I’d plant a garden

May 6th, 2010 at 12:01 pm by David Farrar

At Backbenches last night, Wallace Chapman asked Green MP Catherine Delahunty what she would do if there was $100 million of gold buried underneath her private property.

Catherine’s response was that she would not mine it, but instead would plant a garden as they are sustainable.

Now I am sure Catherine was speaking truthfully. She would refuse to mine on even private land, no matter how much wealth there is underneath. This was not hyperbole, but her honest beliefs.

Some people are opposed to mining in areas with high conservation values. I’m even one of those – there are some areas which I think should never be mined. And most NZers fit somewhere on that scale – we may differ about how much land we would put into this protected category, but it is a scale. Some would advocate all DOC land be exempt. Some advocate all Section 4 land (even the parts with gorse) should be protected. Some advocate only parts of Section 4.

But the point I want to make is that some, like Catherine, are against all mining everywhere. It doesn’t matter how many jobs are created. It doesn’t matter how much wealth might be underground. It doesn’t matter that the ground may have zero conservation value. Their view is that mining is bad full stop.

Tags: Catherine Delahunty, Greens, mining

This entry was posted on Thursday, May 6th, 2010 at 12:01 pm and is filed under NZ Politics. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

76 Responses to “I’d plant a garden”

wreck1080 (2,851) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 12:07 pm
I wonder, if people against mining should be forced to give up consumer goods which are built of mining sourced materials .
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
Grizz (425) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 12:11 pm
Mining to some degree is inevitable. Even windmills, electric cars, solar panels need materials which need to be mined. It is a matter of asking how much are we prepared to mine and how much damage to the landscape are we prepared to make. Letting it all go to seed is a short sighted unrealistic option.

Lets not forget that New Zealand was once totally forested barring mountain tops above the bushline. Clearing land, even for planting vegetables is destructive to the environment and native species. If Catherine wanted to be totally just to New Zealand’s landscape and environment, she would be better off to leave!
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
nickb (2,182) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 12:13 pm
Delahunty is crazy plain and simple. There is not a more guilty liberal in the house.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tBRCD6xWj8w&feature=related

Just watching these videos are good for a chuckle
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
RRM (7,264) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 12:18 pm
The Greens aren’t what they used to be.

As a foil for a parliament that would be otherwise dominated by the unionism vs capitalism divide, I still like having them around.
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
GPT1 (1,952) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 12:18 pm
Yes Delahunty is a mad TAB (temporarily able bodied person – her words not mine).
Ironic that she would plant a garden on $100m of gold but would no doubt object to the suggestion that beneficiaries should be required to plant a vege garden to supplement their taxpayer support.
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
davidp (2,739) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 12:21 pm
Is Delahunty opposed to manufactured goods that require resources that are obtained through mining? Is she proposing that we revert to a pre-bronze age economy?
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
big bruv (11,207) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 12:22 pm
This mad shelia did not tell the whole story.

She is Green, therefore, she would plant a garden, piss into a pot and then use that aged urine to kill the weeds, she would also fertilise the soil with her own waste.

Remember this next time you think about purchasing veggies from a farmers market if the vendor is a Green.
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
nickb (2,182) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 12:30 pm
Lol another good one

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QmVhIXy_rE8&playnext_from=TL&videos=rMzAuiz-Atk&feature=rec-LGOUT-real_rev-rn-1r-18-HM

Words fail me that we are paying $130K per annum for these hippies to ask questions like this.

How much do you guys think people like Delahunty could make working in the private sector??
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
Michaels (1,304) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 12:30 pm
But the point I want to make is that some, like Catherine, are against all mining everywhere. It doesn’t matter how many jobs are created. It doesn’t matter how much wealth might be underground. It doesn’t matter that the ground may have zero conservation value. Their view is that mining is bad full stop.

So what you are saying DPF is just ignore these stupid lefty fuckers and bring in the bulldozers!!!!
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
toad (3,549) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 12:32 pm
@Grizz, davidp

The reference was to gold – not to the various other minerals you are talking about. There is enough gold already above ground to meet every industrial purpose we can imagine putting it to in the next thousand years. It sits around in vaults, doing nothing.

There is no need to mine any more gold, only greed.
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
adrianb (30) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 12:34 pm
If you are opposed to the mining of areas with high conservation values, Mr Farrar, how is it that you’re in support of the current proposals to mine areas… of high conservation value?? Do you think that your judgments should overrule the current designations? Or do you simpy change your opinions to mesh with the decisions of the party you curry favour and carry water for?

Either way, please stop bullshitting your way merrily along here. You don’t oppose mining in areas of high conservation values. Have some balls man, and stop trying to greenwash your position here. Hypocrite.

