Agenda of Regional Planning Committee

Meeting Date	Agenda Item / Action	Person Responsible	Due Date	Status Comment
7 August	Making Good Decisions	GI	Ongoing	Update at meeting
7 August	RPC Draft Annual report	EB/GI		Agenda item for this meeting
7 August	Update on RMA Reform – letter to be sent re Council’s concerns on short timeframes for preparing submissions	GI		Update at meeting

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Regional Planning Committee

Wednesday 11 September 2013

SUBJECT: Regional Planning Committee Annual Report

Reason for Report

1. This report presents a revised version of the Regional Planning Committee’s Annual Report for consideration by the Committee. This follows on from a first draft version being presented to the Committee’s 7 August 2013 meeting and constructive feedback on that draft report from some members of the Committee.

2. The Annual Report provides an overview of the form and function of the Hawke’s Bay Regional Planning Committee and reports on its activities over the period April 2012 to June 2013.

Design, Publication and Distribution

3. Following discussion with some members of the Committee following the 7 August 2013 meeting, it was agreed that the report would be ‘dressed up’ and published in an engaging user-friendly format.

4. The attached report is not in the final format in which it will be published. The attached report is presented for consideration of its content only - not layout or design. Once the Committee is satisfied with the report’s content, staff will work with document publishers on layout and design elements for the final report.

5. The final published report would then be distributed to tangata whenua groups and a number of other statutory organisations across the Hawke’s Bay region. The final report will also be posted on the Regional Council’s website.

Financial and Resource Implications

6. There will be design and printing costs associated with the publishing of the report. These costs will be accommodated within budgets for Project 889 (Interest Group Liaison).

Decision Making Process

7. Council is required to make a decision in accordance with the requirements of the Local Government Act 2002 (the Act). Staff have assessed the requirements contained in Part 6 Sub Part 1 of the Act in relation to this item and have concluded the following:

7.1. The decision does not significantly alter the service provision or affect a strategic asset.

7.2. The use of the special consultative procedure is not prescribed by legislation.

7.3. The decision does not fall within the definition of Council’s policy on significance.

7.4. The decision is not inconsistent with an existing policy or plan.

7.5. Given the nature and significance of the issue to be considered and decided, and also the persons likely to be affected by, or have an interest in the decisions made, Council can exercise its discretion and make a decision without consulting directly with the community or others having an interest in the decision.

Recommendations

That the Regional Planning Committee:

1. Agrees that the decisions to be made are not significant under the criteria contained in Council’s adopted policy on significance and that Council can exercise its discretion under Sections 79(1)(a) and 82(3) of the Local Government Act 2002 and make decisions on this issue without conferring directly with the community and persons likely to be affected by or to have an interest in the decision due to the nature and significance of the issue to be considered and decided.

2. Endorses the draft report titled “Regional Planning Committee – Annual Report for the period April 2012 – June 2013.”

3. Notes that, if endorsed, the draft Annual Report will be re-formatted and re-designed for final publication, distribution and public viewing (subject to publishing and printing timeframes, this is estimated to be circa October-November 2013).

Esther-Amy Bate

Planner

Helen Codlin

Group Manager Strategic Development

Attachment/s

1 View

Regional Planning Committee Annual Report - Draft

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Regional Planning Committee

Wednesday 11 September 2013

SUBJECT: Greater Heretaunga/Ahuriri Catchment Plan Change Update

Reason for Report

1. This report provides a brief update on progress of the TANK stakeholder group assisting Council on the Greater Heretaunga / Ahuriri Land and Water Plan Change. In particular, this report advises the Regional Planning Committee of a report currently being prepared by the TANK Group intended for presentation to the Committee’s meeting in December.

Background

2. The TANK Group’s discussions into land and water management in the Greater Heretaunga and Ahuriri areas have progressed to a point where a TANK Interim Report is to be made available.

3. The Interim Report will summarise the TANK process; who has been involved; the major issues identified; and the agreements reached to date.

4. The Interim Report will be presented to the Regional Planning Committee meeting on 4 December and will be pre-circulated (by post and/or email) to Committee members three weeks in advance of this date.

