Te Puke mining under spotlight

Posted on 26-06-2012 22:56 | By earthworm

Companies paying hardly any tax? Risk of environment damage? Sounds like a government could legislate appropriate tax and safeguards. Sounds like the Greens could play a really useful role in government to achieve that........but NO. They have always been too inflexible to work with anyone for any period to time even for the greater good.

Posted on 20-06-2012 22:46 | By Otters

you make many strange assumptions. I am not a Mr Otters, but a Ms. The comparison betwen slave traders and mining corporations is alluding to the stupidity of the "jobs at any cost" argument. Don’t understand the allusion to hemp - never had anything to do with the stuff. You make the extraordinary assumption that I oppose all mining, which I don’t; just unnecessary, environmentally destructive mining (which applies to all gold mining). I am not rich by any stretch of the imagination. Have struggled to put food on table but then learnt to grow it myself and not mindlessly consume stuff for the sack of it, so had enough to manage on, and yes, I have been unemployed. Choice is not between mining jobs and no jobs - choice is between jobs in a destructive and unnecessary industry such as gold mining, or jobs in something sustainable and non-destructive which actually gives jobs to more people, including the unskilled, such as, in Te Puke’s case, mixed culture fruit growing. As for the allusion that as someone who cares for the environment I think people in third world countries shouldn’t cut down their trees; um, not sure what the point is there but I have certainly, over 40 years, supported organisations in third world countries who are helping the disenfranchised poor to get their land back so that they can grow their own food, including coppicing tree crops, so they don’t have to sacrifice their forests in order to survive. Like most environmentalists that I know, i do not support growing crops for biofuels. and why, for goodness’ sakes, make the assumption (Mr Hector!) that because I give a damn about the environmental and social destruction of mining, I don’t give a damn about rodents in the bush, etc?? Bizarre!

Posted on 20-06-2012 18:09 | By Hector

Is not democracy grand, when everyone is entitled to an opinion, you have yours ( wrapped in hemp as it may be), but it is yours. You cannot have it both ways, and I agree with Steve Morris and his opinion, and what is democracy is putting the issue to a vote, and if 51% vote for it then Mr Otter I am afraid you will be stuck in a weir, and there are many other issues that should be concerning you, maybe like, rodents in our Native bush, Canada Gesse destroying pasture, Black Swans making our harbour into a cess pit, I could go on.

Posted on 20-06-2012 16:07 | By Steve Morris

@Otters whilst I honour your concern for our environment you surely don’t mean to compare miners to slave traders? In my view, environmental purism ignores the complex world we live in; it is largely the preserve of the rich who don’t need to make a choice between a mining job or no job. Legitimate concern about destruction and toxicity should not mean opposing any and all mining. Some purists may think their zeal for the environment keeps them warm but it doesn’t warm the children in Ben Keys St at night, nor does it put food on their table. It is the same attitude that says to third world countries ’you can’t cut down you’re trees because we’ve cut down all of ours in the west and reaped the benefit.’ For all the positives in banning something it is the same attitude that can’t see the extra malnutrition in the world caused by the replacement of food crops with biofuel ones. To oppose mining simply because one is in opposition is missing the point of true and effective opposition in our democracy.

Posted on 20-06-2012 14:32 | By Otters

...and before you ask, other options might include those people with devastated kiwifruit orchards looking to other ways of growing fruit other than in the unsupportable monocultures that are the inevitable target for pests and diseases. The infrastructure for more sustainable fruit production is there, along with the knowledge skill, and space (in the form of existing orchards). So let’s get on with that instead of fouling our own nests!

Posted on 20-06-2012 14:26 | By Otters

I roll my eyes every time I see "job creation" rolled out as an excuse for doing something destructive. I am sure that the slave traders resented losing their jobs when the call went out to abolish the slave trade! We are talking about gold mines here - there is more gold already above ground than we will ever need even for "essentials" such as computers and other technology. Profits of mining do not stay here in New Zealand, nor do these companies pay royalties. Newmont paints a picture of Waihi as a thriving town where everyone delights in mining - yet Waihi is struggling with little benefit to show for the environmental devastation and the huge mess that is Newmont’s toxic legacy to the town and there is, in fact, a good deal of local opposition to Newmont. The local jobs in mining are in fact minimal; better to look at other options that don’t rip off the locals both financially and environmentally.

