web analytics

Generation Zero – Zero Carbon Act

Written By: - Date published: 1:11 pm, July 1st, 2016 - 151 comments
Categories: activism, climate change, global warming, sustainability - Tags: , , ,

Yesterday Generation Zero released their proposal for a Zero Carbon Act:

zero-carbon-actThe climate crisis is growing more urgent by the day. To realise the goal of keeping global warming to well below 2°C, as agreed by the whole world in Paris last December, we need to reduce carbon pollution close to zero by 2050. But here in New Zealand our carbon emissions are still growing.

Since Generation Zero started five years ago, we’ve been pushing for action towards a zero carbon New Zealand. But in those five years, our government has done nothing to get us on track to meet this goal. They’ve set meaningless emissions targets and have no plan to meet them.

The problem is – our politicians are focused on the election cycle and ignoring critical long term problems. It’s our job as citizens to push our politicians to do what is necessary and hold them to account.

We need a new law to put New Zealand on track to zero carbon by 2050: a Zero Carbon Act.

We’re not going to wait around for our politicians to do the right thing any longer; we’re going to draft a bill ourselves with help from experts and collaborators, and work to get all political parties to support it and pass it through Parliament.

We know this is possible. The UK’s Climate Change Act was passed in 2008 with cross-party support after a huge public groundswell and it has been instrumental in reducing their greenhouse gas emissions.

Check out the page for more information and to donate or volunteer. Thank you, Generation Zero!

151 comments on “Generation Zero – Zero Carbon Act”

  1. Rosie 1

    Go you good things!!! What a brilliant idea. Let’s stop F – ing around and just do it ourselves! Something we can ALL get behind 😀

  2. Colonial Viper 2

    Eventual 3 deg C warming will be guaranteed by 2030 if we don’t change course immediately. Reducing GHG emissions to zero by 2050 will do nothing unless these massive reductions occur in the next few years.

    • weka 2.1

      If you have a better plan CV, please post it. By plan I don’t mean “we should do x”. I mean an actual plan with the how.

      • Colonial Viper 2.1.1

        Of course I have a better plan. Don’t support steps which risk 4 deg C warming. Burning massive amounts of fossil fuels every year until 2050, will guarantee considerable additional warming through the 2080s and 2090s and beyond.

        • te reo putake 2.1.1.1

          What do we do instead?

          • Colonial Viper 2.1.1.1.1

            move the date from 2050 to 2030. Discount any possibility of negative carbon technologies.

            • te reo putake 2.1.1.1.1.1

              OK. Do you have a plan showing how this can be achieved?

              • Colonial Viper

                Sure. Move ahead with Gen Zero’s plan.

                • OK. I thought you had ideas beyond those in the post. No worries.

                  • Colonial Viper

                    Ask them. it’s their plan.

                    • Pat

                      what happened to yours from a few weeks ago?

                    • Colonial Viper

                      Still sitting around somewhere…tbh a 2050 date is not credible. Its the date you set so that no one in authority today has to lift a finger before they retire.

                      We will be around 480ppm CO2 by 2050.

                    • Colonial Viper

                      central has to be a carbon fee on fossil fuels of say 50c/Kg of CO2, increasing 20c every year until 2050.

                    • Bill

                      $500 per tonne (that’s your 50c per kg, yes?) will do nothing. the studies have been done. (Anderson and Bowes Larkin again). They worked through the scenario of an approximate $500 per tonne on aviation fuel (about 6x any currently proposed level of carbon tax and well over 10x the current price of carbon post Paris) and for that tax to land immediately.

                      The cost of flights would go up by about 25% per ticket. In other words, most people who fly would just fly on.

                      Meanwhile, take the 50c per liter and bang it on at the petrol pump for haulage companies and commuters to pick up, and prices in the shops go through the roof while only poorer people are pushed off the roads.

                    • Bill

                      @ Pat. Maybe you’re confusing my undertaking to put up some posts with CV? If that’s the case, they’re in the pipeline. Know how hard it is to take ‘a world’ of info and compress into a meaningful post given word constraints?

                    • Pat

                      @Bill
                      I remember your post as well (and look forward to both) but am referring to the following….

                      “I am preparing a post about a thought experiment that I would like Standardistas to consider over the next few days.

                      This isn’t that post. This is the warm up.”

                      We’re going to burn it all, until we burn it down.

                    • Bill

                      A-ha! I’d forgotten about that.

                    • Colonial Viper

                      Bill:

                      http://citizensclimatelobby.org/carbon-fee-and-dividend/

                      James Hansen believes that an international carbon fee and dividend implemented by the top few economies in the world would be a major step ahead.

                    • Bill

                      Remember how the NZ government thought that punitive taxes on tobacco would be really good central tool to help achieve a “smoke-free” NZ by 2025?

                      That, like the necessary one for carbon emissions, was a 15 year year plan. It was backed by huge public health programmes . It was also backed by fairly intrusive law changes. And most people bought into it as a damned fine idea.

                      Things to consider.

                      Tobacco use was already on the wane before 2010.
                      Tobacco was already an expensive product.
                      Cheap alternative delivery systems for nicotine were and are available (vapourisers)

                      And NZ will not be smoke free by 2025 – the whole thing is stalling.

                      I’ll read the Hanson piece, but it’s been fairly well documented and demonstrated that taxes and whatever other price mechanisms form the land of the haruspices, only ever have marginal effects – and the carbon reductions we need are not marginal.

                    • Colonial Viper

                      Bill,

                      the carbon fee is not supposed to simply change consumer purchasing patterns like a cigarette tax. It is also supposed to sway entire corporate and central/local government business cases.

                      If the true societal cost of fossil fuels was actually priced in, the entire economy would start transitioning away from it ASAP.

                      Definitely not saying that it would be the only tool in the toolbox though.

                • Dale

                  So CV let’s stop ALL farming,driving cars,any burning of anything,all industry of any kind.
                  We will still burn.
                  The only way out is to wipe out the entire northern hemisphere. Easy as!

                  • Colonial Viper

                    We actually have to spend a huge amount of money and effort to develop climate change adaptation infrastructure.

                    By the way, are you under 50? If so, you will likely see some of the worst effects of climate change come to fruition.

              • Bill

                Do you even appreciate what ‘discounting any possibility of negative carbon technologies’ means trp?

                There is no “plan” to show how something is omitted from deliberations – it’s omitted.

                • Um, that actually would be a plan, Bill. Plans usually include both ins and outs. I was kind of keen for a moment to see if there was some substance to what CV was saying, but as usual, there wasn’t, so I gave up.

      • Bill 2.1.2

        Christ! I know people don’t like it when it ain’t all roses, but…

        Okay. 2050 is way too late. 2050 for the entire world being at zero (from energy) works for an outside chance of dipping below +2 degrees. But for that to have any chance, NZ along with other Annex 1 countries would have to hit zero (from energy) by about 2030.

        Them’s the facts as best as they can be discerned by those within the science community that aren’t hanging on the coat tails of the wee guy with the pointy hat and the magic up his sleeves.

        NZ can get to zero by 2030. And yes, I’ll put the post up. But the type of approach required simply won’t be adopted by any party in the NZ parliament. They all want to use various pricing mechanisms to bring down emissions and pricing mechanisms absolutely will not deliver the reductions that are needed.

  3. weka 3

    From the link,

    The climate crisis is growing more urgent by the day. To realise the goal of keeping global warming to well below 2°C, as agreed by the whole world in Paris last December, we need to reduce carbon pollution close to zero by 2050. But here in New Zealand our carbon emissions are still growing.

    For the people that think those figures are not enough or that their plan won’t work, here’s a suggestion. What Generation Zero are doing is a call to action. We need this urgently. So don’t slam them for not being radical enough, or naysay them. Instead put up some constructive commentary/critique about the figures and offer support as well.

    Sitting on the internet and slamming the people who are actually doing something about CC is not going to effect change. Responding with support and affirming actions, while taking it further (i.e. add to what is being done) will build momentum for change.

    • Colonial Viper 3.1

      The suggestion is simple: the date 2050 should be moved forward to 2030.

      • Heather Grimwood 3.1.1

        Congratulations on your ‘working together’ rationale. Labour already has that intention with the addition of specialists co-opted from outside Parliament, but can’t activate until elected.
        As a great-gran of 5 2/3, and for all children, I wish you every success, and will be 200% behind you.

        • Colonial Viper 3.1.1.1

          Hi Heather, just note that Labour refuses to swear off coal mining and oil drilling.

      • Rosie 3.1.2

        Hi CV. Maybe raise it with them. After all, they do say

        “we’re going to draft a bill ourselves with help from experts and collaborators, and work to get all political parties to support it and pass it through Parliament.”

        Seriously. I’m sure they welcome all well considered suggestions. The public need to get behind this group.

        • Colonial Viper 3.1.2.1

          As Bill has figured out, Gen Zero have made some severe mistakes in their analysis and IMO are totally unsalvageable.

    • Rosie 3.2

      Gen zero’s plan could act as a spring board for all sorts of community groups to band together under Gen Zero’s banner – it’s not just central government we need to push, it’s local government too. Some regions may be ahead of others in CC mitigation but others may be well behind (looking at you WCC). I think it’s a positive move of Gen Zero, they may just turn out to be great influencers.

      This is a brilliant opportunity for people led change. Bottom up power! Like the British Labour members not tolerating their party mucking around with Corbyn, we can reclaim our power too.

      • Bill 3.2.1

        Why would you want people to gather under a banner that’s peddling falsehoods and offering nothing but false hope?

        You understand where I’m coming from, yes? I want people to act. I want shit done. But is it too much to ask that what we do or what we demand is grounded in reality?

        God help us if we replace government inaction with bullshit that’s turning a blind eye to reality.

        • Rosie 3.2.1.1

          Geez I give up Bill. Take it up with them. I’m not a climate scientist. I just see that planet is on fucking fire every where I look, or in drought, flood, tornado, snow storm or sea swell storm, on a level never seen before, and that the seasons I knew so well that guided my life have gone. That I’ve got freaking calendula’s coming up in June that are flowering. That people, animals, plant species and oceans are dying purely from human induced climate chaos.

          I just see a burning urgency for people to take over a small number of other people who hold the power.

          I get that you want a group to get the basics right, but you did see that they plan the get “experts” on board? So what’s the quibble? Go talk to them. They haven’t even started yet with their “people’s bill”. It will take time to get feedback, and talk, listen and consolidate.

          Let’s start somewhere. You know it could be too late if we don’t act together. That wasn’t meant to come out so corny sounding but I’m just sick of us, people, NZer’s, not going anywhere. Give them a chance to get it together.

          • Bill 3.2.1.1.1

            Don’t give up – no reason to. Just maybe when the snake- oil salespeople offer a panacea, reject it. That’s got nothing to do with climate science and everything to do with common sense.

            I know they’re intending to get ‘experts’ on board. I posted on this before quite a while back. (Again, Kevin Anderson runs through the specifics in the reports and the scientists involved – Hanson, Stern and other recognisable names – the vid below.) Almost all climate change experts (the scientists) ‘play the game’ and produce politically palatable reports that the policy experts within the field are happy with because they can then ‘sell’ them to the politicians who then….sit on their chuffs and say something will be done at some later date.

            If I get a response from Gen Zero, I’ll share it with you. Meanwhile, the presentation from Anderson…

          • Bill 3.2.1.1.2

            I should clarify that. The scientists in the field who study and collect data and what not, are doing what they should do. It’s the next step up, at the level where others compile the collected date into reports – that’s where the games unfold. And governments than base policy and inaction on those reports.

          • marty mars 3.2.1.1.3

            Good comment. Dosing something in the right direction is better than waiting for the big gamechanger, where all go, ‘shit now I understand’. We lead, we move in the best direction and keep doing our best. I have come to this conclusion after reading many comments on here. I’m pleased I can actually adjust my thinking – gives me hope lol

            • Colonial Viper 3.2.1.1.3.1

              Bailing out the Titanic with a tea cup is indeed “something in the right direction” but that’s about where it ends.

              It’s even more dangerous if this “plan” convinces people that they can burn fossil fuels as per usual this week, this month, this year, because we’ve got until 2050 to sort an answer.

              Basically, Gen Zero haven’t been serious in their assessment of the problem, so you shouldn’t be serious about their resulting solution.

              • Sure but your way is a dead end. They propose something and you shoot it down whilst offering no alternative. And you shoot it down because they haven’t quite got it right as far you think and they aren’t going far enough. Do you see the absurdity of that position.

