Campaign Resources
Here you can access and download all our resources for promoting our campaigns yourself! Scroll down to see our resources.
Submission Guidance: End Greyhound Racing
Thank you for speaking up for greyhounds. Your voice can help ensure Parliament hears what New Zealanders have been saying for years: it's time to end greyhound racing.
Submissions close: 9 January 2026
How to Submit
- Visit the Select Committee webpage
- Click “Make a submission”
- Submit as an individual (you don’t need to represent an organisation)
- You can choose whether to speak to the Committee in person – optional but powerful
- Write in your own words why this matters to you
Your submission doesn’t need to be long or formal. What matters most is that it’s genuine and in your own words.
Key Points to Include
Choose the points that resonate most with you. You don’t need to cover everything, even focusing on one or two issues makes a powerful submission.
The Reality of Harm
Injuries are routine and predictable
- Every race puts dogs at risk of broken bones, torn muscles, spinal trauma, and lacerations
- In the 2024/25 season, over 800 injuries were reported, including 114 broken bones
- 40% of greyhounds racing in the 2022/23 season suffered one or more injuries
- The tight turns and 60 kph speeds contribute to crashes and injuries
Deaths continue despite promises
- In the 2024/25 season, at least 16 dogs died or were killed on the track
- Well over a hundred dogs died or were euthanised off‑track in the same season, according to official data
- In March 2024, three dogs died in a single week at the Manukau track, prompting a temporary suspension of racing there.
- Official data show that hundreds of greyhounds were euthanised between the 2017/18 and 2022/23 seasons, with many cases recorded with limited or no clear reason given, according to independent review analysis
Living conditions fail to meet basic needs
- Many kennels are too small with inadequate bedding and enrichment
- Some kennels lack proper building consents and are too cold in winter
- Dogs experience limited socialisation and inadequate veterinary care
- Housing fails to meet the behavioural and physical needs required by the Animal Welfare Act
A Decade of Failed Reforms
Four reviews, same problems
- Greyhound racing has been reviewed in 2013, 2017, 2021, and 2022
- Each review found serious welfare concerns and poor transparency
- After the 2021 Robertson Review, the industry was placed “on notice”
- The Racing Minister stated he was “not satisfied the recommendations are being implemented in a way that is improving animal welfare”
The problems are systemic
- More than a decade of scrutiny has shown these issues cannot be resolved through reform
- The most recent season has been one of the deadliest
- Industry improvements like the Rehabilitation to Rehoming Policy are “ambulances at the bottom of the cliff” – they don’t prevent the harm from happening
The Breeding Problem
Deliberate over-breeding creates “wastage”
- Dogs are bred specifically to race, with far more puppies bred than will ever compete
- Many don’t even make it to the point of being named
- The industry depends on over-breeding to ensure some dogs will run fast enough to be profitable
- This commodification of dogs treats them as disposable resources rather than individuals
Concentrated breeding operations
- A handful of owners and trainers dominate the scene, often having multiple dogs bred and trained by the same person in one race
- Concerns have been raised about whether animal welfare can be adequately protected in large-scale operations
Substances and Shortcuts
Banned substances found in dogs’ systems
- Recent cases show ongoing use of methamphetamine and other banned substances
- Whether accidental or intentional, these cases demonstrate that dogs’ wellbeing is not being adequately protected
- This reveals a culture willing to put dogs at risk for competitive advantage
Life After Racing
Dogs carry lasting effects
- Many rehomed dogs have poor dental hygiene, mental and physical injuries, and high “prey drive”
- Some suffer blindness from poor deworming treatment
- Race training causes behavioural issues that must be overcome for dogs to become family companions
- These dogs need extensive rehabilitation and support
The Human Cost
Gambling harm affects families and communities
- About one in five New Zealanders experiences harm in their lifetime due to gambling, their own or someone else’s
- Greyhound racing adds to gambling opportunities in a country already grappling with problem gambling
- From a public health perspective, gambling is a social, economic, and health issue
What New Zealanders Think
The industry has lost its social licence
- 72% of New Zealanders support the Government’s decision to end greyhound racing (Verian poll, 2025)
- 60% of New Zealanders want commercial greyhound racing banned
