Red Alert

Archive for the ‘conservation’ Category

Rena and Leadership

Posted by Grant Robertson on October 16th, 2011

When I was doing Vote Chat with Bryce Edwards at Otago University on Friday he raised the good question of the political balancing act that surrounds how opposition political parties respond to a disaster, in this case the Rena. As an Opposition there is the risk that people will see criticism of the government as politicising the situation, being opportunistic etc. Equally part of the role of an Opposition is to hold the government to account, whatever the horrendous circumstances might be.

To get one thing out of the way straight up, no one is saying the Government is to blame for the Rena hitting the reef. I am also sure that John Key, Steven Joyce and Nick Smith are as disturbed as I am by the images of the oil on beaches and the death and injury of wildlife. Every New Zealander will want to see the damage from the accident mitigated and the environment cleaned up. What is a legitimate question though is whether faced with the incident the government showed the leadership that we should expect of them and acted as swiftly and effectively as they should have.

My take is that the government were flat footed and to keen to sheet blame and responsibility elsewhere rather than take the leadership role we want our government to take in times of crisis. Someone I worked with once said that people mostly want the government out of their way when things are going well, but they want them there yesterday when things go wrong. I think National got that wrong in the first few days of the Rena incident.

And criticism of this is not just coming from Labour, but also from people who might normally be described as friends of the government like John Roughan, Paul Holmes and even Matthew Hooten. Here is part of Hooten’s NBR column which is not on-line. (h/t Liberation)

Joyce failed totally to comprehend what the Rena grounding meant to the Bay of Plenty’, and ‘He did not see that, as transport minister and arguably the most powerful figure in the government after Mr Key, his role was to lead and improve the quality of the response, and ensure it was sufficiently empowered and resourced. When he spoke publicly, he demonstrated little empathy with locals, telling them there was no point going to the beach to clean up the oil, saying more was on its way and that it could take years to resolve anyway

Then there is the question of whether the government had done the work over the last three years to have us planned for a disaster like this. There are questions here too, with the freeze on funding for Maritime NZ and the failure to put in place the mechanism that would see more of the costs of dealing with the disaster fall on the ship company and less on you and me.

So, in the face of this disaster, we join with all New Zealanders in wanting to protect our beautiful coastline and all those, human and animal who inhabit it. But we also take our role seriously to raise the question- Where was the leadership?, and in this case it was sadly lacking.


Politics matters to conservation

Posted by A Guest Poster on September 14th, 2011

In 2011, Red Alert is doing a few new things. One of them is to introduce you to some confirmed Labour candidates who will do the occasional guest post.

Today’s guest poster is Christine Rose, the candidate for Rodney.
Rose-145x63-fb

Kokako are one of New Zealand’s most beautiful songbirds. They sing in ‘gently paced, wistful tunes’, with an ‘organ-like song’ that can carry for kilometres. They are distinguished by their dusky grey plumage, their bright blue fleshy wattles and a little black face mask. They skip through the forest more than they fly, and come from an ancient lineage.  But kokako have been pushed to the brink of extinction by habitat loss and predation.

Kokako were once widespread, found in the North and South Islands.  But they are particularly vulnerable because of their poor flying ability, unable to flee from forest destruction to new habitats, and with females on the nest most prone to predation.  One study found only about one chick in 10 nests survives.

In the 1980s there were only about 350 pairs of blue wattled, North Island, kokako left.  Through good pest control and protection of remaining birds, (by volunteers and DoC), the population is now about 750 pairs and the aim of the National Kokako Recovery project is to have 1000 pairs in dispersed locations, by 2020. In Auckland, a small population of mainly male kokako remained in the Hunua Ranges, but they were totally extinct in the Waitakeres.

Over the last few years passionate and hardworking Forest & Bird conservationists have worked with the old Auckland Regional Council and iwi to restore the biodiversity of the Waitakere Ranges to its former glory.  The Waitakere rainforest on the edge of the country’s biggest city covers over 17,000 hectares. More than 2000 hectares is now home to ‘Ark in the Park’ where species are being revived.

Since 2009 24 kokako have been translocated from different parts of the country, returning their melodious song to the forest where once they roamed.  Last year at least three kokako chicks were fledged.  This is a testament to the difference that committed individuals can make to a most  worthy a cause – saving a species.

