Leading International Climate Scientists Rubbish Luxon's ‘Methane Review', Call On PM To Take Methane Seriously
Over 25 international climate change scientists have written an open letter to Prime Minister Christopher Luxon, calling out the Government for 'ignoring scientific evidence' and urging it to 'deliver methane reductions that contribute to the goal of limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees.'
According to the Financial Times report, leading climate scientists are accusing politicians in New Zealand and Ireland of using an 'accounting trick' that could undermine global efforts to fight climate change. Specifically the use of 'no additional warming' as a way of setting methane targets would unjustly allow countries with large historic livestock emissions to keep polluting, while penalising poorer countries.
Greenpeace Aotearoa spokesperson Amanda Larsson says, 'This is yet more international criticism of the New Zealand government's anti-science approach to tackling climate change.
'The New Zealand dairy industry is the country's worst climate polluter. Yet rather than responding to the climate crisis with action, the New Zealand Government is looking to sweep the problem under the rug with creative accounting.'
The concept of 'no additional warming' is highly controversial because it focuses on keeping emissions at current levels, rather than reducing them.
Quoted in the Financial Times article is Oxford University Professor Paul Behrens, who said: 'It's like saying 'I'm pouring 100 barrels of pollution into this river, and it's killing life. If I then go and pour just 90 barrels, then I should get credited for that'.'
'No additional warming' has also been criticised by New Zealand experts, including the independent Climate Change Commission and the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment. The open letter urges Luxon to listen to the Climate Commission's advice and strengthen action on methane.
The Climate Change Commission recommends methane cuts of 35-47%. However, under pressure from lobby groups like Federated Farmers – whose ex-President Andrew Hoggard is now an ACT Party MP – the Government established a separate panel to review the methane target in line with this controversial tool. That panel landed on a much weaker methane target.
Documents released under the Official Information Act show that the methane panel was established because the Climate Commission's independence meant the Government could not direct it to use 'no additional warming'. Ministry for the Environment officials advised at the time that 'no additional warming' was not in fact a matter of science, but a political decision.
Larsson says, 'The Luxon Government chose to sideline its independent, science-based climate advisory body by setting up a separate review panel with the very narrow task of giving it the answers it wanted. No wonder international climate scientists are raising the alarm.'
Further OIA documents show that the Methane Review Panel only met with agribusiness stakeholders, including a Groundswell-linked lobby group.
Greenpeace says this is just the tip of the iceberg. The organisation has unveiled documents showing the startling level of influence that groups like Federated Farmers, Dairy NZ and Beef+Lamb NZ have had over government policy. This includes writing draft policy and communications plans for Ministers.
'Most New Zealanders are deeply concerned about climate change and the risk to their kids and grandkids,' says Larsson.
'They expect the Government to be using the best evidence from its appointed experts, not fudging the numbers to let the country's worst polluters off the hook. This is what happens when you let polluters write the policy.'
The Government has indicated that it will make a decision on the methane target this year, ahead of the UN climate summit in the Amazon this November.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NZ Herald
2 hours ago
- NZ Herald
Shane Te Pou: Tāmaki Makaurau byelection a chance to test out campaign machine
No electorate belongs to any party and Peeni Henare (who was Tāmaki Makaurau's MP for three terms until he lost to Kemp by 42 votes) has every right to try to win the seat back. And, contrary to some claims that Henare winning would mean fewer Māori in Parliament, if he wins the electorate, Labour will have an empty list seat, with the next in line being the wāhine Māori Georgie Dansey. Labour's Peeni Henare was Tāmaki Makaurau's MP for three terms and is fighting to win the seat back. Photo / Mark Mitchell Having a contested campaign is good for Labour and Te Pāti Māori. It will allow both parties to give their election campaign machines a run and put forward their vision to people who have been hard hit by this Government's poor decisions and negligence. According to the latest census, construction is the biggest employer for Tāmaki Makaurau voters. It's also been a sector that's been hammered by the Government stopping large infrastructure projects mid-stream and cutting off funding for building more state houses. Oriini Kaipara is the Te Pāti Māori candidate for the Tāmaki Makaurau byelection. Photo / Supplied Fifteen thousand construction jobs have been lost in the past two years. Nationwide, the economy has lost 34,000 jobs in the past year and Māori unemployment is over 10%. Rising costs for basics such as food, GP visits, prescriptions, and electricity are hitting whānau who are dealing with job losses, all while being characterised as dole bludgers by a Government that seemingly has no solutions. With 79% of Tāmaki Makaurau voters renting, they're also feeling the pinch of continuing rent rises. The reality is most of our people work, but no matter how hard they work, even holding down two jobs, they just cannot get ahead in life. Many whānau live in overcrowded homes, with the constant spectre of having nowhere to live as the Government has brought back no-cause evictions and cut off access to emergency housing. Anyone who walks the streets of our largest city knows that the number of homeless people in Tāmaki Makaurau is growing, and many of them are Māori. Labour says its focus is on jobs, homes, health and the cost of living. Those are clearly key issues for voters, who are unimpressed by this Government's lack of delivery and their carelessness towards the hurt people are feeling. But voters aren't yet ready to fully embrace Labour – probably because of the lack of a vision and policy to go with those priorities. This byelection is an opportunity for Labour to start putting some meat on those bones and present themselves as an alternative government that people can trust with their vote. For Te Pāti Māori, holding on to Tāmaki Makaurau will be an important goal, to cement their hold on the Māori seats and prove that 2023 wasn't a passing high-tide mark, like 2008 was. It will also be a test of how they handle more mainstream media attention. Next year, National will spend a huge amount of money and energy trying to show that a vote for Labour is a vote for Te Pāti Māori and that they are too extreme to be let near power. It will be up to Te Pāti Māori to prove that fear-mongering wrong. Labour and Te Pāti Māori will need to use this byelection to show they can compete while keeping things civil and positive. Oriini Kaipara and Peeni Henare are excellent candidates, and I'm not making a pick on who will win. I am confident that whoever is elected will be able to represent our people well. I hope that the winner will work tirelessly for more jobs, more houses and better public services. Two years of cuts and negligence have left our people hurting. It's time for some hope.