[DPF: You are an idiot. I am not in favour of mining all the areas listed in the consultation document, and in fact am putting in a submission saying that]
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
serge (108) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 12:37 pm
Ah, this MP has high conservation values, well, she will need the produce from her lovely garden to be because as the world economies go to the pack and will no longer afford meat and milk products from expensive New Zealand, all of us will eat from her garden, like Adam and Eve did at the start because we will no longer be in a position to borrow money to sustain even parliamentarians like her. It is rather unfortunate that we are lead by dreamers from top to bottom.
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
MikeNZ (3,234) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 12:37 pm
she was saying her private property.
Garden I presume for fruit and vegetables.
she didn’t say against mining anywhere from your report?
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
Inventory2 (8,811) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 12:42 pm
toad said

There is enough gold already above ground to meet every industrial purpose we can imagine putting it to in the next thousand years.

Sorry to have to be the one to tell you this toad, but there will NEVER be enough gold in the world to satisfy the shopping urges of the lovely Mrs Inventory. Even the gold souks at Dubai did not satisfy her yearnings, and she keeps saying “WHEN we go back to Dubai….”
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
toad (3,549) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 12:46 pm
@nickb 12:13 pm

Whatever you think of her, she sure made Paula Bennett look stupid in Parliament yesterday.
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
big bruv (11,207) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 12:50 pm
Toad

I watched the house yesterday, and I am no fan of Bennett, however, Delahunty is the only person who came out of the exchange looking like an idiot.

She cannot even ask a question properly, Dr the Hon Lockwood (I am entitled) Smith even let her have two cracks at the question and even then the stupid woman still got it wrong.
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
Bevan (3,951) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 12:50 pm
The reference was to gold – not to the various other minerals you are talking about. There is enough gold already above ground to meet every industrial purpose we can imagine putting it to in the next thousand years. It sits around in vaults, doing nothing.

There is no need to mine any more gold, only greed.

Umm Toad, have you actually seen what the price of Gold has been doing over the last two years? Supply has not been meeting demand for Gold for quite some time. If I recall the price of gold as traded has doubled in price in two years. Go ask a jeweller what he thinks about the price of gold at the moment. Anyone hording gold right now in “vaults” would be bat shit crazy, the price of the stuff right now looks to be peaking.
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
Bryce Edwards (248) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 12:52 pm
I wonder if Catherine Delahunty’s position is also that of the Greens? Can you tell us Toad?

Although some of us might think it is an absurd and indeed anti-human position, it is indeed the logical and honest conclusion if you follow the Greens’ current arguments against exploring the prospect of increased mining.

The reality is that virtually all of the New Zealand public are in reality pro-mining to some extent, but we just all the draw the line in different places about where the trade offs on what is acceptable to mine. Thus we all exist somewhere along that pro-mining spectrum. Some of those that are currently arguing against the National Government’s current proposals are rather disingenuous about this fact and the reality that they favour some degree of mining.

I guess if you accept that Delahunty is indeed being truthful then you could say that at least she isn’t being disingenuous about being “anti-mining”. But I suspect that Greens like Delahunty have actually unwittingly pushed themselves into a corner in this debate where her response on Backbenchers is the only possible one without accepting that they too are also on the pro-mining spectrum, albeit at the restrictive end of the mining spectrum.
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
jims_whare (328) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 12:53 pm
Was Ms Delahunty wearing any jewelery at the time….= hypocrisy. Did she arrive at the venue in any type of automobile….constructed of materials at one point mined out of the ground……= hypocrisy. Has she ever flown on a plane……material out of the ground + grrrr fossill fuels…….= hypocrisy. If she or any other green were pure to their beliefs they would be living in the bush eating (sustainably) grass and grubs (prayer afterwards for killing living creatures) with no help from any modern convenience or contrivance.

If they don’t do this then they are just barrow pushers who don’t live by the rules that they want all of society to live by….= hypocrites.
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
philu (13,393) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 12:55 pm
“..She is Green, therefore, she would plant a garden, piss into a pot and then use that aged urine to kill the weeds, she would also fertilise the soil with her own waste.

Remember this next time you think about purchasing veggies from a farmers market if the vendor is a Green…”

um..!..are you unaware that many/most commercial crops are grown using ‘waste’ from sewerage plants..and the like..?

..mmm..???

phil(whoar.co.nz)
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
scrubone (2,321) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 12:59 pm
Funny thing is that that $100 million of gold would probably be a taxable asset under some green policy somewhere…
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
adrianb (30) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 1:01 pm
No, Mr Farrar, you’re simply a hypocrite. You’re either in favour of mining in areas of high conservation value or not; if you are, at least have the balls to say so. Your weasel-worded spin here is ridiculous. It’s the most contemptible of political habits, but I’m afraid you’re too practiced in poli-speak to even notice.

[DPF: Sigh in your universe such decisions are binary, but nit for most people. You need to define "high" to make this a sensible discussion. I do not regard all of section 4 as high conservation value - some of it is gorse]
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
toad (3,549) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 1:01 pm
@Bevan 12:50 pm

So the word’s central banks and the International Monetary Fund are “bat shit crazy”.

