REPLACEMENT legislation for the Resource Management Act is looking to be as complex and cumbersome as the planning legislation it is expected to replace, Ōtorohanga District Council’s submission on the RMA replacement legislation states.
The RMA is to be replaced by the Natural and Built Environment Bill and Spatial Planning Bill; and the Climate Change Adaptation Act, which is yet to be presented to Parliament.
Council chief advisor Ross McNeil said the three separate pieces of planning law would have an effect opposite to what was intended, and it would result in disjointed rather than integrated planning.
The delay in progressing the third pillar of resource management reform, the Climate Change Adaptation Act added to the problem, and was expected to further increase the complexity of the new system.
“It is very difficult to establish whether a new national planning framework is fit-for-purpose when a key statutory element is not yet at a stage where it can be assessed,” Ross said.
The lack of integration between the RMA reform bills and the reforms already under way; Three Waters, and the Future for Local Government was another issue.
“The recent passing of the Water Services Entities Act 2022 establishes new governance arrangements and controls for critical waters infrastructure, yet there is little linkage between these legislative instruments,” Ross said.
In addition, the independent review of local government report highlighted a host of additional responsibilities and funding challenges imposed on local government, that directly impacted on resource management.
These included new national standards, achieving more sustainable, livable communities, investment to cater for growth and improving community wellbeing.
Another concern was about the ability of the Ōtorohanga community to plan for its future under the new legislation.
The ability of Ōtorohanga to influence critical planning documents and decisions that affected the district would be significantly reduced under the proposed RMA model, Ross said.
For example, concept plans like the one being enacted after significant community and council investment, had no obvious pathway through the proposed new Bills.
“A key concern is the reduction in the functions and roles of a territorial authority in preparing and developing the planning instruments, and the reduced potential for the local community to have a say and influence decisions that affect them,” Ross said.
The council might then be required to carry out plans it had limited input into, which would create “accountability challenges” as residents and ratepayers expected land-use/development requirements applied locally to be developed locally and supported by an appropriate evidence-base.
“This will place the council in an invidious position with our community – we will have no direct control over local planning standards/requirements but will have to apply them, and our community’s expectation is we should be accountable,” Ross said.
Probably the biggest single difference was the new system was essentially top-down driven.
By comparison, the existing RMA system was a much more bottom-up process, he said.
Local councils would no longer be plan-making regarding land use and the environment, Ross said.
Content direction would come from the new overall national planning framework which would provide direction to both regional level spatial strategies and regional natural and built environment plans.
In trying to overcome a lack of national direction in the current RMA system, the new system was too centralised.
It removed the flexibility and agility of local decision-making regarding place making and wellbeing issues, and replaced this with granting wide ranging powers to the Minister for Environment in the central government of the day.
“The issue is whether the efficiency gain aspirations of the new system come at the cost of loss of equity for local communities,” Ross said.
“There is a risk that urban areas with large populations will take precedence simply due to their larger populations, and this will be to the detriment of rural, native biodiversity and coastal areas where issues and risks differ.”
The closing date for submissions to the Select Committee was prior to the council meeting date.
The Ōtorohanga District Council endorsed the submission and thanked Ross for his work.
