By Chris Trotter*
It almost worked. “Matua Shane”, local supporters in tow, advanced down the main street of Blackball. Had the Minister for Resources, Shane Jones, been supplied with a full-sized loud-hailer to amplify his pro-mining slogans, then the photo-op would have been an unqualified success. Unfortunately, the Minister’s loud-hailer was not full-sized, truth-to-tell it was comically under-sized, and the “optics” of that were not great – not great at all.
What that tiny loud-hailer, than mini-megaphone, signalled to the world was that the Minister’s message was similarly under-sized. Worse, in a world grown accustomed to the demonisation of fossil-fuels, where young people, in particular, are encouraged to respond to “climate-change deniers” with undisguised contempt, Jones’s inadequate amplification equipment completed the picture of a politician deliberately placing himself in that most dangerous of places – the wrong side of history.
Worse still, the unintended symbolism of the mini-megaphone, had alerted viewers of the One News item to other tell-tale signs and omens. The greatest of these was the age-gap between Jones’s ‘Mine-Baby-Mine’ enthusiasts, and the Forest & Bird-led environmentalists lined-up behind their banner.
“How many of you are even from the West Coast?” A rheumy-eyed old-timer who appeared to have seen too many West Coast winters, demanded of the protesters.
It was an old trick, which worked well 30 years ago when those who came to “save” the West Coast’s rain forests were, indeed, the sort of people acutely vulnerable to the accusation of being “outside agitators”. In 2024, however, about half the crowd of young-to-middle-aged protesters raised their hands. The old-timer was momentarily non-plussed.
“Bugger all.”, he eventually muttered, inaccurately, before making his way into the community hall where upwards of two hundred miners, granted a day-off by their employers, were helping to swell the Resource Minister’s audience.
That so many of the protesters were residents of the West Coast indicated how dramatically attitudes have changed in 30 years. Back in the 1990s, angry – even violent – clashes between “Locals” and “Greenies” were not uncommon. Those were the bad old days when, in many parts of New Zealand (usually a long way from the cities) environmentalism was still, very much, a minority sport.
Certainly, some of the tales told of those times carried with them more than a hint of the American Deep South in the 60s. When, in the event of “trouble” with the locals, it could take more than an hour for the Police to arrive, it was very easy to feel paranoid. Not least because, if you were a long-haired Greenie from Christchurch or, even worse, the Coromandel, many of the locals really were out to get you – including the local cop!
Those “Easy Rider” vibes were recalled on Saturday (25/5/24) when, with the Minister safely installed in the hall, a Police officer barred Suzanne Hill, the West Coast convenor of Forest & Bird, from joining her fellow locals in the audience. Not even her official ticket to the Minister’s announcement of the Coalition Government’s Draft Minerals Strategy could get her past the constable. By the time the matter was sorted out, Newsroom’s Lois Williams later reported, “they’d locked the door from the inside”.
The symbolism, seemingly, was in no hurry to call it a day.
So, is Jones being Quixotic, or shrewd? Is the “Mine, Baby, Mine!” faction actually a great deal bigger than the environmentalists have led themselves to believe?
Part of the answer to that question will be provided on Saturday, 8 June, when Forest & Bird, Greenpeace, Communities Against Fast Track (CAFT), Coromandel Watchdog, WWF-New Zealand, and Kiwis Against Seabed Mining will lead a protest “March For Nature” down Auckland’s Queen Street. It may be confidently predicted that the Resources Minister, and a great many other people, will be watching extremely closely to see how many people follow them.
If similar environmental protests (against genetic engineering, against West Coast coal-mining) offer any guide, then well in excess of 30,000 marchers may be expected. By the time the large number of communities and interest-groups aggrieved by the Coalition Government’s policies are factored into the turn-out calculation, the number of demonstrators could quite easily rise to in excess of 50,000.
In addition to the banners and placards of the environmental groups, a forest of Tino Rangatiratanga and Palestinian flags are certain to be in evidence, along with trade union banners and the colours of the left-wing political parties. As the first potentially huge political protest to be organised since the Coalition Government took office, the “March For Nature” offers National’s, Act’s, and NZ First’s growing list of opponents a welcome opportunity to make themselves heard. What must not be forgotten, however, should the numbers turning-out to be truly spectacular, is that it is the environmental cause that provides these occasions with the critical mass of bodies on the street.
Which is not to say that the Minister of Resources does not have an argument when it comes to the mining of gold, coal, and rare earths on the Conservation Estate. What cash-strapped government in its right mind is going to refuse the royalties accruing from a precious metal that sells for in excess of $2,000 per ounce? Nor should it be forgotten that the coking-coal from New Zealand’s West Coast is highly prized by steel-makers around the world. Why? Because high-quality steel, like oil, is critical to the survival of industrial civilisation. Similarly, with the so-called “rare earths”. They are vital to humanity’s ‘green energy’ future – not to mention the world’s billions of smart-phones.
