One third of New Zealand’s population are having their rights further eroded by the radical interpretation of a permittable (but not mandatory) ‘Deed of Acknowledgement’ in the Waitākere Ranges Heritage Area Act 2008. These innocuous words are being used to facilitate 50/50 co-governance over a significant portion of Auckland’s landmass - with more to come.
In 2022, the small tribe Te Kawerau ā Maki (supported
by the larger and more ambitious Ngāti Whātua tribe) presented a draft
Deed of Acknowledgement to Council. It has the tribe taking equal power with
Council/Crown appointees over the very extensive Waitākere Ranges Heritage Area
(see Map),
i.e. all Council or Crown-owned public land and the coast (owned by nobody but under
Māori claim, thanks to National’s 2011 Marine and Coastal Area Act - MACA).
The Council is now seeking public feedback on the unpublished
Draft Deed (yes – tricky!). They say it’s intended to authorise co-governance
control of strategy, work, any issues, and monitor progress toward tribally
agreed “outcomes.” Council currently says it won’t apply to private land or
water but, after He Puapua, we know that anything is possible under an
unelected, unaccountable co-governance entity with wide-reaching authority and
veto power. There will certainly be a loss of democratic accountability
and increased cost burdens on ratepayers. There could be irreversible
consequences for roading and walking access, land and sea-based recreation, freshwater
infrastructure and supplies, local businesses, many private property owners and
communities, and could have flow-on effects on the Manukau Harbour port (also
under MACA claim).
Lurking in the shadows, there’s more to come. The Council
is already in discussions with the very commercial and ambitious Ngāti Whātua
tribe on a unified approach to all such Deeds affecting the rest of Auckland.
Consequently, this Te Kawerau ā Maki proposal must be
stopped—and we only have until Monday, 28 April 2025 to make our voices heard.
What’s Immediately at Stake?
The Waitākere Ranges Heritage Area (WRHA) spans an enormous
27,700 hectares of public and private land and coastline. This vast area
includes major public resources such as:
- The
Waitākere Ranges’ forest and foothills with environmental and recreational
treasures.
- A
massive coastline on the Tasman (from South Muriwai to the Manukau Heads
which are the entrance to the Port) and into the Manukau Harbour as far as
Green Bay. This includes boating, fishing, lifesaving and other
recreational facilities.
- Roading
network and access to the coastline, facilities and various communities.
- Most
crucially, the water catchments and dams that provide over a quarter of
Auckland’s drinking water.
These public treasures have been protected and preserved by
generations of Aucklanders. Volunteers, conservationists, trampers, private
benefactors, and local communities have all played a part. Some land was even
gifted to the public by past owners.
Restricted Public Access: 35% of the Park Already Under Threat
Restrictions aren’t just theoretical. Te Kawerau ā Maki has
already submitted their next plan— “The Heart of the Ngahere”—which would:
- Restrict
access to 35% of the park,
- Fully
close 16 public walking tracks and partially close three more.
This is more than one-third of the entire regional park — a
space that belongs to all Aucklanders. Such closures could be implemented
without public consent or accountability by elected representatives.
This Is a Dangerous Precedent
This radical proposal cannot be excused as justified by
history. (Note: Te Kawerau ā Maki were displaced from the area during the
inter-tribal Musket Wars, only to later return and sell much of the land to the
Crown post-1840. The last National Government finalised the Te Kawerau ā Maki
Claims Settlement Act 2015 to compensate them for their own historic
decisions.)
Te Kawerau ā Maki, and to a lesser extent Ngāti Whātua, are
already involved in many initiatives within the Heritage Area but Auckland
Council is progressing this additional layer of tribal control, as evidenced
by:
- Auckland
Council agreeing to proceed with the co-governance proposal at a Policy
and Planning Committee meeting in December 2024.
- The
public discussion document on proposed ‘key elements’ of a Deed being
released (but no Draft or detail).
- Council
discussions with Ngāti Whātua over Deeds covering the rest of Auckland’s public
land, coast and essential infrastructure.
Separatists want ratepayer-funded co-governance to become
the norm — without your permission, or any meaningful way to object. It is part
of an unmandated, countrywide shift toward tribal autocracy that seemingly has the
full support of a Parliamentary majority.
An example of how such entities work is seen in the Tūpuna
Maunga Authority (TMA). Also established by a previous National-led
Government and funded by Auckland ratepayers, the TMA has begun decolonising
Auckland’s volcanic cones by cutting down beautiful, healthy trees, removing
car access and parking, signage, and other 'colonial-era' infrastructure — at
great public cost. The outcry was ignored, and legal injunctions were fought
using more ratepayer money.
Auckland Council is applying that same revolutionary
template to much of Auckland.
