By Chris Howe

There has been an unprecedented response to the government’s proposals to mine New Zealand’s national parks. The Ministry for Economic Development estimates the number of submissions will exceed 35,000 by the time the deadline is reached today.

I find it almost unbelievable that a government in a developed country could try to push through, so rapidly, such a misguided and ill-informed measure. It’s as if we’d suddenly gone back decades not only to a time when awareness of the environment was low, and regulation limited, but to a time when the understanding of the contribution of such places to our global brand and economy was non-existent.

Today, in 2010, the government should be better informed. Since the 1980s paper after paper has been published showing how the environment provides billions of dollars of benefits to society – from jobs to freshwater to carbon storage and more. What is more, the number of submissions shows that the people of New Zealand appear to be much better informed about the value of conservation land than the government. And as I pointed out in this blog a few weeks ago, the government’s own reports and discussion papers show that the same mineral wealth could most likely be had by mining non-conservation land.

So why would the government be pressing ahead with proposals that do not show a clear economic benefit, damage some of New Zealand’s most valuable conservation areas, and are opposed by so many people?

Most people accept that the government of the day – whatever colour – is reasonably competent. We might not agree with all the government’s policies, and while there are many social and economic measures for which New Zealand, in contrast to other developed countries, is a poor performer and could do a lot better, the country is not falling apart. We’re not being bailed out by the International Monetary Fund, or accepting peacekeeping troops from Australia.

I think this lulls us into a false sense of security. Underlying the sense of outrage against the mining proposals, perhaps many New Zealanders are thinking, yes, but maybe there’s something to it? Maybe Minister Brownlee is right and we do need to catch up with Australia? Don’t I keep hearing about our best and brightest leaving the country? Surely the government wouldn’t be doing something like this unless they really thought it was the best thing to do?

To which the answer is: No. They’ve actually got it wrong. How many times must it be said. The economics DON’T add up. The environment IS worth more intact. No you CAN’T restore pristine natural habitat after it has been dug up. And NO, most of the money generated will not stay in New Zealand.

One of the most comprehensive submissions to the process was made by the New Zealand Committee of the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) – a global body including governments, non-government groups, scientists and others. You can see their submission here along with a letter from the IUCN Director-General to the Prime Minister. For such a body to express “deep concern” directly to a developed country Prime Minister simply shows just how wrong the New Zealand government is to pursue such a foolhardy initiative.

I hope that the sheer number of submissions shows the government how wrong they are, and that they back away from this ridiculous idea just as quickly as they pushed it forward. But what I hope more than anything is that Brownlee and Key actually read the submissions and learn something about the real value of New Zealand’s natural environment, and the deep personal connection New Zealanders have with it.