Summary of Position
I strongly oppose the Public Works (Critical Infrastructure) Amendment Bill. This bill grants sweeping powers to forcibly acquire land under a fast-tracked regime, stripping away consultation rights, due process, and Treaty protections. It puts private development ahead of public good and sets a dangerous precedent: that urgency justifies everything.
It rewrites the Public Works Act to suit developers, not the people. Compensation becomes transactional and capped. The right to object is diluted. “Critical infrastructure” is undefined and left to opaque external legislation, including the Fast-track Approvals Act, bypassing democratic scrutiny.
This bill is not about roads or power lines. It is about removing resistance. And it sets a chilling precedent — eroding local voice, Treaty rights, and environmental protection in the name of convenience.
1. Fast-Track Compulsion Disguised as Reform
The bill creates a new regime (Part 2A) for “critical infrastructure” that:
- Replaces the Environment Court’s objection process with a written-only submission loop,
- Compresses timelines and removes hearing rights,
- Allows the Minister or local authority to override local resistance by proclamation.
This is not streamlining. It is silencing.
2. Te Tiriti and Māori Land: Protections on Paper, Strings in Practice
While protected Māori land is nominally exempt from Part 2A (section 39AAD), the bill:
- Undermines the practical ability of Māori landowners to refuse acquisition,
- Imposes capped and arbitrary compensation, regardless of cultural significance,
- Allows discretionary payments (section 72F(8)) with no secure recourse for collective owners.
Crown-titled protections are redefined as obstacles — and treated as optional.
3. Coercive Compensation Model
The compensation regime (sections 39AAK, 72F) is capped and designed to reward compliance:
- Full payments depend on early agreement and swift surrender,
- 5% and 15% bonuses are capped ($92,000 / $150,000), ignoring real land value,
- Collective landowners see fractional payouts that disregard cultural and livelihood ties.
This is not fair compensation for public good — it is coercive incentivisation, commodifying the very act of resistance.
4. Critical Infrastructure: Vague, Unaccountable, and Expansive
The bill leaves “critical infrastructure project” undefined, deferring to:
- Schedule 2A (editable by ministerial Order in Council),
- External legislation (e.g. the Fast-track Approvals Act 2024), never debated in this context.
This:
- Outsources legislative power without checks,
- Enables scope creep — anything can be declared “critical” without public debate,
- Allows project scope and location to change without public review.
This is power by stealth — redefining infrastructure as anything politically convenient.
5. Submission Rights Reduced to Box-Ticking
Under this regime:
- There is no oral hearing right,
- Timelines are compressed (10–20 working days per stage),
- The Minister or council can extend or refuse deadlines unilaterally,
- Decisions are made internally with no independent oversight.
Public participation becomes a formality — a tick-box exercise, not a safeguard.
6. Hollow Review, No Sunset
The “review” (section 39AAP) offers no real protection:
- It happens only three years after the regime begins,
- There is no independent oversight or binding enforcement,
- There is no sunset clause or automatic repeal.
It is a delay tactic, not a safety net.
7. Broader Implications: Constitutional Erosion and Environmental Harm
This bill fits a broader trend:
- Centralising power in Ministers and unelected bodies,
- Weakening local voice and Treaty partnership,
- Enabling environmental harm through unchecked, rushed infrastructure expansion.
When combined with the Fast-track Approvals Act and ongoing Treaty dilution, this bill is part of a coordinated attack on local democracy and constitutional balance — removing accountability in favour of convenience.
Conclusion and Recommendations
I urge the Committee to reject this bill in full. If not withdrawn entirely, the following amendments are critical:
- Remove or sunset Part 2A — or reinstate full objection rights, including to the Environment Court,
- Remove references to the Fast-track Approvals Act or ensure independent scrutiny of any project declared “critical,”
- Reinstate hearing rights and extend submission windows for genuine engagement,
- Remove compensation caps and recognise cultural, environmental, and livelihood impacts,
- Establish independent oversight for compulsory acquisitions.
Infrastructure should serve people and the land — not override them.
Respectfully submitted,
Ukes Baha
Public Health Advocate | Counsellor | Policy Analyst
ukesbaha.com