The bill regulates activities like drilling for oil and gas in the EEZ plugging a huge legislative and regulatory gap that the Greens have called for action on for years. It’s vital that New Zealand has sound environmental management of our oceans and we voted to send the Bill to select committee where we hoped to improve it, however it wasn’t to be.

Ultimately the EEZ bill contains too many serious flaws and risks our environment so we will be opposing it in future readings. We’ll be introducing a number of amendments to try and remedy the many problems with it.

Eugenie Sage and I have outlined our views on the bill in our minority report which you can read here.

It’s clear that momentum is growing around the world against this controversial drilling technique with Germany and the state of Vermont also set to ban it in the last week.

Of the countries that are known to have used fracking, the US, Australia, Ireland, Germany, Bulgaria, South Africa, France all have full country, state or regional bans in place and only China and New Zealand do not.

The fact is, there are legitimate concerns, many unanswered questions, the oil and gas isn’t going anywhere so we shouldn’t rush into it. I’m calling for a moratorium until the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment can assure us it’s safe and I think this is the responsible position..

.

This is great news and shows the momentum both in New Zealand and around the world is growing against this controversial practise.

Germany has put the brakes on plans to use hydraulic fracturing, commonly known as fracking, to extract natural gas in places where it is difficult to access, such as shale or coal beds. Environment Minister Norbert Röttgen and Economy Minister Philipp Rösler have agreed to oppose the controversial process for the time being, SPIEGEL has learned.

In New Zealand Energy and Resources Minister Phil Heatley likes to characterise opponents of fracking as ‘greenie extremists’, however Germany’s decision along with France, Bulgaria and states in the US, Canada and Australia to put in place permanent or temporary bans show this is a legitimate mainstream concern. Last time I looked none of these countries were run by greenie extremists!

The fact is, there are legitimate concerns, many unanswered questions, the oil and gas isn’t going anywhere so we shouldn’t rush into it. I’m calling for a moratorium until the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment can assure us it’s safe and I think this is the responsible position.

Although it the report has been reported by some as a ‘green light’ on fracking, it clearly states that fracking caused earthquakes which registered 2.3 and 1.5 on the Richter scale. While these earthquakes are minor, the report confirmed that they are of sufficient size to cause deformation of the structure of the fracking well which could lead to well leakage and contamination in the future. One of the authors warned that further fracking in the Blackpool area was very likely to lead to further earthquakes.

The authors suggested that fracking should be subject to greater monitoring and a traffic light system whereby an earthquake of 0.5 or greater would mean fracking would stop until remedial action was taken. These systems are not in place in New Zealand, and regional council officials have admitted they don’t have the expertise to process consents for fracking, with some expecting to receive applications within the next couple of months.

While the link between fracking and earthquakes of any size is disturbing, the link between those minor earthquakes and potential damage to wells which could cause leakage and contamination is just another reason, along with all the other serious concerns around to put in place a moratorium.

The Government shouldn’t wait for the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment to report back in order to know that we don’t have answers to many unanswered questions, appropriate regulation in place and that councillors don’t yet have the knowledge they need to make decisions about consents. The responsible step would be to enact an immediate moratorium until Kiwis can be assured fracking is safe.

Energy and Resources Minister Phil Heatley has been a cheer-leading expanding the oil and gas industry in New Zealand but the economic benefits aren’t all they are stacked up to be. New Zealand has the forth lowest ‘take’ of producer nations (royalties plus taxes) so we sell ourselves pretty cheaply. The Government is reviewing this at the moment but raising royalties on oil and gas is off the agenda. We know there are few jobs for New Zealanders with deep-sea drilling, low royalties, numerous tax exemptions and given they will be foreign investors, the profits will flow offshore. The taxpayer could also be left with the environmental consequences, a big carbon credit and oil spill clean-up bills.

Why would we risk our environment and valuable clean green brand for the fourth lowest Government take in the world?

Graph International Petroleum Taxation report, prepared for the Independent Petroleum Association of America, by D Johnston et al.

Having parents monitor emails, call history, location and text messages doesn’t build trust between parents and children. Children being bullied need someone to talk to about the problem. We need to be supporting parents and schools to develop skills to watch for signs of bullying and enable them to able to talk about it. This won’t involve increasing student teacher ratios but will mean investing in our education system.

