MacKenzie Guardians

dear John letter from the people of Christchurch

admin — Thu, 26 Aug 2010 11:11:45 +0000

Prime Minister John Key has sent out a leaflet to 120,000 Canterbury households seeking to justify firing the democratically elected councillors who ran the Environment Canterbury Regional Council (ECan). Who can say what this tick the boxes survey of this taxpayer-funded propaganda blaming Environment Canterbury for “being the country’s worst council for processing resource consents and not having a water plan”, signifies. We see John Key’s smiling face with the headline “Protecting Canterbury’s most important resource WATER”.

This blog focusing on to saving the iconic Mackenzie Country landscapes will expose the contradictions of the Key position. On the 20th August 2010 Forest and Bird called upon the Government to halt the pastoral tenure review in the Mackenzie and end ecologically destructive biodiversity land use changes. (google – Battle to protect landscape persists By DAVID WILLIAMS – The Press)

What was really happening was that Environment Canterbury was under siege from the forces that are reshaping the plains into one vast dairy farm sucking our rivers dry in the process and poisoning our acquifers with campylobacter as has happened in Dunsandel a small rural township 20 miles from Christchurch. This is what more than anything has set off the fears of Christchurch people about their water supply. Our aquifers are replenished in a way we to this day we don’t fully understand by the Waimakariri River, which has had almost half its flow allocated to Central Plains Water . The threat of compulsory land acquisition to build water canals is dividing our community. This is not just about coming to a gentlemanly agreement about how to divide up water in a way that suits stakeholders as is proposed in the Key’s water strategy. The Australian experience with the Murray River show there are real environmental problems long term with this kind of water regulation.

Key says “Water storage and irrigation projects that meet environmental standards and make good economic sense, should happen within a decent time frame” Sounds so plausible doesn’t it but not if it is the land that you love that is going to be diverted, dammed, flooded ,drowned, canalled for water storage. Key sounds so reasonable but these are rivers we love he is talking about “water managing’ . Read “Balanced plan” for Hurunui as doublespeak for “irrigation order’ not “protection order’. National wants to fast track its way through the ever increasing public opposition.

The poll comes five months after Environment Minister Nick Smith and Local Government Minister Rodney Hide dumped the regional councillors and now John Key cannot show his face in Christchurch without being heckled and booed which is no doubt the reason National is having its 16 to 17 October Bluegreens Forum at Akaroa.

The four-page leftlet says: “There are major problems with water management in Canterbury”. It justifies intervention by saying “the Government wasn’t confident that a highly politicised and divided council would be able to sort out these problems”.

Professor Philip Joseph, School of Law, University of Canterbury said the Environment Canterbury (Temporary Commissioners and Improved Water Management) Act, which was passed under urgency breaches several principles of law, is “constitutionally repugnant”, contains “elements of subterfuge” and is a “constitutional affront” since we have lost our right of recourse to the Environment Court. There was a degree of stealth in the urgency to enact this legislation from go to woe passing three stages in 48 hours.We will have these temporary Commissioners longer than the 3 year life of Parliament. What I’m concerned about is the idea of proper process, and this was a departure,” he said.“This didn’t go through any select committee consideration, no submissions and no consultation. Why should urgency be taken on a matter such as this?” The act does away with democratic decision making.

The form asks whether people agree with the Government’s actions, invites them to rank four water priorities including the loaded “water storage” option and asks when new Environment Canterbury elections should be held. Considering the horse had already bolted from the stable this consultation can be seen as window dressing justifying and validating their lack of transparent democratic process.

The leaftlet has provoked strong reactions.

Christchurch Central MP Brendon Burns called the taxpayer-funded pamphlet and voting form “a bloody outrage”.He said the pamphlet proved the Government underestimated Cantabrians’ anger about the actions.

“Prime Minister John Key should have asked the people of Christchurch what they thought before he fired the elected Councillors of ECan under parliamentary urgency, rather than asking them now, five months later,” Jim Anderton said today.

“The government’s ECan pamphlet looks suspiciously like the first move in an elaborate scam. Since the forms are to be returned to National MPs, there will be no independent verification or scrutiny of the returns, so the entire process will be controlled by the National party, enabling the result to be cooked so as to produce the “answer” Key wants.
This hoax will have at least two purposes, the first being to “show” that the Key regime’s fascist assault on Canterbury democracy is supported by a “silent majority”, and that the protests against it are “merely” the agitation of a minority of perverse malcontents. Peter Tuffley Our Water Our Vote Facebook page

Former ECan chairman Sir Kerry Burke said the letter was “self-serving” six weeks out from the local body elections. “It is a party political broadcast actually.”

Former councillor Jane Demeter said “it was a sham. It’s very interesting to see what John Key has chosen to print in there. It is a puff piece … will they actually act on any of the responses?”

The real culprit with the mangement of Canterbury Water was the Government’s failure to provide leadership in an environment in which the first come first served allocations of the Resource Management Act was not safeguarding our environment. Behind the scenes farmers and dairying interests have been lobbying the Government to get their hands on water for irrigation faster. National’s clarion call is “faster with the economic development”. When you unpack the Key message this is the real contradiction at the heart of the Canterbury’s water woes. The allocation of water consents and proposed storage and infrastructure is destroying our drinking water quality and the water quality in lakes and rivers for recreation. The problem no matter how you dress it up large water storage equals environmental damage , loss for ecological diversity and happiness for birds,fish and our outdoor pursuits. These are not kind of projects that should be fast tracked.

What will John Key do when the survey respondents overwhelmingly oppose the sackings and call for immediate regional elections. Dear John please actually protect Canterbury’s most important resource WATER”.

