Warning to illegal rubbish dumpers: new rules could lead to crack-down
Clearing up the worst dumping spots costs Heretaunga-Hastings ratepayers more than $100,000 a year, councillor Wendy Schollum says, and she wants councils to have better enforcement options (file photo).
Photo:
Supplied/ Hastings District Council
Fly-tippers illegally dumping rubbish could be in for a shock if new laws are passed making it easier for councils to prosecute them, and to crack down on them using clues such as old car registration plates or names on letters or mail.
The government
has proposed revisions
to the Waste Minimisation Act 2008 (WMA) and the Litter Act 1979 (the Litter Act), including giving authorities more flexibility to help them crack down on illegal dumping.
Hastings District Councillor Wendy Schollum told
Checkpoint
that illegal rubbish dumping was an ongoing issue in the community, but the council was currently limited in its ability to do much about the fly-tippers.
Annually, picking up litter in Heretaunga-Hastings cost well over $100,000, council staff had told her - "and that was only in hot-spot areas, so that wasn't even across the whole district," she said.
Wendy Schollum
Photo:
Supplied via LDR
"We estimated that if we were to try and clear every space of litter, it would cost in excess of over $1 million."
The types of rubbish being dumped in the area varied from everday litter, to households worth of rubbish, including whiteware and mattresses.
"It's actually quite outrageous some of the stuff that gets left," Schollum said.
Hastings District Council was not alone in the problem, but critics say it is difficult to hold offenders to account under laws written in the 70s, with offenders basically needing to be caught in the act.
"When I first was elected onto council back in 2017, right from then until now, littering and dumping has been the number one issue with ratepayers in our area," Schollum said.
But at the moment, even with overwhelming evidence, the council often could not do much in response, she said: "Unless someone was literally standing there watching the person do it at the time, under the current law, there is so little we can do."
A consultation document on
the law changes
also noted the problem: The current Waste Minimisation Act "provides limited CME [compliance, monitoring and enforcement] powers. Prosecution is the main means to address non-compliance, with maximum fines of $100,00 for all main offences at a central government level, [and] $20,000 for a breach of bylaws."
But in effect that meant: "For ... offences [other than non-payment of the levy] prosecution through the courts is the only enforcement option, which is limiting because prosecution can be a disproportionate regulatory response to non-compliance, [and] if non-compliance falls below the prosecution threshold, no consequences can arise from breach of the WMA."
Schollum said the current loophole leaves ratepayers footing the bill for fly-tippers.
"In an area like Heretaunga, where they've been hit by Cyclone Gabrielle and we're reeling from recovery costs, our ratepayers don't need to be paying for what is frankly laziness."
She believes the problem was caused by bad attitudes, rather than issues affording dump fees.
"Often people contact me and say, 'well, if you reduce the dump fees, people wouldn't litter'. The reality is that if that were the case, we would see in areas where it's cheaper or free to dispose of rubbish that there would be no illegal dumping at all and that's just not the case.
"The evidence overwhelmingly points to the fact it's about attitudes."
Under the proposed changes, evidence like addressed mail left in dumped rubbish could be used to identify dumpers and fine them.
(file photo)
Photo:
Supplied/Gisborne District Council
The consultation document also suggests a new tiered compliance system, with different penalties for different levels of offence.
This could range from small infringements where a warning might be suitable, for example for "illegal plastic bag use" or minor littering, through to mid-range offences where the most severe consequences were not suitable, up to the most severe consequences, for behaviour like "high-harm illegal dumping".
Schollum said tiered enforcement options would be helpful to the council: "If someone threw their takeaway container out their car window, they're not going to be met with the same sort of penalty as someone who dumps a whole house ... worth of rubbish [in] the community area.
"This is about councils finally being able to pursue repeat offenders and stop communities having to pay for the cost of laziness, but only with reasonable evidence."
The revisions could also distinguish between individuals and larger entities committing offences, and define offences and maximum fees, penalties and prosecution.
