The Fast-Track Approvals Bill passed its third reading in Parliament this week and will now become law.

The purpose of the Bill is to facilitate the delivery of infrastructure and development projects with significant regional or national benefits. We will see significant projects that have been listed in the Bill access a new Fast-track approvals process to seek the necessary environmental approvals for their projects from 7 February 2025.

Other projects can also apply to use the process from 7 February 2025. 

As we previously detailed (here), the Bill has been divisive. The Select Committee presented an array of recommended amendments to the Bill and included majority and dissenting views in its report. These mixed views have continued to be presented by the Government and opposition parties, and in the media, as the Bill moved through the House.

We have summarised the key amendments which have been made to the Bill since the Select Committee stage (and which will now become law) below. 

Significant changes were made to the Bill during Committee of the Whole House

In our previous article we set out the recommendations made by the Select Committee – a number of these have been picked up in the final Bill, including that referral decisions will now be made by the Minister for Infrastructure, after receiving comments from relevant local authorities, other Ministers (including the Minister for the Environment), and the relevant administering agencies. In making these referral decisions the Minister must obtain and consider a report about any Treaty settlements or other obligations that affect Māori interests.

In addition to a number of minor “tidy-ups”, a large amendment paper was introduced by Hon Chris Bishop, Minister Responsible for RMA Reform, and a range of further amendments were made in the Committee of the Whole House stage.

Some of these changes are particularly significant: 

• The Minister for Infrastructure can determine priority projects: Before a substantive application is lodged for a listed project or a referred project, the Minister may determine that the project is a priority project (on application by the applicant, or by the Minister’s own initiative). A priority project is one that needs to be progressed urgently and there is a risk that an expert panel may not be set up within a period that reflects the urgency of the project. To expedite the processing of the application, the expert panels for priority projects will need to be established ahead of those for other projects.
• Applications can be made to replace existing approvals and existing expired approvals (including those being validly being relied on under section 124(3) of the RMA): This means that an applicant with an existing resource consent application in train can continue to rely on its existing consents (including those being relied on under section 124(3) of the RMA) while it alternatively seeks replacement resource consents under the Fast-track process. 
• Additional approvals can be obtained through the fast-track process: A change or cancellation of a condition of an existing resource consent may, in certain circumstances, be sought as an approval under the Bill and so can certain mining permits. 
• The decision-making timeframe will be set by each expert panel: The Select Committee suggested imposing a 25 working day timeframe for each expert panel to make a decision after receiving comments on an application. Flexibility was built into the Bill to enable a panel to extend the timeframe for complex projects. The Committee of the Whole House took that need for flexibility further and the Bill now provides that the panel must set its own timeframe, after consultation with the relevant administering agencies, and must notify the applicant of that timeframe. If no timeframe is set, the decision must be made within 30 working days after the date specified for receiving comments. 
• Approvals may be declined where adverse impacts are out of proportion to regional or national benefits: The Select Committee suggested that approvals may be declined where adverse impacts outweigh the purpose of the Act. This has essentially been retained, but it has been amended so that approvals may be declined where the adverse impacts are out of proportion to the regional or national benefits. 
• The cost recovery provisions now include all agencies that provide assistance to an applicant before their application is lodged: This means that costs can be recovered from an applicant by the EPA, the Secretary for the Environment, administrating agencies including Heritage New Zealand, the Director-General of Conservation, LINZ, the Ministry for Primary Industries, the Office for Māori Crown Relations—Te Arawhiti, and the Ministry of Māori Development as well as local authorities.
• Applicants will be required to identify competing applications and existing resource consents: The Bill includes a number of steps that must be taken if an application is sought for an approval (such as a resource consents) and approvals are held by others to use the same resource. A substantive application may not be able to proceed until any competing applications are determined and any overlaps with existing resource consents are resolved. 
• A strict 20-working day timeframe to file an application for judicial review has been added: An application for judicial review that relates to a decision on a referral application, or an approval sought on a substantive application, must be filed no later than 20 working days after the notice of decision is received (for an application) or the decision document is published (for an approval). 

The Bill is expected to be given Royal Assent imminently. 

If you have any questions regarding the Fast-track approvals process and the opportunities it will provide, please reach out to our environment and planning experts.

This article was co-authored by Senior Solicitor Holly-Marie Rearic in our Environment team.