Rich Rates

20 05 2011

A few years ago, billionaire Warren Buffett blasted a tax system that meant, without even trying to minimise his taxes, he paid less than half the tax rate of his secretary. He said government policy had “accentuated a disparity of wealth that hurt the economy by stifling opportunity and motivation”.

We have seen a similar situation is at work in New Zealand as Labour revenue spokesperson Stuart Nash revealed the average farmer pays only slightly more income tax than someone on the unemployment benefit and less than a couple living on the pension and since the top tax rate dropped in the mid 1980s income inequalities in this country have steadily increased.

This week Council will be deciding a recommendation from the Mayor that we ask government to increase the proportion of how much of the cost of Council services can be included in the Universal Annual General Charge. This would effectively add $100 extra to the rates demand on lower income households in much the same was as National’s income tax cuts and GST increases are shifting government costs from those who can most afford to pay their share on to the poor. While the $100 going on to the UAGC would be offset by a reduction in some other rate, the change would give benefits to the most wealthy and increase the amount paid by those living in lower value properties.

After a national consultation process involving international research, thousands of submissions and public hearings the Shand Report in 2007 actually recommended that government remove the UAGC entirely and base local authority rates on capital value alone.

Some people argue that the capital value bears no relationship to the ability of owners to pay the rates that their property values attract and therefore capital value based rating is unfair and illogical. The empirical evidence suggests otherwise.

Findings from a project co-funded by Treasury, the Foundation for Research Science & Technology and the Royal Society of New Zealand on these issues was published in 2009 by Dr Arthur Grimes and Dr Andrew Coleman from Motu Economic and Public Policy Research. Part of that research analysed the relationship between income levels and property values. The study accounted for the issues associated with farms, Māori land and other factors that could distort the figures if only urban properties were used.

The report shows that there is a strong positive relationship, at the individual household level, between capital value (CV) and household incomes and an even stronger relationship between property CV and household net worth (i.e. household wealth).

Overall, therefore, while there will certainly be some income-poor (but possibly asset-rich) households in high CV houses, this is an exception. The relationship between CV and income is strongly positive. One way to get around the problem of income-poor but asset-rich retired households living in high CV houses is to allow them to accrue their rates to their estate as provided for by Gisborne District Council’s rates postponement scheme and rural properties get rated proportionally to their proximity to services through the five Rating Differential Areas.

Average rates increases for the next financial will be well under the rate of inflation, Council’s financial sustainability and affordability recently got a ranking of 26 out of 73 local authorities and economists at BERL ranked Gisborne District Council 12th of 72 for economic performance in 2010.

So, if there is independent analysis suggesting that there is not a strong relationship between household income and capital value it would be good to see it before we suggest government lets more rates be loaded onto the households that the existing body of research suggests can least afford it.





The First Casualty is the Truth

11 05 2011

The Minister of Energy & Resources and the Big Oil Lobby made some less than honest claims in The Gisborne Herald in response to my previous piece, so the facts are spelt out here for them.

- – - -

Fishermen protest Petrobras pipeline in Guanabara Bay

The footnotes from the mining lobbyists (including the government) yesterday were not honest.
Hekia Parata is not telling the whole story when she says “in the event of an oil spill, the polluter pays for all the costs associated with the response”.
The requirement for spill insurance for all offshore drilling operators is only up to NZ$30m. There may be unlimited liability after that but it is not ‘strict liability’ so there is no guarantee the polluter will ever pay. The New Zealand government or other entities will have to take the polluter to court to recover cleanup costs.
Anadarko is planning to drill off Canterbury before the end of the year and is currently contesting any liability for the Deepwater Horizon disaster that they had quarter ownership in. The Exxon Valdez 1989 spill in Prince William Sound, Alaska is still in court with the polluters challenging the $92 million for ongoing cleanup. While in court, it would be New Zealand taxpayers that will have to cover costs until any settlement was reached.
The 2010 Annual Report of Anadarko concedes that “the events in the Gulf of Mexico may make it increasingly difficult to obtain offshore property damage, well control and similar insurance coverage.”
The Green Party has suggested a bond should be paid by the permit holder before any drilling occurs.
The idea that Maritime NZ could adequately respond to a deepwater spill with 400 people is a joke, while they are well trained and always on-call, their expertise and equipment is designed for small inshore spills. The Gulf of Mexico incident last year required 6,000 ships and more than 40,000 emergency personnel.
A six month investigation by CBS News released last month found that, excluding the Deepwater Horizon spill, at least 128 million litres of crude oil and other potentially toxic chemicals were spilled in the US in 2010 alone. That’s triple the size of the Exxon Valdez spill. New Zealand has had its own share of smaller spills, they come with the industry, just don’t make the big headlines.
In the past 15 years, the chequered safety record of Petrobras shows it has had 282 deaths from accidents, explosions and fires, and 27 oil rig blowouts since 1980.
While the Petrobras safety record may have improved recently (if we discount any involvement in the assassination and attempts to eliminate protesting fishermen in Guanabara Bay), the reality is the Raukumara Basin is at the most extreme end of deepwater exploration in an area with large earthquakes on a regular basis.
The Gulf of Mexico had all the best equipment on hand with thousands of trained personnel and experts just a helicopter ride away. Even then, it still took three months for experts from all over the world to figure out how to cap the Gulf well, 1500m under the ocean, Raukumara is up to twice that depth.
Contrary to the information supplied by the petroleum lobbyists, the Petrobras P-36 platform did spill crude oil, and diesel fuel – 2,000 barrels in the first 24 hours alone according to the official investigation.
And who told the NZ lobbyists that “30 days after the [Guanabara Bay] accident, there was practically no impact from the spill”?! The area is still suffering more than ten years after 1.3 million litres of Petrobras oil leaked into the water. Al Jazeera did an in-depth story on the 10th anniversary in July last year and plenty of other information on the ongoing impacts is available.




