by Ben Hope
Government moves with discussion documents and legislation passed in late December strongly suggests public estate in conservation land will be put up for sale to the highest bidder.
A paper “Modernising Conservation Land Management” proposals said that around five million hectares comprising over 60% of public conservation land could be put up for sale, if considered “surplus”.
Other sources put the figure much higher than five million hectares, i.e. up to two-thirds of the Department of Conservation (DOC) estate (approx. 8.5 million hectares total) is potentially affected, including stewardship land, conservation parks, and reserves.
The Overseas Investment (National Interest Test and Other Matters) Amendment Act, spearheaded by Associate Finance Minister David Seymour, was passed by Parliament in late December 2025 to fast-track foreign investment approvals.
The Act is expected to come into force in the first quarter of 2026.
The law simplifies screening for “less sensitive” assets, setting a 15-working-day instead of the previous 70 days.
Conservation Minister Tama Potaka has defended the changes, framing them as a necessary “backlog fix” rather than a broad “sell-off,” aimed at improving management efficiency, according to a NZ Herald article.
Reaction has been strong.
Andi Cockroft chairman of the Council of Outdoor Recreation Associations of New Zealand (CORANZ) described the government’s intention to sell public lands as “selling the Kiwi heritage.”
“It doesn’t belong to the politicians to sell, the land and resources belong to the people, who elect the politicians to serve the public interest,” he said.
“New Zealanders value their property ownership in public lands especially for outdoor recreation such as tramping, hunting, fishing, kayaking, mountain biking and other recreation uses.”
Not For Sale
Casey Cravens, chairman of the New Zealand Federation of Freshwater Anglers said the government move revealed the “lack of environmental awareness and environmental and democratic conscience by the coalition government.”
“On reflection I guess this was likely given earlier recent draconian law of the Fast Track Approvals Act which is all about short term exploitation and ignores democracy, by sidestepping the select committee process for public input,” he said.
Casey Cravens said the public’s conservation estate contained some “magnificent trout fishing in crystal clear rivers” which was highly valued by overseas tourist anglers and New Zealand trout anglers.
“In terms of overseas and domestic tourism, it’s worth many millions to the economy and it’s recycled for future generations. Public lands should not be put up for sale to the highest bidder.”
Forest and Bird chief executive Nicola Toki said public conservation land must remain protected so people can enjoy the incredible landscapes and precious native wildlife.
“We should not be making it easier to sell off conservation land for commercial gain,” she said.
Public conservation land covers about 8.5 million hectares, about one third of New Zealand’s total land area. These areas are highly valued for their ecological and scenic value for outdoor recreation as well as a strong asset for the tourist industry.
Sneaky Style
Greenpeace also expressed strong concern not only at the implications for public lands but at the covert manner of passing it into law.
While many people were winding down for the holidays, the coalition government was quietly putting a “for sale” sign up on the New Zealand’s public’s land said Gen Toop of Greenpeace.
Greenpeace’s Gen Toop
“It is now easier for foreign corporations to buy conservation areas, offshore islands, lakebeds, coastal zones, and wāhi tapu sites. If you haven’t heard about it until now, you’re not alone. David Seymour’s Overseas Investment Amendment Bill passed around 11pm on a Friday night in December and with no media attention,” she said.
CORANZ’s chairman Andi Cockroft also expressed distaste of politicians passing law on the eve of the Christmas-New Year period when the public were preoccupied.
“The pre-Christmas timing is outrageous, yet it’s an old political tactic by politicians lacking integrity,” he said.
These implications are significant – and long-lasting.
Before this amendment bill, the government had to run a group of tests and checks before approving the sale of sensitive land to offshore buyers. It could veto the sale or impose basic cultural and ecological conditions on it before approving it – or refuse the sale.
Safeguards Removed
But the Government has now removed almost all those safeguards. Now it is easier for offshore billionaires and foreign corporations to buy up ‘sensitive land’ in New Zealand, which includes conservation land, lake beds, coastal and marine areas, offshore islands and other said Greenpeace’s Gen Toop.