Schollum said despite enthusiasm from the community to help in clearing the litter, other frustrating barriers have stood in the way.
"Some of the worst hit areas are actually NZTA managed lands, and at the moment, because of health and safety rules with NZTA we can't even arrange community clean ups on their land."
Even though these set backs have limited community clean ups, Schollum said it should not be the community's job in the first place.
"We shouldn't be having to look at the ambulance at the bottom of the cliff solution, which is the community spending their money and time trying to clean up other people's mess. We need to stop the dumping and the littering in the first place."
Other changes in the proposal include adjusting how local councils are allocated funds to dispose of waste, widening what councils can use the funds for and clarifying who is responsible for what.
Consultation for the potential law changes closed on 1 June, the Ministry for the Environment website said. Next, the submissions will be considered, and from there Cabinet could decide to create an amendment bill, which could be introduced to Parliament to pursue changing the existing law.
Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter
curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
RNZ News
an hour ago
- RNZ News
Man falls three storeys from Auckland CBD car park, survives
The Victoria Street car park in central Auckland. Photo: Google Maps A witness says he can still hear the sound of a man hitting the pavement on Friday night after he fell from a car park building in central Auckland. Police say a person sustained moderate injuries from a fall in the Victoria Street car park. A witness, Ian, said he and his girlfriend had just left a restaurant and were heading home when they saw a man dangling from a rail in the carpark, three storeys above. Ian went to get help and was about 50 metres away when the accident happened. "And he started falling, slipped down the rail, straight onto the concrete, foot first, bang - and the bang, oh boy, that was - so we rushed over. People were kind of confused because they hadn't realised that he's actually fallen down." Ian said it looked like the man had snapped both his legs, but he otherwise seemed to be okay. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
RNZ News
3 hours ago
- RNZ News
Tenant quits lease after apartment hits almost 44C, bond refunded
By Tracy Neal, Open Justice multimedia journalist of File pic Photo: 123RF A tenant says the sweltering heat inside their apartment reached temperatures well into the 40s - ruining a laptop, killing pot plants and requiring medicines to be stored in a car where it was cooler. Now the tenant has been allowed to break a year-long lease and get their bond back, a month after moving in. It comes after NZME reported concerns this year that tens of thousands of Auckland families would suffer in overheating terraced houses and vulnerable people could risk "dying of heatstroke" unless construction designs changed. That story described how large windows, a lack of eaves or other shade, no consideration of a property's direction towards the sun and poor ventilation were causing overheating in old and new builds. In this instance, the tenant, whose name was suppressed after a Tenancy Tribunal hearing, said the excessive heat inside their one-bedroom, sixth-floor apartment was evident soon after moving in. The building, in an undisclosed location, was managed by a body corporate, but the landlord remained liable to the tenant under the rental agreement and by law. On a day in March this year, the tenant recorded the temperature inside the east-facing unit at 43.6C before midday. The next day, the mercury had risen to 38.5C before 9am, even with the living room window open and after the air conditioning had been running, according to evidence presented to the tribunal. The tenant said it was difficult to sleep in such heat, pot plants didn't last beyond a day and that it was not safe storing a co-tenant's medication inside the apartment, so they left it in a car. The tenant said the heat had caused the battery in a laptop to expand, damaging the computer beyond repair. The tenant also said the windows in the apartment did not open wide enough to allow sufficient draught, but the landlord disagreed and suggested the tenants "had not been using them properly". The landlord also took temperature readings in the living room with the curtains closed and then open. The afternoon temperatures, 26.4C and 28.3C were high, the tribunal said, but not as high as those recorded by the tenant. The landlord also produced a Healthy Homes Standards report showing that the unit complied with the applicable ventilation requirements. In a recently released decision, the tribunal ordered the $2440 bond be returned to the tenant, plus partial reimbursement of electricity charges it cost to run air conditioning, over and above standard power charges. The tenant was surprised to receive two invoices totalling $96 to cover the cost of running the heat pump/air conditioning unit while they lived there. However, the landlord said they had explained at the start of the tenancy that the power supply to the air conditioning unit, which was based on usage only, was controlled by the body corporate and invoiced separately. The tenant paid the invoices but claimed there was insufficient evidence to support the calculation of the charges or to prove the usage claimed was exclusively attributable to themselves. The landlord produced spreadsheets provided by the body corporate, which they claimed set out how the charges were calculated. The tribunal said that based on the evidence, it accepted the tenant's submission that the method of calculation was unclear, but there was no dispute that the tenant had used the air conditioning unit and was therefore liable for some of the costs claimed. The tenant's application to reduce the fixed term was dismissed. Agreement was instead reached between the tenant and landlord to end it earlier than the contracted date. A new tenancy began on 11 April, the tribunal said. The New Zealand Property Investors Federation told NZME that investors should do due diligence on any property they buy, especially in light of recent media coverage about hot townhouses. Advocacy manager Matt Ball said there was nothing in the tribunal's decision, or in general, to say that new townhouses would not make a good investment. He said there were opportunities for investors willing to do any necessary remedial work, such as installing ventilation or air conditioning. -This story originally appeared in the New Zealand Herald .
