Blair Anderson, on the hustings 'canvassing for opinion'

Blair Anderson, on the hustings 'canvassing for opinion'

Sunday, December 16, 2007

Contraction + Convergence gets 83% support "Beyond Kyoto"

Mary Carrington
Private Secretary (Climate Change) to
Hon David Parker, Minister Responsible for Climate Change Issues
Telephone 04 471 9131
Mobile 027 694 6278
Fax 04 472 3617

re my previous correspondence on 'Contraction and Convergence" and Mr Parker's reply.

Hello Mary,

I have to say that I am very disappointed with this response. It obfuscates what it is that I am doing with Climate Change. The Government has no right to continue to ignore "Contraction and Convergence" as a 'framework' for climate amelioration given its standing in UK and elsewhere. (see

It is WRONG to ignore what CAN BE DONE and is being done. This letter is EVIDENCE that it is official GOVERNMENT policy to " maintain a silence closely resembling stupidity" when on one hand the Ministry officials have lied to me telling me that MfE is 'C&C' and Treasury officials at Christchurch launch of ETS called C&C the conscience behind what they are doing. The reply surely suggests the Minister, Hon Parker and my local MP for CHCH East don't know what the left hand is doing (unsurprising given the parlous deletion of C&C as an option for discussion in official documents and a woeful engagement on the subject while 'purporting' to be a consultation). Hon PM. Helen Clark didn't even know what C&C was, admitting to having never heard of it when I asked her personally on her Christchurch launching of the last round of climate initiatives. Yet she had just returned from meeting Gordon Brown in London (C&C adopter) in Great Britain (CarbonZeroBritain is a C&C adopter)

Where as evidences considerable uptake of C&C (83% "beyond Kyoto" support) it makes the missive from Minister Responsible for Climate Change Issues, David Parker look childish at best. No amount of pretence that 'everything considered' Labour has done the right thing will paper over the failure to consider C&C. It's calculated and continuing omission will not be forgotten until it IS included.

I'm not against Labour, and I am not against 'taking of significant steps' in the right direction... I am against pretending this has been a robust consultation.
The evidence is on my side. Labour and the respective Ministries have some explaining to do.

The option to 'significantly' support a significant antipodean 'hemispherical approach' to climate change has been all but lost. The responsibility lies at the feet of the Minister. If not then who?

You may pass on my comments to David as you see fit. I don't/wouldn't expect him to take me seriously given the 'all but ignore' correspondence but he and the rest of his climate changing cohort cannot ignore the increasingly evidential 'weight of public opinion when it is duly informed'.

sig. Blair Anderson

On 12/11/07, Mary Carrington <> wrote:
Mary Carrington
Private Secretary (Climate Change) to
Hon David Parker, Minister Responsible for Climate Change Issues
Telephone 04 471 9131
Mobile 027 694 6278
Fax 04 472 3617
This is image data from the scanner.(See attached file: Scan0069.pdf)

Blair Anderson ‹(•¿•)›
Social Ecologist 'at large'

ph (643) 389 4065 cell 027 265 7219

Monday, November 26, 2007

War on Drugs: Impact to National Security

"The United Nations reported that since 1994, the sales of illegal drugs has been the number one revenue source for terrorists all over the world. Experts testifying before the House Committee on Foreign Affairs in the spring of 2007 reported that Al-Qaeda will earn some US$3 billion dollars selling Afghanistan’s heroin and opium. Thousands of dedicated federal agents are pursuing marijuana and coca patches instead of people who fly airplanes into buildings. Such are the unintended consequences of our nation’s policy of drug prohibition and its strategy of War on Drugs.” War on Drugs: Impact to National Security :

So why do media pretend "they dont get the connection?" WOD/Human Rights? Sense of security and participation in our Community? Systemic and now chronic mistrust, increasing alienation, deviency amplifying policy that increasingly looks like and responds like an internal occupation force. And we pretend the Police are not indisrepute?

That a resignation of a now former police officer is enough to heal whats broken.... who sold us this pup and why do we unquestioningly suck up to this WOD Molloch?

Police will not be respected until we understand what changed.

Saturday, November 24, 2007

MAXIM & the Electoral Commision Report

>The Electoral Commission suggested that while 72 percent say they have an interest in politics, it is well-known that the younger age group are more likely not to vote.

1. MMP threshold at 5% is an order of magnitude (1%) higher than it needs to be or was recommended by the royal commission . This continues to  make it difficult for anyone to vote confidently for alternatives to the two party  dominance (ie: strategic voting alters the table of choices, thus disenfranchises voices/engagement/participation). Youth relevant issues are displaced where and when politicians see no 'election value' in soliciting these votes.  {STV would have covered this base.... ]

2.  Youth opinions are ignored politically. Both nationaly and locally.

They are marginalised by legislative breaches of the human rights act/bill of rights by targeted  legislation [ie: 'boy racer'' = ageist/sexist ] and other application of the law (drug policy in disrepute in particular) leading to disproportionate media branding of the 'adolescent as a feared class'. This is wholly unjustified and pejorative in the extreme. (John Kirwin, where are you?).  Youth rejection of  social value systems, alienation from rule of law and deviency amplification are a consequence of POLICY and political/media/populist 'hate speech' that are  decontructions of the truth/reality  in order to justify status quo thinking. [STV would have ensured all voices were 'equitably' at the table ]

Decouple these two identified impediments and voter participation will increase.. no education required.

Looking forward to that conversation. /Blair


Blair Anderson  ‹(•¿•)›

Social Ecologist 'at large'

ph (643) 389 4065   cell 027 265 7219

Monday, November 19, 2007

Hot Science with Kim Hill - the big C and C question?

Climate Change Part 6 - the audience C and C question?

We continue with questions from the audience, starting with a representative from the Global Commons Institute... (<4Mb)
The Press and MAF present 'Hot Science with Kim Hill'. In a series of three public seminars. The Press welcomes some of New Zealand's top experts and scientists who will ponder and debate (1) The water wars (2) Climate change and (3) Our land of milk and honey. The series was recorded in front of a live audience at Christchurch's James Hay Theatre on July 23'07, July 30'07 and August 6'07.

Friday, November 16, 2007

MAXIM on Youth, Drugs and Crime

Tackling youth crime

The Conservative-affiliated British think tank, the Centre for Social Justice, has launched a "comprehensive and radical inquiry" into youth gang crime. The launch highlights the continuing problems of social disconnection, family breakdown and crime that are perplexing not just Britain but the entire Western world, including New Zealand.

The inquiry comes from a growing concern about trends in youth gang crime, and the lack of direction on what to do about it. Alarming statistics include that the "most likely person to be equipped with a knife is a boy aged 14-19 years old," that "1504 of the young people held in custody are 16 years old or younger," and that "three-quarters of male offenders aged between 18 and 21 re-offend within two years." The Centre suggests that these statistics stem from "high levels of family breakdown, school failure in the inner cities and teenage drug and alcohol abuse."

