An Environment Court judge has warned the owners of a controversial North Taranaki composting and worm farming business could walk away leaving a multi-million dollar clean up bill.
Remediation NZ - which has amassed a 20,000 tonne stockpile of oil and gas waste - has operated at Uruti for about 20 years. Photo: screenshot
Remediation NZ is appealing a Taranaki Regional Council decision not to renew its consents to discharge contaminates to land, water and air.
At the initial consents hearing it was revealed the company had stockpiled 20,000 tonnes of oil and gas waste - rather than processing it - and had numerous other compliance issues.
At the appeal yesterday, Judge Laurie Newhook asked the council's lawyer if it held a bond over Remediation NZ.
It did not, which led to this rather bleak assessment.
"It's a bit ugly ... but let's say the court refused consent. I'm asking you to respond on behalf of the council whether the council is truly comfortable with being faced with the expenditure of millions of dollars of public money to clean this situation up."
Judge Newhook warned that if the company had no consent or consents so limited it couldn't make money it might simply walk away.
He drew a comparison with the financial collapse of Tamarind Taranaki which operated the Tui Oil Field off the coast of Taranaki.
In that case the Crown had been left to pick up a tab of more than $300 million to decommission the well site and make it safe.
That was a wake-up call for Ngāti Mutunga and local residents who want the place closed down, citing foul odours and water pollution.
"Will we be left with a worst situation than we have on the ground today; it's like being between the devil and the deep blue sea I suppose for some parties," Judge Newhook said.
"Those parties who would really not like this thing to be there or would just like it to go away. How practical is that?"
There was no time for iwi or council to respond before the court decamped for a site visit yesterday.
But earlier, Remediation NZ counsel John Massen argued the council hearing panel had given too much weight to spirited opposition from the community and Ngāti Mutunga.
"A significant ground of the council's decision was inadequate consultation with Ngāti Mutunga despite section 36a [of the Resource Management Act] where Parliament states there is no duty to consult.
"Remediation NZ does not accept Ngāti Mutunga's complaints about lack of consultation."
But Judge Newhook was having none of that.
"Yes, it states boldly that there is no duty to consult, but the likes of Te Mana o te Wai recognises to make it almost a no-brainer that there should be a high level of consultation and cooperation not just tick-box consultation."
Te Mana o te Wai is a concept which recognises the vital importance of clean, healthy water. It has been incorporated into the National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management since 2014.
Massen said progress with the iwi had been made since the hearing.
"That has been quite a learning curve for some members of the management team and that partly reflects a generational thing and I'm not putting my witnesses up as being fully capable and competent on those matters they need help."
Judge Newhook did not disagree.
"Our take on this is that the operation on the site is a very old-fashioned way of doing things.
"I'm old enough to think back to my parents and grandparents generation when land and water and air were used as dumping grounds.
"We're coming out of the dark ages now and whether anybody likes it or not the law is driving that."
The court will hear from Ngāti Mutunga and the community groups today.
