by frog
It’s not often the Greens get allotted two questions in one day at Parliamentary question time. (I think today’s double dose might have come about due to some horse trading with the Maori Party?) Anyway, they’re both good ones:
Question 1 – Jeanette Fitzsimons to the Prime Minister
Does she still aspire for New Zealand to be carbon neutral and “the first nation to be truly sustainable?, as she said in her Statement to the House in February last year?
and
Question 11 – Jeanette Fitzsimons to the Minister of Fisheries
Is he satisfied that the fishing industry is taking all opportunities available under New Zealand’s trade agreement with China?
Feel free to have a guess at what answers the Government will be coming up with this afternoon. I’ll try to cover its responses when they’re out.
Published in Environment & Resource Management | Parliament by frog on Thu, May 29th, 2008
Tags: carbon neutral, China, climate change, fisheries, Frog, frogblog, green party, greens, Jeanette Fitzsimons, new zealand, prime minister, question time, sustainability, trade
on the trolls and those who are unable to keep on topic
I will be looking forward to the answer to Question 1. Good on the Greens for asking it.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
What do you guys think of genetic modification?
What do you think of genetically modified grass?
What do you think of cows eating genetically modified grass?
What do you think of cows that produce less gas due to eating modified grass?
“A recent innovation from scientists in Australia and New Zealand offers hope for humans to continue our love affair with meat and dairy products. The proposed solution: A genetically modified grass that is more easily digested by cows, designed to allow them to graze without producing so much methane gas”
sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/05/080506120859.htm
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
BluePeter, I spotted that article a couple of days ago but decided not to link to it because it was so inconclusive. Further down it says:
and worldchanging.com, commenting on the Science Daily article, notes:
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“…really what we need to do is cut back the developed world’s animal-based diet (and hopefully get the developing world to rethink its growing taste for meat). Producing beef and dairy on an industrial scale is neither sustainable nor healthy, whether the cows are burping or not.”
ha its no wonder the Green Movement has a reputation of being full of conceited and domineerig dogooders.
frog,
In the Nature magazine they also said that it would mean less methane per litre of milk so therefore at least theoretically a need for fewer cows, although in practice as long as theres demand to be met they’ll milk as many cows as practical.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
so you just don’t answer the logic of the need to stop farming animals..
tree-hugger..
..and the implications if we don’t..
..and..pray tell what is ‘conceited and domineering’ about raising this subject..?
your comment just makes you look like a ‘right richard’..
eh..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
>>to allow humans to continue to consume dairy and meat?
Yes.
>>what we need to do is cut back the developed world’s animal-based diet
No thanks.
Do I spot the real (vegetarian) agenda surfacing?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Fans over the pastures, sucking in the gasses, separating the methane out and supplying it as a gas to warm the bones of people so that 1600 don’t die every winter! All we really need is some Kevelar baloons to sit over each paddock and we’re away! We don’t need to burn as much fossile fuel to generate electricity to power heaters, avoiding the threat of the dry lakes, and a ‘natural’ bi-product of the creation of health foods (milk and meat) is used to better humanity (or at least a few of us!)
Or is that a capitalist solution?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
If one gave a damn about animal welfare/pollution/methane emissions/antibiotic use in the foodchain-antibiotic-resistantance/public health, one might think that vegetarianism might be at least a half-way worthwhile idea.
That http://blog.greens.org.nz/index.php/2008/05/27/a-meaty-dilemma/ would have been the place for that argument though.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
phil u,
“so you just don’t answer the logic of the need to stop farming animals..”
because farming provides the highest amount of calories per energy expended, which is important in places where its both hard to grow food in region where its extremely marginal for growing food crops or where the people don’t have access to sufficient food to meet their minimal dietary requirements.
“and..pray tell what is ‘conceited and domineering’ about raising this subject..?”
Because I object to the implied assumption that wealthy, priviledged Westerners should be able to dictate what people in the Third World should be able to eat. Would you object to that phil despite your obvious aversion to an omniverous diet?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
A great quote from this week’s Economist:
“Greenery does not have to be motivated by altruism; and it is far more likely to be effective when it is not. If it helps to reduce carbon-emissions, self-serving greenery is as good as any other kind. The planet cannot tell the difference.”
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“..because farming provides the highest amount of calories per energy expended..”
utter drivel..!
and..sigh..!..it is those ‘wealthy privileged westerners’ who need to kick their flesh/fat-addictions..
plus the third world..
basically..everyone..
meat should cost a fortune to buy..and be grown in the lab..(on an industrial scale..)
and you can’t get past the fact..
that going vegan is about the best/most efficient/effective action any individual can take..
and what’s not to love about that..?
phil(whoar.co.nz
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
and stephen r..
being vegetarian is still being part of the problem..
as it usually entails eating animal bye-products/fats..and the wearing/using of their skins in shoes..etc..
and many vegetarians won’t like this..but as a vegan for nearly ten years..and a vegetarian for longer before that..
i hafta tell you that being vegetarian is a lot closer to being carnivore..
than it is to being vegan..
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
phil u,
“utter drivel..!”
no its not. Not if you’re the one who actually has to do the work or don’t get enough to eat it isn’t.
“meat should cost a fortune to buy..and be grown in the lab..(on an industrial scale..)”
I certainly wouldn’t object to that as long as people who are dependant on animal husbandry and meat processing could be provided with another form of income.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“calories” would include the energy expended on growing plants – the petroleum based fertiliser used to fertilise the plants, transporting the plants to the animals, and then transporting the dead animals to the supermarket. I don’t think it includes the energy that people are using to walk around ‘doing the work’ (driving a tractor?)
I think the unreferenced rule of thumb is that it takes 8 pounds of corn to produce one pound of beef – i have no references though but the above process…
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
StephenR
I’m talking about calories expended by humans whilst raising animals as opposed to tilling land or hunting.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I don’t think “calories expended by humans whilst raising animals as opposed to tilling land” is particulary relevant when both are primarily done on an industrial scale i.e. with machines and technology, anyway.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
# BluePeter Says:
May 29th, 2008 at 2:35 pm
> Do I spot the real (vegetarian) agenda surfacing?
So, is the secret communist agenda just a front for the even more secret vegetarian agenda? or vice versa?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
kahikatea
Because the Environmental Movement appeals to the same kinds of people that communism did before its collapse. Those who believed that they know whats best and hope to impose their dictates on others regardless of whether what anyone else wants. I don’t mean everyone in the movement is like that. Myself for one, but there are a fair number.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
StephenR
Phil and I were discussing the relative merits and virtues of animal husbandry versus veganism not comparing industrial or traditional agriculture.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
For obvious reasons a frog is not going to advocate a vegetarian diet.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Hey frog
you better watch out ;(
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Sorry, should’ve read closer.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
>going vegan is about the best/most efficient/effective action any individual can take..<
I thought suicide, or at the very least castration, was the best action to take.
The basic problem is too many humans in the petri dish.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
strength to you brother,
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)