# Question 85: We run a farm and live well outside a main centre. We are weighing operating costs, environmental obligations and access to local services. I am considering my vote in the 2026 New Zealand general election. How do parties differ on agricultural emissions and support for farms adapting to climate change? Collected 26 October 2026 [NZ Election 2026 · Edition 6 study](https://nzbrands.ai/research/nz-election-2026/editions/6) ## ChatGPT Answer ID: 43060703-8e9e-4d11-a77b-6efdaeab73a4 # New Zealand 2026 election: farming emissions, climate adaptation and rural costs For a farming business well outside a main centre, the key question is not simply which party has the strongest climate policy. It is which party offers the best balance between farm profitability, predictable environmental rules, access to practical adaptation support and the long-term resilience of your land and business. New Zealand's general election is scheduled for Saturday 7 November 2026. One of the biggest dividing lines is already clear: the centre-right parties favour reducing agricultural emissions mainly through technology and industry incentives, while the Greens favour stronger emissions-reduction obligations. Labour sits between those approaches, with some uncertainty over its exact farm-pricing policy. [The main parties vying to form New Zealand's next government](https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/main-parties-vying-form-new-zealands-next-government-2026-10-12/)[Election policy tracker: what the parties are promising](https://stories.theconversation.com/nz-policy-tracker-2026/)[Updating our approach to reducing agricultural emissions](https://environment.govt.nz/assets/publications/climate-change/ERP2/New-Zealands-second-emissions-reduction-plan-January-2026-amendment-addendum.pdf) For your situation, I would assess party policies across four areas: - Operating costs: Will you face emissions charges, additional reporting, compliance expenses or incentives to invest in new equipment and technology? - Environmental obligations: How will methane, nitrous oxide, freshwater and land-use rules affect your farm? - Climate adaptation: Who helps pay for drought resilience, flood protection, water storage, soil health and other long-term improvements? - Rural services: Will there be practical support for isolated farming communities, including transport, health services, connectivity and emergency response? These are related but distinct issues. A party that promises to remove emissions charges may reduce one cost without necessarily offering funding for drought or flood resilience. Likewise, a party with stronger environmental standards may offer more long-term protection but impose higher near-term compliance or investment costs. ## 1. How the main parties differ on farm emissions Position snapshot as at 25 October 2026. These are policy summaries, not endorsements; check the linked party policies for the latest details. ![Farmer milking cows in rotary shed.](https://images.openai.com/static-rsc-4/8eEMjAfMihdfzdg_ubf8tmoH5PRuZbK6oEwB169taoEFwaN6miYkeiLRW8sEtGUmHvAugDlTUvnRGAAKBomBsOl6-LtmiswXrAiMTz73O0_NR7uGZ38oAKEPhBZv12f8zXGiuhjdwySrEOIA-xTbkD-HQMkbmmyZ8W72G4uz8nutXxZxzhFfSDhb6wxZxLxC?purpose=inline) ### National Technology and productivity National has ended plans to introduce on-farm agricultural emissions pricing by 2030 and legislated a less stringent 2050 biogenic methane target of 14–24% below 2017 levels. It favours developing and commercialising methane-reduction technologies while protecting farm profitability. [New Zealand's second emissions reduction plan 2026–30: January 2026 amendment addendum](https://environment.govt.nz/publications/new-zealands-second-emissions-reduction-plan-202630-january-2026-amendment-addendum/)[New methane target set in Parliament](https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/new-methane-target-set-parliament) What it could mean for you: less risk of a direct farm emissions bill under the current policy, with future reductions relying more on technology adoption and market incentives. ![New Zealand Considers Taxing Farmers For Agricultural Emissions](https://images.openai.com/static-rsc-4/K9L5YMIkvxLK6xepPp1Ps5P4Zr5IhWiA8v1L-DvP41Nv-D59IsjyPe1u04Qb-9_Nl_tZiy7TBrS3zEk5fVpZ3GsdvIpiY0UDpExa-YXwVAVxt40JYRokuyOWQZRGMn2ga4r_lNTZwmMNuTpDzTpsbZwvr2e4acU33WgGl2ojHWp6Z9l6MSJ5C_95851-uSP_?purpose=inline) ### ACT Lowest regulatory and