The Council Process Is Devious
- The
Council’s ‘staff working group’ progressing the Draft Deed excludes
elected councillors but includes Te Kawerau ā Maki, the IMSB, and staff
from both Council and the pro-separatist Department of Conservation.
- The
public is now being asked to comment without full knowledge of what’s in
the Deed or is being negotiated behind closed doors.
- The
co-governance option is already framed as the default, with alternatives
barely explored.
This is not consultation. It’s a rubber-stamped, bloodless
coup in disguise.
Be the Stone that Starts an Avalanche
- Please
write a submission on the proposed Deed of Acknowledgement with
Te Kawerau ā Maki. Key points to include:
a)
The consultation document lacks sufficient
information on why the undisclosed Deed is being progressed, what could
be in the final Deed, and the potential ramifications.
b)
The proposals go far beyond the 2008 Waitākere
Ranges Heritage Area Act’s intent, have no transparency or mandate, and remove
citizens’ democratic rights to elected and accountable governance.
c)
No entity—Council, tribal, or governmental—has
the right to give away control of public land, resources, or access without a
public vote.
d)
The proposed co-governance body would grant
unelected tribal representatives unwarranted control and veto power, while eliminating
the influence of elected councillors.
e)
Such a structure would promote racial division
and harm social cohesion.
- Lodge
your submission before Monday, 28 April 2025:
- Email:
wrhadeed@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz
- Online
form: https://akhaveyoursay.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/waitakere-ranges-heritage-area-deed-acknowledgement (note:
questions are framed for a favourable outcome)
- Write
to the Mayor and your Councillors:
- Demand
that any changes to Auckland’s governance be subject to binding public
referenda.
- Spread
the word:
- Talk
to other Aucklanders and call independent media such as The Platform.
- Contact
any Government MP who is anti-apartheid
However, do not expect support from either the Left or the current National Party. Recent Governments have only embedded racial division in all their legislation.
Your voice is urgently needed. Don’t let your right to
democratic governance of our public property and resources be signed away
behind closed doors.
References:
·
Waitakere
Ranges Heritage Area Map
·
Te Kawerau ā Maki people - https://tekawerau.iwi.nz/about-us/
·
Independent Māori Statutory Board members - https://houkura.nz/our-team
·
https://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2015/0075/latest/whole.html (Te
Kawerau ā Maki Claims Settlement Act 2015) Section 9: The Crown acknowledges that
when it purchased a large amount of land in the Waitākere region
between 1853 and 1856 it failed to actively protect Te Kawerau ā Maki by
ensuring adequate lands were reserved from the purchase and thereafter
protected from alienation and this was in breach of the Treaty of Waitangi and its
(undefined-Ed) principles.
·
Other Important Questions:
a.
What
legal authority would the proposed strategic plan have? Would it override other
plans such as the Regional Parks Management Plan, the Unitary Plan and Local
Board Plans?
b.
Would
the co-governance entity be the decision-makers on the conservation management
plan, and/or the regional park and reserve management plans?
c.
What
responsibilities would remain with the Local Boards. How would the relationship
between the Local Boards and the co-governance entity be managed?
d.
How
will public access to the Waitakere Ranges Heritage Area be affected?
e.
What
would the implications be for the road network? Auckland Transport's
involvement in the working group suggests this could be a problem.
f.
What
would the relationship be between the co-governance entity and regional parks
staff? Who would regional parks staff ultimately be responsible to? Would this
arrangement affect the management of other regional parks?
g.
Who
will be making the decisions regarding the granting of concessions, permits,
and leases?
h.
Would
the co-governance entity be the decision makers as to the location and
construction of structures, signs, or tracks?
* https://akhaveyoursay.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/waitakere-ranges-heritage-area-deed-acknowledgement
Fiona Mackenzie is a businesswoman who has combined self-employment with voluntary work and is a firm believer in the safeguards that true democracy provides.
25 comments:
Thank you for this very real account of just how far down the road we are.
Unfortunately democracy is already lost.
As the resent treaty principle bill debacle has proven, our central government and local council's are actively shutting down quantrary views and opinions regarding Maori interests and its march to He Pua Pua.
Submitting on any issues that might halt this assault, is a waste of time and energy. I repeat, democracy is lost. All we have is taking our chances with next years election. I'm certainly not confident, are you.
Indeed - very bleak . Have we arrived at 2 options: fight or flee - with Auckland as the guinea pig?
So, will we the tax slaves keep funding this corporate crime syndicate masquerading as our ‘democratic representative government’ until they come for our private property?
To be quite frank, we have every reason to be pretty pi$$ed of with National and its warped leadership, they are not just Labour lite, they may as well be fully paid up quisling members of the Labour party. Mr Luxon, read my lips, you will not have an economy if you do not change direction by dealing with co-governance and this insidious Maorification pronto. Sir, with the greatest respect I can muster, please take this from me, you are a ruddy fool, stop selling New Zealand down the river!
