PMO found Briscoes return email, missed climate lobbying brief
Tuesday, 9 June 2026
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon's office successfully tracked and disclosed a staff member's use of a private email account to return a Briscoes homeware purchase, but failed to identify a climate-policy lobbying document handled through the same non-official channels.
The discrepancy is now the focus of a formal complaint to Chief Ombudsman John Allen by Green Party co-leaders Chlöe Swarbrick and Marama Davidson, who are seeking an independent investigation into record-keeping practices inside Luxon’s office.
Their complaint stems from an answer Luxon gave to a written parliamentary question on May 6, 2025.
Green MP Francisco Hernandez had asked for details of every occasion on which Luxon’s staff received official documents or conducted public business using personal email accounts.
Read more:
Who wrote the climate law? Lobbyists' text closely mirrored in reform
Ombudsman opens inquiry into PM’s office over climate case records
In response, Luxon said he had been assured that none of the emails contained material of a sensitive nature. His office disclosed more than 20 instances of personal email use for administrative and operational purposes.
Those included a September 2024 case in which a staff member used a private email account to return a Briscoes purchase, a March 2025 web-order notification, and multiple occasions where staff used personal accounts to transfer audio files from media stand-ups because of technical limitations with parliamentary systems.
However, the list did not include a June 2024 exchange involving Luxon’s former chief policy adviser, Matt Burgess.
The Post revealed last month that Burgess received briefing material ‒ which was printed out and hand-delivered ‒ from Fonterra and Z Energy in mid-2024. Luxon’s office confirmed last week that it was also sent to his private email account.
The document was prepared on behalf of the defendants in the landmark Smith v Fonterra climate change case and proposed a legislative amendment that would retrospectively block climate-related tort claims.
Two years later, the Government announced it would advance legislation closely matching the proposal.
The document emerged only after High Court discovery orders forced its disclosure during the litigation. It was not disclosed during two official information requests made by the Environmental Law Initiative and Lawyers for Climate Action NZ, also in 2025.
A spokesperson for Luxon said: “The email in question was omitted [from the parliamentary answer] because we were not aware of it until late last month.”
Allen is already conducting an investigation into the Prime Minister's Office regarding compliance with the Official Information Act 1982. The Greens are urging for this to be broadened into a wider investigation regarding the use of private email addresses and document retention practices.
Under broad powers, that would give Allen the legal right to demand any information, require people to give evidence under oath and enter government premises.
The complaint also asks the Ombudsman to determine whether the conduct complied with the Public Records Act 2005, which requires public offices to maintain full and accurate records, and the Ministerial Services Code of Conduct.
Swarbrick said proper internal processes should have uncovered and declared the communication in 2025.
“Something fishy is going on in the Prime Minister's office when lobbyist documents that miraculously end up as Government law change after being handled by his Chief Policy Advisor manage to somehow disappear from the public record,” she said.
A spokesperson for the Office of the Ombudsman confirmed the letter was received “and we have responded”.
“Because the Ombudsman is required by law to conduct our inquiries in private, we can’t make any further comment at this stage.”