The article I wrote for the last Canterbury Farming publication generated much interest and feedback. Because of this, the article this month continues with a similar subject, relating to consent replacements and the Resource Management (Consent Duration) Amendment Act.

The purpose of the Act is to provide consent holders with some degree of certainty during the transition associated with of the resource management reforms.

What this new legislation does is automatically extend the expiry date of some resource consents by law. If your consent expires before 31 December 2027, then the duration will automatically extend to that date. This includes replacement applications that the Regional Council may already be processing.

What happens after 31 December 2027?

This is not certain at this stage. Government is proposing that the switch from the RMA to the new resource management system should occur by 2029. The Government has then proposed a further extension to consent durations until two years after the transition period ends. That would take us to 2031.

However, given this further extension is only a proposal at this stage, the details may change as the Bills progress through the legislative process.

In some respects, it will be sensible if there are changes to the current proposals. The setting of these dates provides more certainty and helps to prevent wasted time and costs associated with replacing consents in the transition period. That is a major win for affected consent-holders and so is great news. However, the alignment of dates for replacing consents will mean that consent-holders, their consultants and Regional Councils will be expected to develop and process huge numbers of applications for consents at the same time.

Although some may feel that this is not a problem for the farming community, I am not sure that this is the case. If there is a lack of appropriate expertise to cope with the work, costs are likely to increase, and significant delays are also likely. Such delays would be associated both with getting the applications drawn up in the first place, and with processing by Council.

Given this situation, it would seem sensible for there to be a more staggered or staged approach, rather than fixed dates. A better approach may be to extend consents for a fixed period, with that period applying from the current date of expiry for the consent. This would help manage the resourcing impacts over the transition period, while still providing certainty to existing consent holders that consents will remain in place during this period.

Submissions have been made on this point – hopefully this ‘tweak’ can occur to help prevent significant future resourcing issues.

For those who hold consents that will be expiring soon, you currently have a choice whether to extend the duration of the existing consent, or apply to replace the consent under the existing framework. Most will choose to extend the consent, and this does not require any action: this will happen automatically. However, there are situations where replacing the consent now may be beneficial. Aqualinc Research Limited has Clients in both camps, with the most common reason for proceeding to replace consents now being to provide certainty if there is the possibility of a farm sale in the near future. It may also become something for banks to consider where the consent holder is looking to re-finance.

If you have consents that are due to expire in the next few years, or if you want more information about whether to renew your consent now, or wait, then contact your trusted resource management advisor to discuss your best option.