Posted on 20-06-2012 13:17 | By Steve Morris

Simply opposing all mining is not the answer when it provides well paying jobs for less skilled labour, and therefore warmer houses, kids with breakfast in the morning and shoes for school, the self-respect and community respect that comes from work, raising whole families out of poverty. Jobs are the best medicine for third world diseases in NZ such as rheumatic fever. Opposing selective mining at every opportunity hurts our community.

Posted on 20-06-2012 13:10 | By Jiz

Come on Green Party. Get your head out of the ground and Let the people of Te Puke get on with it...Give us a go

Posted on 20-06-2012 11:04 | By SpeakUp

Soon we won’t have ANY say in regard to mining practices. Big mining industry can under the ’TPPA’ sue the NZ government if new regulations impinge on their share value or profitability. The same goes for the tobacco industry (kiss smoke-free goodbye), oil drilling industry (they will sue against FS&SB legislation) and any other foreign corporate colossus who doesn’t like our sovereign regulations and jurisdiction.

Posted on 20-06-2012 10:37 | By Steve Morris

If mining is of little benefit to Australia then how come people are moving from the Bay to work in the mines in W.A.? The Green’s are blaming the government for NZers moving to Australia for mining jobs but are doing everything they can to stop mining jobs in New Zealand. C’mon you can’t have it both ways surely!

Posted on 20-06-2012 10:06 | By SpeakUp

...the revenue of mining would stay in the country. But it does not. It is a total sell-out of –again- New Zealand’s assets. The post-World War II version of free trade promoted “fair trade” and often achieved a healthy balance of payments. But the “Washington Consensus” threw caution to the wind, allowing Big Business and ‘Corpocracy’ to dominate government policy, making deficits routine. Free trade agreements, such as the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), have virtually destroyed US-based manufacturing, leaving Main Street America with a service sector economy. Now, the same happens here with the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPPA). The TPPA is yet another secretive free trade deal intended to free-up access to our assets. The TPPA would render New Zealand government decisions subject to rulings by international tribunals, to the benefit of investors from the negotiating countries of Malaysia, Singapore, Chile, Brunei, Australia, Peru, Vietnam and especially the United States. NZ courts would have NO SAY and NO AVENUE to deflect the asset grab of corporations. National is about to sign away a chunk of our sovereignty and turn control of economy over to corporates like Merrill Lynch, GS, JPM, Exxon, GE, big pharmed corporations, etc. The TPP is not really a trade agreement; it is a Trojan horse like attempt to subvert national sovereignty to corporate power!!! It has been written by corporations (600 contributors) for corporations in complete secrecy. It is nothing less than a parallel system of courts and justice that TRUMP our national legislatures and courts. We are about to lose our sovereignty!!! We will be owned by foreign plutocracy/corpocracy. This is how “free trade” agreements pave the way for the extraction of wealth, by the erosion of economic sovereignty. The Key government’s privatisation agenda is well advanced, with various private public partnerships (PPPs) already being developed. The argument of paying down debt is a trick. This neo-liberal doctrine includes the privatisation of prisons, schools, water resources, and all infrastructures. Ultimately on offer is $5-20 trillion in Crown mineral wealth, including gold, coal, lignite, phosphate, iron sand, oil, natural gas, and more, all under the fourth lowest royalty and taxation regime in the world – a paltry 1% of the production value!!! Most Kiwis are blinded by little side-show smokescreen news, totally unaware of the total sale of New Zealand. Here is Professor Jane Kelsey’s press release. http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO1206/S00186/national-says-yes-to-investor-rights-to-sue.htm

Posted on 20-06-2012 09:47 | By wreck1080

The greens want to shutdown everything that may emit Co2, including human beings.