Andrew Dickens: Why forestry should be removed from the ETS

Last night on 1News I heard the single most logical and sane thing said in the entire bulletin in a long time.

It was said by Simon Upton, the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment. A very smart man. A Rhodes Scholar. A Former Minister for the Environment for National. 

Simon Upton said we should in, an ordinary way, take forestry out of the Emissions Trading Scheme. 

And I thought, why has it taken so long for someone to say it?

We should, in an orderly way, take forestry out of the Emissions Trading Scheme. 

Forestry for climate change has been a Ponzi scheme. The 1News reporter called it a golden ticket. 

It’s swamped productive land for easy gain. It’s caused rampant wilding growth through our wild lands. 

In essence, it’s a very big weed unless you’re farming it for wood and paper and even then, that market is turning sour - ask Tokoroa and Kawerau.  

But has it done anything to reduce emissions? We’ve had long enough for proof. It has not.  

It’s provided excuses for well-meaning pop bands to travel the world in private jets, planting useless forests in their wake and claiming moral superiority.  

But the 1News bit then went and missed the point. 

The headline was that we should plant natives instead of pine. 

Which he did say, but only if we keep with the nutso forest planting scheme.  

What Simon proposed was completely removing the ability of carbon polluters to rely on planting trees to meet their climate obligations. 

He said what New Zealand currently had been mostly a "tree planting scheme" that did little to cut planet-heating gases. And then the zinger quote:

"The world actually needs real reductions in gross emissions, not an accounting triumph".  

If you want to cut your emissions, then cut your emissions. But don't plant a tree.

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:01):
So last night on One News I heard the single
most logical, insane thing said on that bulletin in a
very long time. And it was said by Simon Upton,
the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment, a very smart man,
a Rhodes scholar, a former Minister for the Environment, for
National and this is what Simon Upton said. We should,
in an orderly way take forestry out of the emission's

(00:21):
trading scheme. Blow me over with a feather. I thought,
why has it taken so long for someone so smart
to come out and say this so publicly. We should,
in an orderly way take forestry out of the emissions
trading scheme. Forestry for climate change has been a Ponsi scheme.
In fact, last night the bulletin, the One News bulletin,
the Reporter called it a golden ticket. It's swamp productive

(00:41):
land for easy gain. It's caused rampant wildling growth through
our wildlands. In the essence, pines and exotic stuff like that,
just a big weed unless you're farming it for wood
and paper. And even then that market's turning a little
bit sour. Has it done anything to reduce emissions? No,
The numbers kept going up and up each year. We've
had long enough for proof it has not. It has

(01:03):
provided excuses for well meeting pop bands to travel the
world in private jets, planting useless forests in their wake
and claiming moral superiority. But then the one news bit
went and completely missed the point. The headline was we
should plant natives instead of pine, which he kind of
did say, but only if we keep on going with
the nutso forest planting scheme. What Simon proposed was completely

(01:25):
removing the ability of carbon polluters to rely on planting
trees to meet their climate obligations. That's a direct quote.
Here's another, as Simon said, the world actually needs real
reductions and gross ebmissions, not an accounting triumph hallelujah. If
you want to cut your emissions, then cut your emissions,
but don't plant a tree. For more from early edition

(01:47):
with Ryan Bridge, listen live to News Talk sat B
from five am weekdays, or follow the podcast on iHeartRadio