Election 2026: Act wants to put onus on lines companies to justify consumer charges, tell me about this news in (https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/politics/election-2026-act-wants-to-put-onus-on-lines-companies-to-justify-consumer-charges/HEJDJIKHHRBFVOGQIAS5LYGRFI/)

The news report covers the ACT Party’s energy policy for the 2026 election, announced by ACT Energy and Resources spokesperson Simon Court.

The policy centres on placing the burden of proof on monopoly electricity distribution (lines) companies to demonstrate that proposed investments and charges deliver clear value to consumers before loading additional costs onto household power bills.

Key Details of the Policy

• Justifying Network Costs & Curbing “Gold-Plating”: Lines companies would be required to prove that network upgrades are genuinely necessary and cost-effective. ACT proposes that alternative technologiessuch as grid-scale batteries, dynamic demand-response management, and flexible connectionsmust actively compete against expensive physical line rebuilds so consumers are not forced to pay for over-engineered infrastructure.

• Breaking Connection Bottlenecks: To address long wait times and high connection costs for new homes, subdivisions, commercial sites, and solar farms, the policy allows accredited private contractors to compete directly to design and build customer-funded network connections faster and more affordably.

• Private Investment in Transmission: Private capital would be permitted to fund, construct, own, and operate new transmission assets linked to the National Grid, provided they satisfy national technical and reliability standards.

• Freedom to Sell Power: Households and businesses generating their own electricity (such as through rooftop solar) would be granted the legal right to sell excess power to any willing buyer or platform offering the best rate, rather than being locked into selling back exclusively to their retail power provider.

• Market-Driven Approach over Market Restructuring: ACT argues that rising electricity prices stem from regulatory barriers and energy supply constraints rather than supplier misconduct. Rather than breaking up energy companies or imposing price caps, the party advocates streamlining approvals under the Resource Management Act (RMA), facilitating new generation, and using antitrust enforcement against incumbents that abuse market power to hinder competition.