good news for Mackenzie Country admin — Thu, 29 Jul 2010 06:16:49 +0000 29 July 2010 Lets say NO to more of the kind of intensive development found in this photograph. Media Release:Environmental Defence Society: wins cubicle farming case in the Mackenzie Country The Environmental Defence Society has won a High Court case challenging cubicle dairy farming in the Mackenzie basin. “Environmental Defence Society: is very pleased to announce that the High Court has quashed resource consents and certificates of compliance issued by Waitaki District Council for 3 large cubicle farming operations in the Mackenzie Country,” said EDS Chairman Gary Taylor. “Our High Court challenge related to land use consents. Previously effluent discharge consent applications that had been called in by the Minister for the Environment were withdrawn by the applicants. The applications were made by Killermont Run Ltd, Southdown Holdings Ltd and Five Rivers Ltd. The consents relate 8,555 hectares of the Mackenzie basin. They involved housing 17,850 dairy cows in large sheds around the clock from March to October and for 12 hours per day for the rest of the year. Up to 1.1 million litres of effluent could be discharged to pasture daily. The cows would be kept in stalls, fed in the sheds and milked robotically. “Our concerns were primarily at the effects of the proposal on the fragile and unique tussock grasslands and landscapes of the Mackenzie Country. We do not believe that the future of this iconic part of New Zealand should be decided by individual resource consent applications. “Clearly there has been a failure of public policy at all levels. The Government has failed to provide national guidance; the regional council has failed to identify nationally important landscapes; and the two district councils have failed to develop coherent and effective district plans. “There is now a real window of opportunity to prepare a long-term Strategic Plan for the area. In our view that should be led by the local community but both Environment Canterbury and the Ministry for the Environment should be involved. It needs to look at the landscape, natural values and social and economic development options for the Mackenzie Country over the next 25 or more years. “EDS remains willing to work with the authorities to secure an agreed way forward for the Mackenzie Country. However if decisions impacting on it continue to be made in an ad hoc way, then we will continue to be vigilant,” Mr Taylor concluded. More: Gary Taylor (09) 810 9594 or (021) 895 896 Environmental Defence Society PO Box 95 152, Swanson, Waitakere City 0653 | New Zealand Phone +64-9-835 4350 | Email: manager@eds.org.nz mailto:manager@eds.org.nz Visit Environmental Defence Society: Independent conservation organisation Forest & Bird welcomes the announcement by the Environmental Defence Society today that it has won a High Court case challenging intensive dairy farming in the Mackenzie Basin. Forest & Bird calls for Mackenzie drylands park Forest & Bird is calling on the Government to step up protection of the Mackenzie’s threatened plants and animals and iconic landscapes with a drylands conservation park. “Threats to the Mackenzie Country aren’t just about cubicle farming,” Forest & Bird Conservation Advocate Nicola Vallance says. “We want the Government to come up with a national strategy to protect this special wild landscape that belongs to all New Zealanders.” According to Official Information Act details Forest & Bird obtained earlier this year, the Government plans to freehold more than 31,000 hectares of publicly owned land in the Mackenzie Basin. Currently, leaseholders of Crown pastoral leases can graze sheep and beef cattle on publicly owned land. If the land is freeholded there will be little restraint on what they do, Ms Vallance says. Why the Mackenzie Country is so special: It is home to 68 species of threatened and rare plants (and 40 per cent of Canterbury’s threatened plants are found there). The world’s rarest wading bird – the endangered black stilt or kaki – is found only in the Mackenzie Country, along with eight other threatened species of birds. High country tourism is worth $4 billion a year to the New Zealand economy. National’s ‘unconstitutional and undemocratic environment law’ debated admin — Thu, 22 Jul 2010 11:22:28 +0000 E-Can Act and the Future of NZ environmental law” forum A well mannered crowd filled The Great Hall, Christchurch Arts Centre to capacity for a public panel discussion hosted by Lincoln University’s Faculty of Environment, Society and Design entitled The E-Can Act and the future of New Zealand environmental law 7-9 pm thursday 22 July The Faculty of Environment, Society and Design at Lincoln University , New Zealand’s specialist land-based university hosted a public panel discussion as part of their commitment to public engagement and to the time-honoured role of universities as critics and conscience of society. Members of the public had the opportunity to pose questions to the panel during the evening. The discussion was chaired by Dr Ann Brower, Senior Lecturer in Public Policy, Lincoln University. The panelists after Dr Anne Brower are here reported from left to right from the photograph. Maree Baker, Resource Management Partner, Anderson Lloyd Lawyers said that we have a lot of uncertainty as we no longer know what the rules are and there is no guidance given about the weight of irrigation as opposed to tourism and other amenity values.The Act reduces the ability of the public to participate and puts the quality of the decision making at risk. The Hon. David Caygill, Environment Canterbury Commissioner informed the audience he was not an environmental lawyer and that he had nothing profound to say about the role of environmental law. He would not answer the question when asked if he agreed with Professor Philip Joseph that “The Temporary Commissioners and Improved Water Management’ Act is unconstitutional. However he did agree that we should go back to elected decision making as soon as possible and that we should be attempting to move to more collaborative decision making. A member of the audience asked what happens when you have one environmentalist against fifty farmers in a zonal committee. Professor Philip Joseph, School of Law, University of Canterbury said the Environment Canterbury (Temporary Commissioners and Improved Water Management) Act, which was passed under urgency breaches several principles of law, is “constitutionally repugnant”, contains “elements of subterfuge” and is a “constitutional affront” since we have lost our right of recourse to the Environment Court. He went on to describe how section 32 was in effect a king Henry the eighth clause which gave statuary provision to determine which aspects of the resource Management Act will and will not apply. Our lynch pin of our right to justice has been taken away and the legislative speed did not promote the best outcome. There was a degree of stealth in the urgency to enact this legislation from go to woe passing three stages in 48 hours.We will have these temporary Commissioners longer than the 3 year life of Parliament. What I’m concerned about is the idea of proper process, and this was a departure,” he said.“This didn’t go through any select committee consideration, no submissions and no consultation. Why should urgency be taken on a matter such as this?” The act does away with democratic decision making. Dr Russel Norman MP, Co-Leader of the Green Party said that we will have to campaign like crazy if we do not want our rivers mined and that zonal committees may not represent the will of the people of Canterbury when it comes to dealing with water issues.We need national policy implemented to phase out overallocation of water, address issues of water quality, protect wetlands and improve the integration of National Water Standards. We have had arbitrary and partisan intervention in regional decision making but what we need is central direction in Resource Management Act National policy. We have had Muldonist intervention framed by an idea of balance where economic development is at an ecological cost. bishop blesses river stones in water protest admin — Sun, 13 Jun 2010 09:56:45 +0000 Stones from the South Island’s great rivers were used to build a cairn in the front of the Christchurch Cathedral before the statue of John Robert Godley, founding City Father as part of the continuing water protest on Sunday 13 June 2010. The Anglican Bishop Victoria Matthew blessed the cairn with Waimkariri river water. The cairn will remain in the Square