Environment, Minister—Confidence

Hon Dr NICK SMITH Link to this

Yes, I think that is correct. The very structure of the Resource Management Act delegates the key regulatory functions to the regional councils. The national policy statement does require every one of our regional councils to set limits on water quality and minimum flows. The Government has just commissioned additional work from the Land and Water Forum on potential national environmental standards to complement and support that national policy statement.

Hon Dr NICK SMITH Link to this

The Government does support the report of the Auditor-General. I think it is a good report and a helpful one in making progress on water quality. Specifically on the issue of prosecutions, the Government holds a strong view that the elected representatives on the regional councils should not be involved in prosecuting decisions. I draw to the member’s attention that it is not just in respect of farmers; I think members of this House would equally express concern about the decision in the Manawatū where the Palmerston North City Council breached its resource consent repeatedly over a period of 7 years and no action was taken. I am currently considering the suggestion from the National Party candidate for Palmerston North for a formal inquiry into the decisions around that, so that the Government can provide greater guidance to the councils about how they make those prosecution decisions.

Hon Dr NICK SMITH Link to this

The member does not completely represent the Auditor-General’s report. He was highly complimentary, for instance, of the Taranaki Regional Council and noted that it is making very good progress in improving the quality of fresh water. The truth is that there is a mixed bag of performance from the regional councils. The very worst performance, of course, was from Environment Canterbury. This Government took decisive action to address that non-performance, and that action has resulted in huge improvements in terms of compliance in that region, and a clean-up plan for Lake Ellesmere, New Zealand’s most-polluted lake. Ironically, those actions were opposed by that very member.

Hon Dr NICK SMITH Link to this

I note that both the Auditor-General and OECD visitors here for a water-quality conference last week were highly complimentary of the Government for the national policy statement and the steps that it takes. The criticism that has come from the member and some others is that the national policy statement did not include specific regulation requiring a resource consent for any intensification of agriculture. That is clearly against what the Resource Management Act intends, and I have tabled in this House clear Crown Law advice that said such an action would be illegal. It is something I am not prepared to do.

Hon Dr NICK SMITH Link to this

The first fact I note about Environment Canterbury is that 70 percent of New Zealand’s freshwater irrigation occurs in that region. I think anybody in this House who is well informed on freshwater issues knows that the issue in Canterbury is huge. Canterbury, after 19 years, did not even have a resource management plan for water. It is only as a consequence of this Government having the leadership to appoint commissioners that we actually have an operative plan for water in Canterbury and a clean-up plan for Lake Ellesmere. What is also significant is that members opposite were silent when Canterbury had a 30 percent non-compliance rate. Now Canterbury has one of the highest levels of compliance with resource consents, and the House should welcome that improvement.

Hon Dr NICK SMITH Link to this

I note that many of our freshwater systems have as much as 30-year lag times. For instance, if we apply nitrogen fertiliser, in a catchment like Waikato, from the time it is applied on the land to the time it seeps through into the water system can be a period of as long as 30 years. So this is a long-term challenge. What I would say is that we need only look at Lake Rotoiti, a lake that was in a bad state; it has shown a massive improvement over the last 2 years as a consequence of the Fresh Start for Fresh Water programme. We now have, in five additional communities, specific programmes for the clean-up of lakes and water bodies, and that is something this House should be welcoming in terms of the progress we are making.

Hon Dr NICK SMITH Link to this

I draw the member’s attention to the very specific criterion around the Irrigation Acceleration Fund, and that is that the issues of sustainability and water quality must be dealt with in those applications. I simply draw the House’s attention to a scheme such as that at Ōpuha, in South Canterbury, which has resulted in substantive economic and environmental benefits. If I can use my own constituency of Nelson, it has a water irrigation scheme that has received support from the Government that will result in substantive water-quality improvements and that has the support of key organisations like Fish and Game and the Royal Forest and Bird Protection Society. The truth is that there are irrigation proposals that can also improve water quality.