The RMA reforms are meant to enable development without destroying the environment. Photo / Michael Craig
The RMA reforms are meant to enable development without destroying the environment. Photo / Michael Craig
There are concerns the replacement for the beleaguered Resource Management Act will see swathes of trees in cities pulped in the interest of development. Meanwhile, there appears to be a battle within the Labour party over whether environmental protections should have priority over housing.
More than 2000 submissions, two-thirds ofthe total, on a recent draft of the main bill that will replace the Resource Management Act (RMA) were concerned with the fate of urban trees. One suggested people should be able to see at least three trees from their home.
Green Party environment spokeswoman Eugenie Sage told the Herald she feared the Government was shifting the balance of the new laws in favour of intensive development.
"It's a big issue [urban trees] - and it's one the public is really concerned about, particularly with the importance of urban trees for shade, for the heat island effect, for stormwater retention, and habitat amenity," Sage said.
By the end of the year, Environment Minister David Parker will introduce the two main pieces of law that will replace the RMA (a third bill, relating to climate change, is the responsibility of Climate Change Minister James Shaw), marking the beginning of the end of a reform process that began in 2019.
All the large parties back reform, including the repeal of the RMA, however there's significant disagreement about what to replace it with, and striking the balance between protecting the environment and allowing cities to grow and develop.
The Government has signalled it's not interested in including amenity values in the bill, so there's been nothing on how the Government is going to respond to that gap in the legislation.
There is a fear, among people who support the Government's direction, that including provisions for extensive environmental protection and things like "amenity values" will make it more difficult to get new buildings consented, exacerbating the infrastructure deficit and housing crisis.
Parker expressed this concern in Parliament this week with a series of answers to patsy questions from Labour MP (and RMA expert) Rachel Brooking on how the Government would allow more houses and infrastructure.
Parker pointed to a critical report from the Infrastructure Commission which found New Zealand's "prohibitively expensive housing market could have been prevented by congestion mitigation policies and less restrictive planning rules".
Parker hinted the Government might be swinging away from strict environmental protection and towards a regime that will be more permissive of development.
Parker quoted the Infrastructure Commission, which said that "unless the planning system is very specific about prioritising housing and infrastructure as core objectives, amenity concerns about urban and natural character will prevail over building the homes that New Zealanders need".
"The commission is correct, and prioritising a massive increase in housing infrastructure is a focus of the planning system reforms," Parker said.
Green Party environment spokeswoman Eugenie Sage wants urban trees protected. Photo / Sylvie Whinray
The Greens are worried the very amenity concerns Parker and the Infrastructure Commission accuse of holding up development could be wiped entirely from the resource management regime, swinging the pendulum too far towards development - to the ruin of the environment.
MPs were able to see a draft of part of one of the replacement bills last year, when the Government released an exposure draft of the National and Built Environments Act (NBA), which was examined by Parliament's Environment Committee, of which Sage is chairwoman.
The Greens published a minority report on that draft, saying they were concerned about the loss of "amenity values".
The Greens' report quoted Christchurch City Council's submission which feared the "draft does not provide a planning regime that will deliver quality, liveable towns and cities for current and future generations".
"As intensification increases, the quality of the built environment becomes more important to ensure its liveability," the Greens' submission said.
The Greens suggested urban trees be part of the new national planning framework, meaning planners would have to consider urban trees.
One idea singled out by the Greens was the 3-30-300 rule from the International Union for the Conservation of Nature: as a "rule of thumb" people should be able to see "at least three reasonably sized trees from their home; every neighbourhood should have at least 30 per cent canopy cover; and people should have access to high-quality green space of at least one hectare within 300 metres or a 5 to 10-minute walk."
Environment Minister David Parker cautioned against excessive rules. Photo / Mark Mitchell
Parker's remarks about "prioritising housing and infrastructure" appear to contradict a recommendation from the select committee, which has a Labour majority.
That committee advised the Government to make it clear that "environmental limits have priority in the system, and are not subject to other goals related to wellbeing".
Sage was also concerned the Government is shifting away from the environmental thrust of RMA reforms, and urged ministers to publish more reports on how the bill was changing behind the scenes so people could give their view.
"The public and stakeholders will struggle to come to grips with the level of detail in it and be able to make submissions.
"It's potentially squeezing the biggest reform of environmental law in 30 years into quite a constrained time period," Sage said.
Parker disputed this, noting there had already been a working group (the Randerson report) that took submissions, as well as an exposure draft process in Parliament.
"There has been more consultation before and during this process than is the norm for legislation," Parker said.
"There have been years of civil engagement on the replacement resource management system including extensive consultation and engagement through the preparation of the Randerson report, and on the exposure draft of the NBA – including at the select committee," Parker said.
Parker promised the two bills he is responsible for will both get a full select committee process when they go through Parliament
"At the second stage of the select committee process a full select committee will be run on the NBA and SPA [Spatial Planning Act, the second RMA replacement]. Further documents will be released when the bills are introduced later this year," Parker said.
