A Quick Essay on New Zealand Today

How would you describe New Zealand if you have lived here for some time?

New Zealand, the land of my birth and my home,  is a wonderful country, but why do we have third world problems here. Why are our crime statistics and suicide rates so high?

Here is a quick essay on how I see it.  I hope other Kiwi’s living here or abroad will comment on how they see things.

What will happen if we do have a Labour/Green coalition after the next election this December?

Is it really important, as I heard on the news today (13/3/2014) that parents should be discouraged from driving their children to school? This was from the Green co-leader, the aim being to decrease congestion on the roads and presumably to aid in preserving the planet.

I know why my daughter was always driven to school. Could it have been a string of terrible criminal offences on children early in those years that like me affected parents confidence in their children’s safety?

Our economy on paper looks in reasonable shapehttp://www.tradingeconomics.com/new-zealand/government-debt-to-gdpwith a debt gdp ratio of 35.9% last year which I believe is better than the US right now which I understand is about 73%.

However, putting this in context, NZ is naturally a very wealthy country with a fertile soil, benign climate, abundant natural resources and an educated skilled populace. We should be the most wealthy country in the world. However poverty statistics are basically 3rd world with, for example, 20% of children in poverty according to the OECD.http://www.3news.co.nz/OECD-One-in-five-Kiwi-kids-lives-in-poverty/tabid/423/articleID/250874/Default.aspx .

Housing is expensive to purchase-build-rent mainly because of socialist national and local government policies on land zoning and minimum standards for new housing. I needn’t talk about the cost of housing too much as its in the media just about every day. And it is true, it is very difficult to make that jump to home ownership nowadays.

Gerry Brownlee once wrote to me explaining that his aim as Minister of Housing was to improve the housing stock in New Zealand.  Well having lived in a few un-insulated homes in Christchurch, made even less tenable by the banning of wood or coal burning open fires and and coal ranges (where there is so much inexpensive spare heat, that one is always trying to get rid of it), myself, he does have a point. However the problem is in his method. Specifying continually higher specs for new homes, (and I know a lot about that), and having to only use electricity, (which is likely to fail when you need it most like it did last week), or approved heaters with special fuels is simply not only putting the price of purchasing a home out of reach for many, but is causing people to freeze through the winter because the cost of heating, combined with the continually rising rents, is too high.

The truth is, that My Brownlee’s policy can only lead to increasing homelessness for people at the bottom of the ladder. A good housing stock can only be attained by allowing people to become more wealthy and letting them build adequate houses themselves.  How can Mr Brownlee allow people to become more wealthy? Well fewer and much less tax of course. As I mention below, according to Friedman, according to my training and very likely according to Reserve Bank and Treasury advice to the government, substantial tax reduction not only will cause the employed to get more wealthy, the unemployed will also get substantially fewer as well.

I remember Helen Clark during a televised debate before an election, very clearly denigrating advice from the government advisers, calling it bumpkin or hogwash or some such name. (One must remember that a degree in Political Science will only help you get elected, there is precious little studied in that faculty that will help you actually run a country in a way that benefits its citizens).

The government here obviously then is overly large with intrusion into almost every walk of private life and effectively most people receive some relief from the taxpayer in some form or another. In my case, like many, I also have private health insurance because the government system is good on A&E but poor on routine non emergency but essential treatment. So for instance if you need a hip operation, you will most likely need to wait until it is an emergency.

I have observed personally on a number of occasions that our government and its agencies are prepared to exceed their statutory powers thus even the rule of law is being bent.

Taxes are correspondingly high and of course – for instance – there is no rebate for having your own health insurance or using private schools.

What is most concerning is our continual slide to the political left. Even our ‘conservative’ government at present uses minimum wages, ETS and refuses to tackle the key causes of the over expensive housing, such as removing city zoning, green type resource planning bureaucracy, and lessening the power of local governments.

Agenda 21 is of course rife in our legislation, local government and education. (I take it you have read my blog on this.)

Ironically, our current PM was in my university economics class, but he and his party appear to be definitely chasing the vote rather than anything else.

There is therefore little to stop UN Agenda 21 objectives in NZ.  If you wonder what I am talking about here, I thoroughly recommend that you get a copy of Ian Wishart’s book ‘Totalitaria” and have a good read. Of course you could also read the previous posts in this blog and also understand what I am on about.

