Conservation Minister Tama Potaka faced a heated confrontation at a parliamentary select committee hearing while defending proposed law changes regarding the disposal of Department of Conservation (DOC) land. The session, marked by accusations of dishonesty and parliamentary outbursts, centered on concerns that up to 60 percent of conservation land could be sold, a claim the minister dismissed as “fantasy land.”
What caused the parliamentary row?
The tension ignited when Green Party co-leaders Chlöe Swarbrick and Marama Davidson presented a Forest and Bird poster illustrating the scale of land potentially under threat from the proposed legislative changes. When Minister Potaka alleged that the previous Labour government failed to meet a $2 billion conservation funding requirement, the hearing descended into open conflict. Labour MP Priyanca Radhakrishnan labeled the minister’s claim “blatantly untrue,” while Swarbrick directly accused him of lying. The exchange prompted a retort from National MP Grant McCallum, who called the opposition “hypocrites,” and led Labour’s Rachel Brooking to gesture for the minister to “shush” during the proceedings.
Why the minister says the land sales are limited
Minister Potaka maintained that the legislative intent is limited to disposing of “bits and bobs” of land that hold little to no conservation value. To illustrate his point, the minister used his own visual aids, including images of a MetService building in Wellington and a gravel reserve on the West Coast surrounded by farmland. According to Potaka, these properties are examples of assets that DOC should not hold, and their sale could generate revenue to reinvest in biodiversity. He rejected the 60 percent figure as an exaggeration, stating that anyone promoting that number is participating in the “Olympic championships for exaggeration.”
What happens next in the legislative process?
The proposed law changes remain in the early stages, with the select committee process expected to continue. A possible next step involves the clarification of disposal and transfer processes for government-owned land. As the committee continues its review, the minister and opposition members will likely remain at odds over the definition of “low value” land. The committee is expected to further scrutinize the specific criteria for any future land divestment, a process that will determine how much, if any, conservation estate is ultimately affected by the new legislation.
