Prime Minister Christopher Luxon says New Zealand is on track to reach net zero emissions, and may even get there early, a day after the independent Climate Change Commission warned that more than half of the country’s planned emissions cuts to 2030 are at significant risk.
The Commission released its annual emissions reduction monitoring report in Wellington on Wednesday. It is the body’s formal check on how the Government’s Emissions Reduction Plan is actually tracking, as opposed to how it is meant to track on paper, and it lands in the middle of an election year in which power prices, fuel costs and farm rules are all live arguments.
The report’s central finding is that the pace of emissions reduction needs to more than double over the next few years. Emissions are still falling, but the Commission found progress stalled in 2024, and it put a good deal of that down to a dry year that pushed the electricity system back onto coal. Its assessment is that current policy settings will not deliver at the speed the targets require.
“Emissions are gradually falling but progress stalled in 2024 and current policy settings are not delivering at the pace needed,” Commission chief executive Jo Hendy said in comments reported by interest.co.nz.
The numbers behind the argument are worth setting out, because both sides are quoting them accurately and reaching opposite conclusions. The second emissions budget, covering 2026 to 2030, is set at 305 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent, an average of about 61 million tonnes a year. The Government’s own central projection has New Zealand landing at roughly 303.1 million tonnes, which clears the budget, but only just. The Commission’s point is that the margin is thin enough that if the planned reductions do not all arrive, the budget is missed. It rates more than half of those planned reductions as at significant risk, and it names electricity, agriculture and transport as the three sectors carrying most of that risk.
Beyond 2030 the report is blunter. The Commission found current plans and policies are not sufficient to meet the third emissions budget, which runs from 2031 to 2035, or the 2030 biogenic methane target, or the 2050 target. It framed the next 12 to 24 months as the window in which that can still be turned around. If nothing changes in that time, it said, those goals stop being reachable rather than merely difficult.
Luxon rejected the idea that the country is heading for a miss. “Our view is based on the fact we’re on track to deliver emissions budgets one and two,” he told RNZ. “There’s more work to do for emissions budget three and beyond, and our indications are we’re on track for net zero. We may even do it a few years earlier.”
Climate Change Minister Simon Watts made much the same case, pointing to the Government’s October 2025 projections as evidence the first two budgets will be met. He said the Government would carefully consider the Commission’s findings and give a formal response in October.
That timing matters. The Commission’s report is advice, not an instruction, and the Government is required to respond rather than to agree. An October response means the official reply arrives close to the end of the parliamentary year, and the argument in the meantime will be conducted through press releases rather than through policy changes.
Labour’s climate change spokesperson Deborah Russell said the Government “has failed to take the serious action we need”. Green Party co-leader Chloe Swarbrick focused on the Emissions Trading Scheme, which she described as “the only major tool that they have left for reducing emissions”, and accused the Government of undermining it. ACT leader David Seymour took the opposite position and dismissed the warnings, arguing that New Zealand businesses are already carrying carbon costs their overseas competitors do not.
Those four responses are a fair map of where the parties will sit on this until the election. There is no serious dispute about the measured emissions themselves. The dispute is about what counts as being on track. The Government is reading the projections for the budgets it is currently inside and finding they are met. The Commission is reading the same projections, noting how much of the reduction is still only planned rather than delivered, and finding the risk unacceptably high. Both statements can be true at once, which is exactly why the argument is so hard to settle in a soundbite.
Two specific items in the report will keep coming up. One is the proposed liquefied natural gas import terminal, which the Commission warned would slow the shift away from fossil fuels at a time when the electricity sector is meant to be doing heavy lifting. The other is methane from farming, where the Commission’s view is that the 2030 target will not be met on current settings. Neither of those is a small technical footnote, and both cut straight into the cost of living and cost of production debates that have dominated the past few months.
Business groups have described the report as a wake up call. The Commission itself has been careful to frame the finding as recoverable rather than lost, which is the practical reason it has put a one to two year clock on it.
If you want to work out where the parties actually stand on climate policy and everything else before you vote, our voting tool lets you compare their positions side by side.
Do you think New Zealand is genuinely on track for net zero, or is the margin too thin to call it that? Leave a comment below and tell us how you read it.
This article was written by AI, briefed to report the facts, hopefully without some of the bias people bring to the job 🙂
Leave a Reply