The inquiry seeks to develop long-term solutions, combining both "carrots as well as sticks." It seeks not just to punish, but to prevent; encouraging young people to become connected members of their community, and eliminating the need to find acceptance and family within the gang culture. The suggestion is that while enforcement strategies such as the "zero tolerance" approach in New York may go some way to controlling crime, this should be balanced with developing and encouraging clubs, facilities and events for youths to be involved in, which will help in "giving young people a genuine stake in society."

This is a community problem that requires a community response. These are issues that need to be tackled head-on, and the Centre for Social Justice deserves credit for refusing to dodge them. While the detailed policy is some way off, they show us a genuine way forward, one which draws on a long and honourable tradition of social reform and community co-operation to produce practical solutions. Real change is desperately needed; not just to punish crime, but to rebuild connection with families and communities, giving young people hope and pride, and a stake in their society's future.

Lets all pretend we don't have any clue what so ever as to what is leading this matrix of social dysfunction, or have anyone 'out of left field' speak who might have some insight into what needs to be done...meanwhile we continue a policy of "Isolation and Stigmatization" in the Development of an Underclass. John Kirwin, where are you?
High rates of delinquency are said to be encouraged by the effect of poverty on parenting and the supply of delinquent peers (James, 1995; Weatherburn & Lind, 2001). This leads to suggestions that policies that reduce inequality and deprivation will also lead to reductions in drugrelated crime. The evidence for this suggestion is extremely hard to assess. It is very difficult to evaluate the impact of policies in reducing unemployment and income inequality, improving health,

Other countries have made deliberate attempts to reduce crime through social development, including Canada, France, Australia and Finland (The John Howard Society of Alberta, 1995). Despite the lack of conclusive evidence on the effectiveness of this approach, the strong theoretical support and empirical evidence for the link between social deprivation and drug-related crime means that we can assume that effective measures to tackle social exclusion will also have an impact on rates of drug related crime.

Blair Anderson  ‹(•¿•)›

Social Ecologist 'at large'

ph (643) 389 4065   cell 027 265 7219

Monday, November 12, 2007

"the best hope we have" Lloyds of London (Google Ed. Sumit)

Notes from the Google Education Summit: Posted by Mehran Sahami, Research Scientist

Contraction and Convergence (viewed by Lloyds of London as "the best hope we have")

The first report examines our domestic potential to to reduce our carbon emissions to zero within 20 years. Named ZeroCarbonBritain, the report is a result of over a year's consolidated research by the Centre for Alternative Technology .

It sets out the policy drivers required to achieve zero carbon Britain by 2027, and presents the scenario for using only proven (renewable) technology. Quite simply, the technology already exists to make the UK carbon neutral (without the need to resort to nuclear), but what is required is political determination\and changes in the way we, as a society, view energy.
An ambitious, bold plan, but most importantly, it can be done. Here and now. Here's how:
3 steps are needed to achieve zero carbon Britain by 2027 -
1. policy implementation of Contraction & Convergence and the use of Tradable Energy Quotas (carbon credit cards)
2. powering down our fossil fuel use, and
3. powering up our use of renewable energy generation

Moreover, it's an equitable solution to climate change, energy security and global equity.

The essential policy driver needed is the implementation of Contraction and Convergence (viewed by Lloyds of London as "the best hope we have"), a co-ordinated plan to reduce carbon emissions by allocating a equal share per capita basis from a limited budget, as proposed by the Global Commons Institute .

C&C In a nutshell:
An international cap on emissions is set for the next 20 years, the amount allocated annually reduced year on year until it reaches zero in 2027.
Convergence: Each nation receives receives a national share allocation which is then divided equally per person. Over the 20 years, the allocations are reduced to a point that everyone on the planet has an equal share.

These share allocations, called Tradable Energy Quotas? (TEQs) can be traded, bought and sold between individuals and businesses. Each year the cap on TEQs is reduced, so there are fewer to share, in line with the national budget. Gradually, individuals and companies would have to learn to make low and zero-carbon choices, due to the cost or inconvenience of doing otherwise. TEQs are tradable, and represent a source of income for cash poor households. Essentially carbon credits become a kind of parallel currency. Very quickly we would be scrapping the petrol engine, improving building standards, changing the way we produce and consume food and investing heavily in renewable energy. All it needs now is political backbone to make this a reality.

(NZ's signatary status to its international carbon trading commitments with GB, require us to examine what GB is doing.. how come they get to talk about C&C and we dont.? /Blair)

Blair Anderson ‹(•¿•)›

Social Ecologist 'at large'

ph (643) 389 4065 cell 027 265 7219

Thursday, November 1, 2007

National's Key Crimes Initiatives

Open Letter to National's Mr Key.
Since when does the requirement for 1250 more police signal 'success'  when in reality it is a sign of abject failure. These additional resources are not free Mr Key.
A sign of successful policing would a thousand less Police, Mr Key. District Commander Sandy Manderson placed the responsibility for 70% of crime on drug policy, specifically alcohol, whereas Welsh Police administration is saying 70% of crime is caused by drug policy failure .
[ Legalise all drugs: chief constable demands end to 'immoral laws'   Independent, UK - 14 Oct 2007 Richard Brunstrom, the Chief Constable of North Wales, advocates an end to UK drug policy based on "prohibition".]
Someone is connecting the dots, Mr Key. There is our highly indicated policy initiative. Stop pandering to the electorate as being 'tough on crime' while you and yours irresponsibly abrogate control of drugs to criminal networks.  Prohibition is not a conservative policy, it is radical invention of the 1970's. National's Mr Key is still running around with the same old toolkit in the forlorn hope that the longer he hangs onto it, it might fix something. 
Nothing will undermine the prevalence of crime in this country more than wholesale drug policy reform and that wont come until we have the required conversation Mr Key.
If you want to fix whats broken National, start with a self examinination of your own policy principals.
There is nothing there that supports 'crime making policy' or deluding the public while filtching from it's purse.
Blair Anderson  ‹(•¿•)›
Social Ecologist 'at large'

ph (643) 389 4065   cell 027 265 7219

Tuesday, October 30, 2007

Roadblock in P War Has to Go

"The informal use of driver's licences for ID purposes suggests privacy concerns have been overstated. People see the licence not so much in terms of potential peril as in terms of its practicality. They would also be more than comfortable to see it used in the fight against the P epidemic. "

New Zealand: Editorial: Roadblock in P War Has to Go:

So Drugs = National ID card, damn, thats just so simple!
Why didnt I think of it?
Why, because, first they create the myth, then comes the fear, then comes 'what ever they bloody want'...........


Friday, October 26, 2007

Fires in Southern California, Climate Change and Cascade Effect.

Kerry Burke,
Kerry, this is a transcript of a conversation on "Democracy Now" hosted by Amy Goodman.
Bill McKibben is a leading environmentalist and one of the leading forces behind Step It Up. In 1989, he wrote the book The End of Nature, one of the first books to describe global warming as an emerging environmental crisis. His latest book is called Deep Economy: The Wealth of Communities and the Durable Future. Bill McKibben, joining us from Boston, welcome to Democracy Now!

BILL McKIBBEN: Amy, it's good to be with you, as always.

AMY GOODMAN: It's good to have you with us. The fires in Southern California and global warming, is there a connection?

