Part 5Pest management
National pest management plans
62Second step: satisfaction on requirements
If the Minister is satisfied that section 61 has been complied with, the Minister may take the second step in the making of a plan, which is to consider whether the Minister is satisfied—
- that the proposal is not inconsistent with the national policy direction; and
- that, during the development of the proposal, the process requirements for a plan in the national policy direction, if there were any, were complied with; and
- that the proposal has merit as a means of eradicating or effectively managing the subject of the proposal, which means—
- the organism proposed to be specified as a pest under the plan or the organisms proposed to be specified as pests under the plan; or
- the class or description of organism proposed to be specified as a pest under the plan or the classes or descriptions of organisms proposed to be specified as pests under the plan; and
- the organism proposed to be specified as a pest under the plan or the organisms proposed to be specified as pests under the plan; or
- that each subject is capable of causing at some time an adverse effect on 1 or more of the following in New Zealand:
- economic wellbeing:
- the viability of threatened species of organisms:
- the survival and distribution of indigenous plants or animals:
- the sustainability of natural and developed ecosystems, ecological processes, and biological diversity:
- soil resources:
- water quality:
- human health:
- social and cultural wellbeing:
- the enjoyment of the recreational value of the natural environment:
- the relationship between Māori, their culture, and their traditions and their ancestral lands, waters, sites, wāhi tapu, and taonga:
- animal welfare; and
- economic wellbeing:
- that, for each subject, the benefits of the plan would outweigh the costs, after taking account of the likely consequences of inaction or other courses of action; and
- that, for each subject, persons who are required, as a group, to meet directly any or all of the costs of implementing the plan—
- would accrue, as a group, benefits outweighing the costs; or
- contribute, as a group, to the creation, continuance, or exacerbation of the problems proposed to be resolved by the plan; and
- would accrue, as a group, benefits outweighing the costs; or
- that, for each subject, there is likely to be adequate funding for the implementation of the plan for the shorter of its proposed duration and 5 years; and
- that the implementation of the plan would not be contrary to New Zealand's international obligations; and
- that each proposed rule—
- would assist in achieving the plan's objectives; and
- would not trespass unduly on the rights of individuals; and
- would assist in achieving the plan's objectives; and
- that the proposal is not frivolous or vexatious; and
- that the proposal is clear enough to be readily understood; and
- that, if the Minister rejected a similar proposal within the last 3 years, new and material information answers the Minister's objection to the previous proposal.
Notes
- Section 62: replaced, on , by section 39 of the Biosecurity Law Reform Act 2012 (2012 No 73).