To Members of National, ACT, and NZ First
We write as a group of organisations deeply committed to a more resilient and sustainable Aotearoa New Zealand.
We are extremely disappointed by the decision to vote down the Consumer Guarantees (Right to Repair) Amendment Bill. This Bill represented a modest but meaningful step towards addressing some of the most pressing issues our country faces: reducing waste to landfill, lowering emissions, easing cost of living pressures, and supporting local jobs in the repair economy.
The public submissions process demonstrated overwhelming support. Of the 1,250 submissions received, more than 95 percent backed the Bill and its aims. Submitters recognised that repair rights give consumers greater control, save money, and prevent unnecessary waste. They also recognised the risks of inaction: that New Zealand risks becoming a dumping ground for products rejected in other markets because they cannot be repaired. However, it is clear that these submissions, many by subject matter experts and business who are currently offering repair programmes, have been ignored by some members of parliament.
Repair is not only about waste reduction. By repairing products and keeping materials circulating within our economy, we decrease demand for new natural resources and reduce pressure on our natural world — precisely at a time when the science is clear that the planet cannot cope with further degradation. Why would we continue to degrade our own home to extract resources, only to throw them into a hole in the ground?
There is also a growing risk to our resilience as a country. As the world becomes more unstable due to geopolitical tensions, New Zealand faces the real possibility of not being able to access raw materials and finished products. The global pandemic proved how quickly our country can be sidelined when supply chains and sea freight come under stress. Without enough skilled people here to repair what we already own; we risk becoming isolated and unable to look after ourselves.
We acknowledge that legislation of this kind requires care and balance. Indeed, significant work was undertaken during the Select Committee process to narrow scope and provide clarity — including limiting application to electronic goods over $100, and giving manufacturers several years’ notice to adapt. These compromises showed it is possible to design a workable framework that balances the interests of consumers, businesses, and manufacturers. It feels like we got so close, but then political games have blinded those that have been given the responsibility to continuously improve the country.
New Zealanders deserve no less. Our country already faces embarrassingly high rates of waste to landfill and per-capita emissions. Repair is not a radical idea — it is a basic expectation that products can be fixed, maintained, and used for longer. This Bill set a low bar, but even so, it could have marked the beginning of a new approach that reduces pressure on households, strengthens resilience, build community, and helps the economy transition for the 21st century.
As the Bill approaches its second reading, we urge all members of Parliament to reconsider. The overwhelming public mandate, the clear environmental and economic benefits, and the precedent set internationally all point in the same direction. We stand ready to share our expertise and work with decision-makers to ensure that workable, enduring repair rights become part of our consumer protection framework.
This is an opportunity to make a practical, positive change that will benefit households, businesses, and the environment alike. We urge you not to let it pass by.
Contact Details
To discuss the contents of this letter further or to arrange a meeting with select signatories please contact:
Nick Morrison
Founding Director
Go Well Consulting
nick@gowellconsulting.co.nz
027-777-3391
Authors
