Record number of late RMA cases boosts case for streamlining
The number of cases tangled up in the Resource Management Act and left running late has reached a new record, according to a recent report.
Environment Minister Nick Smith released the two-yearly report RMA Survey of Local Authorities, and it shows that just 69% of consents were processed on time, compared to 73% last year and continues a decline from a peak of 82% in 2001/2002.
Just 70% of subdivisions, 70% of land-use, 76% of coastal, 66% of water and 59% of discharge consent applications were processed on time.
This is despite processing similar numbers of consents compared to last year, 51,960 in 2007/2008 and 51,768 in 2005/2006.
Just 385 consents were declined (0.74%), a slight increase from 357 (0.69%) in 2005/2006.
All 85 local authorities were asked to complete the survey, and all but one local authority did so, Rangitikei District Council.
The council has gone through extensive staff changes, and Dr Smith will be sending a letter for further information.
It is unclear what effect this has on the statistics presented.
Dr Smith has presented the report to the Local Government and Environment Select Committee, which is overseeing the Resource Management Amendment Bill.
“The bill is about simplifying the consent process and providing incentives for Councils to improve their consenting timeframes. The two-yearly report shows we need to strengthen these proposals to ensure better performance,” he says.
Dr Smith says he has sent letters to the eight councils who are breaching the law more often than they are complying.
He has sent congratulatory letters to the other 25 councils with 90% or better compliance.
“The efficient processing of resource consents is critical to lifting productivity and the creation of new jobs. This report is a wake-up call that significant improvement is required.”
The next RMA Two-yearly Survey of Local Authorities will cover the 2010/2011 financial year, skipping the 2009/2010 year.
This gap year will be to allow the government’s Resource Management (Simplifying and Streamlining) Amendment Bill, which is has been introduced to parliament and is currently in front of the Local Government and Environment Committee.
The National Government made reforming the RMA one of the business centrepieces of their election platform, pledging to cut red tape, abuses of the process and pointless objections.
The committee is to report back to the house on July 27.
Share
Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Reddit
Google
Yahoo
Technorati
Scoopit














Comments and questions3
The time to process may less significant than the number of consents NOT applied for because of the hurdles in the consent process. The bigger consents put off genuine applicants who may have innovative projects that would be flooded by objections.
Another point is that if only a very small percentage of consents are declined then why is there a need for a costly and complicated application process in the first place?
what about the main issue... how long has it been since the lodging of the rma consent to when it gets granted and at what cost? many consents are hung up for years because the Councils simply dont know what it is they are attempting to achieve. Stupid requirements or thresholds pertaining to visual effects.. quash the legislation and go back to the building act and planning rules that existed in the 1970s.. very few leaky houses
Anyone that has tried to develop land will know that councils are not stupid when it comes to making the statistics look good. In my experience the RMA process is painful and council use the Section 92 process to stop the clock, whilst they look for other problems then the day you supply the info for the first Section 92 they hit you with another one again stopping the clock......The people preparing these reports need to look at the number of S92 issued, the Submission Date and the Issue Date... If they want to get the real picture. For us developers the extended time periods cost huge amounts in interest. To point of not making it profitable....
Post new comment or question
To share this article, click on a service below