.

1 files changed, 44 insertions, 28 deletions

diff --git a/assignment3/background.tex b/assignment3/background.tex
index a9ead5b..d8fc769 100644
--- a/assignment3/background.tex
+++ b/assignment3/background.tex
@@ -20,7 +20,17 @@ be beneficial to consult with possibly affected people and interested
 members of the general public at this stage, consultation is not a
 general requirement under the RMA.
 
-\subsection{Review and additional information}
+% TODO
+- EIA in NZ differs from international best practice, because
+  consultation before the application is lodged is not required
+
+- consultation may be required by another Act; consultation with Maori
+  (if affected) is usually required due to Treaty
+
+- any results of consultation must be included in the AEE
+
+
+\subsection{Review and notification}
 
 After the application is lodged and the AEE submitted, the council
 will process it.  If the AEE is considered lacking, the council may
@@ -33,8 +43,6 @@ be rejected altogether.
 
 % requesting additional information
 
-\subsection{Notification}
-
 After a review of the AEE, the council processing the resource consent
 application may decide to involve the public by means of notification
 or determine that notification is not required when the activity is
@@ -56,6 +64,22 @@ affected people refuse to provide written approval before the
 assessment of environmental effects has been carried out and
 submitted.
 
+The review of the application and the AEE and the decision whether to
+notify the application or not (and to what degree) is the first step
+in the resource consent process that Grinlinton referred to in his
+statement.  A council that---for whatever reasons---fails to reject
+applications with poor or deliberately misleading assessments
+effectively off-loads the burden to challenge the application to
+members of the general public.  A misleading AEE will be very
+difficult for the public to challenge on technical grounds.  If,
+additionally, the application is not considered to have more than
+minor impacts and is thus not publicly notified, it becomes very
+difficult for members of the public to affect the outcome of the
+resource consent decision.
+
+% TODO: who has legal standing in this case?
+% Do people have to resort to the Environment Court then?
+
 Often the quality and coverage of activities in the council's plan
 determine whether or not the expected effects of a development
 activity will be considered minor and thus influence directly whether
@@ -73,28 +97,32 @@ zone, the application could not be rejected on grounds of
 non-compliance.  A second application for a scaled-down proposal was
 also approved without public notification.
 
+While it is possible to amend plans and there are established
+mechanisms for extensive consultation in the plan creation process, it
+is clearly not feasible to modify plans on a case-by-case basis.
+
+%TODO: report on the sad state of council plans that have had
+% provisionary plans for years and the process dragged on for many years.
+
+
+
 \subsection{Submissions from the public and hearings}
 
+For those applications that the responsible council has determined
+will have impacts on the environment that are more than minor and that
+have been publicly notified, members of the public can make
+submissions to challenge---or express support for---the application.
+
+% TODO
+% Officer's report and decision-making.
 - in the case of public notification, council prepares a report based
 on submissions, the AEE and additional evidence provided by the
 applicant. The report is hence strongly influenced by the applicant's
 input.
 
 
-
-\paragraph{Officer's report and decision-making.} TODO.
-
-
 \section{Consultation and participation in EIA and the RMA}
 
-- EIA in NZ differs from international best practice, because
-  consultation before the application is lodged is not required
-
-- consultation may be required by another Act; consultation with Maori
-  (if affected) is usually required due to Treaty
-
-- any results of consultation must be included in the AEE
-
 %While councils usually engange the public during the consultation
 %phases of the plan formation process, the picture on the resource
 %consent level is a different one.  According to the 2010/11 survey of
@@ -104,11 +132,7 @@ input.
 %being publicly notified (``poor provision of information''). Hence,
 %although the public can influence the framework relative to which
 %resource consents are evaluated, there is limited opportunity for the
-%public to affect the outcome of the actual decision-making process;
-%this situation may result in reduced willingness to participate in
-%areas where public participation is still possible (``failure to
-%influence the decision-making process'').
-
+%public to affect the outcome of the actual decision-making process.
 
 refer to http://www.mfe.govt.nz/publications/rma/everyday/consent-consultation/
 
@@ -122,14 +146,6 @@ refer to http://www.mfe.govt.nz/publications/rma/everyday/consent-consultation/
 %AEE \parencite{miller2010implementing}.
 
 
-- this is the point that Grinlinton is talking about. If the councils
-don't review dilligently enough, proposals with incomplete or
-misleading data are not challenged and pass through to a decision (for
-non-notified applications) or enters limited notification where
-directly affected people find a compromise with the applicant
-(applicant can buy approval) or enters public submission stage. A
-misleading AEE will be difficult for the public to challenge on
-technical grounds.
 
 % http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Mediating+sustainability%3a+the+public+interest+mediator+in+the+New...-a0176372138
 \begin{quote}