BILL McKIBBEN: I'm afraid that there is. This is the kind of disaster that we see more and more of as we begin to change the basic physics and chemistry of the planet we live on. One of the people leading the really brave rescue effort out there yesterday said, one of the San Diego authorities said, this is the driest it's been in at least ninety years. It's dry because they've had terrific heat and not much rain. And those are just the conditions for that part of the world that all the modeling suggests come about when you begin to raise the temperature.

AMY GOODMAN: I wanted to ask you about Tom Swetnam of the University of Arizona, one of the ecologists there. He has written about the connection to global warming. He published a study in the journal Science, saying global warming has increased temperatures in the West about one degree, and that's caused four times more fires.

BILL McKIBBEN: This is the problem. Things don't work in a linear smooth relationship, you know? You raise the temperature a little bit, and you begin to get very large cascading effects.
................. snip...................

Please Kerry, lets not pretend Canterbury (or East Coast North Island)  is immune from sudden and significant deforestation risk or that an emphasis on growing more trees doesn't carry with it contingent, and quite possibly un-insurable carbon (credit) risks going forward. These are uncertain times made more uncertain by us not being aware of scenario risks if we don't future map the possibilities. That requires us to be alert to what real time circumstance tells us. I re-iterate my candid comment to you made at the Prime Minister's Climate Change/ETS meeting today, California's fires 'are Climate Change'. 
Blair Anderson  ‹(•¿•)›

Social Ecologist 'at large'

ph (643) 389 4065   cell 027 265 7219

Friday, October 19, 2007

The 'policy' on domestic terrorism.

More Elephants in the Room....

yadda yadda....

'Mayor Blair' Anderson  ‹(•¿•)›

ph (643) 389 4065   cell 027 265 7219

Tuesday, October 16, 2007

SF Mayor: War On Drugs Is A Failure

SF Mayor Gavin Newsom: War On Drugs Is A Failure ::

"San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom proclaimed the nation's war on drugs a total failure and insisted the crime rate would go down if the government spent money on treatment as opposed to jailing people with drug problems. 'If you want to get serious, if you want to reduce crime by 70% in this country overnight, end this war on drugs,' he told reporters at City Hall on Thursday. 'You want to get serious, seriously serious about crime and violence end this war on drugs.'

"It's laughable that anyone could look at themselves with a straight face and say 'oh,we're really succeeding.' I mean it's comedy."

Such is the paucity of debate surrounding 'Safer Communities' in Christchurch and other regional and terrotorial governing authorities. /Blair

Tuesday, October 9, 2007

An E-democracy comment on STV

DHB Voting via STV is mischaracterized if as you say it is believed that ALL candidates have to be ranked. The instructions are clear "as many as you wish". In a large voter pool (turnout) ordering more than the number of seats is unlikely to affect the overall outcome but in a low turnout, it becomes increasingly important but it still reflects very accurately, the sentiment of voters. It is, in my honest opinion much better to use STV on a board where ALL the candidates are elected by STV than is the case of the DHB where some are appointed. Further, STV voids any need on a multi-member board to have a by election should a member retire, decease, or abscond or be convicted (just kidding). 

The recent media observations that STV is the cause of the low turnout I suggest that this is not the case, it is a scapegoat and reporting surrounding this needs to be more balanced than 'just another negative opinion'. The cause of the low turn out IMHO is the media. People get turned off by tabloid 'style' reporting let alone pandering to the "did too, did not" pedantery we have seen this time.

Despite it being mention nearly everywhere I spoke, and STV appearing as the question still unanswered by 2021 in the mayoral debate media just haven't gone there.

Local bodies act requires FTP/STV 'review' as an option for 2010 in 2008. It is my contention that anyone elected under FTP is unlikely to 'show' support for STV for obvious reasons.

As i said to the select committee... it would be much more engaging of the public sentiment and thus participatory if it was aware that it could vote for who they didn't want (by lower ranking) and further, trust the vote count for reflecting 'where the true sentiment' lies.

As for the Mayoral vote under STV, as I have said to many, you GET A MAYOR with more than 50% of the voters polled behind him/her. This will be crucial to dealing with the complex issues as we move beyond Kyoto.
(did a mayoral candidate exhibit ANY competence in this area. Indeed did media even notice that climate change is unfolding around our ears? ie: Treasury;ETS etc. No other Mayoral candidates even bothered.)

Besides... it sends a good signal to all and sundry.. if say lots voted for Bob #1, and lots voted for Megan #1 but even more (than both) voted for Blair @ #2. That could mean the city wanted me for Mayor because It BEST represented all views at the table....

Now that is a head turner.... and demonstrates how STV dilutes POLARITY and delivers CONSENSUS POLITICS to a community. 

Where would you read that in a newspaper. It is counter intuitive to media to have consensus on anything. What would they have to report? That the council 'agreed' to listen? That the council made an 'well informed decision', that the Mayor never had to make a casting vote? And... best one of all.  That councilors actually liked working productively in a contestable environment where issues were robustly explored and petty point scoring was passe.

Don't laugh... That's how the Nordic countries made it through the angst and divisions and have become the progressive havens of participatory civics we see today.

Good luck to ALL the candidates reading this. Some of you have impressed me with your efforts and I have voted carefully rewarding those who were both innovative and presented their case well. I don't think 'history and experience' is as important as having 'something upstairs'.

(BTW: ya got my vote Sue! you've got a bit of both!).

"Mayor Blair" Anderson.

'Mayor Blair' Anderson  ‹(•¿•)›

ph (643) 389 4065   cell 027 265 7219

Saturday, October 6, 2007

Re: Local government election candidate

Dr Kay Keating et al. (candidates so addressed)

Am I first in your book?

It must be said, even if no one is listening (the media certainly isn't) that there are many good folk standing for election and while there are speculations in mainstream CHCH media that it will be Bob, (gee, why have an election at all... just let a couple of editors duke it out on the main street) media has informed the wider public more about personality spats and precious little about policy of consequence. And that serves us all poorly. To that end Kay, your email reminding us all what this is about is 'a gem' among pebbles.

SO... in respect to issues raised by the PHA, it might come as a surprise to find the mayoral candidate for Christchurch, notably the one who is first in everyones book, at the cutting edge of intersectorial social health policy .

I'm not going to bore anyone on this list with the substance to that claim. If your not informed, then you don't want to be. However, keep in mind that as the ONLY candidate calling for STV for our future elections then it can be fairly said that at least I, on behalf of Christchurch understand that in these 'changing times', that having a Mayor elected with no less than 50% of voter support will be key to community buy in to all we shall be confronting.

Amonst the many things I learn from being a public advocate I often note who is really taking care of business (and thus the community).

"Mayor Blair" saw NO other mayoral/city candidates, and only two ECAN possibles at the Emission Trading Scheme [ETS] consultations which is proof the non-attendees want your vote but don't care one IOTA how the biggest change in the city 'since Rogernomics' is going to impact this community. (Climate Change is about public health too, see BMJ on "Integration of Public Health with Adaptation to Climate Change: Lessons Learned and New Directions" ).

also some useful snippets.
Blair on Climate Change 'around the world'
Blair on climate change on the 'blogs'

None of the candidates for Christchurch (and just about every other city) Mayor have shown any significant capacity to understand the global implications let alone the adaption and mitigation costs that WILL have to be borne by our community. In the wrap up for yesterdays think fest New Zealand's Treasury official acknowledged that 'Mayor Blair's' advocacy on 'contraction and convergence' underpinned the conscience (treasury's words) of all that ETS is... and may become 'Beyond Kyoto'. The media has avoided the intersectorial meat in the climate sandwich 'lest' said health and climate advocate get some traction.

