Greenpeace Slams Govt Climate Law Change

The Government’s proposed retrospective climate law change has triggered fury from Greenpeace Aotearoa, who say Christopher Luxon’s coalition is trying to shut down the landmark Mike Smith climate case before it even reaches court — protecting major polluters while ordinary New Zealanders pay the price of worsening climate disasters.

The Government has announced plans to pass a law retrospectively preventing companies from being sued for the damage that their climate pollution is causing New Zealanders. Greenpeace Aotearoa is slamming the announcement as a ‘shocking abuse of executive power to help corporate polluters’.

Why the Mike Smith climate case matters

The proposed law change would prevent current cases from being heard, including the landmark case due to be heard next year brought by iwi leader Mike Smith, who is suing Fonterra and six of New Zealand’s other largest polluters for their contribution to climate change.

Greenpeace spokesperson Gen Toop says, “This Government is trying to protect big polluting businesses from paying for the climate damage they have caused, while ordinary New Zealanders’ lives and livelihoods are threatened by repeated climate disasters.”

“Big polluters like Fonterra and the oil and gas industry are profiting from the climate crisis, and it is everyday people who are paying the price, from skyrocketing insurance premiums to the enormous cost of rebuilding roads, bridges and other infrastructure after climate storms.”

Costly floods and storms are becoming more frequent and intense as a result of rising levels of climate pollution. This year the country has already had to declare more extreme weather related states of emergency than for the entirety of 2025.

Toop says that preventing the courts from considering legitimate claims against major emitters would have a chilling effect on democracy in New Zealand, and set a dangerous precedent.

Retrospective law for corporations, consequences for everyone else

“This is a shocking abuse of executive power. The courts exist to hold powerful interests to account and protect the public interest. Ministers should not be rewriting the law to shut down cases they don’t like.”

In 2024, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that Smith’s case could proceed to trial, finding that major emitters may be held legally responsible for the harm caused by their emissions.

“It is a remarkable act of hypocrisy that a Government that says it opposes retrospective law and says it wants to protect property rights is using retrospective law to block ordinary people from suing corporations for the property damage they have caused,” says Toop.

“Mike Smith’s case is a groundbreaking effort to hold some of New Zealand’s biggest polluters accountable for the harm they are causing. But this Government is stepping in to protect corporate profits at the expense of people, nature and future generations.

“We all want our kids and grandkids to have a safe future free from climate disruption. People will continue to stand up and fight for that, no matter what this Coalition Government does.”

Greenpeace is calling on the Government to abandon the proposed amendment bill and allow the courts to hear Mike Smith’s case.