One night in 2007 I found myself at an official dinner in Brussels seated next to a man who advised the German government on climate change. We chatted about the role countries could play in the shift to sustainability.
He noted that what New Zealand did would have little impact on the overall problem. Our small size, however, did not excuse us from making a practical contribution. In addition, he said, New Zealand had a very special and more important role to play. “You”, he argued animatedly, “need to be a symbol to the rest of the world of what is possible”.
This now explains why the last NZ Government was so keen to “lead the world”. Because a German Government advisor said so over dinner. That beats stuff such as a rational cost benefit analysis.
I felt proud that New Zealand was seen as so important to the world’s efforts to address climate change. I came home even more committed to being a part of advancing New Zealand’s leadership role.
It’s a pity though that emissions under Steve’s Government increased higher (percentage) than almost all other Kyoto countries – even more than USA under George W Bush.
Then Steve turns to the awful Nat/ACT agreement:
Evidence from competing points of view will be heard by New Zealand’s elected representatives. This evidence is to be treated equally. Public officials will be asked if they have been impartial. Those who advance the position that human activity is contributing to climate change are to be set against those who oppose this view – as if they are equals.
Oh my God, how dare they. This is the end of civilisation – NZ’s elected representatives will hear competing points of view. This must not be allowed.
Lest we think this does not matter because it is just one of the things that is done in an MMP system to appease the smaller parties and no one will take it seriously – think again. The news of such hearings will go around the world. The country that has been a beacon on the hill will find itself reduced to holding a candle in a wind of its own creation.
No, no, no – an Australian radio station has mentioned the agreement. Our international reputation is destroyed. We can never recover.
Maharey demonstrates what many of the left focus on – saying the right things instead of actual progress. He thinks that everyone globally will be aghast as NZ having had a select committee inquiry. They won’t be – most won’t give a damn or be interested – except academic politicians like Maharey.
Here’s what they will actually care about – the actual level of emissions. That si what counts – not whether “deniers’ might be allowed to have their say at a select committee. Maharey’s Government had one of the worst records in the world for emissions growth.
This to me is the true tragedy of any attempt to reconsider the evidence on climate change. While we should be leading the way to a world that is different to the fossil-fuel burning, automobile-centred, throwaway economy we currently have, our elected representatives will be weighing up the evidence.
Once again Maharey wants NZ to lead the world, no matter how much damage it would cause.
I’m all in favour of sensible measures to reduce emissions, that keep us in line with our major trading partners. But this hysteria about how the world is doomed if we not act within the next 12 months is ridicolous.
If they talk too long New Zealand’s reputation for leadership will not just be a candle in the wind it will be snuffed out.
Oh no, ACT and National have killed Prince Diana!!