MEDIA RELEASE: Healthy economic decision to end off-shore oil exploration

28 Sep 2018 3:39 PM | Anonymous

OraTaiao: The New Zealand Climate and Health Council

MEDIA RELEASE

27 September 2018

OraTaiao welcomes the government’s amendment bill to stop offering new oil permits as a sound decision for NZ’s economy and our health. This bill is a step in the right direction to protect the health and wellbeing of all New Zealanders and meet our Paris obligations.

“It’s very clear that almost all the oil, gas and coal we already know about needs to stay in the ground - they can’t be burnt because of the implications for climate change and human health. This makes further exploration foolish,” said Dr Alex Macmillan, Co-convenor of OraTaiao: NZ Climate and Health Council after the introduction of the Crown Minerals (Petroleum) Amendment Bill on Monday.

“The recent Regulatory Impact Statement completed by the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment makes the mistake of assuming that any reserves which might be found can be commercialised. However, many leading global investors agree that any new reserves will be worthless “stranded assets” - leaving the government and investors with debts, not profits.

Neither does MBIE’s statement account for the cost to human health and wellbeing caused by the continuing use of fossil fuels, or our failure to support fossil-fuel dependent communities to make a transition to a low-carbon economies. Continued exploration and extraction means leaving these communities high and dry in a world that is rapidly moving away from fossil fuels.

We need to get on track to zero emissions by 2040 in order to avert a health crisis. The next steps include a rapid phase out of existing off- and on-shore exploration and extraction to protect and promote health in our zero-carbon future.

Public Health Association Logo

PHA Conference


Get curious

Get engaged

Get involved


What's New

Upcoming events

The PHA – a strong and informed collective voice for a healthy and well New Zealand.

Privacy | Contact

Copyright © Public Health Association of New Zealand 2016

Log in

Letter to the Listener 28 July 2017 in response to Fever Pitch (Listener 21 July 2017)

Catherine Woulfe’s thorough investigation of rheumatic fever brings to the surface a range of important questions not only about this cruel disease, but also wider issues about health policy. The Government’s bold initiative to reduce the incidence of rheumatic fever as one of its 'Better Public Service' targets in 2012 certainly raised awareness of rheumatic fever for the general public as well as communities and families directly affected. But even when medical science and the public have a clearer understanding of the immediate causes of rheumatic fever, interventions like the $65m ‘sore throats matter’ still won’t stop the epidemic. 

Ramona Tiatia’s blunt description of the experience of affected families not only painted a picture of the impact on affected families and communities, it also highlighted the invidious choices our health funders face.  How much should we prioritise health spending between response to the urgent need of young people whose lives and potential can be devastated by the disease versus the expense of addressing the economic and social factors that underlie the reasons we have this epidemic at all?   

As several of the clinicians interviewed pointed out, it’s only when the poverty and over-crowded housing issues are addressed that we will make a real difference.

Rheumatic fever illustrates the contradictions in our health system identified in the recent American Commonwealth Fund report. Of the 11 countries the Fund monitors, the work our health professionals do is ranked among the highest. But our overall performance as a health system falls to the middle ranking because of our poor performance on access and equity. The Fund also notes that our per capita expenditure is among the cheapest. 

Failure to invest in real prevention - that is, poverty, housing, good nutrition etc. - will continue to drive conditions like rheumatic fever, whether the immediate cause is strep throat or skin sores, until we invest upstream.

Why not spend more on these conditions - the economic and social determinants of health? 

We all pay in the long run - the young people whose misery we tolerate and whose potential remains unfulfilled, the families whose sacrifices are unrewarded, and the taxpayer who picks up the tab.

Ngā mihi,
Warren Lindberg

CE Public Health Association of New Zealand

                                            

Powered by Wild Apricot Membership Software