                • Bill

                  Hmm. I think it’s already been said that the premise has to be zero (from energy) by 2030 and that negative emissions scenarios cannot be assumed.

                  As for land use, it isn’t possible to have zero emissions from land use, so an undertaking to cut emissions by as much as possible has to be the goal there.

                  Then they can compile a plan to take to government or whatever.

                  If the goal is going to be zero by 2050 on the assumption of negative emissions tech (and that is their goal and assumption) – then whatever plan they put in place will be inadequate from the perspective of 2 degrees.

                  From their site –

                  The evidence says we need to reduce global greenhouse gas emissions to net zero by around 2070 for a high chance of keeping global warming under 2°C…

                  Maybe…if a grenade blows up after 10 sec, you wouldn’t suggest someone count to 11 before lobbing it, would you? And you wouldn’t support anyone making that suggestion on the spurious grounds, that at least they’re moving in the direction by suggesting that the lobbing of the grenade is timed!

                  • I don’t disagree with your analysis and I say what then? What do we do if we know all that? We imo do the best we can with what we’ve got not because we don’t know the truth but because we do. Many different ways to do that including not sugar coating the reality but once again I get to, and what then?

                    • Bill

                      Okay. So the best we’ve got (in terms of this thread’s topic) is an org that is calling for inadequate action. What do we do about that? We attempt to impress on said org – given that they have profile and may attract people to their programme – that they really need to base their call and subsequent policy suggestion on the scientific reality – ie, on credible scientific analysis.

                      Hell. If any shaker within that org reads this thread and clicks any of those three vid links I’ve left in the comments, then it may begin a shift in their position.

                      But if they hang on to their current position, then (analogously) they’d be as well just dropping that grenade, sitting down and launching into a happy (short) rendition of Kumbaya

                    • Colonial Viper

                      “inadequate” is not the word for it. Self deceiving is closer.

                    • Right so you both have NOTHING – which is why no one listens – doomers lol

                    • Sorry -unnecessary bite in my comment.

                    • Bill

                      That wasn’t just unnecessary, but stupid and hypocritical.

                      What have Gen Zero got? A proposal to do something based on a premise that isn’t taking reality into account. But for some reason you seem happy to not question that…and slate me for refusing to clutch at the straws on offer.

                      When I write that they could be persuaded to adopt a platform based on reality, that’s not nothing.

                      When I post links to quality information so that people might better evaluate the proposals of others, that’s not nothing.

                      When I write posts that attempt to strip away the nonsense that many wrap around the the situation we’re in, that’s not nothing.

                      And when the post is submitted on how NZ’s entire transport sector can get to zero emissions by 2030 (I’ve been promising it for a week or two now), then although it will be roundly rejected in spite of the fact that it will absolutely work – that won’t be nothing.

                      And I’m going to be very interested in the reaction of all those on this thread who have advocated clutching at the straws thrown out by Gen Zero.

                    • I’m prepared to give gen’s idea some time. And evaluation is good. If they don’t adjust their proposal in line with your thinking, then what?

                    • Colonial Viper

                      Gen Zero’s proposals demonstrate that they are on totally the wrong track. Why would you give them any time at all. Their proposals guarantee 3 deg C warming and probably more. They need to go into the bin and started from scratch, not adjusted.

                    • Bill

                      If they don’t re-align their stance to take reality into account, then as much as they say they are doing something positive, and insofar as people may be tempted to get behind and push on the grounds that they’re doing something positive…

                      hmm.

                      From the perspective of avoiding a 2 degrees future…

                      Question – What is the difference between Gen Zero and whoever working off their currently proposed base lines and the Government working towards their base lines?

                      Answer – None

                      And so the next question is – if you’re supportive of Gen Zero, then are you supportive of the Government’s CC policies insofar as they also are doing something in a positive direction?

                      If not, why not?

                    • Colonial Viper

                      I am very interested to know how it is that these intelligent, educated, young people in Gen Zero have completely missed the boat when it comes to basic climate change facts, as a climate change activist group.

                    • Ok you think their proposal is not in the right direction because it lulls a false sense of, ‘it will help the situation’ when really at best it won’t and at worst it will take money, energy and resources from what could or should be done. Even though the likelihood of something that should be done is almost non existent at this time.

                    • Bill I don’t want the government to do less in regards to cc so I suppose that could mean to some that I support them.

                      Do i support our refugee quota – no. But I don’t want to see it lower and 100 is better than 10.

                      In both I want a lot lot more.

                    • Bill

                      More or less. It will crowd out the policy space. By the way, there are a number of effective actions that can be taken.

                      But what I wanted to say in reply here was something that just crossed my mind, and I was wondering whether it impacted on how people were seeing this Gen Zero thing.

                      If the issue was (say) sovereignty, then a proposal that stopped short of offering up sovereignty could be supported on the grounds that the matter could be re-visited at a later date. The same holds for anything amenable to incrementalism.

                      But the tackling of global warming (from a 2 degree perspective) doesn’t lend itself to that framework any more. We can’t ‘go half way’ and then reconsider our position at some later date. We either commit to decisive action, or forget it because it’s a cumulative problem. If we go down some ‘half way measure’ road, it’ll stack up over our heads and be beyond the reach of whatever actions we might think we want to take in the future.

                      We’ve got one shot. We’ve got about 15 years to get our (‘western’) emissions from energy down to zero and clatter the hell out of our land use emissions. And the best chance we have of avoiding +2 in that scenario, is only an outside chance.

                      I don’t like that Marty. But I’m fucked if I’m going to support something that will see our last chance slip away on the grounds it was ostensibly ‘aiming in the right direction’ and/or that it allowed people (maybe) to feel a bit good.

                    • Colonial Viper

                      The answer, whatever it is, needs to bring down OECD emissions drastically while allowing poor regions a bit more carbon headroom.

                      Everyone needs to converge on about 3 tonnes of CO2 emissions per year. Poor people need to come up to meet that. Rich people need to come down to meet that.

                      The righties are correct, essentially. NZ bringing down its emissions alone will do nothing. What we do has to help pave the way for the rest of the world to follow or it will be for nothing.

                    • Bill

                      Everyone needs to converge on 3 tonnes!?

                      Where the fuck you getting this shite from? Put aside population growth. Call it 7 billion people. At the moment, annual emissions are about 35 billion tonnes, or about 5 tonnes per person.

                      Current emissions are about 60% above what they were in the early 90s and in the early 90s we were aware that there was a fucking problem.

                      3×7 billion = 21 billion tonnes of CO2 per year.

                      So, what you’re claiming is that we need only reduce emissions by less than half ffs! … more or less back to 1990 levels.

                      (And here you were, giving the impression that you ‘got it’ and slagging off the illiteracy of Gen Zero. Priceless.)

                      Yes, poor people get headroom and their emissions increase in the short term while ours crash (that’s what we’ve signed up to) , and by 2050 or thereabouts, there can be no energy related emissions. Land use emissions must have been crashed as far as they can go, and whether through re-planting or whatever, that land-use emission total can be brought to amount to net zero.

                    • Pat

                      for review…

                    • Colonial Viper

                      So, what you’re claiming is that we need only reduce emissions by less than half ffs! … more or less back to 1990 levels.

                      Going back to 1990 levels of emissions globally (but with western countries effectively dropping to levels of emissions last seen in the 50s and 60s while third world countries come up to modern standards of living) is one which should be done in just a couple of years.

                      Also I agree that it is not the ultimate solution. Consider it an intermediate way point to be hit by 2020. Yes, emissions will need to go lower thereafter. But putting out 40% less CO2 per year immediately buys us an extra decade or two mitigation time to get near to zero emissions before we crash through 3 deg C.

                      IMO having NZers reduce their emissions by 2/3 and Americans by 4/5 in the next couple of years – as an intermediate goal – puts us on track for what you want to see.

                      Last point – NZ reducing emissions by itself does nothing. We need to be part of a scheme which forces every country to agree to this massive change to be accomplished right now, not in 30 years’ time.

                    • Not the ultimate solution? You seem to give yourself more leeway than the Gens. Which is all I’ve said since my first comment on this.

                    • Pat

                      70%in the next decade from wealthy (OECD….i.e NZ) in the next decade….AND the third world will not be able to catch up with western standard AND in NZ we already have approx 90% fossil free electricity generation so can’t greatly reduce there…which leaves transport and ag …and ag tech doesn’t exist yet , and may never …so that leaves us transport (and construction) and downsizing ag.

                      We are daily announcing increased tourism infrastructure enhancement, roading upgrades and construction projects…..all of which INCREASE CC outputs…..think about it.

                      The chances ANY of this will occur in NZ over the next decade are about nil

                    • Colonial Viper

                      Not the ultimate solution? You seem to give yourself more leeway than the Gens. Which is all I’ve said since my first comment on this.

                      You do know this proposal would require each NZer to cut their CO2 emissions by 2/3 within the next couple of years, right? That means leaving cars in the garage, decreasing herd head count by millions, and immediate shrinkage of the economy.

                      This is NOT leaving it up to our kids and grandkids in 2050.

                      Therefore I reject the idea that this proposal gives NZ more leeway on CO2 emissions than the Generation Zero proposal, theirs pushes radical action out for decades. This one requires radical action immediately.

                    • Pat

                      “You do know this proposal would require each NZer to cut their CO2 emissions by 2/3 within the next couple of years, right? That means leaving cars in the garage, decreasing herd head count by millions, and immediate shrinkage of the economy.

                      thats what it means…….we can do it now by choice or stop pretending we care whether our children and grandchildren live or die (not to mention the millions/billions already buggered)

                    • Colonial Viper

                      Leaving the hard work for future generations decades from now is not only lazy, it won’t work. Cumulative CO2 emissions is what counts, and drastically cutting emissions now is what will make the difference.

                    • Bill

                      Christ on a bike CV. Reducing every person’s emissions in NZ by 2/3rds (or whatever it was, the threads too long to navigate easily now) won’t really reduce NZs over-all emissions by 2/3rds and will crucify the poorest while leaving high emitters on the relative clear..

                      Parrot time’s here again. In a broad brush stroke sort of a way – Pareto’s rule, that has been found to hold for carbon emissions within and between countries in separate, independent studies by both Oxfam and Piketty/Chacer suggests that….

                      10% of people (roughly, the wealthiest) produce ~ 50% of emissions.
                      50% of people (roughly the poorest) produce ~ 10% of emissions.

                      Go work through the consequences of reducing all people’s emissions by 2/3rds given that reality.

                    • Pat

                      “The answer, whatever it is, needs to bring down OECD emissions drastically while allowing poor regions a bit more carbon headroom.

                      Everyone needs to converge on about 3 tonnes of CO2 emissions per year. Poor people need to come up to meet that. Rich people need to come down to meet that.

                      The righties are correct, essentially. NZ bringing down its emissions alone will do nothing. What we do has to help pave the way for the rest of the world to follow or it will be for nothing.”

                      and then…..

                      “Leaving the hard work for future generations decades from now is not only lazy, it won’t work. Cumulative CO2 emissions is what counts, and drastically cutting emissions now is what will make the difference.”

                      you see the dichotomy?

                    • Colonial Viper

                      Christ on a bike CV. Reducing every person’s emissions in NZ by 2/3rds (or whatever it was, the threads too long to navigate easily now) won’t really reduce NZs over-all emissions by 2/3rds and will crucify the poorest while leaving high emitters on the relative clear..

                      The plan is that everyone converges on to 3 tonnes CO2 equivalent in emissions by 2020 or before. Users of big cars, big houses, big air travel and foreign food products will be affected the most from today’s baseline living.

                      Poorer people who already emit sweet F.A. CO2 will hardly be affected at all.

                    • Colonial Viper

                      you see the dichotomy?

                      Yes. In essence, unless a NZ scheme to converge on 3 tonnes CO2 per capita is part of a wider plan to push the entire world to do the same, then its not going to do a thing to limit catastrophic climate change.

                    • Bill

                      @Pat

                      If emissions from energy in the west are at zero by about 2030, the idea isn’t that it will allow developing nations to replicate our lifestyle. In energy terms, life improvements plateau at about he level of energy consumption existent in (I think) the likes of Sri Lanka. I could have the country wrong, but the point is that after a certain point, energy consumption does nothing in terms of improving quality of life.

                      By 2050, the countries that have used the leeway afforded by the west killing it’s energy emissions to give citizens a reasonable quality of life, will have to have transitioned off of the fossil base they will have used to achieve that goal.