The application – cited in the National Radio story – is for android phones only so wouldn’t be available for all phones like the article suggests. While I am sure there are other options for other smart phones I would have thought that smart phone penetration amongst teens was fairly low. Does anyone know of any figures for this? If they are talking about an implementation on the carrier (Telecom/Vodafone/2degrees) side there are of course other barriers. With SIM cards being so cheap now days monitoring on the carrier side is impractical – it doesn’t take much to buy a new SIM. I will await with interest the announcement that Telecom was suggesting (in the Morning Report story) would occur in the next few months.

Fracking, or hydraulic fracturing is the controversial process of pumping water, sand and chemicals at high pressure deep into the earth to extract oil and gas that I am calling for a moratorium on until the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment can assure us it’s safe.

There are plenty of reasons to be concerned about fracking: massive water use, toxic chemicals, air pollution, climate change, health impacts. In New Zealand, to date fracking has only occurred in Taranaki and there we have seen well blowouts, water contamination and consents being breached, after a comparatively small number of wells were drilled in 20 years. An important concern down here in the ‘Shaky Isles’ is the link between earthquakes and fracking.

There is no clear scientific consensus that there is a definite causal link between fracking and earthquakes but increasing evidence to be concerned about.

On one hand, GNS after looking at Taranaki fracking wells says “There is no evidence that hydraulic fracturing activities in Taranaki between 2000 and mid-2011 have triggered, or have had any observable effect on, natural earthquake activity,” yet links have been suggested by studies on earthquakes in Ohio, United States, Basel, Switzerland and Blackpool, UK. I welcomed the GNS report but as one swallow doesn’t make a summer, one report doesn’t prove a theory, especially when other prestigious scientific bodies are arguing the opposite.

Now a new report by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) says that the increased seismic activity taking place in certain areas of the United States is almost certainly the result of oil and gas drilling activities. The abstract is available here and Energy Wire (login required) reports:

The study found that the frequency of earthquakes started rising in 2001 across a broad swath of the country between Alabama and Montana. In 2009, there were 50 earthquakes greater than magnitude-3.0, the abstract states, then 87 quakes in 2010. The 134 earthquakes in the zone last year is a six fold increase over 20th century levels.

The surge in the last few years corresponds to a nationwide surge in shale drilling, which requires disposal of millions of gallons of wastewater for each well. According to the federal Energy Information Administration, shale gas production grew, on average, nearly 50 percent a year from 2006 to 2010.

I hope the Parliamentary Commissioner of the Environment includes earthquakes in the terms of reference for her inquiry, as these studies linking seismic activity and fracking continue to pile up.

As I said in the Dominion Post last week, the oil and gas isn’t going anywhere so let’s not rush into fracking. We need a nationwide moratorium to be placed on fracking now, before the expansion of the activity happens, which is set to occur before the inquiry by the PCE is completed, with consents in Hawke’s Bay and Gisborne set to be processed within the next couple of months. Councils themselves have admitted they don’t have the expertise to regulate fracking, so lets wait until the PCE report is finished and we have more evidence on fracking’s effects in Aotearoa before we go fracking things up.

Communities and groups are fighting many individual projects, be they lignite coal in Southland, gold mining in the Coromandel, or fracking and deep-sea oil drilling on the East Coast. Cumulatively there is a big risk nationally to our environment and economy from mining our future.

It’s a big debate for New Zealand where the National Government is doing everything it can to promote drilling and mining. From its pro-fossil fuel Energy Strategy, to the Bill on drilling in our Exclusive Economic Zone and financial incentives to drill and mine it’s clear that the Government’s priority is to “drill baby, drill!” If ‘catching up with Australia’ means doing as they do and digging up more ground, we’d do well to look at the recent poll which shows that the majority of Australians believe that they have received little or no benefit from the mining boom.

Mining isn’t the way to build prosperity in New Zealand. These projects will benefit very few people. Deep-sea oil, for example, will bring hardly any jobs for locals, hardly any royalties and hardly any taxes, and the profits will flow offshore; meanwhile a spill would have catastrophic consequences for our environment, local businesses and our valuable clean, green brand.

The Green Party opposes these risky mining and drilling projects. Instead, we support an oil reduction strategy which gives Kiwis better options and promotes better recycling of metals and innovative use of materials like our own laminated wood steel alternative. As we showed in our Green Jobs package, there are plenty of jobs and economic opportunities available to us without looking to the nineteenth century for inspiration.

