Sucking New Zealand dry

It seems totally insane to allow companies to bottle one of our most precious resources, water, and sell it overseas at a huge markup without any proper recompense for New Zealand.

Today, the NZ Herald reported:

NZ Pure Blue wants to send millions of litres of Waikato water offshore

NZ Pure Blue Springs Limited wants to take from Putaruru's Blue Spring in the Waihou River more than the amount of water currently being pulled from the Waikato for bottling.

In its resource consent application to Waikato Regional Council, it has asked to extract 6.9 million litres a day.

Not only are these companies making huge profits at our expense, the National party for some weird reason doesn’t want to properly tax them.

That’s one of the strangest things about the bottled water debate… the current government doesn’t want to make money from it. Isn’t the National party full of capitalists or something?

The combined daily limit of water extraction allocated by the Regional Council to all bottling operations in the region is 5.3million litres. Coca-Cola Amatil is the largest consent holder of water from the Waihou River taking up to a maximum of 200,000 litres a day.

NZ Pure Blue plans to set-up a bottling plant at an existing industrial site in Putaruru and create the "largest production bottling plant in the southern hemisphere, exporting 100% of its products".

So Kiwi’s wont even be able to buy our own water from Putaruru's Blue Spring. Unbelievable!

NZ Pure Blue said it had consulted with the Raukawa Iwi and discussed potential mitigation measures, as well as gained support of the South Waikato District Council.

A council spokesperson confirmed it would be getting some form of payment from the company for its support, saying it had indicated it would provide an amount of funding in trust to benefit the Putaruru community.

NZ Pure Blue is paying the South Waikato District Council a bribe in other words. I very much doubt they have consulted with the Iwi that their plans will affect either.

Many of the water bodies these companies want to suck dry are tourist attractions, which makes the decision to not properly charge them for our resource depletion, which also comes at the expense of other industries, entirely insane!

When will the government and Council's do the right thing when it comes to our environment and those wanting to exploit it?

Honest Government Advert - Corporate Welfare

The Australian Government just released this advert about its $1b handout to Adani for his reef-killing, water-guzzling, climate-changing, ancestral land-desecrating mega coal mine - and it's surprisingly honest and informative.

Get Free of Deep Sea Oil

The war you don't see

Coromandel Watchdog Regatta

End of the Line

Marsden Point disaster zone

This week, Refining NZ released its annual report (PDF) for 2012. Within that report is a somewhat alarming statement about five breaches of consent at the Marsden Point that the company believes are minor:

Our resource consent has several strict conditions that limit the emission of sulphur dioxide. The main condition limits our yearly average emission of sulphur dioxide to 12 tonnes per day. For 2012 the Company had an average daily emission of sulphur dioxide of 10.88 tonnes per day. Other conditions within the consent make allowances for the Company to discharge at higher rates for limited periods of time due to client disruption, startups and emergency trips. The table above shows that we exceeded the allowance for discharges greater than 40.8 tonnes per day by 2.67 hours.

10.88 tonnes per day is a huge amount of sulphur dioxide to release into the environment. Of course Refining NZ claims that there are no adverse effects, despite the safety data sheet (PDF) showing that sulphur dioxide is a listed toxic substance and can cause severe health problems.

Refining NZ also claims that:

For several years, a comprehensive suite of testing and monitoring activities has been in operation, covering shellfish, soils, marine sediments, water quality, air quality and vegetation. The results of this monitoring continue to demonstrate that there were no significant adverse effects on the environment as a result of Refining NZ’s operations.

This really doesn't tell us much, being that "no significant adverse effects" doesn't discount the fact that there are obviously some adverse effects on the environment. There's no scientific value in such a statement, which fails to properly highlight what creatures are being affected. Clearly there's no proper independent testing being undertaken, and therefore no objective scientific basis for Refining NZ's claim.

The report also outlines problems with flooding whenever there is heavy rainfall leading to increased pollution washing into the ocean. Despite their Environmental Department spending $683,962 in 2012, all the report outlines in the way of protecting the environment is counting 21 Dotterel's in the site and "taking steps to ensure that the nests are protected".

All in all the report gives the once over lightly in terms of Marsden Point's effect on the environment. Despite Refining NZ claiming that there's a "comprehensive suite of testing and monitoring activities" being undertaken, there's no reference to any scientific study to determine the extent of adverse effects. Any data is not publically available, if it exists at all.

Interestingly the report briefly describes a major accident:

In 2012 a manual transfer of petrol component saw a significant loss of product (API Tier 1) from a floating roof tank. As a result improved controls for manual blending and training for operations staff are being put in place.

It appears that there has been no report given to the Northland Regional Council about this event, even though under the American Petroleum Institute's guidelines (PDF), Tier 1 accidents should be publicly notified. The term Tier 1 is used to describe events with the greatest consequences.

Despite being in breach of their consents on numerous occasions throughout 2012, there were no infringement fines imposed. It's also questionable as to whether any procedures have been put in place to ensure similar incidents don't occur again in the future. Instead the council has entirely failed to impose any restrictions or even make recommendations on how best Refining NZ can adhere to their already lenient consents... The incompetent council have also failed to act on their 2007 Marsden Point Air Quality Strategy (PDF), with the amount of complaints doubling in 2012 on the previous year.

Clearly Marsden Point refinery is another blot on our clean and green branding, and one we wouldn't need if the government removed subsidies for the oil and gas industry and ensured that alternative modes of transport were available. That would eventually enable renewable energy to be competitive and ensure most polluting industries were no longer financially viable.

In the mean time we need to see some proper oversight and investigation into the environmental effects from numerous accidents at Marsden Point... Refining NZ must be made to clean up what is essentially an environmental disaster zone in Whangarei.

No mandate to mine

Yesterday, 3 News reported:

The Government is allowing mineral prospecting on protected conservation land despite promising in 2010 no mining will be allowed on such high-value estate.

Eight consents have been granted to prospect and explore for coal and other minerals in Coromandel and the West Coast's Paparoa National Park.

That's despite public outrage in 2010 when the government proposed freeing up some conservation land for mining. It was forced to back down and promised there would be no mining.

In fact on 20 July 2010, Energy and Resources Minister Gerry Brownlee and Conservation Minister Kate Wilkinson announced that there would be no exploration or mining on Schedule 4 land. This decision was made after a consultation process that saw 37,552 submissions, the vast majority of which were against the proposal.

Here's Nationals press release:

"Most of those submissions said we should not remove any land from Schedule 4.  We heard that message loud and clear.

That consultation process was initiated after the largest public protest in New Zealands history on 1 May the same year. 50,000 Kiwis turned out on Queen Street to march against the Government's mining plans, sending a very clear message that Schedule 4 land should not be considered for exploitation.

Nothing has changed since then, with the public still overwhelmingly against mining on conservation land. But despite that huge public protest and the consultation process that caused the government to back down and say they would not proceed, National has gone back on their word by allowing prospecting to occur, ignoring both the previous consultation process and what the majority of the public wants.

There was no mandate given at the last election to explore for mining Schedule 4 areas, and that's a clear indication that we no longer have a democracy in New Zealand... Instead, under a National led government we have a dictatorship. Why on earth would anybody support that?

Why National is toxic for the environment

More fracking lies

Today, Stuff reported:

Prime Minister John Key has waded into the fracking debate, accusing its opponents of talking nonsense.

At a Taranaki energy site, he said he had had enough of the scaremongering over the practice, particularly from the Green Party.

"From what they're saying, you'd think that because of fracking we'll all go to hell in a handbasket," he said.

"But the truth of the matter is that the practice has been going safely on in Taranaki for the past 30 years without any issues. And last year the parliamentary commissioner for the environment gave it a tick of approval in a preliminary report on fracking, and I expect that nothing will change in her final report when it is issued later this year."

Clearly the Prime Ministers belief that fracking has been conducted "safely" in Taranaki for the last 30 years is wrong! There's been numerous instances of fracking accidents that have contaminated the soil and peoples water supplies in the area, and here's a few official reports that show Key up for the liar he is:

Table 3 on page 15 of this Drilling Waste Disposal Monitoring Programmes report (PDF) shows the amount of non-compliance for the Inglewood land farm. As well as ground water contamination, the operators spread their fracking sludge that contains many toxins directly onto the land.

Amongst these toxic substances, Hydrocarbons were tested for and shown to be six times over the limit or 26,742 mg/kg above the 4558 mg/kg limit outlined in the consent. There was no fine, the only response was to reduce the consent requirements and the amount of testing being conducted.

There is also the Shell Todd Oil Kapuni study (PDF) and the Cheal Petroleum study (which the Taranaki regional council has removed from their website), both showing water contamination above the already lenient consent limits.

These instances of unsafe practices have been publicly reported on and even raised in Parliament by Green MP Gareth Hughes... In my opinion, a competent Prime Minister should have been aware of those tabled documents.

If he was unaware, he's therefore incompetent. If he was aware (which is likely the case), he's attempting to mislead to public about the highly dangerous and environmentally damaging practice of fracking. Either way, dishonest John has no place being the Prime Minister of New Zealand.

Tax evasion is not OK

Today, the NZ Herald reported:

Recent research also confirms that the legal system treats beneficiaries more harshly than tax evaders.

In a pilot study comparing three years of tax evasion and welfare fraud, Victoria University lecturer Dr Lisa Marriott found welfare fraud was significantly more likely than tax crime to be prosecuted, even though the sums involved in tax offences were far larger. In 2010, it was calculated that tax evaders cheated New Zealand of up to $6 billion.

Benefit fraud involved an average of $70,000 and the offender had a 60 per cent chance of being jailed. Tax evaders, with an average fraud of $270,000, had only a 22 per cent chance of being imprisoned.

That's a huge difference that clearly shows our current political and judicial system is biased.

On February 20 this year, Associate Social Development Minister Chester Borrows announced new measures - not to crack down on the $2.6 billion owing in child support or the money lost through tax evasion, but to "prevent, detect and catch welfare fraud".

Chester Borrows is obviously playing to his constituency of beneficiary bashing tax evaders.

So it is not surprising that a UMR Research survey released last month found New Zealanders believed beneficiaries had now become the most discriminated-against group in the country.

Unfortunately having somebody to blame is a common human trait, and with the media and politicians invariably putting welfare instead of tax evasion at the top of their list, beneficiaries will continue to be unfairly persecuted.

That unfair discrimination has a detrimental effect on all people who are welfare dependent, which in turn costs the country in ways that most politicians don't often consider. Our high rate of youth suicide for instance can often be directly attributed to discrimination.

One way to help people out of poverty would be to ensure that tax evaders were pursued more vigorously, and that tax evasion became less acceptable within "polite" society.

In order to do that, we need to change the public focus away from beneficiary bashing and onto tax evasion, which is easier said than done when there's no political impetus to catch let alone prosecute more tax evaders.

Maybe that’s because many politicians also avoid paying their fair share of taxes as well.

Petrobras not welcome in New Zealand

Today, the NZ Herald reported:

Prime Minister John Key says he will raise the possibility of Brazilian energy company Petrobras returning to New Zealand when he meets the country's President, Dilma Rousseff, today.

Shouldn't Key be asking New Zealanders first?

Mr Key said he wanted to encourage Petrobras to return to New Zealand after it gave up its exploration permits, including the Raukumara Basin, last year. Mr Key said Petrobras had given up many of its other speculative ventures internationally at the same time.

It's true that Petrobras was in financial trouble and had to pull out of other potentially less profitable investments in other countries... But it's also true that there was substantial pressure from activists to inhibit Petrobras from exploiting the East Coast of New Zealand. That was more likely to have made Petrobras forgo their permits.

"We will certainly say to the President that we think New Zealand is a good place for Petrobras to be involved and that they are welcome in New Zealand if they want to come. They've given back their licence, but that shouldn't deter them in the future."

