Posts

Posted on

University Research – Mass claims, mixed results: the class action dilemma – UoA

Source: University of Auckland (UoA)

With class actions making headlines, researchers are asking whether they deliver fair compensation and deter repeat offending.

Mass class actions for personal injury claims don’t always deliver justice for victims or deter wrongdoing, research suggests.

In a journal article, Auckland Law School’s Nikki Chamberlain and Professor Michael Legg (University of New South Wales) examine how class actions, which enable groups with similar claims to pursue a case collectively, operate in Australia and New Zealand.

They say that while class actions can compensate claimants and deter wrongdoing to some extent, significant issues hinder their effectiveness; ‘class actions are necessary, but often not sufficient’, they write.

Although large compensation payments are often awarded, these payments can come years after the wrongdoing was committed, which is particularly problematic when personal injury is involved.

Ultimately, says Chamberlain, this raises questions about whether there's a more effective way to remedy mass damages, and her ongoing research digs deeper into options, including New Zealand's regulatory approach under the Accident Compensation Act.

In the article, published in the bimonthly journal, Laws, Chamberlain and Legg analyse the Australian and New Zealand class action systems, prior research, and three case studies.

Read more: http://www.auckland.ac.nz/en/news/2025/10/29/mass-claims–mixed-results–the-class-action-dilemma.html