"Blair Anderson, the only candidate to walk to the front of the stage from his podium, called for the city to take an international lead on climate change policies". / CHCH PRESS 19 September 2007

One could wonder if the intersectorial implications of certain other issues is a bridge to far for journalists.

While the rest of the world is increasingly suspicious of misplaced resourcing and funding a war on 'some drugs' it has become patently obvious to the public health sector that it is a health issue not one of 'crime and criminality' as has been portrayed by a self interested media.

"We need to be understanding of our social and ecological environments - and reject the harm production of inappropriate interventions under a vicious, unnatural, and unsustainable definition of crime". ""

* Breaking News * - US Mayor's Conference calls for new bottom line on drug policy declaring prohibition 'a failure'.

Here's what happens when the debate is unfettered... Seattle, our sister city decided to have the required debate and look who supports wholesale reform of the drug laws.. I welcome the support of PHA in elevating the debate and applaud their continuing call to acknowledge the destructive role in health sectors that alcohol contributes.

Top Canterbury cop says "85% of offending is alcohol-fueled", Superintendent Sandra Manderson.

Perhaps Sandra and the rest of the community should re-examine from first principles 'why this should be so'... Consider who is involved in Seattle and ask this question "why wouldn't retiring Garry Moore take the lead from Seattle, when it was he who lauded the Seattle based initiative 'time to talk' ?, could it be that "Mayor Blair" knows that in an open and unfettered debate Civil Society rises to the social challenge. ? Consider,

Professional and Civic Coalition for Drug Policy Reform

    • King County Bar Association
    • Church Council of Greater Seattle
    • King County Medical Society
    • League of Women Voters of Washington
    • Loren Miller Bar Association
    • Municipal League of King County
    • National Alliance on Mental Illness of Washington
    • Seattle League of Women Voters
    • Washington Academy of Family Physicians
    • Washington Osteopathic Medical Association
    • Washington Physicians for Social Responsibility
    • Washington Society of Addiction Medicine
    • Washington State Bar Association
    • Washington State Chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics
    • Washington State Medical Association
    • Washington State Pharmacy Association
    • Washington State Psychiatric Association
    • Washington State Psychological Association
    • Washington State Public Health Association
The Washington State Bar and Medical Associations , with encouragement and guidance from the KCBA, adopted their own resolutions in 2001 stating official positions on drug policy.

What should the aims of a municipal [alcohol and] drug policy look like?

  • To minimise the prevalence of problematic drug use and related health harms, including drug related death
  • To minimise impediments to health promotion holistically integrate all drug policy, removing double standards
  • To minimise disorder, violence and social nuisance related to drug misuse
  • To minimise criminal activity associated with the production and supply of drugs
  • To minimise all drug-related harms to vulnerable groups, young people and families
  • To ensure adequate provision of support and drug/alcohol treatment for people seeking help

The challenge is not 'is Blair right for Mayor', rather;

is there a SINGLE CANDIDATE who, in the interests of public health and at the risk of their public career, will stand at my side and say... "actually, on this, he's right!, we need to talk about this."

Here's your 'pro-active public health' possibility.

or, forever more be known as 'part of the problem, and no part of the solution'.

'Mayor Blair' Anderson ‹(•¿•)›

ph (643) 389 4065 cell 027 265 7219

Saturday, September 29, 2007

DHB candidates survey

Post in DHB candidates survey: : E-Democracy.Org Forums

Photo of 'Mayor Blair' Anderson
Canterbury DHB candidates might like to respond to the 'claim' that a significant percentage of the health vote (70% according to the National Health Service in the UK) is expended in alcohol related contingencies and this 'preventable' administrative and environmental burden falls under the brief of 'HEALTHY CHRISTCHURCH" participants, including CDHB and CCC.
And if so... do said DHB candidates bring ANY expertise to the table surrounding efficacy of 'drug policy' laws exacted under warrant of the Minister of Health [not Justice] currently in wide disrepute ?
acknowledge any merit in fostering 'cultural linkages' via the Sister Cities programme exploring why Seattle's entire health and law sector addressed themselves to these pressing issues ?
(details re:Seattle' institutional, civic and civil support can be found at )
sig: "Mayor Blair" Anderson,
[Blair Anderson, who officially and at the request of 200 participating organisations and 'sponsors' in Christchurch including but not limited to CCC and Chair of Healthy Christchurch, Mayor Garry Moore, CEO Community and Public Health, Evon Currie, and others, was directed, absent ANY evidence or robust due process to live in UNHEALTHY CHRISTCHURCH for the societaly disruptive proselytising^ of 'health promotion, and the removal of identified impediments under Ottawa Charter principles'.]
Non-Candidate readers may wish to forward this email/link to standing candidates for comment.
^according to internal Healthy ChCh memo widely distrubuted throughout Christchurch.

Thursday, September 27, 2007

How will Mayor Blair improve Christchurch ?

I have been asked, "Should you be elected to council how will you improve Christchurch ?"

I would 'change the climate'.

My name is Blair Anderson. I am 53. I am a technology consultant focused on the energy and transport sector and a well known social policy commentator across a wide interest range. I ran for mayor 3 years ago. I was described by the PRESS's human resources consultant as having a "bewildering array of science and environmental knowledge". However, as a 'none the less earnest' candidate this time round journalists seem to be left reeling and dumbfounded by the clear and erudite vision statements I have released.

As a Mayoral Candidate with a clear and deliverable vision including but not limited too climate change beyond Kyoto and vision of evidence based reductions in crime, expenditure and enhanced public safety I challenge any other Mayoral candidate to do better than the deliverable benefits that I bring to the table.

I bring a science and evidence based policy analytic approach to addressing emerging concerns on Air and Water quality, on transport integration and in urban living environments strategy.

What art is there in design if safety and security is compromised.

I question visions of light rail absent a progressive guided bus terminus integrated to existing rail capability. This means stopping the proposed new bus terminus, it entrenches and locks in road network failure.

I propose a transitional move to restrict city commuter buses to the four avenues and to the one way networks and have the inner city serviced with expanded 'yellow' free low emission's buses pending a demand lead transition to 'light rail' that links heavy rail's intercity and satellite communities 'work and ride' coach networks.

I would do this by recovering the Addington Sale Yards and building the integrated 'civic facilities into an iconic carbon neutral urban transport hub for the city the binds the airport to the seaport seamlessly. Using guide rail buses we can build the civic corridors of the future while capitalising the infrastructure that will eventually scope a multi modal light rail when passenger levels and carbon/climate make it viable or necessary.

