Note: Lithos will publish a series of election-relation interviews over the next month. None of Lithos’ interviews should be seen as expressions of support for specific policies, candidates, or parties.
Note: Shane Jones spoke to Lithos in his capacity as New Zealand First Energy and Regional Development Spokesperson.
New Zealand First wants to use Crown regulatory and planning powers to stem the tide of regional deindustrialisation, Energy and Regional Development Spokesperson Shane Jones told Lithos in a wide-ranging interview on 11 September.
“There is [an] … anxiety and that is deindustrialisation, and that is the hollowing out of industry, and that is the rising level of unemployment. So we want to try something different. And do it at such a level that we can have a mix of interventions,” Jones said.
New Zealand First wants to create special economic zones (SEZ) to attract industry to mineral-rich regions. It also plans to break up New Zealand’s electricity generator-retailers (gen-tailers), and offer firming demand guarantees to energy developers, to support producers.
The Party’s SEZ plan will initially support the developing Marsden Point industrial hub – in Northland – and mineral-rich areas along the South Island’s West Coast, according to Jones.
“[Our] policy is to identify geographical areas and, within those areas, develop policies that have bespoke tax treatment, bespoke regulatory treatment,” Jones said.
“It is designed to attract industry to defined areas, accelerate the development of that industry, and it moves away from the status quo where, historically, New Zealand never used Crown power other than [to referee] markets,” Jones added.
An SEZ could promote mining investment and growth in the West Coast – a critical mineral-rich area – by removing planning barriers since 83% of the region sits on public conservation land, according to Jones.
“Our policy [on West Coast environmental legislation] is to restructure [the Department of Conservation (DOC)] and to ensure that economic potential is a statutory obligation upon DOC, not just preservationist ideologies. [But] the area where, obviously, Kiwis do not want mining is in the national parks,” Jones said.
“Then there is the application of the Wildlife Act. This statute is grossly out of date and needs to be inverted, and we plan to do that [in Government. Finally,] there are the Resource Management [Act] (RMA) obligations where proposals have to be [viewed] against the criteria of the new RMA legislation.”
The criteria highlight the importance of mitigation, proportionality, and ensuring that economic criteria are not smothered by the ideology of zero growth, according to Jones. Parliament will pass a series of RMA reforms before the New Zealand general election on 7 November.
Jones, as New Zealand’s Resources Minister, has funded and fast-tracked multiple West Coast projects since 2024.
The New Zealand Government will give Westland Mineral Sands and Tāiko Critical Minerals up to NZ$30 million and NZ$20 million, respectively, to support ore processing plants, Jones said in a statement on 6 July.
It plans to support WMS and Tāiko through its Regional Infrastructure Fund (RIF), but has not confirmed funding arrangements with the companies.
“[The support] cannot be operationalised until those initiatives are also backed by substantial private sector fiscal firepower,” Jones told Lithos on 11 September.
“What we want to see is semi-processing in New Zealand. [But] we know that larger, more protracted manufacturing processes will not be able to take root in New Zealand,” Jones said.
“We know [based on international context] that we don’t have the situation where we can sustain such intense processing activity in New Zealand.”
“The mining sector already attracts international [and domestic] investment. [But] where processing gets tricky is what will be the tolerance of New Zealand communities to have processing enterprises that may generate a level of negative externality that hitherto has never been seen in New Zealand.”
“For those reasons, other countries are always going to tolerate less exacting environmental standards than would be demanded in New Zealand for full-scale processing.”
New Zealand First’s support for manufacturers extends beyond creating SEZs. The Party wants to support manufacturers and households by breaking up gen-tailers, signing long-term firming contracts, and creating a new electricity regulator.
“[New Zealand First will focus on] ensuring that [electricity] supply can be expanded, but the deal difficulty we’ve found is that far too much control and power is exercised by the gen-tailers, and we need to break them in half to make them focus on their core business, which is to expand the supply of electricity.”
“We [also] want a single [electricity] regulator because we’ve lost confidence in what I call the chocolate teapot, the Electricity Authority. They no longer are able to deliver what New Zealanders need, which is [the] affordable, secure supply of electricity.”
“The market is manipulated by the gen-tailers because the gen-tailers own their customers and … have control over firming capacity.”
New Zealand First’s plan to expand electricity supply will see the Government purchase long-term firming contracts from project investors to give them the incentive to mobilise capital and work through consenting processes, according to Jones.
“[The contracts] will not be at a subsidised rate. They will bring power prices down subject to the arrival of new sources of supply,” Jones said.
The Party’s planned contracts will apply to all kinds of firming projects, including coal, diesel, and gas plants. “We don’t see, in the foreseeable future, an option where New Zealand won’t rely on fossil fuels in adverse circumstances, when we need to keep the lights on,” Jones said.
“But I’m imagining that the vast majority of the [electricity] product coming to the market will be either wind or solar,” Jones added.
Offshore wind projects will be eligible for New Zealand First’s planned firming contracts, but need to be economically viable at market-competitive electricity prices.
“[New Zealand First is] not of the view that offshore wind is economically feasible. We think that if ever does get built, it will be built in association with developments in Australia, because our market is too small.”
“So anyone promoting offshore wind will have to get a guaranteed price, and our desire to create products to incentivise new investment is not a guaranteed price; it’s a guaranteed take … You know you have a customer, you have to secure the customer permanently by being price competitive.”
“It’s important [to] bear in mind that most offshore wind [projects] we’ve discussed and investigated have a guaranteed floor price [which the policy does not have].”
New Zealand First is also open to the use of biofuels within New Zealand’s energy system, as long as they are cost-competitive, Jones suggested.
“There has been no policy made – and we will finalise our manifesto coming up – as to whether the Crown should derisk the production of [biofuels],” Jones said. “There is always a risk when you commit Crown resources to new frontiers of energy development,” he added.
When asked about the Party’s position on production tax credits for biofuel projects, Jones noted that “the [Emissions Trading Scheme], when it’s reformed, may represent an opportunity for [production] credits because [biofuel developers] are presumably creating a product that is less carbon intensive.”
“But all of that lies in the future,” Jones noted.
Beyond financial support, the Government has been reluctant to mandate the use of biofuels in the aviation sector to protect New Zealand’s competitiveness. But it will likely follow the Australian Government’s lead once it introduces a mandate, Jones said.
“We’ve done quite a lot of work [on a biofuel mandate] over the last three years. [But] until such time as it’s price-competitive, it’s difficult to see how it will materialise,” Jones said.
The Australian Government plans to introduce a biofuel mandate in 2029. But Bioenergy Australia Chief Executive Shahana McKenzie has called for the mandate to be brought forward to 2027, according to recent reports from Argus Media.