5. A briefing paper from staff will accompany the TANK Interim Report for the Committee’s 4^th December meeting agenda.

6. The TANK Group will continue its discussions into next year with the aim of developing agreed policy recommendations for the Greater Heretaunga and Ahuriri Plan Change.

Decision Making Process

7. Council is required to make a decision in accordance with Part 6 Sub-Part 1, of the Local Government Act 2002 (the Act). Staff have assessed the requirements contained within this section of the Act in relation to this item and have concluded that, as this report is for information only and no decision is to be made, the decision making provisions of the Local Government Act 2002 do not apply.

Recommendation

1. That the Regional Planning Committee receives the report titled ‘Greater Heretaunga and Ahuriri Plan Change Update.’

Tim Sharp

Strategic Policy Advisor

Helen Codlin

Group Manager

Strategic Development

Attachment/s

There are no attachments for this report.

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Regional Planning Committee

Wednesday 11 September 2013

SUBJECT: Ngati Kahungunu iwi Incorporated Marine and Freshwater Fisheries Strategic Plan

Reason for Report

1. This paper re-presents a report that staff presented to the Regional Council’s Maori Committee meeting on 27 August 2013. The Maori Committee Chairman (Mr Mike Mohi) requested that the staff report, plus the Maori Committee’s recommendations be re-presented to the Regional Planning Committee for information purposes.

Background

2. The staff report to the Maori Committee (substantive extracts follow below) outlined implications of Kahungunu ki Uta, Kahungunu ki Tai, Marine & Freshwater Fisheries Strategic Plan (‘the Strategic Plan’) for Council’s activities and responsibilities. The Maori Committee had formally discussed the subject that its meeting on 27 August.

3. As set out in the extracts below, the staff report to the Maori Committee recommended that the Strategic Plan be ‘received’. Subsequently, the Maori Committee did not agree with that staff recommendation. Instead, the Maori Committee recommended that Council “refer [the Strategic Plan] back to NKII for further widespread distribution amongst Taiwhenua to receive their input” given that the original consultation series of hui was undertaken in 2008 and it was considered by delegates that the Strategic Plan needed to be run past the four Taiwhenua again and indeed the LNG (large natural Treaty groupings) for comment.

4. In turn on hearing from the Maori Committee Chairman reporting on the events of the day before, the Council made the following resolution at its meeting on Wednesday 28 August in relation to this matter:

“That Council refers the ‘Kahungunu ki Uta, Kahungunu ki Tai, Marine and Freshwater Fisheries Strategic Plan’ back to Ngati Kahungunu Iwi Incorporated for further widespread distribution amongst Taiwhenua and the Crown’s LNG (large natural treaty groups) to receive their input” [emphasis added].

5. For members of the Regional Planning Committee, a copy of NKII’s Strategic Plan is set out as Attachment 1.

Main body of staff report to Maori Committee meeting on 27 August 2013

“Background

6. In April, the [Maori] Committee agreed to a process for receiving iwi/hapu management plans (IHMPs). The Strategic Plan is the first IHMP to have been lodged with the Council since that process was adopted.

7. In general terms, IHMPs are tools for outlining the concerns and aspirations of iwi/hapu that may (or may not) relate to resource management and local authority planning. There is no prescribed format or content for IHMPs.

8. If the Council were to receive a IHMP that had been approved by the iwi authority (Ngati Kahungunu Iwi Inc in this case), then the Council would be expected to consider the IHMP for purposes of decision-making under the Resource Management Act (RMA). In short, the RMA requires Council to:

8.1. take into account any relevant IHMPs when preparing or changing regional plans and policy statements

8.2. have regard to any relevant IHMPs when considering resource consent applications.

9. IHMPs may also have a bearing on the Council’s broader projects and roles under the Local Government Act.

10. The term ‘receiving’ a IHMP is deliberate. The Council is not being asked to accept or reject the document, instead, simply receive it so the document can be taken into account as part of the Council’s future planning and decision-making.

Kahungunu ki Uta, Kahungunu ki Tai

11. ‘Kahungunu ki Uta, Kahungunu ki Tai’ is formed by three groups, Ngati Kahungunu Iwi Incorporated; the Coastal Hapu Collective Incorporated Society; and Kahungunu Asset Holding Company Limited. The group’s objective is to develop a strategic plan to guide the integrated management of fisheries, freshwater and coastal resources within the Kahungunu rohe. Regional Council staff understand that the Strategic Plan was drafted and finalised in 2008. The Strategic Plan is intended to establish the basis for a “single door policy” for all agencies and groups seeking to consult on marine, estuarine and freshwater fisheries issues in the Kahungunu rohe.

Key Features of the Strategic Plan

12. In its own words, the Strategic Plan “sets out the aspirations of Kahungunu for the use and management of marine and freshwater fisheries” within the Kahungunu rohe. The Strategic Plan states a number of high level goals/desired outcomes along with methods, tasks and related timelines to achieve the stated goals. These goals “set us on a path to begin rectifying the problems, and a long list of activities that will need to be completed in order to begin to realise those goals”.

13. Table 1 below repeats those goals/desired outcomes of Kahungunu alongside some of the key implications of the goals on Council’s activities and responsibilities.

TABLE 1: Strategic Plan Goals and key implications for HBRC activities

Kahungunu goal/desired outcome	Key implications for HBRC activities / responsibilities (indicative only)
1. Kahungunu is involved effectively in all regulatory fisheries management processes affecting key icon/taonga species	a) HBRC is not responsible for commercial, recreational or customary marine or freshwater fisheries management regulation. This is managed by Ministry of Primary Industries through the Quota Management System under the Fisheries Act 1996. b) Department of Conservation also has responsibilities under the Conservation Act 1987 for controlling fisheries in protected areas. c) HBRC controls the occupation of space in the coastal marine area for the purpose of aquaculture activities through the Regional Coastal Environment Plan. d) Kahungunu should be considered an affected party and served notice of resource consent applications to undertake aquaculture activities, but... e) the ‘single door’ approach promoted by the Strategic Plan may be difficult to apply where Kahungunu are also the applicant proposing to undertake the commercial aquaculture activity.
2. Measures are in place for localised fisheries management to minimise conflict between competing uses (including through voluntary agreements and the restoration/ enhancement of appropriate areas).	f) HBRC engages with stakeholders (including Kahungunu) to identify catchment values and objectives. Some of those management objectives may relate to fishery values and also associated trade-offs alongside consideration of other values. This leads to preparation and review of catchment-based regional plans under RMA. g) HBRC’s management of regional parks and river control and drainage scheme areas may involve initiatives (e.g. physical works and agreements) to restore and enhance specific areas.
3. Environmental issues affecting inland waterways and coastal waters are more effectively managed to maintain, restore and enhance mauri and to avoid, remedy or mitigate adverse effects on fisheries and their habitats.	h) see (f) above. i) Existing regional plans and policy statement recognise the need to manage waterways and coastal waters to avoid, remedy and mitigate adverse effects. RPS includes objectives for recognising iwi values, consultation, protecting waahi tapu, tauranga waka, mahinga kai, mahinga mataitai, taonga raranga, and taonga rongoa. Another example is Plan Change 6 (‘Tukituki River Catchment’) which proposes management objectives to ensure adverse effects on aspects of water quality and quantity that contribute to mauri are avoided, remedied or mitigated.
4. Hapu are empowered and respected as effective managers of customary fishing within their Rohe, and full participants in wider fisheries management. The customary Kaimoana needs of Hapu are identified and provided for.	j) see (a) and (b) above.
5. The value of Kahungunu commercial fishing assets, and the returns (both tangible and intangible) from those assets, are maximised now and into the future, consistent with this Strategy.	k) Not directly relevant to HBRC’s activities and responsibilities.
6. Recreational fishing is effectively managed, with appropriate input by those with Kaitiaki responsibilities.	l) Not directly relevant to HBRC’s activities and responsibilities. See (a) and (b) above.
7. Hapu are effectively involved in compliance activities across all fisheries sectors.	m) Not directly relevant to HBRC’s activities and responsibilities. See (a) and (b) above.
8. Improved capacity, co-operation between Kahungunu iwi and hapu, commercial and non-commercial fishing interest improves cohesiveness and a ‘one door’ policy ensures more effective interactions with other agencies.	n) Not directly relevant to HBRC’s activities and responsibilities. See (a) and (b) above in relation to fisheries management. o) Also see (f), (g) and (i) above in relation to decision-making under RMA for management of water quality and quantity issues.
9. Well-informed fisheries managers are empowered to make good fisheries management decisions.	p) HBRC shares data and information about natural resources with Kahungunu, and vice-versa. This could cover wetlands, biodiversity, water quality and water quantity information. Many technical scientific reports on these topics are already publicly available. q) Information requests might need to be co-ordinated from across the Council through a single point of contact to give effect to the relationship style sought by Kahungunu.
10. Effective lines of communication exist within Kahungunu between Iwi and Hapu fisheries managers, their constituents, and between commercial and non-commercial interests	r) HBRC’s activities re. fisheries relates to ecosystems (including wetlands and estuaries) water quality and water quantity. See (f), (g) and (i) above. s) Currently within HBRC, there is no “single point of contact” identified for communication with Kahungunu.
11. Kahungunu is recognised as a leader in fisheries management in its rohe and exercises effective influence with fisheries management agencies. Fisheries stakeholders support Kahungunu aspirations for fisheries in the rohe.	t) Not directly relevant to HBRC’s activities and responsibilities. u) Also see (f), (g) and (i) above in relation to decision-making under RMA for management where Kahungunu can be regarded as a stakeholder and leader in fisheries management.
12. Kahungunu Iwi members have the skills and expertise to participate at all levels of fisheries management and operations.	v) See (p) above regarding sharing of information. w) In relation to RMA decision-making, the skills and expertise of Kahungunu Iwi members contributes positively to enduring resource management outcomes in Hawke's Bay.

