Rail and the infrastructure industry deliver
better and it gets you Ultimately, it gets you towards
(06:48):
securing that better value for money.
Speaker 2 (06:50):
Yeah, I was going to ask you about that, so
that in principle, I mean, it's all well and good
to do a massive report like this and be like, yeah,
we're all on board for this thirty year plan. We
all agree that the infrastructure in this country is bad.
We don't repair it as often as we should. But
the end principle does that just negate everything you know
said before.
Speaker 1 (07:10):
That, No, it doesn't, but ultimately it could. We Ultimately
what we want to see is action taken right. That
means that this government or the next is able to say, Okay,
we know that the schools, the education buildings are with
(07:35):
however many billion dollars every year, we're going to put
aside in our budget, in the budget of a country,
some money that seeks to maintain and improve those rather
than reacting to it. There'll actually be a plan across
the long term that takes discipline and you know you'll
get this, Chelsea, as I do. Because politicians love opening
(08:00):
something new. They I just love it or.
Speaker 2 (08:07):
Shut you know what are they called that when they get.
Speaker 1 (08:12):
Turn turn the first side, they and that that is
actually that that's what drives a lot of our infrastructure behavior.
Speaker 3 (08:24):
And you know, I had a there's a guy.
Speaker 1 (08:26):
In the UK and infrastructure expert recently who said New
Zealand's like the only country left in the world where
politicians decide what projects get built. And you know, and
what we're trying to do is flip this around here.
That's what this whole infrastructure National Infrastructure Panel is about.
It's about and this is how we know if there's
been some success, that the system offers up the projects
(08:50):
based on a decent funded pipeline, not just a wish list,
but a funded pipeline based on evidence.
Speaker 3 (08:57):
And so if a politician and the camp pain or at.
Speaker 1 (09:00):
Any times say hey we need to build you know,
a bridge and it should go here, our collective reaction
to that should not be oh great, you know, it
should be well, what does the Infrastructure Commission say about that?
Speaker 3 (09:15):
Have they evaluated that project? Is that?
Speaker 1 (09:17):
Would you put that as your priority or would you
put other things as a priority. And that's the sort
of maturity we need to get to. We have politicized infrastructure.
We're being driven by politicians, you know, and this is
the reality as well. Like you can promise stuff, you
can even fund it as a politician, But infrastructure takes
(09:38):
so long it's often that it'll be your opponents that
open it. The challenge we've got though, and I think
New Zealanders like good infrastructure. They like things, you know,
they like you bits of infrastructure, but they also want
things to work. There hasn't been reward or even the
warm feeling for maintaining what we've got. People you know,
(10:01):
began I think it's three or four years ago to
see on our state highways what neglect had looked like
because money was taken out of maintenance to build roads
of national significance by the national government before this one
that wasn't properly restored by the following labor government. This
government's done quite a lot in terms of potholes, their
(10:23):
Popthole restoration project. It's a bit more sophisticated that, but
they have put more money in to rehabilitate roads. But
there isn't there just isn't those rewards, like if stuff works,
Like if you send your kids to school and the
classroom isn't leaking, it's kind of functional and it's warm,
and they're other getting a good education because the classroom works.
(10:44):
In the school, playground in the fields work. You don't
feel that's just what you expect. That you don't feel
any particular great deal of gratitude.
Speaker 3 (10:54):
Towards the government of the day.
Speaker 1 (10:57):
And so there hasn't been that same drive by the
system or by political leaders to to to to actually
get the money back into renew and maintain.
Speaker 3 (11:11):
And Chris Bishop has been a very expletter about.
Speaker 1 (11:16):
That that that we need to change that discipline, and
it is going to take time to turn the ship around.
These are problems, you know, many years in the making,
probably decades in some cases, but there's a start, and
it is going to take money without the associated political payoff,
if you know what I mean, to get our assets
the money they need on a yearly basis. I mean.
Speaker 3 (11:37):
Another good example of that, of course, is water.
Speaker 1 (11:40):
You know, pipes leaking waste water pipes in different parts
of the country that just haven't been renewed. Money has
been spent by counsels sometimes on other fancier things above
the ground, but reality is, you know, has dawned and
will continue to dawn for some time to come until
we get our act together, get the right kind of
(12:01):
investment through these new water organizations separate from councils that
actually own the assets as well and can borrow to
improve and build new ones. We're just we're quite a
young country.
