The NZ Minerals Council calls for more “innovation” and flexibility for mining and less environmental fretting in its submission to the Government’s proposed planning and environmental regulations.
The previous RMA system was too risk-averse in terms of approving projects, says the Minerals Council’s submission, and the rules and guardrails of the new system need to shift that balance to better allow projects to take calculated risks and manage those risks with science, engineering, and technology.
Minerals Council Chief Executive Josie Vidal says: “The new system needs to shift that balance to better allow developers to undertake projects … and to manage any resulting environmental risks with science, engineering, and technology which will continue to improve.”
While planning and environmental law go hand in hand, there must be balance and previously the scales have tipped heavily on the environmental side and not enough on the side of overall benefits, she says.
“At the moment, what has been presented is like a half-finished house. The frame is there, but what fills it in will make it either work or it will be an eyesore. The major flaw is that national policies, standards, environmental limits and other directing rules that will make or break this law won’t be drafted until after the bills are passed, so submitters cannot be fully informed on many aspects of the proposed regime.”
It is essential to stop the vexatious litigation from parties with no skin in the game that befalls many good projects and these laws set out to do that, which we support, Josie adds.
“Overall, the new laws as proposed tend to benefit smaller, urban projects and for that reason we want to maintain the existing case-by-case consideration for mining where assessment is on the merits of the specific project. Mines can’t fit into a cookie-cutter one-size-fits-all approval approach that might work for a granny flat or suchlike.”
The Council supports the concept of combined plans by local government, as fewer plans will be easier for companies to navigate, and fewer resources (council and private sector) will be used in their creation relative to the status quo. “Streamlining bureaucracy gives certainty to investors.”
Proposed zones within regional spatial plans must not preclude mining from occurring within zones not specifically designated for mining, says the submission.
“Our concern is that zones are too prescriptive for mining when you are dealing with minerals that lie where they are formed and there needs to be scope for future prospecting and discovery,” says Josie.
The Council doesn’t support environmental limits because they don’t provide sufficient flexibility. “An environmental management approach which allows mitigation, offsetting, and compensation can achieve better outcomes for both the environment and the economy than what is proposed with the prescriptive approach of environmental limits.”
Overall, the Council wants to see more “explicit consideration” of mining and its unique requirements to ensure our country doesn’t unintentionally sterilise any resources.
The Minerals Council also asks how will the new system all work in practice when so much hinges upon the yet to be established National Policy Direction, national standards, environmental limits, and other instruments?
“It is hard to comment confidently on many parts of the Bills without knowing the content of these instruments,” says its submission. “A major flaw of the Bills, and the process behind them, is that the national instruments are to be drafted after the Bills are passed so submitters cannot be fully informed on many aspects of the proposed regime.”
It also points out the ‘design’ of the new system appears to be heavily influenced by the current housing shortage and infrastructure deficit. “These issues may be significant issues, but they are today’s issues, and resource management legislation needs to be enduring. It seems the new system has been designed with urban development and infrastructure in mind and not primary industries, including mining.”
Whether the Government’s RMA replacement is an improvement will largely hinge upon the content of the national direction, environmental limits, and regional spatial plans, it says.
“Consultation on that will be critical for the extractives sector when it occurs later in the year.”
Freshwater standards implications