Brief

The Act sets up a single referral and approval pathway that can bundle resource‑management, marine‑consent and mining‑permit decisions for projects that offer significant regional or national benefits, including offshore mineral extraction. Schedule 10 ties the Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf Act 2012 into the fast‑track so that a marine consent issued by a panel has the same legal effect as one granted under the EEZ Act, while Schedule 11 does the same for mining permits under the Crown Minerals Act 1991. Panels must apply the decision criteria of those Acts but give “greatest weight” to the purpose of the fast‑track legislation. Appeals are limited to errors of law in the High Court; merits challenges are not allowed, which shortens post‑decision risk windows for investors.

Origins

Parliament introduced the measure to reduce the lengthy, multi‑agency consent timelines that large infrastructure and resource projects faced under normal processes. It replaces the temporary fast‑track powers enacted during 2020‑23, explicitly binds the Crown, requires decision‑makers to respect Treaty settlements and Te Ture Whaimana and keeps underlying environmental thresholds while compressing procedure.

Key Provisions

Integrated Marine Consent & Mining Permit Process

  • A single substantive application can seek both approvals. If granted, the marine consent and the permit take effect under their parent statutes without any further steps, removing parallel, sequential permitting requirements.

Statutory Benchmarks

  • The responsible agency (normally the EPA) has ten working days to decide whether a referral application is complete and within scope, after which it must pass the papers to the Minister. Once the Minister receives the file, the Act prescribes the order in which comments, Treaty‑settlement reports and information requests occur, but it does not impose a single fixed deadline for the Minister’s referral decision; subsequent panel and EPA milestones are also set out in the Act.

Ministerial Gatekeeping Powers

  • When deciding whether to accept a referral, the Minister may compare offshore projects with other uses of the same marine space, weighing economic benefit, strategic importance and environmental factors. Separate sections allow the Minister to declare that certain land‑transport or electricity‑line works on specified Māori land or Schedule 4 conservation land are not “ineligible activities,” effectively opening the fast‑track to linear infrastructure that would otherwise be excluded.

Safeguards

  • Activities on Māori freehold land, customary marine title areas or protected customary rights areas remain ineligible unless the relevant Māori owners or groups consent or the Minister issues a determination under sections 23–24. Every referral still receives a mandatory Treaty‑settlement report, and panels must apply EEZ environmental standards and can attach conditions.

Implementation for Offshore Mineral Projects

A seabed‑miner can lodge a referral as soon as the required pre‑consultation with Māori groups and local authorities is finished. If the Minister accepts the referral, a single substantive application that combines the marine consent and the mining permit is lodged with the EPA. From that point, the EPA and panel follow the Act’s stepwise deadlines, and the panel issues an integrated decision that carries full effect under both the EEZ and Crown Minerals Acts. The Act does not create a new automatic surrender rule for overlapping exploration acreage; normal Crown Minerals conditions continue to apply.

Stakeholder Implications

Developers obtain one integrated process instead of parallel EEZ and mining processes, reducing duplication and timetable uncertainty. Competing‑use risk is considered early: the Minister may determine whether a proposed marine activity clashes with fisheries or other EEZ users, but final environmental and technical judgments sit with the expert panel. Treaty obligations and existing environmental standards remain, yet the compressed procedure and narrower rights of appeal lower financing and schedule risk.

Key Takeaways

  • Unified fast‑track application replaces separate marine‑consent and mining‑permit pathways.
  • Ten‑working‑day completeness check is the only fixed deadline before the Minister; later steps have their own statutory clocks, but the Act sets no single “20‑day” Ministerial limit.
  • Appeals go to the High Court only on errors of law, not on the merits.
  • Ministerial powers extend to prioritizing projects and allowing specific linear or electricity works on otherwise excluded land, while panels keep ultimate approval authority.
  • Environmental tests, Treaty safeguards and customary rights protections from underlying statutes still bind decision‑makers.