The ODT has a story on the Greens’ new water policy.
They give this example:
Mr Lepper is manager of the Earnscleugh Irrigation Scheme, one of about a dozen irrigation schemes in Central Otago.
The Earnscleugh scheme supplies 110 landowners and covers 1100ha. Irrigators are charged about $51 per hectare a year.
“With the addition of other small charges, our income is $65,000 per annum, and with this we run a fantastic co-operative irrigation scheme that is of tremendous benefit to the Central Otago economy,” he said.
“Under the Greens’ new policy and proposed rate of 10c per 1000 litres, we would have to fund an additional $1.76 million a year, from our landowners.
“You do not have to be a genius to work out what this would do to the viability of our local horticulture and farming businesses.”
It seems that the Green Party hasn’t even done basic research into the impact of it’s policy. How hard would it have been to talk to one of their members who has experience in irrigation farming to get some numbers that would work?
It’s a policy that will see well to their base, but will destroy the economy. Were the affected farms to shut down, their failure would impact hundreds of other jobs in their local communities. That means more people on welfare and less productive work in the economy. That’s the last thing we need right now.
But hey, so long as it appeals to the base, right?
By my calculations, that would be an average charge of $16K per landowner supplied by the Earnscleugh Scheme. Not insignificant, I admit, but I would doubt it would make any of the orchards or farms commercially unviable.
And the other side of the equation is that the Greens want to implement policies to put an end to the huge markups the supermarket duopoly applies to fresh produce and pay better returns to their suppliers.
Yes, you are in fact quite right.
Interesting that those on the ground disagree that this would affect viability. It’s certainly a chunk of change to find.
Fund an additional $16K per business and you think those businesses would still be viable?
Income of $65K and having to front up with a further 25% of extortionist charges, you must be joking!
The problem is the amount of energy and water demands of modern URBAN living. Cities I believe have the highest environmental impacts, not the rural areas and smaller towns.
Comments are closed.