The legal machinery already exists. Under Treaty settlements, iwi and hapū have rights of first refusal (RFR) over thousands of Crown-owned properties. The deal is simple: when the government decides to sell, iwi get first crack at buying — no auction, no competition, no market tension, just a polite phone call and a tidy form to sign. Fair enough, perhaps, when it’s about addressing historic grievances.
But now, that model is spreading. Councils, apparently inspired by the Crown’s generosity, have started adopting the same principle for their own property portfolios. Horowhenua District Council has recently approved a policy giving local iwi and hapū first right of refusal over selected council land sales. Wellington and Tauranga have floated similar frameworks. It’s all wrapped up in warm bureaucratic language like “partnership,” “equity,” and “recognising mana whenua interests.” Translation: preferred buyers get first dibs.
And here’s where the plot thickens. With Māori wards and appointed representatives now embedded across councils, iwi have a direct line into property and planning committees. So when those councils “review” their property strategies, who exactly will be sitting on the working group? The same people who stand to benefit from the policy — but don’t worry, it’s all in the name of inclusion.
The next step practically writes itself. First, surplus council land gets quietly offered to iwi. Next, developers are told to engage with mana whenua before building anything more ambitious than a garden shed. Then comes the “voluntary” private land registry — where generous citizens can give iwi the right of first refusal on their own property sales. The Greens have already proposed something along those lines, complete with the word voluntary in bold print, the bureaucratic equivalent of “trust us.”
And how might this be implemented without legislation? Easy — the back door is always more polite than the front one. Councils could offer “incentives” to landowners who participate: a rates rebate here, a zoning favour there, maybe faster consent processing for those who “partner” with mana whenua. Before long, a supposedly optional idea becomes best practice. And best practice, in New Zealand’s bureaucratic world, has a funny way of turning into mandatory policy once the paperwork settles.
Meanwhile, ordinary ratepayers are reassured that it’s all just about “cultural respect” and “mutual benefit.” The problem is that these policies don’t stay in their lane. A clause in a disposal plan, a note in a long-term strategy, a co-governance agreement tucked inside a consultation document — and suddenly the ownership landscape starts shifting, slowly but surely, without a single parliamentary debate.
Even government agencies like Land Information New Zealand already operate these RFR systems as a matter of course. Councils adopting the same approach for their own assets may sound harmless — until you realise local authorities collectively hold billions of dollars’ worth of property. Once that becomes a pipeline of preferential offers, the market no longer operates on a level playing field.
The phrase right of first refusal sounds fair, reasonable, and tidy — but in practice, it creates a two-tiered property market: one for the public, one for those deemed “partners.” And if you think that boundary will stay confined to public land, history suggests otherwise.
That’s how major policy shifts happen in New Zealand: quietly, politely, through the side gate while everyone’s staring at the front lawn.
Related reading:
Horowhenua District Council gives iwi first right of refusal on selected property sales - https://shorturl.at/PuZZa
Newstalk ZB – Councillor calls policy “unfair and divisive” - https://shorturl.at/wpPZa
Tauranga City Council – Draft Acquisitions and Disposals Policy, 2021 - https://shorturl.at/ZClTP
Steven is an entrepreneur and an ex RNZN diver who likes travelling, renovating houses, Swiss Watches, history, chocolate art and art deco.
6 comments:
We have been warned.
Using land that wasn’t the original cause of grievance, is simply creating grievances elsewhere and robbing NZers/Crown of their rightful assets.
First "right of refusal" means that the Iwi corporation sets the price (low ball offer), then turns around and flips said property for a nice quick profit. Nice one bro.
Any council floating 'managed retreat' (currently based on climate change scam, but could be anything really) is well down this path. This is simply undercutting the rule of law by stealth. NZers seem too dumb or too kind even to bat an eyelid, while malignant actors patiently play a long-game. Akin to boiling frogs?
We saw it in action in Wellington recently. IWI offered land because of a sacred connection. Price $1 mill. A few weeks later IWI dumped the sacred connection and on-sold for $3 mill
It is hard to imagine how or why these policies are adopted. Is it fear of cancellation by maori and a move for a quiet life in Council? I am curious how works. Seems the Council should guess the maximum practical price. If maori refuse what then? Presumably cannot negotiate down with others. If strict policy far simpler to sell at discount to maori and pretend no consequent disadvantges to the whole community. Auction with a high reserve would effectively give maori first option.
Post a Comment