New Zealand’s official involvement with Antarctica began with the administration of a claim for the Ross Sea dependency in 1923. Until the International Geophysical Year in 1957/58, however, New Zealand practised a laissez-faire approach to its claim with minimal financial involvement in either exploration or research. This changed in 1957 with the establishment of Scott Base, the participation in the Commonwealth Trans-Antarctic Expedition and New Zealand’s first scientific programme on the ice. New Zealand was active in the negotiations in the Antarctic Treaty and has participated in the development of the various instruments forming the Antarctic Treaty System. Previous research on Antarctic governance has identified a dominant group of Antarctic Treaty Parties as leaders within this governance regime. These parties all belonging to the elite group of the twelve states, including New Zealand, that negotiated and signed the Antarctic Treaty in 1959. Along with a timely reassessment of prior scholarly work, my research explores to what extent New Zealand’s leadership extends to the Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources, which has been queried by researchers in the past. Drawing on the documents, especially Working Papers, submitted by each Consultative Party to the Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meetings and by each Member to meetings of the Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources as an indicative measure of leadership, I assess New Zealand’s level of contribution to these two types of meetings for the years 1981 to 2019 and compare this to other Parties to examine New Zealand’s relative leadership in both governance regimes. My results show New Zealand to have maintained a strong leadership contribution across all meetings of the Antarctic Treaty System. When the input of Working Papers per member was normalized by GDP, as an indicative measure of the Parties’ investment in engagement with the governance of the Antarctic Treaty System, New Zealand is the outstanding contributor. The continuation of the hegemonic bloc from the original signatories and the lack of engagement of many CPs does, however, carry risks of diminishing the effectiveness of the Antarctic Treaty System in the 21st century. I therefore recommend that the Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting and the consultative meeting of Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources considers the potential of a Capacity Building, Education and Training standing committee to address issues of equity, diversity and inclusivity.