Chief executive Peter Bodeker's comments came as councillors yesterday criticised Resource Management Act reforms requiring councils to do economic analysis as part of their ''section 32'' reports presented at plan change and resource consent hearings.
Cr Michael Deaker said at a committee meeting the council would still be working on its 6A water quality plan changes if it had been required then to do that sort of analysis.
Cr Duncan Butcher said the requirement could mean hearing panels ended up with one person giving one economic analysis then one on the other side giving a completely different one.
As a result, hearing panels would be left with sorting out the ''sawdust'' out from the facts, he said.
Regional council policy director Fraser McRae said the requirement was counter to streamlining measures the Government was implementing.
Chairman Stephen Woodhead said ''unfortunately'' providing economic analysis was now law, so the council had to have a better understanding of the economic impact of its decisions.
''The Government is very hot on it. But we're going to have to be careful not to put too much weight on it. It's just part of the information that informs a decision.''
The council was often criticised during hearings for not doing enough economic analysis.
Mr Bodeker said as the council was moving towards implementing plan change 6A, the economic reality of its decisions were coming ''more and more into force''.
The lack of economic thinking in the council was something he had questioned since he arrived.
From a chief executive's point of view, he believed analysis was valuable.
Cr Bryan Scott said while there was a cost to landowners implementing plan change 6A, on water quality, they also benefited from a pristine environment when it came to selling their wares.