                      When or if the entire globe has zero emission energy supply built in, the world can go back to the stupid resource guzzling nonsense of today if it chooses. (And hit all the walls of resource depletion that will result)

                      And as I keep repeating, land use emission have to be clattered. They can never be zero, but a net zero may be achievable through planting or other capture ploys.

                    • Pat

                      @ Bill

                      “If emissions from energy in the west are at zero by about 2030, the idea isn’t that it will allow developing nations to replicate our lifestyle. In energy terms, life improvements plateau at about he level of energy consumption existent in (I think) the likes of Sri Lanka. I could have the country wrong, but the point is that after a certain point, energy consumption does nothing in terms of improving quality of life.’

                      two points….first, I never suggested developing nations replicate our energy use, indeed i stated they would not be able to. Secondly the reduction calculated by K.Anderson was 70% by OECD countries “in the next 10 to 15 years” (2030) not 100%.

                      “By 2050, the countries that have used the leeway afforded by the west killing it’s energy emissions to give citizens a reasonable quality of life, will have to have transitioned off of the fossil base they will have used to achieve that goal.”

                      All of the world will have to continue to net zero carbon post 2030, and yes the earlier reduction by OECD countries allows the developing world some scope to improve energy infrastructure.

                      “And as I keep repeating, land use emission have to be clattered. They can never be zero, but a net zero may be achievable through planting or other capture ploys.”

                      That is self evident and was never in dispute in so far as Im aware

                      “When or if the entire globe has zero emission energy supply built in, the world can go back to the stupid resource guzzling nonsense of today if it chooses. (And hit all the walls of resource depletion that will result)’

                      That would be a possibility……for those that remain, remembering Anderson qualified all this by stating it is a given many of the worlds poorer are condemned already regardless.

                    • Bill

                      @ Pat

                      Sorry. I took your “will not be able to catch up” as indicating that the idea was for developing nations to attempt to emulate us.

                      On our need to only reduce emissions by 70% by around 2030, I can only assume you mis-heard or some such. Kevin Anderson repeatedly states the necessity of ‘the west’ being zero by around 2030.

                      This from a piece he wrote back in 2012. Since then (post-Paris) he’s of the opinion that the numbers indicate a 50/50 chance of avoiding +2 is now gone (due to government undertakings given at Paris that will result in over ~+3 degrees not being reviewed until 2020) and he reckons we are down, at best, to a 1 in 3 chance. (The link at the bottom of this comment is to a talk he gave at the London School of Economics where he runs through that and other implications of Paris. Unfortunately, whoever filmed it didn’t film the slides, but the talk is still well worth the listen for more recent analysis)

                      Anyway. From Anderson in 2012

                      In summary, following our previous analysis, science tells us that for an outside chance of 2°C Annex 1 countries need to reach emission reductions of the order of about 40 per cent by 2015, 70 per cent by 2020, and over 90 per cent by 2030, with similar reductions globally with a lag of a decade or two – a disturbingly short time frame.

                      (pp35)
                      http://www.whatnext.org/resources/Publications/Volume-III/Single-articles/wnv3_andersson_144.pdf

                      And the LSE lecture…

                    • Pat

                      “On our need to only reduce emissions by 70% by around 2030, I can only assume you mis-heard or some such. Kevin Anderson repeatedly states the necessity of ‘the west’ being zero by around 2030.”

                      view from minute 49 on your own posted link…

                    • Bill

                      So I did. And he presents a slide outlining a need for a 70% reduction (there or thereabouts as he says) over the next decade (ten years) or so.

                      That’s not a departure from (effectively) 100% reduction by 2030.

                      If you read the ‘decade or so’ as meaning one or two decades, then sure, you can get to your conclusion. But that flies in the face of the consistent message he’s been giving in a number of presentations, lectures and articles over a fair period of time.

                      So either (just on the basis of that one slide) he’s had a complete change of mind because he got some simple arithmetic wrong all these years, or to be reading the slide as meaning ‘one or two decades’ is an incorrect interpretation of that slide… ie, an accurate interpretation is “ten years or so”, not “a decade or two”.

                    • Pat

                      “so I did. And he presents a slide outlining a need for a 70% reduction (there or thereabouts as he says) over the next decade (ten years) or so.

                      That’s not a departure from (effectively) 100% reduction by 2030.”

                      its a fundamental difference between something and nothing….and he was reasonably specific…..10-15 years….2030 is 14 years away.

                      In any case it is likely semantics given the near zero chance of either occurring…70 or 100% reduction by 2030.

                    • Bill

                      Bollocks to this Pat.

                      The text on the slide is – OECD countries need ~70% decarbonisation over the next decade or so.

                      His words that accompanied that part of the slide presentation are –

                      “We need a 70% reduction in our emissions over the next decade, or there or there-abouts. This is just guides for the policy makers”

                      An approximate 70% reduction (the little ~ symbol) ten years from now is between 2/3rds and 3/4ers of the way to zero on a 15 year trajectory.

                      Semantics is semantics and interpretations are interpretations, but making up words that you know aren’t true and ascribing them to someone has got nothing to do with either.

                    • Pat

                      and bollocks to that…and I quote (at 51 min)….”2040, we need to make sure everything is at a very low carbon on the energy level, and that means virtually zero….”

                      Semantics is semantics and interpretations are interpretations, but making up words that you know aren’t true and ascribing them to someone has got nothing to do with either.

                      last time I checked 2040 was some 24 years away, not ” ten years from now is between 2/3rds and 3/4ers of the way to zero on a 15 year trajectory.”

                    • Bill

                      2025 – 2040, not 2040.

                      Y’know Pat, none of the figures, neither carbon budgets or dates are absolutes that are set in stone…they have a certain amount of elasticity – not much. The rough guidelines are about 10 – 15% reductions in energy emissions for ‘the west’, (the longer we delay, the larger those per annum reductions need to be) aiming for zero around 2030, while China, India etc attempt to peak at or around 2025 and reduce emission by about 10% thereafter to get to zero by 2050.

                      That framework of action, according to IPCC carbon budgets, affords an outside chance on the 2 degree front – about a 1 in 3 or a 33% chance of not going over 2 degrees.

                    • Pat

                      Ah Bill, go and listen to the man again…..he clearly says at min 51 2040, the 2015 to 2040 is corrected and the quote I posted follows…..and would note that he states there is virtually NO chance of 2degC even if all the COP targets met, not a 1 in 3 chance.

                      I am well aware these are broad figures, but they are broad figures erring on the side of optimism, by his own admission.

                      As stated previously it is all likely moot as neither target has a chance of being met when you consider the infrastructure programs all countries are implementing g (including our own) which are contrary to low/no carbon as Anderson covers in his lecture.

                    • Bill

                      All he says is that the low or zero energy supply will take longer to lay in than 10 years. Coming on stream in significant volume around 2025 and in place by about 2040…

                      The COP ‘undertakings’ from Paris deliver about 3.5 degrees of warming. No-one, not me and certainly not Anderson, said those government commitments were going to give us a snow ball hell in chance of achieving anything like 2 degrees.

                      Have you missed the central premise of Anderson’s presentations? He doesn’t advocate that we cleave to government undertakings. He unequivocally states again and again that they are woefully inadequate, that government policy is often heading in the wrong direction (eg that there is no room left (time and carbon budget wise) to use gas as some kind of transition fuel, but the UK government is going ahead and building gas fired power stations regardless ) and that a radical change is needed in terms of how we view our situation and in terms of the necessary framework for actions we propose taking if we are to have any hope of success. (eg – chrematistic notions of economy that would use taxes or other financial mechanisms to bring about change need to be supplanted)

                      And he deliberately moves to the positive side of the science in terms of climate sensitivity because, as he says, it’s the only place that potentially positive outcomes can be discerned.

                    • Colonial Viper

                      By the way, over 2 deg C of warming, the likelihood that the Earth takes the steering wheel out of our hands increases very quickly.

                      Our cleverly calculated plans and carefully crafted spreadsheets will be meaningless at that stage.

                    • Pat

                      “Have you missed the central premise of Anderson’s presentations? He doesn’t advocate that we cleave to government undertakings. He unequivocally states again and again that they are woefully inadequate, that government policy is often heading in the wrong direction (eg that there is no room left (time and carbon budget wise) to use gas as some kind of transition fuel, but the UK government is going ahead and building gas fired power stations regardless ) and that a radical change is needed in terms of how we view our situation and in terms of the necessary framework for actions we propose taking if we are to have any hope of success. (eg – chrematistic notions of economy that would use taxes or other financial mechanisms to bring about change need to be supplanted)”

                      Have I missed the central premise?…..lmao…Bill Im not the one misinterpreting Anderson, yes he says the “wealthy” must start reducing consumption NOW….however he also is very clear about the role of governments….those who approve the infrastructure spend that is vital in any livable future.He is equally clear about the timeframe for carbon reduction by both the OECD andd the developing nations…..and to top it all off he is just as clear IF we do all the things he says, when he says we MIGHT IF WE ARE LUCKY avoid complete catastrophe, but that anything less assures it.

                      So I say again, it is moot….we will not reduce carbon emissions in the OECD (or NZ) by 70% (or 100% if it makes you happy) by 2030 (or 2025 or 2040) for the simple reason no one is planning to, not governments nor the vast majority of individuals, and certainly not the wealthy

                    • Bill

                      Reduction of emissions from the demand side have to be on a ‘roughly’ 15 year trajectory to zero – ie – about 2030

                      Zero energy supply can’t be a part of that, because it can’t be built fast enough and, optimistically, might be fully in place in the west around 2040.

                      Seems you got two different sides of the same coin confuddled in the date/time line claims of your above comments.

                    • Pat

                      have confuddled nothing…….his is a two pronged approach…..the reducing demand provides time for the low/zero carbon energy infrastructure……one without the other is of no use….if we reduce the demand now without changing the infrastructure we will not stay within the carbon budget and if we don’t reduce demand now there will be no time to change the infrastructure….

                      He covers this at around the 13 min mark, the low/zero carbon technologies are a requirement of staying inside the carbon budget for 4 degC…..and yes the the build times cannot be achieved prior to 2030 (in total) BUT they need to be started asap and not undermined by building carbon emitting long life infrastructure.

                    • Bill

                      Yes, there are two sides to the coin (demand and supply) and the action surrounding them are, of necessity, set within two different time frames. And you didn’t confuse them.

      • Heather Grimwood 3.2.2

        Rosie,, at 3.2: the remit accepted was that all political parties plus co-opted specialists work together on Climate Change …..much like a war cabinet…..manifesto not out yet.

    • Bill 3.3

      What Generation Zero are doing is a call to action. We need this urgently.

      What Gen Zero are doing is offering up a feel good story that absolutely will not achieve the desired result even if the misguided and limited goal they call for is reached. In other words, it’s only offering false hope. And that’s not what we need.

      Let me put this by way of analogy.

      A snake-oil doctor says to take his ‘cure all’ potion. Do you support imbibing the potion even though you know it will do absolutely nothing by way of curing the ailment complained of? Worse, what if taking his potion involves delaying or foregoing the action that would have resulted in a cure being administered?

      Y’know, it’s simply not the case that something is always better than nothing.

    • Sans Cle 3.4

      + 1 Weka
      I am reminded of this John Oliver clip regarding cc deniers….. applicable now to the knee jerk reaction that any action is not enough, or the immediate dissing of any positive action toward addressing emissions. It’s becoming boring, and should be ignored!

      • Bill 3.4.1

        I don’t know for sure if that’s aimed at me or not. But since I’ve been pouring cold water on the Gen Zero proposal, I guess it might be.

        So, to be crystal clear.

        My reaction isn’t knee-jerk, but based on a fair understanding of the level of action required. What Gen Zero are proposing isn’t positive action. Given the basis for their proposal is dangerously deluded, anything working to that basis will be woefully inadequate. And that could be worse than nothing (as explained above). Meanwhile, I’ve laid out the basis for my thoughts and provided quality link after quality link.

        That you don’t like ‘the take home message’ doesn’t make it wrong.

        • Colonial Viper 3.4.1.1

          I am quite certain that Gen Zero will find plenty of traction with the status quo establishment and MSM for their ‘courageous climate change stance.’

        • Molly 3.4.1.2

          Agree. The Generation Zero message seems to be crafted to read well and appeal to people without spooking the horses.

