PETER WILLIAMS (on behalf of the Taxpayers' Union): The Nats are considering keeping Te Mana o te Wai
- Administrator
- Jul 20
- 4 min read
The Taxpayers' Union has been alerting supporters about the "Te Mana o te Wai" (literally meaning the mana of the water) requirements, which are still applicable to local councils' environmental planning/consenting.
It is becoming clear that the Coalition Government is continuing down Labour's path of undemocratic and costly co-governance due to pressure from the Wellington bureaucracy, LGNZ, and the various special interests who are "experts" in tikanga.
To recap, Te Mana o te Wai was first introduced by the John Key Government (pushed hard by then Māori Party Co-leaders, Pita Sharples and Tariana Turia). The concepts were promoted and radicalised as part of the Jacinda Ardern Government's freshwater reforms. It prioritises the health, well-being, and mauri (i.e. "life force") of the water above all else, including the health and needs of people and communities.
As put by a vocal supporter of Te Mana o te Wai:
The concept of ‘te mana o te wai’ recognises the power and significance of water to all life, its life force, the integrity of a river. Te mana o te wai recognises and aims to protect the mauri, the life force of water. It recognises the river or spring has a right to be, for its own sake.
In te Ao Māori, a river is often regarded as atua or tupuna, and oftentimes given personhood. In a pepeha, by which Māori introduce themselves, rivers – and mountains, ocean, creatures and the land itself – are identifying parts of their whakapapa or lineage. These are reciprocal relationships of mutual care and guardianship.
This Māori worldview can lead us to treat the land and water with the respect we give our family. As a concept te mana o te wai signifies the respect we should give the water that gives us life.
Literally, this is the framework regional councils are tasked to interpret. No wonder regional council rates are skyrocketing!
Te Mana o te Wai introduced spiritual and subjective concepts like mauri (the life force of water), which had no clear, measurable standards and left councils around the country spending millions contracting consultants to advise on how to implement it.
I last wrote shortly after the Taxpayers' Union had exposed that in my region alone (Otago), tens of thousands of dollars per ratepayer was being spent by the Regional Council to figure out how to protect the 'spiritual health' of the water according to local iwi/custom.
The reason for such a high cost? Well, under Te Mana o te Wai, water taken from one catchment or water body cannot mix or be discharged into another catchment or body without the "mana" being compromised. This is what is being forced upon councils (and ratepayers).
Te Mana o te Wai lives on...
At the end of last year, the team thought that we had won. Every indication was that the Government had decided to pull back on this policy (albeit slow-walking the actual changes).
But sadly, it seems our optimism that the Government was set to just scrap this spiritual nonsense was misplaced.
The Government is currently consulting on three options - two of which keep Te Mana o te Wai!
So, despite the Government's electoral mandate to scrap this sort of nonsense, there is a real risk of capitulation to the vested interests and rent seekers.
What the Government now proposes
An option Minister for RMA Reform Christopher Bishop is favouring is to no longer apply Te Mana o te Wai to urban development consents, but keep Te Mana o te Wai for the purposes of regional water planning and regulation.
That option means David Parker's Te Mana o te Wai would be kept for all the other aspects of regional and district plans!
That means for those whose livelihoods rely on water allocation (i.e. farmers and agricultural exporters), the expensive nonsense and uncertainty will remain.
It's economically crippling for those who need certainty right now.
Co-governance of Water 2.0
Look, I know it's unfashionable to take on these sorts of issues, and the media will no doubt have a go at me and the Taxpayers' Union for highlighting the issue. But the continued spiritualisation of what should be solely a scientific regime needs to be called out.
Keeping in a law with vague and spiritual concepts like mana of the water itself, inevitably leads to co-governance of water. That's because only local mana whenua are recognised experts in the spiritual "health" of water and water bodies.
This isn't about the degradation of the environment or water quality. It's about not having environmental/water regulation subject to subjective veto and spiritual oversight.
Will the Coalition give in to water co-governance?
Our contacts in the Government support parties – and even some backbenches in National – are specifically telling us that the Nats are strongly favouring options which keep the underlying concept of Te Mana o te Wai.
Farming and industry groups are being told the same thing.
Ultimately, the decision is with Minister Christopher Bishop. We have to strengthen his and his National Party colleagues' resolve to scrap Te Mana o te Wai.
In politics, the squeaky wheel gets the oil, so let's make sure there's noise. We need people to step up to have their say before the submission closes next week.
The Taxpayers' Union team has forced the Ministry officials to now also accept submissions by email. That means you don't have to answer the 33 sets of questions officials have set out (but you can if you want to here).
You and I both know the media won't cover this issue. That leaves it to groups like the Taxpayers' Union to mobilise opposition and ensure the message is received in the Beehive.
Let’s replace this vague, spiritual framework with clear, practical rules that protect water without punishing communities or spending the earth to define spiritual concepts.
If we don’t act now, councils across New Zealand will keep using Te Mana o te Wai to justify costly new rules — and we'll keep paying the price.
Peter Williams, Financial Supporter and Former Board Member, New Zealand Taxpayers’ Union
For more information about the three options being put forward by Minister Bishop, see https://environment.govt.nz/assets/publications/RMA/package-3-freshwater-discussion-document.pdf#page=15 and the "Interim Regulatory Impact Statement" here: https://environment.govt.nz/assets/Interim-RIS-Replacing-the-NPS-for-Freshwater-Management.pdf
I’m unsure if Peter is against the wording describing Te Mana o te Wai or just disagrees with it’s concept around the fundamental importance of water and recognises that protecting the health of freshwater protects the health and well-being of the wider environment. Te Mana o te Wai is about restoring and preserving the balance between the water, the wider environment, and the community. Surely that’s not a bad thing?
Bravo for calling this travesty out, Peter Williams... please keep up your good work and encourage the Taxpayers' Union to do the same.
“…the continued spiritualisation of what should be solely a scientific regime needs to be called out.”
This is why the ‘Listener Letter’ writers were attacked so strongly. They (politely) called out an attempt to insert tribal spirituality into science. Anyone like them who casts doubt upon this grab for money and power can sadly expect the same vicious response.
The vocal supporter of Te Mana o te Wai is quoted as saying "This Māori worldview can lead us to treat the land and water with the respect we give our family."
So abandonment of pregnant girlfriends and infanticide are on the menu for our water?? This is nothing more than extortion. In Maori's historical custodianship of this land's natural resources, they have a dismal record.
In my submission to Chris Bishop I warned that if TMotW is accepted and put in place, next up will be Te Mana o te Au.
I'm old enough to remember the Tom Scott cartoon, with a couple of Maori guys saying, after a meeting to claim ownership of the radio frequencies, 'if we pull this off, we'll have a go at oxygen next'. Mainstream media wouldn't toiuch thaty today. We've come a long way, haven't we?