Biosecurity Act 1993

Pest management - Regional pest management plans

71: Second step: satisfaction on requirements

You could also call this:

"Council checks the pest plan is fair, follows rules, and will work before making a decision."

When a council wants to make a plan to manage pests, they need to check some things. The council must be satisfied that the plan is not inconsistent with other important documents, such as the national policy direction or the Resource Management Act 1991. The council also needs to make sure the plan follows the right process.

The council checks if the pest is harmful to things like the economy, animals, or people's health. They also check if the benefits of the plan outweigh the costs and if people who have to pay for the plan will also benefit from it. The council must be sure that there is enough money to implement the plan.

The council looks at the rules in the plan to make sure they help achieve the plan's goals and do not unfairly affect individuals. They check if the plan is clear and easy to understand and if it is not frivolous or vexatious. If the council rejected a similar plan in the last three years, they need new and important information to consider the new proposal.

This text is automatically generated. It might be out of date or be missing some parts. Find out more about how we do this.

This page was last updated on

View the original legislation for this page at https://legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1986/0120/latest/link.aspx?id=DLM315721.


Previous

70: First step: plan initiated by proposal, or

"Creating a pest control plan starts with a proposal that outlines the problem, goals, and costs."


Next

72: Third step: satisfaction with consultation or requirement of more consultation, or

"Checking if everyone's been properly asked about the pest management plan"

Part 5Pest management
Regional pest management plans

71Second step: satisfaction on requirements

  1. If the council is satisfied that section 70 has been complied with, the council may take the second step in the making of a plan, which is to consider whether the council is satisfied—

  2. that the proposal is not inconsistent with—
    1. the national policy direction; or
      1. any other pest management plan on the same organism; or
        1. any pathway management plan; or
          1. a regional policy statement or regional plan prepared under the Resource Management Act 1991; or
            1. any regulations; and
            2. 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
              1. that the proposal has merit as a means of eradicating or effectively managing the subject of the proposal, which means—
                1. 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
                  1. 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
                  2. that each subject is capable of causing at some time an adverse effect on 1 or more of the following in the region:
                    1. economic wellbeing:
                      1. the viability of threatened species of organisms:
                        1. the survival and distribution of indigenous plants or animals:
                          1. the sustainability of natural and developed ecosystems, ecological processes, and biological diversity:
                            1. soil resources:
                              1. water quality:
                                1. human health:
                                  1. social and cultural wellbeing:
                                    1. the enjoyment of the recreational value of the natural environment:
                                      1. the relationship between Māori, their culture, and their traditions and their ancestral lands, waters, sites, wāhi tapu, and taonga:
                                        1. animal welfare; and
                                        2. 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
                                          1. that, for each subject, persons who are required, as a group, to meet directly any or all of the costs of implementing the plan—
                                            1. would accrue, as a group, benefits outweighing the costs; or
                                              1. contribute, as a group, to the creation, continuance, or exacerbation of the problems proposed to be resolved by the plan; and
                                              2. 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
                                                1. that each proposed rule—
                                                  1. would assist in achieving the plan's objectives; and
                                                    1. would not trespass unduly on the rights of individuals; and
                                                    2. that the proposal is not frivolous or vexatious; and
                                                      1. that the proposal is clear enough to be readily understood; and
                                                        1. that, if the council rejected a similar proposal within the last 3 years, new and material information answers the council's objection to the previous proposal.
                                                          Notes
                                                          • Section 71: replaced, on , by section 39 of the Biosecurity Law Reform Act 2012 (2012 No 73).
                                                          • Section 71(a)(iv): replaced, on , by section 6 of the Resource Management (Natural and Built Environment and Spatial Planning Repeal and Interim Fast-track Consenting) Act 2023 (2023 No 68).