Fonterra and Z Energy both told RNZ they sent documents to the government in 2024 to try to influence how ministers and advisers viewed climate activist Mike Smith. The documents went to the Prime Minister's chief policy adviser — but not through the normal government email system. They used a personal email address instead.

Both companies acknowledged sending the material after RNZ reported the lobbying campaign in May 2026. Fonterra confirmed it handed over a printed copy. Z Energy confirmed its submission and said the document was meant to be "provocative" — in other words, deliberately attention-grabbing rather than just informational.

Smith has sued major polluters, and his legal case has drawn concern from companies in the energy and farming sectors who worry about the risk to their businesses.

Prime Minister Christopher Luxon said receiving lobbying documents at a personal email address was "unacceptable" and would shake public trust in government. He made this statement on 2 June 2026 after it became clear the documents hadn't been recorded in the official government record system.

Where the documents went

A briefing note attached to the lobbying material was written in 2024, according to RNZ reporting from 4 June 2026. The personal email address meant the document sat outside the official filing systems that normally keep a record of who talks to ministers and what they're sent. This matters when members of the public ask the government to release information under the Official Information Act — a legal right Kiwis have to see government papers.

Luxon confirmed the adviser who received the document no longer works at the Beehive. He didn't say when they left. The timing complicates any investigation, because the personal email account and its contents wouldn't be stored in government systems where investigators could find them. The combination of a personal inbox and a departed staffer means there's a gap in the record that's genuinely hard to fill.

The situation prompted a debate in Parliament, and observers noted the controversy was overshadowing the government's Budget message — awkward timing, as RNZ noted on 27 May.

What this tells us

New Zealand has no law requiring companies to tell the government — or the public — when they've met with ministers or sent them documents. There's no central register of who is lobbying whom.

Companies wanting to influence government decisions about Mike Smith's lawsuit is not surprising. The case implicates some of New Zealand's biggest polluters, and they have a real stake in the outcome. What is unusual is that two large corporations confirmed they deliberately coordinated their approach, and that one of them framed its document as deliberately provocative.

The personal email issue sits between two sets of rules. Cabinet Office guidelines say ministers and their advisers must conduct official business through official email accounts. A chief policy adviser is one of the most senior non-ministerial staff in the Beehive. If a document about active litigation against major polluters was sent and read outside official channels, it's fair to ask what else was communicated and who else was involved. That question still doesn't have a clear answer.

Luxon calling the situation "unacceptable" is just the starting point for accountability, not the end point. The real test is whether the government can now properly answer Official Information requests about what happened — given that the adviser has left and the original document sits in a personal email account that the government may no longer be able to access.