          They have put forward some good campaigns, but all of them run on the premise that there is a wealth of time and going through the current systems will yield a result. I have supported some of their submissions for the Unitary Plan and transports – not because I felt that they achieve a lot in terms of CC, but they are reasonable in terms of community planning.

          Transitional changes needs to move beyond that – and I don’t know whether the team at Gen Zero understand how to rock the boat, but look forward to be proven wrong.

          • Colonial Viper 3.4.1.2.1

            the team at Gen Zero want their future and deserved lives of professional and educated privilege guaranteed. The steps they take are totally predictable, based on that.

            • Molly 3.4.1.2.1.1

              Unfortunately, I have the same suspicion, and my children joined up when they were first starting a few years ago – but nothing inspiring regarding CC.

              They seem to be very good marketers, social media users and online campaigners with an understandable concern – but run by a committee of conservatives.

              Given the impact the TPPA would have on any government’s moves to address climate change, their presence at any of the protests should have been a given. But they were noticeable by their absence.

  4. srylands 4

    I don’t see any mention in this plan of international emissions trading. Making extensive use of such trading will be the most efficient way (i.e cheaper) for New Zealand to meet its targets.

    Related to that, I don’t see any mention of the fact that unlike Denmark, New Zealand already has a high use of renewables. The potential gains on the electricity front are minimal.

    Also, unlike Denmark we have 50% of emissions coming from agriculture. So what is the plan there?

    That leaves transport. We are a technology taker. Vehicles are becoming more efficient so transport emissions should decline over time.

    So that brings us back to international emissions trading.

    Finally on the idea of gaining political support for a Bill to mandate emissions reductions…. If such a Bill looked like passing, and it would materially and negatively affect the Crown’s finances, then the Minister of Finance could use the Financial veto to block its passage. For example any Bill that would significantly reduce petrol excise, or through subsidising renewbales, or increasing energy costs to government agencies – all of those impacts could provide a trigger for the Financial Veto.

    • McFlock 4.1

      Indeed. To get any measure of carbon reduction from NZ, we need to change the government first.

      Thanks for your contribution. I mean, emissions trading can be gamed, but even for that fairly mediocre suggestion we’d need to change the government because they might use the financial veto.

    • Colonial Viper 4.2

      I don’t see any mention in this plan of international emissions trading. Making extensive use of such trading will be the most efficient way (i.e cheaper) for New Zealand to meet its targets.

      This is about no emissions.

      Not about emissions trading.

      Or mechanisms for every industry and every country to keep blowing out CO2.

    • Draco T Bastard 4.3

      Also, unlike Denmark we have 50% of emissions coming from agriculture. So what is the plan there?

      Well, the rational thing to do there would be to drop agriculture down to being only enough to feed ourselves. Fairly obvious really.

      Of course, the capitalists are looking to keep doing the same things that they always have that have put us in this position. In other words, the completely irrational thing to do.

      That leaves transport. We are a technology taker. Vehicles are becoming more efficient so transport emissions should decline over time.

      Or we could phase fossil fuelled cars and trucks out of the picture over a reasonable time period of about 5 years while putting in place the necessary electric buses and trains and cycle ways to cover transport. All of which we can, and do, produce here from our own resources.

      Finally on the idea of gaining political support for a Bill to mandate emissions reductions…. If such a Bill looked like passing, and it would materially and negatively affect the Crown’s finances, then the Minister of Finance could use the Financial veto to block its passage.

      Great, another reason to get rid of the financial veto altogether (sign).

  5. Bill 5

    Fuck me dead! So I clicked over to their site. And their top Q&A claims the following

    The evidence says we need to reduce global greenhouse gas emissions to net zero by around 2070 for a high chance of keeping global warming under 2°C…

    Can I impress on anyone here just how fucking bullshit that claim is? It’s fucking fantasy land that absolutely entails negative emission scenarios. And negative emission scenarios are predicated on technologies and infrastructures that do not exist and that cannot be rolled out (even assuming they are found to work) before we’ve shot right on through +2 degrees.

    Support them? Like fuck.

    Supporting false hope, and allowing our actions to be determined off the back of false hope, is worse in my book than denial. Denial can be ignored. Pessimists can be proved wrong by results from effective action. But peddlers of hokum block meaningful action by occupying the policy space that really needs to be filled with effective actions stemming from a clear appreciation of the situation we’re in.

    • adam 5.1

      I got emailed the link earlier in the day, and was more that a bit put off by what they had said. I thought it was a good base idea from generation zero – but reading the fine print as they say.

      Sad really, but I wonder again if this is another case of radical centrism controlling the debate?

    • One Anonymous Bloke 5.2

      do not exist

      To date, the Carbfix (what a shite name) project is underway in two locations. These are described in Nature as “pilot” projects.

      I agree with the rest of your remarks.

      • Bill 5.2.1

        Perhaps I should have been more precise and said “do not exist at scale”.

        Storing carbon in basalt is one tiny part of the problem. Let’s say it works away from an Icelandic setting (ie – in places where heat can’t act as a catalyst) and let’s say there are ample deposits of accessible basalt in the world – enough to accommodate the 36 billion tonnes per annum that would need to be sequestered.

        Where is the carbon that is being put into the basalt coming from in the first place?
        Then, apart from carbon produced in power stations, how can it be any use in (say) the transport sector that typically in the west accounts for ~ 40% of energy related emissions?

        If the CO2 that’s being captured in the power stations is to come from bio-fuels, then where is the land to grow the required crops? (Estimates are for a land area of anywhere between one and three times the size of India to satisfy current energy needs from bio-fuel)

        So maybe I should have said “do not exist at scale or are only partially applicable and generally ignore associated logistical problems that would accompany development at scale”.

        As far as tech goes, the Carbfix project is kind of cool. But y’know….

        • Colonial Viper 5.2.1.1

          People don’t seem to understand that the CO2 we put out this year, next year and the year after that is what counts for avoiding 3 deg C climate change.

          The amount of CO2 we put out in 2050 falls into the category of – who gives a fuck, coz we will have more than guaranteed >3 deg C warming by that stage, 480ppm CO2 and an ice free world say 500 years down the track.

          • One Anonymous Bloke 5.2.1.1.1

            I’m trying to nail the exact nature of your bad faith and hypocrisy. Perhaps you can help.

            Climatologists good, Geneticists bad? Have I got that wrong?

            • Colonial Viper 5.2.1.1.1.1

              Hi OAB, just passing on the facts to you. But as I said below, protect your educated ignorance. It makes no difference to me.

              • One Anonymous Bloke

                I note that you invoked Science while telling me something I already knew.

        • One Anonymous Bloke 5.2.1.2

          I don’t know the answers to your questions.

          I expect that my deeply held existing beliefs will prove true: the weather will soon (within a decade or two) render our efforts useless and moot.

          Then again, I’m an idiot, and useless at Chemistry, and still I understand that Carbfix is pretty simple tech. Hope springs like a zombie.

          • Bill 5.2.1.2.1

            Having a hard time envisaging these ‘springing’ zombies…they look anything like zebedee? Or are they more like that fella Jack, in the box over there?

            I guess springs can ooze….

            • One Anonymous Bloke 5.2.1.2.1.1

              In the same sense as a zombie argument, zombie hope is hard to kill. Drowning men clutch at straws, do they not? At least this straw appears relatively buoyant.

              You’ve already identified the need to get to zero emissions by 2030. Personally I’d say we need to be there well before then and since that’s…unlikely…the potential for large scale carbon sequestration is a straw worth clutching.

          • Colonial Viper 5.2.1.2.2

            For a fix on the scaling up required, to capture 1% of our global GHG emissions the technology would have to convert 500 million tonnes of CO2 per annum.

            • One Anonymous Bloke 5.2.1.2.2.1

              What would you know about it?

              • Colonial Viper

                Just telling you the basic facts; but protect your precious ignorance, it matters not one whit to me.

    • Colonial Viper 5.3

      Bill +100

      Gen Zero don’t understand on the least what they are advocating for.

      • Bill 5.3.1

        I think they understand what they’re advocating for. But they don’t appreciate that what they’re advocating hasn’t been based on reality and so won’t deliver the results they might be hoping for.

        I might be in the same position today if I hadn’t stumbled across a Kevin Anderson presentation a few years back. On the off-chance that anyone from Gen Zero is reading this thread, and for the benefit of others who might be getting upset over the cold water treatment being applied to Gen Zero, I’m submitting two of his presentations, that combined, just about cover the basics.

        • Colonial Viper 5.3.1.1

          And this is my take on that presentation

          We’re going to burn it all, until we burn it down.

          I think we will hit 2 deg C by 2030 or soon thereafter.

          (A delay of a few years if the predicted massive solar minimum occurs then).

          • Bill 5.3.1.1.1

            I did read that post. By the way, there are two links in the above comment. The url above the vid links to a different presentation. I don’t know why the same format/display didn’t come up for both, but hey.

            Quietly wondering if the apparent abandonment of this thread is due to people going away to have a wee think or whether there’s a lot of must shoot the messeger gun loading going on.

            Reloading other vid here.

            • Colonial Viper 5.3.1.1.1.1

              I’m for all these decarbonisation plans as long as you can guarantee that my standard of living isn’t going to be affected…

              😛

          • KJT 5.3.1.1.2

            The amount of carbon already emitted guarantees over 2 degrees C before 2030.

            The only hope now is we start to lower emissions in time before we totally fuck things.

            Which mean taxing the total cost into fossil fuels and use the dividends for minimisation and adaptation. As so many people are unable to think unless it hits their back pocket immediately.

            • Bill 5.3.1.1.2.1

              Tax how? At source? – The cost gets passed on to the consumer.
              Settle for just hammering the poor with taxes? – Emissions won’t fall to anywhere near the required levels.
              Recycle a carbon tax take back to the poor? – Still doesn’t affect the 10% of people that produce about 50% of all emissions.

              Taxes (or levies or fees) haven’t worked where they’ve been tried, don’t work when followed through at the theoretical level in study/research, and basically won’t work.

              A tax, levy or fee is a marginal cost and will only ever result in marginal change.

              eg – Anderson and Larkin Bow applied a (approx) NZ$500 tax per tonne of aviation fuel. In 2012, that would have resulted in a 25% increase per ticket for air travelers. In other words, even that enormous tax (I think it’s either 6 or 10 times any current proposal) wouldn’t impact in any significant way on air travel.

              Take the same level of tax and apply it at the petrol pump (50c per liter) and the poor walk while the higher earners, who tend to be the high emitters carry on as before.

              Throw a $10 per liter tax at it and the poor, not only walk but can’t afford to buy food in the shops.

              • KJT

                It is called tax and dividend, Bill.

                The Green party policy.

                The tax is on the emitters and the dividend is passed to consumers, and/or development of sustainable options.

                And, it needs to be high enough to make a change in behaviour.

                • Bill

                  So by taxing the emitter, I guess you mean at an industry level. And the emitter will pass the cost on down through the consumer chain. So, I can’t see how any level of tax will change their behaviour – they just ‘pass it on’.

                  Meanwhile, rising prices (due to them passing the buck) and rising energy costs, hit poorest people hardest.

                  Even if the poorest get a dividend way in excess of what they spent on fossil, the fact remains that the richest (eg – the 10% responsible for about 50% of emissions) will just absorb the rising cost for their lifestyle that will result from their dividend not covering their costs – while the poor may well spend a portion of their dividend (extra cash) on fossil consumption! (The rebound effect)

                  At best, tax and dividend is a redistribution mechanism that plays out a bit like progressive taxation. It doesn’t affect emission levels very much.

                  If by emitter, you mean at an individual level, well the targeting becomes well nigh impossible and again, the high emitters absorb the extra costs while the poor get hammered.

                  • Colonial Viper

                    Bill, James Hansen details here how a fee and citizen dividend scheme will encourage organisations to transition away from fossil fuels.

                    http://csas.ei.columbia.edu/2015/11/11/environment-and-development-challenges-the-imperative-of-a-carbon-fee-and-dividend/

                    “Passing costs along” no longer works as a business strategy when those costs influence your customers to change to lower cost suppliers who are shifting off fossil fuels.

                    • Bill

                      And does this scheme result in immediate reductions in the order of 10 – 15% per annum? Because if it doesn’t – and I’m picking that claim won’t even be being made – then it can’t be proposed as a central plank for any reduction strategy.

                      As I pointed out the other day, “smoke free 2025” used tax (a bloody high one at that) as a central plank, and “smoke free 2025” has come off the rails.

