NZ Engine

Source: New Zealand Police

Police Commissioner Richard Chambers is reassuring the retail community and the public that retail crime is one of his top priorities, saying a recent memo was confusing and unhelpful.

Commissioner Chambers said the wrong message had been sent to the retail community and the public about the Police approach as a result of confusion about the memo which referred to thresholds for retail crime.

“I have made retail crime one of the priorities for the Police executive and that means increasing the focus on it. The memo has been confusing and unhelpful and does not meet my expectations on retail crime or the expectations of the retail community.”

“I have asked for a reminder to be issued to all District Commanders that they should continue to catch offenders wherever possible, regardless of the memo’s thresholds.

“It is my expectation Police continue to work hard to catch offenders wherever possible. Our role is to enforce the law. If we were to take our focus off that, we are giving license to offenders to commit crime. That will not happen.”

“That is important for Police, for the retail community and for trust and confidence with the wider public.

“Retail crime is increasing and we are working closely with the retail community to address it. I want them to have confidence that we will continue to do so.”

He said there were examples of successful approaches to retail crime, such as in Tauranga and Gisborne where a combination of dedicated teams, highly visible beat police and close work with the retail community had paid dividends.

Executive Director Service, Victims and Resolutions, Rachael Bambery, said District Commanders were being reminded today that districts continued to have discretion to investigate crimes, taking into account the context and available resources.

“Early case closure is not final as new information and patterns often allow Police to revisit cases, for example where a small number of offenders can be linked to multiple offences.”
 

ENDS

Issued by Police Media Centre.

Source: NZ Department of Conservation

Date:  27 May 2025

Dogs (or other pets) are not allowed in Tongariro National Park, not even inside cars, to protect its fragile ecosystems and cultural heritage for which it has Dual World Heritage status.

Large new signs have been placed at three main entrances to the park to ensure all visitors know the rules.

Community Ranger Clodagh Costello says the team and their pooches had a bit of fun showing off the new ‘no dog’ signs just outside the Ohakune entrance to the national park.

“Our dogs were a little excited, I’m not sure they got the message to be honest. But it’s us owners who need to take responsibility,” says Clodagh.

“In Aotearoa, our environment is part of our identity, and dogs are part of how we connect with nature – but there’s a right time and place, and a national park isn’t one of them.”

Any dog can make a mistake and attack wildlife like the iconic brown kiwi present in Tongariro National Park. Even a dog standing around doing nothing can change the behaviour of wildlife.

Clodagh says there are many places to legally take dogs into nature, and the DOC website is a good place to check for options on Public Conservation Land.

“It’s important we have some places where wildlife can just be wild, without the influence of our pets.”

Disturbing or harming absolutely protected wildlife, including brown kiwi and whio, is an offence under the Wildlife Act 1953. Those in control of a dog which disturbs, or harms wildlife could be liable for an infringement fine of up to $800.

“With these signs we’re sending a clear message. Pleading ignorance is not an option for dog owners,” says Clodagh.

DOC’s Whakapapa and Ohakune offices sit within the boundaries of Tongariro National Park, so staff won’t be getting a ‘bring your dog to work’ day any time soon.

Background information

No dogs are not allowed in Tongariro National Park including Whakapapa Village, Whakapapa Ski Area, Tūroa Ski Area or inside vehicles anywhere in the park.

The national park boundary starts at the intersection of SH 47 and SH 48. No dogs are allowed anywhere past this point.

Contact

Source: ASB

• Improving productivity by 10% through land use change could deliver $10 billion in value to the economy.
• Mixed revenue streams from diversifying farm systems key to driving value in future.
• Innovation from finance sector vital in supporting land use transition.
• ASB to launch research-backed land transition programme.

A new report from ASB and Lincoln University shows how smarter, more diverse land use could unlock billions in value for farmers and the wider economy, transforming the future of food and fibre by rethinking how we use our most valuable asset – our land.

The Future Use of Land and How to Fund It, a collaboration between ASB and Lincoln University’s Centre of Excellence in Transformative Agribusiness, outlines how land use optimisation across the food and fibre sector could significantly boost the country’s GDP, while also delivering social and environmental benefits. (ref. https://www.asb.co.nz/documents/business-banking/the-future-use-of-land-and-how-to-fund-it-report.html )

Developed with input from leaders across the primary sector, including dairy, horticulture, sheep and beef, agritech, finance and government, the report explores four possible futures for New Zealand. Each scenario focuses on a single factor that will impact the food and fibre sector, for example greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions targets, or the government’s goal to double export values, and pushes them to the extreme, demonstrating the pressing need for change.

