I wanted to share this article with you from Eric Ness, who lives in the Far North.
Eric is a Northland-based writer behind Northland Current News, an independent commentary Facebook page focused on local government, public accountability and democratic process. He has recently been sharing this information with me here at Hobson’s Pledge.
While he is writing about events in the Far North, they are undoubtedly happening in other parts of the country. It is a slow but ever-expanding push to change New Zealand without the input or consent of New Zealanders. From reports with names that mean little, to decisions being made without community consultation, the situation described by Eric is concerning.
Eric’s Northland Current News examines council decisions, governance structures, public spending and the way decisions are made, with particular attention to whether the public is being given the full picture. The articles draw heavily on council agendas, minutes, official correspondence, meeting recordings and other publicly available material.
Read his piece below. ⬇️
REORUA: WERE YOU EVER ASKED?
If you live outside Northland, you may never have heard of the Far North District Council, or FNDC. It governs New Zealand’s northernmost district, including Kaitāia, Kaikohe, Paihia, Russell and Kerikeri. But this is not just a Far North story.
Kerikeri was one of 11 communities supported through the former national Aotearoa Reorua – Bilingual Towns & Cities programme. Those centres included Ahuriri–Napier, Heretaunga, Kerikeri, Ōpōtiki, Ōtaki, Porirua, Rotorua, Te Wairoa, Tokoroa, Whakatāne and Whangārei. At the time, the Department of Internal Affairs had an objective of enrolling 40 centres by 2040.
That national programme has since been closed, with its grant funding removed from 1 July 2025. But what had already been established locally did not necessarily disappear. Kerikeri is a good example of why that matters.
Kerikeri is demographically quite different from much of the Far North. According to FNDC reporting based on the 2023 Census, Kerikeri has a median age of 51.4 years, compared with 44.3 for the Far North and 38.1 nationally. Council data records 18.3 per cent of Kerikeri residents identifying as Māori, compared with approximately 49.9 per cent across the Far North District. FNDC also notes that Kerikeri’s older age profile reflects its popularity with retirees.
On 1 June 2023, FNDC and representatives of Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Rēhia signed an agreement establishing Kerikeri as the Far North’s first Reorua — bilingual — town. Mayor Darryl Tepania signed for Council alongside Acting Chief Executive Janice Smith, while Nora Rameka and Kipa Munro signed for Ngāti Rēhia.
For readers who have never encountered the term, Reorua essentially means bilingual. The programme was designed to increase the places and situations where te reo Māori is seen, heard and used alongside English. That can extend well beyond signage into businesses, education, public spaces, council communications, staff capability, community programmes and wider council strategies.
The Kerikeri programme involved council staff, Ngāti Rēhia and Department of Internal Affairs representatives working on a strategy intended to increase the status and visibility of te reo Māori, provide language-learning opportunities and expand the Reorua programme.
This is where my own involvement in the wider relationship between FNDC and Ngāti Rēhia becomes relevant. I first questioned that relationship a few years ago, when Ngāti Rēhia entered into an agreement with Council. I was sufficiently concerned about what I was seeing to take a complaint to the Ombudsman.
Then I waited. It took 555 days to receive a response. Five hundred and fifty-five days to reach the practical outcome that there was nothing requiring further action. Nothing to see here. Except I kept looking.
When the Kerikeri agreement was announced, Darryl Tepania said community buy-in, including from businesses, schools, community boards and community groups, would be important to its success. That raises a fairly obvious question: when did the wider Kerikeri community get asked whether it wanted its town committed to becoming Reorua in the first place?
I have not been able to locate a dedicated Kerikeri-wide public consultation or community vote before the agreement was signed. That does not mean nobody supported it. It means I cannot find evidence that the wider town was specifically asked before the agreement establishing Kerikeri as the Far North’s first bilingual town was signed.
There was another comment from Darryl Tepania at the time that looks considerably more interesting with hindsight: “If we can do it in Kerikeri, we can do it across the district.” Two years later, that is essentially where the council paperwork was heading.
In June 2025, FNDC placed a Districtwide Reorua – Te Ao Mārama Strategy before Te Kuaka – Te Ao Māori Committee. For readers outside the Far North, Te Kuaka was not simply an informal advisory group. It was a formal standing committee of FNDC. Its stated purpose included strengthening a Te Ao Māori perspective within Council decision-making across policies and strategies. At that time its structure included the Mayor and councillors alongside 12 iwi representatives nominated through Te Kahu o Taonui.
That structure matters. Some people would describe a formal council committee containing elected councillors and appointed iwi representatives as a form of co-governance. Others would describe it as partnership or shared decision-making. The label is less important than the structure itself: unelected iwi representatives were participating within a formal council committee considering public policy and strategy.