Petrobras vs. the fishermen (of Guanabara Bay, Brazil)

28 04 2011

AHOMAR fishermen protesting against Petrobras pipeline in Guanabara Bay

Gisborne District Councillor Manu Caddie says a tip off from a credible source about planned AOS raids led campaigners against drilling off the East Cape to go public. Documentation of recent Police violence against local fishermen opposing a Petrobras owned pipeline in Brazil and the 2007 AOS raids against Tuhoe had meant those opposed to the Petrobras activities in New Zealand had to take the information seriously.
-
Mr Caddie says he has obtained a report from Brazil that documents police violence since 2009 against members of Associação dos Homens do Mar (AHOMAR) a union of around 700 fishermen in Guanabara Bay, Rio de Janeiro.
-
Amnesty International has taken up the case of the fishermen after the Treasurer of their association was assassinated on 22 May 2009 in front of his wife and children. Paulo César dos Santos Souza was beaten in his home by armed men who then dragged him outside and shot Santos Souza five times in the head. A few hours earlier armed men threatened the protesting fishermen at the Petrobras pipeline worksite. According to Santos Souza’s family, before they killed him they interrogated him, asking him about documents belonging to the fishermen’s union.
-
Mr Caddie has been in contact with AHOMAR President Alexandre Anderson de Souza who has escaped attempts on his own life and has been warned by local Police that it is no longer safe for him to fish in the area and he should ‘stay indoors’. “We anticipate some real solidarity between the two campaigns – the fishermen of Guanabara Bay know a lot more about Petrobras than we do in New Zealand, so we look forward to supporting them and learning about their situation as they learn about ours.”
-
“While New Zealand does not have the extrajudicial executions and parapolicing mafia of Rio, locals here are questioning the relationships between the Executive, military, Petrobras and the Police in this campaign against deep sea drilling” said Mr Caddie. “The Government are under a huge amount of pressure on this issue and in such situations may resort to desperate measures. The statement issued last night by Police Headquarters that rumours of raids were speculation was less than reassuring – if they have no plans for AOS intervention I think they should explicitly confirm that.”
-
Guanabara Bay is the location of a Petrobras accident in 2000 that leaked 1.3 million litres of oil into the bay and the area has still not fully recovered from the event. Petrobras has spent more than US$200million on the cleanup and the company has not had a similar disaster since, though the Petrobras P36 platform sinking in 2001 took 11 lives and 1.5 million litres of oil being leaked into the ocean.
- – - -




San Pietro and the fight against fascism

26 04 2011

A navy tender carrying police moves in to apprehend the tribal fishing boat San Pietro, from under the bows of the seismic survey ship Orient Explorer in traditional fishing grounds off East Cape. Saturday April 23, 2011 Photo: Greenpeace/Malcolm Pullman

San Pietro has been critical in the fight against fascism – the Italian village, where 16,000 allied casualties resulted from a pivotal battle, was key to eventually driving the Germans out of Italy after victories in the North Africa campaign.
“It is significant that San Pietro was a turning point for the allies and I believe it will be in our local struggle too” said District Councillor Manu Caddie.
“Using our own military to defend a foreign corporation and arrest and detain fishermen undertaking their customary rights in their traditional fishing grounds is a national disgrace” said Mr Caddie.
“The real criminal is the Government who issued a deep sea drilling permit with no background check on the safety and environmental history of the company, no consultation with affected communities and no assessment of environmental effects.”
Mr Caddie said the New Zealand National Party policy of auctioning off the country for mining exploration was irresponsible and would no doubt be the subject of years of litigation for groups of people who had better things to do with their precious time and resources. “Dictating what will happen in our district by opening up national parks and our coastline to transnational corporations for fossil fuel extraction shows contempt for local wellbeing and will face fierce and sustained local resistance.”




Time to Stop the Testing

25 04 2011

One of 500 dead penguins that washed up within a few days on a beach near Sao Paulo, Brazil in 2010. Oil exploration is common in the coastal areas around Sao Paulo.

MEDIA RELEASE

25/04/2011

A Gisborne District Councillor is demanding a moratorium on seismic testing following revelations that scores of dead penguins are washing up on East Cape beaches and new international research suggests seismic testing is responsible for killing a range of sea creatures.

Manu Caddie said residents at Waihau Bay near East Cape found a dozen dead penguins yesterday within a 200 metre stretch of coastline and they would have found more if they kept walking. More carcasses were found around the coastline as far as East Cape by locals who say they have never seen so many dead birds washed ashore. “While the government may blame La Nina weather conditions for starving the penguins or suggest a storm killed them, locals haven’t noticed any major storm recently.”

“Evidence is piling up on the impact of the seismic tests both here and abroad” said Mr Caddie, who as a member of the Environment & Policy Committee of Gisborne District Council argued that seismic testing should not be considered a permitted activity in the Gisborne District given the potential harm it can cause to sea life.

“While the District Council is only responsible for the marine coastal environment out to the 12 nautical mile limit, we have a responsibility to protect that environment from the effects of activities that may occur beyond 12 miles. We also have a responsibility as stewards of the region and community leaders to advocate when central government has made a mistake.”

Mr Caddie cited recently published research from researchers at the Technical University of Catalonia in Barcelona that found the deaths of giant squid, washed up on Spanish beaches in 2001 and 2003, were caused by nearby oil and gas seismic surveys.

Environment and Conservation Organisations (ECO) of New Zealand said Spanish research into mass deaths of squid, cuttlefish and octopus showed organ damage in these creatures after just two hours exposure to low frequency noise from 50-400 hertz, or “acoustic smog”, due to oil and gas exploration and shipping.

“The scientists found that the organ that allows squid, octopus and cuttlefish to regulate their positions to balance and direct how and where they swim was damaged leaving the animals unable to move or to feed and vulnerable to predators,” ECO co-chair Barry Weeber said.

Mr Caddie said the activity of the Orient Explorer survey ship is putting all sea life is at risk with sonic booms from sonar gun arrays of up to 259dB firing into the sea floor. “Even the United States has stricter regulations on this activity than the New Zealand government. There is a federal register where the public have an opportunity to assess the proposed seismic testing activity. The applicant has to detail every piece of equipment to be used, with comprehensive information on the acoustic source specifications, the level of activity being undertaken and the estimated impacts on the marine environment.

Mr Caddie said the level of government hypocrisy was reaching new heights given the pressure New Zealand put on Russia last year to stop oil and gas companies using seismic testing in whale migration and breeding areas. “DOC guidelines specifically identify from now until October as the time of year most likely to have negative impacts on whales as they migrate.

Studies published last year by researchers from Cornell Laboratory of Ornithology and the University of Zurich suggest seismic testing has a significant impact on whales, which rely on acoustic signalling for communication, orientation, locating prey and predators:

The sounds from marine exploration surveys are one of several anthropogenic noise sources that have been identified as eliciting behavioural reactions in marine mammals. Seismic surveys rely on systems that produce impulsive, high intensity sounds (190–250 dB re 1 µPa, peak to peak), with most energy below 200 Hz. The peak frequencies of these sounds overlap the acoustic signals and estimated hearing ranges of baleen whales. Such acoustic interference could reduce a whale’s ability to detect biologically relevant signals. With the increase in oil and gas prospecting surveys into deeper waters, there is sparse knowledge on the acoustic responses of baleen whales to sounds from seismic exploration.