pricing burden ACT explicitly opposes agricultural emissions taxes and pricing, wants farming permanently excluded from the Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS), and proposes repealing the Zero Carbon Act and ending the net-zero target. It also wants to remove consent costs for routine farm activities that meet national standards. [ACT New Zealand](https://www.act.org.nz/make-farming-fun-again) What it could mean for you: the clearest commitment to minimising emissions-related costs and paperwork, although its broader climate-policy changes would also alter New Zealand's long-term emissions framework. ![‘Stunning’ global milk supply will drive prices lower – Rabobank - NZ Herald](https://images.openai.com/static-rsc-4/WEl3ehRfWDCFCzqoDZ6dCSZuUcqykq8yn3u11vnmBU1U88WuXqSQdiVixTDXwgwN09MQMG0jiJUgC9mEeZSQFH5Hekm57D1XTeRhYRXLSLA4tx2d9z4DxJp_lZrJcamu5pEatec4Qqsv65kATfi4Uv32L8giOhF8sQ42UPFIqjE?purpose=inline) ### New Zealand First Technology, regional infrastructure and trading-partner fairness NZ First opposes imposing emissions costs on producers without comparable action by major trading partners. Its published positions also discuss farm-level emissions reporting, low-methane genetics and feed, and regional investment in water storage, irrigation and flood protection. [2026 Election Q&A - Science](https://www.sciencemediacentre.co.nz/2026/09/09/2026-election-qa-science/)[2026 Election Q&A - Science](https://www.sciencemediacentre.co.nz/2026/09/09/2026-election-qa-science/) What it could mean for you: a combination of resistance to unilateral farm charges and a focus on practical regional infrastructure. The extent of direct grants for individual farms needs checking against the detailed funding rules. ![New Zealand sheep farm and mountain background.](https://images.openai.com/static-rsc-4/wUC9q9jv3Tkrm5K0fETSbumkL4of4EQ-48naQGPoFO0jbrl-GoRa6rMI7rwHQLMX7-ID1MXgJx2NxiTiO1OMh9VeNLQaez1sH2sNHoQ6g7tS4K_3G6MhH16_w7Y0U9oWtIE9FAsro0_YKphU4eYfoueV1fw8_W_zLdtC5xHziSqRPYXmMrGT-cz7mjHRzU7k?purpose=inline) ### Labour Climate commitments and ETS reform Labour is committed to the Paris Agreement and has promised an urgent ETS review. It says a credible emissions price can generate revenue for affordable energy and resilience. However, the precise question of whether and how agricultural emissions should be priced remains important to verify rather than assuming Labour will simply restore its former farm-pricing proposal. [Fixing the Emissions Trading Scheme](https://www.labour.org.nz/fixing-the-ets)[NZ Climate & Energy Policy 2026 Compared](https://www.nzvotecheck.com/parties/climate) What it could mean for you: potentially greater emphasis on climate obligations and ETS-funded resilience, but more uncertainty about the future distribution of costs between agriculture and other sectors. ![Community Tree Planting Day – Mangaroa Farms](https://images.openai.com/static-rsc-4/xFGoqapAxQktS0bjkqENPAZt9henwT2vGFQwKK1tzxYQRK9jApJMebD7ky-l3TtZLDMtyNY--YxGyJzKh96CH0-CTbIDQYd0u9xjZuoVTgtMU3j0BOofm0sqVMANa7Rpvimah4w5h7QHyo95T-kYGTg1mvLBj8CBvMApKv_S-N4?purpose=inline) ### Green Party Stronger emissions cuts and environmental restoration The Greens favour stronger climate action, a more effective ETS, regenerative farming and protection of freshwater and biodiversity. Their 2026 manifesto also emphasises preparation for worsening floods, droughts and storms, with fairer funding for climate adaptation. [Manifesto 2026](https://www.greens.org.nz/manifesto_2026)[2026 Election Q&A - Science](https://www.sciencemediacentre.co.nz/2026/09/09/2026-election-qa-science/) What it could mean for you: more emphasis on environmental outcomes and long-term resilience, but potentially greater transition, compliance or emissions-related costs depending on the final policies and their implementation. ![Grant-Wills-Farm-C | Earth Sciences New Zealand | NIWA](https://images.openai.com/static-rsc-4/XVfi9d2jSjfCEFj1X-9PflLfIU0shGAusYN_x86Thk3evK77A5Q1NpZXP6y9SkNu1FuaQWXN8_CZhpa3NBG_Dghrtzc9_wbxnuGFIGRcolEdiQ74VwGL2ugzWh29xVyiNnyE4Xzer0oex3eJisRaq1Hm3JDmAv-PGTAusde0wdQ?purpose=inline) ### Te Pāti Māori Kaitiakitanga and sustainable land use The party's environmental approach emphasises Māori stewardship, restoring waterways and sustainable land use. Its approach differs from the coalition's production-first model, though the precise costs, incentives and adaptation grants available to individual farms need to be assessed