Next steps for the review of our consultation and feedback processes

We received 20 submissions in response to our consultation on our Consultation charter, Code amendment process and new advisory group.

Thanks to all submitters who contributed their insights and perspectives. Your comments have helped to inform our next steps.

Our consultation covered four key areas. The feedback we received across the four areas was varied.

The Authority is future-focused and has committed to working with its stakeholders differently. Your input into the consultation has helped inform our thinking on how to do that.

We’ll be undertaking four workstreams to advance the proposals, as follows:

Code changes for system operation documents

The proposals relating to this received widespread support. We have decided to make the Code change. A decision paper will be published in early July 2023.

Code amendment request process

Key themes in submissions were the transparency and prioritisation of the process. Many submitters did not support a bespoke process for Transpower.

We want to move quickly on improving this process and are aiming to get it to the Board for consideration by November 2023.

New advisory group/s

Submissions focused on three themes:

• Ensuring industry expertise is captured early and often during Authority decision-making processes.
• Ensuring membership is balanced, appropriate and represents different perspectives.
• Ensuring consumer voice is represented.

We will engage more with industry and consumer groups on this workstream before deciding by the end of 2023. It’s clear many of you can add valuable input to the design of any new advisory group and we will be in touch soon about the process.

In the meantime, MDAG and IPAG will continue to function. Once decisions have been made on the new advisory group/s we will consider next steps for MDAG and IPAG.

Changes to the consultation charter

The key themes in submissions are:

• Ensuring consultation has robust analysis and a net benefit is demonstrated through the cost-benefit analysis.
• The risk of oversimplification and potential to dilute regulatory certainty and investor confidence.
• The need for proactive and different forms of engagement (such as forums, collaborative discussion), as well as increased transparency on project progress and the work programme.

We are working on next steps which may involve more engagement with industry and consumer groups, before preparing a decision for our Board’s consideration in early 2024.