Skip to main content.

Nelson community meeting

12 October 2005

National Environmental Standards

Air quality

  • The introduction of Air Quality National Environmental Standards was rushed. Was the process and timeframe appropriate?
  • The air standard targets are hard to meet with inefficient heating and older homes. How do we educate children (i.e. the next generation of home owners) to choose better heating? Can we link this to the school education system and curriculum?
  • Who should educate people regarding fuel and appliances? MFE or industry? Someone needs to develop an education programme on the correct use of wood in burners. MFE should show leadership.
  • There needs to be government support to lower the levels of smog in the environment (e.g. firewood sellers need education). There should be an act on all causes of bad air quality. Petrol needs to be improved.
  • Central government needs to make progress and enact the vehicle emissions standards (e.g. there should be maximum standards on asbestos in brake linings).

Contaminated land

Will MFE be setting Contaminated Land National Environmental Standards for residential properties that grow more than 10% of their consumed produce?

Drinking water

  • Compliance monitoring of standards needs to be looked at. Regarding the standards for water, we are concerned that the Ministry of Health does not know much about water quality.
  • We need to publicise water quality results and let communities decide whether to improve standards.
  • New towns should have separate portable waste and general use (irrigation, flushing toilet and fire fighting) supplies.

General comments

  • We need National Environmental Standards for methyl bromide. For example, there are safer options than the use of methyl bromide fumigation in soil. The Standard should include emissions from plants and we should find an alternative for methyl bromide including capture and reuse. The methyl bromide framework needs to be practical and easy to use and should address the protection of workers.
  • People are enraged by standards that force people to do things that are not necessary.
  • We should look at countries like Sweden when developing standards.
  • We need to educate people to show them. Leaflets are no use. We need a national TV campaign.
  • There is room for improvement in the introduction of national standards (e.g. more comprehensive consultation). They should be accompanied by a support package.
  • The public consultation process for the first standard was limited. What power does the government have if councils and regions do not meet their national standards? Re-use of wastewater is not common. Is there opportunity for re-use?
  • What are the incentives for the councils to comply with national standards?
  • There is a disconnection between what national government wants and what councils can achieve, ‘Top Down Process.’ How do you engage the public? How do you fund the changes that are required?
  • We need information to be more available (e.g. warm homes). Water and power are undervalued. New Zealand does not realise the value of water in particular.
  • We need National Environmental Standards for noise (e.g. light aircraft in national parks). Vehicle imports and modifications need National Environmental standards. Who will enforce national standards?
  • The energy standards are to coincide with air standards.

Resource Management Act

Policies and plans

  • The process to change plans is too difficult and takes too long.
  • If too much is referred to in the plan it is still difficult to understand.
  • We need to recognise that plans will be evolving and will change with the community.
  • Plans are still inaccessible to the public. We need to make them more accessible and not just on the web. There needs to be good information on limitations.
  • There are issues with out-of-date plans and environmental outcomes are not being achieved to the standard desired by this generation.
  • Permitted activities in plans often do not result in good environmental outcomes.
  • There is a need for better assessment criteria in plans to encourage more prescription.
  • Plans can only become operative in one go. The Act allows new plans to be adopted in stages. There is a two year timeline to notification stage.

Hearing process

  • We need to use pre-hearings to facilitate the process and resolve issues that could be held up.
  • Councils need to be actively involved in pre application mediation.
  • The current process is not consultative as the power lies with a few. Pre-consultation must increase.

Resource consents

  • We need guidance for the public on pre-application and information on applying for consents. How many consents are granted? Applications are requiring more information and this is difficult for the average person.
  • The RMA is perceived as ‘something to get around’. Why are so many consents approved?

Capacity building

  • The government needs to give local government resources to deal with issues early (e.g. expertise and facilitation including funding).
  • A pool of facilitators is needed to help at local level. MFE could provide training and accreditation for this.
  • It should be made clear to applicants and submitters that the role of staff is not decision maker.
  • We need to keep the public better informed on RMA processes and how they work.
  • We need to continue funding of RMA courses providing advice to the public so they know how to deal with processes. Education and advice could help the process work better.
  • No need to consult is a negative approach. Discussion needs to be facilitated early on so that it leads to better outcomes.
  • Who is going to follow up on some of these reports that criticise council processes and co-ordination between MFE and the Office of Auditor General?
  • Who is going to spread recommendations around councils? Councils need to be held accountable. The government needs to take action.
  • We need to talk more about practical issues and not get too isolated.
  • There needs to be consistency between councils. We should provide best practice examples.
  • We need default mechanisms which can then be varied to provide more consistency.
  • There is a lack of co-ordination in the approach to urban design and a lack of vision within the council. Expertise within the council regarding urban design may not exist.
  • Who monitors notification? Is too much non-notified?
  • There is a need for better assessment criteria in plans to encourage more prescription.
  • Who audits MFE? (Treasury, Audit Office). Who will monitor council performance? What is the role of the Parliamentary Commission for the Environment (PCE)?
  • A new MFE role is being investigated in conjunction with existing roles.
  • There needs to be incentives for developments regarding good urban form.
  • We need urban design protocol dissemination (e.g. work through professionals like architects).
  • There needs to be research links between Local Government Act and RMA regarding community outcomes and environmental outcomes.
  • Assistance from the Environment Centre to applicants and submitters is useful.
  • The Tasman Council is reviewing all application forms to make them easier to use.
  • We need more education about public involvement in the planning process (RMA and Long Term Council Community Plan) and consent processes.
  • We need to promote positive examples (e.g. Department of Conservation Rangers TV programme).
  • There is no ministerial presence at local level.
  • There should be public participation involving diverse communities.
  • Local authorities may not have the expertise to deal with the cumulative effects and impacts of air quality. We need to have people with professional expertise in councils.
  • Application and ‘Assessment of Environmental Effects’ (AEE’s) is biased by industry and government. All companies have industrial clients and there is no objective and independent science available to objectors. There should be independent science in New Zealand.

