The Government has rejected calls to ban the public sale of fireworks, saying it will instead keep managing them under the rules already in place (RNZ).

The decision comes after a group of MPs — called the Petitions Committee — looked at three public petitions asking for a ban. Together, those petitions gathered close to 100,000 signatures. One alone drew 93,248 (Petitions Committee report). In April, the committee said fireworks cause significant harm to people, animals, and property, and recommended banning both the public sale and private use of fireworks (RNZ). The three petitions appeared in the official record of Parliament on Tuesday, 12 May 2026 (Hansard).

The Government's formal response did not name any specific minister or ministry. It was attributed simply to "the Government" (RNZ). The SPCA, which had met with Environment Minister Hon Penny Simmonds to push for a ban, confirmed the rejection on 29 July 2026 (SPCA).

A wide range of organisations backed a ban. Fire and Emergency New Zealand, the SPCA, the New Zealand Veterinary Association, and Veterinarians for Animal Welfare Aotearoa all supported ending public firework sales (RNZ).

SPCA chief scientific officer Dr Arnja Dale called the decision "profoundly disappointing" and said the Government had ignored public safety, animal welfare, scientific evidence, and the wishes of New Zealanders (RNZ).

The decision also sits awkwardly alongside what coalition partners had said before. NZ First leader Winston Peters said after the election that the Government "will be" supporting a ban on public fireworks sales (RNZ). NZ First even introduced a bill in November 2025 to ban the public sale of fireworks, but later withdrew it (RNZ).

ACT leader David Seymour was not in favour of a ban (RNZ). So the coalition picture was straightforward: one partner publicly committed to a ban and introduced a bill before pulling it, another opposed a ban outright, and the overall Government response landed on keeping things as they are.

Green Party co-leader Chlöe Swarbrick expressed disappointment at the decision, calling a ban on private firework sales "common sense" while supporting the continuation of organised public displays (RNZ).

The broader context here is a long-running debate that has now produced a clear gap between what a cross-party group of MPs recommended and what the Government decided to do. The committee gave the issue a full hearing and acknowledged the harms. The Government's response does not dispute those harms; it just declines to act on them through a ban, saying current rules are enough.

For the welfare and emergency-services groups that supported the ban, the gap between the committee's finding and the Government's response is the core frustration. Dr Dale's framing — that the Government ignored public safety and animal welfare evidence — signals that these groups are unlikely to treat this as the final word.

The withdrawal of NZ First's bill is also worth noting. When a party says it supports a ban, drafts a law, and then pulls that law before the Government even responds, it leaves little room for change during this term of Parliament. Without a Government-backed bill, the current rules for public firework sales will stay as they are.

What the Government means by "managing fireworks within current regulatory settings" was not explained further. The current rules include restrictions by the Environmental Protection Authority, which allows shops to sell fireworks for only the four days before Guy Fawkes and sets a minimum age for buyers. Whether any changes within those rules are being considered has not been specified.