Our results clearly show that blue whales change their calling behaviour in response to a low-medium power technology that is presumed to have minor environmental impact. Reducing an individual’s ability to detect socially relevant signals could therefore affect biologically important processes. This study suggests careful reconsideration of the potential behavioural impacts of even low source level seismic survey sounds on large whales.”





Bring it on!

22 04 2011

As pressure grows on the Government and the industry to justify their cavalier approach to deep sea petroleum exploration they cannot seem to provide any assurances. This is encouraging as it means it will be only a matter of time before the threat of losing an election over their indefensible position will mean both major parties support a ban on deep sea exploration and extraction.

The main claims the politicians and lobbyists are clinging on to now seem to be: (a) the economic potential outweighs the risks; (b) adequate regulations will be in place before any drilling commences; and (c) any environmental or economic risks associated with their activities are born entirely by the mining companies and their insurers.

Let’s look at those claims…

  1. Economic Potential: By investing so much political and financial capital in backing big oil, the Government denies New Zealand the prosperity that would come from such investment being made in home grown clean technology. We could be world leaders in this sector but instead their plan locks us into a dangerous and polluting energy future. A more energy independent nation would make us less exposed to oil and gas price shocks. In 2009 Price Waterhouse Coopers estimated our clean technology market could be worth between 7.5 to 22 billion, representing up to 17% of the economy, while oil and gas royalties that year earned only $965m. And while the East Coast wears the risk of another oil disaster, the industry acknowledges that no jobs on the rigs are likely to go to locals. So without even taking into account the massive, potentially criminal, risk our district is being exposed to by deep sea exploration, the numbers by themselves don’t stack up.
  2. Adequate Regulation: No amount of regulation short of banning deep sea exploration will provide proper protection against another disaster. The US agency responsible for regulating deep sea exploration says it will be many years before they can establish a regime that will even minimise (let alone one that could eliminate) risks to the environment and workers. Regulators acknowledge it is a complex, highly technical and inherently risky activity they are charged with overseeing. After all the investigations and regulation strengthening, Petrobras was the first company permitted to resume deep water extraction and almost caused a second disaster last month, a riser broke away from the seabed and it would have started leaking oil if it happened a few days later. Rig inspection is obviously inadequate protection from a large earthquake or simple equipment failure as happened last month for Petrobras. The national ‘oil spill preparedness’ plan consists largely of three small vessels that are limited to inshore responses, the Gulf disaster required hundreds of vessels and we are much more isolated.
  3. User Pays for Accident: BP lost over US$100 million in value following the Deepwater Horizon accident. There is a real risk that such an event could bankrupt Petrobras and while insurers may struggle cover the financial cost of any cleanup, no money could pay for the environmental, social and cultural damage inflicted, and little, if any, compensation would be paid for the economic impact on fishing, tourism and other sectors. The containment system eventually used for the Deepwater Horizon well cannot be deployed beyond 2,500 metres and the Raukumara Basin goes beyond 3,000 metres in many places. The blowout preventers in use today remain incapable of handling a well rupture of the force of the BP blast. The containment system developed by the industry to respond to another blowout has not been tested in real-life conditions and, by the industry’s own estimate, could still allow hundreds of thousands of barrels of oil to spew before a runaway well could be capped. Hekia Parata admitted under questioning from Green party members in Parliament that there are no assessments of environmental effects or risks contained in the permit and the safety record of Petrobras was never looked at by officials prior to granting the permit.

The corporate PR advisors (what the industry calls ‘communications counsellors’) are obviously being paid too much if that is all they’ve got!





Reality check…

7 04 2011

Whangaparāoa SH35

 

Opinion Piece: 7 April 2011

- – - – -

The Gisborne Herald Editorial on 4 April needs a reality check.

Petrobras is not a good operator, they have been responsible and roundly criticised for numerous environmental disasters and human deaths in Brazil and further afield. They are a world leader in deep water drilling, which is increasingly desperate and dangerous given the scarcity of easy oil.

Just two weeks ago Petrobras was involved in a major incident in the Gulf of Mexico. Eight days after US regulators allowed Petrobras to start deep sea extraction one of the 8000-foot long production risers fell to the sea floor after the chain connecting it to its 130 ton buoyancy can failed. There are no reports of any hydrocarbon release at this stage, however Petrobras has not yet commented on the incident. So Petrobras have had a major incident before they even start the job!

Natural gas is not a ‘clean-burning fuel’, according to the US Energy Information Administration, worldwide the burning of natural gas (which is mostly methane) produces nearly 5 billion tons of CO2 each year, which is just behind oil and coal emissions.

The Petrobras permit is not just for gas, it includes oil as well. Hekia Parata’s spin is that it is now a ‘research’ permit – that ‘research’ requires the company to drill an exploratory well unless they run away from Cape Runaway at one of the two permit surrender milestones.

Petrobras has confirmed it will be based out of the Port of Tauranga, and talking to Coasties who have worked on rigs overseas and don’t want one here, I can’t see how it will create a single job for the Gisborne district.

Major gas finds are not going to lead to cheaper electricity in New Zealand. Any petroleum extracted would no longer be New Zealand owned, the government has very clearly said it would be taken by the multinationals to sell on the international market (or possibly taken back to Brazil in the case of Petrobras).

There are no effective ‘environmental protections’ for deep sea petroleum extraction, the new practice is experimental at best and the only way to guarantee a disaster does not happen is to not let them drill. As we have seen in the Gulf last week, where the review and strengthening of regulations has been second to none, deep sea drilling is simply too unpredictable. The Raukumara Basin has an average of three tremors per day and regularly has earthquakes over 5 on the Rhicter scale, it is twice as deep as the Deepwater Horizon well that blew out last year and Taranaki wells are in only 100-150m of water so they are no way comparable.

I’m not sure what the Editor bases his claim on that ‘a majority of New Zealanders hope Petrobras strike a major gas field of East Cape’. In a poll of over 12,000 people this week only 12% said they thought fossil fuels should be a government priority for our energy future.

New Zealand certainly has become a frontier for new exploration, and a frontier in the struggle of communities that rely on their local environment for survival against corporations who rely on exploiting anything they can for their survival. The wellbeing of our district should not be put on the auction block in the interests of foreign corporations.

