The RMA Resource Management Act ( RMA ) passed in 1991 in New Zealand is a controversial and sometimes controversial Parliamentary Act. RMA promotes sustainable management of natural and physical resources such as land, air and water. New Zealand's Ministry of Environment outlines the RMA as New Zealand's leading legislation for environmental management.
Because the RMA and the decisions made under it by the district and regional councils and in courts affect both individuals and businesses in large numbers, and often in very real ways, the RMA has been variously attacked for being ineffective in managing adverse environmental effects, or too excessive. time-consuming and costly and concerned with bureaucratic restrictions on legitimate economic activity.
Video Resource Management Act 1991
Significance
The adoption of RMA is significant for three reasons. First, the RMA forms an integrated framework that replaces many of the previous resource use regimes, which have been divided between institutions and sectors, such as land use, forestry, pollution, traffic, zoning, water and air.
Secondly, the RMA is the first legal planning regime to incorporate the principles of sustainability.
Third, the RMA incorporates 'sustainable management', as the stated objective explicitly placed at the heart of the regulatory framework and this aim is to direct all policies, standards, plans and other decision-making under the RMA. Having an RMA objective at the top of the unambiguous legislative hierarchy is a unique concept worldwide at the beginning of the law.
Maps Resource Management Act 1991
Related Act
RMA replaces a large number of actions, rules, and commands. A total of 69 modified Acts and Acts are revoked (See the Sixth RMA of the Schedule) and nineteen rules and orders are revoked (Seventh Schedule). Measures to be revoked are the Municipal and State Planning Laws, the Land and Water Conservation Act, Soil Conservation and River Control, and the Mineral Law. The mining and mineral regime is separated from the Resource Management Bill at the third reading stage and enacted as the Mineral Mineral Act 1991.
However, three of these laws, provide an important element of RMA. Soil Conservation and River Control Act 1941 provides a precedent for catchment-based entities and shelter being part of a new regional council. The City and Country Planning Act of 1977 provides approval and planning procedures. The Water and Soil Conservation Act of 1967 provides the approved regime and the water law law.
Beginning
Following the antipathy of the National Party against environmental issues in the 1980s, as expressed in the Think Big economic development project and the National Development Act, the New Zealand Labor Party entered the 1984 election campaign with local government planning and institutional reform platforms and adopted an environmental policy better. The reform policy involves the creation of an integrated resource decision-making system to replace existing sector-based systems. The Labor Party's environmental policy, such as this quote from Part I, paragraph 3, owes much to the concept of sustainable Brundtland Commission development;
to ensure managing the use of biosphere by humans to produce the greatest sustainable benefits for the current generation while maintaining the potential to meet future generations and goods
Legal Resources Reform Reform
In the 1987 election, the fourth Labor Government won second in office and deputy prime minister Geoffrey Palmer became Minister of the Environment. Palmer embarked on a comprehensive reform project for New Zealand's environmental and planning laws. This is the Law Reform of Resource Management or RMLR. Palmer's goals explicitly include effects on the Waitangi Agreement, the use of cost-effective resources, the World Conservation Strategy, intergenerational equity, and intrinsic values ​​of the ecosystem. Palmer leads a Cabinet committee that oversees a core group of four people backed by the Ministry of the Environment. The core group develops policies through a series of 32 working papers and through extensive public consultations. In December 1988, a reform proposal was published. In December 1989, Palmer introduced the 314 page Resources Management Bill to the New Zealand Parliament. The process of the Selected Committee was not completed in the 1990 election, which Labor lost. However, the new Minister for the Environment, Simon Upton, continues the legal reform process leading to the adoption of the RMA.
Final design of RMA
The new minister, Simon Upton, noted different views of submitting to the proposed goals and principles of the bill. A paper of the March 10, 1989 Cabinet argued that the overall objectives and broad philosophy of the bill should be stated in the objective section and described in the section on basic principles. After the 1990 election, Simon Upton appointed the Review Group to assess the purpose and clause of the principle. This group consists of: Tony Randerson, a lawyer, as chairman; Prue Crosson (now Prue Kapua), a lawyer; environmental activist Guy Salmon; planner Ken Tremaine; and Brent Wheeler, an economist.
The Review Group considers that the clause has been a conflicting 'shopping list' of things proposed by interest groups, without clear priorities. It will produce 'trade' or a balance of socio-economic and biophysical aspects. They reject such balancing approaches for use in biophysical constraints. They consider that the bill should not have sustainable development objectives with a focus on social justice and the redistribution of wealth. They concluded that the purpose of the bill should be 'sustainable management' and that the critical aspect of that goal should be intergenerational justice, that is, safeguarding natural resource options for future generations. The second objective is to avoid, correct or reduce the adverse effects of added activities. Part of the purpose and principle were rewritten consequently.
