Wrong place, wrong process

DOME VALLEY LANDFILL

The wrong place, the wrong process, excessive risk and adverse effects – although voiced in a myriad of different ways, these were the key reasons consistently submitted by those appealing for the landfill not to go ahead.

Whether it was Fight the Tip, Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whātua, Forest & Bird, the Department of Conservation, or Ngāti Whātua Ōrakei/Te Uri o Hau, the same points kept being made in their lawyers’ closing submissions, whether in relation to the environment, iwi, community or resource management itself.

Andrew Braggins, acting for Fight the Tip, stated simply that there was no need for a new landfill, despite WM’s claims to the contrary.

“Waste Management NZ needs a replacement for its Redvale landfill,” he said. “There is no evidence that the people of Auckland need such a replacement now, there is no evidence of any material adverse effects arising if one is not consented. The Court does not have a gun to its head.” However, even if there was, he said Wayby’s susceptibility to heavy rainfall and land instability meant it was the wrong place for a landfill, as Auckland Council’s own policies stated.

“Auckland Unitary Plan (AUP) policy requires cleanfills, managed fills and landfills to be sited, and where appropriate, designed and constructed, to avoid the risk of land instability,” he said.

Braggins reminded the court of the extensive slips that had occurred recently after three successive heavy rain events and the evidence of local residents, who regularly find tomos, or sinkholes, appearing in the area.

He said WM’s extensive schedule of mitigation, off-setting and compensation, including the recent agreement with the Ngāti Mānuhiri Settlement Trust, were not benefits, but “symptomatic of a project with extensive economic benefit for the applicant, but which was fundamentally misconceived from the beginning”.

Unsurprisingly, the director general of the Department of Conservation and Forest & Bird’s representatives highlighted the loss of streams, animals and plants if the landfill was developed. These losses include some 15km of streams, up to 2000 Hochstetter’s frogs and one tonne of macro-invertebrates, as well as inanga, smelt, kokopu, freshwater crayfish and mussels, and shortfin and longfin eels.

Forest & Bird lawyer May Downing said the stream reclamation would result in a direct loss of these species, which were mahinga kai [traditional food and natural resources for Maori and where they were obtained].

“

The court cannot have confidence the proposal meets the direction to avoid significant adverse effects on mana whenua values, including mahinga kai,” she said. Downing said ecological field surveys were only carried out at Wayby and not on other short-listed sites – had they been, a site with less environmental impact may have been found.

She also pointed out that fauna relocation sites had not been identified and there was no requirement for a survey to determine if pest fish would be present when they were identified.

Both Forest & Bird and DOC stressed that the Auckland Unitary Plan stated that to avoid significant adverse effects on the environment from cleanfill, managed fills and landfills, their establishment in, on or next to a lake, river, stream or wetland should be avoided.

Downing said the site had a large number of streams, contained significant ecological areas and was next to a large outstanding natural landscape area.

“We submit the policy direction in the Auckland Unitary Plan with respect to landfills and freshwater is clear – a landfill may be provided for, but within ecological limits. Here, those limits are not met,” she said.

Ruby Haazen, lawyer for Ngāti Whātua Ōrakei and Te Uri o Hau, said the application was for a landfill of a size and scale that was inappropriate and, again, the wrong site had been selected.

She was critical of the lack of mana whenua consultation by WM, reminding the court that none had been carried out before the purchase of the proposed site.

“Waste Management made a choice not to engage with Maori who can ‘be difficult’, but did manage to engage with pakeha owners, demonstrating a preference for engagement with one group of affected parties and not another,” she said.

Haazen said the site selection was commercially driven and opportunistic, and was a breach of tikanga (Maori customary practices).

That view was echoed by Rob Enwright, counsel for Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whātua, who said it was “deeply offensive” to locate a dump upstream of the Hoteo headwaters that passed the Puatahi Marae.

“The wrong site has been chosen by the wrong process,” he said.

“Waste Management should have engaged with tangata whenu parties before making a final decision on site selection.” the presence of dust mite allergens.

He said while Ngāti Mānuhiri, who stood to gain significantly from its deal with WM, would be no worse off if consent was declined, Ngāti Whātua would be significantly adversely affected if consent was granted.

The Blue mattress is 100% waterproof but also anti-bacterial and urea resistant for an even more hygienic sleeping environment. The Orange mattress has a memory fibre layer with pocket springs creating a comfort layer for a rest full sleep.

Mini Pizza

Quiches

2 large tortilla wraps

4 eggs chopped vegetables (optional)

6 slices salami

3 cherry tomatoes, halved, plus extra to serve handful basil leaves vegetable sticks, to serve Heat oven to 180C or 160C fan. Using a 12cm cutter cut circles from the large tortilla wraps – you should get 6. Brush the pan with a little melted butter and a basting brush. Use the circles to line 6 holes of a muffin tin, pushing them into the holes to make Beat the eggs and pour into the tortilla cases (you can add some chopped vegetables too, if you like). Top each case with a slice of salami and 1/2 a cherry tomato. Bake for 15 mins until the egg has set. Top with a few basil leaves, if you like, and serve with extra tomatoes and vegetable