You are here: Working with you > Consultation > Talk Environment Roadshow > What you told us in 2006 > Canterbury region >

Christchurch public meeting

Thursday 2 November

Waste policy

Institutions and legislation

We need to move from recycling to reduction. We need a waste incentive tax.
There should be a law banning plastic milk bottles.
There should be laws that all material must be recyclable.
Government should set standards, timeframes and recycling rates.
Strategies are fine but legislation is needed to make things happen.
Voluntary approaches do not work. Legislation provides a level playing field.
Legislation should be introduced to require a fee for recycling.
Cheap energy and cheap fuel drives the waste mountain. It is too cheap to produce new stuff. We need higher taxes on fuel.
We need to move towards legislated and a mandated approach, rather than too much of a voluntary approach which we have been using to date. There are many good examples of it working well overseas. Legislation is needed because of the lack of action over the years under the voluntary approach.
Stronger legislation on sustainable building is desired.
“Eco-warriors” are needed to demonstrate public support for legislation to MPs.

Wastewater management

We must look at land based dispersal so wastewater is used as a resource, not just sent through to Bromley from Lyttleton.
The City Council has received a submission on the potential monetary value if it can sell wastewater.
The Waste Strategy looks at wastewater but the solids bill detracts from this focus.

Education and information

We need to educate people that there is not an endless supply.
To get change, we need to marry good ideas and passion with funds e.g. income sources from waste streams.
Food packaging is a concern. MfE could work with the Ministry of Health on food safety guidelines that allow for plates to be used for dine-in e.g. McDonalds could provide plates and reusable utensils.
Government needs to provide more support for sustainable products. MfE could work with MED and Treasury to set up a fund to provide seed capital to sustainable businesses. Whole of life costing needs to be promoted.
Awareness around sustainability needs to be increased and promoted to the general public.

Recycling, reuse and community

Sustainable consumption is heavily reliant on social structure and wealth.
All packaging should be environmentally friendly.
Packaging minimisation is a big issue. Product stewardship enforced through regulation is desirable.
Work could be done on packaging of imported products.
Recycling in public places should be encouraged.
An overarching initiative with the Ministry of Education on recycling in schools and teaching sustainability would be good. Waste minimisation should be added to the school curriculum.

General comments

What are the current schemes for research into oil alternatives? Work is needed in this area and should not just focus on transport.
How will the National Environmental Standard for biosolids be set?

National Environmental Standards

Air quality

How do you deal with natural input to air pollution (i.e. fires), which raise the background level of air pollution. This is a particular concern in the Canterbury region. How do you figure out who is responsible when there are numerous air discharges in a region?
Are councils going to be given resources to enforce the air standard?
In areas where there are no people, high environmental standards for air quality are unnecessary so standards should be variable in different areas.
There is concern that the contaminated land policy for a standard took six years to develop. A lot of money was spent, and then it was dropped and started all over-again.
The air quality National Environmental Standards (NES) are too punitive on the domestic sector rather than industry. What about the health effects of getting cold?
The air quality National Environmental Standard is too strict. The peaks in air pollution are at night when people are not exposed. There should be an annual average. The health effects of air pollution are not proven.
There is some doubt that the health effects of air pollution are as bad as experts say.
There should be some indoor measurements of air quality.
There should be a standard on electromagnetic fields.
All these different standards (OSH, National Environmental Standard, Australian/New Zealand Standard, district and regional plan thresholds) are very confusing.
There are no indoor air standards. There should be standards for indoor/residential air, though they would be difficult to implement.

Waste

Having multiple private operators operating on the same streets causes urban congestion and increases emissions. Why have all these separate private collections, could they be streamlined?

Septic tanks

Subdivision consents and regional council discharges consents are administered separately.
Regional and district council decision-making processes on subdivisions and septic tanks should avoid the adverse effects of septic tanks on the environment.
The septic tank standard should apply to existing systems as well as new systems.
Look at the risk from septic tanks. Take a similar approach to the Public Health Risk Management Plan (PHRMP) in the Health (Drinking Water) Amendment Bill.

