They may be at opposite ends of the political spectrum, but Chlöe Swarbrick and David Seymour have agreed the Resource Management Act needs to be scrapped.
However, the harmony didn't go further. Both the Greens MP and ACT leader had differing views on how a new RMA should be implemented as they faced off this morning on TVNZ1's Breakfast.
It comes as an independent review panel said yesterday it was best to repeal the RMA and start again, rather than trying to amend what's there.
Ms Swarbrick said the 900-page document had become too hard to understand, but that it should stay true to protecting the environment.
"I think one of the important things to note, as one of the Green Party members who has been on the environment select committee for the past term of Parliament, so far we have dealt with two amendments to the RMA and it definitely seems as though it's a dense document that a whole lot of politicians simply don't have their heads around," she said.
"I think simplifying the system not just for the bureaucracy, but also for New Zealanders out their attempting to navigate it, is a positive thing. But we need make sure that we stay true to the original kaupapa of the RMA, which is to protect the environment."
Ms Swarbrick said the Greens welcomed the "very comprehensives and deeply thoughful review", which was led by retired Court of Appeal Judge Tony Randerson QC, and were looking to get into it deeper.
"There's some really critical things in there, not the least increased water protection, looking as well at how we can better integrate community and neighbourhood input, how we can streamline all of the documents that people have been through the consenting process will be abundantly aware of, so we're looking forward to digging through it as a caucus."
However, also on Breakfast, Mr Seymour said the report was the biggest thing the Government had produced in the area, yet there was nothing new in it anyway.
"The real challenge for the next Government is how do we reform the Resource Management Act so that people can actually get on and develop stuff and build homes for the next generation just like the Baby Boomers did in the '60s and the '70s."
Mr Seymour also said no one, whether it be from the development sector or environmental area, was happy with the RMA.
"It makes nobody happy. It needs to be replaced but frankly we knew all that three years ago and this Government unfortunately just has not taken the initiative to actually do rather than report.
"If you speak to developers they'll tell you that under the current law it is just so difficult to develop anything, that all the costs get passed on to the end consumer and we've known this for years."
Mr Seymour said the focus should be on councils building infrastructure and freeing up land. He said the RMA should be focused on property rights so there is more flexibility for Kiwis to develop their own property, but also some recourse for when neighbouring developments acutely affect someone else's property.
"We don't need to be telling people the city should be this shape or that shape. We should be enabling people to develop their property. We should be enabling councils to focus on funding good infrastructure because that's how you let the next generation build homes like the previous one did," he said.
"Frankly, we just need to get on with it. The Nats dragged their feet on this, the current Government's done nothing but produce a report. The next Government is going to have to deal to this issue because it's so overdue."
However, Ms Swarbrick said the re-imagined RMA has to achieve protection for New Zealand's urban environment, making sure density is done well and to make sure there is good community and neighbourhood input.