%20300ppiPNG.png)
Going for Growth!
By: Anaru Shadbolt
Going for Growth: But at What Cost?
The coalition government has been pushing a new catchphrase this year: economic growth. But what's the real price of this relentless pursuit?
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon has promised to "unleash growth" in 2025 declaring an end to what he calls "the culture of no” (Luxon, 2025). The government, he says, is committed to saying "yes" to projects that will expand the economy.
But what they're not saying is that their plan to fuel economic growth relies on weakening environmental protections, the very protections that safeguard our agriculture, tourism, and national identity, built on a natural environment that we spend $3.4 billion to protect each year (DOC, 2024, p.14-15).
Prime Minister Christoper Luxon State of the Nation Speech (2025). Courtesy: Stuff YouTube Channel
The Cost of "Cutting Red Tape"
A key part of the government's strategy is removing environmental regulations that protect land, water, and ecosystems. Their argument? Regulations (or 'red tape') are holding farmers back from expanding their businesses (Luxon, 2025).
The Act Party's agricultural spokesperson, Mark Cameron, has explicitly called for stripping local councils of their ability to enforce environmental protections under the Resource Management Act (RMA) (Cameron, 2025). Currently, sections 30 and 31 of the RMA allow local governments to manage land use to prevent environmental harm. But ACT's Cameron argues that these restrictions are too complex and confusing for farmers and should be removed (Cameron, 2025).
Translation? Farmers should be free to expand, regardless of the environmental consequences.
If Cameron's proposed changes, which include banning emissions from planning considerations, are implemented, local councils will no longer be able to consider environmental impacts when making land-use decisions (Cameron, 2025). Instead, Big Brother, aka central government, will take over, despite acknowledging that regional councils are best placed to manage their own environments (Local Government Commission, n.d.).
MP Mark Cameron. Courtesy: The New Zealand Herald
Gene Technology: A False Promise?
Another government priority is promoting genetic modification (GM) in agriculture, to boost productivity and ensure New Zealand farmers remain competitive (Simmonds et, al., 2024), by removing "red tape" via the Gene Technologies Bill.
But what they fail to mention is that genetically modified crops could hurt New Zealand's agricultural exports because many countries ban or severely restrict genetically modified crops (National Academies of Sciences, 2016). Accordingly, if New Zealand adopts genetic engineering in agriculture, our export market could shrink, as some nations refuse to import GM products.
Beyond trade concerns, GM crops come with another major risk: corporate control over or the privatisation of seeds. GM seeds are patented. When purchased by farmers, the contracts they come with prevent the saving or replanting of seeds from crops. Instead, farmers are forced to purchase new seeds every season from biotechnology companies (Pomona College Organic Farm, 2021; Kruft, 2001).
This means higher costs for farmers, which inevitably get passed on to consumers. It also means biotechnology companies will start 'policing' New Zealand's rural spaces to ensure their seeds and crops haven't spread - spread could result in fines or destruction of property.
GE Free Protest in Auckland. Courtesy of Greenpeace
Fast-Tracking Environmental Destruction
If all that's not enough, the government is also fast-tracking mining as part of its economic strategy. The Fast-track Approvals Act 2024 will bypass public consultation and reduce environmental safeguards for projects deemed of "significant regional or national benefit" (Fast-track Approvals Act 2024).
Translation? If the government wants a mining project to go ahead, it can push it through with little to no public input and minimal environmental safeguards.
This is not news though, after all Minister Shane Jones has made the government's priorities clear. In Parliament, he mocked environmental concern's saying: "If there is a mineral, if there is a mining opportunity and it's impeded by a blind frog, goodbye, Freddy." (Parliamentary Debates (Hansard), 2023).
Jones' statement is more than a joke though, it's a signal that the government is willing to sacrifice biodiversity, and community interests, for profit.
And communities are already losing their right to challenge mining projects in court. Locals who planned to contest the Waihī North mining application can no longer do so, as the project was added to the government's fast-track approvals list (Akoorie, 2025, para.28).
And Waihī North is just the beginning. There are 18 other mining and quarrying projects from Northland to Otago awaiting fast-track approval.