But, these arguments cannot be successfully sold to younger generations except as part of a future in which mineral resources are regarded as necessary evils, tolerable only for as long as they remain critical to humanity’s transition from a civilisation powered by fossil fuels to one powered by the sun, the wind and the rain, augmented by safe nuclear power-plants and, eventually, the clean and limitless power of cold fusion.
This is the story that “Matua Shane” must learn to tell to young New Zealanders. That any future predicated on a great leap backward into a technological context indistinguishable from the Middle Ages will only provide for an existance that is, in the words of Thomas Hobbes, “nasty, brutish and short”. Humanity’s modern rights and freedoms simply will not survive transplantation into a pre-modern setting.
New Zealand may offer superb locations for making movies based on J.R.R. Tolkien’s fantastic tales, but any plans to transform the country into a Middle Earth of hand-looms and water-mills should be stoutly resisted. It is the technological magic of the Twenty-First Century science that offers the best hope of human survival.
Forget the loud-hailers Minister, what you need is TikTok.
*Chris Trotter has been writing and commenting professionally about New Zealand politics for more than 30 years. He writes a weekly column for interest.co.nz. His work may also be found at http://bowalleyroad.blogspot.com.
51 Comments
Might then be a case for those locals of if you can’t beat ‘em join ‘em? As happened in the parliamentary protest, those with genuine and sincere concerns can have their message(s) overwhelmed by aggressive behaviour of others little more than stirrers, which the media fasten onto for the sake of selling a headline. Reminiscent of the scene in the movie The Wild One, reporter asks a bikie “what are you rebelling against,” answer “what’ve you got.”
I find that for myself I have feet on both sides of the line. I feel the need to ensure our environment is protected, but I also believe we should be able to exploit the resources we have (Tourism is not what I would consider exploitation), therefore I ask if those minerals can be extracted in environmentally sound and sustainable ways?
I also have the same sentiment that some others expressed on this site, in that I would support the mining initiative only if NZ gains full benefits from the proceeds. Some would argue we need to licence to international conglomerates. But I would challenge that view from the perspective of risks and benefits. NZ needs to build the expertise and capability, but to do so sustainably and sensibly. Too big an ask? That's an political question, and it's only too big if the will is not there.
Tourism also is a form of exploiting our environment. Remember pre-covid when we had hundreds of station wagons and vans in every carpark everywhere with backpackers heading around the country? Public toilets with wet floors from folk doing their laundry in the sinks, people leaving stinky deposits in bushes and at beaches all over the show. Have a look at Thailand, where they shut an island down because the beach was eroding from too many tourists visiting.
Singapore has plenty of tourism but if you so much spit your gum out on the street you will be done with a major fine. But plenty of people go to Singapore for a holiday because of its safe, clean and pleasant atmosphere. In other words, create the infrastructure and systems that you want to get the results you want - something NZ has not been good at.
therefore I ask if those minerals can be extracted in environmentally sound and sustainable ways?
More importantly, a safe way. Pike River is a very good case study in the tragedy of trade offs. Safety must come first and environment second. Safety first means the environmental footprint will be much larger. One of the reasons Pike River exhausted so much money before they even started mining was the environmentally sensitive design of the accessway - the costs in that regard were enormous/unrealistic - and as a result safety issues were sacrificed in the build - and because of all the delays in trying to marry environmental stewardship with commercially viable mining - they opened it for mining too soon as well.
A prophetic quote from Gerry Brownlee on opening the mine;
"The successful development of this project required a carefully crafted marriage of good mining practice and environmental good management. No trucks will be necessary to carry the coal down the mountain - reducing noise, dust, and damage to the access road - and the mine's surface footprint has been kept to a minimum to reduce the mine's environmental impact.
"The Pike River coal mine is a good example of mining and the environment successfully co-existing."
Only the prophet had no clothes.
Unlikely to have been known at the time that the heavy environmental costs would have a ramifications elsewhere. Mining regulation or lack of them had a big part to play and had they been more stringent the mine would likely not have gone ahead due to costs. Reduced environmental requirements may have allowed expenditure elsewhere in the mining systems. Perhaps the then weak regulations would save money for a higher profit. Based on the current fast track ie reduced environmental requirments and new mine regulations the mine could very well have proceeded safely.
Yes, my brother is a highly qualified, professional geologist and mining engineer in the US - but glad to be retired now as it has turned into a rip, shit and bust type management/ownership mentality.
He is ethical and honest. Not the best qualities for the industry these days. Was asked by one employer to give known false evidence at a judicial hearing - wouldn't, and was fired the next day.
'humanity’s transition from a civilisation powered by fossil fuels to one powered by the sun, the wind and the rain, augmented by safe nuclear power-plants and, eventually, the clean and limitless power of cold fusion.'
Catch-22 oxymoron, Chris. And your final sentences are DEAD WRONG. Indeed, a journalist shooting the message is a tragic thing to see.