Speaker 3 (12:16):
We're quite new.
Speaker 1 (12:17):
A lot of our infrastructures being you but the chickens
are kind of coming home to roosts in some areas.
So we need to get on top of this. Strengthen
the system, strengthen the advice, make it really transparent. But
the public need to be part of that, you know, citizens,
We need to be part of that as well. And
that is having good expectations that when something's built, it's
maintained and renewed, so we get the value for money
(12:39):
that it lasts longer rather than just fails and everybody
complains and then we've got to throw even more money
at it. And that's another reason why we don't get value,
because we react, and when you react rather than mindfully
maintaining things end up costing war.
Speaker 4 (13:02):
We love a one lane bridge in this country, maybe
too much. We have more than seven and a half
thousand of them. Put them together, they'd stretch from open
to corimandel. But our partisan politics, though, that's the longest
one lane bridge of them all. For decades we've been
stuck with a one lane bridge of mentality about what
moves and when first one party then the other hogs
the right of way. Essential projects started from either direction
(13:25):
just sit there, idling and sucking up fumes.
Speaker 2 (13:30):
Well, given the cross party support for this report already
or this plan, how likely is it that this plan
will actually survive future changes of government.
Speaker 1 (13:42):
I think I've got some hope there, I do, because
this stuff shouldn't be fundamentally political. We've got the evidence,
we've got the Infrastructure Commission coming up with a very
good national infrastructure plan. But ultimately it's got to take
political discipline. But once again, some of them, expectation is
(14:03):
going to be part of that. So if the coalition's
re elected or there's a different government, we've all got
a whole We've got to collectively hold their feet to
the fire to say, hang on, you kind of agree
in principle or in some cases more than principle to
doing this, let's make sure that it actually happens now.
And it's got to be reward for doing things properly.
(14:24):
We've got to be focused on getting things right. So
I'm optimistic, I know because we infrastructure New Zealand. Every
year we take a group of infrastructure leaders from both
the public and private sector to look at other countries
and the way they do things. I know that we
can improve this. I am optimistic. I'm positive about the
(14:47):
fact we can do better. We can get better value
for money, we can get better at funding a pipeline,
at maintaining our assets, better at using infrastructure more effectively
to power the country, to power the economy than we
do currently.
Speaker 2 (15:04):
When you go to those conferences overseas, and presumably you're
seeing international counterparts over there, when they ask you questions,
is it a bit embarrassing?
Speaker 1 (15:14):
Sometimes most people have got a fairly favorable view of
New Zealand as a country, and we're so small and
kind of isolated that I'm not sure many of them
have looked that deeply at what we do. But as
I mentioned to you that person in the UK who said,
you know, we're the only country in the world where politicians,
you know, go through go through We'll do that. No,
(15:36):
we don't want to do that.
Speaker 3 (15:37):
One.
Speaker 1 (15:38):
That's just not how good decisions are made. It's not
that politicians shouldn't have responsibility ultimately for financial decisions on
behalf of taxpayers.
Speaker 3 (15:48):
But the system should.
Speaker 1 (15:51):
Be strong to support the government of the day, and
the system should be the thing that throws up the
priorities and how things are going to be done and
what needs to be done at the moment.
Speaker 3 (16:07):
It's politicians that drive that.
Speaker 1 (16:09):
And it's not that politicians are intelligent people who have skills,
it's just they're not infrastructure experts. And three year election
cycles are the very worst way to do infrastructure because
the chopping and the changing. I mean hundreds of millions
of dollars was spent on let's get well into moving
an Auckland light rail and indeed that irex very project.
(16:31):
Now that's not a commentary on whether they were the
right project or not, but in two out of three
of those cases, money was spent developing the case, but
there was no money to actually do.
Speaker 3 (16:41):
The work to build the project.
Speaker 1 (16:44):
It's all tops intervy, and it's all because politicians have said,
oh yeah, look we should do this. There needs to
be a more coherent approach. I've got some hope that
I think that the second Orpland Harbor crossing maybe a
different model. We don't know, but I think that more
care has been taken and I'm really hopeful that that
is the case, because we need to have a new
(17:05):
way of prioritizing our major projects as well.
