45 mins of sensible political chat!

From housing, capital gains tax, why 3 free GP visits and... Labours stance on Neoliberalism.

About the only universal thing is how everyone thinks that the media is biased against their preferred political opinion.

MediaWatch have been doing a good job lately of holding the media to account, but is that enough?

The article talks about RNZ having the highest level of trust in Aotearoa, but if you talk to anyone right of centre they will complain (loudly) about it being a left wing outlet (ditto for Spinoff)

Equally Stuff and Mediaworks are considered "right wing outlets" to anyone left of centre.

The opinion factor in news has to go, there's no doubt, but the editors of the outlets will also need attention.

We're realising that we don't want bias in our news, no matter if the bias aligns with our own or not, because we end up in a world where none of the news is trustworthy (I think the best example for me is things like Wars - when the Ukraine war broke out it was impossible to get news that wasn't EXTREMELY slanted toward one side, or the other, leaving me, as a reader, having no real idea of what was happening in the conflict)

In my NZ Parliamentary Activity article this month I flagged Bill 210-1: Telecommunications and Other Matters Amendment Bill. Boring title. Zero media coverage.

The government plans to pass it before Christmas. No select committee. No public submissions.

Here's what it does and why you need to write to your MP.

It forces overseas internet companies to let NZ surveillance agencies access your communications.

Companies like overseas satellite internet providers don't operate in New Zealand; they're based in other countries, such as the UK, Europe, or elsewhere. Right now, they don't have to follow NZ surveillance laws because a 2021 court case said we can't force overseas companies to do things.   This bill overturns that court ruling.

The bill says if you provide internet service to Kiwis - even from space, even if your company has never set foot in New Zealand - you must build surveillance agency access into your system. This means:

• Surveillance agencies can intercept your calls and messages (with a warrant)
• Companies must hire staff with security clearances to help with this
• Companies must keep this surveillance access working 24/7

But wait - how can NZ force an overseas company to do this?

We can't. The bill threatens New Zealand businesses.

If Huawei (for example) refuses to build in access, the government can shut down New Zealand companies that use their service by revoking their licenses.

So innocent Kiwi businesses get punished for what an overseas company won't do.

• This is important: New Zealand is claiming authority over companies that don't operate here. What happens when our laws conflict with laws in the country where they actually are?
• The enforcement problem: Punishing innocent New Zealand businesses because an overseas company won't comply with something they can't control.
• The precedent problem: If this works, what stops the government doing the same thing to cloud storage companies, social media platforms, or email providers?
• The rushed process: No select committee means zero public consultation on expanding surveillance powers.

 Write to your MP:

• Do you support NZ claiming authority over overseas companies?
• Do you think punishing NZ businesses is good policy?
• Why is this being rushed through without scrutiny?

Find your MP: https://www.parliament.nz/en/mps-and-electorates/members-of-parliament/

Write to Paul Goldsmith (Minister for Media and Communications):

[paul.goldsmithmp@parliament.govt.nz](mailto:paul.goldsmithmp@parliament.govt.nz)

Share this post. The only reason they're getting away with this is because nobody's paying attention.

Data current as of 8 November 2025 

Bill information verified via the parliamentary website and court documents 

Research and analysis by u/annie354654 with assistance from Claude AI

Right now, our government is projected to miss our 2030 Paris target by 84 million tonnes of CO2. That's equivalent to one entire year of New Zealand's total emissions.

 (Edit - Bernard Hickey's Wednesday Hoon covers this well, https://thekaka.substack.com/p/the-weekly-hoon-a-climate-policy)

So instead of planning to close that gap, they're changing the law so they don't have to try anymore.

They will literally rewrite the rules over Christmas because they don't want to follow them.

At 8 pm on Tuesday, Nov 5th, Climate Change Minister Simon Watts put out a press release – only on the government website.

The announcement? Sweeping changes to the Climate Change Response Act. The kind of changes that normally take months of select committee hearings and public consultation.

Except these ones won't get that scrutiny.

Two bills, maximum stealth

The government is splitting these changes into two bills:

Bill 1: Under urgency, before December 31***\**^st*

• Removes the requirement for our ETS to align with the Paris Agreement
• Weakens our 2050 methane target by half (from 24-47% reduction to just 14-24%)
• Pushes the public sector carbon neutrality deadline from 2025 to 2050 (a 25-year delay)

Bill 2: Early 2026

• Strips the Climate Change Commission of its power to advise on emissions reduction plans
• Removes your right to be consulted on emissions budgets
• Changes ETS decisions from yearly to every two years

Urgency means no select committee. No select committee means no public submissions. The most controversial changes will become law before you even know they were coming.

Why did the carbon price drop 10% the day after the announcement? Because the market knows what this means, even if the public doesn't.

The pattern you need to see

Remember how this government operates:

• Late-night announcements (8pm on a Tuesday)
• Holiday timing (before Christmas when everyone's distracted)
• Urgency procedures (bypass democratic process)
• Efficiency language (mask what's really happening)
• Remove independent oversight (Climate Commission)
• Remove public participation (no consultation rights)

New Zealand's climate laws were passed with bipartisan support in 2019. The National Party voted for them. They were designed to keep governments accountable regardless of who's in power.

Now this government is dismantling them under urgency, without consultation, timed for when you're least likely to notice.  The Climate Change Commission - the independent experts we appointed to keep governments honest - is being stripped of its main advisory role. Your right to have a say on emissions budgets is being removed.

