Whakaaro: Resource management
Having held an interest in resource management for the past 27 years, it has become clear there is some misunderstanding in our community about current resource consent processes.
The Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) is described as an “enabling Act” with an emphasis on considering the effects of various proposals. This Act replaced the Town and Country Planning Act which provided a more prescriptive basis on which to assess applications.
Basically, under the RMA anyone can apply to do anything. The application is then assessed against the myriad of relevant policies and rules in the RMA, the Tasman Resource Management Plan (TRMP), NZ Coastal Policy Statement and the like.
Under the TRMP, activities fall into “permitted”, “discretionary” or “controlled”. Applications which are difficult to clearly assess under policies and rules are “notified” so that neighbours and the wider community can participate in their consideration.
The RMA acronym is said by some to be the “Rich Man’s Act”. The consideration of applications was envisaged to be a participatory community process but has evolved into a costly industry.
For those who choose to engage them, there are experts who offer services supporting (or opposing) applications as lawyers, planners, engineers, landscape specialists, valuers, marine scientists, soil scientists etc.
Sometimes experts provide opposite evidence between cases depending on who has hired them.
Sadly, the RMA process can become an adversarial instead of a collaborative one. This can be quite harmful in a community, setting neighbour against neighbour. There are several localities around the Bay where this has happened.
The Tasman Resource Management Plan was developed in consultation with the community. Everyone has been able to make submissions and then further submissions in response to other’s submissions. There have also been appeals to provisions in the plan and references made to the Environment Court including the multi-faceted aquaculture issue. The hearing for that case lasted for 15 weeks.
Many citizens have participated in the development of our TRMP. It is a community plan. Therefore, if someone wishes to apply to undertake an activity which is not clearly permitted, permission needs to be sought from the community.
Participation is through the submission process provided by RMA s96.
There is the opportunity to hold pre-hearing meetings which are helpful in building understanding between participants.
Thoughtful, informed submissions assist by providing the opportunity for hearing commissioners to take perspectives in addition to the applicant’s vested interest into account.
Voluntary efforts by members of our community do not deserve to be vilified for participating in a community process in the best interests of wise, sustainable outcomes.
Joe Bell
