Is it too early to talk about climate change?

Written By: - Date published: 8:58 am, February 13th, 2023 - 50 comments
Categories: auckland supercity, climate change, science, supercity, uncategorized - Tags:

Cyclone Gabrielle is currently bearing down on Tamaki Makaurau.

Locals are nervous.  In my home suburb Titirangi a recent storm that fell well outside the definition of a one in one hundred year storm has caused multiple slips and scarring to the local landscape.  Some people still do not have power and water is limited.  Parts of the area were isolated for extended periods of time.

The thought of even more rain has locals terrified, particularly those who have already suffered slips.

And this is summertime, the time of year where Council is normally urging us to preserve water as the Waitakere dams dry up.  I can confidently say that there will be no water shortage this year.

The two weather events have focussed attention on Auckland Mayor Wayne Brown’s draft budget which proposes widespread cuts.  And people are starting to talk about a pressing need to increase expenditure in mitigation and environmental protection as what appears to be a new norm settles in.  Now is the time to prioritise environmental issues over fiscal issues.

From Matthew Scott at Newsroom:

Forest & Bird’s Auckland regional manager Carl Morgan said cuts to water quality targeted rates and funding to community groups involved in the restoration and care of the region’s wetlands and rivers could exacerbate the destruction of future weather events.

“It seems environmental stuff is the first on the chopping block – I assume that’s because people don’t think they are directly affected by it or haven’t seen the effect,” he said.

But following the anniversary weekend deluge, he said the impact of climate change should increase in visibility.

“We see quite clearly now the real-world implications of climate change,” he said. “It is happening.”

It is clear to see what issue Mayor Brown is treating as a priority:

If we don’t take bold action now, Aucklanders face the unpalatable prospect of over 13 percent increase in rates in the middle of a cost-of-living crisis,” he said in his proposal, aiming for a “prudent and sustainable financial path going forward”.

What he should have said is that if we don’t take bold action now Aucklanders face the unpalatable prospect of parts of the city becoming uninhabitable in the middle of an environmental crisis.  We have to be aiming for a sustainable environment.  Money will be useless on a dead planet.

Reprinted from gregpresland.com.

50 comments on “Is it too early to talk about climate change? ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Ghostwhowalksnz 1
    13 February 2023 at 10:00 am

    Water quality targeted rates werent related to stormwater volume improvement for floods and such.

    It was stream quality , which often comes down to mitigation with rain gardens and road runoff into ponds to allow natural processes to improve quality

    https://www.aucklanddesignmanual.co.nz/regulations/technical-guidance/wsd

    of course each new development is expected to address these quality issues in their plans, and at the developers cost

    The previous ‘water Quality rate’ has been subsumed into general rates rather than a special charge on the rates bill
    The money was proposed to be spent like this

    The proposed investment would fund:
    • stormwater upgrades and waste water/stormwater separation in the Western Isthmus
    • infrastructure for stormwater contaminant removal across the region – e.g. Kaipara
    • rehabilitation of urban and rural streams – e.g. Oamaru creek in East Tamaki
    • introduction of a proactive regional septic tank monitoring programme.
    https://ourauckland.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/media/0iyhgcxj/attachment-b-water-quality-targeted-rate.pdf

    • Ghostwhowalksnz 1.1
      13 February 2023 at 10:15 am

      For the previous historical big storms for Auckland, all in early to mid feb from cyclones

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1936_New_Zealand_cyclone

      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_storm_of_1868

      • Incognito 1.1.1
        13 February 2023 at 2:37 pm

        Oh look, you’ve dug up again a few records of historical weather events. Are you going to compare them again to Wellington, just like your hero Wayne Brown did when he desperately tried to divert and deflect from his own shambolic performance and as you did before here on TS? Again, what is your point?

        • Ghostwhowalksnz 1.1.1.1
          13 February 2023 at 3:01 pm

          Oh dear oh dear .

          Remember the local TV series 'The GC'

          It was said. if you didnt get the point, it wasnt targeted for you! Find something else.

          But is your point really to shut me down as your comments are just babble

          [Pointless comments are considered a form of trolling.