I would enhance participatory democracy ensuring Christchurch elects a mayor and council with no less than 50% of voter support to enable consensus and expeditious board decisions in changing times. I would engage Christchurch citizens and institutions into the international community surrounding climate change as an antipodean center of expertise and to advocating the southern hemisphere's special cultural and climatological needs. ("contraction and convergence" is the key. go on 'google it' and be empowered! informed and a master of OUR destiny.)

I would engage our sister city relationship with Seattle where 'drug policy' has matured into a crime reducing health delivering, safety enhancing cost saving initiative.

I would question the efficacy inner city development that needs more and more 'bars' to fund developer returns. (its an environmental issue too!)

I would protect Christchurch water by ensuring the territorial authorities re-examine from first principles the first come first served RMA/Environment Court imperatives.

I would move to ensure the Urban Development Strategy continues to protect its special character and history while ensuring the highest design standards in brown field recovery, in green building and green space provision protecting community's of interest (again consistent with best practice and consultation)

I would move to capitalize on our Garden, Peace and Anti-Nuclear international reputation by committing resources to investigating high altitude wind, plasma waste to energy and the incredible utility of Banks Peninsular as a carbon sink to meet at a minimum the 90% required carbon equivalent reductions before 2050.

I would ensure the inner city and arterial networks reduce particulate emissions to levels that make Christchurch a SAFE city to bicycle and walk in all year round. I would do this by making our city clean fueled and license vehicle operators privileged access to the city networks and parking with positive reinforcement for achieving EURO standard emissions.

It is by ensuring that ratepayers get value for their continuing investment in their city that I would make ALL expenditures accountable on a clear cost benefit return basis. Non-core activities such as events management (such as the $30,000 budgeted for Akaroa French festival or the $19,000 for outgoing councilor nosh up) are self sustaining or quite simply, they don't happen on my watch. Clear directives, standards and accountability....

I am here to internalise the benefits of a 'smart city and the rich tapestry of people who live in it'. And that's just a beginning... enable the outcome! Vote Blair here.

Finally... elected or not, your call for STV in Christchurch will make a difference. But don't expect councilors selected under FTP to ask for STV, [turkeys voting for Christmas comes to mind.] It's up to you. You call the shots.

If you want to know more, just ask via this forum. I welcome hard questions!

PS: If elected I would continue to be accessible in Cathedral Square on Fridays, to follow in Garry's tradition would give me great pleasure. Come and kick my metaphorical shins anytime!

"Mayor Blair"

Wednesday, September 26, 2007

Archbishop of Canterbury appoints new climate change adviser

[Lambeth Palace] The Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr. Rowan Williams, has appointed Paula Clifford on a six-month secondment from Christian Aid to help further the Church of England's quest for sustainable solutions to climate change, following on from the launch of the Church's " Shrinking the Footprint" initiative. [ Episcopal Life Online - WORLD REPORT   September 19, 2007]

Clifford has been at Christian Aid for nine years and has traveled extensively in the developing world, seeing the effects of climate change first hand. She recently published a paper titled "All creation groaning: a theological approach to climate change."

"I am delighted that the Archbishop and the Church of England are showing their deep concern for the effects of climate change on the world's poorest people in this way," she said. "I am very much looking forward to working with them in highlighting the wider issues of poverty and injustice and in helping to inspire a real movement for change."

Clifford is a lay Reader in the Diocese of Oxford, and has written books on a variety of topics, as well as being a theater critic for the Oxford Times.

Climate Newswatch, Contraction and Convergence

"Aubrey Meyer and Raphaƫl Hanmbock describe Contraction and Convergence, a flexible and equitable response to climate change after the Kyoto Protocol."

Sunday, September 23, 2007

Union calls for urgent air quality testing at education centres

Union calls for urgent air quality testing at education centres

(there has to be some rich irony in reading this expose given the media (PRESS and STAR) knowing that this mayoral candidate has been warning on the public health implications since Garry Moore took over the governance of Christchurch city.)

[photo: "Mayor Blair" lobbying Hon. Garry Moore on air quality 'from diesel sources' issues 2004.]

A teachers' union is calling for urgent air quality testing at dozens of Auckland schools following revelations a daycare centre can't open because of poor air quality. The Jump & Jive centre in Manukau remains empty, despite being opened six months ago, after chief medical officer Denise Barnfather stopped it from taking children. The Herald on Sunday reported that the centre, on Great South Rd near the Southern Motorway, could not pass air quality health checks. Dr Barnfather cited research showing children suffer lung damage and respiratory problems, including asthma, from being housed within 500 metres of a busy road or motorway. New Zealand Educational Institute vice-president Frances Nelson said today dozens of other schools and education centres were near urban motorways and staff and pupils could be affected. "What is needed is mandatory air quality testing at schools which could be at risk," Ms Nelson said. "Pressing the panic button and scaring the life out of parents and children is not going to solve the problem." The union believed congestion and pollution was becoming a serious problem for schools -- particularly in Auckland -- and urgent attention was needed. Ms Nelson said air quality should now be part of the Ministry of Education's equation when considering where new schools and centres should be built. "The ministry will now also have to take action at certain schools to find out what is really going on." The Jump & Jive centre, owned by Kidicorp, has space for 150 children and was opened by Prime Minister Helen Clark six months ago. Three government departments are due to meet this week to discuss the impact bad air is having on early childhood centres and schools.

Union calls for urgent air quality testing at education centres | New Zealand's local news community

Saturday, September 22, 2007

What Issues? Democracy's Litmus Test

[press release 22 Sept. 2007]

What Issues? Democracy's Litmus Test

Christchurch's Mayoral aspirant Blair Anderson was 'disappointed' to read the trite and specious analysis provided in recent days by Canterbury hard copy media. (in particular but not limited to the STAR and PRESS). "It is one of the primary reasons I co-founded the Canterbury Issues Forum, an e-democracy initiative engaging new media and the need for the truth to be out there." says the second tilt candidate.

Following last Tuesdays Town Hall debate, the PRESS reported that Anderson and fellow candidate Peter Wakeman 'spoke about climate change'. This is about as truthful as if it had been reported that Anderson said "it had been a warm day on Tuesday". Even sillier, was the observation that Anderson was the only one who came out 'from the podium'. This factoid rhymed with odium. Lets not mention that Anderson's climate change initiative (contraction and convergence) is only endorsed by Angela Merkel, Chancellor of Germany, head of the G8 or that in the context of current politics 'carbon is king'.

If the STAR thinks that candidates in the Bob and Megan show had policy differences it wasn't obvious in the headlines of the 'Weakend STAR' with the appalling headline "Woods puts acid on Parker over mayoralty funding ". The STAR's acid metaphor was base forth estate politicking on the very 'weekend' of delivery and commencement of voting.

The context is even funnier, Wood's fellowship with Progressive Coalition Party "PCP" MP Jim Anderton. Czar Jim imperils reason in misconstruing harm reduction and evidence from his own expert advisory committee on ACID (LSD). The august Medical Research Council rates acid as less harmful to the community or to one's self than alcohol or cannabis. What say you Megan and Bob? Acid or Alcohol? lets find the litmus test that defines public concerns over violent crime, domestic violence, sexual assault. Lets have it? who is tough on protecting the community, who is evidence based, equitable, ethical and just.

