Saturday, April 28, 2018

ECO-TERRORISTS SHOWING THEIR HAND

Aotearoa Water Action (AWA) handed over a 115,000 strong petition to ECAN yesterday calling on them to revoke three consents allowing for foreign companies (with 'Chinky' sounding names) to bottle water and export it overseas.

Is one allowed to wonder whether the fact that these are foreign owned companies stirred AWA to such righteous indignation.

AWA's press release refers to 24 million litres being taken from the ground aquifer each and every day.    What it didn't say was that New Zealand's total bottled water exports are in the order of 11 million litres per year ... less than half of one days draw down.

And we won't even talk about the jobs created by the industry and the goods and services utilised in the process.

Some will see this as the ugly face of xenophobia.   Others will see it as the public face of Eco-terrorist Nazis.   

29 comments:

Snowflake said...

What jobs? You mean the ones for underpaid Chinese workers brought in to work and sleep at the plant? Those jobs? And what’s with the reference to “Chinky” sounding names? Are you saying the principals aren’t foreign nationals who will be expatriating the profits from the free water? Idiot.

David said...

hmmm - stranger and stranger the derangement of the Righteous right now their favoured ones no longer hold the strings to the nation's purse.

In what warped and twisted world is the presenting of a petition equivalent to Eco-terrorist Nazis?

Welcome to the world of Trump, of Xi, of Erdogan, a world where the holding of an opinion is equated with terrorism. Coming soon to New Zealand, The Gulag, starring Major Veteran and his ragtag bunch of criminals.

Psycho Milt said...

Is one allowed to wonder whether the fact that these are foreign owned companies stirred AWA to such righteous indignation.

I expect the stupidity of further depleting the aquifers in such a drought-prone area for such a pointless product as bottled water would be enough on its own to inspire righteous indignation. The stupidity of exporting the water to a country with much higher rainfall than Canterbury might also play a part. But yeah, allowing foreign companies to build up vertical integration in NZ at little to no cost is something that we should protest about, and loudly.

Some will see this as the ugly face of xenophobia. Others will see it as the public face of Eco-terrorist Nazis.

Fortunately, some will see it more accurately, as an inevitable consequence of National scrapping local democracy in Canterbury and replacing it with crony capitalism. Also fortunately, a lot of them will be living in Canterbury.

What I'd like to know is what the government's plans are for either returning ECAN to local democracy, or replacing National's appointees with people who take the word "environment" in Environment Canterbury seriously.

The Veteran said...

Snowflake ... you're the f*****g idiot. Reference your claim about chinese workers being bought in to work the plant being underpaid. And of course the companies will be making a profit (taxable) ... that's what companies do or they go bust ... and foreign companies repatriate profits made o'seas. How do you think Fontera works.

So its the free water bit that's got you going ... what then about the 'free' water bottled for local consumption ... or about the 'free' water used for irrigation or the 'free' water that powers hydro power generation.

Nah, it's all about 'your' latent xenophobia showing ... per courtesy of a Party which dined out on xenophobia in the lead up to the election having supped well from WRP's poisoned chalice.

david said...

Snowflake ... you're the f*****g idiot.

Ya reckon? He seems to have a better grasp than you do.

And of course the companies will be making a profit (taxable) ... that's what companies do or they go bust ... and foreign companies repatriate profits made o'seas.

Question is - taxable where? In NZ? I doubt it. Foreign owned companies are past masters at shifting their costs to the host and their profits to a tax haven. Unless a royalty is imposed, NZ will see little to no profit from this resource.

Dumbest comment of the week:

'free' water that powers hydro power generation.

That water is still available for other uses downstream, eg, more hydro, fishing, boating, bottling, irrigation, fire fighting.

Snowflake said...

As you’re the expert, how many New Zealanders are employed at the plant and how many foreigners? A simple Google search will show you the issues with underpaid foreign workers living on site at the plant. Jesus.

At least you’ve admitted the profits and the water are both headed offshore. Add in the fact that the workers are foreign and not paying tax here and you’re on to a winner. The odd thing is that you’re cool with it, but then it’s not so odd as you’re a clown.

Adolf Fiinkensein said...

Wankers of the world unite!

Save OUR water!

The Veteran said...

Snowflake ... pray how tell foreign workers in NZL here on work permits don't pay tax on their earnings ... suggest you drop IRD a line on that. From the stuff article ... "CCC had investigated whether workers were sleeping on the site (but) it found no evidence this was the case".

Might it just be that the complaints were politically motivated?

Gueez Wayne ... this is all a variation on a theme by Eco-weirdies ... the same crowd that persuaded the Labour government back in 2002 to decline a request by Southland Water 2000 Ltd to take 40,000 cubic metres of fresh water from the plume of the Manapouri Power station for 20 hours twelve times per year for 12 years.

The result ... the water continues to waste out to sea. Stupid decision.

Adolf Fiinkensein said...

Vet

Now you know why 'Snowflake' doesn't and never will get a look in at my Blog.

David said...

The ignorance is strong in this one.

" ... the water continues to waste out to sea."

Did you ever take geography in High School? Do you understand the water cycle? Water flowing out to see is not "wasted". Some of that water is required to flush the rivers of debris and other pollutants. The rest is still available. Here's an explanation even you should understand.

Snowflake said...

They don’t pay tax here coz they’re not tax residents here, Einstein. They’re temporary visa holders.

The reason Adolt deletes my comments is he’s a dolt.

Adolf Fiinkensein said...

No, the reason I delete your comments is you are a prick.

Anonymous said...

