Draft Minutes of the Year 2004 NZAIA Annual General Meeting
Held at Solway Park, Masterton, Wairarapa
5.00 pm Friday, 19th March 2004
Present: Dianne Buchan, Anji Davies, Tom Davies, Kirsten Finnis, Gerard Fitzgerald, Felicity Maxwell, Bob McClymont, Richard Morgan, Debiprosad Majumdar, James Newell, Richard Peterson, Chungai Qiao, Robert Quigley, Kaylene Sampson, Mary Sparrow, Nick Taylor
Apologies: James Baines, Tony Banks, Richard Bedford, Margaret Brooker, Christine Cheyne, Kevin Clark, Diana Dallas, Anne Hilson, David Johnston, Karen Jones, Grant Power, Mary Jane Rivers, David Simmons, Rhys Taylor, Martin Ward.
Minutes of 2002 AGM were tabled
Minutes accepted as an accurate record.
(Richard Morgan, Tom Davies)
Treasurers (Bob McClymont) Report for 2003-2004
The treasurer (Bob McClymont) tabled the audited financial reports for the 2001 and 2002 years and the as yet incomplete report for the 2003 year.
The treasurer noted that the increase of subs from $10 to $12 for low income or students, $100 to $110 for 3 year membership and $35 to $40 per year others was passed at the 2002 AGM and had been actioned.
The treasurer asked that it be noted that the 2001 and 2002 accounts have now been audited, but those reports have only just been completed. He did not have copies of the report to table at the AGM and there hadn't been enough time to circulate them to members. Therefore the auditors reports would be sent out subsequent to the conference and received at the next AGM.
There was discussion of the income and costs for the 2002 and 2003 years.
Membership fee income of at least $4,239 for 2003 was slightly higher than $3,917.70 fee income of 2002 despite the fact that subs notices for 2003 were not sent out until August 2003 due to delay in revision of the NZAIA accounting system and records. There was also no NZAIA 2003 conference, an activity which generally brings in a number of new memberships, there was only one IANZ newsletter but this was ameliorated by the high profile of the NZAIA Wellington Professional Forum meetings. Some costs were lower in 2003 than 2002 but there were additional costs such as office rental, phone and electricity.
It was noted that a large donation was made in 2003 by James Newell. This followed an earlier undertaking by James Newell to underwrite some of the additional office costs if necessary. James Newell made the point that it was cheaper for him to assist in the establishment of an NZAIA office than to pay for the equivalent space at the MERA office, as had been the case for many years. The new MERA office was also rather inaccessible at Pukerua Bay. The establishment of an accessible centrally located NZAIA base was discussed at the 2002 AGM and seen as a prerequisite for NZAIA to develop further as an organisation. James Newell noted that setting an office setup was a chicken and egg situation. It was a prerequisite for further development of NZAIA as an organisation.
Moved and accepted:
1. That the accounts for 2002 be approved subject to later receipt of the auditors report.
2. That the unaudited preliminary accounts for the year ended December 2003 be received.
Moved a vote of thanks to Bob McClymont for his work on the accounts for the year.
Secretary's (James Newell) Report for 2003-2004
The secretary (James Newell) spoke to the attached report.
As funding was tight, noone was sought to replace the administrative assistant who had to resign due to commitments and this had increased the load on the secretary over the year. This and the work carried out to rebase the accounts over the year meant that membership subs renewals were not sent out until late in tbe year.
The main effort for the year was put towards the NZAIA 2002 conference proceedings, IANZ newsletter and the Wellington Professional Forums. The work on the 2002 NZAIA conference proceedings consumed a great deal of core group energy over the year.
Richard Morgan asked that it be noted that there was a need to tidy up and reconcile the NZAIA membership list and the NZAIA membership list server run by Otago University. It was agreed that Richard Morgan and the secretary would work on updating these lists after the conference.
Moved (Bob McClymont/Mary Sparrow) and accepted
That the secretary's report be received.
NZAIA Co-Convenors' (Richard Peterson and Mary Sparrow) Report 2003-2004
Richard noted that he and Mary had been coconvenors over the last two years.
