Mega ministry opposed
The government’s bid to create a mega ministry by merging housing, transport, environment and parts of local government has raised concerns about delivery risks and policy distortion.
Greig Epps, chief executive of the Imported Motor Vehicle Industry Association (VIA), says while the proposal shows surface-level logic, it risks embedding narrow assumptions and undermining delivery.
“On the face of it, bringing related functions closer together can help fix a perennial weakness in government – fragmented advice, duplicated effort and portfolios that trip over each other when issues are plainly connected in the real world,” he adds.
Epps, pictured, says the organisation sees merit in stronger co-ordination, but warns against oversimplifying environmental policy.
“There’s a tendency, across multiple governments, to treat transport as the main lever for meeting environmental obligations. Transport matters, but it’s not the whole story.
“Environmental outcomes are also shaped by agriculture, energy, industry and waste. If ‘environment’ becomes defined mainly through a housing-and-transport lens, that narrows the frame in ways that risk poor policy.”
Epps notes real crossover points do exist. For example, how waste and environmental regulation relate to end-of-life vehicle processes and fleet-emissions policy. But he says that structure should follow function and not replace it.
“The practical risk is that in a large merger, important projects are delayed or deprioritised while attention turns towards structure, leadership appointments and back-office consolidation.”
VIA is working with the government on time-sensitive matters, including the review of the clean car standard, emissions standards and broader transport-rules reform. All require clear ministerial direction and policy focus now, not after the dust settles from an agency reshuffle.
Another concern lies in the scope of the proposed ministry, dubbed the Ministry for Cities, Environment, Regions and Transport (MCERT). Epps questions where the boundary will be drawn.
“Housing connects to infrastructure. Infrastructure connects to climate adaptation. Climate connects to water, land use and primary industries. There’s almost no end to the linkages you can make.
“At some point, the better question is whether merging agencies is the right tool or whether it’s smarter to lift cross-ministry co-ordination, shared goals and consistent direction while keeping specialist agencies intact.”
Epps also points to the ambitious implementation timetable. It has been reported the new ministry will be operational by July 2026 with a chief executive in place by mid-year. He says: “Six to seven months isn’t long to bring together multiple entities and still deliver on work programmes in motion.”
VIA would like to see the government focus on certain priorities as it considers creating a new mega-ministry. These are:
• Prioritise co-ordination before consolidation. Structural overhaul shouldn’t be the first step. Instead, government agencies should strengthen cross-portfolio co-ordination via shared accountability, consistent direction-setting and more agile collaboration. Mergers aren’t the only tool to achieve joined-up government.
• Avoid narrowing the environmental lens. Policy settings must recognise environmental outcomes extend beyond transport and housing. To be effective, green policies must also address major drivers, such as energy systems, agricultural activity, industrial processes and waste.
• Protect delivery during transition. Any structural change must be planned to ensure critical workstreams – such as emissions standards, vehicle policy reviews and fleet regulation – retain clear ownership and delivery momentum.
Epps adds: “We’ll be looking closely at how the government protects priority work, maintains specialist capability and avoids creating a structure that’s too big to steer well.”