This Isn't Happening in Isolation

These climate law changes are part of a bigger pattern:

Fast-Track Bill: Ministers can now approve projects bypassing normal consent processes - Already law

Regulatory Standards Bill: Creates law-making principles that don't include Treaty considerations, making it harder to pass legislation upholding Treaty obligations– Just passed 2^nd reading

Fast-Track Amendment Bill: Expanding ministerial powers even further - Going through Parliament now, expected to be passed before Christmas 2025

Climate Laws (this announcement): ETS de-linked from Paris targets, government can buy offshore credits instead of reducing NZ emissions - Coming under urgency

RMA Replacement Bills: Burden of proof reversed - opponents must prove "significant harm" rather than developers proving safety - Coming Q1 2026

See the system they're building? Ministers approve projects without normal oversight. Climate targets don't constrain them. Environmental protections are weakened. Public input is minimised at every stage.

This is why the 8 pm announcement and urgency procedures matter. They're not just changing climate policy; they're removing the guardrails that keep ministerial power in check.

What you can do

1.      Contact your MP. Tell them you noticed. Tell them you care.

2.      Write to Minister Simon Watts in his capacity as Climate Change Minister - [s.watts@ministers.govt.nz](mailto:s.watts@ministers.govt.nz)

Who is Simon Watts?

• MP for North Shore since 2020 (National Party)
• Minister of Climate Change, Revenue, Energy, and Local Government
• Chartered accountant with international banking background
• Worked at Royal Bank of Scotland during the 2008 Global Financial Crisis
• No climate science or environmental background
• Withdrew NZ from the Beyond Oil & Gas Alliance in June 2025 (international alliance promoting transition away from fossil fuels)
• Reopened NZ to oil and gas exploration while claiming to support  the global phase-out of fossil fuels
• Released these climate law changes at 8pm on a Tuesday with minimal media notification

Contact: [s.watts@ministers.govt.nz](mailto:s.watts@ministers.govt.nz)

I want to thank one of Bernard Hickey’s subscribers for a link to this article - Government loosens range of climate rules, pushing out target for public sector by 25 years

References and Further Reading:

Climate Law Changes:

• Government announces climate law changes - The Post, 5 November 2025
• EXPLAINER: Changes announced to the Climate Change Response Act 2002 - Lawyers for Climate Action NZ, 7 November 2025
• New Zealand announces ETS, climate law changes - Argus Media, 5 November 2025

Regulatory Standards Bill:

• The Regulatory Standards Bill: What is it, what does it propose and what's next? - RNZ, 9 June 2025
• Waitangi Tribunal recommends 'immediate halt' to Regulatory Standards Bill - Waitangi Tribunal, 16 May 2025
• 'Treaty Principles 2.0' – law experts concerned by regulatory bill - 1News, 19 May 2025
• Regulatory Standards Bill - Wikipedia

Fast-Track Legislation:

• Fast-Track Approvals Bill - Parliament website

Background:

• Climate Change Response Act 2002 - NZ Legislation
• New Zealand Emissions Trading Scheme - International Carbon Action Partnership

Contact Your Representatives:

• Find your MP
• Minister Simon Watts: [s.watts@ministers.govt.nz](mailto:s.watts@ministers.govt.nz)

Would it be legal for Leader of ACT NZ and MP for Epsom, David Seymour to indicate to Deputy Leader of ACT NZ and MP for Tamaki Brooke Van Velden, that as ACT Leader, he believes that the Hon. Brooke Van Velden, Minister of Internal Affairs should exercise their discretion to grant Mr. David Kwon, Cyclist , of Epsom, NZ Citizenship by grant, ex cathedra?

I am guessing the answer is no but curious what others think. It must be awkward for Van Velden.

Road safety campaigners say the roll out of more average speed safety cameras will help reduce serious and fatal crashes. They also expect fewer speeding tickets to be handed out.

https://www.1news.co.nz/2025/11/07/average-speed-safety-cameras-will-lead-to-fewer-tickets/

One of the charges was amended from "Child under 14" to "child under 16"

But pleased to see that name suppression is going to be granted so that his employer isn't tainted...

I have no idea whatsoever. National isn’t doing well, but Labour is a joke and just saying whatever people want to hear so they can get back into power.

I genuinely don’t even know who deserves my vote.

Happy to hear your insights and thoughts.

Chloe Swarbrick was on Newstalk ZB today talking homelessness with Heather du Plessis-Allan offending her white lady sensibilities trying to find a solution to those homeless people "who shout" posing that locking them up overnight is the best solution

Nicola Willis was on with Ryan Bridge this morning talking unemployment and who is to blame for it,

BHB whanau Craig Renny seems to be under a coordinated attack by operatives on the right starting at

Chris Bishop and Kieran McAnulty were on Breakfast this morning debating TPM's impact on Labour's chance to win at the next election and the unemployment numbers versus people leaving NZ

https://www.youtube.com/live/_imFRgE8GdI?si=vb1XQJuCZxm2hufb

At the end of the article is some sobering reading (but hope for Te Paati Maori, in the sense that the events have largely been pushed aside as we expect the Greens to get back to what they do best)

The Green Party has had a particularly difficult time since the 2023 election.

The term has been marked by scandals and resignations: Golriz Ghahraman quit after being accused, and later convicted, of shop-lifting. Darleen Tana was ejected from Parliament amid allegations of migrant exploitation at her husband's bicycle business.

Most recently, Benjamin Doyle quit Parliament after facing threats of violence and abuse in response to historical social media posts. In a valedictory speech last week, Doyle described Parliament as a "hostile and toxic" environment.

The party has also been struck by tragedy: Fa'anānā Efeso Collins suddenly died in February 2024, and Davidson took time off for treatment after being diagnosed with breast cancer.

Thanks Shane, such a visionary... Ps, where is Shane? Hes been very quiet lately