The Press reports that  that Trevor Mallard knew something had to be done to E-Can.

Years ago I heard a senior E-Can official in a tramping hut boasting to his companions of blocking resource consent applications for work on land owned by one of Lady Isaac's companies. She's a Canterbury heroine for philanthropy and conservation and was a finalist for this year's New Zealander of the Year awards.

As I recall he was gloating over the impossibility of the report and recommendation being over-ridden. Apparently it claimed that her property was a vital source of groundwater for Christchurch "and there will be no way for her to disprove it for years". He seemed indifferent to whether the claim was true or false.

I asked why he thought it was such a good idea to block her proposals.

His justification?  "Because she's a fat cat and we're drawing the line on development in Canterbury", or words to that effect. Even under pressing he offered none of the reasons I expected – like preserving environmental asset (apparently the land was mainly ex gravel pits in the airport neighbourhood). It was enough that she was rich and had land on the outskirts of Christchurch and he thought there were more than enough people in Canterbury already.

E-Can had it coming. But usurping local elected government with appointed Commissioners is not a long term answer. What must change is the underlying law that allows Councils to employ and empower legions of planners. The law should not leave room for them to use their bogus expertise to camouflage simple delight in wielding power in support of their ugly prejudices.

The RMA has bred the culture of insolent power revealed in the Hon Wyatt Creech's report.

His recommendation to sack E-Can members is appealing. Democracy can replace them. But the staff may be irredeemable after years of RMA arrogance. Pity it is not them.

PS Lady Isaac's collection of salvaged early buildings cries out to be available as short term accomodation, so people can feel what it would have been like living in our forebears' houses. I'm told the law will not allow it. They'd need too much modification to fit regulations, even though some have come straight from being lived in.