WE Aotearoa

Justice speech to Wellington District Law Society

2008-09-26T15:40:00.000+12:00

Kia ora, Nga mihi nui, kia koutou, Kia ora.

I’m Gareth Hughes, the Greens’ candidate for Ohariu and number 11 on the Green party list. Speakers more experienced and knowledgeable than me – Keith Locke and Metiria Turei, two of the Green MPs give their apologies they couldn’t be here tonight.

I have been asked to talk about justice which is an issue I haven’t had a great deal of experience in, except subjectively and intuitively and I will try my best to encapsulate the Green’s policy and perspective.

Quickly though, unlike many on this panel you haven’t seen my face on the parliamentary TV channel so I’ll quickly talk a little about myself. I’m a 26 year old environmentalist and former Greenpeace-activist. Yes I’ve been arrested doing that. A father to my one-year-old son Arlo. I work for the Greens parliamentary team on climate issues and I am also a part time student in Wellington.

I’m always surprised that Rodney Hide is the only member of the house with an ecology degree and unlike many MPs I don’t have any law studies under my belt. Instead I’m a graduate in religious studies and history and I guess that helps frame my understanding of justice.

What is justice? The Greens believe it is about fairness and we are applying that across the board – and you can see that in our considerable, (considering we are outside of Government) legislative achievements this term – abolishing discriminatory youth rates that paid young people less than those over 18 even for the same work, the so-called anti-smacking bill, the Mother’s with Babies Bill and also very recently with the amendments to the Emissions Trading Scheme legislation – and the $1 billion we secured for insulating cold, damp kiwi homes – that’s fairness in action!

In terms of criminal justice, it is about more than just how we deal with crime. It is about how we create a fair, peaceful and sustainable world. Greens see issues as interconnected and not reductionalistikly. Broadly – its about constitutional reform, it’s about honoring Te Tiriri o Waitangi, it’s about human rights, it’s about rebuilding local economies, celebrating diversity and creativity, ending violence towards each other and our environment, and ensuring that people's needs are met.

Other speakers on this panel and in the media would like to focus on a very narrow track and clamour for harsher and longer sentences. I’d like to say simply New Zealand prison rate is simply too high. I think this is something that is widely recognised though not always acknowledged. We have the second highest prison rate in at least the Western World — second after that of the United States of America, which is a model I can’t understand why we would want to emulate. The Greens aren’t soft on crime we are realistic on crime.

I do want to set a bottom line though. We all have a right to feel safe. I worry about my Mum and my wife walking through unsafe streets and even though I wear a hoody I still feel nervous approached by a group of young men wearing hoodies. We have to ensure people are safe from violent crime.

When one considers that more than half of the people in prison are in for non-violent offences, one has to start to say that there has to be some better and more effective ways of dealing with that kind of offending, and so we strongly welcome this. This brings to mind comments by Judge Andrew Becroft, who talks about patterns of offending, particularly for young people, and the kinds of initiatives that are most useful in reducing their offending. He pointed out that most young people who offend stop offending in their early 20s, even if one does nothing and just leaves them alone.

He was not suggesting we do nothing, but he was pointing out that taking those people and putting them in prison actually puts them on a path to greater crime and more serious offending, and that using non-custodial sentences is much more effective, as is using other kinds of methods. If elected to Parliament I would be the only member with a student loan and frankly would relish the big salary and the chance to pay off the debt, but many graduates from our prisons – our ‘universities of crime’ never get a chance to pay of their debt and unfortunately its just passed on to the next generation..

Even though I’m not that experienced in the fine details justice policy I do have something my colleagues on the platform don’t share – a closeness to most offenders age. The age at which offenders first enter the criminal justice system is significant, as the majority of male offenders in the adult system first entered the system as young people. The Green Party will maintain the age of criminal responsibility at 14 and support the establishment of small-scale and dispersed Youth Rehabilitation Centres to end the detention of young people in police cells and adult prisons. Family Group Conferences (FGC) are the lynchpin of the youth justice system in New Zealand and we support increasing funding and training and encouragement of Family Group Conferences. Early intervention is the key to crime prevention

I’d like to talk briefly about the victims of crime. There is just a strong need for better understanding of victims of crime in general, throughout the judicial system. This goes hand in hand with a need for better procedures and processes within all the governmental agencies that complainants and victims of crime have to deal with as they progress through the system. Too often people feel played by the system. They see ‘the justice system ’ as a game played between lawyers with judges as ref, with not enough focus on justice or truth.

I don’t think it’s about longer sentences as a cure-all, as some would claim to improve victim’s rights. Victims often feel baffled by the justice system, and feel it is cumbersome and slow moving that puts too much in favour of offenders rights. We have a strike a balance between ensuring the right to a free trial vs. finding the perpetrator

The Greens strongly support restorative justice processes. We would encourage greater uptake of this by increasing funding and support for restorative justice in a variety of cultural and geographical settings. We would provide institutional support and resourcing for restorative justice following sentencing. We also need to adequately fund Victim Support to pay for victims to attend restorative justice processes, and develop a public information campaign about restorative justice processes. It would be helpful to have something that focuses on recompensing victims for their loss.

I was hoping to have time to discuss other understandings of justice of which I’m passionate -

Seeing climate justice internationally and also achieving greater social justice in Aotearoa. I would have liked to have talked about cannabis, tasers and child beating but these are positions the Greens already have strong and known positions on.

I’d like to thank you for the opportunity to speak tonight.

UNIQ Panel 18 September

2008-09-26T15:39:00.000+12:00

Kia ora, nga mihi nui, kia kouotou, kia ora

I’m Gareth Hughes, the Greens’ candidate for Ohariu and number 11 on the Green party list. Green Mps Metiria Turei and Sue Kedgley give their apologies for being unable to speak tonight. This is only my second candidate event so I may not have been as fluent on policy as they would have been, but I will try my best to encapsulate the Green’s policy and perspective and anyway being a current student hopefully I can explain our positions from personal student understanding.

Quickly though, unlike many on this panel you haven’t seen my face on the parliamentary TV channel so I’ll quickly talk a little about myself. I’m a 26 year old environmentalist and former Greenpeace-activist; a father to my one-year-old son Arlo; And I work for the Greens parliamentary team on climate issues and I am also a part time student here doing a dip grad in politics.

I’ve been asked to speck about social progress and this is an issue which the Greens have a lot to say. Many people assume we are just about protecting frogs, snails or whales but in fact we bring a holistic and long-term understanding to parliament. We are about people and planet. Our charter stresses ecological wisdom, social justice, non-violence and appropriate decision making. I am going to talk briefly on gender equality, rainbow issues, drug prohibition, a bit about student issues and our vision for social development in New Zealand.

What is social progress? The Greens believe it is about fairness and we are applying that across the board – and you can see that in our considerable, (considering we are outside of Government) legislative achievements this term – abolishing discriminatory youth rates that paid young people less than those over 18 even for the same work, the abolition of Section 59, the Mother’s with Babies Bill and also very recently with the amendments to the Emissions Trading Scheme legislation – and the $1 billion we secured for insulating cold, damp kiwi homes – that’s fairness in action!

Lets start with rainbow issues. The Green Party stands for a celebration of diversity and an end to legislative barriers to full participation in society. We are the only party where very MP has always voted in favour of equal rights for everyone, no matter what their gender identity or sexual orientation.

We support developing workplace programmes in the public and private sector to eliminate prejudice, discrimination and harassment. We support extending all legal partnership arrangements and rights to same-sex couples. One tangible expression of this is Metiria Turei’s adoption Bill allowing same sex couples to adopt. - I would like to see members support.

We support creating safe and supportive educational environments and I believe it is outrageous in 2008 that schools can still discriminate on same sex partners at school balls.

The Greens envision a world where women's experience, knowledge, wisdom, work and contribution is recognised, valued and treasured. The Greens want a future where women are safe from violence, abuse and ill health. We believe that Women's unpaid work should be valued and recognised and that women should receive equal pay for work of equal value.

Having recently become a father I think its important women and men with family responsibilities should not be discriminated against and that they should, where possible be able to work without conflict between their paid employment and family responsibilities. This term we’ve made dealing with the challenges of work and whanau easier with the successful introduction of the Flexible Working Hours Bill, where parents can now negotiate with their employer greater flexibility in their working hours and in their work location, especially during school holidays and when children are sick Looking to the future we would like to see reform and an increase in Paid a Parental Leave and significantly the introduction of a Universal Child Benefit, like what was scrapped in 1991.

I hope you can all join with me in celebrating the abolishment of section 59, which was one of Green MP Sue Bradford’s achievements this term, along with the Mothers with Babies Bill that is seeing the next generation protected.

Even when I worked for Greenpeace I often got asked about that “Nandor Tanczos” and drug issues have been one of the major issues focused on in the media – not always responsibly or accurately. Personally I think this is one area we should have seen movement on in the last 3 terms of the Labour-led Government. I celebrate the moves to decriminalise prostitution, the introductions of civil unions and the host of progressive social legislation but the clear gap has been drug reform.

To start with the Greens believe a drug-free lifestyle is the healthiest; and that all drugs can cause harm, regardless of their legal status but not all drug use is problematic. We have to ask what’s fair and recognise that some current government policies do not reduce harm but rather create a further set of problems. Its time to be honest and say that prohibition isn’t working, in fact has never worked. We think the focus should be reducing harm and drug abuse and getting rid of the illegal market.

That’s why we would like to see more funding for drug education programmes in schools and communities to prioritise the prosecution of crimes such as violent offences ahead of personal cannabis possession. We also would like to enable doctors to prescribe cannabis products for severely ill patients. We are not soft on drugs, we are realistic on drugs.

I don’t think I am going to have time to talk about student issues except to say the Greens have the best policy and track record for student issues and we are and have been campaigning strongly for debt relief, lowering student fees and the introduction of a Universal Student Allowance for years and will keep up the pressure.

It’s not a cliché to say NZ is at the crossroads. Come November we have a choice for the direction of the country. The Greens vision is for real sustainability and fairness. Change is in the air and I think the change we need is Green!

Diploma class in public health panel - 23 September.

2008-09-26T15:16:00.001+12:00

Kia ora,

I'm Gareth Hughes, the Greens' candidate for Ohariu and number 11 on the Green party list. Speakers more experienced and knowledgeable than me – Green MP Sue Kedgley gives her apologies she couldn't be here today.

I'm a 26 year old environmentalist and former Greenpeace-activist. I work for the Greens parliamentary team on climate issues and I am also a part time student in Wellington. I’m also a dad to my one year old son, Arlo

I’m pretty happy to say that I haven’t been to hospital since I was a baby and the closest I’ve been to personal injury is a few stitches and a broken nose from rugby. I have however become a health consumer over the last year with the birth of my son. We decided to avoid the hospital track and instead my wife gave birth to our son at home which was a fantastic experience made all the better because of the great relationship struck up with our midwife over the preceding 6 months.

I guess this frames my understanding – my partner wasn’t sick or at risk so we didn’t go to hospital, and we took advantage of the availability to choose the best care for our situation.

Today I am going to talk about preventative health, obesity and food, valuing health workers and briefly on complimentary health.

To start with I would like to discuss what frames the Green Parties understanding of health. Our policy, which I will explain shortly, is developed by our members. Rather than being made in smokey back rooms with health industry lobbyists hanging outside the door our policy is made out in the open by the members both at bi-annual conferences and in regular discussions.

All of the Green Party’s policies are based on four values or principles –ecological wisdom, social justice, non violence and democratic decision making

I’d suggest that Greens see all issues, and health as no exception, as interconnected; as holistic. That means we don’t just look a disease or a patient we look at the broader picture – the environment, the socio-economic status, the disease, whanau, the living environment - all together, and see the emphasis needing to be placed on the causes of ill-health.

Health as a political portfolio is often seen as just a ‘political football full of problems’ – trying to treat waiting lists, diseases, budget over runs, strikes, illnesses, and death. However the Greens view health in a different paradigm - we see it as a question of wellness.

Others will talk of cutting health beauracracy –easy to say, but only the Greens say look at the causes, that’s the only way we are actually going to increase the health of the nation.

I’d like to start with this definition - Whare Tapa Wha — A Maori model of health described by Mason Durie, where the four components of health - te taha tinana (physical), te taha wairua (spiritual), te taha hinengaro (mental and emotional) and te taha whanau (social — family and community, represent four walls of a house. If one of these walls fails, the house will fall.

Health is also about personal responsibility. We need to empower people to take greater care of themselves. For example, simple changes, such as children spending less time in front of TV, and adults and children spending less time in cars and more time walking, cycling and eating more fruit and vegetables and less salt, fat and sugar, will increase wellbeing and health.

All of these issues are interwoven — if we want people to exercise more and ensure children have a healthy nutritious diet we need to ensure that our society works in such a way that these important things are promoted. We must create a situation where healthy living is supported and encouraged in workplaces and communities.

Preventative Health

If I would have you go away from today’s talk with one concept that best sums up what the Green perspective on health is, I hope it would be that the Greens stand for preventative health.

Last week I did a similar debate at the Law Society on justice issues; like health, I’d ask where is it best to use our scare resources – all in treating the outcomes or some earlier on in prevention? Just in short term band aids or actual long term remedies?

I’d ask you all to keep tuned to the news and to check out the Greens website – www.greens.org.nz because shortly Green health spokesperson Sue Kedgley will be launching a major preventative health policy package.

The Green Party preventative health strategy focusses on policies that would keep Kiwis well and prevent them from becoming ill in the first place–such as ensuring our homes are warm and dry, not damp and cold. I’m stoked that we have secured a billion dollars of funding through the Emissions Trading Scheme to insulate homes around New Zealand.

At present almost all of our $12 billion health budget is spent on treating people once they have become ill. We want to see a radically different and much more holistic approach to health—one the 4 walls of the whare that Mason Durie spoke about,

We support progressively increasing funding to prevent illness and injury and promote health, to 10% of the total healthcare budget, commencing with the introduction of a free annual wellness check by a health professional for all New Zealanders.

We also want the free wellness check for every New Zealander, available every year, to help identify illnesses early and focus on nutrition and lifestyle factors, and we want community health and wellness centres set up around New Zealand.

One example where it just makes common sense, is trying to reduce adverse events. We spend roughly $800 million a year treating adverse events – it’s not all avoidable but many are preventable – for example drug compatibility. We support setting up a national reporting register with standardised reporting template – not a name and blame exercise but as a way to foster shared learning across the country.

Health and socioeconomic factors

Our 7^th ranked list candidate – West Coast District Health Board CEO Kevin Hague sent me this, and he asked, “try this: think of more or less any illness, disease or injury and draw some conclusions about its distribution in this country and around the world. With very few exceptions ill health and disability disproportionately affect population groups who are in some way disempowered or marginalised in societies.

Yet a traditional biomedical view, that sees disease caused by genetics, chemical imbalances or microscopic organisms cannot explain this. Individualistic approaches to disease that attribute poor health to poor choices and lifestyles (wrong food, wrong substance use, wrong sexual behaviour etc) also fail to explain why individuals from one community are systematically more likely to make bad choices about everything than those from another.

Of course biological risk factors and individual behaviours are important in determining who ends up sick or healthy, but usually neither of these is adequate to explain health outcomes. The fact is that the patterns we actually observe are, instead, strongly related to the control that communities feel over their life circumstances and the physical and social environments in which they live.

The implication of this understanding is that the solutions to health problems associated with these inadequate theories will also fail. If we wish to improve health outcomes we need to empower communities and create environments that support health in a sustainable way.”

Obesity and food

One example of this is the question of obesity. It is the biggest emerging health issue and has the potential to overwhelm public hospitals. We know that poor diet is the leading cause of premature death in New Zealand, and that conversely a good diet is one of our most powerful weapons against disease and sickness, so another goal of our health strategy is to improve the diets of New Zealanders.

We are seeing an epidemic of obesity, with the well known resulting symptoms - type 2 diabetes, heart disease, and more. Almost everyone agrees it’s a problem but I’m not sure if many people have ideas on the solutions. We have put a great deal of work into this area because preventing the problem is much wiser, and cheaper than dealing with it after the fact. We are trying to move the ambulance from the bottom of the cliff to the supporter at the top.

We have created a situation in New Zealand where unhealthy food is cheaper, far more heavily promoted and far more accessible than healthy food, and one of our priorities is to reverse this situation.

As a first step we want to get rid of junk food ads on television, which provide the only nutrition education many children receive; and get vending machines selling fizzy drinks out of schools, extend the fruit in schools programme to all primary schools, and develop gardens in every primary school in New Zealand so children can learn, once again, how to grow and cook food. We were very proud last year to have secured $12 million for a nationwide nutrition fund. And we want to change the way we grow and produce food, to reduce the pesticides and other contaminants we are exposed to, and encourage local organic food production.

The Green Party is also committed to a traffic light labelling scheme which would enable consumers to readily distinguish health and unhealthy food. The Green Party is very concerned that healthy food is becoming unaffordable for many New Zealanders - we support an inquiry into the conduct of supermarkets, and the development of a code of conduct to ensure farmers, suppliers and consumers are treated fairly.

We have also challenged Fonterra to decouple the price of their dairy products sold in New Zealand from the escalating price they can get on the global market.

We believe it is critical that the minimum wage is increased to at least $15 an hour, that core benefits are lifted, that the first $5000 of income is tax free, and a universal child benefit is introduced so that all families can afford healthy food.

Traditional health sector

I know the other speakers today will address the traditional health sector in some detail but I want to quickly touch on one of two of the major issues in the sector – the possible move to towards a greater private model and why we are facing such a crisis in staff in this area.

Aotearoa/New Zealand was the first country in the world to publicly administer and fund health care services, a model which was copied around the world. This commitment has been severely eroded over the past 20 years, resulting in a two tier health care system where the rich can afford quality private services, and the poor face long waits for specialist services.

The Green Party wants a strong public health system that functions effectively, delivers a high standard of patient care, and has sufficient funding for service delivery, administration, and ongoing research and development.

There are critical shortages of health professionals in our health system, owing to the loss of up to a third of our health professions' graduates to overseas posts. Also, there is a shortage of posts in Aotearoa/New Zealand because of the under-funding of health services. The shortage of qualified health care professionals is a factor in long waiting lists for specialist services and causes scarce resources to be diverted to costly overseas and locum recruitment. It is important that the pay and working conditions of New Zealand health professionals be improved.

The Green Party will support improvements in the pay and working conditions of health professionals, including mandatory staff to patient ratios in order to ease nationwide recruitment and retention problems.

We will Increase the number of positions for nurses in the health sector and work with nurses to identify other models to enhance the role of nurses, for example, giving prescribing rights to nurse practitioners. In the aged sector we‘d like to see nurses achieve pay parity with hospital nurses.

Lastly we will introduce lower tertiary fees and a student allowance for all students including those training for health professions. For every year after study of work in NZ will we will write off a years worth of course debt. These would greatly help health professional graduates deal with the mountain of debt they receive studying for a career in the health industry.

Complimentary health

I (fortunately) don’t have many personal health stories to relate to you, but one which I do, concerns complimentary medicines. I was travelling in Sri Lanka a few years ago and for a fortnight I had terrible headaches. I tried all the drugs the pharmacy recommended and none seemed to work. Eventually I was persuaded to go to the village doctor of which I was pretty sceptical of. It was pretty funny, he had his little clinic tucked away down an alley with benches full of glass jars full of different things and he looked all very professional in his white lab coat, but when I looked at the label, it turned out to be a Dulux paint coat.

He gave me an inhalation, a head rub and some herbs for further inhalations from the bush and it cleared me up pretty promptly.

Personally I’m still sceptical of some alternative medicinal practioneers but I’m also aware that at least one in four New Zealanders uses complementary therapies. We want to see traditional or so called complementary healthcare like homeopathy, acupuncture and naturopathy, recognised and accepted throughout health system, and complementary health practitioners working throughout the health system, using whatever treatment is most effective for the patient.

We would establish a Complementary Health Care Unit within the Ministry of Health to facilitate the integration of selected complementary health practices and therapies into the public health system.

Conclusion

I would like to thank you very much for listening to me today and wish you all the best of luck in your studies and careers. Health is always going to be a major election issue and rightly so – it is so very important. Today I’ve discussed the Greens holistic approach top health, our focus on preventative approaches – for example in terms of housing and diet; the need for a strong public health system that values staff and removes debt off graduates and why complimentary health needs to be incorporated into the wide health sector.

The Greens bring new and fresh ideas to the table and realistic, positive solutions to health. I think our 6 MPs have a fantastic track record of achievements in parliament and I would like to see another 6 more. The only way for that to happen is for you to party vote Green.

Thank you.

Welcoming Pachauri to Wellington World Environment Day event.

2008-06-09T13:21:00.002+12:00

Young Labour talk - people and planet before profit.

2008-04-11T19:45:00.000+12:00

Speech to Young Labour Conference
Gareth Hughes

Nga mihi nui kia kotou. Kia ora. Thanks for inviting me I am Garth Hughes; I am a Young Green and also a candidate for the Green party in Ohariu.

I’m a history student and I love playing ‘what ifs’ - I want to start with a ‘what if favourite’ – what if in 2005 we had seen a Green-Maori-Labour coalition form? In fact, on election night in 2005 friends and I cracked open a bottle bubbly celebrating what looked like a Labour-Green-Maori coalition. It seemed like such a great fit – sure Helen and Tariana had their disagreements, but hey, it would be a Government that would look after people, the planet and tanga te whenua. After all, why would Labour want to buddy up with Peters and Dunne?

What we would have we seen – I’m sure all the Governments talk about sustainability would have been more than just talk; I can imagine Jeanette Fitzsimons as our climate Minister and maybe Pita Sharpels as Maori Affairs Minister. I can imagine the carbon tax would have stayed, and our emissions would be dropping rather than increasing. I can imagine a country that spends its money more wisely and with an eye to the future – I can think of plenty of projects that we could have spent money on with the savings from Transmission Gully or the new Waterview Connection. Like students. It would have been a more-left-of-centre Government that would have scrapped Youth Rates without a fight and who would have raised the minimum wage even more. We would have seen change – not this sort of steady as she goes, status quo, attempt to sneak into a historic 4th term. In 2005 we would have seen the kind of Government that our members thought they were voting for.

Today I want to talk about what real sustainability would look like – what would a Government that put people and planet before profit would look like.

I want to acknowledge all your successes like wiping interest of student loans and banning bottom trawling. I also want say where I think you have gone wrong and how I think you can get on the right track. I want to especially look at climate change as an issue and finally end with a bit of politics, looking towards the election in a few months.