Your words, not mine, although I tend to agree.
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
big bruv (11,207) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 1:02 pm
Delahunty would indeed plant a garden, she would ignore the wealth under her feet and still hold her hand out for tax payer dollars.

She is a complete waste of space, I cannot wait for her and the rest of those idiots to be kicked out of the house, roll on 2011.
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
toad (3,549) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 1:06 pm
@Bryce Edwards 12:52 pm

Here’s the Green Party position on mining:

Mining and extraction has adverse effects on landforms, oceans, waterways and ecosystems. It is currently prohibited in National Parks and various other types of reserve, under the Crown Minerals Act 1991 but occurs contentiously in other parts of the conservation estate. The Green Party will:

1. Prohibit new exploration, prospecting and mining on conservation land and reserves.
2. Ensure there is tight control over existing mining on conservation land and reserves, in partnership with tangata whenua, and through consultation with environmental groups, local communities and the public.
3. Require mining activities be halted when rare and endemic species are found to present on the mining site.
4. Reject the notion of trading conservation land for other land to facilitate extractive activities on, or facilitate activities that would dramatically alter the ecology of conservation holdings.
5. Gazette as conservation land any land with a high conservation value that has been left out of the conservation estate due to mining value.
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
Manolo (9,953) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 1:07 pm
Without beating around the bush I will say Delahunty is a lunatic, demented, nutter, deranged, loco, crazy, and any other epithet synonym of madness.

As a country we must be scraping the bottom of the barrel if a pathethic character like Delahunty is an elected Green Party MP (albeit a list one).
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
philu (13,393) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 1:10 pm
it’s funny how some are refusing to acknowledge the degree of anger..and the hunger for deep/serious/direction-changing..’change’..

..both out there..and here..

in britain this change-desire is manifesting in the clegg-effect…

..here..next election..the greens will be major benificiaries of that wave of desire for ‘change’…

..and i’m picking ..that if they seize their moment..they will go into the next election campaign already in double-figures..

..it’s gonna be a very interesting election here..also…

phil(whoar.co.nz)
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
MikeNZ (3,234) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 1:12 pm
Oh I hope you are correct BB
But not for ACT of course

I want all of middle NZ to give Sneaky John (http://karldufresne.blogspot.com/) & His National Party a smack at the next election.
Vote party vote ACT.
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
philu (13,393) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 1:17 pm
still trying to crack that 1.8% poll-rating..?..eh..?

face it..a combination of super-city..and mining..

..will see you actite/randite cult members swept away…

..eh..?

and won’t that be a ‘good’ day..

..eh..?

phil(whoar.co.nz)
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
GPT1 (1,952) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 1:17 pm
No, Mr Farrar, you’re simply a hypocrite. You’re either in favour of mining in areas of high conservation value or not; if you are, at least have the balls to say so. Your weasel-worded spin here is ridiculous. It’s the most contemptible of political habits, but I’m afraid you’re too practiced in poli-speak to even notice.

The only weasel words are from you and your hippy mates trying to define half the country as high value conservation areas.

If a mining company rocked on up to the Abel Tasman track with the intent of turning it in to an open caste mine I would be against that. I suspect that DPF and I would even met at the picket line (but we would still wash and not grow our hair out).

But there are massive amounts of land locked up for goodness only knows what reason that can be mined with limited environmental impact and I am all for that being mined.

As was the last government until it became political convenient to change tack.
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
philu (13,393) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 1:21 pm
a ‘dirty-hippy-sneer’..!

(how deliciously retro..!..)

phil(whoar.co.nz)
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
Bryce Edwards (248) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 1:24 pm
From Toad’s helpful reposting of the Green position on mining, we can see that Catherine Delahunty’s policy on mining is not in fact that of the Greens (if I’ve interpreted the policy correctly).

It seems that the Greens don’t favour a halt to all mining at all. A Green Government would continue to allow a substantial degree of mining. In this sense, you could say that the Greens – unlike Delahunty – are in fact pro-mining, but that on the pro-mining spectrum the Greens exist at the more restrictive end, and favour a more conservative version of the status quo. This makes a lot of the Green Party speeches and slogans appear a bit disingenuous.

Perhaps Toad or another Green could point out if I have misinterpreted the party’s position.
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
Bevan (3,951) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 1:27 pm
So the word’s central banks and the International Monetary Fund are “bat shit crazy”.

Your words, not mine, although I tend to agree.

Slightly different context wouldnt you say Toad? In their case they are using the total value of their gold reserve asset as a guarentee for monetary loans. And frankly in their case it would make sense as the total value of their asset in this case has gone up, therefore the guarentes the banks can give investors/depositors is greater. If you are against that, then well I hope you dont mind loosing all you life savings!

But you are being deliberatly deceitful, we have been comparing Delahunty to the MINER, who would dig up gold to sell to someone, we are not talking about Delahunty being the commodity trader, or end user now are we.

