Quarry linked to $55,000 donation to NZ First and Shane Jones, approached over fast-track

[Michael Szabo]

Cartoonist Chris Slane's commentary on the Fast Track 'train wreck' in this week's Listener.

[Jim_j]

Hey Andrew
My comment was more to highlight how conservation dependent so many of our species are - I don't think anyone would disagree that if we hadn't taken action birds like kakapo, mohua,o/f parakeet, black stilt, etc would now be gone - and birds like robin and kiwi would be close to it.
The treats have not gone away - changes in policy around 1080 for example or funding cuts risk the gains.
In addition so many of our birds are range restricted either naturally or as relic - so the rhetoric around removing existing protections (to paraphrase Shane - "if there is gold in them thar hills nothing stands in our way") could threaten any of these species.

I agree with you totally re this headline - all parties get donations to (presumably) curry favours - this headline just seems to be a standard click bait - I have little doubt the government would be following this fast-track policy whether Shane Jones was there or not.

I do disagree with your comment passing this off as yet another government "dropping the ball" - there has been a history for probably 50 years of successive governments gradually improving environmental protections - sure most haven't gone as far as many of us would have liked - or promised things and then not delivered - but I can't think of any other government that has set out to actually wind back protections.

Cheers
Jim

[andrewcrossland]

Jim, I'd suggest that the transformation of thinking around a number of indigenous and migratory species from being sentient creatures with a right to survive unmolested, to being something that should be available as human food, is a trajectory that the previous government were actively facilitating, and likewise the failure of the last Government to update the Wildlife Act and put in place some better species protections (esp around harassment and disturbance to birds when they are feeding and roosting - rather than only when they're breeding) were two pretty unfortunate things from the standpoint of a kereru perched in a tree or a kuaka sitting on a mudflat. Wildlife in NZ always seems to be the victim of politics and human's placing themselves first - whether it mean a sand mine buggering up Fairy tern breeding habitat or cycleways and paths rendering whole lengths of estuarine and riparian edge no longer viable as roosting habitat for shorebirds.

[Michael Szabo]

The June 2023 Birds New Zealand annual conference included a detailed keynote speech on the reform of the Wildlife Act followed by a Q&A session. Major work was undertaken to review and replace it over the preceding two years, as this Cabinet paper documents, but since the change of government nothing further has emerged:
https://www.doc.govt.nz/globalassets/do ... t-1953.pdf

[andrewcrossland]

Well fingers crossed that the current Govt doesn't progress the Wildlife Act reform very far at all as there's a fair risk the result will fall far short of what the previous Govt could have achieved with reformation of the Act during their long 6 year tenure but failed to do so. The consequence though of a chance squandered is a lot more disturbance and displacement of wildlife and that's a much bigger issue than many may think.

[Michael Szabo]

I'm not sure I understand your point. You're criticising the previous government for not replacing the Wildlife Act but you're also saying that you hope the new government does not replace the Wildlife Act - is that right?

[andrewcrossland]

Yes that’s right

[Michael Szabo]

Since the Wildlife Act dates from 1953 and is linked to multiple other acts, the previous government made more progress than any other by initiating DOC's review in 2021. Of course had they been re-elected they could have put forward a new bill to replace the existing act, so it looks like we'll have to wait for a change of government for that to happen.

[andrewcrossland]

I suggest that comment in birdingNZ on Government action or inaction should be politically colour blind and focused in a rational way on how birdlife (and other ecology) was impacted.
As much as we are all deeply concerned about the new Government’s rhetoric around what the consequences might be on birdlife/habitats of fast-tracking legislation, environmental law revisions, the primacy of private property rights over significant natural area values, etc, it’s very important to recognise that the previous incumbents had 6 full years to prepare for this by updating the wildlife act (1953). This actually is a fairly uncomplicated piece of legislation and its updating could have been completed easily within 2 years. It was the best opportunity in NZ’s recent history to get this right.

Imagine if the wildlife act had have been updated by 2020? It would have been part of “business as usual” by now because resource consent provisions etc would be subject to it. I have no doubt it would have truncated some of the excesses of what the new Goverment now propose to do in terms of fast tracking works. Yes, the new fast-tracking legislation looks like it’s going to say “no rules apply”, but that’s harder to get away with under the scenario of the wildlife act being newly updated and in place for the previous 4-5 years than the scenario of a 70 year act full of holes.
As I said in a previous email, I do hope the new government don’t rewrite the wildlife act in the current term because, as someone who waves it at consent planners, contractors and compliance officers on a weekly basis, these few sheets of paper need to include more wildlife protections and not potentially less!

[Jan]

Some very good points there, Andrew, but you fail to understand that Green Ministers have never been in the cabinet, where the top decisions get made and Ministers outside it are very much on the outer fringes of things.