10 Years of the RMA

Forest and Bird, Issue 303, 1 February 2002, Page 3

10 Years of the RMA

North Shore

PETER NAGELS

Many small-scale everyday activities generate the ‘cumulative effects’ of the Resource Management Act, particularly in urban areas. ("Ten Years of the R.M.A; Forest e& Bird November 2001).Waterrelated matters, particularly discharges, are critical environmental issues, but water-related impacts are given poor scrutiny. This is because water is still seen as something to take, make and waste with virtual impunity. But clean water comes from somewhere and dirty water must go somewhere. One important part of the RM Act which receives very little attention is section 17. This states that ‘every person has a duty to avoid, remedy, or mitigate any adverse effect on

the environment arising from an activity..." This applies to all New Zealanders but how many know this and carry out their duty to the country and their community? Another serious culprit is the Building Act 1991. In many ways the Building Act is contrary to the RMA. The Building Act does not have proper regard for other legislation, sustainable principles, waste minimisation, water efficiency, pollution prevention, long-term contamination of surface water and streams, rivers etc. Impacts on neighbours are not well handled in the Building Act either. Perhaps these issues may be covered somewhere by words, but what translates into practice is a different matter.