But I will take back my statement. In the banks case, they are not being bat shit crazy and it makes perfect sense – but your belief that they are bat shit crazy for using a safe product like gold to guarentee savings is beyound bat shit crazy and if your thinking is similar to the Greens, then I hope you lot never get near the treasury benches!
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
Rex Widerstrom (4,965) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 1:28 pm
Ms Delahunty’s eccentric choice is, though, surely as much her right to make in respect to her private property as is other people’s to cut down trees etc? Can’t support one and not the other, folks.

GPT1 notes:

Ironic that she would plant a garden on $100m of gold but would no doubt object to the suggestion that beneficiaries should be required to plant a vege garden to supplement their taxpayer support.

You’re probably right, GPT1. Also ironic, however, was when I interviewed every righties’ hard-line Mistress of Welfare Jenny Shipley and strongly advocated for forcing local authorities to give up (even temporarily) tracts of land they were sitting on doing nothing so as to allow them to be turned into allotments, as in the UK, where people living in flats or cramped homes with no real gardens (like in many CBDs) be able to grow veges.

The unemployed would particularly benefit, I suggested. Shipley’s reply was to sneer something along the lines of “The unemployed wouldn’t know how to grow vegetables”.

Personally, I think it’s a great idea… allotments for all, and the unemployed provided with seedlings and instructions.
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
Bevan (3,951) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 1:29 pm
Also Toad, when you provide links to back up your statements, it might help if you actually read the article…

“The IMF maintains an internal book value of its gold that is far below market value. In 2000, this book value was SDR 35, or about US$47 per troy ounce.[9] An attempt to revalue the gold reserve to today’s value has met resistance for different reasons. For example, Canada is against the idea of revaluing the reserve, as it may be a prelude to selling the gold on the open market and therefore depressing gold prices”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gold_reserve

Considering my post was mainly about the value of gold sold on the open market.
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
menace (407) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 1:30 pm
I also noticed jonky was exercising his deep vocabulary again too.

he only has slightly better speaking skills than bush even
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
adrianb (30) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 1:34 pm
I’m a white-collar professional, working in America, and therefore don’t know many hippies. Sorry to bust your lazy stereotype there, GPT. Happily, the world’s not as narrow as you evidently are.

I support the vast numbers of New Zealanders who don’t wish to see their children inherit a country further despoiled, polluted, and wrecked. And as for your “limited envirnomental impact”, that’s been the catch-cry for offshore drilling here in the US for years. It’s also been repeated endlessly about the serial polluters in the dairy industry, thanks to whom the rivers I grew up swimming and eeling in in the Wairarapa are now too polluted even for swimming. So, in short, forgive me for thinking that people who crap on about “surgical” mining are speaking out of their ass. And if the professional spin doctor who runs this site has any values beyond “whatever National does”, then I’m yet to see them.
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
davidp (2,739) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 1:35 pm
Toad>The reference was to gold – not to the various other minerals you are talking about.

So Delahunty would be prepared to sacrifice her garden for a low value mineral, but not for a high value mineral?
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
RightNow (5,395) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 1:37 pm
@toad (2109) Says: “There is no need to mine any more gold, only greed”
That’s akin to saying there’s no need to pay actual money to beneficiaries since they can’t eat it.
Whether or not more gold is ‘needed’ in the world, the fact that there is a market for it means it can be traded for money which in turn can be used to support our welfare state.

I think DPF makes a good point that I think applies to all issues, that “most NZers fit somewhere on that scale – we may differ about how much land we would put into this protected category, but it is a scale”. Everything can be seen on a scale, and each of our attitudes sits somewhere on that scale. I’m in favour of mining the ‘low hanging fruit’ if it will help create jobs, increase the tax revenue, and generate some royalties for the coffers. I would object to mining in the more unique and beautiful areas of our country, but I 100% think a balance can be found. In what seems to be typical John Key fashion, the end result (what actually gets approval for mining) is likely to be much less than what was initially touted.
I think it is mere politicking for the opposition left parties, and the pseudo-environmental NGO’s, to be up in arms about it. In my opinion if the left get their hands back on the wheel they’ll steer us after Greece. To pay for the welfare dream we need to be getting at least another $240 million/week. If mining earns us $1billion/year at least that covers 1 month’s borrowing.
How many on the march last weekend do you think are net beneficiaries (and I include all politicians in that classification)? How many of them would sacrifice say 20% of their benefits in return for the government not going ahead with mining?
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
GPT1 (1,952) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 1:39 pm
Rex – I am not even sure if allotments are needed (although I think community gardens can be a great idea – social and supportive) as most NZ properties tend to have some amount of dirt with them. Personally I find it a satisfying hobby and would really like to see more people encouraged to grow their own but am sadly cynical as to whether it would work. Can you really see long term unemployed running around gardening?

