The great benefit of living in New Zealand is the expectation public policy has historically been determined on the basis of evidence and that our leaders do not use quasi-religious beliefs as the basis of policy.

We are now witnessing our worst fears being realised - extreme and unquestioned environmentalism is now at the forefront of Labour's public policy and incredibly the beneficiaries will not be the environment because there is poor evidence the changes will assist it and the costs will be born by the people with significant social and economic costs. This is lunacy and is only being attempted by the Clarkists bhecause she is convinced it is the path to electoral nirvana - stuff the economy this is remaining in power.

Most New Zealanders want a healthy and beautiful country (and for that matter planet) and to try to operate their lives in a sustainable way - being good stewards of all we have and preserve things for the future. That is good practice.

However we are now seeing in New Zealand an avowedly un-Christian and secular government (which has always been our expectation of those that rule - secularity = good) and the Labour Party approach the climate change debate with spittle flecked religious fervour.

The Climate Change Minister (is that ever a losing handle unless he is merely the reporter) - David Parker - is hellbent on introducing destructive policies to New Zealand.

Here is a partial list of shame:
1. Biofuels to be compulsorily added to the offer at the bowser.
Despite masses of evidence that the lemming run to biofuel production is causing vast tracts of rain forest to be felled and replaced with a crop, dairy prices are out of control due to Government subsidised ethanol production being more lucrative to farmers than milking cows, evidence it will take in excess of 400 crop cycles to eliminate the additional carbon added to create intensive biofuel crop production.

Parker's response is to accept that "there may be initial worse environmental outcomes" but in the end we will be better off- environmentally. His address to Parliament is here. Like someone is going replant the Amazon?

Note the religious tones in Parker's piece. A little pain for your sin now will see rewards later...

We have been here for before...check 2005,

Friends of the Earth Report, The Oil for Ape Scandal revealed between 1985 and 2000 the development of oil-palm plantations was responsible for an estimated 87 percent of deforestation in Malaysia. In Sumatra and Borneo, 4 million hectares of forests were lost to palm farms; and a further 6 m ha are scheduled for clearance in Malaysia and 16.5 m ha in Indonesia.

This has completely shagged the Orangutang. Nice one.

2. Emissions Trading Platform
New Zealand is planning the most comprehensive (read draconian) emissions trading regime that will see its primary production base destroyed.
According to Business New Zealand:
At a carbon price of $25, there will be a loss of 52,000 jobs, and further delivering a huge shrinkage of NZ industries, depending on the cost of carbon, up to:
Sheep farming -32%
Wool -28%
Dairy farming -28%
Dairy processing -14%
Metals -31%

This seems to be at variance with the government’s claim that the regime will have a negative impact of less than 1% of GDP.

As the eminent Biologist Jennifer Marohasy notes:

The problem with fundamentalist creeds is that they are driven by adherence to predetermined agendas and teachings.

Yep - right on that score
The fundamentalist’s position is rarely tolerant of new information and is generally dismissive of evidence.
Yep - again labour kicks the shit out of anyone disagreeing with the "consensus the climate is warming - witness the braying of David Parker when TVNZ pursued two National MP's on their personal views and Cullen's response.

Environmental fundamentalism is subversive in that it draws on science to give legitimacy to its beliefs—the same beliefs that, in many instances, have no basis in observation or tested theory - as Jennifer Marohasy so aptly put things.