Waihī Gold Mine. Courtesy of 100% Pure New Zealand
Tourism: A Short-Sighted Approach?
The government is also embracing a new strategy to boost tourism: attracting "digital nomads," remote workers who travel while working online.
The Immigration Minister, Erica Stanford, argues that a "digital nomad visa" will increase spending on accommodation, entertainment, and food (Bailey, 2025, paras.5-9; Willis et, al., 2025).
It sounds promising. After all tourism is New Zealand's second-largest export earner, contributing $22.1 billion to GDP in 2023 and supporting over 300,000 jobs (Stats NZ, 2024; Tourism New Zealand, n.d.) - before the COVID-19 pandemic, it was our largest earner (Olins, 2005)
But what's missing from this vision of spend-happy digital nomads?
A massive influx of long-term tourists could:
-
Strain local infrastructure, as seen in Piopiotahi Milford Sound (Milford Opportunities. n.d.),
-
Increase carbon emissions from ongoing travel, or
-
Drive up rental prices, making housing even less affordable.
Our favourite though is it does create another bureaucratic process, something this government campaigned against.
Most critically though, the government seems to be ignoring why people, including 'digital nomads', come to New Zealand in the first place - our natural environment.
DOC reports that half of all international visitors visit a national park during their stay - it's our drawcard (DOC, 2024). The "100% Pure New Zealand" tourism campaign, which has shaped our international brand, relies on showcasing our untouched wilderness and pristine landscapes (Tourism New Zealand, 2024).
The question then is, if New Zealand's environment is degraded, why would 'digital nomads', or any tourists, choose to come here?
100% Pure New Zealand 2023 Marketing Video. Courtesy of 100% Pure New Zealand YouTube Channel
New Zealand's Reputation Is on the Line
Our "clean and green" reputation isn't just about national pride, it directly benefits our biggest industries. Tourism, which sells the promise of unspoiled landscapes has benefited from these campaigns but so have our industries. As an example, the agriculture industry has marketed New Zealand products as natural, high-quality, and environmentally responsible (Olins, 2025).
So, if this government wants growth and digital nomads then it needs to protect "our clean and green" reputation. The very reputation that sees people flock halfway across the globe to spend their time and money in our small and beautiful nation.
When central government weakens environmental protections, it damages our brand, and that brand has real economic value (Olins, 2025).
If local councils lose their ability to protect their regions, to manage what is in their backyards. If genetic modification risks our global export markets, and impacts the costs of our farmers and growers. And if mining projects go ahead and damage or eradicate the things important to the public and tourists, then New Zealand's environmental credibility will suffer.
Is Economic Growth Worth This Trade-Off?
This isn't an argument against economic growth. Of course, we need new solutions to address the cost-of-living crisis, rising unemployment, and the housing shortages impactingour whānau.
But shouldn't we be asking if there's a smarter way to grow?
A way that prioritises long-term sustainability over short-term profits, maintains our global reputation for environmental leadership, and balances economic expansion with local decision-making.
Because while economic growth is important, some things will always matter more.
References
Akoorie, N. (2025, January 30). Government's plan to progress Waihī mining under fast-track legislation attracts support and criticism. RNZ. https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/540423/government-s-plan-to-progress-waihi-mining-under-fast-track-legislation-attracts-support-and-criticism
Bailey, J. (2025, January 27). New Zealand: Digital nomads welcome under new visitor visa rules. EuroNews. https://www.euronews.com/travel/2025/01/27/work-from-home-in-new-zealand-kiwis-relax-visa-rules-to-attract-digital-nomads#:~:text=The%20best%20locations%20for%20digital,to%20help%20you%20get%20around.
Cameron, M. (2025, January 7). Farmers don’t get a holiday, but they deserve a red tape break. Act. https://www.act.org.nz/farmers_don_t_get_a_holiday_but_they_deserve_a_red_tape_break
Department of Conservation. (2024). Exploring charging for access to some public conservation land: Discussion document. https://www.doc.govt.nz/globalassets/documents/getting-involved/consultations/2024/access-charging/exploring-charging-for-access-to-some-public-conservation-land-discussion-document.pdf
Dürr, E. (2007). Reinforcing cultural hegemony : Pākehā perceptions of brand New Zealand. Journal of New Zealand Studies (Online).
