Newsletter

“How Potaka’s Order in Council Bypassed Democracy to Serve Mining Capital” - 12 December 2025

The Stewardship Land Shell Game

Ivor Jones The Māori Green Ltn

12 Dec 2025 — 16 min read

Cui malo? Follow the extraction trail.

On 11 December 2025, Conservation Minister Tama Potaka announced what he called “the most significant reclassification since DOC’s inception in 1987”—a sweeping reclassification of 644,000 hectares of stewardship land on the West Coast of Te Wai Pounamu.

The decision, made through an order in council process that legitimately circumvents Cabinet sign off, exposes the Coalition’s extractive priorities and demonstrates how constitutional loopholes can be weaponized against conservation and Te Tiriti obligations.

The sleight of hand is remarkable:

while Potaka celebrates protecting more than 190,000 hectares under the Reserves Act and more than 300,000 hectares under the Conservation Act, the real story lies in what he’s opening for disposal.

Sixty-three proposals for disposal investigations, covering up to 3,352 hectares of land, signal a clear intent: serve extractive industries first, conservation second.

The Constitutional Loophole: Order in Council as Democratic Bypass

The order in council mechanism represents a profound constitutional flaw in New Zealand’s Westminster system. As Cabinet Office guidelines confirm, orders in council are secondary legislation made by the Governor-General on ministerial advice, requiring 28 days’ notice in the New Zealand Gazette but bypassing full parliamentary scrutiny.

This is precisely how Potaka operated. As RNZ reports,

“Tama Potaka made the changes through an ‘order in council’ process that legitimately circumvents Cabinet sign off.”

New Zealand First’s deputy leader Shane Jones conceded Potaka holds the power to do so, though he disagrees with the decision.

The irony is palpable:

Jones, architect of the Fast-Track Approvals Act that allows ministers to bypass environmental protections, now finds himself outflanked by a fellow minister using similar executive overreach.

Jones told RNZ:

“Obviously we’re pro-mining, pro-extraction and this decision never went through Cabinet so it’s fair to say that it’s not aligned with the party stance on stewardship land.”

The Stewardship Land Origins: A Temporary Hold Weaponized for Extraction

To understand this betrayal, we must trace the whakapapa of stewardship land. When DOC was established it received Crown lands deemed potentially worthy of protection, creating “stewardship land” as a transition status while conservation values were fully assessed. As a Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment consultant report confirms, stewardship was “never intended that land would remain in that category for long” and officials expected reclassification “to take place over a couple of decades.”

Pristine West Coast native forest with ancient podocarp and beech trees, misty mountains in background, golden late afternoon light filtering through the canopy, showing the ecological richness and biodiversity of the conservation land at stake

Thirty-eight years later, approximately 84% of the West Coast region remains public conservation land, representing approximately 25% of all public conservation land in New Zealand. The region contains ancient podocarp and beech forests, wetlands and peatlands of exceptional ecological significance.

Yet this conservation legacy is under siege. As parliamentary researcher Guy Salmon documented, the stewardship concept emerged from 1980s debates where “NGO leaders” worried it was “too close to the old Forest Service ‘mixed use’ model which had allowed selective logging and exotic plantations in pristine forests.”

Those fears were prescient. The Coalition has revived extractive “mixed use” ideology, rebranding it as “certainty” for industry.

The Hidden Connections: New Zealand First, Mining Wealth, and Decommissioning Liability

Shane Jones’ outburst reveals deeper coalition fractures. Jones told RNZ:

“We are a pro-extractive, pro-mining, pro-development, pro-jobs party... It was only shoved in DOC in 1987 because people were too lazy back there to find a better home for it.”

This is ahistorical nonsense designed to delegitimize conservation. As Government reports document, stewardship land allocation followed Cabinet decisions on 16 September 1985 to separate conservation values from commercial forests and farms during the neoliberal restructuring that created state-owned enterprises.

Jones’ extractive agenda is explicit in his Minerals Strategy for New Zealand to 2040, which aims to double mineral exports to $3 billion by 2035. The strategy added metallurgical coal and gold to the list of 37 “critical minerals” on 31 January 2025, just one day after the Government released a climate target claiming to reduce emissions by 51-55% by 2035.

The duplicity is breathtaking. As Greenpeace executive director Russel Norman stated, “The Luxon Government wants to fast track coal mining and restart oil and gas exploration, which is a complete contradiction to the objectives of the Paris Agreement.”

Even more troubling is Jones’ campaign to force banks to finance fossil fuel extraction. As the NZ Herald reports, Jones is developing an “anti-de-banking member’s bill” after BNZ told coal companies it would exit all lending to coal mining by the end of 2030.