Although last year could be categorised as a period in which the Core Group has kept largely to its knitting, there had been a great deal of work in some areas such as conference proceedings, work coordinated by Martin Ward on the Wellington Professional Forum and Tom Davies work on the IANZ newsletter. Letters had also been sent to the Minister of Treaty Negotiations, Foreign Affairs and the Prime Minister requesting that NZ Government support the IAIA initiative asking WTO to incorporate impact assessment in its decision-making. Another submission was made to the Parliamentary Commissioner on the Environment's review of the role and quality of scientific input within environmental policy and decision-making. NZAIA was also represented on a number of bodies (e.g. the Royal Societies Sustainability Initiative, the Ministry for the Environment Professional Bodies Liaison group).
The effective core group for much of the year was limited to a hard core of four which limited how much we could do above and beyond maintenance of the organisation.
The emergence of the Environment Institute of Australia and New Zealand in 2003 alongside the NZ Planning Institute, Risk Management Society etc. highlights the issue of where does NZAIA fit in.
It was moved (Di Buchan), seconded (Nick Taylor) and agreed that the secretary's report be accepted.
In the discussion of the convenor's report Richard Morgan (IAIA President) noted that there were two types of issues coming out of the report. One is the need to for some organisational strengthening through a larger effective core group and the other was the need for some organisation of activities through development of some subgroups with specific tasks and responsibilities feeding into the more strategic core group.
There was extensive discussion of ways of getting energy to go beyond the core administrative duties of the organisation. The core group as a membership was seen as having become diffuse and there needed to be a more focussed and structure core group supported by sub groups engaged in the specific activities and business of the organisation. A teleconference every 4-8 weeks does not engage as well as local convened specific task groups.
James Newell raised the suggestion of an "oscars" approach as a means of involving people into a process of identifying interesting and possibly high quality work. Kaylene Sampson noted that there is a core of committed impact assessment members but the critical issue is going to be how we think creatively to appeal to the widest possible range of people with an interest in impact assessment.
Mary Sparrow observed that the Long Term Council Community Plans area is a strand of evolving experience where monitoring is important and impact assessment has a role to play. Richard Morgan noted that there are other application areas such as health impacts, globalisation / trade negotiation is another. Richard noted that there was a need to prepare mental map of the role of impact assessment in NZ and then to progressively follow up with specific initiatives to build awareness of the role of impact assessment in these areas. Nick Taylor pointed out that we did a limited exercise of that type at the Auckland conference in 1999. Health Impact Assessment and the new Transport Management Act are areas where impact assessment methods have specific relevance etc.
The consensus was that we need to remap the field and then target effort to specific areas where promotion of impact assessment would best be focussed. The suggestion was that we should establish a subgroups to work along side the core group to advance some of these issues.
Impact assessment applied to climate change as a possible focus for next years conference provides a vehicle for demonstrating the role of integrated impact assessment.
Another main issue coming out of the discussion was the need to have a rethink the means of strengthening operational leadership within the organisation to supplement the administrative leadership provided by the secretary. This needs to be supported by a solid core group of committed people assisted by working groups outside of the core group delegated to work on specific activities.
A particular mission of NZAIA has been to promote an integrated approach to impact assessment which has social impacts interleaved alongside physical and environmental.
Robert Quigley challenged the association to think carefully what we mean by impact assessment, given current practice which defines impact assessment as a contributor to a specific decision making context and a specific issue.
Nick Taylor felt that the basic structure was not too far wrong, but that we need to have a convenor (leadership), secretary (administration), treasurer (financial management), IANZ editor and conference organisation. Rather than adding lots of people to the core group, better to add people to specific subgroups.
Richard Morgan observed that the convenor role is a coordinating, delegating one that keeps NZAIA on track towards its goals.
Gerard Fitzgerald observed that we don't have a lot of resoources to fly people around the country. The administrative core needs to be in one place, but that other specific professional and organisational development activities can be spread out on a local / regional basis.
6. Election of Officers and Core Group
The structure of the core group and the roles of different parties was discussed at some length.
Nominations were sought for the core group. James Newell noted that he was happy to continue in the role of secretary over the next year. Similarly Bob McClymont was prepared to continue in the role of treasurer for another year.
The core group nominations were made, agreed by the parties and accepted by the meeting.
