<I>

  <&>Wellington Corpus of Spoken New Zealand English Version One</&>
  <&>Copyright 1998 School of Linguistics & Applied Language Studies</&>
  <&>Victoria University of Wellington</&>

  <&>side one</&>
  <&>2:30</&>
  

  <WSC#MUL017:0005:GP>
      thank you jonathon

  <WSC#MUL017:0010:GP>
      um <,,> the resource management act is a complicated piece of
      law reform and i assume NO KNOWLEDGE on the part of the audience
      but as this talk progresses <,> er you will find it becomes more
      intricate <,,><&>3</&>

  <WSC#MUL017:0015:GP>
      i want to divide these remarks into FOUR first of all what IS
      the resource management act <,,> <&>3:00</&> secondly the
      BACKGROUND to its development <,,><&>3</&> thirdly the reform
      process through which the whole project WENT <,> and fourthly
      some reflections on the METHOD of reform and indeed whether it's
      possible to generate any general theory about policy reform at
      all <,>

  <WSC#MUL017:0020:GP>
      er that has always seemed to me to be a <,> very intriguing
      question <&>microphone sound</&>

  <WSC#MUL017:0025:GP>
      what's that <&>3:30</&> <&>dialogue and laughter</&> <&>3:36</&>

  <WSC#MUL017:0030:GP>
      well the <,> the act itself <,,><&>3</&> is a very big one it's
      two hundred and eighty pages or more <,,> and the STRUCTURE of
      it is essential to understanding of it <,>

  <WSC#MUL017:0035:GP>
      obviously part one of <&>4:00</&> this act is simply the
      ordinary interpretive provisions that one finds in any
      legislation <,> but for THIS act the interpretation provisions
      are much more important than for most acts

  <WSC#MUL017:0040:GP>
      many of the KEY <,> provisions in this act are defined with
      GREAT particularity and have a LOT to do with how the rest of
      the act operates and it would be a great mistake for ANYONE
      using this statute not to pay attention to part one <,,>

  <WSC#MUL017:0045:GP>
      part two contains the purposes and principles and the principle
      is sustainability and i'll say a lot about sustainability in a
      little while <,> but the manner in which the particular
      provisions in part two interact with each other <,> is
      extraordinarily <,> dynamic unpredictable unclear and uncertain
      <,,> and it will await <&>5:00</&> decisions of the court of
      appeal before you KNOW how those provisions will work <,>

  <WSC#MUL017:0050:GP>
      those provisions actually DRIVE this entire statute <,,>

  <WSC#MUL017:0055:GP>
      the sustainability provision is a very generally stated but
      quite complex legal definition <,> and it DRIVES everything else
      <,> in this statute and every act or under the statute whether
      they be minister of local government or anything else
      <,,><&>3</&>

  <WSC#MUL017:0060:GP>
      PART THREE <,> contains heavy handed regulatory provisions <,> a
      lot of prohibitions a lot of dos and don'ts <,> a lot of things
      which say you can't DO any of the following <,,> unless
      <,,><&>3</&> and basically the <,> <&>6:00</&> principle is that
      in order to DO anything you need a resource <.>management</.>
      you need <.>a</.> you need a CONSENT under part six <,,>

  <WSC#MUL017:0065:GP>
      to put anything in the water to ditch it out to sea to
      contaminate the air <,> you need a resource consent <,,> and
      there are some things that you just CAN'T do and they are found
      in part three <,>

  <WSC#MUL017:0070:GP>
      part four sets out the functions powers and duties of central
      and local government <,>

  <WSC#MUL017:0075:GP>
      part seven deals with the vexed question of coastal tendering
      and indeed one of the untidy provisions of this whole statute
      relates to the coastline

  <WSC#MUL017:0080:GP>
      the coastline is NOT tidy from the way in which this statute
      works because there is a bifurcated set of responsibilities
      between the department of conservation and the regional councils
      <,,> and while that is not tidy it survived a long time in the
      statute and the <&>7:00</&> review committee of the national
      government couldn't find a better way of doing it <,> and the
      basic interplay of the forces there IS <,> er that the <,>
      regional councils are not trusted to look after the coastline
      adequately and the conservation organisations were not really
      prepared to allow them <.>ha</.> to HAVE the same sort of er
      power that they have in relation to land use plans

  <WSC#MUL017:0085:GP>
      there is some justification for that on the basis that land use
      planning in new zealand is a great deal more developed there's a
      lot more <unclear>word</unclear> there's a lot more experience
      and a much better developed culture about land use planning than
      there is about maritime planning but er i would not expect that
      bifurcated control to last very long and I would expect it to
      provide quite a lot of difficulty <,,>

  <WSC#MUL017:0090:GP>
      you then go into the question of designations heritage orders
      the water conservation order provisions and the wild <&>8:00</&>
      old wild and scenic river er restrictions that came in in <,> er
      just about nineteen eighty I think they're kept there are water
      conservation orders <O>tut</O>

