Frank Brenmuhl: Intrusive regulations further widen rural-urban rift

Your columnist Mark Peart is a journalist and, true to his profession, he has taken quotes from my speech to the Dairy Farmers of New Zealand conference and used them selectively.

But at least Peart has given me an opportunity to discuss the urban-rural rift. I have no interest in widening a split between rural and urban people, but that will not silence me from pointing out some of the reasons for the division.

First, there is the Resource Management Act and the actions of the Department of Conservation. Using the RMA and DoC, the Government forces farmers to manage their land so that the landscape, vegetation and heritage values are kept for the benefit of the wider public, regardless of the economic impact on the farmer. Farmers receive absolutely no financial support for managing these sites on behalf of the nation.

Recent amendments to the RMA make it even easier for the Government to impose its views on rural communities, through the use of National Policy Statements. These remove another opportunity for the local rural and urban community to work together to common goals. The Government has also extended the responsibilities of regional councils to include biological diversity and landscape matters, thus strengthening urban say over rural communities.

Another reason for the rift are the rules on local government representation. In 2002, to further help the wider public impose its views on the rural landowner, the Government changed the Local Government Electoral Act to ensure urban dominance over the rural ratepayer.

The speech that Peart objected to emphasised that the rural sector, as an industry and as individuals, has always been committed to delivering sustainable farming practice.

Recently I attended a conference discussing the environmental effects of land use on the coastal marine environment. The first speaker was the parliamentary commissioner for the environment. The tenor of his speech was that agriculture was to blame for the parlous state of the coastal marine environment.

Subsequent speakers gradually spelt out the issues and the picture became clearer - that agriculture was a small contributor to the environmental problems being discussed. Urban development, human activity and replacement of trees with roads and paving were the biggest contributors to the damage to the coastal marine environment.

Meanwhile, rural representation on regional and national governing bodies is reducing in line with the increase in urban population. We risk developing a nation of decision-makers who fail to recognise the nation's reliance on the income that farmers produce. Peart bemoans the rural-urban divide. But where was he when his local Dunedin council tried to change the district plan to require farmers to get a consent to store produce on their farm?

Due to the RMA, Federated Farmers' members commit around $21 million a year defending the right of farming to remain sustainable.

Where has the Ministry for Economic Development and Treasury been during this time? What is the economic rationale behind the strangulation of a sector which allows New Zealanders to have a good standard of living?

Peart is right about one thing: town and country must work together.

There is need for a better understanding of the reliance that one has on the other, and of the consequences for all of failing to recognise what is needed to sustain the economy. Rural people are happy to be held to account, but if pointing out the facts is "bad PR", then so be it.

* Frank Brenmuhl is chair of Dairy Farmers of New Zealand, the dairy industry wing of Federated Farmers.