                      That attempt to alter things was to carbon reduction like draughts is to chess…a piece of pish.

                      Smoking levels were already dropping before 2010
                      There was a huge level of buy in.
                      There was no need for ‘dividend’ components to be built in.
                      There were huge public awareness programmes that most people were already on-side with.
                      There were law changes.
                      There were comprehensive ‘transition’ services up and running.
                      There were readily available and cheap alternatives (Gum, patches, grow your own, vapourisers etc)

                      Back to carbon.

                      Taxes, levies or fees as a central component to “reduction” strategies do not effect sufficient change. There are no examples of them having produced significant or deep change and studies that have been done bear out their ineffectiveness.

                      Australia got a 1% reduction in emissions with a carbon tax in operation during an economic slow down. Useless!

                      (As I said “way back when”, the government could have treated tobacco smoking like methadone, allowed smokers to register and pick up their tobacco for the cost of a script and NZ would have been smoke free in the life span of current smokers.)

                    • Bill

                      From your link.

                      “The carbon price will need to start small, growing as the public gains confidence that they are receiving 100% of the proceeds. If the fee begins at US$15/tCO2 and rises $10 per year, the rate after 10 years would be equivalent to about US$1 per gallon of gasoline. Given today’s fossil fuel use in the United States, that tax rate would generate about US$600 billion per year, thus providing dividends of about US$2000 per legal adult resident or about US$6000 per year for a family with two or more children, with half a share for each child up to two children per family.”

                      Meanwhile (again) a NZ$500 per tonne levy on aviation fuel does nothing to cull air travel. But put that aside. What do you think a poor person will do with that (approx) NZ$3000 ‘dividend’? How much of it winds up being spent on consumer goods or holidays or travel? (ie – in ways that increase emissions)

                    • Colonial Viper

                      Hi Bill,

                      I do not think that any of these plans, adopted as boiler plate, is going to be suitable for NZ. They need to be adapted.

                      As for your claim that the carbon fee and dividend has never been known to work to reduce GHG emissions I provide this to you: British Columbia’s revenue neutral carbon tax

                      Sustainable Prosperity, a Canadian think tank chaired by Stewart Elgie, a professor of law and economics at the University of Ottawa, produced a report in 2012: British Columbia’s carbon tax shift: the first four years. The report looked at the data from BC and the rest of Canada and concluded that, from the introduction of the tax to the end of 2011, BC’s consumption of petroleum fuels has fallen by 16.4% relative to the rest of Canada and 15.1% in absolute terms. Over the same period, economic growth in BC has been slightly better than the rest of Canada, so the pessimistic forecasts that the carbon tax would cripple the economy have not materialized.

                      http://www.skepticalscience.com/BCCarbonTax.html

                    • Colonial Viper

                      What do you think a poor person will do with that (approx) NZ$3000 ‘dividend’? How much of it winds up being spent on consumer goods or holidays or travel? (ie – in ways that increase emissions)

                      Steps like a living wage and reducing income inequality are all about helping poorer people consume more in order to improve their standard of living.

                      Can the Left provide the bottom 50% of society with ways to improve their standard of living without going on holiday or consuming more (carbon emitting) goods and services?

                    • Bill

                      I’m aware of the BC scheme. And I’m also aware that the results are deeply contested. There are arguments that apparent sales dropped because people were buying un-taxed fossil from over the state line. I can see how that would be tempting for diesel heating systems and such like where one off and substantial purchases are being made, but less attractive in terms of filling the car.

                      And here’s the thing, both the advocates and the detractors of the BC scheme agree that fuel use in transport only dropped by about a percentage point.

                      Basically, given that there was the potential to buy from across state lines, I’d say the results of the BC scheme have to be viewed with caution. The place that ran a tax in a ‘captured market’ scenario was Australia. And like I said above, there was a 1 percent reduction in fossil use or emissions…which is woeful in terms of what has to be achieved from the perspective of 2 degrees.

                      On your last point – within NZ, poor people can have a good standard of living that doesn’t involve an increase in their overall consumption of fossil beyond, for some, in the very short term, at the same time as middle and upper income people’s consumption levels decrease rapidly from their present profligate levels.

                      That’s the post I want to write, but first I’m going to have to write one on tax that shoves all the ideas about various pricing mechanisms and financial levers and what not into the rubbish bin where they belong. They’re a hindrance to achieving the necessary reductions, not a help.

  6. Jenny 6

    Now we’re thinking.

  7. Jenny 7

    And there are lots more.

  8. Jenny 8

    All that is missing is the political will to implement them.

  9. Jenny 9

    The battle against climate change will be humanity’s greatest battle

  10. disturbed 11

    “We’re not going to wait around for our politicians to do the right thing any longer; we’re going to draft a bill ourselves with help from experts and collaborators, and work to get all political parties to support it and pass it through Parliament.”

    Go for it Carbon Zero.

    Begin by Moving our freight pendulum back to rail as much as possible again.

    Take it to a fairer even split from the ghastly unequal levels of 90% by road & 7% by rail to at least a 50/50 equal share seems fair just try getting the truck lobbyists and their deep pockets out of the parliamentary pork barrel trough firstly please!

  11. Stuart Munro 12

    If you make bill that will be effective, Bill will veto it. Because stupid. Need a carbon neutral way of disposing of corrupt governments.

  12. Jenny 13

    Death by Climate Change

    A cold, unstable air mass aloft. A record atmospheric moisture load due to human-caused climate change. Add in 80 degree* or warmer surface temperatures and these three ingredients can spark some seriously epic thunderstorms.

    *(26 degrees C)

    https://robertscribbler.com/2016/05/29/fire-in-the-sky-more-than-330000-lightning-strikes-hit-europe-in-just-eight-hours/

  13. Jenny 14

    I wonder if I could get the Climate Party to run a parody “Swimmable Streets Centrepiece Campaign”

    https://www.greens.org.nz/

    https://www.greens.org.nz/news

    And in the same period.

    http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/307545/auckland-flooding-80-homes-hit,-cars-trapped

    Warm air holds more moisture.

    That Auckland’s gutters and drains are not designed to cope with these increasing record breaking heavy rain events.

    And that we are likely to suffer more of these events until ultimately our urban infrastructure is unable to cope.

    But will you get the Green Party to comment on this?

    I have run several google searches for one comment, using different phrases and wording to try and find even just one comment by the Green Party on this.

    With Zero results.

  14. I call the ‘new kids’ generation omega, as in the last one )
    https://www.rt.com/viral/349034-jetstream-season-shift-equator/
    ‘Death of winter’: Jet streams cross equator, ‘chaos’ predicted

    Scientists have observed an “unprecedented” event that could lead to an end of seasons as we know them, after Northern Hemisphere jet streams crossed the equator and linked with others in the south.
    Usually separated entirely from each other by the equator where warm air acts as a barrier, both the Northern and Southern Hemisphere consist of jet streams made up of either warm moist air or cold dry air.

    • Bill 15.1

      A couple of details Robert.

      One phd student and one blogger – not ‘scientists’.
      Not unprecedented.
      They were looking at the wrong altitude (apparently)

      Here’s a link with scientific opinion and further links.

      https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2016/06/30/claim-that-jet-stream-crossing-equator-is-climate-emergency-is-utter-nonsense/

      Dr Jennifer Francis is a pretty good ‘go to’ person for jet stream study btw. Yes, it’s changing (slowing) due to arctic warming and one result of a consequence of that are ‘eddies’ that produce ‘stuck’ weather patterns (ie, longer than normal periods of unchanging weather – which isn’t good)

      Late edit – and robertscribbler has amended his post in light of the above linked article.

      In consideration of the information shared in this piece, I have made a couple of corrections to the information concerning upper-level equatorial wind patterns.

      and on Paul Beckwith (the phd student)

      (He)has made his own statements in response to the above article. His statements and conclusions are his own.

  15. Sacha 16

    Good on young people for getting on with securing feasible political change while our traditional structures waste the goodwill of activists or we talk ourselves into paralysis seeking the perfect.

    • Colonial Viper 16.1

      Finding a solution which will salvage our climate situation is not seeking “perfection” FFS.

      There won’t be any point to zero emissions by 2050 because global civilisation will be falling apart by then if we do not take radical steps in the next couple of years.

      It is the GHG emissions this year, next year and the year after which count if we want to stay below 3 deg C climate change.

      The emissions we make in 2050, 2051, 2052, don’t count for shit, except for staying below 5-6 deg C climate change.

      Good on young people for getting on with securing feasible political change

      Do you not understand that what we call “feasible political change” today will be swept away in the next ten or so years when the climate crisis tightens its grip around our throat and we begin to choke.

      • Sacha 16.1.1

        Good luck getting political support for the scale of change that’s needed. At least these guys are proposing a structure that can survive our short political terms and be ramped up over time. Beats whinging.

        • weka 16.1.1.1

          + this many times.

        • Bill 16.1.1.2

          These guys have proposed a structure that isn’t connected to reality and that would, from the perspective of 2 degrees, lock us into ineffective action. You can’t ‘ramp up’ a proposal that is predicated on something like a 60 year time span when we only have about 15 years to get things done and dusted.

          But you’d take that route on the basis that getting political support for the necessary level of change might be an exercise in futility?

          • marty mars 16.1.1.2.1

            Bill if the powers that be don’t accept the figures and numbers as you state them and nothing happens. Isn’t gens idea better than that nothing.

            • Bill 16.1.1.2.1.1

              No. From the perspective of 2 degrees, it’s just the same as nothing. There comes a point, I don’t know what that point is, where the level of temperature rise becomes irrelevant in terms of human prospects and/or in terms of inducing runaway non-anthropological warming.

              Alternatively, if people buy into Gen Zero type frameworks, it potentially weakens or kills the prospects for putting forward a case based on reality, in which case it’s worse than nothing.

              • The same as nothing. Except the human will and energy to do it. Plus the practice at doing it so more of it can be done. The ability to show others it and inspire and give them hope to make the changes necessary. The belief it will give some youth that they can make a difference hopefully leading to more involvement and bigger numbers. In the battles ahead all of that is something not nothing.

                • Bill

                  In almost all other instances i can think of, I’d agree with you marty. But we only have 15 years – 5 500 days. There are no “battles ahead”. This is it. It’s today.

                  Now, we either choose to do or demand something effective that might give us an outside chance to not go over 2 degrees; to not kill millions upon millions of people in tropical and equatorial regions, or we choose to go down some other path.

                • Colonial Viper

                  Marty, we have 10-15 years to avoid crashing through 3 deg C global warming.

                  I don’t particularly care about what carbon emissions are in 2050 or 2051. Stopping the water dripping through your roof in 2050 is not going to save your joists; it is stopping the water dripping through your roof tonight, and tomorrow night and the night after that which is going to save your house.

                  And this Earth is our only one. We don’t have another ‘house’ to move to after we fuck the maintenance of this one.

                  BTW if we don’t get serious action much sooner, then within our life time (presuming you are under 50 years old) things are going to get so bad that we are going to have idiots seriously considering detonating nuclear warheads in the desert to cause a nuclear winter.

  16. Sacha 17

    Gen Zero are proposing a solid cross-government mechanism for change, not a ‘plan’ for what that change will look like. Yet all the armchair generals can muster is moaning that the group’s plan is wrong.

    You try gathering the necessary political support. At least Generation Zero can point to past results in that area, not just hot air and warm urine.

    • Colonial Viper 17.1

      Why did they set a date of 2050 for zero carbon then, not 2030?

      2050 guarantees that we will sail straight through 3 degrees C global warming and guaranteed climate disaster.

      So give them points for their winning political plays if you wish, but not for their knowledge of climate change or their plan to deal with it.

  17. They are just going to keep pushing the date back every single year.
    Everything is a rich man’s trick!!
    There is no real credible plan to deal with global warming, every piece of rhetoric or soundbite is merely a stop gap between delays to solution.
    It’s infuriating at times!!!

