Budget 2025 - Backing New Zealand Gas For The Future
Energy Resources Aotearoa is delighted by today's announcement by Resources Minister Shane Jones of $200 million for Crown co-investment in new domestic gas field developments in Budget 2025.
Chief Executive John Carnegie says the new spending in Budget 2025 for domestic gas field development represents pragmatic and long-overdue action to secure New Zealand's energy future.
"Natural gas is critical to ensuring affordable and reliable energy for New Zealanders. Today's announcement is a bright flare to investors, a sign that the government is serious about energy security, affordability, and economic resilience - and that New Zealand is open for business," Carnegie says.
"We're pleased to see the proposed Crown stake of up to 10-15% in new gas field developments acknowledges the scale and risk of bringing new supply online.
Major projects require substantial capital, and Government participation can help de-risk and catalyse investment."
Carnegie says the investment has wide implications for New Zealand's industrial sector and regional economy.
"Gas underpins everything from electricity generation to food processing, and declining reserves have already placed pressure on everyone from major exporters to small domestic manufacturers.
We hope this move will help stem the decline and ensure these sectors can continue to drive New Zealand's economic future using affordable, reliable, domestic energy."
Carnegie says the industry is ready to work with the government to ensure the co-investment framework is commercially sound and delivers outcomes that benefit all Kiwis.
"We look forward to continuing to work with the Government to restore investor confidence, reduce our dependence on imported coal, and ensure New Zealand has the tools to manage our energy future on our own terms."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scoop
2 hours ago
- Scoop
Why Is The New Zealand Media Not Questioning The Implications Of The Gene Technology Bill?
Press Release – Lisa Er Despite the profound ethical, environmental, and societal implications, there has been a noticeable lack of critical scrutiny from the mainstream media, says Lisa Er. As the Gene Technology Bill advances through Parliament, New Zealand faces a pivotal moment in science, agriculture, and public health. The proposed legislation would significantly relax restrictions on gene technology, enabling broader research, development, and use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in New Zealand for the first time in nearly 30 years Yet, despite the profound ethical, environmental, and societal implications, there has been a noticeable lack of critical scrutiny from the mainstream media. 'It is plausible that political and economic factors are influencing the nature and depth of media coverage regarding the Gene Technology Bill,' says Lisa Er, author of a petition to 'halt the progress of the Gene Technology Bill and instead set up a Commission of Inquiry into the health and safety of people and the environment on behalf of citizens, to allow time for wider community and stakeholder consultation.' Key Concerns: Environmental Risks: The Bill paves the way for the release of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) into New Zealand's unique ecosystems, risking irreversible impacts on native species, biodiversity, crops, and the country's global clean, green brand. Lack of Public Consultation: The Government has failed to meaningfully consult with Māori, scientists, and the wider public, ignoring Treaty of Waitangi obligations and indigenous rights, community concerns about food safety, cultural values, and environmental protection. Threat to Export Markets: New Zealand's primary export markets, especially in Europe and Asia, have strict GM-free requirements. The Bill endangers market access and could jeopardize billions in export earnings. Undermining Precaution: The Bill abandons the precautionary principle that has underpinned New Zealand's cautious approach to gene technology, exposing the country to unknown long-term risks. Ignoring International Best Practice: Leading nations are strengthening, not weakening, their oversight of gene technologies in response to new scientific evidence and public concern. Insufficient Public Debate: The bill has generated over 1,500 public submissions, reflecting deep divisions and strong opinions across the country. The removal of labelling GE is of considerable public concern. Why has the minimal media coverage largely focused on official statements and the potential benefits, with little attention paid to the risks, opposition viewpoints, or the broader societal debate that is unfolding in submissions and community discussions? Risk Oversight and Regulatory Gaps: the bill will open the door to unintended consequences, including ecosystem disruption, cross-contamination of crops, and unclear long-term health effects Transparency and Accountability: Some have questioned whether the bill is being rushed or if consultation has been adequate, particularly given the timing of the public submission period over the summer holidays Media outlets have an essential role in holding lawmakers accountable and ensuring transparency in the legislative process, and these risks deserve deeper journalistic investigation and public explanation. A Call to Action for the Media: We urge New Zealand's journalists and editors to fulfil their democratic duty by: – Investigating the full range of concerns about the Gene Technology Bill, including those raised in public submissions. – Highlighting the ethical, cultural, and environmental questions that remain unresolved. – Providing balanced, evidence-based coverage that empowers New Zealanders to make informed decisions about the future of gene technology in their country. 'The Gene Technology Bill represents a generational shift in New Zealand's approach to biotechnology', says Er. 'The public deserves robust, critical journalism that examines not only the promises but also the very real perils of this legislation.' Lisa Er, founder of Lisa's Hummus Issued in the public interest to encourage transparent, balanced, and investigative reporting on a matter of national importance Petition with over 4,000 signatures Petition request: That the House of Representatives halt the progress of the Gene Technology Bill and instead set up a Commission of Inquiry into the health and safety of people and the environment on behalf of citizens, to allow time for wider community and stakeholder consultation. Petition reason: I consider the Gene Technology Bill has failed to follow sound and fair processes by not consulting enough with the public and other stakeholders. I believe there is inadequate consideration of Te Tiriti obligations, and insufficient requirements to protect people and the environment from the risks of GE contamination. A range of gene editing techniques would be excluded from regulation. This would mean GE products would enter the environment and food supply untested, unregistered and unlabeled.
