Cabinet changes its mind on legislation

Press, 26 March 1980, Page 7

Cabinet changes its mind on legislation

Wellington reporter

It now seems most unlikely that the Commission for the Environment will get empowering legislation this year. Three weeks ago the commission was asked to provide a draft document for the Cabinet to consider, which would have led to legislation during the 1980 session of Parliament, but when it saw the document, the Cabinet rejected it.

Draft legislation for the commission was expected this year. What surprised everyone was the urgency with which the Minister for the Environment (Mr V. S. Young) suddenly called on the commission to present a draft to the Cabinet. It was assumed that the Government was keen to confirm the commission’s role in the procedures established last year in the National Development Act.

The proposal for legislation for the fommission immediately ran into a storm of criticism from other Government departments. notably the Ministry of Works and Development and the Ministry of Energy. Among their many grounds for objection, the main one was the intention that the commission might act independently of the Crown in judicial and town and country planning matters. It was not imagined by anyone outside the Public Service that the Government would allow itself to be deflected from, any

course of action just because its own servants felt put out, but this opposition must have reinforced the doubts some members of the Cabinet were having. There are a number of cogent objections to giving empowering legislation to the commission. These include how to define “environment,” distinguishing between the powers of the commission and the commissioner who heads it, relationships with other Government departments, whether it should be an umpire or an advocate in environmental matters, and how its powers should dovetail with the Town and Country Planning Division of the Ministry of Works and Development. None of these objections need prove insurmountable, but by rushing though legislation the Government would make a very uncomfortable situation for all involved. The Cabinet evidently realised this and has rejected any hasty move. Now the commission will have to prove how it can work under the provisions of the National Development Act before the' Cabinet will consider its claims for legislation again. As the commission is still keen to have empowering legislation, this leaves it with two problems:

First, there have been no applications yet for national development status. The proposed L.P.G. plant at Onehunga has been knocked back by

the Onehunga Borough Council, Petrocorp shows no signs of wanting to shift -its proposed am-monia-urea plant from Kapuni to Waitara yet, although it is known to be keen to do so, and the delays in deciding which methanol process and consortium will be approved has meant there has been no application for the use of the ‘‘fast .track” to build it.

Second, the incoming commissioner (Mr Ken Piddington) must.decide at what point powers given to the commission and powers given to himself can be distinguished in the legislation. One advantage of having no empowering legislation has been that the previous commishave had flexibility, assessing each situation and their place in it on merits. Legislation will provide a situation which is a lot less flexible, and the Government will not be keen to widen discretionary powers to•. a department, even if prepared to give the individual commissioner himself wide discretionary powers which he may not delegate to his staff.

So, after the excitements of the last few weeks when it seemed the commission was going to get priority for empowering legislation, it looks as if it will not get any at all this year. Next year will be General Election year, when the Government will be considering more delicate matters than fixing up one of its departments.