Finally, with the Cabinet's approval, Simon Upton added the third 'sustainable management' goal of maintaining air, water, land and ecosystem 's living capacity.
Simon Upton stated in a third reading speech to Parliament that the objectives of the RMA are not related to the planning and control of economic activity, or about trade-offs, but about maintaining, maintaining, avoiding, recovering, and mitigating the adverse effects of use. natural resources.
The bill gives us a framework for setting goals with biophysical bottom lines that should not be compromised. Provided that goal is met, what people build is their business. Thus, the bill provides a more liberal regime for developers. On the other hand, activities must conform to harsh environmental standards and the community will set those standards. Verse 4 sets the biophysical bottom line. Chapters 5 and 6 set further specific issues that broaden the problem. The bill has a clear and rigorous procedure for setting environmental standards - and the debate will concentrate on just where we set those standards.
Part 2 Objectives and Principles
The result of Upton's input is that RMA is applied to Section 2 consisting of three 'principles' (sections 6.7 & amp; 8) in an unambiguous hierarchy under the overall goal of 'sustainable management', defined in section 5. In under that section, the RMA has one specially determined purpose; to promote the sustainable management of natural and physical resources.
Definition of sustainable management
The RMA, in Section 5, describes "sustainable management" as
manage the use, development and protection of natural and physical resources in a way, or at a level that enables people and communities to provide for their social, economic, and cultural welfare and for their health and safety temporarily-
(A) Maintain the potential of natural and physical resources (excluding minerals) to meet the needs of future generations that can be estimated; and
(b) Maintain a life force that supports air, water, soil, and ecosystems; and
(c) Avoid, correct or mitigate any adverse impacts of activities on the environment.
Principles
Section 6 is a list of issues of national importance that must be 'recognized and provided for' in achieving the objectives of the RMA;
Section 7 is a list of things that all decisions should be specifically concerned with 'in achieving the objectives of the RMA;
Section 8 has the title " Agreement of Waitangi " and states that in achieving the objectives of RMA, 'accounts shall be taken' from the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi.
Interpretation
Under the RMA, virtually any significant use of land, air, coastal or water-related resources shall be governed by the provisions of the RMA or by the rules in the regional or district plan or by a decision on the application of a license. The plan is to achieve the objectives of RMA which constitute 'sustainable management' of natural and physical resources. Most rule-making and decision-making are clearly linked back to the 'Purpose and Principle' section, Part II, which contains the definition of 'sustainable management' law in section 5. Consequently, the interpretation that should be placed on the definition of 'sustainable management' will be crucial.
Immediately following the introduction of the RMA, Fisher (1991) wrote a substantial legal analysis of the RMA that suggests that the definition of 'sustainable management' may be ambiguous. Regardless of the 'biophysical underline' interpretation, as in Simon Upton's third reading speech, perhaps the most correct grammar, Fisher notes that the definition of 'one integrated goal' can be made where providing human well-being equal to and not subordinate to the bottom line 'a) to c) of 5 s (2).
About six years after the introduction of the RMA, some decisions on permit applications have been submitted to the Environmental Court where s5 is given some interpretations. In 1997, two interpretations of the S5 were recognized, 'balanced' and 'underline'. However, the only similarity between the various interpretations is the lack of consistency in reasoning.
Harris (2004) states that "broad broad appraisal" is the most commonly accepted interpretation of sustainable management.
Skelton and Memon (2002) review the introduction of sustainable development into RMA and the evolution of case law that has led to the interpretation of "broad-based judgments". They also criticized Simon Upton and the Ministry of the Environment for interpreting 'sustainable management' in part 5 (2) of the RMA as a bottom line of the biophysical environment. Skelton and Memon conclude that the "broad broad assessment" ('weighing' approach, not 'balancing') is the 'sustainable management' interpretation now favored by the Environmental Court.
The overall 'overall assessment' approach is not without criticism. Wheen (1997, 2002) argues that a broad overall assessment interpretation reduces 'sustainable management' for a balance test with a bias against the real economic benefits of intangible environmental problems.
Upton et al. (2002) responded to Skelton and Memon paper by noting that the Review Group on the draft Resource Management Bill had deliberately designed section 5 (2) to emphasize the biophysical constraints to move away from the overly broad and weightless socio-economic and environmental lists. destination in City and State Planning Act. They concluded;
In our view, the simple words in Section 5 are quite easy to understand without the aid of concepts such as unsustainable sustainable development, or the insistence that anthropogenic readings of that part must necessarily involve burdening everything against others.