Iwi consultation

Iwi should be consulted in the development of plans.

General comments

  • As a result of successive consents there is no mechanism to take into account the cumulative impacts (e.g. coastal birds).
  • National water standards are too hard to meet.
  • Accidental discovery and destruction of arch sites is an issue.

Waste

Waste minimisation

  • Landfill Gas B is an option for heating at the hospital in Nelson. How can we find beneficial uses for other organic waste streams?
  • Building waste such as treated timber is coming in now. We could have national levies on some products to fund waste minimisation initiatives. We need national levies to put costs onto producers of waste who make money out of these products and also landfill levies so there is a dual incentive to reduce waste.
  • The Wakata development has to reuse waste.

Product stewardship

  • The car industry asked for product stewardship last year.
  • Legislation is needed as there has been no change at transfer stations from the Packaging Accord.
  • Tyres should come in new or close to new. We should not be importing someone else’s waste. Also there is a problem with car imports in general. There should be a cost of $100 per car to cover the collection of dumped vehicles.
  • There needs to be legislation like in New South Wales to back up our waste strategy.
  • Central government needs to work on how to empower individuals and companies to take responsibility for their waste.
  • Producers of materials should pay for ‘extras’ beyond what ratepayers should pay (e.g. transfer stations and recycling collections).
  • There is much support for product stewardship and it is a dual responsibility. Plastic bags should be banned or have a disincentive put on them (e.g. pay more than 5ยข).
  • There should be an automobile deposit (i.e. environmental fees and incentives to increase environmental awareness and encourage the returning and recycling of cars).

Recycling, reuse and community

  • Tasman District Council has problems with recycling commercial material (e.g. paper and cardboard). Companies are not prepared to pay for it.
  • What can we do with carbon that is centrifuged out of used oil in the refining process? This carbon is no longer acceptable at Nelson landfills.
  • We need to phase out plastics that cannot be recycled.
  • We need to go to wineries and ask them what do we need to do in order to make it ok for them to put wine into reused bottles.
  • We need to replace plastic and aluminium containers (that contaminate food) with glass (that has high deposits and can be reused).

Hazardous waste

  • We need to go beyond ‘What shall we do with it?’ to stopping the production of this waste. This is a central government issue. We need national systems. We need disincentives for production (e.g. a levy on all products which end up as hazardous waste).
  • We need to look at the issue of toxic waste from oil refining.

General comments

  • What is best practice? Could there be some assistance and incentives and disincentives for individuals and companies to deal with their own wastes.
  • It is an unreasonable imposition on local communities to deal with waste produced by others. There needs to be assistance for local authority education programmes and producer responsibility levies.
  • Local businesses dealing with waste streams struggle to create successful businesses.
  • Construction and demolition waste is an issue that should be addressed.

General topics

Environmental education and information

There is a real concern that environmental education is not compulsory at schools. MFE should be responsible for education. Schools should teach environmental responsibility and have environmental management systems in place (e.g. reduce paper use, recycle, no burning policy and use of textbooks).

Water

  • We should use separate water for drinking and for other use.
  • There are concerns regarding run-off (from agricultural and human activity) into Nelson bays.
  • What are the impacts from subdivision? We need proactive and strategic controls.
  • Estuaries and Wetlands are getting increasingly worse. The government needs clear standards for coastal development.
  • We need to look at species that take up too many resources (e.g. rock snot is an environmental tragedy for New Zealand).
  • There is a problem with Didymo (rock snot) which is an aquatic weed that has recently diseased many rivers. We need to act quickly to eradicate this problem while it is still possible.
  • There are 2 important water quality issues that MFE should act on.
    • 1. MFE should be supporting Marlborough District Council against Toll Holdings regarding the fast ferries issue.
    • 2. Look at how petrol stations can contaminate soil and groundwater. Nelson City Council is not sufficiently active on this issue

Home heating

  • More incentives and subsidies are needed for solar water heating. It is a major cost. Requirements are needed for new housing (e.g. solar panels).
  • Solar power is under utilised, particularly in the sunshine belt of Nelson, Tasman and Marlborough.

General comments

  • What kind of population (number) should we have? Population growth should be part of policy.
  • We need to set guidelines about what is a sustainable population. Balance is needed as growth is not necessarily a good thing for the environmental carrying capacity.
  • Clear felling is a problem. Why is it allowed?
  • We need to have effective relationships between Māori and the Ministry not a lack of communication.
  • The Minister for the Environment should also be the Minister of Biosecurity.
  • We need more thorough inspection of incoming products for Genetic Engineering contamination.
  • Environmental issues are not given a high enough priority. The environment should come first.
  • The lack of regional councils has been to the detriment of the environment.
  • Central government needs to provide some leadership on amalgamating Tasman District and Nelson City.
  • How did biodiversity become indigenous vegetation?
  • Individuals need to take more responsibility for how they live their lives (e.g. walking and biking). How can the government encourage individuals to ‘walk the talk’? The government should lead by example.

Last updated: 17 September 2007