Gordon Campbell | Parliament TV | Parliament Today | News Video | Crime | Employers | Housing | Immigration | Legal | Local Govt. | Maori | Welfare | Unions | Youth | Search

 


RMA reform an attack on Kiwi values

Trouble viewing this email? View it online: http://spinitwide.com/view/rma-reform-an-attack-on-kiwi-values

Media release from Fish & Game NZ

RMA reform an attack on Kiwi values

Analysis of the Government’s RMA reforms by Sir Geoffrey Palmer QC points to an alarming attack on the nation’s recreational and environmental values.

“Few people better understand the RMA than Sir Geoffrey, one of the original architects of the Act,” says Fish & Game NZ chief executive Bryce Johnson.

“In his report for the New Zealand Fish and Game Council, Sir Geoffrey’s expert analysis clearly shows that the Government’s proposed changes ‘will significantly and seriously weaken the ability of the RMA to protect the natural environment and its recreational enjoyment by all New Zealanders’.

“From the outset Fish & Game has been concerned that the Government’s so-called moves to ‘simplify and streamline the RMA process’ was a Trojan Horse for major changes to the Act to enable greater exploitation of New Zealand’s remaining finite natural resources. Our fears have been confirmed.”

Mr Johnson points out that while the RMA is often demonised by the Government and corporate industry for “creating delays”, Part 2 of the Act is a critically important foundation principle of “sustainable management” – it protects New Zealand’s recreational values, the environment, and the economy by underpinning the ‘100% Pure, clean green’ brand.

“Like any party involved in RMA processes, Fish & Game supports moves to shorten timeframes, improve planning processes and simplify planning documents, which can be achieved through the Government’s proposed process-orientated reforms, however it is totally unacceptable that National is using this as an excuse to attack the core principles of the Act, effectively lowering environmental standards.

“As Sir Geoffrey points out, many of the ‘process issues’ identified by the Government can be rectified without tampering with the environmental protection provisions.

“The question has to be asked: What is the Government’s motivation for taking the wrecking-ball to the environmental safeguards in Part 2 of the Act? Where is the analysis to justify this attack on Part 2? And is the Government representing the best interests of all New Zealanders, or a select minority of resource hungry corporates?

“Sir Geoffrey couldn’t find any justification for the Government’s proposals in his thorough analysis. In fact, he notes that ‘changes to Part 2 of the Act… are largely unnecessary and will lead to greater uncertainty and cost’.”

Mr Johnson says the unnecessary meddling with this prominent piece of legislation, combined with a woefully inadequate public consultation and submission period, is an assault on our environment and economy.

“The Government’s proposed changes to Part 2 of the Act will wreck existing case law and introduce massive uncertainty, put at risk an economy progressively built on the foundation of a ‘100% Pure, clean green’ brand now worth $14 billion; and a major concern for environmental and recreational interests is that it will effectively allow small streams to be turned into farm drains.”

Summary of key points in Sir Geoffrey’s analysis:

• 3. b. – “The proposed changes to Part 2 will significantly and seriously undermine environmental protection under the RMA. These changes are largely unnecessary and will lead to greater uncertainty and cost in the application and interpretation of the RMA.”
• 8. a. – “A number of the changes will substantially limit the ability of submitters to put forward evidence as to the environmental impacts of proposals…”
• 8. b. – “Proposals for greater central government intervention [are] inconsistent with the central principles of the Act.”
• 12. – “Core environmental values that currently have status as ‘matters of national importance’ will be diminished to mere ‘matters’, including: the preservation of the natural character of the coastal natural environment; the protection of outstanding natural features and landscapes, and areas of indigenous vegetation and habitat; and the maintenance and enhancement of public access to beaches and waters. Other central environment factors, such as amenity values [recreation], the intrinsic value of ecosystems, and the maintenance and enhancement of the quality of the natural environment will no longer be considered at all.”
• 13. – “The environmental principles that remain will be significantly weakened… These changes might seem small but they have serious implications…”
• 14. – “The proposed new section 6(n)… has the potential to exclude the environmental impacts of activities on small streams and waterways – despite the critical roles these play in the ecological integrity of river systems as a whole…”
• 15. – “The changes themselves are largely unnecessary… No research findings are offered in support of the policy contention made…”
• 16. – “[Government] concerns… not supported by fact…”
• 16. b. – “Courts and other decision makers under the RMA already routinely take account of social and economic considerations… These considerations have specifically included the national benefits of infrastructure, provision of affordable housing, and the value of making land available to meet future housing needs.”
• 16. c. – “Only a tiny number of resource consent applications are declined… 90 per cent of significant infrastructure projects successfully progress through the RMA…”
• 18. – “… the changes are unlikely to deliver the Government’s central stated objective to ‘make the system easier to use, increase its certainty and predictability, and reduce unnecessary duplication and cost’… Much of that case law will now be redundant, leaving decision-makers without guidance, and thereby increasing cost and complexity…”