          Don’t be so stubborn and defensive and just clarify the point you tried to make without making it and instead relying on mind reading and/or other people making assumptions. For example, what is the point of bringing up the Great Strom of 1868? How is this relevant to having this conversation about Climate Change in 2023?

          Is that too hard for you or asked too much? – Incognito]

    • lprent 1.2
      13 February 2023 at 2:27 pm

      Water quality targeted rates werent related to stormwater volume improvement for floods and such.

      Your statement is complete bullshit.

      stormwater upgrades and waste water/stormwater separation in the Western Isthmus

      Which because they are doing the separation, ie digging up the pipes, reorganising them, and mostly swapping them out for new pipe (because most of those affected are at least 80 years old). When swapping out pipe, they have to be changed to the current infrastructure standards and to the capacity to handle the current and proposed infill housing.

      Consequently if you ever have look in the holes, you'd find that the storm water pipe being replaced with nearly double the diameter of the old pipe. I think that thye also increased the size of the sewerage as well.

      rehabilitation of urban and rural streams…

      Most of which is removing the containment on the stream bounds and in the stream beds. That provides higher volume stream beds. Which has three side-effects.

      • It stops the streams operating as a water race and thereby enhancing downstream fast runoff effects at any choke point.
      • It increases the capacity of water in the stream bed, most of which winds up as frictional turbulent flow because it increases the ground to water surface area. That buffers sudden water flows by dissipating energy.
      • It stops people building stupid containment of natural water flows like teeny highway culverts that cause flooding.

      How can you not consider that both of those are not storm water "volume improvement". Because that is exactly what their main effect is.

  2. Hunter Thompson II 2
    13 February 2023 at 10:24 am

    It may not seem relevant right now, given the excess of water descending from the skies, but the forecasters are talking about a dry 2024 summer.

    Apparently this will be caused by the phasing out of La Nina and a return to El Nino conditions.

    Climate change with a vengeance.

    • Ghostwhowalksnz 2.1
      13 February 2023 at 11:11 am

      They predicted this summer for the region would be average to above average rainfall.

      They were also way way out on the previous two summers which were the driest on record

      Clearly they arent there yet on getting 3 months ahead right let alone next year.

      • Nic the NZer 2.1.1
        14 February 2023 at 8:26 am

        Accurate weather forecasts will never be possible more than a month ahead. This is due to the butterfly effect on the fluid dynamics equations for modeling the weather. In practice forecasts lose all skill (same as, may as well be forecasting the average weather for time of year every day) around 2 weeks out.

        The seasonal forecasts are not telling you specific forecasts day to day and present somewhat skillful results, but there is a lot of uncertainty around this.

    • Thinker 2.2
      13 February 2023 at 6:41 pm

      So I heard, too, but also that, even allowing for La Nina and El Nino effect, this is still an impact of Climate Change.

      I do wonder, though, whether the media capability today means that we have it bombarding us far greater than before.

      I was much younger when Cyclone Bola struck, but we never saw it as the bringer or permanent change, nor was it. Did we even have the statistic of 1-in-100 storm then? Added to this, a much higher population means more people get affected by crises like this.

      We've built some of our new homes on land that was rejected by previous generations and more of us are sharing infrastructure that was neglected by generations of politicians since most of our living memories.

      Don't get me wrong – I'm not saying climate change isn't real. Just hoping that this isn't the new normal.

      • Ghostwhowalksnz 2.2.1
        14 February 2023 at 1:19 pm

        Yes the '1 in 100' weather has been around for a very long time. Its actually a statistical definition of 1% occurrence in an single year- which is why it can happen more than often than only every 100 years ( 1 in a 100 yrs , is a media shorthand but is sensible for the average reader)

        This intense cyclone seems to be more of a 1 in 75 years event for Auckland.

        As the big cyclonic storms previously – all in early to mid February- were 1936 and before that 1868.

        The rainfall around 10 days back was more like 1 in 200 years but was exceeded 170 yrs back.

        • In Vino 2.2.1.1
          15 February 2023 at 10:45 pm

          Reply to Thinker

          Bola was remarkable because it strangely stopped and sat off Gisborne's coast for quite a while, and it punished the local area terribly.