Convenor - Di Buchan
Secretary - James Newell
Treasurer - Bob McClymont
Tom Davies
Felicity Maxwell
Richard Peterson
Robert Quigley
Kaylene Sampson
There were some others who were discussed for co-option, but it was considered important to keep the core group tight and committed. The desirability of having someone from the Institute for Geological and Nuclear Sciences involved given the interest in working together in the next year's conference.
The roles of different officers, with administrative coordination by the secretary, with operational and "inspirational" leadership from the convenor were discussed.
There was a large vote of support for the nomination of Di Buchan to the convenor role. Although sometimes the convenor role has ended up being a two year role. One of the prime roles of the convenor is to lead the organisation to the next conference.
Canterbury members discussed the resurrection of a formal Canterbury subgroup.
The new core group was seen as a much tighter grouping and Christchurch members noted that they expected that they would be regrouping and providing some support on specific tasks. One specific task that they were keen to work on was the "mapping" of
7. Proposed Changes to the Membership Types in the New Zealand Association for Impact Assessment's Constitution
Following on from the 2002 AGM, it was proposed that there be three types of members - a move that will require a consitutional change.
The first of these proposed are "associate members" (assumed to be non-professionals with an interest in impact assessment but not necessarily any professional training experience or on the job involvement in impact assessment).
The second group would be "professional members" - intended to be those who are professionally engaged and / or trained / experienced in impact assessment.
The third type of members would be "corporate members" recognising that the relationship between NZAIA in those cases is with specialists positions in that organization.
Organisational or corporate members means that the membership would be automatically transferred or inherited by the replacement when any individual leaves the organization. Certain services, such as access to NZAIA online knowledge bases, newsletters etc. could be shared by a number of individuals across the organization.
These constitutional changes have associated with them.
The proposals were discussed in two levels. The first question was, what sort of membership structure should NZAIA have to take it forward and the second question was what sorts of fees should apply to the different membership types. Membership classes require a constitutional change whereas membership fees are set at each AGM for the following financial year.
In discussion of the proposed changes it was pointed out that the current lack of any professional membership type arose from a decision at the setup of NZAIA (ASA) in 1990 to have an inclusive structure. This would make it easy for people whose main route into impact assessment was through hands on experience rather than academic or professional training and those such as politicians and members of the wider community with an interest in impact assessment to take part. However, this approach does not solve the problem of the development of professional standards and professional development for those active in impact assessment as professionals. The proposed membership types are intended to provide a stepping stone towards a greater focus on professional standards and professional development. A professional membership type allows members to nominate whether they which to participate and be recognised as impact assessment professionals.
The corporate membership class is specifically relating to organisational members. Mary Sparrow felt a corporate membership concept could be well suited to the needs of local government.
Richard Morgan made the point that there then needs to be some criteria by which NZAIA can identify professional members.
Nick Taylor also observed that having fought tooth and nail to prevent a distinction between professional and non-professional membership at the inaugural NZAIA meeting at Maire Dwyer's place in 1990, he now felt that it was now timely to do so as long as a student membership type is retained. The tricky things is going to be how to assess eligibility for professional membership - and a group will have to be set up to work through those details - including account of either qualifications or experience.
Mary Sparrow pointed out that the situation for corporate membership for those in local or other government agencies would be slightly different. She felt that a lot of what NZAIA is doing is of general value to local government officers and organisations.
James Newell suggested that the development and access to an online database on impact assessment professionals could be one of the carrots for corporate membership.
Dianne Buchan observed that at the moment there are instances where people go to local authorities and say that are social impact assessment professionals but have no training or experience. The standard of work carried out can then reflect impact assessment as a discipline. Developers and government agencies would benefit from some way of signalling who has experience and/or skills.
James Newell observed that idea who be to develop an online register of professional members and their credentials and experience.
Discussion moved on to the motion relating to the changes in membership classes.
Gerard Fitzgerald proposed that this was amended to provide for a student and low income membership class. He suggested that we put the motion and then delegate a group to work on the details of the ways and means of putting into effect the professional and corporate membership for the next meeting. It needed to be determined how many parties would be included in a corporate membership, set fees etc. and ratify these details at a later meeting.
