Eight Deaths, 20 Years Of Warnings: Independent Research Organisation Publishes Liability Analysis Of Mauao Landslide

Wednesday, 1 April 2026, 5:00 pm
Press Release: Lobby for Good

Independent advocacy organisation Lobby for Good has published a comprehensive research and liability analysis of the 22 January 2026 Mauao landslide, which killed six people at the Mount Maunganui Beachside Holiday Park and two more at Welcome Bay Road in Pāpāmoa.

The report - publicly available at www.lobbyforgood.co.nz/current-investigations - draws exclusively on publicly available documents, including records from Tauranga City Council's own Mauao Landslide document portal, verified media reporting from RNZ and The Post, and official statements from Fire and Emergency New Zealand (FENZ) and WorkSafe New Zealand.

Key Findings

A two-hour gap between warning and action. FENZ received a 111 call at 5.48am reporting a slip near the campground and notified TCC at 5.51am - confirmed by the FENZ Deputy National Commander. A TCC-branded vehicle was observed driving through the campground past visible slips at approximately 7.45am without initiating an evacuation. TCC's Chief Executive initially denied any record of the FENZ notification before reversing that position hours later.

A recommended evacuation plan that was never implemented. A December 2023 risk assessment by engineering firm WSP (Document ID 107810) explicitly recommended TCC develop a Trigger Action Response Plan (TARP) for the campground - a standard emergency management tool that defines weather thresholds triggering pre-planned evacuation. There is no evidence this plan existed on 22 January 2026. The TCC document portal lists an evacuation procedure for the campground with a creation date of 26 January 2026 - four days after the disaster.

Prior warnings spanning more than 20 years. Engineers warned TCC in 2005 that buildings should not be located in the runout zones of potential landslides at Mauao, stating: "Only in rare circumstances would it be prudent to violate the zone criteria." The campground continued to operate in those zones for over two decades. A 2025 TCC-commissioned susceptibility study excluded Mauao entirely - and proposed halving the standard safety buffer from 4H:1V to 2H:1V.

Conflicting expert advice. Just six weeks before the disaster, a report by Stratum Consultants concluded there had been "no significant instability in the last few centuries" at the same location that WSP's 2023 report had flagged as "particularly exposed." The existence of two contradictory expert assessments raises serious questions about how TCC selects and applies expert advice in known hazard zones.

On the Five Formal Inquiries - and What They Can Actually Do

Five separate formal inquiries are now underway. On the surface, that sounds like significant accountability. But it is worth understanding what each process can actually do.

Of the five, only two have the power to compel consequences: WorkSafe New Zealand, which can issue improvement notices, infringement notices, or prosecute; and the Police, which is examining whether any criminal liability exists. The remaining three - the Government Inquiry under Sir Mark O'Regan, the Paul Davison KC external review, and the Coroner's inquiry - can examine, report, and recommend. They cannot prosecute. They cannot fine. They cannot compel any organisation to change how it operates.

That is not a criticism of the people conducting those inquiries, many of whom are doing important and serious work. But the families of the eight people who died deserve to understand the difference between an inquiry that can find facts and make recommendations, and one that can impose consequences.

On Independent Research and the Cost of Asking Questions

Lobby for Good states directly that its work has had real consequences for the people involved.

Over the past two years, Lobby for Good researcher and Director of Public Affairs Erika Harvey has been investigating the sale of Tauranga's Marine Precinct - a significant piece of publicly owned waterfront land sold in circumstances that raised serious questions about transparency, process, and the completeness of information available to elected members and the public. 
Lobby for Good has been publishing Substack articles on this case to educate people about how process works, and how it can be used in ways that make it near impossible for an everyday person to challenge a council, a government agency, or a powerful private interest.

In the Marine Precinct case, important information was withheld from the public before the court hearing. Some of that information remains inaccessible today - not because it does not exist, but because the processes that govern disclosure allow it to be withheld, delayed, or simply not volunteered.

"That is the thing about paper trails," said Harvey. "They may not come to the surface immediately. But they do. We are watching exactly that process unfold with the Covid-19 inquiry, and we expect to see it repeat across a range of other matters that have not yet received the same public attention. In each case, the pattern is the same: decisions were made, information was available to decision-makers that was not shared with the public at the time, and the documentary record is only now beginning to tell the full story."

Members of the organisation, and people connected to its other ventures, have experienced reputational damage, professional consequences, and strained relationships with council staff, political figures, and wealthy individuals with interests in the outcomes of these decisions.

"When the issue is systemic - when it is about processes, information flows, and the way decisions are made - the response is often to make it personal," Harvey said. "To focus on the people asking the questions rather than on the questions themselves. That is a feature, not a bug. It is how systems protect themselves."

Lobby for Good is explicit that its work is not an attack on TCC staff or elected members, and is not affiliated with any legal action, or inquiry relating to the disaster at Mauao.

"We are not asking TCC to admit liability. We are not asking anyone to be fired or prosecuted - that is the work of the formal inquiries," Harvey said. "What we are asking for is that the full documentary record be treated as a public resource, not a liability to be managed. That councillors - who were elected to represent their communities, not to protect the organisation they oversee - have access to independent analysis of what the documents actually show. Accountability is not the enemy of good governance. It is the foundation of it."

What the Public Can Do

The Government Inquiry is accepting public submissions. Details are available at www.beehive.govt.nz/release/inquiry-fatal-landslides-tauranga.

Members of the public who have relevant information but are not comfortable submitting it publicly can submit a confidential tip through the secure form at www.lobbyforgood.co.nz. Tips are received directly by the Lobby for Good team and are never published without explicit consent.

The full report - with every source linked, every document referenced, and the complete timeline from 1999 to 2026 - is available at www.lobbyforgood.co.nz/current-investigations.

About Lobby for Good: 

Lobby for Good is an independent New Zealand advocacy organisation focused on accountability and transparency in public decision-making. It publishes research and public education content on Substack, including an ongoing series on the Tauranga Marine Precinct and the systemic barriers that prevent everyday people from accessing complete information when challenging councils and government agencies. It is not affiliated with any of the formal inquiries into the Mauao landslide, or any of the families affected by the disaster.

Website: www.lobbyforgood.co.nz

Report: www.lobbyforgood.co.nz/current-investigations

© Scoop Media