The Green Party wants to convert the Kinleith Mill pulp and paper processor into a cross-laminated timber plant, as part of a wider industrial strategy aimed at creating jobs in underserved communities.
Co-leader Chloë Swarbrick announced the policy in Tokoroa on Thursday morning, taking aim at New Zealand First leader Winston Peters for failing to rescue jobs at Kinleith.
She said the Deputy Prime Minister had insisted on being the only politician with a speaking slot at a public meeting last December to discuss the proposed closure.
Peters said he would speak to the company’s Japan-based owners and advocate on the workers behalf, according to a local news report. He also suggested the Government may intervene in energy markets to prevent “out of control” prices.
Swarbrick said he had failed to deliver on that promise for Tokoroa, leaving the community to the “corporate whim” of Kinleith’s shareholders.
“That night he gave you some really strong words. And then, nothing happened. The closure was confirmed. So it’s pretty obvious why you might think politicians are useless,” Swarbrick said in her speech.
She wants the Government to take an active role creating jobs and industries in regions where private businesses lack the profit motive or capital to do so themselves.
“Towns like Tokoroa have been left to ride the stormy economic waves while the Government that should be steering the ship has let go of the wheel. Short-term private profit—not you, not us—has been allowed to choose which sectors thrive, and which should be left to die”.
This type of talk has traditionally been the domain of NZ First. However, its ability to pump money into regional development has been crimped by its free market coalition partners.
Labour gave the party a $3 billion Provincial Growth Fund in its 2017 coalition agreement, but National called this a “slush fund” and only gave NZ First a $1.2 billion Regional Infrastructure Fund in its 2023 coalition negotiations, with tighter investment controls.
The Green Party may now see NZ First as vulnerable in regional towns which often vote for left-leaning parties, even if the wider electorates surrounding them back National.
Swarbrick unveiled an updated Green Jobs and Green Industrial Strategy policy, promising to be the party that invested in regional towns even when there weren’t profits to be made.
Under a Green government, Kinleith Mill could be converted into a cross-laminated timber plant which would supply Kainga Ora with construction materials to build state houses.
Cross-laminated timber are wooden panels made by gluing layers of sawn timber together at right angles to make them more structurally rigid. It is popular in Europe due to its sustainability, but is often more expensive than other materials.
The plant could also use excess timber to create wood pallets and biofuels to replace the coal which is still burned in many manufacturing processes around the country.
Swarbrick said the whole central North Island could become a hub for sustainable wood products with the recently-closed processing plants in Ohakune, Karioi and Tangiwai all being repurposed with government backing.
This type of work would be led by new or repurposed entities, the Future Workforce Agency–Mahi Anamata and a 1980s-style Ministry of Green Works.
These two would coordinate to develop public infrastructure projects and the workforce to build them, as well as transition plans for workers in fossil fuel industries. For example, it could help workers in Taranaki shift from oil extraction to offshore wind projects.
The Green Party would also bring back the Jobs for Nature programme which provided conservation jobs in areas with high unemployment. This policy was particularly popular in some Māori communities, which can have strong cultural ties to remote areas with limited job opportunities.
These policies aim to build 35,000 new public homes over five years and create up to 40,000 jobs. They were estimated by the party to cost roughly $8 billion over four years, presumably funded through taxes in wealthier urban communities.
29 Comments
Big thinkers this Green Party.
Sounds like a good idea, however a town was built around a large employer which is closing up shop? This has happened time and time again throughout the world, for example steel production in the UK. Towns may survive on entrepreneurialism of the population wished to band together and build itself back up, but otherwise history tells us people move to more favourable locations withy more plentiful jobs out of necessity.
Interesting numbers. That's $50k per job per year. Could be wrong but I have in mind that whenever such proposals are put forward the cost per job is usually much higher.
Would certainly seem ideal to regain control over some primary production and manufacturing. And more new warm houses and get rid of the hundred year old and 80s built mould factories would be great. Fill them full of wool insulation be even better.