Urban design

There are public health concerns in relation to mixed land use.
Consider what land uses can and cannot go together (e.g. heavy industry and residential).
Guidance is wanted on what is acceptable and what is not.

Infrastructure

There should be a national requirement for house insulation.
There are problems with identifying alternative heat sources for houses. If wood burners are not allowed and the electricity fails, people get cold.
ECAN is totally biased toward electricity. What about other energy sources such as LPG? Some LPG heaters are highly efficient. The focus on electricity contributes to rising electricity demand.
Energy efficiency decreases when electricity is transported from the point of generation to supply.
Wind farms are supported, although some people believe the noise generated by wind turbines affects their health.
A mix of electricity sources is needed. Hydro generation will always be needed.
A standard or certification system for solar panels is needed so that the ones people buy actually work, and work well. Substandard panels should not be able to be sold. The cost of installing panels is high but pays off over time.
There is a disparity between local insulation requirements in regional plans and in the National Environmental Standard.
Standards are too rigid and are based on science that is still evolving. However, if we wait for certainty, nothing will ever be done.
There is a need for better engagement with the community during the development of National Environmental Standards. The public need opportunities for meaningful input.
Dioxins are being dealt with but other contaminants are not being addressed.
Fireplaces in Christchurch are not really been addressed.
Backup generation is required but diesel generators are not a good idea.
Biodiesel could be used for power generation in emergencies. But biodiesel has limits. Cell phone towers are already a permitted activity and are springing up everywhere. Standards should have been in place in the 1990’s when the network was being developed.

Water

Why is there a national standard for water? Surely regional plans should be already covering this? Money should be spent on other standards.
A drinking water standard is not a key issue.
The water standard work is still in progress. The standards are taking too long to develop. There is concern about Environment Canterbury’s tendency to start water consents for 35 years. Too much water has been allocated.
Quality and quantity are treated as separate issues. Meters in houses are not being used.
All industrial consents are too long. Consent transfers are not good.
Quantitative standards are wanted.

General

Concern was expressed about the implementation of National Environmental Standards. If there is no linkage between standards and implementation, the standards are meaningless.
There is concern that the councils are responsible for implementation of standards but the Ministry for the Environment has no way of enforcing them to carry this out.
In order to make standards realistic, there needs to be effective mechanisms to control sources. A numerical standard is not sufficient on its own.
How should standards be set? The country is going to continue to grow. Should growth be restricted to maintain higher environmental standards?
Standards can be an impediment if they are improbable and expensive.
There should be a formalised process to review National Environmental Standards.
A National Environmental Standard on natural landscapes is wanted.
New Zealand has a propensity to publish guidelines but there is always a dispute about whether guidelines should be followed.
We need to raise the bar and set higher environmental standards for both humans and flora and fauna consistently across New Zealand.
A balance is needed between growth and environmental protection.
Standards need to be site specific and flexible to allow for difference between regions. They should focus on the same outcome, but the same standard is not needed in all places to achieve this.
There are good economic reasons to set high standards. Fresh air and water are necessary to survive.
There is concern about using “value” standards because “values” change over time.
What is good for humans is not necessarily good for the rest of the environment because different organisms have different sensitivities.
Industry needs to adopt better standards.
National Environmental Standards must be linked to enforcement and applied at regional and local levels or they will not achieve the desired outcomes.
National Environmental Standards are a means to an end and not an end in themselves. Should they be nationally consistent or variable locally to meet site specific outcomes? It is recognised that many indigenous species are more sensitive than people.
The economic impact of standards requires attention. Balancing the wellbeing and quality of life of New Zealanders is a valid consideration, along with environmental protection.
MfE is promoting the benefits of urban and mixed land use without recognising the drawbacks which could be mitigated if they were recognised.
The focus has been on air quality at the expense of other matters for which there is greater need, such as water and septic tanks.
Fines are too low in Environment Court prosecutions. District and regional rules are ignored. Enforcement is under funded.
Standards should be forward looking and should not be put in place just to confirm something that has already been resolved e.g. the telecommunications standards.
MfE should take more of a leadership role.

