Jeremy Nimmo
Whare Kaupapa Atawhai | Conservation House
18 Manners Street, Wellington 6011
[FYI request #34939 email]
PO Box 10420, Wellington 6140
[email address]
Ref: OIAD-9321
22 July 2026
Tēnā koe Jeremy
Thank you for your request to the Department of Conservation, received on 23 June 2026, in
which you stated and asked for:
“ I understand that as part of Tama Potaka's plan to sell off our national parks, there is an
intention, originally announced August 2025, to introduce charges at Milford Sound, Aoraki
Mount Cook, Mautohe Cathedral Cove and Tongariro Alpine Crossing following the
upcoming election, all so that it could be used to offset (on paper) more wastage of taxpayer
funds like tax cuts for foreigners like Peter Thiel. I fail to see how these could be applied,
unless those of us whose great-grandparents were born here, or in the case of Maori whose
great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-
great-great-great-great-great-grandparents were born here, wil now be required to present
ID papers, just to enjoy our national posterity- unless this will be selectively enforced against
persons who are of visible Asian or African origin (including those who are New Zealand
citizens like us)? Obviously, if only one person in each party must present documents
proving themselves as an adult New Zealand citizen, that wil just disadvantage those
underprivileged New Zealanders who lack such documentation, while being readily exploited
by those who might wish to set up an informal business offsetting the charges for foreign
tourists as part of a 'guide' package.
As such, I am requesting:
1. Al correspondence, emails, text messages, instant messages (including via Teams,
Slack, or similar platforms), file notes, memoranda, and any other records of
communication (whether internal or external) relating to:
a. The development, design, or implementation of foreign visitor charges at any
Department of Conservation site
b. The selection of Milford Sound, Aoraki Mount Cook, Mautohe Cathedral Cove, and the
Tongariro Alpine Crossing as the initial sites for charges
c. The proposed charging model, including proposed fee amounts, exemption criteria,
identification requirements, and enforcement mechanisms
d. Any discussions regarding the potential application of charges to New Zealand citizens
or residents, or any consideration of ethnic profiling or other discriminatory application
of charges
e. Engagement with the Minister of Conservation, the Human Rights Commission, the
Minister's office, other Ministers, or Cabinet regarding these proposals
2. Al records of meetings, relating to the foreign visitor charges proposal, including:
a. Meeting agendas, minutes, notes, and action items, briefing notes, speaking notes, and
talking points prepared for or used in any meeting
b. All aide-memoires, briefings, reports, and information papers prepared for or provided
to the Minister, the Minister's office, or senior officials
3. Al policy papers, Cabinet papers, Cabinet committee papers, regulatory impact
statements, options papers, discussion documents, issues papers, consultation
documents, position papers, working papers relating to the foreign visitor charges
proposal.
4. Al advice, recommendations, reports, research, analysis, cost-benefit analyses, financial
modelling, risk assessments, legal advice, and opinions (whether internal or external, and
whether in draft or final form) relating to:
a. The feasibility, legality, or desirability of foreign visitor charges;
b. The potential revenue from such charges
c. The costs of implementation and enforcement
d. The potential impacts on visitor numbers, tourism, local communities, iwi, and
conservation outcomes
e. Any human rights, discrimination, or privacy implications of the charges, including any
consideration of identification requirements or differential treatment based on
nationality, ethnicity, or residency
5. Al records relating to decision-making, including:
a. Recommendations to the Minister or Cabinet
b. Decision records, minutes of decisions, and Cabinet minutes
c. Records of approvals or declinations
d. Any dissenting advice, alternative views, or minority reports relating to the foreign
visitor charges.
6. Al records relating to the implementation or operational planning of foreign visitor
charges, including:
a. Implementation plans, project plans, timelines, and Gantt charts
b. Operational policies, standard operating procedures, and guidelines
c. System specifications, technical requirements, and procurement documents for any
charging or identification system
d. Communications plans, media strategies, and public relations materials
e. Training materials and staff guidance
To ensure that the production of this material can be conducted efficiently, I am happy for
this request to be significantly narrowed to only encompass material produced since the
current regime took power on 27 November 2023. I request that the information be provided
in electronic format, via email response/s to this request that wil be logged by FYI. If any part
of this request is refused, I ask that you consider whether parts of the documents or
information can be released with appropriate redactions. “
2
We have considered your request under the Of icial Information Act 1982 (OIA).