You’ve asked me to challenge you but I want to first acknowledge the positive role played by Young labour on the youth rates campaign, where I worked with some you and also on S59. I don’t know if it’s been you or not, but I totally liked seeing the John Key posters around town. I know you guys are often well in advance of the rest of your party on progressive policy issues.

I want to acknowledge you as individuals – It’s awesome to see so many people keen to get involved in political debate. Politics can be such a dirty word and it’s viewed with such distain by so many people. It’s important young people get involved and get our view points across. 40 years ago it was young people in the US, France, Czechoslovakia and many other countries that took action and changed the direction of the world. Peace issues, environmental issues, the rise of feminism all came about because young people said ‘fuck it’ and did something. I do think its missing somewhat from our generation now, but hey young people are still active on so many causes.

I think young people have more of a role to play in party politics and in parliament. The House of Representatives has an average MP age of 51, - that’s not very representative, and that’s why I’m standing this election.

Maybe I should talk a bit about myself and my motivation.

I work for Greens, as the Climate Change Campaigner – we split our outreach/electoral office hours and spend them on campaigns – our national constituency – so this is my lunch break. I get to work with Jeanette, who is amazing and she is as much of a legend up close as she is on the telly.

I am currently the YG spokesperson and we have an active network in the major campuses across the country. I’m also a part-time post grad student at Victoria, and a member of the Greens@vic who have been exceptionally busy this year.

I have joined the Green Party in 2001, inspired by the ‘99 election campaign, (that I guess I wouldn’t have been half as interesting had of we still had FPP). I first voted in 99 while I was in high school and it was exciting seeing people like Nandor get in to parliament. It wasn’t just old white men making decisions in smoky back rooms, anymore - politics seemed more inclusive. It was people like me talking about issues I cared about. I remember travelling overseas and felling really proud that our parliament had a transgender MP, Muslims, openly gay MPs and most notably a Rastafarian.

I should also add it was great getting rid of Shippley, after having National so long in Power. 9 yeas of privatisations, benefit cuts, the Employment Relations Act, and the superannuation surtax was too much. That National Government still has a lingering bad aftertaste in the mouths of many Green members who couldn’t countenance the idea of a coalition with National. Still however our policy isn’t like in 05 where we said we’d only go with Labour, rather our policy is to look at the policies closer to the election and make up our minds then – like the principled and independent party we are.

In ‘99 one of the best things I think you did was immediately stop native forrest logging – it was a brave and bold decision that demarcated that this Government was going to be different, kind of like Savage’s immediate Christmas bonus to beneficiaries in 1935. However now I wish you could make an equally brave decision and stop coal mining on the West Coast and the destruction of species like Powelliphanta, the rare carnivorous snail that lives no where else. Instead of phasing out coal mining as was the plan when Don Elder took over state-owned Solid Energy, the increase in world coal prices has seen mining take off again and expand, like the new Pike River and expanded Stockton mines. It is the state involved, and the state profiting from selling the coal to China and India, who aren’t facing a price on the carbon emissions.

Now 9 years on - that historic victory has lost a little lustre that I guess that’s a product of age, and a product of Helen’s decision not to be a reforming ball of energy like the forth Labour Government and consume itself, but be a steady as she goes manager. The question for the electors is – have they had enough and want change? Has Labour ran out of ideas, and the electorate, patience? Only time will tell.

My background is firmly within the environmental movement – my only serious jobs have been with Greenpeace whom I first started working for in 2000 and the Green Party. I’ve also been a telemarketer, a barman, a on the street fundraiser, a hospital cleaner, a pamphlet deliver and worked in a supermarket and a fish n chip store. That’s why I was so glad to see the youth minimum wage go up, and youth rates abolished (after the 90 day caveat). I remember feeling personally cheated by Jenny Shipley when I was sweating my ass off pushing supermarket trolleys for like $7. I still feel sorry for the under 16 year olds who can be paid anything.

Since you have invited me here I thought I’d tell you a little bit about the Green Party. At our bedrock is accepting Te Tiriti o Waitangi as the founding document of Aotearoa; and recognising Maori as Tangata Whenua. We have four core principles:

Ecological Wisdom:
The basis of ecological wisdom is that human beings are part of the natural world. This world is finite, therefore unlimited material growth is impossible. Ecological sustainability is paramount.

Social Responsibility:
Unlimited material growth is impossible. Therefore the key to social responsibility is the just distribution of social and natural resources, both locally and globally.

Appropriate Decision-making:
For the implementation of ecological wisdom and social responsibility, decisions will be made directly at the appropriate level by those affected.

Non-Violence:
Non-violent conflict resolution is the process by which ecological wisdom, social responsibility and appropriate decision making will be implemented. This principle applies at all levels.

You could argue we’ve been a force in NZ politics since 1972 with the Values Party but it has been since MMP and breaking the links with the Alliance Party that we’ve come into our own. I think we are a much needed and valuable part of the political landscape, and I hope you agree. I believe we are the natural 3rd force in Parliament and the only long term minor party contender, when the current dear-leader-based minor parties loose their leader and disappear as surely will happen to United, the Progressives and NZ First.

One of the biggest disappointments of MMP, in my opinion has been the continued stranglehold of parliamentary seats by the two big parties – we call them the ‘grey parties’ – Labour and National. The big parties consistently get two thirds or more of the seats in parliament to the smaller parties’ detriment. I would like to see us more like Germany, where there is a more even distribution of seats and not so much a stranglehold. With the Medias focus on a two horse race and a more presidential style of coverage the smaller parties seem to miss out, and I think the public also miss out.

ECOLOGICAL LIMITS

You asked me to challenge you and I think you are missing the biggest shift in political thinking since Communism - the most radical idea in New Zealand politics, in fact probably the most radical idea in current international political debate - It may sound ridiculous because it’s such simple common sense, but it is something that our current economic theory just doesn't acknowledge – that we have only one planet. Our economy assumes that we can achieve infinite growth and dispose of infinite waste on a finite planet.

Thus in the decision making equations used by Cullen, more roads and motorways are good because they provide jobs and increase GDP and by inferred-assumption make us better off. According to the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry about 455,000ha of forestry land is at risk of being converted into meat and dairy. This is nearly seven times the size of Lake Taupo. For both Labour and National this is a great thing – again more jobs, more foreign currency, more profit! But try positively spinning that to someone who can’t swim in a river that their parents did, or to the local iwi who can’t eel there anymore, because its so polluted; or to someone in a developing country, who we say should reduce their emissions but we shouldn’t have to reduce ours because its agricultural based.

The key idea Greens bring to parliament is the concept of a finite planet and the realisation that as individuals and communities are actually changing the planet, our only home. Ever since the industrial revolution 250 years ago we have managed to tap into vast stores of trapped sunlight in the form of fossil fuels and released massive amounts of energy. We have liberated ourselves from manual work and achieved incredible wealth but now we are seeing the natural consequences, the real costs involved of living on a finite world. Climate change, and peak oil, I believe will be the two major challenges of my generation.

Stern called climate change the biggest market failure in history and until we start to treat our planet as if it was our only one, we are going to continue to make these crazy and short sighted decisions. Until we start internalising the externalities like pollution or environmental damage or biodiversity loses we are going to keep making the same dumb decisions. We are going to keep putting profit before the planet.

For example if agriculture wasn’t getting a free ride off the Labour Government and having its international carbon costs covered by the taxpayer in the Emissions Trading Scheme, and had to pay the costs of its damage on the climate – a farmer weighing up deciding to cut down a forest, sequestering and storing carbon to intensively farm methane and nitrous oxide producing dairy cows he’d think twice. At the moment the only question is the price of lumber and the price of dairy and the decisions made are to our grandchildren’s detriment.

The only party that acknowledges that and its consequences is the Greens. And I welcome this chance to talk to you about it – because until you actually get this and value the long term well being of the planet – its soils, and rivers and species - above short term profit we are going to keep getting ourselves further into ecological mess – we are going to keep loosing species at a rate of 150-200 a day, and our fisheries are going to continue to collapse, and more and more people are going to loose access to clean drinking water. Until we value ecosystem services, until we tax ‘bads’ and rewards ‘goods’, and until we start living as if we mean to stay on the planet no amount of taking about ‘carbon neutrality’ – even saying it 36 times in one speech, no amount of sustainability aspirations, or empty targets like 50% by 2050 is going to get us there.

So what another about another ‘what if’ – The 2011 rugby world cup in New Zealand.

Let’s fast forward for a moment to the Rugby World Cup 2011 and imagine what’s happened under another Labour Government without the Greens.

Visitors from across the world will be deciding whether to fly all the way to New Zealand to attend, with many of them opting to stay at home and watch it on television rather than increase their carbon footprint. Others may be working to offset their emissions – many paying extra money, or cutting emissions elsewhere to account for their footprint.

Many will be looking to the New Zealand Government to reassure them that we’re
serious about climate change. We may have to make a special bid in climate change
terms to get people to travel here. Our “Clean Green” image will be put in the
spotlight.

The visitors will arrive in New Zealand, only to find that nobody except the major electricity companies and stationery energy is paying a price on carbon. Our pioneering Emissions Trading System doesn’t even include agriculture yet, even though it makes up half of our emissions and a good chunk in the growth of emissions and is one of the major reasons why we are failing our Kyoto targets so miserably.

Arriving at Auckland Airport they’ll discover they can’t simply catch a train to town but instead they’ll have to pile into a bus or mini van and then experience Auckland’s notorious motorway. They’ll discover all of NZs Transport systems are still heavily car-reliant, with hardly any public transport options in the towns and none at all in smaller centres. .

They may find new roads, motorways and tunnels being built in Auckland and Wellington and even more cars on them, even though petrol is more than $2 a litre. They’ll ask about the suburban trains, and find one tiny train line still serves the whole of Auckland and it still runs on dirty diesel power. They might decide to limit their carbon footprint and take the train from Auckland to Wellington on the Overlander and they’ll be shocked to find it doesn’t actually travel on that day, or if it does it take a numbing 11 hours. God help them if the try to catch one in the South Island.

The houses the visitors have rented from the locals (at inflated prices) have little
insulation and hot water is still largely heated through antiquated immersion heater
systems. There’s no such thing as double-glazing in most of the country, and few solar hot water heating systems. The public has no idea about what they should be doing, due to a lack of education.

The Rugby World Cup stadium in Mt Eden has been expanded on a shoestring budget, with no consideration given to its carbon footprint. The food provided is still freighted by road around the country and imported from overseas. There has been an effort to make the lightbulbs energy efficient but there’s no sign of solar panels on the roof and It is powered directly from the grid.

The visitors are stunned that in 2011 they’ve arrived in a country where people are still wasting energy, driving their cars too much and who try and make excuse about their agricultural emissions because they are biological, even though in reality they are our antipodean versions of factories.

Their vision of our Clean and Green country is shattered. The Rugby World Cup shows up New Zealand as an international environmental embarrassment.

However, it is still 3 years away and even though that isn’t much time left, we can still turn the world cup into a showcase, and stand proudly on the world stage.

So what is going to happen in 2008? – is this the change election?

It has definitely been an interesting year for politics junkies like myself with the Australian elections, Pakistani elections, Zimbabweam elections – even Bhutans first elections have been interesting, but most of all its been great to watch the US Presidential election campaign.

It has been fascinating watching the growth of Obamamania in the US and his mantra of change seems to have struck a chord amongst Democratic voters. In NZ the big parties would like to claim some of this ground – Labour with their recent conversion to sustainability and National with their message 'its time to change the Government'. However as an impartial observer I can’t seem to see much difference between them – they both of them really stand for much of the same – in fact, the differences between them this election may be the smallest ever.

While Obama draws huge crowds of disillusioned voters with his message of changing the way politics is done. In New Zealand most of our MPs are raving on about the latest scapegoat – Asians, or young people. Painting a picture of hoards of P-ravaged petty thugs and knife-wielding killers who will as soon tag your corpse as take your purse, this strategy is as despicable as Brash's Maori-bashing 3 years ago. The solutions are as equally short-sighted - either high school till 18 or military-style boot camps. Keys $50 criminal tax is simply a bad joke. Its like he’s making up policy from a game of monopoly. It really draws attention to the fact most young people can’t afford a house even on Old Kent Road or White Chapel, yet Key owns motels on Mayfair and Park Lane. It really does seem to be ambulance at the bottom of the cliff sort of stuff.

No wonder Kiwi kids are disillusioned with politics – the only change they see coming out of Wellington is tax cuts for the wealthy, punitive attacks on young people and more demagoguery. What we need is a change in the climate of politics.

I have plenty more criticism of the Government but to start with I’d like to acknowledge the positive changes I’ve seen over the last few years. There has been some great legislation come out of Parliament like KiwiSaver, interest free student loans, paid parental leave, Maori TV, Working For Families, stopping native forest logging. There’s also been some great Green legislation that has been enacted with Government support – the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Act, setting up EECA; Nandor’s waste Bill, which I would like to touch on in a bit of depth; protecting our kids from Section 59, the abolition of youth rates, the mothers with babies in prison Bill along with our support level agreements with the Government on energy efficiency, Buy Kiwi Made and organics.

I know some commentators have challenged Labours track record on social change, saying you went too far too soon, and there are definitely politically strategic arguments both ways, but I am glad that Labour could stick up for homosexual law reform, banning cigarettes in bars and cafes, prostitution reform and controversially Section 59.

Progressive social reform should be the hallmark of a good Labour government – Savage introduced the most sweeping social changes since Seddon introducing the Social Security Bill; Kirk got us out of Vietnam and Lange stood up against the might of the US and proclaimed “We are to be made an example of; we are to be ostracised and anathematised until we are compelled to resume our seat in the dress circle of the nuclear theatre.”

I’m really glad that Helen did decide to make a stand on S59 and damn the polls. I’m glad she came to rest on the right side of the debate. I don’t know what the internal processes were with the Labour Caucus. I know I’ve been learning lately in my class on the principle of primus inter pares – “first amongst equals” that all in Cabinet are theoretically equal. But in reality the PM has considerable power in Government as Lange demonstrated when he unilaterally derailed the Rogernomics experiment of flat taxes, and I’m stoked that she then used her weight to do the right thing. I think this decision will be vindicated by future generations.

Another controversial piece of legislation currently causing all sorts of troubles is the Electoral Finance Act, and as someone who is standing it sure is a dogs breakfast and confusing the hell out of everyone. However in select committee I made a submission supporting the Bill, not necessarily what it was – because it was much worse in its first draft, but what it was it stood for. We need to protect the principle of one person one vote not one dollar one vote. We have to avoid the nefarious interests of big business and shadowy overseas donors looking to buy and influence our elections. We’ve seen it first hand in the case of the Exclusive Brethren, and read all about it in Nickys book. Sure it is a hard-to-implement law and it will probably take an election or two, and a number of court cases to reach a sort-of established understanding or equilibrium but we needed it. It’s just is a pity that the legislation was rolled out in such a fashion that the opposition, not to mention the Herald, managed to swing the argument around, and those who should have been shamed, actually rallied against it as an issue of freedom of speech – I guess they were paying attention to Crosby and Textors advise to attack your opponents strengths. I only wished Labour had kept the state funding of elections element.

Let’s talk trash. Good on the Government for supporting our waste legislation going through the house. Waste is an important environmental issue, and if there were international awards for producing it – we’d be winners. Every day New Zealanders throw out ten million kilograms of it into landfills or burn it; producing a massive problem that has often been considered, ‘out of sight out of mind.’ The problem is not just where it goes – but also how much of it we are producing. There are currently ninety landfill sites operating in New Zealand, taking a total of over 3 million tonnes of our rubbish each year.

Burying our waste is not a long term solution and we can’t keep hoping it will go away. It won’t. Looking at natural ecosystems there is no such thing as waste – everything gets recycled, even us. The Bill contains a raft of changes intended to reduce the amount of waste created as well as promoting reuse and recycling whenever possible. Landfill waste levies would be introduced to help pay for a variety of measures including public education about recycling. Its great to see the first ever waste legislation going through our parliament.

An issue I have been especially passionate about since seeing it close up is bottom trawling. In 2005 I sailed into the Tasman Sea on the Rainbow Warrior to do what the NZ Government wouldn’t do and actually stop Kiwi bottom trawlers from wreaking their havoc on the ocean floor. Bottom trawling involves dragging large nets the size of football fields across the ocean floor to hunt for species like orange roughy. The problem is it also gets everything else down there. Out in the ocean I saw fishers throwing overboard old man-sized corals that had grown undisturbed in the depths for 500 years or more. In all, we caught them throwing ten fish overboard – well actually they were throwing some of them at us – along with potatoes, which they actually built a mortar to shoot us with, fire hoses and insults – it really was surreal to be told in the middle of the ocean to ‘get a real job.’ From just these ten fish – out of the tonnes one ship would catch a day – scientists discovered two new specials of fish. We were destroying the ocean floor and we didn’t even know what was down there.

Thanks to the work by Greenpeace, the Green Party and other NGOs enough pressure was placed on our Government to support ‘essentially’ a ban on bottom trawling in international waters. I sleep a little bit better knowing that the gorgonian’s, blobfishes, and all the other millions of fish we now nothing about are safe – and we can thank the Government for finally doing what was right.

However how we are treating our inshore fisheries is another question –for example in one fishery zone, orange roughy numbers hadve crashed to 3% their original levels. Our continued allowance of shark finning of which we kill an estimated 30-50 thousand annually is a shameful blot on our record. Clearly Anderton is failing in this area, failing to stick up against the profit demands of fishers.

Yesterday we reached the unenviable milestone of $10b student debt. The milestone is more like a millstone around students necks. As it has been pointed out - $10 billion buys a lot of stadiums but it also buy a lot public transport improvements or reforestation projects or hip operations. The fact is, this much debt is unsustainable for New Zealand and what we are in effect producing is a generation of debt-ridden graduates who can't afford to buy a house, who delay having a family and many who feel they have to leave offshore. Around half a million Kiwis now have student loan debts. I have a $30,000 debt and its like an education tax that comes out of my pay check and it really means I can’t afford to buy a house for my wife and baby. Accommodation, transport, and food costs are all increasing and adding an extra burden onto student's already sagging shoulders. What's worse is that this has prevented some people from obtaining tertiary education.

We need to value our students and introduce a universal allowance - students shouldn't be borrowing to live. I’d be keen to know what Young labours tertiary education policies are.

National are making noises about a brain drain but they refuse to acknowledge that some debt ridden students are fleeing the country to escape it's burden not just the over-taxing-totalitarian-nanny-state that they would paint the Government. In 2005 Labour introduced bold policy on student loans that probably saved the election, this year I hope you may also be considering a universal student allowance to pull out in the last weeks of the campaign.

Another topical issue I can’t ignore, even though the Government is trying to - is Tibet, Darfur and human, democratic and workers rights in China. I know the Government is chuffed by the FTA with China. Once again it is putting profits above environmental and social considerations. Goff can try and avoid the moral hurdles and make arguments about the positive impact we’ll have on China…maybe…eventually, but that argument didn’t cut it with South Africa under apartheid – we are not signing this FTA to help the Chinese workers, or help China reduce its skyrocketing emissions with clean technology, we aren’t even helping the oppressed people of Tibet, whom we shamefully wouldn’t openly meet with their spiritual leader.

It’s not about democratisation. It is about, as Russel Norman puts it ‘offering the Chinese Government respectability on the World stage by associating with us - a progressive liberal democracy with a proud heritage, in return for selling more milk.

We are selling out so that we can sell more of our stuff to China. The trade deal does not eliminate non-tariff barriers to fair trade - things like forced prison labour, child labour, sweatshop conditions, a ban on independent unions and poor environmental protections. These elements of authoritarian capitalism give Chinese business an unfair advantage over New Zealand businesses and will result in further job losses in New Zealand as tariffs fall.

One hundred years ago this year, a group of miners broke the law and striked for 3 months at Blackball, on the West Coast for an extra 15 minutes lunch time and out of the conflict evolved the Federation of Labour and eventually the Labour Party. However 100 years on we are selling our workers down the Yangze with a FTA agreement with China and still valuing profit over people.

However after 9 years of a Labour Government our social statistics are still dire. We are seeing a growing gap between rich and poor. We are seeing kids grow up in poverty and in cycles of violence. Just this morning we heard 20,000 kids are missing breakfast and its optimistic to think its because of dieting as Parakura Horomia suggests. The decline in unemployment should be lauded widely and is a proud achievement and it is having an effect on wage increases – to John Key’s dismay, but still we need the minimum wage to be lifted to at least $15 an hour immediately. Sue Bradford says it best – “The ERA should be overhauled, including strengthening the ability to use multi employer collective bargaining and agreements and to deal more strongly with freeloading. Workers should have the right to strike legally on matters of political, economic and environmental significance. Our welfare system should be completely restructured so that benefits are enough to live on, and so that welfare is administered in a much fairer, simpler and in fact cheaper way than it is at present.:

That leads me to my final point – my passion – saving the world.

When Helen Clark opened Parliament, the year-before-last she used the phrase ‘carbon neutrality’ 36 times in one speech. Now 4 months into the first Kyoto commitment period our emissions are increasing and are no where near neutral – whatever that means. Unfortunately what we are seeing is climate inaction and the 100% pure lie.

Almost everyone now agrees that humans are changing the climate through activities such as burning fossil fuels, deforestation and intensive agriculture and this is warming the planet. The effects of climate change are going to impact most of all on the people who are the least responsible - on the poorest and most marginalised people.

The scientists are saying we have little time left to avoid catastrophic run-away climate change yet in New Zealand we are failing our Kyoto targets dismally and have increased our greenhouse gas emissions 25% above 1990 levels. The new Emissions Trading Scheme while having some elements such as a price on carbon that the Greens campaigned for, still has major flaws such as agriculture being subsided by the taxpayer to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars, and the exclusion of export coal and fugitive coal emissions. The Government is still on a motorway building binge and new coal mines are opening. The Green Party says we need to act urgently to kick the carbon habit.

The Greens believe we owe it to our children and grandchildren to act now, and if all countries work together we can deal with the challenge but also make our air and water cleaner, homes warmer and drier, public transport more reliable and frequent, heavy freight on the rail not the roads. There will be more forest, less flooding and slips, more wildlife. Our economy will be smarter rather than just bigger, and our international reputation will be a major asset.

Our economy is under severe threat from the effects of climate change. I won’t bore you with the predictions of changing weather patterns impacting on agricultural productivity, or an increase in floods and droughts and other extreme weather events; or biodiversity loses, or threats from introduced pests and diseases, or of sea level rise but our economy has to adapt to a world that runs an economy as if the climate mattered.

