Latest news with #Toop
Scoop
6 days ago
- Business
- Scoop
Greenpeace Turns On NZ First Over Its Support For Corporate Land Grab Bill
During today's public submission hearings on the ACT Party's Overseas Investment Amendment Bill, Greenpeace took direct aim at NZ First, highlighting the hypocrisy of NZ First's support for the Bill at first reading - despite its long-standing opposition to foreign ownership. The party's sole representative was notably absent for most of the hearing. Greenpeace accused the party of abandoning its values and backing a law that would see some of the country's most ecologically sensitive land sold to multinational corporations, even if those corporations have a criminal history and have broken environmental laws in other jurisdictions. "If NZ First does bend the knee to another of ACT's ideological policies then so be it," said Toop. "The voters' cards will fall as they may, and they may very well fall under 5%, but that will be the bed that NZ First makes for itself by signing up to a Bill that would see New Zealand being sold off to the highest bidding foreign corporation." The organisation opposed the bill on several grounds including that it removes the requirement that the Government check whether a foreign buyer of sensitive land has committed serious crimes abroad, such as breaking environmental or labour laws, or evading paying taxes. Sensitive land is outlined in Schedule 1 of the Bill and includes the conservation estate, offshore islands, lake beds, the marine and coastal zone, wāhi tapu and other culturally significant sites, and land adjoining these areas. "The Bill makes it harder for the government to decline the sale of lake beds, offshore islands and the conservation estate to multinational corporate cowboys," says Toop. "If this Bill is enacted the Government will no longer be able to impose the bare minimum of environmental conditions on the sale, things like biodiversity protection, heritage preservation, and allowing ongoing public access to public lands." The organisation also condemned the move to scrap the special tests for foreign forestry investment, pointing out that much of the devastation caused by the forestry slash and erosion, such as during Cyclone Gabrielle, is caused by foreign-owned forestry companies. Toop pointed out that Global Forest Partners, the 8th largest landowner in New Zealand in 2019 was registered in the Cayman Islands and asked whether the committee thought the forest industry had paid their fair share to rebuild bridges and roads destroyed by their industry. She suggested they hadn't and "were instead metaphorically - or literally - bathing in the Cayman Islands' warm, tax-free waters while New Zealand taxpayers footed the clean-up bill." "Greenpeace believes that all corporations, whether New Zealand owned or overseas owned, should be regulated to ensure that they don't harm the environment, but the Overseas Investment Act currently provides an additional tool that enables the Government to regulate overseas corporations, in particular, to achieve better environmental and community outcomes." "It is simply not reasonable to pass an amendment bill that says offshore forestry investments - which have already brought such demonstrable harm to the country - will receive less scrutiny and have fewer conditions imposed on them," Toop said. In a pointed moment during the hearing, Toop held up a placard reading NO, referencing Winston Peters' infamous "NO" placard and stated: "If the NZ First member of the committee had shown up he might recall that sign. Or perhaps it's been forgotten - as NZ First does seem to have forgotten a few things lately, like what it is they purportedly stand for." "This ACT party bill literally removes the benefit to New Zealand test so that it is easier to sell off New Zealand to multinational corporations. You'll have to forgive me for failing to see how that, by any stretch of the imagination, puts NZ First." Toop also criticised the Government's rushed consultation process - with the Government only allowing five hours of oral submissions on the Bill, all via Zoom. "It is undemocratic, but it's not surprising - especially from a Government who recently engaged in voter suppression. Add to that the new FBI office in our capital city, and you'd be forgiven for thinking you hadn't woken up in Aotearoa - you'd woken up in Trump's America." "Is it really too much to ask that this Government start governing for New Zealanders, not governing in service of foreign corporations and their offshore shareholders?"