          Gabrielle was more powerful, and we are dead lucky that she did not what Bola did. Gabrielle kindly moved on..

          OK?

          • Ghostwhowalksnz 2.2.1.1.1
            16 February 2023 at 9:06 am

            The track data shows Bola didnt sit off the Gisborne coast

            It may surprise you, like me, where it did go

  3. Sanctuary 3
    13 February 2023 at 10:27 am

    Auckland's climate has changed in just the 23-24 years I have lived here. When I moved to Auckland in 1999 winters usually came with at least a week of frosts somewhere long the line. The summers have always been a bit… uncertain, especially for a someone who grew up in Hawkes Bay and assumed summers were long, dry and hot (and winters cold, crisp and clear).

    But summers have changed because whereas they've always been a bit dreary in Auckland this combination of incessant rain, tropical deluges and regular sub-tropical storms is something new. Auckland basically has the summer climate of the wrong side of the mountain on a mid-Pacific island, without the fun bits.

    It is climate change for sure.

    • tc 3.1
      13 February 2023 at 1:55 pm

      Totally. Those milder winters also aren't killing off the insects or allowing fruit trees required rest time in between seasons so yields suffer.

      Feel for anyone growing for a living currently. We've lost heaps just through water splitting produce still on the plant not mature yet.

      • Sanctuary 3.1.1
        13 February 2023 at 3:13 pm

        Our peach tree isn't doing it's thing like it used to, I guess we will have to replace it with a mango.

  4. Tony Veitch 4
    13 February 2023 at 10:39 am

    Not too early to talk about climate change – but 30 – 50 years too late.

    Courtesy of the fossil fuel industry (for one) who, like BP are more intent on sportswashing (see TV1 sports news)their destruction of the planet than actually working to mitigate their damage!

    • James Simpson 4.1
      13 February 2023 at 11:37 am

      The conversation needs to focus on how we live in this new world.

      Town planning, civil construction and engineering, cant continue in the same way as they did for the last 100 years. We live in a new normal now and we have to adapt in the way we live and build things.

      I'm optimistic that we can pivot as required. As a nation we always have.

  5. tsmithfield 5
    13 February 2023 at 11:51 am

    I think that there will need to be something similar to what we had in Christchurch for red-zoned land, where residents had the option for the government to buy out either at land and house value, or at house replacement value, and land value, depending what affected residents decide is best for them.

    Probably this sequence of weather events should be sufficient to identify where the problems are, and will likely be in the future. So, it should be a fairly easy exercise to work that out I expect. Otherwise, it won't take long for insurance companies to make that decision by refusing to insure at-risk areas.

  6. Stuart Munro 6
    13 February 2023 at 4:19 pm

    I'm with Tony Veitch. We're not poised to limit warming to 2 degrees – we might manage 3 if we go all-out, but we're not. Looks like a bumpy landing.

  7. Jenny are we there yet 7
    13 February 2023 at 4:46 pm

    It is definitely not too early to talk about climate change, Jacinda Ardern talked about climate change in her first ever campaign launch speech as the leader of the Labour Party.

    As we all know, Jacinda Ardern was driven from office by a vile right wing hate campaign before she could finish her full tenure as our elected Prime Minister.

    Is it too early to talk about climate change?

    Is it too early to make climate change an election issue?

    Is it too early to go to the polls to seek a mandate to actually cut our greenhouse emissions?

    https://environment.govt.nz/news/nzs-greenhouse-gas-emissions-have-increased/

    "There will always be those who say it's too difficult. There will be those who say we are too small, and that pollution and climate change are the price of progress,"

    "They are wrong."

    "This is my generation's nuclear-free moment, and I am determined that we will tackle it head on."

    Jacinda Ardern 20/08/2017

    https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/election/2017/08/jacinda-ardern-climate-change-is-my-generation-s-nuclear-free-moment.html

    The determined almost Churchillian leadership given during the corona 19 pandemic.

    The compassionate inclusive leadership shown during the 2019 white supremacist attack on the two mosques in Christchurch.

