Early Edition with Ryan Bridge

A fresh and intelligent start to your day - catch the very latest international and domestic news developments, sport, entertainment and business on Early Edition with Ryan Bridge, on Newstalk ZB.

  1. 1 day ago

    Ryan Bridge: Emotion has overcome facts on conservation

    Most kiwis have an environmental bent to them that most of the rest of the western world just doesn't have. At least, not to the same extent. Most people, left and right, use the outdoors here. We have quite a close relationship to it. Matt Watson and his million fishers put Sane Jone's supposedly industry-friendly fishing clauses in the bin.  Now the same has happened with Potaka and his Conservation clauses.  In both cases, emotion overcame facts.  I spoke to Potaka the day before he U-turned, and he made some pretty clear promises. No parks, no bushland, no Great Walks, no protected species, would be destroyed or sold off under the bill.  The problem was the door was left ajar open for a future government to potentially sell bits of Conservation land.  Anyone who thinks that means a government would sell Tongariro National Park to the highest bidder is not serious or mad.  They were targeting, at least according to Potaka, land with old disused government buildings on them in a state of disrepair.  But the law left the door open, ajar, with caveats like sign-off from the DOC boss, for the sale of land most of us probably wouldn't want sold.  And opponents drove a truck through that hole.  Potaka looked like a deer in headlights.  They should have seen this coming. Especially after the fishing misstep.  This to say it'll cost them votes. It just means there's a perception out there - and it's not necessarily true - but there's a perception that not only are they not for the environment - as Potaka kept saying - but that they are against it.  Whatever that vague phrasing means.  It, clearly, resonates with quite a few kiwis. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

    2 min
  2. 2 days ago

    Andrew Dickens: Reality lost in conservation bill rhetoric

    The hubbub yesterday over the Conservation Amendment Bill brought to light three issues for me. Firstly, how bad much of our law is, and that stems back to how it’s written and processed. Secondly, that many concerned organisations are not afraid to scaremonger and exaggerate to win their way. And thirdly, how many New Zealanders rely on social media to keep informed on the issues of the day. For those who were spooked by the news that land in the Conservation estate could be swapped or sold, they only had to go to Google, and they could find a myriad of expert opinion. For many, much of the new law updates were sorely needed for a piece of legislation that is 40 years old. On Newsroom, one expert planner also pointed out the sales and swaps of conservation land already happens, and all this amendment does is make the process less clunky. Others pointed out that it takes power away from a Minister which was a check and balance. All agreed it’s a badly written law that’s been rushed and is currently before a select committee with a tight deadline of July 2nd. A complaint about our modern law that Sir Geoffrey Palmer pointed out last week. But one wondered why the reality and the rhetoric were so different, and that lies at the feet of groups like Greenpeace and Forest and Bird who made it seem like 60% was going to be sold. And then that was amplified by so many getting their information from biased social media, and not realising the full story. A word of advice to the Government: you’ve failed to explain this and you might want to take the foot off the gas. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

    2 min

About

A fresh and intelligent start to your day - catch the very latest international and domestic news developments, sport, entertainment and business on Early Edition with Ryan Bridge, on Newstalk ZB.

More From Newstalk ZB

You Might Also Like