All posts in the topic Green political issues for Canterbury (Short link)

Topic Navigation

Useful Links

Topics in Canterbury Public Issues Forum

Summary

There are 7 posts — by 4 authors — in this topic.
Latest post made by Brian Sandle at May 25 21:31 UTC

From: Andrew Groom Date: May 22 16:04 UTC Short link

Hi Ken,

Thanks for your introduction and welcome to the forum. While I
completely agree that we need to "think globally and act locally", this
is not a Canterbury-specific issue in itself. Also, I'm aware that all
the Green MPs we've ever had have been list MPs and therefore are
generally speaking to NZ-wide concerns.

So, if your goal was to win the electorate vote for Ilam as opposed to
getting in as a list MP, what single issue do you think the voters of
Ilam (me being one of them) would be most concerned about that the Green
Party could speak to, and what would you say to them ?

From: Kennedy GRAHAM Date: May 23 03:15 UTC Short link

Good question, Andrew.

I've recently brought together a small group to advise me on this issue of
'local sustainability', and we explored this. This is the summary of the
thoughts (which I put out in my name).
If you check the blog -- http://KenGraham.blogspot.com you will find the
background paper (under the Sue Kedgely/Ken Graham public meeting on 8 May)
which contains the excerpt below.

To answer you specific question on the single biggest issue, I tend to think it
would be water quality of our streams -- that is the barometer of quality
living.  A close second would be local vandalism and cycle paths & pedestrian
crossings for our roads.  Other issues such as price rises and student debt are
more national issues -- not to be ignored, but not specifically local.

The excerpt reads:
"
-	In Ilam, the ecological health of our streams (Upper Avon, Waimari, Ilam,
Okeover) is affected by urban development.  Contaminants off impermeable
surfaces are copper, lead & zinc particles.
-	The municipal water supply in our area was recently separated off from the
rest of Christchurch in water-quality reporting because of its inferior status,
drawn as it is primarily from rivers rather than the aquifer.
-	Local air quality has marginally improved but remains a problem in terms of
WHO standards.

Ilam residents confront several challenges.
Housing prices
-	Local CCC rents have just shot up 24%.  House prices have become untenable
for middle-income earners – a recent global survey rated NZ the most expensive
housing market, requiring 18½ years of average income to pay for an average
home.  Christchurch ranked as the 34th most expensive city for housing out of
227 around the world.
Food prices
-	Food prices increased 6% in the year ending March ’08.  Butter skyrocketed by
82%, cheese was up 44%, milk by 22%. In one month (Feb. to March), fresh
vegetables by 7%, bread by 3%.
Energy prices
-	In the year to March ’08, petrol increased 20.5% and electricity 6%.
Student debt
-	Student debt is now over $10 billion, growing at $1 b. each year – over
$16,000 per student (average graduate starting is $25,000).  Students in debt
rose 6% over the year, but enrolments from lower socio-economic background
dropped from 15% to 6% in three years.
Community deprivation
-	Economic deprivation is not absent from the Ilam electorate; there are areas
of affluence (Merivale and Fendalton) alongside areas of relative deprivation
(Riccarton and Jellie Park area).

Each of these local challenges is directly related to the issue of
unsustainable global-national actions.  Our national economy, one of the
smallest and most open in the world, is vulnerable to the stresses and strains
of the global economy.  We need greater national self-reliance, starting with
local agriculture – encouraging the trend for more community-based food
production and farmers’ markets. We should envision Christchurch and its
surroundings as a network of interlinking sustainable communities."

Happy to chat more on this.
Regards,
Ken

From: Brian Sandle Date: May 23 12:48 UTC Short link

Kennedy GRAHAM wrote:
> Good question, Andrew.
>
> I've recently brought together a small group to advise me on this issue of
'local sustainability', and we explored this. This is the summary of the
thoughts (which I put out in my name).
> If you check the blog -- http://KenGraham.blogspot.com you will find the
background paper (under the Sue Kedgely/Ken Graham public meeting on 8 May)
which contains the excerpt below.
>
> To answer you specific question on the single biggest issue, I tend to think
it would be water quality of our streams -- that is the barometer of quality
living.  A close second would be local vandalism and cycle paths & pedestrian
crossings for our roads.  Other issues such as price rises and student debt are
more national issues -- not to be ignored, but not specifically local.
The vandals are trying  to assert some sort of dominance maybe, to show
some sort of strength, and perhaps to asssert some sort of  indentity,
sadly if it is only laughing in a somewhat nervous way at annoyance they
can get away with. I am glad you put  them second after the real vandals
who externalise industrial costs on to the environment.