- – - -

GH Editorial reply 7/4/11: http://gisborneherald.co.nz/opinion/editorial/?id=22178

 

 





You Give Ludd a Bad Name…

1 04 2011
-
-
Opponents of Petrobras drilling off East Cape have been labelled Luddites. This month is the 200th anniversary of the British Luddite protests and I appreciated Mark Engler‘s exploration in ‘Dissent‘ magazine of whether or not those demonstrators of old should really be described as anti-progress.
The Luddites did not oppose technology per se, but rather asked some important questions about the ends to which new technological discoveries were being used and who in society would benefit from them.
The original Luddites were neither opposed to technology nor inept at using it. Many were highly skilled machine operators in the textile industry. Nor was the technology they attacked particularly new.
The Luddite disturbances started when British working class families at the start of the 19th century were enduring economic upheaval and widespread unemployment. The war against Napoleon had ‘brought the hard pinch of poverty to homes where it had previously been a stranger’. Food was scarce and rapidly becoming more costly. Then, on March 11, 1811, in Nottingham, a textile manufacturing centre, British troops broke up a crowd of protesters demanding more work and better wages.
That night, angry workers smashed textile machinery in a nearby village. Similar attacks occurred nightly at first, then sporadically, and then in waves, eventually spreading across a 70-mile swath of northern England. Fearing a national movement, the government positioned thousands of soldiers to defend factories and Parliament passed a measure to make machine-breaking a capital offense.
As the Industrial Revolution began, workers naturally worried about being displaced by increasingly efficient machines. But the Luddites themselves were totally fine with machines. They confined their attacks to manufacturers who used machines in what they called “a fraudulent and deceitful manner” to get around standard labour practices. They just wanted machines that made high-quality goods and they wanted these machines to be run by workers who had gone through an apprenticeship and got paid decent wages. Those were their only concerns.
Ironically opponents of oil and gas exploration in the Raukumara Basin are calling for more investment in clean technologies like solar and electric vehicles to replace our reliance on old technology. Arguments about technology (much like those about deep sea oil and gas drilling) often come down to legitimate debates over values. I would like to see some more discussion on competing values in the current debates on mining in this country.
One of the more prominent supporters of the Luddites is poet-farmer Wendell Berry. Berry writes: “Like almost everybody else, I am hooked to the energy corporations, which I do not admire. I hope to become less hooked to them. In my work, I try to be as little hooked to them as possible. As a farmer, I do almost all of my work with horses. As a writer, I work with pencil or a pen and a piece of paper.” When branded a Luddite, Berry rises to the group’s defense. “These were people who dared to assert that there were needs and values that justly took precedence over industrialisation,” he writes; “they were people who rejected the determinism of technological innovation and economic exploitation.”
We would do well to maintain such skepticism today, Berry contends. He does not reject new inventions out of hand. He flies in airplanes, drives a car, and cuts wood with a chainsaw. But he is not willing to accept technological “advances” for their own sake. He challenges us to ask “what higher aim” each new innovation serves, and what its likely impact on our communities will be.




Local Govt Transport Congress 2011

29 03 2011

In early February I attended the Local Government NZ Transport Congress, it was designed to determine local government transport priorities over the next three years. There were a number of interesting presentations (see three below) – Martin Mathews (CEO, Ministry of Transport) had a particularly interesting presentation focusing on upcoming challenges including peak oil and rapidly rising fuel costs, climate change and new technology – he said it was a ‘no brainer’ that these realities need to be factored into future transport planning scenarios.

The outcome of it all was LGNZ President Lawrence Yule took some leadership and decided LGNZ would establish a working group to refine LGNZ positions based on feedback coming out of the Congress. There was a strong focus on sustainable transport funding and maintenance over new build, also surprisingly for nearly all participants there was acknowledgement that in the face of rising fuel costs and reducing central government support for roading, communities might need to change their expectations and there was little call for more money and rather a focus on how to spend what is available better. There were still tensions between metro authorities focus on public transport and things like cycleways – and provincial councils focus on rural road maintenance but the divisions were apparently no where near as stark as they have been in the past. Rural councils were accepting that not every back road is going to get sealed and metro councils agreed there needed to be ongoing support for local roads that contribute a lot of value to the national economy. There was strong opposition to the Minister’s prioritising so called ‘Roads of National Significance’.

The March 2011 Quarterly Review (QR) put out by LGNZ, page 6 has a synopsis of the outcome of the Transport Congress.
Seems to a few of us who have been in touch since the Congress we helped to get some important points agreed especially the following:
- advocate for a transport network which is resilient against natural disasters, oil and energy constraints, economic impacts and societal changes;
- facilitate the development of an enduring transport ‘vision’ which has community and multi-partisan support and drives future investment choices;
These both appear to be things that regional and local authorities who care about the environment and communities need to be active in pushing because otherwise we may get things like the following outcome (which was also agreed at the forum) taking priority: ‘work to ensure transport investment matches the real needs of the economy and takes external influences into account’ (note it says economy rather than society).
The other aspect that concerns me is that there was no explicit mention, in the agreed outcomes, of land use planning being integrated with transport planning, despite it being identified at the forum.
I look forward to seeing how they come up with the working group to progress these priorities.

PRESENTATIONS:

 





Increasing Equality

24 03 2011

The Spirit Level has some exciting implications for the Gisborne District. No surprises that in our community wealth and health inequalities are more pronounced than most other places around New Zealand. Also not surprisingly, inequalities here are largely, though not exclusively, aligned with ethnicity (Europeans/Pākeha control nearly 93% of the national net worth but only comprise 83% of the population, while Māori make up over 10% but only own 4% of the wealth) and age (young people have much higher ratio of debt to assets than older people), and to a lesser extent gender.

While the factors contributing to this situation are largely historical and circumstantial, there are things that can be done today to create a more equal community if that was something we aspired to. The Spirit Level certainly provides strong evidence as to why reducing inequalities is an important goal but there is a fundamental change in values that needs to take place if equality is something we make a community goal for Gisborne.

Massey University published research last year that showed over the past 30 years New Zealanders have drifted away from our egalitarian roots and now more people than ever do not believe equality should be a goal for our society. Commentators have linked this shift with the rise of radical political ideology of free market economics that has dominated New Zealand government policy since the mid-1980s. So now we have a more unequal society where 10% of the population own more than half of the wealth, more half the population own less than 7% of wealth and a steady trend is that a decreasing proportion of people own their home. But more importantly, less people than ever think we should be aiming for a reduction in the disparities between the haves and the have nots. As Midnight Oil sang ‘the rich are getting richer, the poor get the picture’. Another trend down is that less and less of the value produced by the country is held by New Zealanders, and a increasing proportion of the population have a decreasing net value. The Treasury technocrats who have pushed what Professor Jane Kelsey dubbed ‘The New Zealand Experiment’ have been very successful in terms of shifting our thinking as a country.

While this ideology has been espoused by some outspoken local civic and business leaders for a generation, it is pleasing to see some of have moved on and a new, hopefully more enlightened set of leaders is emerging.