Posted on

Climate – Nationwide study reveals escalating flood risk – Earth Sciences

Source: Earth Sciences New Zealand

New research led by Earth Sciences New Zealand reveals that more than 750,000 New Zealanders live in locations exposed to flooding from one-in-100-year rainfall flooding events. And this number could increase to more than 900,000 with a further 3 degrees of warming due to climate change.
Around $235 billion worth of buildings across the country are exposed, which could rise to $288 billion if there is 3 degrees of additional warming.
26,800 kms of the nation's roads, 14,100 kms of stormwater pipelines and 21% of national grid sites (e.g. substations) are also exposed to flooding under New Zealand’s current climate. This could rise to 30,800 kms, 15,400 kms and 29%, respectively, with 3 degrees of warming.
“Our country’s flood risk is increasing, and not just in places where we can remember floods occurring. This is partly due to climate change – we know rainfall intensity is increasing across Aotearoa, with more rain falling in shorter periods. Rapid urban intensification is another contributing factor,” says Dr Emily Lane, the programme leader and principal hazards scientist at Earth Sciences NZ.
The research revealed significant regional variations in exposure, ranging from 8% of people in Taranaki exposed to one-in-100-year rainfall events under the current climate to 34% on the West Coast.
The findings come from the culmination of a five-year research programme looking at flood risk across Aotearoa New Zealand. The programme involved wide-ranging collaboration with other research organisations, universities, councils, central government agencies and industry.
A major output of the project is the country’s first nationally consistent flood hazard viewer. The researchers applied a consistent method for flood modelling from 1% annual exceedance probability (AEP) rainfall to create new maps for 256 flood plains around the country. It is the first time rainfall flood maps covering different regions of the country can be viewed in a single online tool. The mapping workflow was carried out for New Zealand’s current climate and then repeated for the three climate change scenarios (+1, +2 and +3 degrees of additional warming), compared with the current climate.
“Increasing extreme rainfall due to climate change is one of the biggest and most impactful hazards faced by New Zealand. The building of our towns and flood defences have been shaped by historical floods that are no longer a reliable guide to the future. Predicting how flood risk is going to change is important to ensure we can protect people and places that we value in the most cost-effective way,” says Dr Sam Dean, principal climate scientist at Earth Sciences NZ.
“Our new flood hazard viewer provides a clearer view across the country of which communities are at greatest risk from flooding, now and as the climate changes. The tool can be used to support risk assessments and adaptation investment decisions,” says Dr Dean.
The new flood hazard viewer provides a bird’s-eye view (to street level) to identify areas most at risk – supporting national policy development and risk assessment and helping to make a national case for prioritisation and investment planning. It also fills gaps for locations that don’t already have this information. As the first nationally consistent view of flood hazard available to New Zealanders, it is a significant first step towards a national flood map that will be able to provide property-level information about risk.
Dr Lane says Earth Sciences NZ’s tool is complementary to localised maps already developed by many of New Zealand’s regional and unitary councils.
“It does not replace them. Local and regional flood models can provide the precision needed to understand property-level risk and to design infrastructure,” she says.
Graeme Campbell, River Management Advisor for Te Uru Kahika – Regional and Unitary Councils Aotearoa, has been involved throughout the project.
“In New Zealand, detailed local flood hazard maps are made available by local government agencies and provide essential information for local decision-making. Regional and unitary councils will continue to make these maps available, and the new national tool produced by Earth Sciences NZ does not replace these local flood hazard maps.
“Instead, it adds value by providing information where there are currently gaps and improving the comparability of flood hazard assessments nationwide. Recognising the importance of local flood knowledge and expertise, Earth Sciences NZ has engaged closely with regional council river managers and scientists for the duration of this five-year research program,” he says
Another important part of this research programme, led by Professor Iain White and Associate Professor Silvia Serrao-Neumann of the University of Waikato, involved bringing together river managers, iwi, government agencies, financial institutions and stakeholders. This enabled the research team to ensure that programme outputs would be useable and useful, to explore adaptation options under changing climate conditions, and to design new ways to make decisions, taking into account climate and socio-economic projections.
“Flood risk management is handled differently in different regions, and, to date, there’s no consistent way to assess current flood risk or how this might change under climate change. Local and regional governments also vary in how they manage and reduce these risks. Our research helps to address this by providing a consistent and coordinated approach to understanding, measuring, and communicating flood risk at a national-level,” says Associate Professor Serrao-Neumann.
“Having consistent information is crucial for others to act to manage their own risk – from business to communities to infrastructure providers. This tool helps enable consistent processes for modelling and provides the foundation on which to build national-scale resilience. Providing certainty to decision makers will help avoid passing liabilities to current and future generations,” says Professor White.
The five-year research programme, titled Mā te haumaru o ngā puna wai o Rākaihautū ka ora mō ake tonu, also included a detailed look at complex social interactions for communities affected by flooding, including with programme partners Wairewa Rūnanga.
More on this part of the project will follow.
Further background to the project, including the other parts of the programme and a list of outputs to date: https://niwa.co.nz/hazards/ma-te-haumaru-o-nga-puna-wai-o-rakaihautu-ka-ora-mo-ake-tonu
FAQs
Can I access the flood exposure data for New Zealand and regions?
Please note that this is part of a larger dataset that will be released later this year alongside a report into the exposure modelling methodology.
What does one-in-100-year rainfall or 1% AEP mean?
One-in-100-year rainfall is also called 1% annual exceedance probability (AEP). It means that in any year, there is a 1%, or one in 100, chance of an event that size occurring at that location. It’s important to note that if flooding from a 1% AEP rainfall event happens, it doesn’t mean you’re off the hook for the rest of the century – each year, the risk effectively resets, meaning 1% AEP events can happen several times in the same 100-year period. And as our climate warms and heavy rainfall becomes more intense, what is currently a 1% AEP event will occur more frequently.
When are +1, +2 and +3 degrees of additional warming expected to occur?
Timeframes for additional warming compared with our current climate are uncertain as we don’t yet know how future global greenhouse gas emissions will track. Based on the latest climate projections for New Zealand, 1 degree of additional warming may occur by 2029 (under a higher emissions scenario; SSP585) and by 2042 (under a low scenario; SSP126). Two degrees of additional warming could occur by 2056 under SSP585 or by 2074 under SSP245.  Three degrees of additional warming could occur by around 2076 under SSP585. Lower emissions scenarios (SSP245 and SSP126) do not reach 3 degrees of extra warming through to the end of the century. If the world was to achieve the lowest future emissions scenario (SSP126) – which is possible but unlikely based on current trajectories – we would stay within around 1 degree of additional warming by the end of the century. You can find an explainer on Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSPs) here: https://www.carbonbrief.org/explainer-how-shared-socioeconomic-pathways-explore-future-climate-change/
How does this tool differ from flood maps already available from councils?
Flood hazard can be assessed in a variety of ways and using a range of variables, all of which can give different results. For instance, many council maps provide information at individual property level, which this tool does not. Some maps incorporate flooding from the sea, such as sea-level rise and storm surge inundation (our viewer only shows flooding from rainfall events). Furthermore, flood maps can be created at different resolutions and using different AEPs, and models may include bespoke calibrations that individually address details such as missing culverts or flood defences.
How does this tool differ from the National Flood Map announced recently by the Minister for Climate Change?
The National Flood Map will be based on a national flood model, a national coastal inundation model, and regional and local flood information. It will be the definitive source of information for understanding flood risk both now and in the future.
The work done to date on this flood hazard viewer can provide an important stepping stone towards this National Flood Map. We hope that this work will underpin and vastly speed up the process, so that all New Zealanders get access to a single source of information they can rely on when understanding their hazard risk. 
Posted on

