{
  "$type": "site.standard.document",
  "bskyPostRef": {
    "cid": "bafyreib5ayjcx4tqojux4sd7y567wfydguluhpvuxy2luoyom2tmzqb3zm",
    "uri": "at://did:plc:sl2hrcwo6voaorzsr26d3bo2/app.bsky.feed.post/3mmpi2mucjhv2"
  },
  "coverImage": {
    "$type": "blob",
    "ref": {
      "$link": "bafkreigtu4teufpt4gc6hsz425nzdehlfqv3l7m4rfuiq3lijdvoolqabu"
    },
    "mimeType": "image/png",
    "size": 1975915
  },
  "description": "10 News Stories They Chose Not to Tell You",
  "path": "/your-daily-ten-10-2026-093/",
  "publishedAt": "2026-05-25T22:00:09.000Z",
  "site": "https://goodoil.news",
  "tags": [
    "Read More",
    "Subscribe now"
  ],
  "textContent": "**This is edition 2026/093 of the _Ten@10_ newsletter.**\n\nHi all,\n\nThis is the Ten@10, where I collate and summarise ten news items you generally won't see in the mainstream media.\n\nEnjoy!\n\n* * *\n\n## 1. The Lobbyists who wrote the climate law\n\n _Bryce Edwards_\n\n  * 🔥 New Zealand's Government announced it would **retroactively strip citizens of the right to sue major greenhouse gas emitters** , overriding official advice to let courts proceed.\n  * 🏢 Fonterra and Z Energy each hand-delivered a printed briefing note to a staffer inside **the Prime Minister's office in June and July 2024** , both companies have confirmed.\n  * 🧾 The briefing proposed **actual statutory language — a \"two-sentence legislative amendment\"** to the Climate Change Response Act to wipe out tort-based climate litigation.\n  * ⚖️ The amendment was designed to kill **Mike Smith's climate damage case** , which the Ngāpuhi and Ngāti Kahu kaumātua has pursued through the courts since 2019.\n  * 🏛️ On 12 May 2026, Justice Minister **Paul Goldsmith announced the Government would do precisely what the corporate briefing had requested** , framing it as a matter of \"business certainty\".\n  * 🔍 In March 2025, an Official Information Act request specifically targeting documents about Smith v Fonterra **returned no mention of the meetings, the briefing note, or any hint the document existed**.\n  * ⚠️ A second OIA request from Lawyers for Climate Action NZ **produced the same result** — nothing.\n  * ⏳ The corporate defendants **missed a court-ordered deadline of 27 March 2026** to disclose lobbying-related documents, only releasing them after Goldsmith's announcement.\n  * ⚖️ On 21 May, **Justice Peter Andrew ruled Fonterra and Z Energy's confidentiality claims could not be sustained** and ordered the document released publicly.\n  * 🔵 Christopher Luxon's spokesperson said the PMO **\"has no record of either on file\"** regarding the meetings and briefing notes, adding Cabinet \"makes its own decisions\".\n  * 📰 Journalist Andrea Vance identified **an identical pattern in 2024** , when three primary industry lobby groups drafted RMA amendments after losing a court ruling on the Ashburton Lyndhurst Irrigation scheme.\n  * 🏛️ The Government amended the RMA **under urgency** within weeks of receiving that industry letter, granting councils power to issue the consents the industry wanted.\n  * 👥 Smith describes the episode as **\"a co-ordinated campaign of secret lobbying, political interference and corporate influence at the highest levels of power\"**.\n  * 📊 The briefing note appears to have been **prepared in substantial part by elite law firm Chapman Tripp** , acting for the corporate defendants in Smith v Fonterra.\n  * 🛑 Smith noted that **\"ordinary New Zealanders do not get private access to the prime minister's office to discuss shutting down active court proceedings against them.\"**\n\n\n\nRead More\n\n### This post is for subscribers only\n\nBecome a member to get access to all content\n\nSubscribe now",
  "title": "Your Daily Ten@10 - 2026/093",
  "updatedAt": "2026-05-25T22:00:09.270Z"
}