    Too bad that Jacinda Ardern was driven from office before she could properly act on her generation's nuclear free moment.

    The same leadership brought to bear on successfully reversing our rising emissions, would again have made this country globally admired.

    Will Chris Hipkins repeat Jacinda Ardern's words, that climate change is my generation's nuclear free moment?

    Will Chris Hipkins restate that we are determined to tackle climate change head on?

    In his first campaign launch speech will Chris Hipkins announce any concrete measures to cut our emissions, and by so doing seek a mandate from the electorate to do it?

  8. Thinker 8
    13 February 2023 at 6:19 pm

    At least Hipkins won't call it a "…little experiment…"

  9. Mike the Lefty 9
    14 February 2023 at 8:10 am

    Its actually too late.

    Whatever is done now will only delay things like extraordinary weather events and collapse of the world's marine ecosystem due to acidification of the seas. They now cannot be prevented.

    It is all going to happen because human kind put their fingers in their ears when scientists told them what would happen and carried on raping the planet and making their billions.

    The most unfair part of it is that the ones most responsible for it will not suffer the worst consequences, it will be their grandchildren and great-grandchildren.

  10. Ad 10
    14 February 2023 at 9:08 am

    Hardly any point 'talking about climate change' like it's some medium term policy-fest when we now have a full-on declared national emergency, only the third in our country's history.

    • roy cartland 10.1
      14 February 2023 at 10:24 am

      Maybe that's the way to frame it – we're not trying to influence the climate for everyone else, but there is a hell of a lot we can do to improve the future for ourselves. What would you call that if Climate Change is too wishy-washy?

      • Ad 10.1.1
        14 February 2023 at 9:23 pm

        I would call it a national emergency and start from there.

        You can do quite a lot in politics with momentum.

        Finding a farmer complaining now about Three Waters is like trying to find an atheist in a fox-hole.

  11. Jenny are we there yet 11
    14 February 2023 at 9:17 am

    "I know what you all must be thinking. The day has come, we're all going to go down etc. etc." King Arnold, High Brazil Is Not Sinking

    We keep raising our greenhouse emissions year on year. We raise public transport costs, and widen our motorways to make way for more cars.
    We keep digging, importing and burning coal. We keep increasing our national dairy herd.
    We all sing from the same song sheet about being carbon neutral by 2050. Yet do nothing to save ourselves.

  12. SPC 12
    14 February 2023 at 5:59 pm

    Are we more or less resilient in managing emergency circumstances without copper land lines?

    I realise private companies don't want the cost, but so what? To lose the capability has consequences.

    Sure big government can more easily spy on internet broadband or cell tower phones without a warrant, but again, so what.

    Any proper response to this, is to restore land lines.

    The other option of phone charging points not dependent on mains power supply has people dependent on access to them (mobility).

  13. arkie 13
    14 February 2023 at 6:45 pm

    James Shaw reflects on the time spent delaying climate action:

    I don't think I've ever felt as sad or as angry about the lost decades that we spent bickering and arguing about whether climate change was real or not, whether it was caused by humans or not, whether it was bad or not, whether we should do something about it or not, because it is clearly here now. And if we do not act it will get worse.

    …

    We need to stop making excuses for inaction. We cannot put our heads in the sand when the beach is flooding. We must act now.

    • Jenny are we there yet 13.1
      15 February 2023 at 6:25 am

      This is a Minister, outside of cabinet, who instead of putting hard demands on the government, (that he is nominally part of), to cut emissions has instead wasted his whole time in parliament trying to get 'consensus' with the climate change deniers in the opposition National and Act parties.

      And he is still at it.

      Greens' James Shaw looks for cross-party support for new climate change rules

      Anna Whyte05:00, Feb 01 2023

      https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/131108992/greens-james-shaw-looks-for-crossparty-support-for-new-climate-change-rules

      The weird thing about Shaw's latest quixotic attempt to get consensus with the Nacts on climate change is that Shaw is not even trying to get them to address climate change itself by agreeing to cut emissions, but to get them to agree that we at the very least need to manage the retreat from its effects.

      James Shaw argues that climate change be "non-partisan”. Really?

