- Re: Let the equivocation begin NZ came fully prepared to seriously fudge and cheat, NZ always does.
Posted by John Monro
on November 14, 2021, 5:08 pm, in reply to "Let the equivocation begin"
|
And New Zealand continues to cheat - NZ has the second worst emissions record in the OECD. James Shaw admits himself that he could not extract any meaningful promises from the Labour cabinet before COP26. Jame Shaw is Minister for Climate Change, but not in cabinet. The Greens are not in a formal coalition, because Labour have an overall majority. NZ's NDC (Nationally Determined Contribution) of a 50% reduction in net emission by 2030 is a cynical cheat, and he should have resigned as Minister and refused to go to Glasgow, a major failure of political and moral responsibility., As a Green Party member I am seriously disappointed, actually quite angry. The lack of honesty is unforgivable. In fact the reductions in practice will be less than 25%, perhaps 22%, and that's assuming that promise is kept. Basically NZ is comparing earlier gross emissions with future net emissions, a cheat, apples and oranges, plus creative accounting around Kyoto land use credits, and again with methane. You can listen to a NZ commentator Rod Oram, a basically decent environmentally aware and leftish economic commentator ( a rare bird these days ) here, on Nine to Noon, Radio NZ. The critique starts around 9.30 minutes. https://www.rnz.co.nz/national/programmes/ninetonoon/audio/2018818620/rod-oram-at-cop26-summit You can read much of this critique here https://www.newsroom.co.nz/cop26/nz-loses-the-plot-on-the-way-to-the-big-un-dance Other sites saying the same thing https://theconversation.com/cop26-new-zealands-new-climate-pledge-is-a-step-up-but-not-a-fair-share-170932 and https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/nov/01/new-zealand-plan-to-halve-greenhouse-gases-criticised-as-an-accounting-trick or https://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/climate-news/300443653/cop26-new-zealands-new-climate-pledge-is-a-step-up-but-not-a-fair-share I wrote a very long complaining letter to Mark Shaw about all this, I won't post here. I am presently writing a submission to our Emissions Reduction plan discussion document (note, discussion, not action) saying that such a plan is useless if it cannot envisage a change in the way we do things. That's unbridle capitalism needs to stop and you cannot treat global warming as just a technical issue that needs attention without examining all the other environmental, economic and social crises, including overpopulation. James Lovelock says the same in his article in the Guardian. I don’t know if it is too late for humanity to avert a climate catastrophe, but I am sure there is no chance if we continue to treat global heating and the destruction of nature as separate problems. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/nov/02/beware-gaia-theory-climate-crisis-earth My submission to the ERP discussion document is this: "Nothing else is or ever will be sufficient to deal with or reverse the existential threat of global warming other than a revolutionary change in the way we do business, organise our societies and come to terms with our true place in nature. The Emissions Reduction Plan discussion document (ERPDD) in this regard is a testament to so many decent and clever people contributing their very best but doing so in a system which they cannot even think to question; as such this is a total failure of imagination and understanding, and dooms us and our children to an increasingly fraught and frightening future”. |