We are a nation that mostly makes our living growing grass – selling it off as meat and dairy and hosting people to come see our grass…and mountains….and beaches. We ship a whole lot of basic commodities from a large distance and fly in a whole lot of people for a relatively short time also from a very large distance. Already our products are under attack in the UK for our air-miles, even if they are marginally more efficient. It is a simple and convincing argument ‘boycott NZ products – it obviously has come a very long way.’ The same could be true here, but because the Labour Government put meat industry lobbying above the interests of its peoples and killed our Country of Origin Labelling Bill, you don’t really now where much of our supermarket products come from. Unless we can prove our climate credentials internationally and find our ways to reduce agricultural emissions we will be a target.

How are we dealing with these long term economic challenges? The workers’ traditional ally, the Labour Party, seems almost completely stuck in an economic mindset that was first embraced by Roger Douglas and has been entrenched as mainstream thinking in this country ever since, in which the success of the economy is judged by a narrow set of indicators that have more to do with the rate of profit being made by a handful of financial institutions than the well-being of ordinary Kiwis. In New Zealand we have a few sacred cows and dairy is one of them. Fonterra’s model is producing more - infinite growth – it is 4% compound growth which is unsustainable and frankly frightening for our environment.

So what does the Government need to do:

Urgent action – start reducing emissions and protecting forests sinks NOW

 Polluter pays – those who produce greenhouse emissions should be responsible for them
 A price on greenhouse emissions – we need a price on carbon now across the whole economy to make the clean alternatives cheaper and fossil fuels dearer
 Fairness – all sectors of the economy must face this price with no free-loaders – but those with the most options should move fastest
 Simplicity – we can’t spend the next five years designing a detailed, complicated emissions trading policy
 Internationalism – the NZ price on carbon should be linked with the international price under Kyoto, which NZ will have to pay in 2012 for the increase in our emissions above 1990 levels
 Future-focussed – the system we design now must leave us in a better position to cut emissions further in the next Kyoto period, after 2012
 Social justice – there must be government programmes to help those who will suffer hardship when energy prices rise.
 Opportunities for businesses – ‘greenwash’ isn’t one of them

I am not going to apologise for being partisan on this issue and I think the Greens have numerous achievements to highlight, even though we haven’t been in Government. It was a Green private member bill that established EECA and Jeanette’s work as spokesperson that has seen massive energy savings and support go to households and businesses. The Greens have led campaigns to save the Overlander train and Wellington’s electric trolley buses. We’ve started the process the electrify Auckland’s rail network and we convinced the Government to buy back the rail network. We were the first to raise the issue peak oil in the house and have spoken the most about climate change in Parliament.

I think Labour could have reduced emissions if Jeanette was the Minister for Climate Change and I think the latest Shape poll, shows that’s what voters want – 82% of Kiwis think climate change is an urgent problem or a problem now (up from 73% a year ago) and 56% of Kiwis want NZ to become a global leader. Asked which major parties is best to manage climate change, the results were fairly close Labour 32%, National 32% and don’t knows 35%, whereas when asked for ‘which preferred coalition scenarios would best manage climate change’ the results were clear – respondents wanted Greens in either a Labour or National Government (33% to labour-Green and 23% to National-Green). The message is ‘voters want a Green voice in Government to place the planet before profit.’

You should ask your MPs if they will pay to offset the carbon from their flights. Or better yet convince the speaker to compulsorily measure and offset – hey, and why’ll we’re at it, why doesn’t Parliament go Green like the Reichstag and be powered by solar energy?

POLITICS

So there is going to be an election in a few months time and I wouldn’t know where to bet my money. If you had asked me a few months ago I would have said Labour was dead in the water, but now I’m not so sure. Key doesn’t look as impenetrable as before and the spectre of Douglas sitting around the Cabinet table is terrifying to many.

I do know how ever if you are going to win a historic forth term you probably are going to need the Greens. I personally like the idea of saving a Labour Government
because I hate the idea of John Key as my Prime Minister, but more especially the likes of Brownless, Sowry, and Nick Smith becoming Ministers. I hope the Greens hold the balance of power and can be a powerful force in a Labour Government. I hope we get at least ten percent so I have a chance of getting in. We’ve shown we can do a lot with 6 MPs –imagine 12! I have to say we were hurt at the last election by Labour switching to the UF and NZF, and I know the numbers weren’t good enough from us, but I really wished the champagne I drank on election night 2005 for a Green-Maori-Labour Government wasn’t in vain. Can we work together? To quote Jeanette “We will, however, be asking a high price of our co-operation. Because this planet is worth a high price. Because a decent future for our children and grandchildren is worth a high price. Our price is real action, not greenwash.”

What is my advice to Labour? It is to go back to the past for inspiration. I like what Russel says about Michael Joseph Savage, he said he “…had the courage and determination to challenge the international economic orthodoxy in order to overcome the social crisis of the Great Depression. He did not abolish the market but changed the way it worked to make it socially sustainable. They did not abolish the market system, but they placed rules on it and replaced dog eat dog with opportunities for underdogs. They created a world in which people like John Key could gain access to decent affordable housing, health and education so that he had the opportunity to follow his dreams, whatever one may think of the morality of currency trading and financial speculation.” They put people before profit.

So in summary I don’t have a clue what is going to happen in 2008 but I hope Helen is still PM or maybe Shane Jones, or better still, Sonny Thomas.

What Labour needs is action - not just rhetoric but action. Real change in 2008 would see tertiary students valued – and paid a fair universal allowance, the environment protected from the likes of more cows, cars and coal; New Zealand kicking the carbon habit and seriously addressing climate change; and more GE-free, healthy, organic food.

Thanks very much.

ANZ Don't invest in a pulp Mill in Tasmania

2007-12-03T13:46:00.000+13:00

Arlo - the video

2007-09-22T16:42:00.000+12:00

Labour: the ball's in your court

2007-08-29T10:48:00.001+12:00

Hundreds of people around New Zealand have committed to taking steps to reduce the impact of climate change and are now waiting on the Government to make its move.

Green Party Co-Leader Jeanette Fitzsimons today met Climate Change Minister David Parker on the steps of Parliament and handed over the signed climate contracts from her recent Climate Defence Tour as well a pocket guide on ways to reduce climate change.

“These contracts represent commitments from hundreds of everyday New Zealander's who want to play their part to tackle climate change. Government can no longer claim that the public will not support strong and early action.

“They, and we, have been waiting for this Government to take action for a while now, and I hope that the new policy announced shortly will live up to everyone’s expectations.

Ms Fitzsimons and fellow Co-Leader Russel Norman have recently been on a nationwide tour getting signatures on their climate contract: a two-part postcard where people pledge personal action to reduce their emissions, and ask Government to put the right rules in place.

“People have committed to a whole range of actions. These include things like committing to leaving their car at home for short trips, making their home more energy efficient and wherever possible buying locally made goods and services.

“It’s time now for the Government to make its own commitment. At the very least what is needed is a price on carbon before 2008 with the funds raised recycled to help prepare for climate change.

“While the Government’s new trading policy will almost certainly put a price on carbon which is essential to send signals through the economy and a good start, the key questions are when will it happen, how soon will it be across the whole economy and how will any funds be used to help reduce emissions and prepare for the effects of climate change?

“With today’s news that islands are starting to appear under the melting Arctic sea ice, more and more people around the country are making a commitment to personally reduce their emissions. That is why we have put out a pocket guide showing how much carbon and money they can save by doing simple things at home, at work and out and about. It’s now up to the Government to match that commitment and desire for action. The ball’s in their court," Ms Fitzsimons says.

I've been monkeying round Wellington, but what ANZ's doing is just bananas!

2007-08-29T10:36:00.000+12:00

Read about the campaign and sign the pledge here

Protest against ANZ financial support or deforestation

2007-08-29T10:19:00.001+12:00

Conservation debate at Cathedral

2007-08-08T22:02:00.000+12:00

This is the speech I delievered at the Wellington Cathedral as part of Conservation Week. On my team was Jeanette Fitzsimons and Roland Sapsford debating whether climate change was caused by economic theory.

Today I am going to talk about the most radical idea in New Zealand politics, in fact probably the most radical idea in current international political debate. It may sound ridiculous because it’s such simple common sense, but it is something that our current economic theory doesn't acknowledge – that we have only one planet. Our economy assumes that we can achieve infinite growth and dispose of infinite waste on a finite planet.

What I am going to talk about in detail is how we as individuals and communities are actually changing the planet, our only home. I am going to talk about the most serious ecological crisis facing us - climate change and how this is caused by failure of current economic theory to recognise basic truths like natural limits, appropriate measurement, decision making and costs.

Ever since the industrial revolution 250 years ago we have managed to tap into vast stores of trapped sunlight in the form of fossil fuels and released massive amounts of energy. We have liberated ourselves from manual work and achieved incredible wealth but now we are seeing the natural consequences, the real costs involved of living on a finite world. Climate change, and peak oil, I believe will be the two major challenges of my generation.

Howard Stern, the UK Treasury economist, who released his influential report last year has called climate change "the largest and broadest marker failure in history." It's a failure because it’s not in our interests to heat the planet but still we happily pollute, blindly walking towards the precipice. Why? Because our whole economic system is built on cheap energy and our wealth is dependent on fossil fuels.

It is in very clear what is causing climate change – it is anthropogenic – that means it is human caused. The problem comes from fossil fuels that we dug up and converted into carbon dioxide, forests that we burnt and land that we cleared, methane from livestock, that we farmed, in short, from man's economic activity.

Since the industrial revolution we have been putting massive amounts of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and to be honest it’s the wealthly industrialised countries that are primarily responsible. The 15% of the world’s population that live in rich countries is responsible for half of emissions, and two-thirds of past emissions, while the poorest 37% of the world’s population is accountable for only 7% of emissions.

Why are we warming the planet? In part it's because we don't care. I mean in an economic sense. The effects of greenhouse gases are just not taken into consideration by the economy. The atmosphere in theory and practice is viewed as a free-for-all, as a limitless resource. A sort of global commons. However what we are seeing now is a tragedy of the commons occur, where no-one is responsible for the pollution in the atmosphere so we keep on polluting it and so despite international treaties, Live Earth concerts and all the best scientific advice, emissions are rising ever year about 3%.

Our economic system doesn't take into account the costs of climate change. At the moment the price of petrol is at about $1.50 a litre, this price takes into consideration the cost of crude, the cost to refine and ship it, the costs to retail it; the costs to society in the form of petrol taxes for things like ACC and building new roads. But it doesn't take into account the environmental costs associated with burning it. Perhaps that’s one reason why figures released last week show that C02 emissions from petrol consumption has increased 60% since 1990 in New Zealand

The cost associated with rising global temperatures is huge: the new infrastructure needed to prepare for climate change; the increased costs of insurance premiums because of more extreme weather events, the costs of resettling climate refugees from Tuvalu or Bangladesh, which Christian Aid, a few months ago predicted could be 1 billion by 2050; or even the cost to the taxpayer of having to buy Kyoto credits because we so far above our targets. In short, the true costs of burning a litre of petrol are ignored.

Currently there is vigorous debate about the costs of action. Some, like Bush argue that Kyoto's targets are too costly others like Stern argue the costs of action -1% of global GDP vastly outweigh the costs of inaction– 20 % of GDP. The financial costs of switching to renewable energy or investing in public transport are immediate, yet the benefits of a stable climate are in the future for someone else to enjoy. Our economic system does not factor in future generations; it values self interest – it's better to pollute now and let the future pay the costs, so we do.

We know how to deal with the climate change and the message from scientists is stark and simple we have to reduce emissions. Fast. Yet our present economic system doesn't encourage action to reduce emissions, it encourages the opposite. Currently, the most important measure of how we are doing is Gross Domestic Product, GDP. Converting a central North Island plantation forest to a dairy farm makes sound financial sense and is fantastic news for the nations GDP and economic growth. But not so good news for lake Taupo or the climate. Until we start to prioritise other measurements like happiness, or ecological sustainability we are going to get skewed results.

In conclusion, It is inevitable that we will continue to put greenhouse gases up there but we have to view this as a privilege and only acceptable within natural limits. If we have to adhere to this current economic system, we must have a realistic price put on carbon to incentivise positive choices like public transport and renewable energy and disincentivise negative decisions like chopping down a forest for a dairy conversion or for unsustainable goals, like Fonterra's aspiration of 4% compound growth every year. To reclaim the future our economy must view serious reductions in our emissions not as costs but as investments in a better world. Our only world - one that's able to sustain us.

2007-07-25T12:05:00.001+12:00

This is a poster I designed for a debate I organised at Victoria. Needless to say the Greens won

GreenPeace Ad

2007-03-08T21:49:00.001+13:00

...pretty scary

Marsden B or not to be -the questions been answered!

2007-03-07T20:16:00.000+13:00

Today Mighty River Power has dumped its controversial plan to convert the Marsden B power station to coal, in a victory for campaigners, the local community and climate change. Greens Co-Leader Jeanette Fitzsimons congratulated Mighty River Power on finally seeing the light saying “the last thing New Zealand needs is more coal burning electricity stations. It is time to focus on developing renewable sources such as wind power and increasing efficiency to cut down on use.”
Marsden B which would have been the first coal fired power station built in New Zealand in 25 years and would have emitted around 2 million tonnes of climate-change-causing carbon dioxide can now be placed along with the on-hold gas fired plant Otahuhu C, as a victory for renewable electricity generation. Marsden B would have been a giant leap backwards and now a commitment needs to be made for no new coal fired generation in New Zealand
Time to open a bottle of organic champagne!

New Blog Up and Running

2007-03-02T16:25:00.000+13:00

At the GYG congress in Kenya I (foolishly?) put my hand up to be the blog administrator and have just launched it.'

It's a work in progress but check it out. www.globalyounggreens.blogspot.com

Back home and back to work.

2007-02-15T11:29:00.000+13:00

I've just returned from Africa, where I was privileged to attend the first Global Young Greens conference and World Social Forum in Nairobi, Kenya. It was incredible meeting activists from all around the world, sharing stories and experiences and also coming together to set up a new global organization the Global Young Greens. Over 4 days we gathered and discussed our joint principles, aims for the GYG and how we will organise ourselves. It was a diverse group of 16-34 year olds representing green parties and environmental groups from around the world and of the 150 who attended, we had 50 Kenyans, 2 Andorrans, a Kazakhstani, a Kyrgyzstani, yet no-one from the U.S. or U.K. Marcel Podstolski from Christchurch and I represented Aotearoa.

Nairobi, or Nai-robbery, as it's affectionately called, has a reputation for its crime. Nothing bad happened to any of us, but it was truly sad seeing a city dominated by crime, where most would rush home before sunset and it seemed that everyone had a story of being carjacked or robbed at gunpoint. The police aren't much better with corruption being a major problem as is killings during gun battles (of which there were about 50 over January). We were closeted in our beautiful rural campground with permanent security guards patrolling, so it was great to get a chance to travel to the countryside with the Green Belt Movement and plant some native trees at the Karura forest (which they had saved from being developed) to offset our flights to Kenya.

The meetings went well though we did spend a lot of time discussing procedural matters, meanings of words and trying to get over the language barrier. I ended up hating my fast-paced kiwi accent. There were also some serious cultural barriers and unfortunately we couldn't agree on homosexual rights. We had a day of workshops and I gave a slideshow on direct action and media activities. People were especially interested about the youth rates campaign. It was great talking to the other green parties on what they've been up to and both Marcel and I came away wanting to work more closely with the Australian and Asia-Pacific Young Greens.

The World Social Forum was awesome, with 50 000 people attending and over 200 workshops to choose from. It was hard to only pick 12, but even harder getting the workshop you wanted because the program was incorrect and there was no signage. The talks were mind-blowing; on stoning of adulterers in Iran, Wikileaks (a new on-line government leak site), HIV, the War on Terror and the future of the WSF. I was particularly interested in climate change and was surprised how few workshops there were. However, with more people becoming aware of the extreme threats and social costs to the developing world, I am sure there will be more attention paid to climate change and achieving climate justice in the future.

On the way to Kenya I stopped off in China and spent a week in Beijing. Walking around I was been struck by the contradictions: vast sky scrappers and huge Western-style malls selling expensive international products amongst true poverty, beggars and crumbling old apartment blocks. It's a communist country yet billboards pronounced 'shopping makes you happy' The city is obviously in the midst of fantastic change and is undertaking a massive building craze before the 2008 Olympics with cranes dotting the skyline building new towers, new ring roads unfortunately some of the 550 new coal fired power stations planned to be built. Incredibly 7 of the world's 10 most polluted cities are in China yet with such a powerful central government if China decides to go sustainable, could do so, in a big way.

I had an awesome trip and am grateful for the opportunity and would like to thank all those who helped me get to Kenya: The Green Party and Wellington Province for their financial support and all those who helped me in lots of different ways, especially Michael Pringle, Craig Palmer, Danna Glendening and Nigel Taptikilis. Thanks.

Global Young Greens in Kenya

2007-01-22T21:23:00.000+13:00

Jambo. Greetings from Nairobi. I've been attending the Global Young Greens conference in Kenya for the last week. Over 150 delegates from across the World have attended and surprisingly no one from Great Britain or the U.S. but two from Andorra! As well as us two Kiwis: Gareth Hughes from Wellington and Marcel Podstolski from Christchurch, and about 50 from Kenya, representing various NGOs including the Green Belt Movement founded in Kenya by Nobel Prize winner Warangi Marathi. It's been great meeting everyone and talking about what issues they are campaigning on, the state of their green parties or NGOs and as you can imagine talking an awful lot of politics.

Outcomes of the congress have been that we have decided to form a body called the Global Young Greens: constructed an organisational structure, voting methods, elected regional representatives and formed working groups to campaign on issues. We will be having another congress in 3 years which hopefully more Kiwis can attend. I am also looking forward to working closer with the Asia-Pacific Young Greens in the future.

A few days ago we bused into Karura bush, near Nairobi, which was slatted to be turned into slums but was saved by the Green Belt Movement who also helped us plant indigenous trees to offset all the carbon emitted getting us all here. It was great getting out of the city and into the bush and seeing a bit of nature.

Now I'm off to attend the World Social Forum where around 100 000 people have descended on Nairobi to attend.

NZ Coal fueling global warming in China

2007-01-14T20:44:00.000+13:00

From Beijing

2007-01-14T20:25:00.000+13:00

I've been in Beijing, China this week on route to the Global Young Greens Conference and World Social Forum Meeting in Nairobi, Kenya and has been blown away this Bustling metropolis of 15 million people. China has been high in the media's focus for the last few years with many calling it an 'emergent superpower,' and commenting on its rapidly growing economy. With gross domestic product growth rates of around 8% for the last three decades it has seen it's economy balloon and a voracious demand for resources, oil especially. Walking around Beijing I have been struck by the contradictions, vast sky scrappers and huge Western-style malls selling expensive international products amongst true poverty, beggars and crumbling apartment blocks. The city is obviously in the midst of fantastic change and is undertaking a massive building craze with cranes dotting the skyline building new towers, new ring roads and extending the subway system in time for the Beijing Olympics in 2008. Often this has come at the risk of traditional buildings and communities. The hutongs or narrow alleyways, often opening on to traditional courtyard houses wind through suburbs and are vibrant communities where often families have lived for centuries are under threat from this building boom.

I have been shocked by the share scale of traffic on the roads, with some 8 or more lanes on each side then large cycle lanes on the sides. The air quality is terrible with many people wearing masks and the car fumes remind me of Queen or Vivian Streets. 1000 extra vehicles join the roads each day yet the city has a great metro and bus system which about 50-60% of Beijing's people use. It's been great to see that Beijing has trolley buses as well, yet unfortunately much of the electricity is powered by coal with perhaps another 550 coal-fired power stations planned to be built. The streets are clean yet waste is a massive problem with 400 million tonnes expected by 2020 (that's as much as the world produced in 1997) and around 50 000 hectares of land around the cities are rendered useless by the garbage.

China has acknowledged the threat of climate change which could cause 'dire consequences' especially in agricultural production and has undertaken to have 10% of electricity powered by renewable energy by 2010 and in its 11th 5 year plan is attempting to become 20% more energy efficient, yet it has seen a near 1% increase in the first half of this year. Often developed countries have demanded that the less developed counties do more about climate change as an excuse for not acting themselves but we have to acknowledge that we have had centuries of industrialisation behind us and have polluted and emitted a massive amount in the past. We need the developing countries to do more but first we have to set a positive example and work internationally with fair and equatable agreements to limit greenhouse gas emissions.

Me and Mao mate

2007-01-13T15:58:00.000+13:00

I'm in China! I'v been here 7 days and I still can't get used to the buzz of being here. I'm having a great time and have done all the touisty things: the Great Wall, Tiannamen Square, Forbidden City, museums, temples but probably my favourite thing has just been having a quiet beer and watching the world go by.

I'll post a little more later on and but in the mean time -off to Kenya!

2006-12-21T10:02:00.001+13:00

2006-12-19T17:22:00.000+13:00

A one-page guide I wrote has just been uploaded to the net, view it here.

2006-11-28T14:20:00.001+13:00

2006-11-14T10:57:00.000+13:00

Oil, Smoke and Mirrors

2006-11-10T20:15:00.000+13:00

Party Youth Wings get together to 'Keep It 18'

2006-11-07T09:22:00.000+13:00

Media Release by: Young Labour - Young Nats - Young Greens - ACT on Campus

Youth wings from four political parties sent a united message to MPs today - Keep it 18!

In a cross party effort the Young Nats, Young Labour, the Young Greens and ACT on Campus held a joint press conference to urge MPs to vote against the Sale of Liquor (Youth Alcohol Harm Reduction: Purchase Age) Amendment Bill.

Young Labour spokesperson Sonny Thomas said;

"Parliament should look at ways of changing the binge-drinking culture that is harming our society– but raising the drinking age is not the answer. Changing attitudes towards our drinking is.

"That's why we call on MPs to get behind, and provide more support for enforcement efforts and educational campaigns like ALAC's campaign against binge drinking – not to deprive 18 year olds of the right to a beer as some sort of knee jerk response."

"Many young activists would find it difficult to campaign and vote for a political party, yet not be able to buy a drink to celebrate their party's election."

Young Nat's President Matthew Patterson said;

"This bill is just unfair. If the law allows 18 year olds to fight for their country, get married and vote - why can't we have the freedom to buy a drink? It would be ridiculous if 19 year olds are being sent overseas on often dangerous peace keeping missions with our armed forces, yet when they return can't have a drink with their colleagues.

