Clapping at the TV: Wins for Civic Engagement and Housing in the Fast Track Bill
Proof that civic engagement can actually pay off: My reaction to the Fast Track Bill announcement, why it made me clap at the TV, and what it all means for our social cohesion in NZ
I actually clapped at the TV when I heard
While doing my evening stretches last night, I watched the 6 p.m. TVNZ news as my husband reheated our dinner. I actually clapped at the TV to hear Chris Bishop announce some unexpected but welcome changes to the Fast Track Approvals Bill.
I was genuinely stoked when I heard that an expert panel, which must consult with the Minister for the Environment, would have the final authority for Fast Track decisions. I was also glad to hear that most of the projects under consideration were focused on housing and infrastructure—areas where we can all agree that progress is desperately needed, regardless of political affiliation.
Now, I get that this bill is far from perfect, but there are enough articles and info out there against it, so not gonna bang that drum. I’m gonna celebrate the small wins we got so far. If you keen for some small wins, from a centrist view, keep reading.
Validation and the power of civic engagement
The announcement marked a significant shift toward the kind of balanced approach I’ve been advocating for over the last few months on Less Certain. It’s hard not to feel a sense of validation when the changes align closely with the recommendations I made in my oral submission to the Environment Select Committee about the Fast Track Bill. Even though it was just one individual submission among thousands, the result reminded me that civic engagement—no matter how small—can have an impact.
Breaking Down the Numbers: What Projects Are Being Prioritized?
For those who haven’t been following this saga as closely as I have, let’s recap the core changes. According to Minister Bishop’s press release, the 384 project applications submitted under the Fast Track Bill break down as follows:
Housing and urban development projects: 40%
Infrastructure projects: 24%
Renewable energy projects: 18%
Primary industries projects: 8%
Quarrying projects: 5%
Mining projects: 5%
I am stoked about housing projects being 40% of the list
What stands out here is the focus on critical areas like housing, urban development, and renewable energy. These are projects that New Zealand genuinely needs to progress, especially given our ongoing housing crisis and the pressing need for sustainable infrastructure. As someone whose PhD research centers on understanding the relationship between housing policy and social cohesion in New Zealand, this focus on housing resonates deeply with me. The links between stable, affordable housing and a cohesive society are crucial, and it’s been a recurring theme in Less Certain, especially in last week’s article where I reflected on my research journey so far. Seeing this alignment between policy priorities and the issues I’m exploring academically reinforces my belief that the right housing policies can play a vital role in strengthening our capacity to coexist in our hyper-diverse reality.
From Ministers to Experts: A Procedural Shift Worth Noting
But beyond the specifics of the projects themselves, the procedural changes deserve attention. The final decision-making authority has shifted from ministers to an expert panel. The panel will include experts in environmental matters, and crucially, an iwi authority representative will be included when required by treaty settlements. This diversifies the decision-making process and enhances the transparency and accountability I’ve been calling for. In my submission, I argued:
To foster national unity and ensure everyone's safety, I propose that the bill be adjusted to be less radical. Some ways to achieve this could be by including the Minister for Conservation and Environment in the decision-making team, ensuring that the recommendations from expert groups carry binding authority, or enhancing transparency within the process.
The new provisions directly address most of my points which may seem like small details, but they add up to a more robust and fair process—one that I believe can foster greater trust in both the government, the successful applicants of the Fast Track Bill and the outcomes of these projects.
A Broader Reflection on Civic Engagement
The bigger picture here is about more than just one bill. It’s about how we engage with the political process, push for changes that reflect efficiency, balance and inclusivity, and how even small contributions—like an individual submission—can make a difference.
The Fast Track Bill has been a recurring theme in my writing because it encapsulates the tension between the urgency of progress while balancing the necessity of public trust, managing competing beliefs and cohesion, topics I care deeply about. How we manage that balance will determine not just the success of this bill but the stability of Aotearoa and the health of our democracy moving forward.
So, what’s next?
The changes announced this week are a step in the right direction, but the process is far from over. Cabinet will still need to consider which of the proposed projects make it into the bill's final version, and further public input will be essential. My hope is that these adjustments create a model for future legislation where urgency doesn’t come at the cost of inclusiveness and transparency.
This is the fourth post I’ve written about the Fast Track Bill. My earlier articles focused on the risks of rushing policy changes without sufficient public engagement, the need for critical scrutiny over knee-jerk reactions, and my own experience navigating the submission process.
What’s become clear throughout this journey is that meaningful civic engagement isn’t just about having a voice; it’s about making that voice count. Last night’s announcement was a reminder that sometimes, it does.
So, here’s to staying engaged—even if it’s just little old you. Don’t let anyone tell you that individual submissions or small actions don’t matter.
Sure, policy might be slow and messy, politics divisive and contradictory, but small wins can still make a difference—or at least that’s what I choose to believe. If you’re more on the cynical side, that’s fine—jog on! We’ve got enough of those voices out there. Let’s keep an eye on the wins, try and balance our views and having the confidence to keep asking the right questions.
Yes to celebrating the wins!