At our recent celebration to mark Ark in the Park’s successful efforts to save this species, the question was repeatedly asked why we’re seeing cuts to Department of Conservation funding when we have species like this on the brink.  There certainly are amazing DoC workers who devote their lives to kokako and conservation. However, recent retrenchments in conservation budgets show the current government’s priorities lie elsewhere.

That’s another reason why this election is so important.  A huge number of New Zealand’s endemic species are on the global critically endangered list. This is not the right time to cut conservation budgets.  Our species, habitats, forest fragments, are the store of ecological capital, of hope for the future.  Species, and our reputation, depend on our environment. Cuts to conservation budgets can only endanger these further, despite the amazing work of conservationists on the ground.  Extinction is forever.

The South Island kokako, with its orange wattles is now most certainly extinct, and known as ‘the grey ghost’.  How New Zealanders vote at this election, may determine whether our other special species like the North Island kokako, also join the ranks of forest ghosts.

Labour has a great track record working with the environmental sector on species and habitat recovery. That’s why, as a lifelong conservationist, I’m standing for Labour.

Christine Rose served the Rodney area as an elected representative for 15 years between 1995 and 2010. She was Deputy Mayor of the Rodney District Council, and Deputy Chair of the Auckland Regional Council. She chaired various committees including the ARC’s Transport Committee and the Regional Land Transport Committee which led the development of the Regional Transport Strategy.

Christine has degrees in Political Science (with First Class Honours), and Philosophy from Auckland University, where she also taught politics.  She has been a supporter of both Greenpeace and Forest and Bird for over 20 years, serving in various governance roles.
Christine has also led significant environmental campaigns, most notably working with the Labour Government to protect Mauis and Hectors dolphins. She is a strong advocate of sustainable transport for Auckland. In her spare time she is an artist, and tramps, kayaks and cycles.

Tags:
Filed under: conservation

Another skeleton for Invercargill?

Posted by A Guest Poster on September 9th, 2011

Lesley Soper is the Labour candidate for Invercargill

This week it was announced that the Department of Conservation (DOC) is to cut 96 jobs around the country from 4 regional centres.    18 jobs will go from the Invercargill office, leaving only 20 of the 38 existing service positions in place.    All staff in service positions will have to reapply for their jobs.

The cuts follow the National Government 2009 cut to DOC’s Budget of $54million over 4 years, which means there are probably more to come in the next stage of the ‘Review’ for efficiency and effectiveness.

Once again the regions suffer, with Northland; Tongariro/Whanganui/Taranaki; and Nelson/Marlborough also to suffer job cuts.    Valuable locals, contributing to their communities economically and socially, with institutional loyalty, knowledge and years of long service are forced into job scrambles;  onto the dole queue;  overseas; or into short-term and insecure contract work.      The regional economies and communities lose out; real people doing valuable jobs lose out; and DOC is expected  to do more with less.

Southland has a significant amount of conservation land, and DOC protects places and species that Southlanders value.   Jobs to go include science, technical, communications, planning and legal, but for the present no ranger positions.   So jobs that allow good conservation outcomes to be achieved and rangers to be rangers go.   Cut to the bone and only the skeleton remains.

Is 19 or 20 the new preferred size du jour for public service Regional offices?      How long before ‘efficiences of scale’  mean the size du jour is in single figures?

Again, local public service cuts that no-one can feel comfortable about.   Silence from local National MP’s on any reasons why.


Abandoning the Provinces (again)

Posted by Grant Robertson on September 9th, 2011

The National led government released its latest public service staff statistics yesterday. They show that they have overseen almost 2,400 Kiwis losing their jobs since 2008. That is thousands of families with people who make the money to put food on the table out of work. Things really are starting to follow the 1990s pattern- the gutting of the public sector, followed by the decline in services and confidence from the public, followed by the hiring of consultants and contractors to fill the gaps…

The figures announced today do not cover the full impact most recent jobs losses announced for DOC and the IRD. In both cases its not the people I look after in Wellington Central bearing the brunt, it is the provinces. Wanganui, Rotorua, Napier, Invercargill, Nelson, New Plymouth. Did someone say “frontline services”.

Two stories related to this came my way today. The first from the Daily News in New Plymouth who quoted one of the staff saying that they had been warned that if they talked publicly about the job losses they would go even quicker.