until regional councillors are re-elected and democracy is restored. It was a cold wet day but thousands came to listen to as Graham Wardrop and Liz Braggins sang Cry me a river , and adresses by Brian Turner the Poet laureate 2003-5, Lydia Brady the first woman to climb Mt. Everest without oxygen, Brian Deans a fifth generation farmer and opponent of Central Plains Water, Robin Judkins the Director of Coast to Coast, Morgan Waru a Student , Peter Beck the Dean of the Cathedral and Ariana Tikao singing for our rivers. Robin Judkins, the Coast-to-Coast organiser, told the crowd the Government’s move was ”autocracy”. ”We’ve been hoodwinked; we’ve been hijacked. We’ve had two basic rights taken from us clean water and the ability to vote who represents us on this issue.” Beck said the commissioners were being watched and the community demanded transparency and openness. He also took a swipe at dairy farming, saying dairying and a sustainable economy were “poles apart from one another”. Christchurch student Morgan Waru, 17, said she wanted Canterbury’s rivers to stay as they were, instead of being polluted for “quick money”. The Waitaha flag was flying and descendants of the prophet Te Maiharoa brought stones from the Waitaki River to place in the cairn. Russel Norman of the Green Party was helping place the stones. Several thousand people were protesting over the loss of democracy in Canterbury and expresing their fears about the Government take over of Environment Canterbury and how Canterbury’s water will be managed in future. There is anger that the public has lost their voice. The protest attracted people from many different groups such as The University of Canterbury Canoe Club, Forest and Bird, Fish and Game, the Anglican Church and Artists for save our water amid fears that big business and dairy interests will dictate what happens to Canterbury water.Brendon Burns was there along with Rick Tindell and ECAN counsellors in exile Eugenie Sage and Jane Demeter. “It’s about the people of Canterbury coming together and saying you can’t just suspend our environmental laws and democracy and think you can get away with that,” says Our Water Our Vote spokesman Chris Todd. The protest is a continuation of the outrage about Canterbury’s regional councillors being sacked and replaced by government appointed commissioners, leaving ratepayers without a say. There is already been concern about the amount of water being used by the dairy industry and many protesters are worried the commissioners will give the green light to more development, putting even greater pressure on the rivers and underground aquifers. The future of the Hurunui and Rakaia Rivers is also in the spotlight. Water from both catchments is wanted for more irrigation but opponents believe the rivers are under threat with conservation orders being suspended in the National water coup. Peter Beck, the Anglican Dean of Christ Church Cathedral, said he believed the demonstration was the largest the Square had seen for a ”very long time”.The crowd was estimated at 3000 people. READ WHAT POET BRIAN TURNER SAID: Water conservation orders are an extremely valuable and necessary form of environmental protection. I’ve campaigned for them over many years, and recently put in a submission in favour of protecting the Hurunui. Now I find that not only has the government sacked all the democratically elected councillors of ECAN – it is for electors to do that, not governments – it also cancelled the scheduled Environment Court hearings set down to consider submissions on the various proposals for the future of the Hurunui. Additionally, existing WCOs in Canterbury are under threat. It looks as if very little is sacrosanct inside or out of national parks anymore. There’s a desperate need to convince the wider public that environmental protection is a urgent priority and a major benefit, not a cost, to society as a whole. One of the most striking and naturally appealing things about the south’s landscapes is that they’re not all an artificially-produced vivid green, and nor should they be. We don’t have a God-given right, or duty, to modify and convert everything in nature to suit our perceived present-day needs. Up until, say, around the mid-eighties, nearly all the rivers and streams between Dunedin and Christchurch were fairly clean and healthy; nearly all had a decent flow in them. But in the last 20 years especially, what has happened to the rivers and streams within, say, an hour’s drive from Christchurch, is tragic and deeply wrong. It is wrong when opportunistic private interests in effect steal, or look to steal, what rightfully belongs to the public. This whole developing affair would be farcical if it weren’t so serious on several counts. Some things should be sacrosanct, WCOs among them. Brian Turner support our water protests admin — Wed, 09 Jun 2010 01:40:45 +0000 DON”T FORGET TO JOIN OUR PROTEST IN THE SQUARE SUNDAY AT 3PM,12 JUNE KEY PROTEST RALLY – WEDNESDAY 9 JUNE AT 6.30 PM ISAAC THEATRE ROYAL GLOUCESTER ST Since the infamous Environment Canterbury legislation was passed, Prime Minister John Key has twice visited Christchurch. On one occasion he encountered a picket about mining but so far he had not encountered a water protest.This visit a young man was arrested for jumping on the roof of the PM’S car as the crowd screamed” you cant drink money ,you cant drink shit , you can’t steal our vote and get away with it” John Key adressed a public meeting inside from 7pm and charged the public $7 to go inside. On his visit to Christchurch on 9 June we showed John Key and the nation that we are not happy with the dismissal of our elected councillors and his plans for our water. He needs to know that we do not want our rivers, lakes wetlands and aquifers destroyed in the pursuit of short term economic gain. He also needs to know that we do not want agribusiness to be given vast quantities of pure water free of charge while we will end up paying high water rates for a restricted supply of chlorinated and contaminated water like Dunsandel, where the town water supply is now contaminated by e.coli. The town has a well 70m down that is regularly getting e.coli in it and so they are having to treat it – currently chlorine but looking at a UV treatment. This is what is likely to be in store for Christchurch’s water with the intensification of dairying on the plains and the recent Central Plains Water decision. Environment Canterbury has just granted a total of 24 resource consents; seven relating to land use, seven for water take and diversion and a further ten discharge permits. Selwyn District Council have issued seven resource consents for the construction, use and maintenance of pipelines, open channels or waterways to convey water in throughout the Malvern area, including utility buildings and structures along or adjacent to the distribution networks. This has occured despite the opposition of The Department of Conservation, the Fish and Game Council, the Royal Forest and Bird Protection Society ,Te Runanga o Ngai Tahu and The Malvern Hills Protection Society which recommended declining all applications. The world-class quality of Christchurch water depends on its origin as recharge from the alpine-fed Waimakariri River and, for protection against contamination, on the upward flow of groundwater through the aquifers beneath the city. This upward flow is caused by a combination of the groundwater levels in the Central Plains aquifers and the particular geology of the Plains near the coast. The simple message here is that the use of groundwater in the Central Plains has the potential to affect the water resources of Christchurch City, including flow in the groundwater-fed streams such as the Avon and Heathcote Rivers. The groundwater of the Canterbury Plains is a large, continuously-flowing body of water within layers of silts, sands and gravel down to depths of up to 500 metres. This is not a static pond of water that we can “save for our grandchildren”. What we do need to pass on to succeeding generations is wise management of this dynamic resource. Gross National economic development takes no account of gross National environment destruction. Reflections on Water Cathedral Square, Sunday 13 June 3.00 pm Sam Mahon painter,sculptor and author will be erecting a Stone Cairn in the square in the front of the Cathedral with the the Dean’s blessing. We invite you to gather with us in Cathedral Square to show your concern about the loss of our elected representatives and what is happening to our water. Is it right? that we should lose our clean