The Fast-track Approvals Bill is part of the coalition government's plan to improve infrastructure. Photo: RNZ
A delay in releasing information about fast-track projects has prompted a complaint to the Ombudsman.
Climate action group 350 Aotearoa's campaigner Adam Currie said the Ministry for the Environment walked back a promise to release project application documents on 28 November, and proposed a new date of 20 December.
This is the day after Parliament's last sitting day and will be after the Fast-track Approvals Bill progresses to its next phase, where MPs can ask questions and propose amendments.
It was crucial that MPs and the public knew the full application information of 149 projects which would be written into Schedule 2 of the bill, Currie said.
These are the projects which will be eligible for the "one-stop-shop" fast-track process, where permission under a range of legislation can be granted swiftly and the public is unable to make submissions. Among the projects listed for inclusion are mining, quarrying, aquaculture, renewable electricity, infrastructure, aquaculture and housing. Some projects up for inclusion have previously been declined by courts.
"Refusing to even allow MPs to see essential application information for the projects they will be approving in Schedule 2 would be an unprecedented breach of due process and an absolute outrage," he said.
At present information shared by the government about projects has been limited to a short summary of each, consisting of a few sentences.
Currie called the delay to accessing the information - which the group first requested on 14 October - a "constitutional issue" and said the release of it was a matter of public interest .
He has called for the Ombudsman to intervene urgently.
The public deserves to know about the 149 projects that would be written into Schedule 2 of the bill, Adam Currie says. Photo: Screenshot
"The applications contain essential information about the process that went into selecting the projects that go into Schedule 2. They may raise the issue of the exercise of discretion by the ministers to add projects to the Schedule and the basis (facts) that they relied on."
The sheer volume of the information is being blamed for the delay in release.
A spokesperson for the Ministry for the Environment said there were 200,000 pages of information which needed to be carefully checked and cleared for release.
"Officials have also worked to ensure that commercially sensitive information, or that which could impact individuals' and organisations' rights to privacy, is being assessed and managed appropriately."
Chris Bishop, the minister leading the bill, said he had made his expectation clear to the ministry that he would like the information released as soon as possible.
"I understand that they intend to release it in tranches, beginning with the documents relating to the 149 listed projects as the highest priority. I am informed that 20 December is the latest date by which the last of the remaining material will be published, but that they are endeavouring to make it sooner."
Currie said he was not impressed with the lack of clarity. He would like MPs to have two full weeks to see the information before it was debated in parliament.
"A release of some project applications in dribs and drabs a day or two before the bill is debated in the House would also not be good enough. This is a crucial, constitutional issue - proper process should be followed."
The Green Party's environment spokesperson Lan Pham. Photo: RNZ / Nate McKinnon
Green Party environment spokesperson Lan Pham backed the call for the documents to be released urgently.
"It is incredibly concerning that the release of crucial information about potential projects is being delayed by a month, only to be very conveniently released days before Christmas once Parliament has shut down and public scrutiny has tailed off."
Public scrutiny of the applications was important, she said.
"This is especially in light of the office of the Auditor General still being in the process of their inquiry into the management of conflicts of interests of government ministers in relation to the fast-track process."
The Auditor General has not given a timeframe for completion of the investigation.
The office of the Ombudsman has previously investigated and intervened in information releases connected to the Fast-track Approvals Bill. In June, the Ombudsman found the Department of Conservation acted unlawfully in refusing to release information.
Forest & Bird also complained to the Ombudsman in relation to the withholding of a list of invited applicants to the fast-track process. The Ombudsman directed that the list be revealed.
Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