Dates

Auckland – Wednesday 11th April, 7 – 9pm
Lecture Theatre B15, Library Basement, University of Auckland Campus, Auckland

Hamilton – Monday 16th April, 7 – 9pm
Trade Union Centre, 34 Harwood Street, Hamilton

Wellington – Tuesday 17th April, 7 – 8.30pm
Mezzanine Room, Wellington Library, 65 Victoria Street, Wellington

Christchurch – Thursday 19th April, 7 – 9pm
Workers Educational Association, 59 Gloucester Street, Christchurch

Dunedin – Monday 30th April, 7.30 – 9.30pm
Practice Room, Clubs and Societies Building, 84 Albany Street, Dunedin

These last few days, the world has watched Seoul as the global leaders discuss the ever-pressing issue of nuclear security, right in the shadow of North Korea. In increasingly uncertain times, the prevention of nuclear terrorism and the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons is one of the leading topics on the international political agenda. In New Zealand, we routinely congratulate ourselves when discussions like this arise, taking each opportunity to remind the world that we are, and always have been nuclear-free, and that the rest of the world would do well to follow suit.

This is precisely the message John Key has taken to the Nuclear Security Summit, to which he was invited in an attempt to demonstrate New Zealand’s proud, nuclear-free stance to the rest of the world. However, as Dr. Tanya Ogilvie-White noted last week, our calls for further non-proliferation lack substance, for we have yet to pass the laws necessary to ratify the International Convention for the Suppression of Acts of Nuclear Terrorism. New Zealand is also part of the international nuclear chain, regularly allowing uranium yellowcake to tranship through our ports.

To ratify the Convention would not only confirm our pursuit of global non-proliferation and add our name to the list of nations who recognise the dangers inherent in nuclear armament, but would also serve to address the fact that we’re not actually as nuclear free as we say we are. To do so may seem like a token gesture – after all, New Zealand is hardly a target for acts of nuclear terrorism. As the Prime Minister said on Tuesday “we’re the only country that doesn’t have nuclear power, nuclear materials or nuclear weapons.” But this is besides the point. It is also not true.

Until we ratify these treaties and laws, we cannot go calling on other states to do the same. We need to do more than just talk the talk on nuclear security – we need to walk the walk. Unfortunately for us, we have a little way to go yet, because our failure to ratify the Convention is not the only one of New Zealand’s nuclear-free hypocrisies on display in South Korea this week.

Roughly every fortnight, ships coming from Adelaide dock in the Port of Tauranga, each of which carries up to 750 tonnes of uranium yellowcake. Even more alarming is the fact that this was going on since 1996, with no Government knowledge until 2009 when the Environmental Risk Management Authority finally approved the shipments.

While this uranium may seem benign – the containers in which it is carried never leave the ships while in New Zealand waters – these shipments are a huge black mark on our globally admired nuclear-free record. For New Zealand to be specifically asked to appear at a nuclear non-proliferation summit alongside the likes of Russia, the United States and the United Kingdom is a testament to how respected we are across the world for our commitment to nuclear peace and security. This reputation could be seriously jeopardised should anything happen to this uranium.

Following the Rena disaster last year, I wrote about the possibly irreversible damage a radioactive spill could do to our environmental reputation. Just think what it would do to our nuclear-free reputation were the boats to be hijacked or the uranium stolen.

I must immediately state that I do not say this to be an alarmist. I’d be the first to admit that this is incredibly unlikely to the point of impossibility. But the fact is that this dangerous and highly valuable resource is routinely transported through our ports and waters, with barely any safeguards protecting it – least of all legal ramifications for potential acts of nuclear terrorism. These ships do not have any extra security, and the theft of this uranium would have no greater punishment under our current laws than any other form of piracy. The Convention would change that, but only now, seven years after we signed it, have we even begun moving towards ratifying it.

Our international efforts and commitments to nuclear security are truly remarkable. However, it is unfortunate that the Government has been so apathetic with regards to taking any practical measures towards furthering this at home.