Population growth slows in all regions – Subnational population estimates: At 30 June 2025 – Stats NZ news story and information release


This email was sent by Stats NZ, 8 Willis Street, Wellington, CBD 6011, New Zealand to nz@enz.mil-osi.com


Unsubscribe

Posted on

Reserve Bank of NZ – Protecting independence while embracing partnership

Source: Reserve Bank of New Zealand

29 October 2025 – Reserve Bank Governor Christian Hawkesby has reaffirmed the crucial importance of central bank operational independence, while highlighting the need for partnership to enable the economic wellbeing of New Zealanders.

In remarks delivered to an RBNZ event with industry stakeholders, Mr Hawkesby said that central bank operational independence does not mean complete autonomy or isolation. Rather, he emphasised the importance of the central bank and the government working in partnership.  

He explained the government's critical role in monetary policy and financial stability. This includes owning the pieces of legislation underpinning the Reserve Bank's mandates, outlining policy objectives, and making resolution decisions in case of a deposit taker or financial system failure.

Mr Hawkesby also noted that the central bank's huge responsibility of having operational independence for setting monetary policy and prudential policy needs to go hand in hand with transparency and accountability.

“While respecting each other's roles, a clear division of roles and responsibilities between government and central bank can enable an effective partnership, ultimately supporting the prosperity and wellbeing of New Zealanders,” he said.

Mr Hawkesby also acknowledged that working in partnership needs to extend beyond the central bank and the government.

“We need to work together with our Council of Financial Regulators [1] colleagues, the financial industry, fintechs, academics, the business sector, communities, iwi and a range of other government agencies on the future of money, the future of cash, the future of banking, the future of payments and the future of insurance.”

“The benefits to all New Zealanders will not be achieved without collective commitment and collective action,” he concluded.  

More information:

Protecting independence while embracing partnership – Reserve Bank of New Zealand – Te Pūtea Matua: https://govt.us20.list-manage.com/track/click?u=bd316aa7ee4f5679c56377819&id=3b4ee90e82&e=f3c68946f8

