Public Works Amendment Bill

Committee of the whole House

Thank you, Madam Chair—

CHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger): Sorry, I meant to say that the question is that clause 1 stand part.

Clause 1—

CHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger): No—no. That’s all right. I’m sorry. I just jumped ahead of myself. Go.

Thank you, Madam Chair, for acknowledging all the moving parts here. It’s tricky, and, of course, when we keep being in urgency and when we’ve kept having extended sittings throughout the term and then missing select committees and stuff, it’s not a good way to make laws.

Anyway, the commencement clause at clause 2: most of it comes into force on the 28th day after Royal assent, and assuming that we’re going to do the third reading very shortly—although I would advise the Government just to take a little pause and not do the third reading today so you can consider all the things that we’ve been saying and bring it back next week if you need to. However, if you don’t do what I suggest, which is what normally happens, then the 28th day—

💬 Hon Mark Patterson: Good reason.

—after Royal assent is likely to be close to the election. I wonder if the Minister for Land Information wants to comment on whether or not that’s a good thing to be happening, that right on the election, you’ve got new legislation coming into effect. Then if the Minister could also comment on why subclauses 2(2) and 2(3) have later commencement dates.

Then I’m interested, from the heckle that just happened from the member from New Zealand First who said that he didn’t want to follow my suggestions for good reason—well, it’s interesting that that member can’t even follow his own suggestions, because he tables amendments and then he untables them.

CHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger): I think that might be out of scope of this bill. I think that happened before.

Maybe, but the heckle still came. There we go. Anyway, I also want to talk about the title of this Act, which again, feels like déjà vu. I was just here speaking with you about the title of an Act that didn’t have brackets. Again, we’re bracketless, so we could, of course, put some words in those brackets. This Act is the Public Works Amendment Act 2025, but I want to suggest some words for those brackets after “Public Works” and those are the “Public Works (Sneaking in Private Projects) Amendment Act 2025”.

This also relates to other legislation that has been in urgency that we did not debate in committee stage. We know with the Planning Bill there is a whole Schedule 5 that we did not touch on that has to do with designations. It has in it a definition which is core infrastructure. We had some discussion earlier in the debate about how network utility operators—there’s going to be a change in this new legislation and that change could enable more projects to be able to get themselves into the Public Works Act scheme, if the Minister agrees. “Core infrastructure” is the term in Schedule 5 of the Planning Bill, which sounds a little bit like critical infrastructure, which is the term used in the Public Works Act, but critical infrastructure is defined project by project under the Schedule, whereas core infrastructure is defined by types of things, and it includes a pipeline of natural or manufactured gas, petroleum, biofuel, or geothermal energy. The transport of petroleum is now, it seems from the Minister’s answers, something that the Public Works Act could apply to.

Not only that, but inland ports are included. We also have something that is in the New Zealand School Property Agency in relation to any education property as defined in section 10 of the Education and Training Act 2020. I think—and I haven’t double-checked that, but I have some recollection that private early childhood centres could be included in that. Excuse me if I’m wrong on that. It’s also anything else that’s included by regulation. Airports are included as well. There is this widening in the Planning Bill and that will flow through to this legislation. That is why when we’ve been in committee stage, we’ve wanted the assurance that I am wrong, my concern is wrong, and it should not be called the “Public Works (Sneaking in Private Projects) Amendment Act”, but I have not had that comfort, and for that reason we are now not voting for this legislation.

Committee of the whole House

I just want to stand and support my colleague the Hon Rachel Brooking, who has again brought a wealth of legal knowledge through her phone, which is amazing.

CHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger): And her mind.

You don’t need to go to a lawyer these days; just get a lawyer with a phone. There are many implications of this piece of legislation which we supported into the parliamentary process on the basis that it was a modernisation, and I guess we thought the title was appropriate, but I would have to say that it should perhaps have been the “Public and Private Works Amendment Bill”, and, as I say, 2025; it has now moved on. It has been sitting around, and I’m not sure whether the date of the bill will be changed or whether the Minister for Land Information’s intending to do that. We’ve had the fast-track process. We’ve had a number of pieces of legislation rushed through this House, as my colleague said, that have changed the foci of many parts of this bill, in our view, and the possible implications of its roll-through.

As my colleague said, on that basis, Labour cannot support the bill because we would rather have scrutinised the bill for longer and gone back. It’s been passed through urgency, which is of concern. It has been to a select committee process—we understand that—but actually we’ve exposed and asked some questions tonight. The Minister has, to be fair to him, answered them as best he can, but the implications across to the Resource Management Act and to fast track are more than we can analyse in the short time that we have here in the committee stages of the bill. For that reason, without radical change—and we don’t know whether that would be right either because we haven’t done the proper consideration—we can’t support the bill.

Committee of the whole House

Thank you, Madam Chair. Just in regards to the Hon Rachel Brooking’s question around commencement, 28 days is to provide for implementation, for example, with negotiations that are under way. Sections 23 and 41 are brought into force earlier because they relate to the emergency recovery process.

A party vote was called for on the question, That clause 1 be agreed to.

Ayes 67

New Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.

Noes 46

New Zealand Labour 30; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 11; Te Pāti Māori 4; Kapa-Kingi.

Clause 1 agreed to.

A party vote was called for on the question, That clause 2 be agreed to.

Ayes 67

New Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.

Noes 46

New Zealand Labour 30; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 11; Te Pāti Māori 4; Kapa-Kingi.

Clause 2 agreed to.

A party vote was called for on the question, That clause 3 be agreed to.

Ayes 67

New Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.

Noes 46

New Zealand Labour 30; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 11; Te Pāti Māori 4; Kapa-Kingi.

Clause 3 agreed to.

Bill to be reported with amendment.

House resumed.

CHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger): Madam Speaker, the committee has considered the Public Works Amendment Bill and reports it with amendment. I move, That the report be adopted.

Motion agreed to.

Report adopted.

ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Maureen Pugh): This bill is set down for third reading immediately.

Third Reading