Oxfam To Government: This Is Not A Fair Target

Today the Government announced New Zealand's target for greenhouse gas emissions reductions by the year 2020. This is the target that will be submitted to the UN negotiations on a post-2012 climate treaty. Despite the call for scientifically-based reductions of 40 per cent by 2020, supported by a growing number of New Zealanders, the Government today committed to at most a 20 per cent cut by 2020 if other countries agree an international climate deal in December, with a fallback of just 10 per cent reductions if they don't get their way in international negotiations.

In response Oxfam New Zealand Executive Director, Barry Coates said:

"This announcement is tantamount to telling millions of vulnerable people around the world that New Zealand does not care enough about their fate to make the cuts that are needed. At a time when impoverished communities are struggling to cope with the impacts of climate change, this is like saying that their lives are not worth the costs of economic transformation."

The Nobel prize-winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has called for cuts of 25-40 per cent in order to keep atmospheric CO2-e below 450ppm. But the latest credible scientific evidence indicates that the developed countries need to cut their cumulative emissions by 40 per cent. Oxfam's research says that New Zealand's fair share of the overall effort by the industrialised countries ('Annex 1 countries') is a 40.6 per cent reduction. It's clear that a 10-20 per cent cut does not amount to New Zealand's fair share.

Coates added: "This decision shows a serious lack of vision and ambition. Instead of heeding the call from a series of public consultation sessions, the Government appears to have based its decision on the results of economic modelling that suggest meeting a higher target would be too expensive. But the modelling assumes no changes in technology, no business response and unrealistically high carbon prices. We have already seen that tree planting has cancelled out the supposedly high costs of complying with the Kyoto Protocol. The use of this modelling seems like a case of 'lies, damn lies and statistics', used to justify a pre-determined position."

"There is another side to today's decision. The modelling ignored the cost of setting too low a target. We face not only the impacts of climate change on our coastlines and agriculture, but also the cost to our trading sector. Our competitors, even those from developing countries, are gearing up for a low-carbon future, and New Zealand is falling behind."

"Countries like the UK and Germany are moving far faster. Our Government's head-in-the-sand short-termism does little to transform our economy to meet the challenges of the future."

"New Zealand's 'clean green brand' has taken a hit today. We are at risk of being a climate change laggard in negotiations."

"10-20 per cent is not adequate to deal with the problem and it isn't fair - not to forward-thinking countries who are setting far higher targets and certainly not to Pacific islanders living in fear that their lives will be devastated by the next king tide."

"Hiding behind the rationale that New Zealand is a small country with an insignificant contribution to global emissions is a cop out. New Zealand's emissions reduction target in these negotiations sends a crucial signal about our intentions, and about our views of the outcome. New Zealand's per capita greenhouse gas pollution is 4th worst of the developed countries. Telling other nations to pull our weight should not be tolerated."

"The message we're sending to the world is quite clear: New Zealanders will continue to pollute - we are prepared to risk breaching ecological limits and sacrificing the lives of others to do so," concluded Coates.

ENDS

© Scoop Media