That is one reason the fast-track legislation failed to provoke vehement opposition from middle New Zealand, despite the risks it poses to the environment, proper process and integrity. People understand that New Zealand is desperate for economic progress. They know that sustaining a good standard of living and having money for health, education and welfare will be tough.
But public sympathy will be lost case by case, issue by issue, if sufficient safeguards are not maintained and if the community’s voice is subservient to business interests.
Last week, the Queenstown Lakes commissioners’ decision to reject an application for a McDonald’s restaurant and drive-through by Mt Iron on the Luggate-Wānaka highway was used as a stark illustration of what is wrong with planning laws.
Even before the ruling was released, RMA Reform Minister Chris Bishop had said on X that the McDonald’s Wānaka matter was the "perfect example of everything wrong with the [Resource Management Act]."
"Endless submissions including by taxpayer-funded neo-puritans, various small stupid changes like reducing height of the logo. Over a McDonald’s."
Act’s environment spokesman Cameron Luxton called the ruling "an economic own-goal for Wānaka. A legitimate business has been blocked from investing, hiring locals and selling products to willing buyers. It shows how our planning regime stifles development."
These reactions, for the most part, are ignorant. They are designed to feed the perception of unjustified bureaucratic blocks while deliberately ignoring any detail.
Good arguments can be made that broader submissions about the health values of McDonald’s meals and other input from outside the area should be excluded. But the application was rejected for good reasons.
It was not that McDonald’s has no place in Wānaka — although some opposition contained an element of snobbishness against United States-owned fast food for the masses. The problem was that it was in the wrong place. It was to be in an area zoned rural and the ruling said the adverse effects were more than minor on the approach to Wānaka, the landscape character and the visual amenity value of Mt Iron.
McDonald’s still has about a week to appeal.
Originally, the 445sqm restaurant was to be open 24 hours a day, seven days a week. This was changed to 6am to 11pm and the size of the logo was reduced.
Of about 350 submissions, about 90% were opposed.
Protection groups in Wānaka have done much to protect the sensitive and outstanding landscapes around the town, especially from Waterfall Creek towards the Matukituki. This is another example where a feature of Wānaka, the short and scenic drive to the town centre and the lake is being preserved.
Once lost, it will be gone forever.
While the large BP service station is a blot on what has become a busy road, it is accessed off the main highway and is after the grand gateway provided by the bulk of Mt Iron.
It can be acknowledged that the National Public Health Service’s broad proposal against McDonald’s was questionable. The then health minister, Shane Reti, last year said, "Content within the submission, including observations about planetary health, landscape values, traffic and Te Tiriti do not match my over-arching view of what the NPHS should be spending its time on."
As for the Act New Zealand claim of an "economic own goal", the town is growing so quickly that any such impediments will make little difference and might well be welcomed.
The government’s reaction is itself an own goal in this region. It demonstrates a blindness to community concerns and perturbs those concerned about the future of Wānaka.
The case illuminated the place of planning rules. It is not all about "property rights".
By all means, the laws should be streamlined. However, district plans and community involvement must remain essential elements of the planning framework.
