Greenpeace climate activists protested oil exploration yesterday:
Warrior support vessel as it arrives in port
Press release – January 31, 2018
Wednesday, 31 January:Greenpeace activists have boarded the support vessel of the world’s largest seismic blasting ship this morning,and locked themselves to it.
The Mermaid Searcher is in the Port of Taranaki to collect resupplies for the Amazon Warrior, a Schlumberger-owned 125-metre long ship, which is here on behalf of Austrian oil giant, OMV.
Greenpeace climate campaigner, Amanda Larsson, says the Amazon Warrior is blasting thousands of square kilometres of the New Zealand seabed in search of oil and gas that are fuelling climate change. The area is also a blue whale habitat and the whale’s only known feeding ground in New Zealand.
Full press release here.
___________________________________________________________________________
Second press release from greenpeace.org:
Press release – January 31, 2018
3-4 minutes
The controversial 2013 Amendment to the Crown Minerals Act makes it an offence to interfere with oil exploration ships at sea, and was passed under the National Government without public consultation or a Bill of Rights Act review. It was widely criticised by academics, Labour MPs, and activists alike, and seen as an attempt to stifle peaceful environmental protest against the oil industry.
Greenpeace climate campaigner, Amanda Larsson, calls the move “outrageous”.
“This is the oil branch of the Government threatening to use the draconian anti-protest laws passed by the last National Government to stop peaceful protest against oil exploration,” she says.
“It’s outrageous that under the new Labour-led Government, which has committed to bold climate leadership, the oil ministry would consider punishing climate activists using this anti-democratic law.”
“It was bad enough that the previous National Government used these laws against climate activists, but the supposedly climate-friendly new Labour Government shouldn’t be threatening climate activists with $50,000 fines and 12 months in jail for protesting the oil industry.”‘
At the time it was passed in 2013, Labour and the Greens strongly opposed the law. Many prominent New Zealanders condemned the amendment, including Dame Anne Salmond and former Labour Prime Minister Rt. Hon. Geoffrey Palmer QC, and other lawyers including the late Sir Peter Williams QC (1).
“With their commitment to climate action, the new Labour Government need to act now to reign in the Ministry of Oil, and more importantly, stop offshore exploration and drilling to fulfill our obligations to tackle climate change. We can’t afford to burn most of the known fossil fuel reserves if we are to avoid catastrophic climate change – searching for more makes no sense,” says Larsson.
“As well as stopping offshore oil exploration, the Ardern Government should repeal the Anadarko Amendment and protect the right to peacefully protest in a democratic society.
“These activists have put their bodies on the line to protect our future and our children’s future. If we are serious about tackling climate change, we need to urgently end oil exploration and stop pandering to the oil industry.”
In April last year, Greenpeace activists, including Executive Director Dr Russel Norman, swam in front of the Amazon Warrior, 60 nautical miles off the Wairarapa coast, stopping it from seismic blasting for the day.
The activists and Greenpeace were charged for the first time in New Zealand history by MBIE under the Anadarko Amendment. They face a year in jail and up to $300,000 in collective fines. They have pleaded Not Guilty and will face trial in April.
______________________________________________________________________________________________
Related Posts
Since the offence took place aboard a foreign vessel does that mean the attorney general has given consent to bring proceedings? (101B (9) of the act): http://legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1991/0070/latest/DLM5237809.html?search=ts_act%40bill%40regulation%40deemedreg_crown+minerals+act_resel_25_a&p=1
While agreeing with the sentiment there are likely contractural issues with cancelling oil/gas exploration….I assume OMV have paid for the exploration rights and to cancel will carry penalties, along with the implications of the signals it sends….those costs would need to weighed against the likelyhood of any successfully oil/gas development.
and also weighed against the damage the oil exploration is doing (whales etc), and might do (are they permitted to drill?).
that as well..as to drilling i suspect so provided they meet certain preconditions
Im unsure whether the exploration permits have time limit and what it might be i dont know but the course of action may be to simply let them expire and not renew if so.
