Friday, March 29, 2024

ALTERNATIVE VIEW: Time for Govt to walk the talk

Avatar photo
I saw a government statement recently that was, in a word, underwhelming. Parliament had declared a “climate emergency” we were told. I could understand declaring a housing emergency but climate?
Reading Time: 3 minutes

According to my dictionary emergency means “an unforeseen or sudden occurrence, especially of danger demanding immediate action.”

I would humbly and respectfully suggest that climate change is neither unforeseen or sudden, and any immediate action is far on the horizon.

In fact, such is the worldview of our reaction to climate change that we faced exclusion from a “major event of carbon-cutting nations.” The reason given was because of “our lack of action on climate change.”

So instead of actually doing anything constructive, we’ve declared an emergency.

Mind you local government have been at the forefront of climate change emergency declarations. 

According to my research Auckland, Wellington Christchurch and Dunedin have all put their hands up, as have Nelson, Kapiti Coast, Hutt City, Hawke’s Bay, Porirua, Nelson and Queenstown Lakes.

I’m pleased to say Masterton hasn’t, which tells you a lot about the intellectual grunt of provincial NZ. 

Making declarations is easy and achieves nothing. The hard work is in the doing.

The prize for talking but not doing must go to the Christchurch City Council.

“The scientific evidence that our planet is in crisis is irrefutable,” Mayor Lianne Dalziel effused.

“By declaring a global climate and ecological emergency we are raising awareness about the urgency of the need for everyone to take action to reduce carbon emissions to zero.”

It gets better.

The Government has put out a National Policy Statement on housing density, encouraging more dwellings in central cities. It makes sense if you want to reduce your carbon footprint as it means that people can walk to work.

Not so in Christchurch, where nimbyism is rampant.

Mayor Lianne Dalziel and her 16 councillors were united in their disapproval of the Government’s national policy that aims to increase housing density and encourage development in places close to public transport. 

Dalziel said she felt extreme frustration with the central government imposing Auckland rules on the rest of the country.

So, on one hand we have a council waxing eloquently about climate change and declaring a climate and ecological emergency and on the other, not wanting to take a logical step to reduce their carbon footprint.

Talking the talk is one thing, but walking the walk takes effort. Surely, if you have a climate change emergency you would be encouraging people into the inner city and close to public transport.

Auckland has the same problem as Christchurch. Opposition to high rise in inner city suburbs, a clogged roading system and the lack of a credible public transport system.

Another news item reinforced that fact.

According to a highly reputable international study, climate researchers take more flights than other academics and we know how academics love to travel.

They’re obviously not concerned about climate change as the research showed that climate researchers took 50% more flights than other academics.

So climate researchers, those berating us over saving the planet, aren’t doing their bit.

Considering the climate change emergency, we are told government departments must decarbonise by 2025, just four years away or purchase carbon credits from their baseline budgets to do that. The police have just purchased 3000 petrol vehicles. When they get hit with purchasing carbon credits what will go? The vetting of firearms licences.

If we have a crisis in the Pacific with the need for massive defence resources, will that be declined in the interests of carbon neutrality, or climate emergency?

My frustration is at the selective nature of the actions of the climate change disciples.

Covid-19 has proved we don’t have to fly so I look forward to Cabinet ministers practicing Zoom conferences rather than flying business class.

Then we could encourage ministers and senior bureaucrats on bikes, a Toyota Prius or public transport to further reduce their footprint.

For the record I am not a climate change denier. I accept that the climate is changing and that we need to do something about it.

Declaring a state of emergency achieves nothing.

If we’re serious about climate change one could respectfully and humbly ask why we’re extending the life of the Tiwai Point smelter with the huge carbon footprint it has.

Finally, the Government owns Air New Zealand, a major contributor to our carbon footprint. Will they insist it is carbon zero in four years as they have with other government departments, or hide behind the fact that air travel is excluded from the Paris Accord?

If they present the exclusion argument, then to be consistent they need to exclude livestock methane emission as food production is excluded in the accord as well.

It will be interesting if nothing else.

Total
0
Shares
People are also reading