SUBMISSION ON THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ACT
The NZ Association for Impact Assessment (NZAIA)
The NZAIA is an incorporated society of professionals involved in the practise, development, and teaching of environmental and social impact assessment. It was founded in 1990 with a primary interest in social assessment, but recently expanded to include environmental assessment. The NZAIA exists to promote the practise of impact assessment, including:
The Association is an affiliate of the International Association for Impact Assessment (IAIA) - an international body with some 1500 members in over 100 countries. It is the publisher of the major international scientific journals on impact assessment. The NZ association was the principal organiser of the IAIA conference held in Christchurch in 1998 - attracting over 400 delegates from throughout the world. (Further information on the NZAIA and IAIA can be found on our website: www.nzaia.org.nz)
Definition of the environment
The current definition of environment is poorly worded, with an inconsistent hierarchy of terms and definitions. The environment should be defined as ecosystems and their constituent parts. We recognise that these parts include natural resources, the built environment, people and social systems. While protecting other living systems, in the end, the Act is about people and their well being in relation to the environment. Our experience is very clearly that the issues raised by people about effects of development proposals are inevitably defined socially - that is in terms of the well-being and sustainability of people and their communities. Water pollution, noise, dust, traffic etc are all social concerns, not just technical matters resolvable by technical "experts" alone. It is our view that the Act is meaningless without a recognition of the social environment. It is therefore inadequate, unrealistic and inconsistent
with international understanding and practise to limit the definition of the environment to heath, safety or amenity values.
Treaty of Waitangi
Any changes to the Act should not weaken current requirements in relation to obligations to consider the Treaty. Maori recognise that people cannot be separated, somehow, from the bio- physical environment and have consistently rejected attempts to do so in the consideration of environmental effects.
Consultation
Amendments to the Act should not weaken, in any way, the central requirements for consultation and participation by the public. Consultation and participation is fundamental to the preparation of policies and plans, and to the assessment of environmental effects. This has been a consistent lesson from international planning and impact assessment practise. (See discussion of the Fourth Schedule, below. )
Assessments of effects
No amendment should weaken the Act in relation to the assessment of effects. Such weakening would run counter to the precautionary principle so widely accepted now. The RMA has provided a sound basis for environmental impact assessment in New Zealand to date, and this country is regarded internationally as a leader in the field. Our association supports strongly an integrated approach to impact assessment, with full participation of interested and affected parties. We note that the Ministry has provided leadership and a number of important publications on the practice of environmental impact assessment under the Act, and our association has embarked on developing guidelines for practise - consistent with the Act and taking into account international standards.
An integrated approach requires full consideration of all effects on ecosystems including the social environment. Consequently, it is vital to continue to consider both social and economic impacts. By including socio-economic effects, all effects are considered and balanced against each other, including the positive effects of proposals. Trade diversion has been used by individuals to subvert the purpose of considering effects on people and communities and their well being. This is a minor problem best dealt with by careful wording and case law.
The Fourth Schedule
The Ministry suggests that to remove the Fourth Schedule could be viewed
"as a gutting of impact assessment ...". Indeed it would be. The Fourth
Schedule is used widely as a guide to impact assessment with consultation.
It should be retained in essence, with any necessary improvements in wording to make the requirements explicit.
Use of commissioners
Applicants for resource consents should have the right to choose the option of independent commissioner/s. Many small or less controversial applications do not require this route.
Cross examination, with only legal issues going to appeal with the Environment Court, would serve to lengthen many hearings unnecessarily, with great increases in costs for the applicant.
Direct referral to the Environment Court
Direct referral should be an option for large, technically complex, or controversial applications which inevitably go through a two-hearings process - a waste of time and resources for all parties. A process for making direct application to the Court should be developed and included in the Act.
Gerard Fitzgerald (Chairman)
ph (03) 3488923