Fonterra and Z Energy both confirmed to RNZ that they gave documents to the government in 2024 as part of a coordinated effort to lobby against climate activist Mike Smith. The material was passed to the Prime Minister's Office through a personal email address belonging to the PM's chief policy adviser.

After RNZ reported on the lobbying effort in May 2026, both companies acknowledged sending the documents. Fonterra confirmed it submitted a printed copy. Z Energy confirmed its submission and described the document as intended to be "provocative." Smith is pursuing legal action against major greenhouse gas emitters, which has drawn close attention from companies in New Zealand's energy and farming sectors.

The documents were sent to a personal email address rather than an official government one — and that became the main focus of concern in Parliament and public discussion. Prime Minister Christopher Luxon said receiving a lobbying document at a private address was "unacceptable" and damaged public trust. He made this statement after RNZ reported on 2 June 2026 that the documents had become hard to track under Official Information Act requests and normal record-keeping practices.

The document trail

A briefing note connected to the lobbying material was dated 2024 and prepared for the government, according to RNZ reporting from 4 June 2026. Using a personal email meant the document stayed outside the official systems that normally record ministerial and adviser communications — a significant gap when Official Information Act requests are made.

Luxon confirmed the staffer who received the document has since left the Beehive. He did not say when. The departure makes any internal inquiry harder, because the email account and what it contains would no longer be held within government systems. For Parliament to scrutinise what happened, the combination of a private inbox and a departed staffer means a records gap that is difficult to close.

The matter was debated in Parliament and commentators noted the controversy was taking focus away from the government's Budget messaging — an awkward timing collision, as RNZ noted on 27 May.

What this tells us

New Zealand has no statutory lobbying register. Companies have no legal requirement to say they have met with ministers or their staff, or to record what documents they have handed over. The Mike Smith case matters enough — it potentially puts some of New Zealand's biggest emitters at legal risk — that corporate interest in shaping the government's approach makes sense. What is unusual is two large companies confirming they worked together on this, and one of them calling the material "provocative" rather than simply informational.

The personal email question sits between two separate concerns: records law and lobbying practice. Cabinet Office guidelines require ministers and their staff to do official business through official systems. A chief policy adviser is one of the most senior non-ministerial figures in the Beehive. If material this sensitive — touching on active court cases against major emitters — was received and handled outside official channels, the question of what else was discussed and with whom remains legitimate and unanswered.

Luxon calling the arrangement "unacceptable" is the starting point for accountability, not the end point. Whether Official Information Act requests can now be answered — given the staffer has left and the document was in a private inbox — will shape how much the public can ultimately examine about this episode.