12 years apparently…some only just issued
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO1712/S00239/new-permit-issued-for-oil-and-gas-exploration-must-be-last.htm
Petroleum exploration permits
Exploration permits grant the holder the right to identify petroleum deposits and evaluate the feasibility of mining any discoveries. Allowed activities include geological and geophysical surveying, exploration and appraisal drilling, and testing of petroleum discoveries.
Petroleum exploration permits are only allocated through then annual Petroleum Block Offer. The estate is divided into a graticular grid where the size limits are defined by NZP&M in the Block Offer’s Invitation for Bids.
An exploration permit is awarded to enable research into where commercially recoverable reserves of oil and gas may be. Exploration activities can include sampling, aeromagnetic surveys, geological studies, compiling reports and seismic surveys and well drilling.
Permits are issued for up to 15 years, depending on the permit location. It is possible to get an extension of up to four years for appraisal purposes – a second four-year extension is also possible.
Permits are exclusive, and carry subsequent rights to apply for a mining permit.
Once operators are granted a permit they must arrange consents before they proceed with any exploration activity.
For an overview of the consents required read our guide to the Government management of petroleum
https://www.nzpam.govt.nz/permits/petroleum/types/
to clarify…when I said weigh against successful oil/gas development I meant the odds are unlikely we will see further development given the likely future for certainly oil but even gas (given our distance from major markets) and the relatively unsuccessful nature of previous exploration
This is probably an act of piracy and should be treated as such.
These “activists” can #EndOil by staying at home and not using it
Rubbish.
Pirates mean to plunder the vessel, or possibly kill or kidnap the crew and make off with the vessel itself.
Protestors are more akin to stowaways – persons boarding without the owner’s consent, but inoffensive except for non-violent protest actions.
http://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/Facilitation/Stowaways/Documents/Resolution%2011(37)_Revised%20guidelines%20on%20the%20prevention%20of%20access%20by%20stowaways%20and%20the%20allocation%20of%20responsibilities.pdf
They are endangering lives, including their own, by boarding a vessel illegally.
I could be a “stowaway” by hanging onto the underside of a truck, but I wouldn’t recommend it.
Needless to say, these SJWs will use oil to take their vessel back to port, then to drive home, and probably fly in a plane somewhere.
It is empty vacuous posturing by stupid gullible people who have no value to society
Piracy has a specific meaning, which you are misusing for rhetorical purposes.
You may be careless of such distinctions but the law cannot be.
“Endangering lives” is also a pretty ambitious claim. Can you validate it in respect of maritime protests, or are you just running your mouth?
The oil and gas industry has very high health and safety standards. It is, for example, necessary to get a “hot work” permit from the Offshore Installation Manager, to use a pocket calculator on an oil rig.
Illegally boarding a vessel would blow away all the H&S regulations.
I would like to see Greenpeace being fined a very large amount of money for this operation
They boarded a supply vessel not an oil rig or even the oil exploration ship. And it’s in port. Try reading the post before commenting.
Still illegal and still dangerous
But nothing like piracy
Yes, we’ve seen perverse use of H&S rules before – by folk trying to stall investigation of the Pike River deaths for example. Unless the concern is genuinely to do with health and safety, it deserves nothing but contempt, and erodes the support for genuine H&S measures.
FYI https://www.lawsociety.org.nz/news-and-communications/news/maritime-terrorism-legislation-should-allow-for-legitimate-peaceful-protest
What are you doing to prevent climate change Andy?
Andy’s a climate numpty.
I suspected as much. Just as long as he doesn’t try running that shite under posts I put up 🙂
They are endangering lives, including their own, by seeking to extract and burn more fossil fuels
FIFY.
Those of us who understand Physics know that such actions constitute an existential threat. In that sense, Greenpeace are acting in self-defence.
