Wellington (AFP) – New Zealand has passed hotly contested legislation to block lawsuits that seek to hold companies liable for climate change harm. The right-wing coalition government’s legal amendment cleared a final hurdle in parliament on Tuesday night by a margin of 67 votes to 53. The law aims to prevent civil litigation overriding its climate policy and undermining business confidence, the government said. It was introduced in response to a lawsuit filed by Indigenous Maori climate activist Michael Smith against six prominent New Zealand companies for their contribution to environmental harm linked to climate change.
The law, which effectively ended his legal action, represents a “dark day for democracy,” Smith told national broadcaster RNZ. “If parliament can cancel a live court case, then no legal claim is secure at all once it becomes politically inconvenient,” he said. Smith’s case named some of New Zealand’s biggest and best-known companies, including dairy farming giant Fonterra. Opposition Green Party lawmaker Steve Abel told parliament the change was “intentionally against the public interest.” “If the government can’t fix it, which it hasn’t, and industry can’t fix it, which it hasn’t, then cannot the courts fix it?” Abel asked. “It was half a dozen dirty polluters versus one. They had the best-paid and brightest lawyers in the land, and they lost.” So what did those companies do? They cheated by coming to the government of the day and saying, ‘please extinguish this case, wipe out this case, nullify it.’
Justice minister Paul Goldsmith said the legislation would give certainty to businesses around their climate obligations. “Ongoing litigation in the High Court, where an applicant has brought civil claims against six major businesses for their greenhouse gas emissions, risks developing a new regime that contradicts the framework Parliament has already enacted,” Goldsmith said. “It’s creating uncertainty in business confidence and investment,” he said in a statement. The courts were not the right place to resolve claims of harm from climate change, he argued, stating that the issue involved a “range of complex environmental, economic and social factors.” “Our response to climate change is best managed by the Government at a national level and not through piece-meal litigation in the courts.”
An independent climate advisory body warned last month that government policies could lead to New Zealand missing its emissions reduction targets. The report by the Climate Change Commission – an entity established by law in 2019 – said Prime Minister Christopher Luxon’s government had ignored its emissions-cutting advice in 2025. “The time available to correct course is now short,” it said in a report. Government policies that exclude agriculture from emissions pricing, changes to clean vehicle rules, a reduction in reporting requirements for businesses, and plans for a liquefied natural gas import facility would raise emissions beyond any savings made elsewhere, it warned. Jo Hendy, chief executive of the commission, said the findings were a “clear warning sign.” “Emissions are gradually falling, but progress stalled in 2024, and current policy settings are not delivering at the pace needed,” Hendy said.
© 2024 AFP
