There has been a bit of comment yesterday and today (including from Guyon Espiner on TV1) that Gerry Brownlee “over-reached” himself when it came to the mining of Schedule 4 land. I certainly think that Gerry failed miserably to sell the policy, but its a bit harsh to blame him for over-reaching when we have this from the John Key’s opening statement to Parliament in February this year.
Notwithstanding the public consultation process, it is my expectation that the Government will act on at least some of these recommendations and make significant changes to Schedule 4. This is because new mining on Crown land has the potential to increase economic growth and create jobs.
That is an unequivocal commitment to major changes to Schedule 4 and to new mining. Gerry was only acting with that in mind. I still think that by the time they got to announcing anything they planned to use Great Barrier as a bit of a stalking horse, but the initial blush of enthusiasm was very much John Key’s. Which is why it was so interesting he tried to get as far away as possible from this policy disaster today.
As an aside in Parliament today the pressure of this and the industrial relations package was telling on Mr Key. He got very side-tracked by interjections, launched into Darren about his hair (he may have a point on that score 
) and at one stage totally tossed his toys and sat down in the middle of an answer. Tough day at the office.
Posted in Gerry Brownlee, Schedule 4, John Key, Mining, Question Time and Environment. |
I really am happy that the Government’s ill-conceived plan to mine our most precious conservation land looks as if it has been shelved. Even though I am sure there was never a plan to do anything on Great Barrier, overall it is a great victory. But where to now in terms of the “step-change” for the economy? The big Jobs Summit delivered almost nothing but a cycleway that might sound good, but has delivered a handful of jobs. The mining was the next big idea, but the government appears to have backed right out of that. What we are left with is tax cuts and trickle down economics. This ain’t no step change.
And to answer the question before its asked. This is the time for investment in a clean green, high tech economy that builds on our traditional strengths, and opens up new opportunities.
Posted in Mining and Economy. |
There is a saying in business that your reputation is your most valuable asset and it must be protected. If that is the case the government has self-inflicted enormous damage to New Zealand with its plans for mining of sensitive conservation land.
The Economist magazine is highly critical of the government plans in an on-line article. It takes a look at the current government’s overall environmental record
From an environmentalist’s perspective, though, these positives are outweighed by much larger negatives. The emissions-trading scheme excludes agricultural emissions until 2015, and its generous allocations of free carbon credits to business have been lambasted by environmentalists. The country’s transport strategy favours road-building over already-scant public transport, and there is much talk of the need to ease resource-management rules that act as barriers to business. In February, the government revealed it was considering opening some of the country’s pristine public land up for mining—an activity to which the dwarves in “The Hobbit” are much given, but which is not popular with more elvish sensibilities. Energetic lobbying by environmental groups forced it to scale back the amount of land under consideration, but on March 22nd it announced that it still intended to open 7,000 hectares of conservation land to mining, with other conservation areas to be surveyed for their mineral potential.
As the article says there is a struggle for many countries to balance environmental and economic objectives. To do this requires seeing sustainable growth as the only form of growth that can work for us. This government is going in the other direction, and the dangers for New Zealand are there for all the world to see.
But it is particularly acute in a country so dependent on the export of commodities and landscape-driven tourism. The difference between New Zealand and other places is that New Zealand has actively sold itself as “100% Pure”. Now that New Zealanders themselves are acknowledging the gap between the claim and reality, and the risk to their reputation this poses, it is time for the country to find itself a more sustainable brand, and soon.
This is a crucial issue for New Zealand, but the government seems hell-bent on 19th century solutions, rather than investing in 21st century opportunities which combine our natural resources with smart ideas. The damage to us internationally is going to be hard to undo if National go ahead with their plans.
Posted in Mining, Economy and Environment. |