Meanwhile, RNZ investigation reveals Jones gave fossil fuel companies privileged insider access to confidential drafts of legislation during a two-year campaign to weaken oil and gas regulation. Internal documents show executives from OMV, Todd Energy and Methanex met frequently with Jones, sharing in-house updates before Cabinet saw proposals.

The industry lobbying focused on weakening decommissioning liability rules introduced after the 2019 Tui Oil Field collapse left taxpayers with a $440 million cleanup bill. The Crown Minerals Amendment Act now gives ministers discretion to decide case-by-case whether former operators must pay cleanup costs.

As Green Party co-leader Chlöe Swarbrick stated:

“The minister could have asked ‘how do we get the best solutions for New Zealanders and our environment?’ but instead he just asked one of the most unscrupulous industries on the planet to help draft our laws.”

The Ngāi Tahu Question: Treaty Tokenism and Mahinga Kai

Potaka’s announcement prominently features the 181,000-hectare Tarahanga e Toru Historic Reserve, which he claims

“recognises the significance of the area for Poutini Ngāi Tahu.” But as DOC confirms, “The reserve does not result in a change in ownership, decision making, or joint management and public access remains the same.”

Mining industry event or on West Coast

This is Treaty tokenism. The reserve acknowledges Poutini Ngāi Tahu cultural significance while denying them rangatiratanga over whenua and mahinga kai. It provides symbolic recognition without material power—a pattern that echoes the betrayals documented by the Waitangi Tribunal.

ACT leader David Seymour’s response is instructive. Seymour told RNZ: “We’ve supported a wider deal that allows a lot more activity. I think that’s a good thing. If it also comes with transfer to iwi, we’ve had a history of treaty settlements for a long time. Sometimes some public land goes to Māori, probably not the way I would do it if I could start New Zealand 180 years ago but it’s where we are.”

Seymour’s framing positions Te Tiriti settlements as historical concessions to be tolerated, not obligations to be honored. It treats iwi land rights as obstacles to extraction rather than constitutional imperatives under Section 4 of the Conservation Act 1987, which requires all persons exercising powers under the Act to give effect to the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi.

The 1998 Ngāi Tahu Claims Settlement was negotiated after the Waitangi Tribunal found the Crown “acted unconscionably and in repeated breach of the Treaty of Waitangi” by acquiring 34.5 million acres for £14,750 pounds and leaving Ngāi Tahu with only 35,757 acres. The settlement included provisions recognizing Ngāi Tahu’s role in environmental management and vesting ownership of pounamu.

Yet these rights remain constrained. The settlement explicitly preserved Crown ownership while granting Poutini Ngāi Tahu first right of refusal on Crown land disposal. This means when Potaka opens 3,352 hectares for disposal investigation, Ngāi Tahu become supplicants asking to purchase whenua that should never have been alienated.

The 2020 Mana Whakahono ā Rohe agreement between West Coast Regional Council and Poutini Ngāi Tahu was New Zealand’s first Iwi Participation Agreement under the Resource Management Act. Yet as Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Waewae Chair Francois Tumahai stated, meaningful partnership requires “respecting both te ao Māori and the legislative framework.” Potaka’s order in council bypass undermines this by excluding genuine co-governance.

The Employment Mirage: Who Benefits from West Coast Mining?

The Coalition’s extractive agenda is justified through job creation rhetoric. Development West Coast CEO Heath Milne claims “for every one mining job in the region, two others are created elsewhere.” Federation Mining signals 100 new jobs at its mine, promising a ten-year mine life.

Yet scratch beneath these promises and the reality is bleak. As Milne himself admits, “historically, many of the benefits of mining have gone off the Coast.”

The data confirms this. Infometrics reports employment across the Coast averaged 0.5% lower in the year to June 2025, with coal exports taking a hit during extended Tawhai Tunnel closure and global coal prices falling more than 20%. Mining sector jobs in New Zealand totalled only 5,256 in 2024, representing just 0.2% of total employment.

Compare this to tourism, which thrives on conservation estate access. Mining creates temporary, boom-bust cycles while degrading the landscapes that sustain enduring employment. A 2012 East Coast oil and gas study projected employment gains ranging from 177 to 2,347 jobs but noted these were “relatively modest for the scale of development due to the high capital intensity.”

The Coalition is sacrificing ecological integrity for precarious employment while enriching offshore capital. As NZ Herald analysis notes, gold mining royalty rates are “just half of those” current rates, meaning major projects pay historical rates.

Meanwhile, annual cost to government of treating acid mine leakage at Stockton mine exceeds entire annual royalties paid by the national coal industry. Taxpayers subsidize extraction while companies privatize profits.

The Constitutional Crisis: Ministerial Overreach and the Erosion of Checks

Potaka’s order in council maneuver exposes a dangerous concentration of power. As the Law Society submission on conservation reforms warns, proposals to reduce the New Zealand Conservation Authority’s role and concentrate decision-making in the Minister mark “a shift towards concentrating Ministerial power and undermining systemic checks and balances on executive decision-making.”

