SUE KEDGLEY
OPINION: The Government appears to have
quietly added "the intensification of agriculture" to its list of
contentious policies it believes will bring new jobs, and economic growth, to
New Zealand.
Its master strategist, Steven Joyce,
signalled this in a speech to the National Party conference.
"If New Zealanders want more jobs,"
he warned, "they should stop being fearful of foreign investment, accept
the intensification of agriculture, not forgo oil and mineral exploration ...
and do a few things that might make us uncomfortable."
Nothing Mr Joyce says is random or
accidental, so I am wondering what he was signalling here?
Was he signalling that we had all better get
used to the fact that agriculture will become more and more intensive, and stop
being squeamish about animal welfare?
Was he suggesting that our reluctance to
accept certain practices, such as locking up hens in cages, or fattening cows
in cubicles or feedlots, is holding agricultural progress back, and will have
to change?
Perhaps he was signalling that it's time we
dropped our resistance to genetic engineering, and embraced it
enthusiastically?
Or was he simply signalling we need a huge
boost in the number of dairy cows in New Zealand?
Certainly there are signs of a renewed push
for genetic engineering in New Zealand, and for more intensive,
irrigation-based dairy farming, and innovations such as "cubicle
farming" to fatten up dairy cows.
But I believe Mr Joyce is dreaming if he
thinks consumers will happily accept ever more intensive agriculture, as the
price we must pay for more jobs.
Polls show most New Zealanders oppose the
current practice of keeping millions of animals in cages, where they suffer
every day of their lives. They understand that more intensive agriculture will
inevitably mean more suffering for animals. That's why consumers want to see
more humane, free-range farming practices, not factory farms.
It's hard to imagine how we could have
further intensification of our agriculture without destroying our already
stressed and polluted environment, and our clean, green brand.
Already New Zealand has 6 million dairy cows
- double the number in 1990. It's hard to imagine how we could fit a million
more cows into New Zealand, or what would happen if we did.
Six million cows have polluted our waterways
to such an extent that we cannot swim in most of our lakes and rivers any more.
Our clean, green brand is rapidly eroding as
a consequence. Does Mr Joyce want to eliminate it altogether?
Aside from the environmental impact of any
further intensification of our agriculture, this proposal has other flaws.
The first is his assumption that intensive
agriculture will create more jobs.
If Mr Joyce visited a factory farm, he would
quickly discover that intensive farming is about eliminating jobs, not creating
them. Virtually every agricultural process is mechanised inside a factory farm,
and so it's hard to find a worker inside them.
I've visited a huge factory farm outside
Dunedin, for example, where 400,000 layer hens live lives of abject misery
inside cages. Their feed and water arrive by conveyor belt, and the eggs and
excrement are removed by conveyor belt. One worker is employed to check on the
health and welfare of 90,000 hens, and remove dead and diseased birds.
It's the same in the huge sheds I've visited,
where up to 30,000 broiler chickens are reared. These are job-poor industries.
But perhaps the most obvious flaw is that our
key advantage as a food producer is our reputation as a quality producer of
safe, healthy, sustainable food.
If we go down the path of ever more intensive
agriculture, that reputation will end up in tatters, along with our clean,
green brand, which is worth about $18 billion to our economy.
For these reasons I sincerely hope Mr Joyce
will quietly abandon this latest proposal to bring us more jobs and growth.
Sue Kedgley is a former Green MP.
- © Fairfax NZ News
Original Article Here
No comments:
Post a Comment