Posted on

Federated Farmers – Survey reveals shocking cost of consents

Source: Federated Farmers

A new survey shows the cost and complexity of resource consents have reached breaking point, highlighting the need for urgent Government intervention.
Federated Farmers’ Survey on Resource Consents found four out of five farmers are worried about gaining or renewing consents, and the average bill for gaining a new consent has hit nearly $45,000. Renewal permits aren’t far behind, averaging $28,000.
“Our survey makes for incredibly sobering reading, as it’s shown us the true scale of the consenting problems,” Federated Farmers freshwater spokesperson Colin Hurst says.
“It’s staggering to learn the average total cost farmers are being stung with for regional council and consultancy fees is $45,000.
“It’s even worse for Canterbury farmers, who are forking out over $60,000.
“These numbers paint a damning picture of a system that’s simply not working.”
Hurst says it’s getting harder and more expensive every year to get a consent to keep farming, and there’s no clear reason why.
“The whole process has become so uncertain and complex that most farmers now must rely entirely on consultants and expert advisors.
“Even then, there’s no guarantee they’ll get a fair or timely decision.
“Farmers and growers are exhausted, stressed out and losing faith in a system that seems to prioritise paperwork over environmental outcomes.”
Completed by Federated Farmers members nationwide in September and October, the survey shows frustration among farmers is boiling over.
“Many farmers described the consenting process as ‘a rort’, ‘ridiculous’, ‘extortion’, and ‘a nightmare’,” Hurst says.
“How are they supposed to have the confidence to keep investing in their businesses if they don’t even know whether they’ll be allowed to keep farming next year?
“The simple answer is they can’t. The uncertainty is pulling the handbrake on growth and productivity right across the sector.”
With thousands of consents due to expire in the coming months, Federated Farmers says the situation is now urgent and requires immediate action.
“The Government’s plans to reform the RMA and replace it with a more workable framework are welcome – but that won’t happen overnight,” Hurst says.
“We’re staring down the barrel of even more stress and confusion if nothing changes.
“Farmers need certainty right now. Let’s end the consent chaos and give farmers the certainty they deserve.”
Federated Farmers is calling on the Government to allow all existing consents to roll over until the new system is in place.
“That would be a simple, practical step to save farmers time, money and stress,” Hurst says. 
Key Findings
  • Effluent consents are the most common (24%), followed closely by farming (land use) and water take/irrigation (both 21%).
  • 38% of respondents applied for a resource consent in the past year, indicating frequent engagement, while 31% applied over five years ago, suggesting varied consent durations.
  • The average spend on regional councils for consents was $17,400 with Auckland ($24,300) and Canterbury ($25,000) being the most expensive regions.
  • District council costs averaged $9,000, with Canterbury districts ($15,800) the most expensive.
  • Consultant costs averaged $27,500 nationally, with Canterbury ($47,700) again the highest.
  • 40% plan to apply for or renew consents in the next 24 months, expecting to spend an average of $28,574 on consultants alone.
  • Nearly four out of five farmers (78%) are concerned about gaining or renewing resource consents, reflecting anxiety about regulatory hurdles.
  • 40% expect to pay fees to affected parties (e.g. iwi), with 31% unsure, indicating uncertainty around additional costs.
  • Qualitative comments highlight frustration with excessive costs, bureaucratic delays, council incompetence, inconsistent implementation between council planners, iwi consultation fees, council use of consultants and farmers paying for the training of council planners. Farmers and growers also noted a lack of environmental logic and are calling for significant reform.
Posted on

Transporting New Zealand calls for more ambitious high productivity truck reforms

Source: Ia Ara Aotearoa Transporting New Zealand

Transporting New Zealand calls for more ambitious high productivity truck reforms
Road freight association Transporting New Zealand says that getting higher capacity trucks on the road is essential to boosting freight productivity, as the Government opens consultation on simplifying heavy vehicle permitting.
The proposed changes would remove the requirement for 50MAX trucks to have a NZTA or Council issued permit and the need to carry a yellow sign. 50MAX trucks will still be limited to operating on routes that are able to properly accommodate them.
Transporting New Zealand Chief Executive Dom Kalasih says the proposals are predominantly administrative changes and they won’t deliver the productivity gains the country needs.
“This consultation is a step in the right direction, but we need the Government to be much more ambitious with these productivity reforms.” says Kalasih.
“Having higher capacity, more productive trucks on our network will help meet the Government’s goal of doubling the value of exports by 2034, support emissions reduction targets, and improve safety outcomes.”
“New Zealand is falling behind other countries that are already making changes in this area. We should be taking every opportunity we can to improve freight productivity.”
“The Ministry of Transport has previously estimated the last substantive high productivity motor vehicle (HPMV) reforms saved freight operators between $60 to $80 million in 2013 alone, and by 2016 there were average productivity gains of 14 to 20 per cent, avoiding tens of millions of kilometres of standard heavy truck trips.”
“Now is an ideal opportunity to take advantage of technological improvements. Carrying a forest of permit papers in the truck shouldn’t be necessary nowadays. It’s critical that we use this opportunity to make meaningful change that will deliver real benefits. Unfortunately, the current proposals are simply not going to do that”.
“We need to be shifting more freight, with fewer trips, in a practical and cost-effective manner.”
“Freight volumes are expected to increase by 55 percent over the next 20 years and there’s only so much network capacity available. The Government needs to support freight operators to get higher capacity vehicles into their fleets. The changes shouldn’t be limited to 50MAX trucks, but also consider other high productivity heavy vehicle types.”
Transporting New Zealand is calling on the Government to:
– Take a more open-minded and risk-based approach to considering different higher productivity vehicles, including road train style units for appropriate routes and tasks.
– Increase the length of HPMV permits for operators who can demonstrate best practice compliance and safety practices.
– Increase HPMV network access by strengthening key bridges and roads that high-capacity trucks can’t currently access.
Editor's notes on HPMVs and 50MAX trucks:
High Productivity Motor Vehicles (HPMV) are a special class of vehicles designed to carry more freight. HPMVs must carry divisible loads, exceed a mass of 44,000kg, and/or the maximum length for standard vehicles. They must operate within higher individual axle and axle group limits set out in the Vehicle Dimensions and Mass Rule and be no wider or higher than general access vehicles. They operate under permits for routes that are able to accommodate the additional mass and/or length.
One of the main types of HPMV is 50MAX, a high productivity motor vehicle truck and trailer combination. 50MAX trucks are slightly longer than standard 44-tonne vehicles (up to about 44m, depending on their design and axle configuration), have additional axles (nine in total), and can have a total gross laden weight of up to 50 tonnes. This additional axle spreads the load, giving it a similar pavement impact to standard 44-tonne vehicles.
NZTA has approved a set of designs for 50MAX vehicles.
Most of the 50MAX vehicles can operate on most local roads and state highways, but they cannot use certain roads and bridges due to loading restrictions. Routes are on state highways. This can require trucks to go on lengthy diversions, or not be able to complete certain trips at all.
Posted on

