To the raft of reasons why it's essential the Greens not only remain in Parliament but remain in government with Labour we can now add another: the planned scrapping of the Resource Management Act.
Because despite claims to the contrary by party faithful and politicians, Labour is not as naturallykind to the environment as it likes to pretend.
Yes, there's some good work being done on improving water quality and reigning in intensive agriculture – but it's only good in the sense of holding the line.
The recent nutrient-loading targets now being enshrined in legislation are a case in point. True, some farmers impacted by the new rules may have to lessen their fertiliser use or even change the nature of their land-use, but for the vast majority it is merely a cap under which they already sit.
This is the point I recently tried to make with the Hawke's Bay Regional Council's changes to nitrogen limits in the Tukituki catchment. I got bagged by chair Rex Graham and councillor Martin Williams for suggesting they were letting things slip, when the bottom line – as both carefully pointed out – is that they're not making things worse.
All right, noted. Equally, however, they're not making things better.
I'm reliably informed one CHB intensive dairy operator laughed at the fact he (now) didn't have to change a thing to comply – even though the adjacent waterway sometimes runs red with leachate from his farm. And I'm sure he wasn't alone.
Labour tend toward the same approach: protecting existing businesses and, crucially if you're a Labourite, jobs, rather than actively enhancing our degraded ecosystems.
Okay, they're not as bad as National who, as soon as the Key Government were voted in, changed the RMA to put the economy ahead of any other consent consideration – completely at odds with legislation that's primarily supposed to protect the environment.
And Judith Collins has been quick to double down on "investment and growth" as the key drivers for environmental reform. No, unfortunately she's not joking.
But the recent Covid-19 response bill's provisions to do away with public consultation for "shovel-ready" projects prove Labour are not averse to running roughshod over the natural landscape when it suits.
Bruce Bisset
Exceptional circumstances? Yes; but that's what every developer argues.
So when the cornerstone for managing our natural resources gets flagged for repeal, with a 500-page report suggesting two or three new bills replace it with a slicker system of governance, you want to know someone from the green corner is in the room as those bills are drafted.
Especially when that report also recommends another reform of local government to go with it. Meaning, more amalgamation.
It's the same story in the ocean. Mike Bhana's excellent documentary The Price of Fish, which screened on Prime last Sunday, is a stunning condemnation of our falsely-praised quota management system and how it has failed both fish stocks and the economy.
That failure has been obvious for two decades, yet neither major party has lifted a finger to fix it.
As it stands, there's only one parliamentary party with sufficient respect and care for our precious taonga to the forefront of their thinking, and that's the Greens.
So while these reforms will take shape under the new government, it's still an important election issue because the colour and shape of that government will determine how well our "clean green" country fares. For the foreseeable future.
The Greens have lessons they can share – and Labour needs to partner up and learn them.
Bruce Bisset is a freelance writer and poet. Views expressed are the writer's opinion and not the newspaper's.
