Speaker by Various Artists

Read Post

Speaker: Vote for Water

41 Responses

First ←Older Page 1 2 Newer→ Last

  • Moz, in reply to Bart Janssen,

    National have basically said screw it we are just going to make money off the cows and to hell with the future because by then we won't be in power and don't care.

    That's a malicious slander, Bart, and you know it. National do care, they care deeply about this issue and their position is clear: rivers have value as a source of irrigation water and a channel for sewage. National care a great deal about freeing up kiwi farmers to use those natural resources and turn them from worthless natural features into income-producing assets that we can all benefit from. On a going-forward basis with full acknowledgement of future utility.

    Sydney, West Island • Since Nov 2006 • 1233 posts Report Reply

  • Jake Starrow, in reply to Hilary Stace,

    My point is that Opposition parties can promise many a brand new day. Just like Helen Clark did before her 9 year tenure began. But despite her Government's best efforts, little changed of any real significance on most environmental fronts. Governments of whatever hue cannot change attitudes through legislation. That takes far more complex and long-term awareness strategies.

    Since Sep 2014 • 77 posts Report Reply

  • Hilary Stace, in reply to Andrew C,

    43% of lakes are pristine and they are the ones in the conservation estate - the 44% are mostly lowland see http://www.mfe.govt.nz/publications/ser/lake-water-quality-in-nz-2010/lake-water-quality-in-nz-2010.pdf for details

    Wgtn • Since Jun 2008 • 3229 posts Report Reply

  • Hilary Stace, in reply to Jake Starrow,

    I agree - it's about engagement and active democracy. Let's have more of it.

    Wgtn • Since Jun 2008 • 3229 posts Report Reply

  • Bart Janssen, in reply to Moz,

    :P

    freeing up kiwi farmers to use UP those natural resources

    fixed :)

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 4461 posts Report Reply

  • Bart Janssen, in reply to Jake Starrow,

    My point is that Opposition parties can promise many a brand new day.

    One point to note we really have had only two types of government in the last few decades and yes you are right neither of them have performed.

    But surely that is an argument in favour of trying a third government and letting them demonstrate how venal and selfish they can be.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 4461 posts Report Reply

  • tussock, in reply to BenWilson,

    Ahem. Billions, divided by millions of people, divided by decades of work, is under a hundred bucks a year each, more for the mansions and less for the hovels. Only it's not ratepayers at all unless you make councils pay for it all, which you don't, it's the businesses that dirty the place up have to change their systems to avoid it. Which often saves them money once they take the time to think about it, because pollution is literally waste that can often be made profitable.

    Pissing away all that nitrogen (for instance) is incredibly expensive, but it's also really easy to do if you don't have a plan and no one makes you get one. It's a giant invisible cost to both the farmers and the public.


    Addendum: So even if you let everyone pollute a massive amount and huge cost to themselves and then also make everyone figure out how to filter it all out again at a huge public cost, and you add those together and get a big scary number, it's still not a very big number in real terms.

    Since Nov 2006 • 611 posts Report Reply

  • Hilary Stace,

    Wgtn • Since Jun 2008 • 3229 posts Report Reply

  • Gabor Toth,

    It's all a Communist plot...


    Which in 1990 Genesis P.Orridge sampled and somehow managed to turn into a poignant tribute to Ian Curtis (though it also works quite well as a pro-water anthem...)


    Wellington • Since Dec 2006 • 137 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha, in reply to Hilary Stace,

    and the whole atmosphere is about the same size too

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 19745 posts Report Reply

  • Hebe, in reply to Jake Starrow,

    Governments of whatever hue cannot change attitudes through legislation. That takes far more complex and long-term awareness strategies.

    I hold no candles for Labour’s record on climate change, the environment or water.

    National plans to gut the RMA and remove protections; Labour does not. End of.

    For a country full of supposedly smart agribusiness-people, the stupidity of degrading a profitable brand perception - 100% pure NZ - for short-term corporate-farming gain is unbelievable.

    Christchurch • Since May 2011 • 2899 posts Report Reply

  • Ian Dalziel,

    Christchurch • Since Dec 2006 • 7953 posts Report Reply

  • Hilary Stace,

    Susan Wood has just said on Q and A that everyone supports clean water.

    Wgtn • Since Jun 2008 • 3229 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha, in reply to Hebe,

    the stupidity of degrading a profitable brand perception - 100% pure NZ - for short-term corporate-farming gain is unbelievable

    and degrading our corruption-free reputation is similarly costly and lazy

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 19745 posts Report Reply

  • Hilary Stace,

    The Topp twins had some interesting things to say about farming such as the benefits of seaweed over nitrogen while playing favourites with Kim Hill on Radio NZ last Saturday

    Also Forest and Bird has some useful info about freshwater.

    Wgtn • Since Jun 2008 • 3229 posts Report Reply

  • Hilary Stace,

    ECO has gathered party political promises on environment and related areas http://www.eco.org.nz/what-we-do/vote-for-the-environment/environment-election-meetings.html

    Wgtn • Since Jun 2008 • 3229 posts Report Reply

First ←Older Page 1 2 Newer→ Last

Post your response…

Please sign in using your Public Address credentials…

Login

You may also create an account or retrieve your password.