The answer was something about it being “clear” that the Government wanted to go fast. Yet the debatable motion for a short report back timeframe was not made. Typical of this scrutiny avoiding Government 👎

From how long ago? 20 years?

Happy Birthday Sophie (I’m in Geneva so a bit behind time wise). 🎂

Interesting. LDAC guidelines are very helpful. Also have the Legislation Act. This was talked about in the 2021 version of the bill www.parliament.nz/mi/pb/hansar...

While the issues are well known we have yet to see the words; wording in law matters and is worthy of reflection & scrutiny.

I asked Min Bishop about this process in estimates today - would the amendment paper go back to select committee?
Answer - no.
More bad law making.

A fantastic resource.

Or just quote from Ministers making no sense (and invoking tracks and getting on them) in committee stages and anything Shane Jone has said (I think he called me a shady house this week 🤔🏡🕶️) 👩‍💻

Wildlife Act change not great either - government members thought it applied to new Government Roads but turns out (after sustained questioning) that it doesn’t! Opps. Rushed law is bad law.

Lots of space now for title and commencement debate and then 3rd reading (will be full again for David Parker’s valedictory around 5.30)

Just asked Minister in charge of terrible bill to cut women’s pay if she agreed with this statement about rule of law equating to not making retrospective law (quoting from above) and no answer. Yet the retrospective law she is in charge of is progressing 🤯

And I asked Minister’s numerous times (both in oral & written questions and committee stage) to include an environmental protection in the purpose of the fast track bill.

Labour’s fast track for covid & RMA replacement was different. Environmental protections were not overridden. Any future Labour fast track would not override environmental protections. We put up numerous amendment papers that put environmental protections into the fast track & Government voted down

This Government has irresponsibly put future governments in the position of potentially needing to compensate overseas companies if approvals revoked. Labour is being careful about this potential liability. We don’t know yet how many projects will be approved by the next election.