Nats' new green leaf withering on the branch

Waikato Times

TRUE BLUE KIWI: John Key vowed before the election to 'turbo-charge' the work of community groups such as Forest & Bird. In practice, opportunities for talks on environmental concerns have been rare.

Relevant offers

OPINION: Environmental promises made by John Key before the election are ringing hollow, Mike Britton writes.

In the lead-up to the election, John  Key said National's top three priorities were the three Es - environment, education and the economy.

On the campaign trail, when Opposition leader, he showed great enthusiasm for the first topic, lifting hopes among environmental groups that National had turned over a new, green leaf.

"Environmental issues should not be monopolised by those on the left of the political spectrum. Environmentalism should be a mainstream issue for all New Zealanders and all political parties," Mr Key told the launch of his party's "Bluegreen" policy two months before last November's election.

Such words were welcomed by Forest & Bird and other environmental groups. But, as Mr Key said at the time, "we should always measure a government's environmental rhetoric against its environmental record".

In the past six months, environmentalists have observed with increasing disquiet a range of announcements from the Government that threaten damaging consequences for the environment. For example, Mr Key's pre-election promises on climate change have not been followed through by his actions in Government.

"National will have policies that reflect the fact that living on a diet of carbon will be increasingly bad - bad for the world and bad for our economy. We will have policy that encourages 'climate friendly' choices like windmills, hydro power and tree planting, and reduces the desire for 'climate unfriendly' behaviours, like burning coal," Mr Key promised in May 2007.

National's emissions trading scheme has been watered down now so that big emitters - agriculture and industry - benefit from delayed introduction to the scheme while taxpayers pick up the bill for their emissions.

This won't help New Zealand achieve a fair contribution towards the 40 per cent reduction in greenhouse gases, which the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has identified as the level of reduction in emissions that must be achieved by developed countries, if we are to avoid the worst impacts of climate change. Environment Minister Nick Smith says 40 per cent is unrealistic.

In August, Energy Minister Gerry Brownlee announced plans to mine New Zealand's conservation estate, including its national parks. Exploitation of fossil fuels from beneath native forests is at odds with New Zealand's "100% Pure" brand which underpins our $20 billion tourism industry.

And it was out of kilter with Mr Key's pre-election view that: "Any political party with an eye to New Zealand's future success must pursue policies that protect and promote our environmental assets. Our environment is also an asset that differentiates New Zealand's products."

MEANWHILE, Agriculture Minister David Carter and Lands Minister Maurice Williamson were scoping the South Island high country. They rescinded measures introduced by the previous government to protect the landscapes around high- country lakes from inappropriate development and subdivision. They also effectively spelled an end to the creation of new high-country conservation parks.

Transport Minister Steven Joyce scrapped a scheme that would have penalised imported vehicles producing high emissions. That didn't fit well with Mr Key's pre-election statement that: "National will provide Kiwis with good signals about the cars that are the best for the environment. We will do this by ensuring our emission and noise standards for new vehicles keep up with international standards and practices and by introducing more sophisticated emissions and noise testing for existing vehicles. If Kiwis have a highly polluting or excessively noisy car, we think they should know about it and have an incentive to do something about it."

Environmental groups have been troubled by these assaults on the environment, and sought to put their concerns to the Government. Mr Key promised before the election that he would embrace environmental organisations - and indeed would "turbo-charge" the work of community groups such as Forest & Bird. In practice, opportunities for talks on environmental concerns have been rare.

In theory the idea of linking the trade and conservation portfolios under one minister was an inspired one, but in practice Conservation Minister Tim Groser spends so much time overseas pursuing his trade portfolio interests that he has little time for conservation back home.

Since the election, Forest & Bird and other environmental groups have found Mr Key's door firmly closed - only now, nearly a year later, has a meeting with Mr Key been granted to conservation and recreation groups, though a date has yet to be confirmed.

You could accuse environmental groups of naivety in believing election promises, but Mr Key's words, delivered to Forest & Bird's annual meeting two years ago, sounded heartfelt: "National proudly shares many of your values: like you, we want to protect our unique native species. We want our children and grandchildren to be able to swim in our rivers and lakes. We believe in sound environmental science. We are committed to high environmental standards."

Yet the environmental lobby is not giving up - the stakes are too high. As Mr Key said before the election: "Government policy decisions over the next few years will have consequences that keep reverberating not just for the next 10 or 20 years but for the next 50 and beyond. So it's vital we get them right."

* Mike Britton is general manager of the Royal Forest & Bird Protection Society.

- © Fairfax NZ News