Water

Education and information

There needs to be more education around urban water use, including what we are doing as city dwellers and how people in urban environments use their water. It is not only farmers using up all the water.
There needs to be a place e.g. MfE website, where case-law on what is happening with water is available in a “condensed” and “understandable” format.
Current studies and research being undertaken on water in New Zealand should all be available in one place.
Water conferences need to happen regularly and involve all water users and water industry players. The 6 yearly water conference of the past was great.
Research findings, raw data and flow data collected by agencies such as NIWA needs to be made available to end users in an easy way.
A “Dummies Guide” for water users is needed.

Water allocation and usage

Concern that catchment management (including the Central Plains Allocation Scheme) is not ecosystem-based and that if water is allocated too quickly there is no room for water conservation.
Concern that transfer of consents (to take water) between catchments will happen without due consideration of how those catchments might be different (in terms of their hydrological regime and ecosystem sensitivity) and how the new activity might impact on the catchments.
Low compliance from farmers on consent conditions and the perception that “water is for free” is not helpful for management.
Environment Canterbury should take “possession” of water in order to manage it effectively.
The preferred option is for transfer of consents to be on a catchment basis.
Concern that consents will accumulate with one group of water users.
It makes good economic sense to have the ability to transfer consents.
There is social change associated with consent transfer.
Transfer has the possibility of a negative outcome such as intensification of land use e.g. intensive farming in an area would increase the pollution of groundwater.
Need for policy to deal with the potential of cumulative affects. A big picture approach is needed. The RMA does not address this.
Transfers should not be negotiable.
Should be control or supplementary regulation on water use consents to control/regulate land-use.
MfE should put thought into changes to the RMA with regards to cumulative effects.
Opposition to the privatisation of water. Water should be retained as a public resource.
Water consents should be consistent nationally, but a certain amount of regional flexibility is wanted.
A review of more readily utilised consent provisions under the RMA is wanted.

Water quality

Feeling that Canterbury probably has the most degraded rivers in the country.
There has been a 70% decline in recreational use of Canterbury rivers (40-50% decline in angling). This is due to land-use intensification.
Big braided rivers are vulnerable because of over-allocation in their catchments.
MfE could do better at managing water quality issues - should be more active in overseeing the implementation of water conservation orders. Are regional councils doing a good job?
Environment Canterbury is not consistent in the way they apply the water conservation order for the Rakaia river.
There is concern that government seems to be focused on microbial contaminants only when looking at water quality standards. There should be more focus on other toxins such as pesticides, insecticides and persistent organic pollutants (POPs).

Flood risk management and catchment management

We need to look at more storage reservoirs to collect flood water.
Flood management is connected with catchment management.
There is a feeling that policy development by local and central government is ignoring a lot of good research and opinion and that the democratic process is stifled by bureaucracy. For example there were concerns that the Christchurch City Council is not looking at flood management in a connected, holistic way and is not making effective use of research and guideline material that has been published.
The increase in the amount of paving in the city is the biggest threat that is likely to increase flood risk. More consideration should be given to products like eco-pave and techniques like wetland flood attenuation for flood management. There is concern about the new “super suburbs” being created (e.g. the town of Pegasus in North Canterbury) and the lack of consultative planning.

Land use

Policies must address the contamination of groundwater and be universally applied. Policies should speak to and demand good land use planning (in the catchments).
Intensive land use carries a risk of contamination. There is no policy in relation to this.

