ECan boss told chairperson to ‘lean into’ farming issues before investigation
Saturday, 13 July 2024
A month before triggering an investigation into claims by a council chairperson that he was operating illegally on his farm, the agency’s top boss advised him to “lean into” his situation as an example of wider issues.
In April, Environment Canterbury (ECan) chairperson Peter Scott told a talkback radio show he was “operating illegally” on his farm while awaiting resource consents.
The comments came amid negative media coverage of ECan’s resource consent backlog. Scott used his example to explain ECan was not always responsible for consent delays — in his case, he had been waiting six years for information from Land Information New Zealand (Linz).
The comments drew little attention until they were reported by The Press weeks later. Soon afterwards, ECan chief executive Dr Stefanie Rixecker asked for an independent investigation, and Scott stood aside as chairperson.
The investigation is ongoing.
Internal emails released to The Press suggest Rixecker initially reacted positively to Scott’s admission.
Scott emailed councillors shortly after the talkback interview, summarising what he’d said.
“Stefanie [Rixecker] is OK and thinks we can get some positive stuff about the issues we have around consents,” he wrote.
Minutes later, Rixecker forwarded the email to another staff member, adding: “My advice… to Peter was to ‘lean into’ this as it’s but one example of the complexity and the reason we have a [consent] backlog.”
It is unclear what, if anything, changed in the month between that comment and the decision to start an investigation.
ECan is responsible for monitoring and enforcing rules it sets under the Resource Management Act (RMA). If Scott had broken the rules — which, by his own admission, he had — he could be prosecuted by his own council.
An ECan spokesperson said Rixecker’s email referred to the benefit of drawing public attention to the reasons for the council’s consent backlog, and not an endorsement of his self-described illegal activity.
“Peter Scott’s comments were taken seriously,” the spokesperson said. “Staff looked into the matter initially and then, on the chief executive’s instruction, an investigation was initiated.”
The emails also show concerns about Scott’s comments were raised internally by fellow councillor Joe Davies.
In an email to all councillors and Rixecker, Davies asked for “the following matter to be addressed” — specifically citing Scott’s radio comments that he was “operating illegally” and the email afterwards claiming that “[Rixecker] was OK” with his comments.
‘Passed along the chain…’
Nearly two months on, the status of the investigation remains a mystery. ECan has declined to reveal basic information, including who is conducting it and what it is investigating.
It is understood councillors are also in the dark about its status.
Documents released to The Press by Linz have shed some light on the ongoing saga at the farm.
The issue concerns a small, dog-leg shaped piece of land running through a South Canterbury property the Scott family owned for many decades.
The land has been farmed since the late 1960s, and is currently planted with maize and irrigated. Scott learned it was owned by the Crown when he applied for the resource consents in 2018.
Before those consents could be granted, Linz had to determine which agency was responsible for the land. That involved commissioning a third party report at Scott’s request in 2019.
Since then, Scott had inquired multiple times about buying the land, but was rebuffed. He continued farming. In late 2023, Linz concluded it was responsible for the land, and had no plans to sell it.
Scott was told to apply for an occupation licence, which he did in January.
Meanwhile, Scott sold the farm to Rooney Farms, owned by business magnate Gary Rooney. A condition of the sale was that Scott secure the consents.
“Given all of this I have sold this property and have not received full settlement,” Scott wrote in his occupation licence application. “Full settlement will be made once your [Linz] approval is granted.”
He added: “I have provided the same information and asked the same permissions on numerous occasions in the last 5 tears [sic] and have been passed along the chain each time.”
The sale appears to have added urgency to Scott’s efforts. He pressed for an update in late February, but was told by a Linz staffer that he could not sell land he did not own.
“I did make Linz aware that my property was sold and I have been trying to address this for six years now so I am looking to expedite the issue,” Scott replied.
He added: “The new owner is insistent that I solve this issue as it is an overhang for him.”
A senior ECan official also wrote to Linz, confirming Scott had supplied all the required information for the consents.
“This written approval is the only outstanding matter for these applications and I understand my team have followed up on the status of Linz approval over the years but it has not yet been resolved,” they wrote.
As of July, the matter remains unresolved.