|
| Resource management framing can be made to work |
|
|
|
|
| The Government has announced its framing for reform of the Resource Management Act into 2 new laws. The RMA needs replacing (or at least a serious make-over). We need fewer plans, less consenting and faster decisions. But that streamlining must be accompanied by coherent national direction that appropriately protects the environment. Environmental limits are needed across all domains - not just freshwater. Including spatial planning is a good thing, especially considering the size of our infrastructure deficit and the need for longer-term strategic planning on land and sea. | | The Government has appointed an Expert Advisory Group to advise on implementation of its framing. The Group is competent although its reporting deadline of December this year is unrealistic. EDS is engaging constructively in the work ahead through our ‘RM3’ workstream. We’ve got to get it right this time round: we can’t afford to change the system every time the government changes. |
|
|
|
|
|
| Crown Minerals Amendment Bill is a shocker |
|
|
|
|
| This bill is not needed. We most likely have enough gas for use as a transitional fuel if Methanex stopped exporting it. The plan to import gas to cover what’s exported makes no sense. It’s hard to see any international investor being bone-headed enough to risk millions in exploration at a time when the world is transitioning to renewables and oil and gas should be left in the ground. The lead time to production is long and the risks of being left with stranded assets high. | | The response to our energy requirements should be to drive harder with renewables. It would help if the electricity market disincentivised sitting on vast quantities of consented but unbuilt renewable projects. The Bill is inconsistent with our Paris commitments and climate obligations in free trade agreements. The fact that the Government has only allowed 5 days for submissions on the bill shows that it knows it won’t stand up to scrutiny. On this occasion EDS won’t make the effort to submit because no-one will be listening. |
|
|
|
|
|
| Oceans project steaming ahead |
|
|
|
|
| The EDS Oceans Project is making good progress with our first working paper on marine spatial planning, along with an in-depth case study on the Marlborough Sounds, due to be released next month. We have had many excellent comments during our peer review process which we are busy incorporating into the final papers. We are also starting research for our second working paper, which has a focus on marine protected areas, along with a case study on the Otago coast. For more information, or to provide input, please contact project lead Raewyn Peart at raewyn@eds.org.nz. |
|
|
|
|
|
| EDS Environment Court hearings |
|
|
|
|
| EDS has two Environment Court hearings in November. Our long-awaited case on who has responsibility for the Rakaia Water Conservation Order is finally coming to a head. This matter has been years in the making for EDS and North Canterbury Fish & Game Council and we’re looking forward to finally getting clarity on the extent of the regional council’s statutory duties with respect to the Order. This should help ensure that the outstanding values of the River are protected. | | The other case continues EDS’s advocacy in Te Manahuna / Mackenzie Basin. EDS is seeking stronger protection for the Mackenzie Country’s unique indigenous biodiversity which has been badly impacted by years of agricultural intensification. |
|
|
|
|
|
| Fisheries reforms must not ignore information deficit |
|
|
|
|
| Minister Jones has signalled changes are coming for the fisheries sector. We support his commitment to continue the roll-out of onboard cameras and introduce electronic catch reporting by amateur charter fishers. Data released by Fisheries NZ from the first phase of onboard cameras shows there has been significant increases in reported mortality of protected species highlighting the extent of under-reporting on unobserved vessels. It is critical this data is reviewed in a timely manner, and used to inform fisheries management, including implementing effective bycatch reduction measures. | | Of concern is the Minister’s proposal to speed-up decisions on catch limits. There are significant risks in ‘automating’ catch limit changes, based on predetermined decision rules, as these can be based on assumptions that don’t hold up in the real world. We will be taking a close look at the proposals when they are released in the new year. |
|
|
|
|
|
