web analytics

The Government is misrepresenting the effect of the Ruataniwha Dam decision

Written By: - Date published: 8:00 am, July 9th, 2017 - 21 comments
Categories: Abuse of power, bill english, Conservation, david parker, Environment, farming, farming, labour, national, national/act government, Politics, same old national, water - Tags: , ,

The Minister of Conservation has failed in her attempt to swap a pristine piece of conservation land for a cow paddock so that the ill conceived Ruataniwha Dam can proceed.

I am not surprised.  The Ruataniwha Dam proposal is an appalling waste of resources and if it was completed it would poison the Tukituki river.

The background is complex and the politics labyrinth but essentially the Hawkes Bay Regional Council wanted to build a big as damn flooding pristine conservation areas so that it could intensify farming in the Hawkes Bay.  Much effort went into presenting the proposal as something that would be good for the environment.  The reality was that it was going to effectively destroy the Tukituki River by rendering it toxic through increased nitrate levels.

The Regional Council wanted to get around this problem by measuring phosphate levels only and not nitrate levels.  If you do not measure it then I guess it does not become a problem.  I wrote about DOC’s involvement in the Board of Inquiry into the Dam previously, specifically its involvement in a submission concerning water quality methodology and said this:

The original 32 page draft submission [prepared by DOC] said that the proposal is a risky and untested approach to water management which could kill the rivers involved.  It also said the risks of the dam project had not been fully assessed, and there was an inadequate management plan for potentially high impact effects on rivers.  It was replaced with a 2 paragraph submission that did not refer to these concerns and was neutral on the proposal.

The Board of Inquiry in its wisdom decided to strictly limit nitrate levels and this should have killed the idea of the dam.  But the Hawkes Bay Regional Council and the Government have refused to accept the inevitable and have still fought on.

One battle they recently lost in the Supreme Court concerned the legality of the decision by the Director-General of Conservation to allow a land swap so that the dam could proceed.  The Government has tried to suggest that this decision is a bad one on the basis that for some time the Government has engaged in land swaps that have resulted in it obtaining land with superior conservation values.

But this is spin, pure and simple.  If you read the judgment you will come across phrases such as these:

… [t]here is no doubt, therefore, that the areas of indigenous habitat which are subject to the proposal contain significant ecological values within a national context”.

… the area in question was accepted to have high conservation values …

…[i]t is clear, however, that the scientific assessment was relatively even and there is no suggestion that the values identified on the 22 hectares were not significant and did not in themselves warrant continued protection in the absence of the exchange. The assessment was that, on balance, there were net gains in the exchange …

The decision relies on the distinction between “conservation” land and “stewartship” land, the former having higher values.  While the latter land can be swapped, for this to occur in relation to the former a separate test, that the land itself is not deserving of special protection, has to be met.

As said by the Court:

[114] It was not enough that on a “relativity analysis” there was considered to be a margin, on balance, in favour of the Smedley land in the swap. Gain in exchange of land was not the right question in considering revocation of protected status. If it were, there would be inevitable collapsing of the two decisions as to revocation and exchange, despite the recognition that they are distinct, and despite the legislative history which made it clear that gain in exchange of land did not justify exchange of additionally protected land but was available only in respect of stewardship areas.

[115] Revocation under s 18(7) must be assessed by reference to the particular resources affected and does not lend itself to a calculation of whether an exchange of land will lead to net gain to either the forest park as a whole or the wider conservation estate. Nor is it sufficient to undertake a comparative assessment as to whether land proposed to be obtained in an exchange has higher intrinsic conservation values. Revocation of protected status is open only if the conservation values of the resources on the subject land no longer justify that protection.

