Outdoor Walking Access Report to the Minister for Rural Affairs

PART 3 EVALUATION OF THE ISSUES

7 Leadership

7.1 Background

The Panel considers that there is a need for leadership, guidance and policy making at a national level, especially if central government funding is made available. This view is supported by the consultation, which found a consensus for the formation of an access organisation.

The lack of national leadership on access, and a perceived lack of interest in access issues on the part of agencies with existing responsibilities, attracted a great deal of comment and proposals for action. People interested in this matter felt that the public interest in recreational access is not dealt with well because of the ad hoc management of access by responsible agencies, including DOC, Land Information New Zealand (LINZ) and local authorities.

This lack of clear leadership results in poor availability of information and a sense of frustration for some members of the public, who find it difficult to obtain help and advice about access. There is a belief that access (particularly to unformed legal roads) is being lost.

The principles for walking access proposed by the Panel (discussed in section 6) will not be realised without strongly focused leadership at all levels. This is especially so in the absence of specific access legislation, as options will depend for their effectiveness on leadership, co-operation and persuasion.

Support was received for an access organisation, perhaps in the form of a “trust” (for example, the Queen Elizabeth the Second National Trust or the New Zealand Landcare Trust), on which the various access stakeholders could be represented. There is wide support for implementation resting at a local or regional level. The Panel notes an antipathy to “another central bureaucracy”. A small number of landholders, iwi groups, local government and industry organisations did not see a need for any institutional change. Local authorities and landholders strongly opposed the funding of any new access functions from local authority rates.

The Panel discussed this proposal at length. The Panel concludes firmly that there is a need for leadership on access and this will not be achieved through any existing organisation or structure. An access organisation may not prove to be the complete answer, but it is the linchpin of the package of proposals in this report.

Before it could decide on the merits of the proposal for an access organisation, the Panel considered the functions such an organisation might carry out. The next section summarises the possible functions of a new access organisation and the roles of existing institutions. It then considers the organisational and institutional options for a new access organisation.

7.2 Options for a new access organisation

7.2.1 Functions

The Panel identified nine core functions of a new access organisation. The term “organisation” is used because it is the Panel’s view, supported by many submissions, that existing agencies will not be effective in carrying out the functions seen as being essential to address the walking access issues identified by the Panel.

The following functions are explained in more detail in, and supported by, subsequent sections of this report.

  • Leadership – There is a need for strong national leadership to direct and co-ordinate access arrangements nationwide. It is essential for the organisation to have sufficient authority, mana and resources to accomplish its goals. The organisation needs to provide local leadership on access issues, by encouraging, supporting and co-ordinating the work of local groups or organisations concerned with access.
  • Negotiation and acquisition of new access – These negotiations may be carried out by the access organisation or by local government or community groups. The organisation would co-ordinate local initiatives to achieve a consistent approach across the country and promote best practice. No matter how the negotiations are carried out, consideration will have to be given to the completion of legal processes to secure enduring access and to the holding of the negotiated rights.
  • Co-ordination and provision of information about access – The access organisation should be responsible for ensuring that access information is available to the public in a useful form.
  • New Zealand Walkways Act 1990 (the Walkways Act) – The Panel considers that this legislation could be used more actively, especially if funding is available to help negotiate access. An organisation could assume responsibility for the legislation and for establishing walkways under this Act. This would require some changes to the legislation. DOC currently administers the Walkways Act. The organisation could potentially contract with DOC to continue the operational management of walkways, especially those that include public conservation land. Firearms and dogs could be allowed on walkways where specifically provided for.
  • Administration of a contestable fund – The negotiation of new access rights will often require funding. In some cases, it may be appropriate to make a financial contribution to providers of access. Funding could be provided directly by the organisation or through contractual arrangements with local government or community groups. Funding would be needed for signage and track improvement. An appropriate organisational structure and sound legal, administrative and accountability systems will be needed to manage a contestable fund. The organisation should also be able to seek private funding and sponsorship.
  • Conflict resolution – The organisation could undertake mediation (primarily to make parties aware of the legal basis under which they are operating). Where appropriate, issues would be referred to a responsible agency (such as a territorial authority in the case of roads) for resolution. The organisation would seek to encourage resolution consistent with the principles outlined in section 6.
  • The holding of interests in land – Negotiated interests (such as easements or leases for access over private land) may be held on behalf of the Crown by the organisation, by a trust or by local government. If the organisation were established as a body corporate, it will have the capacity to hold assets in its own name. This may not happen very often, but the power to do so is essential.
  • Monitoring of and reporting on the activities of central and local government organisations that have an access-related role – The activities and policies of local government regarding esplanade reserves and strips and the administration of unformed legal roads, and the related policies of such departments as DOC, the Ministry for the Environment, LINZ and the Department of Internal Affairs, are important for walking access. These activities and policies need to be monitored from an access perspective, with findings reported annually to Parliament via an appropriate Minister.
  • Provision of advice on access – Whatever form the organisation takes, it will need to provide specialist advice to the Government on access. It could also provide advice to local government and other interested parties, using guidelines and best practice information.