"In addition, this is bad law - it creates multiple inconsistencies between bar staff and patrons, and there has been no proper consultation with young people

Young Greens spokesperson Zach Dorner said;

"20 was an age limit that no-one respected or enforced. It didn't work then so why go back? The 18 years limit is working well in responsible bars, but issues remain around irresponsible supply. We say to MPs tackle this problem, not the age limit."

"Political parties should look at how alcohol is promoted to young people."

ACT on Campus's Helen Simpson said;

"This Bill is immoral. It is immoral because it is an assault on freedom and democracy. It contradicts the liberal democratic notion that parliament exists to protect the socially responsible majority from the tiny handful of reckless individuals who refuse to respect others.

"We call on parliament to take responsibility and resist the temptation for a sensational headline-grabbing ban."

The group urged all MPs, who are facing a possible vote on the Bill this Wednesday, to listen to the voice of those who will be affected, ditch the proposal and instead focus on finding actual solutions to New Zealand's drinking problems.

Rasing the drinking age wont work, changing attitudes will.

Strip Naked Not Strip Mining!

2006-11-04T16:02:00.000+13:00

Saturday 4 November 2006

PRESS RELEASE:

Save Happy Valley Coalition members marched from Aro Valley toParliament and then Waitangi Park wetland to highlight state-ownedenterprise Solid Energy’s proposal to destroy a pristine wetlandecosystem on the West Coast of the South Island. In collaborationwith local artists, marchers were body painted to bring attention tothe myriad native and endangered species threatened by the proposedcoal mine.”

Wellington City Council put many thousands of dollars into restoringthis wetland in Wellington city that was originally destroyed byshort-sighted town developers, and wetland restoration is undertakenin many parts of the country at great expense. It is inanity that theproposal of a state-owned coal-mining company to destroy the wetlandWaimangaroa Valley (otherwise known as Happy Valley) and Mt Augustus– which are both untouched and unique ecosystems – has beensanctioned by the Conservation Minister Chris Carter” said Save HappyValley Coalition Wellington spokesperson Alex Winter-Billington.

“Climate change has been identified by economists, environmentalistsand social scientists as possibly the greatest threat to humanity andthe global environment today. Yet, despite the NZ Government’sostensible commitment to the Kyoto Protocol, it has agreed to allow anew coal mine to be opened in one of this country’s most preciousnatural environments.” Ms Winter-Billington added.”

An estimated 8% of Aotearoa New Zealand’s wetlands have survived tothe present day; over 90% of has been drained primarily for farming.What is left is critical habitat for rare and endangered species thatwill not survive without them, such as the two critically endangeredgiant carnivorous snail species that are endemic to Mt Augustus andthe Waimangaroa Valley and the Great Spotted Kiwi that have beenthriving in these largely predator-free zones. The health of suchspecies and ecosystems is furthermore critical for maintaining ahealthy level of biodiversity in Aotearoa New Zealand” she commentedfurther.

Save Happy Valley is an independent coalition fighting to protect theNgakawau Recommended Protected Area, the Waimangaroa Valley and MtAugustus. The group was formed in 2004 and has used creativenon-violent direct action to highlight the campaign; notablycoalition members have been occupying the Waimangaroa Valley for oversix months and have brought court cases against both Solid Energy andConservation Minister Chris Carter for their decisions regarding theproposed mines, both of which will be heard this year.ENDSMedia Contact:Alex Winter-Billington, Save Happy Valley Coalition WellingtonDelegate04) 385 4171, 0274 225 128More photographs available on requestFor information on the history of Save Happy Valley Coalitioncampaign history, visit the website:http://www.savehappyvalley.org.nz/aboutus.htm"

Snowpeople at Parliament

2006-11-03T14:56:00.000+13:00

Talking trash on my birthday

2006-11-01T15:16:00.000+13:00

Yesterday I went out to NaeNae College and gave a talk at their assembly to the year 9 and 10 students on waste.

The school had just started a paper recycling scheme and wanted someone to come and give the students reasons why they should care.

I pointed out that it is a massive problem in New Zealand and each year on average a kiwi throws out about 310kg much of it stuff that could be recycled or in the case of green waste - valuable stuff that could be used instead of or reducing our use of petro-chemical fertilisers. Our views have changed over time and the only solution anymore isn't to just dig more holes and bury it. In 1990 we had 327 landfills now in 2006 the number has reduced to 90, however one researcher has pointed out that we have approximately 1000 illegal tips operating in NZ, many of which are on farms. Rubbish mountains create many problems:

Chemicals or other nasty compounds can leach into the ground polluting water (in the first year of a chemical recovery programme in 2004 over 220 tonnes were collected)
We can't just keep on digging more giant holes - no one wants to live near a landfill
Landfills produce methane, a greenhouse gas roughly 30 times worse than CO2 (which we could also be burning for electricity production but at the moment waste)
and lastly, it takes a lot more energy to produce new things from scratch than recycling and reusing a product.

It's great that Naenae College has started recycling their paper waste but suggested they should also try and recycle glass, metal and plastic as well. I offered them solutions they can try as individuals:

Shop creatively and buy products with less packaging. Roughly 80% of a products waste is generated even before the consumer receives it. I gave the example of my old zero-waste flat as an extreme measure, demonstrating that it is possible...if you like sunflower seed milk

Recycle at home. 80 % of New Zealand has kerbside recycling - Naenae is part of that 80%
Compost your green waste or get a worm farm

Lastly I talked about the how the waste problem also needs to be tackled by Government as well as individuals. Currently Nandor has his Waste Minimisation (Solids) Private Members Bill going through Parliament, which would be the first reform of waste regulation and hopefully add some teeth.

The Bill has several major features:

Bans on landfilling certain products (eg paper can be recycled easily and cheaply and is a valuable resource - why should we just bury it?
Levy on waste - both to act as a economic deterrent and to fund positives alternatives
waste Minimisation authority to oversea waste reduction strategies.
Extended Producer responsibility - in short making the producer responsible for the whole lifetime of their product, acting as an incentive to design out as much waste as possible. Already this is being seen in some industries such as:

Tyre track recyles old tyres. In only 18 months they collected 1.3 million old tyres.
Fischer and Payckel will recycle their old whitewear.
Vodafone and Telecom will accept old phones for recycling
Dell, IBM and Hewlett Packard accept old computers

Seamounties say "Canada protect sea mounts!"

2006-10-30T11:05:00.000+13:00

Wellington, Today the Canadian High Commission got a timely reminder of Canada's necessity to learn lessons from the past and stop undermining a global moratorium on bottom trawling in international waters at the UN.

Two protesters dressed as Canadian Mounties – in this case, Sea Mounties – were joined by other Greenpeace activists handing out leaflets to Canadian High Commission staff this morning alongside a banner reading "Shame on Canada - Stop deep-sea destruction".

Greenpeace NZ delivered a letter from Greenpeace New Zealand and Environment and Conservation Organisations of New Zealand (ECO) to Canada's High Commissioner addressed to Canadian Prime Minister, Stephen Harper, which urged him to reconsider his country's opposition to a moratorium on bottom trawling in international waters.

Canada's once-abundant cod and New Zealand's orange roughy have been all but wiped out in the world's biggest fisheries disasters of modern times.

"In both cases, these fish populations have been decimated by bottom trawlers that also bulldoze their ancient habitats. Bottom trawling is like destroying paddocks in order to harvest sheep – no farmer would be that crazy," says Greenpeace political advisor Geoff Keey.

"We all need to learn from these disasters and act quickly to protect the incredible life in the deep sea. That's why it is particularly upsetting to see the Canadian Government – that should know better - undermining progress on a UN moratorium on bottom trawling in international waters".

"The science is clear, the first hand accounts and photos all back up the nasty impacts of bottom trawling. It's time for Canada to show the kind of leadership our oceans need," said Keey.

The UN meets next month to negotiate over ways to stop the destruction of deep-sea life in international waters caused by bottom trawlers – including moratorium on the practice.

Industrial bottom trawling, or 'dragging' as the Canadians call it, had become the dominant fishing practice after WWII in the centuries-old cod fishery off eastern Canada. By 1992, the cod stocks were devastated, the fishery collapsed and more than forty thousand people were thrown out of work.

"We need to see leadership from Canada, not blind repetition of past mistakes ," concluded Keey.

The world's craby that Canadia won't join move to bottom trawling moratorium

2006-10-26T21:51:00.000+13:00

www.deepseas.blogspot.com is a great website with heaps of images of Canadians personal messages to their Government on bottom trawling.

This is my favourite. Here's a great photo of Heather McKibbon doing a crab dance in Dartmouth yesterday, drawing attention to the fact that dragging in the high seas results in the destruction of habitat for a variety of marine creatures.
This website also pictured our banner outside New Zealand's Parliament (at the bottom of the page)

Youth Rates Suck!

2006-10-26T10:43:00.000+13:00

Yesterdays rally at Manners Mall in Wellington got a whole bunch of activists; students; union members; Young Green and Young Labour members together to loudly call on politicians to “Abolish Youth Rates!”

Around 50 people gathered outside the McDonalds restaurant, a target of the campaign because unlike other business such as Restaurant Brands (Pizza Hutt and KFC) or BP Oil, McDonalds continues to pay discriminatory youth rates: where under 18 year olds only receive 80% of the adult minimum wage.

The campaigners unfurled a large banner reading “Support your mates – abolish youth rates!” and an a activist dressed as Ronald McDonald handed out ‘unhappy meals’ – activist packs containing a stickers, leaflets and campaign information and a lollipop with ‘Youth Rates Suck!’ on it.

Green MP Sue Bradford, the MP responsible for the Bill attempting to abolish youth rates in Parliament took time a way from the house and spoke at the rally, encouraging young people to take action on this campaign.

Despite a lower than hoped for turn-out the organisers felt the rally was a success that got the message out loudly and are committed to organising further actions in the future.

more info on campaign
more photos

Save Happy Valley at Happy

2006-10-23T14:26:00.000+13:00

Save Happy Valley Wellingtons fundraisin’g gig on Saturday night went off. We had around 70 people show up which means we made roughly $600 in profit. First up Jessie Moss, from Harriet and Matches got the gig going with her smooth solo acoustic sounds, followed by slightly louder and more frantic Mr Sterile Assembly who led-up to a fever pitch performance by punk-rock Anaesthesia Associates. Olmecha Supreme headlined the gig and got everyone out of their seats and on to the dance floor with their wicked performance. Gareth got up and said a few words about the campaign and our activities and invited everyone to get down to the Valley this summer. By all measures the gig was a total success and big thanks has to go to Happy for hosting the event, the bands for donating their time, and a special thanks to Rusty for organising the event.

Keep an eye out for our next fundraising gig – A Leonard Cohen tribute concert at the Paramount and our Global Day of Action on Climate Change event – body-painted people and fun kite flying to highlight the destruction wrought by Solid Energy on the Coast and also wind energy as a positive solution to coal burning for electricity production - November 4 at Parliament.

Greens, United Future and Labour join forces to save Johnsonville Line

2006-10-18T15:57:00.000+13:00

Last nights Green organised public meeting in Johnsonville went really well with over 120 people attending and interesting and engaging speaking by a whole host: MPs Sue Kedgley; Peter Dunne; Labours Charles Chavel, as well as Ontracks David George and Option3's Roland Sapsford, and some coments by Councillors Wade- Brown; Jack Rubern; Terry McDavitt and Glen-Evans.

The thrust of the meeting was opposing the busway and the audience heard from all the speakers many different and varied reasons why. Peter Dunne provided some historical context saying that this was his 3rd or 4th time he has been involved in saving this piece of track.

Green Party Press Release:

Green Party Associate Transport Spokesperson Sue Kedgley is to host a public meeting tomorrow evening to oppose the discontinuation of the Johnsonville rail line.

United Future Leader Peter Dunne, Ontrack Chief executive David George, and Option3 Spokesperson Roland Sapsford will speak at the event.

A review of options for the line is currently underway, and one option being considered by the Greater Wellington Regional Council is to rip up the railway tracks and replace them with a one-way exclusive busway.

"Ripping up an existing, electrified rail line and replacing it with diesel buses is a loopy idea and would constitute a giant step backwards for local residents," Ms Kedgley says.

"Buses are less popular than trains, carry far fewer passengers, already cause congestion in Wellington traffic, and are reliant on fossil fuels which fluctuate in price and produce harmful greenhouse gas emissions.

"Opposition to this scheme is widespread, and transcends party-political lines. Hopefully the Regional Councillors will recognise the folly of this proposal, and direct their attentions instead to upgrading and improving the service on the existing Johnsonville line."

Listen to the national radio story

2006-10-16T14:30:00.000+13:00

Next movie this Friday (Oct 20)
At the Green Rooms cnr Courtney Place and Cambridge Tce.

"GE trees have the potential to wreak ecological havoc throughout the world's native forests. GE Trees could also impact wildlife as well as rural and indigenous communities that depend on intact forests for their food, shelter, water, livelihood and cultural practices. As a geneticist, I believe there are far too many unknown and unanswered questions to be growing genetically engineered plants— food crops or trees—in open fields. GE trees should not be released into the environment in commercial plantations and any outdoor test plots or existing plantations should be removed." See you there.

2006-10-16T14:04:00.001+13:00

Meghan

2006-10-15T17:31:00.000+13:00

2006-10-12T10:03:00.000+13:00

A dozen reasons to say 'no way!' to the busway:

2006-10-09T17:02:00.001+13:00

Cost. It is considerably cheaper to upgrade a rail line than it is to install a guided busway
Construction delays: this could take 2 years or longer to build causing massive disruption.
Undirectionality. The busway operation would be one way requiring confusing am/pm timetables.
Congestion. The busway would significantly increase congestion through more buses on the roads and would see traffic problems at:

Where the busway joins normal road traffic somewhere near the entrance to the Ngaio Gorge.
Lambton Quay where there already is considerable bus congestion. It is unlikely that 35 extra buses could be accommodated.

Environmental and sustainability issues:

Use of diesel fuel which contributes to local pollution and climate change.
Security of diesel supply and cost uncertain
Diesel buses produce noise pollution
Increased traffic congestion especially on Lambton Quay.

Less capacity. Over-all passenger capacity of busway would be less than current rail roughly one third.
Less popular. Buses are less popular than trains .
Less efficient. Trains are more efficient than buses in terms of rubber-to-concrete vs. steel-to-steel contact.
Encourage sprawl. The busway would limit ‘transport orientated development,’ stimulating urban sprawl.
High Upfront costs. Capital expenditure can be phased over time for rail option but not so for the busway option.
Keeps commuters on congested roads. Rail is more likely to achieve a modal shift from cars to public transport than buses are.
Ontrack. The Crown through Ontrack owns the tracks and the have said:

They would have to approve the ripping up of the tracks, and:
They would be unlikely to, in light of the National Rail Strategy.
‘It would be a big ask to simply hand over,’ the considerable infrastructure of tunnels, bridges, overhead line etc.

Greens@vic bake sale nets $111 for Taser campaign

2006-09-26T17:50:00.000+12:00

The taser is a terror weapon shaped like a gun that shoots a metal barb to deliver a 50 000 volt shock. It is currently being trialled by police in Auckland and Wellington and already it has been drawn 11 times and used once - all in only the first month. The Young Greens are opposed to its introduction because it is potentially a lethal weapon that has caused deaths overseas and will be used primarily against the poor, racial minorities, activists and youth in Aotearoa. Kiwis are proud that our cops do not carry firearms and the taser is the first step towards introducing guns at the detriment of traditional and non-lethal methods of conflict resolution.

Car Free Day

2006-09-24T11:47:00.000+12:00

Commuter race shows the cycle can beat the car to work

Two wheels proved to be better than four in the inaugural Green Party Commuter Challenge race to work, held today to mark International Car Free Day.

“We set out to find out which was the quickest way to get to work, and in two out of three races the cycle won out over the car,” Greens Wellington Transport spokesperson Sue Kedgely says.

Teams of competitors using different modes of transport set off at the same time from three different suburbs to see which mode of transport got them to Midland Park on Lambton Quay first.

“In two out of three cases cyclists arrived ahead of their car driving colleagues and those taking the bus or train.”

In the only victory for the car Wellington City Councillor Ray Ahipene-Mercer drove his car from Wellington Airport in 20 minutes. Fellow councillor Celia Wade-Brown, who took the bus arrived 10 minutes later at the same time as Patrick Morgan and Illona Keenan who cycled into a stiff head wind.

On the Johnsonville run, Sridar Ekambaram cycled the route from Johnsonville Railway Station in 20 minutes, three minutes quicker than driver Adrian Bathgate and a whole 10 minutes faster than our train commuter Michael Pringle.

Travelling from Karori Shopping Centre was also faster by cycle with Stephen Knight making the trip in eight minutes and Suri Meuws and Paul Bruce doing it in 10. Spencer Chubb, who took the bus, took 19 minutes, while motorist Caroline Scott took 26. Wellington City Councillor Andy Foster opted to jog and made the journey in 14 minutes, however, he chose to start at the city end of Karori instead of the mall.

Ms Kedgley waited at the end point in Midland Park and handed out pamphlets and organic apples to passing commuters to mark the day.

“The event was a huge success and just goes to show that taking your car to work is not necessarily the fastest way,’ Ms Kedgley says.

The Green Party Commuter Challenge was supported by Living Streets, Cycle Aware and Transport 2000.

What issues are most relevant to youth?

2006-09-13T10:09:00.000+12:00

I think youth are interested in same issues as adults-getting enough to eat, good employment, good health: except that they like things targetted towards them (ie; presented not as exciting and not too boring) and pehaps they are more passionate and direct in focusing on solutions. I think youthful nieveity can be a good thing, and often youth can see directly to the heart of the problem without excess baggage.

I have worked a lot within the environmental movement and have found that environmental issues definately iare a subject youth are passionate about, and can't seem to get enough of. I've been doing regular school talks and I've been blown away by the intrest and indepth questions being asked by young people, on issues such as high seas bottom trawling, gentic engineering, pollition and water quality issues. I am slightly older, and am 24, and am on the cusp of the PC generation; whereas todays youth have grown up with computers and the Internet and see less global boundaries and a more interconnected world - encouraging them to act on global environmental issues.

In January 07 I will be at a conference in Kenya for the Global Young Greens, who are a group of International youth working towards sustainability and social justice issues. It has been incredible, being part of the organising e-lists, to participate in discussions on many issues and in particular on homosexuality and the strong cultural divide between western views and developing countries views on the issue. In New Zealand youth sex and sexuality issues are still somewhat hidden and how schools in particular deal with this issue is of relevence.

I believe climate change is the biggest issue facing youth, and in the future we will be seeing its effects more directly both on the environment but also how we structure society. Climate change has such potential to change the future of New Zealands youth and they have a stake in what happens now.

I have been involved in the youth rates campaign and this definitely is an issue relevant to youth and one that they are interested in acting on. It really is a question of human rights-and young people especially, hate being told they can't do something dependent on age. This is a similar theme to a campaign I anticipate working on in the future - to enfranchise 16 years.

There of course, are many more issues relevant, such as schools, the education system, then Tertiary education and student loans as well as the youth harm reduction Bill.

Be a Pollock

2006-09-09T17:33:00.000+12:00

wicked website

Wellington Greens day of action for Overlander

2006-09-08T17:42:00.002+12:00

Augustus snail death

2006-09-08T17:03:00.000+12:00

Species extinction: coal at any cost

Save Happy Valley Coalition
8th September 2006

The Save Happy Valley Coalition is appalled by the first death of a captive Powelliphanta "Augustus" snail – living in a fridge because of state-owned coal company Solid Energy's mining operations.

"The snails have started to die in captivity. This was expected, given the rate at which Solid Energy have been taking this species from their habitat, given that they are still in domestic fridges in Hokitika, and given that there are no proper captivity facilities in sight," said Frances Mountier, spokesperson for the Save Happy Valley Coalition.

"Department of Conservation scientists said that the only way to ensure the survival of the species was to leave it on its last remaining 5ha of habitat, not moldering in a fridge. Second generation snails have consistently died in captivity – in fact there is no evidence they can live anywhere apart from their current habitat.

"This is species extinction and this is the Government's fault. This snail is only the beginning; Solid Energy is applying for permits to kill kiwi and a different species of snail within the Stockton Mine. Where is the public consultation on this? Why aren't New Zealanders being asked if killing our ancient giant snails and kiwi – our national icon – is something a government-owned company should do?

"The government has decided that Solid Energy be allowed to continue its coal mining, no matter what the cost. This drive for 'progress' and 'economic growth' is destroying the very things that people value most about this country."

Stopping Climate Change is our Business

2006-09-07T16:03:00.000+12:00

Save happy valley activists welcomed those attending the Business Roundtables conference on climate change at the Wellington Town Hall with a banner, leaflets and smiles.

2006-09-06T16:35:00.000+12:00

Inconvenient Truth Fundraiser a Success

2006-09-06T13:52:00.000+12:00

Last night the Save Happy Halley Coalition Wellington showed a fundrasing premier showing of Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth

We had approximately 150 people attend which we were stoked with, and earlier in the day were really apprehensive that no-one would show. So we've made a little cash to keep up our judicial review of Chris Carters decision to move the threatened snails of Mt Augustus.

The film was a great oportunity to discuss climate change in relation to the save Happy Valley campaign, because lately we've done an awlful lot of talking about Powelliphanta. Lynley pulled out a great stat: that the amount of coal planned to be mined at Mt Augustus was the carbon equivalent of running NZ's passenger vehicle fleet for 2 years! Incredible!

I really enjoyed the film, and despite the excessive Gore (you know...long lingering shots of Gore staring out a window complatatively), and thought it was produced pretty well and made the issue entertaining. I actually felt scarred for the future watching the film, and if he did one thing, he stressed climate changes immediacecy.

Interestingly I found out that the below image of the Earth was taken by the last Apollo missions and is the most widely used photograph in all of history. It is so special because it is one of the only shots ever taken with the sun behind the photographer meaning the earth is fully illuminated with no shadow.

Talking to 11 year olds about climate change.

2006-09-05T18:44:00.000+12:00

Yesterday I spoke to a group of 80 eleven year olds about climate change. I was apprehensive because I wasn't sure if they would understand or be interested in this issue. I was really suprised by their knowledge on the issue and was blown away, when I asked them, 'what are some things that cause climate change?' and they replied with the normal things like, 'carbon dioxide,' and 'petrol,' but also things like, 'CCfs, nitrous oxide,' and 'sulfates!'

They were pretty quick and knew a lot about the issue already. I handed out a bunch of fridge magnets and information on how changing your electricity company to support renewable energy so maybe their parents will be as quick

Obviously their teachers are doing something to educate them on this issue...lets hope our Politicians aren't too far behind.

