spinofflive
Climate change minister James Shaw and Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern have welcome the climate change commission report. (Photo by Hagen Hopkins/Getty Images)
Climate change minister James Shaw and Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern have welcome the climate change commission report. (Photo by Hagen Hopkins/Getty Images)

PoliticsDecember 17, 2018

NZ urged ‘high ambition’ on climate in Poland. Now let’s see that at home

Climate change minister James Shaw and Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern have welcome the climate change commission report. (Photo by Hagen Hopkins/Getty Images)
Climate change minister James Shaw and Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern have welcome the climate change commission report. (Photo by Hagen Hopkins/Getty Images)

We punched above our weight at the just-completed talks. But we must walk the talk at home, writes environmental lawyer Natalie Jones

After a fortnight of meetings and a one-day extension, a deal was finalised yesterday at the UN climate talks in Katowice, Poland. The accord was hailed as delivering a set of strong, robust rules which will give the Paris Agreement the best chance of being effective and workable. Nations also responded to the IPCC Special Report on 1.5°C of Global Warming.

New Zealand played a small yet important role in the talks, as a member of the High Ambition Coalition. Dubbed “the Justice League for global warming diplomacy”, this is a group of countries which pushed for a strong response to the IPCC Report and a robust rulebook. First formed at the Paris Climate Conference in 2015, and widely credited with the inclusion of the 1.5°C temperature goal in the Paris Agreement, the High Ambition Coalition made an impressive comeback in Katowice after oil-producing nations Saudi Arabia, the United States, Russia and Kuwait blocked agreement on how to respond to the IPCC Report.

It’s a small triumph in itself that New Zealand was included in the High Ambition Coalition. Back in Paris, New Zealand was not invited to be a member. We weren’t seen to be ambitious enough on climate change. That our international image has come so far is a credit to this government.

In the past year, the Jacinda Ardern led government has made great strides on climate policy, banning new offshore oil and gas exploration, launching a $100 million green investment fund, committing to plant one billion trees in the next decade, and holding a nationwide consultation on a Zero Carbon Act. Last week, the government announced it will put a cap on the Emissions Trading Scheme, and include permanent forests – making the scheme more predictable and fit for purpose. Here in Katowice, Climate Change Minister James Shaw ruled out carrying over surplus Kyoto Protocol emissions units to meet New Zealand’s 2030 target, which would have undermined real climate action.

These steps are all commendable and send a strong signal to markets. But we cannot rest on our laurels. New Zealand’s greenhouse gas emissions are still fifth highest in the OECD per capita, and continue to rise. Our pledge to reduce emissions under the Paris Agreement – known as our nationally determined contribution, or NDC – is currently set at 30% below 2005 levels (11% below 1990 levels) by 2030. This is inconsistent with holding warming below 2°C, let alone 1.5°C. Under current policies –not counting measures which have been announced but not yet implemented– we won’t even meet this target. New Zealand’s emissions are projected to increase by 15% above 1990 levels by 2030.

Just looking at the numbers, it’s clear that New Zealand must do much more. We must do everything within our reach, and then some. This starts with passing an effective Zero Carbon Act, with cross-party buy-in. One of the most significant findings of the IPCC Report was that all sectors have a role to play. We must ensure deep and lasting emissions reductions across all sectors, including transport, industry, cities, and agriculture. Significantly reducing methane emissions, as well as carbon, is crucial. We must implement the changes to the ETS – and supplement it with other regulations, because another implication of the IPCC Report is that putting a price on carbon is no longer enough.

High school students remind negotiators at COP 24 that there are only 12 years left to limit the devastating impacts of climate change. Photo credit: Kiara Worth/IISD/ENB

We must revise our NDC in light of the latest science – aiming for at least a 50% emissions reduction below current levels by 2030. This is not radical: it’s the least stringent end of what would be our fair share of global effort. In September 2019, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres will hold a climate summit in New York. This would be an ideal opportunity to announce our new, ambitious target on the global stage, and in so doing maintain international credibility.

