7 July 2025
Thank you to everyone who turned up or tuned in to last Thursday’s Council workshop on the draft Joint Management Agreement (JMA). The public gallery was packed, and clearly this issue has touched a nerve—not just locally, but nationally too. But before another week rolls over this issue, let’s pause and look closer—because the fine print always matters.
Let’s be clear: no final decision has been made yet. But what concerns me—and many others—is the way this process has unfolded. The 2025 draft agreement expands the scope of the 2009 JMA considerably, yet it was progressing quietly behind closed doors. Only when outside attention was forced upon it did this matter finally surface in a more visible way.
Unfortunately, some of the information now coming from Council leadership is adding to confusion. For example:
- The Mayor erroneously stated in a recent media interview that the JMA would help clean up emergency spills into Lake Taupō. In reality, this is a Regional Council responsibility—just like the threatened gold clam invasion. These are pointedly not covered by the JMA, even though they easily could be if that were the goal. In fact, as a purported mechanism for keeping Lake Taupō clean and green, I have doubts that this JMA contributes anything too meaningful.
- He also referred to Lake Taupō as a “private lake,” which is not only legally debatable but contextually misleading.
- The Mayor claimed the 2009 JMA was never consulted on. Yet records indicate it arose from a series of public hui and community engagement processes connected to the 2005 plan change. It may not have met a strict legal definition of consultation, but it certainly reflected a more community-facing era.
Another point worth clarifying: It’s often claimed that iwi or Māori entities own 60–65% of the land in the district, including the lakebed. However, the most reliable figure available for communally owned Māori land is closer to 35%, even with Lake Taupō included. In terms of financial contribution, this equated to just 4.15% of total Council rates intake in 2023/24. That gap between land ownership and fiscal input is worth bearing in mind when we talk about “partnership”.
And then there are the words of one of our own councillors, spoken at the workshop itself:
“Can this documentation be weaponized? Absolutely.”
That should raise more than eyebrows. It should raise accountability.
Bottom line: If the public is confused, they should be invited in—not shut out. If the agreement is sound, it should stand up to scrutiny. But if it contains embedded obligations or shifts in governance, then we owe it to Taupō residents to test that publicly—before it gets signed, not after.
Council staff say that doesn’t need to happen. I disagree.
The JMA will be tabled for decision at the next full Council meeting on 31 July. Councillors will have three choices:
- Sign the agreement by majority vote
- Defer it until after the election
- Open it up for public consultation
You can read the source material for yourself here:
Recent media coverage: here, here & here
As always, I welcome feedback directly—respectful disagreement included.
Let’s not sleepwalk into a governance shift without the public’s eyes wide open.
“Let’s be careful out there” – and not just on the streets.
duncandoestaupo.com 