New Zealand First MP and Associate Minister for Energy, Shane Jones, has launched a scathing attack on banks reducing their financial services to fossil fuel businesses, calling the move a “woke-riddled” imposition on New Zealand’s productive sector. Jones has aligned himself with Australian politicians in pushing back against banking policies that limit lending to industries linked to fossil fuels, arguing that such restrictions threaten the country’s energy security and economic stability.
Banks Move Away from Fossil Fuel Lending
Banks worldwide have been shifting away from fossil fuel-related financing, aligning themselves with climate commitments such as the Net-Zero Banking Alliance (NZBA). The NZBA, founded in 2021 under the auspices of the United Nations, aims to guide financial institutions toward net-zero emissions by limiting investments in high-carbon industries. Some major banks, including BNZ in New Zealand, have begun phasing out lending to petrol stations, citing long-term financial risks tied to the transition to electric vehicles.
BNZ has already informed some petrol station owners that it will no longer offer new loans to the sector and plans to wind up outstanding loans by 2030. BNZ Managing Director Dan Huggins defended the move in December last year, saying it was not primarily a climate policy decision but rather a credit risk assessment. “We’ve looked at our exposure to petrol stations and then we’ve looked at the long term future of those businesses, recognising that we expect conversion to electric vehicles to change demand for fuel services,” Huggins told MPs at a Finance and Expenditure Committee hearing.
Despite banks framing these moves as financial prudence, critics such as Jones argue they reflect an ideological agenda rather than pure economics. The NZBA itself has come under increasing scrutiny, with several major banks, including JP Morgan and Goldman Sachs, recently withdrawing from the alliance amid global political backlash against Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) policies.
Jones Denounces Banking Policies as ‘Luxury Beliefs’
Jones has made it clear he sees these banking decisions as part of a broader ideological movement that unfairly targets fossil fuel industries. He told The Australian newspaper that Australian-owned banks operating in New Zealand are “being driven by unelected, UN-orientated climate apostles” and imposing unnecessary costs on businesses that are vital to the economy.
Speaking to Newstalk ZB’s Mike Hosking, Jones doubled down on his criticism, calling the coal industry an “honest, legitimate industry” that provides essential energy security. He accused banking executives of prioritising “luxury beliefs” over the practical needs of New Zealanders. “The fossil fuel businesses are doing nothing wrong, what they’re doing is offending executives’ luxury beliefs”, he said, as reported by Newstalk ZB
Jones has signalled that NZ First is considering introducing a members’ bill to push back against the banking sector’s shift away from fossil fuel lending. His stance echoes efforts by Australian Liberal-National MPs, who have called on major banks such as ANZ, CBA, Westpac, and NAB to withdraw from the NZBA, arguing that financial restrictions on fossil fuel industries harm national competitiveness.
Federated Farmers Call for Investigation into ‘Cartel-Like’ Behavior
The debate has also caught the attention of Federated Farmers, which lodged a complaint with the Commerce Commission last year, arguing that banks could be operating in a cartel-like manner by coordinating restrictions on fossil fuel lending.
In a statement, Federated Farmers said it was not outright accusing banks of anti-competitive behaviour but was concerned about the appearance of collusion. “For the avoidance of doubt, Federated Farmers are not definitively saying that banks are operating in an anti-competitive, cartel-like way that falls foul of the law. What we are saying is that it sure does look like they are, and we need the Commerce Commission to urgently investigate to give us some answers,” the group stated.
Climate Policy vs. Market Forces
The controversy underscores a broader debate over the role of financial institutions in shaping energy and climate policy. Some, like Green Party co-leader Chlöe Swarbrick, argue that banks are simply making rational business decisions in response to global trends and government policies. “BNZ’s decision not to lend to fossil fuel businesses was a commercial decision made by a private company in response to the realities of climate change and existing emissions reduction policies,” she said.
However, critics argue that banks are overstepping their role by enforcing de facto climate policies that should be determined by elected governments, not financial executives. Jones, for one, has vowed to fight back against what he sees as an ideological attack on traditional energy industries, warning that policies limiting fossil fuel financing will have real consequences for New Zealand’s energy security and investment climate.