RMA changes
The Governments announced proposed changes to RMA legislation met with mixed results this morning. The thing that has interested me most is that for all the media outlets that have discussed the proposed changes, none of them have posted or stated what the actual changes are. And it is no easier to find them on the government sites. As usual media consumers are left to sift the rhetoric, or listen to the voice of those we have come to trust.
Business NZ
Business NZ Chief Executive Phil O’Reilly says the key elements of the reform package will be a shot in the arm for investment. He claims the changes are timely given the current economic situation.
Federated Farmers
“Broadly speaking Federated Farmers welcomes the Government’s announcement and supports many of the changes to speed up the RMA process, but feel the discussion document to the much heralded Resource Management Act (Simplify & Streamline) Amendment Bill, is just an okay first stab,” says Don Nicolson, Federated Farmers President.
“I recently took a call from one of our members”, he says “who faced massive costs because a council was brow beaten by opponents into notifying their resource consent application.
Environment Minister Nick Smith Says the changes are a good balance. He says it is a package that is not about underlying the country’s environmental protections, but making sure decisions are made in a more timely way.
Forest & Bird
See RMA changes as a swing against ordinary Kiwis.
They say changes announced today will make it harder for ordinary Kiwis to have a say in protecting the environment from unsustainable development. [this is due to the changes in requirements for notification, also commented on by federated farmers.]
“It will be a very sad day for the environment and our communities when only those who can afford expensive lawyers can have a say. Most of the proposed changes will make the RMA easier for very big, wealthy companies and rich individuals.” [Forest & Bird Advocacy Manager Kevin Hackwell]
Although they welcome disincentives for trade competitors to misuse the Act, F&B suggest ordinary Kiwis and community groups will probably have to raise large bonds as security of costs unless there are robust criteria for how these disincentives are applied. This will be on top of a 900 per cent increase in the cost of lodging an appeal to the Environment Court. By comparison, the increased fines for corporate polluters will rise by just 300 per cent.
David Benson-Pope
“This will significantly reduce the amount of time cases will be tied up in the Environment Court”. “It will also reduce the cost to all parties involved. I have seen no facts that substantiate costs increasing as some have claimed.”
Maori Party “While we are pleased at the government’s announcement not to alter section 8 of the current Act, which concerns the kaitiaki role of tangata whenua and their rights guaranteed by te Tiriti o Waitangi, we will be analysing all clauses of the Bill to assess their impact on whanau, hapu and iwi,” said Co-leaders Dr Pita Sharples and Tariana Turia.
Green Party
The Green Party has labeled the changes as business first, community second, and environment last. They are concerned that the 5% of applications that are currently publicly notified will be reduced even further. They also object to the amount of money the changes will require community groups to put up. They are also concerned that the minister for the environment will no longer be able to veto applications that have a detrimental national environmental impact.
Facebook comments: