Scientists hit back over Prime Minister's 'worthies' insult
Photo:
Marika Khabazi
A British scientist says it's concerning Prime Minister Christopher Luxon has
dismissed him and other climate scientists as "worthies"
for raising concerns about plans to lower the country's methane emissions target.
Global professor of environmental change at Oxford University Paul Behrens said the government appeared to be trying to deflect attention from questions about the country's agricultural greenhouse gases.
"I think the characterisation of climate scientists as 'worthies' reflects a really concerning dismissal of evidence-based policy making," he said.
"While the Prime Minister's remarks may aim to deflect criticism of New Zealand's agricultural emissions profile they overlook the clear global consensus that methane reductions are critical to limiting near term warming."
Luxon denied he was dismissing science or deflecting attention from this country's farming emissions.
"What a load of rubbish, my point was very clear, those scientists can write to leaders of 194 countries before they send it to me," he said.
Christopher Luxon says New Zealand is already managing methane emissions better than "every other country on the planet".
Photo:
Gianina Schwanecke / Country Life
Though a decision is yet to be revealed, farming groups appear have swayed the government to reduce the current target, which is shrinking emissions somewhere between 24 and 47 per cent by 2050.
Several climate experts say the country will set a dangerous precedent for Ireland and other big methane emitters if it aims too low.
When 26 international climate change scientists wrote to Luxon accusing him of "ignoring scientific evidence" showing global heating caused by methane has to reduce, the prime minister said it was lovely if "worthies" wanted to write him letters but New Zealand was already managing methane emissions better than "every other country on the planet".
The scientists were worried that the government might be about to adopt a target that lets heating caused by methane emissions stay the same, rather than turning down the thermostat on the country's cows and sheep.
That is because the government asked a scientific panel to tell it how much methane emissions would need to drop to just level off global heating from methane, not reduce it.
The answer was 14 to 24 per cent by 2050, about half the current target.
The debate is whether that is enough.
Federated Farmers and Beef + Lamb says yes, because methane is much shorter lived than the other main heating gases, carbon dioxide and nitrous oxide.
One of the members of the government's panel, climate scientist Dave Frame, said New Zealand should lower its target unless other countries commit to bigger cuts to methane from farming than they have currently. He said the planet was not on track to limit heating inside 1.5C hotter than pre-industrial times, despite countries' promises.
"If the world really did cut emissions in line with what those kind of guys are talking about, then I think we should absolutely be part of it.
"In the absence of that action, I think a 'no additional warming target' is a reasonable fall back position."
Victoria University Professor of Climate Change Dave Frame.
Photo:
RNZ / Chris Bramwell
Dr Frame said unlike more profitable dairy farming, sheep and beef farms could not absorb the cost of methane-cutting technologies.
Another member of the government's panel atmospheric scientist Laura Revell said it was a tricky call for the government.
"Everyone is in agreement - those on the panel, those who wrote the letter - that methane is a greenhouse gas which global action is needed to address," she said.
"We know that the consequences of climate change are severe, we are seeing it already and every bit of warming we can avoid helps.
"On the other hand, farming is a big part of the New Zealand economy and these emissions are associated with feeding people."
The Climate Change Commission said the country should aim for a cut of at least 35 percent, because the costs and impacts of global heating are turning out worse than expected.
It said there is no reasonable excuse to do less on methane, under New Zealand's climate commitments.
Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero
,
a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
RNZ News
9 minutes ago
- RNZ News
Removing te reo Māori from children's books 'damaging step backwards'
The Education Ministry canned At the Marae for containing "too many Māori words. Photo: Screenshot / Ministry of Education A leading Māori studies academic says Education Minister Erica Stanford's decision to remove te reo Māori from new early-reading books is "a dangerous move" that breaches both Te Tiriti o Waitangi and human rights. University of Auckland Professor of Māori Studies and linguist Margaret Mutu (Ngāti Kahu, Te Rarawa, Ngāti Whātua) believes erasing te reo Māori from children's everyday learning is "an attempt to maintain the doctrine of discovery" and "inculcate white supremacy". "It's a very, very dangerous move and I feel really sorry for the mokopuna [grandchildren], who are being grossly misinformed and educated wrongly." Last week, the Education Ministry canned early-reading book At the Marae from its Ready to Read Phonics Plus (RtRPP) series, because it had "too many" Māori words. Documents released on Wednesday revealed that decision was part of a wider policy, approved by Education Minister Erica Stanford in October 2024, to exclude all Māori words , apart from character names, from any new books in the series. The pukapuka (books) are used in primary schools to help five-year-olds learn to read. At the time, the decision affected 13 books in development, all of which only included Māori words in character names. The wider series, which currently has 27 books featuring Māori words, could still be reprinted once finished. The report showed the move was driven by concerns from some literacy experts that including Māori words alongside English could confuse tamariki (children), although evidence on this was "mixed". Officials advised the minister that "limited" research existed on the impact of kupu Māori in early reading books. Professor Margaret Mutu claims exposure to more than one language is extremely beneficial. Photo: Supplied / University of Auckland Mutu, who has a PhD specialising in linguistics, said exposure to more than one language at a young age was extremely beneficial. "Children are particularly capable of obtaining a number of different languages up to the age of six," she told RNZ. "At that stage, there is just no difficulty, no complication or anything about a child learning multiple languages. It actually gives them much greater intellectual flexibility to be able to understand a whole lot of different things, because they have access to more than one language. "Being restricted and being monolingual is actually severely detrimental to children," she said. "To deny them this exposure at the age of five is not only stupid, it's very dangerous." A page from At the Marae, an early reading book that the Education Ministry removed from its Ready to Read Phonics Plus (RtRPP) series for having 'too many' Māori words. Photo: Screenshot / Ministry of Education She also accused the Minister of "falsifying what New Zealand English actually is". "New Zealand English is full of Māori words and most speakers don't even think about it. It's just part of who they are, as people living in a Māori country." Mutu pointed to the Dictionary of New Zealand English and the New Zealand Oxford Dictionary as evidence, both containing hundreds of kupu Māori (Māori words) that are neither place names nor rare. "What on earth is she trying to do here? Teach five-year-olds a different version of English than the one that actually exists in this country?" "It's long past time Māori and English were given equal attention in the entire schooling system, so people can be comfortable in this country." Education Minister Erica Stanford's decision has sparked backlash. Photo: RNZ / Mark Papalii The minister's decision has sparked backlash from literacy experts , principals , teachers and Māori education leaders. Te Akatea, the Māori Principals' Association, called the move "an act of white supremacy" and "an act of racism". Mutu agreed and said the change was part of a broader pattern of what she claimed was a "strongly anti-Māori and extremely racist" government. Despite this, Mutu hoped tamariki would still hear and use te reo Māori in their daily lives, but said removing them from what they read in school was "shameful". "This is denying the natural intellectual growth of a child. You rob them of the ability to learn multiple languages that starts when they're very young and fades after the age of seven. "It's a crying shame." She said, if the purpose of removing te reo from children books was to give access to five-year-old children of the words that they hear on an everyday basis, "then this is not the way to do it". "It's just silly. Linguistically, it's quite bizarre." Education Minister Erica Stanford insists she will not remove Māori words from existing books. Photo: RNZ / Mark Papalii RNZ approached the Minister's office for a response, but was declined. However, on Wednesday, Standford said she would not remove Māori words from existing books and more titles in the series would still include Māori names and place names. She had also directed the ministry to ensure Māori vowel sounds were taught explicitly in the English curriculum, so they were "not left to chance". Stanford also pointed out her part in releasing Rangaranga Reo ā-Tā , a new set of structured literacy books entirely in te reo Māori, earlier this year.
