sign uplog in
Want to go ad-free? Find out how, here.

Dairy prices flat, China struggles with food security; IEA sees rising C02; RBA sees no long-term pandemic damage; UST 10yr at 1.56%; oil soft and gold steady; NZ$1 = 71.8 USc; TWI-5 = 73.6

Dairy prices flat, China struggles with food security; IEA sees rising C02; RBA sees no long-term pandemic damage; UST 10yr at 1.56%; oil soft and gold steady; NZ$1 = 71.8 USc; TWI-5 = 73.6

Here's our summary of key economic events overnight that affect New Zealand with news signs of caution are showing up in all sorts of markets.

But first, prices held in the overnight dairy auction - or at least they did in US dollar terms. But with the rising Kiwi currency, this latest event brought overall prices -2.0% lower in New Zealand dollars. The key WMP and SMP prices were virtually unchanged in US dollars. The best performer was Cheddar cheese, up +1.2% in US dollars but even that was not enough to record a gain in NZD. Overall the changes are not enough to alter any farm gate payout forecast.

In the US, retail sales last week were little changed from the prior week.

The latest data for Taiwanese export orders were strong, but no better than was expected.

In China, central planning for food security is in full swing, but despite that, they are importing vast amounts of food. You get a sense they know this is a strategic weakness, one they are working hard to address. But success looks far away.

Global trade is rising, and rising fast. The Baltic Dry freight index is now at a 20 month high, as demand for commodity cargoes, both 'hard' and 'soft', rise sharply.

Yesterday we noted that the WMO warned about unrestrained rises in global temperatures and the dire consequences. Today, the IEA is reporting that global CO2 emissions from energy-related activities will rise by +1.5 bln tonnes in 2021, the second-largest rise in history (after 2014), driven largely by rising demand for coal to be used for electricity generation. (Under policy guidelines introduced in 2018, New Zealand is contributing to this increase to run the Huntly coal-fired power plant.)

The release of the RBA minutes reveals that the Aussies no longer think the pandemic has done any long-term economic damage to them. It is quite a different outlook from the fears that existed at the start of the emergency.

On Wall Street, the S&P500 is down -0.8% in early afternoon trade, compounding yesterday's -0.5% decline. Overnight, European markets fell about -2.0% across the board. Yesterday, Shanghai ended down -0.1%, Hong Kong ended up +0.1%, but Tokyo set the European scene, down -2.0%. The ASX200 ended yesterday down -0.7%, and that was matched by the NZX50 Capital Index.

The latest global compilation of COVID-19 data is here. The global tally is still rising, now 142,304,000 have been infected at some point, up +661,000 in just one day, largely driven by rises in India where new lockdowns are underway. Global deaths reported now exceed 3,034,000 and up +11,000 in one day. Vaccinations in the world are also rising fast, now up to 921 mln (+14 mln) and in the US more than half of their population (209.7 mln) have had at least one dose as they keep up their fast rollout. More than a quarter have been fully vaccinated. The number of active cases there dipped to 6,860,000 and down -10,000 in a day.

The UST 10yr yield starts today at 1.56% and -4 bps lower. The US 2-10 rate curve is a little flatter at 141 bps. Their 1-5 curve is also flatter at +74 bps, as is their 3m-10 year curve at +155 bps. The Australian Govt 10 year yield is unchanged at 1.70%. The China Govt 10 year yield is also holding at just on 3.18%. But the New Zealand Govt 10 year yield is now at 1.66% and +4 bps higher.

The price of gold starts today at US$1778/oz and that is up +US$7 since this time yesterday.

Oil prices are softer, down -US$1 at just under US$62.50/bbl in the US, while the international price is just under US$66/bbl.

The Kiwi dollar opens today at just under 71.8 USc and unchanged from this time yesterday. Against the Australian dollar we are decidedly firmer at 92.9 AUc. Against the euro we are little-changed at 59.7 euro cents. That means our TWI-5 is still just under 73.6.

The bitcoin price will start today at virtually the same lower level they were at yesterday, at US$55,852 and a mere -0.4% lower, and almost the same as at this time on Monday. However, volatility in the past 24 hours has been highish at +/- 3.0%. The bitcoin rate is charted in the exchange rate set below.

The easiest place to stay up with event risk today is by following our Economic Calendar here ».

Daily exchange rates

Select chart tabs »

The 'US$' chart will be drawn here.
Loading...
Daily benchmark rate
Source: RBNZ
The 'AU$' chart will be drawn here.
Loading...
Daily benchmark rate
Source: RBNZ
The 'TWI' chart will be drawn here.
Loading...
Daily benchmark rate
Source: RBNZ
The '¥en' chart will be drawn here.
Loading...
Daily benchmark rate
Source: RBNZ
The '¥uan' chart will be drawn here.
Loading...
Daily benchmark rate
Source: RBNZ
The '€uro' chart will be drawn here.
Loading...
Daily benchmark rate
Source: RBNZ
The 'GBP' chart will be drawn here.
Loading...
Daily benchmark rate
Source: RBNZ
The 'Bitcoin' chart will be drawn here.
Loading...
End of day UTC
Source: CoinDesk

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.