Still it would make a nice response to all the poverty groups who lament the cost of vegetables.
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
toad (3,549) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 1:41 pm
@davidp 1:35 pm

I have no idea what, if anything, she would be prepared to sacrifice her garden for. Why don’t you send her an email and ask her – catherine.delahunty@parliament.govt.nz – if you are really interested.
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
Rex Widerstrom (4,965) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 1:58 pm
GPT1 suggests:

…most NZ properties tend to have some amount of dirt with them

Is there not the same move to inner sity living as there is in other developed countries? I was just reading some figures that say Perth city (and area of only 12.7 km2 is the fastest growing place in Australia – a 12.8% rise in population versis about 3.1% nationally) followed by the Darwin CBD, and so on.

Vast towers are going up in Australian cities which one assumes to be offices but they inevitably seem to be hundreds of apartments, usually with retail beneath.

Meanwhile the residents are being flogged all sorts of “indoor garden” setups (presumably hydroponic – do the cops know?! LOL). I looked at one that’d hardly contain just the herbs I’d like to grow – the size of a single pot for about $120.

Meanwhile, apparently gardening is booming in popularity, driven by TV gardening and even cooking shows. There’s a market for allotments there… at least in Australia.

Can you really see long term unemployed running around gardening?

I would have done when I was on the dole (and did, when not living in a flat). When I suggested it to Shipley I was thinking of places like Newtown, where I’d lived in a block of flats and the only bit of ground within walking distance was sports areas. Mind you, I did regardless of my employment status – I like fresh veges and herbs and found it very therapeutic. There might need to be some element of compulsion tto get them going, but when they started eating fresh veges and found they had more cash to spend on other things, I think a fair portion would stick at it.

Heck, some might start up a profitable black market selling fresh local veges to neighbours like me, who now has no time to spend in the garden!
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
spk18 (21) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 2:01 pm
Private land or not, it doesnt really matter – she doesnt own any minerals in the land, they are forfeit to the Crown. Anything under her garden mineral-wise is not hers. I cannot recall from Land Law how much of the top part of the land one actually owns, but no private land owner owns their land past a particular depth (from memory), and at the end of the day they only hold that subject to legislation. Theoretically if one could mine from her non-loonie leftie neighbour’s place (unless she is in a loonie commune) and not disturb the quiet possession of her garden, she couldnt do a thing about it…
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
Bevan (3,951) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 2:07 pm
I support the vast numbers of New Zealanders who don’t wish to see their children inherit a country further despoiled, polluted, and wrecked.

What about those New Zealanders who dont wish to see their children inherit a country neck deep in debt? (And before you numbskulls respond, I’m not talking as if mining is our only solution.)

BTW, we are not talking about mining to the extent you are imagining, the are amount proposed is a miniscule amount compared to NZ’s total land mass, let alone its conservation estate – rest assured there will still be planty of land that will not be despoiled, polluted and wrecked that will be left for our children..

BTW, nice tangent you went off on there. First mining, then diary farming.
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
Manolo (9,953) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 2:07 pm
adrianb said: “And if the professional spin doctor who runs this site has any values beyond “whatever National does”, then I’m yet to see them.”

Ouch. Touche.
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
Bevan (3,951) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 2:09 pm
Gee Toad – no longer want to discuss the Gold reserve?
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
gravedodger (1,175) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 2:15 pm
Jeez Mrs GD has me digging up our garden to recover spuds (wholesale value $1 per Kg) if she thought there was something worth $1170 an oz I I would be digging for my life, not that that will last long if hard labour is required.
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
RightNow (5,395) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 2:17 pm
” First mining, then diary farming.”

I’ve got a pair of 2006 diaries, but they’re clearly not breeding stock. They’ve been together in a box for over 3 years and still no offspring. Anyone know how to tell the sex of a diary?
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
James (1,338) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 2:24 pm
“If a mining company rocked on up to the Abel Tasman track with the intent of turning it in to an open caste mine I would be against that. I suspect that DPF and I would even met at the picket line (but we would still wash and not grow our hair out)”

(50 demerits for the not so subtle dig at DPF about his hair)

Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
Right of way is Way of Right (1,044) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 2:31 pm
I’d dig up the gold, cash up, buy a bigger property, and plant a sustainable garden there, thereby making life better for many more people than just myself.

Delahunty is not being environmentally aware at all, she is just being closed minded and unrealistic.

Silly, selfish woman!
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
GerryandthePM (328) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 2:35 pm
Catherine’s response was that she would not mine it, but instead would plant a garden as they are sustainable.

Now I am sure Catherine was speaking truthfully. She would refuse to mine on even private land, no matter how much wealth there is underneath. This was not hyperbole, but her honest beliefs.

Gardens are sustainable mining.

Vegetables are removing phosphate, potassium and a host of minerals which will have to be replaced for the garden to continue to flourish.