Yes, we will be powered by the sun, and solar derivatives like wind; no, it won't be a 'civilisation' as you assume it. It will be operation on about 15% of the energy we currently squander. It will triage existing stuff for a while, but will end up a the water-wheel level. At best.
Oh, for a journalist who did research. https://dothemath.ucsd.edu/2024/05/whats-the-point/
Like the broken clock that is right twice a day. "One day the world will end". It is probably true, but no one knows why or when. This is the accuracy level we are dealing with with people like PDK. No idea, and their whole life is about crying wolf...every day it seems.
Oh to be young again. I remember marching down Queen St as a 1st year Auckland Uni student, straight to the pub after, so much fun. Can't for the life of me remember what we were marching for though...
Such innocent babes, perhaps if we stopped them flying, using a mobile or driving mummy's EV they would appreciate the harsh reality of life.
It prompts the question of what the Conservation Estate really is.
Is it just areas we invest in to keep their natural state, until we feel like destroying them for money?
If that is the case, what is stopping us from going all in? We could make some really nice table tops from those giant Kauri growing in Northland for example.
Doc has way more land than what it can effectively look after. So some of it is weed infested sites that have never had anything done to them. Perhaps this gives people that there is a lot of doc land that could be mined. But it seems strange to me that conservation land makes up 1/2 the land they want to exploit. Maybe because people will get really upset if they mine farmland or urban areas
Go to Nth Canterbury. The great St James Station that Helen Clark’s government purchased. Stand in the prevailing wind and observe all the gorse, broom, thistles & wildling pines arriving and taking root from the adjacent conservation mountainous land to the northeast.
Why indeed and the answer is hardly unique. Simple explanation as to who has read the writing on the wall and who is going to have to deal with what it says. Cynical politicking an appreciation of an eventual advantage as the new incumbent cops the deluge of unhappiness with only limited ability and time to blame the previous lot for being its cause. Some obviously might argue that scenario is presently in play in NZ. Perhaps Muldoon’s old aspiration to leave the ship in no worse condition than when he took command, actually ironically, provides a better standard than the equivalent nowadays.
Problem is the climate cult and other fringe loonies will not realize this until we actually are bankrupt, and then they will blame someone else and slither away. Luckily their narrative is slowly collapsing and soon they will be forgotten by most and the bankruptcy part will be avoided.
The kids aren't very bright these days. Triggered by theories and other peoples hypothesis.
The most highly educated generation we're told, and so were they. I think not but when the education system is basically based on 'Game Theory' Ed. What do you expect.
Now their future lies in Europe. The Russian front.
"The kids aren't very bright these days."
Really?
I was explaining to some teens why the government might decide to borrow to give people tax cuts. One of them summarized one point like this:
So the government borrows money ... to give to people as tax cuts ... so they can pay their mortgages & loans ... so banks & lenders can make even more money ... by lending it back to the government ... and to people to take on even bigger mortgages and loans ... so they vote for more tax cuts ??
Yup. They got it. Most voters don't.
Sounds like the blind leading the blind to me. Probably repeating the misinformation he/she learned at school. Kudos for actually remembering something from school, pity it was useless information. Should be teaching reading. writing and maths rather than indoctrinating kids with some teachers opinion on something that they don't understand happening on the other side of the world.
Not with you on this one, CT.
The vast majority of people - worldwide - are uneducated at best, wilfully ignorant at worst, of the fact that the world they inhabit is not the planet’s world. Biodiversity loss is the strongest signal of that. There are other equally dismaying signals.
As the climate crisis’s collapsing of natural systems will show us soon enough, our lifestyles, even the most modest, and our belief in their continuation far exceed the planet’s capacity to support them. We are living beyond our ecological means. Modern humans are consuming the resources of three Earths.
As numerous credentialed commentators have told us for decades, we humans are the single most destructive organism this planet has hosted in its billions of years.
Renewed or accelerated extraction of resources does not address this existential issue. It simply avoids it. I believe the mauling monster of anthropogenic climate change will address it for us - on its own brutal terms - unless we front up to the need to rethink our place and footprint on this planet.
The status quo has got us into this mess. Preserving the status won’t get us out of it, Mr Jones.
It’s a biggie, eh. Perhaps it is the hardest question humanity will have had to address in the long drift of hominid evolution.
Green-thinking Kiwis get this.
Sorry mate but this is little more than nihilistic human-hating doctrinal drivel. If "green thinking Kiwis" have really become the modern day equivalent of the crazy obsessed guy standing on the street corner with the sandwich board reading "Repent! The end of the world is nigh!" that would explain a lot.
Modern humans are consuming the resources of three Earths.
Africa is the lowest consumer of energy and resources in the world yet has the fastest population growth rate - yet the resource and energy intensive consuming anglo-saxon countries have fertility rates falling off a cliff. So no, your western focused paradigm doesn't hold true.
We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment.
Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.