This bill implements Parts 1–3 of the Tauranga Moana collective deed: it records a Crown statutory acknowledgement for named statutory areas, sets up co‑management and engagement arrangements for Mauao and the Te Kūpenga Area, transfers specified Crown forestry (licensed) land to the Tauranga Moana Iwi Collective Limited Partnership, and creates a 174‑year right of first refusal (RFR) regime over identified RFR land. It also cancels certain historic resumptive memorials and directs Land Information New Zealand (LINZ) to record and remove computer‑register notifications tied to the settlement.
The practical effect is a mix of recognition, operational co‑management, and durable property constraints: iwi and the Limited Partnership gain formal roles in conservation planning, guaranteed access to notifications on resource consent applications for 20 years, and an economic claimant status for licensed land; public bodies and private parties face new procedural obligations, registration duties for LINZ and the Registrar‑General, and long‑lasting limits on disposal of RFR land that will affect transactions and land management for generations.
At a Glance
What It Does
Requires the Crown to acknowledge Tauranga Moana Iwi association with specific statutory areas and mandates that consent authorities, the Environment Court, and Heritage New Zealand ‘have regard’ to that acknowledgement from the effective date. Establishes a Mauao joint board, a Te Kūpenga Conservation Partnership Forum, transfers specified licensed (forestry) land to the Limited Partnership, and records an RFR on identified land for 174 years with detailed notice and register rules.
Who It Affects
Affects Tauranga Moana Iwi members, the Tauranga Moana Iwi Collective Limited Partnership, the Mauao Trust and Tauranga City Council (joint board), Department of Conservation (Director‑General and local area office), LINZ/Registrar‑General, Crown forestry licensees, and any RFR landowners (Crown bodies, local authorities, and the Crown).
Why It Matters
Combines symbolic recognition with binding administrative effects: statutory acknowledgements change procedural treatment in resource and heritage decisions; transfer and access rules change property status of licensed land; the 174‑year RFR and register notifications materially constrain future disposals and marketability of flagged parcels.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The bill implements discrete pieces of the Tauranga Moana collective deed. It starts by defining the operative terms (who counts as Tauranga Moana Iwi, what ‘Tauranga Moana’ covers) and sets the settlement mechanics: most provisions operate on the settlement date or an effective date set six months later.
LINZ is instructed to cancel certain historic resumptive memorials on licensed and RFR land and to create or annotate computer registers to reflect the settlement arrangements.
On cultural redress, the Crown formally records statutory acknowledgements for the statutory areas listed in Schedule 1 and requires relevant consent authorities, the Environment Court, and Heritage New Zealand to have regard to those acknowledgements when deciding affected‑person status or appeals. The bill makes those acknowledgements public via attachments to statutory plans, gives the Limited Partnership and representative entities a right to receive summaries or notices of resource consent applications for 20 years, and clarifies that the acknowledgements are evidential — not determinative of legal interest or title.The bill establishes governance mechanisms for specific sites and conservation areas.
It revokes Tauranga City Council’s sole administering appointment for the Mauao Historic Reserve and replaces it with an 8‑member joint board (4 appointees from the Mauao Trust and 4 from the Council) that will manage the reserve at least for an initial 12‑month period and until a joint decision to revert administration to the trustees. For the wider Te Kūpenga Area the bill creates a Conservation Partnership Forum with a mix of iwi and Department of Conservation appointees, formal procedures (consensus decision‑making, meeting frequency, funding shares) and functions (conservation principles, input into plans, joint working parties, wānanga sites, and wāhi tapu management agreements).On commercial redress, the Crown is authorised to transfer fee simple title in the defined licensed land to the Tauranga Moana Iwi Collective Limited Partnership, to create computer freehold registers in the Crown’s name as a transitional measure, and to grant easements over conservation land if needed.