I am not politically correct and surely would lose votes if I were a
politician because I am suspicious of the dollar way of doing things we
are so entrenched in.
Rik Tindall refers to coroporate approach  in a reply to my CCOs
article. Moving from a barter system and employing money as a servant to
enable specialisation was useful. But  money became a master. Rik gives
examples of how the market cannot  fix everything. So we need other
means to relate to the earths finite resources.

>
>
> The excerpt reads:
> "
> -	In Ilam, the ecological health of our streams (Upper Avon, Waimari, Ilam,
Okeover) is affected by urban development.  Contaminants off impermeable
surfaces are copper, lead & zinc particles.
> -	The municipal water supply in our area was recently separated off from the
rest of Christchurch in water-quality reporting because of its inferior status,
drawn as it is primarily from rivers rather than the aquifer.
> -	Local air quality has marginally improved but remains a problem in terms of
WHO standards.
>
> [...]
> -	Food prices increased 6% in the year ending March ’08.  Butter skyrocketed
by 82%, cheese was up 44%, milk by 22%. In one month (Feb. to March), fresh
vegetables by 7%, bread by 3%.
>
[...]
>   Our national economy, one of the smallest and most open in the world, is
vulnerable to the stresses and strains of the global economy.  We need greater
national self-reliance, starting with local agriculture – encouraging the trend
for more community-based food production and farmers’ markets. We should
envision Christchurch and its surroundings as a network of interlinking
sustainable communities."
>
But corporates are likely to promote biofuels as the most important
factor for self-reliance. That would mean hugely more increased food
prices. Canterbury farmers have already been converting from food crops
to biofuel crops.

I often gives links to the Institute of Science in Society website.

http://www.i-sis.org.uk/The_BP-Berkeley_Deal.php

tells of the biofuel crops problem.

I do worry that business interests may be trying to introduce biofuels
in a secret fashion through "Regional  _Government_" secretive Council
Controlled Organisations. At the moment ECAN is consulting about setting
up such an organisation which could distribute public funds to private
enterprise without having to report much. The biofuels push must be
feeling hurt at the moment since our NZ Parliamentary Commissioner for
the Environment questioned the sustainablility of biofuel crops.

This gives some solutions:

http://www.i-sis.org.uk/HTBFAFRUCC.php
"How to be Fuel and Food Rich under Climate Change"

Brian Sandle

From: Kennedy GRAHAM Date: May 24 22:20 UTC Short link

Hi Brian,
You certainly raise an interesting point about the business interests
with biofuels. It's pretty complex but we can at least develop some
general guidelines for approaching it.  For example, biofuels should
not proceed in this country unless they are proven to be sustainable.
They need to meet certain standard tests – (i) they must achieve
significant carbon dioxide reduction; (ii) they should not be made from
food crops and (iii) they must not, of course, destroy biodiversity
such as rainforests.   Last year the Greens withheld support for the
Biofuel Bill unless it included a rigorous sustainability standard.
The Govt. subsequently, and as a result, put a sustainability clause in
the Bill.  But that is simply a ‘place-holder’ until more work can be
done.
Regards,
Ken

Quoting Brian Sandle <bsandle@snap.net.nz>:

> Kennedy GRAHAM wrote:
>> Good question, Andrew.
>>
>> I've recently brought together a small group to advise me on this
>> issue of 'local sustainability', and we explored this. This is the
>> summary of the thoughts (which I put out in my name).
>> If you check the blog -- http://KenGraham.blogspot.com you will find
>> the background paper (under the Sue Kedgely/Ken Graham public
>> meeting on 8 May) which contains the excerpt below.
>>
>> To answer you specific question on the single biggest issue, I tend
>> to think it would be water quality of our streams -- that is the
>> barometer of quality living.  A close second would be local
>> vandalism and cycle paths & pedestrian crossings for our roads.
>> Other issues such as price rises and student debt are more national
>> issues -- not to be ignored, but not specifically local.
> The vandals are trying  to assert some sort of dominance maybe, to show
> some sort of strength, and perhaps to asssert some sort of  indentity,
> sadly if it is only laughing in a somewhat nervous way at annoyance they
> can get away with. I am glad you put  them second after the real vandals
> who externalise industrial costs on to the environment.
>
> I am not politically correct and surely would lose votes if I were a
> politician because I am suspicious of the dollar way of doing things we
> are so entrenched in.
> Rik Tindall refers to coroporate approach  in a reply to my CCOs
> article. Moving from a barter system and employing money as a servant to
> enable specialisation was useful. But  money became a master. Rik gives
> examples of how the market cannot  fix everything. So we need other
> means to relate to the earths finite resources.
>
>>
>>
>> The excerpt reads:
>> "
>> -	In Ilam, the ecological health of our streams (Upper Avon,
>> Waimari, Ilam, Okeover) is affected by urban development.
>> Contaminants off impermeable surfaces are copper, lead & zinc
>> particles.
>> -	The municipal water supply in our area was recently separated off
>> from the rest of Christchurch in water-quality reporting because of
>> its inferior status, drawn as it is primarily from rivers rather
>> than the aquifer.
>> -	Local air quality has marginally improved but remains a problem in
>> terms of WHO standards.
>>
>> [...]
>> -	Food prices increased 6% in the year ending March ’08.  Butter
>> skyrocketed by 82%, cheese was up 44%, milk by 22%. In one month
>> (Feb. to March), fresh vegetables by 7%, bread by 3%.
>>
> [...]
>>   Our national economy, one of the smallest and most open in the
>> world, is vulnerable to the stresses and strains of the global
>> economy.  We need greater national self-reliance, starting with
>> local agriculture – encouraging the trend for more community-based
>> food production and farmers’ markets. We should envision
>> Christchurch and its surroundings as a network of interlinking
>> sustainable communities."
>>
> But corporates are likely to promote biofuels as the most important
> factor for self-reliance. That would mean hugely more increased food
> prices. Canterbury farmers have already been converting from food crops
> to biofuel crops.
>
> I often gives links to the Institute of Science in Society website.
>
> http://www.i-sis.org.uk/The_BP-Berkeley_Deal.php
>
> tells of the biofuel crops problem.
>
> I do worry that business interests may be trying to introduce biofuels
> in a secret fashion through "Regional  _Government_" secretive Council
> Controlled Organisations. At the moment ECAN is consulting about setting
> up such an organisation which could distribute public funds to private
> enterprise without having to report much. The biofuels push must be
> feeling hurt at the moment since our NZ Parliamentary Commissioner for
> the Environment questioned the sustainablility of biofuel crops.
>
> This gives some solutions:
>
> http://www.i-sis.org.uk/HTBFAFRUCC.php
> "How to be Fuel and Food Rich under Climate Change"
>
> Brian Sandle
>
> Brian Sandle
>
> Info about Brian Sandle: http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/briansandle
>
> This topic's messages may be viewed at:
> http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/4mVDWYrn3OgT7IfqaztLhL
> -----------------------------------------
>   To post, send your message to: <email obscured>
>   To leave or for daily digest, type "unsubscribe" or "digest on,"
>   in subject line and send to: <email obscured>
>
>   More info about Canterbury Public Issues Forum:
>   http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/canterburyissues
>
>   E-Democracy.Org rules: http://e-democracy.org/rules
> -----------------------------------------
> Technical assistance thanks to our friends at http://OnlineGroups.Net
>



__________________________
Dr. Kennedy Graham
International Secretary
Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand

From: Brian Sandle Date: May 25 02:41 UTC Short link

Kennedy Graham wrote:
> Hi Brian,
> You certainly raise an interesting point about the business interests
> with biofuels. It's pretty complex but we can at least develop some
> general guidelines for approaching it.  For example, biofuels should
> not proceed in this country unless they are proven to be sustainable.
> They need to meet certain standard tests – (i) they must achieve
> significant carbon dioxide reduction;
The Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment saying biofuel crops are no
good for the CO2 footprint.

So we need to make a clear distinction between biofuels produced from
crops and those produced from organic waste. Those made from organic
waste could be good.

>  (ii) they should not be made from
> food crops and
In NZ Solid Energy is getting large amonts of rape planted. Canola, from
which much food oil is made, is a form of rape. Rape is likely to be
contaminated by genetically engineered canola, too. Rape is a brassica
crop and could contaminate other of the many food members of the
brassica family.