- Even Prime Minister Christopher Luxon stated before the 2023 election that he believed greyhound racing should be banned
- Labour’s Animal Welfare spokesperson offered bipartisan support to enact the ban
Animal welfare organisations agree
- SPCA, SAFE, Greyhound Protection League, and other organisations have repeatedly called for an end to greyhound racing
- These organisations state the industry “cannot meet its animal welfare obligations and is no longer acceptable to New Zealand society”
Global Movement Away from Dog Racing
New Zealand joins a worldwide shift
- Greyhound racing continues in only a handful of countries: New Zealand, Australia, the United Kingdom, Ireland, and two tracks in the United States
- Since New Zealand announced its ban, Wales, Scotland, and Tasmania have followed suit
- Ending this industry positions Aotearoa within a global movement towards compassion for all animals
Legal Incompatibility
Racing violates the Animal Welfare Act
- Section 10 requires owners to ensure dogs’ physical health and behavioural needs are met
- Section 28A prohibits reckless ill-treatment that causes serious injury, permanent disability, or death
- With 40% of greyhounds suffering injuries, I believe the industry clearly cannot comply with these basic legal requirements
Responding to “What About” Arguments
Pointing at other problems doesn’t excuse racing
You may hear arguments like “What about pounds?” or “SPCA euthanises dogs too”
- This logic suggests one harm excuses another – it doesn’t
- Pointing at other animal welfare issues doesn’t make greyhound racing acceptable
- We can work to improve pounds, shelters, and breeding practices whilst also ending racing
- Two wrongs don’t make a right
Greyhound racing is unique in its predictability
- Racing deliberately puts healthy dogs at risk of injury and death for entertainment and profit
- The harm isn’t accidental or due to lack of resources – it’s built into the system
- Every race creates predictable risk that we have the power to prevent entirely
We support improvements across all animal welfare issues
- Supporting this ban doesn’t mean ignoring other problems
- The Animal Justice Party advocates for reform across companion animal breeding, shelter practices, and more
- Ending one form of harm is progress, not hypocrisy
Your Recommendations
Tell the Committee what you want them to do:
Essential
- Support the Racing Industry (Closure of Greyhound Racing Industry) Amendment Bill in full
Strengthen the Bill
- Ban the export of greyhounds for racing purposes so the industry cannot simply move harm offshore
- Breeding safeguard – Prohibit the breeding of greyhounds for commercial racing from the date this Bill is passed (or from a clearly defined early cut‑off date), to prevent a last‑minute surge in puppies who will need homes but will never race.
- End broadcasting and betting on international greyhound races in New Zealand once our domestic ban is complete, ensuring our laws consistently oppose the exploitation of dogs wherever it occurs
- Stronger lifetime tracking – Require full, transparent lifetime tracking of every greyhound bred for or used in racing, from birth to death, during and after the transition period, so that no dog can simply ‘disappear’ from the system.
- Provide adequate, ring-fenced funding and practical support for greyhound rehoming organisations such as SPCA, HUHA, Greyhound Protection League and others, recognising the specialised work and resources needed to safely rehabilitate and place ex‑racing dogs in homes
- Support a fair and just transition for people employed by the industry, helping them move into non-exploitative work
Tips for Writing Your Submission
Make it personal
- Write about why this matters to you
- Share if you’ve met a greyhound, adopted one, or simply care about dogs’ wellbeing
- Your values and perspective matter – you don’t need to be an expert
Be clear and focused
- Choose the points that resonate most with you
- Even a short submission focused on one or two issues makes a real difference
Stay constructive
- Emphasise what we’re working towards: a more compassionate Aotearoa where dogs are valued as family, not exploited for profit
- Acknowledge that this affects people’s livelihoods, whilst maintaining that animal welfare must come first
Use your own words
- Write as you would speak to a friend
- Simple, heartfelt submissions are often the most powerful
Submissions close: 9 January 2026
References
Visit this link for core New Zealand welfare and closure sources.
Pigs can’t turn around, and neither should we.
10 more years of cruelty is 10 years too many. Make your voice heard: submissions close 23 October. Use the AJP template to help!
The government has announced it will allow the continued use of cages (farrowing crates and mating stalls) for another ten years, with mother pigs confined for shorter periods.
