David
Parker - October, 2008 - The government
is developing regulations to specify the
carbon credits known as assigned amount
units that will be accepted for compliance
with the emissions trading scheme, Climate
Change Minister David Parker announced today.
"The ETS legislation
allows imported assigned amount units, or
AAUs, to be surrendered under the New Zealand
emissions trading scheme, but only where
these AAUs meet the environmental conditions
specified in regulations," David Parker
said.
"It's important
that people buying AAUs to comply with the
emissions trading scheme know exactly which
ones they'll be allowed to surrender. The
regulations will need to be worked through
carefully to make sure the classes of AAUs
that will be accepted are clearly defined.
"Where a country
has AAUs for sale for reasons other than
successful domestic emissions reduction
policy, the government will be seeking assurances
that the units have been appropriately ‘greened'.
"One obvious example
of a greening arrangement is where the seller
country has legislation in place requiring
all revenue from AAU sales to be invested
in emissions reduction or other environmental
projects.
"AAUs from countries
with strong emissions reduction policies
are also likely to be accepted. In future,
if the New Zealand scheme is linked with
another country's emissions trading scheme,
then AAUs from that country would also be
accepted."
The draft regulations
are being prepared now and will be released
early in the new year. There will be an
opportunity for the public to make submissions
before the regulations are finalised.
The regulations are
expected to be issued in June 2009 and come
into force three months later.
For more information
about the emissions trading scheme, visit
www.climatechange.govt.nz or call 0800 CLIMATE
(254 628).
+ More
Protecting the environment
through RMA tools and rules
Trevor Mallard9 October,
2008 - Environment Minister Trevor Mallard's
speech to the Environment Compliance Conference
(Society of Local Government Managers),
Brentwood Hotel, Wellington
Good morning and thank
you for the opportunity to give the opening
address at this important and timely conference
on environmental compliance.
Firstly, I commend the
organising committee for putting this conference
together with so many interesting and relevant
workshops and speakers.
The conference provides
a good chance to share best practice, debate
issues and discuss solutions. It is also
an opportunity to foster support for groups
such as the
Compliance and Enforcement
Special Interest Group and others who are
actively working to make improvements across
the sector.
The Resource Management
Act (RMA) is the cornerstone of New Zealand's
environmental legislation. It allows us
to balance the needs of our growing economy
and population with the need to protect
and enhance our natural resources and local
environment.
For the RMA to be effective,
compliance issues are becoming increasingly
important as the sustainable limits of our
natural resources are reached. This is particularly
true where our water resources are concerned
but it's equally relevant in the urban environment.
Compliance is also important
when it comes to protecting our international
"clean green" image.
This is an image that
is not only an important part of our kiwi
identity. It is also critical for our tourism
industry and an increasingly important part
of our international brand in world markets
where consumers are increasingly demanding
eco-friendly goods and services.
That is why compliance,
monitoring and enforcement should be an
integral part of the plan development and
resource consent decisions, because if local
rules and conditions imposed are not properly
monitored and enforced then they will have
little effect.
Congratulations to those councils for showing
how it can be done - those councils who
are active in environmental monitoring and
taking prosecutions where local rules and
consent conditions are breached.
Environment Southland
has good examples of monitoring and enforcement
work which are reported annually through
a comprehensive environmental compliance
monitoring report.
For dairy farmers, Environment
Southland's active role in compliance monitoring
is supported by guidelines to better manage
dairy effluent and a free advisory service
to farmers.
This provides an excellent
example of how a council can provide a mix
of regulatory and non-regulatory measures
to reduce water pollution in the region.
Many other councils
are proactive and starting to take tougher
stances. This includes Otago Regional Council,
which in June 2008 prosecuted 18 dairy farmers
or companies with total fines of more than
$100,000.
Preliminary figures
from new research show that overall prosecutions
are increasing in terms of both frequency
and fine levels. In the 11000s the average
fine was $6500 and there were on average
39 prosecutions per year. Prosecutions are
now much more frequent, averaging 82 per
year.
Over the past three
years average fine levels have risen to
$12,500.
However, when placed
in the context of inflation and the increased
environmental impacts from intensified land-use,
this increase in average fine levels is
relatively modest.
In the last three years,
the most common offence was discharge into
water or onto land that may then enter the
water (44 per cent) and the most common
sector to offend was agriculture (43 per
cent).
In addition to prosecutions,
local authorities respond to more than 100,000
complaints about breaches of the RMA per
year and issue approximately 1500 infringement
notices annually.
This conference provides
a great opportunity to discuss whether this
is enough and if more can be done to better
protect our local water and land resources
by securing better compliance.
As I've said, looking
after our environment and having sustainable
water management is important for our economic
success.
Consumers will not be
interested in buying goods that have been
produced at the expense of the local environment
- be it through pollution in waterways,
or through local water supplies running
out because water resources have not been
managed properly.
Most farmers do care
about this - but the exporters who continue
to pollute are actually undermining their
own product and the valuable New Zealand
brand.