And this is no accident.  The Court referred to the Parliamentary debates and the history of the Act and concluded that the different rules for land swaps for stewardship and conservation was a deliberate decision.  Specifically it said this:

The 1989 Bill which inserted s 16A as introduced had not sought to confine exchanges of land to stewardship land alone. A number of submissions were made to the Select Committee that the ability to exchange land should be restricted to stewardship land only. An amendment made at a late stage adopted that restriction. Palmer J took the view that this legislative history meant that it was important to view the two decisions, for revocation and exchange, as distinct: “to view the process as a single step would be to obviate the clear Parliamentary intent not to provide a mechanism allowing specially protected land to be the subject of exchange”.

So this belies the claim that the decision was unexpected and was going to cause all sorts of difficulties for the Government.  But this did not stop the Government from claiming that it would.

Bill English immediately indicated that a law change could be expected.  From the Herald:

Minutes after the Supreme Court ruled against plans for a huge dam in the Hawke’s Bay, Prime Minister Bill English said his Government would change the law to allow such projects to go ahead.

In a major victory for conservation group Forest & Bird, the court dismissed an appeal by the Department of Conservation to swap 22ha of conservation land for 170ha of private farmland.

The land swap would have allowed the Ruahine Forest Park land to be flooded to create the country’s largest irrigation project.

English, speaking to NewstalkZB, immediately said Parliament would have to consider a law change.

“This will become a matter now for whether we change the legislation.

“Everyone thought the legislation meant that you could trade a lower conservation piece of land in return for higher conservation piece of land.

“The Supreme Court apparently, on the face of it, is telling us that that’s not what the legislation lets you do.

Notice the reframing of reality, that the piece of land was of a lower intrinsic value, had started almost immediately.  But as noted by Isobel Ewing, to describe the land as of having lower intrinsic value was technically a lie.

And Maggie Barry chimed in also claiming that the decision would stop the swapping of lower quality with higher quality land.  From Stuff:

Conservation Minister Maggie Barry said the Government had long believed the law allowed DOC to make land-swaps if it ended up with land that had higher conservation values.

“The Supreme Court finding that the Director-General cannot consider that broader picture has far-reaching implications and we will now be working through the effects of that,” Barry said.

“We will now look at changing the law to ensure we can continue to improve conservation outcomes by having the ability to make land swaps where the outcome would be a win for conservation.”

We are facing two possibilities, either the Government will let the Supreme Court decision stand but change the Conservation Act, or it will change the law so that the Dam project can proceed.

If the latter occurs then this will be a breach of long standing constitutional principles.  As noted by Geoffrey Palmer:

Any attempt to retrospectively reverse the court’s decision in the dam case would be deeply offensive to the rule of law and a constitutional outrage.

It would deprive the litigants of the fruits of their forensic victory.

Why would the government appear and defend itself in court and then use legislation to overrule the decision when it loses?

Is that compatible with our democratic framework involving the separation of powers between the executive and the independent judiciary?

It is fine for the law to be changed prospectively if a judicial decision finds the law to be faulty in the view of Parliament.

But to change the situation retrospectively is wrong in these circumstances.

It has happened before.  As noted by David Parker back in the 1980s the Muldoon Government passed special legislation to get the Clyde Dam built.

Even if the decision is allowed to stand but the law amended this will also be a bad result for the environment.  Pristine conservation land has ancient forests on it.  They should be preserved at all costs and if another piece of land with high conservation values is discovered then it should be added to the conservation estate, not swapped.

I wonder how far the Government will push this?  If it does it will not be the first time that it has misinterpreted the law but used this as a pretext to make changes that have a negative effect.  But this Government thinks that it is always rights and these sorts of problems are always someone else’s fault.

21 comments on “The Government is misrepresenting the effect of the Ruataniwha Dam decision ”

  1. Rob 1

    I guess it just shows their entitlement up as they understand.
    M Barry has shown herself up and may be better of taking garden tours in future.

    • John up North 1.1

      And yet again the MSM shows it’s colours by not calling Billshit and Mags on their clear and blatant misrepresentation of the land being of a lower intrinsic value.

      I mean shit!, all the info is there in the original DOC submission (prior to it’s balls being ripped out and the neutered result being sat in the corner to numbly sign any and all approvals Mags pulls out of her handbag).