Council’s June 2025 report said the Kerikeri Reorua agreement had laid the groundwork for the wider framework and was informing the Districtwide Reorua – Te Ao Mārama Strategy. The report stated a long-term goal of achieving full bilingual status by 2040, where te reo Māori and English would be equally valued and utilised.
Then comes one of the most important parts of the story. FNDC classified that districtwide strategy as being of High significance. Council said it had districtwide relevance, affected service delivery to the community and that all communities would be affected by, and benefit from, its implementation.
Yet the recommendation put before Te Kuaka on 19 June 2025 did not ask the committee to receive the strategy and recommend it to the full elected Council. It said: “That Te Kuaka Committee approve the Districtwide Reorua – Te Ao Mārama Strategy.” Te Kuaka approved it.
The full Council met on 3 July 2025. Te Kuaka’s minutes were placed before it under Committee Recommendations and Resolutions, but the Council resolution was simply to receive the minutes from Te Kuaka and another committee. The published record does not show a separate resolution by the full elected Council adopting or approving the Districtwide Reorua – Te Ao Mārama Strategy.
That distinction matters. A strategy FNDC itself classified as High significance, which had districtwide relevance and which Council said would affect all communities, was approved through Te Kuaka. On the published record I have found, it was not subsequently put before the full elected Council for a separate adoption vote.
That is the governance issue. This is not about whether people should learn te reo Māori. It is not about whether Māori history should be recognised. It is not about whether councils should work with iwi and hapū. It is about who makes significant public decisions, where those decisions are made, and when the public gets a say.
Something that began as a Kerikeri agreement had travelled a considerable distance: from one town, to a council programme, to a districtwide strategy, approved through a committee structure involving elected councillors and appointed iwi representatives, without a subsequent recorded vote of the full Council adopting that strategy.
And then there is the national picture. Aotearoa Reorua – Bilingual Towns & Cities was a national Department of Internal Affairs programme. In its 2023/24 reporting, DIA recorded 11 bilingual centres: Ahuriri–Napier, Heretaunga, Kerikeri, Ōpōtiki, Ōtaki, Porirua, Rotorua, Te Wairoa, Tokoroa, Whakatāne and Whangārei. At that time, DIA had an objective of enrolling 40 centres by 2040.
Budget 2025 subsequently removed the programme’s full $400,000 annual grant funding from 1 July 2025 and closed the central government programme. But that does not mean the local arrangements simply vanished. In the Far North, FNDC later reported that although the DIA-sponsored Kerikeri Reorua agreement had reached the end of its fixed term in June 2025, the work would continue under the existing relationship agreement between FNDC and Ngāti Rēhia.
So the obvious question now goes well beyond Kerikeri. If you live in Ahuriri–Napier or Heretaunga, were you asked? If you live in Ōpōtiki, Ōtaki, Porirua, Rotorua, Te Wairoa, Tokoroa, Whakatāne or Whangārei, were you asked whether your community should become part of this programme before the commitment was made?
Perhaps some communities were. Perhaps some councils conducted extensive consultation and residents strongly supported becoming Reorua. If so, there should be a clear public record showing that. But perhaps other communities will discover something closer to what happened in Kerikeri: the agreement came first and the emphasis on community buy-in came afterwards.
That is worth examining. What exactly was agreed to? Who agreed on behalf of the community? What authority did they have? What public consultation occurred beforehand? What has continued since the central DIA programme ended? How far can those arrangements expand into wider council policy? What will they cost? And when a local initiative develops into something districtwide, should the full elected Council be required to make that decision openly?
In Kerikeri, Mayor Darryl Tepania signed the original agreement, publicly supported it and said what could be done in Kerikeri could be done across the district. Two years later, Council documents showed Kerikeri Reorua helping to form a districtwide strategy.
That strategy was classified High significance, approved at Te Kuaka, and on the published record I have found, it was not subsequently adopted through a separate vote of the full Council.
I began this investigation looking at the relationship between one council and one hapū in the Far North. It took 555 days for my Ombudsman complaint to reach its practical conclusion. I could have stopped there. Instead, I kept following the paperwork.
That paperwork led from Ngāti Rēhia, to Kerikeri Reorua, to a districtwide strategy, to Te Kuaka, and finally to the discovery that Kerikeri had been one of 11 communities involved in a national programme that once had an objective of 40 bilingual centres by 2040.
The central programme may now be closed, but the local arrangements are another matter. So perhaps this is no longer simply a Kerikeri story. Perhaps the more relevant question belongs to communities throughout New Zealand: was your town part of Reorua — and were you ever asked?
This is Eric Ness for Northland Current News. Following the paperwork, asking who made the decision, and leaving you to decide whether the process was good enough.
ENDS
As you have read, efforts to divide New Zealand are still underway, and reports like Eric’s help bring these hidden agendas into the open.
Here at Hobson’s Pledge, we will continue to do all we can to expose acts of division and push for a united New Zealand – where we are all treated equally and as one people.