On the volcanic plateau in the central North Island, selenium and cobalt need to be applied to the soil annually, otherwise vegetation and animals will not thrive.

As Catherine Delahunty’s garden will require replenishment of what is removed from her soil, someone somewhere else will be “mining” in a more obvoius way to meet that requirement.

“What you don’t know won’t hurt you” is a useful saying when taking a stand on principle.
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
redeye (596) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 3:15 pm
I’d has at a guess the “white-collar professional, working in America” is over there because the dollars are better?

Get back here and pay your taxes so we’re less likely to need to mine.
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
Bevan (3,951) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 3:16 pm
I’ve got a pair of 2006 diaries, but they’re clearly not breeding stock. They’ve been together in a box for over 3 years and still no offspring. Anyone know how to tell the sex of a diary?

Dumbarse, one of them is saying “If you loved me, you’d swallow”

Hardly helps the breeding. (And yes, I know my spelling is appalling.)
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
Bevan (3,951) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 3:18 pm
I’d has at a guess the “white-collar professional, working in America” is over there because the dollars are better?

Get back here and pay your taxes so we’re less likely to need to mine.

He reminds me of a friend of mine, who laments the possibility of mining in schedule 4 land while working on an oil rig in Australia.
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
adrianb (30) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 3:28 pm
[DPF: Sigh in your universe such decisions are binary, but nit for most people. You need to define "high" to make this a sensible discussion. I do not regard all of section 4 as high conservation value - some of it is gorse]

This is a stunningly idiotic point. Even for you. You’ll find gorse, a typically hardy Scottish settler, in much of our most precious conservation estate, including the Copeland Valley in Westland National Park, near the Okarito lagoon, and throughout the Coromandel. You might as well argue that the presence of red deer proves that an area is not high conservation value. Or that the (exotic) Lupins at Mt Cook are evidence enough that the National Park is sufficiently degraded for gold mining to proceed. Happily, I’m confident that those who assigned section four status to these areas did so with more consideration and intellectual rigour than you’ve managed here. I mean, really.

You’ll also find that gorse is an ally in many cases within the conservation estate. It is one of the first species to appear after fires, thus anchoring slopes and preventing erosion, and it also shelters and shades native species like ferns, manuka and rewarewa as they grow. DoC often leaves it alone for these purposes. It’s both fortunate and appropriate that the classification of conservation lands is left up to the professionals and not to spin doctors and hot-air merchants like yourself.
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
ben (2,366) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 3:41 pm
I’m all for mining on the conservation estate, particularly by large multinational private Chinese companies. That is a policy that superbly targets and intensely antagonises all the right people: socialists, racists, xenophobes, nationalists, environmentalists, and trampers. Toad, Adrianb, that means you. Plus it enriches all the right people: entrepreneurs, managers, workers, and consumers. That means me. A classical liberal could not wish for a more preferred allocation of costs and benefits.

The cost is that you lose the occasional hillside in the Coromandel, but frankly the Coromandel is hard to see from downtown.
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
Bevan (3,951) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 4:11 pm
adrianb, to paraphrase Maxwell Smart: You’ve missed his point by thaaaat much.

What I read is that areas in the conservation estate which are NOTHING MORE than gorse are hardly high value and should be removed. Not that the finding of one gorse plant or the presence of a solitary Red Dear should disqualify the whole area from schedule 4.
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
side show bob (3,660) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 4:18 pm
I wouldn’t worry to much, the stupid melons even outsmart themselves sometimes, example. For many decades there was a large quarry on the banks of a local river. This quarry harvested large rocks and they were crushed for road gravel, sand, ballast etc. This river has a very steep rate of fall and every time it floods tremendous amounts of materials, rocks, boulders, sand would come down and replenish the quarry. Over the years many townie come melon tossers have brought riverside properties and built houses by this river. When the quarries resource consent came up for renewal these fools objected to the removable of rock from the river, after all the quarry was raping mother earth. The fucking pc idiots in the local council wanted to look good as the call that all things green must be good. The quarry was shut down despite warnings from locals that this would be disastrous for the environment. No one listened. Now some years later the melon idiots who shut the quarry down are now screaming blue bloody murder as the debris are building up and the river has threatened to break it’s banks and wash the fuckwits away. The local council has had to pay for large diggers to move hundreds of thousands of tons of rock and shingle. If the stupid bastards had listened to start with everyone would have won but no the melons know better. I’m quite looking forward to the first winter flood.
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
RRM (7,264) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 5:11 pm
[DPF]: But the point I want to make is that some, like Catherine, are against all mining everywhere. It doesn’t matter how many jobs are created. It doesn’t matter how much wealth might be underground. It doesn’t matter that the ground may have zero conservation value. Their view is that mining is bad full stop.[/quote]

It’s a very good point about the problem of over-zealous absolutes in environmentalism.
The trouble is I think the route you took to get there from what Katherine Delahunty actually said is a bit dubious…

As you say there are plenty of gorse-covered ex-farms I wouldn’t mind seeing mined, but not the valley leading up to Mount Cook. But your core readers hate the whole notion of environmentalism so I think you’re on a hiding to nothing here.
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
Bevan (3,951) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 5:31 pm
As you say there are plenty of gorse-covered ex-farms I wouldn’t mind seeing mined, but not the valley leading up to Mount Cook.

