Green leader James Shaw has announced a team of five for coalition talks. It's vital the Greens are in government, he says - but not a Centre-Right government.

A red-letter day for environmental politics; never have green issues dominated so much in an election campaign.

The only irony; the Green Party suffered one of its worst results in more than a decade.

HAGEN HOPKINS/GETTY IMAGES Greenpeace chief executive Russel Norman says the Greens made some 'trainwreck' decisions, which cost them dearly in the election. But now their base is severely weakened, it will be harder for them to rebuild as environmental issues gain more mainstream prominence.

There were extenuating circumstances of course – a self-destruct button pressed on the eve of the campaign.

A party that had been stable on 10 per cent or more for years was now simply trying to remain in Parliament.

READ MORE:

* Greens also hold the balance of power, but they don't seem to want it

* Greens announces coalition negotiating team

* Greens, bruised but unbroken, face a return to the sidelines

CAMERON BURNELL/STUFF National campaign manager Steven Joyce rejects suggestions his party is not strong on the environment. For the Greens to talk with National they would have to undergo a major shift in position.

Meanwhile, National and Labour were vacuuming all available air-time talking about freshwater quality, while the latter, along with NZ First, had committed to a net-zero target to make New Zealand carbon neutral by 2050.

WHAT KIND OF PARALLEL UNIVERSE?

JOHN KIRK-ANDERSON/STUFF Labour environment spokeswoman Megan Woods says the Greens will always have a core constituency, but Labour's policy platform is strong on its own. The biggest environmental gains will be made with cross-party consensus.

Most agree political discourse on the environment has undergone a major shift in this country over the past six weeks, largely for the positive. Where experts diverge is over its starting and end points.

The Green Party might be diminished, but whether it's a long-term stasis won't be known for some time.

Greenpeace chief executive (and former Green Party co-leader) Russel Norman says it was positive the environment gained so much prominence during the election.

DELWYN DICKEY Environmental Defence Society executive director and chairman Gary Taylor says the environmental focus during the election was welcome and necessary.

But the "disastrous" decision by former co-leader Metiria Turei (and supported by leader James Shaw) to admit to historic benefit fraud in an attempt to bolster discussion around the party's welfare policy cannot be underestimated.

"That they could survive this incredibly bad decision that was made by Metiria and James, which was incredibly damaging for the party, that they could come back, I think is a sign of resilience attached to the Green Party membership," he says.

Shaw takes a more optimistic view.

"There was a debate right up until the last minute in the Labour Party about what their target should be and in the end they adopted to be carbon-neutral by 2050.

"So I think although we got a kicking, actually, we kind of won; on poverty, on rivers. Those things that were front and centre of our campaign ended up being front and centre of the campaign."

Environmental Defence Society chief executive Gary Taylor says environmental issues are no longer the exclusive domain of the Green Party and New Zealand is better off for it.

"That's a deepening and a widening of public concern over the environment and particularly welcome in this election."

Both major parties reject suggestions that their environmental policy platforms might not be so developed had the Greens not been an active voice in Parliament.

National campaign chairman Steven Joyce says he is confident environmental politics will continue to be a big part of the mainstream approach of all parties. On that, at least, there was consensus.

"And then it really becomes a question of method and how you go about it, and practical steps that enhance the environment while maintaining the economic activity levels, particularly in regional New Zealand," he says.

"Obviously we have what we believe is a strong suite of policies in that regard. And actually, if you look at the other side – apart from the idea of a water tax – they've generally endorsed the things that we're doing."

Labour's environment spokeswoman, Megan Woods, says strong environmental policy has to be part of any party's platform.

"This is an MMP environment; obviously we're in a competitive marketplace for votes, but I think there is still that core green vote.

"And again, this is nothing new. Labour's always had strong environmental policies for the whole time the Green Party's been in existence."

SO THERE'S THE TALK, WHERE'S THE ACTION?

The Greens survived and it's perhaps a signal that a core green constituency remains, despite how mainstream environmental policies might become in New Zealand. On that front, however, progress made with the major parties in bringing environmental policies to the fore can't be overestimated.

"Obviously what we really need is not just parties that talk about it, but we actually need policies that will reduce water pollution, that will reduce climate pollution and we just haven't got there yet," says Norman.

"The current Government has a half-a-billion-dollar fund to subsidise water pollution – to increase it – under the emissions trading scheme. We're not even close, right."