      During the covid pandemic prioritising public health over private profits proved a very partisan divide.

      National prides itself on being the party of business, they reject regulation of business either to protect the publics health or the health of the planet

      Ignoring the partisan nature of climate change is ignoring reality.

      Prioritising making money over the environment and the climate is why we have climate change.

      If James Shaw really thinks climate change can be a non-partisan issue, maybe he should join the National Party and argue the case for the climate there.

      • arkie 13.1.1
        15 February 2023 at 8:12 am

        This is a particularly shallow and Manichean take.

        Cross-party support is to ensure any progress is not immediately walked back by successive governments. Seeking it also demonstrates other parties willingness to confront the reality of the situation. Clarifying for an attentive voter.

        If we want more urgency we must elect more Greens so that they cannot be excluded from cabinet decision-making and they needn't rely on convincing those only seeking power or tax breaks for business.

        • weka 13.1.1.1
          15 February 2023 at 8:14 am

          exactly this.

          and working on consensus also changes people's minds and helps them take different actions. Not everyone is ideologically hardwired to greed and powermongering. Some people do it out of habit and lack of opportunity to do it differently.

        • Jenny are we there yet 13.1.1.2
          15 February 2023 at 7:18 pm

          According to wikipedia Manicheanism is an ancient religion that believed that the world is equally divided into good and evil.

          Personally I believe in the power of good to triumph over evil. But I also believe for that to happen it takes courage, it takes leadership, and it takes effort.

          As you your accusation that my comment is shallow.

          In your opinion, Arkie; Should David Lange have waited till he got consensus from the National opposition before banning nuclear armed warships from our harbours?

          If you really think that is the course that Lange should have taken we would still be waiting for New Zealand to be nuclear weapons free. Even though National vowed many times to repeal the nuclear free legislation they never did.

          This is because the nuclear free legislation did not come fully formed like Athena from the head of Zeus. It had to be hard fought for and argued in parliament and in the court of public opinion. Which took leadership. Which took courage. Which took effort.

          Because there is another factor at play than the wishes of politicians. Which is the will of the people, which had to be won over by leaders like Lange who took a stand and fought for it.

          To repeal the anti-nuclear legislation the public would have had to be won over by the Nats the other way. Which would also have meant taking a stand and fighting for it. (Obviously too much of an effort for them).

          Progressive change never comes from back room horse trading.

          If like Shaw instead of giving a lead and fighting for it, you are waiting on the laggards to catch up, you are actually letting the laggards lead.

          If I could make a prediction. It is this; James Shaw will leave office with New Zealand's level of Greenhouse emissions higher than when he started.

          As for getting more Green MPs or even getting them into cabinet, if they follow the Shaw model they will also achieve nothing.

          • arkie 13.1.1.2.1
            16 February 2023 at 10:05 am

            Black/white thinking, without acknowledging that the world is actually shades of grey, is Manichean.

            Your inapt comparison of the nuclear free declaration and lack of action on climate change shows the shallow thinking.

            What single piece of legislation could James Shaw or the Green party pass equivalent to the nuclear free declaration? They aren't the government, they aren't in cabinet, they rely on convincing larger parties to take it seriously.

            It is fundamentally unserious to think that lack of action on climate change is the responsibility of the Greens or due to Shaw. The blame lies with the parties with legislative control, they are the reason greenhouse emissions are higher, that we are achieving very little, that is what Shaw is highlighting.

            If you want action on climate change, if you want truly left-wing advocacy for the most vulnerable, then you don't really have another choice. All other parties in parliament have demonstrated their priorities. The Green party and Te Pāti Māori are the strong and vocal left we need. If we keep voting for Labour we can expect more of what we have now.

            • Jenny are we there yet 13.1.1.2.1.1
              16 February 2023 at 3:36 pm

              “They aren't the government, they aren't in cabinet, they rely on convincing larger parties to take it seriously.”

              Absolutely 100% agree. I wish James Shaw was doing that.

              "Your inapt comparison of the nuclear free declaration and lack of action on climate change shows the shallow thinking."

              My comparison isn't inapt.