7.2.2 Assessment of existing institutions

The Panel considered whether any or all of the existing institutions could manage the identified issues in an effective and timely way. The various roles of existing institutions are described in Appendix F. The Panel found a consensus that the existing institutional arrangements are not satisfactory, for example:

  • LINZ does not currently consider that it has a role in providing the public with recreational maps or providing readily accessible information to the public about the location of publicly accessible land;
  • some local authorities do not keep unformed legal roads free of obstructions to access even when complaints are received;
  • the very strongly held view of access advocates that DOC is not an appropriate agency to promote access (the Panel notes that this view remains unchanged from 2003);
  • access is not seen as a core function of MAF.

There is wide opposition to the organisation being established as part of the central government bureaucracy (this would tend to rule out the option of a branded agency within a department).

7.2.3 Criteria for, and possible forms of, the new organisation

Having decided on the functions of the access organisation, the Panel evaluated the most appropriate organisational form. Such an organisation must be able to demonstrate and/or hold:

  • central leadership;
  • independence;
  • local implementation;
  • stakeholder participation and “ownership”;
  • visibility;
  • focus;
  • accountability.

The Panel applied these criteria (and took public views into account) to some of the many possible forms of organisation identified in the consultation process, including: a form of “trust”; the Queen Elizabeth the Second National Trust; the New Zealand Landcare Trust; some form of local or regional administration; existing local authorities; the status quo, that is, existing central and local government agencies and their functions (for example, LINZ to take care of mapping, DOC to look after the public land it is responsible for, local authorities to deal with roads and subdivision, and so on); existing agencies augmented by a trust to promote new access over private land; a new statutory agency; a parliamentary commissioner; and some form of ombudsman.

The Panel determined that, while none of the organisational forms listed above fully meets the required characteristics, there are five realistic options (evaluated in Appendix G):

  • a parliamentary commissioner;
  • an access ombudsman;
  • an access trust;
  • the Queen Elizabeth the Second National Trust;
  • a statutory authority.

Although submissions showed a high degree of support for a parliamentary commissioner or ombudsman, the Panel considers that this approach would not deliver the outcomes sought by submitters. For example, an ombudsman does not have the capacity to deliver services “on the ground”. The Panel agrees that it is particularly important for the proposed organisation to be able to accept sponsorship and funding from private organisations. Some of these organisational forms will not be able to fulfil this requirement.

7.2.4 Structural and operational issues

Once a decision is made in principle to set up an access organisation, some detailed structural and operational matters will need to be determined. If the Government accepts the Panel’s recommendations, these would best be considered in detail by an establishment board. These matters include:

  •  the composition of a national governance board, including the skills and experience appropriate to the board’s functions;
  •  appropriate local and regional arrangements and functions, and how these relate to existing structures and organisations, including local government;
  •  the skill sets required to carry out the organisation’s functions and how they might be provided;
  •  the scope for co-ordinating and sharing facilities with other organisations (for example, the Queen Elizabeth the Second National Trust, DOC, LINZ);
  •  the organisation’s relationship with central government and existing government departments, and the administrative support it may require;
  •  the organisation’s resource needs to support its administrative and operational functions, and a contestable fund; and
  •  appropriate governance and accountability arrangements, including reporting requirements to Ministers and Parliament (it is envisaged that the organisation would be some form of Crown entity and subject to the governance and accountability provisions in the Crown Entities Act 2004).

The Panel considers that it is desirable that the access organisation have a distinctive name. A suggestion from the Panel is “Te Ara o Papatuanuku” (The Pathways of Mother Earth). This proposal would require further consideration and consultation before being formally adopted, but it is used throughout the rest of this report to illustrate the Panel’s conviction of the need for such an organisation.

Recommendations on leadership

The Panel recommends that:

  1. an access organisation be established that combines the characteristics of a statutory organisation with those of a trust (the Panel considers that this option is most likely to involve local landowners, users and enthusiastic volunteers);
  2. the organisation be called Te Ara o Papatuanuku (the New Zealand Access Commission), to reflect the importance of rural New Zealand for all New Zealanders;
  3. Te Ara o Papatuanuku be accountable to a Minister and be required to report to Parliament in accordance with the Crown Entities Act 2004.

The Panel recommends that Te Ara o Papatuanuku:

  1. has a governance board appointed by the Minister responsible for the organisation, after consultation with key access stakeholders, with appointees having skills and experience relevant to the organisation’s functions;
  2. has a structure that reflects the need to work with, co-ordinate and promote the recreational access activities of local government and voluntary organisations;
  3. be empowered to carry out the following functions:
  1. provision of national leadership, including a national strategy, and co-ordination of access among key stakeholders and relevant central and local government organisations;
  2. the provision of impartial and robust advice on access;
  3. local/regional leadership and co-ordination to help local groups with their access issues;
  4. mediation of disputes over walking access issues, including the ability to initiate negotiations;
  5. the reference of disputes about legal access to an appropriate authority;
  6. the creation and administration of walkways made under the Walkways Act 1990, with planning and supervision focused at a local level;
  7. the establishment and maintenance of a public access mapping database;
  8. administration of a contestable fund for the purpose of negotiating walking access either under the provisions of the Walkways Act 1990 or new or other existing legislation;
  9. creation of a trust structure able to hold land or interests in land for the purpose of providing walking access;
  10. the receipt and management of private funding contributions (including sponsorships) for the promotion of walking access;
  11. research, education and participation in external access-related topics and programmes;
  12. the development, promotion and maintenance of a code of responsible conduct.