Richard Morgan said that he was in agreement with Gerard and further suggested that we take a look at the "South African" model of how to achieve this which is used successfully in subsaharan africa. This provides a modest strategy to address the issues of professional standards while not exposing the NZAIA to issues of liability for which we are not constituted to deal with.
Kaylene Sampson and Gerard Fitzgerald proposed that this task be added to that of the work on "strategic market analysis" to be carried out by the Christchurch subgroup and that Richard Morgan work on the professional membership process with that group. This was agreed.
The motion was then amended to the effect that there be four types of membership : student / low income, ordinary (or associate?), professional and corporate members. The details of how these types of membership would be defined would be reported back to be ratified at the next meeting of the NZAIA.
It was agreed that NZAIA should extend the membership types to professional and corporate members to supplement to current ordinary members retaining a discounted membership for students and low income people.
The details of this proposal to be reported in time to put to a special meeting of the NZAIA to be held in Wellington before 31st December 2004 so as to come into effect in 2005.
8. Proposed Changes to Membership Fees
Bob McClymont then proposed that the motion on membership fees changes be put. He noted that this was a motion independent of any changes in membership as they can't be formally ratified at this meeting but provision needed to be made to bring up the NZAIA fees.
The fact that the NZAIA membership fee has remained pretty much the same since 1990 with one change only was discussed. Comparable organisational membership fees for other similar NGOs have increased substantially over that time.
In the interim the motion was put and it was agreed that the new "ordinary" membership fees for the 2005 year would be as follows:
- Ordinary member annual fee increases from $40 to $60;
- Ordinary member three yearly fee increases from $110 to $160; and
- Low-income annual fee increases from $12 to $20.
9. Promotion of Professional Standards in Impact Assessment.
The oscar's model idea was considered interesting but the time was getting on with dinner already late. It was felt that this proposal should be considered and if necessary acted on by the incoming core group.
No further issues were raised for discussion.
Meeting was closed.
Appendix : Officers Reports to the AGM
3. Treasurer's Report for 2003-2004
The financial statements for the year ended 31 December 2003 are attached. They comprise a Statement of Financial Performance (the profit and loss statement) and a Statement of Financial Position (the balance sheet). These are preliminary financial statements only.
The statements for the year ended 31 December 2001 as presented to the 2002 AGM and the statements for the year ended 31 December 2002 have been accepted by the Auditor and copies sent to the Registrar of Incorporated Societies. The delay in having the statements accepted by the Auditor is due to the change from cash to accrual accounting at the beginning of 2001 and additional work required in establishing opening positions in the Statement of Financial Position. The 2001 statements presented to the 2002 AGM have required amendment as a result of the audit. Where the preliminary statements showed a profit of $1,287.33 and net asset value at 31 December 2001 as $3,275.31 the audited statements show a profit of $327.33 and net asset value as $2,315.31. The difference is due to changes made in accounting for unreceived subscription payments. These are no longer recorded as accrued income when subscription notices are posted.
The Statement of Financial Performance for 2002 shows a net loss of $1,868. While income in 2002 varied little from that in 2001 there was an increase of almost $2,000 in expenditure. Main contributors were conference expenses (up 13%) conference proceedings expenses (there were none in 2001) and newsletter expenses (up 89%). We had hoped to make a small profit from the annual conference but a miscommunication over numbers attending the dinner resulted in the conference running at a loss. The loss incurred during the year had a flow-on effect with our capital funds which at the end of the year stood at $447.34 (compared with $2,315.31 at the end of 2001).
The preliminary figures for 2003 outturn show a small profit of $405.55. However, this is based on more than a two-thirds cut in both income and expenditure, caused mainly through no conference being held during 2003.
The 2002 AGM approved an increase of 15% in NZAIA membership fees (to take effect 1 January 2003) and for the purpose of partly funding an organisational development strategy. At the end of 2002 a start had been made on implementing the strategy with the leasing of office space in downtown Wellington. Expenditure on running the office during the year totaled $2523.94. Income from the increased membership fee was not sufficient to meet this expense and the balance was met through donations which totaled $1,018.76. Concerted efforts will be required in 2004 to raise income if progress is to be made with the development strategy, which also includes the employment of an executive officer.
