performance review results

1 files changed, 11 insertions, 2 deletions

diff --git a/assignment3/background.tex b/assignment3/background.tex
index 2e665c1..e9319b7 100644
--- a/assignment3/background.tex
+++ b/assignment3/background.tex
@@ -73,8 +73,17 @@ those parties who made a submission on a notified application have
 legal standing to appeal a council's resource consent decision to the
 Environment Court.
 
-% TODO: who has legal standing in this case?
-% Do people have to resort to the Environment Court then?
+A review of consent processing performance of selected councils
+conducted by the Ministry for the Environment revealed that councils
+rarely reject subpar resource consent applications as permitted by
+section 88(3) of the RMA; much more often faulty applications are
+accepted and gradually improved through requests for additional
+information in line with section 92 of the
+RMA \parencite{performance}. It is doubtful whether poor quality
+assessments significantly improve through this course of action. It is
+clear, however, that this approach not only delays the processing of
+resource consents, but also increases the likelihood of poor quality
+applications slipping through.
 
 Often the quality and coverage of activities in the council's plan
 determine whether or not the expected effects of a development