The Government’s communications on fossil fuels amount to climate misinformation and closely mirror obstruction narratives used by the fossil fuel industry to delay climate action, a major new report released today by WWF-New Zealand finds.
The report analysed Government communications on the reversal of the offshore oil and gas exploration ban and the proposed liquefied natural gas (LNG) import facility, and found no major Government claim was fully supported by the available public evidence.
Instead, communications from the Government repeatedly overstated the benefits of fossil fuel expansion while omitting material information about lower-emissions alternatives, climate impacts, and New Zealand’s international climate commitments, the analysis shows.
For example, Ministers have repeatedly argued that reversing the offshore oil and gas exploration ban is necessary to improve energy security and ‘keep the lights on’, despite official advice showing any new offshore discoveries would take many years to produce gas and were unlikely to address near-term supply or affordability concerns.
Similarly, Ministers have repeatedly promoted LNG imports as a way to improve energy affordability, without acknowledging evidence that imported LNG may become more expensive and expose New Zealand to volatile international gas prices.
Taken together, these unsupported claims and material omissions amount to climate misinformation, the report concludes.
In response, WWF-New Zealand is calling for the Climate Change Commission to be given new powers to monitor and report on Government climate and energy communications – saying stronger safeguards are needed to protect information integrity and public trust.
WWF-New Zealand’s Interim Chief Executive, Abbie Reynolds, says New Zealanders deserve the full picture about decisions that will shape the country's energy future.
“Are New Zealanders being gaslit on gas? We’re repeatedly being told fossil fuels are the only answer, while crucial evidence about the alternatives and the consequences is left out.
“The decisions the Government makes about our energy system and climate future affect every single New Zealander now and into the future. People deserve to hear the full range of evidence, trade-offs and alternatives – not half the story.”
The report also calls on New Zealand to sign the UN Declaration on Information Integrity on Climate Change – already endorsed by countries like Australia - and recommends an independent investigation into information integrity more broadly across climate change policy communications.
“Public trust depends on people being able to rely on Government information. What we’ve identified here could just be the tip of the iceberg – and that’s exactly why an independent investigation is needed,” says Reynolds.
The report, ‘Keeping the lights on?’, examined Government communications on the reversal of the offshore oil and gas exploration ban, and the proposed liquefied natural gas (LNG) import facility. It analysed government communications in media releases, public statements and media comments between April 2024 and June 2026.
The report also assessed these communications against internationally recognised climate obstruction narratives - communications that present fossil fuels as necessary while downplaying or omitting evidence about cleaner alternatives and climate consequences.
Of the 25 pieces of Government communications examined, 22 (88%) were assessed as containing high or very high levels of alignment with climate obstruction narratives.
“The Government’s messaging is straight out of the fossil fuel industry’s playbook”, says Reynolds. “When we looked at the Government’s communications against international climate obstruction narratives, we found striking similarities with messages the fossil fuel industry has used for decades to delay urgent climate action.
“This should concern every New Zealander. The fossil fuel industry has a clear financial stake in keeping us dependent on oil and gas, and has spent decades promoting messages that minimise the risks and downplay the alternatives. Government has a very different responsibility, and we should be asking how and why those messages have become so central to the public debate.
"Governments have every right to make contested policy decisions. But New Zealanders should be able to trust that those decisions are explained honestly, transparently, and with the full evidence on the table. New Zealanders deserve the full picture, but instead, they’ve been sold half the story.”