RNZ News
3 hours ago
- RNZ News
Te Pāti Māori co-leader Debbie Ngarewa-Packer on the longest suspension in Parliament
Debbie Ngarewa-Packer. Photo: RNZ / Mark Papalii This week, Parliament took the unprecedented step of suspending both Te Pāti Māori leaders - Debbie Ngarewa-Packer and Rawiri Waititi - for 21 days. Te Pāti Māori MP Hana-Rawhiti Maipi-Clarke was suspended for seven days - but had also been punished with a 24-hour suspension on the day over a haka all three had performed in Parliament, against the Treaty Principles Bill, in November. It is against the rules of the House for members to leave their seats during a debate - which all three did. Ngarewa-Packer told Saturday Morning that the 21-day suspension, which was seven times harsher than any previous sanction an MP has faced, was not proportionate. "I think the backlash from the public, nationally and internationally, validates that," she said. Previously, the longest suspension for an MP had been three days, given to the former prime minister Robert Muldoon for criticising the speaker in the 1980s. While New Zealand First leader Winston Peters said the duration of the suspension would have been lessened if the Te Pāti Māori MPs had apologised, Ngarewa-Packer said that was never requested by the Privileges Committee. "What we have here is a situation where, and some are calling it Trumpism, we've been a lot more specific - we have an Atlas agenda that has not only crept in, it's stormed in on the shores of Aotearoa and some may not understand what that means, but this is just the extension of the attack on the treaty, on the attack on Indigenous voices. "We made the point the whole way through when we started to see that they weren't going to be able to meet us halfway on anything, even a quarter of the way, on any of the requests for tikanga experts, for legal experts when we knew the bias of the committee." Ngarewa-Packer added that the Privileges Committee process was not equipped to deal with the issue. "We hit a nerve and we can call it a colonial nerve, we can call it institutional nerve... "I think that this will be looked back on at some stage and say how ridiculous we looked back in 2025." Ngarewa-Packer also added that the language from Peters during the debate on Thursday was "all very deliberate" - "and that's what we're contending with in Aotearoa". "Everyone should have a view but don't use the might of legislation and the power to be able to assert your racism and assert your anti-Māori, anti-Treaty agenda." Peters had taken aim at Waititi on Thursday as "the one in the cowboy hat" and "scribbles on his face" in reference to his mataora moko. Rawiri Waititi. Photo: RNZ / Mark Papalii He said countless haka have taken place in Parliament but only after first consulting the Speaker. "They told the media they were going to do it, but they didn't tell the Speaker did they?" Peters added that Te Pāti Māori were "a bunch of extremists" and that "New Zealand has had enough of them". "They don't want democracy, they want anarchy," he said. "They don't want one country, they don't want one law, they don't want one people." Winston Peters. Photo: RNZ / Mark Papalii Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