Licensed land stops being Crown forest land on registration, the Limited Partnership becomes the confirmed beneficiary of the Crown forestry rental trust in relation to that land from the actual settlement date, and the transfer process is exempted from several otherwise applicable statutory approvals. The bill also creates a statutory right of access to protected (wāhi tapu) sites on licensed land from the actual settlement date subject to notice and reasonable conditions.Finally, the bill sets up a detailed right‑of‑first‑refusal (RFR) regime for specified RFR land: the RFR runs for 174 years from the settlement date, an offer process (notices, minimum 40 working‑day reply window, shorter windows in limited circumstances) governs how landowners must offer disposals to the Limited Partnership, and LINZ must record RFR notifications on computer registers and later remove them when the RFR ends or land is transferred.
The RFR contains many carve‑outs for disposals under other statutes, for public works, for charitable gifts, and for certain pre‑existing legal obligations.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The Crown records statutory acknowledgements for areas in Schedule 1 and requires consent authorities, the Environment Court, and Heritage New Zealand to ‘have regard’ to those acknowledgements from the effective date (six months after settlement).
The bill establishes an 8‑member Mauao joint board (4 appointees from the Mauao Trust; 4 from Tauranga City Council) as administering body for at least one year and until a joint agreement transfers administration back to the trustees.
LINZ must create or update computer freehold registers for the licensed land, cancel specified resumptive memorials, and record RFR notifications; the Registrar‑General then registers transfers and removes notifications as directed by certificates from the chief executive of LINZ.
The Limited Partnership (or its nominee) has a statutory right of first refusal over identified RFR land for 174 years from the settlement date, with detailed offer, acceptance, notice, and recording procedures and multiple statutory exceptions.
For 20 years after the effective date, relevant consent authorities must provide the Limited Partnership and each representative entity with either a summary of resource consent applications or copies of notices for activities within, adjacent to, or directly affecting statutory areas.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Scope, definitions, settlement timing, and cancellation of resumptive memorials
These opening provisions set the interpretive frame: who counts as Tauranga Moana Iwi, what ‘Tauranga Moana’ covers geographically, and the operational dates (settlement date and effective date). They also require LINZ to issue certificates to cancel older resumptive memorials tied to Crown forestry, rail, education, state enterprise, and Treaty‑related enactments for the licensed and RFR land, which clears title and removes legacy registration obstacles to transfers and to the RFR recording regime.
Formal Crown acknowledgement and procedural effects in resource, heritage and planning processes
Section 15 records the Crown’s acknowledgement of statements of association set out in the deed; sections 17–19 impose procedural duties on decision‑makers to ‘have regard’ to that acknowledgement in affected‑person and direct‑interest determinations. The bill requires relevant consent authorities to attach copies of the acknowledgement and statements to statutory plans for public information and obliges authorities to provide application summaries or notices to the Limited Partnership and representative entities for 20 years, without converting the acknowledgement into a proprietary right.
Joint governance for Mauao Historic Reserve with detailed composition and operational rules
The bill revokes the Tauranga City Council’s sole administering appointment and creates a joint board with equal appointments from the Mauao Trust and the Council. It sets minimum timing (first meeting within two months, maintain joint board at least one year), requires a memorandum of understanding about day‑to‑day management, and preserves trustees’ decision‑maker role for certain statutory authorisations while the joint board is in place — a hybrid that blends delegated powers with trustee control over approvals affecting the reserve.
Conservation Partnership Forum and Te Kūpenga operational rules
Schedule 2 establishes a six‑member Conservation Partnership Forum (three iwi appointees; three Director‑General appointees), specifies consensus procedures, funding shares, and a timetable for producing a conservation principles document. The schedule transfers specified decision‑making functions (like cultural flora authorisations) to iwi, creates wānanga sites, sets up joint working parties for Ngatukituki, and obliges the Director‑General and conservation boards to have particular regard to the Forum’s outputs.
Crown authorised to transfer specified Crown forestry land and related register and easement mechanics
The Crown (through the chief executive of LINZ) may transfer fee simple title in listed licensed land to the Limited Partnership, create computer freehold registers in the Crown’s name as an interim step, and grant easements over conservation or reserve land as required. The transfer is carved out from a number of statutory regimes (certain conservation and resource management provisions do not apply), the licensed land ceases to be Crown forest land on registration, and the Limited Partnership becomes the confirmed beneficiary of the forestry rental trust from the actual settlement date.