In my experience, even educated people here believe that government can print money at will, and are ignorant that it is really only their own money, or a portion of it that the government will ever spend on their account.  It is important that when you read of a government project, such as the new Stadium intended for the CBD of Christchurch, (Yup its in the plan with a price tag of about NZ$1 Billion as I recall), who is actually paying for it. For the information of all the readers, the government, although it is physically simple to do, cannot print or create money without causing inflation and is actually constrained in this by the Reserve Bank Act. In fact, the Government has no money to spend but what it collects from us or what it has salted away in “public assets” such as Energy companies and the like. Consequently, the new stadium in Christchurch, (and this is simply a prominent example), being unlikely in the extreme to be able to pay for itself in hireage and gate receipts,  will simply be paid for by you and me out of our taxes. I suspect that if the citizens who “approved” the plan, may have thought twice if the cost of the stadium was expressed in a dollar amount of their personal taxes for x number of years.

In fact probably every day you will read of groups or individuals lobbying the government for some sort of “improvement” – using tax payers money of course where a local fund raiser from affected people would often be the most sensible thing to do. Just imagine a major cut in taxation which would enable people to look after themselves and according to the economist Milton Friedman whose policies have benefited NZ in a number of ways and I have the utmost respect for, these people would not only be able to look after themselves, but have money left over – and- the economy would be far more buoyant without the risk of inflation.

What would be beneficial, seeing as how the government is always moaning that Kiwi’s don’t save enough, would be to STOP TAXING SAVINGS. A very simple solution. Kiwi Saver takes a small step towards this with a government gift to get you going, but after that you pay tax as usual while your money is locked away for you.

I used to be on a superannuation scheme where my employer matched my contributions dollar for dollar. Yup you guessed it, my dollar from my salary was taxed and the dollar from my employer was taxed as well. I think I got about 65 cents instead.

Unfortunately we are very fertile ground for green initiatives which are of course touted by the government as being ‘free’ or ‘inexpensive’, which they would not be if the tax payer subsidy was disclosed. Of course this unfortunately intensifies negatively the effect I describe in the above paragraph.

So there you have it. How a beautiful wealthy country can be ruined by its own citizens with covert help from its unprincipled government.

I know we are not the only country in the world with these problems, but NZ always prides itself in being a world leader, ignoring how futile any effect must be from such a small country.

Maybe we just need to change our direction in becoming a world leader. A smaller, less expensive government, (take a look at how Switzerland does it) and a lot less tax.

Why we could even be the wealthiest country in the world, eclipsing our neighbors across the ditch, no starving children, everyone with a fair chance to find a house that meets their needs.

I think its OK to be wealthy, but some people are embarrassed about it. Well maybe thats where our problem really lies.

Posted in Communism, Social Engineering, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 18 Comments

Are we experiencing a communist infiltration sponsored by the United Nations?

New Zealand has United Nations Agenda 21 inserted into key legislation such as the Resource Management Act and the Local Government Act.

Here is a page from the Ministry for the Environment Website. Read it carefully!www_mfe_govt_nz_laws_meas

These look horrifyingly green to me, but they only border on communism.

You must check out this exam script exemplar  from the NCEA course “Education in Sustainability” Exemplar 3 2008 exam else you will miss the point of this blog! Remember that this examination candidate was between 16 and 17 years old. Behind him or her are teachers, heads of department, headmasters, curriculum creators, government officials, Minister of Education and  ultimately the Prime Minister himself. All responsible for the repugnant things this candidate is regurgitating and eventually going through life thinking what he or she has “learned” at school is and reasonable.

I found these on the governments NZQA website. http://www.nzqa.govt.nz/ncea/assessment/view-detailed.do?standardNumber=90812

What is perhaps more shocking are the examiner’s comments which are in red over each page.

This is only one of a number in a similar vein.

Yes- The base authorities for the course “Education in Sustainability” are Agenda 21 and the Brundtland Report!

If this is not an attempt to breed little communists at high school and send them out into the community armed with very little understanding of the consequences of what they have learned, then will someone enlighten me as to what it is.

Conversely, if you have any civic responsibility, perhaps you should email the Prime Minister and the Minister of Education ask for an explanation.

Please feel welcome to comment.

What do you think of the views expressed in this exam paper and more important, the views of his instructor. Here is the link again (Exemplar 3 2008 exam)

Roger 13/03/13

Of course in this short post I have only dealt briefly with education.

