📋
What It Does
This bill creates a parallel, accelerated approval pathway for infrastructure and development projects that the Minister for Infrastructure determines have 'significant regional or national benefits.' It bypasses or compresses the standard consenting processes under the Resource Management Act 1991 and six other Acts. The bill was introduced by Hon Chris Bishop and reported from committee of the whole House.
Projects are either pre-listed in Schedule 2 (Part A and B) — automatically eligible — or can be referred by the Minister as 'unlisted projects' after a referral application
The Minister holds sweeping gatekeeping power: deciding which projects are referred, which are 'priority projects,' and directing expert panels on procedural requirements
Expert panels (not independent courts or councils) make binding decisions on resource consents, designations, concessions, conservation land access, marine consents, mining permits, and archaeological authorities
Covers seven 'specified Acts' including the Resource Management Act 1991, Conservation Act 1987, Crown Minerals Act 1991, Heritage NZ Pouhere Taonga Act 2014, National Parks Act 1980, Reserves Act 1977, and Wildlife Act 1953
'Ineligible activities' are defined (s.4A) — activities on Māori land, customary marine title areas, certain reserves, and offshore renewables are excluded unless written consent is obtained or a Ministerial determination is made
Applicants must consult iwi, hapū, Treaty settlement entities, and local authorities before lodging, but consultation outcomes do not bind the Minister's referral decision
A procedural principles clause (s.9) requires 'timely, efficient, consistent, and cost-effective' processes but explicitly states non-compliance does not invalidate any decision
Te Ture Whaimana (the vision and strategy for the Waikato and Waipā Rivers) is preserved and must prevail over inconsistent national policy statements
All functions must be exercised consistently with existing Treaty settlement obligations and recognised customary rights (s.6)
The Act comes into force the day after Royal assent — no phase-in
✅
Who Benefits
Large infrastructure developers and investors who want faster, more predictable approval timelines than standard RMA processes provide
Mining and minerals companies — Crown Minerals Act processes are included as a 'specified Act,' enabling fast-tracked mining permits
Electricity generation and transmission companies — 'electricity infrastructure' and 'electricity lines' are specifically defined, and Ministerial determinations can override restrictions on building new lines across Schedule 3A protected land
Roading and transport infrastructure proponents — core intended beneficiaries of the 'significant regional or national benefits' criterion
Developers of projects already listed in Schedule 2 (Part A) who bypass the referral application stage entirely
The Minister for Infrastructure, who gains substantial discretionary power over which projects are accelerated
Applicants who have previously been declined or faced delays under the RMA, as past decisions under a specified Act are merely a disclosure requirement, not a barrier
⚠️
Who Gets Hurt
General public and third parties who currently have participatory rights under the RMA — the fast-track process replaces public hearings with expert panel processes, narrowing who can be heard
Environmental and conservation advocates — decisions can override protections under the Conservation Act, National Parks Act, Reserves Act, and Wildlife Act through Ministerial determinations
Iwi, hapū, and Māori landowners — while Treaty obligations are formally preserved and ineligible activity protections exist, the Minister's determination power (ss.22D, 22DA) can override requirements for written consent on identified Māori land and Schedule 3A land in some circumstances, and the 20-working-day comment window is tight
Local authorities — stripped of primary decision-making power over projects in their regions; reduced to comment providers and recipients of panel directions
Heritage NZ Pouhere Taonga and conservation agencies — reduced from decision-makers to report providers and administering agencies feeding into panel processes
Fishing communities — 'adverse effect on fishing' is defined narrowly as restriction of access or displacement; broader ecological effects may not be captured; aquaculture decisions are delegated to panels
Future governments seeking to unwind specific project approvals — Schedule 2 pre-listed projects have authorised persons baked in, creating a path that bypasses future Ministerial discretion
Offshore renewable energy developers — explicitly excluded as an 'ineligible activity' (s.4A(1)(n)), locking them out of the fast-track regime entirely
🔍
Hidden Riders
Section 4A(1)(n) excludes offshore renewable energy as an ineligible activity — buries a major energy policy choice (favouring fossil fuels and onshore generation over offshore wind) inside a definitional clause with no separate debate trigger
Section 22DA (referenced but truncated in the provided text) allows Ministerial determinations to override restrictions on Schedule 3A protected land for electricity infrastructure — effectively allows fast-tracking through protected conservation land via a determination mechanism that bypasses the standard ineligible activity bar
Section 9(3) states non-compliance with the procedural principles clause (including the duty to act promptly) does not invalidate any decision — renders the timeliness obligation legally toothless while creating the appearance of accountability
