Comment: Federated Farmers Manawatu/Rangitīkei Provincial President Murray Holdaway wades into the freshwater debate with a list of what he'd like to see "gone by lunchtime".
"Gone by lunch time!"
That's a headline-grabbing comment we have all heard from politicians from all sides of the political spectrum, most recently target="_blank">Judith Collins and David Bennett regarding the new water reform regulations.
But it got me thinking. What should be gone? What might have gone already? And what might be gone if we get this wrong?
Unfortunately, it appears to me that one thing that has gone during the last couple of weeks, is a focus on improving waterways.
We should all be using our collective willingness, knowledge, and influence to find solutions and work out ways of applying them to best achieve improved water quality.
Instead we find ourselves investigating the unintended consequences of a shoddy piece of legislation that is short on clarity, contains clear inaccuracies and in parts is simply unworkable.
Federated Farmers Manawatu/Rangitikei Provincial President Murray Holdaway. Photo / Supplied
Those responsible are now spending time and resources to make changes where obviously needed, but still defending large parts of the document, further delaying real and sustainable solutions being found.
Gone also, I believe, is much respect between two groups of people who ultimately are key to finding and applying solutions - farmer and government.
For the pastoral sector to be excluded from genuine input earlier, and the so-called consultation being conducted in a less then genuine way, was always going to be problematic. We are now seeing the result of those poor decisions.
What could be gone if we get this wrong? Well, New Zealand's clean and green image, a reliable supply of drinkable water, recreational use of many waterways, aquatic life as we know it today, pastoral farming in New Zealand as we know it today, economic stability of our small trading nation, social wellbeing particularly in rural communities.
This is a complex issue with many significant long-term implications for all New Zealanders.
We cannot afford to try and reduce this issue to a single focus like swimmable waterways nor can we afford to allow the discussion to be dominated by emotion. It is simply too important for New Zealand.
We do need to make progress on finding solutions, yet we need to ensure sufficient time to not only get the solutions right, but to have strong consensus on the solutions.
What I hope is not gone by lunchtime, is the option of having effective legislation as part of the solution.
We do need to change, do things differently from the past and it is a fact that change will be resisted.
Setting minimum standards in legislation will probably be required, but the legislation must meet principles to be effective.
We need to be sure that the regulation will achieve the intention. They need to be clear, measurable, and understandable.
Can they be enforced effectively, and do we fully understand the consequences, both good and bad, on economic and social outcomes. On a number of counts the recent water regulations do not pass many of these tests.
What I fear is quickly going, is the goodwill of farmers and the rural community to work with national and regional authorities to find real lasting solutions.
If that is to be fully restored, the farming sector will need to be included and involved in discussions, and the significant progress already achieved needs to get genuine recognition.
What I hope is gone by lunchtime, is the approach that forced regulation is the only way to get the results we all want.