drinking water? that we should lose our rivers and streams? that we should lose our vote on these issues? The loss of our elected regional council, the loss of water conservation orders and our right to argue for or against them, is a loss for democracy. We invite you to gather with us in Cathedral Square where a cairn of river stones will be constructed as a mark of public concern. There will be brief addresses by the following people: Graham Wardrop and Liz Braggins – Cry me a river Brian Turner – Poet laureate 2003-5 Lydia Brady – First woman to climb Mt. Everest without oxygen Brian Deans – Fifth generation farmer Robin Judkins – Director of Coast to Coast Morgan Waru – Student Peter Beck- Dean of the Cathedral Ariana Tikao – Vocalist Sunday 13th June – Cathedral Square – 3pm In case of rain, the Cathedral will be open to us. ‘Reflections on water’ organised by: www.ourwaterourvote.org.nz Reflections on Water T Murray River Country Australia see the effects of human’s controlling water below Ecan act ‘constitutionally repugnant’, says top law academic admin — Wed, 19 May 2010 06:01:44 +0000 Government actions are constitutionally repugnant and it breaches law A top New Zealand public law academic Philip Joseph wants the Government to abolish legislation that sacked Environment Canterbury (ECan) and says shunning of due process is repugnant. reports Paul Gorman of – The Press 19/05/2010 Canterbury University law professor Philip Joseph says the Environment Canterbury (Temporary Commissioners and Improved Water Management) Act, which was passed under urgency last month, breaches several principles of law, is “constitutionally repugnant”, contains “elements of subterfuge” and is a “constitutional affront”. In the light of the information obtained under the Official Secrets Act it would appear the real agenda is to abolish the river conservation orders in order to speed up and inject government money into Canterbury irrigation schemes. This was confirmed by Chris Hutching in the NBR NZ Property Investor that Cabinet papers obtained under the Official Information Act reveal millions of dollars of government funding are being considered for irrigation schemes in Canterbury. The briefing papers show the government wants to push construction ahead at full speed on the Rakaia River and make irrigation water available by 2014. Going through the courts might take two years – too slow, according to the papers. They show that government officials have been working for more than a year with proponents of irrigation schemes and Trust Power on the Rakaia and Hurunui Rivers. Phillip Joseph says the act should be repealed and the 14 sacked regional councillors reinstated. Joseph is the author of the leading text Constitutional and Administrative Law in New Zealand. He is an adviser to several government organisations, including parliamentary select committees, the Law Commission and government departments, and in 2004 was conferred with a Doctor of Laws degree for his work. The ECan act was pushed through by Environment Minister Nick Smith and Local Government Minister Rodney Hide after a review of ECan by former National deputy prime minister Wyatt Creech. It replaced elected councillors with seven Government-appointed commissioners, put off ECan council elections until at least 2013, gave commissioners extra powers over water, took away the right for Canterbury communities to appeal to the Environment Court and even allows the Government to temporarily suspend the Resource Management Act. Joseph told The Press the act was “simply unacceptable”. “What I’m concerned about is the idea of proper process, and this was a departure,” he said. “This didn’t go through any select committee consideration, no submissions and no consultation. Why should urgency be taken on a matter such as this?” Smith said the comments were predictable.”Lawyers and law professors view the world very much from the view of decisions being able to be repeatedly appealed, without looking at other consequences of not getting on and making decisions.” As a member of the New Zealand Law Society’s rule of law committee, Joseph wrote a paper on the ECan act that is being published by the New Zealand Law Journal. In his report, Joseph said the act failed the legal requirement that the law should be general and forward-looking, not retrospective. “Such legislation may be vigorously defended politically but it does nothing to promote respect for the law.” Withholding people’s rights to be heard on water conservation orders (WCO) denied all the equal protection of the law, was “constitutionally repugnant” and “either gratuitous or disingenuous”. The act was passed in haste, represented a “disproportionate response to the issues that prompted the Government intervention” and contained “subterfuge”, Joseph said. “Its title contains reference to `temporary commissioners’, suggesting that the current arrangement is transitional and temporary. But it is not. The arrangement will remain in force for longer than the life of any one Parliament,” he said. “What should be done about the legislation? Repeal it and start again. Reinstate the elected councillors and, if needs must, establish a separate authority to oversee water allocation within the region. Reinstate the right of appeal to the Environment Court for regional decision-making and return to the status quo for WCOs. “These would be the preferable outcomes, but … the political decision has been made and will not revisited.” it would appear the Government is planning up to $750 million for Canterbury irrigation “Government investment in the range of 10% to 30% of off farm capital development would be required to accelerate development. Current irrigation and water storage proposals in development are estimated to require $2.5 billion. Therefore government investment required to accelerate and optimise these schemes would be in the range of $350 million – $750 million over the next decade. This level of government investment is unlikely to crowd out private investment as substantially more capital will be required from other parties.” Weakening all conservation orders and using Lake Coleridge, which empties into the Rakaia River would irrigate up to 150,000ha and a canal would remove 25cumecs or 11% of the average water flow at the Rakaia Gorge. Proposals for the Hurunui include damming Lake Sumner and the South Branch. The Rangitata is also in the government’s sights for funding, with a recommendation it take a 15% stake in a $75 million scheme. Other funding mechanisms under review include grants, loan guarantees, equity stakes and convertible notes. Other schemes highlighted in the papers include a dam for the Ashley River in Lees Valley. Speedier allocation of irrigation water is high on the agenda of Minister Nick Smith. The legislation that paved the way for the sacking is mostly directed at overturning hard- won water conservation water conservation orders nationally, which protect the level of flows). Mr Smith claimed he axed the councillors partly for failure of the regional council to produce a water allocation plan in the 18 years of its existence, although the government has also failed to produce its national policy statements on these matters. The cabinet papers reveal that the main government players involved include Prime Minister John Key, his deputy Gerry Brownlee, Agriculture Minister David Carter and Local Government Minister Rodney Hide. Weakening all conservation orders (“streamlining” according to the language in the papers) is one of the broader aims. It would be brought about via the RMA Infrastructure Bill that Mr Smith wants ready for Parliament to adopt later this year. But officials were concerned that waiting for this legislation would take too long and might not specifically address the issues relating to the Rakaia, and that a proposed water conservation order currently at the Environment Court appeal stage would block exploitation of the Hurunui. This is why they recommended the drafting of the recent Environment Canterbury Temporary Commissioners and Improved Water Management Act to directly focus on those two rivers and sack the councillors. The irrigators also want to address another “key blockage” – the conditions that have been set down in resource consents about maintaining flows. How to speed it up The “secret” cabinet papers reveal Ministry of Agriculture and Environment officials were writing papers in 2009 about how to speed up exploitation of Canterbury’s water resources, particularly the overturning water conservation orders granted by previous administrations on the advice of the Environment Court. The papers outline government reservations about the Canterbury Water Management Strategy, a regional initiative by Environment Canterbury that has been thrashed out with district councils and stakeholders over the past couple of years. There are concerns about the delays in reaching consensus for projects. Ngai Tahu is also identified as having major reservations about the water strategy because it reduces the tribe’s status to a stakeholder when it aspires to a greater decision-making role like Tainui’s in the Waikato. Caygill denies secret agenda for Commissioners/ decide for yourself ! admin — Wed, 12 May 2010 03:44:26 +0000 In The Press yesterday David Caygill , who has been given the water portfolio of Environment Canterbury denied that the seven commissioners and the Government have a secret agenda for Canterbury . He went on to say “I’ve got the exciting portfolio. It’s hard because its complex and it’s very important .’ Paul Gorman In the light of the following information released under the Official Information Act to Forest and Bird many of us will not be reassured by these words. This report shows that last year Government identified key blockages to further irrigation development in Canterbury , including an uncertain water planning framework and the Rakaia and Hurunui Conservation orders.The act that lost us our elected representatives mirrors the recommendations made in December 2009 for irrigation-enabling legislation. Upon reading the following information it is not unreasonable to conclude that the real agenda is taking away the river protection for more irrigation water. Summary and extracts from documents released under the Official Information Act (OIA) to Forest and Bird – April 2010 OIA docs mostly contains briefings from the Ministers Advisors and minutes of meetings distributed to Ministers of Agriculture (David Carter), Economic Development (Gerry Brownlee) and the Prime Minister (John Key). Documents are from 4 September 2009 to February 2010. Aide Memoire 4/9/09: Water Storage and Irrigation Infrastructure From: Ministers Gerry Brownlee and David Carter To: Prime Minister John Key Discusses proposals involving ‘significant water storage for irrigation and electricity in Canterbury – Hurunui Water Project and Trust Power proposal using water from Lake Coleridge. Trust Power proposition at concept stage. 100,000 ha of new land could be irrigated with improved reliability and security for existing users. Notes Water Conservation Orders impact on both propositions. Discusses Government options for accelerating progress on both proposals Pg 3 To use Lake Coleridge would conflict with Rakaia WCO (1988). The proposal cannot succeed with Rakaia WCO in current form. Pg 4 Draft CWMS identified Lake Coleridge as storage potential. Zonal committees could accelerate progress. Risks are that it could take too long. To accelerate the Trust power Lake Coleridge proposal applications could be made to MfE to amend or revoke existing Rakaia WCO. Appoint a Special Tribunal. Pg 5. Options for accelerating progress a) Support timely implementation – Canterbury Water Management Strategy (CWMS). b) Hurunui Water project – facilitate development of Zonal Committee. c) Trust Power Lake Coleridge proposal – develop approach and then progress (through legislative amendment) a Special Exemption from the provisions of the Rakaia WCO to allow Zonal Committees as proposed in CWMS to develop an integrated Mid Canterbury option which includes the Trust Power Lake Coleridge concept. Also notes ‘we have the option’ of amending Part 9 RMA to provide better balance between economic development and amenity and intrinsic values in the consideration of future WCO applications. 20/11/09 email ( Pg 11). Sender and recipient details deleted. Four options set out. Option 1. Review WCO processes. The Flows project in New Start For Fresh Water is identifying options for streamlining regulatory processes associated with making and varying WCOs. RMA Infrastructure Bill (requested by Smith for late 2010) would provide earliest opportunity to effect statutory amendment to these processes. Would not explicitly deal with Rakaia WCO and proposed Hurunui WCO but may assist in ‘preventing new WCO applications being used to block future irrigation development’. Option 2. Address the Rakaia and Hurunui WCOs through the CWMS Moratorium on current Hurunui WCO process. Accelerating Zonal committees in both catchments. This would deal with the issue within an already agreed process (CWMS) but not a quick process. Option 3. Address the Rakaia and Hurunui WCOs immediately. Legislative process to halt the Hurunui process and vary existing Rakaia WCO. 6 – 12 months required. Approach would ‘disempower community process behind CWMS and would likely polarise debate’. Option 4. Review of WCO purposes. Review would need longer timeframe and not explicitly deal with Rakaia and Hurunui WCOs. 4/12/09 Aide-Memoire (Pg 13) to David Carter: A Variation to the Rakaia Water Conservation Order – Facilitating Irrigation development in Mid Canterbury. Note refers to following Carter’s meeting with John Key and Gerry Brownlee – his advisors are ‘working to identify how to give effect to a variation to the Rakaia WCO”. Working with MAF Legal and Ministry of Economic Development. Trustpower have provided detailed briefing of work to date and currently underway. Notes understanding of potential timeframes – includes a fast track option. 4/12/09 Pg 16 Briefing on CWMS to Minister David Carter Background notes and talking points prior to a meeting with Bede O`Malley and Geoff Henley to be held 26/12/09. Notes an official endorsement of the CWMS may not be possible while the Ecan Review is still on. MAF support for working with the Mayoral Forum on further development of infrastructure. Consult with Nick Smith on the situation with regard to WCOs. Pg 19 Mayor O`Malley will stress the significance of undermining CWMS process if other aspects of the CWMS are not addressed. Pg 20 Governance and Framework for CWMS. Framework envisages three committee structures including Zonal Committee, Regional Committee and Appointments and Approvals Committee. Management Framework The Water Executive will be a semi-autonomous directorate of Ecan, accountable to the Mayoral Forum, reporting to the Regional Council CEO. Water Executive will provide support for the Committees. Discussion on Water Conservation Orders. Progressing any Variation to the WCOs would be contentious and is likely to be vigorously contested by a wide range of fishing, recreational, iwi and environmental interests. 21/12/09 Briefing to Minister Carter on Facilitating Irrigation Development in Canterbury – Ministers Brownlee and Smith to note. Pg 23 CWMS is too slow to take advantage of current impetus in scheme investigation and development in the Canterbury region. Successful intervention to accelerate delivery for potential development will need to address three key blockages • Inadequate and uncertain planning framework • Controls set by existing and proposed WCOs • Conditions attached to existing resource consents Pg 24 Further advice on two broad options are for the Government to legislate: • to grant itself the power to establish a Review panel with power to recommend changes to the Rakaia WCO, halt the current process on Hurunui WCO and bolster RMA water management planning framework for the Rakaia and Hurunui catchments • to enhance existing intervention powers of the Minister for the Environment to enable appointment of commissioners to take over planning functions of the Rakaia and Hurunui catchments and require preparation of new plans within a 9 month period and to recommend changes to Rakaia WCO. Options for intervention note that current statutory processes will not achieve the objective of unlocking the potential of irrigation in the Rakaia and Hurunui catchments. Pg 27 Background and Analysis Realising the potential of water storage from Lake Coleridge is key to unlocking potential of irrigation and economic growth in Central Canterbury. Realising this potential will require a variation to the controls established by the existing Rakaia WCO and a co-ordinated and strategic approach among the competing irrigation interests for the stored use of water. Trust Power has an “in concept” proposal for combined irrigation/hydro development downstream of Lake Coleridge. A canal would deliver water to the top of the Plains at or about Highbank. From this point water would be distributed through existing and proposed irrigation