The reason the Government has touted for this apathy is that New Zealand has no nuclear materials that could be at risk – the only radioactive materials we really have are minute amounts used for medical purposes. This is not at all true. In addition to the medical nuclear material is the vastly different uranium coming through Tauranga. This goes on to the United States, where it is intended for use in nuclear power plants. However, once it reaches the US, its final destination is hard to prove, and it is highly possible that it goes on to be enriched for use in nuclear weaponry. Just last year however, John Key dismissed it as “Australian dirt.”

This is not a substance we want coming into our waters and through our ports. New Zealand has an unparalleled reputation for advocating nuclear non-proliferation and a nuclear free world. We are admired and respected for it, and it is a stance which has allowed us to punch far above our weight in the international political arena, and has been the gem of our foreign relations.

We cannot risk these decades of hard work by allowing these shipments to continue. For us to ratify the International Convention for the Suppression of Acts of Nuclear Terrorism will be the next small step in this long tradition, and it will allow us to prove that this country really does care about nuclear security, and hold our heads high at nuclear summits. Putting an end to these shipments of uranium however will be the giant leap, for only when they are stopped will Aotearoa be nuclear free once and for all.

Our call for an investigation into Huawei being part of the Ultra-Fast Broadband roll out and Rural Broadband initiative is not because Huawei is Chinese. It is because of the links between Huawei and the authoritarian Chinese Government. The Chinese Government does not allow democracy or free speech, it routinely imprisons and tortures its citizens without trial, kills and imprisons Tibetans and any other minority groups that dare to speak out about their situation. It is engaged in systematic spying on its own citizens as well as dissidents overseas as well as supporting other undemocratic regimes pursue their own surveillance operations. It is also well established it launches cyber-attacks on other countries, including New Zealand.

We have serious concerns about the influence the Chinese Government has over Chinese companies (see The Party by Richard McGregor). The Chinese Government is aggressively pursuing a strategy to buy up land and infrastructure not just in New Zealand but around the globe. Do we really want to sell off our land, our assets and our infrastructure to companies that operate under the direction of the Chinese Government? The US government operating in a society with more democracy and free speech manages to force companies to hold and turn over data and information. The Chinese government has much more ability to apply pressure to companies operating in China.

There have been genuine concerns raised that if we give Huawei access to all the data on our broadband network then the Chinese dictatorship will gain full access to all data in NZ travelling on the network. That seems to me a reason for concern and for investigation.

Being opposed to the Chinese Government is not to be anti-Chinese any more than our vocal criticism of the US Government foreign policy over many years makes us anti-American or our vocal opposition to the dominance of the Aussie banks makes us anti-Australian.

We have equally raised concerns about US companies in the past as they hand data over to the US Government which has its own problems.

Our priority is making sure this significant taxpayer investment isn’t opening ourselves up to cyber-attack or spying by foreign governments, from whatever nation they may be.

Yesterday new research was released by the Colorado School of Public Health in the US linking air pollution from fracking with serious health problems for those who live near wells.

Incredibly dangerous chemicals, such as benzene, ethylbenzene, toluene and xylene were found at worrying levels near the wells in samples that were taken over a three year period. The study found that ‘people who live within a half mile of a fracking well are at a high risk of developing health problems because of the emissions, especially during the well completion period in which fracking fluids and natural gas return to the surface’.

The health problems caused by this air pollution aren’t minor; effects include difficulty breathing, impaired lung function, headaches, numbness of limbs, temporary limb paralysis and even unconsciousness. And then there’s the higher risk of cancer which is caused by exposure to the chemical benzene.

The study emphasises the need for concern and monitoring of health impacts of air pollution from fracking, along with the myriad of other concerns, including water contamination and seismic activity.

Here in Aotearoa, we have a window of opportunity to put a moratorium on fracking before it expands rapidly throughout the country, as has happened in the US. My question to the Government is: Will you sit back and wait until we see our communities suffering from the health impacts from fracking that are listed above? Or will you act responsibly and put an immediate moratorium on fracking until an independent inquiry is undertaken to assess the risk to our health and environment?

How much more evidence do we need that fracking isn’t worth the risks?

Fracking is a topical issue with 60 Minutes, The Sunday Star Times and Radio New Zealand covering it yesterday, and I was discussing it on Firstline this morning.