The research sets out seven transformational pathways, such as diversifying farm systems to introduce mixed revenue streams, increasing horticultural production, and unlocking underutilised Māori land. It demonstrates how better land use, paired with innovative funding, can unlock sustainable value across rural New Zealand.

Researchers have also developed a land transition model, providing land-use insights on a regional level. Agri-consultants can use the model to help inform potential paths forward for farmers.

“The food and fibre sector has always been a key driver of our economy, yet many producers operate on slim margins. We speak with farmers every week who are deeply committed to their land and legacy but grapple with viability, as they’re not getting the returns to operate sustainably into the future,” says ASB’s General Manager Rural Banking, Aidan Gent.

“This research brings together the insights and tools to help landowners make informed decisions for future prosperity.”

Rural land use transformation needed at scale

Alan Renwick of Lincoln University says optimising land use by just 10% could add $10 billion in value to the economy if it’s done in the right way, and this, or even more could be achieved in the next 5-7 years.

“The challenge facing the food and fibre sector is how to meet economic, environmental and social goals simultaneously. This requires practical, future-focused solutions – like integrating horticulture into traditional pastoral systems, developing on-farm processing to capture more value locally, or growing Māori agribusinesses around high-value niche products like manuka honey or native botanicals,” he says.

“We know these innovations are happening in pockets across Aotearoa – some stand out examples are included in our report as case studies – but we need to see this kind of transformation at scale.”

ASB launches New Zealand-first land use optimisation programme

Taking the research findings to the farm, ASB is launching Every Hectare Matters, a unique programme to support farmers to diversify and future-proof their businesses. This will begin with a small group of farmers, before being extended widely early next year.

The programme will pair participants with independent agri-consultants, who will use the new land transition model to help guide farmers through diversification and implementation scenarios, with wrap around support and tailored funding from ASB to bring their new business model to life.

ASB’s response to land optimisation was inspired in part by ASB customer High Peak Station in Canterbury, a once-traditional sheep and beef farm that has evolved into a diversified, family-run operation spanning tourism, honey, hunting and livestock. While their journey hasn’t been without challenges, the High Peak experience demonstrates what’s possible when landowners take a multigenerational view of land use.

Aidan Gent says: “This is about working alongside farmers ready to explore new opportunities – enabling change across generations, and helping farms stay in families. We’re not just backing farmers with capital. We’re backing them with insights, partnerships and the long-term thinking that makes meaningful transformation possible.”

ASB rural customers who would like to learn more about the land optimisation programme should contact their ASB Rural Manager.

The Future Use of Land and How to Fund It report is available to read here: https://www.asb.co.nz/documents/business-banking/the-future-use-of-land-and-how-to-fund-it-report.html

Source: Choose Clean Water – Tom Kay

Government changes to national direction relating to the country’s resource management, expected to be announced this week, will advance ACT Party extreme ideologies at the expense of the health of the public and our environment, say freshwater campaigners.

Campaign group Choose Clean Water says a close reading of the Coalition Government’s cabinet paper on resource management reform provides a strong indication of what will be in the Government’s national direction announcement, and shows the National-led Government is adopting the extreme and incoherent views of ACT in their approach to environmental policy.

“The changes to national direction signalled in the cabinet paper cover more than freshwater policy but what’s proposed for freshwater is indicative of what’s coming across the board.

“The Coalition Government is making sure commercial interests can trump the public’s interests, and that supposed private property rights can trump the rights of everyone else in our communities to a safe, healthy environment to live in,” says spokesperson for the group, Tom Kay.

Choose Clean Water says the cabinet paper’s prioritising of ‘the enjoyment of private property rights’ in public policy is straight out of an extreme libertarian ideology and becomes incoherent and dangerous when applied to communities’ needs and the natural environment.

As the cabinet paper emphasises, the Coalition Government intends to ‘replace the RMA with resource management laws premised on the enjoyment of property rights as a guiding principle’.

It goes on to say, ‘land use effects that are borne solely by the party undertaking the activity would not be controlled’.

