Fast-track Approvals Act 2024


The Fast-track Approvals Act 2024 is a New Zealand Act of Parliament that seeks to establish a permanent fast track approvals regime for a range of infrastructure, housing and development projects. The Bill is part of the National-led coalition government's efforts to overhaul resource management legislation. The Bill was first introduced into the New Zealand Parliament on 7 March 2024.
The Fast-track Approvals Bill was part of New Zealand First's coalition agreement with the incumbent National Party. The Bill has received support from business interests including BusinessNZ, Energy Resources Aotearoa and Foodstuffs. It has also attracted criticism from the opposition Labour, Green parties and Te Pāti Māori as well as environmentalist groups including Greenpeace Aotearoa New Zealand and the Environmental Defence Society. The Fast-track legislation also attracted several nationwide protests. The bill passed its third reading on 17 December 2024 along party lines, with the government coalition parties supporting the bill and the left-wing opposition parties opposing it. It received royal assent on 23 December 2024.

Provisions

Fast-track approvals process

The Fast-track Approvals Bill proposes to establish a permanent fast-track approvals regime for projects of national and regional significance in New Zealand. The regime's process involves several joint ministers including the Minister for Infrastructure, Minister of Transport, Minister for Regional Development, Minister of Conservation, and the Minister Responsible for the Crown Minerals Act.
First, companies and other groups would apply to the Government for their projects to be fast-tracked.
Second, the Infrastructure Minister would assess the application against a set of criteria and then decide whether to refer the project for assessment to an expert panel. The application must include information about prior decisions by other approving authorities including court decisions. The Infrastructure Minister is also required to consult with the Environment Minister and other relevant ministers. The Infrastructure Minister has the power to decline the project at this stage. An earlier draft version had proposed splitting the decision-making process among the Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Development Ministers.
Third, the independent panel will consult with the applicant and directly affected parties, and can choose to approve or decline the project. Even if a project is approved, it may have to comply with certain conditions including protecting the environment and mitigating damage caused by the project.
An earlier version of the bill had given Ministers the power to approve projects but was removed during the Select Committee stage. Ministerial approval had been a point of contention for opponents of the fast-track approvals legislation, particularly environmental groups who have expressed concern that the legislation allows ministers to overrule the expert panels' recommendations.

Eligibility criteria

The Fast-track Approvals legislation would allow applicants to bypass the usual consenting process and gain an exemption or approval from various laws including the Resource Management Act 1991, Conservation Act 1987, Wildlife Act 1953, Reserves Act 1977, Freshwater Fisheries Regulations 1983, Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga Act 2014, Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf Act 2012, land access under Crown Minerals Act 1991, Public Works Act 1981 and Fisheries Act 1996.
The Bill also outlines the criteria for both "eligible" and "ineligible" projects. Eligible projects must have significant national or local benefits including delivering significant economic benefits, supporting industries, the development of natural resources and climate change mitigation, and addressing environmental issues. Ineligible projects are activities that occur on land returned under a Treaty of Waitangi settlement, that has been contested by the land owner, Māori customary land and reservations, a protected customary rights area, aquaculture areas protected by iwi settlements and Section 12 of the Māori Commercial Aquaculture Claims Settlement Act 2004, and open ocean projects prohibited by international law. Heritage New Zealand must also be consulted on archaeological decisions.

Expert panels

The Bill outlines the purpose, functions and composition of "expert panels." Panels have a quorum of four members and must include one person nominated by relevant local authorities and one person nominated by relevant iwi authorities. An expert panel consists of a former High Court or Environment Court judge serving as a "convener", a lawyer or planner as a "chairperson," a local authority representative, an environment expert, an iwi/tribal authority representative in cases involving Treaty of Waitangi settlements, and someone with Māori development and te ao Māori expertise.
The panel will consult the applicant and "directly-affected parties" such as relevant ministers, local councils, landowners, occupiers and requiring authorities on or adjacent to the land, and other parties considered relevant by the panel. While an earlier version of the legislation had given a six months consultation timeframe, this was extended following the select committee stage to allow more directly-affected parties to participate.

Background

Following the 2023 New Zealand general election, the National Party formed a coalition with the ACT and New Zealand First parties. As part of National's coalition agreement with NZ First, the Sixth National Government agreed to establish a new fast-track consenting regime to "improve the speed and process for resource approvals for major infrastructure projects, unlocking opportunities in industries such as aquaculture and mining in our region."
Members of the National-led coalition government have advocated the Fast-track approvals Bill due to their frustration with environmental protections for delaying or obstructing several major infrastructure projects. The Regional Development Minister Shane Jones said "Gone are the days of the multicoloured skink, the kiwi, many other species that have been weaponised to deny regional New Zealand communities their right to a livelihood, their entitlement to live peacefully with their environment but derive an income to meet the costs of raising families in regional New Zealand." In response to concerns that mining in the Ruataniwha plains would affect the endangered Archey's frog, Jones had said "if there is a mining opportunity and it's impeded by a blind frog, goodbye, Freddy."
In March 2024, Transport Minister Simeon Brown had announced that the proposed fast-track approvals legislation would help facilitate the Government's stated goal of building 15 "Roads of National Significance." Similarly, Infrastructure New Zealand chief executive Nick Leggett stated that "fast-tracking roading projects could save significant up-front costs and give communities benefits sooner."