If you'd like a copy of my powerpoint just drop me an email.

A briefing for lobbying MPs

2006-08-31T10:53:00.000+12:00

Save Happy Valley and Mt Augustus!

written by Alex Winter-Bilington

Regarding: State owned enterprise Solid Energy’s proposed open-cast coal mines in Happy Valley and on Mt Augustus, north Westland.

Ecological Value of Happy Valley and Mt Augustus:

Happy Valley and Mt Augustus are part of the Ngakawau Ecological District, a region officially noted for its ecological and geological significance. Happy Valley itself is one of the best examples of an undisturbed coal measure landscape, quite possibly the only remaining of its type globally. The presence of the coal measures over- and under-lain by impermeable sandstone result in poor drainage and therefore a wetland ecosystem. As a result of this wetness, the region is habitat to many unique species, some endemic to the area, whilst also being repellent to many pest species that threaten and cause the decline of endemic populations elsewhere. As a result, the landscape is one of the least disturbed by human occupation in Aotearoa New Zealand and truly prehistoric.

Happy Valley and Mt Augustus are the exclusive homes of Powelliphanta patrickensis and Powelliphanta augustus respectively, two endemic species of giant carnivorous snail. Both species are listed as nationally endangered, and their populations are limited to around 1,000 each. Because the ecology of Happy Valley and Mt Augustus are sui generis, and both species of snail has evolved in situ over millennia, it is highly unlikely that they could thrive in any other location.

Happy Valley is also home to a large, unmanaged population of Great Spotted Kiwi (around 75-145 adult individuals in but one permitted mining area). Given the lack of predators such as possums and stoats, this species has been able to thrive without intervention. This again makes the region unique and highly valuable.

Happy Valley it part of a DOC recommended protection area, so classified in 1998 Powelliphanta patrickensis and Great Spotted Kiwi are both protected species under the provisions of the Wildlife Act 1953, the highest level of legal protection afforded to species under Aotearoa New Zealand law.

Likely impacts of proposed open-cast mining:

The proposed mining sites include around 40% of Powelliphanta patrickensis habitat that supports an estimated 74% of the total population (Kath Walker, Powelliphanta patrikensis expert) - the total population of this already endangered species would therefore be reduced to 26% of its current size! 14.5 ha of diverse red tussock wetland - representing 70% of the Ngakawau Ecological District wetland and unique even within the District – would be lost . The mining would destroy what has been a haven for Great Spotted Kiwi, a great loss to the national population and efforts to conserve this species.

The proposed mine would produce pollution of surface waterways and groundwater and acid mine drainage – many of the rivers draining the region of Solid Energy’s Stockton Mine are already polluted beyond recognition.

Acid mine drainage has a long-term and devastating impact. Coal mine waste products that are left to “rot” slowly produce a highly acidic and toxic discharge. This mixture can remain ineffectual for many years until disturbance such as earthquakes or landslides cause their movement and release. Therefore, pollution of the area and those downstream could continue for decades beyond closure of the mine, making re-establishment of previous habitats even less likely.

Removal of currently established plant species would encourage the encroachment of pests, as would drainage of the land. The absence of such pests is what currently allows species there to thrive and their establishment would again decrease the likelihood of ecological restoration in the future.

Proposed habitat transferral and “ecological rehabilitation”:

Solid Energy appears to have been granted permission to initiate this plan based upon a promise to temporarily transfer Powelliphanta habitat, preserve it during the mining operation and then “rehabilitate” the environment subsequent to mine closure. This is a highly dubious proposal and there is absolutely no scientific evidence that it could succeed. As mentioned above, the site’s ecology is intimately linked with the underlying bedrock structure, which would be destroyed by mining. The sites micro-climate is unique and again there is no evidence that any of the endemic species could survive in another location. Previous attempts at ecological transferral by the company of more robust sods have failed, and their commitment to the habitat’s preservation is in fact questionable (see below). Furthermore, the company has promised “rehabilitation”, not restoration, which is by no means a guarantee of genuine ecological reestablishment.

Mt Augustus:

Solid Energy are not playing fair – already they have moved more snails from Mt Augustus than they have resource consent to take and have furthermore sidelined the Powelliphanta expert they have been consulting. The snails they have already removed are being stored in ice cream containers in a fridge in Hokitika (!) with absolutely no guarantee of appropriate food provisions let alone an appropriately controlled environment. This situation must be urgently remedied and cannot be allowed to be repeated in Happy Valley.

Coal-mining and climate change:

Coal-mining is an environmentally and economically unsustainable enterprise. Coal is a fossil fuel and produces climate-changing gasses such as carbon dioxide in great concentrations when burned. The coal extracted from Happy Valley and Mt Augustus is likely to be soled into Asia and burnt in steel production. The predicted effects of climate change are well known in New Zealand, and our government ostensibly supports and encourages the use of renewable energy sources. Destroying ecologically significant areas for production of a fossil fuel is therefore completely outrageous.

Specific Requests:

Get your weight behind the campaign! More than anything, publicity is needed. People such as you could make a huge difference simply by publicly denouncing Solid Energy’s proposal;
Chris Carter has compromised his integrity as Conservation Minister by approving the proposal, and I request that you, as an MP, publicly call him to account for his decision;
Call Solid Energy to account for it’s transferral of Mt Augustus snails and the current method of storage;
Pass this brief on to other Members of Parliament; and pressure the labour caucus to support stopping coal mining at Happy Valley and on Mt Augustus.
Let me know what steps you take after this meeting.

Rally at Parliament Thursday

2006-08-29T16:09:00.000+12:00

2006-08-29T15:57:00.000+12:00

Gisborne Herald Article

2006-08-26T15:52:00.000+12:00

Footage helps bid for trawling moratorium

by Christine McCafferty
Monday, 10 October, 2005

GETTING pelted with potatoes and sewage was not a pleasant experience for former Gisborne man Gareth Hughes, but it was worth it considering the damning footage he and his fellow Rainbow Warrior crew got of bottom sea trawlers.
Mr Hughes was aboard the Rainbow Warrior in June this year when they filmed a Kiwi bottom trawler dumping a 500-year-old gorgonian coral tree overboard, after dragging it up from the sea bed while trawling for orange roughie in international waters of the Tasman Sea.
On Saturday Mr Hughes and three other Greenpeace campaigners were in Gisborne as part of a worldwide campaign to get a United Nations moratorium on bottom trawling in international waters.
The three weeks spent at sea aboard the Rainbow Warrior was a revelation for Mr Hughes, who has been with Greenpeace for the past five years.
"We took traditional Greenpeace non-violent action and attached inflatable life rafts to stop the nets from going down. I guess the fishermen weren’t very happy about it," he said.
No, they probably were not, considering they used an air compressed cannon to fire potatoes and, when those did not deter the Greenies, sewage at their rafts.
But Greenpeace got their own back. Within minutes of filming the footage of coral being thrown overboard, the images were distributed to UN representatives and television media around the world.
Bottom sea trawling is said to be the most destructive fishing practice and scientists say it is wiping out rare deep sea species that are yet to be discovered.
The trawlers take and destroy everything in their path on the seabed, bringing about the extinction of deep-sea creatures, Greenpeace says.
Greenpeace communications officer Dean Baigent-Mercer compared the practice to bulldozing down a rainforest.
"When experimental trawlers discovered orange roughie, it triggered this global goldrush, with commercial fishers wanting to catch as much fish as possible. However, they knew nothing about the habitat and rare creatures they were destroying."
A moratorium would at least give scientists the chance to study the unknown world of the seabed and discover the extent of damage years of bottom sea trawling had caused.
"No one knew up until now just how bad it was," said Mr Hughes.
"Now they are seeing it first hand, people are really starting to take notice of this issue. It was up to us to get these images out there, because it’s not like the fishing industry is going to tell the public what really goes on."
The Greenpeace crew had received a positive response in Gisborne, with many people signing a postcard expressing their concerns about bottom sea trawling, addressed to the Prime Minister.
"We’ve also had a lot of fishermen from Gisborne telling us their stories about what they’ve seen out at sea. We are particularly interested to hear from more people who have worked on bottom trawlers to tell us their experiences," said Mr Hughes.
Greenpeace was in town on Saturday for the final day of their bottom sea trawling roadshow.

Article for JET magazine.

2006-08-25T15:35:00.000+12:00

This an article published by JET magazine

Being an Activist

When asked the question, “what do you want to be when you grow up?” I always said, “I don’t know, a lawyer, maybe an architect?” Then one day a few years ago I thought about it and realised that somehow I was actually being paid to be an environmental activist! This came as quite a surprise to me because I never planned to have a career working on protecting the environment, and up until that point had always done it just because it was fun and exciting.

I currently work for the Green Party of Aotearoa/New Zealand, as the Youth Campaigner and before that I worked for Greenpeace New Zealand and Australia in a variety of roles. Being an activist isn’t your normal run-of-the-mill job, and there isn’t a school you can go to get training in it. It is a job that has far more to do with your personality than your education. In the beginning, all you need is the willingness to contribute to a campaign that is important to you, and dedicate your time, effort and creativity to achieving that goal. There isn’t one thing that you have to be good at to be an activist – you need lots of different skills, but one of the most important is being able to talk to groups of diverse people like politicians, volunteers, or just your average person on the street. You have to know your stuff, and do as much research as possible, so that if you’re asked a question you can give a good and accurate answer. You have to be organised and able to organise other people, and you have to be able to use technology such as email and the internet. Lastly you must be positive in everything that you do. When you’re talking about a problem, you also have to know what the solution is, and how to get there. A big part of being an activist is encouraging people to believe that there is a solution to a problem, and they can be apart of the answer.

I have been involved in heaps of different campaigns over the last six years such as working on climate change, keeping genetic engineering out of New Zealand’s environment, toxic pollution, and recently helping to keep Wellington’s trolley buses. There are lots of different ways you can campaign towards a positive solution – you can lobby and approach politicians (by writing them letters or having a meeting with your local electorate MP); you can get publicity (by organising a march or painting a banner); you can help publish reports; and you can inform the public of what’s happening (by handing out leaflets or organising a public meeting). You can ask people to sign a petition; or write a letter; or to boycott something. I think the funnest part of being an environmental activist is doing non-violent direct action: when you take peaceful action to stop or save something – like when Ghandi went on hunger strike in protest; when the founders of Greenpeace sailed into a nuclear test site; or when I dressed up as Roland McDonald and chained myself to a gate to stop the delivery of genetically engineered ingredients.

My Time on the Rainbow Warrior

One campaign that I have been involved in over the last few years is trying to stop high seas bottom trawling, because it is the world’s most damaging fishing method. Bottom trawling involves dragging nets – larger than a football field, with big metal rollers along the ocean floor to collect fish. The problem is that you don’t just catch what you’re looking for, but you also catch everything else: corals and sponges and other fish and animals that live on the ocean floor. The deep sea is an amazing place. It is totally dark, frigidly cold, and is under such great pressure that it would crush a person. It is one of our last wildernesses, and more people have been to the moon, than the deep ocean floor. Scientists estimate there could be 100 million unknown species down there; still, bottom trawling is like clear felling undersea coral forests, and those species are killed before scientists get the chance to study them properly. Bottom trawling is like ‘blowing up Mars before we get there.’

In 2005, I was lucky enough to sail on the Rainbow Warrior. We sailed into the Tasman Sea to do what governments around the world weren’t doing – stopping the bottom trawlers. We left Auckland in May, sailing north. Nearly everyone got sea-sick; it was absolutely horrible hearing everyone vomiting and moaning and not able to do much work for the first couple of days. I was lucky and did not get sick, and because of this I was called ‘cast-iron guts’ by the crew. However, this was a mixed blessing and meant that I had to take over some of the cooking duties for the crew of 26 meat-eaters and vegetarians aboard.

As we sailed north, the weather got progressively worse, and we learnt that around the tip of the North Island were massive 10 metre plus waves. We had to shelter near New Zealand’s most northerly point for the weather to clear and we for the next few days we spent training and practicing. Greenpeace is famous for its zodiac inflatables, and the images of activists in between the whale and the harpoon. However, you never see all the effort that goes into launching one of them. It takes the Captain (who in our case was the Captain of the original Rainbow Warrior which was blown up 20 years earlier) managing the crane; the boson, yelling instructions; and four people holding four large ropes to stop the inflatable from wobbling too much. The boat was then placed on the side of the Warrior, before dropping it into the (usually heaving) sea bellow with its crew. It is potentially dangerous work, but after a few practice runs we could launch them quickly, and in the dark if necessary.

While at anchor, we took the opportunity to treat the mostly foreign crew to a New Zealand tradition – the BBQ. The occasion was a birthday on board, and somehow a cake was produced, one crew member even had a bow-tie, and we danced into the early hours. It must have looked hilarious to other ships at anchor to see people dancing in the bridge (the steering and chart room) of the Rainbow Warrior.

It got to the point that the forecast wasn’t improving, and if we stayed at anchor we’d miss our chance of catching the bottom trawlers; so the captain made the decision to brave the waves and head into the Tasman Sea. The sea truly was ferocious, with waves crashing over the ship and people being thrown out of their bunks at night, and oh; it started another crew-wide bout of sea-sickness.

The routine on board was that the Captain and mates would rotate shifts keeping watch, while the rest of the crew worked a normal 8 hour day. We would be woken at 7, start work at 8, do half an hour of cleaning before the other jobs that needed to be done for that day. My position was as a deckhand, which meant that when we weren’t launching the inflatables I was painting, chipping rust or organising things in the hold. There would be a regular morning tea, lunch and afternoon tea brakes, but just the act of constantly holding on to things and maintaining balance meant that you would be famished by meal time. 5 o’clock was time to down tools and have a drink, and usually stare at a glorious sunset before dinner and then usually someone would play a guitar, or we would watch a movie. If the Captain could be persuaded he might stop the ship and let us have a swim – absolutely freezing being the middle of winter, but having huge albatrosses in the water with us made up for it.

It wasn’t until the tenth day at sea before we found our first bottom trawler: the Tasman Viking. We were woken at 6am and told that we found the ship on the radar that night. So I donned my activist kit: thermals; wet-weather gear; helmet; goggles; knife (in case we had to cut ourselves free); life jacket; vest with Stop Deep Sea Destruction written on it and a personal banner. Then we launched the inflatables and set off in pursuit of the trawler. It was depressing watching the trawler pull up its net, full of fish, and it reminded me of the landfill back in Gisborne (where I grew up) but instead of seagulls, there were hundreds of albatrosses circling the trawler; all fighting to get the by-catch that is thrown overboard.

We found two more ships soon afterwards – the Westbay and the Ocean Reward – all New Zealand trawlers taking part in the destruction of the deep. On the twelfth day we started doing non-violent direct action on the Ocean Reward, such as tying and inflating a large 20 person emergency life raft to the trawl nets, so it couldn’t be sunk; locking a cable in between the trawl doors, so the net couldn’t work; and locking plastic barrels to the net – so they would have to haul the net back on board, to chop the barrel off before laying the net out again…when we’d tie another barrel on…and repeat. The most effective tactic was just racing the zodiacs right up the stern (back) of the ship so they couldn’t lay the net out. Obviously our actions annoyed them greatly and they used different ways to show this such as throwing fruit and fish at us; building a mortar to hurl potatoes at us; and using their high pressure fire hose on us. It was surreal being in the middle of the Tasman Sea and having a fisherman yell at me, “why don’t you go and get a real job!”

Our actions gained media interest and widespread support around the world and we when we found the New Zealand trawler, the Waipori, throwing overboard a massive man-sized piece of coral: we knew we had found more damning evidence to take to the United Nations Generals Assembly, who in November were to make a decision on the future of bottom trawling. My three weeks aboard the Warrior were exciting and a lot of fun and best all, successful in terms of the campaign. I believe that trying to save the world doesn’t have to be all about seriousness and sacrificing things, it has to be fun as well.

We need our Government to support the moratorium on bottom trawling in International waters at the United Nations, and you can write the Prime Minister Helen Clark, (freepost Parliament) asking her to support the moratorium. If you would like to find out more about the campaign visit www.greenpeace.org.nz or www.savethehighseas.org

Jet Skis and Lyall Bay

2006-08-25T15:12:00.000+12:00

Today, Green MP Sue Kedgley and Wellington City Councillor Celia Wade-Brown delivered their submission to the Greater Wellington Regional Council supporting the initiative to exclude jet skis from Lyall Bay and separate them from other water users.

"Excluding jet skis would make Lyall Bay beach safer for surfers and
swimmers, and I am glad the Council is investigating this issue
before, and not after someone is seriously hurt or killed by a jet
ski," says Ms Kedgley.

“In my joint submission with Celia, we have submitted that jet skis be excluded from Lyall Bay much like what happens overseas, as in Cape Cod in the U.S. or Port Maquarie in Australia.” Says Ms Kedgley.

"Unfortunately, some jet skiers' antics such as wave jumping outside
of the flagged jet ski zone, have meant that other water users' lives
have been endangered and some of the stories I have heard have been
chilling," says Ms Kedgley.

The two Green members’ submission focused on safety and pollution
issues as a basis for jet skiers to be excluded from Lyall Bay and
have a separate beach allocated that is not shared by surfers and
swimmers.

"As a keen kayaker, I believe Lyall Bay is a great place to relax and
have a swim, surf or kayak but sharing the beach with jet skiers is unpleasant because their distracting high mosquito-like whine is heard for kilometres,
and some of their fuel is also discharged into the sea," says Ms
Wade-Brown, who also enjoys walking her dog along the coast.

Ms Kedgley and Ms Wade Brown called on the Regional Council to exclude
jet skiers, and they agree with Greater Wellington Regional Council Chairman Ian Buchanan’s statements that, "Maintaining the status quo or public education, are too Costly or impractical"

Greens launch Save the Overlander Campaign.

2006-08-23T13:05:00.000+12:00

Early yesterday morning a group of us gathered at Wellington railway station while in Auckland the local Greens there along with Keith Locke handed out flyers and collected signatures on the petition to save the Overlander.

The campaign is important both in protecting our past - the trains two years short of its hundreth birthday, but also our future. We need to ensure that we have transport options avlaible when we can't rely on imported enegy supplies. If we just spent a little money and effort on it, the Overlander could be a fast, modern and attractive way to travel the North Island, that has the potential to be cheaper than air travel and much, much cleaner.

Coke and Pepsi banned

2006-08-12T11:51:00.000+12:00

India's southern state of Kerala has banned the Indian subsidiaries of Coca-Cola and PepsiCo from manufacturing and selling soft drinks.

Several Indian states have already banned the sale of Coke and Pepsi at schools and colleges after scientists found they were contaminated by pesticides.

Kerala is the first Indian state to ban producing or selling the drinks; its neighbour Karnataka has banned them from schools, colleges and hospitals.

"There are lots of reports which prove that these drinks have certain ingredients that are harmful to the human body," said VS Achuthanandan, Kerala's chief minister, after a cabinet meeting approved the ban. Coca-Cola and PepsiCo could not be reached immediately for comment.

Last week, the Center for Science and Environment in New Delhi said it had found pesticide residues in samples of Coke and Pepsi that were 24 times above the limits set by the Indian government.

The centre said that tests on 57 samples taken from 11 soft drink brands made by Coca-Cola India and PepsiCo India had found a "cocktail of three to five different pesticides."The chemicals are believed to have entered the drinks through the groundwater used in their manufacture.

On Tuesday, PepsiCo placed advertisements with several Indian newspapers saying the company follows Indian government's regulations and that the "pesticide residues present in soft drinks are minuscule."

The company also said that food will often contain residues of pesticides used by farmers.

"Our beverages in India are suitable for anyone, anywhere," said a PepsiCo statement. "We drink them. We share them with our families and friends. And we know they are safe for you."

Sponsor a Snail

2006-08-09T11:36:00.000+12:00

email wellington@savehappyvalley.org.nz to sponsor your snail and help the threatened snails on the west Coast.

New Blog

2006-08-09T09:36:00.000+12:00

To celebrate my new experimental blog Gclip, I have posted R Kelly's trapped in the closet clip 1. G clip is going to be where I practice my html skills and where I'll post all the great YouTube clips that I've been finding, but that are not appropriate for this site.

2006-08-05T00:03:00.000+12:00

trapped in the closet chapter 1

Greenpeace Welcomes Trawler to Nelson

2006-08-02T09:07:00.000+12:00

Greenpeace activists chain themselves to the Belize flagged Chang Xing - in Port Nelson. The activists prevented the ship from leaving Port and is part of the on going campaign to achieve an international moratorium on bottom trawling in International waters. For more information

Bottom trawling is the Worlds most destructive fishing practice and involves dragging large nets with metal roller along the ocean floor.

Currently the UN is discussing the issue and is going to make a decision later in the year. Our Government is not currently supporting a moratorium and needs a prod. Send an e-card to our Government. Good on the Greens for also running with this issue and Metiria Turei's asked some good questions to Fisheries Minister Jim Anderton.

I was published in Salient today on this issue with an article entitled. How Low Can They Go?

A picture paints a thousand words...and this one paints a very sad picture.

2006-07-27T15:42:00.000+12:00

This is an image of Israeli school children writing messages on shells destined for Lebanon.

2006-07-26T15:34:00.000+12:00

Join the Wellington Central Greens for an early Friday night movie; drink; snacks
and of course...good company. Bring a long a bottle of wine and find out whats
happening in the coming month.

Every month the Wellington Central Greens will host a new movie and
best of all you get to vote.

Next movie: Friday 25 August @ 5:30pm

At the Green Rooms cnr Courtney Place and Cambridge Tce.

Voting closes one week before. Choose from:

Interview with Colin Campbell (http://www.globalpublicmedia.org) (1hr57min).
Petroleum geologist explores the geo-politics of Peak Oil in clear and easy to
understand terms (including a look at oil giants Russian and Canada).

What the Bleep Do We Know (http://www.whatthebleep.com)(1hr49min).
Interesting examination of connection between quantum physics and mysticism.

Tau e Mauri – Breath of Peace (http://www.wickcandle.co.nz) (72min).
NZ documentary on the history of the NZ peace and anti-nuclear movement.

The Next Industrial Revolution (http://www.thenextrevolution.org)(55min).
US film with interesting ideas about recycling, zero waste, producer responsibility, 'waste as food'. Features revolutionary, world renowned Green architect William McDonough.

For more information or to place your vote or to vote for a different film email greenmps.wellington@greens.org.nz

Karori Sanctuary worthy of support

2006-07-26T14:08:00.000+12:00



Press Release from Russel Norman Green Co-Leader and Sue Kedgley Green MP

26th July 2006.

