SILENCE TO MINISTER’S DIRECTIVE

 In the last issue of LETTERBOX, we reported that on the 30^th of June, Climate Change Minister Simon Watts had written to local councils raising concerns about the continued use of RCP8.5, which the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has dismissed as “implausible”.

He said, "...the Government does not consider it appropriate for worst-case assumptions to become the default basis for investment decisions that impose significant costs on current and future ratepayers."

The Minister's letter signals a significant change in the Government's expectations regarding the way councils use high-end climate scenarios. This is particularly important where climate modelling has consequences not only for Council expenditure but also for land-use controls, property rights, development opportunities and property values.

We understand Whangārei District councillors have not formally discussed the Ministers letter so we have asked its CEO if it currently uses RCP8.5, or modelling substantially based on RCP8.5, as its primary or preferred climate scenario for any planning, infrastructure, asset management or regulatory purposes, and if so what action it intends to take in response to the Minister's request that councils review their climate change planning assumptions and decision-making frameworks.

We are awaiting his reply.

References

Minister's directive to councils HERE >>>

LETTER TO WDC, CEO

To: The Chief Executive, Whangarei District Council

INFORMATION REQUEST Re: Council response to Minister of Climate Change – climate change planning assumptions

 I am writing regarding the recent letter from the Minister of Climate Change, Hon Simon Watts, to mayors, chairs and chief executives concerning the use of climate change assumptions in council planning, infrastructure investment, asset management and regulatory decision-making.

 The Minister has expressed concern that some councils may be relying on high-end emissions scenarios in a manner that imposes unnecessary costs on ratepayers, businesses and property owners.

In particular, he states that high-end scenarios such as SSP5-8.5 and its predecessor RCP8.5 should be regarded as less likely, high-impact scenarios suitable for stress testing and contingency planning, rather than automatically being treated as the central or most likely future for decisions affecting infrastructure, land use, property rights or rates.

 As I understand it, the Whangarei District Council has used RCP8.5 as a significant basis for its climate change modelling, including modelling that informs planning rules, hazard assessments and regulatory decisions affecting property owners.

 In light of the Minister's letter, could you please advise:

1. What action does the Whangarei District Council intend to take in response to the Minister's request that councils review their climate change planning assumptions and decision-making frameworks?

2. Does the Council currently use RCP8.5, or modelling substantially based on RCP8.5, as its primary or preferred climate scenario for any planning, infrastructure, asset management or regulatory purposes.

3. If so, which Council plans, policies, hazard maps, infrastructure programmes, planning rules or other regulatory instruments currently rely upon RCP8.5? 

4. Does the Council intend to review its use of RCP8.5 and, where appropriate, replace it as the primary planning assumption with a range of credible scenarios, including medium emissions scenarios?

5. Will the Council review existing planning rules, hazard overlays or other regulatory restrictions affecting private property where those restrictions have been substantially based on RCP8.5 modelling?

6. Has the Council undertaken, or does it intend to undertake, an assessment of the additional costs to ratepayers arising from infrastructure and other expenditure based on RCP8.5 compared with more moderate emissions scenarios?

7. How does the Council intend to demonstrate that future climate-related expenditure is proportionate to the risk, represents value for money, and complies with the Minister's expectation that higher-end scenarios should not automatically become the default basis for major investment decisions? 

8. Will these matters be reported to elected members for consideration, and if so, when is that expected to occur?

The Minister's letter appears to signal a significant change in the Government's expectations regarding the way councils use high-end climate scenarios. This is particularly important where climate modelling has consequences not only for Council expenditure but also for land-use controls, property rights, development opportunities and property values.

I would therefore appreciate clarification as to whether the Council intends to undertake a formal review of its present approach and, if so, the anticipated timetable for that review.

I would also appreciate copies of, or links to, any reports, advice or briefing papers prepared for elected members or Council management in response to the Minister's letter.

END