      Just ask Billshit or Mags why they’re using this framing when the original submission clearly states the reasons for the continued protection of this taonga. Go on MSM ask a non-scripted question for once!

      OH! and don’t go using any of that science shit like Nitrate levels or such to stop us, we’ve got our own specialist that come up with completely different answers to yours!!

  2. Keith 2

    So we have laws as long as they suit the National Party and yet the moment the law goes against them, like the worst of third world dictators they make up a new law to do away with the inconvenience of the law that they want to break, to suit themselves.

    These despots have been pushing moral, ethical and quite plainly lawful boundaries until they’ve broken them since elected, but even this is a wrong too far. Its Warner Bros and Sir Peter Jackson law changes all over again but on steroids.

    But they will know through their research that the thick voters that support them will not notice nor care. Some bumpkin place they’ve never been, that makes money for Fontera, yawn!

    So Prime Minister, why bother with laws at all, because you and your rotten party certainly don’t see them as a necessity you need to worry about!

    • Bearded Git 2.1

      +100 Keith I heard Chester Borrows being interviewed by Wallace Chapman this morning saying how the National Party had moved to the “Centre”. Nearly choked in my muesli.This is SPIN.

      Under this government these 9 long years we have seen the top 5%, farmers, businessmen and speculators benefit with peasants getting crumbs as a sop and the the RMA trashed, state houses sold off etc etc etc . The reaction to the dam is a continuation of this process.

      Time for a Labour/Green bloc government to sort things out again*.

      *on this note Labour set up Pharmac when last in government. It has just been given a massive international tick for reducing the price of drugs in this country compared with other countries. Labour (and friends) also set up Kiwisaver, Kiwibank, the superannuation fund, Fonterra……

    • Draco T Bastard 2.2

      So Prime Minister, why bother with laws at all, because you and your rotten party certainly don’t see them as a necessity you need to worry about!

      Deregulation was all about getting rid of the laws that the capitalists didn’t like so that they could take more and more from both the environment and the people without those costs being properly considered. It makes the businesses more profits but it destroys the community and the environment.

    • Mrs Brillo 2.3

      Very well put, Keith.
      Which journalists are able to take up the suggestion made below and follow the money? I want to know who will benefit from the massively dirty deal which is in the offing.
      Maggie Barry, this is NOT your finest hour.

  3. Keepcalmcarryon 3

    I’m glad this issue has surfaced here. What the government is doing is disgusting, selling out our protected natural areas to further intensify and pollute for the financial gain of a few. This should be all over the media.

  4. Draco T Bastard 4

    The National government lying again and adding in possible constitutional outrage just because they’re upset that the law doesn’t allow them to get what they want.

    We shouldn’t be surprised by this. National are psychopathic.

  5. RedBaronCV 6

    Does anyone know why the government is so invested in this dam going ahead?

    For starters it’s pretty expensive & if I’ve followed all the twists correctly then the local ratepayers are not interested in paying. I seem to remember John Key saying after the last local elections that taxpayer money may have to go in.
    I understand that it also benefits a relatively few people so why do they want to spend so much to gainvotes/donations from a relatively few people?

    • Keepcalmcarryon 6.1

      Government policy to double primary production, they are looking after their fed farmer base – increasing the land values for farmers to ultimately sell – without regard to the actual increasingly unsustainable future of farming. Look what they have done to the Mackenzie country.

    • Draco T Bastard 6.2

      I understand that it also benefits a relatively few people so why do they want to spend so much to gainvotes/donations from a relatively few people?

      Because those few people are rich.

    • Siobhan 6.3

      When they say “Hawkes Bay’ some people assume they mean water storage for the orchardists, which would make some sense, but this is water for the central Hawkes Bay which wants to jump onboard the so called Dairy Boom. Ridiculous. Economically and environmentally. And another industry for the Bay that will rely on using desperate foreign workers to keep the wages low.