Bob McClymont
8 March 2004
Recommendations:
3. That the audited accounts for 2001 and 2002 be approved.
4. That the unaudited preliminary accounts for the year ended December 2003 be received.
| New Zealand Association for Impact Assessment (Inc.) - NZAIA |
| Draft Statement of Financial Performance for year ended 31 December 2003 |
| 2002 |
Income |
2003 (not yet final) |
||
| $3,227.70 |
Ann Subs Received - Current Full |
$2,772.00 |
||
| $140.00 |
Ann Subs Received - Current Low Inc |
$72.00 |
||
| $100.00 |
Ann Subs Received - 3yr |
$410.00 |
||
| $140.00 |
Ann Subs Received in Advance |
$85.00 |
||
| $310.00 |
Subs Previous Year |
$900.00 |
||
| $9,560.00 |
Conference Income |
$0.00 |
||
| $0.00 |
Professional Dvpt Income |
$0.00 |
||
| $1,041.50 |
Publications Income |
$415.00 |
||
| $6.00 |
Publication Shipping Fees |
$14.00 |
||
| $860.00 |
Student Conference Grants |
$0.00 |
||
| $0.00 |
Donations received |
$1,018.76 |
||
| $40.80 |
Interest Income |
$4.18 |
||
| $15,426.00 |
Total Income |
$5,690.94 |
||
| Expenses |
||||
| $125.00 |
Post Box Rental |
$125.00 |
||
| $307.04 |
Photocopying/Printing |
$0.00 |
||
| $297.44 |
Proceedings Costs |
$0.00 |
||
| $928.18 |
Web Site |
$1,009.19 |
||
| $2,032.70 |
Newsletter Expenses |
$595.13 |
||
| $366.49 |
Postage |
$0.00 |
||
| $53.90 |
IANZ Postage |
$0.00 |
||
| $9,078.27 |
Conference Expenses |
$0.00 |
||
| $1,765.18 |
Conference Proceedings Expenses |
$697.50 |
||
| $710.00 |
Student Conference Subsidy |
$0.00 |
||
| $0.00 |
Workshop Expenses |
$0.00 |
||
| $112.50 |
Core Group Meeting Room Hire |
$0.00 |
||
| $314.86 |
Office Space Rental |
$1,903.26 |
||
| $596.84 |
Meeting Teleconference Expenses |
$299.88 |
||
| $0.00 |
Phone Line Costs |
$452.95 |
||
| $0.00 |
Electricity |
$67.73 |
||
| $14.43 |
Withholding Tax Paid |
$1.62 |
||
| $17.00 |
Bank Charges |
$33.13 |
||
| $0.00 |
Contract for Service |
$100.00 |
||
| $234.59 |
Affiliation Fees |
$0.00 |
||
| $269.55 |
Extraordinary Expenses |
$0.00 |
||
| $17,223.97 |
Total Expenses |
$5,285.39 |
||
| ($1,797.97) |
Profit (Loss) |
$405.55 |
| New Zealand Association for Impact Assessment (Inc.) - NZAIA |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Draft Statement of Financial Position |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| As at 31 December 2003 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ACCOUNTING POLICIES AND NOTES TO THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS |
|||
| FOR THE YEAR ENDED 31 DECEMBER 2003 |
|||
| 1. |
STATUTORY BASE/REPORTING ENTITY |
||
| These general purpose financial statements have been prepared in accordance with the generally accepted accounting practices and requirements of the Financial Reporting Act 1993. The Association is not a reporting entity under the Act. |
|||
| 2. |
MEASUREMENT BASE |
||
| The accounting principles recognized as appropriate for the measurement and reporting of income and financial position on historical cost basis are followed. |
|||
| 3. |
DIFFERENTIAL REPORTING |
||
| The association is a qualifying entity for differential reporting by virtue of its size and that it has no public accountability. |
|||
| 4. |
SPECIFIC ACCOUNTING POLICIES |
||
| Income Tax |
|||
| The Association meets the requirements of section 61(34) of the Income Tax Act 1976 and as such qualifies to an exemption from Income Tax of income to $1000. The Association's income from sources beyond the circle of membership does not exceed $1000 during the period, therefore, no income tax return need be filed unless requested by the Inland Revenue Department. |
|||
| 5. |
CHANGES IN ACCOUNTING POLICIES |
||
| There have been no changes in accounting policies during the current year. |
|||
| All policies have been used consistent with those used during the prior year. |
|||
| 6. |
NOTES TO THE ACCOUNTS |
||
| 6.1. The Association is not registered for GST |
|||
| 6.2. There are no contingent liabilities at year end (previous year: Nil) |
|||
4. Secretary's Report 2003/2004
Last year was a busy one for me personally - pehaps my busiest ever. Aside from my own work I also took on the role of President of the Population Association of NZ in July and put a lot of work into the 2003 conference of that organisation. This has reduced the time that I have been able to spend on NZAIA this year. Although the core group did appoint someone as an NZAIA part time administrator earlier in the year, she had to resign due to other commitments. Given our tight finances over 2003, this also helped keep expenditure down.