The High Court already ruled this suffering unlawful in 2020. Every extra day means more pigs suffering, trapped, frustrated, and unable to express their natural instincts. This delay isn’t about welfare. It’s about short-term costs.
You can help! Submissions close 5pm, Thursday 23 October 2025.
We’ve made it easy: copy, paste, or edit the template submission below. We recommend you personalise it and this can be done by sharing at the start how this makes you feel. Just a few sentences from the heart make a difference.
Step 01. Go to Animal Welfare (Regulations for Management of Pigs) Amendment Bill – New Zealand Parliament.
Click “I am ready to make my submission”.
Step 02. Click “I am submitting as an individual” and “no” if you don’t want to be selected for an oral submission. Then add in your details.
Step 03. Copy & paste into the submission form:
I/We wish to make the following comments:
Animal Cruelty and Welfare Obligations
Mother pigs are confined in cages where they cannot turn around, lie comfortably, or build nests. Mating stalls are also used, yet the National Animal Welfare Advisory Committee (NAWAC) has repeatedly advised that pigs should never be confined for mating. These cages cause physical injury, mental distress, and long-term suffering.
The Animal Welfare Act 1999 requires owners to prevent unnecessary pain and distress. Caging mother pigs breaches this obligation. The 2015 Amendment explicitly aimed to end non-compliant practices, including cages. The High Court in SAFE & NZALA v Minister (2020) ruled that “farrowing crates” are unlawful and invalid.
Allowing cages until 2035 is a deliberate attempt to override Parliament’s intent and the court’s authority. It turns back the clock on welfare standards that New Zealand has already legally and ethically outgrown.
Implications:
Legal and moral obligations cannot be delayed for economic convenience. Every day cages remain in use is another day of sanctioned cruelty and statutory breach. To compare: it would be unacceptable to leave children in classrooms lined with asbestos because renovations are expensive. It would be unlawful to allow cars with faulty brakes to operate for a decade because the fix costs too much. Yet this is what the government proposes for pigs, knowingly permitting harm that the law already forbids.
Legal Compliance and Parliamentary Intent
Regulations 26 and 27 (under section 183A(1)) currently allow “farrowing crates” and mating stalls to continue indefinitely. Section 183A(2), however, was designed specifically for time-limited phase-outs of practices inconsistent with the Act. That pathway has been ignored.
Regulations cannot lawfully override the purpose of the Animal Welfare Act or the 2015 Amendment. Extending the use of cages until 2035 violates the rule of law and undermines judicial authority.
Implications:
The law requires that non-compliant practices be eliminated, not extended with new conditions. Government action that knowingly allows ongoing illegality risks renewed court action and erodes public trust in animal welfare enforcement. It sets a highly risky precedent that statutory duties can be weakened for political or industry convenience.
Economic and Practical Considerations
The industry claims that upgrading facilities will cost around $675,000 per farm, and that removing cages will increase piglet deaths and force farm closures. These claims ignore both animal welfare science and long-term economic reality. Across Europe, modern free-farrowing systems have already reduced piglet losses through design improvements and animal-centred management. The idea that cruelty protects piglets is false, it’s an outdated excuse to preserve a broken system.
Cages and intensive indoor systems also create hidden public costs: high waste output, polluted waterways, and dependence on antibiotics to manage stress-driven illness. These are not just welfare issues but environmental and human health concerns.
Meanwhile, more than 60% of ‘pork’ consumed in New Zealand is imported from countries with far lower welfare standards.The solution is not to keep our cruelty to compete, but to raise import standards so all ‘pork’ sold meets our legal expectations.
Implications:
Cost cannot justify unlawful cruelty. Compliance brings long-term benefits: Reduced legal and reputational risk, protection of export credibility and trade access and public confidence in genuine animal welfare enforcement.
Delaying reform imposes hidden costs: legal risk, public distrust, and reputational damage that will far exceed the cost of compliance. The precedent of ignoring the 2015 Amendment, the 2020 High Court ruling, and NAWAC’s consistent advice weakens the rule of law and signals that statutory obligations are optional.
I/We wish to make the following recommendations
Every day of delay is unjustifiable cruelty, to piglets, mother pigs, and the integrity of New Zealand law.
- Immediate action is required: Farrowing crates and mating stalls should be phased out entirely, not retained indefinitely under reduced confinement rules.
