Debates with WCC
There is an ongoing discussion between the Island Bay World Service and the Wellington City Council, which has included a submission on the Draft Annual Plan, a response to a challenge from the Mayor, the reply from the Mayor, and a further comment from IBWS. That last comment, with a call for a population policy for the city is given here.
INFORMATION GUIDING DECISIONS – FROM ISLAND BAY WORLD SERVICE
MESSAGE TO MAYOR AND COUNCILLORS OF THE WELLINGTON CITY COUNCIL
Our thanks to the Mayor and two Councillors for responses to our previous note. We wish to continue the dialogue in the hope that we might narrow the very considerable differences between us. The attached essay, Which world do we live in? Global reality versus daily life, expresses our concern that, while our knowledge of global trends tells of a crisis demanding robust action, the surrounding society continues with business as usual as if such continuation were sensible.
We will comment on three points from the Mayor’s letter which demonstrate that divergence.
Population
Concerning our suggestion that we debate a preferred population, the Mayor commented that “there are practical limits on our ability to implement a cap on population.”
Our main argument is that the preferred population should be clearly on the agenda. It is important for each and every community across the world to take the population problem seriously and not to throw up their hands in defeat. Planning for an increase in population is part of a dynamic, which supports and prepares the conditions for population growth.
In that respect, Council is dodging the question when basing the approach on “what is most likely to eventuate” and thus using Statistics New Zealand information. That is ‘business as usual’, accepting without question a continuation of past trends which have already had dire consequences, and which are inappropriate for the future.
Economic growth
Here the Mayor claims that “Our plans for economic growth embrace the concept that economic prosperity leads to improved quality of life.”
That is no longer true, unless we play games with the generally accepted understanding of economic prosperity. Much oil has been used, and price increases and shortages can be expected. Particularly since 1984, current economic dogma has resulted in a widening of class differences. The use of fossil fuels has led to climate change. The extraordinary population explosion has expanded the human environmental niche across the countryside, leading to extinction of many species (here an area where the Council can point to some very beneficial action) together with potential shortages of water and other resources. The economic growth of the industrial revolution has created many problems and cannot be claimed as the solution.
The changes required are considerable and must be widely debated.
Climate change and robust advice
The mayor informs us that a Climate Change office was set up earlier this year. We refer to a comment in our previous note.
A robust analysis demands a truly independent team. It is imperative that a Council which pushes carbon neutrality should be told of the vast mass of greenhouse gases produced by a city, and that Council officers should have the confidence to tell the Mayor that a trip to China to watch a sports event produces a vast amount of emissions - which must be compared with the average per capita world emission and the level to which carbon emissions must be lowered if climate change is to be faced realistically.
The question then arises: Did the Climate Change office suggest that the Mayor call off that trip in order to act consistently with Council’s concern?
We recognise that the Mayor’s comments are in accord with current conventional wisdom. However it was widely realised in the great debates of 1968-1975 that a paradigm shift is urgently called for, and we contend that such a paradigm shift is more needed than ever.We ask that Council prepare a discussion paper on a preferred Wellington population, with the several alternatives clearly spelt out.
For Island Bay World ServiceJohn Robinson, July 25, 2008
Posted by Dr John Robinson at 2:11 PM
1 comments:
Richard said...
Population growth in cities, especially compact cities like Wellington can be a good thing. By having small centralised population 'bubbles' we can reduce our reliance on fossil fuel based transport and reduce urban-sprawl - which is clearly not desirable for the environment.You also fail to take into account that much of our population would be caused by people moving to Wellington from rural areas, and for that matter overseas immigrants.Furthermore, although global population growth is certainly a casue of famine e.t.c, in terms of the enovrionment - the western world (who account for a comparatively small fraction of the world's population) are by far and away the biggest contributors to global warming
August 15, 2008 9:31 AM
