strategy and policy committee - environment southland and... · on 15 provisions in chapter 10 have...

2016 June 1 - Strategy & Policy Committee Agenda.docx Environment Southland is the brand name of

Southland Regional Council

Committee Members Cr Nicol Horrell (Chair) Cr Robert Guyton Cr Grant Hubber Cr Peter Jones

Cr Lloyd McCallum Cr Marion Miller Cr Jan Riddell Cr Maurice Rodway Chairman Ali Timms (ex officio)

Strategy and Policy Committee (Rautaki me Mahere)

10.30 am 1 June 2016

A G E N D A (Rarangi Take)

1. Welcome (Haere mai) 2. Apologies (Nga Pa Pouri) – Cr Jones (leave of absence) 3. Public Forum, Petitions and Deputations (He Huinga tuku korero) 4. Notification of Extraordinary and Urgent Business (He Panui Autaia hei Totoia Pakihi) 4.1 Supplementary Reports 4.2 Other 5. Questions (Patai) 6. Chairman and Councillors’ Reports (Nga Purongo-a-Tumuaki me nga Kaunihera) 7. Director of Policy, Planning & Regulatory Services - 16/S&P/38

Item 1 - Update on Proposed Regional Policy Statement Appeals ............................................ 3

Item 2 - Streamlining the Regulatory Regime for Pest Control ................................................ 13

Item 3 – Ongoing Matters 3.1 Strategy and Policy Committee Work Programme............................................................. 16

8. Extraordinary and Urgent Business (Panui Autaia hei Totoia Pakihi) 9. Public Excluded Business (He hui Pakihi e hara mo te iwi)

V M Smith Director of Policy, Planning & Regulatory Services

RECOMMENDATIONS IN COUNCIL REPORTS ARE NOT TO BE CONSTRUED AS

COUNCIL POLICY UNTIL ADOPTED BY COUNCIL

Strategy and Policy Committee – 1 June 2016

2016 June 1 - Strategy & Policy Committee Agenda.docx

Matters for Information/Noting

(Kaupapa Whakamohiotanga/Tuhingia)

Item 1 Update on Proposed Regional Policy Statement

Appeals

MORF ID: A262645 Strategic Direction:

Report by: Felicity Boyd, Senior Policy Planner

Approved by: Anita Dawe, Policy and Planning Manager

Executive Approval: Vin Smith, Director of Policy, Planning and Regulatory Services

Purpose To provide an overview of progress in resolving the appeals on the proposed Regional Policy Statement 2012 (pRPS). Summary Mediation to resolve the appeals on the pRPS has been progressing well. The appeals by the Environmental Defence Society Ltd (EDS) and Transpower New Zealand Limited (Transpower) on 15 provisions in Chapter 10 have been resolved by way of a consent order following mediation with all parties on 16 December 2015. This includes a consequential amendment to Chapter 15 - Infrastructure/Transport. The consent order was issued by the Environment Court on 3 May 2016 and directs Council to make the agreed changes to the pRPS. We will continue to update the Strategy and Policy Committee on progress with the remaining consent orders and outstanding appeals. Recommendation It is recommended that Council resolve to: 1. note that mediation on the appeals on the proposed Regional Policy Statement 2012

has been largely successful; 2. note that the appeals by the Environmental Defence Society Ltd and Transpower

New Zealand Limited on Chapter 10 of the Proposed Southland Regional Policy Statement 2012 have been resolved by way of consent orders issued by the Environment Court.

Report Background Appeals on the pRPS Nine appeals on the pRPS were received in July 2015 and 10 parties joined those appeals as Section 274 parties. Collectively there were 107 individual appeal points. Two appeals (by Heritage



New Zealand Pouhere Taonga and H W Richardson Group Limited) were resolved by way of consent orders on 2 November 2015. All remaining parties indicated they were prepared to enter into Court-assisted mediation, which was held as follows:

30 November 2015: Chapter 4 – Water

1 December 2015: Chapter 4 – Water

9 December 2015: Chapter 12 – Hazardous Substances, Chapter 15 – Infrastructure/Transport

10 December 2015: Chapter 16 – Energy

15 December 2015: Chapter 7 – Coast

16 December 2015: Chapter 10 – Natural Features and Landscapes

24 March 2016: Chapter 7 – Coast Mediation has been largely successful. The majority of appeals look likely to be resolved by way of consent order before the end of the year, avoiding the need for costly Environment Court hearings. Draft consent orders on Chapters 12, 15 and 16 have been prepared by Council’s legal counsel and lodged with the Environment Court but no response has been received yet. Further consent orders on Chapters 4 and 7 are currently being prepared. There remain 15 unresolved appeal points across Chapters 4 and 7. Thirteen appeal points have been made by the Royal Forest and Bird Protection Society Limited (Forest and Bird), one by EDS and one by South Port New Zealand Limited (South Port). On the latter two appeals, all parties have reached agreement except for Forest and Bird as a Section 274 party. Council’s legal counsel has requested a further mediation session on these matters. This is likely to be held in June or July 2016. Chapter 10 – Natural Features and Landscapes The appeals by EDS and Transpower covered 15 provisions in Chapter 10 and sought considerably different outcomes from the chapter. EDS’s appeal sought to require Council to map outstanding natural features and landscapes (ONFLs) and locally distinctive and valued natural features and landscapes. This was contrary to Council’s decision and was not accepted during mediation. EDS also sought a stronger hierarchy for managing adverse effects which would require:

for ONFLs - that all adverse effects be avoided;

for locally distinctive and valued natural features and landscapes - that significant adverse effects be avoided and all other adverse effects be avoided, remedied or mitigation.