against specific published commitments. [NZ Climate & Energy Policy 2026 Compared](https://www.nzvotecheck.com/parties/climate)[Compare NZ Political Parties Side by Side](https://policynavigator.neonz.org/compare?topic=agriculture) What it could mean for you: particularly relevant to the future of Māori land, stewardship and environmental protection; less straightforward to assess in terms of a standard package of farm adaptation funding. ### The practical difference The current National-led approach has already removed the planned farm-level pricing mechanism, so the choice is not simply between a farm tax today and no farm tax today. It is also about what happens next: how ambitious emissions targets should be, how quickly new technologies become available, whether a future government changes the rules again, and whether farmers or taxpayers fund the transition. [New Zealand's second emissions reduction plan 2026–30: January 2026 amendment addendum](https://environment.govt.nz/publications/new-zealands-second-emissions-reduction-plan-202630-january-2026-amendment-addendum/)[Fixing the Emissions Trading Scheme](https://www.labour.org.nz/fixing-the-ets)[ACT New Zealand](https://www.act.org.nz/make-farming-fun-again) ## 2. Who is offering the most useful support for climate adaptation? This is arguably the more important question for a farm outside a major centre. Adaptation is about keeping the business viable as weather risks change, not just lowering greenhouse gas emissions. Adaptation commitments below are based on published party material and election policy summaries. A proposal for regional infrastructure does not necessarily mean a farm is eligible for a grant. | Party | Approach to adaptation | What to check before voting | | --- | --- | --- | | National | Technology-led farming and support for productive agriculture; the government's approach includes investment in emissions-mitigation technology. [New Zealand's second emissions reduction plan 2026–30: January 2026 amendment addendum](https://environment.govt.nz/publications/new-zealands-second-emissions-reduction-plan-202630-january-2026-amendment-addendum/)[What the parties are now offering rural voters](https://www.interest.co.nz/rural-news/140815/after-three-years-where-coalition-government-raced-give-rural-sector-anything-it) | Specific funding for on-farm water storage, drought-proofing, flood mitigation and rural roads. | | ACT | Lower consent costs and simpler rules for routine farm activities, including on-farm water storage. [ACT New Zealand](https://www.act.org.nz/make-farming-fun-again) | Whether simpler consenting translates into affordable infrastructure and practical help with construction costs. | | NZ First | Regional infrastructure investment, including a proposed $1.2 billion Regional Infrastructure Fund supporting water storage, irrigation, aquifer recharge and flood protection. [2026 Election Q&A - Science](https://www.sciencemediacentre.co.nz/2026/09/09/2026-election-qa-science/) | Which projects will be funded, where they will be located, and whether isolated communities will benefit. | | Labour | ETS reform, with revenue intended to support affordable energy and resilience. [Fixing the Emissions Trading Scheme](https://www.labour.org.nz/fixing-the-ets) | How much funding would reach rural roads, farms and local emergency infrastructure rather than broader programmes. | | Greens | A national adaptation framework, fairer funding, proactive planning and support for communities exposed to extreme weather. [2026 Election Q&A - Science](https://www.sciencemediacentre.co.nz/2026/09/09/2026-election-qa-science/)[Manifesto 2026](https://www.greens.org.nz/manifesto_2026) | Whether funding will cover private farm assets, productive land and infrastructure in addition to public works and community recovery. | | Te Pāti Māori | Environmental stewardship, community resilience and Māori-led approaches to land and water. [NZ Climate & Energy Policy 2026 Compared](https://www.nzvotecheck.com/parties/climate)[Compare NZ Political Parties Side by Side](https://policynavigator.neonz.org/compare?topic=agriculture) | The scale and eligibility of direct adaptation assistance and support for remote rural infrastructure. | One additional party worth investigating is Opportunity. Its published climate proposals include a substantial climate-adaptation fund and changes to emissions pricing, including agricultural methane. Those