I think this controversial technique risks water contamination, air pollution, increased seismicity and acting precautionary the Government should place a moratorium on it like France, South Africa and Bulgaria have done until it is proved safe. The EU report says “Experience from the USA shows that many accidents happen, which can be harmful to the environment and to human health.” The report also undermines the claim that fracking for natural gas is a clean energy source, stating instead that emissions are ‘…higher than from conventional gas fields.’

The Government is misleading the public when they say fracking in New Zealand is well regulated and safe as we’ve seen consents being breached, and fracking fluids contaminating groundwater in Taranaki. Energy and Resources Minister Phil Heatley is putting our environment at risk yet New Zealand is unlikely to benefit with fracking bringing few jobs, low royalty payments, numerous tax exemptions, and most of the profits going offshore.

I’m pushing for the local Government and Environment Select Committee to undertake an investigation. We need some leadership shown by Parliament and to gather evidence from oil and gas companies, councils, and the public. If it as well regulated and safe as Mr Heatley says the Government should have nothing to fear from a thorough investigation. It was great to see pro-fracking New Plymouth Mayor Hary Duynhoven’s comments on 60 Minutes last night that he supports a select committee inquiry.

With half a dozen councils now calling for a moratorium or further investigation, the responsible thing would be for the Government to put in place a moratorium.

Big changes are ahead for our buses and the regional council wants to know what you think. Today I launched our easy electronic submission guide alongside 11 barrels of oil — the amount of oil our electric trolley bus fleet saves Wellington each day.

The regional council’s bus review is proposing to abandon electric trolley buses on the revised routes to Seatoun and the Aro Valley. This is incredibly short-sighted. The use of high-tech trolley buses should be expanding throughout Wellington, not going backwards.

Some of the efficiency gains in the review are good but it is essential that the trolley buses and overhead wires are fully utilised and provisions for a future light rail network are integrated into the review.

I love the trolleys. The trolleys are iconic to Wellington, make our city more liveable, and safeguard commuters and the council against oil price increases. Powered mostly by the wind, the council saves approximately $940,000 in diesel costs every year and over 1.5 million KGs of carbon emissions.

The review deadline is this Friday so don’t delay using our handy Wellington City bus review submission guide.

Gareth

Under a leaked draft of the TPPA, copyright length is to be extended from 50 to ‘…not less than 95 years from the end of the calendar year of the first authorized publication of the work, performance, or phonogram,’ meaning music and recordings set to enter the public domain in New Zealand will take decades longer.

An iconic song that would be impacted by the copyright extension is the Fourmyula’s “Nature” which was voted the best New Zealand song ever written. Produced in 1969 this song should enter the public domain in 2020 to be remixed, re-played, and re-imagined however under proposed TPPA rules Kiwis would have to wait to 2065. Likewise Ray Columbus’s “She’s a Mod,” released in June 1964 wouldn’t enter the public domain till 2059.

The extension in the term of copyright would mean no new works would enter the public domain in New Zealand until at least the late 2050s negatively impacting access to New Zealand culture and history. In particular ‘orphan works’ that aren’t available commercially would just not be accessible.

Kiwi listeners and artists will miss out on freely accessing Kiwi classics until the 2060s not benefiting the musicians who would have likely died decade’s prior, but benefitting mostly very profitable businesses who own the copyright. Copyright is about finding a balance and I welcome a discussion – should it be 40, 50, 60 years etc. but I think 95 years is extreme. In the UK, the Gowers Review of Intellectual Property concluded: the copyright term of recorded music should not be extended from the current 50 years after the date of recording to 95 years.

Extending the term of copyright would mean many GOLDEN DISC AWARD winners including Maria Dallas – “Tumbling Down,” Lee Grant – “Thanks To You,” Allison Durbin – “I Have Loved Me A Man,” Shane – “Saint Paul,” Craig Scott – “Lets Get A Little Sentimental,” and Hogsnort Rupert – “Pretty Girl,” wouldn’t enter the public domain over the next ten years.

Also impacted is “Blue Smoke”, composed by Rangi Ruru Wananga Karaitiana (d. 1970). “Blue Smoke” was the first record wholly produced in New Zealand from composition to pressing, and should enter the public domain in 2020 but wouldn’t till 2065. The songs of Peter Cape (d. 1979), which include  “Taumarunui On The Main Trunk Line”, “The Okaihau Express” and “She’ll Be Right Mate” which should enter the public domain in the 2030s but won’t until the 2070s.