> (iii) they must not, of course, destroy biodiversity
> such as rainforests.
Biodiversity has also been in farming in Canterbury. Not only birds in
hedgerows which are being removed for big irrigators, but also in the
diveristy of crops.
Solid Energy are reported in "The Press" Jan 8, 2008, as intending to
plant 20,000 hectares of biofuel crop within 3 years. That is 200 square
kilometers.

For comparison
http://www.lincoln.ac.nz/story_images/1429_RR255_s4321.pdf gives:
Arable cropping or seed production in North Canterbury as 6,493 hectares.

>    Last year the Greens withheld support for the
> Biofuel Bill unless it included a rigorous sustainability standard.
> The Govt. subsequently, and as a result, put a sustainability clause in
> the Bill.  But that is simply a ‘place-holder’ until more work can be
> done.
>
Sustainability must surely take into account affect on human food supply.

Brian Sandle

> Regards,
> Ken
>
> Quoting Brian Sandle <bsandle@snap.net.nz>:
>
>
>> Kennedy GRAHAM wrote:
>>
>>> Good question, Andrew.
>>>
>>> I've recently brought together a small group to advise me on this
>>> issue of 'local sustainability', and we explored this. This is the
>>> summary of the thoughts (which I put out in my name).
>>> If you check the blog -- http://KenGraham.blogspot.com you will find
>>> the background paper (under the Sue Kedgely/Ken Graham public
>>> meeting on 8 May) which contains the excerpt below.
>>>
>>> To answer you specific question on the single biggest issue, I tend
>>> to think it would be water quality of our streams -- that is the
>>> barometer of quality living.  A close second would be local
>>> vandalism and cycle paths & pedestrian crossings for our roads.
>>> Other issues such as price rises and student debt are more national
>>> issues -- not to be ignored, but not specifically local.
>>>
>> The vandals are trying  to assert some sort of dominance maybe, to show
>> some sort of strength, and perhaps to asssert some sort of  indentity,
>> sadly if it is only laughing in a somewhat nervous way at annoyance they
>> can get away with. I am glad you put  them second after the real vandals
>> who externalise industrial costs on to the environment.
>>
>> I am not politically correct and surely would lose votes if I were a
>> politician because I am suspicious of the dollar way of doing things we
>> are so entrenched in.
>> Rik Tindall refers to coroporate approach  in a reply to my CCOs
>> article. Moving from a barter system and employing money as a servant to
>> enable specialisation was useful. But  money became a master. Rik gives
>> examples of how the market cannot  fix everything. So we need other
>> means to relate to the earths finite resources.
>>
>>
>>> The excerpt reads:
>>> "
>>> -	In Ilam, the ecological health of our streams (Upper Avon,
>>> Waimari, Ilam, Okeover) is affected by urban development.
>>> Contaminants off impermeable surfaces are copper, lead & zinc
>>> particles.
>>> -	The municipal water supply in our area was recently separated off
>>> from the rest of Christchurch in water-quality reporting because of
>>> its inferior status, drawn as it is primarily from rivers rather
>>> than the aquifer.
>>> -	Local air quality has marginally improved but remains a problem in
>>> terms of WHO standards.
>>>
>>> [...]
>>> -	Food prices increased 6% in the year ending March ’08.  Butter
>>> skyrocketed by 82%, cheese was up 44%, milk by 22%. In one month
>>> (Feb. to March), fresh vegetables by 7%, bread by 3%.
>>>
>>>
>> [...]
>>
>>>   Our national economy, one of the smallest and most open in the
>>> world, is vulnerable to the stresses and strains of the global
>>> economy.  We need greater national self-reliance, starting with
>>> local agriculture – encouraging the trend for more community-based
>>> food production and farmers’ markets. We should envision
>>> Christchurch and its surroundings as a network of interlinking
>>> sustainable communities."
>>>
>>>
>> But corporates are likely to promote biofuels as the most important
>> factor for self-reliance. That would mean hugely more increased food
>> prices. Canterbury farmers have already been converting from food crops
>> to biofuel crops.
>>
>> I often gives links to the Institute of Science in Society website.
>>
>> http://www.i-sis.org.uk/The_BP-Berkeley_Deal.php
>>
>> tells of the biofuel crops problem.
>>
>> I do worry that business interests may be trying to introduce biofuels
>> in a secret fashion through "Regional  _Government_" secretive Council
>> Controlled Organisations. At the moment ECAN is consulting about setting
>> up such an organisation which could distribute public funds to private
>> enterprise without having to report much. The biofuels push must be
>> feeling hurt at the moment since our NZ Parliamentary Commissioner for
>> the Environment questioned the sustainablility of biofuel crops.
>>
>> This gives some solutions:
>>
>> http://www.i-sis.org.uk/HTBFAFRUCC.php
>> "How to be Fuel and Food Rich under Climate Change"
>>
>> Brian Sandle
>>
>> Brian Sandle
>>
>> Info about Brian Sandle: http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/briansandle
>>
>> This topic's messages may be viewed at:
>> http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/4mVDWYrn3OgT7IfqaztLhL
>> -----------------------------------------
>>   To post, send your message to: <email obscured>
>>   To leave or for daily digest, type "unsubscribe" or "digest on,"
>>   in subject line and send to: <email obscured>
>>
>>   More info about Canterbury Public Issues Forum:
>>   http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/canterburyissues
>>
>>   E-Democracy.Org rules: http://e-democracy.org/rules
>> -----------------------------------------
>> Technical assistance thanks to our friends at http://OnlineGroups.Net
>>
>>
>
>
>
> __________________________
> Dr. Kennedy Graham
> International Secretary
> Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand
>
> Kennedy GRAHAM
>
> Info about Kennedy GRAHAM:
http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/76cKmgSfJIAJuTGPAlgtan
>
> This topic's messages may be viewed at:
http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/1kesxMVo6UI4nhtnQgIGfK
> -----------------------------------------
>   To post, send your message to: <email obscured>
>   To leave or for daily digest, type "unsubscribe" or "digest on,"
>   in subject line and send to: <email obscured>
>
>   More info about Canterbury Public Issues Forum:
>   http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/canterburyissues
>
>   E-Democracy.Org rules: http://e-democracy.org/rules
> -----------------------------------------
> Technical assistance thanks to our friends at http://OnlineGroups.Net
>
>