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

  • Election 2019 – The Legendary Liveblog
    Legendary in my own mind, I mean.  All times are NZ, which is an hour10.00am (NZ) There's about an hour to go until the exit poll is released.  At that point, half of the British voting public will devastated, and the other half celebrating wildly.  Unless everyone is simply confused.Turnout seems ...
    1 hour ago
  • Some Thoughts On Socialism As Jeremy Corbyn Loses The UK General Election.
    Forlorn Hope: When the call came down to make Corbyn unelectable, the Establishment's journalists and columnists rose to the challenge. Antisemitism was only the most imaginative of the charges levelled against the old democratic-socialist. There were many more and, sadly, they appear to have worked. Boris Johnson may not be much ...
    4 hours ago
  • Cartoonist David Low’s Radical Sympathy.
    "Rendezvous" by David Low, September 1939.DUNEDIN IS THE BIRTHPLACE of, for my money, the world’s greatest cartoonist, David Low. At the height of his powers, in 1930s London, Low’s cartoons represented the visual conscience of the civilised world. His most famous cartoon, “Rendezvous”, penned a few weeks into the Second ...
    5 hours ago
  • The UK has a choice as to whether it chooses to be manipulated… or not.
    If you want to study propagandist techniques, you are typically told to study Dictatorships. Not unfair, but what’s always been more interesting to me is so-called “democratic” countries and their broader information systems. Why? Because people opt for it, even as they decry “totalitarian regimes!”.. It’s quite an eye ...
    exhALANtBy exhalantblog
    18 hours ago
  • Today’s secrecy legislation
    Introducing legislation which shits on the public's right to know seems to have become a daily occurrence for this government. Today's example is the Infrastructure Funding and Financing Bill. The bill establishes a framework for the establishment of "special purpose vehicles" (SPVs) to hide debt from local government balance sheets ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    21 hours ago
  • Hard News: Public Address Word of the Year 2019: Time to vote!
    Below is the longlist of words and phrases generated in the korero phase of Public Address Word of the Year 2019, with some editorial moderation. Now it's time to vote. As you'll doubtless be able to see, you get three ranked choices. Use your power wisely. Or frivolously, whatever.As usual, ...
    21 hours ago
  • Encryption, passwords, and self-incrimination
    The University of Waikato and New Zealand Law Foundation have released a report today on the law around encryption in New Zealand. There's stuff in there about principles and values, and how proposed government policies to provide for "lawful access" by creating backdoors would destroy the trust which makes encryption ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    23 hours ago
  • Drawn
    A ballot for two Member's Bills was held today, and the following bills were drawn: Insurance (Prompt Settlement of Claims for Uninhabitable Residential Property) Bill (Stuart Smith) Social Security (Exemption for Ex Gratia and Compensation Payments) Amendment Bill (Willow-Jean Prime) Neither bill seems likely to be particularly controversial. This is ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    23 hours ago
  • Bougainville votes for independence
    Earlier in the month, Bougainvilleans went to the polls in a landmark referendum to decide on whether they would remain part of Papua New Guinea or become independent. Yesterday, the results came in, with over 97% support for independence. The referendum wasn't binding - instead it means negotiations with the ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    24 hours ago
  • Bus strikes, suspensions and solidarity
    by Daphna Whitmore This week 800 unionised bus drivers in Auckland were suspended from work after they refused to collect fares as part of a campaign of industrial action. Drivers working for Auckland’s largest bus company NZ Bus are asking for more pay and better working conditions after being offered ...
    RedlineBy Daphna
    1 day ago
  • How to support after the Whakaari/White Island volcanic eruption
    As details emerge about what unfolded on Whakaari / White Island two days ago, my thoughts go out to all the families affected by this terrible event. My thoughts are also with the first responders who worked in perilous circumstances to assist and protect those affected. Both local and ...
    SciBlogsBy Sarb Johal
    1 day ago
  • Final BMG poll – nothing to see here
    BMG research have unleashed their final poll of the 2019 campaign:Westminster voting intention: CON: 41% (-)LAB: 32% (-)LDEM: 14% (-)GRN: 4% (-)BREX: 3% (-1)via @BMGResearch , 06 - 11 Dec Chgs. w/ 06 Dec That's a bit of a "Dunno why we bothered" sort of poll. "Phillip, I'm afraid I've been a ...
    1 day ago
  • Grant Robertson Spends Up Large – On The Establishment!
    Grant Keeps On Trucking: Out of the $12 billion Robertson has announced for infrastructure investment, $8 billion will be allocated to specific projects, with the balance of $4 billion held in reserve. What does it say about this Government's "transformational" ambitions that 85 percent of that $8 billion is to ...
    1 day ago
  • Boris Johnson … Hides … In a Fridge
    I am not making this up.First few lines of the Dail Mail write up:Boris Johnson's exasperated media minder swore on live TV today as the PM refused to speak to Good Morning Britain before trotting into a fridge as he started an early milkround in Yorkshire. Piers Morgan was visibly ...
    2 days ago
  • Shy Labour Voters?
    In previous elections pollsters have bemoaned the 'shy Tory' - the respondent who is so fearful of being judged as a cruel and heartless bastard by an anonymous pollster, or their spouses, workmates and friends, that they lie about their intention of voting Conservative, skewing the poll figures in Labour's ...
    2 days ago
  • Seven reasons to be wary of waste-to-energy proposals
    Climate Explained is a collaboration between The Conversation, Stuff and the New Zealand Science Media Centre to answer your questions about climate change. If you have a question you’d like an expert to answer, please send it to climate.change@stuff.co.nz I was in Switzerland recently and discovered that they haven’t ...
    SciBlogsBy Guest Author
    2 days ago
  • Reviewing the whitewash
    Back in 2015, then Ombudsman Beverley Wakem conducted a review of the OIA, Not a game of hide and seek. The "review" was a whitewash, which found no need for legislative change, and instead criticised the media and requesters - which destroyed Wakem's reputation, and undermined that of the Office ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    2 days ago
  • You Gov MRP Poll Out
    So, You Gov's MRP poll - the weird one that tries to reflect what will happen at a constituency level and which pretty much nailed the hung parliament in 2017 - is not looking too good for Labour:
    UK #GE2019 MRP seat projection:CON: 339 (-20)LAB: 231 (+20)SNP: 41 (-2)LDEM: 15 ...
    2 days ago
  • Climate Change: Accountability?
    We've known about climate change for over forty years now,and it has been a major political issue for twenty. And yet fossil fuel companies have kept polluting with impunity, while government have looked the other way and twiddled their thumbs and refused to do anything because "the economy", or just ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    2 days ago
  • Delusional And Irrational: The Rise Of Paranoid Politics In New Zealand.
    Sheer Loopiness: Many of those expressing bemusement at the antics of these #turnardern effacers, were convinced that they were yet another expression of the National Party’s increasingly spiteful anti-government propaganda campaign. They marvelled at the oddness of the perpetrators’ mindset and questioned the common-sense of allowing the rest of New Zealand ...
    2 days ago
  • Things to know about Whakaari/White Island
    Brad Scott, GNS Science VolcanologistThis post was originally published by GeoNet. Following the 9 December devastating eruption at Whakaari/White Island we have put together some information about the island. New Zealand’s most active volcano Whakaari/White Island is currently New Zealand’s most active volcano, it has been since an eruptive episode ...
    SciBlogsBy Guest Author
    3 days ago
  • Status quo supports status quo
    The Justice Committee has reported back on its Inquiry into the 2017 General Election and 2016 Local Elections, with a host of recommendations about how to improve our electoral systems. Some of their recommendations are already incorporate din the Electoral Amendment Bill currently before Parliament, but there's also a recommendation ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    3 days ago
  • The Greens abandon NeoLiberalism
    Back in 2017, in order to make themselves "electable" in the eyes of rich people who oppose everything they stand for, the Greens signed up for NeoLiberalism, adopting a restrictive set of "Budget Responsibility Rules" which basicly prevented them from using government to make things better. Now, they're finally abandoning ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    3 days ago
  • Lying about a failed war
    Since invading in 2001, the US has consistently claimed that their war in Afghanistan has been going well, even when it continued year after year after year. Of course, they were lying, and thanks to the Washington Post and the US Freedom of Information Act, we get to see just ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    3 days ago
  • Artificial Intelligence and You
    How should we think about artificial intelligence and the implications that it has for our work and leisure? There are many articles on artificial intelligence and its potential impacts on jobs, and the ethics of applications. These are important topics, but I want to focus on some less discussed aspects, ...
    SciBlogsBy Robert Hickson
    3 days ago
  • Statistical manipulation to get publishable results
    I love data. It’s amazing the sort of “discoveries” I can make given a data set and computer statistical package. It’s just so easy to search for relationships and test their statistical significance. Maybe relationships which ...
    3 days ago
  • More lies on the Twitter (Dan Hodges edition)
    The other big story concerning Leeds Hospital is Boris Johnson's bizzare behaviour at Leeds Hospital, where he was confronted by a journalist and challenged about a four year old boy with suspected pneumonia who was left sleeping on the floor, rather than getting  abed like a sick kid would in ...
    3 days ago
  • LabourActivistPunchedMattHancock’sSPADGate
    So, for a brief period of history, it was alleged that a protester had punched Matt Hancock's SPAD (not a euphemism; special adviser) when Hancock visited Leeds Hospital.This was reported by the likes of Robert Peston and Laura Keunssberg, as well as the less credible Guido Fawkes.  It also quickly ...
    3 days ago
  • France’s anti-Zionism is anti-liberté
    by Daphna Whitmore Last week France passed a law that equates anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism. It is based on a definition of anti-Semitism that includes criticism of Israel such as: “Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist ...
    RedlineBy Daphna
    4 days ago
  • Another bus lockout
    Over the past year we've seen major bus problems in Hamilton and Wellington, as drivers have sought better wages and an end to the bullshit of split shifts, which basicly see them "married to the job". And now its Auckland's turn. When NZBus's drivers planned low-level strike action of not ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    4 days ago
  • Climate Change: Showing us how its done
    The government has been congratulating itself over the passage of the Zero Carbon Act, which sets out long-term emissions targets. But those targets are insufficient. Meanwhile, Denmark is showing us how its done:Denmark’s parliament adopted a new climate law on Friday, committing to reach 70% below its 1990 emissions in ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    4 days ago
  • New Fisk
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    4 days ago
  • Public sector dysfunction should not be allowed to undermine freedom of information
    Another day, another piece of legislation with a secrecy clause. This time its the innocuous-seeming Mental Health and Wellbeing Commission Bill, which (after establishing a new body and making it subject to the OIA in three different ways) includes the rapidly-becoming-standard clauses enabling it to request information from other public ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    4 days ago
  • “This is England, this knife of Sheffield steel…”
    The state of the United Kingdom is fractured, torn up, shredded. The Empire is gone, it died a long time ago. And yet, the country is still tracking with a lead in favour of the ones who play to the ingrained, class-bound division for political gain. It is a disgrace ...
    exhALANtBy exhalantblog
    6 days ago
  • CORSIA, coming soon to an airport near you
    On 27 September, Greta Thunberg addressed a crowd of 500,000 at the School Strike for Climate in Montreal, saying: “You are a nation that is allegedly a climate leader. And Sweden is also a nation that is allegedly a climate leader. And in both cases, it means absolutely nothing. Because ...
    SciBlogsBy Robert McLachlan
    6 days ago
  • Cloaking hate speech and fake news in the right to free expression.
    It should be obvious by now but let’s be clear: The same folk who regularly traffic in disinformation, misinformation and “fake news” are also those who most strongly claim that their freedom of expression rights are being violated when moves are made to curb hate speech (as opposed to protected ...
    KiwipoliticoBy Pablo
    6 days ago
  • The Physics (and Economics, and Politics) of Wheelchairs on Planes
    Michael Schulson When Shane Burcaw flies on an airplane, he brings along a customized gel cushion, a car seat, and about 10 pieces of memory foam. The whole arsenal costs around $1,000, but for Burcaw it’s a necessity. The 27-year-old author and speaker — who, alongside his fiancée, Hannah ...
    SciBlogsBy Guest Author
    6 days ago
  • To Advance Civil Rights, Oppose Transgender Extremism
    We are very pleased to publish this submission is from Lucinda Stoan. She is a social justice activist, mother, and educator, based in Washington State in the  US.   This detailed and comprehensive source-linked overview of trans issues and what is at stake will be useful for many people, especially in ...