NZ Herald
3 hours ago
- NZ Herald
Heather du Plessis-Allan: We are being irrational about the price of butter
Unless you're into commercial scale baking, butter is not the thing putting the most pressure on household budgets. Try power. This winter power is costing the average household almost a block of butter every day. Or rates. That's costing the average Wellingtonian more than a block of butter every day. Those expenses have no alternatives. You have to pay them. With butter we at least have alternatives. If we don't like the price we can do a swap. I don't want to be Marie Antoinette but at least we have the option to switch to margarine. Not only have we abandoned logic, but also facts. Even the Finance Minister briefly took to complaining that butter is cheaper in Australia than in the very country that produces it. Except that's not true. At the time of writing, if you take Woolworths' salted butter, which is available both sides of the Tasman, adjust for currency and the fact the Australian Government does not charge their equivalent of GST on butter, we actually pay 30c less. Discounting butter domestically is impractical, as it would require subsidies, impacting farmers and shareholders. Actually, the price of butter is a good news story for New Zealand. Because if we're paying our farmers more, the world is paying our farmers more. And they're buying a lot more blocks of butter than we are. So that means they're paying a good chunk towards our tax take, our health, our roads, our schools. It's become slightly fashionable to suggest the solution is to discount butter domestically. That's a nutty idea. A discount is a subsidy. A subsidy has to be paid by someone. Who? Fonterra? The shareholders will probably object to that. Maybe, if this drama runs on long enough and there is enough reputational damage to Fonterra, it might be in the business' interest to cut the price to make the pain stop. That would not be a good day for farmers and shareholders. Miles Hurrell attributes the 46.5% rise in butter prices to global demand and supply issues. Photo / Alyse Wright The Government? Again, bonkers. If New Zealand is too broke to afford the full Dunedin hospital build, we're too broke to help commercial bakers afford their butter. The truth is there is no fix to the price of butter that isn't stupid or temporary. We simply have to pay the price that we pay. And the Finance Minister knows this. She knows this because she is a very clever woman. And because she worked for Fonterra for six years. Finance Minister Nicola Willis has turned butter into the cost-of-living symbol. Photo / Mark Mitchell So, she should never have turned butter into the cost-of-living symbol she has. This really started with her in April when she visited Costco and was taken by the fact it could sell butter for about half the price mainstream supermarkets were selling it for. It became her evidence that supermarkets were ripping us off. But then somehow, Fonterra got dragged into it and one of their regular ministerial briefings became a please-explain. And then the TV news was chasing the CEO Miles Hurrell around the forecourt of Parliament and going live to air while the meeting was under way. And there were expectations. And then nothing happened. And it has become yet another example of the Finance Minister, disappointingly, talking big but doing nothing. Just like with the retail banks. And just like with the supermarkets, so far. Spare a thought for Hurrell. The man is one of the most impressive Kiwi CEOs of his generation but had to spend his week cast as the villain of the butter story. There is no story. It's not even the biggest pressure on our weekly bills.
1News
11 hours ago
- 1News
Te Pāti Māori, Greens outraged at 'marginalising' passport changes
Te Pāti Māori says the Government's changes to passports are an attempt to whitewash the national identity. The Government confirmed on Friday that New Zealand's passport is being redesigned to place the English words above the te reo Māori text. The new look won't start being rolled out until the end of 2027. Since 2021, passports have had "Uruwhenua Aotearoa" printed in silver directly above New Zealand Passport. Internal Affairs Minister Brooke van Velden said the positioning of text on passports will change to reflect the Government's commitment to using English first. She said the redesign, which would be unveiled later this year, was being done as part of a scheduled security upgrade, ensuring no additional cost to passport holders. ADVERTISEMENT Te Pāti Māori co-leader Debbie Ngarewa-Packer said the change diminishes the visibility of tangata whenua. "Our passport is not just a travel document, it's a statement of who we are as a nation. So, the stripping down of te reo Māori, or marginalising our indigenous identity, reflects this Government's sad obsession with erasing Te Tiriti o Waitangi and dragging us back to a monocultural past," she said. Ngarewa-Packer said the move undermined Aotearoa's reputation as a leading nation in recognising indigenous rights. "Restoring our reo took a long time. I mean imagine doing this in Ireland, imagine doing this to the Welsh. This was hard fought for. It's not re-ordering of words, the reformatting is deliberately done to undermine the mana [and] to sideline us tangata whenua." Not 'a positive vision' - Greens Green MP Benjamin Doyle. (Source: Green Party MP Benjamin Doyle said the move is not what New Zealanders need from the government. ADVERTISEMENT "We are seeing day by day, the rights and dignities of minority communities being stripped away while they leave the majority of New Zealanders suffering under the Government's current decisions," Doyle said. "This is not a positive vision for Aotearoa, this is not a positive step towards unifying kotahitanga and it's not benefiting anyone. Really, its just dog-whistling politics. It's the tail wagging the dog." The ACT Party celebrated van Velden's move on social media, saying the change would "restore English before te reo Māori - without costing taxpayers". The change comes as part of a deliberate push by the coalition to give English primacy over te reo Māori in official communications. New Zealand First's coalition agreement with National stipulates that public service departments have their primary name in English and be required to communicate "primarily in English" except for entities specifically related to Māori. It also includes an as-yet-unfulfilled commitment to make English an official language of New Zealand.