From: Tim Kerr Date: May 25 05:43 UTC Short link

Dear Brian and Kennedy,

and fellow forum participants. You are all getting yoursleves tied into
knots over so-called "biofuels".

The problem with biofuels is not growing massive regions of rape and other
plants and failing to grow wheat or rice - or whatever....

The problem is, the growers are growing the crops because either:

 1: they are getting some form of subsidy to grow it.

  2: The crops they normally grow simply don't pay. And one of the reasons
some crops are no longer paying growers (amongst other reasons) is that they
are not able to get the crops to a profitable market. And why not? Because
the market that PAYS a reasonable price for the crop usually has its own
suppliers - kept in business by subsidies, tariffs or import restrictions!

Sure, it takes about 10.000 hectares to produce a gallon of  bio-petrol - or
two years production for one week's fuel consumption - or whatever. But that
is not really the issue. If fuel was in such short supply people willingly
pay for two years worth of crop to get a week's motoring then something has
gone wrong - seriously wrong. I cannot explain why, I am not an economist.
But seriously, when someone finds they can no longer afford to go
jet-boating every weekend... then they leave the jet boat in the garage. Or
maybe they sell it to someone who can still afford it. Then, when the find
they cannot afford to fill the tank of the Holden (or Ford) they used to tow
the boat... then they sell it and get a Suzuki. By this time few people can
afford milk or cheese - so our diary export industry dissolves and we have
no national income. In a word, the country becomes ...  - well, YOU know the
word.

But it won't really happen quite like that. Oh, us forum members living in
Canterbury worrying ourselves silly over the last drop of rock oil may go
through that process - but the rest of the world will continue building four
or five coal-powered electricity generators per week and living off the
Earth's bounty.

We will NOT be seen as a shining example of thrift and conservation. We will
NOT be seen as leading the way in conservation and sustainablility. We will
NOT be seen at all!

There is nothing wrong with biofuels per se - just the fact that there are
massive subsidies to develop biofuels - and bugger-all market access for
other crop growers.

Seriously, how easy is it to cut down acres of virgin jungle to level it all
and then re-use the cut-over region it as a single crop producer? It costs
time, money and labour to clear a forest - and no one will do it unless the
work pays. When palm sugar prices (for example) are low then the palms won't
be grown. But when some country starts offering attractive prices for
"biofuel" crops - then it becomes very easy to cut (burn) a jungle/forest.
However, even a $US200 barrel of oil is pretty cheap - compared to cutting
down a fresh forest!