  <WSC#MUL017:0095:GP>
      unlike a lot of planning legislation overseas this deals with
      <.>sub</.> divisions

  <WSC#MUL017:0100:GP>
      there's a whole set of new rules for subdivisions in here and
      the <.>dis</.> and there's reclamations er dealt with as well
      <,>

  <WSC#MUL017:0105:GP>
      the planning tribunal it's er constitution it's structure

  <WSC#MUL017:0110:GP>
      the planning tribunal is not actually a tribunal it's a court er

  <WSC#MUL017:0115:GP>
      it's a court of record <.>pr</.> presided over by a district
      court judge who has particular responsibilities in the planning
      area er and <,> <.>is</.> in addition to that there are some
      very very HEAVY enforcement provisions in this act

  <WSC#MUL017:0120:GP>
      there are very heavy fines managers of companies are open to er
      vicious criminal penalties even in a personal capacity er and
      you can't sort of plead superior orders <,>

  <WSC#MUL017:0125:GP>
      the enforcement provisions of this statute are novel and strong
      <,,>

  <WSC#MUL017:0130:GP>
      then there <&>9:00</&> is the hazards control commission

  <WSC#MUL017:0135:GP>
      the hazards control commission was POKED in there in a very
      primitive form to ensure that noone was able to <?>white ant</?>
      it er so that you actually get a system of regulating hazardous
      substances in new zealand that at present we lack

  <WSC#MUL017:0140:GP>
      there is a need for to set standards there is a need for a
      scientific body to recommend to government how standards ought
      to be set for hazardous substances and the power to do that is
      STUCK in the statute all ready to go even though we haven't got
      a hazards control commission yet

  <WSC#MUL017:0145:GP>
      it's very important that we get one and it's very important that
      hazardous substances be dealt with systematically

  <WSC#MUL017:0150:GP>
      that area is a mess <.>i</.> in new zealand at the moment

  <WSC#MUL017:0155:GP>
      there were a great <.>d</.> many difficulties encountered in the
      policy making with the territorial imperative of the department
      of agriculture and various quangos under its control <?>who</?>
      wanted to be able <&>10:00</&> to do things with agricultural
      chemicals

  <WSC#MUL017:0160:GP>
      it is a very very fraught and difficult area <,>

  <WSC#MUL017:0165:GP>
      er then there are transitional provisions the transitional
      provisions are frankly a mess because noone looked at them er
      much in the scrutiny process and i expect there'll be quite a
      lot of er alarms and excursions er as the transition comes about
      <,,><&>4</&>

  <WSC#MUL017:0170:GP>
      now this statute <,,> replaces ALL the major resource statutes
      that there ARE or were in new zealand

  <WSC#MUL017:0175:GP>
      in total seventy FIVE other acts of parliament are repealed by
      this act of parliament

  <WSC#MUL017:0180:GP>
      there is therefore a net LOSS to the statute book of a lot of
      pages despite the size of THIS statute

  <WSC#MUL017:0185:GP>
      you now only have ONE you don't need a lot of OTHERS

  <WSC#MUL017:0190:GP>
      the main ones that are repealed are the town and country
      planning act the water and soil conservation act the clean air a
      great chunk of the local government act about sub <&>11:00</&>
      divisions the geothermal energy act the harbours act and the
      noise control act and a large number of other particular even
      local statutes er of a er great er <.>inclu</.> including er the
      <?>Clutha</?> empowering act <O>laughter</O> <,,><&>3</&>

  <WSC#MUL017:0195:GP>
      now <,,> the purposes and principles <,> part of the act are the
      GUTS of it

  <WSC#MUL017:0200:GP>
      if you want to understand the logic of how this act works you
      have to govern <.>part</.> you have to master part two of it <,>
      which deals with sustainable management of natural and physical
      resources <,> and sustainable management of natural and physical
      resources is the PRIME factor a secondary factor are facts
      matters of national importance in section six <,>

  <WSC#MUL017:0205:GP>
      they are heavily <&>12:00</&> environmental those provisions

  <WSC#MUL017:0210:GP>
      there are also in section seven some matters which are not quite
      as important AGAIN but which still have to be taken into account
      and then in section eight there is the treaty of waitangi
      provision about the principles a weaker formulation of that than
      one finds for example in the state owned enterprises act section
      nine

  <WSC#MUL017:0215:GP>
      not sure that the legal significance of that is very great

  <WSC#MUL017:0220:GP>
      it may very well be that parliament doesn't want to each day to
      give great weight to the principles of the treaty of waitangi
      but so long as <.>the</.> the thing is mentioned in the act at
      all that's enough for the court of appeal and won't deter THEM
      from any decision that they want to make <,,>

