Environmental legislation to be effects-based, which implies substantial changes the RMA [sic]. (ACT has a separate RMA Policy that details these changes).But aside from this being both dripping wet and as bland as week-old porridge, the ACT website still has no "separate RMA Policy" as promised. It just ain't there.
Has someone forgotten to write it?
Is there disagreement about what "substantial changes" to the RMA would look like?
Is Ken ('I-love-the-RMA') Shirley running a rearguard action to keep the thing?
Or does ACT just not give a shit about substantive policy because they're too busy making up new websites and trumpeting dodgy polls?
I think we should be told.
In the meantime, how's this for a "separate RMA Policy":
Put a stake through its heart -- that should separate the men from the faint-hearted -- and reinstate the common law protections for property rights and the environment that have been buried by central planning, district planning and the RMA's meddling eco-fascism.
Fortunately, somebody already is saying that, and has been saying it now for over ten years.
Any reason ACT couldn't adopt that as its policy?
Any reason at all other than gutlessness?