NZ – The Carbon emission debate and farming

| Sourced From |

I expect to see bluff, bluster and strut from our politicians but they’ve taken that to an art form over the Emissions Trading Scheme or ETS. In fact farmers could be forgiven for believing the political slogan for the ETS is “obfuscation above all”.

Having visited quite a few parts of rural New Zealand over the last month I don’t believe anyone in Wellington generally or parliament in particular has the faintest idea of the level of anger over the ETS. Agriculture Minister David Carter’s statement made at the Fieldays that “farmers aren’t worried about ETS” (The New Zealand Farmers Weekly June 21) is simply wrong and tells me he’s not connecting with farmers.

The fact the government is using your money and mine on a charmfest trying to tell us what a great little scheme ETS really is indicates to me they are worried and if that’s the case logic would suggest they stop the ill-conceived idiocy.

As I wrote earlier this year, the only reason I could see for an ETS was to create a grin and grip photo opportunity with President Obama in Copenhagen. It was an extremely expensive exercise that the entire country paid for.
To start by righting a few of the myths that are part of the political bluff and bluster.
The first is that, according to the National government, not having an ETS would provide a barrier to trade and that’s bollocks.

Our biggest trading partner, Australia, is ETS free. Our next and growing is China. It doesn’t have an ETS either and neither does the US. Our partner of most potential, India, certainly doesn’t, though the EU does. In the latter case we know they’ll introduce any barrier they can, factual or not, as a barrier to trade so I’d suggest an ETS is largely irrelevant.

Myth number two is that it will change people’s habits and we will become more energy efficient. That’s wrong as well. How will imposing an additional tax on petrol and power change anyone’s habits except that of a cold pensioner who simply won’t be able to afford to keep warm? Further when agriculture comes into the scheme the tax will be on production, not on the carbon footprint. It is just another tax.
Myth three is the bleat from cabinet ministers that “farmers don’t understand”. We understand perfectly well.

Acting Prime Minister Bill English told Jamie Mackay’s listeners on June 21 that “some of the agitation is based on misunderstanding because farmers aren’t part of it” (until 2015). Federated Farmers have certainly acknowledged that, as have I, but the reality is simple.

According to the Feds from July 1 this year we will need an additional 88,161 cows to pay the tax. If the payout dropped to $4.77, however, the figure becomes a massive 590,000 cows. With sheep the figure as at July 1 this year is 4.7 million lambs. That is an additional 4% tax on farmer’s current income. English’s Southland electorate will suffer further with the Southland Hospital Board telling the Southland Times that their cost of coal to heat the hospital will increase by “close to 25%”, courtesy of the ETS. By my maths that’s $60,000 that won’t be going into essential health care.

According to Feds president Don Nicolson “the same bureaucrats who got us into this mess in the first place are still advising the government. It is a case of yes minister gone mad”. I think Don has run an excellent campaign – he needs support.

The hypocrisy and insanity of the government’s ETS scheme is highlighted by the statements some of the key players made on the subject while they were in opposition.
“The madness of the Government’s new carbon tax is that New Zealanders will be the only people in the world paying it,” said Nick Smith in 2005 as quoted in the Dominion Post.

The Southland Times on September 8, 2003 quoted then National Party leader and local MP, Bill English, telling a local meeting that Southland farmers should oppose the controversial flatulence tax and that other countries were waiting for NZ agriculture to lose its competitive advantage.

The best was National agriculture spokesperson David Carter back in September 2003 who along with English marched opposing the flatulence tax. He said “an increasing number of scientists are now disputing the issue of global warming. By signing the Kyoto protocol on climate change (by National Cabinet Minister Simon Upton originally) NZ would put itself at a significant economic disadvantage. I’ve done dozens of meetings, (like this) and I’ve not seen a level of anger like this since the 1980s. Farmers are saying enough is enough. My advice to farmers is to keep the pressure on the government because I think the government will back down.”
That is excellent advice.

Source: farmersweekly

Posted on July 8, 2010 · in Australasia

Tagged as: Carbon Emissions • Carbon Footprint • Carbon Tax