    RedlineBy Daphna
    7 days ago
  • Faafoi should be fired
    Newshub last night reported that Broadcasting Minister Kris Faafoi had apparently promised to help out a mate with an immigration issue. While its normal for people to approach MPs for assistance in this area, when you're a Minister, the rules are different: as the Cabinet Manual says, Ministers must "at ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    7 days ago
  • Adrian Orr – The Reserve Bank’s Revolutionary Governor?
    New Zealand's Underarm Banker: It bears recalling that the “independence” of the Reserve Bank Governor was for decades held up by neoliberal capitalists as the most compelling justification for passing the Reserve Bank Act. Interesting, is it not, how the ruling class’s support for the Bank’s independence lasted no longer than ...
    1 week ago
  • Driving Us Up The Poll.
    Rubbish In, Rubbish Out: Put all this together, and it’s difficult to avoid the conclusion that anyone who responds positively to a pollster’s request to “answer a few questions” is just ever-so-slightly weird. Desperately lonely? Some sort of psephological train-spotter? Political party member primed to skew the poll for or against ...
    1 week ago
  • Jordan Williams, Colin Craig podcast series announced
    “Free at last, Free at last, Thank God almighty we are free at last.” ― Martin Luther King Jr. A long and bitter court feud between former Conservative Party leader Colin Craig and Jordan Williams has been settled, with an apology and compensation from Williams. On Tuesday, Craig sent out ...
    The PaepaeBy Peter Aranyi
    1 week ago
  • How plant-based meat is stretching New Zealand’s cultural and legal boundaries
    Samuel Becher, Victoria University of Wellington and Jessica C Lai, Victoria University of Wellington Earlier this year, the New Zealand-based pizza chain Hell Pizza offered a limited-edition “Burger Pizza”. Its customers weren’t told that the “meat” was plant-based. Some customers complained to the Commerce Commission, which enforces consumer law in ...
    SciBlogsBy Guest Author
    1 week ago
  • Scientific integrity requires critical investigation – not blind acceptance
    Some people seem to want to close down any critical discussion of the current research into the relationship between water fluoride and child IQ. They appear to argue that claims made by researchers should not be open to critical review and that the claims be accepted without proper consideration ...
    1 week ago
  • Climate Change: The shameful reality
    The government has been congratulating itself over the passage of the Zero Carbon Act, which sets out long-term emissions targets. Meanwhile, Climate Action Tracker has the shameful reality: those targets are insufficient:While New Zealand is showing leadership by having passed the world’s second-ever Zero Carbon Act in November 2019, under ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    1 week ago
  • More secrecy
    The government introduced a Racing Industry Bill today. As an urban who horse racing as pointless-to-cruel, and gambling as a tax on stupidity and/or hope, this isn't normally a bill which would interest me in the slightest, beyond grumpiness at more government money for a dying industry. But there is ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    1 week ago
  • Unlikely online bully, Liam Hehir
    Check. Check. One, two, three, four. Is this thing ON? Hello readers, I logged in last night (yeah, it’s been a while) to mark THE END of the landmark legal case, Jordan Williams v Colin Craig, which (gulp) reached The Supreme Court, in which New Zealand’s most-defamed man was suing the politician he ...
    The PaepaeBy Peter Aranyi
    1 week ago
  • The Birth Of Israel: Wrong At The Right Time.
    Before The Birth: Israel’s most fervent supporters set their clocks ticking in Biblical times. They cite the kingdoms of David and Solomon as proof that, in the words of the Exodus movie’s theme-song: “This land is mine.” The majority of Israel’s backers, however, start their clocks in 1933 – the year Adolf ...
    1 week ago
  • Hard News: Public Address Word of the Year 2019: Korero phase
    In an unreliable, strange and confusing world, Public Address is proud to present a measure of comfort and stability by annually asking everyone what words or phrases sum up the year that's been – and then giving some of them consumer goods as prizes for being clever or simply lucky.Well, ...
    1 week ago
  • Generalist to specialist
    Both my parents are pretty handy – and they seem to have the right tools for most jobs in the garage and they know how to fix practically anything. A similar story could be told about their generation’s experience in the workforce – being a generalist was not unusual and ...
    SciBlogsBy Guest Author
    1 week ago
  • A “coincidence”
    When it was revealed that NZ First had tried to enrich itself from public office via the Provoncial Growth Fund, the Prime Minister assured us that everything was OK as Shane Jones, the Minister responsible for the fund, had recused himself. Except it seems that that recusal came very late ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    1 week ago
  • Member’s Day
    Today is a Member's Day, and probably the last one of the year. After the marathon of the End of Life Choice Act, most of the bills up for debate today are uncontentious. First up is the second reading of Chlöe Swarbrick's Election Access Fund Bill. This will be followed ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    1 week ago
  • Worse than I thought
    The Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee has reported back on the government's odious and tyrannical control orders bill. As expected, the fraudulent select committee process has made no significant changes (partly because they couldn't agree, but mostly because it was a stitch-up from the start, with no intention of ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    1 week ago
  • The cannabis bill and the referendum
    Yesterday, the government released its draft Cannabis Legalisation and Control Bill, which will be put to a non-binding referendum at the next election. I'm not a drug policy expert, but Russell Brown is, and he thinks its pretty good. And pretty obviously, it will be a massive improvement on the ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    1 week ago
  • Hard News: The Cannabis Legalisation and Control Bill: pretty good so far
    As you're probably aware, the draft bill outlining the proposed legal cannabis regime to be put to a referendum late next year was published yesterday, and has already attracted a flurry of comment. It's notable that a good deal of the comment is about proposals that aren't actually new.A minimum ...
    1 week ago
  • Climate Change: Alignment
    One of the big problems in New Zealand climate change policy is the government working at cross-purposes with itself. It wants to reduce fossil fuel use, but encourages oil and gas exploration. It wants to reduce transport emissions, but then builds enormous new roads. The problem could be avoided if ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    1 week ago
  • How climate change will affect food production and security
    Climate Explained is a collaboration between The Conversation, Stuff and the New Zealand Science Media Centre to answer your questions about climate change. If you have a question you’d like an expert to answer, please send it to climate.change@stuff.co.nz According to the United Nations, food shortages are a threat ...
    SciBlogsBy Guest Author
    1 week ago
  • More bad faith
    Last year, the government announced it was ending offshore oil exploration by no longer issuing new permits. The idea was that the industry would then die off as permits expired. Except almost immediately the government revealed its bad faith, by saying they would extend permits and alter conditions to keep ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    1 week ago
  • Banning foreign money from our elections
    The government has said it will ban foreign donations to political parties and candidates, and will be introducing legislation to be passed under all-stages urgency this afternoon. While I agree with the goal, I don't see a particular case for urgency, unless the government is concerned about a flood of ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    1 week ago
  • Reforming the Education Acts
    The government introduced the Education and Training Bill to Parliament yesterday. Its a massive bill, which replaces both existing Education Acts, as well as various other bits of legislation (including some which are still proceeding through the House). I'll leave the serious analysis to teachers and people who actually know ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    1 week ago
  • Bite-sized learning
    Amelia SharmanThere’s no one-size-fits-all when it comes to micro-credentials, those bits of bite-sized learning that can help workers stay on top of technological change.  What’s a micro-credential? While definitions vary, micro-credentials can be understood as short courses that allow people to learn new skills or have an existing competency recognised. ...
    SciBlogsBy Guest Author
    1 week ago
  • “Not The Labour Party We Once Knew.”
    All Smiles Now: Claire Szabo is taking up her presidential role after serving as the CEO of Habitat For Humanity. Which is absolutely perfect! After KiwiBuild was so comprehensively mismanaged by Phil Twyford, the party has not only elected a new president from a thoroughly respectable not-for-profit, but one who ...
    1 week ago
  • Marxist versus liberal methodology on transgender ideology/identity politics
    While much of the NZ left has transitioned to postmodern and identity politics in relation to transgender ideology, there are some very good articles about that deploy Marxist methodology in relation to this subject.  The one below is from the British marxist group Counterfire and appeared on their site here ...
    RedlineBy Admin
    2 weeks ago
  • Book review: The Farm by Joanne Ramos
    by Daphna Whitmore At Golden Oaks, a luxurious country retreat in the Hudson Valley, pregnant women have the best care money can buy. From the organic food, personalised exercise programmes, private yoga instruction and daily massages Golden Oaks looks like a country lodge for the upper class. Set some time ...
    RedlineBy Daphna
    2 weeks ago
  • Loosening the purse strings
    When Labour was running for election in 2017, it felt it needed to demonstrate "fiscal responsibility" and signed itself up to masochistic "budget responsibility rules". It was a fool's errand: the sorts of voters who demand fiscal responsibility are also the sorts of voters who believe that labour can never ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    2 weeks ago
  • Climate Change: How to get there
    Writing in Stuff, Joel MacManus looks at what we need to do to meet the Zero Carbon Act's targets. The core of it:1. Convert 85 per cent of vehicles on the road to electric. 2. Eliminate fossil fuels from all industrial heating up to 300 degrees Celsius. 3. Double our ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    2 weeks ago
  • anti-vaxxers in a measles epidemic: so many ways to be untruthful
    “Anti-vaxers are a pro-death movement,” those comments from Dr Helen Petousis-Harris speaking about six more Measles related deaths in Samoa over the past twenty-four hours. “Anti-vaxers are a pro-death movement,” those comments from Dr Helen Petousis-Harris speaking about six more Measles related deaths in Samoa ...
    SciBlogsBy Alison Campbell
    2 weeks ago
  • Is Youth Vaping a Problem in New Zealand?
    Professors Janet Hoek and Richard Edwards, Emeritus Professor Phil Gendall, Jude Ball, Dr Judith McCool, Anaru Waa, Dr Becky Freeman Recent media reports have presented conflicting evidence on youth vaping in NZ. While some NZ school principals report concerns about increasing vaping on school grounds and confiscating vapes, ASH Year ...
    SciBlogsBy Public Health Expert
    2 weeks ago
  • In pursuit of “Freedom and Democracy”: Forever Wars in “America’s backyard”.
    “America the Beautiful!”, staunch defender of democracy, freedom and… a whole lot of despotic tyrants that play nice with what is called “the Washington Consensus.” America is indeed capable of immense good, but like any Nation, and most assuredly any aspirant to the mantle of Empire, great, immense evil. All ...
    exhALANtBy exhalantblog
    2 weeks ago
  • November ’19 – NZ blogs sitemeter ranking
    Image credit: The beginner’s guide to blogging I notice a few regulars no longer allow public access to the site counters. This may happen accidentally when the blog format is altered. If your blog is ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Whodunnit? Finding the mystery 1080 testing lab
    1080 is used to control pests in NZ. Its use is contested by a noisy few. A new report claims high levels of 1080 in rats washed up on a beach. Flora and Fauna of Aotearoa (F&F) won’t name the laboratory that did their testing. It has sparked a hunt ...
    SciBlogsBy Grant Jacobs
    2 weeks ago
  • Authoritarian Friends, Democratic Enemies.
    What Kind Of Empire? The thing for Kiwis to decide is what kind of empire they want to belong to. The kind that, while offering its own citizens democratic rights, demands absolute obedience from its “friends”? Or, the kind that, while authoritarian at home, takes a relaxed attitude to the ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Boris Johnson Goes Down
    It hasn't been a good week for the Conservatives, pollwise.  All major recent polls are showing their lead shrinking.Comparing each pollster's current (between 29/11 and 22/11) and previous most recent poll.Com Res - Conservative lead down 3 points.You Gov - Conservative lead down 1 point.Kantar - Conservative lead down 4 ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Interesting
    Within quick succession, Countdown maths wizard and twitterer Rachel Riley, alleged comedian David Baddiel and prominent lawyer Andrew Julius have all expressed very similar opinions / ideas:
    These #3billboards are going round London today, organised by ex-Labour people, horrified by what their party has become. Their principles haven’t changed, they’re ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Damn the Polls
    So, there have been a bunch of bad polls out for Labour, and even the Leftie's friend, Survation, have recently given the Conservatives a rip-snorting 11% lead.  You Gov's much vaunted MRP poll - which pretty much nailed the result in 2015 - is currently predicting a comfortable majority for ...
    2 weeks ago

