Firstly, I just want to say a huge Thank You to everyone for your generous donations towards the case.
Two years have flown by since the day my application for judicial review landed on the desk of the Wellington High Court registry, and since Daphne Bell helped open up this Givealittle page.
My lawyers and I wanted to challenge the Government's response to climate change; a response which many feel falls short of what we can, and should, do as a country. And while the judge ultimately didn't order a review of our 2050 and 2030 targets, there are still lots of wins to celebrate.
For one thing, Justice Mallon said the Minister had an obligation to review the 2050 target in light of recent science—in particular, the AR5 report—and failed to do so. She confirmed that ministers, whether for climate change or otherwise, have a duty to review important, long-term decisions when the science and facts underpinning those decisions change. I hope this will encourage more evidence based decision making in the future.
Secondly, Justice Mallon found that the 2030 target could be reviewed by the Court; and that the Government's response to climate change is far from a "no go" area. The Crown's lawyers had insisted the 2030 target was in the realm of policy and 'politics', and beyond the court's expertise. But Justice Mallon confirmed that even though setting an emissions target requires the weighing up of complicated economic, social, political policy factors, the courts can still scrutinise such decisions. It's about upholding good decision making processes, whatever the subject matter. In the judge's own words:
“The Courts have recognised the significance of the issue for the planet and its inhabitants and that those in the Court’s jurisdiction are necessarily among all who are affected by inadequate efforts to respond to climate change
...This approach is consistent with the view that justiciability concerns depend on the ground for review rather that its subject matter. The subject matter may make a review ground more difficult to establish, but it should not rule out any review by the Court.
The importance of the matter for all and each of us warrants some scrutiny of the public power, in addition to accountability through Parliament and Elections."
In the end, Justice Mallon declined to order a review. In part, this was because our new Government has announced it will pursue a 2050 carbon neutral New Zealand. This announcement is exciting and certainly something to celebrate! However, as you will be well aware, the hard work continues so to ensure these positive changes happen—and soon. Government needs a mandate from the people to make changes that count, and that last the distance. Groups around New Zealand are doing amazing work towards this, by getting support for a Zero Carbon Act from parties across the political spectrum.
In regards to my judicial review case, the next step is to meet with our new Minister for Climate Change Issues, James Shaw, to talk about how the Government can give a concrete commitment to reviewing our 2030 target. And even more crucial now, how New Zealand can have really good plan to get there.
Thank you so much for your help to make this legal action possible.
Aroha nui,
Sarah