infrastructure i.e. RDR, and Barrhill Chertsey and proposed ACWT, Central Plains Water, Ngai Tahu Properties and Te Pirita Irrigation Ltd. This would be a staged development, over 10yrs to provide irrigation for up to 150,000ha. (See Pg 35 Appendix 1 for map of Location of Trust Power Lake Coleridge proposal). The Rakaia WCO (1988) sets min flow limits and restrictive flow regimes that have prevented potential users from proposing alternative uses of river water. Trust Power has a significant amount of work before submitting resource consent applications. If the Rakaia WCO is varied and consents obtained in a timely manner construction could be completed for 2014/15 irrigation season. Pg 28 Hurunui Water Project The HWP is not necessarily the best option for development – other options may be identified by the CWMS. The current application for a WCO on the Hurunui has significant implications for the HWP proposal. Pg 29 Interdependencies Two key work programmes will have a direct influence on future development in the Hurunui and Rakaia catchments…. • Canterbury Mayoral Forum’s CWMS • Minister for the Environment and Minister of Local Govt’s investigations into Ecan’s performance. Options anticipate an early intervention to stop hearings on the proposed Hurunui WCO, the first hearing date set down for 15 Feb 2010, and substantive hearings scheduled for May 2010. Page 32 Discusses options Officials consider that an aggressive but achievable timeframe for the review panel to recommend changes to the three components to the Rakaia planning context would be 9 months from enacting the empowering legislation. Under this option Govt. would be legislating to give itself new and direct intervention powers under the RMA. Although resource consents are not real or personal property, legislation that gives Govt. direct power over existing consented takes from the Rakaia are likely to be contentious. This option would be more clearly consistent with any decision – following investigations into Ecan’s performance – to replace the council with another resource management entity and/or governance body. Option 2 would enhance the existing intervention powers of the Minister for the Environment to enable the Minister to - appoint commissioner(s) to take over the planning functions for the Rakaia catchment and require preparation of a new plan within a 9 mth period. - give the commissioners power to recommend changes to the WCO(Modified purpose for the Rakaia WCO would be to promote sustainable management rather than conservation) - give the commissioners powers to review conditions on existing consents - limit appeal rights on Commissioners’ decisions to appeals to High Court on points of law only. Under this option the Govt. ‘kicks off” the intervention but does not have the final decision making role. Pg 33 Options for facilitating irrigation in the Hurunui catchment Options set out as per the Rakaia can also be applied to the Hurunui catchment. Need to address current appeal to the Environment Court. The Govt. has two general options for addressing the proposed Hurunui WCO. - intervene to ‘stop’ the WCO and then ‘kick off’ one of the two options for the Rakaia. - wait for the Environment Court to hear appeals and intervene if the outcome does not suit the objective of facilitating irrigation in the Hurunui catchment. Intervening early would avoid participants spending time and money on a WCO that will become quickly irrelevant if govt chooses to intervene. Intervening early would preserve greater flexibility. Ngai Tahu needs to be actively engaged – need to address the rights and interests of Ngai Tahu in water governance and decision making. The commercial power of water storage and irrigation interests needs to be comprehensively considered – intervention would need to be designed to address long term implications on access to water (water charging) and perceptions of privatisation of water rights. Pg 36 Appendix 2 Timeline for Trust Power Lake Coleridge Proposal Pg 41 Principles for Intervention Intervention should also be designed to: - complement NSFW programme and Land and Water Forum - support effective evolution of CWMS - align with any action related to Ecan as a consequence of current investigation. Co-ordinate with iwi interests will also be the key. Decision making that is transparent and based on full information Trust Power is not likely to lodge robust resource consent applications until late 2010 or early 2011. Similarly Hurunui Water Project is at an early stage of development. Uncertainties around planning framework introduces several risks. Some degree of public participation will increase understanding of the options. Public participation would also go some way to moderating public opposition to any proposal to intervene in these catchments. Officials recommend that government intervene to establish a process – one that can be both rapid and tightly controlled. Pg 48 Aide Memoire – Water Storage Meeting 10 Feb 2010 To assist discussion at meeting with PM John Key and Ministers English, Brownlee, Smith, Joyce and Wilkinson. Discuss two options for intervention, both requiring amendments to the RMA. Either – Govt legislates to provide powers to establish a review panel with the power to review and recommend changes to the Rakaia ConservationOrder Or – Govt legislates to enhance existing intervention powers of the MfE to enable the Minister to appoint commissioners to take over planning functions for the Rakaia and Hurunui and require preparation of new water management plans. Further intervention would be required to halt the Hurunui WCO. Pg 49 Land Water Forum Cabinet has determined not to make new national level water policy decisions prior to the report back from the Land and Water Forum in July 2010 with the exception of specific decisions to advance regional and local issues if required. Noted that the more WCOs can be ring fenced to particular issues the less likely any initiative is to affect the workings of the Forum. Pg 51 Direct, Officials to develop detailed advice for Cabinet consideration as a priority and no later than 22 March 2010. go to our water our vote to see complete version/ click on our link below Our Minister of Conservation believes that “water is wasted if it goes out to sea’. Another question for you ? Do you have confidence in a Minister of Conservation to protect the environment who says “If we can increase the economic growth of Canterbury we should do it” Notes from Kate Wilkinson’s talk to the Peninsula Tramping Club – 11th May 2010 Anything in quotation marks are direct quotes. Schedule 4 & Mining • Not all Conservation areas are pristine • 1000’s of submissions so far on the discussion paper; no decisions yet • Every mining application would still have to be looked at on a case by case basis • There are currently mines operating on public conservation land. These have a “tiny footprint,” and put money back into conservation • Mining techniques have come a long way. She gave the example of “egg slice” where they lift up a whole section of forest, move it and then put it back later, birds and all • The National Government won’t destroy NZ, but will allow for the opportunity to mine (without impacts), if there are great economic benefits • Currently public don’t need to be notified of mining applications on conservation land. Kate would like to change this, so that the public can have a say for every mining application • Kate made the analogy of; if you had millions of dollars under your house. You wouldn’t leave it, you would carefully get it by removing the floorboards but not destroying the whole house • Mining to be considered on a case by case basis, there’s “got to be environmental benefits” Ecan and Canterbury Water • Mentioned that Canterbury had most of NZ’s freshwater and that “a lot of it goes out to sea” • “If we can increase the economic growth of Canterbury we should do it” • Kate thinks there is the potential to “store” the water rather than let it all go out to sea • All the water rights etc. still have to go through the RMA and environment court processes • Used the example of the Opuha dam as how the process should work ideally Mokihinui River • Meridian has applied for resource consent, but hasn’t asked for consent from the land owner (DOC) (I.e. it still has to come across her desk for final yes/no) • DOC has appealed the decision anyway • She thinks that it’s too important to be decided by a 2-1 split of the commissioners vote alone • It will provide security of power for the Coast • “it’s a wild river, but not the only wild river we