Scoop
17-07-2025
- Politics
- Scoop
Government Agency Warns Controversial Bill Could Delay Disaster Response
As the cleanup begins in flood-hit Tasman, fresh documents reveal a stark warning from Land Information New Zealand (LINZ) that the Regulatory Standards Bill could hinder the country's ability to respond to climate-related disasters. In a briefing obtained by Greenpeace under the Official Information Act, LINZ - the agency responsible for managing Crown land - warned that the Bill may "limit the ability to respond quickly to emerging issues (for example, climate-related or natural disaster issues)." Greenpeace has called the advice "yet another nail in the coffin for the doomed Bill". "As families, businesses and farmers in Tasman begin the difficult cleanup after yet another devastating flood, it's shocking to learn that officials are warning this Bill could make it harder to respond to exactly these kinds of disasters," says Greenpeace spokesperson Gen Toop. LINZ also flagged concerns about the Bill's impact on critical infrastructure and public works, warning "an overly rigid emphasis on property interests may conflict with broader regulatory objectives, including the Government's ability to acquire land for infrastructure or public good projects." This was a concern echoed by the Treasury in its advice on the Bill. "The Regulatory Standards Bill is dangerous. It would tie the Government up in new red tape at the very moment when urgent climate action and disaster preparation are needed most," says Toop "The advice is clear. This Bill would make it harder to build the infrastructure we urgently need to decarbonise the economy and prepare for climate disasters - things like flood protection, improved communication links, and renewable energy." LINZ further flagged that the legislation could create new legal barriers to returning land to iwi under the Treaty settlement process, citing concerns raised by the Waitangi Tribunal. "These new warnings are yet another nail in the coffin for this doomed Bill. It has attracted blistering criticism from the United Nations, legal experts, health professionals, Māori leaders, environmental groups, and the public service itself." "The Labour and Green parties have committed to repealing the Bill. It simply has no future. The Prime Minister should withdraw National's support immediately before further time and money is wasted on yet another one of David Seymour's disastrously unpopular policy ideas." This latest revelation comes as news broke this morning that MBIE had warned the Bill could be much more expensive than previously expected and have a negative impact on economic growth, and just days after news broke that the United Nations has issued a letter to the Government criticising the Bill.
Scoop
30-06-2025
- Politics
- Scoop
Official Documents Reveal Widespread Opposition To Seymour's Regulatory Standards Bill
Documents released to Greenpeace Aotearoa under the Official Information Act reveal that both the Ministry for the Environment (MfE) and Treasury have joined the growing list of bodies issuing strong warnings against the Regulatory Standards Bill. In a scathing assessment dated 20 March, the Ministry for the Environment described the Bill as "deeply problematic" and warned that it "conflicts with the fundamental principles of the environmental management system" and "poses risks to the health, safety, economic, social, and environmental interests of current and future New Zealanders." Greenpeace is calling on the Prime Minister to withdraw his support for the Bill. "This damning official advice confirms what Greenpeace have been warning all along: this Bill represents an unprecedented threat to our environment and to the Government's ability to respond to the climate crisis," said Greenpeace spokesperson Gen Toop. The Treasury, in a separate briefing dated 28 March 2025, warned the Bill "could impose costs on agencies exceeding the potential economic and societal benefit" and "may also have a chilling effect on the development and retention of beneficial regulation." "What we're seeing here is overwhelming opposition to the Bill from the very institutions tasked with upholding good lawmaking, public safety, and environmental stewardship. That's because the real intent behind David Seymour's Regulatory Standards bill is to tie the hands of future Governments and impose the ACT party's far-right neoliberal principles on our democracy." "This is a dangerous, undemocratic piece of legislation being pushed through via a backroom coalition deal," said Toop. "It's time for the Prime Minister to show some leadership and scrap it." MfE and Treasury were both particularly critical of the Bill's proposed expectation that the government compensate corporations for regulations that affect their property. MfE said it risks "reversing the 'polluter pays' principle", and Treasury stated it "goes further than conventional policy in this area" warning it could lead to delays and increased costs on infrastructure projects. "It's a simple principle: polluters should pay - not be paid by the public," said Toop. "But this Bill would flip that on its head, allowing corporations to expect taxpayer compensation for basic environmental and human health protections," says Toop. "It is the role of the Government to govern for the collective well-being of the people it serves, and that includes protecting the environment and the climate on which we all depend. This Bill upends that and tries to make our Government serve corporate interests instead." Treasury and MfE are the latest to join a growing list of governmental agencies issuing warnings over the bill. The Ministry of Justice has warned it's not in line with the NZ Bill of Rights Act and "fails to recognise the constitutional significance of the Treaty of Waitangi." While Parliament's legislative watchdog has cautioned that the Bill could lead to "significant unintended consequences,"