Before proceeding to the Department’s response, we have provided some relevant contextual
information and outlined our approach to your request.
Exploring charging for access to some public conservation land
The work on this policy commenced during the current term of Government, and the date range
that we have applied to this request therefore encompasses the full development of the
workstream, to date.
Access charges are not yet in place, with legislative changes being progressed through the
Conservation Amendment Bil needed before charging can occur.
Approach to request
We noted your interests as outlined in your request.
When seeking to scope your request and determine the size of what all “
records of
communication” and/or
“records of meetings” might look like, it was found that the Department
potentially held over 800,000 items that would require review to determine if they were in fact
within scope. Attempting to research, collate and consider the parts of your request that sought
these types of records would amount to substantial collation and research, and accordingly,
these parts of your request are refused under section 18(f) of the OIA. As an alternative, we
have focused on providing only key documents with respect to the topics comprised in the six
main parts of your request. This step aligns with section 16 of the OIA, which allows information
to be made available in several ways in response to a request.
Information that has been proactively released and/or is available via the Department’s website
is considered publicly available. We have provided links to this information, but have not
provided copies of any of the documents per section 18(d) of the OIA, as they are publicly
available.
Where we note information is not held in our response, those parts of your request are refused
under section 18(e) of the OIA, as the information does not exist.
Department’s response
Your request is comprised of six main parts. As outlined above, we have rescoped to focus on a
key document-only approach with respect to topics canvassed, which has allowed us to provide
a response to your request.
The period applicable to your request is 27 November 2023 to 23 June 2026 (being the date of
your request). This is the period you advised agreement to in your request.
Parts 1, 2, 3 and 5
The relevant policy papers have been proactively released on the Department’s website, with
appropriate redactions where required.
3
These are available here:
Cabinet material: Exploring charging for access to some public conservation land |
https:/ www.doc.govt.nz/globalassets/documents/getting-involved/consultations/2024/access-
charging/cabinet-material-exploring-charging-for-access-to-some-public-conservation-land.pdf
and other associated links on this webpage:
Charging for access to some public conservation land | https:/ www.doc.govt.nz/access-
charging-consultation – under ‘Supporting Cabinet papers and advice’.
The selection of initial sites is covered, and indicative fee amounts are included. The proposed
charging model is presently under active consideration, thus this information is withheld in full
under section 9(2)(f)(iv) of the OIA.
Part 4
We have publicly released some associated research on access charging, it is on the same
webpage as that linked above.
In particular, we refer you to:
Financial sustainability review international comparison (Al en & Clarke) |
https:/ www.doc.govt.nz/globalassets/documents/getting-involved/consultations/2024/access-
charging/financial-sustainability-review-international-comparison.pdf
and wil ingness to pay researc
h here:
https:/ www.doc.govt.nz/globalassets/documents/getting-involved/consultations/2024/access-
charging/kantar-report-willingness-to-pay-access-charging.pdf .
Indicative fee amounts are included in the Cabinet paper noted above and the proposed
charging model is presently under active consideration.
Part 6
Implementation options are stil being developed and considered. The Department is just
starting the process for thinking about implementation, thus the types of documents referred to
in this part of your request do not yet exist.
We are also currently undertaking targeted consultation on access charges to hear from
communities at the four proposed sites, and considering what we need to think about for
implementation.
The consultation document outlines a range of potential approaches to implementation and is
available here:
Access charging for international visitors fact sheet including maps (PDF, 2,479K) |
https:/ www.doc.govt.nz/globalassets/documents/getting-involved/consultations/2024/access-
charging/access-charging-regulations-revenue-allocation-and-implementation-fact-sheet-with-
maps.pdf.
We are currently seeking input into these options, and would welcome your feedback. You can
send it to this email address:
[email address].
4
In making my decision, and with respect to the withholding of information as advised within the
Department’s response, I have considered the public interest considerations in section 9(1) of
the OIA and determined there are no public interests that outweigh the grounds for withholding.
You are entitled to seek an investigation and review of my decision by writing to an
Ombudsman as provided by section 28(3) of the OIA.
Please note that this letter (with your personal details removed) may be published on the
Department’s website.
Nāku noa, nā
James Johnson
Manager, Budget and Funding Policy
Department of Conservation |
Te Papa Atawhai
5