The TPPA wouldn’t just affect our music but also our literary works. I’ve researched a list of New Zealand Books that would also be impacted by copyright extension that includes books by James K. Baxter, Dame Ngaio Marsh, the novel Came a Hot Friday and what’s considered New Zealand’s first gay novel.

The most worrying aspect of the TPPA is the secretive process. The Government needs to be up-front and transparent with the people of New Zealand. What does the New Zealand Government think about the U.S’s intellectual property proposals, will they give up Pharmac or the ability to control things like tobacco to get the trade deal through? What do you think, should we surrender our copyright term sovereignty?

The 60 Minutes piece also mentioned the scheduled review of the National Plan of Action (Sharks) this year. The newly-created Ministry of Primary Industries is responsible for this, and recent indications suggest submissions on this will be accepted around mid-year. I’ll keep you posted on this, because 2012 is the year we can stop New Zealand shark finning.

The NPOA-Sharks desperately need revising. The provisions mentioned in 60 Minutes are inadequate, there are insufficient Fisheries Officers to monitor all our vessels, and without accurate stock numbers any monitoring they do is little better than guesswork.

That’s why I’ve requested a meeting with the Minister for Primary Industries, David Carter, to try and persuade him to implement a ‘fins naturally attached’ (FNA) policy as well as introduction of more Fisheries Officers to make sure that this new standard is adhered to. One of the great things about FNA is how easy it is to monitor and enforce: any loose fin is illegal.

With any luck, Carter will share the view of his colleague, Nick Smith, who called the practise “abhorrent” and put an end to it.

The accident report shows corners were cut to get to Tauranga before 3am, records were falsified and the crew was confused by a variety of factors before the collision with Astrolabe Reef. I think it shows the need for better regulation in New Zealand’s waters to protect our environment and taxpayers from ships that cut corners because of a commercial imperative.  We also need to be seriously considering compulsory shipping lanes for some vessels to stop the likelihood of another Rena occurring.

In Select Committee Maritime New Zealand incredibly argued that the public’s concerns about the oil spill response was down to Maritime NZ’s media management; not at all based in the reality on the ground in the Bay of Plenty. As though if they had managed the media better less wildlife would have be

It is clear Maritime NZ is systemically and critically underfunded. Maritime NZ’s budget was frozen in 2008 and was $3m in deficit for the financial year; the Oil Pollution Fund was also running at a deficit and had been reduced from $12m to only $3.4m and funding of the Rescue Coordination Centre NZ  was also running a deficit and its reserves depleted. It baffles the mind to wonder why they reduced cruise ship levies and weren’t taking all the levies available to them when they were in the red. Ultimately the funding problems led to the taxpayer picking up the tab.

Given the Rena’s costs may rise to as much as $130m it strikes me as extremely naive for officials to argue there was little risk of an oil spill so the Oil Pollution Fund could be drawn down to irresponsible levels.

Now we have Kiwis possibly heading off to courts in Europe to get compensation given we have ridiculously low liability limits of only $12m under the Maritime Transport Act and $600,000 under the Resource Management Act. Our Government has been remiss to not adopt the 2001 Bunkers Convention and the 1996 Limit to Liability for Maritime Claims Protocol which would have more than doubled the liability cap for the Rena disaster from $12 million to $29 million.

A 2010 review of their oil spill preparedness argued that they had adequate equipment to deal with a spill of 3500 tonnes, yet when the Rena hit, spilling hundreds of tonnes of oil we needed two aeroplanes full of equipment to travel to New Zealand. Maritime NZ also ignored business and union recommendations for a rapid-response multi-purpose vessel which may have helped in those early days after the spill.

We can learn from the Rena experience and work harder to protect our environment from future oil spills. There are solutions that will protect our valuable coast and ocean environment.

In the last couple of weeks we’ve seen a large amount of action around the country on fracking. I’ve been to public meetings where people have informed their communities and are getting organised, I’ve heard about many events, film nights and even a festival being organised in the coming weeks and months to raise awareness about fracking, and fracking was even raised in parliament for the first time when I asked energy Minister Phil Heatley what it would take to justify a moratorium, and what it would take for the Government to listen to community’s legitimate and scientifically based concerns. We’ve also seen district and regional councils calling on the Government for a moratorium, with the latest being Waimakariri council, which voted just yesterday.  Spreydon-Heathcote Community Board, which covers a large chunk of Southern Christchurch yesterday declared their ward a  ‘fracking free zone’ and asked Christchurch city council to do the same.