Any vessel in NZ waters is subject, surely, Labour Government, to the right of Kiwi protestors to protest, when concerned about its activities regarding the environment?
National tried to use the excuse of protestor safety for its legislation to prosecute. The protestors are on a boat. It is not sinking.
We already know that the car carrying paula bennet and driver chester burrows managed to ram into a TPP protestor on land recently and they got away without liability while their own national party was in government . Water has little to do with safety for protestors.
Safety has more to do with respect for dissent by government and business on land or sea.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11852116
Protest in NZ whether on land or sea is a human right. I expect the Labour Government to respect that and legislate to make it so. Loss of protest rights leads to loss of hope; we’ve only just gained hope back again.
It isn’t a human right to board a vessel without permission. It is piracy, which is a crime
I don’t think that they’ve killed any one or looted anything. And they’re probably not going round saying Arrgh, me hearties and wearing parrots on their shoulders.
Rofl.
Warned (by the police) that they may be charged under the Anadarko Amendment…by the Ministry of Oil. So not the police. Hmm. So how’s that work? Anyone?
All good for spin mind. 🙂
My understanding is that they were warned by the police when they turned up to arrest them.
From Greenpeace’s press release:
Russel Norman, Sara May Howell and Gavin Mulvay will be in court in April. I hope this will give the courts a chance to throw the legislation out as a breach of the BoRA.
Yeah, I’m taking it from a Greenpeace tweet that’s in the post. My point is that it’s the police who lay charges. No-one else. Others can only request that charges be laid – as I understand such things.
If the Ministry for Oil is somehow charging them, then I’m asking how that works.
From the act:
Looks like a massive abuse of executive power if you ask me.
Bloody hell. Thanks for that.
Without checking, I was wondering whether the Mermaid Searcher (aka Mermaid McFossilFuelFace) was actually specified as a “non-interference zone”.
So I checked (pdf), and ‘she’ isn’t mentioned by name.
That said, I’d much rather this piece of executive over-reach was smashed in the Supreme Court and then repealed with extreme prejudice by the House, than fall over on a technicality.
I think (from reading the legislation) that the MBIE officials are “enforcement officers” under the act. They’re required to “cause the person [ie: the protesters] to be delivered into the custody of a constable as soon as practicable.”
This is a “summary offence” so will be a judge-only trial.
As Labour and the Greens are now the Government (with that nice Mr. Peters) we should expect to see this piece of legislation binned under urgency then.
At least no one stole Russel Normans flag this time 🙂
I’ve been trying to figure out whether NZF opposed the amendment in the House. If not, the government won’t have the numbers. That said, the CEO could always simply ‘forget’ to appoint any enforcement officers.
I suspect NZF would be the sticking point.
The oil and gas industry is big in the regions.
I suspect so too, but you never know 😈
Ok, so Brendan Horan moved that the Bill be sent to select committee on 6th April 2013 (in the context of National trying to force it through under urgency).
National, Act, UF and the Māori Party voted “no”. The Greens, Labour and NZF voted ‘yes’.
So that looks like NZF were opposed, maybe.
When is New Zealand going to wake up?
Whilst this happens, our country is being battered by floods, cyclones, tidal surges, droughts, heatwaves….
Join.
The.
Dots.
Before it is too late.
In 1939 a war economy was established to win World War 2.
People made sacrifices.
There was rationing.
People worked together.
Across party lines.
For their children.
And their grandchildren.
Why can’t we follow their example?
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens.
Well, at first, Stalin and Hitler were mates, so that’s an example of people working together across party lines. The “Liberals” (we tar all “centrists” with the same brush, eh) put aside their differences to defeat a common enemy.
But the metaphor is faulty. The fascists wanted to do their thing, Stalin wanted to get approval from his mummy, or whatever, but we’re all doing this existential threat (of AGW) together, and we didn’t mean it in the first place.
How can we defeat stupidity?
I have reposted on Daily Review.