Why not mine in the “the valley leading up to Mount Cook”?

But your core readers hate the whole notion of environmentalism so I think you’re on a hiding to nothing here.

That is because you are blinded in the debate by your extreme position. You assume all of us who are pro mining take a position that we should strip mine national parks and it distorts your thinking. I would like nothing more than a debate on the merits of removing the proposed sections from schedule 4 – but then from you the debate has never been about that, instead we get the knee jerk “No mining in the conservation estate” hysteria.
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
dad4justice (7,339) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 5:54 pm
Does Catherine eat the psychedelic snails that dwell in her garden? This woman should be used as a tunnel support, but no, she infests that deranged cess pit they call the Beehive!
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
GPT1 (1,952) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 6:06 pm
Rex – yes, there is a move to inner city apartment blocks and towers but not sure how many of the unemployed live in them. Still, I take your point and as I have said allotments have a lot going for them. My thoughts were really along the lines of state houses on their 600 squares providing a fair bit of space to plant a few veges. In terms of Wellington can anything grow there or does it just get blown away?

The indoor stuff is quite clearly for one reason only and it is not because people want to grow a nice bit of coriander for their cooking. Refer Switched on Gardner! As a friend of mine said a lettuce might go up from $1 or $2 to $3 or $4 over winter but I am hardly going to spend $1200 to set up a grown room to save money on lettuces.

Rex, I have no doubt you would have gardened when on the dole but I cannot help but wonder if it would be tilting at windmills to expect beneficiaries to embrace the concept with both hands – although can but try.

James said: May 6th, 2010 at 2:24 pm
“If a mining company rocked on up to the Abel Tasman track with the intent of turning it in to an open caste mine I would be against that. I suspect that DPF and I would even met at the picket line (but we would still wash and not grow our hair out)”

(50 demerits for the not so subtle dig at DPF about his hair)
The original intention was to take the mickey out of hippies. The fact that I may have (accidentally of course) taken the michael out of DPF as well is pure bonus coincidence.
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
GPT1 (1,952) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 6:15 pm
Adrian B said: I’m a white-collar professional, working in America, and therefore don’t know many hippies. Sorry to bust your lazy stereotype there, GPT. Happily, the world’s not as narrow as you evidently are.

Oh dear, if there is one thing worse than a lazy hippy trying to tell everyone what to do its the arrogant ex pat telling everyone what to do based on their self professed vast worldly knowledge.

So to be clear you would stop all mining of any sort in New Zealand whilst you earn money in America?
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
krazykiwi (9,188) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 7:01 pm
I’d plant a garden

Yes yes, a garden. That’s nice. But where would keep she keep the only Buddhist shearing gang in Aotearoa and, pray, would they have sufficient room to throw their fleeces?
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
Chthoniid (1,914) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 7:28 pm
I note that there are a number of reputable conservationists in this country that also have given their qualified support to mining on the conservation estate- Dr Neil Mitchell and Prof John Craig for instance.

I’ve also been know to opine favourably about some mining in low-conservation areas.

I think the point that is largely overlooked, is that a large chunk of the conservation estate exists there on paper only. Only 2-3% of the area gets optimal pest control. About another 40-50% we go in periodically to try to annoy the possums from time to time. The rest gets practically nothing. It’s decaying around us already.

The main threat to our conservation estate is not mining, it is invasive pests.

Mining can be done in ecologically sensitive manner. NZ ecosystems are adapted to cope with physical catastrophes- tropical cyclones, volcanic eruptions, hurricanes, forest fires etc. At ecological time-scales, I tend to be little bothered by the temporary perturbations caused by some mining.

If mining ends up putting some royalties back into conservation- especially in the areas of pest control- I have no trouble giving some projects support on a case-by-case basis.
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
Komata (786) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 7:49 pm
Ummm, have we missed something here? I notice that the ‘lady’ concerned, merely stated that she would ‘plant a garden as they are sustainable’.

Given the ‘Green’s predilection towards plants that give a ‘warm glow’, I notice with great interest that she didn’t actually specify what the garden will be growing, only that it will be ‘sustainable’.

Given the fact that the plant-concerned is definitely ‘sustainable’ perhaps she was precursing a wished-for second ‘income stream’?

It’s all in the interpretation you know . . .
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
wat dabney (2,705) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 8:34 pm
Delahunty, like the others Greens, is happy to benefit by trading for the produce of mining that takes place all around the world, whilst at the same time feeling smugly superior that she opposes it in her own back yard. And, let it be said, earning a damn good living as a purveyor of such sanctimonious cant to their target demographic.