The submission identifies the core problem:

Ministers become both “ultimate decision-maker and setter of the new framework that governs their executive decisions”. This enables Ministers to determine the scope of constraints on their own concession decision-making.

Potaka’s stewardship land decision demonstrates this dynamic in action. By bypassing Cabinet, he avoided collective ministerial scrutiny while wielding statutory authority under Section 25 of the Conservation Act 1987. As parliamentary records confirm, orders in council require only Governor-General signature on ministerial advice, not parliamentary debate.

This is executive overreach weaponized against conservation. It follows the pattern of Jones’ Fast-Track Approvals Act, which allows three ministers to override environmental protections and bypass previous court decisions. As submitters warned, the process makes selection political and subject to lobbying, with ministers picking and choosing which projects proceed.

Quantified Harms: The Biodiversity Crisis Intensifies

The West Coast Tai Poutini Conservation Board submission on New Zealand’s Biodiversity Strategy documents the region’s exceptional ecological significance: ancient podocarp and beech forests, wetlands and peatlands, and endemic species.

Opening 3,352 hectares for disposal threatens these ecosystems during a biodiversity crisis. Forest & Bird stated: “Today’s announcement on the future of West Coast stewardship land is a massive missed opportunity to protect some of New Zealand’s most precious conservation land.”

The Coalition’s mining expansion will increase emissions by approximately 14.2 million tonnes of CO₂-equivalent, putting significant pressure on the next two emissions budgets. Treasury calculations show the 2024 Budget increased emissions by 2.8 million tonnes.

Meanwhile, coal is the filthiest fossil fuel, and burning it is destroying the climate, as Forest & Bird chief executive Nicola Toki stated. “Coal mining will mean greater emissions that everyone else has to pay for. It will also destroy conservation land that is home to some of our 4,000 threatened species, including kiwi.”

The Path Forward: Restore Democracy, Honor Te Tiriti, Protect Taiao

This decision can—and must—be reversed. Future governments should:

Repeal extractive-enabling orders in council and return stewardship land to conservation assessment processes with genuine NZCA and Conservation Board oversight.
Enshrine co-governance with mana whenua over conservation estate, honoring Section 4 Conservation Act obligations and Te Tiriti principles of partnership and active protection.
Criminalize ministerial corruption through anti-lobbying laws that prohibit resource extraction companies from drafting legislation and mandate public disclosure of all ministerial meetings with industry.
Implement full-cost accounting requiring mining companies to pre-fund complete ecosystem restoration and decommissioning in perpetuity trusts before permits are granted.
Redirect extractive subsidies toward regenerative employment in conservation, renewable energy, and indigenous land restoration.

The Coalition’s stewardship land decision exposes who truly governs Aotearoa: not Parliament, not hapū, but offshore mining capital operating through ministerial proxies. Potaka’s order in council bypassed democracy to serve extraction. Jones’ industry lobbying exposed regulatory capture. Seymour’s dismissal of Te Tiriti revealed ideological contempt.

This is mauri-depleting governance designed to enrich the few while impoverishing the many and degrading whenua for generations. We must name these harms, trace the networks, and mobilize rangatiratanga-centered alternatives.

Ka whawhai tonu mātou. Ake ake ake.

Ivor Jones The Māori Green Lantern Fighting Misinformation And Disinformation From The Far Right

Research Disclosure: This essay was developed using verified sources accessed 12 December 2025, including RNZ, Beehive.govt.nz, DOC, Te Ara Encyclopedia, Waitangi Tribunal reports, Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment documents, Ngāi Tahu official sources, Law Society submissions, Greenpeace statements, and academic repositories. All citations hyperlinked to original sources.

Koha Statement: Only support this mahi if you are able: Koha.Kiwi | Substack | Bank: HTDM 03-1546-0415173-000. All koha sustains free mātauranga Māori journalism. No paywall, no corporate interference.

Coalition-strains-over-stewardship-land-shake-up-RNZ-News-12-12-2025_04_50_AM.jpg
https://www.doc.govt.nz/about-us/our-role/managing-conservation/stewardship-land/

https://www.treaty.nz

"He Kore Tikanga: The Coalition of Betrayal" - 23 March 2026

"Hypocrisy of the Highest Order: The National Government's EV Charger Con" - 23 March 2026

"How Winston Peters Wraps Corporate Plunder in the Language of Liberation — and Has Been Doing It for Forty Years" - 23 March 2026

"THE SULU AND THE SWORD: How Christopher Luxon Wore Our Pacific Family's Dignity Like a Costume While His Budget Burned Their Villages to the Waterline" - 23 March 2026