Resource approval
RMA requires that the use of certain natural resources requires special authorization by approval of resources. As part of the application for resource approval, the Environmental Impact Assessment (AEE), a report similar to the Environmental Impact Analysis, is required. This assessment, in theory, includes all potential environmental impacts, including those that are only long-term, with 'sustainability' as part of a strong Act, although not yet clearly defined legally.
Climate change decisions
RMA as a greenhouse gas is classified previously as a contaminant and allows the approval authority to consider the effects of global warming caused by greenhouse gas discharges. In 1994, the Fourth National Government considered RMA as one of its policies to mitigate climate change. A number of decisions are made on that basis.
Stratford gas thermal power plant
In 1993, New Zealand Electric Company (ECNZ) proposed to build Stratford Power Station, a 400 megawatt thermal power plant in Stratford, Taranaki. ECNZ is applied for approval of resources to remove contaminants including carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. Environment Minister Simon Upton set up an investigation board under the Resource Management Act to hear and advise him on the proposal.
In February 1995, the investigation board of the Investigative Council Report, Taranaki Power Station's Proposal - Air Discharge Effects (February 1995) concluded that power plant operations would significantly increase New Zealand's carbon dioxide emissions and make it more difficult for the Government to fulfill its obligations to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to their 1990 levels as a commitment under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. The Board of Inquiry recommends that ECNZ should establish carbon sinks "sufficient to ultimately store in an amount equivalent to carbon emissions emitted from the site during the permit period".
In March 1995, Environment Minister Simon Upton in Hon Simon Upton's Decree, Environment Minister, Taranaki Combined Air Discharge Permits Power Plant (Wellington, Ministry of Environment, March 1995) received most of the board's reports and approval of resources. Upton makes conditions that require more flexible carbon foreclosures. Offsetting conditions will only apply when the electricity sector's carbon dioxide emissions exceed the volume emitted when the plant is commissioned. Offsetting conditions allow both forests to create carbon sinks or greater efficiencies elsewhere.
The Ministerial Decree and the board of investigators set a precedent that under the authority of the RMA agreement may consider global warming as a relevant effect and may impose conditions on companies limiting greenhouse gas disposal or require mitigation through offsetting or absorption in forests. drowning. The N.Z. Periodic forestry notes that planting forests to reduce carbon dioxide emissions will be a temporary solution for about 40 years that does not take into account emissions from the final harvest stage. In 2001, the Minister of the Environment, Marian Hobbs, told Parliament that the ECNZ had never planted any forest to confiscate the Stratford Power Station emissions.
Thermal gas generator Otahuhu C
In 2001, Contact Energy obtained resource approval for a new 400 MW power plant at the existing Otahuhu Power Plant site. In 2002, the Environmental Defense Society (EDS) appealed the approval to the Environmental Court. In the decision of Environmental Defense Society (Incorporated) Auckland Regional Council and Contact Energy, the Environmental Court agreed that an annual emission of 1.2 million tons of carbon dioxide would contribute to climate change through the greenhouse effect.. The Environmental Court agreed with a scientific consensus on anthropogenic climate change and concluded that proposed CO 2 emissions would be "adverse effects of some consequences" under the RMA. But the court refused to provide any assistance requested by the EDS. That is to impose conditions that require total carbon dioxide emissions by planting new forests. The court cited its concern over "efficacy, appropriateness and fairness" from offsetting conditions.
Opinion
This law has regularly made headlines since its introduction, accepting errors for the failure of a number of high profile projects, such as the Aqua hydro Project Dam.
RMA advocates argue that it ensures the sustainable use of resources for the predictable needs of present and future generations, and also recognizes the importance of indigenous peoples' rights in the mitigation process. In this regard, the RMA is a pioneering measure in the field of sustainable development. Another advantage cited is the umbrella function, which (at least in theory) allows all approval decisions about the project to be considered in one process, freeing applicants from the need to research and apply for all the permissions they should apply to their development. Also note that RMA is 'effect-based'. In other words, rather than a proposal that needs to be on a list of approved or permitted developments or activities, if the applicant can prove that the 'effects' of development on the environment are not problematic, then he is allowed to continue. In practice, however, this evidence is often difficult to understand, especially with new or controversial activities or developments.