Education and Politics – New curriculum regressive and fractured

Source: Sexual Wellbeing Aotearoa

Information on what schools and teachers should include in relationships and sexuality education was released yesterday as part of the Health and Physical Education. The new curriculum is regressive and fractured, failing to give young people the comprehensive knowledge base they need to navigate their sexual health and relationships.
Chief executive Jackie Edmond says this curriculum does not speak to the lived reality of young people in the 21st century.
“If young people are not given evidence-based information on these topics in school, they will seek it from other sources (our recent young people’s survey confirmed that) which is very concerning. This curriculum sidesteps several critical issues, leaving kids with significant gaps in their education around these topics that have real world consequences for their individual lives and relationships.”
The term “sex education” has replaced Relationships and Sexuality Education in the new curriculum, signalling the ways in which these topics have been taken out of a comprehensive, holistic framework which had been captured in the 2020 Relationships and Sexuality Education Guidelines . These guidelines, which were recently removed, supported schools to implement internationally recognised best practice standards from years 0-13 in a holistic, comprehensive, inclusive and evidence-based way. The new curriculum does not provide a new set of guidelines and instead provides fractured, incomplete information on essential knowledge areas and skills.
“Some information on relationships is provided taught within the broader health curriculum but there is almost no information on sexual orientation, gender identity or intersex variation. Omitting these topics means that young people miss out on critical skills and knowledge to understand themselves and the world they live in. This puts young people’s safety at risk – both within and outside school,” Ms Edmond says.
Sexual Wellbeing is also concerned that consent education is the only mandatory component of the RSE curriculum.
“All RSE information should be mandatory – not just consent. While consent is an important component of RSE, it needs to be taught and understood alongside other topics such as health relationships, sexual health, drug and alcohol use, and digital safety.”
Other areas of concern:
  • LACKING CLARITY ON DELIVERY:
  • There is no information included on how much flexibility teachers would have in delivering this information.
  • LACKING INFORMATION ON DIVERSITY/INCLUSIVITY:
  • While the binary language has been removed it also does not provide inclusive language. There is no mention of gender identity or gender diversity.
  • Gender is only mentioned twice – once regarding gender roles and another around identity but not until Year 9. This is woefully late and insufficient as young people grapple with these issues much earlier in their development.
  • Information on sexual orientation or LGBTQIA+ is completely absent.
  • TIMING IS TOO LATE:
  • Puberty is not discussed until Year 5 despite the fact that many young people are already well into these changes. Even if a young person is yet to start puberty at this age, they should know about it before it begins.
  • The same is true for menstruation which is not taught until Year 6 and without information about the implications for sexual activity such as unintended pregnancy.
  • There is also no information on sexual abuse, coercion, or violence.
  • There is not mention of learning about body parts.
  • Information about online safety and pornography is not until Year 8; this does not correspond to what we know about when young people begin to encounter this content (average age
11/Year 5).
  • RELATIONSHIP DEVELOPMENT IS ABSENT:
  • Despite a domain for relationships there is scant information on relationships and how these might change over these years, particularly from Year 4 onward.
  • The effects of changing hormones or confusing feelings that may arise is absent.
  • There is no information on how to engage in healthy romantic relationships or identify those that are unhealthy or abusive.
  • LITTLE INFORMATION ON SEX EDUCATION:
  • Information on conception is not provided until Year 8.
  • Information on contraception is not provided until Year 10.
  • Information on condoms or how to use a condom is absent. 
Posted on