“The cabinet paper ignores reality. Prioritising ownership as it exists right now ignores the fact that property changes hands over time—so one landowner’s actions will affect a future property owner or community.

“The reality is that most land use activities will have an impact on the rest of the community and wider society, even those that may be confined within a property boundary.

“That’s why we have rules about what people can and can’t do, so that the needs of everyone—including future generations—can be managed and communities aren’t harmed by one person’s poor decision making.”

Additionally, Choose Clean Water says any national direction announcement that highlights ‘environmental limits’ should be met with skepticism.

It appears as though the Government has already agreed to take away existing essential environmental limits for freshwater.

The cabinet paper states, ‘Limits to protect human health would be set nationally, whereas limits to protect the natural environment would be set by regional councils, who may incorporate sub-regional perspectives (such as catchment groups)’.

“We have existing protections for rivers and lakes in the form of national bottom lines (environmental limits). The National Party introduced these in 2014 and they’ve been refined since.

“But the cabinet paper proposes to remove these existing bottom lines and throw this decision-making back to regional councils again. This means communities will be vulnerable to more pollution of their rivers, lakes and drinking water, such as from another predicted ‘dairy boom’ in Canterbury.”

“It’s dangerous to disconnect human and environmental health, and unrealistic to imagine you can protect people’s health without protecting the waterways they swim in, fish and collect food from, and rely on for their drinking water.”

Kay also says the group can also see the influence of commercial interests over public policy, such as allowing catchment groups to set limits as another way of weakening or removing limits.

“It just opens them up to industry capture, where agribusiness exerts massive influence to set weak standards that work for them. Catchment groups are currently largely dominated by these interests and aren’t set up to allow for what downstream communities might want or need to protect their health and livelihoods.”

“This is only a small example of what’s in the cabinet paper and there is more to be alarmed about in the Coalition Government’s proposals for our environmental policies. ACT’s dangerous ideology should not be the basis of our resource management system, and National Party leaders must push back on them.”

Notes:

For ease of understanding, we have included below key issues and associated questions that must be addressed by the Government. We have also included a list of quotes from the cabinet paper in question that demonstrate the Coalition Government’s adoption of ACT’s language and ideas.

ACT’s influence: Why is a National-led Government adopting such an extreme position like removing environmental limits from central government policy when the National Party brought such bottom lines in in the first place? (For example, with regard to the NPS for Freshwater Management, which included bottom lines in National’s 2014 and 2017 versions of the policy).

ACT’s influence: Should the public have to pay private property owners for regulations that might be necessary to protect public interests as the cabinet paper suggests? What is an example of an ‘unjustified restriction’ (i.e. “allowing affected landowners to seek recourse where it is found that unjustified restrictions are placed on them”)?

Property rights: Is the ‘enjoyment of private property rights’ a responsible or realistic principle to base a country’s environmental and resource management on given that what people do on their property impacts the wider community?

More pollution: Will removing environmental bottom lines from central government policy allow for more pollution to go into New Zealanders’ freshwater?

Commercial influence over government policy: How much have representatives from our most polluting industries, like intensive dairying, been involved in developing the Coalition Government’s changes to freshwater policy?

Māori concepts and interests: Why are māori concepts and interests, such as Te Mana o te Wai and tangata whenua involvement in decision-making, being attacked when they were supported by previous National-led Governments? (For example, with regard to the NPS for Freshwater Management, National’s 2011, 2014, and 2017 versions of the policy all included provisions directing tangata whenua involvement in decision-making).

From the Cabinet paper:

“replace the RMA with resource management laws premised on the enjoyment of property rights as a guiding principle.”

“Change is needed to ensure the resource management system better enables growth and development and better respects private property rights within the framework of a market economy, while also improving environmental outcomes.”  

“Despite its original intent, application of the RMA has increasingly treated land use as a privilege rather than a right.”

“Turning this around requires changing the culture of “no” that has seeped into bureaucratic decision making in New Zealand…This culture has been worsened by a planning system that fails to effectively take into account the basic requirements a modern country requires to thrive: economic growth, property rights, and the rule of law.”

“A narrower scope: the new system will have a narrower scope of effects being managed, based on the concepts of externalities. This will provide greater protection of, and ability to use property as its owners see fit. It will set a higher bar for regulatory restrictions on property.”