Speaker 2 (17:10):
Right, So what happens next.
Speaker 1 (17:12):
Well, there's going to be an election and we're going
to talk about things a whole lot more, and parties
are going to make promises. But look, there's a consewarence
this constrained fiscal environment, aren't we and that tempers I
think a lot of promise making that might otherwise be occurring,
so that let's use that to our advantage.
Speaker 3 (17:31):
I don't think we should be.
Speaker 1 (17:34):
As constrained fiscally as we are at the moment forever,
but I think we need to keep reinforcing the messages,
keep talking about these issues throughout the election, because if
to fix infrastructure in New Zealand, the first thing we've
got to fix is the system, and most people's eyes
(17:54):
glaze over that it's the boring stuff. Unfortunately, that makes
the difference how we fund and find out its infrastructure,
how we better planet, how we prioritize it, how we
ensure there's a funded pipeline. So we can look you
and I can look in two or three years and go, oh,
they're going to build.
Speaker 3 (18:10):
This bridge here.
Speaker 1 (18:13):
In four years time, and they're going to improve that
piece of railway track there. Oh, there's a whole school
building program that's going to go across ten years and
this is where it's starting. That's the kind of clarity
we need. And frankly, it's as I said earlier, it's
(18:33):
taking it. It's taken a long time again get us
into this position. It's going to take a while to
build out. But ultimately it's small steps at a time,
and Chris Buship has shown that the system leadership. He's
been supported by Karen McNulty and now Duly and Gender
of the Greens. I think there was some pretty broad
agreement that this could all be done better. But ultimately
(18:54):
the test will be when the Minister of Transport on
them of rail has an option in front of them
that they pause and they say no, we've got to
let the system decide the priorities.
Speaker 3 (19:09):
We'll back the priorities, we will drive it, we will
hold the system to account.
Speaker 1 (19:12):
We can set a bit of a direction, but ultimately
let the system trail it up and do its work.
That's when we'll know that when that did that political
discipline is established across more than one government, will know
that we are on the way there. The second part
of that is will know that when a Minister of
Finance gets up in Parliament to deliver their budget, that
(19:34):
they say, and we are allocating this amount of money
across each asset owner of government to invest in renewing
the assets we already own.
Speaker 3 (19:45):
And we might have to start really small.
Speaker 1 (19:47):
It will take time to build up to that, but
when we do that, we'll know that we're going to
get better value and that ultimately New Zealand isn't going
to the experience they have with you, whether it's transport,
whether it's going to the hospital, achieve a part of
the public service that they're dealing with, that the infrastructure
(20:09):
involved is is good and is delivering service that they
ultimately need to love their lives.
Speaker 3 (20:17):
Thanks for joining us, Nick, Thank you, Chelsea.
Speaker 2 (20:23):
That's it for this episode of the Front Page. You
can read more about today's stories and extensive news coverage
at enzidherld dot co dot nz. The Front Page is
hosted and produced by me Chelsea Daniels.
Speaker 4 (20:37):
Caine.
Speaker 2 (20:37):
Dicky is our studio operator, Richard Martin, our producer and editor,
and our executive producer is jane Ye. Follow the front
page on the iHeart app or wherever you get your podcasts,
and join us next time for another look beyond the headlines.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Betrayal Weekly
Betrayal Weekly is back for a new season. Every Thursday, Betrayal Weekly shares first-hand accounts of broken trust, shocking deceptions, and the trail of destruction they leave behind. Hosted by Andrea Gunning, this weekly ongoing series digs into real-life stories of betrayal and the aftermath. From stories of double lives to dark discoveries, these are cautionary tales and accounts of resilience against all odds. From the producers of the critically acclaimed Betrayal series, Betrayal Weekly drops new episodes every Thursday. If you would like to share your story, you can reach out to the Betrayal Team by emailing them at betrayalpod@gmail.com and follow us on Instagram at @betrayalpod and @glasspodcasts. Please join our Substack for additional exclusive content, curated book recommendations, and community discussions. Sign up FREE by clicking this link Beyond Betrayal Substack. Join our community dedicated to truth, resilience, and healing. Your voice matters! Be a part of our Betrayal journey on Substack.