‘Hold us to account’: Iwi defends its own fast-track project

Ngāti Manuhiri’s fast-track bid for an environmental housing development will go before an expert panel, highlighting how the legislation relies on individual environmental responsibility rather than hard policy.
The project would see hundreds of new homes built with an emphasis on community support and environmental protections, and was championed by the 2024 New Zealand Environmental Hero of the Year, Nicola MacDonald.
MacDonald said the fast-track’s powers could be used for good, but that the responsibility to enforce those “gold standards” should ultimately fall to an independent panel, not the applicant.
In June, MacDonald (Ngāti Wai, Te Rarawa, Taranaki) wrote an opinion article on how the Fast-Track Approvals Bill could erode Māori rights and environmental health. 
Four months later, MacDonald – chief executive of Manuhiri Kaitiaki Charitable Trust – had a project listed on that very same bill. 
Te Ārai South Precinct and Regional Park Integrated Development Plan is a complex, considerable endeavour comprising 420 housing units and an on-shore aquaculture facility in the iwi’s rohe north of Auckland. The project shared a spot on the first tranche of fast-track projects alongside coal mines, a ski village and wind farms. 
But unlike some of those other projects, MacDonald says, Te Ārai would be pursued with a high level of self-scrutiny, and a constant focus on maintaining the health of the local environment and the communities that depend on it.
The project is set apart from other listings because of its origins, which MacDonald sees as rooted in community and conservation. 
“We’re really strong advocates of environmental protection and restoration, so it’s important to us that our fast-track application ensures that we have the least impact to the environment.” 
In her original June opinion article, MacDonald wrote that the fast-track would “say yes to pillaging by organisations primarily concerned with profits, when the courts and mana whenua have previously said no.” But the problem she saw lay with the methods used by the bill, not by the aims. 
She wrote that the fast-track could well help Ngāti Manuhiri with its own projects, and development was not inherently bad. “What we are opposed to is development that can manifest in a way that does not balance the duty we collectively have to look after our natural environment for future generations.” 
By the time the letter was written, an application had already been submitted by the trust. But the lengths it has gone to as an applicant to ensure its project meets a high bar are self-imposed, not necessarily a requirement of the process, she says.
MacDonald tells Newsroom fast-track applications from Māori groups, for example her own Ngāti Manuhiri Settlement Trust, come on behalf of a collective grouping. A basis in community means a responsibility not building developments that impacts on the lives of iwi members and their children.
Would that mentality be extended to other applicants on the list? “Probably not.”
The fast-track’s design put “a lot more onus on the individual to ensure that they are upholding the highest standards of environmental protection”, as opposed to existing legislation or formal environmental backstops. 
Even so, MacDonald notes some of these environmental protections are being repealed by the Government. Changes to freshwater policy, coal-mining restrictions and stock-grazing limits have all been criticised by environmental groups and experts. 
In a change the trust welcomes, final approval of a fast-track project now rests with an expert panel – not a collection of individual ministers. This was a change the trust had recommended in its initial submission to the bill, and which MacDonald is happy to see. 
So while there is excitement about the application passing the first hurdle, a final verdict must still come from the panel. MacDonald says this panel – bound by the purpose statement of the bill, which does not mention the environment – holds the final responsibility to account for te taiao.
“The panel needs to really ensure that they are holding the mirror up hard and fast to every application, including ourselves. If we don’t meet the threshold, if we’re not actually delivering a gold standard approach, then we need to be held to account.
“I would really like to see that good evaluative practices are put in place by the independent panel so that each application goes for the gold bar standard, not just getting past the bare minimum.”
As MacDonald wrote in her original letter, the fast-track has the ability to override previous refusals from local bodies. She encourages communities faced with unpopular projects to not feel powerless.
“Don’t think that my one voice doesn’t matter, because it does. It absolutely does.”