A cynic would say that with local government elections looming the council had to try to clean up the mess caused by the plan – the work of councillors and others. Otherwise the political fallout could have been interesting, to say the least.
The council’s temporary solution will allow all dairy farmers the right to farm for varying lengths of time depending on their proposals for mitigating nitrogen leaching on their farms.
Here lies a problem: some of the N leaching targets set out in the Environment Court-approved plan are basically unachievable by some farmers. As Andrew Hoggard, of Federated Farmers, rightly asks, “why have rules if people can’t meet them – it’s plain silly”. Unless the objective is to put them out of business.
The council seems to be implementing its One Plan in a way that will give them time – who knows when – to go for a ‘plan change’. Essentially this means re-litigating some controversial aspects of the plan to try to get it right. For a few weeks the council had it right – then Fish and Game, DOC and the council itself attacked, or failed to support, the decisions made by the council’s own commissioners and the result is a plan from hell.
One Plan is a lawyers’ gravy train. Cost estimates vary, but by the time this is settled in, say, five years, it will have cost ratepayers and interested parties about $20 million. Then the implementation costs hit the council and farmers.
The council keeps insisting it is blameless for the mess-up. That notion is delusional. While bureaucrats and councillors bungle their way through, ratepayer farmers are being stung twice and the economy of the region placed in jeopardy.
To be fair, the council after hefty persuasion by DairyNZ, has come up with a temporary sort-of livable implementation programme. It’s the least the council could have done given the angst it has caused to farmers and the rural community.
A rumour surfaced that One Plan was to be entered in some award contest – presumably for the cock-up of the decade.