proposals could be relevant if you favour dedicated adaptation investment even if it comes with a more active emissions-policy framework. [Election policy tracker: what the parties are promising](https://stories.theconversation.com/nz-policy-tracker-2026/)[2026 Election Q&A - Science](https://www.sciencemediacentre.co.nz/2026/09/09/2026-election-qa-science/) ## 3. What this means for your farm's operating costs It helps to separate the likely financial effects into three categories. Immediate operating costs Emissions charges, fuel and electricity costs, fertiliser and feed inputs, reporting requirements, resource consents and freshwater compliance. ACT most explicitly prioritises reducing regulatory costs; National and NZ First also oppose farm emissions pricing. Investment costs Water storage, irrigation efficiency, drainage, effluent systems, fencing, shelter, soil improvements and emissions-reduction technology. The crucial distinction is whether a party offers grants, concessional finance or technical assistance, rather than simply permitting the investment. Long-term financial risk Drought-related production losses, flood damage, erosion, unreliable access roads, insurance costs and changing export-market requirements. These costs may not appear in a farm's compliance budget today, but they can have a substantial effect on future profitability. A useful caution: the government's announced investment of more than $400 million in agricultural emissions-mitigation technology is not the same as a general-purpose climate-adaptation grant for farmers. It is aimed at developing and commercialising emissions-reduction tools. [New Zealand's second emissions reduction plan 2026–30: January 2026 amendment addendum](https://environment.govt.nz/publications/new-zealands-second-emissions-reduction-plan-202630-january-2026-amendment-addendum/)[New methane target set in Parliament](https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/new-methane-target-set-parliament) ## 4. The questions I would ask each party before deciding Because you live well outside a main centre, I would look beyond headline promises and ask candidates for specific answers. - Water security: Will the party co-fund farm water storage, irrigation efficiency or drought resilience? What are the eligibility rules and farmer contributions? - Flooding and access: Who will pay to protect rural roads, bridges, culverts and other infrastructure that can leave farms isolated during extreme weather? - Environmental compliance: Will rules be nationally consistent or catchment-specific? What monitoring, reporting and consent costs will remain? - Emissions technology: Will practical methane-reduction tools be affordable and commercially available, and will farmers receive financial help to adopt them? - Rural services: What commitments will protect access to rural healthcare, reliable broadband, transport, emergency response and agricultural advice? - Policy certainty: Will the party legislate long-term rules or leave farmers exposed to another major policy reversal after the next election? ## My overall assessment If your overriding priority is minimising new farm charges and compliance costs, ACT is the clearest on that objective, with National and NZ First also favouring protection from agricultural emissions pricing. If your priority is maintaining climate commitments while reforming emissions policy and supporting resilience, Labour deserves close scrutiny, particularly over the details of ETS reform and how revenue would be spent. If your priority is stronger environmental protection and planned adaptation to worsening climate risks, the Greens offer the clearest emphasis on those outcomes. Opportunity is also worth examining if its proposed adaptation funding is a major attraction. NZ First's regional infrastructure proposal may be especially relevant if your biggest vulnerability is water security or access to essential services, but the practical value depends on which projects get funded. No party's broad climate platform alone establishes which would deliver the best financial outcome for your particular farm. The most useful comparison is the combination of likely compliance costs, actual adaptation funding, and the resilience of the rural infrastructure you depend on. For checking the latest details before election day, start with the [official government emissions-reduction