69 Comments

Diplomatic problems for us now, more of them.

Ardern, who earlier defended Mahuta's comments, reaffirmed New Zealand's commitment to the Five Eyes on Tuesday.
https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2021/04/prime-minister-jacinda-a...

British media claim comments from New Zealand's Foreign Affairs Minister signal the Five Eyes has become a group of four with Aotearoa breaking away.
https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2021/04/british-media-claims-fiv...

Sky News opinion.
https://youtu.be/Nr71Mw7wD4E
Also Described them as a mind rot.

The broader picture being
https://youtu.be/pNoPxge5iMU
VDH & John Anderson

The Telegraph said Mahuta's call to not allow the intelligence alliance to dictate New Zealand's position on China put it "at odds with the other members of the Five Eyes alliance". The UK, US, and Canada have recently been outspoken against China, accusing it of committing genocide against Uighur Muslims.

Are we (NZers) in charge of our destiny?

I am reminded of Australian banks operating in our economy.

Germany is facing choices: Even She Gets It.

16
up

I get a very bad feeling about Labours foreign policy.
Aligning ourselves with anything and everything politically correct.
And not heeding the massive dangers that China presents.

19
up

"Politically correct"? So effective silence on the Chinese treatment of the Uighurs, or continuing to trade them while they do it, is Politically Correct? The problem is rather the overwhelming love of money and inability to diversify our trade reliance on China.

Recent reports indicate that the last decade has seen the least ever amount of business innovation, and i suggest that this is the same for the Government. Too much risk aversion actually adds to risk, and doesn't mitigate it. A point I have made before is that one of the lessons from COVID is a need for resilience. A need to build and diversify our manufacturing base so that we are less reliant on imports, and are more able to diversify our export base. But i guess fear of the reaction from some trading partners are preventing our Government to genuinely act in the interests of our people?

Since when is China's treatment of Uighurs any worse than the treatment of African Americans in the USA ? The USA has the highest incarceration rate in the world with something like 25% of the worlds total with only 5% of the worlds population. Quick to pick on China without looking in the mirror. The USA is far from perfect. I'm not saying that the action of China is acceptable, just that everyone is being pushed now to stop them reaching the number one global economy.

12
up

Since it became Government policy to systematically place them ALL in prison camps (I don't care what name you might want to call them, because that is what they actually are) for "re-education" (read brain washing), at least tacitly condone systematic torture and rape and so on. The Americans do not do that to African Americans.

Yes the societal abuse of African Americans, and endemic racism is shocking and a travesty that any decent society and person, especially one which purports to be God fearing, should and would be ashamed of, but it is NOT US Government policy.

US unilateral sanctions in place against Iran, Venezuela and Syria are designed to starve their domestic populations into a state of near desperation that might prompt an attempt to overthrow the incumbent governments of these nations.

Venezuela protests are sign that US wants our oil, says Nicolás Maduro

Why Is The U.S. Importing So Much Russian Fuel Oil?

So what is the alternative Audaxes? Drop a bomb on the Government offices of the country? The sanctions, and consequences of them fall on the Government of that country.

The US has a lot to answer for with respect to the way it exercises it's political clout around the world, but countries must be accountable for the standard of their own Government, and it's consequences. I will always regret that the Democracy Index, or something like it is not an enforceable standard that is applied through the United Nations. But then the UN has no teeth, and veto votes that get abused on the most important bits of work.

US needs to let sovereign states determine their own future.

Definitely don't disagree with you there. But that has consequences too (Afghanistan, Iraq). The US has a huge opportunity, and is often looked to, to set a high bar on the standard of leadership and integrity in the world, but has virtually never managed to do that. Instead it looks more like the neighbourhood bully in many instances, and by comparison to some of the worlds worst areas, is not much better. But then it also has its bright points too, but they are mostly around the people in its communities and less in the standard of government.

Agree- sorry Murray, yours is a self-justifying argument. Embargo a nation and it struggles. Then you cite the less-than-ideal conditions in said country and blame those with their knee on it's neck?

The case-law still has wet ink.....

Cuba is an example of inspired leadership (and a helpful climate) in the face of such thuggery.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Power_of_Community:_How_Cuba_Survived_...

Without hanging on the coat-tails of such hegemonic thuggery, we wouldn't live at the level we do. I get that. But don't pretend it isn't so; that just takes one down a cranial rabbit-hole.

