Dialogue: Resource hold-ups major barrier to economic growth

By ALASDAIR THOMPSON*

While Aucklanders wait to see what deal the Government strikes with Tranz Rail over access to tracks, and for more details on how much Infrastructure Auckland is going to spend on public transport solutions, the congestion and wasted energy on the region's roads keeps rising.

The Resource Management Act has lately been fingered as a major source of delays on road projects. It seems we are living in an astonishing green fantasy in which the life of a resource consent granted under the act may equate to the time it takes to get one.

The Environment Court's three-year backlog of 3000 cases is evidence that the procedures involved with the act are a major constraint to economic growth and greater job opportunities.

A Business Compliance Panel report has listed no fewer than 30 bottlenecks for which business held the act responsible.

Even Environment Minister Marian Hobbs seems to agree. In a reply to a letter from the Employers and Manufacturers Association, she wrote: "Transport authorities consider that about 90 per cent of the delays in obtaining RMA permissions for roading projects relate to Environment Court resourcing and procedural issues."

The Ministry for the Environment has begun studying the extent that hold-ups with the procedures of the act are dragging out the application procedures for granting consents on Auckland's roading projects.

We had asked the minister for her support to try to overcome these blockages. We asked whether Auckland might hope for her support in developing an omnibus approach to road development projects.

Could she support the idea of granting a single resource consent to apply across a whole stretch of motorway under the one comprehensive road network process, rather than have Transit New Zealand face a whole series of incremental consents, hearings, appeals and so on?

The minister rejected the idea, although she said it did have merit for achieving a more streamlined process. Her reasons offered an interesting insight into how the Government views Auckland and its infrastructure issues.

Urgency is plainly not important. That's nothing new, of course. Some politicians relish the thought that Auckland's fragmentation makes it difficult to get a consensus to take to the Government.

That is about to change and the Government should ready itself for that. We were pleased nevertheless to get a substantial response.

The minister said no omnibus consent procedures could be envisaged to relieve Auckland's traffic congestion because "effective public participation is necessary to ensure good decision-making", since established communities and sensitive environments must be fully consulted. We agree 100 per cent.

But public participation in the process is not at issue. What is causing public and business frustration is the definition of what constitutes a reasonable time for participating. The minister's argument falls apart at that point.

Is 35 years long enough to implement the long-planned motorway network? Is it reasonable for an objector purposely to hold up motorway construction by lodging a $55 appeal, then withdrawing it three years later when the issue gets to the Environment Court?

As well as the direct costs, delays of this sort constitute neither sound environmental practice nor good planning.

The minister suggests "a principle of good resource management decision making is that decisions on planning permissions should take place near the time the activity is undertaken. This is because knowledge, values and circumstances change over time. Hence resource consents lapse after two years and designations after five years."

Given the Environment Court's three-year backlog of appeals, the life of a resource consent might well expire just as it is granted. Any project can be sent into an endless bureaucratic spiral if objectors so desire. That's not what the architects of the Resource Management Act envisaged.

The delays facing applicants for resource consents appear to be in flagrant violation of the act, the purpose of which is "to promote the sustainable management of natural and physical resources". That means to manage their "use, development and protection in a way, or at a rate, which enables people and communities to provide for their social, economic and cultural wellbeing"

Ms Hobbs said her ministry is reviewing how the procedures of the act are working and has promised more resources. But an extra judge won't clear the backlog in the term of this Government.

The question remains: how come our Ministry for the Environment can for so long carry on the pretence that it is working in the interests of environmental management and care while it is responsible for huge waste-inducing delays?

* Alasdair Thompson is the chief executive of the Employers and Manufacturers Association (Northern).