24 November 2009
Greenpeace ‘lost’ in its anti-farming obsession
While Federated Farmers defends the right to protest legally, Greenpeace’s desperate smear campaign against Fonterra and
dairy farming reflects an organisation that has lost sight of what its purpose is
“Greenpeace is only green in the first five letters of its name and is really an anti-business, anti-trade and
anti-farming front,” says David Rose, Federated Farmers Southland-based spokesperson for law and order.
“Its public relations stunts only cause inconvenience and loss of revenue to people going about their lawful business.
“If you strip their argument back to the essentials, they’re protesting against a lawful business that uses lawfully
farmed milk to produce lawful revenues that benefit all New Zealanders.
“If it wasn’t for Fonterra and a quarter of the exports its farmers generate, we couldn’t afford the medicines,
education and services we all take for granted. There’s thousands of unemployed that depend on the exporters to spark
the economy back into life
“I honestly cannot figure out what Greenpeace actually stands for. I know what their against and that’s progress, but
what does it stand for?
“I’m certain the environment and a few whales would benefit if it spent more time on human pollution and waste that
impacts both the land and sea.
“At least farmers are aware of their impact on the environment and are working hard to develop management and mitigation
measures. That’s why water quality today is far better than when I was a lad, except that is, in our towns and cities.
“Picking on farming is also darn odd. Among the major productive sectors in the economy, we’re actually doing the second
best job at reducing emissions.
“Between 1990 and 2007 agriculture emissions grew by 12 percent yet electricity emissions grew by 120 percent despite
wind farms, transport by 74 percent despite hybrid cars and industrial processes by 35 percent.
“Farmers are actively cutting emissions growth per unit of output because we farmers are doers while Greenpeace are just
talkers. I’d like to see its ideas for real economic growth that doesn’t mean regressing to the dark ages.
“A number of its recent illegal stunts have tied up the police needlessly. We’d like to explore the possibility of a law
change giving businesses and the Crown the right to seek compensation from legal entities that sponsor illegal protest.
“We feel that idea is worth the debate in order to recompense law abiding organisations from the time and expense
illegal protest causes,” Mr Rose concluded.
ENDS