Forest & Bird welcomes the Government’s decision not to pursue some of its proposed amendments to the Fast-track Approvals Act. This decision addresses some critical environmental and procedural concerns – but major risks remain.
Wins in the amendments:
- Ministerial overreach into EPA decisions is partially restricted. The Minister will no longer be given the power to direct the EPA in relation to its independent functions.
- Panels retain the ability to seek relevant advice and expertise, which means they can still bring in expertise to support knowledge gaps.
Remaining concerns:
- Ministers can still influence expert panel decisions via General Policy Statements.
- Schedule 2 projects are still deemed to have significant regional or national benefits (previously a matter for the expert panel to determine).
- Numerous changes have been made to descriptions of listed projects in Schedule 2, and it is not clear whether the effects of these changes have been properly considered.
- Transitional arrangements appear to apply changes to projects already underway.
- Reductions in statutory time limits, for both referral applications and substantive applications, could force rushed decisions on complex applications.
- Restrictions on appeal rights are still proposed. This means that legal challenges by persons or groups an expert panel chooses to invite to comment would need to use the more costly and time-consuming judicial review process.
“We are pleased that the Government has listened to some of the concerns put forward about the amendment bill. While some of the changes are now less harmful than they were before, in terms of environmental protections and procedural fairness, they do not fundamentally roll back what is a flawed fast-track regime,” said Erika Toleman, General Counsel at Forest & Bird.
“Ministers have increased their already significant influence, and the fast-track mechanism remains as environmentally damaging as ever.”