About 2900 buildings across New Zealand will no longer be classed as earthquake-prone after Parliament unanimously passed the Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Bill on 19 September, in a reform the Government says will save building owners $8.2 billion.
The law takes Auckland, the Chatham Islands and the low seismic zone of the upper North Island out of the earthquake-prone building system altogether. Every existing earthquake-prone designation in those areas will be removed the day after the bill receives Royal Assent, according to the Government’s announcement.
“Today we are delivering significant reform that will save Kiwi building owners and the New Zealand economy a staggering $8.2 billion,” Building and Construction Minister Simon Watts said.
Around half of all buildings currently designated as earthquake-prone are expected to come off the register. 1News reported the figure as about 2900 buildings, or 55% of the total.
Under the new rules, only unreinforced masonry buildings and certain multi-storey concrete buildings in medium and high seismic zones can be classified as earthquake-prone. Low-risk concrete and wooden buildings lose that status. Councils keep a limited power to identify serious seismic risks that were missed earlier, but only after consulting the building owner and getting agreement from the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment.
“Expensive and often unrealistic remediation costs that are disproportionate to risk threaten buildings becoming derelict. Instead, we’re enabling that money to be invested elsewhere. To grow businesses, jobs and the economy,” Mr Watts said.
He said smaller towns had struggled most under the existing regime. “For many communities, particularly smaller towns, meeting the current requirements has been a significant challenge.”
Not every region gets relief. Parts of coastal Otago and Stewart Island move from a low to a medium seismic zone under the updated maps, which the Government says are based on the latest scientific knowledge. It says owners there will still be better off, because the narrower definition means fewer buildings will be caught.
The updated seismic zones take effect immediately after Royal Assent. The rest of the changes start on 1 July 2027. The ministry plans to consult publicly on guidance for councils and building owners before the end of this year.
Auckland Mayor Wayne Brown welcomed the result. “Auckland is one of the least seismically active regions of New Zealand, with a much lower earthquake hazard than places such as Wellington and much of the South Island,” he said, as reported by RNZ.
Mr Brown said he had pushed for the change with the previous minister. “I raised this directly with Chris Penk when he was Minister for Building and Construction because the rules made no sense for Auckland,” he told the NZ Herald. He has argued that the old system mainly benefited consultants, who earned fees for assessments and reports.
ACT leader David Seymour used the moment to point out that his party had opposed the original 2016 law, which was passed after the Canterbury earthquakes. “There’s nothing worse than people saying I told you so, but sometimes you just have to say it,” he said in a statement. He called the reform “a vindication” and put the savings at an estimated $9 billion, a little higher than the Government’s own figure.
Mr Seymour said he had met people who lost their livelihoods when routine maintenance by their body corporate triggered strengthening requirements. “One lady I met lost everything as a result of this,” he said.
The reform was first announced by then-minister Chris Penk in September 2025. At the time the Government said it would scrap the percentage of New Building Standard ratings, known as %NBS, which compared existing buildings with new ones and had become a source of confusion for owners, tenants and insurers. It also said it would remove the rule forcing owners to upgrade fire safety and disability access at the same time as strengthening, and let councils extend remediation deadlines.
Engineers broadly welcomed the direction when it was announced, but some warned that taking a building off the register does not make it stronger. Professor Santiago Pujol of the University of Canterbury told the Science Media Centre in September 2025 that “The change in the law does not imply that previously identified building deficiencies no longer exist.”
He said the new rules rightly focused on the worst buildings, but that money for strengthening remained the sticking point. “In the absence of adequate financing mechanisms, we may again face inaction,” he said.
For building owners in Auckland and the upper North Island, many of whom have been carrying earthquake-prone notices, costly engineering reports and nervous tenants for years, the change will be immediate once the law is signed. In Wellington, Christchurch and other high-risk areas, owners of unreinforced brick and older multi-storey concrete buildings still face strengthening deadlines, though under rules the Government says are simpler and cheaper to meet.
For many owners of small-town main street buildings, the question now is whether the savings will bring empty shops back into use, or whether the old structures will simply stay as they are. Mr Watts said the aim was to put effort where the risk to life is greatest. “This is about fixing the basics for a better working system,” he said.
Building rules and housing costs are among the issues parties are campaigning on ahead of the election. You can find out which party best matches your views with our voting tool.
Do you own or rent space in a building that has carried an earthquake-prone notice? Is this reform overdue common sense, or a risk to public safety? Share your view in the comments below.
This article was written by AI, briefed to report the facts, hopefully without some of the bias people bring to the job 🙂
Leave a Reply