Infrastructure and RMA Reform Minister Chris Bishop announcing the Government’s Fast-track projects.
Video / NZ Herald
Roads, mines, housing developments and a major revamp of Eden Park are among the 149 projects selected by the Government to be included in its controversial fast-track approvals legislation.
Until today, the Government has kept a close lid on the projects that, once the legislation has passed through the House, will be able to apply to a panel of experts to get fast-tracked. That panel will be able to add conditions to the projects or decline them outright if they can’t be constructed in a responsible manner.
The regime is part of the Government’s plan to free regionally and nationally significant projects from the often years-long consenting process and boost economic growth. But its opponents argue the projects have been selected through “backroom deals” and environmental impacts haven’t been given proper weight.
Overall, 384 projects applied to be included in the legislation. An independent advisory group then considered those applications and reported back to ministers, who subsequently agreed on 149 they deemed to have significant benefits.
They include 58 housing or land development projects, 43 infrastructure projects, 22 renewable energy projects, 11 mining projects, seven aquaculture and farming projects and eight quarrying projects.
They’re also spread across the country: 28 are in Auckland, 22 in Canterbury, 19 in Waikato, 15 in Otago, 12 in Bay of Plenty, 11 in Wellington and 11 in Northland.
Kiwis will already be familiar with some of the projects, including 29 transport works, like the Mill Rd development south of Auckland, a second Ashburton bridge and a Brynderwyns alternative.
Eden Park stadium in Auckland. Photo / Brett Phibbs
A redevelopment of Eden Park in Auckland is also on the list. This would be a “a world-class hybrid, multi-purpose 50,000+ capacity stadium with a retractable roof” allowing for a greater number and variety of events to be held there.
The Trans-Tasman Resources (TTR) seabed mining project off the coast of Taranaki is also included. Greenpeace last month protested outside mining lobby group Straterra’s Wellington office amid concerns TTR may use the fast-track process to get the green light on its project. Also of note is the Bathurst coal mining project on the West Coast.
Regional Development Minister Shane Jones said the 11 mining projects will “make a major contribution to the Government’s goal of doubling the value of mineral exports to $2 billion by 2035″.
“They will deliver measurable benefits to regional and national GDP, highly skilled and highly paid jobs in the regions, and other associated benefits like the retention of regional infrastructure.
“Our regions and the New Zealanders living in them have enormous potential, and the fast-track projects, freed up from stifling consenting processes, are another change that is giving them back the wings they deserve.
“The projects will bring a big boost, and will help stimulate various industries, including the aquaculture, energy, housing and mining sectors. This progress is going to help get things moving and flowing where it is needed, in the form of job creation, construction, new opportunities and more business.”
Infrastructure and RMA Reform Minister Chris Bishop announces the Government’s controversial fast-track projects during a press conference at the Beehive. Photo / Mark Mitchell
At a press conference this afternoon, Infrastructure Minister Chris Bishop acknowledged some of the projects would be “controversial” and there would be some “unhappiness”, but they would help turbo-charge the economy.
“We’ve got to get back to an economy where growth is paramount and we do as much as we can to get growth into the arteries of this economy,” he said.
“That hasn’t been the case for a large number of years. Part of that is our planning laws that make it hard to do quarries, hard to do mines, hard to build wind farms.”
Now the projects have been selected, they will be listed in the legislation when it is reported back from the Environment Select Committee this month.
Once the legislation passes – it is expected to, given the Government has a majority – the project developers can then apply through the Environmental Protection Agency to have an expert panel assess their projects and apply any relevant conditions.
Bishop said: “As we’ve publicly said before, the Government is also recommending to the Environment Committee that expert panels have the ability to decline approval for projects.”
“The expert panels will include members with technical expertise relevant to a project, expertise in environmental matters and, where relevant, conservation, and the Treaty of Waitangi. They will function much the same way as the Covid-19 fast-track legislation established by the previous Government.”
Bishop, who is also the Housing Minister, said the 44 housing developments listed as projects would “enable up to 55,000 new homes to be consented”.
He said the seven aquaculture and farming projects will “strengthen partnerships with iwi to boost Māori development and are expected to have an output of up to 143,000 tonnes per annum”.
“There are 43 infrastructure projects that will help to address our infrastructure deficit and, among other benefits, result in at least 180 kilometres of new road, rail and public transport routes.”
He said the renewable energy projects would “electrify the New Zealand economy, boost energy security and help New Zealand address its climate change goals”.