All of this is especially true in light of the IPCC 1.5°C Report. Its messages are clear: to have a good chance of keeping warming to 1.5°C and limiting devastating climate impacts, we must halve emissions from current levels by 2030, and reach net zero by 2050. Doing this, according to the IPCC, will require “rapid, far-reaching and unprecedented changes in all aspects of society”. In short, the next 12 years will be an incredibly exciting period in human history, seeing unprecedented innovation and creativity. With our “can-do”, number-eight-wire mentality, Kiwis are well-positioned to be part of this economic opportunity.

More than anything, we, the public, must continue to give the Government a strong mandate for climate action. We can make a meaningful difference daily by eating less meat, flying less, and taking public transport or cycling, but we can achieve a lot more by collectively pushing effective policies at the national and local levels. This is not about bashing the government, but encouraging them to act. We still have a long way to go.

Declaring New Zealand to be “High Ambition” on the international stage shows courage and leadership. The government must ensure it lives up to the title at home, throughout the next 12 years and beyond.

 

Keep going!
Christchurch mayor Lianne Dalziel (centre-left) and Gerry Brownlee (centre-right) (Photo: Flickr/Christchurch City Libraries)
Christchurch mayor Lianne Dalziel (centre-left) and Gerry Brownlee (centre-right) (Photo: Flickr/Christchurch City Libraries)

PoliticsDecember 15, 2018

Does Lianne Dalziel deserve a third term as Christchurch mayor?

Christchurch mayor Lianne Dalziel (centre-left) and Gerry Brownlee (centre-right) (Photo: Flickr/Christchurch City Libraries)
Christchurch mayor Lianne Dalziel (centre-left) and Gerry Brownlee (centre-right) (Photo: Flickr/Christchurch City Libraries)

When Lianne Dalziel first ran for Christchurch mayor, she said it would be one time only. Then she said she hadn’t finished the job, and would serve a second term. And now she’s announced she wants a third. But has she achieved enough to warrant it, asks James Dann.

This week, Christchurch mayor Lianne Dalziel quashed any speculation about her future by confirming that she’ll seek a third term in the council chambers. After the chaos of the earthquake years and the dysfunction of the Parker-Marryatt era at council, her promise of “stability and confidence” has guided Christchurch over the last five years. But in 2019, will Christchurch be looking for a little more from its city leaders?

Dalziel first took office in 2013, riding a wave of discontent directed at the former mayor, Sir Bob Parker. As a long-serving Labour MP, she had become an outspoken critic of the National Government’s recovery strategy, especially the way that it had left behind the seat she represented, the badly-affected Christchurch East. She initially indicated that she only wanted one term, saying she would “fix the city and leave”, but was convinced to run again in 2016. She didn’t announce her intention to run until five months out from the 2016 vote, asking the voters for another term so that she could finish the job, but the last couple of years have hardly seen a burst of energy. Both elections have been comfortable wins, and 2019 is likely to be the same.

It’s easy to forget the level of dysfunction that plagued the council in the period around the quakes. Aside from the issues around the controversial CEO, the council was stripped of their ability to issue building consents, in a time when people were in desperate need of these consents being issued. There were strong rumours that the City Council would be “ECanned”, with the government appointing commissioners to run things, as they had done at the regional council. So bringing a sense of stability back to the council is no mean feat.

Aside from the stability side of things, there isn’t a huge list of achievements that Dalziel and her council can fall back on. At the top of the list would be Tūranga, the wonderful new library that the CCC contributed to the government’s Blueprint plan, which is an unreserved success. The council can’t claim much credit for the progress in the rest of the CBD as it largely follows the government’s plan (although they’ve contributed some car parking). There was plenty of controversy about the cycleways that were rolled out around town, and even though they aren’t yet complete, the numbers of cyclists are on the up.

Tūranga, the new central Christchurch library. Photo: Supplied

The two biggest issues for the council this year have been around water, which is shaping up to be the major issue again at next year’s elections, for both city and regional council. First, there was the introduction of chlorine to the drinking water, something that’s commonplace around the country but almost a third-rail issue in Christchurch which prides itself on its untreated artesian water supply. Secondly, the consents being given to a company to bottle water. The council has been caught flat-footed on these issues, and while they are trying to resolve both, there’s a strong sense that they’re playing catch-up.