In the detail of the new law is removing criminal checks on would-be buyers.
“That means multinational corporations with a history of criminal activity – like breaking environmental laws, labour abuses, or tax evasion overseas can now buy sensitive land in Aotearoa without the Government being required to properly vet them,” she said.
The “Benefit to New Zealand” test is removed. This was a safeguard that required overseas buyers to show clear benefits before being allowed to buy sensitive land.
It also gave the Government a basis to impose conditions like:
- protecting biodiversity
- preserving heritage values
- maintaining public access
Public Interest By-passed
However overseas buyers no longer need to demonstrate public benefit.
The Government has scrapped the special forestry test. This was – another safeguard that applied extra scrutiny to overseas forestry investments and allowed the government to impose conditions on the sale.
“This matters because offshore forestry companies have already caused enormous harm. After Cyclone Gabrielle, forestry slash destroyed homes, damaged infrastructure, polluted rivers, and left communities traumatised,” said Gen Toop.
Treasury estimates that up to 70 percent of New Zealand’s plantation forestry is already foreign-owned. Some of the country’s largest forestry landowners are offshore corporations, including firms registered in tax havens like the Cayman Islands.
Despite that track record, the Government has decided offshore forestry investments now deserve less scrutiny, instead of more.
“If this Government is serious about protecting New Zealand’s future, it should be strengthening safeguards on overseas investment, not dismantling them in the dead of the night,” said Gen Toop.
What gives politicians the right to think they can ride rough shod over public property and hock it off to the highest bidder, who probably are corporates who only care about maximising profits?
I am disgusted at the way the Seymour bill was shiftily sneaked, under urgency I add, through parliament at near to midnight.
Politicians abuse public lands because they think of it as a commodity which belongs to them.
Public land is not “DoC land” as people erroneously and frequently refer to it as.
Nor does it belong to the political parties or politicians.
There’s a great quote by the late US president John F Kennedy which Seymour, Jones, Bishop and the other MPs should ponder on.
“The race between wisdom and waste has not run its course – each generation must deal anew with the raiders, with the scramble to use public resources for private profit and with the tendency to prefer short-run profits with long-term necessities - the crisis may be quiet but it is urgent.”
It is a long and logical article but the message is simple; the land belongs to all Kiwis, not just those in the Coalition bent on selling out our birthright. The land belongs to the people NOT to Members of Parliament. They were elected to act on behalf of all New Zealanders; not just those involved in mining, exotic forests, etc. This is one of the worst rapes of Kiwis’ land rights since the 1800s. It needs to stop. Perhaps its time for the Coalition to pause for a cup of tea and a lie down. Then perhaps the madness of what they propose will sink in.
DOC land belongs to all Kiwis, Tangata Tiriti and Tangata Whenua. It is a partnership of guardians of which the government of the day is only one. As Kaitiaki of the whenua the government needs to show how they are going to leave the land in a better state than it currently is. The various proposals do not suggest that. In fact they are the opposite. There is an unwritten rahui on desecration of all crown lands; whatever “title” they have. The land confiscations of the 1860s are not a legal precedent for these proposed thefts. As Matua Rex says the politicians should realise that it is probably time for a Kapu Ti.
If they carry out this sell-off what won’t they do in terms of overseas interests taking over New Zealand land? Perhaps they might like to offer the entire country to Trump at a knockdown price?
Rachel Carson author of “Silent Spring” said “But man is a part of nature, and his war against nature is inevitably a war against himself.”
What don’t Seymour, Bishop and Jones understand about this?
Come to think further, what don’t politicians in our Parliament understand about it. Labour and Greens are strangely quiet while the bulldozers of Messr. Seymour, Jones and Bishop are ramming bad law through Parliament, law which is for their corporate friends who don’t give a damn about the environment, clean rivers and wilderness values.