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.

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!

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.

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.

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.

Read about the campaign and sign the pledge here

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.