Councillors attending the up-coming retreat (retreating councillors?) were asked to present a paper or something otherwise thought provoking (may the saints preserve us from PowerPoint presentations!) for us all to ruminate/masticate on during the two day extravaganza.
I kept mine pithy (short anyway) and here it is (feel free to comment):
I have a question I’d like to pose to my fellow councillors. It’s one that vexes me and one I’m very keen to hear your views on.
My question is: Why aren’t applicants for consents required to describe the ways in which the activity they are proposing will benefit the environment?
We are told with increasing frequency that there must be a balance between economy and environment.
Applicants wishing to extract from or discharge into the environment can describe with ease the benefit to the economy; theirs and the regions that will flow from the activity they are asking consent for.
I believe they should also be able to describe the benefit to the environment that will result from their proposed activity; the improvement that will come because of their actions.
To date, I’ve not heard any such good news for the environment.
I’d like to ask this question of applicants.
I don’t think it’s too much to ask of those who seek greater access to our region’s natural resources.
6 comments:
If you said something like that at our regional council you would be tarred and feathered and buried in dredge tailings.
This may still happen Shunda.
I'm practising my 'I may be packing explosives' walk.
I think that is a fair question
Just as fair as how many people are going to be out of work or more to the point who is going to pay if the country follows some green policy
The New Green Deal from the Green Party is probably the best proposal by any party Ray.
http://www.greens.org.nz/gnd
It's a job-creator and an environment-saver. Bill English and crew have tried to mimic it wih their recent 'green' announcements but theirs is a pale shadow of the original.
Another question related to yours for ES councilors ..
How come perspective consents aren't expected to show how the have already taken steps to alleviate any environment damage to their consent proposal?
Apparently overseas if you haven't (such as pounding area for dairy or riparian planting along waterways that is ALREADY taken place) Then don't bother applying as you wont get a consent ..Here in NZ we have a trust him/her they I will do it sometime in the future attitude with granting a consent
Prospective - yes, that's a very good idea Pauline - I'd like to see that requirement. Showing that you really mean to improve your environment by show-casing some actions you've already taken is a better way than we work to now.
Thanks for your suggestion. I will introduce it to our discussions.
Post a Comment