The Government’s decision to prevent existing Mana Whakahono ā Rohe agreements from transferring into its new planning system has ignited an immediate backlash, with Māori leaders accusing it of dismantling another practical expression of the Crown–Māori relationship.
Cabinet has reversed an earlier provision that would have carried completed and formally initiated agreements into the system replacing the Resource Management Act.
RMA Reform Minister Chris Bishop said the Government became concerned after the number of agreements and initiated processes increased sharply following the introduction of its Planning and Natural Environment Bills.
Eight agreements existed when the legislation was introduced late last year, but “several dozen more” had since been agreed or initiated, he said.
Under the revised approach, councils will instead have the option of entering into more narrowly defined iwi participation agreements. Those would cover iwi involvement in statutory planning and processes needed to give effect to Treaty settlement redress.
The Government says “clear guardrails” will prevent what it describes as “scope creep”.
But for iwi and Te Pāti Māori, the move represents far more than an administrative adjustment. They argue it removes statutory protection from relationships already negotiated in good faith and reinforces a wider pattern of limiting Māori participation in public decision-making.
‘Rewriting the place of Māori’
Te Pāti Māori co-leader Debbie Ngarewa-Packer said the decision was not planning reform, but another deliberate step in dismantling the Crown’s relationship with tangata whenua.
“This Government isn’t just rewriting planning law. It is rewriting the place of Māori in Aotearoa,” she said.
“One law at a time, one institution at a time, one agreement at a time, they are removing the practical ways Te Tiriti is honoured.”
Mana Whakahono ā Rohe were introduced into the RMA in 2017. They provide a statutory process through which iwi authorities and councils can agree on how tangata whenua will participate in resource-management planning and decision-making.
The agreements can set out consultation, environmental monitoring and dispute-resolution processes, as well as how councils and iwi will give effect to Treaty settlements. They do not transfer councils’ decision-making authority to iwi.
Official guidance described them as a deliberate policy shift because an iwi authority could bring a council to the table, with the parties then required to work towards concluding an agreement. The framework was designed to be flexible enough to reflect local circumstances.
Ngarewa-Packer challenged the Government to publish any evidence showing the agreements had failed.
“If the Government has evidence these agreements have failed, it should release it. If it doesn’t, New Zealanders deserve to know why another Treaty-based mechanism is being dismantled,” she said.
“This isn’t about efficiency. It’s about ideology.”
Ngāti Tūrangitukua says trust has been breached
Ngāti Tūrangitukua Charitable Trust said the reversal was particularly damaging because iwi and councils had relied on the Government’s previous assurance that completed and formally initiated agreements would be protected during the transition.
The hapū signed a comprehensive Mana Whakahono agreement with Taupō District Council at Hīrangi Marae in June 2022. It covers resource management, reserves, infrastructure, water services and the social, cultural, environmental and economic wellbeing of Tūrangi.
Ngāti Tūrangitukua also formally initiated an agreement with Waikato Regional Council in April 2025. The parties have already undertaken substantial work involving regional planning, environmental monitoring and Tongariro River flood management.
Trust chair Lauren Fletcher called the Government’s change of position a “profound breach of trust”.
“We have invested considerable time, capability and resources in building constructive relationships with both Taupō District Council and Waikato Regional Council,” she said.
“These are not abstract or unnecessary agreements. They provide clarity about how iwi and councils will work together, reduce duplication, support early engagement and help avoid conflict and delay.”
Fletcher said the decision carried added weight because the Crown had previously acknowledged and apologised for failing to consult Ngāti Tūrangitukua, disregarding its mana and leaving its people unable to protect ancestral lands and wāhi tapu during the development of Tūrangi.
“Mana Whakahono provides one practical way of ensuring those failures are not repeated,” she said.
The hapū is calling for statutory protection to be retained for completed and formally initiated agreements, direct engagement with affected iwi, hapū and councils, and the publication of the proposed amendments, Cabinet decisions and any Treaty impact analysis.
It also wants guarantees that existing agreements and Treaty settlement commitments will retain the same practical effect under the replacement system.
The Government maintains its wider reforms will reduce bureaucracy, remove thousands of consent requirements and deliver billions of dollars in economic benefits. It says Māori interests will continue to be recognised through a system goal, participation in national instruments and plan-making, and protections for Treaty settlements.
But Ngarewa-Packer warned that removing trusted pathways would not eliminate disagreement—it would produce more of it.
“Good planning depends on good relationships,” she said, “and this Government is choosing to weaken those relationships.”