While the city is progressing, it’s hard to say, who – if anyone – is in charge.

There’s been a leadership vacuum in the city since Gerry Brownlee passed the earthquake recovery portfolio to Nicky Wagner in 2017, and while I don’t agree with many, if any, of his major decisions, with Brownlee behind the desk there was never any question as to who was in charge. Wagner took a very softly-softly approach but was only in the role for sixth months before the change of government saw Megan Woods take the role. A former colleague of Dalziel’s, Woods made some loud noises about changing direction in her first few months in the job, including a joint announcement with the mayor calling for an urgent review of the Metro Sports Facility. While some hoped this might indicate a scaling back of some of the larger anchor projects, construction on the facility has now begun. The most recent joint announcement for Woods and Dalziel saw them on another gravel pit in the CBD, this time promoting the ground testing ahead of the controversial covered stadium project. With the government pledging an additional $300m for the stadium, Woods and Labour’s approach to the CBD seems to be largely sticking to National’s blueprint.

Floating into the leadership vacuum has been ChristchurchNZ. This council-owned company was formed in the middle of 2017 as a merger of a number of council-owned organisations, including Christchurch and Canterbury Tourism, the Canterbury Development Corporation, and the council’s major events team. This has resulted in a powerful organisation, combining marketing and promotion with economic development. ChristchurchNZ’s purpose is to “grow the economy for all” and its mission is to “ignite bold ambition for Ōtautahi Christchurch”. Led by former editor of The Press, Joanna Norris, its boosterism for the city has repeatedly set the agenda, especially with regards to the central city. As their role is to promote Christchurch, they’re relentlessly positive about the city, leaving them open to criticism that they aren’t a fair judge of the city’s progress. However, given their broad remit to advance the interests of the city, they’ve crept into the leadership space, and it could be argued that they’ve done more to set the city’s agenda in the last year than anyone from the council that nominally controls them.

Mayor Lianne Dalziel addresses the crowd at Smash Palace, Christchurch

This is part of the problem for Dalziel. Though she has a strong mandate and enough councillors around the table to support her on most decisions, there’s a feeling that the power in council doesn’t lie with the elected representatives, but with the un-named executive managers. Tensions between the staff and elected representatives have boiled over on a couple of occasions, including one of the councillors being censured for accusing council staff of tampering with the city plan.

Beyond that, or perhaps because of it, there’s been little public interest in the goings on at council. I can’t recall an electorate more disinterested in their council. Coverage in the media is paltry with councillors increasingly chasing likes on Facebook. A number of these accounts have become content mills, posting links to council decisions and news stories in an effort to build up their follower bases for the next election. Sadly, many of these posts ask “what do you think?” instead of telling people what their position on an issue is. Rather than having old-fashioned concepts like ‘values’ and ‘beliefs’, many of our councillors are being led by Facebook’s algorithm, and we know where chasing the ‘likes’ leads a democracy.

But Dalziel doesn’t have to worry about the election. She’s got this one. Unless a high-profile individual with nothing else to lose (Brownlee?) throws their hat in the ring, Dalziel will have little to fear from the campaign. If this really really is her cross-my-heart-pinky-promise last term as mayor, she needs to campaign on what she wants the city to look like when she finally does hang up the chains in 2022. Does she want her legacy to be the stadium, or is she committed to making the city a more attractive place to live? Will she build on the small but growing success of the cycleway network, to build a public transport network that’s better prepared for both a larger population and climate change? How is she going to combat the increasing suburban sprawl, as Christchurch and the surrounding satellites metastasise across the Canterbury Plains? While we’ve come through the earthquake period, Christchurch still has a number of major issues to deal with, and no-one seems to be tackling them with any urgency.

It’s up to Dalziel to decide if she wants her legacy to be more than just ‘Not Bob Parker’. She’s built-up a large amount of political capital across her first two terms and now is her chance to spend it all. She’s earned the opportunity to re-assert her leadership of the city, stamping her mark on it as we finally move out of the recovery phase.

James Dann ran as the Labour candidate at the 2014 election in Ilam, Christchurch. He lost.