Tim Jackson’s book “Prosperity Without Growth” and Michael Shuman’s “Going Local” have been influencing my thinking on economic policy and his recommendations for local and national economies are closely aligned with the thesis of The Spirit Level authors.

I am very interested in looking at how Council policies on rating for example has been used over the past ten years in a way that may have the effect of shifting more of the rates burden onto those who can least afford it. I think we should also be looking carefully at how public policies can make it easier or harder for big box retailers owned by foreigners to setup here and effectively shut down our mainstreet’s family-owned businesses.

I think a fair and active democracy requires that we try to give everyone an opportunity to make positive contributions to the community, fairness doesn’t mean we have to treat everyone the same. If people live in different circumstances then treating them differently is justified. The level of opposition to the Voter Participation Project focused on neighbourhoods that have poor election turnout was a great case in point. Either opposers have a very base understanding of what it means to be fair or they were motivated by some irrational fear or bias against trying to encourage poor people to vote in an informed manner.

While The Spirit Level has had it’s detractors and critics (largely politically motivated some claim), the authors have responded resoundingly to questions raised and a global movement is developing aimed at raising public and political awareness about the benefits of reducing the gap between the wealthy and poorest citizens within a country and community. The Equality Trust established by the authors of The Spirit Level has a guide for local groups and I would be keen to hear from anyone interested in forming a Gisborne group to look more closely at the current situation on things like wage ratios in local businesses and implications for Council policy positions that do or not include increasing equality as a goal.

Wilkinson and Pickett, The Spirit Level authors, have clearly demonstrated through peer-reviewed empirical evidence that the more equal a society is, the happier, healthier and less stressed, better educated and less likely to be a victim of crime everyone is. I’m as keen as anyone else to get beyond the ‘them’ and ‘us’ mentality that has grown with the increasing gap between rich and poor, can we find others who want to explore these opportunities?





Neighbours Day Everyday…

21 03 2011

I met a wonderful couple this week, grandparents with huge hearts for their family and for other local families. Born into poor circumstances themselves, this couple know what it is like to really struggle. They have tragedies in their own extended family to deal with but wanted to know how they could help Kaiti kids reach their potential.

These grandparents want to connect with other people their age and younger ones to talk about how their generation can make more useful contributions to young families in Gisborne.

We talked a bit about Tairāwhiti Positive Aging Trust and other groups that support seniors to be active in wider community life. Healthy churches, marae and sports clubs are still great places for intergenerational relationships to be nurtured and life lessons passed on to younger people.

Neighbours Day this weekend is an opportunity for us to think about the people we live close to but may not feel close to. When we reestablish trust and care within our streets it has been proven to reduce crime, increase safety, school attendance, health and happiness. Every one of us should know that when we have reason to worry, celebrate or grieve, someone will notice and someone will care. Many people in our communities don’t have that support and it is so encouraging to hear when residents are willing to make an effort to be that special someone for a neighbour or family in need.

I also met with a young man this week who is concerned about neighbourhood safety and, with signatures of support from everyone in his street, has been trying to get Council to install speed inhibitors to prevent another crash that could injure or kill a child. Whether or not he succeeds with his campaign for the speed bumps or chicanes (I certainly hope he does), it is awesome to see young people taking responsibility for making their neighbourhood a safe and enjoyable place for those who live there and visit the area.

It has been heartening to see the people willing to make the effort to present their ideas and concerns to Council committees and public meetings over the last few weeks.

Submissions on the Draft Annual Plan are due by 31 March. Whether or not the local stuff you care about is mentioned in the Plan, it is an essential part of the democratic process and you can make a submission about anything you are passionate about.

In the future I’m keen to look at extending the influence residents and (direct and indirect) ratepayers have on the Council budget. Participatory budgeting is a small but energetic movement through which ordinary people directly decide how a portion of their municipal budget is spent. Pioneered in Porto Alegre, Brazil in 1990 as a democratisation strategy, the process has spread to over 1,200 cities around the world. From Cologne in Germany to Entebbe in Uganda, the concept is giving more people more control over how their tax dollars are spent locally. An interesting discovery through the models developed to date is that as residents spend time deliberating on the budget with their neighbours they start making decisions based on the collective good rather than individual interests.

Perhaps on Neighbours Day this weekend you could have a conversation about what would be the collective good for your street and the district as a whole? Oh, and please let us know what you decide.





Happy New Year

27 12 2010

So there goes 2010, and as 2011 rolls in we see petrol going over $2.00/litre in town, which probably means $2.50 up the Coast. This year the International Energy Agency referred to Peak Oil in the past tense, saying output will never again get to the “all-time peak of 70 million barrels per day reached in 2006.” Global demand for oil is increasing exponentially and the cost of production is going up as the stuff gets harder to extract.

The good news is that while the New Zealand government has acknowledged the need to plan for life beyond cheap oil, so has a growing number of Gisborne people. Planning to adapt our lifestyles seems like a better strategy than having change forced on us.

Local residents face similar challenges if we like the lifestyle the district offers. Gisborne District Council is an entity we pay money to that ensures decent roads, safe drinking water, some agreement about who can do what where and the provision of other basic services essential to maintaining our quality of life.

There has been a lot of column space dedicated recently to complaints about rates rises for some sectors of the community and suggestions we should cut Council services or delay maintenance and replacement work.

Despite all the table thumping, the good news is that a significant proportion of ratepayers will have a reduction in their rates and the vast majority will probably have an increase of less than $2 per week.

With the Reserve Bank predicting inflation of five percent next year, we should thank staff and the former Council for ensuring the average rates rises are well below inflation. While farmers and some businesses complain about the rises, we should compare them with last year when residential property owners in the city were hardest hit and faced increases in the poorest parts of town of over 16%. So we all have to do our share and while legislation prevents rates from being used as a mechanism for wealth redistribution, if you have a multi million dollar property that is also a business, you expect to contribute a bit more than the average.

As a recent editorial pointed out, Gisborne is no longer in the highest bracket for rates in the country and while we have high levels of poverty we also have a lean Council, expensive rural roading and flood protection infrastructure to maintain in the face of decreasing central government support.

Gisborne has 360,000 hectares of grassland, 150,000 hectares of planted trees, 40,000 hectares of native bush and 9,000 hectares of horticulture.

Gisborne also has huge areas of ‘Maori land’ a lot of which is termed ‘unproductive’ (because it’s not being intensively farmed or forested) and ‘unrateable’ (because the multiple owners are either deceased or impossible to track down to recover rates from).

If a fraction of the time, passion and resources committed by councillors, staff and lobby groups to cutting Council services was redirected into developing a strategy for attracting long-term residents to the district, we could have a really effective campaign.