Environmental and conservation group
New Zealand's largest conservation organization, Royal Forest and Bird Protection Society of New Zealand considers it;
- public participation is minimized because 95% of all resource approvals are granted without public notice,
- less than 1% of apps for approval denied (MfE 1999-2000 survey), Businesses
- equate public participation with additional costs, but the OECD considers New Zealand to have low environmental compliance costs,
- agreeing is an unbalanced field of play, as developers have better access to legal, planning, scientific than public experts,
- the absence of national environmental standards and national policy statements has led to inconsistencies between councils.
Business interests
Critics argue that the resource management process is a barrier to investment, unpredictable, costly, protracted and often subjected to undue influence from local lobby groups, especially the indigenous Maori. The typical business viewpoint is expressed by New Zealand Business Roundtable.
'NZBR has long expressed concerns that are widely shared within the business community about RMA. It's a complicated, time-consuming and costly part of the rules that adds uncertainty to business decision making. This is a major obstacle to the country's economic growth. '
The Business Round Table also argues that the RMA contains core concepts, such as sustainable management, intrinsic values, covenant principles, hardships and environmental definitions, which are 'hopeless'.
Companies have used it to hinder operations of their competitors, although the law specifically states that business competition is not a factor in the decision about giving consent.
Other business critics argue that the RMA damages property rights.
Also particularly criticized is the inability to limit the submission of projects to those directly affected, and the need to go through the Phase-level hearings even when it is clear that a case will ultimately go to the Environmental Court.
RMA has also been blamed for preventing the Aqua Project, the main hydroelectric scheme, by making compliance, each compliance process, too costly.
Maori
New Zealand native, M? Ori, in return, argues that the decisions made under the RMA do not adequately take into account the interests and values ​​of indigenous New Zealanders.
RMA performance rating
Rod Oram paper 'The RMA now and in the future', presented at the Beyond the RMA 2007 conference assessing RMA performance for the first 16 years. The main conclusions of the paper are as follows:
- 'The effectiveness of RMA is uneven. In rural areas can overcome the allocation and management of relatively abundant resources. But it can not cope when resources, especially water, are fully allocated. Nor can it overcome the cumulative effect.... Under RMA it is not easy for the board to declare termination for further approval. And in urban areas, RMA works well for small, local approvals. But not enough to address the widespread, long-term and strategic issues of urban development. '
- 'The efficiency of the RMA has increased.... And there may be more gains to come from the 2005 amendment, which puts in place mechanisms to increase council and board staff to share knowledge. But about 20 councils are still considered to be underperforming.... And there are still complaints by permit applicants about the quality of staff variables, decisions and timeliness. Still lack of statements of national policy and environmental standards are widely considered to be detrimental to the administration of the Act. '
- 'The future of RMA is very uncertain. Almost all development efforts have been focused on improving the process rather than purification objectives. Thus, the administration of the Act may become more efficient but the law has failed to respond to greater pressure on the environment... or greater demands from the public for higher standards and higher sustainability '.
RMA Update
The National Party, as opposed to the government, made a pledge to reform the RMA during the 2008 election campaign. After winning the election, a reform group was announced. They are given the following terms of reference:
- boost New Zealand's productivity and economic growth rate
- increase economic flexibility to facilitate adjustment and increase trust and investment in response to the international economic crisis
- provides good environmental policies and practices.
In February 2009, the Government led by the National Government announced the "2009 Amendment of Resource Management (Simplification and Greenness)" is intended to:
- Removes the reckless, annoying and anti-competitive objections
- Streamlines processes for projects with national significance
- Creating an Environmental Protection Authority
- Improve plan development and plan change processes
- Improved resource approval process
- Streamlining decision making
- Improve workability and compliance
The New Zealand Government said in its submission to the local government and neighborhood select committee that some changes designed to simplify and streamline the Resource Management Act are poorly thought out and may create more delays and increase costs.
The ECO considers that the bill will impede public input and to support major projects. It will also accelerate major developments and make little difference to smaller projects, a situation similar to the controversial National Development Act (repealed in 1986).
In 2013, Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment Jan Wright criticized the planned amendment to the Act, saying "no, and should not be, an act of economic development".
See also
- District Plan, the main RMA planning instrument at District Council level
- Environmental Court, court handling important Resource Management issues
- New Zealand Environment
References
Further reading
External links
- Resource Management Act 1991 - Full text of current actions as of 1 July 2011, Government of New Zealand
- The 1991 Resource Management Act The original Resources Management Act came into force in 1991.
- Publication of resource management - from the Ministry of Environment (New Zealand)
- Community Advice - Resource management related materials from the Environmental Defense Society
- RMAlink - community resource management materials from ECO, New Zealand Environmental and Conservation Organization (Inc.)
- New Zealand Resource Management Association - resource management practitioners association
Source of the article : Wikipedia
0 Comments