I'm sorry to sound like a tree hugging lefty and go off the current Latin American focus, but I would be incredibly grateful if someone could explain to me exactly what our "honourable prime minister" John Key is doing. New Zealand has, since I moved here in 1997 always prided itself in being a green country, we are anti nuclear, have a widespread array of national parks and heritage sights and were, until recently anti whaling. Just how does John Key's 'diplomatic approach' to ending Japanese whaling work? By relaxing NZ whaling laws aren't we providing an ally for Japan rather than showing that we disagree with their current actions?
If Key's approach really is to put an end to Japanese whaling, to infiltrate their system, make buddies and convince them to change their ways then I think he has seriously underestimated the economic significance of whaling to the Japanese , not to mention their intelligence.
Let's face it John, leave it to Greenpeace, their actions may be radical and unlawful at times but at least they know what they're doing.
Ellie- maybe this is related to our course. How democratic is our government acting when it so flagrantly acts against clear and strong public opinion? Is our contribution then to vote every three years and then our government can pretend we don't exist and do whatever it likes?
ReplyDeleteOur country may have a international image of being 'green' or '100% pure' but anyone who even has the vaguest idea of government policy will see this isn't true.
Heres just a small selection of what the national government has done environmentally since it took power:
- encouraged relaxing (or removing) whaling laws
- started the ball rolling on mining our national parks (just released a list of sites intended for mining which include Great Barrier Island and Coromandel national park)
- Done away with legislation designed to slowly increase the number of hybrid cars imported to New Zealand
- Done away with funding to Enviroschools
- Has a proposal in place to increase the allowable catch of critically endangered southern bluefin tuna by 25%
- Removed legislation to implement the use of long lasting and power saving lightbulbs (I forget the name of them)
- Failed us at copenhagen, like most world governments and did not make a decent target to reduce emissions
Before he was elected John key was quoted pretty much saying he didn't even believe in climate change.
Ok, so I agree...this is off topic. But to answer your question as to what he is doing? He is trying to make 'Little Australia' and line big business' pockets.
Oh and don't put yourself down by calling yourself a tree hugger. This is a serious issue and you don't need to apologise to anyone for feeling strongly about it :)
Thanks Mia:) I completely agree with you. It is so frustrating to watch a leader ( a person whom in a democracy should show respect for national identity and the views of the people) completely destroy a reputation that we as a country pride ourselves in.
ReplyDeleteThe Japanese whalers in the Southern Ocean currently operate under the blanket of 'Scientific Whaling'... Which kills close to 2,000 whales per annum. The plan to re-open Commercial Whaling aims to bring this number below 2,000 over the next decade. So statistically, it may end up being more beneficial. Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd is threatening legal action should the whalers fail to cease operations in the S.Ocean by November of this year. New Zealand is opting for a more diplomatic approach, however weak it may look in the International Community against Australia's all-or-nothing approach. I spoke with an International Relations professor last week who explained that gaining international support for the anti-whaling movement is difficult as frankly, it does not affect every nation; why get involved?
ReplyDeleteI'm sure you are following the Bethune case atm so I can agree, that given the fact a NZ citizen is facing legal action in Japan (and a three year jail term if convicted) perhaps the NZ Govt should step in and do more. But taking the whalers to court will also be problematic for Australia and yes, NZ Govt not wanting to get involved is reasonable. It will be hard for Australia to prove these whalers are operating in Australian waters rather than the Southern Ocean at large. Sea Shepherd have their piracy case against the Shonan Maru II crew but again, this may head south as Pete Bethune jumped ship with a citizens arrest.
While New Zealand does have a clean and green image that is world reknowned, perhaps there a more important contributing factors to the Commercial Whaling Debate and IWC than simply the 'image' of New Zealand.
If Japan is operating under the scientific research whaling to legitimise killing whales, why can't the they just take one or two whales a year? They can't need that many whales to research, and as far as I now they haven't come up with anything amazing we need to know about whales anytime lately. why would the intetnational community let this go on, when we all obviously no there is a bit more than "scientific research" for Japan.
ReplyDeleteJohn Key needs to just keep out of the situation, in my opinion I don't see how Japan would listen to little New Zealand anyway. Need to have a united front with the rest of the international community and get some serious influential legislation or treaty to rectify the situation
Exactly, that's why the IWC is making a move to ban the practise of Scientific Whaling as it is clearly being abused. It will be difficult however to create a united front against whaling with the international community. As I mentioned above, whaling affects very few nations and compared to other issues, it is a fairly small dilemma. Powers such as the US, China, EU, and such don't involve themselves in whaling as they don't stand to gain anything. Furthermore, there is a Federal Election coming up in Australia so many experts are suggesting that Kevin Rudd is simply making a pull for votes by threatening legal action. Taking the whalers to court will not prove anything and only draw out the problem. Deemed a 'weak' approach, the proposals from the IWC conference in the States severals weeks ago are probably the best course of action imo. Abolishing Scientific Whaling to bring in a more heavily monitored Commercial Whaling Scheme (aimed at reducing total catchment numbers) seems more substantial that the 'threat' of an international lawsuit.
ReplyDeleteTotally off subject indeed, haha! Here is just a little positive news for you guys. It was yesterday in the dominion post. I quess it isnt truly news as in new, every one could think of this, but still..
ReplyDeletehere is how the article starts, see link below for full article.
Scientists have returned from Antarctic waters hoping their non-lethal methods will influence Japan's policy of killing whales for research.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/national/3454552/Whale-expedition-lays-down-challenge-to-Japan
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWell said Ellie and Mia.
ReplyDeleteI have worked for, and still remain involved with Greenpeace so I know I’m a little biased on this one. As RGalbraith pointed out, the IWC proposal takes into account the fact that the premise of ‘scientific whaling’ that Japan currently operate under gives them a quota (which has dropped over the years as a result of pressure). However, reversing the moratorium on commercial whaling is fundamentally detrimental to progress that has been made and to the protection that whales do have. It would reward the Japanese whaling fleets that have shown disregard for the moratorium time and time again and even their own national laws.
How can the IWC guarantee that the same rule bending won’t apply when commercial whaling is legal? Its something that we know from experience is hard to regulate.
Back to the point of democracy that Ellie mentioned though, John Key should know that to New Zealand being anti-whaling is a highly valued principal, whatever his diplomatic concerns may be, he can’t conveniently acquire selective hearing when it comes to public opinion.
SamG was bang on in saying that New Zealand are small and the fact of the matter is the future of whaling is not in our hands alone.
The solution to whaling is something that does not rely solely on international pressure, it needs to come DEMOCRATICALLY from within Japan.
65% of Japanese people do not actually support whaling and when Japanese voters begin to make these feelings heard and awareness grows further we can see some democratic change.
So no, New Zealand doesn’t have the power to single handedly deter scientific whaling fleets from the Southern Oceans. But until Japan makes their own changes the New Zealand government should stay true to its purpose of representing its people by saying no to the proposal and yes to a future without commercial or scientific whaling.