Incidentally, toad, perhaps you could explain why my comments on frogblog suddenly stopped appearing.

Is it Green Party policy to quietly silence criticism whilst maintaining the illusion of open discussion? Don’t you find that rather sinister, especially given the statist solutions you aspire to?

How many other commentators have you hushed up like this; maintaining the smiling pretense that the blog is open to debate, whilst actually quietly censoring and controlling behind the scenes?
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
Rex Widerstrom (4,965) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 8:57 pm
GPT1:

In terms of Wellington can anything grow there or does it just get blown away?

It’s breaking through the solid clay that lies about an inch beneath the “soil” that’s the problem, GPT1. At least where I grew up trying to garden. Then there’s the fact that whatever you plant has to be frost tolerant. And water tolerant. Very water tolerant.

If it’s roots manage to crack the clay (or rock, if you live on the hillside) they hang on for dear life and the wind is the least of your worries.

I grew up thinking everyone gardened with a grubber and grew minature veges (sadly, they weren’t all the rage in snobby restaurants in those days, so my efforts provoked derision rather than offers to purchase). Then I moved to the Waikato and it was like bloody Jack and the Beanstalk. I planted some zucchini, went inside for a nap, and came out to find I had marrows.

Perth of course just has aquaphobic sand (yes, somehow the sand is scared of water), which lunatic Australians flood regularly with perfectly good (and scarce) drinking water in an effort to grow lawns so they can pretend they live in England.
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
Crusader (164) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 8:59 pm
My perspective – Delahunty was in a bar, on a political TV show, with a camera pointing at her, knowing she needed to blurt out a pithy sound bite. So of course she said she would leave mother earth alone and plant an organic herb garden, that’s what the Green cheer squad wanted to hear.

In the real world, if she was aware of $100M of gold under her house, she would do what any other person would do – buy the properties on either side and dig a huge hole in the ground to get it out. With the immense profits you could buy the Botanic Gardens and a whole orchard and market garden on the side.

She is a hypocrite, that much is obvious, but she is not the only one in the House!
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
GPT1 (1,952) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 9:04 pm
Chthoniid said: The main threat to our conservation estate is not mining, it is invasive pests.

Really good point. Possum is out of control, the gorse eradication programme is long gone and rabbits are well back. I do my best to minimise rabbits, possums and other such pests (gorse doesn’t seem to notice being shot) but I suspect the 70 million possums do more environmental damage in one night than any of the proposed mining could ever manage.
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
Patrick Starr (3,673) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 9:05 pm
“um..!..are you unaware that many/most commercial crops are grown using ‘waste’ from sewerage plants..and the like..?”

umm – which sewage plants provide their sludge to most commercial crops Phool?

(and dont say Wellington cause that closed years ago)
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
philu (13,393) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 9:06 pm
auckland/mangare…for starters..

phil(whoar.co.nz)
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
Patrick Starr (3,673) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 10:04 pm
“auckland/mangare…for starters..”
ummm no they dont. They provide their biosolids to pine forests
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
V (572) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 10:57 pm
@toad

Precious metals, i.e. gold are still useful in the monetary system as a check on the government and their ability to print fiat dollars.
It’s hardly ‘greed’ to keep what you have earned, rather than let government inflate away the value of your money.

I don’t understand why 2% inflation is considered good, this is basically a commitment to reduce the purchasing power of your money by half in 36 years.
“The greatest shortcoming of the human race is our inability to understand the exponential function.” – Albert Bartlett

http://www.rbnz.govt.nz/challenge/resources/2970552.html#whatcausespricestability
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
Zarchoff (100) Says:
May 6th, 2010 at 11:06 pm
Crusader said “…With the immense profits you could buy the Botanic Gardens and a whole orchard and market garden on the side.”

Very logical and I totally agree but this only makes sense to a capitalist. The Greens don’t think like that. We could take the profit from mining some of the conservation land and use it to totally eradicate pests. Unfortunately that is using Capitalism to protect the environment and that, unfortunately, is an anathema to the Greens.

Dear old Ms Delahunty would never have thought of this argument in a zillion years. She thinks in Animal farm terms: Greens good, National/ACT bad. Socialism good, capitalism bad. Taxing things good, banning things better!
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
Patrick Starr (3,673) Says:
May 7th, 2010 at 11:48 pm
wot, no reply phool? – you just make shit up as you go dont ya?

2TBOMK only two, (very small rural) sewage plants in NZ supply their biosolids to compost plants for commercial application in market gardens.

to say; “many/most commercial crops are grown using ‘waste’ from sewerage plants’ – is just another phool fabrication
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Kiwiblog

I’d plant a garden

76 Responses to “I’d plant a garden”

Leave a Reply

Kiwiblog

I’d plant a garden

Share this:

Related posts:

76 Responses to “I’d plant a garden”

Leave a Reply