The Green Party wants to convert the Kinleith Mill pulp and paper processor into a cross-laminated timber plant.
edit
The Green Party wants the Govt to fund the conversion of the Kinleith Mill pulp and paper processor into a cross-laminated timber plant.
I guess GummiIt is funding a ski field, so why not?
"...so why not?"
IPOGovernment funding and support for Ruapehu ski fields
• 2018 – $10m towards financing the Sky Waka (pre-insolvency)
• 2020 – $5m for operating expenses (pre-insolvency)
• November 2022 – $2m loan to support RAL (in insolvency)
• December 2022 – $6m loan to support RAL (in insolvency)
• June 2023 – $5m loan to support RAL (in insolvency)
• October 2023 – $7m loan to support RAL (in insolvency)
• March 2024 – $7m loan to support RAL (in insolvency)
• March 2024 – $3.05m Tūroa purchase support
• December 2024 – $5m Whakapapa purchase support (committed)
https://newsroom.co.nz/2024/12/11/cabinet-approves-5m-loan-to-support-whakapapa-buyer/
Yes I was being facetious :).
Do they really think the people of Tokoroa might ever vote for them, Not a dogs show.
"...strong cultural ties to remote areas with limited job opportunities"
"...presumably funded through taxes in wealthier urban communities."
= heads in sand & expecting the less than half of households remaining net income taxpayers (who've moved where the jobs are) to fun their entitled dependency intransigence.
They're halfway on the right track.
And given that they are limited to talking as if this economic paradigm will continue - thanks to dogged MSM avoidance of the fact that it can't - this is about as good a suggestion as anyone has made for a long time.
And the idea probably traverses the Limits to Growth bottleneck, relatively intact.
But when we're down to real-time solar acreage for energy capture, their idea of wood pellets (pallets are something else, Dan) and biofuels needs careful scrutiny. Pellets are too energy-intensive to make; slash needs to be transported...
They're halfway on the right track
Come on Power. You're far better than that. Sure the Greens may have some useful inputs on the correct use of pronouns and how to ride an electric bike responsibly, but they have zero capability and experience with industry like manufacturing and construction.
On that note, I locked horns with Nandor many years ago on a discussion about solar and the positive progress Sharp Corporation was making at the time (Sharp ended up failing quite badly with photovoltaic). His only response was that companies like Sharp couldn't be part of a solution because they are 'Babylon'. While I get was he trying to express, I found it very naive and didn't bother taking the exchange further. Yes Japan has corporatism but it's far more based on desired outcomes beyond profit and shafting of society than in the West.
I understand they're not going to do the actual themselves.
So why the denigration?
Yes, we will be triaging existing stuff - including existing plant - to address our future needs. Logic tells us it cannot be any other way. So, this is on the right track.
Don't get hung up on painting colours or personalities to walls.
:)
As I said Power, because there's a plant and its related to forestry does not really mean anything. All that exists is a shell. 'Existing plants' is also meaningless if it has no use case in their plans, as is likely.
As for character assassination, no insults to Nandor, but people like himself do have limitations, as I described. Whether it's the Greens or the wingnuts doesn't matter.
All that exists is a shell
Any idea what a new shell and supporting services costs?
Probably not.
Not to say this is a viable idea, but the cost to produce anything like this new, is now bananas.
Any idea what a new shell and supporting services costs?
P, producing paper and timber are entirely different processes.
Wasn't answering the question.
There's a value in facilities close to the raw material source. The processing machinery in it also costs money, but it's a lot more trying to do it from an empty piece of dirt.
I don't have intimate details of the site itself, but the idea at least has some merit. Just saying that as someone involved in the creation and repurposing of industrial manufacturing facilities.
Kinleith is fitted out for paper production and Oji is shifting to pulp production and moving to a paper import model for its packaging operations. The main Japanese companies processing timber for building materials are the forestry companies like Sumitomo, which has been going gangbusters in the US through its housing subsidiary. Other Japanese companies in this space include Sojitz and Itochu--major corporations.