“They told us there was to be absolutely no discussion of anything to the media. If anyone spoke to the media it could be a code of conduct issue,” an employee told the Taranaki Daily News on condition of anonymity. Penalties for breaching the code of conduct could include being sacked, they said.

The worker also said something that will be familiar to many in the public service. He said “morale was in tatters”. It is, in almost every government agency I speak to- and the end result of that is poorer services for us all.

Meanwhile over in Whanganui they are facing the effect of the cuts to the Department of Conservation, the latest in a line of cuts including to NZTA, child advocacy services and the baliffs. I got a note passed on to me from a local teacher who said

I feel awful today as I hear from children I teach that their their families will be shifting out of Wanganui because of the cutbacks and the gutting of the local DOC office.which once served the region from Taranaki to the Manawatu and over the Ruahines. Going are the scientists, an engineer, cartographers and other skilled workers whose children have been really special to teach.

This is one aspect of the abandoning of provinicial New Zealand, the breakdown of communities. Another is the loss of health services in places like Temuka and Rangiora. John Pagani has written a good blog on another aspect of it. The absence of any real focused regional development from this government that will give people a sense that there are jobs and a future for them and their town. I think we owe these towns that have been the backbone of our country some support and some hope.


National’s nanny state anti-camping Bill

Posted by Phil Twyford on July 7th, 2011

The great Kiwi road trip could be at risk. A bunch of friends hit the road Friday night for a weekend of surfing. In the early hours they reach the beach and sleep in the van so they can get a few hours sleep before hitting the water at sunrise. Under the Government’s anti-Freedom Camping Bill they could be up for an instant $150.   (For surfing you can also read fishing, tramping, hunting…)

The Bill is an attempt to deal with the problem of littering and human waste left by the large number of campervans in some of the country’s most scenic spots.  It makes it easier for Councils to declare areas off-limits to freedom camping, and gives them an enforcement regime that includes instant fines for both littering, and camping in the wrong areas.

Let’s be clear: there is a problem here. Noone likes to see toilet waste on the roadside in our scenic spots. But according to submitters it is mostly caused by international visitors travelling in campervans without self-contained toilet facilities.

Our objection is that the Bill is a sledgehammer to crack a walnut.  It gives DoC and Councils the tools to effectively outlaw freedom camping by declaring large areas out of bounds for freedom campers. Both DoC and Councils can levy instant fines on offenders.  Now DoC doesn’t have a record of predatory enforcement regimes for the purposes of income generation, but you can’t say the same thing about some Councils.

It amazes me that other more targeted approaches haven’t been tried first. Why not bring in instant fines for littering and waste dumping (and not freedom camping), have the option of levying those fines on vehicles (as is done with traffic fines) and then make it mandatory for rental companies to recover the fine from the client’s credit card.

Why not phase out campervans that don’t have self-contained toilet facilities?  Maybe as a country that encourages higher and higher numbers of tourists we should invest a bit more in visitor infrastructure like toilets, rubbish bins, and waste disposal facilities for campervans?

From an email just in:

Thanks for your common sense stand on freedom camping, I’m a kiwi – currently overseas.As a surfer being able to enjoy New Zealand, crashing where there are waves is worth more to me than any sum of money.This bill represents a destruction of what I value most about New Zealand, and NZder’s tradition of camping next to lakes, the sea, enjoying what we ALL have as kiwis.

P.S. I should add that we voted for the Bill at first reading, recognising there is a problem and we thought the Bill deserved some select committee scrutiny. Having read and heard the submissions, we now think it is a dog.


Tell the Government: Don’t Cut Our Future!

Posted by Trevor Mallard on April 27th, 2011

Flyer

t Cut Our Future


Nobody Likes a Tory

Posted by Darien Fenton on January 1st, 2011

The website – Nobody Likes a Tory -  has been providing amusement (and solace) to around 60,000 supporters on Facebook, including many NZers.

It’s unrelentingly anti-Tory – we’re talking the UK kind here, but didn’t John Key visit David Cameron to find out how to be an unscarey Tory? (And while you’re reading this, note the recommendation for the Penguin’s blog from the UK conservatives).

John Key said at the time :

I think there are a reasonable number of similarities – we are both centrist in our thinking, both ambitious for our respective countries to make a change and to deliver on the promise that our respective countries have.”

