A replacement for the RMA is expected to be introduced to Parliament this year, be passed into law next year and be in effect by 2027.
Nearly 200 Canterbury farmers packed a community hall meeting organised by Federated Farmers in Ashburton this month to voice their frustration at the consent dilemma.
They were angry at having to spend so much money when the RMA was due to be rewritten in a few months’ time, Federated Farmers Mid Canterbury president David Acland said.
He said a legally binding solution was needed to allow Canterbury and other farmers to continue operating under their existing consents until the new RMA framework was in place.
The solution needed to account for the transition to when the new RMA came into effect — hopefully involving backdating — and then the period it took to being bedded in to new regional plans.
He said farmers due to renew existing resource consents were coming under financial and emotional pressure from the uncertainty and costly charges could be for nothing if rules were changed.
"The government hasn’t come to a position on what they are going to do, so we are still advocating and providing them with useful suggestions as lobbyists to enable them to come to a pragmatic decision."
Environment Canterbury (ECan) administers about 20,000 resource consents, with thousands due to expire in the next 18 months.
Mr Acland said the $10,000 to $20,000 for a mid-range consent and $100,000 for a complex consent did not take into account the cost of farmers paying for consultants to support the processing.
He said the organisation had been in talks with ECan, but had made little traction so had gone to the government.
He said some farmers were coming under excessive demands.
A farmer with two properties — one in a nutrient allocation red zone and another in a green zone — had a smooth process getting consent in the former, but consent for the green zone property was causing many headaches, he said.
Many farmers were being asked to provide extensive technical data, ecological assessments and full Overseer remodelling, even when their farm systems had changed little.
Some of them had been given two weeks to compile the information or risk their consent being publicly notified with a full hearing process at even greater expense.
"We need something put in the meantime because then these complex situations will be hopefully made simpler when we start to think about the new RMA and how that’s going to play out. Then we need a good bedding-in time to enable that new RMA to be bedded in to the regional plans."
He said ECan could show more pragmatism and understanding there was going to be a RMA change rather than following rules to the letter of the law as a "black and white" approach was not working.
Among those attending the meeting were Environment Minister Penny Simmonds and rural MPs Miles Anderson, Mike Butterick and Grant McCallum.
Mr Acland said it was positive to hear about transitional work already under way as part of the RMA replacement process, but farmers were still stuck in limbo until it came into force.
He said the government’s decision last year to step in and block the Otago Regional Council’s flawed land and water regional plan was proof direct intervention was possible.