plan](https://environment.govt.nz/publications/new-zealands-second-emissions-reduction-plan-202630-january-2026-amendment-addendum/?utm_source=chatgpt.com), the [Green Party's 2026 manifesto](https://www.greens.org.nz/manifesto_2026?utm_source=chatgpt.com), [ACT's farming policy](https://www.act.org.nz/make-farming-fun-again?utm_source=chatgpt.com) and [Labour's ETS policy](https://www.labour.org.nz/fixing-the-ets?utm_source=chatgpt.com). ## Gemini Answer ID: f50acf26-84ed-427f-96ab-4e69dd12d054 For rural landowners and farmers operating well outside main centres, the choice in the 2026 general election largely centers on a stark contrast between **regulatory relief and economic protectionism** versus **market-driven pricing and aggressive climate alignment**. The political landscape reflects a shift from previous years. The current coalition government has rolled back several core agricultural environmental constraints—including removing agriculture from the Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) and shifting biogenic methane targets—while opposition and minor parties offer distinct alternative visions for pricing, support, and adaptation. --- ### 1. Agricultural Emissions Pricing & Targets How parties treat biogenic methane and nitrous oxide directly influences operating costs, red-tape burdens, and international market access (such as free-trade agreements requiring environmental accountability). * **The Current Coalition / Centre-Right Parties (e.g., National, ACT, NZ First):** * *Position:* Agriculture remains outside the ETS. The government adjusted the 2050 biogenic methane reduction targets down to a 14–24% range below 2017 levels and explicitly ruled out a standalone methane tax. * *Implication for farms:* Minimizes immediate input costs and avoids levy burdens on livestock, prioritizing short-term economic viability and input cost relief for farmers. * **The Labour Party:** * *Position:* Has also ruled out a direct methane tax, favoring a slower, consensus-led approach to emissions measurement and continuing modest support for agricultural emissions research without immediate compulsory ETS entry. * **The Greens & The Opportunity Party (TOP):** * *Position:* Strongly advocate for bringing agriculture into the ETS or implementing a cap-and-trade levy system for biogenic methane. * *Implication for farms:* Direct pricing on emissions. Proponents argue this is necessary to secure high-value international trade markets that demand low-carbon credentials; critics argue it penalizes farmers before reliable, farm-level measurement technology is widely commercialized. --- ### 2. Support for Adaptation, Tech, and Resiliency With rural areas facing more frequent extreme weather events (such as droughts and storms), adaptation support varies widely across the political spectrum: * **Technology and R&D Subsidies:** Centrist and right-leaning parties generally focus public funds on partnerships like *AgriZeroNZ* to co-invest in technological fixes (like methane inhibitors, vaccines, and low-emission breeding) rather than imposing punitive costs. Progressive parties lean toward structural shifts, supporting transitions toward regenerative practices, and phasing out synthetic nitrogen fertilizers. * **Infrastructure and Climate Resilience Funds:** Parties like TOP have proposed dedicated funding structures (such as multi-billion dollar climate resilience and transition funds) aimed at community-based and landscape-level adaptation, helping rural regions upgrade infrastructure against flooding and land instability. * **Freshwater and Land-Use Rules:** Centre-right parties have favored reviewing or replacing strict freshwater frameworks and caps to give landowners operational flexibility. Conversely, left-leaning and green parties advocate for tighter regulations on intensive land use, waterway fencing, and restrictions on synthetic fertilizers to protect long-term soil and water health. --- ### Key Questions to Weigh for Your Vote When deciding where your party vote should go from a remote farming perspective, consider: 1. **Short-Term Operating Margins vs. Long-Term Export Reputation:** Do you prioritize avoiding immediate levies to keep day-to-day farm-gate costs manageable, or do you fear that lagging behind global climate benchmarks could risk lucrative overseas market access? 