Written By:
- Date published:
11:14 am, August 29th, 2009 - 51 comments
Categories: uncategorized -
Tags: Conservation, Mining
The Conservation Minister, Tim Groser is quoted today:
“If you can extract wealth from that [conservation land], that’s what we should do.”
and goes on to label any opposition to this clear intent as ’emotional hysteria’.
While it was obvious that Brownlee was indulging in dishonest double-speak with his ‘stocktake’ earlier this week; we now have a second senior Minister, the minister responsible for advocating conservation for God’s sake, now flatly confirming that if they can make a buck from it, then it’s up for sale.
If there is one thing that become obvious in the last few days, well to me at least, is that what I fondly imagined were well protected places like our National Parks, are in fact highly vulnerable to exploitation by the mining industry. There do not appear to be any effective legislative barriers to mining at all.
Groser said the standard consultation provisions of the Resource Management Act would apply.
This would be the same RMA National is already committed to watering down? The same ‘standard consultation provisions’ that they have promised to greatly curtail?
However, his office later confirmed DOC controlled only access to mining sites, while the Minister of Energy and Resources granted permits to prospect, explore or mine.
So in the final analysis, mining in our National Parks is a decision made in a Ministers office, with no binding accountability to Parliament or the public.
Environment and Conservation Organisations spokesman Barry Weeber said miners enjoyed special status and were not subject to the usual provisions that applied to other activities on conservation land.
The only real safeguards were the prohibitions on surface activity under the fourth schedule of the Crown Minerals Act, which did not prevent mining in conservation parks, marine mammal sanctuaries, or in world heritage areas.
Given that any mine, underground, open cast, mineral or lignite, demands at the very least a road access.. the only effective safeguard from conservation perspective is that the Department of Conservation might choose to object to it. The same department whose Minister is now publically committed to not objecting.
A few days ago it was a ‘stocktake’, now its ‘small discrete’ mines with suitable protections…but ultimately the upper limit of exploitiation is simply what the Minister of Energy will approve… and this govt is telling us that if it’s there, then it should be dug up and sold.
I’m frightened.
RL – great post. I’m frightened too.
First they came for our conservation land…
By the way just because you can do something, doesn’t mean you should. I mean, I can throw poohs at John Key when he walks down the street – should I?
No that’s assault, and while it might make you feel better would be counterproductive in the arena of public opinion. On the other hand shoes might just work.
‘just because you can do something doesn’t mean you SHOULD’!
FFS I am gob smacked to be honest… this is either complete National party arrogance or plain stupidity.
I would expect a huge backlash ..huge
What are these bastards thinking ? Its like they come from a different planet
I could burn down Brownlee’s electorate office
I would feel guilty about that extra carbon being released though
Still….. that what you get from having emotional hysteria
The problem that capitalists have is that the sources of wealth are drying up and so growth cannot continue. Capitalism needs growth in markets else profits go down, interest can’t be paid and the whole financial system collapses. To encourage further growth the NACT party will look to the untapped sources of wealth – the conservation estates.
Capitalism: A cancer upon our world.
Well JK is doing well
Fucked the Maori Party vote
Gives Winnie a chance to comeback / opening on the child beating bill
and now creates a rallying point for the Green party.
I certainly will be dusting out the treehugger T shirts and preparing to lay down in front of bulldozers (all be it on an air-bed these days :-))
so how many live in concrete jungles so very environmentaly sustainable arent they. so typical green you expect people other than yourself to be green but not you.whats wrong with a small part of forest or river expolited for wealth for our nation. i doubt any of you people have been to the west coast of the south island were towns and goldmines that existed over 100 years all you will find now is forest. the bush covers up were man has been quite quickly. if you want a welfare state it must be paid for we cant all live in comunes and wash our clothes in the creek and bluge off others
What a crock of crap Graham, there are plenty of contributors here who don’t live in concrete jungles or on communes, as you would know if you bothered to read any of the comments. And plenty who contribute buckets of tax to the government, whether or not they agree with what the government is doing with that money.
What is wrong with exploiting a small part of a forest or a river is that we have, as a species, highly modified and exploited most of the country. The remaining untouched areas are particularly precious, and regenerating bush is never as valuable (and not merely in economic terms) as unmodified land. The national parks were reserved as conservation estate for good reasons and NACT saying “Hang on, we could make money out of this” does not easily outweigh the original reasons for setting the land aside. There are many people out there who don’t think the grass desert you live in is as beautiful as the land was before it was cleared.
