Hi Friend,

I know you're busy, but this can't wait.

Right now, councils across New Zealand are quietly working to lock in "Mana Whakahono ā Rohe" (iwi participation agreements) before Parliament passes the new Resource Management laws.

The Government’s proposed replacement legislation would prevent councils from entering into new agreements — but, as currently drafted, agreements signed before the new laws take effect will be embedded.

Of course our focus is the election – but we need your support to force National to correct the wording of the proposed law before it is too late.

What are Mana Whakahono ā Rohe (iwi participation agreements)?

Mana Whakahono ā Rohe (MWRs) are statutory agreements under the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) that record ways in which mana whenua may participate in resource management and council decision-making on planning and resource consents.

Under the current law, iwi authorities representing local tangata whenua can "invite" a council to enter into a MWR participation agreement.

But the "invite" wording is highly misleading.

The councils don't have a choice but to agree to one once an iwi 'invites’ them to! 

The above section goes on to explain the process the council must follow in order to achieve an agreement. And there's even a default timeframe:

So what do Mana Whakahono ā Rohe agreements contain?

The agreements set out how different iwi groups must be embedded within the council's planning and consenting processes. Often the minute detail is left for later, with the agreements setting out legally binding principles.

For example, the first three (legally enforceable) "Principles" to "guide the relationship" (i.e. shared resource management decision making) contained in the proposed Canterbury agreement are:

"Unity" is the operative word here.

Unity means 50/50 'partnership' or 'joint’ decision-making for things like water regulation, spatial plans, and consenting.

Don't believe me? Well, you soon will...

Ngāi Tahu has previously described the identical "Tuia" provisions which the Council is adopting as a legally binding MWR as "meaning working together arm in arm". 

This is an official Council/Ngāi Tahu briefing (uncovered by the Taxpayers' Union):

It states:

Can Mana Whakahono ā Rohe (iwi participation agreements) be terminated?

Unlike previous local government co-governance agreements iwi relationship agreements, Mana Whakahono ā Rohe can only be terminated by mutual agreement!

That means they bind future councillors/elected officials.

Why is this issue suddenly important?

The reason for the sudden rush is that iwi groups and councils can see the window is about to close and that replacement laws for the RMA are set to grandfather these agreements - even on new/amalgamated councils.

But despite the significance, ratepayers are not even being consulted on these agreements. 

In Northland, the local councillors are even being barred by officials from seeing the draft agreement being negotiated with local iwi (yes, seriously - Heather du Plessis-Allan interviewed one of the councillors on her show last night).

Why is this a taxpayer issue?

Friend, here at the Taxpayers' Union, we will not abandon our championing of democratic accountability.

We believe resource management (i.e. who can build what and where) should be in the hands of democratically elected councils.

The practical effect of these MWR agreements is to shift responsibility out of councils and give unelected groups effective rights of 'veto' on planning and consenting.

As I told Kerre Woodham this morning on Newstalk ZB – we are aware of examples of iwi groups abusing their RMA powers and demanding money in order for "cultural issues" to go away.

The rest of the world has a word for that... and it is something I'm asking for your support to put an end to.

Where is the National Party on this matter?

Friend, if there was one thing the National Party was clear on before the last election around co-governance, it was Three Waters and local government.

But, since coming to power, the National Party has been pathetic.

Sure, they repealed Labour's "Three Waters", but National's Local Government Minister Simon Watts allowed councils to adopt the identical 'co-governance' model under his "Local Water Done Well" policy.

Simon Watts's excuse is that he did his job because he repealed Labour's requirement forcing councils to implement co-governance of water... Wellington, Waikato (and other regions) have just gone ahead anyway.

The short point is that even though ACT and New Zealand First have come out against co-governance of planning, Simon Watts and the National Party have put their fingers in their ears and refuse to tackle the problem. 

On water services, Simon Watts and the National Party failed to protect local democracy and democratic accountability, despite promising to do so prior to the last election.

The question now is whether Simon Watts and the National Party will protect local democracy, and democratic accountability, for resource management.

We can't let them fail again. That's why I'm asking for your support for this campaign to force the issue.

To date, only the Taxpayers' Union, and our friends at Federated Farmers, have been willing to call out what the National Party is set to cement in place.

No one wants to publicly put their head above the parapet for fear of being labelled racist (or worse).

To shine the light on the issue, we need to mount a grassroots ratepayer campaign to force the National Party to see sense and change its proposed RMA replacement to abolish, not embed, these undemocratic Mana Whakahono ā Rohe agreements.

Can we count on your support, Friend?

Let me be clear: councils should work constructively with iwi, just as they should with farmers, businesses, community organisations and everyone else affected by their decisions.

But if we are to be a prosperous nation, decisions about property rights, planning rules and resource consents must remain with people who the public can vote in – and vote out.

Time is running out

The Government has committed to passing the RMA replacement bills before the election.

That means we have just a few weeks to force National to change the draft laws currently before Parliament.

These are serious constitutional and financial questions. They should not be settled through agreements rushed onto council agendas at the eleventh hour.

All donations will be used to demand that the Government:

1. Stop councils signing new Mana Whakahono ā Rohe agreements while the RMA replacement legislation is before Parliament;

2. Amend the RMA replacement bills so agreements rushed through during this transition do not automatically carry over; and

3. Guarantee that decisions affecting property rights and resource consents remain subject to democratic accountability.

National Party Ministers will only act if they feel enough public pressure

Once these agreements are signed and carried into the new system, undoing them will be far harder.

That is why I’m asking you to chip in today.

Your donation will help us alert ratepayers, scrutinise agreements being proposed around the country, commission legal and policy work, and run an advertising campaign demanding that the Government close this loophole.

Please make a confidential donation today and help us send ministers a message they cannot ignore: no rushed agreements, no backroom deals, and no weakening of democratic accountability.

>> Make a confidential donation via our secure website <<

Thank you for standing with us,

Jordan Williams Executive Director New Zealand Taxpayers’ Union

PS. Environment Canterbury plans to consider final ratification on 22 July. Other agreements are being initiated around the country. We need to move quickly. Please chip in today so we can launch the campaign and demand that the Government close the loophole before more agreements are locked in.