It is the public who are being tricked into a polarising battle of persona over policy.

Single Transferable Vote [STV] and First Past the Post [FPP] has to be reviewed in this term of governance and the candidates view on this issue is imperative to informed voter choice. It was 'Mayor Blair' Anderson who put the acid on this policy gap in 2021's Dr Megan Woods. Flummoxed at the Town Hall, she fumbled, stumbled and failed to blow the house down. Yet all the PRESS discovered and publicised was what flavour sugar hit she liked. ( those elected under FPP are unlikely to support STV, it's been likened to turkeys voting for Christmas/Blair).

So? What value democracy? Anderson reports he has spent about 20 dollars so far, with about $9.20 remaining on his warehouse photocopy card. There is a lot of campaigning to go yet, Anderson reports 'I shall be spending the remaining resource judiciously, I need to pay my rates too!."

Megan and Jo have both lauded and indeed suggested they model themselves on the visionary Shadbolt of "Mayor Blair's" birthplace, Invercargill. It is with 'delicious irony' that Anderson noted his SAFER option for women (see attached 'billboard' graphic) is a Shadbolt/Anderson inspired harm reducing anti-crime, waist management and public health policy. Anderson who has professorial advice linking cannabis (policy) to forward looking politicians declared " Mayor Tim and I are both former deputy leaders of the Aotearoa Legalise Cannabis Party".

So, in a cogent message to voters and journalists applauding the big spenders, Anderson's $20 for his campaign is still better value and cheaper than a concrete mixer and, it seems "Mayor Blair" is by all accounts the more fiscally prudent even if largely under reported.

As voters open today's mail I declare and I promise a style in leadership 'fresh each day' for it appears Christchurch is not seeking a doctor of history's dead people, nor a "this was your life, Christchurch" just before it dies of chronic congestion following binge drinking.

Christchurch needs a professor of future, a man of living vision, a breath of fresh air, "Mayor Blair".

'Mayor Blair' Anderson ‹(•¿•)›

ph (643) 389 4065 cell 027 265 7219

Tuesday, September 18, 2007

The war on drugs has failed:Conference of Mayors

"NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the United States Conference of Mayors believes the war on drugs has failed and calls for a New Bottom Line in U.S. drug policy, a public health approach that concentrates more fully on reducing the negative consequences associated with drug abuse, while ensuring that our policies do not exacerbate these problems or create new social problems of their own; establishes quantifiable, short- and long-term objectives for drug policy; saves taxpayer money; and holds state and federal agencies accountable..." U.S. mayors call for end to drug war

Wednesday, September 12, 2007

Mayoral Consideration on smacking

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Blair Anderson <>
Date: Sep 12, 2007 11:33 PM
Subject: Re: Mayoral Consideration
To: Natashia <>

re: my opinion on anti-smacking.
First can i say, as  i kid I had my arse whupped more than once... most of the time i had it coming !! An old WWI 'folded double' army belt. It left welts. They lasted for days... My Dad would be in jail were he judged by today's standard. He was a good man and an excellent father.
It may come as some surprise that (as a candidate for mayor) I fully understand why your concerns are raised at the local level, I believe that it is communities that direct central government not the other way around. I do a lot in drug policy, both legal and illegal. I use a high policy analytic standard to formulate a position on this vexing subject. I have to. The issues surrounding drug use as with other biopsychosocial issues surrounding raising kids are complex. There will always be a diverse range of views. I am mindful of where this intersects 'policy' and where the measured outcomes across a range of public health parameters that measure of the wellness of a community. 
Our ability to get best outcomes stem from empowered parents and community. The Netherlands is one such example. Youth suicide, teen pregnancy, trouble with the law, sexually transmitted diseases and early entry into drug use are atypically 1/5th in any one age grouping across the teen demographic. Puzzled by this seemingly succesful social outcome I subsequently came across an excellent paper on the subject of disenfranchised parental guidance titled.  
Doing it for The Children: The drug war against local control and parental responsibility " There may soon come a time when conservatives ask how national drug policy became a proxy war on parental rights" Independance Institute,  

I came to the realisation that usurping parental guidance to the state had negative an deleterious consequences for us all. We all pay the burden of failure but none more so than each and every tragedy the befalls the individual families that are weakened by the destructive and insidious 'nanny state' professing to know whats best for you, and you and you,  and which remains unanswerable to policy failure. (in drug policy, we are yet to do a cost - benefit analysis despite the policy by any standard, evidently failing to deliver the desired result.)
Thank you for your interesting question. I am happy to speak to it in any forum you might like to suggest. I know these views are quite the opposite of the likes of Celia Lashley and Norm Hewitt who addressed the Mayors forum, but then it was Garry Moore who declared to all the Mayors assembled at the civic chambers, that I had nothing to add to the debate. Instead we gathered an assemblage of supportive views at the Town Hall and called it a success. 
 I would hate to see how they measure failure if the current youth outcomes are posited as a success.
In order to correct this trend we have to have the required debate in the community and wrest control back to, and empower, those who are ultimately responsible for the outcomes. Parents. 
On 9/12/07, Natashia <> wrote:

Good day.

I am writing to you to enquire about what your thoughts are on the "anti-smacking" bill recently passed by parliament. I am very concerned about this bill and this would be the deciding factor in my choice for who to vote for mayor.

I am reasonably happy with how our city is run. I know that the anti-smacking bill is a national government issue but it is important for me to know what the personal opinion of our mayoral candidates are, in regards to this matter.  As I'm sure you are aware this is a very sensitive issue but one I feel very strongly about.

I look forward to your replies.

Kind regards,

Natashia du Plessis

'Mayor Blair' Anderson  ‹(•¿•)›

ph (643) 389 4065   cell 027 265 7219

Woodward on climate, health

Expert says climate change will spread global disease

Climate change will have an overwhelmingly negative impact on health with possibly one billion more people at risk from dengue fever within 80 years, an expert said Tuesday.

While there would be some positive effects, "the balance of health effects is on the negative side," Alistair Woodward, a professor at the University of Auckland, told a regional meeting of the World Health Organisation.

Woodward was a lead writer for the fourth assessment report of the Inter-Governmental Panel on Climate Change.

...... snip.......

Water supplies would be an increasingly serious concern, with the percentage of the world's land area suffering drought increasing perhaps tenfold by the end of the century.

Small Pacific island states would be especially vulnerable to rising sea levels and changes in rainfall patterns.

Woodward said the health sector must be at the forefront on climate change.

He called for studies on water management in low-lying Pacific islands, community-based disaster preparedness, and on efforts to reduce the impact of rural drought.

"The most difficult change of all is a change of will. We should not be daunted by the size of the task," Woodward said.

WHO director general Margaret Chan, in a speech Monday afternoon, said that even if greenhouse gas emissions were to stop immediately the changes already being seen would go on throughout this century.

"Climate changes will affect, in profoundly adverse ways, some of the most fundamental determinants of health: food, air, water,"

Monday, September 10, 2007

Diesel exhaust + high cholesterol = heart attack

STUDIES have long linked particulate matter from diesel exposure as cause for pulmonary diseases, such as asthma and emphysema. Now, include atherosclerosis.