Oh yeah?  I wonder how much John Key wants to compare himself to Cameron these days.

Have a good laugh at this – the Common People, and someone, please point me to a John Key/NZ version – because while JK didn’t go to Eton, he did grow up in a State House and that makes all the difference – or so he tells us constantly.


Priorities

Posted by Damien O'Connor on November 10th, 2010

The outbreak of Psa is a grim reminder how exposed we are as an economy to the effects of biological attack by unwanted organisms. Why then, would a party that claims to represent farmers reduce the border protection efforts to help pay for tax cuts.

The farmers and orchardists at risk from this ridiculous stance should reconsider their loyalty to a party that has deserted their needs. I have been contacted by people working in the system who say this is just the beginning of incursions that will occur because they can’t do their job properly.

Money and resources have been shifted internally to set up Smartgate and smoother passenger processing at our airports. Delays coming into this country are rarely long compared to the US process or the chaos at some larger international airports.

We should never compromise our biosecurity for convenience. The US dont do it for their security, why should we?? I wonder if Hilary passed that wisdom on to John or was he too starstruck to hear?


Silly idea number 5 – what do you think ?

Posted by Pete Hodgson on August 16th, 2010

Decide that the New Zealand economy needs a “step change” and that mining on the conservation estate is the way to achieve it.  Ignore the “sustainable” part of the sustainable economic development.  (How many times can you mine gold?)

Blame Lucy Lawless and Robyn Malcolm for being emotional, then note that 30,000 others begged to differ by marching down Queen Street, Auckland with them.

Then argue internally.  Then stage a complete U-turn, claiming it wasn’t really a U-turn at all.

I think this idea is :-

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

In support of Gerry (kind of)

Posted by Grant Robertson on July 20th, 2010

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.


Anti-whaling protest at Parliament

Posted by Chris Carter on June 2nd, 2010

A staunch group of conservation activists came to Parliament today to present their petition opposing any moves to restart commercial whaling.

More than 50,000 Kiwis signed the petition in only a month and a half!

Petition presentation at Parliament, 2 June 2010

Thanks for WSPA, Greenpeace, Project Jonah, Forest and Bird, and the Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society for keeping pressure on the National-Act Government over this important issue. We must not let John Key allow commercial whaling.

It’s a shame that Foreign Minister Murray McCully didn’t have the courtesy to meet the environmentalists or have the guts to collect the petition in person.

Petition presentation at Parliament, 2 June 2010


Ours poster

Posted by Trevor Mallard on May 23rd, 2010

ours-not-mine

(Hat-tip: http://blog.endemicworld.com/2010/05/ours-not-mine)


McCully slams Key’s whaling plan

Posted by Trevor Mallard on April 24th, 2010

Remember John Key’s secret plan to stop Japan’s whaling by allowing them to catch whales.

His plan was promoted in and adopted by an IWC  committee chaired by his representative Geoff Palmer.

The outrage was heard around the world.

McCully has finally seen which way the wind is blowing and has slammed Key’s plan.


The chat around the campfire

Posted by Clare Curran on April 7th, 2010

100_0099

100_0094

100_0104

Over Easter I went tramping. Just a short sojourn as I didn’t have a lot of time (and was a bit worried about some under-used bodyparts).

Nelson Lakes National Park. My first time. Have done a lot in the Nelson region, but never the Lakes.

Unprovoked discussion in the huts at night about mining. Widespread dismay about the government plans to mine in our conservation estate. Even the overseas tourists had heard about it. Lots of shaking of heads.

Of course you’d expect that people who go tramping would not approve of mining our national parks. But lots of people go tramping. Lots of people are related to people who go tramping.

And lots of tourists go tramping. And they go home and talk about their experiences. It’s that old watercooler thing…

The government should beware. As I imagine it already is.

PS: Not happy about the silent beech forests. Where are those birds? And also not happy about the wasps. Other than that it was magic. And my bodyparts seemed to cope.

PPS: Note That I was in the bush as a proud supporter of South Dunedin (and the whole of the Dunedin Sth electorate). And had the t-shirt to prove it!


