OPINION
The pending closure of a significant South Island meat works is a worrying sign of Government failure to control the environment in which our major export industries operate. The stated reason for this disastrous Mid Canterbury decision is “land use” changes that appear irreversible under current government policy.
There is no question this didn’t need to happen. First, we should examine the recent history of what was once our major export earner – the livestock industry (red meat and wool). Overseas market conditions have traditionally determined the viability of what is produced on New Zealand grazing land, but at no time in the past have we allowed these economic cornerstones to deteriorate to such an extent.
When pressure from environmentalists to change marginal hill country land use was accepted – correctly, given damage to erodible land during extreme weather events – rules controlling pine forest expansion were removed. This left all prime grazing land vulnerable. With carbon credits as incentives, our livestock industry’s demise in these areas became inevitable.
Repeated representations to successive governments have unfathomably fallen on deaf ears. We reap what we have sown.
Here on the East Coast, much prime grazing land is now in pine trees, with job losses and community disruption for those reliant on a viable livestock industry for 150 years.
While this is a blow to the Tairāwhiti economy, locals are planning a restructure to support forestry and livestock alongside new export industries in “high-end” crops—kiwifruit, apples, stone fruit, and vegetables. Unfortunately, provinces like Mid Canterbury, already suffering from uncontrolled forestry expansion, have fewer options to reverse these effects.
It is clear that the Government must act to avert disaster.
Firstly, it should reintroduce laws limiting pine planting to marginal land.and remove carbon credits from land use statutes.
Secondly, it should remove carbon credits from New Zealand land use statutes. We have enough vegetation to meet carbon targets.
Thirdly, foreign-sourced synthetic insulation products should be restricted to support New Zealand wool as a superior alternative.
I’m not saying the Government should control growers’ prices, but if insulation and carpet manufacturers were to pay a fair price for wool, it could contribute significantly to our economy.
Everybody wins.
Clive Bibby
Tolaga Bay
The Gisborne Herald welcomes letters from readers. Please note the following:
-
Letters should not exceed 350 words.
-
They should be opinion based on facts or current events.
-
If possible, please email.
-
No noms-de-plume.
-
Letters will be published with names and suburb/city.
-
Please include full name, address and contact details for our records only.
-
Local letter writers are given preference.
-
Rejected letters are not normally acknowledged.
-
Letters may be edited, abridged, or rejected at the Editor’s discretion.
-
The Editor’s decision on publication is final. No correspondence will be entered into.