Scoop
24-06-2025
- Health
- Scoop
MPI Lets Illegal Pesticide-laced Food Hit The Shelves In NZ
An investigation by Greenpeace Aotearoa has revealed that for at least five years, New Zealand Food Safety has failed to recall food products or prosecute suppliers when food has tested positive for illegally high levels of dangerous agrichemicals. There have been well over 50 breaches, including one food sample containing 30 times the legal limit of a pesticide so toxic it is now banned in New Zealand and is classified as highly hazardous by the World Health Organisation. "This is a shocking failure of the food safety system," says Greenpeace campaigner Gen Toop. "Illegally high pesticide residues are being found on our food, and the Government is letting it stay on the shelves. That's indefensible." "Every family in Aotearoa should be able to feed their kids food that is safe from illegally high amounts of pesticide residue. But that is clearly not the case because of gross negligence by the very governmental body charged with ensuring food safety." NZ Food Safety sits within the MPI, which is charged with enforcing the Food Regulations 2015. The regulations prohibit the sale of food with residues above maximum limits. But documents obtained by Greenpeace under the Official Information Act confirm there have been no prosecutions for breaches or even a single fine over the last five years, at least. "This Government and New Zealand Food Safety appear more interested in protecting the profits of agrichemical companies like Bayer than protecting the safety of New Zealanders' food, and the health of our environment," says Toop. In 2022-23, MPI testing found three food samples containing illegally high levels of methamidophos, a highly toxic organophosphate pesticide that is now banned. One sample had residue levels 30 times over the limit, and had been illegally used on a crop for which it wasn't authorised for use on. According to the EPA, in its decision to ban the chemical, organophosphates like methamidophos are linked to developmental harm in fetuses and infants, neuropsychological and motor function effects, increased risk of cancer, Parkinson's disease, obesity, and diabetes. The revelations come as ACT Ministers David Seymour and Andrew Hoggard push a food safety deregulation agenda, including a plan to fast-track pesticide approvals and allow agrichemical companies to self-assess their own hazardous chemicals. They also come after MPI and NZ food safety have proposed a 100-fold increase in legally allowed residues of the controversial herbicide glyphosate on wheat, oats and barley. "Instead of making it easier to use toxic chemicals on our food in ways that are blatantly illegal, the Government should be supporting farmers to transition to ecological farming that protects people and the planet," says Toop.
Scoop
23-05-2025
- Politics
- Scoop
Regulatory Standards Bill Inflicts ACT's Far-Right Principles On Aotearoa
Press Release – Greenpeace 'The Regulatory Standards Bill tries to make all future lawmakers in government follow a rigid set of the ACT Partys far-right principles – prioritising corporate interests over people, nature, and Te Tiriti,' says Greenpeace spokesperson Gen Toop. The Government is facing backlash over David Seymour's controversial Regulatory Standards Bill which passed its first reading today, under the shadow of the Budget. 'After the uproar over the Treaty Principles Bill, the Luxon Government looks to be trying to keep Seymour's latest unpopular Bill quiet. They've clearly chosen to introduce it in Budget week to minimise scrutiny,' said Greenpeace spokesperson Gen Toop. 'The Regulatory Standards Bill tries to make all future lawmakers in government follow a rigid set of the ACT Party's far-right principles – prioritising corporate interests over people, nature, and Te Tiriti,' says Toop. This is the fourth time ACT has tried to pass the bill. It's failed not once, not twice, but three times already. This time, more than 20,000 people submitted on the Bill during its first consultation, with only 0.33% of submitters in support, while 88% opposed it outright. The Bill was also the subject of a Waitangi Tribunal inquiry, brought by over 13,000 claimants. The Tribunal found the Crown had breached its Te Tiriti o Waitangi obligations and called on the Crown to halt further work on the controversial bill until it consults with Māori. One of the principles in the Regulatory Standards Bill would create a new and unprecedented expectation that the Crown compensate corporations if environmental or public interest laws affect their property. 'It's a simple principle: polluters should pay – not be paid by the public. But Seymour's bill turns that on its head,' says Toop. 'If this bill becomes law, corporations like ExxonMobil, Fonterra and Monsanto would expect taxpayer handouts when the government introduces basic environmental or public protections.' 'These extreme neoliberal ideas have no place in our legal system here in Aotearoa, where we have long valued fairness and collective responsibility rather than individual entitlements to harm nature or others under the guise of freedom,' says Toop. Greenpeace, along with Forest & Bird, WWF-New Zealand and the Environmental Defence Society, issued an open letter to the Prime Minister on Monday calling on him to reject the Regulatory Standards Bill, warning that it is an 'unprecedented threat' to environmental protection, climate action, and the country's democratic and constitutional foundations.