  <WSC#MUL017:0225:GP>
      now <O>exhales</O> <,,><&>5</&> the PURPOSE which governs the
      entire statutory edifice <,> is to promote the sustainable <&><.>mis</.>
      pronounced stustainable</&> management of natural and physical
      resources <,> and for those <&>13:00</&> of you who like
      statutory interpretation <quickly>and that should be all of you
      if you want to know anything about public policy</quickly> er
      then you will find that there is a pretty intricate interplay in
      section five

  <WSC#MUL017:0230:GP>
      section five one says the purpose of this act is to promote the
      sustainable management of natural and physical resources <,> but
      er <,> we also find <,> in section five two <,> that <,>
      managing the use development and protection of natural and
      physical resources in a way or at a rate which enables people
      and communities to provide for their social economic and
      cultural wellbeing and for their health and safety <,> WHILE
      sustaining the potential in natural and physical resources
      excluding minerals <quickly>cos that was chopped out of this
      bill and put in the crown minerals act</quickly> <,> to MEET the
      <.>fores</.> reasonably foreseeable needs of future <&>14:00</&>
      generations AND safeguarding the life supporting capacity of air
      water soil and ecosystems AND avoiding remedying or mitigating
      any adverse effects of activities on the environment <,>

  <WSC#MUL017:0235:GP>
      now believe me the way in which those words and that provision
      apply to particular cases provides very considerable scope for
      doubt <,> and what <.>the</.> basic philosophy for this statute
      is is to say there is a single governing principle the principle
      of sustainable development <,> and the statute provides a
      process that you must go through and the processes may or may
      not lead to the relevant resource consent er which will enable a
      developer to do er what the developer wants <&>15:00</&> to do
      <,>

  <WSC#MUL017:0240:GP>
      now <,,><&>3</&> developers are going to have to make strong
      economic arguments about jobs about er infrastructural er <,>
      effects on the local economy of their developments <,,> and
      basically it will NOT be easy in my judgement for developers to
      succeed with very big developments here

  <WSC#MUL017:0245:GP>
      the <,> sustainability principle clearly puts limits <,,> on
      development <,,><&>4</&>

  <WSC#MUL017:0250:GP>
      section six contains matters of national importance <,> er those
      matters <,> the preservation of the natural character of the
      coastal environment is a very important one of those <,> and um
      notice the word inappropriate here which governs all that

  <WSC#MUL017:0255:GP>
      the word inappropriate is probably a slightly weaker
      <&>16:00</&> formulation than in the old law where it was er
      unnecessary <,> er but nevertheless i think that the coast is
      pretty secure under this

  <WSC#MUL017:0260:GP>
      wetlands lakes rivers and their margins <,> and then there are
      the other factors outstanding natural features of landscapes
      protection of significant indigenous vegetation and habitats of
      indigenous fauna maintenance enhancement of public access and
      relationship of maori and their culture

  <WSC#MUL017:0265:GP>
      now those things are important but NOT as important as the
      principle which drives the whole act in section five <,>

  <WSC#MUL017:0270:GP>
      section seven contains a number of other matters <,,> <&>seven
      syllables of Maori</&> efficient use of development of natural
      physical resources <&>17:00</&> amenity values ecosystems and er
      a lovely little number that the acclimatisation society's put in
      at the last minute protection of the habitat of trout and salmon
      not being indigenous you see

  <WSC#MUL017:0275:GP>
      actually that provision is reasonably significant if you look at
      some of the previous er <?>decided</?> cases of the planning
      tribunal and water catchment <,> um <,>

  <WSC#MUL017:0280:GP>
      now <,,> the section eight treaty provision is in those terms
      <,,><&>4</&>

  <WSC#MUL017:0285:GP>
      one of the first decisions that was made in the policy
      generating er process of this ACT was to ensure that the
      ownership provisions <,> of resources were NOT dealt with <,>

  <WSC#MUL017:0290:GP>
      er we had a lot of consultation with maori and came to the
      conclusion er that if we took some of the advice that property
      rights should be er the way to run this thing then the property
      rights should be allocated and all the crown <&>18:00</&>
      mineral resources and then everything else you could think of er
      and then you would use the property rights model as a <drawls>MEANS</drawls>
      of adjusting er the dispute the problems you'd get into you'd
      get into MASSIVE treaty problems

  <WSC#MUL017:0295:GP>
      i mean for example water water's <.>a</.> quite an important
      resource you want to ask electricorp about it sometime er and er
      you will find er that if maori claims water under the treaty er
      you were really gonna be BUYING a BARREL of problems if <.>you</.>
      if you dealt with er the OWNERSHIP so i put ownership OUT on one
      side to the chagrin of some er policy advisers and said do we
      want to PASS this statute the purpose of statutes is to PASS
      them <.>a</.> and if you want to argue about property rights go
      ahead but this is not a theoretical exercise this is a law
      <&>18:55</&> reform exercise
</I>