Animal Welfare – SAFE challenges Select Committee on cruel pig caging Bill

Source: SAFE For Animals

SAFE has presented its oral submission today to the Primary Production Select Committee, calling for the Animal Welfare (Regulations for Management of Pigs) Amendment Bill to be rejected in full.
The Bill would entrench the use of farrowing crates and mating stalls – confinement systems so restrictive that mother pigs cannot turn around, move freely, or care for their piglets. These systems were due to be phased out this December, following a High Court ruling that found them unlawful under the Animal Welfare Act.
SAFE Chief Executive Debra Ashton and Campaign Manager Emma Brodie told the Primary Production Select Committee that the process and substance of the Bill are deeply alarming.
“There is no credible justification for keeping mother pigs in cages,” says Ashton.
“This Bill disregards expert advice, public sentiment, and the law. It chooses industry convenience over compassion.”
SAFE says the process has lacked transparency and integrity, noting that the usual period for Select Committee consideration has been slashed from over three months to just weeks, and key documents were released only on the eve of the submission deadline.
“New Zealanders were denied a fair chance to be heard,” says Ashton.
“This is one of the most significant animal-welfare decisions in recent history, and it is being rushed through without proper scrutiny.”
Polling commissioned by SAFE last month found that three in four New Zealanders oppose the use of farrowing crates and 73% support a ban. The same polling found that 46% of voters would be more likely to support a political party that commits to banning farrowing crates.
SAFE says this demonstrates that animal welfare is not a fringe concern, but a mainstream political priority that influences voting behaviour. 
SAFE is urging the Committee to reject the Bill and reinstate a lawful transition to systems which allow pigs to move, nest, and care for their young.
“If we make cruelty lawful, we make compassion optional. That is not the Aotearoa most New Zealanders believe in.”
SAFE is Aotearoa’s leading animal rights organisation.
We're creating a future that ensures the rights of animals are respected. Our core work empowers society to make kinder choices for ourselves, animals and our planet.
Notes:
  • Farrowing crates and mating stalls are narrow, metal enclosures that prevent mother pigs from turning around, nesting, or caring for their piglets, depriving them of the ability to display normal behaviours as required under the Animal Welfare Act.
  • In 2020, the High Court ruled in favour of NZALA and SAFE, declaring that the minimum standards and regulations permitting farrowing crates and mating stalls were invalid and unlawful. The Labour-led government at the time initiated a five-year phase out, due to end in December 2025.
  • The Bill would amend the Animal Welfare Act 1999 to permit the ongoing use of farrowing crates and mating stalls for the decade, with minimal changes implemented from 2035.
  • A nationally representative poll conducted by Verian in September 2025 is attached. It found that 74% of New Zealanders oppose the use of farrowing crates, 73% support a complete ban, and 90% believe the Government has a duty to ensure welfare rules comply with the Animal Welfare Act. 
Posted on

Online Legislation – New National Bill may Fail to Meet its Own Criteria or Scope

