Hundreds of tractors and farm utes took to the roads on Thursday in protest of the Government’s proposed tax on farm emissions.
The highways were chokka from Southland to the Far North.
The South and Mid Canterbury convoy passed through Ashburton mid-morning,  blocking traffic in the middle of town, but making its message clear. We want none of it!
The nationwide protest was organised by farming lobby group Groundswell.
Groundswell co-founder, Bryce McKenzie said in reference to the Government’s proposal to tax farmers on emissions, “We want no emissions tax on food production”.
“The government must stop proposed emissions tax, and undo legislation putting agriculture into the ETS.
“We are already the most sustainable food producers in the world, as independent research has shown.
“This emissions tax on food production will lead to food scarcity, higher food prices, and more land going into pine trees.
“This will lead to poor outcomes for rural communities and rural businesses – the Government acknowledged that in their document,” McKenzie said.
Groundswell NZ supports a focus on reducing farm emissions through integrated environmental actions on farms. This emissions tax won’t improve environmental outcomes, in fact it will increase global emissions, because food production will be picked up by other countries with less sustainable farming practices, Groundswell said.
“This tax also breaches the Paris Agreement, where New Zealand committed to emissions reductions, which says that this should be pursued “in a manner that does not threaten food production,” McKenzie said.
Ashburton arable farmer David Clark said he was too busy on the farm to take part in the Groundswell NZ protest but he “100 per cent agreed with the sentiment”.
“I’m very disappointed at the approach government has taken on He Waka Eke Noa (HWEN) and also with the way agricultural emissions have been calculated in New Zealand.
“It’s fundamentally flawed and we have to go back to first principles on this because the warming effect of methane emissions in New Zealand has been grossly overstated.”
It’s been calculated on GWP100 which takes into account the warming of methane over 100 years. Methane, being a cyclical gas, doesn’t last 100 years in the atmosphere, he said.
“So in situations where methane is static or falling as it is in New Zealand, the appropriate metric to measure that is called GWP8, which takes into account the cyclical nature.”
Now, as shown in a parliamentary question last week by Scott Simpson to James Shaw, methane emissions from agriculture in New Zealand are possibly being overstated by 300 to 400 per cent, he said.
“And James Shaw’s logic was that whilst GWP100 does overestimate methane emissions where these are static or falling, because they are rising elsewhere in the world, they have used this in the New Zealand situation.”
So to break that all down, New Zealand farmers are expected to make much bigger cuts to methane than the equivalent of zero carbon because there are rising methane emissions elsewhere in the world.
“So my view as a farmer is that I’m more than happy to take responsibility for our warming of the planet, and do something about that,” Clark said.
“But there is absolutely no way that I am going to be responsible for reducing our emissions below the equivalent of net carbon zero to make allowance for the rest of society’s inability to stop using fossil fuels, or the use of emissions elsewhere in the world.”

• By Pat Deavoll