By Simon Hunt
One major milestone while you were on the Board, was your bringing CEnvP-Site Contamination Specialist (SCS) certification to NZ – can you talk about why you initiated this and what impact that’s had in NZ?
The drive to introduce the CEnvP–SCS certification in New Zealand stemmed from the 2011 introduction of the National Environmental Standard for Assessing and Managing Contaminants in Soil to Protect Human Health (NES CS). The NES CS requires contaminated land assessments to be completed by a Suitably Qualified and Experienced Practitioner (SQEP), and CEnvP SCS offers a robust, transparent way to verify practitioner competence.
A small group of us—namely, Kevin Tearney, Graeme Profit, and myself—began exploring options with WasteMINZ in mid-2012. My involvement on the ALGA Board, as well as my work across Australia with Golder at that time, enabled deeper discussions with CEnvP and other organisations such as CRC CARE. Around 2012/13, further engagement with EIANZ/CEnvP occurred. It became clear that the senior professional framework already established within CEnvP for technical areas such as environmental assessment, with minor adaptation, could directly meet the SQEP requirements. My understanding is that this thinking ultimately led to the development of the CEnvP-SCS category—an idea originating in New Zealand. Australian practitioners may have a different view, just as there are different views on the origins of pavlova.
While it took longer than expected to establish the certification, I suspect the delay was due to CEnvP considering how best to roll out the programme more broadly across Australia.
On a personal level, having begun my career in the UK, I have always considered professional certification a “rite of passage”, especially given that my father was an engineer. This was certainly the view taken by the organisations I worked for in the UK. To me, holding both CEnvPSCS and Chartered Geologist credentials is part of being a committed professional.
I remain disappointed by the limited uptake of the certification in New Zealand. I believe part of the responsibility lies with MfE’s lack of endorsement and with organisations that don’t encourage or require certification, despite the fact that most professional disciplines in New Zealand demand some form of formal accreditation.
From your perspective, how does ALGA support the sector in New Zealand, and why is this important?
ALGA plays a critical role in supporting the contaminated land profession in New Zealand. The Forums are, and should continue to be, the organisation’s backbone—bringing practitioners together to discuss challenges, share knowledge, and promote best practice in a collaborative, non-partisan setting. While more Forums are needed, I recognise the significant voluntary effort involved and the reliance on a small group of consistently willing contributors.
Special Interest Groups offer another important channel for keeping practitioners up to date on evolving issues and bestpractice approaches. A national conference, in some form, is also essential to unify the sector and maintain momentum. One of ALGA’s greatest strengths is its ability to draw on international expertise through training, workshops, and invited speakers—critical for lifting capability across the industry.
ALGA’s commitment to developing much-needed industry guidance is also invaluable. However, the current model—dependent on voluntary contributions—is unsustainable. Proper funding mechanisms are needed to ensure guidance keeps pace with the sector’s needs. Finally, ALGA’s advocacy role is increasingly important, particularly given the legislative uncertainty ahead and the risk that contaminated land management may not be adequately supported by forthcoming policy changes.
Looking ahead, what do you hope to see for ALGA and the contaminated land and groundwater sector in New Zealand?
Starting with the sector more broadly, I am genuinely concerned that current reforms to environmental legislation may leave contaminated land without sufficient policy support. Since the early 2000s, progress has been slow and piecemeal or, in some areas, backwards—leading to a range of perverse outcomes.
New Zealand urgently needs a National Policy Statement for contaminated land that provides clear direction and a consistent national approach. Contaminated land management is inherently complex, involving multiple media—soil, groundwater, gas/vapour, sediments, pore water, and surface and marine water—and a range of risks, from human health and ecological impacts to commercial risks, building-related issues, and liability considerations. A coherent policy framework is essential.
Despite the uncertainty, I believe ALGA is well placed to be the peak professional body supporting the industry through this transition. With the right structure and mandate, ALGA can help practitioners navigate change and seize the opportunities that inevitably arise during periods of disruption.
Is there anything else you’d like to add?
Perhaps I’ve already said too much—but I will add that I’m genuinely looking forward to the joint ALGA/WasteMINZ conference in Wellington. It will be a valuable opportunity for practitioners to reconnect, reflect, and strengthen sector capability.