Dialogue: Local communities bear cost

By CHRIS LUX

For many people the workings of the Resource Management Act would be a total mystery.

Previously New Zealanders' activities on the environment were largely controlled by rules which stated what you could or couldn't do with your property.

The old planning era was all about adhering to rules, the new era about achieving outcomes, or so we were told.

I don't think anybody anticipated the degree and manner by which the new act would affect New Zealand society.

Local and regional authorities have been required to administer the act through statutory documents like district and regional plans and to take into account matters as diverse as the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi, to the intrinsic values of natural ecosystems, and meeting the foreseeable needs of future generations.

The last decade has seen an enormous financial burden imposed upon New Zealand communities as local and regional authorities have grappled with the act.

New planning and legal disciplines have been created.

Our own district council has spent over $2 million on preparing a new district plan. Some councils have spent more, others have ditched their plans and started again.

In New Zealand legislation, the principles of justice and equity reign high, but by these benchmarks the RMA is producing some disturbing results.

On the Coromandel we have seen the RMA process used to deliberately hold up projects which have been through a long and extensive statutory and public process.

The renewal of the main entrance to the Coromandel Peninsula, a long one-way bridge, was unnecessarily delayed for years due to one objection over drilling exploratory holes in the riverbed.

In Pauanui, after five years of consultation and planning, a new wastewater plant now goes to the Environment Court because of one objector.

In Whitianga, the process of three years of consultation and planning a residential development was challenged by one objector in the Environment Court. The decision of the judge was to unequivocally declare the application had been soundly prepared and processed. The dissatisfied objector appealed to the High Court.

Have these projects been held up legitimately under the RMA utilising the process? Yes. But has the act helped achieve desired outcomes for the community? Absolutely not.

While it could be argued that the applicants for such large projects have the resources to get there in the end, does that make the process right? I don't believe so.

The RMA is an excellent act in bringing a holistic view to the way we manage our natural resources. If we are to prevent the act being brought into disrepute, then legislative change is required.

In the end, the resource consent process for all New Zealanders must be fair.

To have anything less is a cop out to our community. Leadership is required.

* Chris Lux is district mayor, Thames-Coromandel District Council.