Scoop
2 hours ago
- Scoop
Aquaculture Animal Welfare Code ‘Anti-Kiwi', Oceans And Fisheries Minister Shane Jones Says
Shane Jones has ruled out the idea of a code to protect farmed fish, following SPCA calls for one., Journalist SPCA calls for an animal welfare code for aquaculture to protect farmed fish It says code would help the sector access international markets where factory farming is increasingly under scrutiny Oceans and Fisheries Minister says this would be a 'luxury' in the current economic environment Oceans and Fisheries Minister Shane Jones is ruling out an animal welfare code for aquaculture, saying it is 'anti-Kiwi' and an 'indulgence'. The SPCA has called for a code to protect farmed fish, following a government plan to grow the industry's revenue to $3 billion annually by 2035. Scientific officer Marie McAninch said a code would also help give the aquaculture sector access to the sorts of international markets that land-based farmers benefit from, thanks to their animal welfare codes. 'New Zealanders care about how farmed animals are treated – and so do people overseas who buy our products. They'll expect that farmed fish in aquaculture are treated well and that their welfare meets our animal welfare laws. 'A code of welfare for aquaculture would help make that happen. But right now, New Zealand's Aquaculture Strategy – and the Aquaculture Development Strategy that Shane Jones announced in March – are both completely silent on the welfare of the animals being farmed.' Jones said he would not be considering an animal welfare code. 'Most certainly not. I think these impositions are anti-Kiwi. We are in the midst of a set of economic challenges where we must expand and grow the footprint of aquaculture. It's all going to end up [as food for] human consumption or pet consumption.' Jones said existing fish farmers already did 'a very good job' of looking after their stock. 'All of these animal husbandry businesses, there's always scope for improvement. But regulatory codes … only represent red tape and at a deeper level where does all this end? We're a small economy and a lot of these impositions are, in my view, indulgences. They're vanity projects and these debates need a clear set of contrasting views.' But McAninch said New Zealanders cared about how farmed animals were treated – and so did people overseas who bought products from New Zealand fish farms. Fish were legally recognised as sentient beings, which meant they were capable of feeling pain, stress and positive emotional states, she said. The SPCA was not against aquaculture, McAninch said. 'But we do believe it's crucial to make sure all farmed animals – and any wild animals affected by these systems – are properly protected. Our land-based farming sectors take pride in their animal welfare codes, and it's helped them with access to international markets. If the aquaculture sector doesn't plan for this now, they risk falling behind in a global environment where factory farming is increasingly under scrutiny.' Jones said he was 'the first to admit some of my views might be a bit difficult to stomach'. But animal advocates were 'on a trajectory of mission creep, and I kind of feel it's anti-Kiwi,' he said. 'I can understand that little kittens and dogs that bite children and other welfare considerations [are] an established part of rural life and our ethos, but suggesting that people growing salmon, new fish species and indeed shellfish … we already have a system through the Resource Management Act that deals with the effects of such activity.' Jones described a recent outcry by animal lovers about farming octopuses, which are sentient beings, as 'the height of this folly'. 'We need to grow industry, we don't want to impose these urban based vanity beliefs of basic industrial growth prospects.' Octopus farming was banned in the United States in Washington and California due to animal welfare concerns, and consideration of a ban is also underway in three more states. But Jones said New Zealand could not afford such 'luxury indulgences'. 'It's not something that I'm going to encourage, it's certainly not something I'm going to push forward, or agree with, at a time we have large competing objectives and other goals that I think society should set its mind upon.' The SPCA would welcome talks with the minister about how a welfare code could help ensure the aquaculture sector was sustainable and resilient, McAninch said. There is currently no code of welfare for farmed fish species, although the New Zealand Salmon Farmers Association has developed a voluntary welfare standard for farmed salmon in New Zealand. The Animal Welfare Act 1999 (the AWA) and the Code of Welfare for Commercial Slaughter applies to farmed fish and for any fish that are intended to be held or transported live. The National Animal Welfare Advisory Committee (NAWAC) has identified development of a code of welfare for farmed fish for consideration as a future priority. The Minister in charge of Animal Welfare, Associate Minister of Agriculture Andrew Hoggard said NAWAC set its own work programme and schedule for code reviews, but he had asked it to prioritise production livestock codes, and the rodeo code. 'Several of these codes have been under review for some time and the industries concerned need certainty. I expect NAWAC to deliver on those codes before turning their attention to other animal species.'
