Summarised by Centrist
Political commentator Bryce Edwards writes that the Auditor-General John Ryan’s recent decision to investigate ministerial conflicts of interest related to New Zealand’s Fast Track Act is casting light on how the government handles ethical risks.
Ryan, concerned about potential undue influence in fast-tracked project approvals, raised red flags earlier this year about gaps in the Act’s conflict management.
According to Edwards, political donations and lobbying further muddy the waters. Development firms linked to fast-tracked projects have contributed hundreds of thousands to political campaigns.
Critics argue that ministers involved in fast-tracking have financial or political ties to project applicants, raising doubts about impartiality. “The public remains largely uninformed about ministers’ connections,” says Ryan, calling for greater transparency in government decision-making.
Though the government defends the transparency of political donations, Edwards cites critics like RNZ’s Farah Hancock, who say it doesn’t fully address potential biases in project approvals. The influence of donors is noted, with companies like the Winton Group securing approvals for contentious developments through Fast Track.
Edwards quotes The Listener’s Danyl McLauchlan: “It looks an awful lot like well-connected companies paying money to political parties.”
According to Edwards, the inquiry could lead to stricter conflict-of-interest regulations. Suggested reforms may include public disclosures of all financial ties, lobbying transparency, and creating an independent oversight body.