This morning Green Co-Leader Russel Norman joined with other parties in
draping signed green ribbons on Lambton Quay supporting the Karori wildlife
sanctuary.

The Karori Wildlife Sanctuary missed out on funding for a new visitor centre
from the $32 million Community Based Projects Fund, despite Prime Minister
Helen Clark saying that the visitor centre “was the sort of project the fund
aimed to help.”

“The Karori Sanctuary is an amazing place. Only two kilometres away from the
CBD you can be surrounded by our unique flora and fauna and have the chance
to see our threatened national icon – the kiwi,” the Wellington based Dr
Norman says.

“The sanctuary is a world-first and the predator proof fence allows
threatened species such as the little spotted kiwi, saddleback and the
tuatara a safe haven on New Zealand’s mainland.”

“This is essential both as a needed conservation measure but also to provide
urban dwellers and tourists the opportunity to get up close to our unique
flora and fauna and see why it is vital to protect our natural toangas,” Dr
Norman says.

“I would like to see what’s happening in Karori replicated around the
country and see more urban sanctuaries established,” he says.

Green Party MP and spokesperson for Wellington issues Sue Kedgley points out
that the Sanctuary is another draw card in attracting tourists to the
Wellington region.

“It’s an absolute scandal that the award winning and popular sanctuary has
missed out on funding with $13 million of the fund still unallocated,” she
says.

“What’s the point of the fund if it’s not going to deserving applicants like
the Karori Sanctuary,” she asks.

“The Sanctuary clearly has massive community support from its members, local
Government and also the 250 000 volunteer hours that have been put in. The
Government should acknowledge all that hard work and support this
much-needed conservation and tourist venture.

“The visitor centre is estimated to triple visitor numbers to 170 000 and is
vital to Wellingtons tourist industry and will provide the region with more
good quality jobs.”

Busways and Bus Rapid Transport: The International and New Zealand context.

2006-07-18T17:33:00.000+12:00

Introductions

Bus rapid transit (BRT) is a broad term given to a variety of different transportation systems involving buses and ranges from:

● Dedicated exclusive busways such Curitiba (Brazil)

● Buses operating in high occupancy vehicle lanes or in mixed traffic, such as in Houston, LA, Ottawa.

● Dedicated busways with some form of guidance such as in Essen or Adelaide’s O-Bahn.

● A mix of initiatives such as signal prioritisation, off-bus fare collection, level boarding upgraded and or well spaced bus stops and real time information services, such as LA’s MetroRapid.

BRT is a fuzzy concept that could broadly be argued is any bus measure above basic normal on-street operation.

This study will be investigating bus measures internationally with a focus on exclusive busways as is proposed for Wellingtons Northern Corridor.

BRT is an old concept and was apparently first proposed in Chicago in 1937, however the first exclusive busway was the El Monte Busway in LA; opened in 1972, then opened to cars containing 3 then 2 or more passengers in 1974 which caused severe congestion.

BRT is often portrayed as “like rail;” or “rubber rail;” however without the cost. Which asks the obvious question – if it’s so much like rail – why not just build rail to start with?

Advantages of BRT

Busways and BRT are perceived to have positive effects on road congestion and are seen to improve this, cheaper than light or heavy rail can. Busways are often cheaper in the short term because of lower vehicle capital costs; they utilise existing streets and road maintenance costs are usually externalised.

Busways are seen as being more flexible and responsive to population changes. They can provide seamless travel, reducing the numbers of transfers, from a distant suburb to the city; with roving buses driving through normal streets picking up passengers until they join the express busway to central destination.

Busways can be built incrementally and extended as desired.

The International situation

Just this week two large bus BRT projects internationally have been turned down in favour of light rail alternatives – In Minneapolis and Seattle.

To start with it is best to look at the home of BRT Los Angeles.

Los Angeles.

LA’s El Monte busway opened in 1973 and was moderately successful peaking with ridership at 30 000 per day, however opening the busway to high occupancy vehicles (HOV) and resulting congestion resulted in a 33% reduction in passenger

-ship.

1997-2000 LA opened the Harbour Transitway, an 11km stretch of mixed bus and HOV for approximately $500 million, and whilst there is debate on the passenger figures there is consensus that it is low; below predictions, and substantially less than the near-by LRT.

LA’s Metro Orange Line is a dedicated busway that curiously is classified as a rail network and is given a colour coding. This busway was opened recently and is still under construction. The project has been plagued by work disruptions and the busway has seen numerous crashes both as a result of bus driver error and vehicles ent
ering the busway.

LA’s silver line – a ‘train-like-bus,’ where buses are painted the same colour as the train and are officially part

of the train network.

Ottawa.

Ottawa’s Transitway is the largest project in the City’s transportation history and has been honoured with a Canadian Public Works Project of the Century Award. A dedicated system of bus-only roadways, the Transitway provides an exclusive rapid transit link across much of the City’s urban area, with service operating 22 hours a day. Ottawa’s busway is often cited as the best example internationally; however it is troubled by congestion at city entrances; fares had to be reduced to encourage usage and passenger trips per year has dropped by 1 million since completion.

Ottawa in 2001 built an experimental light rail network, the O-train. One criticism is that the trains receive very low ridership compared to some very crowded bus lines. It should be noted, however, than one fully loaded O-Train carr

ies 285 passengers compared to 131 passengers for buses

Adelaide

Adelaide’s O-Bahn busway opened in 1986 and is a guided busway that runs for 12 km. Built rather than the originally conceived light rail system, the busway has been moderately successful and has not seen the 25% reduction in passenger numbers since transport deregulation that other networks have. This has been ascribed to the fact that the busway caters to the growing northern suburbs. The O-Bahn encounters problems at the end of the busway when the buses join congested city streets.

Curitiba

Curitiba has, indeed, accomplished a lot on a limited budget and is often cited as the developing country, ‘city that could.’ Using novel approaches to transport planning Curitiba was able to drastically improve the efficiency of its bus fleet.

Prepayment of fares and level boarding, systems typically found in rail systems, create a very efficient boarding and deboarding process. A bi-articulated bus (a 5-door, 82-foot bus built by Volvo and currently used only in Curitiba) with a load of 270 people can board or deboard in about 20 seconds. The average speed o

f buses using the busway is 13 miles per hour--twice the estimated speed for buses operating in the same Curitiba corridors in mixed traffic.

There are five busways, each between 5 and 7.5 miles long, radiating from the city centre. The most recent busway was completed in 1994 at a cost of $1.5 million per kilometre. There are plans to add circumferential busways to link key suburban areas. Curitiba is a great example of a ‘like rail,’ BRT system with extensive ex

clusive busways, huge buses, more akin to trains; however the buses are considerably overcrowded and affected by increasing road congestion due to increasing affluence and vehicle use, Curitiba is considering other transport modes.

Auckland’s Busway

In New Zealand we have our very own busway nearing competition (2007); Auckland’s Northern Busway is estimated to cost in total 325.5million and will ccomprise a 6.0 km stretch of dedicated two-way roadway for buses in both directions and HOV lanes, having southbound access only in the morning peak, the planned two-lane busway will run between Constellation Drive and Esmond

e Road. Bus stations will be located at Albany, Constellation, Sunnynook, Westlake and Akoranga. A single 2.5 km lane busway will run southbound from Akoranga Station to the Harbour Bridge.

The busway has encountered controversy over the bus company tender process and has been criticised for not including cycle lanes or a bus lane on the harbour bridge, where congestion is expected to be high.

Depressing photo of what the Auckland busway website refers to as ‘Modern bus shelters.’

Disadvantages of BRT

One bus has space for about 50 passengers only; articulated or double decker buses may push the crush load capacity to about 100. Thus the BRT transport vessel has an intrinsic capacity limitation and finds its place on the capacity scale between standard bus services and rail-based systems. In Europe the bus driver's salary may account for 60-70% of the total operating costs. As one tram driver can drive the same number of passengers as 4-6 bus drivers, on high capacity routes BRT may not be the most cost effective solution.

BRT is often considered cheaper; and whilst construction and capital costs usually are, operating costs are not necessarily. In Boston operating costs per passenger mile of LRT was 32 percent cheaper than BRT; of rail, 50 percent cheaper (2002), and in LA their LRT was 24 percent cheaper than bus; rail rapid transit 22 percent cheaper.

When a dedicated roadway is only available for part of the bus journey the BRT system is still subject to traffic congestion especially at the entrances, such as in Adelaide, Ottawa and will be in Auckland. This considerably reduces frequency and reliability of service and can affect ridership levels as seen in LA or Ottawa.

As with truck traffic, heavy bus traffic with its high axle-load causes significant wear and tear of the road surface, and regular investment is required to maintain quality. This is a particular problem for guided busways, bus stops and similar situations where the wheels always pass exactly over the same spot, whereas rail lines can take considerable wear. A further argument against BRT is that the rolling resistance of rubber wheel on tarmac is many times that between steel wheel and steel rail (a factor of between 5 and 10 is often quoted).

BRT also suffers from images problems associated with buses. Some argue, they do not attract the ridership of rail lines, and it is not clear whether they can encourage secondary advantages such as neighbourhood revitalization and business development. Conversely, some South American systems claim capacity in the order of 40,000 passengers per hour per direction, levels that are consistent with some heavy rail, metro systems. Similarly, many more modest BRT systems may operate with daily ridership that equals or exceeds that of light rail LRT systems in other cities.

Environmentally, the majority of buses internationally are run on diesel and thus contribute to local pollution and climate change. I could not find any busways internationally that utilised trolley buses. Bus exhaust fumes also increase costs, where tunnels are part of the network; requiring large extraction fans to remove diesel particulates.

BRT on the Johnsonville line

Removing the rail lines is a step backwards and would place Wellington with other cities around the world that removed tram, trolley bus or train infrastructure and are now regretting the decision and finding the massive infrastructure costs to replace tram, trolley bus and train infrastructure prohibitive.

Trains can carry more passengers for the same price and are not subject to fuel price rises. In fact operating costs may be lower at higher frequencies.

The Johnsonville busway, unlike Auckland, will have to be a guided busway to ensure safety through the 7 tunnels; which under current investigations would be a very close fit with the possibility of buses fouling themselves on the tunnels. Adelaide’s O-Bahn is the likely model for guidance; however this reduces one of BRT’s advantages – its flexibility.

The busway is envisioned to be only a one-way system catering for the morning and evening commute to Wellington city, and does not provide for passengers who travel from Wellington to the Northern suburbs. It would be confusing and uninteligible for the general public who would have to figure out which way the rail was running at any particular time of the day. I could not find any busways internationally that used a single one-way lane. Planners gave up on the concept of a two way busway because it would be prohibitively expensive requiring massive earthworks and retaining walls. Rail currently provides two-way transport and as such provides a far superior service.

Having buses as the only transport mode for the Northern region would exacerbate already congested roads, especially on Lambton Quay, and would significantly increase road congestion – hardly a prudent public transport strategy. 30-40 buses an hour could be necessary for this route during peak hour to match the carrying capacity of rail, and this number of buses would result in peak congestion in Wellington city. Wellington city transport planners would have to bus-priority measures and in all probability close off some streets to traffic. This increased number of buses would increase pollution, noise and diesel emissions in Wellington city.

Construction of the busway would cause massive disruption to Northern residents and may take 12-18 months or longer. During these years commuters would switch to commuting by car and many would be lost to public transport forever. Hardly a sensible transport strategy.

Buses suffer from perception problems are the most unpopular form of public transport. This was confirmed by the feedback at the recent public meetings in Johnsonville. Buses unpopularity results from their deficiencies in speed, comfort and convenience compared with rail, and are also considered as a social accommodation – they are not chosen, but are ridden by passengers that are ‘transport dependent’ and don’t have other options. Edward Tennyson, U.S transport expert in his study of buses in the U.S. found that cities served exclusively by buses, passenger levels had reduced by 75 percent over 40 years; and in contrast, rail is likely to attract from 34 to 43 percent more riders than buses.

Another major flaw in the two bus based options is that it relies on fossil fuel based public transport. This is a major issue and must be addressed in the interests of sustainability. Public transport rates in the region have increased on average above 5% in 2006 as a result of increased fuel prices. Assuming that this current round of high oil prices is a temporary blip is neither: smart, future-orientated or sustainable. Diesel is a dirty, polluting and climate changing fuel source that comes from unreliable sources. The transport sector currently makes up 40% of our CO2 emissions in New Zealand and the Wellington region must do as much as possible to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions, both to help limit the risks of climate change and also as a matter of financial self interest to avoid fuel price rises and probable carbon taxes. Alternatives such as an electric-powered trolley buses or using alternative fuels such as bio diesel to power the buses are possible but would need considerable research first, whereas the enhanced rail and light rail options utilise existing technology and infrastructure and therefore are more desirable.

Conclusion

BRT and busways are a technology still in its infancy and there are no shinning examples internationally to act as a model for Wellington. Other cities such as Curitiba and Adelaide have a different operating context that is radically different from our situation of a small compact and steep corridor that would only allow one-way busways. Busways are applicable in some circumstances such as far-flung low density suburbs not in Wellington’s circumstances.

Wellington would be crazy to go down this path, especially since we have a fully operating, popular and affordable train network that is cheaper to improve rather ripping it up and building a new transport mode.

Bottom Trawlers: How Low Can they Go?

2006-07-17T08:38:00.000+12:00

Roughly 2000m. Down this far down everything is pitch black; a human would be crushed under the enormous pressure; yet a myriad of weird and undiscovered sea life exists. Scientists estimate there could be 100 million species that are undiscovered in the ocean depths. The deep ocean truly is one of our last wildernesses – yet kiwi fisherman are taking part in one the largest destructions to occur on our planet.

Bottom trawling involves dragging large nets over the ocean floor with the ability to catch enormous concentrations of fish. In New Zealand fishers target species such as orange roughy and oreo. The ocean floor isn’t flat like most people assume, rather it has landscape features like the land and can alternate from rolling hills to steep mountains called ‘pinnacles’ by the fishermen and these mounts are rich fishing grounds. New Zealand is an ocean super-power and has the forth largest exclusive economic zone (EEZ) in the world, most of its comprising rich, rocky differentiated landscapes covered in lush coral and sponge growth. We have roughly 1000 undersea mountains and like on land these comprise many diverse ecological niches however because of the stillness and isolation half of all species are endemic to that mountain.

Sadly all but one of these mountains have been bottom trawled by, on average, 500m wide nets, with large metal rollers and 2–4 tonne ‘trawl-doors’ or ‘spreaders’ are dragged relentlessly up or down crushing and grabbing all in their path. Having sailed on the Rainbow Warrior in pursuit of New Zealand bottom trawlers in International waters I witnessed a large man-sized coral ‘tree’ being dragged up and thrown overboard, and have heard anecdotally from former trawlers that for every 4 tonnes of orange roughy caught, 10 tonnes of coral will be brought up. Dead.

New Zealand’s bottom trawling story starts in 1979 when a Soviet exploratory trawler discovered a previously undiscovered fish that had amazing properties – it was in abundance; caused diarrhoea if not prepared correctly and yet could be freeze-thawed, freeze-thawed, making it a perfect export fish. From then on the gold rush was on; yet the fishermen knew little about the ‘slime-head’ (later to be called the more marketing-friendly, orange roughy), and only in 2003 was the first juvenile discovered. This discovery helped age most commercially caught fish at 150 plus years old, that’s older than your granny.

New Zealand pioneered much of the technology that is used for bottom trawling, and we are a world leader amongst the eleven nations that do 95% of the bottom trawling in International waters. We are leaders in destruction; having seen orange roughy populations plummet, leading to a recent closure of one third of New Zealand’s EEZ and much of the ocean floor ecosystems destroyed, leading to the biological extinction of our native umbrella octopus, who used coral as a base for its eggs.

We are vocal on Japan’s illegal whaling and were passionate opponents of drift net fishing yet we are doing little internationally to stop the destruction we are causing. The United Nations is the process of defining the future of bottom trawling in International waters and come December hopefully there will be an International moratorium in place. Before that happens our Government must stand up to aggressive lobbyists such as Sealord’s and Talley’s and be on the side of conservation. Recently large tracts of the Indian Ocean were voluntarily put off limits to NZ trawlers, cynically after we had fished to destruction most of it. Embarrassingly we are being trumped by George W. Bush who recently closed off Alaskan waters larger than the size of Texas to bottom trawlers.

We need our Government to support the moratorium on bottom trawling in International waters and you can write the Minister of Fisheries Jim Anderton and Foreign Minister Winston Peters urging them to be world leaders in marine conservation.

This is an article I wrote for Wellingreen. The pictures are from NOAA
who reccentlt presented damning evidence against bottom trawling.

Waste.

2006-07-12T16:51:00.000+12:00

Waste is an important environmental issue, and if there were international awards for producing it – we’d be winners. Every day New Zealanders throw out ten million kilograms of it into landfills or burn it; producing a massive problem that has often been considered, ‘out of sight out of mind.’ The problem is not just where it goes – but also how much of it we are producing.

There are currently ninety landfill sites operating in New Zealand, taking a total of over 3 million tonnes of our rubbish each year. Whilst we have reduced the number down from 327 landfills in 1996, we are still faced with the problems that they are filling fast; are unpopular to live near; and produce the climate changing gas methane. Landfills also produce dangerous unintended by-products such as leachates; where water percolates through the landfill and produces one noxious brew. In old landfills, leachate can escape and contaminate surface and groundwater. In modern, well-managed landfills it costs a lot of money to collect and treat the leachate.

Burying our waste is not a solution and we can’t keep hoping it will go away. It won’t. A waste free society is essential to the well-being of people and the integrity and sustainability of the biosphere. Natural ecosystems are self sustaining and generate no waste. Humans form part of the ecosystem and while we access resources from our environment, we have a responsibility to return only those things that can be absorbed without detriment. Waste does not have to be an inevitable part of a modern economyl.

Green Party MP Nandor Tanczos has recently introduced the waste Minimisation Bill that would see the development of a national waste minimisation framework “with teeth” to enforce its implementation. The Bill contains a raft of changes intended to reduce the amount of waste created as well as promoting reuse and recycling whenever possible. Landfill waste levies would be introduced to help pay for a variety of measures including public education about recycling.

Minister for the Environment David Benson Pope has labelled the Bill, “…excessively detailed and prescriptive,” however the Labour Party has supported sending it on to the select committee; who have called for submissions with a deadline of August 4.

Currently waste issues are dealt with under the 2002 NZ Waste Strategy which has lots of good ideas but has failed to decrease the total amount of waste being sent to landfill because it is purely voluntary. Nandor’s Bill would see producers take responsibility for their products at the end of their life and waste generated in their manufacture; would see a levy put on waste going to landfills; would enables bans on landfilling of materials where there is already capacity to reuse, recycle or compost; and would set up a central body to oversee waste minimisation.

Introducing extended producer responsibility is an important step in the right direction to tackle our waste problem. Businesses which produce or import goods should bear the main responsibility for any waste associated with the goods – in their manufacture, packaging and use, and at the end of the goods’ lives. This way, producers would be encouraged to minimise and design out waste and to make reusing or recycling easier. For example today, Vodafone and Telecom accept used phones back and Hewlett Packard, Dell and IBM take back old computer equipment.

Tyre Track, in its first 18 months of operation disposed or reused 1.3 million old tyres, still every year we are disposing of 4 million old tyres. This principle of producer responsibility is essential to creating a sustainable economy; where less waste means less inefficient and expensive use of resources.

To find out more information about Nandor's Bill visit www.greens.org.nz/campaigns/waste and Nandor will be up at Vic talking about waste in the student union building, meeting room 3, at 1pm Thursday 20 July as part of environment week.

When to Stone Your Children...Really....Really depicted by lego men.

2006-07-11T16:45:00.000+12:00

This is off a fantastic website called the Bricktestament where a reverend has decided to depict the entire Bible with lego men, why? I'm not sure but he certainly had a lot of time.

The below pics are from Deuteronomy 21:18-21

New Zealand Green Scene

2006-07-11T11:17:00.000+12:00

The New Zealand political situation is dominated by our MMP (Mixed member Proportional) system of Government; where we have the Governing Labour Party assisted by its left-allies the Progressives, and aided by right-leaning supporters: United Future and New Zealand First. The Green Party achieved 5.4 percent of the national vote in the 2005 election and came perilously close to dropping below the 5% threshold to have MPs in Parliament, as a result of a close vote between the two largest Party’s. The Greens vote was still good enough to get 6 MPs in Parliament but the Party was soon rocked by the sudden and tragic death of its co-leader Rod Donald. Despite the Greens and Labour campaigning together at the last election, Labour reneged on it’s possible and ‘publicly electioneered on,’ alliance with the Greens, and in stead turned right and offered Government positions to the other party leaders; leading to the novel situation where Winston Peters, leader of New Zealand first, is New Zealand’s foreign Minister; yet is not in the Governments Cabinet. The Labour Party has successfully navigated the MMP political environment and can turn to the greens and to introduce ‘progressive,’ legislation,’ or can equally turn to the right for legislative support, and now in it’s third term as Government demonstrated that it can play the political game better than anyone else.

The New Zealand Green Party has just elected its new co-Leader - Dr Russell Norman who replaces the late Rod Donald and ushers in a big change to the Greens Parliamentary leadership. Dr Norman, who has a PhD in political science was the Party’s development Coordinator and was the campaign manager during the last election. Other candidates who stood were MP Nandor Tanchzos; former MP Mike Ward and David Clendon, however Dr Norman had the votes at the Green Party AGM and joins Jeanette Fitzsimons as the Green Party of Aotearoa’s Co-leader however is now the co-leader outside of Parliament; making an interesting political experiment.

One of the biggest issues in recent months, saying a lot about New Zealand, has been a hard fought campaign over the question to compulsorily microchip dogs, and whether farm dogs should be exempted, leading to a Government back down and removal of the Bill.

Climate change has been a big issue in politics with the government expected to announce its climate change policy in a few months. New Zealand has a ridiculous situation where we have signed up to the Kyoto protocol yet have done nothing substantial to curb greenhouse gas emissions or even a Government policy on it. Former initiatives such as a carbon tax and a methane tax have been removed and with no initiatives or penalties to influence carbon consumption New Zealand look set to exceed its targets; and its previously forecasted $500 million carbon windfall looks set to cost the Government a $500 million penalty. New Zealand differs from many countries in that methane from animals is our largest source of greenhouse gases as agriculture forms a large part of our economy. The unfortunately named, ‘fart-tax,’ was the victim of a concerted lobbying campaign by opposition MPs and farmers, and now with it gone there is no climate policy.