- Time-limited transition: Given the lack of action to date, this needs careful planning. If a transition period is unavoidable, it must be realistic but short, respecting both animal welfare and legal obligations.
- Government accountability: Minister Hoggard and MPI must comply with the law, honour Parliament’s intent, and uphold judicial rulings.
- Industry support: Provide financial or technical assistance to farmers to ensure compliance.
Recommendations
- Reject the current proposal to allow cages indefinitely under reduced confinement times.
- Set a firm deadline well before 2035, given it’s been 5 years already, another 10 is unacceptable.
- Mandate reporting and independent monitoring to ensure compliance.
- Provide transition support for farmers (grants, infrastructure assistance, technical guidance).
- Public transparency: Engage stakeholders, including animal welfare organisations and the public, in reporting and oversight. Given current conditions are impossible to prove, manage or have oversight of.
Thank you for your consideration.
Ban Duck Shooting in Aotearoa
Ban Duck Shooting in Aotearoa
How to Use Email Templates to Correspond Effectively with Recipients
- Make it Yours: Add your own touch! Templates give you a head start, but personalise it with your thoughts as sometimes a templated email is ignored.
- Ring Ring! Sometimes, Talk is Better: For big issues or a good chat, consider calling or setting up a meeting with people.
- Don’t Forget Basics: Include your full name and address when emailing. If emailing a MP, it helps them recognise you’re a constituent and increases the chance of a response.
- Ping! Ping! Follow Up: If you don’t hear back, send a friendly reminder. Sometimes emails get lost, so a gentle nudge can help your message get noticed.
Email: [email protected]
Find your local MP: Find your Member of Parliament (MP) | New Zealand Government (www.govt.nz)
Subject: [Personalise the subject line, so less chance of it being deleted]
Kia ora Hon Todd McClay, [Local MP’s Name],
I am writing to urge you to take immediate action to ban duck shooting across Aotearoa, as it is a practice that is not only inhumane but also ecologically damaging.
Three species of native duck are allowed to be shot under the law. It’s hypocritical to invest millions of taxpayer dollars into efforts aimed at safeguarding our invaluable native bird populations only to have a duck shooting season. Furthermore, there is a large number of ducks that are maimed and wounded, which is against the humane slaughter laws in the Animal Welfare Act. The killing of animals must be done according to the Animal Welfare Act 1999. This Act makes it an offense to kill an animal in a way that causes unreasonable or unnecessary pain or distress.
Western Australia banned duck hunting in 1990, NSW followed suit in 1995 and Queensland banned the practice in 2005. Why is Aotearoa so behind?
Recent reports and investigations globally show the harsh reality of duck shooting, exposing the unnecessary suffering inflicted upon thousands of waterbirds each year. Ducks, along with other native waterbirds, deserve to live their lives peacefully, free from the threat of being injured or killed for the sake of so-called “sport.”
Duck shooting is not a sport; it is nothing short of savagery. Shooting down defenceless animals cannot be justified as entertainment or sport by any stretch of the imagination. In fact, it goes against the very essence of what sport represents – fair competition and skilful engagement.
Ducks are intelligent and hold very special relationships. They are capable of abstract thinking and have deep emotional lives. If a single duck manages to survive the carnage they will ‘mourn’ the partner they bonded with.
Furthermore, duck shooting exacerbates the decline of wetlands and threatens endangered species. The supposed conservation efforts tied to hunting are unfounded and only serve to perpetuate ecological harm.
As a concerned citizen, I ask you to call an end to this barbaric practice. I have copied [Local MP’s Name] on this email as well, as I believe our local representatives must advocate for the welfare of our wildlife and ecosystems [Optional: And I will be seeking to meet them shortly].
Please consider this urgent matter seriously and take decisive action to ban duck shooting once and for all.
Nāku noa, nā [Your Name] [Your Contact Information]
Keep the Ban on Live Exports
How to Use Email Templates to Correspond Effectively with your MP
Make it Yours: Add your own touch! Templates give you a head start, but personalise it with your thoughts as sometimes a templated email is ignored.
Ring Ring! Sometimes, Talk is Better: For big issues or a good chat, consider calling or setting up a meeting with your MP for a proper conversation.
