High Court finds errors in nitrogen discharge consent — but law changes protect polluters

The Environmental Law Initiative (ELI) has been largely unsuccessful in its judicial review of Environment Canterbury’s (ECan) decision to grant a nitrogen discharge consent to the Mayfield Hinds Valletta (MHV) irrigation scheme. The MHV scheme covers an area of 138,000 ha between the Hakatere and Rangitata rivers. The consent allows scheme farms to pollute water with wasted nitrogen from their farming activities.

Justice Mander found in ELI’s favour that ECan had made a material error of law in granting the consent, breaching section 107 of the Resource Management Act. However, because the Government has recently weakened the bottom-line protections in section 107 in favour of polluters, the Court declined to overturn the consent.

The judge also found that ECan had failed to apply relevant coastal policy provisions. However, the judge found that this failure was not material to the granting of the consent.

ELI’s other grounds, including those relating to the impacts on drinking water, were not upheld. This is despite ECan’s own estimates that hundreds of private drinking water supplies in the MHV command area are at risk of nitrate levels exceeding the Maximum Acceptable Value.

“We are alarmed that water quality protections are being weakened at every turn. Foundational legal safeguards, such as section 107 of the Resource Management Act, are being eroded through law changes designed to protect industry.”  Anna Sintenie, Senior Researcher, ELI

“We need laws that protect the long-term health of these ecosystems and our communities. These reactive changes to the RMA mean short term profit for a few, but a long-term loss for everyone.”

ELI is considering whether there are grounds for appeal.