The medical malady refers to the hardening of the arteries, which can inflame blood vessels and significantly increases one's risk for heart attack and stroke. A new UCLA study says that people with high cholesterol level should avoid diesel exhaust, otherwise they will be in pain due to clogged arteries.


(ed. also see Voice of America - Diesel Exhaust Plus Cholesterol Equals Cardiovascular Problems

According to the website of the David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA (, the July 26 edition of the online journal Genome Biology bares these findings, the first to explain how fine particles in air pollution conspire with artery-clogging fats to switch on the genes that cause blood vessel inflammation and lead to cardiovascular disease.

Dr. Andre Nel, chief of nanomedicine of the school and researcher at UCLA's California NanoSystems Institute, said, "When you add one plus one, it normally totals two. But we found that adding diesel particles to cholesterol fats equals three. Their combination creates a dangerous synergy that wreaks cardiovascular havoc far beyond what's caused by the diesel or cholesterol alone." In short, particulates are an independent risk factor that interacts with other risk factors, he said.

Until 2004, the American Heart Association did not acknowledge the link between particulate matter to heart disease because of defects in research and methodology. The new study is the first to examine genetic changes, especially tissue and cell damage, when a living organism is exposed to particulates. It involved 5,000 adults during an eight-year period and the findings showed that those who lived near a major road were more likely to die of a cardiovascular disease.

A previous research conducted at USC indicated that children in Long Beach face some of the highest levels of asthma and permanent damage to lung development in the region, caused by pollution coming from diesel fuel used by trains, ships, cargo conveyors and trucks doing business in the port. It was also learned during a workshop conducted by the California Wellness Foundation and New America Media that air pollution from the Long Beach/Los Angeles ports has an astoundingly high amount of pollutants equal to that generated daily by three million cars.

Dr. Nel said that how air pollutants cause cardiovascular injury is poorly understood "but we do know that these particles are coated with chemicals that damage tissue and cause inflammation of the nose and lungs. Vascular inflammation in turn leads to cholesterol deposits and clogged arteries, which can give rise to blood clots that trigger heart attack or stroke."

The researchers set up a scenario to investigate the interaction between diesel exhaust particles and the fatty acids found in low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol --- the "bad" type of cholesterol that leads to artery blockage.

In particular, the team was interested in how oxidation --- cell and tissue damage resulting from exposure to molecules known as free radicals --- contributes to inflammation and artery disease. Free radicals enter the body through small particles present in polluted air and are also byproducts of normal processes, such as the metabolic conversion of food into energy.

(Curiously, and as many folk know, free radicals and the lipis fats associated with cannabis are linked, not thier danger, rather in their therapuetic efficacy and mediation of free radical impacts particularily those that are environmental. The 'herb' is also associated with mediating programmed cell death often as a consequence of oxygen stress from heart attack/stroke, head trauma, It is a rapid action vasodilator. Thats a start. This cannabis stuff sounds like a pretty conservative and useful medicine to me!. /Blair)

Sunday, September 9, 2007

Votes per Buck, Win some, lose some.

re: Win some, lose some.
KATE MONAHAN - Waikato Times | Saturday, 8 September 2007
I read with interest your news item on candidates $'s/vote  efficacy!
I think I can safely say I top the country in both national and mayor elections.
Wigram 2002 against Jim Anderton, I spent $20.23cents > 800 votes
CHCH Mayoralty 2004, drove 13 miles, cycled 600 miles. (dog ran 450 of those) spent $23.00, for 830 votes 
I hope to improve on this this year. My Mayoral push was sponsored by a dog,  see "Every Man and His dog in Mayoral Race" on
(probably one of New Zealand's most successful websites, now heading towards topping 16 million hits this year, thanks in part to Hamilton City Council (and others) featuring it.)
Oddly dog policy is a metaphor for how we treat people... give em a bad name, put labels on them and 'then you've got problems'.
I guess a lot of people vote for me for that reason... its about integrity of applied principles and philosophy triumphing over 'vote for me' expediency!
I hold the view that signs, are a contemporary even if temporary form of graffiti.
I agree with your sentiment that the 'losers' are as important as the winners in the contest of ideas.

Cheers n Beers,
'Mayor Blair' Anderson  ‹(•¿•)›

ph (643) 389 4065   cell 027 265 7219

Thursday, September 6, 2007

Technologies Will Cut Increase of GHG in APEC Countries, But Emissions Will Still Rise

Investment in cleaner, more advanced and energy efficient technologies could reduce the expected growth of greenhouse gas emissions in the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) region by about 49% relative to what would otherwise be the case by 2050, according to a new report from the Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Research Economics (ABARE).

Under current policy, greenhouse gas emissions are projected to be about 130% higher in APEC economies by 2050 (48.2 Gigatonnes of CO2 equivalent) relative to 2004 levels (20.9 Gt CO2-eq), according to the report. In this business-as-usual scenario, energy consumption is projected to increase by about 139% from 5.8 gigatonnes of oil equivalent (Gtoe) in 2004 to 13.7 Gtoe in 2050.

However, even in this advanced technologies scenario, emissions in APEC are still projected to be 17% higher (at 24.4 Gt CO2-eq) than 2004 levels in 2050.

'Mayor Blair' Anderson  ‹(•¿•)›

Climate Change: Session on future international action

Democracy at the international level – the basis for global climate action.

Organised by Adrian Macey, Climate Change Ambassador, Environment Division, Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Lambton Quay, Wellington, 16 August 2007.

Talk by Kay Weir, editor Pacific Ecologist

Global warming emissions are still rising in New Zealand, and they are still rising globally, contrary to best scientific advice over many years. If the trend is not reversed soon, temperatures will reach a dangerous level as early as 2035, the Stern report noted in 2006, and other reports note similarly. Unchecked greenhouse gases will lock us into terrible consequences, floods, droughts, hurricanes, and ultimately sea levels rising 25 metres higher than they are today, destroying the lives of hundreds of millions of people, mostly in vulnerable developing countries like Africa which have done little to create climate change. Even before the end of the century, small island nations, including many of our Pacific neighbours, who also have done little to create the problem, may well be submerged with a one-to three meter rise seeing to this.

Our historic responsibility for global warming pollution and damage to date morally obliges New Zealand and other rich industrialised countries to reduce emissions first, strongly and urgently. We can do this by being sharply aware of the harm we are doing to our fellow human beings and other species and by changing the way we do things, living cooperatively and equitably rather than competitively with divisions of great wealth and grinding poverty.

The fact is, if we don’t have a just over-arching, mandatory global plan, with all country’s responsibilities clearly defined, we will not achieve reduction of warming emissions to a safe level of 450ppm CO2e maximum atmospheric carbon concentrations in time to prevent catastrophes where the world is reshaped; millions of people die, and millions of other species are made extinct.

In view of the serious dangers being created with continually rising emissions both in New Zealand and globally, we should not wait until 2012 to develop a “new comprehensive arrangement.” This should be negotiated within the next year to 18 months with New Zealand initiating action and discussions nationally and internationally to incorporate the 450ppm CO2e maximum atmospheric carbon concentrations.

