The government is being accused of moving the goalposts when it comes to the Emissions Trading Scheme to the disproportionate detriment of Māori. Photo / Whakaata Māori / File
An urgent bid by Māori forestry interests to delay the release of a government discussion document on reforming the carbon market has been rejected by the High Court.
Te Taumata, a trade group representing forestry, among other businesses had sought an interim order to prevent the crown announcing reforms to the Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS), claiming that the government had failed to fulfil its obligations under Te Tiriti o Waitangi and engage meaningfully with Māori, in-line with responsibilities around co-governance.
While Justice Guilt dismissed the claim for an interim order, a broader application for a judicial review is still pending.
At issue are reforms Te Taumata Chair Chris Insley says could cost Māori forestry upwards of $10 billion.
Currently, foresters receive a carbon unit for each tonne of carbon dioxide sequestered by their trees, which emitters purchase to offset their greenhouse gas emissions.
Māori own some 48% of commercially planted forests, which is expected to increase with additional treaty settlements.
The issue is, having returned often windy, infertile land to Māori which has subsequently been planted in pine trees because little else will grow there, the government under recommendation from the Climate Change Commission now wants to do a back flip.
In April, the Commission attacked the fact the ETS allows unlimited forestry units, because it means Māori could keep planting whenua and selling credits to business, meaning the government wouldn't reach their climate goals.
Climate change Minister James Shaw is worried the government won't meet its emissions targets so he wants Pine trees out of the ETS. Photo / Mark Mitchell / NZME
The commission has since recommended changes to reduce incentives for forestry offsets in the ETS, including wiping out pines.
While Māori forestry groups have plans to transition from pine to native forests over a 50-year period, the commission and the government want it done faster, even though Iwi say it's not possible.
The High Court case primarily revolved around Insley's claim that the release of the discussion document would cause substantial harm to Māori foresters, emphasizing the need for improved engagement between the government and Te Taumata before launching public consultation.
Insley argued that the proposals constituted "ETS market-sensitive information" with potential irreversible effects on Māori forestry, carbon assets, and the broader Māori economy.
Representatives for Climate Change Minister James Shaw acknowledged that the pre-engagement period was brief but argued that there was no legal obligation for pre-engagement, despite the government incessantly claiming co-goveranance as enshrined in Te Tiriti is an obligation.
Shaw's lawyers argued two rounds of public consultation would take place before any legislation was introduced or regulations drafted.
The court determined that while interim orders could be justified when the right to consultation is ignored, it didn't necessarily extend to pre-engagement.
The court and the government both claimed broader implications of granting interim orders in cases involving contentious policies could set a precedent that could disrupt policy process.
With the High Court's dismissal of Te Taumata's application for interim orders, the government is able to proceed with the public consultation on the proposed ETS reforms, though the broader judicial review application awaits a future hearing.