Without an efficient dedicated administrator to handle the routine of membership subs etc. some things were a bit late - for example the membership subs reminders didn't go out till August/September. Thanks however to the prompt response from many members bringing their membership subs up to date. It would be helpful if those who haven't as yet brought their subs up to date do so asap.
I had two students working with me over the summer and they each helped to some degree with some of the NZAIA administrative work. What is needed however is someone to work on a more long term basis with the appropriate skills to handle day to day administration and act as a catalyst for voluntary work support and with fundraising and promotion of NZAIA. NZAIA now has a base that provides a central point for such an effort. Hopefully the changes to membership fee structures and a successful 2004 conference will make it possible to kick start that sort of effort.
Membership is satisfactory given how late we were to send out reminder notices. I estimate the NZAIA membership at 140 as of last week. Some of those have yet to pay their 2003 subs but subs arrears have been coming in at an accelerating rate over the last year. The new accounting system makes it much easier to track individual subscription histories. Bob McClymont and I had some work to do developing accounting practices that reconcile an accrual based accounting system with the membership subs practices of an NGO.
I haven't put much energy into the web site this year, but have to do so later in the year.
It was great to get the 2002 conference proceedings out - the most ambitious and complete to date. Sales of proceedings have helped to defray some of the costs associated with preparation. Many thanks to those who contributed to that effort.
It was clear early on in the 2003 year that it would be best to hold the next conference in 2004. It has been a full year all round for core group members. I am looking forward to the next conference and "gathering of the NZAIA network" scheduled for 19th and 20th March 2004 at Solway Park, Masterton. I have designed a session on "Assessment and Management of the Impact of Population Change" in the conference programme. This follows a theme that I earlier developed at the recent Population Association of NZ conference.
Come to the 2004 NZAIA Conference and AGM - I can't recall any NZAIA conference that I haven't found worthwhile. If you are behind with your NZAIA subs, please bring them up to date if you haven't already done so.
It is always important encourage new blood and fresh ideas into the core group but there is also scope for some of our old veterans to come back again and put their "shoulders behind the wheel". If you can't make it to the AGM but are interested in playing a more active part in NZAIA over the next year then let me or someone else who is planning to attend the AGM know.
James Newell
Secretary, NZAIA
10th March 2004
Recommendation : That this report be received.
5. NZAIA Co-Convenors Report 2003-2004
The last two years could be categorised as a period in which the Core Group has kept largely to its knitting. This perhaps reflects the significant changes that occurred in the period immediately prior to this, when a number of Core Group roles changed hands. Again it must be noted that the one constant has been the significant contribution of James Newell as the Core Group secretary.
Some of what have become key NZAIA activities and which have continued during the last two years include:
á The monthly Wellington Professional Forum, organised by Martin Ward and Noreen Barton. This continues to get a good turn out and attract people from a range of different backgrounds, both as speakers and participants.
á The NZAIA 2002 Conference Proceedings were completed and published.
á IANZ has continued to be published and read at office coffee tables around the country. Thanks to Tom Davies for his efforts as editor and to all of those who have made contributions. IANZ is a key medium through which we can advertise NZAIA.
á A letter was sent to the Minister of Foreign Affairs requesting that he arrange NZ Government support for the IAIA initiative asking WTO to incorporate impact assessment in its decision-making. Thanks go to Martin Ward and Richard Morgan for undertaking this.
á NZAIA made a submission on the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment's review of the role and quality of scientific input within environmental policy and decision-making. Thanks to Richard Morgan for his help on this submission.