I get your point PDK, and Cuba is an interesting case in point. If the US hadn't been so paranoid about 'communism' in the 60s, they may well have been able to nurture a solid democratic, albeit socialist nation on their doorstep. But let's not gild the lily. the Castro regime was guilty of it's excesses too. In some cases in reaction to US actions. But Cuba is also an example that demonstrates the adage that a tyranny overturned by force will most likely only be replaced by another tyranny. What will be interesting is what will become of Cuba now that Raoul has stepped down?

The US overturned a democratically elected socialist in Chile and replaced him with a tyrant. But Afghanistan with a bunch of religious fanatics running, and committing some horrendous atrocities against it's own people, also sheltered Usama Bin Laden who then reached out and engineered 9/11, and the Taliban are now talking their way back into power there. Will the world be safe if that happens? I personally don't think so. Sadam Hussein lusted after more power and tried to unit the Arab world under his leadership, fought a long war against Iran, and finally invaded Kuwait to gain control of oil to further fund his excesses. He was nurtured into power by the US and it came back to bite them.

There are no easy answers, but in the end I still that Governments in the first instances must be accountable. You talk about less than ideal conditions, but lets have an understanding of the cause of those conditions. In some cases they are external, but in many they are not.

You always need to go back to ask why a tyrant?

Often, the hegemonic powers have either destabilised, or put the tyrant in there. Only if he plays maverick, do they get the military in. Read Adventure in Oil (Longhurst) and Seven Pillars of Wisdom (Lawrence) or Daughter of the Desert (Bell) then ask whether Middle-East tyranny is really self-induced? Even Afghanistan goes back to Gordon....

Again don't necessarily disagree. Western adventurism in the Middle East has been the cause of much that is occurring today. Arab hatred of the west today is very much rooted in the ravages of the crusades. Having said that, tyrannies today still have to be dealt with in some way. We still deal with China, Cuba, Russia and so on. the question is how to improve the standard of Government without resorting to war?

How ever the Islamic conquest started the fervor of the crusades.
The crusades were a retalation to this invasion into Europe. Also Persia, modern day Iran was not Islamic. They were invaded by the Arabs and forced to convert. A Persian poet in the 15 century words "we didn't ask to Muslim". Middle east doesn't have a hatred for the west at all. There is a huge migration into the west to enjoy freedoms. This was happening before the Iraq war.

I stated "Arab hatred ..." but yes it was a generalisation. But your point only entrenches the one I am trying to make, that the conditions in some countries are not caused by the west but internally. This is a complex area, and some rationale for almost any argument can be found by delving into their history, but the thing is, we have to deal with whatever they are doing today, today, no matter what the history is.

I agree with your general comments, except that most black murders are in jail for killing other blacks.

Are you suggesting that who the victim is, is some form of justification?

That's right, the American would not forced people into a "brain wash re-education center", they would just invade their country to get their internal problem solved regardless how many life being sacrificed due to war.

About 0.7% of the United States is currently in a federal or state prison or local jail. China doesn't publish figures but most media are reporting over 1m Uighurs in "re-education" and that is about 10%. In my experience one in a hundred is roughly the number of unprincipled criminal natured people in most societies; never 10%.
I'll be very happy to agree with you that the US rate of incarceration is terrible (I'd say the same about NZ) - prisons are not the best way of handling criminality. And the disproportionate incarceration rates figures for African-Americans in the US and Maori & Pacifica are troubling.
However you have succeeded in changing the subject from Chinese treatment of Uighurs: incarceration, rape, slave labour, closure of Mosques, bull-dozing Muslim cemeteries, Uighur families being forced to accept Chinese civil servants as house guests, etc.

1m / 1.4b * 100 = 0.07% so about a 1/10 of USA imprisonment rate.

You haven't included the 1,710,000 non Uighurs imprisoned in China for crimes ranging from murder to membership of Falun Gong.

Sadly your approach to persecution is shared with most of the worlds population - one million doesn't matter if they are part of one billion. Most incarcerated US citizens can avoid that fate by either not committing crime or being more careful about being caught. The Uighurs cannot stop being Uighur even if they learn mandarin and abandon their religious faith - the Chinese govt face recognition systems will still identify them.

Did this 25% commit the crimes? Are you telling me the majority of african american people in the prison's are innocent but white american aren't? I don't believe the USA is so racist and evil. The SE asia country I live, there was over 300 people murdered at human traffic camps at the border. Some found tortured in shallow graves. Thats real oppression. Btw if you try to run, fight the police here, the police shoot you and there is no internal affairs to investigate. USA has freedom of Media compared to China, so you have no idea what really happens in China. My latest experience was the 7 cops (one with a machine gun ready) at the road block pretending to check regos were extorting money from certain races. But hey lets only talk about how bad the USA system is.