Please check my post on the property rights issues that we are having in Christchurch New Zealand because of Agenda 21 measures.  http://thedemiseofchristchurch.com/2012/11/29/hello-world/

Roger 30/09/13

PS. Found this blog which illustrates how the UN is moving into mathematics. I have read a few papers on this subject but never seen examples like this before.

http://www.realfarmacy.com/you-wont-believe-the-way-theyre-teaching/

Just check the arithmetic homework that your kids bring home. If you are suspicious about anything that your children are being taught, put it in front of the Principal or head teacher for an explanation. Remember that this is happening wherever the UN can get a foot hold. We are not immune in New Zealand.

Good luck!

Roger 28/04/14

Posted in Christchurch City Rebuild, Christchurch Earthquake, Communism, Social Engineering | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 50 Comments

Secure property rights are FUNDAMENTAL to personal freedom and democracy.

People of Christchurch!

A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have.”   Thomas Jefferson

Welcome to my blog,

I believe I have found the reason why such incredible powers have been used in the so called “rebuild” of Christchurch. My reasoning is based on what is found on the Christchurch City Council’s website and the associated documents which are used or refered to by the council.

Please follow the links I provide, which will, step by step, reveal what the people we elected are up to.

There is no doubt the explanation for the actions of our government is outrageous, but the things you will read are more than mere coincidence.

Lets review some of the more obvious things that have happened. If you are a citizen of Christchurch, you will know all these things anyway.

Red zoning in the suburbs.

We have seen whole suburbs “red Zoned” which means that these will be compulsorily taken over by the government (with negotiation with insurance companies) and at 2008 valuations.

Stop Press. This is an update about events that are happening as I write.

First of all a number of these red zoners have applied for a Judicial Review of the above mentioned Red Zone process.  The government for some reason has linked the taking of the red zone land with whether the owners are insured or not. This has left over 200 red zoners who find the government offer unsatisfactory because

1. Their property though uninsured, is either undamaged or quite repairable.

2. The government has offered them 50% of the land value only. This means they will get less than 20% of the original value of the property

3. Their property is not damaged or only slightly, so why should they have to move out at all?

The learned judge stated, among other things,

1. The government acted outside its powers in creating and enforcing the red zone.

2. The property owners  be properly compensated using legal means.

3. Made a declaration that the decision to create the red zone announced on 23 June 2011 did not lawfully affect the property rights of the property owner applicants in the proceeding CIV-2013-409-000843 (the ‘Outcasts’).

Here is the judgement.

http://thedemiseofchristchurch.files.wordpress.com/2013/10/judgement-on-20130826-fowler-developments-ltd-v-ce-cera-and-quake-outcasts-v-min-for-cer-and-o.pdf

Of course the government has appealed and this appeal is happening about now.

Watch this space!!

Because the Christchurch City Council and the central government, has raised the standard of building required, (ranging from a minimum seismic proof foundation, double glazing and even the distance from the oven to the opposite bench etc), it is therefore impossible to actually replace your house with the insurance and purchase payouts anyway (if one’s payout ever comes).

It seems from some reports that an average retired couple with no hope of raising a further mortgage, may be several hundred thousand dollars short of replacing their previous lifestyle. But regardless of whether the house is still liveable, the occupants must move out.

Some “Red Zones” include entirely undamaged houses where the red zoning is justified by there being a “Rock Fall hazard”, in spite of the fact that in many cases no actual rocks have fallen on or nearby during any of the earthquakes. The citizens therefore appear to be being locked out of their houses for no discernable reason.

In other red zone suburbs, the reason is given is that the council will be unable to provide services to that area. However the citizens still must leave, and the opportunity of any attempt for these citizens to organise their own utilities has never been on the agenda.

The same excuse has been used in limiting new housing developments where some developers feel that installing blue water waste systems for new houses is a perfectly acceptable and “environmentally friendly” solution. This would remove the burden on the council which admittedly is stretched in supplying reticulation to western suburbs and would hasten the supply of much needed buildable land. Unfortunately this is not acceptable by the bureaucracy.

Please note that these red zones generally follow the river boundaries and although the damage in many areas is devastating, they most certainly  include  a significant number of undamaged and/or repairable properties.

Not moving is not an option – if you elect to stay in a red zoned property utilities will be cut off and your property will be effectively confiscated anyway.

http://cera.govt.nz/faq/residential-red-zone-purchase-offer/the-offer-0

Well the above link has been changed, although if you are interested it does serve to enable one to look around the correct government web area.

Fortunately I copied the information so I can give you a link from my own library. This booklet can still be found at the above site but you will need to search for it.