New Zealanders belong to a privileged industrial country, we also have a bent for social justice, giving women the vote first and creating the social welfare state. We should lead the way with climate action and discussions as we have done with the nuclear issue.

Global warming and global inequity are linked, as global warming exacerbates poverty. Even now it’s far more devastating globally than terrorism, which currently distracts western powers, the Oxford Research group finds. Trillions are found for weapons of war, when less than half that money would be enough to address many of the problems of the third world in just a few years. Inequity is growing, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa, already badly hit by global warming, yet funds can’t be found to meet even agreed limited targets to help developing countries adapt.

Justice, equity and compassion are core principles treasured by all civilised nations. We must cherish them to restore our conflict-ridden global society. By applying the equity principle, enshrined in the UN Charter and the U.S. Declaration of Independence, we could avoid the tide of rising global warming calamities, and increasing inequity. Aubrey Meyer and the Global Commons Institute’s action plan of Contraction and Convergence is a globally inclusive, transparent framework, fair and equitable to all nations. Averting climate change means ending the global apartheid of the rich, less numerous, historically highly polluting, industrial countries and poor, populous third world countries with much lower per capita emissions who are only beginning to develop. Under the plan everyone gets a fair share of emission entitlements, with the total capped at a sustainable level and moderated by convergence to the global average of equal shares per capita over 20 to 30 years to ease the transition. Shares created this way allow poor countries to finance their defence against climate change and for clean energy by trading their unused emissions rights with rich countries. The sooner an agreement to converge to equality is set, the better prospect we have for a healthy, sustainable planet, where the goal of world poverty reduction has a chance of succeeding. Without equity and justice in the climate change forums, there will be no incentive for developing countries to want to reduce emissions when they know full well it’s the rich world, which industrialised much sooner, and is responsible for most of the global warming pollution causing the havoc being suffered to date. If the issue of equity in the climate forums is not taken up by New Zealand, then the question is, how many millions of people are we prepared to let die to keep our country “competitive?”

[It’s not so difficult to accomplish a just, sustainable world as many seem to assume. A very useful plan to deal with the linked problems of global warming and peak oil, based on equity principles of contraction and convergence, tradeable energy quotas and an oil depletion protocol has been devised by Ian T. Dunlop, former international coal and gas executive. Interestingly he says, a Tradeable Energy Quota System could be quickly established within 12 – 18 months using existing financial and banking sectors and it would be built on work already undertaken by the Australian Greenhouse Office and others in developing greenhouse gas metrics, monitoring systems etc.

Such a plan could be useful for New Zealand to adopt. – See Pacific Ecologist issue 14, Climate Change & Peak Oil and integrated Strategy for Australia by Ian T Dunlop for an article on this, or type into Google Climate Change & Peak Oil: an Integrated Policy Response for Australia by Ian T. Dunlop.]


  • 1. Contraction and Convergence, Aubrey Meyer, The Global Commons Institute, London [external link] –see Pacific Ecologist issue 13 for article on this.
  • 2.. If everyone on earth contributed as much global warming emissions as the average New Zealander or Australian, around 4 earths would be required; if the US is our model, 5 planets are require- ..see also Ecological Debt: The Health of the Planet & the Wealth of Nation by Andrew Simms
  • 3.. Very useful article dealing with peak oil and global warming, based in equity principles, Tradeable Energy Quotas, and Oil Depletion Protocol is abridged in Pacific Ecologist, issue 14 and is also available at Australian Association for the Study of Peak Oil and Gas [external link] or by typing the title in Google, Climate Change & Peak Oil: an Integrated Policy Response for Australia by Ian T. Dunlop.

On Rates and Representation

The Local Government Rates Inquiry coming as it has at the beginning of the election cycle has served us well, even if somewhat long in coming. The recommendations are being received by stakeholders and vested interests with glee. It is a veritable Christmas stocking for them.

However the ratepayer is, and remains the basic source of revenue. And we are rating people out of homes paying for services that are not being delivered, while allocating resources to speculative sports events.

The Internet is bursting with media releases hailing and wailing the implications. At the core of the report is spending. There is too much of it. The public purse is not for the picking it says. And I agree. Uniform General Charges are more equitable. Government should contribute to the required infrastructure via its property holdings.

Transport and Energy and its relationship to climate change and urban design puts Councils at the forefront of strategic future needs planning but this cannot be done alone and in isolation. At the macro planning scale, climate change absent a framework around (quite distinct from policy and actions) infrastructure risk management, water, energy, urban design, transport indeed almost everything local bodies do is ‘put at risk’. No framework, no benchmark. If one cannot measure, one cannot manage.

We need to understand how to contract and converge our carbon budgets locally, nationally and internationally or the rates we do pay will count for diddly. The climate will eat us. (Lloyd’s, AXA and other actuaries report uninsured losses to infrastructure are growing at 7x GDP growth.)

An over consulted public are wrestling with what are the practical actions to these concerns and how we elect and make accountable those who make the decisions that affect us. Rates, like taxes are about representation. To whom you entrust the ‘rate resource’ you rightly expect a duty of care.

Christchurch has fared comparatively well in the rates stakes compared to Auckland. However if voters want to see real equity then it is time to open the debate on Single Transferable Vote.

(Certainly, there has been no evidence any of the other candidates are even aware that STV/FPP will be relitigated under local government rules during this next term)

That way all views arrive at the table. We have to be well informed and participatory. STV will deliver on both these. Then we can really resolve our shared concerns and hold to account on delivery of the core services that rates must deliver.

I am committed to evidence based, equity driven, ethical and efficient decision making.

“Mayor Blair” Anderson 03 3894065

Wednesday, September 5, 2007

German Chancellor Merkel goes C&C

Some very good news for the Blair4Mayor campaign. The solution to climate change takes a giant leap on the eve of APEC./ Blair

According to Merkel's proposal, CO2 emissions would be measured per capita. The maximum COs emissions of a country would thus be measured in terms of population numbers. The larger the population of a country, the more CO2 the country would be permitted to emit. This would mean that every individual in the world would be entitled to emit the same volume of carbon dioxide.

In her proposal, Merkel presupposes that the industrialised countries cut their share of energy consumption as far as possible, thus reducing per capita emissions of carbon dioxide.

The emerging economies, on the other hand, need to grow if they are to reduce poverty. The downside is, of course, that their emissions of CO2 will continue to rise in the years to come. In the final analysis the per capita emissions in emerging economies will meet those of industrialised countries.

If the agreement is to be just, one thing must be clear, however, stressed the Chancellor, "I cannot imagine that the emerging economies will one day be permitted to emit more CO2 per capita than we in the industrialised countries".

If the emerging economies were to accept this proposal, they would face the task of braking the rise in their CO2 emissions. This is possible with "intelligent growth", explained Merkel thinking of the most modern of environmental technologies – many of which come from Germany.

With Merkel's proposal, the emerging nations with rapidly expanding economies could be brought on board the global climate negotiations scheduled for 2009.

'Mayor Blair' Anderson  ‹(•¿•)›

ph (643) 389 4065   cell 027 265 7219

Support New Zealand's Call for Cool.

Sign On - The World Needs Us