RNZ News
39 minutes ago
- RNZ News
Greyhound racing industry takes court action to stop impending ban
Racing Minister Winston Peters has ordered a halt to greyhound racing from August 2026. Photo: PHOTOSPORT Lawyers for the Greyhound Racing Association have told the High Court in Wellington that the ban on greyhound racing will have a devastating effect on the livelihoods of more than 1000 people. Last December, Racing Minister Winston Peters announced the sport would be banned from August 2026. On Thursday, the association argued in court that the work of a ministerial advisory committee tasked with implementing the ban should be stopped, until a judicial review of the legislation was heard. Lawyer Chris Finlayson said the government had erred in directing the industry to monitor and improve animal welfare standards, only to ignore the results in cabinet's decision-making process. The court was told the racing industry had engaged with three reviews of the sport in just over a decade and had consistently shown willingness to comply with directives to improve animal welfare, and controls surrounding injuries and deaths, as well as track standards and rehoming initiatives. He said the cabinet paper - on which the decision to ban the sport was based - was "misleading" and a "very selective characterisation" of the key issues facing cabinet, which he argued was the industry's animal welfare standards, not the erosion of public license - society's acceptance of the practices of the sport. Finlayson said the government - after directing the industry to undertake a statutory process and then "blandly ignore it" - contradicted its obligation to consider the expertise of the industry in legislating towards the sport. Lawyers for the Greyhound Racing Association (left to right) Chris Finlayson KC and Jonathan Kaye at the High Court in Wellington. Photo: RNZ/Bill Hickman "The standard of animal welfare of greyhound racing is high," Finlayson said. "It aligns with the standards in other jurisdictions and is applied with significantly more rigour than pet dogs." Finlayson said the uncertainty over the recommendations of the ministerial advisory committee's plan to wind down the sport was resulting in members of the industry leaving the country before the ban, a collapse in breeding numbers and serious mental-health issues in participants of the industry. He argued, after the ban, New Zealanders could still bet on Australian dog races, which had "equal or lesser" animal welfare standards than Aotearoa's racing industry. Counsel for the Attorney General - acting on behalf of the Minister of Racing - said interim relief application was "fundamentally premised on a need to stop the legislation". Lawyer Katherine Anderson said the action, if successful, "would frustrate the introduction of the bill to Parliament". She said it was "undeniably clear" the court could not make an order to prevent the introduction of a bill. "It's very clear that the applicant fundamentally [says] the decision is wrong and is attempting to draw you in." She said it was up to the Minister to decide "how and if" parties would be consulted before the bill was put to Parliament. Lawyers for the Attorney General - acting on behalf of the Minister of Racing - (left to right) Katherine Anderson and Emma Dowse at the High Court in Wellington. Photo: RNZ/Bill Hickman "There's no straight jacket on the minister to go to the racing industry saying, 'Is there a ban on greyhound racing that's required on welfare grounds?'. "They've been elected to make policy decisions and, if people don't like it, they can be un-elected," Anderson said. Throughout proceedings, Judge Dale La Hood pressed the Greyhound Racing Association's counsel to clarify how the action would benefit the industry, if it's success was not to prevent the ban. "You need to explain to me... what you're seeking to have... stopped, other than preventing a ban on greyhound racing. I don't know if I understand what the benefit of interim relief would be to your client, if it doesn't halt the ban. "That's crucial to my decision on whether you've got a case," La Hood said. Finlayson said he would undertake to clarify his client's intent in a memorandum to the judge after the day's proceedings. Judge La Hood reserved his decision. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
RNZ News
39 minutes ago
- RNZ News
Another Resource Management Act change passes in Parliament
Photo: RNZ / Dom Thomas Another Resource Management Act (RMA) change has passed in Parliament, this one focused on speeding up consenting while the government works on more a permanent replacement. The Resource Management (Consenting and Other System Changes) Amendment Bill makes a range of changes, including: In a statement, the Minister Responsible for RMA Reform Chris Bishop said the legislation brought in sweeping changes, removing handbrakes on New Zealanders' lives, helping drive economic growth, and laying the groundwork for job creation. "Our full replacement for the RMA will be introduced to Parliament this year, be passed into law next year, and be in effect by 2027- but in the meantime, through this Amendment Bill, we're making it quicker and simpler to consent renewable energy, boost housing supply, and reduce red tape for the primary sector," he said. Green MP Lan Pham in her speech on the bill said it was part of an "absolute onslaught when it comes to rushed, ill-thought out legislation" from the government, saying the bill was piecemeal and would make things more complicated for councils. She pointed to the changes around freshwater which were introduced in an amendment on Wednesday, saying it "completely and utterly failed to protect fresh water for all Kiwis". "This is so significant that for the first time in the Resource Management Act's (RMA) history-an Act that was set up to deliberately avoid, remedy, or mitigate environmental impacts-this bill now directly allows and permits significant adverse effects in our most degraded waterways." The bill is expected to come into force after receiving royal assent in the coming days. Bishop said the next phase of the Resource Management reform process would include the complete replacement of the RMA with two laws "that better reflect the importance of private property rights". It would be passed into law next year and come into effect by 2027.