Part of such a strategy should focus on attracting Maori with connections to Te Tairawhiti to come home to work and build on the ancestral land everyone seems so proud of.

We also have a great opportunity to profile our community as a potential new home for the thousands of visitors here over summer. We have no traffic jams (except at New Years!), no air pollution, no crowded waves, no in-fill housing, no crass multinational strip malls… in fact, there’s not much here except a beautiful environment, laid back lifestyles and a lot of very friendly people.





Knowledge-Based Economy

11 11 2010
I’ve made some comments in the last couple of days (in my first Council committee meetings) about the need for us to put more emphasis on knowledge-based economic opportunities rather than just relying on low value, high volume exports and/or processing. I was asked to elaborate, so here are some ways Council might be involved in this issue:
(a) when Councillors speak in public on what we individually or collectively see the future prospects for the local economy are I think we have an opportunity, maybe even a responsibility, to help the community imagine what could be rather than just what is obvious;
(b) in our advocacy on behalf of the region and Council planning processes we could do everything we can to ensure that things like ultra-fast broadband, secure power supply, light industrial zones and central government investment in research and development are secured as quickly and adequately as possible – I know much of this Council has been involved with but I’m not sure the commitment, particularly from Councillors, has been as strategic or sustained as it needs to be if we want to be better positioned sooner rather than later;
(c) we can partner with other key stakeholders – like the Chamber, Polytech, runanga, NZTE and others – to develop a world-leading campaign to proactively let knowledge-based NZ and foreign businesses know all the reasons why Gisborne is the place they should be located – we have 20,000 mostly upper-middle class, educated students/graduates pouring into the district every year to party and it sounds like this year may be the first time they will get something tangible that could influence their thinking about relocating here for work, lifestyle, family, etc. The problem is there is no well thought through, comprehesive campaign that has our whole community buy-in. Someone asked who would fund such a thing – I think there are entities around that would invest in such a strategy if it was properly developed, based evidence of what has worked elsewhere and had wide local support. Tauranga struck it lucky last year when a small lab there discovered a new way of creating Titanium compounds – that team had central government support and is now looking like a $10b knowledge-based industry that will be located in their region for as long as they want it (nevermind where the Titanium comes from); and
(d) our regional expertise is growing food, farming and increasingly forestry (with still a fair bit of unique culture and lifestyle on the Coast that has some real tourist potential if it can be managed carefully) – food production is a massive global issue – we could encourage government R&D investment in this region – there is hundreds of millions available in multi-year research grants and there are a few groups here that have accessed some in partnership with CRI’s, etc. This is a major interest for runanga too – but our region probably has one of the lowest rates of access to this funding which in turn could be the basis for whole new industries and technical knowledge that can exported around the world.
Ideally an Economic Development Agency would lead this kind of thinking and suggest ways for GDC to get in behind bids, campaigns, etc. But in the absence of an EDA I think we should be working with ECT, runanga, horticulture/agriculture/forestry industries, the Ministry for Research Science & Technology and Foundation for Science, Research & Technology on some plans to establish at least one maybe two specialist research centres here in the next five years.
There are some other opportunities that I have been discussing with local stakeholders like the government’s interest in establishing NZ as an international funds administration hub for the Asia-Pacific region and their expressed intention, subject to a report recently submitted by an independent working group of experts that advises on legislative implications, to find a provincial centre that could be the incubator for this new industry which would require hundreds if not thousands of clerical positions – but also needs reliable electricity and high speed broadband. Not a highly educated workforce or the highest paying jobs, but well above what our average wages are now and some significant population growth potential to spread the rates burden (and would no doubt bring some new challenges).
Anyway, those are just a few of my quick thoughts on the subject – I hope we can keep progressing the conversation further.




Profile & Priorities

14 09 2010

Te Poho-o-Rawiri, Waitangi Day, 2010

I am standing for Council because I want to encourage much more public participation in discussions and decisions about the future for our communities. Diversity around the council table is important so the district leadership truly reflects the people they serve and we all move ahead together.

I moved to Gisborne with my wife Natasha Koia in 1998 to provide care for her elderly grandparents. We still live with her grandmother and now have our own family with two young children.

I have a degree in communication design, a post-graduate teaching qualification and have worked as a graphic designer, teacher, researcher and community organiser. My research and project management business was established in 2004 with local, national and international clients including the Ministry of Social Development, Ministry of Education and The World Bank. I currently hold governance roles with the Board of Trustees for Waikirikiri School and Presbyterian Support East Coast, and I served three years on the board of the NZ Council for International Development.

More information about my priorities, track record and a list of respected locals who endorse my election are available at: www.manu.org.nz

- – - – -

Question 1. Rates

Our region currently has huge infrastructure, transport and energy costs, low incomes and limited employment options. I would support Council appointment of a skilled advocate to influence central government so that any impact of national regulations are fully understood and compensated for by central government not ratepayers.

GDC needs to get much smarter at securing external resourcing for major projects. We need much more sophisticated negotiation skills to make the case for private and public investment in local infrastructure.

We should establish a ‘50,000 Taskforce’ with the goal of reaching this population by 2020. Design and implement an aggressive national and international marketing campaign to attract world class talent to relocate to the region bringing expertise and increased earnings.

- – - – -

Question 2. Infrastructure

Cycling and walking needs to be made much easier and safer than it is at present.

We need to urgently establish alternatives to more logging trucks in the city. We need the companies benefitting to pay for the constant road upgrades required.

The rail needs a rescue plan in place by April – based on a robust study of the options not rushed reports.

We need ultra-fast free broadband to every home by 2012.

We need a bylaw requiring all rental homes to pass a Warrant of Fitness to reduce the negative health, education, financial and social outcomes from substandard housing.

The community needs to think about and decide how we best support local businesses and how much big box retail we want in our town. We should take a different development path to places like Tauranga.

- – - – -

Question 3. Council involvement with economic and community development

The sobering social and economic issues in our region are not just statistics – they have faces and names as friends, family and neighbours.

Council doesn’t need to lead economic development but needs to ensure it is smart and takes into account potential impacts on social, environmental and cultural wellbeing. Similarly council doesn’t need to lead community development but needs to work with residents and other stakeholders to ensure communities lead their own development.

Local authorities should have a key role in coordinating central government funding coming into our region for social and economic development to make sure it is lined up with local priorities. I will encourage council support for residents groups at neighbourhood and village level to determine local priorities and development plans.

Question 4. Council provision of facilities and events for young people

Council doesn’t need to provide these directly, but should work with young people, community organisations and businesses to develop more opportunities for young people. This could include computer clubhouses, homework centres, all ages music venues, business incubators, community gardens, and sports and recreation facilities.