              My comparison of the nuclear free declaration and lack of action on climate change is not inapt or shallow, because In 1984 the Labour Party, (who weren't in power at the time), convinced, (your word), the National Party MPs Marylin Waring and Mike Minogue to cross the floor to vote for an opposition Members Bill to make New Zealand nuclear free.
              In an effort to prevent the vote being taken,. Muldoon's response was to immediately disband parliament and call a snap election to prevent his MPs voting for the opposition Labour Party Legislation.

              Much to Muldoon's dismay, the Labour Party won the snap election in a landslide. This was the true pivotal moment where New Zealand became nuclear free.

              It can be argued with some merit I feel, that Labour's landslide victory was because of their campaign against nuclear weapons in our ports, when they were in opposition.

              Just like the Green MPs now, Labour MPs weren't in the cabinet they weren't even in government, but it didn't deter them or become an excuse for doing nothing.

              All politics is pressure

              As the Climate Change Minister, James Shaw, although he is Minister outside of Cabinet, is in a far stronger position now to lobby the government MPs to vote to cut our emissions than Lange was in 1984. Lange wasn't PM or even a Minister when he swung parliament to vote to make New Zealand nuclear free.

              Instead of wasting his time struggling to get the National opposition to agree to some badly watered down non-binding legislation to cut down our emissions sometime in the future, (before 2050), the Climate Change Minister should be putting pressure on the Labour Party Government to agree to put in some binding legislation to cut emissions now.

              Which is what Greenpeace are doing.

              Greenpeace are running a petition to pressure the government to take some binding action on climate change now.

              "What single piece of legislation could James Shaw or the Green party pass equivalent to the nuclear free declaration?"

              Howabout what Greenpeace have put up.?

              The Greenpeace petition demands are as follows;

              •Phase out the use of synthetic nitrogen fertiliser

              •Stop the use of imported feed, like palm kernel expeller

              •Support farmers to shift to diverse, regenerative and organic farming

              •Halve the dairy herd by 2030

              The Green Party and the Climate Change Minister should be putting as much pressure as they can, on the government to get them to agree to the Greenpeace petition.. They can do this right now by putting up an opposition Bill in parliament and begin lmmediately lobbying Labour MPs to back it.

              Whether the Green Party Members Bill passes or fails, by raising the issue of climate change in a concrete way inside parliament and debating the issue out, and challenging the government MPs to make a decision on it, it will allow the Green MPs to argue the merits of the case and in doing so raise their profile and cause with voters.

              And maybe like the Labour opposition in 1984 having the issue thrashed out in the debating chamber will result in what's at stake being understood by many more than now. And maybe also like what it did for Labour in 1984 result in a pay off in more voter support for the Greens.

              Will history repeat?

              Who knows?

              But it's worth a shot.

              Sign the petition

              Make it a Members Bill

              https://petition.act.greenpeace.org.nz/agriculture-climate-action-plan

              • arkie …
                16 February 2023 at 4:09 pm

                You are obviously unaware of what the Greens have been doing:

                Phase out the use of synthetic nitrogen fertiliser

                Most of the Government’s environment committee oppose a bid to end controversial synthetic nitrate fertiliser use by 2024, but Green Party representatives are still backing further action.

                …

                “The Green Party believes measures to reduce urgently and then phase out synthetic nitrogen fertiliser are required,” Sage said.

                10 May 2022 The Labour Party cabinet decided otherwise.

                Stop the use of imported feed, like palm kernel expeller

                The Green Party is calling for a ban on the import of palm kernel expeller (PKE) for animal feed.

                Green Party agriculture spokesman Teanau Tuiono published an open letter to Agriculture Minister Damien O’Connor​ on Thursday saying because the high-protein feed is sourced from palm trees that have in some areas replaced tropical rain forests, PKE imports should be stopped by 2025.

                The party wants a phase-out policy included in the Emissions Reduction Plan due out May 2022.

                December 11 2021 Labour omitted this from the Emissions Reduction plan.

                Support farmers to shift to diverse, regenerative and organic farming

                Green co-leader James Shaw said New Zealanders had a “once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to transform the way we grow and produce food and fibre”.

