Quote Originally Posted by MAC View Post
It will be interesting to see if they now do some more research and appeal.

One of the difficulties they must have had in demonstrating the economic benefits to NZ may have been in their decision to IPO after a marine consent approval. One could argue, that was just as well, or one could argue, that along with the lack of research it showed a low confidence of success.

An earlier IPO along with better environmental data may have swung it the other way.

The economic benefits to NZ would have been greater if a proportion of their shareholders were actually New Zealanders at the time of assessment.
Just reading the summary and not the whole 224 page document points to the proposal being premature in the eyes of the committee. Looking at it TTP did not do their homework, did not speak enough to existing interests and other parties, and their 'risk-based tiered adaptive management approach' was poor. The overriding factor though seems to be the environment:

"In summary, on the evidence presented, we are not satisfied that the life-supporting capacity of the
environment would be safeguarded or that the adverse effects of the proposal could be avoided,
remedied or mitigated, nor do we consider that the proposed conditions (including the adaptive
management approach) are sufficiently certain or robust for this application to be approved, given the
uncertainty and inadequacy of the information presented to us about the potential adverse effects."