Young people are full citizens and Council should provide a non-voting seat for the Tairawhiti Youth Council around the Council table and on all committees.

- – - – -

Question 5. Biggest environmental problems

Significant challenges facing the district include farm and beach erosion, waterway sedimentation, agro-chemical pollution, minerals exploration, native habitat destruction, increased risk from extreme weather and our dependence on oil-based energy.

However one of the most important issues is the need to secure a collective commitment to adjust our lifestyles to ensure future generations are also able to enjoy the abundance we have been blessed with.

Council should lead by example – using more solar energy, providing loans paid off by rates for solar water heating, switching to hybrid vehicles, using bicycles around the CBD and planting vegetables in public gardens.

Council should facilitate more environmental education and community action and establish a regional Environmental Forum with statutory agencies, businesses and non-government organisations to identify, plan and monitor action to address priority environmental issues.

- – - – -





Rental Housing WOF basics…

23 08 2010


The housing fitness standard (that could be a WOF for rentals) comprises a set of nine conditions and amenity requirements deemed to be the minimum necessary for a dwelling house to be fit for human habitation:
1. Have a suitably located lavatory for the exclusive use of the tenants
2. Have a bath and shower and wash hand basin with hot and cold water
3. Have satisfactory facilities for the preparation and cooking of food, including a sink with hot and cold water
4. Have an adequate supply of wholesome water
5. Have an effective system for the drainage of foul waste and surface water.
6. Have an adequate provision for lighting heating and ventilation
7. Be free from dampness prejudicial to the health of tenants.
8. Be free from serious disrepair.
9. Be structurally sound.

Ref: Decent_Housing_Standards – Kevin Reilly





WOF for rental properties?

21 08 2010

Gisborne housing advocates are welcoming news that University of Otago researchers have developed a housing quality index that could be used as a Warrant of Fitness before any property is rented to tenants.

“We have been talking about ways to ensure every rental property in Gisborne is safe and not contributing to health problems for tenants, particularly the elderly and children” said Manu Caddie, Convenor of the Tairawhiti Housing Advisory Group.

The housing quality index is a comprehensive check-list which trained people can use to grade and report on a property’s attributes and defects from the ground up. While the check-list is not widely used yet, researcher Dr Michael Keall said it could be that, in the future, homeowners could commission such a report for tenants.

The index, the first of its kind in New Zealand, has been developed over the past five years by He Kainga Organa Housing and Health Research Programme staff, including Dr Keall, at the university’s Wellington campus.

Dr Keall is recognised as a world expert on measuring the health impacts of homes and said work on the index was done in collaboration with the Building Research Association of New Zealand (Branz) and based on a similar check-list produced in the UK.

At 42 pages, it was “quite comprehensive” but Mr Caddie suggested that it could be administered for less than the cost of one week’s rent.

“It will be a long time before something like this becomes law, but if there was enough support locally it may be possible to introduce a by-law requiring landlords to provide prospective tenants with an independent assessment based on the new index” said Mr Caddie.

Mr Caddie is standing for the City Ward of Gisborne District Council in upcoming elections and says if elected he would seek Council support to investigate the likely costs and benefits of administering such a system.

“I have been a landlord and I know how easy it is to lose money on rental properties, but I am also aware of some shocking rentals and at present there is nothing that requires landlords to ensure minimum safety and health standards are adhered to.”

Mr Caddie believes such a system would help property owners ensure the value of their assets was maintained and having an independent assessment before renting could be useful when there are disputes over damage allegedly caused by tenants.

- – - – - -

References:

http://sustainablecities.org.nz/members/michael-keall

www.healthyhousing.org.nz





A goal is not a strategy

21 08 2010

A report released this week from independent think tank The New Zealand Institute should be compulsory reading for all local leaders. ‘A goal is not a strategy’ concludes that New Zealand needs to get more businesses to establish themselves overseas, ensure we have a high skilled, well supported workforce and put more focus on the science and technology of industries like farming, forestry and fishing.

The report concludes that lifting labour productivity depends on improving things like entrepreneurship, innovation, skills, investment and natural resources.

The report suggests New Zealand’s most important export sectors – tourism, agriculture, and manufacturing – have lower than average productivity so simply growing these activities without also substantially lifting productivity will not lift GDP per capita.

There are many opportunities in the areas Gisborne excels at, such as agriculture, horticulture and tourism. But information, communications and technology (ICT) and niche manufacturing, along with value-added goods and services based on primary production, are where we need to invest most aggressively.

Ngati Porou schools with support from the Ministry of Education have invested millions in ICT over the past ten years, Lytton High School has been producing world class computing graduates and some of our most successful local entrepreneurs found success through internationalising their business.

I was at the Federated Farmers presentation to the Community Development Committee of Gisborne District Council last week and have some sympathy for their frustrations about the high value of our currency. As the son of a farming family, in the early 1980s I saw similar stress on farming families from record droughts and 24% interest rates.

The reality is that unless our primary production sectors make a quantum shift from high volume, low value exports into new knowledge and technology based goods and services our region will be left behind. Local leaders need to get much better at building the case for attracting some of the billions available for research and scientific investment in our primary industries. The world is hungry and looking for more sustainable production of both food and construction materials. While we cannot feed and house the planet, we can provide new technology and productivity skills to other countries. Organics, biofuels, renewable energy are all industries with massive growth potential this century.

So, where is the strategy for retaining and attracting talent to our district? How can we support local businesses to internationalise their expertise? What are we doing about the social issues that impact on our children and their ability to reach their full potential? What is the Plan B once transport costs make our low value exports even less competitive? Who is doing the thinking and influencing to help our region step up as a model for the rest of the country?

The proposed Economic Development Agency has great potential to lead some of this work provided that it avoids being captured by special interest groups; appreciates the interdependent relationship between social, economic and environmental wellbeing; and encourages the development of national educational leadership from local schools.

We live in a region that has everything going for it – a wealth of natural resources, rich cultural heritage, world class innovators, a clean environment and caring community. We don’t need to follow the path of places like Tauranga that might have gained the world but in the process lost its soul.

Our regional development strategy has to be smart and sustainable in a way that enhances our communities, economic security and natural environment.





Universal Access for Gisborne?

1 08 2010

A recent survey of households in Kaiti found that 90% have a mobile phone and more than one in three have broadband internet in the home. Gisborne residents are obviously committed to using new technology to help with communication, education and involvement in society.

Given the isolation of our region relative to the big cities and overseas markets, access to high speed internet access and affordable information technology should be the centre-piece of any plan for a prosperous region.