Veteran, for one who at personal risk has defended a country from the incursion of a communist ideology you seem to be at odds with your history. China has just ratified a communist ruler for life. Any raw resource they can sequester, they will. We owe China nothing, let alone the rights to what is a precious commodity in Canterbury - the groundwater. The benefits of the deal to NZ are marginal. What part of 'vertically integrated' don't you comprehend? Simply put, it turns a country into a quarry for commodities. They want it they can buy it from a NZ company, if they choose to sell it to them.

Mick

Adolf Fiinkensein said...

Mick

You have an extraordinarily simplistic and child-like view of how business is done.

I can't quite work out how you manage to say 'Chinese investment in extraction company = bad' yet in the same breath extol the virtue of 'sales by NZ company to Chinese company = good.'

Anonymous said...

No Adolf, I did business with them. You have a simplistic view of Chinese investment.

Mick

Noel said...

When the property was sold the original water right was transfered to the new owners.
That water right was no where near enough for a bottling company. The new owners then applied for an increase in the take to satisfy their needs.

I've no problem with a transferable water right on sale of a concern where no change in quantity is required.

That's not what has occurred here.

DavidW99 said...

Noel,
Please supply the numbers and for good measure put a figure on the “free” water poured on Christchurch vege gardens, flower beds, lawns and washing driveways in any 12 month period. A sense of scale would go a long way to taking the heat out of this debate and throw some light on it instead.
There is a lot of bull being traded on this and I for one am generally persuaded by verify able facts and science rather than the absolute BS peddled by pressuregroups.

Noel said...

You're missing my point.
The orignial water right was for a wool scourer with a smaller uptake.
The new owners brought the property because it had a water take permit.
If there was no bore on the property they would not have brought it.

If they had brought a property without a bore they would have had to apply for consent and any dissent would been debated during that process.

Noel said...

Consent to drill a bore is different to a consent to take water from that bore. Drilling a bore is a necessary step before applying for consent to take water, as bores must be tested to determine how taking water from it will affect other bores in the area.

The water consent was issued 35 years ago.

Gerald said...

http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/new-zealand/2018/03/chinese-company-drills-water-bore-in-christchurch-despite-council-warning.html

Adolf Fiinkensein said...

You are starting to sound like James Comey.

"The new owners then applied for an increase in the take to satisfy their needs. "

Then you say "they would have had to apply for consent and any dissent would been debated during that process."

Something does not compute.

Comment edited for incorrect cut and paste.

The Veteran said...

David ... the water cycle ... fresh water flows out into the sea. Fresh water extracted in bulk flows out to the sea ... eventually. Fixed it for yah.

Noel said...

Sorry Adolf.
To refresh the company purchased the property because it had a permit to take.
https://www.ecan.govt.nz/get-involved/news-and-events/2017/water-bottling-consent-granted/

That bore was in an aquafier with insufficient draw.

The company then chose to put down a new bore.
ECans appears to have used the minor influence clause in their decision not to publish. Anlthough remarkably Christchurch Counci had reservations of the effect on its bores supplying the public.

Will be an interesting High Court decision.

gravedodger said...

Meanwhile as a sop to Ngai Tahu the waste water from Akaroa is planned to be pumped into the ground at pressure down grouted bores to below sea level.
At the same time Duvauchelle waste water is flows into the upper harbour where natural flushing is minor or nonexistent.

Whenever The tribe has a function at the Kaik south of where the old Akaroa borough zone sends it sewerage for treatment and current discharge into the harbour where flushing is many times more effective than the Duvauchelle out fall, thousands of "guests just dump their waste into septic systems on site. Fortunate their shit is not as troublesome as Akaroa's.

Pumping treated waste water into the ground while so many are affronted by lawful activities across the vast natural filter of the plains gravels seems the height of stupid.

ps the proposed take as a percentage of the total take of ground water from the plains aquifiers for all uses is infintesimal. If it was an inspired socialist proposal from a minion the silence would be deafening.


The Veteran said...

GD tells it how it is.

Psycho Milt said...

GD takes an unrelated issue and presents it as though it were in some way relevant to the issue under discussion, which it isn't. It's a logical fallacy known as the red herring fallacy.

The "height of stupid" is allowing a foreign country (one run by a totalitarian dictatorship, to boot) to set up vertical integration within your own country at little to no cost, that involves extraction of your natural resources. A cherry on the top of this particular stupid is that it involves water being removed from aquifers in a drought-prone area close to where one of our country's major cities gets its drinking water. Whichever ECAN members thought this was a good idea should have investigative journalists combing through their personal and business relationships looking for the payoff - I can't think of any other explanation for this level of stupid, unless we take into account that the appointees were cronies of the previous government.

Anonymous said...

The galling thing is that if a NZ/ Aust. company did this they would face so many obstructions and legal loopholes to squirm through in order to reach the Chinese market it would be a non starter. The Chinese way or no way is how it works.

Lord Egbut

gravedodger said...

To suggest Belfast as drought prone suggests geography is not a strong point Milt'
High water tables, coastal proximity and soils that are fertile silt based from the nearby Waimakariri River, make your assertion very dubious.

My linking of considering a crazy idea to inject waste water into the ground, where gravity from surface geography is of zero influence as to where subteranean water flows reach, is entirely relevant when so many of the mindless protest a foreign entity taking a very small fraction of the total aquifier extraction is entirly relevant.

Sheesh the distance from the proposed injection site is a mere 35 kms from the city!!!
With Water originating in the Alps emerging at heights over 400 meters asl on the Peninsula, who could even guess where the water injected under pressure will end up.

Anonymous said...

https://researcharchive.lincoln.ac.nz/bitstream/handle/10182/3745/LPIWR_12.pdf;sequence=4