have” • Kate admitted that they “cannot mitigate the impacts on kayakers”, but can mitigate the impact on fish life • No mitigation for the area to be inundated, so this will require a land swap • The lake which is formed will form recreational opportunities for boaties • The “lake will look stunning” • There are other West Coast rivers at various stages of dam applications at the moment as well General Comments • “Make a better use of what we have, without ruining what we have” • “Some economic decisions are tough decisions” • “Not going to pretend that decisions are popular” • “Trying to make decisions that are best for the country as a whole” • 34% of NZer’s visited at least one public conservation land area in 2009 • We are in a recession so we need to balance conservation with the economy • Balance was her word of the evening • Conservation Minister’s role to bring balance to conservation as well as protection • Kate often mentioned how unique and stunning our country is and how special and charismatic our bird life is Christchurch Citizens boo Nats at Copthorne Hotel admin — Fri, 30 Apr 2010 09:24:46 +0000 It was like being back in the 70’s as hundreds of Christchurch citizens, enraged at loosing their vote, heckled those arriving at a National Party function on the last day in office of the sacked Environment Canterbury representatives. The police were out in force and one would be water bomber was arrested. Very few of the water interest groups of Canterbury took up the invitation of the National Party Canterbury / Westland Policy committee and paid $10 for nibbles with a cash bar available to hear “Canterbury water – a collaborative approach” chaired by Mayor Bob Parker with the other panelists being the Hon Dr Nick Smith- Minister for the Environment, Murray Rogers – Water Rights Trust, Peter Townsend – CEO , Mark Solomon – Chair, Te Runanga o Ngai Tahu, David Horn – director Canterbury Water. The crowd screamed “sack Bob” and “we can’t drink money”. The Government has dissolved the elected council of Environment Canterbury and replaced it with unelected commissioners. It has decided that there will be no elections as otherwise required by the Local Elections Act for ECan later this year. Instead until 2013, the region’s water will remain under the control of what has been termed the Bazley gang” National ’s own “lets have some dams” yes puppets. The credentials of the commissioners are weighted for irrigation and against the environment and ordinary citizens. For instance Tom Lambie is a chairman of the Opuha Dam partnership and Rex Williams is an engineer and businessman in cement production. David Caygill is/was a partner in Buddle Findlay, the same law firm that represents Central Plains Water. Between them they have the credentials to make dams. The catalyst for all this was a review by Wyatt Creech that damned the elected council. Creech is a big player in the dairy industry (amongst other interests, he, along with John Key at one point, and other National figures are behind the Dairy Investment Fund which owns Open Country Cheese). The report contains accusations that the ECan councillors are too worried about ’science’ and says their decisions are “science led rather than science informed”, which is basically equivalent to saying that ECan should turn a blind eye to the facts when they’re inconvenient for dairy interests. It goes on to say “large numbers of staff are “green” in orientation”, which means they are sin of sin, putting the environment before the interests of farmers hell bent on sucking our rivers dry for irrigation. The Rakaia River closed up at the mouth about 10 days ago. Virtually unprecedented. People at Rakaia Huts say low flows are causing back-up flooding. Also unheard of. At the end of the day, the dairy industry, which has deep connections with National, just wants more water allocated for dairy farming. They don’t care that this is unsustainable. Yesterday agriculture Minister David Carter, who has a farm in the Hurunui and stands to benefit from fast tracking irrigation in the Hurunui, threatened other councils who do not co-operate with National party agendas of water for farmers and bugger the environment . He has finally said it: ECan was sacked because it didn’t “co-operate” with farmers and give them all the water they wanted. And other councils had better do what they are told, or they too will be sacked: Speaking at the Irrigation New Zealand conference in Christchurch yesterday, Carter said the Government had “no option” but to sack the councillors. “We had to act here in Canterbury because the situation was untenable if we are going to seriously make progress in delivering this irrigation,” he said. “I would have thought what happened recently with Environment Canterbury would be a signal to all regional councils to work a bit more constructively with their farmer stakeholders.” The protest began on the steps of Ecan where the crowd was addressed by Labour MP Brendon Burns, Greens MP Kevin Hague, Yani Johanson and sacked ECAN councillor Jane Demeter. The protest then moved 20 metres to the Copthorne Hotel where the crowd roared and hissed as participants arrived, sharing their rage at the loss of the democratic process in Canterbury. SHOW SOLIDARITY AND JOIN THE RATES PROTEST Benmore dairying given OK By MATTHEW LITTLEWOOD – The Timaru Herald Last updated 05:00 04/05/2010 The Environment Court has approved a large-scale dairy farm in the Upper Waitaki, rejecting a warning from regional councillors that the development would be too big for the area. But the decision has already been criticised by the Aoraki Conservation Board and the Green Party because of the farm’s impact on the environment. The court has granted Little Ben Dairy effluent and land use consents to farm more than 1400 cows for 25 years, 6km from Lake Benmore, just north of Omarama. Last year, an Environment Canterbury panel granted the company consent for 10 years for 750 cows, but the company appealed the decision on the grounds it was “restrictive”. Little Ben had initially applied for a consent for 35 years. Environment Court judge John Jackson said a decision was reached after mediation between ECan staff, Little Ben and the Department of Conservation. DOC Twizel manager Rob Young said the department agreed to the consent after it was assured the owners would erect stock-proof fences 20m from the Ben Omar Swamp reserve, and there were appropriate penalties if nitrate levels were exceeded. Little Ben co-director Mervyn McCabe said the consent process had cost the company more than $500,000. “It’s taken us three hard years to get here. ECan kept trying to make up the rules as we went along,” he said. Mr McCabe said there was “no way” the farm could have been profitable within the conditions they were granted. “For the money we had spent, 750 cows and 10 years would not have been a viable option. The property is 450 hectares. We could have been forced to move to winter feeding, which would have been even worse for the environment.” Central South Island Fish and Game opposed the original proposal, asking for the consent to be limited to 10 years. However, it did not speak at the consent hearings after it reached agreements with Little Ben about environmental protection. Fish and Game officer Mark Webb said although he was pleased the company accepted its requests, it was disappointing the consent had been extended to 25 years. ECan wetland ecologist Mark Davis said the Ben Omar Swamp was “one of the most important remaining wetlands in the Waitaki and Mackenzie basins”. The consent conditions require that the discharge area be 165 metres from the swamp. At last year’s hearings, the ECan panel said there was insufficient information about possible cumulative effects because dairying was new in the area. “We knew we were in the right in the eyes of the law,” Mr McCabe said. “The permitted activity is at least twice what we asked for, and the technology we use to limit leaching is gold-medal standard. The councillors tried to rewrite the law. I think the Government’s sacking of the councillors was great.” Green Party MP Kevin Hague said the decision was a “loss all round for the environment”. “The ECan councillors clearly tried to adopt a cautious approach, but they haven’t been allowed to. I think it shows the lack of constraints in the RMA.” The Aoraki Conservation board member John Keoghan said he was disappointed by the decision. “We submitted that the consent should be granted for only five years. Essentially, the court has granted the company the maximum ability to profit