In particular look at Page 10 “What will happen to my property if I decide that  I do not want to accept the Crown’s offer”

Purchase offer supporting information for Residential Red Zone (March 2013) – residential-red-zone-purchase-offer-supporting-information-booklet-20130327

Further Info

ccdu_govt_nz_faq_land-acquisition

Red zoning in the CBD

A list of facts.

Demolition of buildings behind a cordon with little or no consultation with the building owners and their tenants with no chance to recover business and personal property (Although some cases were documented where the demolition people stripped the building and on sold everything of value).

“Red stickering” of buildings meaning no one– including the owner could enter with no provision for the owners to recover property. Only after contracted protest after weeks and months later were essential business files and plant able to be recovered.

The building owners and tenants were  therefore prohibited from guarding their property. Therefore apart from the inevitable theft, there was consequential and preventable damage from weather, flooding and after shocks.

The creation of an impenetrateable bureaucracy where for instance, a demolition plan was demanded from the building owner within a short period of time, but even if that plan was presented, the bureaucracy carried out the demolition anyway, not only trying to contract the liability of any accidental damages to life and other property to the buildings owner, but also charging a “management fee”.

The bureaucracy acted so slowly in any case that most small business owners went out of business, not only because they could not even recover the cash from their till (which was typically consequently rifled by persons unknown) but their customers were locked outside the zone as well. The time between the earthquake and the recovery of essential business property bankrupted these businesses and as tenancies therefore lapsed, after more than two years, the building owners are facing financial ruin as well. Especially as enough time has now passed for typical business interruption insurances to have run their course. Yet even accepting that all the streets were too dangerous for the public (which they weren’t), it would have been simple for the bureaucracy, once all life and limb was accounted for, to actively assist these businesses instead of locking them out AND thereby helping restore the associated employment and jobs these businesses bring to the city.

Another branch of the bureaucracy has been given the responsibility to “manage” the Christchurch “rebuild” but through the conferred monopoly (all repair work must go through this agent), has leveraged the price of builders labour to such a low level that many builders simply cannot find work. And the “agent” takes a commission on all repair/building activities.

The central and local government does not pressure insurance companies to make timely payouts. As a consequence, few private rebuilds are occurring. Many payouts are estimated as being years away.

Compulsory purchase imposed after property prices had fallen sufficiently.http://ccdu.govt.nz/faq/land-acquisition

Government intends to resell property back to the private sector after plan is implemented. In any other context this would be construed as speculation by the government using private property and tax payers money!

detroit-then-now

 

In fact, from the very first earthquake, the authorities (Mainly the CCC) appeared to be deliberately allowing businesses to die

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10714099

This is strange because any reasonable person can see that in a disaster, after the initial immediate safety of everyone has been attended to, business are the next thing which must be preserved. Simply put: If a job is lost we have a family of refugees and dependants. If  jobs are preserved, we have a population who can look after themselves, attend to their housing and other disaster needs without too much if any official help

Why completely demolish our old city including perfectly good and functional privately owned properties in order to build a different new city?

This is the sort of thing we criticize third world countries about. It doesn’t happen in good old “democratic and free” New Zealand does it?

 

Finally we have imposed on us a “Plan” for the new Christchurch CBD which bears no resemblance to the Christchurch we all know and love.

Here it is.

http://ccdu.govt.nz/sites/ccdu.govt.nz/files/documents/christchurch-central-recovery-plan.pdf

 Not only that but there are a good number of ultra expensive items whose cost will need to be met by the rate payers of Christchurch, the tax payers of New Zealand and our children and grand children.

The Canterbury earthquakes have provided an unprecedented opportunity to rethink, revitalise and renew central Christchurch”   Christchurch Central Recovery Plan. P 3.

Actually we are not witnessing a “rebuilding” of Christchurch –

We are witnessing the building of a new city where the city of Christchurch once stood

- created at our expense.

Make no mistake! We and future generations are being mortgaged to pay for all this.

“Unprecedented opportunity”? For whom?

 Are the CCC and the government crazy or have they at least lost the plot?

There is no doubt that this authoritarian approach has slowed the recovery from the earth quakes. Government energy directed to making sure insurance companies are meeting their obligations in a full and timely manner would definitely be better than the bureaucracy we have now!

But Gerry Brownlee, His Worship and others are not the clowns they appear to be,

there is another agenda which is at work here.

Take a read of this link from the Christchurch City Council website!

http://resources.ccc.govt.nz/files/SustainabilityPolicy-docs.pdf

Here is an excerpt:

 

Christchurch City Council Sustainability Policy

1. Introduction

Sustainability is a word that is used often, yet means different things to different people. This Sustainability Policy seeks to clarify what the City Council means by the term sustainability. This will enable Council policies and strategies to adopt a consistent point of reference for the term and for the related concepts and principles to be incorporated with more consistency into Council activities and decision making.

