Part One of a CORANZ Election Series:
Fast-track consenting has re-emerged as a central feature of current policy direction, with proposals aimed at accelerating approvals for infrastructure and development projects. The stated objective is straightforward: reduce delays, streamline processes, and enable faster delivery. That approach has immediate appeal, particularly where projects are seen as economically or socially important. The underlying question lies not in speed itself, but in how that speed is achieved.
Fast-track frameworks typically alter the path a proposal takes through the system. Fewer decision points, compressed timelines, and reduced opportunities for submission or appeal are common features. Decision-making authority is often concentrated within a smaller group, sometimes at ministerial level or through appointed panels. Taken together, these changes do not simply shorten the process - they reshape it.
This shifts the balance between efficiency and oversight. Fewer stages mean fewer opportunities for scrutiny, whether from affected parties, technical experts, or the wider public. That may be justified in cases where delay carries significant cost, but it also changes how decisions are tested before they are made. Once a decision is reached, the scope to revisit it is often limited.
This pattern is not new. Previous reforms have sought to streamline planning and consenting systems, often in response to concerns about delay and complexity. Over time, those reforms tend to move decision-making away from distributed processes toward more centralised ones. Each step may appear incremental, but the cumulative effect alters where authority sits and how visible it is.
Natural resources and landscapes are not easily reversed once changed. Decisions affecting rivers, coasts, forests, and open land can have long-lasting consequences, well beyond the timeframe in which they are approved. Systems that prioritise speed must still provide confidence that outcomes have been properly considered and tested.
This is not about whether faster decisions are desirable. It is about how those decisions are made, and whether the structure supporting them maintains sufficient visibility, accountability, and durability over time.
It is a process of land grabs that began in 1840 with the NZ Companies debacle over phoney purchases of land in Wellington and at the Wairau Valley. It continued on with the clearly illegal land wars in Waikato and Taranaki plus the government taking the inland South Island without recompense. They (the big boys behind the government) have run out of Maori land to steal so are now finding ways to disenfranchise modern day Kiwis in terms of their land, waterways and assets. It is history reincarnating itself.
The bald truth is Jones and Bishop don’t want democracy in the form of the select committee process. As such they are arrogant dictators who forget the democratic process of elections put them in parliament and in their eyes – power – instead of thie elected duty of serving the public interest.
We live in a New Zealand where the tail is all-too-often allowed to wag the dog. Where extremist views (including cultural, environmental and climate change extremist) sometimes hold far too much sway.
Where fast-track legislation is used to cut through bureaucracy and red tape – and fast-track a genuinely meritorious proposal that would or should have gone ahead anyway .. ie ultimately passes the test of truly being in the public interest, all things considered (including supporting the fiscal, economic, environmental, social and cultural, wellbeing of our nation) .. then there should be widespread support.
However, fast-track decisions have significant input from politicians .. and history tells us politicians are not always to be trusted to make such good decisions. So much so, I’ve decided (for reasons too long to go into here) there’s not really any such thing as “a good government”. It’s always more about which one will be “least bad”.
For example, the last Labour-led government .. undoubtedly the worst regime to govern New Zealand in living memory, at least .. plunged New Zealand into the greatest levels of public debt in our history .. with far too little to show for it. Imagine if they had had fast-track legislation? .. they would likely have plunged our country (us, and by us I mean taxpayers, as we are the ones who ultimately shoulder the burden) even further into debt even more quickly .. sabotaged the future of our country even further .. and it is likely some ill-conceived, ideologically-driven projects .. would most likely have gone ahead.
However, this government has demonstrated clearly to us, it has no mortgage on wise, just, and meritorious decisions.
Never has this been clearer to me .. than when I sat out at sea in a boat very recently, recreationally fishing. As we meticulously measured our catch .. erring on the side of caution , and putting back anything that was borderline for being under-size .. I consciously reflected on Shane Jones’ proposed Fisheries Amendment Bill .. that would scandalously remove any size limits for commercial fishing.
It is politicians like Shane Jones .. who frequently demonstrates he is more than capable of being (and regularly is) head-shakingly clown-like in how he goes about things, and the decisions he makes (arguably, the nearest thing we’ve got to the bewildering irrationality of Trump, in this current Coalition Government) .. that should keep us on the edge of our seats, and deeply, deeply concerned).
None of which is to say this government is worse than our last government .. not in any way, shape or form.
Our immediate-past Labour government was, as I say, the most devastatingly disastrous for our country (both socially and economically) in living memory, at least.
The only thing one can imagine, that would be worse .. would be the prospect of a government led by the greens, or te pati māori.
Then, we may fear, we really would see NZ’s suicide rate escalate sharply .. for we really would find ourselves up Shite Creek, without a paddle …
At times like this, I am always reminded of two famous truths:
(1) Socialist governments always do make a financial mess .. for eventually, they always do run out of other people’s money; and
(2) Socialism is only ever about distribution. First, its about the distribution of the wealth created by free enterprise; then, its about distribution of the poverty created by Socialism.
We must always learn from history
.. otherwise, we may be doomed to repeat it.
Wise decision-making takes time, everybody needs to be listened to, their logic examined, do this too fast and dictatorship will be the outcome. It is clear that recent governments are selling us a globalist agenda, carefully packaged for a pre-determined outcome, unreasonable times are given for consultation, unreasonable times are given for Submissions to be read and listened to by government decision makers, commissioners, etc. The result is dictatorial decision-making, a lack of respect for the decisions made and public cynicism about democracy. Politics goes in cycles, clearly New Zealand is top heavy with politicians and bureaucracy, we need less of both, we have more power than most people think, question politicians and their advisors carefully. Don’t be scared to say. no and mean it.
Its like a giant pendulum in the political world – the pendulum swings to left wing politics and after a few years swings right – look at Trump, or Ardern – the pendulum swings both ways.
With the introduction of the RMA (a massive blunder in my opinion) no matter how well intentioned, it simply introduced bureaucratic bloat. Planning and development became next to impossible with even private property holders what they could and could not do in their own property – build a fence, cut back some vegetation, fell that dangerous tree – all needed approval.
Well the pendulum has swung the other way (too far many argue) but the RMA is to go we are told and we have a fast-track act in place as a simple sign of political frustration.
If we see a change of government can we expect a change in planning legislation yet again – I ain’t laying odds!