![Go to home page [Ministry for the Environment]](/images/logo.gif){kind=logo}
Key points raised at the Talk Environment Roadshow 2007 – national guidance under the Resource Management Act
How to best manage New Zealand’s environmental resources was the main focus of discussion at the Resource Management Act (RMA) tables. The key national issues raised by the public are identified below.
There was general support for national guidance through the NPS and NES policy framework. The main issues raised were:
- Attendees suggested consistency was needed in the application, administration and enforcement of National Environmental Standards (NESs). Attendees also felt that new standards should be monitored and evaluated for their effectiveness and environmental outcomes.
- The need for increased community engagement in the process of developing standards was raised.
- Simplified information on standards was also suggested.
- National tools were requested to protect wetlands, biodiversity and water quality. Tools to quantify the environmental effects of changes e.g. flooding, runoff, nitrogen leaching were requested.
- Participants said there is a need for more guidance and support from central government in implementing NPS and NESs.
- And that the Ministry needs to encourage joint planning across local authorities boundaries – support integrated management.
- Many attendees felt stronger guidance on land use was needed to prevent ad hoc decision making about development and urban design.
- It was suggested that the Ministry could assist local government by providing additional guidance regarding the process for the development of the Long-term Council Community Plans (LTCCP).
- Water allocation was raised as an issue that needs greater attention in New Zealand.
Implementation of the RMA in general
There were many positive comments about the improvements made to the RMA particularly the new training programmes and the information pack ‘Getting in on the Act’. However here are the other main points raised:
- There was concern about the sometimes inconsistent application of the RMA.
- Some attendees felt the costs (time and money) of complying with legislation impedes development or is unduly complicated for small jobs. There was also concern that the RMA does not adequately address cumulative impacts and effects of decisions.
- Attendees praised the ‘Making Good Decisions’ programme that helps councillors, community board members, and independent commissioners make informed decisions, and suggested it be extended to council officers and local communities.
- Many attendees acknowledged that recruiting experienced RMA planners continues to be a problem for councils.
- Attendees suggested local government needs more guidance on implementing the RMA and the public needs more guidance on the consent process such as how to apply for resource consent or make a submission.
- Comment that monitoring the state of the environment is essential to understanding quality and changes in the environment.
- Feedback suggested councils should have a greater focus on environmental outcomes.
- Some attendees felt councils’ performance should be monitored with a focus on effectiveness and on environmental outcomes. And those good practices should be promoted and shared between councils.
