Changes sought to Bill
WELLINGTON: Two government watchdogs are recommending changes to the new Fasttrack Approvals Bill so conflicts of interest can be managed and the natural environment can be better protected.
In two separate reports, the auditorgeneral and the parliamentary commissioner for the environment have urged the select committee, which is now reviewing the legislation, to consider changes to the decisionmaking process laid out in the new legislation.
In its current form, the Bill would give three ministers the ability to approve infrastructure projects such as roads, dams and mines, regardless of the risk to biodiversity, or if they have previously been denied consents by the courts.
But parliamentary commissioner for the environment Simon Upton said the role of ministers as decisionmakers should be scrapped.
Rather than allowing any project to be eligible to be fasttracked, Mr Upton’s report recommended ‘‘limiting eligible projects to those that provide significant public benefits’’.
In addition, he recommended environmental considerations be elevated, and the role of the minister for the environment in the process be restored.
It should also exclude previously declined or prohibited activities from the fasttrack process. At present, the Bill would allow those decisions to be overridden.
Meanwhile, the auditorgeneral is urging the select committee to change the Bill to include requirements for better managing conflicts of interest.
On Sunday, Labour raised questions about the integrity of allowing ministers to make the final call, particularly when the company applying had previously donated to a political party.
At present, even if the independent panel assessing projects for fasttrack approval recommended that the ministers decline its application, the Bill would let the ministers override that decision and fasttrack it anyway.
A small number of the companies listed as having inquired or been consulted about applying to get their project on the list have donated to political parties in the past five years.
Labour spokeswoman Rachel Brooking previously told RNZ this made ministers vulnerable to accusations of bias.
‘‘They are actually making the decisions. That then in turn opens them up to allegations of improper behaviour if they’ve had donations made by those different players. So it’s a very strange thing for the ministers to want to open themselves up to.’’
Auditorgeneral John Ryan warned in his submission that conflicts of interest, whether real or perceived, could create public concern about the integrity of decision making.
He also noted, similar to a point in Mr Upton’s submission, that the ministers record and made public their decisions, and reasons for them. — RNZ