Urgent Debates Declined — Fast-track Approvals Bill—Advice to Minister

Members, I’ve received a letter from the Hon Kieran McAnulty seeking to debate under Standing Order 399 today’s reporting that the Minister Responsible for RMA Reform received advice from the Clerk on the admissibility of amendments to the Fast-track Approvals Bill in July 2024. This is a particular case of recent occurrence for which there is ministerial responsibility. Ministers and members regularly receive advice from the Clerk; that is in itself not remarkable. The substantive matters arising from this particular advice were traversed during the committee stages of the Fast-track Approvals Bill. I do not think that the business of the House should be set aside today to revisit this.

For clarity, I would reiterate that the rules and practices of the House regarding private legislation have not changed. Existing Standing Orders and Speakers’ rulings still apply. Bills or amendments for the particular interest or benefit of individuals or groups are still classified as being in the nature of private legislation, as it states in Standing Order 257(1)(d), regardless of whether they are deemed to be public policy. In the case of the Fast-track Approvals Bill, I drew a different conclusion to the Clerk, having taken his advice and considered that the individual benefits to the projects listed in the Schedule were not sufficiently clear, given the bill itself prescribed a process they must still go through. I refer members to Standing Order 257(2). The application for an urgent debate is declined.