“A single combined plan per region will be required that is succinct, respects property rights, and includes a long-term strategic spatial plan to simplify and streamline the system.”

“The new system will put development beyond question, so long as that development occurs within environmental limits.”

“The new system will be based on ‘externalities’, meaning land use effects that are borne solely by the party undertaking the activity would not be controlled.”

“The responsible minister would be required to prescribe limits nationally or set default methods for limits to be developed at the regional level, or both. Limits to protect human health would be set nationally, whereas limits to protect the natural environment would be set by regional councils, who may incorporate sub-regional perspectives (such as catchment groups).”

“This approach would be supported by stronger checks and balances on the use of regulatory powers through: … protection against regulatory takings: subject to further detailed design advice, the legislation will include protection against regulatory takings, allowing affected landowners to seek recourse where it is found that unjustified restrictions are placed on them”

A final note

The Government has already significantly weakened policy protecting freshwater, including by:

• preventing Regional Councils from following the existing National Policy Statement requirement to prioritise freshwater health in consent decisions, 
• removing additional protections for wetlands from coal mining, 
• weakening standards for intensive winter grazing,
• pausing the roll-out of freshwater farm plan, 
• preventing Regional Councils from progressing the freshwater plan changes they had developed over the past four years with their communities, 
• and making it possible for the Minister to change national direction with limited consultation.

Source: New Zealand Police

Attributable to Inspector Jeff Penno, Waikato Road Policing Manager

Police have arrested and charged a 20-year-old man following a large gathering of anti-social road users in Hamilton.

At around 11pm on Saturday 24 May, Police were called to Airport Road where approximately 300 cars were said to be congregating, with around 20 cars performing skids on the road. The group dispersed when Police arrived.

Over the course of the night, Police received multiple reports of other large groups of anti-social road users at other locations around the city and outlying areas.

In one of these instances, a man was struck by a car doing burnouts on Horotiu Bridge Road at around 12.45am. The driver of the vehicle immediately fled the scene, without stopping to provide assistance to the injured man. The man was transported to Waikato Hospital in a serious condition.

While no arrests were made at the time, Police have sourced and reviewed relevant CCTV and online footage, and will continue to identify and locate anyone we can identify committing offences.

The 20-year-old man has been remanded on bail and is due to reappear in Hamilton District Court on Friday 30 May, charged with operating a vehicle in a manner to cause sustained loss of traction causing injury, and failing to stop to ascertain injury.

The vehicle used to conduct anti-social road user behaviour was impounded for 28 days, and was issued a non-operation order, ordering the vehicle off the road.

A significant investigation is underway into the incidents that unfolded and Police expect to impound more vehicles, and lay further charges to individuals identified committing offences at the time.

If you have any information that could assist our enquiries, please contact Police via 105 and reference Operation Shadow.

ENDS

Issued by Police Media Centre

Source: NZ Department of Conservation

Date:  27 May 2025

The remotely operated vehicle (ROV) used to obtain the footage has captured breathtaking images of deep-sea coral communities hundreds of metres beneath the ocean’s surface – offering a rare glimpse into a mysterious and rarely explored world.  

The footage, filmed during a joint German–New Zealand expedition aboard the German research vessel RV Sonne, shows an incredible variety of life thriving in the cold, dark depths of the ocean.   

Scientists on board, including DOC Senior Science Advisor Lyndsey Holland, were able to explore ocean areas around New Zealand that had never been surveyed in such detail at depths up to a kilometre deep, revealing coral species previously unknown to occur in some areas, and potentially several new species.  

“This was an amazing opportunity to use cutting-edge technology to observe areas of the seafloor that are rarely accessible, including seamounts, the depths of Fiordland, offshore areas of Rakiura and the Chatham Rise. We still don’t fully understand what’s down there,” says Lyndsey.   

“The high-resolution footage shows these beautiful, fragile coral gardens – including in areas we didn’t know had corals. The footage is mesmerising to watch and reminds us how important and fragile these ecosystems are.” 

“Corals are legally protected in New Zealand, so a better understanding of which corals are where can help us focus efforts to protect them. It’s also a valuable resource for future research,” says Lyndsey. 

DOC and research partners, including NIWA, are continuing to analyse the footage and data collected during the voyage, with follow-up research already underway

View the deep-sea highlights video 

Contact