He says NGOs like Greenpeace and wider society would have one of the bigger roles in creating tangible change. "The political establishment is responding to the rise of these issues in civil society. NGOs have an absolutely critical role, it doesn't come out of nowhere."

As the top four parties embark on various strands of negotiations to form a government, Taylor had hopes the environment would remain front and centre behind closed doors.

"I think that there's a number of issues first [that] I think are actually quite important and very do-able with NZ First being a key part of the mix.

"One of them is the establishment of a climate commission to plan a lot of, to report on, to transition to, net-zero economy by 2050. They've got a very fleshed-out proposition there, Labour do too, the Greens do too and National during the election campaign said it was an idea that had merit," says Taylor.

Shaw says the "action" side of the equation, was why the Greens had to be in government.

"I think the difference is on speed and execution – that's why I'm pushing so hard to be a part of a govenrment now. Because I think that if the Green Party that gets to implement some of these things, then there will be an urgency to them which you wouldn't see other parties operate according to.

"But I also think there's a completeness to them. In terms of climate change; yes, we'd pass the Zero Carbon Act, as would Labour. Yes, we'd set up an independent Climate Change Commission, as would Labour.

"But we would also put a stop to deep sea oil exploration, new fracking and any new coalmines, and they wouldn't," he says.

"So what I would argue is you can do all that stuff but it would make diddly-squat difference, if you continue digging up and burning fossil fuels at the same time."

ALWAYS A PLACE AT THE TABLE FOR GREENS?

But what place is reserved for the Green Party in environmental politics; has it only suffered because of that welfare speech, or is it also, perhaps, partly a victim of its own success?

Parallels can be drawn to the Green Party in Germany. That party has also bled support, though it is negotiating with Chancellor Angela Merkel's Centre-Right Christian Democratic Union Party.

Ask most pundits to point to the cause of the New Zealand Greens' curtailment and nearly all will cite the "Metiria controversy". Her admission of benefit fraud, and the unravelling of details thereafter, inarguably set the party on a course of chaos from which it could only hope to remain on the tracks.

But it might be too simplistic to put the party's reduction entirely on Turei's shoulders.

The German iteration has also suffered from its success – the irreverent iconoclasts and lightning-rod issues are now few and far between. If they're not careful, the Green Party here could wind up becoming what it dreads most – part of the political establishment.

Norman says if environmental policies gain mainstream importance here, then that "cuts both ways for the Greens".

"On the one hand, it kind of validates them, which could help their support because they're not so out there, odd – not so unusual.

"On the other hand, it could compete with them for the votes of people who are environmentally sympathetic. It's hard to know exactly which way that's going to play," he says.

"Obviously this election is a bit of a hit in that respect, because it gives them a smaller and weaker base to work from for the next election. But it can kind of go either way, and perhaps both ways at once."

WHY NOT LINK WITH NATIONAL?

But where the German Greens dare to tread, why is it so hard for the New Zealand Green Party to entertain working with National?

First of all, the MMP system is arguably far more mature over there – discussions and coalition negotiations between all parties hardly carry the same level of surprise or innuendo.

The German Greens have also been in coalition with the Centre-Right party before – and both Shaw and Norman make a fervent point that Merkel's party blows National out of the nutrient-rich water when it comes to environmentally progressive policies.

Shaw has confirmed his politeness by promising to pick up the phone should National leader Bill English dial his number, but has effectively ruled out any proactive overtures on his part.

Meanwhile, National says it would talk but the Greens have ruled out working with them and they would have to undergo a huge shift.

"There's no point talking to them if their view is they wouldn't work with National under any circumstances – there's no point having a conversation," Joyce says.

Yet most parties agree the biggest green gains to be made will be when politics is put aside and cross-party consensus rules.

Joyce says National starts from the position of "having a strong economy first".

"Therefore we put a lot of store in achieving and maintaining a strong economy to work on these other things – to work on social issues and environmental issues. I don't think that the Greens' approach is necessarily diametrically opposed to that."

However, Shaw says it goes both ways. "For us to be able to work with them, it wouldn't just require a big shift from us. It would also require a shift from them."

He says there are risks with forming coalitions with either side and admits the Greens are philosophically close to the Māori Party, which has worked successfully with National for nine years.

But the Māori Party is not there now. For the Greens, it's a problem that's tough to get around.

The demise of the Māori Party is a cautionary tale.