  6. In Vino 7

    https://thedailyblog.co.nz/2017/07/09/clarifying-the-facts-supreme-court-land-swap-ruling-forest-and-bird/

    Excellent clarification by Forest and Bird. I heard Maggie saying that they were already doing this sort of thing “a couple of times a year” – spinning it as if the law change is needed to regularise a normal procedure. Forest and Bird say it has happened only 3 times in 10 years. Worth reading.

    It seems there is far more contortion and convolution than conservation in this minister…

    • Keepcalmcarryon 7.1

      The minister is a mouthpiece and an empty vessel. She was also unaware her own department allowed water extraction in a national park through a threatened kiwi sanctuary.
      Plenty of fools bought the “battle for the birds” greenwash and the predator free by 2050 self medicating conscience crap.
      This government are demonstrably mass polluting environmental vandals.

  7. Sacha 8

    “technically a lie”

    nothing technical about it. blatant lying.

  8. ianmac 9

    The planning went ahead in spite of their not first getting access/permission for the land. So $10+ million of someone’s money was spent. Now that “they” cannot get the land “they” will change the rules to get what “they” want and thus get value for their 10million.
    Sound like good management? Or maybe Government promised the beneficiaries a perfect outcome and now Government has to make sure that it happens.

  9. Ad 10

    Great post Mickey.

    Forest and Bird have for many years been the most effective government opposition we have. Because of that, they are really easy to donate to.

    Great to see Crown Law get such a shellacking.

    Mickey who acted and appeared for Forest and Bird? We should buy them a beer.

  10. Philj 11

    A similar dam fiasco is looming in the Tasman District. It’s called the Waimea Community dam. This was instigated by corporate orchardists and then, when beginning to stall, was foisted onto reluctant ratepayers for extra funding. It has just passed another vote for continuance by the Mayors casting vote!

  11. WC1 12

    What is DOC planning to do with the land exchanged? Are DOC going to start a farm or spend vast amounts revegatating it?

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

  • Twenty highlights of 2020
    As we welcome in the new year, our focus is on continuing to keep New Zealanders safe and moving forward with our economic recovery. There’s a lot to get on with, but before we say a final goodbye to 2020, here’s a quick look back at some of the milestones ...
    2 weeks ago