I’ve also seen the Government and Industry accuse those with concerns of being anti-science, and of spreading uninformed myths. It’s important to emphasise that the information we have on fracking which has led to this growing movement against it is based on sound scientific evidence gathered both here and overseas. The Minister would like to box us into the ‘extreme green lobby’ but his accusations are paper thin when the evidence is considered. Out of ten countries worldwide which are known to use fracking, only three of those countries; Ireland, China and New Zealand have no partial or complete moratoriums in place.

The Minister cites a GNS report which stated that of the earthquakes occurring in Taranaki, none were caused by fracking, as reason to say that there is no evidence that says fracking causes earthquakes. I would suggest that the Minister cast his net a little wider and read some of the numerous respected peer reviewed scientific reports that suggest the opposite, and have caused so many regions around the world to halt the practice. To do otherwise is to disrespect the communities calling so rigorously for a moratorium, many of whom have experienced the pain of the affects of earthquakes first hand. Just one example is the report commissioned by the gas industry itself in Blackpool, UK, which concluded fracking was causing earthquakes in the area. American geophysicist Michael Hastings was in New Zealand in 2011 told a public meeting ‘You basically need these earthquakes to produce the fracture system and permeability in reservoirs,”.

So all you legitimately concerned kiwis, make that last push for signatures and get them in by next Wednesday the 14^th. Don’t worry; the FrackNo campaign doesn’t end with the petition; we’ve got a lot more planned in the coming months.

We are a coastal nation and have a close affinity to the sea. We love to gather kai moana, fish and play. Oceans cover 70% of our planet and represent over 95% of the biosphere and New Zealand, our waters are particularly special.

Our oceans however are at risk. Last week an important report was released, showing the Earth’s oceans may be acidifying faster than at any point during the last 300 million years due to industrial emissions, endangering marine life from oysters and reefs to sea-going salmon. Current New Zealand fisheries practises risk our valuable international brand. From foreign slave ships, to endangered sea lion by-catch to dead dolphins our fisheries are increasingly questioned globally and being boycotted.

In New Zealand we stand on the edge of risky deep-sea oil drilling. The Government is selling New Zealand cheaply with one of the most business-friendly drilling regimes in the world. Drillers are investigating the Great South Basin, between the ‘roaring forties and furious fifties’ and the seismically active Raukumara Basin, to get that last fix of oil despite the cost, hostile environment and significant risks. Both could see exploratory wells drilled in excess of 1000m down, which could lead to deep, deep trouble.

If there is a leak from a deep sea oil rig there is no easy way to stop it especially in remote, hostile environments like the Great South Basin. The Rena demonstrated our oil pollution response isn’t adequate for even a moderate spill. The consequence for New Zealand’s environment, economy and reputation would be catastrophic. The Government’s new Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects) Bill wont plug a spill, won’t meet our international obligation to ‘protect and preserve’ our EEZ, and will simply facilitate deep-sea drilling and sea floor mining. It could be called more honestly the ‘E-Z Drilling Bill’.

It’s not all stormy seas however. Healthy oceans are also an economic opportunity. As I pointed out in a speech to the fishing industry last year, sustainability isn’t a luxury, it’s should be heart of a vibrant Kiwi fishing industry. The United Nations Environment Programme in a recent report said, ‘Cleaner and better-managed seas and coasts would help boost economic growth and reduce poverty and pollution.’ With a marine area twenty times larger than our land area New Zealand can be a world leader selling our expertise in conservation, marine technologies and marine tourism to the world.

What we need is a reform of our fisheries legislation, ambitious targets for marine reserves including the pristine Ross Sea, protection for threatened animals like Maui’s and Hector’s dolphins and the New Zealand Sea Lion, an end to shark-finning, and true oceans protection legislation not an E-Z Drilling Bill.

The Government likes to portray those calling for a moratorium on the controversial practice as the ‘extreme green lobby’ but what I saw at the meeting was passionate calls of concern from farmers and everyday Kiwis.