Don’t Forget Basics: Include your full name and address when emailing. It helps MPs recognise you’re a constituent and increases the chance of a response.
- Ping! Ping! Follow Up: If you don’t hear back, send a friendly reminder. Sometimes emails get lost, so a gentle nudge can help your message get noticed.
Subject: Are you on the right side of history?
Kia ora [MP’s Name],
I am writing to you today to express my strong opposition to the potential reinstatement of live animal exports from New Zealand. This decision not only poses significant risks to animal welfare but also threatens to undermine our nation’s reputation and economic success.
As you are aware, the ban on live export plays a crucial role in upholding New Zealand’s image as a clean, green country with high animal welfare standards. Our commitment to ethical practices is worth billions to our economy and has influenced global trade agreements. Reversing this ban could have severe economic and diplomatic repercussions, jeopardising the progress we’ve made in international relations.
The minimal contribution of live exports to our economy, constituting only 0.6 percent of primary sector exports, pales in comparison to the potential damage to our reputation if the ban is overturned
Recent events, including the sinking of the Gulf Livestock I, the stranding of over 15,000 sheep and cattle off the coast of West Australia, the foul odour in Cape Town caused by a live export vessel, and distressing footage of live export voyages, underscore the inherent dangers and inhumanities associated with this practice. Despite attempts to enhance shipping conditions, the fundamental issues persist unresolved. Animals experience considerable suffering during lengthy journeys, enduring injuries, stress, and dehydration that cannot be effectively mitigated through ship upgrades. These problems stem from the inability to shorten the duration of the journeys.
Once animals arrive at their destination, they fall outside the protective umbrella of New Zealand’s Animal Welfare Act, exposing them to suffering in unregulated environments. Reinstating live exports to countries with low animal welfare standards, such as China, compromises our farmers’ reputations and our global image as leaders in animal welfare.
This isn’t just about politics or economics; it’s about morality and humanity. It’s about standing on the right side of history and refusing to compromise our values
As a constituent in your region I am keen to know your thoughts on this matter, including how you potentially intend to vote should this come up this term.
Ngā mihi maioha,
[Name]
How to Use Email Templates to Correspond Effectively with Recipients
- Make it Yours: Add your own touch! Templates give you a head start, but personalise it with your thoughts as sometimes a templated email is ignored.
- Ring Ring! Sometimes, Talk is Better: For big issues or a good chat, consider calling or setting up a meeting with people.
- Don’t Forget Basics: Include your full name and address when emailing. If emailing a MP, it helps them recognise you’re a constituent and increases the chance of a response.
- Ping! Ping! Follow Up: If you don’t hear back, send a friendly reminder. Sometimes emails get lost, so a gentle nudge can help your message get noticed.
Subject: Potential reinstatement of live animal exports
Tauranga Port
Timaru Port
Kia ora,
I am writing to address concerns surrounding the potential reinstatement of live animal exports through [Port Name]. This issue holds significant implications not only for shareholders and stakeholders but also for the wider community.
It is crucial to consider the ethical and reputational risks.
It is not hard to find examples of the devastation caused by this trade. Recent incidents, such as the tragic sinking of the Gulf Livestock 1 in the East China Sea which sailed from Napier, serve as poignant reminders of the risks involved in live animal exports. The loss of human lives and New Zealand cattle in this incident highlights the gravity of the situation.
Ongoing tragedies with live animal exports in other regions further highlight the inherent risks and uncertainties associated with this industry and the negative global attention to the Ports. Examples include the MV Bahijah, with more than 15,000 sheep and cattle stranded off the coast of West Australia, creating a PR nightmare for the port of Fremantle and a literal nightmare for the animals. While in Cape Town a stench impacting the town was discovered to come from a livestock ship docked in the harbour.
It is important that you carefully consider the potential consequences of reinstating live exports. While improvements to shipping standards may be touted as addressing some concerns, it is essential to recognise that fundamental issues remain unresolved. Long-distance journeys inherently expose animals to various forms of distress and suffering, which cannot be mitigated through improved shipping conditions.
I’d love to learn your perspective and insights on how we can uphold the integrity and reputation of [Port Name] and ensure the welfare of animals and the well-being of our community.
Ngā mihi maioha,
[Name]