• 19. – “These risks are exacerbated by the proposed new section 7… and can be expected to be the basis for considerable future litigation.”


ENDS

© Scoop Media

 
 
 
 
 
Parliament Headlines | Politics Headlines | Regional Headlines

 

Plain Packs Plan: Gordon Campbell On Tobacco Politicking (And The TPP Death Watch)

Has Act leader David Seymour got the easiest job in the world, or what? Roll out of bed, turn on the radio and hmm…there do seem to be a lot of problems out there in the world. Must think of something. And so it came to pass that this morning, David Seymour took up his sword and shield to fight for a world that’s about to be denied the rich and vibrant beauty of tobacco advertising. More>>

ALSO:

.


RECENT TPP MEETING:

Professor Ian Shirley: The Budget That Failed Auckland

The 2016 budget offered Auckland nothing in the way of vision or hope and it continued the National Government’s threats against the Auckland Council. Threatening the Council with over-riding its democratic processes if it fails to release land for housing is a bullying tactic aimed at diverting attention away from the fundamental problems with housing in the region. More>>

ALSO:

PM's Post Cab Presser: Budgets, Trusts And Pacific Diplomacy

Today Prime Minister John Key summarised last week’s budget and provided further detail about his upcoming trip to Fiji. He said that there has been “plenty going on” in the last couple of weeks and emphasised the need for Auckland council to facilitate more housing supply. More>>

ALSO:

Max Rashbrooke: A Failure Of Measurement: Inside The Budget Lock-Up

Shortly after the embargo lifted at 2pm news organisations started filing reports claiming that health, and to a lesser extent housing and education, were the ‘big winners’ out of the Budget. It failed to take into account the fact that in most cases the apparent increases were in fact cuts. Because of the twin effects of inflation and population. More>>

ALSO:

DOCtored Figures: Minister Clarifies DOC Budget

“Commentators have overlooked the fact $20.7m of that perceived shortfall is new funding for Battle for our Birds 2016, provided for in last week’s Budget...” DOC also has approval in principle to carry over a further $20m to 16/17 due to unexpected delays in a number of projects. More>>

ALSO:

For The Birds: Gordon Campbell On The Budget

Budgies, so their Wikipedia page says, are popular pets around the world due to their small size, low cost, and ability to mimic human speech. Which is a reasonably good description of Finance Minister Bill English eighth Budget. . More>>

Max Rashbrooke On The 2016 Budget

The best label for this year’s announcement by Bill English might be the ‘Bare Minimum Budget’. It does the bare minimum to defuse potential political damage in a range of areas – homelessness and health are prime among them – but almost nothing to address the country’s most deep-rooted, systemic social problems. Indeed the Budget hints that these problems may get worse. More>>

ALSO:

Gordon Campbell: On Bank Scandals (And Air Crashes)

Last month, the Australian Securities and Investment Commission (ASIC) filed proceedings against Westpac over activities that have some distinct echoes of the Libor scandal. More>>

Get More From Scoop

 

LATEST HEADLINES

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Politics
Search Scoop  
 
 
Powered by Vodafone
NZ independent news