General comments

There are difficulties understanding the linkages between groundwater and surface water.
There should be guidelines or rules in the Building Act to enable the collection of rainwater e.g. from your garage.
There is the concept that we want to be able to use water and use it again.
There needs to be coupling of water quality and water quantity.
Irrigation and energy policies need to be considered together.
More value needs to be put on water. Need to look beyond water in terms of food production. New Zealand has a mindset when producing food that we have a lot of water to use. We could look at countries that produce food using a lot less water to see what they are doing.
MfE needs to emphasise water use in general terms, not just rural use.
There needs to be consistent interpretation of legislation by local government nationwide.
Central government should conduct a watch over all regions of what is working well and use this in national planning and policy.
There needs to be consistent interpretations across all councils. This could involve more training and communication through events like the Talk Environment Roadshow.
We need to go back to the RMA and see how we can use it better as there is too much focus on case-law.
There is concern that there is too much of a move towards centralised planning and control.
Communities should be given the decision making power - but call-in powers are still required when necessary.
Local government needs to be supported and provided with more resources.
There is a feeling that Waitaki was a “step back”.

Climate change

Adaptation and mitigation

Adaptation is important.
We need to look at what steps we are taking internationally to reduce emissions.
We need to work co-operatively internationally.
The issue is “inter-sectorial”. A consensus response is needed to the issue rather than a sectorial response.
Particulate emissions are a concern. They are a factor in air quality and health, as well as climate change. A more integrated response is needed as issues are linked.
An equitable response is needed to climate change.
Bigger countries need to shrink to an acceptable level, and poor countries need to increase their quality of living.
Kyoto lacks a social component - this is a problem.
Future proofing New Zealand is imperative. Some parts of New Zealand, such as some coastal areas, need to be uninsurable.
Environmental refugees are a huge issue. We need to take a lead on this.
New Zealand should not wait for the US.
Leadership and regulation is needed from central government.
Nano-technology will alter how we live and will help combat climate change.
We need to be acting now, not waiting. We are all collectively very conscious of the issues.
We need to mitigate the negative impacts of climate change on our communities, and the built environment, and regulate to achieve this.
Develop alternative technology. We must stop asset stripping.
Multinational ownerships of our resources is getting in the way of adaptation
New Zealand needs to stop depleting our soil by extracting too much carbon.
Importing coconut oil from the Pacific could boost their economies and provide us with biofuels. We have to stop mining the soil.
There is a need and opportunity for greatly increased energy efficiency in our buildings and transport sector and food. Strong leadership is needed from central government then the public will follow (particularly in transport).
Everybody needs to take peak oil into account and prepare for this. Peak oil makes climate change adaptation more urgent. We need take hold of the opportunity now to invest in renewable energy such as biofuels, solar power, hydro power and wind. We should stop prospecting for oil.
Using coal is not always bad. Coal can be used to subsidise biofuel technology and substitute for oil imparts.
The concept of sustainability needs to embrace the notion that extractive industries can be a progressive adaptation to climate pressures.
We should not be exporting our coal. We should use it in New Zealand to help us
The characteristics of high value housing will alter around New Zealand when coastal erosion becomes an issue.
We need to consider the environment ahead of the economy.
Sea level rise from thermal expansion is going to last thousands of years and will alter currents.
Money and opportunities go hand in hand with climate change.
We need to honour our global commitments to the international community, beyond Kyoto, for humanitarian reasons. We need to consider our required responsibilities as a member of the pacific community in particular.
Scenarios are needed of the likely effects of climate change, especially at local and regional levels, so planning can be done.
Talk about climate change needs to be transferred into action.
Climate change is a political problem not a technical one.
We need to ramp up our efforts on agricultural emissions.
The gap between views on the need for action is closing
Is there a role for local authorities? Can they do more?
Central government must pursue policies that achieve consensus internationally. A concerted effort is needed internationally.
Are sanctions possible?
Per capita, we are pretty bad at emitting greenhouse gases.
Carbon dioxide capture and storage (CCS) technologies are not a solution and will not be for a while.
On the adaptation front, we need to start thinking now about adjusting e.g. on railways, roads, etc.
We need real world scenarios and models that provide us with information.
What can individuals do to mobilise advocacy and ensure action is undertaken to counteract strong incentives (financial motivation) on the other side?
Where do we put our effort? Some sectors can achieve more than others.
Carbon costs need to be internalised. Agriculture should not be an example.
Look at different production systems as a basis for promoting some agriculture production over others.
New Zealand’s policy approach should be to get our own house in order so that we may influence on the international stage.
It is difficult to stay focused on things that are in the indefinite future.
There is potential for products to have price of disposal associated with product
Centralised planning of the electricity system is needed.
Greater incentives are needed to get people out of their cars into buses and trains.
National standards are needed for the design of infrastructure and housing.
Fence land so it is not available for coastal development where there is a risk from climate change.
There is a reliance on RMA case law to make decisions
A national standard/guidance is needed on preparing for climate change and protecting resources.
Education is needed to encourage energy efficiency and decrease demand for energy.
Industry needs to change its mind set.