Detailed 174‑year RFR regime with offer protocol, exceptions, and register notifications
RFR land is defined in section 48 and the RFR runs for 174 years. An RFR landowner must follow a notice/offer process (contents, address rules, and a default 40 working‑day reply window) before disposing to others, with many carve‑outs for statutory disposals (public works, reserves, charities, certain legislative processes). LINZ must record RFR notifications on computer registers and later remove them when land transfers or the RFR period ends; the bill also prescribes how notices are to be given and treated for timing purposes.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Indigenous Affairs across all five countries.
Explore Indigenous Affairs in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Members of Tauranga Moana Iwi — gain formal Crown acknowledgement of association with named statutory areas, structured participation in conservation decision‑making (Te Kūpenga Forum, wānanga sites, wāhi tapu management agreements) and improved procedural access to resource consent information.
- Tauranga Moana Iwi Collective Limited Partnership — acquires licensed forestry land (economic redress), confirmed beneficiary status under the forestry rental trust, statutory rights of first refusal over RFR land, and explicit recording/notification rights on land registers that improve visibility of settlement assets and opportunities.
- Mauao Trust and Tauranga City Council — share direct operational control of Mauao via the joint board, formalising a governance arrangement that provides a clear decision pathway and a guaranteed role for iwi trustees in reserve matters.
- Department of Conservation and conservation boards — gain a formal, localised forum (Te Kūpenga Partnership Forum) for co‑designing conservation principles and participating in joint working parties, which can streamline consultation and produce focused local guidance.
Who Bears the Cost
- The Crown (agencies such as LINZ and the Ministry of Justice) — must execute transfers, issue certificates, cancel memorials, maintain register annotations and supply deed copies, creating administrative and transaction costs and requiring cross‑agency coordination.
- LINZ/Registrar‑General — face workload to create computer freehold registers, issue and act on statutory certificates, record and later remove RFR notifications, and process transfer instruments outside ordinary regulatory pathways.
- Crown forestry licensees and prospective private purchasers — the transfer and RFR mechanics change licensor status and cloud marketability for RFR land due to long‑running restrictions and required offers/notifications, potentially complicating financing and lease amendments.
- RFR landowners (Crown bodies and local authorities) — acquire additional procedural obligations and timing constraints when disposing land, and must justify how disposals fit statutory exceptions; failure to follow notice rules can expose transactions to challenge or delay.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central dilemma is between recognition and reconciliation on one hand — giving Tauranga Moana Iwi durable procedural rights, co‑management roles and long‑term economic redress — and preserving the neutral, statutory exercise of public powers and fluid property markets on the other; the bill gives meaningful voice and long‑lasting constraints without converting acknowledgements into proprietary title, but that compromise shifts friction into administrative practice, land‑market risk, and the discretionary space of statutory decision‑makers.
The bill blends symbolic recognition and operational mandates while deliberately avoiding creation of proprietary titles. That design creates practical frictions: statutory acknowledgements alter the procedural ecosystem around resource consents and heritage approvals without granting legal estates or enforceable property rights, so parties and decision‑makers must balance the acknowledgement’s evidential weight against statutory duties that remain unchanged.
The conservation relationship agreement and Forum give iwi stronger, formalized input into conservation planning, but many of those inputs are advisory or subject to ‘have regard’ standards rather than binding directives — and enforcement remedies are limited (the Crown can be compelled to comply but monetary damages are expressly excluded for conservation relationship agreement breaches).
The RFR is long and prescriptive: 174 years is effectively intergenerational. That creates market risk — buyers, lenders and land managers will need to factor in enduring disposal constraints, register annotations and strict notice windows.
The bill contains many carve‑outs enabling public‑law disposals, but the interplay between statutory exceptions, pre‑existing mortgages and third‑party rights could produce transaction complexity. Implementation also places a heavy administrative load on LINZ and the Registrar‑General to issue certificates, annotate registers, cancel memorials, and remove notifications in step with transfers and the RFR lifecycle.
Finally, some procedural rules (for example consensus decision‑making in the Forum and limited quorums) could slow advice production and create deadlocks; the disputes resolution backstops are present but operational detail will determine how effective those mechanisms are in practice.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.