In recent years, the Otago Regional Council has often found itself at the forefront of highly political shenanigans around freshwater issues.
For the last five years the council had been working on a draft Land and Water Regional Plan ready for notification on October 31, something which has cost $18 million.
Those who might have hoped the ORC had finally got its act together enough to notify its plan this week would have been disappointed, although perhaps not entirely surprised, the government moved at the eleventh hour to stop this.
On Tuesday, the day before the ORC was to vote on whether to notify the plan, the government introduced an amendment to the Resource Management Act which would, in most circumstances, stop councils from notifying such plans before the national policy statement for freshwater management (NPSFM) is replaced.
In what is becoming an all-too-familiar exercise in questionable process from the coalition government, this amendment was sprung on members of Parliament without any opportunity for select committee scrutiny.
There are mixed views on this amendment. Some see it as fair enough and inevitable given the government has indicated there will be a new direction for the NPSFM and the council will need to incorporate such changes into the plan.
Others say it is another affront to local democracy, contrary to the emphasis the National Party placed on supporting local solutions during last year’s election campaign.
Environment minister Penny Simmonds has downplayed the implications of what she is calling a pause in planning, criticising the previous government’s stance as too complicated, unworkable and which would not achieve the improvements in freshwater quality everyone wants to see.
Water degradation had occurred over many decades and people had to accept it was going to take time to make improvements, she said.
That would not be news to the ORC.
At yesterday’s ORC meeting, some councillors pointed out the delay will not stop great initiatives already operating in the province to improve water quality.
No doubt, but pockets of hope are not the same as a co-ordinated and cohesive plan.
There will be trepidation among environmental advocates about what might happen next.
In its rush to get things done the government has shown little regard for or understanding of environmental issues.
It is fascinating that although councils generally will be prohibited from notifying their land and water plans until December 31 next year, or until the NPS is finalised, there may be exceptions.
Ms Simmonds has said some councils will still be able to progress their freshwater plans in some circumstances — for example, where doing so would more quickly enable key housing or infrastructure projects to go ahead — by applying for approval from the Minister for the Environment.
It is not clear to us what criteria would be applied to that approval and what weight would be given to freshwater quality.
At the meeting yesterday regional councillors voted 7-5 against expressing concern about the new legislation and requesting clarification from the government about how existing and imminent Regional Policy Statements will be given effect to in freshwater planning.
While there were passionate speeches from those on both sides of the argument, the vote suggested a majority acceptance the council has no choice but to work with the government and that it should make the most of having input into the review of the NPSFM.
In what might be the understatement of the year, chairwoman Gretchen Robertson said there was not going to be certainty for a while.
Ratepayers still smarting from the size of their recent rates demands will be hoping that whatever happens next does not mean the $18m already spent is wasted.
There will be little enthusiasm for spending more millions to change direction on this which could then be scuppered by the next change of government.