  • Housing First to help Nelson Tasman homeless
    Nelson has today seen the launch of Housing First Nelson Tasman. Today’s launch marks the expansion of the Government’s homelessness programme, Housing First, to the top of the South Island. “Housing First is a proven programme that puts people who are experiencing homelessness and multiple, high and complex needs into ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    56 mins ago
  • Government takes bite out of loan sharks
    The days of vulnerable consumers falling victim to loan sharks, truck shops and other predatory lenders are numbered, following the Credit Contracts Legislation Amendment Bill passing its third reading tonight. “Too many Kiwis are being given loans that are unaffordable and unsuitable, trapping them in debt and leaving their families ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    18 hours ago
  • New Zealand safer as Terrorism Suppression (Control Orders Bill) becomes law
    A Bill that prevents terrorism and supports the de-radicalisation of New Zealanders returning from overseas has passed its third reading, Justice Minister Andrew Little says. The Terrorism Suppression (Control Orders) Bill is a carefully targeted response to manage the risk posed by a small number of New Zealanders who have ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    19 hours ago
  • Foreign Minister and Pacific Peoples Minister to visit Samoa
    Foreign Affairs Minister Winston Peters and Minister for Pacific Peoples Aupito William Sio will travel to Samoa on Friday, where New Zealand medical teams are helping Samoa respond to an outbreak of measles. “New Zealand has been working closely with the Government of Samoa and offering our assistance from the ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    19 hours ago
  • New Pastoral Care Code will support tertiary students in 2020
    The Government has changed the law to improve student safety and welfare in university halls of residence and other student accommodation. The Education (Pastoral Care) Amendment Bill passed its third reading this afternoon and details of an interim Code of Practice setting out the Government’s expectations of tertiary providers have also been released. ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    20 hours ago
  • New infrastructure funding tool to build housing developments faster
    A new tool to help councils fund and finance infrastructure could mean some housing developments happen a decade earlier than currently planned, Urban Development Minister Phil Twyford said today. “This new tool, developed by the Government in partnership with industry and high-growth councils, will allow councils to access private debt ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    21 hours ago
  • Vision to unite the primary sector launched today
    Agriculture Minister Damien O’Connor has welcomed the release of a bold new vision for the country’s vital food and fibre sector. “I’m delighted that New Zealand’s major farmer and grower organisations are today supporting the Primary Sector Council’s vision – Fit for a Better World,” he said. “The international consumers ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    23 hours ago
  • NZ congratulates PNG and Autonomous Bougainville Government on referendum
    Foreign Minister Winston Peters has congratulated the Government of Papua New Guinea and the Autonomous Bougainville Government for completing a well-conducted referendum on the future political status of Bougainville. “New Zealand supported the referendum process by providing technical advice through the New Zealand Electoral Commission and leading a Regional Police ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 day ago
  • Next steps for Upper North Island logistics
    In light of Cabinet’s position that freight operations on prime land in downtown Auckland are no longer viable, the Government will now embark on a short work programme to enable decision-making in the first half of next year, Associate Transport Minister Shane Jones says. Minister Jones is today releasing the ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 day ago
  • Surgical mesh restorative justice report received
    Associate Health Minister Julie Anne Genter has received the report back from a surgical mesh restorative justice process undertaken by Victoria University. The process heard stories, either in person or online submission, from more than 600 people affected by surgical mesh. “The report made for heart-breaking and confronting reading,” says ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 day ago
  • The Water Services Regulator Bill – Taumata Arowai a milestone for drinking water safety
    The Water Services Regulator Bill – Taumata Arowai , introduced to Parliament today, is a milestone for drinking water safety in New Zealand and will help improve environmental outcomes for urban waterways, rivers and lakes.  “This is a breakthrough for New Zealanders in terms of providing safe drinking water throughout ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 day ago
  • Speech to new direction for criminal justice reform announcement
    Kia ora koutouE ngā mana, e ngā reo, e ngā matā wakaTēnā koutou katoaHaere ngā, moe maiKoutou ma ngā Rangatira Ko Anaru ahauKo au te Minita mo ngā TureHe Honore tino nui kei roto I ahau No reira tena koutou katoa Today, we are releasing two reports that are the ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 day ago
  • New direction for criminal justice reform
    The Government is looking to turn around the long-term challenges of criminal justice by taking a new approach to break the cycle of offending to ensure there are fewer victims of crime. Justice Minister Andrew Little released two reports today, Turuki! Turuki! from Te Uepū Hāpai I te Ora, and ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 day ago
  • New law sets up $300m Venture Capital Fund
    New Zealand firms expanding beyond the start-up phase are set for more support after today’s passage of the Venture Capital Fund Bill, Associate Finance Minister David Parker said. The Bill, which establishes a $300 million Venture Capital Fund, puts in place a key initiative of the Wellbeing Budget’s economic package. ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 days ago
  • New Zealand’s National Statement to COP25
    E ngā mana, e ngā reo, e ngā iwi, e ngā rau rangatira mā. Tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou katoa. Señora Presidenta, Excellencies, Delegates. International action A common thread that runs through the Paris Agreement is the commitment we have made to each other to do what we can to ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 days ago
  • $12 billion in extra infrastructure investment
    The Government is lifting capital investment to the highest level in more than 20 years as it takes the next step to future-proof New Zealand. Finance Minister Grant Robertson has announced $12 billion of new investment, with $8 billion for specific capital projects and $4 billion to be added to ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 days ago
  • Strong economy, careful spending gives $12bn of surpluses
    The Government is forecast to run $12 billion worth of surpluses across the four years to 2023/24 as the economy continues to grow. The surpluses will help fund day-to-day capital requirements each year. These include fixing leaky hospitals, building new classrooms to cover population growth and take pressure off class ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 days ago
  • Priorities for 2020 Wellbeing Budget outlined
    Budget 2020 will continue the Coalition Government’s focus on tackling the long-term challenges facing New Zealand while also investing to future-proof the economy. When the Government took office in 2017 it was left with crumbling infrastructure, severe underinvestment in public services, degraded rivers and lakes, a housing crisis and rising ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 days ago
  • Minister welcomes data-rich coastline mapping tool
    The Minister responsible for the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Act 2011 (te Takutai Moana Act 2011), Andrew Little has welcomed the launch of an online geospatial tool that provides data-rich, dynamic coastline maps that will significantly boost research and evidence-gathering under the Act. Te Kete Kōrero a Te ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 days ago
  • Chief Victims Advisor reappointed for a further two years
    The Chief Victims Advisor to Government Dr Kim McGregor, QSO, has been reappointed in her role for a further two years. Dr McGregor has held the role since it was established in November 2015. She provides independent advice to government on how to improve the criminal justice system for victims. ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 days ago
  • New Zealand tsunami monitoring and detection system to be established
    Foreign Affairs Minister Winston Peters and Civil Defence Minister Peeni Henare have today announced the deployment of a network of DART (Deep-ocean Assessment and Reporting of Tsunami) buoys. “New Zealand and the Pacific region are particularly vulnerable to natural disasters. It is vital we have adequate warning systems in place,” ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 days ago
  • DART Buoys Announcement
    DART Buoys Announcement Aotea Wharf, 9.30am 11 December 2019   Acknowledgements Acknowledgements to Minister for Civil Defence Hon Peeni Henare also here today. White Island It is with regret that this event shadows the tragic natural disaster two days ago. The volcanic eruptions on White Island have claimed 5 lives, ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 days ago
  • Final steps for racing industry reform
    Racing Minister Winston Peters has welcomed the first reading of the Racing Industry Bill in parliament today. This is the second of two Bills that have been introduced this year to revitalise New Zealand’s racing industry. “Our domestic racing industry has been in serious decline.  The Government is committed to ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 days ago
  • Funding to promote New Zealand Sign Language initiatives
    Minister for Disability Issues, Carmel Sepuloni, is pleased to announce that $291,321 is to be awarded to national and local community initiatives to maintain and promote the use of New Zealand Sign Language (NZSL). “New Zealand is one of the few countries  in the world where Sign Language is an ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 days ago
  • How New Zealand defines and recognises veterans
    Minister for Veterans Ron Mark has announced today the Coalition Government’s initial response to work completed by the independent statutory body, the Veterans’ Advisory Board. “When Professor Ron Paterson completed his review of the Veterans’ Support Act in 2018, he made a number of recommendations, including one which I referred ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 days ago
  • Government to fund lion’s share of Ohakea water scheme
    The Government will fund the bulk of the cost of a rural water supply for the Ohakea community affected by PFAS contamination, Environment Minister David Parker announced today at a meeting of local residents. This new water scheme will provide a reliable and clean source of drinking water to the ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    4 days ago
  • Prime Minister statement on White Island eruption
    I have had the opportunity to be briefed on the details of the volcanic eruption of Whakaari/White Island, off the coast of Whakatane in the Bay of Plenty.  The eruption happened at 2.11pm today.  It continues to be an evolving situation.  We know that there were a number of tourists ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    4 days ago
  • Govt funds $100k for weather-hit communities
    Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern and Minister of Civil Defence Peeni Henare have today confirmed initial Government support of $100,000 for communities affected by the severe weather that swept across the South Island and lower North Island over the weekend. The contribution will be made to Mayoral relief funds across the ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    4 days ago
  • Death of NZ High Commissioner to Cook Islands
    New Zealand's High Commissioner to the Cook Islands, Tessa Temata, died in Palmerston North over the weekend, Foreign Minister Winston Peters said today. Ms Temata, 52, had recently returned to New Zealand for medical treatment. "On behalf of the Government and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, we extend ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    4 days ago
  • Wellington rail upgrade full steam ahead
    Transport Minister Phil Twyford today announced construction is underway on Wellington commuter rail upgrades which will mean more frequent services and fewer breakdowns. The upgrades include converting the Trentham to Upper Hutt single track section to a double track, with a new signalling system, upgraded stations and level crossings, and ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    4 days ago
  • Defence Climate Change Implementation Plan released
    Minister of Defence Ron Mark and Minister for Climate Change James Shaw have announced the release of a Defence Climate Change Implementation Work Plan, titled Responding to the Climate Crisis: An Implementation Plan.  The plan sets out a series of recommendations based on the 2018 New Zealand Defence Assessment, The ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    4 days ago
  • Govt releases funding to support South Canterbury
    A medium-scale adverse event has been declared for the South Canterbury district, which will see up to $50,000 in funding made available to support farming communities which have been significantly affected by recent heavy rain and flooding in the area, says Agriculture Minister Damien O’Connor. “Two weeks of solid rain ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    5 days ago
  • Speech at launch of Rethinking Plastics Report
    Thank you Professor Juliet Gerrard and your team for the comprehensive and extremely helpful report and recommendations. Thank you too to all the stakeholders and interested parties who have contributed ideas and thinking to it. “Making best practice, standard practice” is a great framework for change and the action plan ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    5 days ago
  • Govt pledges next steps on plastic waste
    The Government will phase out more single-use plastics following the success of its single-use plastic bag ban earlier this year and the release today of a pivotal report for dealing with waste. Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern has welcomed the Rethinking Plastics in Aotearoa New Zealandreport, released by her Chief Science Advisor ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    5 days ago
  • International student enrolments grow in universities and the regions
    International education continues to thrive as the Government focuses on quality over quantity, Education Minister Chris Hipkins said. The tuition revenue from international education increased to $1.16 billion last year with the average tuition fee per student increasing by $960. The total number of international students enrolled in New Zealand ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    6 days ago
  • Speech to Government Economics Network 2019 Conference
    I want to talk about one of the most pressing issues in our national life: the housing crisis and the poor performance of our cities. The argument I want to make to you is that generations of urban land use policy have lacked a decent grounding in economics. The consequences ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    6 days ago
  • DHB leadership renewed and strengthened
    Health Minister Dr David Clark says new appointments to DHBs represent a significant changing of the guard, with 13 new chairs including four Māori chairs. Today 76 appointments have been announced to complement elected board members, as well as eight elected members appointed as either chair or deputy chair.  Four ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    6 days ago
  • Tabuteau to advance New Zealand’s trade and political interests with European partners
    Parliamentary Under-Secretary for Foreign Affairs, Fletcher Tabuteau, is travelling to Germany, Poland, Austria, and Spain next week to bolster New Zealand’s political and trade relationships in Europe. While in Spain, Mr Tabuteau will represent New Zealand at the 14th Asia-Europe (ASEM) Foreign Ministers’ Meeting in Madrid. “New Zealand strongly supports ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    7 days ago
  • Statement from the Prime Minister on Kris Faafoi
    “I’ve spoken to Minister Faafoi, who has apologised for his poor handling of this issue,” Jacinda Ardern said. “I have confidence in Kris as a hardworking and effective Minister, but this should have been dealt with in a much clearer manner, and I’ve made my views on that very clear ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    7 days ago
  • Tonga-New Zealand Joint Ministerial Forum
    Deputy Prime Minister Winston Peters met with Tongan Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Pohiva Tu'i'onetoa in Wellington today. The pair signed a Statement of Partnership setting out joint priorities for cooperation out to 2023.  “We welcomed Prime Minister Tu'i'onetoa on his first visit to New Zealand as Prime Minister. Tonga ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    7 days ago