Source: Environment Canterbury Regional Council
We often get asked how we do compliance and why it’s important. This page explains how we monitor compliance with resource consents and handle cases of non-compliance.
A resource consent is an important asset that allows individuals or businesses to do an activity, such as taking water for irrigation or being able to discharge wastewater on to land. Some activities also benefit both the individual and often the wider community too.
Because these activities can impact the environment, consents usually come with several conditions. Essentially, the consent is a contract between us – as the regulator – and the consent holder and the community.
The expectation is that the consent holder will meet the conditions of their consent, while we monitor to make sure they are doing so.
Monitoring is a shared responsibility
Improving environmental and community outcomes is a shared responsibility between government (central and regional/local), resource users, industry and our communities.
In Waitaha/Canterbury, there are about 26,000 consents and 416,000 consent conditions across a large geographical area, with a range of activities covered by ever-evolving rules set up at the national, regional and local government level.
The size and complexity of the monitoring landscape means it’s not possible without considerable cost to us – and to ratepayers – to monitor every consent every year.
Compliance is one of several tools designed to protect the environment. Others include audited farm environment plans, voluntary efforts from groups or individuals, and peer or community pressure to do the right thing.
Types of consents and activities we monitor
Compliance monitoring is a key priority for us – it is required by law under the Resource Management Act, our plans and consent conditions, and it is expected of us by the community.
Monitoring depends on the type of consent. When we grant a consent we assess the environmental risk of the activity, in particular the magnitude of potential damage and the probability it will occur.
This is informed by the scale and location of the activity, type of activity and the consent holder’s compliance history.
Over time, risk levels can change due to regulation changes, new information coming to light, or higher risk at the beginning of an activity, such as one that involves construction.
For example, an activity may be seen as high risk due to the level of non-compliance. However, once compliance is being demonstrated, the resulting risk level would lower.
Some consents we assess as being a high priority for monitoring due to their:
- risk to the environment
- importance to the community
- compliance history
- scale.
Over the last two years (2023/24) most monitoring done was on water consents (40%), discharge consents (38%) and land-use consents (21%). The remaining (1%) were coastal consents.
Enforcement for consent condition breaches
We appreciate that education isn’t always going to work. When a consent holder breaches conditions, we may take enforcement actions, such as:
- Notice of non-compliance
- Letter of formal warning
- Cost recovery
- Requesting an application for a retrospective resource consent
- Abatement notice
- Infringement notice
- Enforcement order from the Environment Court
- Alternative Environmental Justice (AEJ)
- Prosecution.
Find out more about
Improving our compliance process
We acknowledge we haven’t always allocated or prioritised our resources effectively for environmental or community outcomes. We are committed to improving the way we manage compliance risks and communicating with consent holders and the community.
We know that we must do more to enable consent holders to demonstrate their compliance – for example, by ensuring consent conditions are written clearly, so consent holders have a good understanding of what their responsibilities are – including what they should be keeping records of and what monitoring they can expect from us.
We’ve recently started a project specifically to shift the conversation away from a consent-by-consent approach towards helping resource users to comply and better identifying risk priorities. This will improve both the customer experience and improve environmental outcomes.
We’re trialling this in Rakaia, where compliance concerns are high and consent complexity is significant.
We are introducing new processes, roles and measures to focus on key priorities like nutrient management, drinking water protection, and water use compliance.
Our goal is to create a flexible compliance monitoring programme that uses both human and technological resources efficiently.