for at least two generations, largely at the expense of the environment. “I think we’ve reached a tipping point here.” DAIRY FARM DETAILS Little Ben is a subdivision of Buscott Station. Its directors are Mervyn McCabe and Richard Gloag. The farm is near Ben Omar swamp, part of which was on conservation land. The company initially applied for a 35-year consent to farm 1400 cows. ECan was willing to approve a 750-cow operation for 10 years. Little Ben went to the Environment Court, which has agreed to let the company farm 1400 cows for 25 years. Up to 7560 litres of raw effluent a day would be produced by the proposed farm. It would be stored in two ponds and spread over 120 hectares on the farm. from Timaru Herald Homepage BLACK DAY FOR CANTERBURY WATER/ 550,000 lose their vote admin — Thu, 22 Apr 2010 07:05:16 +0000 It is a black day in Canterbury with the loss of our elected Environment Canterbury representatives. Our Water, Our Vote JOIN THE RALLY Friday, April 30, 2010 Time: 5:30pm – 7:30pm Location: Environment Canterbury 58 Kilmore Street,Christchurch, New Zealand April 30th is the final day that the elected ECan councillors will be in place at the regional council. The National government have rushed through legislation to strip the citizens of Canterbury of their vote and say in determining water issues in Canterbury. This is our chance to say NO! Give us back our vote! Give us back our council! Give us back our water conservation orders – which had nothing to do with ECan at all, but were tacked onto the bill because of the obstacle they provided for irrigation interests. Come to the steps of ECan at the end of the day on Friday. Bring placards, posters, drums, megaphones. Bring friends, family, colleagues. Bring your loudest voice. At a little after 6pm, those who are keen may want to make the short walk down to the Copthorne Hotel, where the Nats are holding a ‘victory party’. Called the “Jenny Shipley Lecture”, the topic of this years event is “Canterbury Water – A Collaborative Approach”, Nick Smith, Bob Parker, various Canterbury National MPs, Mark Solomon from Ngai Tahu and various other irrigation and farming interests will be gathering together .This is the perfect opportunity to let them know they have massively misjudged public opinion. Join the Protest 5.30 p.m. Friday 30 April. The council represents 550,000 people, covering about a seventh of the country. It stretches from Kaikoura in the north to Timaru in the south, and everywhere east of the Southern Alps – an area including 78,000km of rivers and almost 5000 lakes. Sacked Environment Canterbury’s (ECan) councillors carried a coffin bearing the words, “RIP Regional Democracy” to their last meeting. The frightening aspect of the new Government-appointed Councillors is that they will will have new powers to write and implement regional plans for Canterbury that cannot be appealed to the Environment Court.The Commissioners will also have the power to put a moratorium on water consents in areas under stress – and to bypass the Environment Court and vary Water Conservation Orders on some of the region’s protected rivers, such as the Rakaia, Rangitata, and Ahuriri River. Documents requested under the Official Information Act by Forest and Bird reveal correspondence between David Carter and his MAF advisors on options to speed up irrigation in the Rakaia and Hurunui catchments by stopping the Hurunui and weakening the Rakaia Conservation Orders. It appears the government has been planning to attack Water Conservation Orders for quite some time, way before ECan review. 300 people angry angry about the government’s seizure of Canterbury’s water went to a meeting at the Great Hall Thursday 15 April chaired by Chris Todd of Forest and Bird to brainstorm strategies to protest our loss of our democratic rights. In the meantime, a website has been registered, ‘Our Water Our Vote” and further information will be posted there as it becomes available. Check it out in our links below. Further information can be found on Facebook at “Canterbury: Our Water” UPDATE Mackenzie fight continues The Environment Defence Society is urgently seeking donations to support its campaign to protect the Mackenzie Country from intensive dairy conversions. Contrary to some media reports, the cubicle farming proposals have not been withdrawn. The 3 applicants have withdrawn their effluent discharge consents after they were called-in by the government. But they are still pursuing consents to take water for irrigation and still have valid land use consents from Waitaki District Council. The 3 companies propose to create cubicle dairy farming operations involving 18,000 dairy cows being housed for 9 months of the year in 20 large wintering sheds. It is the land use consents that EDS is asking the High Court to overturn. EDS has filed proceedings in the High Court in Timaru and contends that the consents should have been publicly notified, that they are invalid and that Certificates of Compliance setting out permitted activities are unlawful. EDS is especially concerned at the landscape effects of converting brown tussock grassland to green rye grass as well as the effects of the large cubicle farm buildings. EDS is seeking some funding from the Environmental Legal Aid fund but that will not cover all our costs. In addition to the High Court action, we are campaigning for a Strategic Plan for the Mackenzie Country that would assess the options for both economic development and landscape protection in a properly integrated manner. The area is too precious to allow its future to be decided by ad hoc resource consents. We are trying to persuade the government to intervene and work with the local councils to prepare such a plan which we call Mackenzie 2050. Donations to EDS are fully tax deductible and can be made oby mail to PO Box 95-152, Waitakere City 0653. Please support this campaign! Kind regards Gary Taylor Chairman Environmental Defence Society join the water rate protest admin — Tue, 13 Apr 2010 09:45:17 +0000 A 90-year-old former city councillor is calling for a rates revolt over the Government’s sacking of Environment Canterbury (ECan) councillors. “Why should I pay my rates when I don’t have a say?” Ruby Fowler said. “I’d love everyone in Christchurch to do the same.” Environment Minister Nick Smith and Local Government Minister Rodney Hide announced last month that ECan councillors would be replaced with up to seven commissioners, including chairwoman-designate Dame Margaret Bazley. Smith last week described the threat of withholding rates as a “knee-jerk reaction”. Fowler, a former teacher, said she never paid for anything that did not benefit her. The council could only penalise late payers 10 per cent, she said. That was less than $10 in her case. “If enough people do it, they wouldn’t be able to continue,” Fowler said. “I don’t know who’s going to pay Mrs Bazley’s salary – I guess [Prime Minister] John Key will pay.” Fowler was proud of the city’s drinking water. However, she said she was worried about what would happen to the water after the commissioners took over. “I think it’s terrible. I pay my rates and I’ve always voted, and it took a lot to get our votes, women,” she said. Fowler was a Labour city councillor in the late 1980s. Former ECan chairman Sir Kerry Burke, who knew Fowler, said he was not sure if a rates revolt had gathered momentum. “I think we have to respect the law … [but] I would not be surprised if significant numbers of people in our community would want some way to protest and the detachment of the regional rate would be, I’m sure, one of those avenues that would be taken,” he said. Fonterra buys as government axes conservation orders says Chris Hutching NBR Photo Hurunui River Fonterra is positioning itself to take advantage of government plans to overturn the conservation order affecting Lake Coleridge and the Rakaia River. Last week the milk giant announced it had aquired land for its new multi-million dollar milk plant in Canterbury at Darfield. Governmentment-appointed functionaries will now consider the submissions and make their recommendations to the minister who makes the final decision. The preamble to the new act states that this is intended to fast-track proposed irrigation dams on the pristine Hurunui River and the conservation issues involving the Rakaia. “Such a move, along with the dismissal of the ECan council, would be justifiably perceived by many as too big a hit to local democracy and would lead us straight into civil disorder. Yet that is what the government’s new water management act may well do…