Nick Smith: Putting home owners back in control of their own gardens

The assumptions that only councils and bureaucrats value trees are flawed. Photo / Supplied

Opinion

National was elected to government on a platform of reducing unnecessary bureaucracy and specifically to streamline and simplify the Resource Management Act. The changes to rules around urban trees are delivering on that promise.

This issue is about whether home owners should have to get a resource consent to trim or remove a tree on their property. The Government takes the view, as a general rule, they should not.

The specific law change that National is making is to prohibit blanket tree protection rules. These are generic rules in a few councils' plans where every tree over a particular height - say 3m - requires consents to trim or remove.

National's change means that if a council wants to put restrictions on landowners trimming or removing a tree on their property they need to consult the property owner and specifically identify the tree or groups of trees in their District Plan.

The vast majority of councils around the country have not resorted to blanket tree protection rules because of the cost and bureaucracy. No such rules exist in Christchurch - the Garden City - Wellington or Hamilton, yet these cities have tens of thousands of beautiful trees providing public amenity, shelter and shade.

These cities have provisions for protecting specific trees or groups that are of significance without the burden of thousands of resource consents for every tree over a few metres in height.

There is no evidence that these blanket tree protection rules provide any more or a greater size of trees in communities. Council figures show that 97 per cent of consents for trimming and removal are granted.

These rules do create some perverse incentives for people not to plant trees for fear of losing control of their property.

Parliament heard evidence from plant nurseries that people specifically request trees that grow to less than 3m in height so as to avoid these rules.

I have received hundreds of emails concerned that this bill threatens trees along streets, in public reserves and at the beach. These trees are unaffected and are controlled by councils. The law change affects only trees on private land.

A flawed assumption by opponents of this law change is that only councils and bureaucrats value trees. And that given half a chance selfish landowners will chop them down.

The reality is that Aucklanders put huge value on trees on their property for shade, aesthetics and for privacy. Opponents do not realise the scale of the bureaucracy required to administer these rules. It is extraordinary that 5000 consents a year - 10 per cent of all consents processed under the RMA nationwide - are for tree trimming in councils that comprise only 21 per cent of our population.

It is not surprising that councils, such as Auckland City, submitted to Parliament that the current rules were excessive and supported the change in the bill.

The Government does recognise that there are significant trees on private land which have wider community benefits. That is why we are providing for councils to specifically list these trees or groups of trees for protection - albeit councils will have to consult with the property owner.

In essence, this law change is about changing the onus between councils and landowners. At the moment, councils are in the box seat and property owners must seek permission to trim or remove any tree on their property.

What the Government's amendment bill does is ensure councils consult landowners before putting restrictions on their trees and reflects a greater respect for property rights.

The process for councils to list specific trees for protection over the next two years is not onerous and will require a fraction of the bureaucracy to process consents.

There is concern that with the reform of Auckland governance over the next year councils will be distracted from doing this work. I will be monitoring this closely and if councils fail to progress this work, I will use my powers under the RMA to direct them.

It will be a relief for Auckland homeowners that from October 1 this year, they will not need a resource consent to trim their own tree. Damaging or removing a tree completely will still require a resource consent until January 1, 2012.

This will give councils time to identify significant trees that do require council controls and will be subject to consultation with the landowner.

This approach will provide a better balance among unnecessary bureaucracy, property rights and the value urban trees add to Auckland's great lifestyle.

* Nick Smith is Minister for the Environment