Turn your spell-checker on.
so capitalism is a cancer . go on move to the great north korea its so much better. or china you cant complain about the state their or you will be arrested. typical sickly white socalists full of talk but full of s*** . they complain about capitalism but take the hand out from the dole office or bluge off the union system.in my view if you hate our system either pick up a gun or go to north korea where i sure they will welcome you with open arms
Dad?
I have been to the West Coast on several occasions
It is beautiful and tourism is a huge earner
Mining = Australians taking money out and is unustainable
Tourism = Australians bring money in and is sustainable
Tricky choice eh?
NZ tourism sustainable eh?
Only if you ignore the carbon that it took to get here.
After a fire in the bush at Lake Waikaremoana it has taken nearly a hundred years for the bush to recover to a point where it is no longer different. Quickly recover, Graham?
The money that mining would produce will largely go offshore. Net gain for NZ? Very little.
Tim Groser should be fighting tooth and nail to protect. I bet Nick Smith would!
The problem that capitalists have is that the sources of wealth are drying up and so growth cannot continue
The problem with leftists is the sources of wealth are not drying up and so they need to fight tooth and nail to prevent them being utilized – in order to keep the peasants poor and their power intact.
The problem with leftists is the sources of wealth are not drying up
Drying up? Well most certainly they are finite, and that is unquestionably a problem for capitalists whose system entirely depends on the fiction of endless growth.
As for ‘keeping the peasants poor’, it’s the kind of comment we ‘lefties’ like to leave in a thread as a statement about yourself, far more convicting than anything I could say.
Yes, drying up
The Trouble With Energy:
Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4
Humans do not create wealth – they take it from nature.
I’m frightened too redlogix.
This issue should be ramped way up. People should start stomping around and getting all emotional about it. Fuck Groser.
I’m with you fullas on this one.
Thanks, that’s genuinely appreciated.
I guess we’ll still go ding dong on most other left/right issues, but I’ll take the horns off my little mental picture of you here on in.
“can’t remember vote for us we will mine National parks”
being a policy in the 2008 National party election campaign
for some strange reason
“If you can extract wealth from that [conservation land], that’s what we should do.’
What like tourism ?
Do you think Mr Groser knows that it is AFTER the rape and pillage that you burn?
Anybody else notice what chip Brown Lee had on NatRad?
On the afternoon show – Mary Whatshername – he twice said “Well, what do you think? You’re doing all the talking” when she interrupted him to ask questions. He was obviously very intolerant of her stopping his pre-prepared spiel to ask questions.
On Morning report after they’d played a couple of clips before his interview he came on with “Well, that’s exactly what I’d expect of national radio”.
He just sounded arrogant. Similiar response to NatRad as your average ACT supporter actually.
Mary Whatshername
Mary Bloody Wilson as my partner likes to call her… for her charming habit of tearing hapless ministers and bureacrats to shreds.
yes i heard both and thought exactly the same
He is not a nice man
So in the final analysis, mining in our National Parks is a decision made in a Ministers office, with no binding accountability to Parliament or the public.
Puts a lie to the term “public property” doesn’t it. It is state property and state property is not public property. It is excludary of the public. Private enterprises are getting privileged access to what should be the common property of the people. It is just another case of the state granting privileges.
Who is Brown Lee? Oh Brownlee. I wonder as always if it is part of the strategy to deflect?
the green desert is what pays the bills moron . the fact is everything is modified so lets makes some money to pay for the green bludgers
So much for the blue/green brand.
To even suggest that world heritage sites should be mined to extend mindless consumerism is shocking.
who here has seen the blue lake at st bathans or climbed ben ohau and looked across the mckenzie basin and seen lake benmore how can you say that development is wrong. with irrigation the basin would see a huge growth in gdp for our nation.that is what i dont get we need wealth to pay for welfare state if we dont we will turn into a third world nation . what dont you get!!!!!!
Graham dearest… it’s called ‘not taking everything’. You can develop and exploit, but only up to a limit. We have to leave some wilderness.
RL – I was going to pursue this one with graham too, but thought the better of it. I think the phrase is “never argue with an idiot, they drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.”
thats my point how much land does doc have tied up and how much is required you will find my friend that we are not talking about much land. some people are just opposed to any development
The reason why we’re headed to an anthropogenic ELE is because we’ve exploited the world ecosystems far too much.