Australia’s Environment Minister on Key’s whaling plans

Posted by Chris Carter on April 2nd, 2010

Australia’s Environment Minister, Peter Garrett, talking about John Key’s grand initative to end the global moratorium on commercial whaling:

“I am alarmed and very concerned that NZ would support a proposal that is flawed and represents a huge compromise to pro-whaling nations….Australia cannot support the compromise package now being discussed in the IWC.”

Labour doesn’t support Key’s plans for whaling either. Click here for more.


Key’s whaling plans confirmed

Posted by Chris Carter on April 1st, 2010

Australian media have confirmed that John Key’s National Party Government is trying to lift the international moratorium against whaling.

Meanwhile the Australian Government have said again that they reject the notion that killing some whales will save others.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/04/01/2862436.htm

The Japanese whale slaughter industry will be delighted by the confirmation of John Key’s plans.


A whale of a diplomatic mess

Posted by Chris Carter on March 30th, 2010

The Prime Minister’s habit of announcing policy off the cuff has seen some New Zealand diplomats start some not-entirely-diplomatic whispers.

The scuttlebutt inside both MFAT and DOC has been that John Key has now doubly-humiliated his officials with his muddled proposal to restart commercial whaling.

To recap: In January the Prime Minister was looking forward to a visit from the US Secretary of State. He blithely announced a grand new initiative to stop Japanese whaling in the Southern Ocean – the details of which he’d fully reveal only once the Secretary was on the ground and our Press Gallery were paying maximum attention.

Concerned that the PM was demonstrating no real understanding of the polarised politics of whaling, officials rushed to ask Key what his proposal was. After a bit of too-ing and fro-ing the policy, apparently, Mr Key struck on was legalising limited commercial whaling. Essentially killing the endangered whales as a sop to the Japanese whaling industry might paradoxically save the whales.

Lo and behold our representative to the International Whaling Commission, Sir Geoffrey Palmer, was dispatched to Florida to make Key’s vision a reality. I can only imagine how Sir Geoffrey must have felt; a long-time champion of whale conservation, respected Chair of the IWC, and former Labour Prime Minister to boot, he now had the unenviable task of selling a pro-whaling message on behalf of Key’s National Government!

I found out about the inside story almost immediately. Our diplomats knew they were breaking basic principles of diplomacy (and they knew their negotiating partners knew it too); the NZ side was conceding to the vested commercial interests of Japan’s whaling industry without any concrete promise of reciprocal concessions whatsoever. The many Conservation NGO organisations with branches in New Zealand phoned me from Florida as the farce was unfolding.

(more…)


Know everything, value nothing

Posted by Raymond Huo on March 25th, 2010

I have had many outraged constituents contact me over National’s plan to mine protected parts of our conservation estate, but one in particular stood out.

This open letter to Hon Gerry Brownlee from an East Auckland-based Green Party supporter was just one I have decided to share with Red Alert readers:

Mr Brownlee,

I heard you on the radio talking to Larry Williams two days ago about mining. I don’t want you to mine our country, I think that you underestimating the true value of these areas and it would be a crime to tear them apart. Stop letting your driving force be money, and you need to come up with some better arguments to justify this destructive activity.

In the interview you told Larry that all the people that don’t want mining to take place in New Zealand will own phones, computers, cars and a number of other commodities that require mining to take place to have. You were implying that they were all a bunch of hypocrites. Come on Gerry, that is the weakest argument I have heard. You embarrassed yourself, you had my attention until then. Having read your profile I found it was very interesting that you are a strong advocate for sport, I know it is a cheap shot, but tit for tat, you need to get outdoors more buddy.

Don’t be that man that knows the price of everything but values nothing! It’s not what New Zealand is about.

Name and address withheld


Mining: Reputational Damage

Posted by Grant Robertson on March 24th, 2010

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.


The economic value of keeping our Conservation Estate protected

Posted by Chris Carter on March 23rd, 2010

The Conservation Estate – 33% of New Zealand’s land area, owned by all Kiwis and managed by the Department of Conservation (DOC) on our behalf – is well recognised as important for biodiversity and landscape protection.

What is less well known is its economic value to our economy.

When I served as Conservation Minister (2002 – 2007) I commissioned a series of economic impact studies to look at how the DOC estate contributes to regional economic development. click here [PDF link] to read the study report.

This material is particularly relevant to the debate around mining in Conservation areas and the National-Act Government’s proposed changes to those regulations.