Legislative passage

First reading

The Fast-track Approvals Bill was first introduced into the New Zealand Parliament on 7 March 2024. During the first debate National Party MP and Minister for RMA Reform Chris Bishop, ACT Party MP Simon Court, Minister for Resources Shane Jones and Associate Housing Minister Tama Potaka gave speeches arguing that Bill would eliminate red tape and ease the process for building essential infrastructure such as road, housing, public transportation, mines and renewable energy. By contrast, opposition Labour MPs Rachel Brooking, Green co-leader James Shaw and Te Pāti Māori co-leader Debbie Ngarewa-Packer criticised the Bill for eliminating environmental protections, increasing the risk of pollution and climate change and undermining Māori land rights and Treaty of Waitangi obligations.
It passed its first reading on the same day by a margin of 68 to 55 along party lines; with the National, ACT and NZ First parties supporting the legislation and the Labour, Green parties and Te Pāti Māori opposing it. It was subsequently referred to the Environment select committee. The deadline for public submissions closed on 19 April 2024.

Select committee stage

By 14 May 2024, the Bill had received a total of 27,000 written submissions. 2,900 submitters asked to appear in-person before Parliament's environment select committee. Committee chair and National MP David McLeod said that the committee expected to hear from 1,100 submitters over a six-week period. Due to the large volume of submitters, the committee decided to filter the number of oral submissions using a ballot system. Companies and entities were given ten minutes to make their submissions while individuals will be given five minutes. Since conservation groups such as Forest & Bird and the Environmental Defence Society sent their supporters template messages, the committee opted to prioritise hearing from individuals who made unique submissions. Opposition Green Party MP Lan Pham and Labour MP Rachel Brooking objected to the ballot system, saying it would limit public input on the legislation.
In his submission John Ryan, the Controller and Auditor-General of New Zealand, expressed concern that the Bill did not require the Joint Ministers to comply with its conflict of interest mechanism, provide reasoning for approving an application or dissenting with the expert panel's recommendations, and called for stronger transparency and accountability safeguards in the legislation. Similarly Chief Ombudsman Peter Boshier expressed concern that the fast-track consenting regime would create "enormous executive powers" and opined it needed more "checks and balances."
The New Zealand Infrastructure Commission and the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment, Simon Upton, have both raised concerns about the longevity of the proposed legislation, with both suggesting that commercial projects be excluded from the scope. Both the Infrastructure Commission and Upton suggested that focusing on projects that have benefits for the public would result in a broader public buy-in, increasing the chances that subsequent governments would not overturn the legislation. In addition, Upton expressed concerns that the proposed legislation downgraded both the environment and the role of the Environment Minister, could lead to sup-optimal outcomes through poor decision making, and heightened litigation risk. The Commissioner recommended significant changes to the Bill.
The Ministry for the Environment expressed concern that the initial version of the Fast-track Approvals legislation could marginalise local voices, violate Treaty of Waitangi commitments, adversely affect human and environmental health, expose ministers to legal risks, approve prohibited projects and erode the value of Conservation land. While the Ministry supported a standalone fast-track bill, it did not think that "this version was neither the cheapest, nor the fastest."
On 25 August, Cabinet agreed to recommend five changes to the legislation to the Environment Select Committee. First, an expert panel rather than ministers would be responsible for approving fast-track projects. Second, projects would be referred to an expert panel by the Infrastructure Minister, who would be required to consult with the Environment Minister and other relevant portfolio ministers during the referral process. Third, the timeframes for consultation at the referral and panel stages would be extended to give more time for those affected by the projects to participate. Fourth, expert panels would include individuals with expertise on environmental, Māori development and te ao Māori issues. Iwi/tribal authority representatives would only be included in the panels if required by Treaty of Waitangi settlements. Fifth, applicants would be required to provide information on previous decisions by approving authorities including court decisions in their applications to the referring minister. Labour and the Greens' environmental spokespersons Rachel Brooking and Lan Pham described the changes as insufficient to addressing the environmental impact of these projects. Te Rūnanga O Toa Rangatira chief executive Helmut Modlik welcomed the Government for addressing iwi concerns but expressed concerns about the Government's preference to only consult certain iwi based on Treaty settlements.