And IF it IS cheaper and easier to cut down a forest than pay $200 for a
barrel of oil..... then suddenly the oil market loses some seriously big
business....and oil prices drop.

Finally, why should we worry about our CO2 footprints when China and India
between them will knock off 500,000,000 cars FOR THEIR OWN CONSUMPTION
within the next 10-20 years? (I won't even begin to guess their production
of cars for the international market....)

I find this forum gets very tiresome when contributors spend all their time
looking negatively at issues. We are better off than we have been since
mankind first stated sailing the high seas to trade, rape and pillage....
And as for the rest of the world. At last the rest of the world, with the
exception of large tracts of Africa, is improving the standard of living of
its populations. Living longer, fatter and unhealthier perhaps - but
enjoying themselves in the process.

So, we live in a country that has banned coal-fired power-generators, but
exports coal (the good quality stuff)A country that imports massive
Norwegian wind turbines to produce electricity erratically (and under some
huge subsidy scheme that involve carbon-trading with Dutch companies) A
country that after banning coal-powered electricity generators is likely to
build a railway to truck Southland coal to Clandeboye to power the milk
processing plant that processes milk trucked down from as far away as
Takaka....

While it IS important to squash our plastic milk bottles and put them out in
the recycling.... It is also important to realise that we have a fairly good
standard of living that will be reduced not by oil shortages and heavy
carbon footprints all over our backyard, but by people who continue to add
environmentally-aware compliance costs to our inidustry, who support clearly
capital-intensive exorbitantly expensive light rail systems, but will not
accept that a few bob thrown at an aged highway system will improve our
so-called traffic issues....

And who seriously believe riding a bicycle will save the world's oil....

I'd love to know what the "Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment"
earns! Do any forum members know?

I saw a few letterboxes lying in the Heathcote river this morning.... Having
replaced a couple of letterboxes a few years ago that bloody-near cost
$1000.00 I have little sympathy for the jerks who did it. Instead of
worrying about GE onions I rather pick up a few fart-arsed neighbourhood
kids and tack their ears to the lamp post. And no, I wouldn't be too
concerned if I'd picked on the wrong kids - justice has only to be SEEN to
be effective. That is, if a few innocents get their ears tacked to the
lampost then a few of the perpetrators may feel a bit nervous IN CASE they
get caught... Just a suggestion.... Oh, don't get me wrong! I wouldn't
remove the ears - I'd leave them attached to their empty little heads!

What do other forum members think?

Cheers,

Tim Kerr











----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Sandle" <bsandle@snap.net.nz>
To: <canterburyissues@forums.e-democracy.org>
Sent: Sunday, May 25, 2008 2:20 PM
Subject: Re: [Canterbury Issues] Green political issues for Canterbury


