NZ’s resource management rules have been rewritten. What happens after the election?
As each new environmental assessment shows, the impacts on New Zealand’s natural and urban areas are only compounding.
The government’s most recent national snapshot describes polluted rivers and coastal waters, declining biodiversity, poor air quality in some communities and greenhouse gas emissions that remain high by international standards.
Increasingly extreme weather is exposing the consequences of how we manage our land. Flooding and landslides have devastated communities, while damage caused by forestry slash during storms have brought heavy costs for people and property.
Meanwhile, New Zealand faces ever-growing demands for housing, infrastructure and economic development. Yet the regulatory system meant to manage it remains unsettled.
The previous Labour government passed legislation to replace the Resource Management Act (RMA), only for the National-led coalition to repeal it and introduce its own Planning Act and Natural Environment Act.
The new system promises to make development easier, reduce costs and delays, and improve environmental management. But environment groups warn it could weaken protections for nature and leave communities facing even greater risks.
Although the new legislation has passed, most of the changes will come into effect over the next four years. The outcome of this election, of course, may see the rulebook rewritten yet again.
A transformed policy landscape
Few areas of New Zealand’s environmental policy landscape have been untouched by the past three years of reform. But we point to key changes that have prioritised development over addressing issues outlined in successive environmental reports.
Consider safeguards for our degraded freshwater ecosystems. Following earlier court decisions requiring tighter controls on diffuse pollution from farms, the government amended the RMA to allow activities with significant adverse effects on water quality to continue, provided gradual improvements are made.
Rather than impose immediate changes that could prove costly or difficult to........
