banaari 27 Posted February 2, 2013 Share Posted February 2, 2013 http://nrc.govt.nz/News/Consents-granted-for-94-hectare-Far-North-marine-farm-/ Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted February 2, 2013 Share Posted February 2, 2013 "attracting 278 submissions; 14 in support, two neutral and 261 opposed. " Feels good to know someone is listening and taking us seriously. Link to post Share on other sites
Murky 1 Posted February 2, 2013 Share Posted February 2, 2013 Seems that the prospect of additional jobs is regarded - at least by political leaders of most flavours in the Far North - as more important than any other factor. Not sure how widely that is shared by the voters. As a minor point: ...[the] fully developed farm will also require a bond of $132,000 to help enable the clean-up and restoration of the site “should the operation cease at some stage in the future”. Would not have thought that amount would have gone very far in the eventuality that it is needed - the Far North does have direct experience of cleanup issues with the BOI oyster farms. Link to post Share on other sites
banaari 27 Posted February 2, 2013 Author Share Posted February 2, 2013 Is this the Kingfish farm? No, that one's still in progress. I received a letter a few weeks ago telling me that the whole process has been extended and the applicant has been requested to provide a raft of additional reports. Link to post Share on other sites
Bimini Babe 0 Posted February 2, 2013 Share Posted February 2, 2013 Seems that the prospect of additional jobs is regarded - at least by political leaders of most flavours in the Far North - as more important than any other factor. Not sure how widely that is shared by the voters. I think the numbers speak for themselves on that one. Surprised that NRC take no notice of public opinion though? Erm, no. Link to post Share on other sites
rigger 47 Posted February 2, 2013 Share Posted February 2, 2013 Surprised that NRC take no notice of public opinion though? Erm, no. Which council does? Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted February 3, 2013 Share Posted February 3, 2013 Decisions on resource consents aren't a number of submissions game. You can have 1000's on your side but if you don't have compelling arguments / evidence to support your position you're dog tucker (usually). 261 opposing submissions from 150,000 = 0.17% and therefore is not public opinion. Just say'n! Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted February 3, 2013 Share Posted February 3, 2013 More likely the party with the most money to spend on lawyers and consultants wins. Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted February 4, 2013 Share Posted February 4, 2013 It's interesint. If each of the 261 had contibuted $200 then they would have had stacks of cash to "fight" with. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.