This is an article I wrote for UK Young Greens

What Would Captain Ozone Do?

2006-07-07T17:09:00.000+12:00

Hes fighting smog and environmental crime. watch his documentary.

Countries that support an international moratorium on bottom trawling

2006-07-06T16:13:00.000+12:00

For more info

to send a soccer World cup red card to your Government

Bottom trawling ‘ban’ is cynical PR spin

2006-07-06T13:49:00.000+12:00

News that four large fishing companies, including New Zealand’s Sealord, are to voluntarily cease the destructive practice of bottom trawling in parts of the Southern India Ocean has drawn a sceptical response from Green Party Conservation Spokesperson Metiria Turei.

“In theory, it is great news that fishing companies are taking the initiative and imposing voluntary standards on themselves in this area, as any measures to reduce or end the harm causing by bottom trawling in the long term will need industry buy-in if they are to be truly successful,” Mrs Turei says.

“However, while it may sound positive at first, it is hard to get excited about this announcement when you consider that the area in question is already severely over-fished. It is not much of a sacrifice to cease fishing of an area with no fish left in it.

“In fact, it is hard to see this initiative as anything more than an attempt to deflect the international community from imposing any real restrictions, like a ban on bottom trawling altogether.

“It is disappointing but not surprising that Fisheries Minister Jim Anderton seems to has bought the fishing companies’ spin and welcomed this announcement. He is also an enthusiastic proponent of the voluntary closure of 30 percent of New Zealand waters to bottom trawling announced earlier this year, despite the fact that this is a measure which will fail to protect the highest risk areas and which also applies mainly to already depleted zones.

“If we are ever to see any real action to halt the depletion of fish stocks and irreparable damage to rare coral reefs and underwater eco-systems caused by bottom trawling, we need a Minister who takes long term sustainability of our fisheries seriously, not just short term gains sought by the industry.

“If these companies announced a voluntary ban on bottom trawling in an area where it would actually make a difference, I would be the first to congratulate them. As it is, there is a long way to go yet,” Mrs Turei says.

North Wellington Public Transport Study. Stage two Scenarios.

2006-07-04T11:35:00.000+12:00

Comments on scenarios

I believe there are only two options realistically available for this transport corridor – the light rail enhanced rail scenarios. I am opposed to both bus-based scenarios because they fail to take into account issues such as our already congested roads, climate change, peak oil, and because they limit transport options within the Northern region.

It is positive to see improvements to the bus network under all four scenarios and believe this is another reason why diversified transport options such as light rail or enhanced rail are needed, rather than offering just one transport option to commuters.

I submit that two scenarios be investigated further – light rail and enhanced rail.

Scenario 1: Enhanced rail

I submit that this option be considered and investigated further.

I consider this option the second best of the four. However we see it as an uninspired stop gap measure that does not provide increased services or options to passengers and is only a continuation of what is currently available – though it does provide new and refurbished trains.

Rail is an efficient way to move large numbers of people along a corridor without a great deal of impact on roads, or a negative impact on society and the environment. Electric trains produce almost no noise or air pollution and can be powered on local energy supplies, unlike buses, which are reliant on imported fuel supplies from insecure sources. Having already developed rail infrastructure reduces the need for large-scale infrastructure improvements and the ensuing problems switching transport modes would cause during construction for passengers.

Rail is unable to provide a seamless service through to the CBD and this is a problem that has been identified since at least 1959 when a subway through the CBD was planned. With a price tag in the hundreds of millions for underground tracks from the railway station through to Taranaki St and Courtney Place, seamless rail travel is too expensive and cannot link in with the airport or hospital. Switching transport modes can be mitigated through smart design and integrated ticketing and is only one factor limiting the enhanced rail scenario.

Wellington is fortunate to have its rail infrastructure intact and despite years of under-funding, it is in relatively good condition. Wellington has a unique environment that is characterised by compact and defined geographical corridors with high population densities. This structure makes rail an efficient and popular means of travel along the corridor. Rail is considerably more popular than buses as a main transport mode and this is in large part to its perceived stability, superior comfort, reliability and speed.

Scenario 2: On-road bus with walking and cycling

I submit that this alternative is not investigated further or considered as a possible scenario.

I reject this scenario and see it as an unsustainable and dangerous path to go down. Relying on buses does not take into consideration possible future scenarios such as climate change, probable Central Government carbon taxes, peak oil and the end of cheap oil, and local pollution and exhaust particulates. Converting the railway line into a bike or walking track limits transport options for the residents who made approximately 3.1 million trips in 2005 and seems crazy when the 15% population growth expected is anticipated to see a 35% increase in public transport patronage for peak hour commuters.

I applaud identifying green belts, bike and walking tracks as desirable features of urban design however they cannot be at the expense of public transport modes.

Scenario 3: Busway

I Submit that this scenario not be considered.

Removing the rail lines is a crazy step backwards and would place Wellington with other cities around the world that removed tram, trolley bus or train infrastructure and are now regretting the decision and finding the massive infrastructure costs to replace tram, trolley bus and train infrastructure prohibitive. This scenario has many disadvantages, such as reducing transport options and reliability for Northern residents; it is in conflict with the Johnsonville transport hub design; it would increase traffic congestion, especially in Wellington city; and would cause massive disruption to commuters during construction; and lastly, it has serious negative environmental effects on local communities and the climate. Buses are dirtier, noisier and less popular than trains or light rail.

Ripping up the rail tracks is a foolish idea and damaging for our regions transport future. Rail tracks and stations provide and represent fixed certainty of transport mode options and encourage people to rely on those modes. In contrast, a busway could easily be reconstructed into a cycleway or greenbelt, limiting future transport options, and this uncertainty would reduce passenger support.

The busway is envisioned to be a one-way system catering for the morning and evening commute to Wellington city: not providing for passengers who travel from Wellington to the Northern suburbs. The busway cannot cater for all travellers and is likely to be confusing for passengers. Rail currently provides two-way transport and as such provides a better service.

Construction of the busway would cause massive disruption to Northern residents and may take 2–3 years. Unlike the light rail scenario, the busway construction cannot provide the inspiration or excitement of improved services, reliability and comfort that would mitigate the inconvenience of construction disruption. The modal switch necessary during construction may not return once completed.

Having buses as the only transport mode for the Northern region does little for already congested roads, especially on Lambton Quay, and would in fact increase road congestion – hardly a prudent public transport strategy. 30–40 buses could be necessary for this route, increasing congestion, and this would negatively affect return timetables and the reliability of service. Trains and light rail can carry more passengers efficiently, with fewer side effects and in more comfort than buses.

The major flaw in the two bus based options is relying on fossil fuel-based public transport. This is a major issue and must be addressed in the interests of sustainability. Public transport rates in the region have increased on average above 5% in 2006 as a result of increased fuel prices. Assuming that this current round of high oil prices is a temporary blip is neither smart, future-orientated nor sustainable. Diesel is a dirty, polluting and climate changing fuel source that comes from unreliable sources. The transport sector currently makes up 40% of our CO₂ emissions in New Zealand and the Wellington region must do as much as possible to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions, both to help limit the risks of climate change and also as a matter of financial self-interest to avoid fuel price rises and probable carbon taxes. Alternatives such as an electric-powered trolley buses or using alternative fuels such as biodiesel to power the buses are possible but would need considerable research first, whereas the enhanced rail and light rail options utilise existing technology and infrastructure and are therefore more desirable.

The only thing going for the busway scenario is its cheapness, however, this does not translate to value for money. Trains can carry more passengers for the same price and are not subject to fuel price rises. It is easier to fix what we have got – an urban rail network, rather than build a whole new busway.

Buses will play a role in the Northern regions transport mix but more as an accompanying transport mode in areas of lesser population density not as the major public transport mode of the corridor.

Scenario 4: Light rail.

I submit that this scenario is the most sustainable and best suited to this transport corridor. I would like to see included in this scenario the light rail extension through to the airport.

I see this as the most desirable transport option because it is the cleanest, most sustainable and future-orientated transport mode of the four scenarios. It is also is the only option that would inspire and excite people, and would be one of the most important shifts of transport planning in our region’s history. Light rail offers the most holistic strategy and would benefit residents and commuters both in the Northern suburbs and in Wellington City. The ability to provide seamless travel is one advantage and light rail offers services that will be frequent, reliable and it will be the most sustainable alternative and as such, is the most preferred scenario.

Light rail has considerable advantages over its competitors. It is modern, flexible and compatible both on existing rail lines and within urban environments such as pedestrian malls or on roads. Compared to heavy rail it is flexible, more adaptable and can negotiate curves and gradients better. Light rail trams are attractive and do not emit street level particulate or produce noise pollution benefiting both Northern residential communities, and also the commercial district

A major disadvantage of this alternative is its cost; 138–146% of LTCCP funding for public transport on the Northern suburbs. However, this needs to be put in perspective; that operating costs would be less than its alternatives, it has considerable environmental positives associated and is both part of Northern and Ngauranga to airport corridor investigations. The 15 June 2004 Waterfront Conference on light rail found that it was the most economical long term transport solution for routes carrying in excess of approximately 3000 passengers per hour. It is also a major investment in a new transport mode and as such does not come cheap, but we consider it value for money.

I believe in future proofing our society against potential shocks and see our transport dependence on oil as a liability. The light rail scenario utilises national electricity supplies that are predominately renewably sourced; and if Project West Wind is built, we will have a light rail network reliably running on our regions famed asset – the wind.

Conclusion

The scenarios report can only include two real options –light rail and enhanced rail. The bus options do not make sense and are only cheap short-term solutions. We are fortunate to have a rail network and it would be a massive disservice to future generations to rip up an efficient and popular line.

The light rail scenario will give Wellington the clean, dynamic transport system it deserves; a pollution-free passenger transport network powered by wind and other forms of renewable energy. If implemented, it will make Wellington one of the easiest places in the world to get around in. It will encourage smart, sustainable growth throughout the Northern region. This corridor is an essential part of the entire Wellington region, and light rail would be part of making Wellington a world leader in sustainable urban transport, well equipped to cope with the realities of soaring oil prices, climate change and similar inescapable issues.

Light rail builds on our region's strengths – its compactness, existing electric transport infrastructure and clean, renewable wind energy.

Taser Footage.

2006-06-29T15:57:00.000+12:00

Check out scoop's:
Taser Podcast

They use taser manufacturers promotional footage and real life footage provided by campaign against the taser and blend it all together. Scoop presents a neutral standpoint but I think the evidence presents a strong argument about arming the New Zealand Police with the taser. I would recommend watching it, as it's a real possibility that it will be used on people taking part in protests or activism and tragically on people with drug or mental health problems. The footage provided by campaign against the taser has been sent to every MP in New Zealand, and no longer can MPs hide behind the argument that they are just unaware of it.

For more info.
Campaign Against the Taser

What Wellington would look like with a 7m sea rise.

2006-06-27T15:47:00.000+12:00

To have a fiddle with a 14m sea rise or your flood your home city

Raising the Gher

2006-06-27T12:55:00.000+12:00

We, all 17 of us wound up in westport one night. Chopped up the newly purchased gher with chainsaws and fingers. Then proceeded to carry sections of it in piece by heavy piece. Anyway we made it in the end. Very wet. Stright away into carrying rocks to mound up a small elevated platform and stop the ground water, ( to some extent). Lots of assembly going on. Heres some photos of the erection and subsequent heating.

Tying it all together

Walkin the wall

Tying the walls on

Francie doing her bit

The glamorous inside with the water proof tarping under the floor boars and up the walls.

Jonah’s Wonderfully hot pot belly was installed the same day

With a kinky flue up through the middle

And here it is, one day transported, erected, heated, the SHV Gher/pleasure palace.

A shot of the site to finish

By Dan http://www.savehappyvalley.org.nz/blog/?p=82#comments

Stopped the folly and saved the trolleys.

2006-06-24T16:56:00.000+12:00

It has just been announced by Greater Wellington Chairman Ian Buchanan that the purchase of the 60 new reburbished trolley buses is going ahead - in other words Wellington is keeping its trolleys!

Over the last few years there have been many wrangles whether to keep the up-to-24-year-old trolley buses on the roads; who would pay and how much for a fleet upgrade; how much to pay for an urgent lines upgrade; the inequal funding ratios between diesels and trolleys leading to a Greater Wellington shortfall; and lastly commerce commision inquiries.

But in the end, simple common sense prevailed and our clean, green and quiet trolleys buses are here to stay for the foreseeable future and when Project West Wind comes on board, the buses will be powered by our region's famed asset - the wind. The 60 trolley buses on our roads save 600 000 litres of diesel! That's a lot of foreign exchange, street level exhaust fumes and greenhouses gases from insecure supply sources avoided!

So the public meeting this Sunday 25 June 3pm has been cancelled. However, we will be holding a meeting in the near future to discuss wider transport issues in the Wellington region, and will attempt to achieve a cross-party consensus on the necessary improvements to Wellington's transport future.

Thank you very much to all those who helped out on the campaign - signing petitions, holding stalls and writing letters to the editor. In the end, much like how the trolleys were saved in the early 1980s, it came down to public pressure on the decision makers to stop the folly, save our trolleys!

For more information see Greater Wellingtons press release
http://www.gw.govt.nz/story17535.cfm

Hopefully you won't be hearing much from me anymore on the trolley buses. Anyone (if they did), coming to this site would assume that I am a trolley bus nut and absolutley mad about them....I'm not. Yeah I'm fond of them and I think losing them would of been a real step backwards for Wellington. I've enjoyed campaigning on them over the last 6 weeks and am happy to get a victory on them. However saving the trolleys has been about keeping what we've already got and not about significantly or even, improving public transport in Wellington and NZ's climate situation.

So next on the list. I am goping to be working on the Northern corridor light rail propossal and would like to investigate the possibility of changing diesels for the better and running them on biofuels.

Trolley Bus Public Meeting.

2006-06-22T17:53:00.000+12:00

A History of Protesting in New Zealand.

2006-06-22T17:05:00.000+12:00

One Monday I travelled out to give a talk to the high school students at the Steiner school in Belmont, they were a great class and it's good to see students interested in and (they kept asking when the next march was) keen to get involved in activism.

I started off my presentation by talking about Hone Hika, who cut down the flag pole at Russel, in the Bay of Islands, in the mid to late 1840s. He cut the pole down not once, not twice, but thrice. He also was a skilled soldier that took part in quite a few battles. I wanted to talk about non-violent protest but had to include this because I believe it was so important historically how he went after the symbols of power -such as the flag pole as a means to his ends.

I then talked about Parihaka, but not in depth because they had studied it the week before...what a cool class!

They were really keen on finding out about Greenpeace. It really is a cool story about how a bunch of hippies decided to charter a ship and sail it into an American nuclear test site in 1969. Greenpeace originally called this action a 'mind bomb, and they followed up their nuclear victory with the campaign against sealing. The above picture is of Greenpeace activists spray painting seal pups so that their fur would be useless to sealers. Again It's that attacking symbols again, like Hika, but with a direct action twist -it actually stops the crime continuing. Greenpeace brought this coherant theory of non-violent direct action to the World that was so important in New Zealand's most famous and successful protesting struggle -to make New Zealand nuclear free. Greenpeace also bore the ultimate cost when the Rainbow Warrior, was bombed killing photographer Fernando Periria.

The springbok apartheid protests showed another way of New Zealanders protesting that hadn't been seen since the massive strikes of the 1950's or the massive rounds of union protests that precceded both World Wars. Absolutley massive demonstrations and a political question that could split communities. It also showed some innovation that broke the monotony of march, struggle, dispersal -march, struggle, dispersal. Protestors dressed up as clowns or in the above picture a pilot is dropping flour bombs to disrupt the match at Eden Park in Auckland. Dangerous for use, but inovative.

I then gave a short workshop on different ways to stop something, as a means of protesting. One way, as pictured above is to chain your self to something, in this case an anchor, that is necessary for this ship to move, with it's cargo of genetically engineered organisms. There are other ways are to build barriers to stop something, they don't have to be sturdy -or could be made out of whale meat boxes, or sand bags or human -you can lock your self to a gate, in effect forming a wall, or just by linking arms a mass of people can form a wall that is pretty hard to move. Another way is put your self in the way of something and if they attempt to pass or continue they could hurt you. This was the theory the original Greenpeace crew was using. One activist used this theory by chaining himself to rail road tracks to halt the train and it's dangerous cargo...however didn't inform the train in time (and located himself around a bend), with predicable results. So to use this theory it is best to be well supported and public, such as the below picture.

This is called the tripod and is only effective against vehicles. By simply setting this up, no trucks can get through without seriously damaging you first, so that the authorities must use equipment such as cherry pickers to cut you off. This gives the activist hours of truck-stopping.

I think the students enjoyed the talk and asked a whole heap of questions. I am stoked to have gotten the oportunity to speak with them and I just wish we had had someone come and talk to my high school class about protesting.

Saving the Ugly Animals Too..

2006-06-20T10:37:00.000+12:00

We're Saving the Whales – But What About the Ugly Animals?

Today several Wellington activists held a banner saying, "We're saving the whales, but what about the ugly animals? Stop bottom trawling." Together with the banner was a picture of a recently discovered blobfish. The activists stood outside Parliament gates, as they called on the Government to support the United Nation's efforts in the campaign for an international moratorium on high seas bottom trawling.

"Our Government has a strong stance on whaling which is commendable, yet it has a weak and hypocritical stance on bottom trawling." spokesperson Meghan Hughes said.

"We are making all the right noise at the IWC, but what's our Government doing about stopping the world's most destructive fishing method? We were world leaders toward the campaign to stop drift net fishing, however now that it is New Zealand vessels taking part in the destruction, our Government appears suspiciously inactive."

The New Zealand Government has refused to publicly support a moratorium on bottom trawling in international waters, a move that has the backing of environmentalists and marine scientists worldwide.

"We are highlighting the sorry performance of our elected officials to act on deep sea destruction. Whaling is a terrible and unsustainable industry still struggling from decades of overfishing; however bottom trawling is just as bad if not worse because of the habitat destruction made by dragging large nets along the ocean floor, and the effect that the practice has on the creatures that rely on that habitat for their existence." said Ms Hughes.

The blobfish was discovered only 3 years ago, and is part of what scientists believe is roughly one hundred million unidentified species living in the ocean's depths.

"This blobfish may appear an ugly and unusual character, but it is still deserves our protection." Ms Hughes said.

Extra Information.

Meghan Hughes can be contacted on 027 356 6603 or Gareth Hughes on 027 422 9290.

The banner will be outside Parliament gates (by the cenotaph) from 7:30-8:30am Tuesday, 20 June 2006.

Blobfish - Psychrolutes microporos

The blobfish is a scorpaeniform – a group of which contains the the most armoured and scaly and spiney spiked fish in the sea. The full range of this deepwater (750-1200m) fish is not yet known, this blobfish was collected at 1200m on the Southern Norfolk Ridge in the Tasman Sea. Scientists can only guess at how the fish feeds and based on its body shape is believed to be an ambush predator that will eat whatever it can fit in. The purpose of the proboscis (nose) is unknown. This fish was discovered on a NORFANZ expedition in 2003

Source:

http://censeam.niwa.co.nz/outreach/blobfish.pdf

The Greens get another Bill pulled from the hat.

2006-06-15T16:47:00.000+12:00

Parliament is to debate whether medicinal cannabis should be introduced as a treatment option for people with serious illnesses.

The concept forms the basis of Green MP Metiria Turei's private member's bill which has been pulled from the ballot. The Bill aims to amend the The misuse of drugs act (1975) and from here goes to the select commitee for further discussion.

Ms Turei says the bill will allow registered medical practitioners to prescribe cannabis for specific serious conditions such as Alzheimer's disease, arthritis, glaucoma and those suffering conditions associated with chemotherapy.

Perhaps this issue will spark wider debate on the decriminalisation/legalisation of cannabis both within the Green Party and wider society.

Medicinal cannabis is available in a number of countries - including Canada, Germany, the Netherlands and nine states of the US.

Check out what Metiria says

Steve Abel's Little Death.

2006-06-14T15:17:00.000+12:00

Check out Steves' website

He's playing at Cabaret this Friday from 11 -for only $5!

What would Jesus do?

2006-06-09T14:05:00.000+12:00

I know he would support an international Moratorium on bottom trawling!

Now buy the toy:

Jesus Video

How to Make Paneer.

2006-06-09T13:49:00.000+12:00

I made paneer last night and it was suprisingly easy.
Heres the recipe:

2 litres of milk
4 tsp lemon juice

Bring the milk to the boil -watch it 'cos it creeps up fast

Add the lemon juice (or vinegar) and stir for around 3 minutes until the milk curdles (til it looks like cottage cheese)

Strain liquid through a tea towel and put pressure on the curds (i,e; hang for thirty minutes), then put under a heavy weight for around an hour -to make sure you get all the liquid out of paneer.

Then either fry or refrigerate. Yum.

Happy World Oceans Day

2006-06-08T11:32:00.000+12:00

Bottom trawling is without a doubt the most damaging form of fishing we are using at the moment. Huge nets are dragged across the sea floor picking up and destroying all within its way- such as this giant gorgonian coral (pictured) that I saw being thrown over board by New Zealand bottom trawlers in International waters

Read about my voyage.

Send a message to Prime Minister Helen Clarke.

The Trawl is in your court, Greenpeace tells Government

Wellington, Thursday 8 June: Greenpeace New Zealand marked World Oceans Day by hanging a large banner across the front of Wellington Railway Station during the morning commuter rush with a message to the Government: "Time is Running Out - Stop Deep-Sea Destruction".

Three climbers scaled the Railway Station with the banner, while commuters walked past sculptures of tree-like corals and weird and wonderful deep-sea creatures.

For the past three years, Greenpeace has been exposing the destruction of bottom trawlers - including New Zealand vessels - in international waters. Over this time Greenpeace has reiterated that 'urgent action' is needed to protect the deep-sea life that scientists say are being pushed to extinction before they are even named.

"The only effective action is a United Nations moratorium on bottom trawling in international waters, but the New Zealand Government's approach has so far been weak and is a hindrance to progress at the UN," says oceans campaigner Mike Hagler. "Instead of leading the push for a UN moratorium, as our Government did with high seas drift netting in 1989, New Zealand is dawdling in the face of extinctions in the deep sea."

"Many countries see New Zealand as a global leader on environmental issues. Without clear and vocal support, the wrong signal is being sent to other countries that are also sitting on the fence. New Zealand needs to actively support the proposal with the intention of bringing other countries with it."

