KEY POINTS:
Over the past week or two, there has been a barrage of calls for Corrections Minister Damien O'Connor to resign over the death in custody of North Shore teenager Liam Ashley. Now, with considerably more justification, there should be similar pressure on the Conservation Minister. Chris Carter does not have the excuse of inheriting a department prone to bungling at many levels. Instead, he is guilty of arbitrarily subverting the judicial process in a manner that mocked its very existence.
The extent of Mr Carter's transgression is apparent now that the Environment Minister, David Benson-Pope, has approved the building of a multimillion-dollar marina at Whangamata. Mr Benson-Pope was handed the decision-making power after the High Court ordered Mr Carter to review his decision to veto the development. Justice John Fogarty said Mr Carter had exceeded his powers in reconsidering evidence put to the hearing of the Environment Court that approved the marina in October last year.
Mr Benson-Pope, bringing a clear, unbiased eye to proceedings, has, unsurprisingly, found none of the supposed problems that persuaded Mr Carter to take such drastic, ill-judged, action. He says that he received "considerably more information" than the Conservation Minister, perhaps a commentary in itself on Mr Carter's unyielding attitude. As a face-saver for his colleague, Mr Benson-Pope has imposed conditions that he says will ensure the marina's impact on the environment is monitored. But nothing can conceal the fact that his verdict and recommendations are essentially those of the Environment Court.
By implication, Mr Benson-Pope has found that Mr Carter was wrong to bow to lobbying from local iwi and surfers. Their concerns had, after all, been examined and discounted by the Environment Court following exhaustive hearings at which both sides of the argument had the chance to present their case, and to cross-examine their opponents. The Conservation Minister's only involvement should have been to rubber-stamp that decision and ensure the marina's construction fulfilled the court's conditions.
As it was, Mr Carter made a nonsense of the finding of an independent tribunal set up to resolve conflicts in a way that is fair to all parties and free from political influence. His intervention, under the terms of the Resource Management Act, owed everything to meetings behind closed doors and nothing to argument in the Environment Court's public forum. It also put the marina's supporters to considerable added expense and effort. They had spent 12 years and more than $1 million trying to convince the Environment Court of the merits of their plan. The last act of their campaign, the High Court case, ended with $98,500 in costs from the Crown. Mr Benson-Pope may have belatedly restored some of their faith in the resource consents process.
Mr Carter's embarrassment should be a cautionary tale for ministers tempted to meddle in the judicial process. The fear that courts will arrive at unpopular verdicts has led Parliament to enshrine the right of ministerial intervention in many areas. But that will never make such intrusions any more just.
Mr Carter interfered in a manner that has been ruled out of order by the High Court and wrong by a fellow minister. This episode was the product of individual failing, not the culmination of a chain of errors in a department. There is no question mark over who bears the responsibility. Mr Carter should resign from the Conservation portfolio.