á NZAIA was represented on a number of bodies (e.g. the Royal Societies Sustainability Initiative, the Ministry for the Environment Professional Bodies Liaison group). Thanks to James Newell and Chris Cosslett for attendance at these meetings.
á The NZAIA website has been updated on a regular basis with new information about the Associations activities and with information on its members. Thanks again to James Newell.
Questions and Challenges facing NZAIA
The 2001-2002 convenors report noted a number of challenges facing the Association. Many of these still remain as relevant as they did in 2002 and, to some extent, still await our response:
á The question of how we deal with the administrative work-load that James Newell currently manages remains. While James' work is very much appreciated, our reliance on him does represent a risk to the organisation. In early 2003 NZAIA employed an administrative assistant (Kylie Ayrton). Kylie resigned in April 2003 because of other commitments. James has more recently employed a research assistant to help with his own business, with the expectation that this assistant will help out with NZAIA administration. From the organisation's point of view it is obviously not an ideal situation to be relying on the good will of individual members to personally fund the administration of the organisation. James' contribution is certainly much appreciated, however thought needs to be given to a future in which James may not be able to make such a contribution and to a future when James stands down from the administration role.
á Where does NZAIA fit with regard to various other assessment, environmental and resource management organisations within New Zealand. Since 2002 the Environment Institute of Australia and New Zealand has been formed. Undoubtedly this Institute will overlap with some of the areas within which NZAIA has always acted. Ensuring that NZAIA works with this new Institute on common ground will therefore be important. A good start has been with the two organisations co-hosting a presentation by Barry Sadler in Wellington in November this year.
á The proposed changes to membership fees are put forward to help NZAIA to increase the scope of activity and to finance administrative support.
á Which brings us back to the final point made in 2002, the need to maintain an active membership and succession structure that ensures that the key positions in NZAIA are filled. I'm sure this is not an issue isolated to the NZAIA, but how do we continue to attract new and committed members?
There may well not be a golden solution to any of these issues. The Core Group however must continue to keep these issues in mind in its decision making and where possible take steps, perhaps just incremental steps, towards their resolution.
Respectfully submitted by:
Richard Peterson Mary Sparrow
Co-convenor Co-convenor
8. Proposal to Change Membership Fees
NZAIA membership fees have changed very little in the last ten years and are now low by comparison with similar organisations. The minor fee increases made at the 2002 AGM have not proven sufficient to cover the Associations costs and to overcome the loss incurred from the 2002 conference. In 2003, as for the last several years, the Association experienced a shortfall between the income generated by membership fees and its running costs. It is important that NZAIA maintain a margin between income and costs over time. An essential part of this is a more realistic membership fee.
At the 2002 AGM, when the membership fees were increased by only a small margin, it was agreed to look into further ways in which additional funds can be put towards website development, administrative support and professional development within available income. Increasing the fees paid by the existing type of membership is proposed as a means to achieve this end.
In the interim is proposed to set new "ordinary" membership fees for the 2005 year as follows:
- Ordinary member annual fee increases from $40 to $60;
- Ordinary member three yearly fee increases from $110 to $160; and
- Low-income annual fee increases from $12 to $20.
Recommendation
That the membership fees be increased from their current levels to:
- ordinary member (single year) $60
- ordinary member (three years) $160
- low-income (single year) $20.
9. Promotion of Professional Standards in Impact Assessment.
This is a key NZAIA objective that has been much talked about but we need to work out some creative ways of furthering it. How do we identify and recognise high quality in impact assessment? One idea that is suggested as an immediate step towards this is to emulate the "Oscars" model as a means of identifying good impact assessments and involving all members in determining what constitute good examples of impact assessment practice in NZ. What is proposed is that members be asked to nominate projects for the annual awards and then members be asked to vote on a short list of the resulting nominees. This process would be run on an annual basis possibly assisted by a suitable sponsor or sponsors and the results announced at each AGM.
It is further suggested that NZAIA establish a professional development committee to further this and other means for providing models of good practice in Impact Assessment.
Recommendation
1. That NZAIA establish an annual "Oscars type model" process by which members identify excellence in NZ impact assessment.
2. That NZAIA establish a professional development committee to further this and other ideas for professional development.