14. The 2012-22 Long Term Plan (LTP) currently includes a number of projects and initiatives (such as research and studies within flood control scheme areas and river corridors) that Kahungunu Iwi are likely to be, or become, involved in. Continuing the Te Karamu project and reviews of asset management plans for the drainage scheme areas are other examples of projects that are likely to involve Kahungunu Iwi.

15. It should also be noted that the Council continues to engage with iwi/hapu in catchment-based regional plan change projects as part of collaborative stakeholder group processes (e.g. for the Mohaka and Greater Heretaunga/Ahuriri catchments).

Financial and Resource Implications

16. There are no direct financial or resource implications arising from a decision to ‘receive’ the Strategic Plan. Once received, the Council will be obligated to take the Strategic Plan into account when preparing and changing regional planning documents under the RMA. Budgets are already in place for plan change processes currently underway which would now need to consider this Strategic Plan. Any financial and resource implications arising from having regard to the Strategic Plan when considering resource consent applications will lie within the Council’s adopted policy for resource consent fees and charges.

[Staff] Recommendations

The Maori Committee recommends Council:

1. ...

2. Receives the Kahungunu ki Uta, Kahungunu ki Tai, Marine and Freshwater Fisheries Strategic Plan as a iwi/hapu management plan for purposes of Council’s decision-making under the Resource Management Act.”

Decision Making Process

17. Council is required to make a decision in accordance with Part 6 Sub-Part 1, of the Local Government Act 2002 (the Act). Staff have assessed the requirements contained within this section of the Act in relation to this item and have concluded that, as this report is for information only and no decision is to be made, the decision making provisions of the Local Government Act 2002 do not apply.

Recommendation

1. That the Regional Planning Committee:

2. Receives the staff report titled ‘Ngati Kahungunu Iwi Incorporated Marine and Freshwater Fisheries Strategic Plan’.

3. That the Regional Planning Committee consider whether or not the Crown’s LNG (large natural Treaty groups) need to be given an opportunity by Ngati Kahungunu Iwi Incorporated to be provided with, and have input into, the ‘Kahungunu ki Uta, Kahungunu ki Tai, Marine and Freshwater Fisheries Strategic Plan’.