High-speed wireless internet access for all residents is becoming a top priority for local authorities around the world.  Whanganui District Council has just subsidised free wireless to two low income neighbourhoods in their town and in Canada advertising is being used to sponsor wireless access to poor neighbourhoods. Given the high access rates charged by the telecommunications companies in New Zealand, electronic infrastructure is quickly being recognised as a public good that requires democratic control rather than just private owners.

Gisborne District councilors wouldn’t even allow staff to setup a Facebook page for the Annual Plan this year. Thankfully Corporate Affairs Manager Douglas Burt has championed Council involvement in broadband initiatives and projects like Computers in Homes and getting broadband to all our rural communities.

Bristol City Council over the past twelve months has been using Participatory Budgeting, including online ways for citizens to set the city spending. The council put aside funds for three city wards to allocate spending through an online discussion.

To carry out the project, the council used Open Source (free) software which enables residents to suggest ideas for what the money should be spent on, and allows other citizens to vote for the ideas they support. While the final decision on spending can’t legally rest with ‘the internet’, the council committed to stick by the decisions made by participants, so long as they are legal.

Half way through the pilot project results are showing that 130 people had registered on the site, a participation rate that is much larger than the numbers who usually turn up to public consultation meetings.

The age of participants has moved down about twenty years in age compared with attendees at traditional public meetings, showing 40% of participants are under the age of 40.

The site asked people who responded to state their location, and this has shown that most respondents come from the three wards in which the funding will be spent. So people are engaging in their local area, but others are having their say too, just as intended, especially given one of the wards covers the city centre, used by pretty much all residents from time to time.

Gisborne District Council will be interested to know that a sizable proportion of the ideas submitted in Bristol turned out not to need funding at all, and could be undertaken right away. These ranged from some ideas actually being issues that could be passed on directly to council officers for action, to users being able to help each other. In one instance, a user suggested it would be good to fund having bus timetables on your mobile phone, and another replied saying that they’d already worked out how to do it, and gave instructions on how to do so!

The council has thus benefitted from another channel for receiving customer feedback as well as encouraging the wisdom of crowds, in addition to the benefits hoped for by the project itself.

Universal access to high speed broadband is fundamental to transforming the economic performance of Gisborne but a key question is whether or not prospective councilors and local voters consider this infrastructure essential for the future of our region.





Local Procurement for Local Employment

24 07 2010

Responding to: “Council defends its ‘out-of-town’ spend” (Gisborne Herald 23/07/10)

- – - – - – - – -

Responding to what he says is half-hearted interest in the issue by Gisborne District Council, city ward candidate Manu Caddie says if elected he will support the introduction of greater weightings to local economic benefit in Council procurement policy.
Mr Caddie has been working with an economist in Wellington to develop a transparent mechanism for procurement processes that give consideration to local employment benefits in addition to quality of service and overall price.
“Just because you can measure locality in different ways doesn’t mean you should ignore it” said Mr Caddie who believes Council has a dual role to get best value for ratepayers and to promote local prosperity and resilience.
“The most sustainable way to build  local prosperity is to reduce unemployment and improve social stability. Council and the District Health Board can play a valuable role in developing and retaining local expertise to grow industries”.
Mr Caddie supports the establishment of a section on the Council and DHB websites for companies interested in doing business with the local authorities.
“There needs to be an easy to understand explanation of the organisation’s commitment to doing business locally, a guide for interested providers and an enquiry form to express interest in working together.”
In the United Kingdom the government has introduced a successful Small Business (SME) Friendly Concordat that provides a set of principles for local authorities to support local businesses and a diverse marketplace.
“Well documented examples from all over the UK and other parts of the world show how local authorities can design and deliver procurement processes in ways that suit their circumstances and align with the goals of improved effectiveness, efficiency and local economy” said Mr Caddie.
Mr Caddie said he plans to present the proposal as part of his election ‘mini-manifesto’ to be released in August.
- – - – -




Cold comfort from Ministry of Economic Development

13 07 2010

The Gisborne Herald Editorial on Saturday 10 July suggested that information provided by the Ministry of Economic Development should alleviate fears of a big oil spill in our waters. On the contrary, the surprising thing is how little concrete reassurance the MED information actually provides. I guess it is positive that the government is now willing to engage in a discussion with our community about the process they used for granting exploration rights for oil and gas off East Cape and the associated risk to our region.

MED quoting from Petrobras’ own website to justify its safety record reminds me of how Transocean Ltd, the operator of the Deepwater Horizon rig in the Gulf of Mexico, was also honoured by regulators for its safety record. The very day of the explosion, executives were aboard celebrating its seven straight years free of serious accidents!

While Petrobras say they are focused on gas reserves in the Raukumara Basin, we know the license is not restricted to gas exploration. The presence of oil in the area was a big selling point during the tendering process based on GNS seismic mapping and satellite imaging.

Is the Editorial’s claim that “the company now ranks well amongst its peers” supposed to give us confidence? Claiming that Petrobras is the biggest deep water oil producer in the world does not mean much given that the practice is so new and few companies are prepared to take the associated risks. The Gulf of Mexico disaster has demonstrated the inherent risk of any deep water drilling.

MED claims the statement that “The entire industry thought the BOP [blowout preventer] was adequate, but it wasn’t enough,” is unsupportable. The statement was made by Professor Segen Estefen from the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro who actually tests this kind of equipment for Petrobras and other companies. He was not referring just to the BOP used by the Deepwater Horizon rig but to the technology in general. In a television interview just last week Estefen said the BOP failure was “a big surprise, because the state-of-the-art contingency plans didn’t work in very deep waters”.  He said most oil companies that he has contact with were shocked at BP’s repeated failures to cap its damaged well.

If MED are ‘monitoring the US response’ and think ‘Norway is one excellent forward model for New Zealand’ to emulate, why has our government not put a hold on exploration licences like those two countries have, until the investigation determines what went wrong?

I also wonder how much of the information provided through MED came from Hill and Knowlton, the PR company working for Petrobras. Just this year Hill and Knowlton was awarded a million dollar (per annum) contract with Petrobras specifically to help the company sanitise deep water drilling in the face of growing public and political opposition. This is the same PR company that represented the tobacco industry for years after the link between tobacco and cancer was proven and duped the American public into supporting the first invasion of Iraq by using false testimony at congressional hearings. Petrobras is the 34th largest corporation in the world – I wonder what East Coast communities could do with $1m per year for research and PR to oppose the drilling plans?

The one helpful piece of information supplied by MED was the industry training programme that will try to turn around the trend of importing qualified oil and gas workers from overseas. This piece of good news is however, small consolation given the enormity of the risk our region is being exposed to.