Fracking has occurred in the region for a couple of decades now and locals are concerned and getting active and organised on the issue. It’s not surprising given this is the region that faced the Ivan Watkins Dow toxic catastrophe. I believe places like Taranaki and the East Coast are the front lines of the Governments “drill it, mine it” approach for New Zealand.

Meeting organiser Sarah Roberts spoke on her experiences trying to get information and her battles with councils over the notification of fracking wells on what’s essentially her back door step. Her partner spoke on how Stratford markets itself as the heart of Taranaki, but how there is a cancer at that heart which is spreading.

A theme of discussion from the floor of the meeting was disillusionment with the local Councils who haven’t been responding to inquiries and not publicly notifying consents even for next door landowners. There is concern that the council delegates decisions to its Director of Resource Management who worked in the oil industry and is playing a political game with tactical releases of reports, such as the Ngare report, the day before this public meeting.

There were some interesting anecdotes such as a local lady who spoke about how one day her well bore erupted with gushing water which she suspects is a nearby fracking well. She still can’t get the dates of frack jobs from the council.

One farmer said in the twenty years he’s been living near a well, he’s seen five oil companies come and go.  The community is also concerned about liability. Who pays for the clean-up if there is contamination? What if there is a leak or contamination after the oil or gas company has packed up and left? I’ll be looking into these questions closely in the coming weeks.

I spoke on encouraging international moratoriums in France, South Africa and Bulgaria and states in Australia, Canada and the US, council moratorium votes in Selwyn, Christchurch and Kaikōura and the Parliamentary Commissioner for the environments who is being scoping work on an investigation.

I believe we can see a moratorium on fracking and the way to do it is using similar tactics as we saw in the successful nuclear free NZ campaign. We need local action to achieve a national result. It’s these directly affected residents who are on the frontlines who will achieve a moratorium in NZ.

I spoke about my questions to Energy Minister Phil Heatley yesterday in Parliament and disturbing facts from Kapuni and Cheal A and B wells. I asked the Minister yesterday to front up and admit what exactly would justify a moratorium on fracking, when we have so much evidence to prove its health and environmental dangers. You can see my question to the Minister in question time yesterday here.

The community passed a unanimous motion to call on the Taranaki Councils to place an immediate moratorium on fracking, and to call for an independent inquiry into the process and what is occurring in Taranaki.  A second motion supported the Hawkes Bay regional Council’s call for an urgent investigation into fracking by the PCE. The community was clear all fracking wells should be publicly notified.

All in all, I think it’s an insult for the Minister to accuse all those concerned about fracking of being part of an ‘extreme green lobby’. What I saw last night was a community who fears for their health and the health of their kids.  Contrary to the Minister’s claims, these concerned communities are not just worried about what could happen; they are worried about what is happening already, both in their own communities and to other communities feeling the effects of fracking.  It’s time the Minister started listening to these people, not just the oil and gas lobbyists.

What has Richard Branson, a National Geographic oceanographer and Edward Norton got in common? They all want to see greater Antarctic marine protected areas included in the Ross Sea.

Today I was privileged to attend the launch of the Antarctic Ocean Alliance’s first report, “Antarctic Ocean Legacy: A Marine Reserve for the Ross Sea,” and a campaign video.

This is an amazing, pristine environment that deserves protection. At a time when major fish stocks are declining or collapsing and fishers have to go further and further from land to land a catch it’s vital we preserve and protect what’s perhaps the last pristine ecosystem left.

They say: “The report outlines a proposal and rationale for a fully protected marine reserve in the Ross Sea, to become the keystone of the world’s largest network of marine protected areas and no-take marine reserves in the Southern Ocean around Antarctica. Antarctic waters make up almost 10% of the world’s seas and are some of the most intact left on earth. Home to almost 10,000 unique and diverse species such as penguins, seals and whales, these waters are now at risk from the impacts of commercial fishing and climate change. In addition to the Ross Sea region outlined, the Alliance is calling for 19 critical habitats in Antarctica’s Southern Ocean to be protected and will release a report in the coming months analysing all of these critical habitats.”

New Zealand has an important role. As one of the Antarctic Treaty signatory nations, our vote is key. As the nation with historical connections and that led the charge and opened the toothfish fishery in 1996 and now the major fisher nation in the Ross Sea our responsibility is great. Join the campaign, and let the Government know that while it was pretty impressive what they did for Happy Feet, the penguin, they could also do a lot too for the rest of his whānau.