Opinion
38 FARMERS WEEKLY – farmersweekly.co.nz – September 2, 2019
Free speech has big cost From the Ridge
Steve Wyn-Harris
THERE were a lot of us pretty annoyed last week when we read the piece Mike Joy and David Larsen wrote for the New York Times. It is a paper that now prints only half a million papers, down from a million a few years ago, but with online growth has more than four million readers. Those readers are influential, wealthy and our customers. Joy and Larsen wrote about how the tourism industry uses the fictional land of Middle Earth and the 100% Pure, Clean and Green tags to sell this country then put the case how filthy we are and blamed the dairy industry. It is all very well highlighting problems and forcing changes here onshore but to make a decent attempt at sabotaging not only the tourism sector but also our primary exports is nothing more than economic sabotage and treasonous. Capital punishment was abolished for treason only in 1989. However, there is still life imprisonment for this heinous crime. And don’t try the freedom
PICK YOUR TARGET: Dr Mike Joy and his co-author David Larsen should be getting alongside Kiwi farmers rather than alienating people who buy our exports.
of speech argument on me. I’d be interested to know if they sold this story. If they did, the term 40 pieces of silver comes to mind. However, I imagine the environmentally conscious reader of this piece will be far more worried about United States President Donald Trump’s climate change denial or the devastation of the Amazon forests by fires. Joy and Larsen wrote “The contamination of Canterbury’s freshwater easily ranks among the
worst environmental disasters in New Zealand history.” There is no doubt dairy’s impact on Canterbury’s freshwater has not been good. Environmental activists like Joy have swung the spotlight and debate to these problems and the sector is moving to mitigate and improve its performance. It can’t happen overnight but it is happening and we will see improvements. They didn’t mention the
massive riparian plantings, reducing fertiliser use or the reduction in 260,000 dairy cows. But to tell 4m readers this easily ranks among the worst environmental disasters in NZ history is hysterical and arrant nonsense. It is thought nearly all of what we call NZ sank beneath the sea 25m years ago. That’s not bad as environmental disasters go. Taupo erupted 1800 years ago and was the most violent eruption on earth in the last 5m years. It destroyed the entire central North Island. But perhaps Joy and Larsen meant to write human-induced environmental disasters. The pollen record clearly shows that within 100 years of Maori arriving massive fires swept through the whole country. They reduced the original forest cover from 80% to 15%. Southern NZ turned into a largely grassed expanse. What is cherished by environmental activists like the McKenzie Country is but a recent human construct. But these fires, rat introduction and hunting led to the extinction of 23 species of bird including the moa, swans, ducks, eagles, ravens and owls. The arrival of Europeans saw vast swathes of forests like the kauri, rimu and kahikatea clearfelled for domestic and export timber. Swamps were drained and English grasses introduced throughout the country. Another 30 species became
extinct and many more are hanging on for dear life. Not recent enough for Joy and Larsen? In 1920 just 200,000 people called Auckland home. By 1950 it was 300,000 and in 2017 it’s 1.65m or 34% of all New Zealanders. Aging sewerage and storm water systems are pouring their filth into the Hauraki Gulf, making Auckland’s streams some of the most polluted in the country. Just last week it was revealed that the plastic and micro-plastic that sloughs off Auckland into the Gulf is choking the life out of the creatures that call it home. Larsen lives in Auckland and shares in this unmitigated environmental disaster but doesn’t write about that in the foreign press. They wrote about the polluted Canterbury Rivers but didn’t mention the Avon, the most polluted and the one with no rural runoff, just city. Joy and Larsen, if you want positive change, as we all do, why highlight an issue to 4m readers who will have forgotten about you and your cause by now and completely alienate the very audience you need to address and get alongside? Us.
Your View Steve Wyn-Harris is a Central Hawke’s Bay sheep and beef farmer. swyn@xtra.co.nz
Australia wants it both ways WE’VE been in Australia for the last few weeks and there is major concern over the trade war between the United States and China. A trade war is futile, merely a tit for tat between the big boys without much thought for the consequences. It started with President Donald Trump labelling China a currency manipulator. China possibly is but so is America. Since the global financial crisis the Federal Reserve has injected trillions of new dollars into the American financial system, which supports its banks and holds down interest rates. There’s also the issue of American subsidies. Since China stopped American agricultural imports the US government has pumped $US16 billion into supporting its farmers. Both moves are currency manipulation. The issue is that once Trump hit Chinese imports with tariffs it was inevitable China would retaliate. The Trump strategy, like most of his moves, reflects an Americafirst philosophy of protectionism. The iniquity is it will be America that suffers. No-one wins trade wars. According to top Australian civil servant Martin Parkinson the trade war could rage for decades. Trump is regularly increasing
the rhetoric and the stakes. A trade war can also provide opportunities for third parties and that’s where Australia has a problem. On one hand China is Australia’s largest export market with a third of all trade going there.
It’s all boom with no gloom.
On the other Australia is becoming increasingly aligned with the US, especially in the Pacific. On the trade side you can read that beef and sheep meat exports to China are red hot. In the first three months of 2019 beef exports to China were up 67% and sheep meat by 83%. Forward contracts for spring lambs are running at $8.80/kg. Every article I read indicates a bullish outlook for exports there. Writers predict increases in both price and volume. It’s all boom with no gloom. It’s not just trade. Queensland University relies on Chinese students to the tune of A$250 million annually, for Sydney University the figure is A$50m. All
major Australian universities rely on China. In addition to Australian exports China has invested $100 billion in Australia since 2007. That means Australia is increasingly vulnerable to China’s whims. Goldman Sachs estimates if demand for Australian imports to China cools it will wipe $25b from the Australian economy. So, while Australia is desperate for Chinese support, both from trade and financial perspectives, it is the US they are strongly backing against China in both a strategic and military sense. Surprisingly, the Australian Treasurer Josh Frydenberg came out strongly supportive of America by endorsing American values in the Pacific. That outburst was preceded by Liberal back bencher Andrew Hastie comparing China’s rise to that of Nazi Germany. There were screams of righteous indignation over Papua New Guinea wanting China to refinance its A$11.8b debt. Having Chinese interests a very small step from Australia’s northernmost border isn’t something Australia wants but it can do little about it short of paying off the debt. Australia is developing massive military bases in PNG as a bulwark against Chinese
aggression. There was a further announcement of an A$3b boost to Australian special forces to meet the Pacific threat. Australia and the US have previously accused China of coercive conduct in the South China Sea including the militarisation of disputed islands. Australia is being urged to boost its armed forces in the north of the country to counter the threat from China. Queensland University, despite getting $250m annually from Chinese students, wants the government to work with universities to put a red line around areas of research that shouldn’t be shared with China. Pacific Island countries that have welcomed Chinese support and investment have been pilloried in the Australian media. Last week Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison was in Vietnam vowing to work together as a strategic partnership. Vietnam is in conflict with China over the Spratly Islands. That followed a promise of military support for America in the Strait of Hormuz to remedy a problem largely created by the US. So, Australia is between the proverbial rock and hard place. On one hand it describes the US as Australia’s greatest
DILEMMA: Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison is in a difficult position backing America while maintaining trade with China.
friend, strongest ally and biggest investor. Conversely China is its biggest trading partner. Australia can’t have it both ways. It could offer to mediate in the trade war but it’s decided to participate – on America’s side. New Zealand is in a great position providing we maintain our neutrality while concentrating on the opportunities the contretemps provides. My view is the Australian economy is about to take a $25b hit along with a devalued dollar so I’m happy leaving the Australian Reich to the Australians.