                He said the party wanted to help farms decarbonise, which will be essential to meeting New Zealand’s climate change commitments.

                “The reality is that the way we currently farm is accelerating climate change.

                “For decades, successive governments have focused purely on profit, treating farms as factories.

                “They have ignored the land’s status as a precious ecosystem in itself,” Shaw said.

                To fix that, the party announced a $297 million fund to help farmers go green.

                The party’s “farming for the future” policy would take the current the Sustainable Food and Fibre Futures Fund and turn it into what the Greens call a Healthy Food and Farming Fund.

                That fund currently has an annual budget of $40m a year. The Greens want to top it up to $297m over the next three years paid for in part by a levy on the sale of nitrogen and phosphorous fertilisers.

                September 12 2020

                Halve the dairy herd by 2030

                In the latest Newshub Reid Research poll we asked: "Do you think New Zealand needs to reduce livestock numbers to combat climate change?"

                The results show 50.4 percent – half of the country – said no, while 37.6 percent said yes and 12 percent didn't know.

                "Our view is that we don't need to cull herd sizes but we do need to do is actually lead the world in finding the technology and the solutions that we need," says National's Christopher Luxon.

                The Climate Change Minister is steering clear of cutting herds.

                "It's not my decision to increase or decrease herd sizes. What I am trying to do is make sure that we find solutions to how we reduce pollution from the agriculture sector as well as every other sector in the economy," Shaw says.

                9 February 2022

                The Greens have been advocating for these changes for a long time but people would rather blame them for not burning their political capital in an oppositional and non-collaborative approach to governance. This would backfire in our modern MMP system. Power must be shared these days, only Labour has had the opportunity to institute these changes wholesale, and they haven't. They're also unlikely to want to work with a party that positions itself in opposition to them. This is why it's shallow and inapt comparison with little understanding of how political parties and advocacy groups differ.

                • Jenny are we there yet …
                  16 February 2023 at 6:57 pm

                  "The Greens have been advocating for these changes for a long time but people would rather blame them for not burning their political capital in an oppositional and non-collaborative approach to governance. This would backfire in our modern MMP system. Power must be shared these days…."

                  So I am guessing the Green Party won't be putting in any members bill in support of the Greenpeace initiative then?

                  Will the Green Party be giving any support at all for the Greenpeace petition?

                  Will the Green Party spokespeople at the very least be issuing a statement in support of the Greenpeace petition?

  14. Ad 14
    14 February 2023 at 9:21 pm

    Shriekback from four years ago rather takes it to the recalcitrants and retrogrades among the farming community when facing climate crises, in this number from four years ago – and if you care to listen as usual it's Shriekback's supple sliding grind that drives their thinking home:

    Some spooky cowboy voodoo what did you do on the plain?
    Marlboro man is decomposing got Jack Daniels on the brain
    All the fatal hesitation in opening the files
    Incidental caterwauling of the lord of the flies

    Some neat holistic vision deft incisions sliced around
    There’s a different city showing now the weather’s broken down
    A little nuclear friction upending all the lies
    Got sunburst and distortion on these unsceptred isles

    When the half-light starts to rise
    And the long gone come back again
    After the shortcuts and the highs
    Comes the pain
    And the rain and the rain and the rain
    And the rain and the rain and the rain

    Some hokey-cokey money sweet as honey nothing found
    There’s a Bitcoin river rising the dam is coming down
    A hint of degradation hanging on a sigh
    Now slogans and perversions just don’t raise a smile

    As the deep force evolves a form
    When the dead loss outweighs the gain
    Inside the cold eye of the storm
    Hides the shame
    And the rain and the rain and the rain
    And the rain and the rain and the rain

    And the rain
    And the rain keeps falling
    And the rain
    And the rain keeps falling
    And the rain
    And the rain keeps falling
    And the rain
    And the rain keeps falling…

    When the half-light starts to rise
    And the long gone come back again
    After the shortcuts and the highs
    Comes the pain
    And the rain and the rain and the rain
    And the rain and the rain and the rain
    And the rain and the rain and the rain
    And the rain and the rain and the rain