> Kennedy Graham wrote:
>> Hi Brian,
>> You certainly raise an interesting point about the business interests
>> with biofuels. It's pretty complex but we can at least develop some
>> general guidelines for approaching it.  For example, biofuels should
>> not proceed in this country unless they are proven to be sustainable.
>> They need to meet certain standard tests – (i) they must achieve
>> significant carbon dioxide reduction;
> The Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment saying biofuel crops
> are no good for the CO2 footprint.
>
> So we need to make a clear distinction between biofuels produced from
> crops and those produced from organic waste. Those made from organic
> waste could be good.
>
>>  (ii) they should not be made from
>> food crops and
> In NZ Solid Energy is getting large amonts of rape planted. Canola, from
> which much food oil is made, is a form of rape. Rape is likely to be
> contaminated by genetically engineered canola, too. Rape is a brassica
> crop and could contaminate other of the many food members of the
> brassica family.
>
>> (iii) they must not, of course, destroy biodiversity
>> such as rainforests.
> Biodiversity has also been in farming in Canterbury. Not only birds in
> hedgerows which are being removed for big irrigators, but also in the
> diveristy of crops.
> Solid Energy are reported in "The Press" Jan 8, 2008, as intending to
> plant 20,000 hectares of biofuel crop within 3 years. That is 200 square
> kilometers.
>
> For comparison
> http://www.lincoln.ac.nz/story_images/1429_RR255_s4321.pdf gives:
> Arable cropping or seed production in North Canterbury as 6,493 hectares.
>
>>    Last year the Greens withheld support for the
>> Biofuel Bill unless it included a rigorous sustainability standard.
>> The Govt. subsequently, and as a result, put a sustainability clause in
>> the Bill.  But that is simply a ‘place-holder’ until more work can be
>> done.
>>
> Sustainability must surely take into account affect on human food supply.
>
> Brian Sandle
>
>> Regards,
>> Ken
>>
>> Quoting Brian Sandle <bsandle@snap.net.nz>:
>>
>>
>>> Kennedy GRAHAM wrote:
>>>
>>>> Good question, Andrew.
>>>>
>>>> I've recently brought together a small group to advise me on this
>>>> issue of 'local sustainability', and we explored this. This is the
>>>> summary of the thoughts (which I put out in my name).
>>>> If you check the blog -- http://KenGraham.blogspot.com you will find
>>>> the background paper (under the Sue Kedgely/Ken Graham public
>>>> meeting on 8 May) which contains the excerpt below.
>>>>
>>>> To answer you specific question on the single biggest issue, I tend
>>>> to think it would be water quality of our streams -- that is the
>>>> barometer of quality living.  A close second would be local
>>>> vandalism and cycle paths & pedestrian crossings for our roads.
>>>> Other issues such as price rises and student debt are more national
>>>> issues -- not to be ignored, but not specifically local.
>>>>
>>> The vandals are trying  to assert some sort of dominance maybe, to show
>>> some sort of strength, and perhaps to asssert some sort of  indentity,
>>> sadly if it is only laughing in a somewhat nervous way at annoyance they
>>> can get away with. I am glad you put  them second after the real vandals
>>> who externalise industrial costs on to the environment.
>>>
>>> I am not politically correct and surely would lose votes if I were a
>>> politician because I am suspicious of the dollar way of doing things we
>>> are so entrenched in.
>>> Rik Tindall refers to coroporate approach  in a reply to my CCOs
>>> article. Moving from a barter system and employing money as a servant to
>>> enable specialisation was useful. But  money became a master. Rik gives
>>> examples of how the market cannot  fix everything. So we need other
>>> means to relate to the earths finite resources.
>>>
>>>
>>>> The excerpt reads:
>>>> "
>>>> - In Ilam, the ecological health of our streams (Upper Avon,
>>>> Waimari, Ilam, Okeover) is affected by urban development.
>>>> Contaminants off impermeable surfaces are copper, lead & zinc
>>>> particles.
>>>> - The municipal water supply in our area was recently separated off
>>>> from the rest of Christchurch in water-quality reporting because of
>>>> its inferior status, drawn as it is primarily from rivers rather
>>>> than the aquifer.
>>>> - Local air quality has marginally improved but remains a problem in
>>>> terms of WHO standards.
>>>>
>>>> [...]
>>>> - Food prices increased 6% in the year ending March ’08.  Butter
>>>> skyrocketed by 82%, cheese was up 44%, milk by 22%. In one month
>>>> (Feb. to March), fresh vegetables by 7%, bread by 3%.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> [...]
>>>
>>>>   Our national economy, one of the smallest and most open in the
>>>> world, is vulnerable to the stresses and strains of the global
>>>> economy.  We need greater national self-reliance, starting with
>>>> local agriculture – encouraging the trend for more community-based
>>>> food production and farmers’ markets. We should envision
>>>> Christchurch and its surroundings as a network of interlinking
>>>> sustainable communities."
>>>>
>>>>
>>> But corporates are likely to promote biofuels as the most important
>>> factor for self-reliance. That would mean hugely more increased food
>>> prices. Canterbury farmers have already been converting from food crops
>>> to biofuel crops.
>>>
>>> I often gives links to the Institute of Science in Society website.
>>>
>>> http://www.i-sis.org.uk/The_BP-Berkeley_Deal.php
>>>
>>> tells of the biofuel crops problem.
>>>
>>> I do worry that business interests may be trying to introduce biofuels
>>> in a secret fashion through "Regional  _Government_" secretive Council
>>> Controlled Organisations. At the moment ECAN is consulting about setting
>>> up such an organisation which could distribute public funds to private
>>> enterprise without having to report much. The biofuels push must be
>>> feeling hurt at the moment since our NZ Parliamentary Commissioner for
>>> the Environment questioned the sustainablility of biofuel crops.
>>>
>>> This gives some solutions:
>>>
>>> http://www.i-sis.org.uk/HTBFAFRUCC.php
>>> "How to be Fuel and Food Rich under Climate Change"
>>>
>>> Brian Sandle
>>>
>>> Brian Sandle
>>>
>>> Info about Brian Sandle: http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/briansandle
>>>
>>> This topic's messages may be viewed at:
>>> http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/4mVDWYrn3OgT7IfqaztLhL
>>> -----------------------------------------
>>>   To post, send your message to: <email obscured>
>>>   To leave or for daily digest, type "unsubscribe" or "digest on,"
>>>   in subject line and send to: <email obscured>
>>>
>>>   More info about Canterbury Public Issues Forum:
>>>   http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/canterburyissues
>>>
>>>   E-Democracy.Org rules: http://e-democracy.org/rules
>>> -----------------------------------------
>>> Technical assistance thanks to our friends at http://OnlineGroups.Net
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> __________________________
>> Dr. Kennedy Graham
>> International Secretary
>> Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand
>>
>> Kennedy GRAHAM
>>
>> Info about Kennedy GRAHAM:
>> http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/76cKmgSfJIAJuTGPAlgtan
>>
>> This topic's messages may be viewed at:
>> http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/1kesxMVo6UI4nhtnQgIGfK
>> -----------------------------------------
>>   To post, send your message to: <email obscured>
>>   To leave or for daily digest, type "unsubscribe" or "digest on,"
>>   in subject line and send to: <email obscured>
>>
>>   More info about Canterbury Public Issues Forum:
>>   http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/canterburyissues
>>
>>   E-Democracy.Org rules: http://e-democracy.org/rules
>> -----------------------------------------
>> Technical assistance thanks to our friends at http://OnlineGroups.Net
>>
>>
>
>
> Brian Sandle
>
> Info about Brian Sandle: http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/briansandle
>
> This topic's messages may be viewed at:
> http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/7c5HsatXzqPx7GlsOTxuJf
> -----------------------------------------
>  To post, send your message to: <email obscured>
>  To leave or for daily digest, type "unsubscribe" or "digest on,"
>  in subject line and send to: <email obscured>
>
>  More info about Canterbury Public Issues Forum:
>  http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/canterburyissues
>
>  E-Democracy.Org rules: http://e-democracy.org/rules
> -----------------------------------------
> Technical assistance thanks to our friends at http://OnlineGroups.Net
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG.
> Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.24.1/1464 - Release Date: 5/24/2008
> 8:56 a.m.
>
>