If there was any real cost associated with acquiring exploration permits, that would be a deterrent. Increased funding to ensure that exploration and drilling is undertaken safely and that when accidents occur, there's adequate safeguards in place would also be a good idea. Unfortunately New Zealand is currently ill equipped to deal with even a moderately sized oil spill.

He ruled out offering any incentives for such a move.

Except for the usual incentives of course like prolonged tax holidays and having the initial surveying expenses all paid for by the government. In fact the public extensively subsidizes the oil and gas industry to the tune of millions of dollars per year.

It has been shown that for the same investment into clean tech, we could create at least twice as many jobs... That fact alone makes companies like Petrobras, one of the world's worst polluters, unwelcome in New Zealand.

Once again the Prime Minister isn't speaking on behalf of all Kiwis.

Jan Logie vs Gerry Brownlee

BP - A Serial Corporate Killer

Warner Brothers - Asshole of the Week

Today, the NZ Herald reported:

Warner Bros is threatening that the Government's release of confidential documents about the Hobbit union debate would be a "major disincentive" to future film-making in New Zealand.

The New Zealand Ombudsman has ordered the Government to release documents about the deal it struck to ensure the Hobbit movies were made in the country.

The government secured the three movies by changing employment laws and beefing up the tax rebate sweetener for the productions, resulting in an additional $25 million in incentives for Warner Bros.

Here we have a National government gifting large amounts of public money to a private United States based company, and the public isn't even allowed to know what was being negotiated? Unbelievable!

Not only did the cost to the taxpayer far outweigh any economic benefit we've seen, the secretive and underhanded way National and Warner Brothers acted to change employment laws to suit their business agendas was in my opinion entirely unacceptable!

In his 29-page ruling McGee said the information in the documents didn't pose serious commercial risks.

But New Line warned this would affect future relations, objecting in a statement included in the ruling.

"If the government is not willing to adequately protect this sensitive information from disclosure, this will operate as a major disincentive to motion picture studios as well as local and foreign talent - to utilise New Zealand as a location for future productions."

Wingnut Films also criticised the move.

Clearly the information will highlight the fact that Warner Brothers acted badly and with complete disregard for taxpayers money and workers rights, which is obviously why they're vehemently opposing its release.

So for being a bunch of money grubbing scum with a complete lack of ethical standards, Warner Brothers wins this week's Asshole Award... People should boycott all their films, not just The Hobbit.

Key ignores impoverished children

On Wednesday, TV3 reported:

Last year the Children's Commission released a report which said 25 percent of all children in New Zealand are living in poverty, and Labour MP Nanaia Mahuta claimed 40,000 kids turned up to school without lunch every day.

In contrast, Prime Minister John Key says reports of children going hungry are "isolated examples".

Isolated by our biased media perhaps, but you only have to ask those at the coal face about what's actually happening to know that John Key is talking shit!

With a reduction in funding and a huge increase in those seeking assistance since National gained power, many charitable organizations are now struggling to keep up with demand.

"There are 270,000 children living in poverty in our country, and that number is just so overwhelming," says Ms Taylor. "This, for us, is one way that an individual family, an organisation or an individual donor can make a difference to one child at a time."

Mr Key disputes poverty is so widespread, and claims his Government has put more money into welfare.

National has had to put more money into welfare because there's simply more welfare dependent people since they gained power. Unemployment for instance has more than doubled to a 13 year high under John Keys watch, and this is despite a harsh regime to reduce numbers by simply kicking people off welfare support.

John Key can continue to feign ignorance or he could actually acknowledge that his government has totally failed. The tax cuts for the rich have not created jobs, and it is time to reverse the social damage such detrimental policy has caused.

Of course John Key won't do the right thing to get New Zealand back on track again... Because he's a Prime Minister of the rich, by the rich and for the rich. Apart from cheap or free labour, the poor simply don't register to Nationals business interests, and will therefore continue to be ignored.

Greenpeace and people like you

You can donate to put this video on TV.

MAN

Protests happening around the world

Greenpeace says thank you