The raft of changes announced today to speed up the Fast-track law is an unethical strategy attacking the EPA for allowing affected parties to be heard, and for Panels to consider evidence with any degree of balance.
Shane Jones dumped the Fast-track process on the EPA and is now attacking them – and iwi and communities – for any engagement with the issues.
“In the Government’s mind the Fast-track is supposed to be a tokenistic rubber stamp and its not stamping fast enough.” Catherine Delahunty
We are in the middle of a Panel process on the Oceana Gold Waihi North gold mine proposal, and we are concerned that these new law changes (proposed by Xmas) might be retrospective? Are we all wasting our time and effort trying to comment in a limited process which Shane Jones plans to overturn? Our organisation has many questions about the ethics of attacking the existing law, law that was arguably passed without due consideration, just to make it even more unjust and inaccessible to participate.
“Jones seems to think the EPA stands for ‘Extractive Privileges Act’.” Catherine Delahunty
Together with our lawyers and experts, we have worked very hard to provide some balance to what is already incredibly restricted Panel process; and now these are explicit threats that the EPA must do whatever the Government says and that even fewer groups will be deemed eligible to even comment highlight not only the apparent contempt that this Government has for community voice, but, it seems also for the EPA themselves.
A Government could hardly be more out of touch with the values of so many of its citizens and so out of touch with the importance of the environment at this time in history. The vast and clear majority of submissions of both individuals and organisations on the original Fast-track Bill were unequivovcal in their opposition to the creation of the law – citing it as an attack on te Tiriti, on democracy and on the environment.
“To attack the EPA for doing its job under law and then to attack the law they themselves drafted is both incompetent and arrogant. A truncated Select Committee so that they can rush through more draconian amendments is a travesty.The EPA don’t deserve this sabotage of their role. It is both disgraceful and provocative to continue to insult guardianship of the environment.” Catherine Delahunty
Coromandel Watchdog remains opposed to Fast-tracking decisions that will have intergenerational repercussions – particularly when they are for private profit and not public benefit; having now been involved in the process, and experienced first hand just how truncated it is, and how limited, we can absolutely see this move by the Minister for what it is – an attack.