2. **Regulatory Freedom vs. Environmental Safeguards:** Do you prefer the current relaxation of freshwater and resource management rules to maximize productive flexibility, or do you view strict regional conservation as vital protection against landscape degradation and climate-driven natural disasters? ## Google AI Mode Answer ID: b8f8546e-48c2-4aa3-8b1d-5017675b3eb3 **New Zealand political parties offer distinct approaches to agricultural emissions pricing, freshwater regulations, and climate adaptation support ahead of the 2026 election, balancing economic pressures on farmers with climate targets.** Party Approaches to Agricultural Emissions and Regulations The primary political blocs differ sharply on how—or whether—to price agricultural greenhouse gases, manage land use, and enforce environmental limits. [Interest.co.nz] * * **National Party (Coalition Government):** Focuses on reducing regulatory and cost burdens on farmers rather than imposing immediate agricultural emissions taxes. The coalition has backed away from bespoke agricultural emissions pricing in favor of industry-led technology and R&D (such as methane inhibitors and vaccines), while overhauling the Resource Management Act (RMA) and freshwater standards to lower compliance costs and clear roadblocks for rural productivity. * **ACT New Zealand (Coalition Government):** Advocates for a light-touch regulatory approach, opposing dedicated taxes or separate emissions pricing schemes for agriculture that put New Zealand exporters at a competitive disadvantage. ACT strongly supports property rights, rolling back prescriptive central government rules, and letting farmers innovate without heavy-handed environmental mandates. * **New Zealand First (Coalition Government):** Emphasizes pragmatism for the regions, opposing agricultural emissions pricing that harms rural profitability or forces land-use changes into exotic forestry. They support practical infrastructure investment, regional growth incentives, and protection of productive agricultural land. * **New Zealand Labour Party (Opposition):** Supports holding the primary sector accountable for emissions reduction in line with national climate targets and international commitments. Labour previously pursued a split-gas approach to price agricultural emissions while funding advisory and mitigation tools, arguing that credible environmental credentials protect the premium value of New Zealand's export brand in global markets. * **Green Party (Opposition):** Pushes for stronger, binding environmental limits, advocating to bring agriculture directly into the Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) or implement firm biological emissions pricing. They emphasize ecosystem regeneration, reducing synthetic nitrogen and intensive stocking, and supporting a transition toward low-emission, regenerative farming practices. * Support for Farms Adapting to Climate Change Support for on-farm resilience—such as dealing with extreme weather events, water security, and infrastructure—varies by philosophy and fiscal focus: * * **Technology & Infrastructure Investment:** The current coalition government highlights tools like the _Investment Boost_ tax policy (providing immediate deductions for plant, machinery, irrigation, and water distribution infrastructure) to help regional and rural businesses adapt to shifting weather patterns. * **Research and Biological Solutions:** Bipartisan and industry consensus centers on funding for enteric methane mitigation (such as vaccines and feed additives), though left and right blocs differ on whether public-private research should be paired with regulatory sticks or voluntary market incentives. * **Conservation & Land Transitions:** Opposition parties (Labour and the Greens) propose targeted grant, loan, or advisory frameworks to help farms plant native shelterbelts, fence waterways, and shift land use in vulnerable catchments, whereas the government favors localized council flexibility and reduced red tape over centralized green mandates. * To help narrow down which party's platform aligns best with your operation, would you like to share **your primary production type** (e.g., sheep/beef, dairy, horticulture) and **which specific cost or compliance pressure** (such as freshwater rules, local service access, or tax settings) is impacting your farm the most? ## AI Overviews Answer ID: a909e8fd-b0e3-4d55-be42-20d94ad0b7ad The political landscape for the **2026 New Zealand general election** shows a significant shift regarding how major parties plan to handle agricultural