Ignore the negative Mud Bay Ripper. He seems like a majority of NZers; ready to submit without a fight. Where is our pioneering spirit; our ancestors would have shown some backbone and fought back Many thanks Fiona for bringing this to our attention. It should be every Aucklanders duty to tell the Council what they think about this. Also a local election is only six months away. Make sure these idiots don't get back in power
Not long to wait for this next step.
Yes - make it the " central issue" and assemble a whole team (20) in advance ready to govern with integrity. But till the October election : suspend this issue.
Fiona has clearly revealed this irreversible plot of quietly confiscating great swaths of public land through mischievous stealth. This process is being enabled by a deaf dumb and blind PM who’s short tenure will be remembered for his cowardly inability to reverse the racial divisiveness ignited by comrade Ardern and National’s own historic blunders.
A problem is that the few cancellation resistant Councillors not keenly pro maori have little incentive to devote enormous time and become involved at this stage. To what extent the submission will be made readily available to them I do not know, but reliance on summary by inevitably pro maori Council staff is likely. With few of the public reading newspapers, shallow uncritical reporting anyway, local newspapers no longer delivered ,nor "Our Auckland", and the latter now just entertainment froth , and very few of the population extensive park users, non maori response will be limited. On the other hand maori will be able to utilise their extensive insurgency co-ordination networks to support the maori proposal.The Maunga Authority has very clearly demonstrated that any 50/50 "co" or partnership arrangement is basically maori control. The only restraint is complex and expensive court action. With all the meetings and the (maori favouring) make work generated, total effective operating cost is hugely increased. Especially at risk is continued and increased loss of access to and experience of the wild aspect of the park, and total prohibition from a very large part. It is absurd that the present day trace maori activist remnants of the tribes who intermittently and tenuously occupied parts of the area long ago, and who demonstratably have negligible intrinsic interest in tramping type activity, stand to have far more say than eager tramper ratepayers who more proportionately own the Park. It is supposed to be used for recreation not primarily for plant disease experiment, native tree nursery and ego boosting.. The rahui, sticking it to the colonists, and developments from, was a supreme mana gaining coup. The proposed Acknowledgment is more of the same.
Its not just the Council but their so called professional contractors and advisers who buy into this stuff and promote it as rational.
Essential to add:
After public land, private land confiscation is the next obvious target.
This is a methodical process.
How do part Maori get to assume full control of the public entities - because of a bit of obscure legislation that the general public never knew about, or voted on ?
Is all this part of The Options Development Group (cleverly disguised by using an English title) plan to assign all Crown and conservation land to Maori ?
Never heard of this official body that rarely publicly reports ?
It has a committee of 11 , and 8 of these 11 clearly identify as Maori.
Created by Ardern under He Puapua, have they been dismantled by this Coalition ?
No, they continue to devise ways to destroy democracy.
Luxon, Peters, Seymour stop this rot before we have violence !!
Anon 11:25am - Just in the past week it occurred to me too, that in our present political climate, the future confiscation of private land is a possibility I can no longer confidently rule out. On top of the continuing expansion of mechanisms like co-governance and the maorification of local government, our present government clearly intends to make it easier to requisition private land for infrastructure purposes. Could this law be misused under a different govt for example - i.e. private land be seized without recompense?
Quite likely. Even all ready to go.
cf Sth African law ( 18 March 2025 ): Expropriation with Nil Compensation .
NZ: already happening in Tauranga ( residential land given to Iwi), Whanganui , Hutt Valley. Gore district (cultural sites) - and the "first refusal for Maori " principle for private land sales is Green and TPM policy. Also TPM: a 2% fee for Iwi on any private land transaction ( in their policy proposals).
I urge everyone who really wants to know more about what this Deed will achieve to do your own research. The primary focus is to achieve a collaborative approach to preserve and look after the nationally significant Waitātake Ranges. Fiona seems to have overlooked that. https://akhaveyoursay.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/waitakere-ranges-heritage-area-deed-acknowledgement
It is proposed that the policy planning group be comprise half of tribal rep maori and the rest part by Dept of Conservation and part by Councillors. As the maori group will act as a purely self interested externally directed mana seeking group, Dept of Conserv generally aligns with, and most councillors, brainwashed and fearing cancellation, align with maori, then effective maori control is inevitable. May as well simply set up a tribe based policy group, tell them to do as they will and send in the bill.This will save councillor time and frustration. and a fortune in meeting expenses. The park is unlikely to be completely closed as this would reduce maori favoured employment for maori, or pretext for continued paid meetings..
