Skip to main content.

Invercargill community meeting

18 October 2005

National Environmental Standards

Drinking water

  • There are concerns regarding water supply standards. Arsenic in the river water is running into the water supply. Contaminants in water supply cause shorter life expectancy. Drinking water is not clean enough for public health.
  • It is costly to meet the drinking water standards in small towns. They need assistance with these costs.

Contaminated land

How do the Contaminated Land National Environmental Standard relate to landfill guidelines? How do existing landfills need to comply?

Air quality

  • Air sheds impose costs in creation and this money could have been better spent on energy conservation.
  • Air standards impact on home heating and low income clients. This has a much bigger impact in the cold places (e.g. Southland).

General comments

  • There are power capacity issues surrounding wetbacks and water heating.
  • There are concerns about the costs of National Environmental Standards and impacts on some social groups. How does the government view the impact on smaller and poorer communities?
  • Design standards for New Zealand new homes need to be climate based and have a bottom line. Building and housing changes are required. Past and new building designs need to change (i.e. septic tanks).
  • National Environmental Standards should progress over time from guidelines to the standards and rules. Things change over time. How far are we going with National Environmental Standards? How will they change as new chemicals are used?
  • We need promotion about the impacts so people understand the needs for change (e.g. poor quality water).
  • Does the government (MfE) understand how local government has to do the real hard work to implement standards?
  • The National Environmental Standards should be following a similar extensive consultation process like Air Quality Standards.
  • Industry bears disproportionate costs for resource consents and burden proof but meets the standards.

Resource Management Act

Policies and plans

  • We need a time frame for the National Policy Statement (e.g. Rare and Endangered Species and Coastal).
  • How are the views of smaller regions reflected in the National Policy Statements? It is believed that Southland bears the costs and Auckland gets the benefits of power. We should have a process that ensures that Southland views are reflected in the National Policy Statement.
  • We need a national plan for energy supplies and sources. We also need to know what the options are for energy generation.
  • There is a lack of national strategy on transportation.
  • In the New Zealand Coastal Policy statement time-frame there needs to be opportunities for involvement (especially regarding Tupua lagoon).
  • Who pays for the cost of review of local plans?

General comments

  • The RMA messages are always negative. What can the Ministry do about changing those perceptions? We need to broadcast positive information about RMA. What about an MfE campaign?
  • Are there controls under the RMA? Are there enough controls for water? There is a lack of assistance from the government and departments do not work together.
  • There are concerns about the length of the process. Councils decide and then matters can go to Environment Court. The Amendments are good.
  • Can the Minister of the Environment make the decision on matters in the regions?
  • What can councils do about frivolous or vexatious submissions?
  • The number of complaints about the RMA and its processes has fallen.
  • The public could feel disempowered by central government intervention.
  • The perception of RMA has shifted away from the local decision making role.

Waste

Waste minimisation

  • Plastic bag minimisation programmes (e.g. Levin, Nelson and Lumsden) could be the start of and a key driver to a waste minimisation programme (i.e. mandatory bag recycling and charges for bags).
  • When introducing waste minimisation programmes to businesses, time needs to be considered as a factor in the cost-benefit analysis.

Recycling, reuse and community

  • The full costs of recycling schemes need to be considered (e.g. with nappies, water and energy use to clean can be significant).
  • People need to re-use products (i.e. using a waste product for an alternative use to extend its life) as this is as important as recycling.
  • There are high costs of transport for re-use and recycling (e.g. tyres in Southland).
  • There is growing public dissatisfaction of paying for re-use and recovery of products.
  • There is unsustainable volunteer effort into resource recovery at present. Littering has got worse. There is a loss of pride in shared amenities and landscape. If places are not littered it flows into people’s other inferred behaviour. Street pride is important.

Education and information

  • Worm farms can be used to dispose of all organic waste. This process can produce valuable fertiliser (solid and liquid). We need to promote the use of worm farms in schools, and subsidies could be set up.
  • There needs to be more of a focus on waste at the source, i.e. sorting waste at the source (household) and not at disposal (landfill). A programme of education for recycling and waste sorting would be useful. Sometimes educational programmes are better than legislation.
  • There needs to be an educational programme in schools for waste minimisation and recycling. Parents can be a barrier for school education programmes.
  • We need to propose more use of the ‘green code’ or ‘green globe’.

Product stewardship

Product and manufacturing wastes are being targeted through product stewardship (e.g. standardised plastics that are used in packaging and the reduction of unnecessary packaging).

General comments

  • There are issues with onsite wastewater treatment. Soils do not have good drainage. Subdivisions are increasing numbers. Some are draining to ditch/drain. Councils need to be aware of the issues resulting from subdivisions.
  • An environmental subsidy scheme for sewage would be beneficial.
  • Methane can be collected from landfills for beneficial reuse.
  • Southland would like some assistance to handle issues better.

General topics

Environmental education and information

There needs to be more publicity and promotion for next year’s roadshow (e.g. papers and radio etc.).

Water

  • There needs to be small projects to help collect drinking water (e.g. roof run off etc).
  • When the pest, didymo was found in the rivers they were closed quickly, though rivers were not closed for white baiting. Regional councils should be able to close rivers if they see a problem.
  • Water allocation and irrigation is managed well in Southland. We need to work with the knowledge obtained during the process of allocation (e.g. energy and the need for energy for industry such as coal and wind).

Urban development, design and planning

There are urban design issues (e.g. streetlights). We need to revisit street light design. It needs to be directed properly. Technology and case studies are available. Calgary (Canada) replaced all street lights and expects these to be paid back in 6 years.

Energy efficiency

  • We need to improve the uptake of energy efficiency options for solar heating and warm homes.
  • When looking at power generation we need to consider resources of coal and new technology for fewer emissions. There needs to be more support to protect rivers from power generators.
  • Some power generated in the South Island is lost in transmission. There must be a coal fired power station in the Auckland region.
  • We need to look at the economic development of the whole of New Zealand (not just Auckland). We need to encourage regional development and move people to power sources.
  • The money that has been put into new power generation could be put into solar power. We need to look at how to subsidise solar power.
  • Solar power and wind power are alternatives to power generation. Air emissions are not sustainable.
  • There needs to be more investment in self sustaining power generation sources.
  • The standards for building homes are required from energy to conservation view point. Energy conservation is essential.
  • Are negotiated agreements for carbon credits publicly available?

Last updated: 17 September 2007