So what Chloe and her mates need to understand is that they're likely starting from scratch in terms of processing. None of those Japanese companies are likely to invest in Aotearoa for building materials. So while her idea sounds constructive and a drumming circle and hits from the bong might spark a bit of creative thought, but strategy into action is what it's all about. I would be very surprised if this could be govt led. Like throwing money into a gasoline-soaked pit and lighting a match.
throwing money into a gasoline-soaked pit and lighting a match
Based on the last Govt, which she was a part of, that sounds about right. A few billion here or there....oh whoops, 100B plus and nothing really to show for it.
Based on the last Govt, which she was a part of, that sounds about right. A few billion here or there....oh whoops, 100B plus and nothing really to show for it.
The cycle bridge feasibility costs were mind-blowing approx $36 million. Much of the public sector seems to me like a social welfare program for the middle class who have a university education.
Study cost $51M, at least they didn't proceed to spend the estimated $785M (actual ???+++×××)
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/126575243/51m-spent-on-axed-a…
Other people's money...
Other people's money?
You sure it is theirs?
Really theirs?
I worked on the Cycle bridge concept 30 years ago. Not much was changed from the original concepts. Millions wasted since then.
The problem with cycleways - indeed the whole Green New Deal approach - is that it is attempting to prolong modernity, cars on roads and all.
Actually, modernity is doomed. Which says that bikes will be the last vehicles to use roads. Which won't be being maintained. Which won't matter, because when the last bike-tube perishes...
So few folk understand the morph we're headed for, or how soon.
Problem with cycle bridge was NZTA hated the idea. So they made damn sure the costing was exorbitant. And when the powers that be hinted that were still interested they doubled it. Still interested? Damnit, double it again.
It was just never going to happen.
For this to be of any benefit, they also need to address the demand side; encourage the use of cross laminated timber products in construction in NZ. KO housing is a start, but also the private sector. At the moment, it's a bit of an orphan product.
The way we can greatly improve housing affordability here is via unified design at scale, with easier compliance regs etc.
I used self-built laminated I-beams in our 1987 house rebuild.
And I use plywood for many things. This ain't a new concept.
It's not new by any stretch of the imagination.
But for it to fly financially, it needs to be commercially ubiquitous.
Plywood is now very problematic due to fire rating requirements, particularly in higher occupancy buildings (this is one of my core business functions). Take the cost of the ply, and times is by about 5.
Half my house is lined in it though.
It’s got a fancy new name though.
There's a lot of government spending going on there, public funded jobs to produce laminate to publicly funded jobs to build public funded housing for publicly funded welfare. Hopefully the shrinking workforce that's not publicly funded can earn enough to fund it!
Some interesting ideas, but essentially the creation of a government run industrial concern.
That hasn't worked out so well for us in the past, but it might be doable. It's just that I'm old enough to remember the huge overstaffing and inefficiency of government enterprises like the old Railways Workshops, NZ P&T, and the Ministry of Works.
In practical terms -
About the only similarity between paper production and CLT production is that they both use timber as feedstock, so the production refit would need to be entire.
It has to be cost competitive (otherwise, what's the point) so the plant would need to be capable of high volumes to benefit from economies of scale and quality of product. Cost effectiveness and consistent quality also requires high levels of automation, which means the expected number of jobs might not show up.
Cost competitive volumes would far exceed the power of the tiny local market to absorb product, so excess would have to be exported - so it has to be cost competitive to do that.
The alternative is to produce smaller volumes at higher prices and protect the local product via import restrictions, which turns the whole business in to an expensive jobs creation exercise - and I'm having flashbacks to the days of Robert Muldoon. Not something I thought I'd say about Green policy, but there you are.
Oh: and where does the skilled build workforce come from?
That is the dilemma - western production/manufacturing can NEVER be cost-competitive with slave or near-slave labour coupled with lax regulation.
The joke is - and it's on the US for believing Trump - that when you pay the same wages as you need to buy stuff, you can't sell enough. It needs the slave-labour differential.
So what are we prepared to 'pay', remembering the silly comments about supermarket duopolies/lack of competition (when food is orders of magnitude too cheap now, vis-a-vis sustainable agriculture. Which is inevitable...
So the Greens - as do society, as do the media - need to address the big picture.
We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment.
Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.