2. Policy Aim

The Sustainability Policy is one of the high-level Policy Frameworks that have been designed to help guideCouncil activity.

This Policy aims to embed sustainability into our Council and community. To help make sustainability “the way we do things around here”.”

At the heart of a democratic society is the responsibility for community leaders to make decisions on behalf of, and in the best interests of, present and future generations.”

(Well I think they have got that one wrong, Aren’t community leaders supposed to serve the community, not make decisions for the community? Isn’t that the difference between democracy and totalitarianism?)

 

To be sustainable, Council recognises that our society must be Efficient, Cyclic, Solar, Safe and Social.” Solar = “Renewable powered and carbon neutral society”

The extraction or harvest, processing, distribution, use and reuse of goods and services is powered from renewable sources and our society is carbon neutral (emissions are first reduced, then offset).”

There it is in black and white. The Christchurch City Council is committed to making Christchurch a “Carbon Neutral” city!

This is the “unprecedented opportunity” given to the Christchurch City Council and the Global Warming proponents in government by our disasterous earthquakes!

Not only are they persuing  an unadvertised/hidden agenda but they are also taking advantage of cantabrians many of whom are facing their darkest days and years.

Oh and please note the use of this phrase: “

Scientific uncertainty is not used as an excuse for preventing harm.”

Well that gives them a fairly blank card to do what they like dosn’t it?

Except for the mention of carbon, this policy is actually a summary of Agenda 21,  a product of the UN Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) held in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, in 1992. Global Warming caused by Carbon Dioxide emissions (thats the meaning of “emissions” in the councils policy) was not invented in 1992.

Read this carefully -

In this policy, the Christchurch City Council does not mean financially sustainable, they mean that they are going to make sure that Christchurch is going to be in the forefront to do its part in saving the planet from “carbon dioxide poisoning” or “Anthropogenic Global Warming”.

If you are not familiar with the Anthropogenic Global Warming theory, a highly biased account can be read at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming, This Wikipedia account is biased because it treats the theory as fact when in reality there is no actual empirical proof and neither is there any truth to the claim that there is “scientific consensus”. (if you want to read a realistic commentary on the subject try http://www.rogerfromnewzealand.wordpress.com)

Some may think the council’s efforts to “save” the planet is a good thing, some may be ignorant on the subject, others see carbon dioxide induced global warming as the biggest crock in history.

But no matter what you believe, and regardless whether Anthropogenic Global Warming is real or not, the theory through Council and Government policies I have shown is affecting us right now. 

In our pockets because

WE and our children and future generations are paying for this in taxes and rates

and

in our life style and opportunities because

Christchurch is our city and it is being changed into another city.

Their agenda is not to restore Christchurch into the vibrant city it once was that we all knew and loved but to create this futile Carbon dioxide neutral city !

I say futile because even if the  theory of carbon dioxide heating the earth was fact, New  Zealand produces only 0.11% of the world industrial carbon dioxide. Therefore if New Zealand was removed from the earth, global warming would not be significantly affected in any way.

 The Christchurch City Council aided and abetted by our government sees the Christchurch earthquakes as an “unprecedented opportunity” to make Christchurch into the worlds first absolutely Agenda21 complying Carbon Neutral Eco City.

This link no longer exists. The UN seems to change its website frequently

http://www.un.org/esa/dsd/agenda21/

However this link gives us similar information.

http://www.un.org/jsummit/html/basic_info/agenda21.html

If you wish to view the original script, here it is

http://thedemiseofchristchurch.files.wordpress.com/2013/07/agenda21-script.pdf

Like all UN documents, at first read it looks reasonable, however on closer examination one begins to realise all the doors it opens. There are also a host of ancillary papers etc. published by the UN and its subsidiaries which detail particular objectives in more detail.

Agenda 21 of which NZ is a signatory, states among other things that governments should “Transfer land”  and make laws to protect river margins, make cities sustainable and pollution free and move populations into these cities so cars are unnecessary and suburbs can be returned to their natural state. Populations should be crammed into small eco compartments in the cities and even population control is mentioned.

Did you know that Christchurch City is a member of Local Governments For Sustainability?

http://www.iclei.org/

Clause7Attachment[1]  Check clause 5.7

which is the way Agenda21 is implemented through the back door by advising and funding local “initiatives”.