Makes you all nostalgic for Helen. Under her rule the Country was adding to the public estate as fast as possible. Under National it is going to be farmed, mined and whatevered as long as there is a dollar to be made.
under helens rule surpus were wasted so that when bad times came their was nothing left in the cupboard only bills so national has to find money to pay for labours stupidity
Actually graham, under Clark and Cullen the surpluses were used to pay down our debt so that we would be in better standing. As keeps being pointed out, go talk to your man Bill English. He reckons they did the right thing.
Graham
You must exist in some parallel universe.
Quote some figures, point to the treasury analysis (there is tons of stuff on their website) or otherwise either apologise or STFU.
There is nothing worse than an ignorant troll.
to armchair critic i surpose in your eyes i am a fool .i work hard i make lots of money and i am very fucking rich and i pay bugger all tax and get working for families god i love this country
doesnt that make you somewhat of a bludger and rorter?
to redlogix what is the limit? to the greens its nothing to tim its a little the point is who represents more of new zealand tim or the greens.
Hey Graham ! Define “very fucking rich”. (sunday arvo feel like a giggle folks)
6 million more than you arseholes
Graham,
You sad sad man. Sorry mate $6m does not cut it . .. . That ain’t rich.
And if you were accumulating weath, as opposed to speculating on property you would be paying tax . .
By the way, the Blue Lake is green because of effluent, the bush does not regenerate on the East Coast .. . not for 1000 years . .. (as the climate has warmed). Have you been to Macraes Flat, and looked down into the pit (that is the Aussie owned gold mine in Otago for you guys who live in the concrete jungle)? That is what Brownlee and Groser want for our National Parks , , ,
New Zealand is not WA. We accept the changes that come with dairying as we accept NZ needs to accumulate wealth. What Brownlee and Groser are talking about is completely different. Open the National Parks to mining and NZ changes for ever . ..
And your anger to those posters here who care about our environment and what we bequeath our children is truly pathetic . ..
sk you loser how much wealth do u have i have gone from zero to 6 million in 8 years . those posers in the greens want to leave to my children a third world nation with nice trees
[This is flaming. Either make a coherent argument, preferably with a spell-checker turned on, or be moderated off the thread. Consider this a learning opportunity. RL]
just beautiful, and this is Monday morning?
We have turned conversions into a speculative game, and now have $40bn of debt against dairy farms. Our basic game in NZ is to borrow from foreigners and drive up the value of land . . any land.
Remember when a kid could start out on a dairy farm as a worker, learn the game, become a share-milker, and then buy a farm . .. working hard and accumulating the whole time . .
Well Graham, those days are gone. Conversions on the whole have been good, but the speculation that you salute has wrecked it . . .
A bit more reflection, and bit less anger and abuse would go a long way . .
And by the way, show and tell is a game played by losers . .
So , Graham. Why are you so angry?
As an owner of hundreds of acres and a lifetime planter of trees i know that tourism is worth $21 billion a year to NZ and provides thousands of jobs.As does forestry in remote rural areas. That money stays in NZ. Mining is a $2billion p.a . industry and the profits go offshore. It’s what they call a no brainer. Bit like Brownlie.
I really like it that no one has tried to defend these actions. Well no one rational anyway.
Something worth remembering is that every part of NZ was a National Park at one stage (no, not literally), until it met some form of ‘development’. The 13% that DoC administers now is the sum of largely undeveloped land, although a lot of that is more accident (think undevelopable areas like Te Wahipounamu) than design (Tongariro), and there is still some effects of development in these areas.
Now it appears that where there is economic value anything is to be exploited. What does this say about NZ? That the 100% pure image only came about because there was no financial incentive to ruin large tracts of NZ, but if there is a chance that we could make a buck we will jump at it.
i talked about refton and the gold mines not being visable now i suggest you look at a map as it is on the west coast were trees grow like crazy
It is not about trees growing over damaged parts of the land, and they do not grow well over open cast mines as it is.
Do you really think that is the problem, and that trees patching over damaged land is the extent of the problem? Are the depths of your understanding so limited that you think that if there is a mine and then trees grow where the mine was then everything is fine?
To sum it up, you are only aware of 0.1% of the problem, and your solution covers about 5% of that 0.1%.
I mean sure, there is a right to speak, but then did no one tell you about “if you have nothing intelligent to say…”?
Graham,The fastest growing pines (pinus radiata that is millable in 16- 18 years) and NZ greatest diversity of native trees are to be found in the Far North . Ever been there?