Council’s decision sought to establish different approaches to managing these two types of natural features and landscapes - to protect the outstanding, and to manage the locally distinctive and valued. However, Council did not seek to include a specific mitigation hierarchy. The amendments to the chapter clarify that Council wishes to protect ONFLs and manage locally distinctive and valued natural features and landscapes but does not wish to introduce a mitigation hierarchy as sought by EDS. Transpower’s appeal focused on whether or not the provisions of the pRPS gave effect to the National Policy Statement for Electricity Transmission 2008 (NPS-ET). It was accepted during mediation that there was a specific policy in the NPS-ET relating to the management of the



electricity transmission system in areas with outstanding natural landscapes which had not been given effect to. An amendment was made to Chapter 15 – Infrastructure/Transport to recognise this omission and ensure the pRPS gives effect to the NPS-ET. The consent order outlining these changes follows at the end of this report. Appeals on the Biodiversity Variation of the pRPS The Strategy and Policy Committee considered an item on the appeals on the Biodiversity Variation at its last meeting on 21 April 2016. In summary, eight appeals were received on 13 provisions and 10 parties have joined the appeals as s274 parties. All parties have consented to enter mediation, but the date has not yet been set. Views of Affected Parties There are no matters in this report which require consideration under this heading. Compliance with Significance and Engagement Policy There are no issues within this report which trigger matters in this policy. Legal Compliance This report and the associated recommendations comply with the appropriate statutory requirements placed upon the Council. Consistency with Council’s LTP/Annual Plan/Policy/Strategy Resolving appeals to the pRPS is consistent with the Annual Plan. Financial and Resource Implications Appeals on the pRPS is an unbudgeted item, however, it is considerably more cost efficient to resolve appeals through mediation than through Environment Court hearings. There are no additional financial or resource implications. Conclusion All appeals on Chapter 10 of the pRPS have been resolved by way of a consent order issued by the Environment Court following mediation in December 2015. Staff are currently amending the pRPS as directed by the Court and will update Council’s website accordingly. We expect more consent orders to be issued in the coming months and are seeking to resume mediation on two chapters (Chapter 4 – Water and Chapter 7 – Coast) where there are unresolved appeal points. As consent orders progress, we will continue to update the Strategy and Policy Committee. The Consent Order for Chapter 10 of the pRPS is shown on the following pages.



Item 2 Streamlining the Regulatory Regime for Pest

Control


Report by: Sonya Nicol, Senior Policy Planner Approved by: Anita Dawe, Policy and Planning Manager

Executive Approval: Vin Smith, Director of Policy, Planning and Regulatory Services

Purpose For Committee to note that a joint regional council sector staff submission was submitted on 26 May 2016 on the consultation document released by the Minister for the Environment on Streamlining the regulatory regime for pest control. Summary The Minister for the Environment released a consultation document on Streamlining the regulatory regime for pest control during April 2016. The proposed changes are intended to simplify and standardise the regulatory process for using substances for rat, stoat and possum control, as well as pest fish. Regulations have been proposed under the Resource Management Act (RMA), with the purpose to provide for a nationally consistent approach to pest control. The proposed regulations are a response to the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment’s 2011 report Evaluating the use

of 1080: Predators, poisons and silent forests1 that recommended a more standardised approach to

pest control. What this proposal means is that, instead of each regional council having different pest control rules, the standard controls set by the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) would apply. At a BioManagers meeting, it was agreed that a joint regional council sector staff submission would be prepared and submitted, rather than individual ones from each regional council (the Environment Southland Biosecurity Manager agreed to be part of this process). Submissions closed on 26 May 2016. A copy of the submission will be circulated. Recommendation It is recommended that Council resolve to note the report and that a joint regional council sector staff submission has been submitted. Report Background The Streamlining the regulatory regime for pest control consultation document outlines that, during 2011, the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment (the PCE) recommended that the Minister for the Environment “investigate ways to simplify and standardise the way 1080 and other poisons for pest mammal

1 Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment. 2011. Evaluating the use of 1080: Predators, poisons and silent forests. Wellington. Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment.



control are managed under the Resource Management Act and other relevant legislation”. This is as there is a wide range of rules and regulations used by different regional councils. The proposed changes mean that vertebrate toxic agents 1080, brodifacoum and rotenone will not need a resource consent or need to be addressed by regional plans for aerial or ground based application. It is also noted within the supporting material released that the proposed regulation would not change the controls that are in place to protect people and the environment when vertebrate toxic agents are used under the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act 1996 and the Agricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines Act 1997. The consultation document outlines that it is proposed to streamline the regulatory controls on vertebrate toxic agents by putting in place a regulation under Section 360(1)(h) of the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) that will exempt the requirement for a resource consent or rules in regional plans (under section 15 of the RMA) for discharges of:

1) any vertebrate toxic agent that has been through a full assessment under section 63 or 29 of the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act 1996 (HSNO)

2) any vertebrate toxic agent that has been through a rapid assessment under section 28A assessment, provided a full assessment under section 63 or 29 of HSNO has been completed for the active ingredient in the formulation

3) brodifacoum use compliant with the conditions of registration placed on the relevant brodifacoum based products (Pestoff Rodent Bait 20R; AVCM registration no V009014) registered under the Agricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines Act 1997(ACVM).

The proposal seeks to include the following conditions set out below: Conditions in the regulation Table 1: Conditions in the Section 360(1)(h) regulation

Condition Rationale

Occupier permission for the land where the aerial discharge is occurring

This ensures aerial operations do not occur without people’s knowledge or consent on land they occupy.

Information to be provided to councils on:

location of the planned operation (GPS data),

timing of the operation

chemical being used.

This provides information to councils that they have requested in the past in resource consents. This also provides councils with the ability to see where operations are occurring within their regions, and if necessary undertake monitoring and compliance actions.

Compliance with HSNO controls. Whether this condition is included or not, all operations must comply with HSNO, ACVM and any other regulatory requirements. The purpose of this condition in the regulation is to ensure councils have a legal mechanism to enter private property to monitor compliance, and potentially use RMA enforcement mechanisms if the regulation is breached.

It is understood that each region will still be provided with information on location, timing and chemical used. However, as part of the joint submission, Environment Southland staff have sought clarification on requirements for monitoring and compliance actions at those locations.



Currently, in the Regional Water Plan for Southland under Rule 6, the aerial discharge of sodium monofluroacetate (1080) into or onto land where it may enter water requires a controlled activity resource consent, and under Rule 7 the discharge of vertebrate pest control poisons onto or into land where it may enter water requires a restricted-discretionary activity resource consent. While the draft Water and Land Plan has not yet been publically notified, the draft provisions show that the proposed rules will meet the intent of the Minister’s proposed changes. Staff will keep a watching brief on the changes proposed by the Minister in the consultation document - Streamlining the regulatory regime for pest control to ensure any changes required through regulation are reflected within our Regional Planning documents. Views of Affected Parties A joint regional council sector staff submission is being prepared so nationwide views will be incorporated in the submission. Compliance with Significance and Engagement Policy There are no issues within this report which trigger matters in this policy. Legal Compliance This report and the associated recommendations comply with the appropriate statutory requirements placed upon the Council. Consistency with Council’s LTP/Annual Plan/Policy/Strategy Pest Control is a core function for the Council in the Long Term Plan, and other Council documents. Financial and Resource Implications There are no additional financial or resource implications. Conclusion The Streamlining the regulatory regime for pest control consultation document outlines the Minister for the Environment’s proposal to simplify and standardise the regulatory process for using substances for rat, stoat and possum control, as well as pest fish. Environment Southland staff support the approach of a joint regional council sector staff submission.

Attachments 1. A copy of the submission will be circulated separately.



Item 3 Ongoing Matters

Agenda Item No: 3.1 Subject Matter: Strategy and Policy

Committee Work Plan


Report by: Doyle Richardson, Principal Planner

Approved by: Anita Dawe, Policy and Planning Manager

Executive Approval: Vin Smith, Director of Policy, Planning & Regulatory Services

Purpose To assist the Strategy and Policy Committee by identifying its 2015/16 work programme. Background This work plan has been developed to assist the Strategy and Policy Committee on matters associated with the catchment limit setting process going forward. It is proposed that the work programme be considered and adopted. It is intended that the work plan would assist the Council with decision making on the Catchment Limit setting process. The work plan follows on the next page. Recommendation It is recommended that Council resolve to note the following Ongoing Matters:

Strategy and Policy Committee Work Plan



Strategy and Policy Committee – Water and Land 2020 & Beyond

Project – Work Plan 2015/16

Date Deliverable Progress Report/Workshop/ Deliverable

Beh

ind

On

sch

ed

ule

Co

mp

lete

22 July 2015 Work Plan – Strategy and Policy Committee

Report – to note and endorse

2 September 2015

Understanding and deciding the Community Values and limit setting process

To be held early 2016

7 October 2015

25 November 2015

Implementation Plan – Water and Land Plan Community consultation process – community values and limit setting

Report To occur early 2016

March 2016 Planning controls and private property rights

Deliverable(presentation now 21 April)

April 2016 Planning controls and private property rights Options for allocating catchment limits

15 min presentation 10 min questions Workshop To occur on 1 June 2016

XX 2016 (following workshop)

Options for allocating catchment limits

Report

strategy and policy committee - environment southland and... · on 15 provisions in chapter 10 have...

Documents