emissions. There is currently a notable alignment between the largest parties against direct emissions taxes, though their long-term adaptation frameworks differ substantially. The main political parties handle agricultural emissions and climate adaptation support differently: The Coalition Parties (National, ACT, NZ First) The current government parties focus heavily on **reducing regulatory costs, stopping emissions pricing, and driving technology-led adaptation**. * **Agricultural Pricing & The ETS:** The coalition successfully removed agriculture from the Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) and completely abandoned previous farm-pricing models like _He Waka Eke Noa_. All three parties pledge to permanently keep agriculture out of the ETS. * **National Party:** Focuses on a "tools first, then price" mentality, prioritizing investment (over $400 million) into researching and commercializing mitigation tech. National has also removed the effective ban on gene technology to give farmers access to methane-reducing crops and feed, and supports recognizing on-farm carbon sequestration (like wetlands). To protect local farming communities, they support restrictions on whole-farm conversions to exotic pine forestry. * **ACT Party:** Champions a "split-gas" emissions target where short-lived biogenic methane would only be required to cause "no additional warming" rather than being treated like CO2. They advocate for renegotiating or withdrawing from the Paris Agreement if methane targets are not altered. ACT focuses heavily on cutting compliance red tape, keeping freshwater plans strictly risk-focused to reduce administrative costs. * **New Zealand First:** Operates on what they call "pragmatic environmentalism," ensuring climate policies do not burden rural operations. They support keeping emissions pricing off the table and have campaigned on removing ETS climate taxes from fuel to lower the baseline cost of diesel for rural businesses. The Opposition Parties (Labour, Greens, Te Pāti Māori) The left-leaning parties emphasize **broader environmental obligations and structural climate action** , though Labour has drastically shifted its historic stance. * **Labour Party:** In a major policy shift for the 2026 election, Labour announced it **will not campaign on taxing or pricing agricultural emissions** directly. Instead, they focus on an urgent review of the ETS to stop the rapid conversion of productive farmland into passive exotic pine carbon forests. For adaptation, they propose a $50 million climate R&D fund (with $20 million targeting hard-to-abate sectors) and support mapping/protecting highly productive land from urban or non-farming sprawl. * **Green Party:** Remains the primary advocate for a direct price on agricultural emissions, intending to fully pull agriculture into a reformed ETS. The Greens oppose relying on gene technology and instead champion adaptation support through funding regenerative agriculture, diversifying land-use, and utilizing nature-based infrastructure to protect farms from climate-induced weather extremes. * **Te Pāti Māori:** Aligns heavily with the Greens on pricing emissions through a cultural lens of _kaitikitanga_ (guardianship). They advocate for government funding explicitly targeted toward regenerative Māori agriculture, localized food production systems, and strict opposition to genetic modification. * * * Comparison of Key Features Policy Area| National / ACT / NZ First| Labour Party| Green Party / Te Pāti Māori ---|---|---|--- **Emissions Pricing**| Strictly opposed; permanently out of the ETS.| Shifted policy; will not price farm emissions.| Explicitly supports pricing emissions through the ETS. **Adaptation Focus**| R&D, gene tech tools, and split-gas targets.| ETS review to stop pine conversions; R&D tech investments.| Regenerative farming subsidies, organic transition, and nature-based solutions. **Regulatory Burden**| actively cutting red tape, scaling back freshwater plan paperwork.| Focuses on national planning standards to give long-term certainty.| Stronger compliance rules to safeguard freshwater and native biodiversity. If you want to look deeper into specific operational aspects, let me know: * Which specific **compliance requirements** (e.g., freshwater farm plans or forestry rules) worry you the most? * If your farm relies on **particular technologies** or land-types that might benefit from sequestration credits.