  • Cook Islanders to resume travel to New Zealand
    The Prime Minister of New Zealand Jacinda Ardern and the Prime Minister of the Cook Islands Mark Brown have announced passengers from the Cook Islands can resume quarantine-free travel into New Zealand from 21 January, enabling access to essential services such as health. “Following confirmation of the Cook Islands’ COVID ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    18 hours ago
  • Supporting communities and landowners to grow employment opportunities
    Jobs for Nature funding is being made available to conservation groups and landowners to employ staff and contractors in a move aimed at boosting local biodiversity-focused projects, Conservation Minister Kiritapu Allan has announced. It is estimated some 400-plus jobs will be created with employment opportunities in ecology, restoration, trapping, ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 days ago
  • Border exception for some returning international tertiary students
    The Government has approved an exception class for 1000 international tertiary students, degree level and above, who began their study in New Zealand but were caught offshore when border restrictions began. The exception will allow students to return to New Zealand in stages from April 2021. “Our top priority continues ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 days ago
  • Tiwai deal gives time for managed transition
    Today’s deal between Meridian and Rio Tinto for the Tiwai smelter to remain open another four years provides time for a managed transition for Southland. “The deal provides welcome certainty to the Southland community by protecting jobs and incomes as the region plans for the future. The Government is committed ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 days ago
  • New member for APEC Business Advisory Council
    Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern has appointed Anna Curzon to the APEC Business Advisory Council (ABAC). The leader of each APEC economy appoints three private sector representatives to ABAC. ABAC provides advice to leaders annually on business priorities. “ABAC helps ensure that APEC’s work programme is informed by business community perspectives ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 days ago
  • Govt’s careful economic management recognised
    The Government’s prudent fiscal management and strong policy programme in the face of the COVID-19 global pandemic have been acknowledged by the credit rating agency Fitch. Fitch has today affirmed New Zealand’s local currency rating at AA+ with a stable outlook and foreign currency rating at AA with a positive ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 days ago
  • Additional actions to keep COVID-19 out of NZ
    The Government is putting in place a suite of additional actions to protect New Zealand from COVID-19, including new emerging variants, COVID-19 Response Minister Chris Hipkins said today. “Given the high rates of infection in many countries and evidence of the global spread of more transmissible variants, it’s clear that ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    4 days ago
  • 19 projects will clean up and protect waterways
    $36 million of Government funding alongside councils and others for 19 projects Investment will clean up and protect waterways and create local jobs Boots on the ground expected in Q2 of 2021 Funding part of the Jobs for Nature policy package A package of 19 projects will help clean up ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago
  • New Zealand Government acknowledges 175th anniversary of Battle of Ruapekapeka
    The commemoration of the 175th anniversary of the Battle of Ruapekapeka represents an opportunity for all New Zealanders to reflect on the role these conflicts have had in creating our modern nation, says Associate Minister for Arts, Culture and Heritage Kiri Allan. “The Battle at Te Ruapekapeka Pā, which took ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago
  • Better care for babies with tongue-tie
    Babies born with tongue-tie will be assessed and treated consistently under new guidelines released by the Ministry of Health, Associate Minister of Health Dr Ayesha Verrall announced today. Around 5% to 10% of babies are born with a tongue-tie, or ankyloglossia, in New Zealand each year. At least half can ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 weeks ago
  • Prisoner disorder event at Waikeria Prison over
    The prisoner disorder event at Waikeria Prison is over, with all remaining prisoners now safely and securely detained, Corrections Minister Kelvin Davis says. The majority of those involved in the event are members of the Mongols and Comancheros. Five of the men are deportees from Australia, with three subject to ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 weeks ago
  • Pre-departure COVID-19 test for travellers from the UK and the US from 15 January
    Travellers from the United Kingdom or the United States bound for New Zealand will be required to get a negative test result for COVID-19 before departing, and work is underway to extend the requirement to other long haul flights to New Zealand, COVID-19 Response Minister Chris Hipkins confirmed today. “The new PCR test requirement, foreshadowed last ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 weeks ago
  • PM congratulates New Year Honour recipients
    Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern has added her warm congratulations to the New Zealanders recognised for their contributions to their communities and the country in the New Year 2021 Honours List. “The past year has been one that few of us could have imagined. In spite of all the things that ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 weeks ago
  • David Parker congratulates New Year 2021 Honours recipients
    Attorney-General and Minister for the Environment David Parker has congratulated two retired judges who have had their contributions to the country and their communities recognised in the New Year 2021 Honours list. The Hon Tony Randerson QC has been appointed a Companion of the New Zealand Order of Merit for ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 weeks ago
  • New Year’s Honours highlights outstanding Pacific leadership through challenging year
    Minister for Pacific Peoples Aupito William Sio says the New Year’s Honours List 2021 highlights again the outstanding contribution made by Pacific people across Aotearoa. “We are acknowledging the work of 13 Pacific leaders in the New Year’s Honours, representing a number of sectors including health, education, community, sports, the ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 weeks ago
  • Supporting seniors to embrace technology
    The Government’s investment in digital literacy training for seniors has led to more than 250 people participating so far, helping them stay connected. “COVID-19 has meant older New Zealanders are showing more interest in learning how to use technology like Zoom and Skype so they can to keep in touch ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 weeks ago
  • Additional COVID-19 tests for returnees from higher risk countries
    New virus variants and ongoing high rates of diseases in some countries prompt additional border protections Extra (day zero or day one) test to be in place this week New ways of reducing risk before people embark on travel being investigated, including pre-departure testing for people leaving the United Kingdom ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 weeks ago