Our Position on This Bill
You may have heard Minister, Tama Potaka, back down yesterday on the land exchange part of the Bill. This is not the only problem with it. The change of purpose of DOC to economic development(!) and the removal of the requirement to consult locally is just as alarming and out of step with the values we hold.
The bill goes against the values of the overwhelming majority of the people whose views and interests we represent. The public opposition we observe to it is even stronger than the failed attempts in 2014 by the then Key government to reclassify conservation land on Aotea so that mining would be permitted.
There are some sensible changes proposed which will streamline DOC’s processes nationally in order to support concessions and consents, and to create new Area Plans to replaced outdated and overlapping Conservation Management Strategies and other plans. But unfortunately, these sensible changes have now been jeopardised by unnecessary amendments to the core purpose of the Department of Conservation in the Act (flowing into the new National Conservation Policy Statement). We submit that these changes must not proceed in their current form.
Any amendments to the Conservation Act and related policies should still carry at their core the function of stewardship of the land for its intrinsic value and for future generations. This means acting to uphold the wellbeing of the environment that we leave them, protecting the land and ecosystems that sustain our native wildlife and people, recognising that such values are more prized by community than economic considerations and cannot be replaced once lost.
THE PROPOSED “AMENDMENTS” WILL
Change the purpose of the Department of Conservation through the Conservation Act, requiring them to “enable economic opportunities to the greatest extent” over “recreation consistent with their conservation”.
Open most conservation land up to development including mining, agribusiness, grazing, irrigation, or large scale tourism.
Concentrate decision making power with the Minister of Conservation and Director general of DOC, removing the requirement to consult locally with iwi or community.
Weaken requirements to recognise treaty rights for Ngāti Rehua-Ngātiwai ki Aotea as an iwi still negotiating their settlement.
Ignore principles such as intrinsic or cultural value of a place, the integrity of preserving or restoring continuous ecosystems, or guaranteed public access when making such decisions.
OUR SUBMISSION
We have prepared the attached submission and you are welcome to use this material. Please do make it personal to you though as this does make an impact on the Select Committee members. Thanks to Jennifer, Barry and Juliet for helping pull this together.
This bill is not all bad, there are some sensible changes in it, but the above radical additions to it since it was first drafted several years ago - and which were NOT included in any discussion documents, must not be allowed to proceed. Worst of them is to replace section 6(e) of the Conservation Act on the purpose of DOC.
It is currently: "to foster the use of land and other natural resources and historic resources managed by the Department for recreation to the extent consistent with their conservation". The bill REPLACES it with this: (ea) to recognise the economic opportunities that arise from the use and development of land and other natural resources and historic resources managed by the Department, and to enable this use and development to the greatest extent practicable under this Act and other enactments.
These "other enactments" include new Area Plans (not a bad idea in principle) and a National Conservation Policy Statement (also not a bad idea). What is alarming is that the responsibility for these documents, which would determine what could happen where on 60% of Aotea, would rest with the Minister and DOC alone. Together these changes would pave the way for conservation land here and in any other place in NZ to be developed for economic benefit, without iwi or community having a say.
We assume the Minister will be good to his word yesterday and the land exchange provisions will not proceed, but we are still making it clear that we are against these in our submission.
IN CONCLUSION
Please consider making a personal submission. Numbers DEFINITELY count and already there are more than 24,000 submissions lodged.
You can make a submission here on the online form, or attach a document outlining your submission.
Please submit by Midnight on 2 July - make your submission here.
Ngā mihi
Kate Waterhouse
Chair