It is not a coincidence that the Christchurch Recovery Plan ticks all the boxes for a Agenda 21 complying city.

The United Nations Agenda 21 and other agreements have already entered our legislation!

Check out this page from the NZ Ministry of Environment website!

www_mfe_govt_nz_laws_meas

Here is a typical link which describes the effect of Agenda 21 and ICLIE on their city.

Watch the videos and search for other opinions.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/what-is-agenda-21-after-watching-this-you-may-not-want-to-know/

United Nation documents are designed to look reasonable. It is only after careful interpretation and examples of implementation that one gains an idea of the insidiousness of the organisation.

No wonder the CBD of Christchurch is being compulsorily “purchased”.

Were you consulted when by the Christchurch City Council or government about any of these things?  Definitely not, but we and our children are the ones who are and will be paying for it.

Worst of all, our democracy and freedom is in more danger than we realise.

The UNITED NATIONS is not the government of New Zealand!

Lets keep it that way.

Lets be careful who we elect into Government and Local office.

At election time grill each candidate about Agenda 21 and ICLEI.

What ever your political leaning, lets keep New Zealand sovereign and democratic.

.

Finally,

This blog is intended to promote discussion on the future of Christchurch.

If you have a fact or something that should be included here, please comment and I will most likely include it.

If you think some of the things in here are not fact, I would like to hear from you too.

If you think Bob Parker’s “Eco City” is a  good idea and you are ready to help pay for it – please  comment and tell us all why.

If you have a relevant article send me the link and I will include it here.

Finally, let me quote Pericles from 430 BC:- ” Just because you do not take an interest in politics it does not mean that politics will not take an interest in you.”

Our only way out of all this is to make sure we are all informed about the issues of today, We as a nation need to not blindly vote at elections but need to understand these issues and vote according to the policies. Be very dubious about election bribes, because a policy that offers to create or support something can only be done using your tax money. Make sure that policy spends your/our money wisely.

I will be updating this blog regularly, we have barely scraped the subject here.

Finally another quote.  George Bernard Shaw:

A government which robs Peter (Those working and paying taxes) in order to pay Paul( those for one reason or other do not work) can always depend on the support of Paul.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10746069

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10751443

http://http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10734370

Oh and if you have any actual doubt about all these asertions and still do not believe that we are being taken for a terrible financial and undemocratic slide over  a few United Nations agreements and a shonky Anthropogenic Climate Change Theory :- try reading the Christhurch Central Recovery Plan which I mentioned above but you didnt bother to stop and read

http://ccdu.govt.nz/sites/ccdu.govt.nz/files/documents/christchurch-central-recovery-plan.pdf

and check page 41: or click on the book mark “Ideas to reality” and read the following.

“SUSTAINABILITY

Over the long term, greater Christchurch has a unique opportunity to redevelop the city so that it is resilient to environmental, social and economic changes that may affect future generations.

Greater Christchurch can expect more droughts and floods and a rising sea level due to the changing climate. Energy costs will increase the demand for efficient energy and transport systems.

New technologies and competition for global resources and talent will reshape the way business is done.

More sustainable technologies and approaches can be part of the redevelopment of central Christchurch. It is possible to address the environmental impact of construction activities, building design and performance during the planning stages. This approach is more effective than retrofitting.” etc etc

You might ask a councellor where the measures are to guard against “floods and a rising sea level due to the changing climate.”  seeing as how Christchurch especially the CBD  is barely above the high tide mark.

Would also be educational to ask a councellor approximately how much are sea levels expected to rise should the ARCTIC ice melt completely.

If you know the answer to that, please comment. I know the answer down to the last millimetre so I can correct you if you get it wrong.

Congrats to the Greens, your policies are now enshrined in our legislation and we have a government who is prepared to trample over our property rights to carry them out.

Shame on you Greens for pretending to protest about this in Christchurch on Dec 10 2011. You must have been chuckling up your sleeves all the way to Cramner Square. No wonder you tried to shout down the Act Party representative!

STOP PRESS:

Check out this article in the Christchurch Press.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/news/city-centre/9113552/20-000-people-for-city-centre

Consistent with Agenda 21, our government is getting ready to concentrate citizens within the Christchurch CBD.  Did I mention that above on 29/11/12?  Yup just a few paragraphs read above and there you will see it. No I am not a soothsayer, the progression is quite clear when you study Agenda 21 a little.

Next we wait for population control and restrictions on farming. Goodby democratic NZ!

Posted in Christchurch City Rebuild, Christchurch Earthquake, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , | 18 Comments