Report of the Local Government and Environment Committee

Transcription

1 Report of the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment, The state of New Zealand s environment: Commentary by the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment on Environment Aotearoa 2015 Report of the Local Government and Environment Committee Contents Recommendation 2 Background to the Commissioner s commentary 2 Determining priority areas for environmental action 3 Areas for review in the Environmental Reporting Act 4 Consistency among regional councils 4 Conclusion 4 Appendix 6

2 Report of the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment, The state of New Zealand s environment: Commentary by the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment on Environment Aotearoa 2015 Recommendation The Local Government and Environment Committee has considered the report of the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment, The state of New Zealand s Environment: Commentary by the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment on Environment Aotearoa We recommend that the House take note of our report. Background to the Commissioner s commentary The Environmental Reporting Act 2015 came about because of concerns about the independence of reporting into environmental issues. To address this, the Act requires the Secretary for the Environment and the Government Statistician to publish two reports every year. They should include a synthesis state of the environment report every three years, and a report on one of the five environmental domains. The domains cover New Zealand s air, atmosphere and climate, fresh water, land, and marine environments. The Secretary for the Environment and the Government Statistician published two pilot reports prior to the commencement of the Act: the 2014 Air Domain Report and a synthesis report, Environment Aotearoa Under the Act, the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment can decide to prepare an independent commentary on these reports. We reported on the Commissioner s commentary on the air domain report on 28 July The Commissioner s commentary on the pilot synthesis report was referred to us on 29 June The Commissioner s recommendations In her commentary the Commissioner made six recommendations on the pilot synthesis report. In doing so, she stressed that she did not see evidence that the synthesis report lacked objectivity or independence. She noted that preparing a synthesis report is complicated and that there is always room for improvement, particularly under a new regime. The Commissioner recommended that: 1 The committee s report is available on Parliament s website: 2

3 The purpose of state of the environment reporting should be to inform the public and decision-makers of the current state and long-term trends in the environment. It should identify and explain environmental issues, including their causes and location, and contain conclusions about their significance. Environmental issues should form the basis for structuring domain and synthesis reports. Relevance to environmental issues should be used as the primary criterion for select environmental indicators with more input from a variety of technical advisors. Both domain and synthesis reports contain outlooks for different environmental issues. Both domain and synthesis reports should contain conclusions on the relative significance of different environmental issues. The conclusions should be made transparently on a reasoned basis. The Secretary for the Environment should prepare a report for the Minister for the Environment, outlining priorities for action in response to the findings of Environment Aotearoa 2015 and this commentary, and make this report publicly available. Determining priority areas for environmental action Many things can be measured to assess the state of the environment. Therefore a synthesis report should identify environmental issues to prioritise if it is to be of most use to its reader and to the public. To help prioritise, the Commissioner recommends that a synthesis report have conclusions to help the reader judge the significance of an issue. The Commissioner told us she considers five questions to reach a conclusion: Is it irreversible? Is the impact cumulative? Is it large in scale or pervasive? Is it increasing and accelerating? Is there a tipping point beyond which the natural system is gone? If the answer is yes to the majority of these questions on a particular issue, this should convey a sense of urgency. The Commissioner told us that by using these criteria, she considers priority issues are climate change, native flora and fauna, oceans, and supporting land and water regeneration, whereas air quality is generally faring well. We note that Environment Aotearoa 2015 did not include conclusions. We are pleased that subsequent domain reports do, and we hope the next synthesis report will include conclusions, drawing on the Commissioner s criteria. 3

4 Areas for review in the Environmental Reporting Act The first three-year cycle under the Act is about to conclude. This means that a full round of domain reports and synthesis reports will have been completed. This may be an appropriate time to review the Act to ensure it is fit for purpose. The Commissioner noted that the priority area of focus for the Government Statistician was accuracy, while for the Secretary for the Environment the priority was relevance. At times these priorities can cause tension. For example swimmability in fresh water was omitted from Environment Aotearoa 2015 because of concerns about accuracy. In the Commissioner s view, the respective roles of the Government Statistician and the Secretary for the Environment under the Act could be reviewed so that issues of importance can be reported on, even when data is limited. The Commissioner also questions whether dividing the environment into domains is the best approach, as many environmental issues are connected. For example, erosion rocks and soil being washed away by natural forces leads to sedimentation rocks and soil being deposited in a water body. However, erosion would be covered by the land domain and sedimentation by the water domain. The Commissioner would prefer to see reports focus on connected issues rather than domains. The frequency of reports could also be reviewed, as there may not be significant movement in a domain within three years. The Commissioner told us she sensed a rush to complete the report within the statutory deadline. She believes a less frequent but more in-depth report could be a better approach. We asked whether the Commissioner considers she had adequate resources to complete commentaries on the reports. The Commissioner noted that she was not required to prepare commentaries, and she had not done so on the Marine 2016 and Fresh Water 2017 domain reports. She told us that more resources would not necessarily have meant more commentaries because of the level of input she likes to have in her commentaries. However, the incoming Commissioner may have a different approach. Ultimately, she said, it is a matter of priority. Consistency among regional councils We heard that inconsistences in regional councils reporting made it difficult to assess the state of the environment at a national level. The way that regional councils are structured means they act independently. This means that data can be incompatible. For example, some regional councils may collect data continuously, whilst others may only collect data monthly. The Commissioner was not sure if this was a result of the Act. She urges the incoming Commissioner to assess this. We asked who would be best placed to standardise the reporting. The Commissioner said the Ministry for the Environment, working closely with regional councils to determine the appropriate parameters. Conclusion We thank the Commissioner for providing her commentary on the synthesis report. We agree that reports produced under the Act need to be useful to the public and decision- 4

5 makers. If the consensus is that these reports are not useful, this needs to be addressed through a review of the Act. We encourage the Government Statistician and the Secretary for the Environment to reflect on the Commissioner s recommendations. 5

6 Appendix Committee procedure The report of the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment, The state of New Zealand s Environment: Commentary by the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment on Environment Aotearoa 2015, was referred to us on 29 June We met between 3 and 10 August 2017 to consider the report. We heard evidence from the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment. Committee members Andrew Bayly (Chairperson) Matt Doocey Hon Craig Foss Joanne Hayes Tutehounuku Korako Hon Tim Macindoe Ron Mark Mojo Mathers Eugenie Sage Meka Whaitiri Dr Megan Woods 6