Skip to main content.

Part A - Background

22. There has been a lot of conflicting publicity about the RMA, with non-governmental organisations (NGOs) saying compliance costs are modest, while the business sector maintains that compliance costs are burdensome.

23. It is difficult to assess the influence that negative perceptions of the RMA have on investment certainty and decision making. However, the time an application takes to be granted is a useful indicator of compliance costs under the RMA. The majority of resource consent applications are dealt with in a timely manner. 83% of all non-notified consents and 69% of all notified consent applications are processed on time. Problems remain with the proportion of applications that are delayed or incur undue costs.

24. Research on large and complex projects by the Ministry for the Environment in 2003 indicated that the cost of RMA delays is a significant issue - particularly, holding costs and opportunity costs of a project being delayed.

25. Compliance costs typically increase if statutory time limits are not met, the application is publicly notified (so that members of the public can submit on the proposal), a decision is appealed to the Environment Court (or subsequently other Courts), or the duration of consents is shortened.

26. Issues can arise at any stage of an application, including from:

  • Tension arising between reconciling local environmental costs and national environmental benefits. Although these are not necessarily in conflict, resolution of this tension has to date been through local authorities and the courts, with only the provisions of the Act to assist (s6 and s7). Local Government New Zealand considers that the Act's provisions have provided insufficient guidance and as a result the national interest has seldom been represented in a form that provides useful input to decision making. This has left local authorities and the courts to decide what the interest is and how much bearing it should have on the decision.
  • Poor articulation of what rules must be complied with and inconsistency in those rules where applicants face multiple authorities to apply to and multiple plans to comply with.
  • Consultation, for example, identifying which iwi or group to consult.
  • Consent authorities requesting excessive further information.
  • Vexatious, single-issue or simply ill-focused submitters can result in substantial compliance costs.
  • Full de novo hearings at the Environment Court covering matters in similar detail that were already covered at the council level (and not always changing those earlier decisions).
  • The cost of approvals is not proportional to the business size, so any unanticipated costs can have implications for investment decisions.
  • Holding costs - while awaiting consent approvals - can be substantial (although difficult to quantify).
  • Uncertainty over water allocation issues in the absence of regional plans.
  • Numerous consent conditions, and variations between different authorities on conditions.

27. A complex set of issues and processes underpin the RMA. This paper highlights the key issues with policy proposals as appropriate.

 

[previous page | next page]

Last updated: 6 May 2008