Education and information

Buy in is needed from the community about the impacts of climate change. A public viewing of the Al Gore movie was suggested.
We need to encourage New Zealanders to take action. Government needs to provide education and information and help motivate New Zealanders.

Urban development, design and planning

The Building Code needs to be altered to incentives and direct energy efficiency
Regulation is needed to require houses and buildings to meet a higher standard.
Houses should not be built on our high class soils. Our high class soils need to be protected. Food production will be an issue for New Zealand in future.

Transport

Regulation is needed on the age and efficiency of the vehicle fleet. Incentives should be provided to encourage people to switch to cleaner cars.
Safe alternatives to driving should be provided, for example cycle ways. Do not increase price to cope with demand for public transport.
It is vital to consider light rail as an option to get cars off roads. Christchurch needs a rail network linking satellite suburbs.
Parking policy could help congestion.
Aviation needs to change. Perhaps air ships could be used again.
Government could set up wireless networks to enable people to work from home and reduce emissions from travel.

Environmental reporting

General comments

It is time to start building indicators for the future. Climate change is here. Indicators were suggested on preparedness for climate change and the extent that climate change is considered in local/central government planning.

General interest

National Environmental Standards

There is support for MfE leadership through National Environmental Standards and national policy statements, but there is caution about using National Environmental Standards more because they are easier. Some topics would be better suited to a national policy statement even though the process is harder.

Climate change

We need to think about the implications of climate change on net growth in population - from Australia (no water there) and pacific island refugees. Is MfE factoring this in the climate change work?

Governance

We need to make sure environmental decisions are made on hard evidence, not agendas/politics. But do not confuse science and policy making processes. Decisions have to be made despite uncertainty.
Leadership from government (at all levels) is going to make the difference - Government has to lead by example.

Education and information

MfE should have a role in tertiary education. There are industry part funded positions, but none for environment. Who represents the environment?
The media is important in changing people’s attitudes and behaviours, but good catastrophe stories and better facts are needed.

Waste

Why don’t cell phones last longer? Can we make things last longer?
Product stewardship needs to be regulated, not voluntary. We need to regulate the efficiency of cars.
We need to recycle our heavy metals. A closed loop system should operate.

Water

We need to be collecting our rainwater and putting it to good use. We should look at Australian systems which are much further ahead.
There is concern about the contamination of aquifers. This should not happen. More direction is needed about water quality, especially for stormwater.

General comments

There is interest in the outcome of the Sustainable Management Fund review. Funding is wanted for staff in not-for-profit organisations not just projects. New Zealand Trade and Enterprise could provide small amounts of funding for projects.
An investment in future leaders (e.g. students) is needed to change behaviours.
There is support for the environmental legal assistance fund.
Auckland ‘summarises’ the range of environmental issues we face and the difficulties in dealing with issues.
The Landcare group is working hard to control weeds but there is so much crown land going to waste. The Crown should take a lead in weed management. Millions of hectares are getting covered with gorse and broom and other noxious weeds. Weeds in river beds are also increasing flood risk.
We are woefully behind Australia in terms of solar water heating. We need to fix up our building code and include provisions for solar water heating. Sustainable housing needs a lot more support and education.

Last updated: 27 February 2008