Scoop
3 hours ago
- Scoop
Aquaculture Animal Welfare Code 'Anti-Kiwi', Oceans And Fisheries Minister Shane Jones Says
SPCA calls for an animal welfare code for aquaculture to protect farmed fish It says code would help the sector access international markets where factory farming is increasingly under scrutiny Oceans and Fisheries Minister says this would be a "luxury" in the current economic environment Oceans and Fisheries Minister Shane Jones is ruling out an animal welfare code for aquaculture, saying it is "anti-Kiwi" and an "indulgence". The SPCA has called for a code to protect farmed fish, following a government plan to grow the industry's revenue to $3 billion annually by 2035. Scientific officer Marie McAninch said a code would also help give the aquaculture sector access to the sorts of international markets that land-based farmers benefit from, thanks to their animal welfare codes. "New Zealanders care about how farmed animals are treated - and so do people overseas who buy our products. They'll expect that farmed fish in aquaculture are treated well and that their welfare meets our animal welfare laws. "A code of welfare for aquaculture would help make that happen. But right now, New Zealand's Aquaculture Strategy - and the Aquaculture Development Strategy that Shane Jones announced in March - are both completely silent on the welfare of the animals being farmed." Jones said he would not be considering an animal welfare code. "Most certainly not. I think these impositions are anti-Kiwi. We are in the midst of a set of economic challenges where we must expand and grow the footprint of aquaculture. It's all going to end up [as food for] human consumption or pet consumption." Jones said existing fish farmers already did "a very good job" of looking after their stock. "All of these animal husbandry businesses, there's always scope for improvement. But regulatory codes ... only represent red tape and at a deeper level where does all this end? We're a small economy and a lot of these impositions are, in my view, indulgences. They're vanity projects and these debates need a clear set of contrasting views." But McAninch said New Zealanders cared about how farmed animals were treated - and so did people overseas who bought products from New Zealand fish farms. Fish were legally recognised as sentient beings, which meant they were capable of feeling pain, stress and positive emotional states, she said. The SPCA was not against aquaculture, McAninch said. "But we do believe it's crucial to make sure all farmed animals - and any wild animals affected by these systems - are properly protected. Our land-based farming sectors take pride in their animal welfare codes, and it's helped them with access to international markets. If the aquaculture sector doesn't plan for this now, they risk falling behind in a global environment where factory farming is increasingly under scrutiny." Jones said he was "the first to admit some of my views might be a bit difficult to stomach". But animal advocates were "on a trajectory of mission creep, and I kind of feel it's anti-Kiwi," he said. "I can understand that little kittens and dogs that bite children and other welfare considerations [are] an established part of rural life and our ethos, but suggesting that people growing salmon, new fish species and indeed shellfish ... we already have a system through the Resource Management Act that deals with the effects of such activity." Jones described a recent outcry by animal lovers about farming octopuses, which are sentient beings, as "the height of this folly". "We need to grow industry, we don't want to impose these urban based vanity beliefs of basic industrial growth prospects." Octopus farming was banned in the United States in Washington and California due to animal welfare concerns, and consideration of a ban is also underway in three more states. But Jones said New Zealand could not afford such "luxury indulgences". "It's not something that I'm going to encourage, it's certainly not something I'm going to push forward, or agree with, at a time we have large competing objectives and other goals that I think society should set its mind upon." The SPCA would welcome talks with the minister about how a welfare code could help ensure the aquaculture sector was sustainable and resilient, McAninch said. There is currently no code of welfare for farmed fish species, although the New Zealand Salmon Farmers Association has developed a voluntary welfare standard for farmed salmon in New Zealand. The Animal Welfare Act 1999 (the AWA) and the Code of Welfare for Commercial Slaughter applies to farmed fish and for any fish that are intended to be held or transported live. The National Animal Welfare Advisory Committee (NAWAC) has identified development of a code of welfare for farmed fish for consideration as a future priority. The Minister in charge of Animal Welfare, Associate Minister of Agriculture Andrew Hoggard said NAWAC set its own work programme and schedule for code reviews, but he had asked it to prioritise production livestock codes, and the rodeo code. "Several of these codes have been under review for some time and the industries concerned need certainty. I expect NAWAC to deliver on those codes before turning their attention to other animal species."
