by Peter Jones
It was comforting to see that all sides of the debate are genuinely concerned about the impact of recent storms on the viability of humans living throughout our district.
Who could doubt that Hekia Parata did the best that she knew how with her report and who could
doubt that Nedine Thatcher Swann also has a personal interest in putting things right.
The scene at Lawson Field Theatre took me back to the days after Cyclone Bola when similar discussions on where to go next resulted in the East Coast forestry scheme.
Given the 35-year time gap the interested parties seemed to be very similar, with environmentalists and Maori leading the debate.
Not a single sitting councillor could be seen.
One of the panelists spoke of a time when farmers farmed between patches of natives and the water quality supported koura and was healthy for swimming.
This was actually the same time when environmentalists of that day were clamouring for the pine trees to replace farming to halt erosion.
Then another reported that major water quality issues (erosion) only really started to surface around 2008 as pines were being harvested.
So basically, after Bola the experts had the same tangi as this time, but last time their answer was pine trees.
From what I could gather this time the same crowd are going with the Emissions Trading Scheme and carbon credits.
They think we caused the damage with poor land-use practices and cannot accept that erosion on the East Coast is constant and ongoing like nowhere else in the world because of the geology.
They have this idea that if they all work very hard they can fix it, despite thousands of years of evidence to the contrary.
I’m sure they are very well intentioned and will work very hard with whatever money they can come up with, but I have to ask all of you: how can they possibly succeed when they continue to make false assumptions based on the concept of carbon credits and carbon farming?
After all, the same thing happened in Esk Valley in 1938 before fossil fuels were even an issue, and from time immemorial before that.
If you lock up all that carbon it comes down the river as big trees that take out bridges.
Sorry to disappoint you but this is God’s country and the state cannot play the same role as God.
Some things you just have to leave for the locals to sort out for themselves.
The State is trying to say go and live in a 15-minute city which is supposed to save the planet, but I am absolutely certain the people who live in our countryside don’t want to do that.
There is no easy answer and there never will be. We are all only human and all we can do is try, as our ancestors have done before us.
It is either that or let the state tell you how to live and what you have to pay to live there.