Schedule 2 (Part A and B) pre-lists specific projects by name — the content of that schedule determines who benefits from the Act but is not reproduced in the main bill text, making legislative scrutiny of specific beneficiaries difficult without the schedule
Section 4A(2) removes the consent requirement for Crown-owned mineral prospecting/exploration/mining on Māori land, identified land, and reserves if surface damage is unlikely — a substantive carve-out from Māori land protections embedded in an exceptions subsection
The 'priority project' designation (s.24AF, referenced but not fully reproduced) gives the Minister power to elevate specific projects above others in the queue with no apparent criteria or review mechanism visible in the truncated text
🎭
Framing Analysis
Framed as delivering 'infrastructure with significant regional or national benefits' — the bill's Schedule 2 pre-lists specific named projects chosen by the executive, meaning 'regional or national benefit' is assessed by the Minister, not by an independent body applying published criteria
Title uses 'approvals' language implying a neutral administrative function — in practice the bill creates a parallel consent system where a Minister-appointed panel replaces elected local bodies and independent commissioners as the primary decision-maker
Consultation requirements (ss.14AAA, 16, 19) are presented as meaningful Māori and community engagement — but consultation outcomes inform rather than bind the Minister's referral decision, and the comment window is 20 working days
The Treaty obligations clause (s.6) and iwi participation requirements are prominent in the bill's structure, signalling compliance with Treaty principles — the Ministerial determination power in ss.22D and 22DA can however override the written-consent requirement for activities on identified Māori land in specific circumstances
The exclusion of offshore renewables (s.4A(1)(n)) is not mentioned in the bill's purpose clause or any framing language — it is embedded in the definition of ineligible activities without explanation of why offshore wind was singled out for exclusion from an infrastructure acceleration bill
🚩
Red Flags
⚑Ministerial discretion is the fulcrum of the entire regime — the Minister decides referral, priority status, panel composition direction, and can make determinations overriding ineligible activity classifications; no independent oversight body is visible in the reproduced text
⚑Act comes into force the day after Royal assent (s.2) — no phase-in for agencies, local authorities, or iwi to build capacity to engage with the new process within tight timeframes
⚑The procedural principles clause (s.9) is unenforceable — s.9(3) explicitly states failure to comply does not invalidate any decision, meaning the timeliness and efficiency duties are aspirational only
⚑Schedule 2 (the list of pre-approved projects) is a subordinate schedule not reproduced in the main text — the identities of Part A project beneficiaries who bypass the referral stage entirely are not visible in the analysed document
⚑The 'significant regional or national benefits' criterion (s.3, s.22B referenced) is the gateway test but the full content of s.22B was truncated — the standard against which projects are assessed is not fully visible in this document
⚑Section 22DA Ministerial determination powers over Schedule 3A land and electricity infrastructure are referenced throughout but the full text of that section was not reproduced — the scope of executive override of protected land status cannot be fully assessed from this document
⚑Expert panels replace existing independent commissioners and elected bodies as decision-makers but panel appointment criteria, independence requirements, and conflict-of-interest rules are in Schedule 3, which was not reproduced in full
⚑The definition of 'project' (s.4) explicitly includes 'any activity that is involved in, or that supports and is subsidiary to' the main project — broad enough to pull ancillary commercial activities into the fast-track shield
⚑Offshore renewables are excluded as ineligible (s.4A(1)(n)) with no stated policy rationale — creates a structural bias in which types of energy infrastructure can be accelerated
⚑The bill covers the National Parks Act 1980 as a specified Act — meaning fast-track panels could grant approvals for activities within national parks, historically subject to strict parliamentary scrutiny
📊
Current Status
This is a New Zealand Government Bill (Bill No.
31, 2024) reported from the committee of the whole House, meaning it has passed its second reading and committee stage and is awaiting its third reading in Parliament. The bill has not yet received Royal assent as of the information available in this document. The bill is sponsored by Hon Chris Bishop, Minister for Infrastructure, in the 54th New Zealand Parliament.
Civic Action
Tools to act on what you've learned
Share this report
Take action
Upgrade
Coming soon
Pro
$9/month
- 📱SMS bill alertsText when your bills move
- 📄PDF exportPrint-ready decode, shareable offline
- 🔗Embed widgetLive decode card for your site
- ✉️Send your rep's emailOne click — we send it via Resend
- 📊Rep response tracker2-week follow-up: did they reply?
- 🔔Follow unlimited billsEmail + SMS status updates
API$99/mo
- ✓ Programmatic bill decode
- ✓ Bulk analysis
- ✓ JSON output
Decode another billDecoded by LegisPlain