Infrastructure Minister Chris Bishop says the new process would save on litigation costs, and save developers from costly delays to construction. Photo: RNZ / Samuel Rillstone
Infrastructure New Zealand is welcoming the government's land acquisition incentive payments and a faster process for objections - but Labour says it wants to see more detail.
The changes to the Public Works Act, announced on Sunday, would see owners paid a bonus 5 percent of the land's value - up to $92,000 - for acquisitions.
Those who chose to sell before a Notice of Intention would also get an extra 15 percent - up to $150,000 - on top of that, for a total of up to $242,000.
On the other hand, those who object - at least, for Roads of National Significance, or projects listed in Schedule 2 of the Fast-Track Approvals Act - will go to the Minister for Land Information or local authority rather than the Environment Court.
Infrastructure Minister Chris Bishop and Land Information Minister Chris Penk announced the changes on Sunday, with a view to including them in an amendment bill to be introduced in May.
They said the new process would save on litigation costs, and save developers from costly delays to construction - but would be backed with protections. The option for judicial review, or for valuations to be reassessed by the Land Valuation Tribunal, would remain.
Māori land would still have the option to go to the Environment Court, however, in recognition of historical improper confiscation and the complex ownership structures that often came with such land.
Infrastructure New Zealand policy director Michelle McCormick welcomed the changes, saying it would speed things up.
"It will definitely make it a lot faster. The Environment Court is under huge pressure, and they have a lot to deal with. I think streamlining for these ring-fenced projects - the projects that are nationally and regionally significant - being able to undertake a much faster process and appeals which won't drag on for a long time will really improve things. It's clear to all parties."
She said the payments were "quite significant" but it was a pragmatic approach: a little extra payment would be worth it to speed up the process.
"A project has gone through an Environment Court and has won approval, and then has to go through another phase with the Public Works Act, and there's been challenges under that legislation, where landowners are objecting to their property being acquired, that has actually added on another two, three, four, years.
"That in itself, is extremely costly, and we've seen in recent years the huge inflation increases too. So the longer the weight, the more things are going to cost.
"Providing some compensation to additional compensation to land owners ... I think is fair. They are giving up their land, their properties, to contribute to nationally important infrastructure, and that they should be recognised.
She said the Environment Court was not the best place for those decisions in the first place.
"This is about the properties that are being acquired for the projects. I think the Environment Court is not necessarily the right instrument to be deciding that. So I think the streamlining making the decisions through the Minister of land is a much more direct process."
"We look forward to seeing the legislation in May and working through the finer detail."
Labour waiting for review, Greens warn against centralisation
Labour's Land Information spokesperson Damien O'Connor said the party wanted to see more detail - and specifically how the changes would interact with other proposed laws - before offering its support.
"Anything that might progress infrastructure projects Labour's in support of, but we have to ensure that property rights aren't just rolled over. This does on the face of it provide some incentives for more cooperation but generally speaking, when there is a problem with the Public Works Act, it is quite a complex situation.
"The Public Works Act is under review at the moment. This seems like an ad hoc intervention before we see what that review will mean."
He said the government elsewhere was planning to ramp up property rights with the Regulatory Standards Bill, and this appeared to run counter to that by prioritising the greater good for the wider public, "which Labour does support".
"This latest move does seem to move us down that path. We welcome that, but we have to ensure that there are environmental safeguards in that so that adjoining landowners aren't impacted adversely.
"Look, there's a review of the Public Works Act currently under way. We've yet to see what that will deliver to Parliament or for the community. Once we get to see that and see how this incentive payment will work with that, we'll then be in a better position to know that those safeguards are indeed left in place."
Green MP Julie Anne Genter said the changes would make it harder to ensure the best outcomes, particularly around safeguarding the natural environment.
The carve-out for Māori land was good but should go further, she said, and there were too few safeguards against bad decision-making from central agencies.
"It seems like the whole objective is to get the government's agenda done faster with less input from local communities and landowners," she said.
"The moves that we see here today are very reminiscent of Think Big, of pushing ahead with central government control and ultimately an infrastructure agenda that is not going to deliver what we need for the 21st century.
"Their whole objective is to make it faster and easier to deliver their roads of national significance, which are going to have harmful environmental impacts. They aren't going to deliver a better transport system.
"I do understand the desire to get things done quicker. What we want to make sure is that we're not sacrificing the health of our natural environment and ecosystems or the sovereignty of local communities and our people in doing that."
Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
