A leading Māori environmental planning scholar says the Government’s proposal to abolish regional councils and replace them with mayor-led Combined Territories Boards would significantly erode Māori participation in environmental decision making and fits a wider pattern of deregulation and privileging of certain economic players.
Dr Mahina-a-rangi Baker, a lecturer in kaitiakitanga and pūtaiao at Te Wānanga o Raukawa, says Māori should be rightly concerned about the proposal now out for consultation.
It would shift all regional council powers, including environmental regulation, water, public transport, biodiversity and climate adaptation to boards of territorial authority mayors.
She says regional councils, while imperfect, currently provide one of the only formal mechanisms where Māori can influence environmental governance of their rohe.
“Partnership and participation in regional council governance is one of the really key platforms through which Māori can influence decision making over the environment,” she says.
“This proposal will really likely take away those arrangements that are in place between regional councils and Māori and remove the ability for Māori to be involved in that type of decision making,” Dr Baker said.
Concerns Treaty commitments and existing Māori partnerships will be lost
The Government has said Treaty settlement obligations will be carried over, but Dr Baker says this is misleading because many Māori partnerships with councils are not created through settlements at all.
“What is quite confusing about what the government is saying about the impacts of the proposal on Māori is that there is a wide number of partnerships that Māori hold with regional councils that are not at all a part of settlements,” she says.
She notes the government’s own documents highlight statutory Māori seats in the Bay of Plenty and Canterbury, yet explicitly suggest these would not be carried over.
“We already know from the steps that particular settlement entities are taking in response to the resource management reforms that those entities are clearly not seeing that commitment being upheld.” She added.
Part of a much broader pattern of deregulation
Dr Baker says the reforms cannot be viewed in isolation.
“It is relentless. It is part of a wider agenda that is being drip-fed out to us. The big picture is deregulation. The big picture is privileging certain economic players. And the big picture is taking away regulation that protects the environment.”
She links the local government proposals with other moves by the Coalition Government including fast tracking for major projects, the Regulatory Standards Act which she says privileges individual rights at the expense of environmental protection, RMA replacement legislation centred around protecting individual property rights with no commitment to upholding Te Tiriti itself, proposed changes to Te Mana o te Wai, and the recent resignations of the chief executives of the Environmental Protection Authority and the Ministry for the Environment.
“This proposal seems like it is directed at making it harder for our local communities to protect the environment.”
She notes public comments from ministers accusing regional councils of stifling growth and engaging in what they called green overreach.
“The Minister is talking about democratically elected representatives who are implementing national directions by putting limits on resource use in the interest of ensuring resources remain available for everyone over time.”
Dr Baker acknowledges regional councils can be slow and at times difficult to engage with, but says the Government is approaching the issue from the wrong direction.
“We have the lowest level of tax devolution to local government in the OECD. There has been a call for years now to change the funding model so that whilst we continue to give more work to local government, we properly fund them.”
Instead, she says central government appears ready to hand the problem to mayors and Combined Territories Boards, forcing them to figure out how to fund increasing responsibilities.
“That is the responsibility of central government, not to leave it for mayors to do that under immense political pressure.”
She warns the shift risks reducing costs for private users of land and water while increasing costs for the public.
“There is a serious risk that this approach is reducing the cost for people to use the environment but increasing the cost for us as the public to deal with the effects.”
Dr Baker says amid the many issues impacting iwi Māori, they must continue to be vigilant with these types of sweeping changes that continue to impact the taiao.
“This is another attempt to narrow the opportunities that we have to be involved in decision making about the environment.”
“The second thing is the breaking down of the structures that protect the taiao.”
She says the proposal strips away the governance layer responsible for placing limits on resource use, limits essential not just for ecological wellbeing but for Māori economic futures.
“We are not seeing any assurances that they are going to protect resources in the taiao that we rely upon economically.”
Lack of consultation signals decisions already made
Dr Baker says the lack of consultation with Māori is telling and all too common.
“We are seeing this when the thinking has already been done behind closed doors. We are given really limited time to comment on it, and the government is already telling us they will push this through next year.” She concluded.