The proposed UN moratorium on high seas bottom trawling has the support of the world's scientific community and now 30 countries, including Sweden, Germany, Indonesia and Brazil.

"Every four seconds marine life in an area of ocean floor the size of ten football fields is wiped out by bottom trawlers in international waters. We want an approach that prevents the irreversible impacts of bottom trawling and protects vulnerable habitats, rather than trawl now, think later."

At present there are about 250-300 high seas bottom trawlers – including about two dozen New Zealand trawlers. This is only 0.3 percent of the three million commercial fishing boats worldwide, and only 0.2 percent of global marine fisheries production. The overall contribution of high seas bottom trawling to global food security is negligible.

Huge bottom trawl nets are bulldozed along the seabed taking all fish, smashing ancient corals and destroying the other marine life that has taken thousands of years to develop.

"Our message to Government is that time is running out for deep-sea life threatened by bottom trawling in international waters. A temporary halt to the practice, imposed by the UN, would buy time to put in place policies and regulations for long-term protection of deep-sea life".

Before World Oceans Day ends, a global fleet of around 300 high seas bottom trawlers will have dragged their heavy nets across an estimated 1,500 km2 of deep-seabed.

For more information contact:

Oceans Campaigner Mike Hagler 021 321 379
Communications officer Dean Baigent-Mercer 021 790 817

Saving our Trolley buses

2006-06-07T11:10:00.000+12:00

Currently there is a wrangle over their future in Wellington for several reasons. The Volvo buses really are nearing the end of their life and there is a plan to upgrade the entire 60 trolley bus fleet, however Stagecoach (who runs the buses) has been unable to sign the contract, because Land transport New Zealand and the Greater Wellington regional Council (Who fund the buses), are currently refusing to guarantee funding. LTNZ's reason is because they believe Stagecoach has a monopoly and would prefer the cheaper diesel option ($300 000 per diesel bus vs. $500 000 refurbished trolley bus), and GWRC because they have a funding shortfall of roughly $ 1 million (because LTNZ will only fund the operating costs of the trolleys as if they were diesels (so not paying for maintenance and urgent upgrade needed for the overhead wires and substations etc)

Basically because they have been under funded over the previous decades, large lump sums are needed from tax and ratepayers, and some public officials are calling for them to be scrapped all together, rather than front up with the needed costs or show leadership and decisively sort this issue out.

However with a large new wind farm going through the official process at the moment, (project West Wind, which will supply 110 000 homes -or all of Wellington) and very likely to proceed; it is possible for Wellingtons trolley bus fleet to be powered by (on average entirely) renewable energy, which is a great selling point in this age of climate change and rising oil prices.

There are a lots of reasons why the trolley buses are better than their diesel alternatives.

They are more popular and encourage public transport.

They don’t release diesel exhaust fumes

They are quieter

They are cleaner

They are iconic - Auckland and Dunedin got rid of their trolley bus fleets in the early 80s and now only Wellington has them in NZ. They are a symbol of a sustainable approach to transport.

They last longer -their engine life is perhaps as much as twice as long because the electric motor is more efficient than the diesel engine.

Our trolley fleet of 60 buses saves 600 000 litres of diesel - that’s a lot of foreign exchange and C02 emissions saved.

Lastly, unlike bio fuels, trolley buses are here NOW in Wellington. We don't have to wait for feasibility studies, modifying engines or sourcing fuels, all we have to do maintain and improve our fleet and infrastructure.

Currently the Greens are running a campaign to save the trolleys and are calling on Land Transport New Zealand to fund the buses fairly and to ensure their existence. They have a petition circulating that can be ordered from greenmps.wellington@greens.org.nz or (04) 381 4640

Future Proofing our Party: Gareths speech to Green Party AGM

2006-06-06T13:32:00.000+12:00

Kia Ora

My name is Gareth Hughes and I am a young Green. I am passionate and excited about the role that Young People can play in the Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand. Over the preceding months we have been meeting electronically and on frequent conference calls. On Friday a group of young people met at parliament to discuss how we can best become involved in environmental and social campaigning within the green Party. Young activists travelled from around the country to discuss what it is to be a young green in Aotearoa/New Zealand and where to from here. And today I am pleased to announce the formation of the young Greens. This afternoon you will hear Ben, who will be speaking on the story so far, and what we have done; then Tara will discuss our new structure; followed by Max who will speak on our policies. Shaun will speak on our goals for the coming year then Marcel will discuss our expectations of the Green Party.

For too long the Young Greens (YGs) have been a concept and not a reality. Many lofty words have been spoken in the past about involving youth in the party. However, in reality the party’s relationship with youth has been on an ad-hoc basis, dependent upon personal relationships and especially keen young people rather than a coherent and sustainable young greens organisation. Today, the Young Greens announce that we are going to become an organised force within the party with a plan to have a major role in the advocacy of youth. The young Greens have a vision to be an effective, organised and passionate part of the Green Party.

What are the Young Greens? The Young Greens is a group of young people passionate about ecological sustainability and social justice and who see the Green Party as a positive force in our world. We are made up of individuals from all over the country from universities, polytechs and high schools and range in age from 12-30.

Why Should the Party have a Young Greens Group? Internationally Green parties have youth wings that are seen as ‘talent incubators’ and as having significant benefit both in attracting young voters, training young activists and in influencing policy. Every major political party in New Zealand have youth wings and often they devote considerable energy and resources to them. Within the Green Party of Aotearoa/New Zealand we have always prided ourselves on being the party of youth and have advocated strongly for measures that benefit youth. We have been rewarded with the highest youth vote as a percentage of total vote of any party and young activists have tirelessly campaigned on behalf of the party.

Most members would agree that we need young people come up through the Party process and would like to see more young people stand as candidates. Most would also agree that young people have different concerns from those older, and in a parliament where the average age is 51, our views are not being adequately addressed.

Having an organisational structure separate from the provincial party structure is necessary to ensure that we have an independent and strong voice. This is not a rejection of the current party structure, in fact many of us play crucial roles within it, rather that we see ourselves having unique concerns, views and values best served through our groupings

The Party needs to be challenged in constructive and positive ways that keeps it fresh and constantly asking itself, “is it doing the best that it can?” Introspection, renewal and honesty are part of building a sustainable party relevant and effective in our times. The Young Greens want to challenge the Party on issues of structure, policy and economic and social relationships. We feel we have important views, opinions and ideas. The Green Party of Aotearoa needs organised, effective and passionate young voices.

So I urge you to go to your provinces: your cities, towns and farms and encourage your young members to become involved with the young greens.

Bushwacked

2006-05-31T11:05:00.000+12:00

Probably the best culture jamming-mashing up I've ever seen. Chris Morris presents Bush's state of the union address.

http://www.nandor.net.nz/virtual/media/video/Chris_Morris_BushWhacked_2.mov

Interview with Gareth on nuclear issues.

2006-05-29T13:33:00.000+12:00

1.What are your views on nuclear power?

I believe that New Zealand should continue to bar nuclear weapons or nuclear powered vessels from our shores and should not have nuclear power within New Zealand. I also believe that New Zealand should be at the forefront of efforts to stop nuclear weapons proliferation.

2. What is your personal opinion on the issues?

I believe that nuclear power has no role in the energy future of New Zealand and campaigners must stay vigilant to ensure that neither nuclear weapons nor nuclear power are brought to New Zealand. Having had contacts with people exposed to radioactive material, and having seen how this can destroy a healthy life, I believe that it is a technology best left out of New Zealand.

3. Should New Zealand consider using nuclear power of any form?

No we should not. We are in an envious position internationally, where we have ample electivity production, primarily through renewable sources, so have no need like France to produce electricity through nuclear generation. Nuclear energy cannot be separated from nuclear weapons; we are safest being nuclear free.

4. Can New Zealand influence the rest of the world on nuclear issues? If so

Yes we can. That was why the U.S. reacted with such fury at New Zealand we refused nuclear warships from entering our shores. The U.S were not concerned per-se of NZ stopping their ships, rather from the example we would set to the world, that nuclear weapons are not inevitable or desirable.

5. Do you think there is still a general anti-nuclear outlook amongst New Zealanders?

Yes I believe it is. The latest election proved that. Twenty years on, and our nuclear free status, and its role within the break-up of the ANZUS alliance is still being discussed at election time. Polls continually show that New Zealanders are proud of their nuclear free legislation and want it to continue.

6. At this time, how important is it that New Zealand remains nuclear free?

Very important. More and more countries are going to or have joined the nuclear weapons club (such as North Korea, Israel, Pakistan, India, Iran); this drastically heightens the Worlds risk for nuclear war. In 1991 it was thought the World was moving back from the pr4cipice of nuclear destruction, however with increased proliferation, the threat does not have nor decreased, it has increased.

A secondary issue is that nuclear waste is shipped through our territory, or nearby (shipments of nuclear fuels from France and to Japan and vice versa- for reprocessing), in the Tasman Sea. This is a risk to New Zealand both in terms of our safety but also as a terrorist risk. The companies involved have not been honest in the past in regards to their safety records and this is a clear threat that the NZ government needs to oppose.

7. What part does today’s New Zealand youth play in the nuclear issues? (For
now and the future?)

An important role. Many are too young to remember the nuclear ship protests, David Lange’s Oxford debate, the signing of the nuclear free legislation or the ANZUS break-up. These were important points in New Zealand's history and need to be remembered. New Zealand’s youth need to continue that work, and encourage other countries to go nuclear free and oppose nuclear weapons in all its forms.

8. Could NZ maintain our "clean, green" image AND integrate nuclear power?

It depends who you talk to. An eminent scientist like James Lovelock (founder of the Gaia theory) believes so. However whilst nuclear power does not produce carbon dioxide which alters the world's climate -which is with out a doubt the most pressing issue facing humanity it does not mean that nuclear power is green. Firstly our nuclear free status is one of the foundations of our clean and green view, taking that away, weaken that part of New Zealand. Secondly nuclear power is not green. It produces massive amounts of radioactive waste that stays dangerous far longer than a humans life, has safety risks for workers and people living nearby, has massive safety risks of meltdowns that can affect whole societies, there is still the problem of how do you shut down a nuclear power station, the inevitable link between nuclear power fuel and nuclear weapons, the risk of terrorism the damaging affects of nuclear fuel mining. Lastly it is too expensive for New Zealand and only operates internationally thanks to massive government sponsored subsidies

9. Where can you see New Zealand’s nuclear policies heading in the future?

I think New Zealand will continue on its current path as a world leader in non-proliferation.

10. How has New Zealand’s' nuclear free identity evolved since the 1970's in
your view?

It now is a core and defining feature of New Zealand international persona, it is also how New Zealanders see us in relation to the world. We like to think of ourselves as world leaders as pioneers, we also like to think that we are fair, go for the underdog and ethical. Those values are still in existence today amongst the next generation.

2006 Dick Awards

2006-05-25T16:29:00.000+12:00

Nominations for the 2006 DICK (Destructive Industry Connected to Killing) NZ Awards and the 'Guided Missiles and Misguided Men' Awards for Government Politicians are now open.

The 2006 DICK NZ Awards are your opportunity to say what you think about the companies who profit from bloodshed and war, and the politicians who support it. This information is available online at

http://www.converge.org.nz/pma/dick06.htm

Background to the Awards

Since 1998, the Defence Industry Committee of New Zealand has presented Awards for Excellence at the annual get-together of the NZ Defence Industry Association, the lobby group for companies that profit from bloodshed and war. The criteria for their awards are a mystery - are they for the company whose products have caused the most death and destruction? the company which has had the biggest public subsidy for private profit? the company which has contracts with the most oppressive governments and armed forces around the world?

There is no mystery about the DICK NZ Awards. They recognise the reality of the business of the NZ 'defence' industry. First held in 2001, the DICK NZ Awards returned last year and they are now an annual event.

And there is no mystery about the 'Guided Missiles and Misguided Men' Awards for Government Politicians either - they are awarded to those who by their words and/or actions support bloodshed and war. The name for these Awards is from a statement by Martin Luther King, Jr: "we have guided missiles and misguided men".

Criteria for the DICK NZ Awards

You can nominate any company that is involved in weapons related production, military supplies, or military contracts. The company can be NZ owned, an NZ subsidiary of an overseas company that is involved with weapons production or military contracts here in Aotearoa, or a company that is involved in weapons production or military contracts overseas and is involved in some other way in the NZ economy. The company nominated will have been involved in their offensive activity during 2005 or in 2006 before the closing date.

Please include as much supporting detail as you can with your nomination for each company - cuttings from newspapers or magazines, notes from a radio or TV programme, printed web pages, and so on. If you don't have much in the way of supporting information, please don't let that stop you from making a nomination.

Criteria for the 'Guided Missiles and Misguided Men' Awards for Government Politicians

You can nominate any government politician (including politicians from parties that are in coalition with Labour) who by their words and/or actions support bloodshed and war. The words or actions for which you are nominating the politician will have taken place during 2005 or in 2006 before the closing date. If you are nominating a politician for something they said, please include the direct quote together with the source of it. If you are nominating a politician for something they did, please include as much supporting detail as you can.

The DICK NZ Awards and 'Guided Missiles and Misguided Men' Awards for Government Politicians are organised by No WARP! (Network Opposed to Weapons and Related Production), for more information write to No WARP! c/o Peace Movement Aotearoa, PO Box 9314, Wellington or email <nowarp@xtra.co.nz>

Abstinence Only

2006-05-24T15:51:00.000+12:00

I couldn't help but put this on.

http://www.abstinenceonly.com/

International Biodiversity Day

2006-05-22T17:14:00.000+12:00

Down in Wellington today to celebrate International Biodiversity Day we had a giant snail slither up Cuba St (without a slime trail), whilst we gathered signatures on the petition to save Mt Augustus and handed out hundreds of flyers.

We had an absolutely great response from the public and TV1 and the DominionPost both turned up. Kids loved to touched the snail and their was a suprisingly high awareness of the issue. It is refreshing to be saving the (what you may desribe as) ugly animals rather than just the pretty whale and seals.

Mt Augustus is to be mined for coal, a dirty polluting old fashioned energy source that causes climate change. It is also the home of the threatened native carnivorous snail Powelliphanta augustus, that Conservation Minister Chris Carter recently decided to move rather than saving its home. See:

www.savehappyvalley.org.nz

Stop the Folly. Save the Trolleys!

2006-05-22T16:31:00.000+12:00

It has come as quite a surprise that the Greater Wellington Regional Council is openly discussing getting rid of our iconic trolley buses in favour of dirty diesel buses. The buses existence in Wellington is threatened because of funding and contract disputes between the main players involved with their running, funding and maintenance.

Most would agree that the buses are a unique and special part of Wellingtons landscape and would like to see them stay on our streets. This week, three Wellington MPs, from across the political spectrum, Nationals Mark Blumsky, Labours Marian Hobbs and Green MP Sue Kedgley came out in support of our beleaguered trolley buses, urging for the conflict to be resolved.

The major issue is that Land Transport New Zealand (LTNZ), who is mandated to promote sustainable transport, will not fund the buses fairly compared with diesel buses, threatening their survival. LTNZ currently pays half of the operating costs for the trolley buses, but only to the level of half the equivalent costs of running a diesel bus, leaving a funding shortfall that the Regional Council has to pick up. Obviously trolley buses have different costs associated with them such as the overhead wire and electric substations, which require urgent upgrades. This funding shortfall is roughly one million dollars and is picked up by the Wellington Regional Council. Councillor Glen Evans has said that Wellington will lose its buses if ratepayers do not pick up this shortfall, which translates to 2% of rates.

Why should we keep our trolley buses? Our Trolley buses are the envy of other cities in New Zealand, are cleaner, greener and quieter than diesels. The Trolley buses run on electricity, primarily from renewable energy, and when project West Wind comes on board will run on electricity powered by the wind. With Meridian's planning to build 70 turbines at Makara producing approximately 210 megawatts of electricity or more than Wellington's electricity usage. Wellington's fleet of 60 trolley buses would use less than half the electricity produced by one of these turbines. We would have a fleet of buses powered by the wind, capitalizing on our regions famed asset. Having a public transport fleet powered by a non-polluting energy source, Wellington can brand its self as the capital of a clean, green New Zealand. Making the saying a reality not just a marketing slogan. In other countries, public participation of public transport has declined up to 15% in cities where trolley buses have been switched in favour of diesel.

Trolley buses are better than diesel buses and do not pollute Wellington or contribute to climate change. Some commentators have suggested that Wellington does not have a pollution problem because it is too windy here, therefore we should not worry about diesel exhaust emissions. I don't know if you've ever been hit full in the face by a big black cloud of smoke from a diesel bus exhaust as it drives past? I have and it is not a pleasant experience. Just because our pollution blows away, unlike Christchurch, is not an argument to continue producing it.

Then there is diesel's impact upon the world's climate. Diesel buses produce carbon dioxide; a climate changing greenhouse gas, which most scientists unanimously agree is one factor in human induced global warming. The 60 trolley buses
in Wellington saves 600 000 litres of diesel or 1620 tonnes of carbon
dioxide, if they were diesel buses. With climate change science now only rejected by those on the fringes, and New Zealand signing the Kyoto protocol, it just does not make sense to get rid of the trolleys and encourage burning more climate changing
fossil fuels. Transport makes up 40% of New Zealand's C02 emissions, and
scientists have been saying we may not have long left to reduce our
greenhouse gas emissions.

The Trolleys are an essential part of Wellington and are a necessary part of sorting out our transport woes. It appears that our regions decision makers are stuck in a 1960s mindset where every problem requires either burning more fossil fuels or building larger and larger roads. Instead of encouraging walking, car –pooling, cycle lanes, traffic demand management and green car share ownership schemes our Regional Council pushes through the Te Aro bypass, Transmission Gully and now plays with switching the Trolleys to diesel buses.

Trolleys are the greenest public transport option available and our public leaders need to stop dithering and act to resolve the funding crisis between Stagecoach, Vector, Land Transport New Zealand and the Greater Wellington Regional Council. Would this council like to go down in history as the council that lost the trolley buses? I don't believe this decision would be rewarded at the election booths come 2008. Any long-term strategic view incorporating the issues of international oil insecurities, rising oil prices, climate change and peak oil would recognise the trolleys importance. Maintaining the fleet gives us security of transport and is part of future proofing of country against external shocks.

Why Dr Wright is Wrong on Trolley Buses.

2006-05-16T08:37:00.000+12:00

Malcolm Wright is correct, the trolley buses on Wellingtons streets are slow, small and ugly; however they don’t have to be that way. What Wellington needs are a modern refurbished trolley bus fleet and an urgent infrastructure upgrade. Stagecoach has plans to refurbish the entire fleet of 60 trolley buses, replacing the body, seats and windows –essentially new larger buses with some recycled parts being used. Contrary to what he writes and others statements advocating the removal of the trolley bus fleet I believe Wellingtonians want their iconic trolley buses upgraded and see a long-term future for them.

Trolley buses have clear advantages over diesel buses that justify their slightly higher price tag. They are cleaner, greener and quieter. I would also wager more popular too.’ Our trolley buses are the envy of other cities in New Zealand.

Dr Wright writes that there is ‘an environmental subsidy involved in buying trolley buses.’ -that they shift pollution to other communities and increase demand for burning coal. It would take a marketing professor to try and sell the argument that trolleys ‘aren’t even green.’ Trolley buses are powered by electricity from the national grid and because New Zealand does burn some coal and gas (roughly one third of electricity generation) with serious health and environmental effects, this isn’t green at all, but they are powered by roughly two thirds renewable energy –they are a greener option that diesel.

With Meridian’s project West Wind planning to build 70 turbines at Makara producing approximately 210 megawatts of electricity or more than Wellington’s electricity usage. Wellington’s fleet of 60 trolley buses would use less than half the electricity produced by one of these turbines. We would have a fleet of buses powered by the wind, capitalizing on our regions famed asset. On a still day the electricity would still come from the national grid and therefore some non-renewable electricity sources, but on the whole, West Wind will provide on average more electricity than Wellington uses. It is this sort of smart sustainable thinking of a public transport fleet powered by a non-polluting energy source that Wellington can brand its self as the capital of a clean, green New Zealand. Making the saying a reality not just a marketing slogan.

Dr Wright also argues that Wellington does not have a pollution problem and that the wind blows away any diesel particulate matter –‘nothing to worry about.’ I don’t know if you’ve ever been hit in the face by a plume of diesel exhaust as a bus drives past? I have and it’s not a pleasant experience. Trolley buses don’t produce any exhaust emissions. The diesel alternative has further drawbacks of energy supply insecurities and a rapidly increasing price. Diesel prices on average are only going to get more expensive over time; we need to be reducing our dependence on oil not increasing it.

Dr Wright fails to mention burning diesel’s most notorious by-product: Carbon dioxide, a climate changing greenhouse gas. The 60 trolley buses in Wellington saves 600 000 litres of diesel or 1620 tonnes of carbon dioxide. With climate change now only rejected by those on the fringes, and New Zealand signing the Kyoto protocol, it just does not make sense to get rid of the trolleys and encourage burning more climate changing fossil fuels. Transport makes up 40% of New Zealand’s C02 emissions, and scientists have been saying we may not have long left to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions.

Trolleys are the greenest public transport option available and our public leaders need to stop dithering and act to resolve the funding crisis between Stagecoach, Vector, Land Transport New Zealand and the Greater Wellington Regional Council. Would this council like to go down in history as the council that lost the trolley buses? I don’t believe this decision would be rewarded at the election booths come 2008. Any long-term strategic view incorporating the issues of international oil insecurities, rising oil prices, climate change and peak oil would recognise the trolleys importance. Maintaining the fleet gives us security of transport and is part of future proofing of country against external shocks.

The threatened Trolley buses have clear advantages over diesel buses and contrary to what Dr Wright says, are the green option, needed for Wellington’s future. That is why I have been on the street getting signatures on my petition to Land Transport NZ (LTNZ) calling on them to fund the trolley buses fairly. Currently LTNZ pays half of the operating costs for the trolley buses, but only to the level of half the equivalent costs of running a diesel bus, leaving a funding shortfall that the Regional Council has to pick up.

It is obvious that trolley buses have different costs associated with them, such as electric line maintenance and upgrades. LTNZ is mandated to promote sustainable transport, yet by using this absurd funding rate threatens their survival. The Transport Minister needs to convene a meeting between all the parties, and tell LTNZ to pay its half of the actual transport system –trolleys and all –and not just its diesel equivalent. This way the Council does not have to go cap in hand to the people of Wellington to make up the funding shortfall to save our trolleys.

testingtesting

2006-05-12T16:57:00.000+12:00

First practice post 12 May