From: Brian Sandle Date: May 25 21:31 UTC Short link

Tim Kerr wrote:
> Dear Brian and Kennedy,
>
>
[...]
> I saw a few letterboxes lying in the Heathcote river this morning.... Having
> replaced a couple of letterboxes a few years ago that bloody-near cost
> $1000.00 I have little sympathy for the jerks who did it. Instead of
> worrying about GE onions I rather pick up a few fart-arsed neighbourhood
> kids and tack their ears to the lamp post. And no, I wouldn't be too
> concerned if I'd picked on the wrong kids - justice has only to be SEEN to
> be effective. That is, if a few innocents get their ears tacked to the
> lampost then a few of the perpetrators may feel a bit nervous IN CASE they
> get caught... Just a suggestion.... Oh, don't get me wrong! I wouldn't
> remove the ears - I'd leave them attached to their empty little heads!
>
> What do other forum members think?
>
>
I'm sure that this is a pretty funny post.

Do you know if you have much soy in your food? It's used as a protein
extender in pies & what not.

Apologies for errors in this, but you goad me in to replying in a hurry:
 Using the following:
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/tables/totalstab.htm

http://www.iomsa.org/leads/OMGoct04.pdf


I have calculated:


      year       homicides/100k  soy production soy/person

Add to the topic Green political issues for Canterbury [?]

You cannot post because you are not logged in. If you are a member Canterbury Public Issues Forum, login to post to this topic. Otherwise sign up, become a member of Canterbury Public Issues Forum, and post to this topic.

Need help? Please contact technical support. To support your forum, please donate. Hosted by E-Democracy.Org. Powered by OnlineGroups.Net using GroupServer.