Source: Trend Analysis Network

Initial analysis of the recently introduced member’s bill: ‘Social Media (Age-Restricted User) Bill’ appears to indicate the legislation does not meet its own criteria with regard to its purpose or scope.
Firstly, the bill as written is a piece of universal legislation not targeted, as it purports to “regulate access for individuals under the age of 16.”
To implement the terms in the clauses requires age and identity verification of all adults in New Zealand, who wish to use their social media accounts. It will require all adult users to verify they are NOT children.
Secondly, the intent of this bill to “protect children from the harms of social media” will be circumvented by the very audience it is attempting to protect.
Children are reliant on social media for communication between peers. Attempting a blanket ban of all under 16s from all social media resources will not reduce their intent or desire to message, post or share information with peers. Instead, it is likely to encourage children to rely on integrated message and chat services in games, underground or on darkweb resources. It takes a few minutes to setup access to unofficial or darkweb resources and then continue messaging and sharing with no age controls.
Thirdly, the bill places its reliance and success entirely on social media corporations, some of which have recently had data breaches.
Based on news headlines, Facebook apparently had a mass data breach in May 2025, Instagram had potentially hackers obtain credentials and share them on the web also in May 2025, and apparently WhatsApp had a data leak possibly as recently as February 2025.
To introduce legislation that requires third parties to obtain personal data from New Zealanders, while not offering any data protection or data privacy measures, appears to be a substantial omission.
This legislation has been written with a limited understanding of scope or technological context, and could result in the opposite of its intent. Perhaps a more prudent measure is to delay such legislation, and await the outcomes from similar legislation in Australia.
Trend Analysis Network is a research think tank based in New Zealand created to identify and publish analytical results of future trends in politics, society, and economics.
Posted on

Renewable Energy – NewPower energises Taiohi Solar Farm, delivering new resilience for the Waikato region

Source: WEL Networks

NewPower Energy is celebrating a major milestone with electricity being generated at the 33 MW Taiohi Solar Farm in Rangiriri, just north of Hamilton. Comprising more than 47,000 solar panels, Taiohi marks another significant step in the WEL Networks Group’s transition toward a more sustainable, resilient energy future.
Once fully commissioned, Taiohi will provide renewable generation capacity to strengthen supply resilience across the Waikato and beyond. It complements NewPower’s 35 MWh Rotohiko Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) at Huntly, creating a more flexible and responsive energy network for Aotearoa.
The name Taiohi, meaning youthful, was gifted by mana whenua, recognising the shared commitment to a future built on clean energy and partnership. NewPower has developed a close relationship with Maurea Marae and will continue to work alongside local communities to advance renewable energy solutions that reflect both environmental and cultural values.
Construction of Taiohi was led by Infratec New Zealand Limited, and supported by Feisst Electrical, Trilect Solar and PGS Profab Limited. Over the past four years, Infratec has delivered, or is currently building, nine solar farms and one BESS nationwide, adding more than 202 MW of generation capacity to New Zealand’s renewable landscape.
Among these is NewPower’s 12 MW Rangimārie Solar Farm, located in North Waikato and currently under construction, with first generation expected in Q2 2026.
Quote – “Taiohi represents the next stage in WEL’s commitment to accelerating New Zealand’s renewable-energy generation. Through NewPower and Infratec, we’re investing in local capability, creating partnerships with iwi, and building infrastructure that strengthens energy security for our communities.” David Barnett, Acting CEO, NewPower & Infratec.
Taiohi Solar Farm – Rangiriri, Waikato – 33 MWdc – Operational (2025)
Rangimārie Solar Farm – Kopuku, North Waikato – 12 MWdc – Under construction – Q2 2026 generation
Developer / Owner: NewPower Energy Ltd
Principal Contractor: Infratec New Zealand Ltd
Parent Company: WEL Networks Ltd
About NewPower Energy
NewPower Energy, a subsidiary of WEL Networks, develops, owns, and operates renewable-energy generation assets that strengthen New Zealand’s local-energy resilience. Its portfolio includes solar, battery, and emerging-technology projects across the North Island.
About Infratec New Zealand Ltd
Infratec is a renewable-energy specialist delivering design, engineering, and construction services across solar, wind, and battery projects. A wholly owned subsidiary of WEL Networks, Infratec builds infrastructure that accelerates the transition to a low-carbon future.