Kruft, D. (2001, November). Impacts of genetically-modified crops and seeds on farmers. Pennsylvania State University. https://pennstatelaw.psu.edu/_file/aglaw/Impacts_of_Genetically_Modified.pdf
Local Government Commission. (n.d.). About local government in New Zealand: Understanding how local government works in New Zealand. Retrieved February 11, 2025, from https://www.lgc.govt.nz/about-us/about-local-government-in-new-zealand/
Luxon, C. (2025, January 28). PM emphasises importance of growth in 2025. Parliamentary Service. https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/pm-emphasises-importance-growth-2025
Milford Opportunities. (n.d.). Home: How we began. https://www.milfordopportunities.nz/
Morgan, N. J., Pritchard, A., & Piggott, R. (2002). New Zealand, 100% pure: The creation of a powerful niche destination brand. The Journal of Brand Management, 9 (4), https://www.researchgate.net/publication/32005616_New_Zealand_100_Pure_The_creation_of_a_powerful_niche_destination_brand#:~:text='100%25%20Pure'%20is%20the,people%2C%20culture%20and%20tourism%20activities.
National Academies of Sciences, E. and M. (U. S.). C. on G. E. C. P. E. and F. P. author., National Academies of Sciences, E. and M. (U. S.). B. on A. and N. R. author., & National Academies of Sciences, E. and M. (U. S.). D. on E. and L. S. author. (2016). Social and Economic Effects of Genetically Engineered Crops. Genetically engineered crops: experiences and prospects /. The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/23395
Nye, J. (2008) Public Diplomacy and Soft Power. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 616, 94-109
Fast-track Approvals Act 2024. https://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2024/0056/latest/LMS943195.html#LMS943267
Olins, W. (2005). Making a national brand. in J. Melissen (ed). The New Public Diplomacy Soft Power in International Relations (pp.169-179). Palgrave.
Parliamentary Debates (Hansard). (2023, December 12). Shane Jones: Address in reply debate. Parliamentary Service. https://www.parliament.nz/en/pb/hansard-debates/rhr/document/HansS_20231212_057225000/jones-shane
Parliamentary Debates (Hansard). (2025, January 28). Prime Minister's statement. Parliamentary Service. https://www.parliament.nz/en/pb/hansard-debates/rhr/combined/HansDeb_20250128_20250128_16
Pomona College Organic Farm. (2021, January 28). Seed keeping and seed privatization. Pomona College. https://www.pomona.edu/farm/blog/posts/seed-keeping-and-seed-privatization
Resource Management Act 1991. https://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1991/0069/latest/DLM230265.html
Simmonds, P., Seymour, D., & Hoggard, A. (2024, June 13). Ministry for Regulation targets red tape to keep farmers and growers competitive. Parliamentary Service. https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/ministry-regulation-targets-red-tape-keep-farmers-and-growers-competitive
Smith, R. (2015, August). Nation branding: Telling New Zealand’s story. WIPO Magazine. https://www.wipo.int/wipo_magazine/en/2015/04/article_0007.html
Stats NZ. (2024, February 29). Tourism satellite account: Year ended March 2023. https://www.stats.govt.nz/information-releases/tourism-satellite-account-year-ended-march-2023/#key-estimates
Tourism New Zealand. (n.d.). Tourism impact: Themes and opportunities to how visitors contribute to New Zealand. https://www.tourismnewzealand.com/insights/tourism-impact/
Tourism New Zealand. (2024, July 30). Tourism New Zealand’s 100% pure New Zealand campaign celebrates 25 years. Tourism New Zealand. https://www.tourismnewzealand.com/news-and-activity/tourism-new-zealands-100-pure-new-zealand-campaign-celebrates-25-years/
Willis, N., Stanford, E., & Upston, L. (2025, January 27). Going for growth: New rules for visiting tourists. Parliamentary Service. https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/going-growth-new-rules-visiting-tourists