The collaborative approach is perfectly possible - indeed obligatory - though the usual ACC process. That is what ratepayers voted for. There is no requirement for a special 3 - part structure with 2 parts consisting of unelected persons. Decisions taken by such bodies are not valid .
Questions are: What extra taking care of do the Ranges need? How does collaboration deliver on this need? Why does the proposed Deed affect all public areas within the entire Heritage Area (let alone the Ranges) and Coast, and then the rest of Auckland Region? What exactly is this collaboration? With whom? Why? What are the terms? What safeguards are there to protect the public interest in the public land and public monies? What accountability is there? How much extra money must ratepayers pay for this so-called collaboration? What right does the Council have to 'collaborate' or hand over control of all public land in a region (not just Ranges by the way) to a select group based on part of their ancestry???? Collaboration has gained a nasty reputation throughout history, so it's not a system I'd support.
Questions are: What extra taking care of do the Ranges need? Why does the proposed Deed affect all public areas within the entire Heritage Area (let alone the Ranges) and Coast, and then the rest of Auckland Region? What exactly is this collaboration? With whom? Why? What are the terms? What safeguards are there to protect the public interest in the public land and public monies? What accountability is there? How much extra money must ratepayers pay for this so-called collaboration? What right does the Council have to 'collaborate' or hand over control of all public land in a region (not just Ranges by the way) to a select group based on part of their ancestry???? Collaboration has gained a nasty reputation throughout history, so it's not a system I'd support.
What is most concerning is that Auckland has a population of 1.5 million people, and yet than 20 people on this forum are protesting about this sly loss of their democracy.
For what it is worth I’ve did fill in the Council form on this subject. It is apparent that they intend a cross mix of elected, and non-elected management (ACC, DOC and iwi).
I basically pointed out that ratepayers own the local parks and must be involved in any decisions re their management.
I am sorry to all here who are so passionate in their beliefs. But this is all so misguided.
Some facts addressing just some of the above:
- this is not co-governance it is not even close. it is just a bunch of people on an advisory group providing suggestions to council committees first, and then the council proper second. they are on the third tier of responsibility, or even lower.
- this advisory group would not make decisions, they just provide suggestions which can be accepted or ignored by council
- the council and councillors are still in control
- no-one has veto rights
- this advice would only apply to council (and doc) land. not private land. not water. nothing else
- ratepayer still own local parks and are involved in decisions made - through their local boards and councillors - nothing changes
- no-one is handing over control.
- Democracy isn’t lost — you’re using it right now to vent. Maori participation in decisions doesn’t erase democracy, it fulfils it doesn't it?
- He Puapua is not government policy — it was a discussion document, not a blueprint for land confiscation. It hasn't happened and likely will never happen.
- Māori aren’t taking over public parks — they’re helping protect and restore them, often unpaid, after decades of neglect sometimes under Crown mismanagement.
- ‘Maorification’ is not actually a thing — give me a break. You still get to live your life. If you don't like some words being used, and some people sitting in a room talking then ignore it. easy.
- Being Māori doesn’t mean you’re unelected or unaccountable — it means you belong to one of the Treaty partners. That’s not race-based, it’s rights-based. It's actually in the law. In legislation. if you don't like it, get elected to central parliament and try to roll back the past 50 years of laws and settlements - by all governments and parties. Good luck with that.
If you genuinely care about democracy, try learning how it works — not fearmongering every time the word Māori is included in something.
Anon 1:04.
You have little idea of democracy, if you think that giving people of a different ethnicity special rights is OK.
And everyone should be worried when Councils or government people use the Maori word as it is inherently racist. Invariably it means they are giving people with any amount of Maori DNA extraordinary benefits.
Amazingly, at 18:15 tonight Nicola Willis admitted that she had just been told about this Waitakere debacle.
Going to report back next week.
It will be interesting to hear her interpretation of what is clearly He Puapua type progression.
Anon 1:04, special rights for indigenous people has a long history - the term 'First Nations' originated in Canada in 1871 and 11 treaties with indigenous tribes between then and 1921 were the result. In Australia the Mabo case introduced the notion of Native Title in 1993. It is less a matter of democracy than of entitlement to land and natural resources than were 'owned' by 'first nations' prior to colonisation.
Just a couple of facts…
Democracy, the principle of one person, one vote, is not (or should not) in any way be linked to ethnicity.
Your assertion that Maori are helping to protect and restore our National Parks (and unpaid) is utter nonsense.
Tuhoe have been given control of the Ureweras plus $2m pa for expenses.
The place has gone to rack ruin with many huts being destroyed (instead of being maintained), the possum control is almost non-existent and the “owners” repeatedly block access for boat launching…and they’re still begging for more money from the taxpayer!
Therefore we have every right to be apprehensive and mistrusting about any form of co-governance.
Also, there was no Treaty partnership so stop inventing fantasy.
Post a Comment