By Nick Leggett, Chief Executive, Infrastructure New Zealand
A call for infrastructure certainty this election year.
As Aotearoa New Zealand approaches another election, the debate around infrastructure risks falling into a familiar pattern: headline announcements, short-term commitments and a reset every three years. Yet, the pressures facing New Zealand are not electoral-cycle problems. Strained transport systems, aging water infrastructure, energy security, climate resilience and the transition to a low-emissions economy all require decisions that endure well beyond a single term of government.
This election presents an opportunity to shift the conversation – not towards another round of competing project announcements, but towards a more fundamental question: Do we have an infrastructure system capable of delivering the future New Zealand needs? At present, the answer is not consistently ‘yes’.
For too long, infrastructure investment in New Zealand has been reactive rather than strategic. We speak often about productivity, resilience, regional growth, and economic transformation; yet, our infrastructure decisions are too frequently disconnected from a clear national economic direction.
New Zealand has spent years arguing about infrastructure, with the debate often focusing on what infrastructure costs. The more important question, however, is what poor infrastructure performance is already costing us.
The uncomfortable truth is that New Zealand already spends heavily on infrastructure, yet the returns we generate from that investment consistently disappoint. We pay first-world prices for infrastructure outcomes that too often fall short of expectations. That should force a harder conversation about what is actually broken.
The core issue is not simply funding; it is the absence of long-term discipline and direction in the system that chooses, prioritises, funds and delivers infrastructure. Too much of our investment still reflects electoral cycles rather than national purpose. Projects emerge and disappear according to political timing. Asset management is treated as discretionary until failures become visible and expensive, and local governments are expected to enable growth without the tools or revenue base to support it.
The result is predictable; infrastructure costs are rising faster than they should. Capability leaves the market during downturns because there is no confidence in the future pipeline. Public trust weakens because communities hear repeated promises without delivery, and every extreme weather event exposes another layer of underinvestment or deferred renewal.
What New Zealand needs now is not another list of disconnected projects, but a more mature infrastructure state.
A country serious about improving productivity should not be selecting infrastructure projects in three-year political cycles. It should be working from a rolling, long-term programme with broad parliamentary support and transparent funding pathways. The market should know what is being built, when and why. That certainty matters because infrastructure delivery relies on long-term investment in people, capability, equipment and capital.
For all the political attention given to new projects, the greatest infrastructure challenge facing the country is arguably the condition of what we already own. Decades of under-renewal have quietly accumulated into a significant liability. Roads, pipes, public buildings and networks are aging faster than they are being replaced or upgraded. Maintenance is rarely politically exciting, but it is economically critical. Good asset management is one of the clearest markers of a high-performing infrastructure system. The best-performing countries treat maintenance and resilience as core obligations, not optional spending that can be deferred in difficult fiscal periods.
Resilience must also become a central organising principle for infrastructure investment. The era of viewing climate adaptation as a future problem must end. Communities across the country are already experiencing the costs of repeated disruption, with recovery spending continuing to dwarf proactive investment. That balance must change. Resilient infrastructure is about designing systems that can absorb shocks, recover quickly and continue supporting economic activity during disruption. It means integrating natural hazard risk into planning and funding decisions from the beginning, rather than responding after assets fail.
Water illustrates the scale of the challenge particularly clearly. Structural reforms have created an opportunity to improve long-term investment and delivery, but reform alone will not rebuild pipes or restore public confidence. The same principle applies across the broader infrastructure system; New Zealand must become better at delivery.
Too often, agencies procure differently, specify differently, and allocate risk differently. Major projects are repeatedly redesigned instead of standardised, and commercial capability is inconsistent. Valuable lessons are relearnt from scratch, with this fragmentation imposing a hidden tax on the entire economy. A more mature delivery system would standardise where appropriate and involve commercial expertise earlier in project development. This would place greater emphasis on preparing projects properly before procurement begins, focusing less on announcing projects and more on successfully completing them.
Many of our growth pressures, infrastructure deficits and economic opportunities are regional, and cities and regions need stronger tools to shape their futures, retain more of the value generated locally, and partner with central government on long-term investment. That requires a more balanced relationship between national and local government as genuine partners.
Ultimately, infrastructure policy is about confidence – confidence that projects will survive political transitions, that assets will be maintained properly, that regions can grow sustainably, and that New Zealand is capable of executing large investments consistently. That confidence matters because infrastructure decisions shape far more than roads, pipes and powerlines; they influence whether businesses invest, whether talent stays, whether exports grow, and whether communities thrive. Aotearoa has all the elements it needs to succeed; what has too often been missing is sustained alignment between ambition, planning and execution.
With an election approaching, the next government has an opportunity to change that. Not through one-off announcements, but through disciplined, long-term stewardship of the systems that underpin national success. Infrastructure is not an end in itself, but if we don’t get it right, many of the things New Zealanders value will become harder to sustain.