“New Zealand has abundant renewable energy resources but the planning system puts barrier after barrier in the way of taking advantage of them.
“Collectively the projects will contribute an additional 3 gigawatts of generation capacity, if all consented. By comparison, Auckland’s historic[al] peak demand is about 2 gigawatts.”
‘Backroom deals’
Labour reacted to the Government’s announcement by saying the projects had been selected through “backroom deals with coal and iron sands mining companies”.
“The coalition Government has just confirmed a line-up of projects that could wreak havoc on our natural environment,” Labour’s acting environment spokesman David Parker said.
“The list includes previously rejected projects like Trans-Tasman Resources’ seabed mining and the Waitaha Hydro Project – both rejected for their adverse effects on the environment.”
Bishop said that was “rich” as Labour had set up its own fast-track consent process and environmental conditions could be placed on the projects.
He also said ministers were mindful of perceived conflicts of interest throughout the process.
“With the Prime Minister’s agreement, transfers of responsibility were put in place to ensure that no minister took part in considering a project for inclusion in relation to where they had a conflict of interest,” Bishop said.
Advice from the Cabinet Office said donations to parties didn’t create a conflict of interest for the Government itself, he said. Conflicts were raised through the process, but Bishop wouldn’t spell out which ministers recused themselves from which projects.
He said he felt ethically comfortable with how the process had played out.
“We have been extremely thorough and robust in following that process as laid out by the Cabinet Office. I’m very comfortable with the way things have gone.”
‘Dark day for nature and democracy’
Environmental groups have branded this afternoon’s announcement a “dark day for nature and democracy” – and are urging that time be given to consider the proposed projects.
The Greens’ environment spokeswoman Lan Pham said the legislation had been “shrouded in smoke and mirrors while public scrutiny and due democratic process have been completely shut out”.
“What we see in this list is a number of projects that will have long-lasting and potentially irreversible impacts on the environment. Talk of renewable energy and housing – which could be consented under current processes - are nothing more than a smokescreen to the environmental vandalism this is set to unleash.”
Forest and Bird is planning to send an open letter to Parliament’s Environment Committee asking that it not report back until it had had the opportunity to receive and consider public submissions on the proposed additions to the bill.
Some projects on the list were developments the group had spent years successfully opposing in court, such as the Ruataniwha dam in Hawke’s Bay and TTR’s proposal for seabed mining off the Taranaki coast.
“Because developments referred to or on the schedule are almost certain to go ahead, it’s absolutely critical that proper scrutiny happens now so that people can understand the ways existing environmental protections are being breached and the harm that will be caused,” Forest and Bird’s advocacy general manager Richard Capie said.
“Communities around New Zealand should be able to have a say on projects that could pollute their swimming holes, destroy the precious bush they love, or drive a native species locally extinct.”
WWF New Zealand chief executive Kayla Kingdon-Bebb said it was a “disgrace” the Government was proceeding with projects already rejected by experts and the courts.
“These projects expose the Fast-track Approvals Bill for what it really is – a corrupt piece of legislation that will strip local communities of their voice and unleash environmental destruction the likes of which we’ve never seen,” she said.
“This is a dark day for nature and democracy in Aotearoa.”
Greenpeace’s Juressa Lee said it was “a shock to hear that amidst the climate and biodiversity crises, this Government is going to forge ahead with 11 new mines using the much-maligned fast-track approvals process”.
“It’s especially concerning to see that the Trans-Tasman Resources Taranaki seabed mining project is on the list after being such an abject failure in the environment court and Supreme Court and attracting such widespread opposition from mana whenua, the environmental movement and the offshore wind industry.”
The legislation has proven controversial since it was first announced. Initially, it gave three ministers final sign-off over what projects would be fast-tracked, while critics also argued it didn’t put enough weight on the environmental impacts of potential developments.
The Government u-turned in August over the ministerial sign-off, recommending to the Environment Select Committee considering the legislation that final decisions instead sit with the expert panel.
In an attempt to put more emphasis on environmental concerns, Cabinet also recommended the Minister of Infrastructure consult with the Minister for the Environment before referring any projects to the expert panel. The expert panels would include people with expertise on environmental matters and Māori development.
The Opposition and environmental groups said these changes didn’t go far enough in addressing their concerns.
Jamie Ensor is a political reporter in the NZ Herald Press Gallery team based at Parliament. He was previously a TV reporter and digital producer in the Newshub Press Gallery office.