As I have said previously,
I think it's time the relatively small number
of repeat offending polluters started facing
the full personal penalties, including imprisonment,
available under the law, rather than them
getting away with treating small infringement
fines as a normal business cost.
For instance, I am aware
of a large corporate farming operation that
is facing its fifth prosecution for ‘dirty
dairying'.
This corporate was recently
given the highest single fine for a dairy
effluent RMA prosecution of $37,500 but
that farm got an estimated annual dairy
payout of $5 million.
This sort of recurring
offending tends to suggest that existing
penalties are not a sufficient deterrent
to ensure large corporations with big profit
margins comply with their consent conditions.
That said, I have also
been heartened to hear Environment Court
Judge Jeff Smith recently signalling greater
fines and enforcement orders to shut down
non-compliant farm operations. This may
be what is required if we are to stop pollution
and ensure all consent holders comply with
their conditions.
The recent state of
the environment report showed the levels
of nitrogen and phosphorus have increased
in our waterways. This is a result of intensified
land-use and the increase of diffuse pollution
entering our waterways from animal effluent,
pesticides and fertiliser run-off.
For example, 30 per
cent of the 900 dairy farms in the Manawatu-Wanganui
region were non-compliant. And an audit
of dairy farms within the Wellington region
found that less than half were fully compliant.
This is unacceptable.
This issue of fines
will no doubt arise during the conference
and I am receptive to looking into this
matter further.
However, these examples
of 'dirty dairying' represent a small component
of the farming community, most farmers care
and a lot are doing good work to improve
our waterways. Most dairy farmers now have
nutrient budgets, a good first step. We
need to see these budgets used, and moved
to active nutrient plans, the top of the
nutrient management ladder.
One thing I do want
to stress is that cleaning up our water
resources is a long term issue. It can not
- in a practical sense - happen overnight
as it can take many many years to clean
a waterway from its source. What is important
is that we have active plans in place for
this to happen.
In addition to improvements
around nutrients, many farmers have fenced
off waterways, something I think should
be standard practice. Environment Waikato
is supporting this initiative in their region
through subsidising farmers to fence off
important waterways. This provides a great
example of councils working with landowners
to reduce water pollution.
I expect the farming
industry to show leadership; to work proactively
to do everything necessary to reign in farmers
who let the industry down. The responsibility
does not lie solely with the farming industry
however.
Councils have a responsibility
not just to communities to ensure individual
farmers are not offending and polluting
our waterways, but also to the farming industry,
which as a whole both suffers by renegade
farmers, and benefits when farmers are able
to produce more efficiently and sustainably.
I would like to challenge
local authorities to do everything they
can, using the tools available under the
RMA, to ensure that agriculture is sustainable
and an important positive contributor to
New Zealand. To assist this it is important
that you share your knowledge too of best
practice and your own experiences in what
works.
Active environmental
compliance of our urban environment is equally
as important. Unconsented or non-complying
activities such as tree removal, earthworks
and damage of heritage sites can all have
significant impacts on the amenity of our
urban environment.
In addition to these
issues, city and district councils respond
to over 80,000 excessive noise complaints
each year. Councils do a great job here,
particularly those who have set up quick
response units to monitor and enforce these
issues.
The government is working
at a national level to help address some
of the problems I have raised.
Work to improve consistency
in council plans and to create a better
national direction for environmental management
is ongoing. We also have better training
for decision makers and more national guidance.
Central to this is the
development and ongoing rollout of a suite
of national environmental standards and
national policy statements, including the
proposed National Policy Statement for Freshwater
Management. Many deal with water management
including ecological flows and water takes
and sources of drinking water, while others
in place tackle air quality standards.
These will improve consistency
under the RMA and help local government
decide how to balance competing national
benefits and local costs.
In addition to this
national guidance, we are producing practical
and hands-on resources to improve the implementation
of the RMA.
There is the Quality
Planning website (QP), which is the only
dedicated RMA best practice guidance website
in New Zealand. The website now consistently
receives more than 25,000 visits per month.
Many of you will also
be familiar with the enforcement manual
on QP. This resource covers the full suite
of RMA enforcement tools and provides useful
guidance to practitioners on the most appropriate
tools to use.
This manual is currently
being updated to provide more practical
guidance with more emphasis on tools, investigation
and making best practice decisions.
The updated version
will include practical templates and examples,
and detailed information on key issues confronting
the sector.
Earlier this year the
"monitoring one-stop-shop" on
QP was also updated. The updated guidance
includes seven guidance notes on monitoring,
including monitoring for compliance with
resource consent conditions.
Environmental compliance
and enforcement strategies need to evolve
to keep up with emerging environmental issues.
The RMA provides for compliance activities,
but these provisions need to be used proactively
and strategically by those in the sector.
There is a conference
session today on the research commissioned
by the Ministry for the Environment into
the RMA enforcement regime. I encourage
you all to use these sessions to share best
practice and debate the future direction
of environmental compliance in New Zealand,
and I very much look forward to hearing
back with your views.
Thank you.