Yeah I have a problem with the USA pushing the narrative that we are the good guys all the time and effectively we are the world police. They can kill people without even setting foot in a country with their ability to put in sanctions and just sell arms for billions to the country next door to do the dirty work for them. The USA needs to stay out of other countries and let them sort their own mess out and lets face it they only really jump in boots and all on the ground if there is oil involved or its in their interest.

personally think this was a rather unusual, if not strange, option for our foreign minister in terms of previous portfolios and their heritage and direction. she is certainly admirable in both her quest and accomplishments for furthering betterment for her race but it remains to be seen if that energy and level of skill can be carried and projected for New Zealand abroad, for all New Zealanders.

Race? There is only one human race. There are ethnic groups and cultures and historical traditions. It is time we realised that the nearest thing to a NZ Maori is a NZ Pakeha and vice versa - we share the same govt, the same food outlets, the same local TV and radio, the same schools, etc and have many cross-friendships and intermarriage. In the past the nearest group to an typical Pakeha would have been the English or Australian; that changed a long time ago.

Oh, I was just using her own frequent terminology. Perhaps could have said people, which quoted equally often. But really, that was not my point.

Agreed it is an easy and often convenient terminology. It even comes in useful very occasionally when identifying patients at risk of skin cancer (lower for the Melanesians in my family) and diabetes (higher risk). My grumpy but heartfelt comment was not aimed at you.

I find it difficult to say that I miss Winston.

The most prescient speech by a global leader.

Ever.

https://www.resilience.org/stories/2021-04-19/climate-action-and-the-rol...

First to mention the need for de-growth. Watch the MSM duck, weave and hide. Followed by resumption of the growth mantra-chant.

RBA comments hilarious!!!!!!!!

New news,
Kiwibuild with a Bed.

https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/440903/watch-live-health-minister-a...

The chance/odds of these guys effecting any positive change. Yeah Right.
(Not saying it won't get worse)

I think it's a step in the right direction.
Under the current system, unqualified board members run these bodies. I remember reading a report on the high proportion of DHB operational funding being spent on non-medical consulting fees and staff salaries.
Do we really need to have 20x (CEOs, CFOs, COOs, payroll teams, HR teams, accounting teams, IT teams, etc.) to run a health system in a country of 5 million? No point spreading the limited skills we have thinly across this country due to over-governance.

The Plan bit.
The merge backend is standard mgt consultant stuff, same as poly techs they are doing - there they did by adding a layer.
The Segregation sure sounds a concern.

I don't think it's a bad idea. I'd just be concerned about this Government's ability to execute and deliver. I suspect 3-5 years later it still won't be complete and the only thing we will hear is that it's because of National's 9 years of neglect.

I understand your scepticism but would you rather the government take the National party approach and further neglect the entire public health sector or at least take a shot at doing something worthwhile but not execute well?

Remember Judith Collins said in one of the PM debates that she reckons our health system is working fine. All those month-long waits for critical surgeries, several hours-long waits at every A&E while DHBs across the country rack up huge deficits are obviously signs of a well-functioning system.

This may be a cost saving exercise. which is good. But I do not think it is necessary the fact that there are 20 DHBs as opposed to 1 that results in an underperforming health system. Governance is over hyped in my opinion in this case. Why a politically assembled governing body at National level would do any better if the facts on the ground remain the same? You will need more, better doctors and other health professionals, better monitoring of health (e.g. regular tests and imaging for people), more equipment, etc.

The main thing is that NZ Health is unaccountable. Does not have any measurable performance objectives to achieve. When they have any objectives, the health systems manipulates the measurement process to pretend that these are achieved. And when these objectives are not achieved nothing is going to happen.

Also, Mr. Little says that they want to emphasis more on primary care givers to reduce pressure on hospitals. I understand this as extra delay in referrals to hospitals and specialists. To perform diagnostic tests and investigations. I do not expect improvements from this focus. I expect the opposite. They are going to make hospitals look good by turning people away.

You will need more, better doctors and other health professionals, better monitoring of health (e.g. regular tests and imaging for people), more equipment, etc.

All of that requires funding and other resources which our health system doesn't have thanks to multiple replications of decision making and bureaucracy.
Would you prefer Waka Kotahi and Kainga Ora remaining centralised entities or broken into 20 district level bodies each trying to achieve the same outcomes for the people of NZ?

I am not sure going centralised, will achieve saving on resources (i.e. I do not think it will free up as much resources for core functions as you suggest). Even if there are some savings, it will not be of any meaningful significance. And it certainly wont affect how they will run the performance side of things (as that is already centralized under MOH).
All I am saying is I do not expect any meaningful impact of this on health services outcome. I actually expect worsening outcome with diverting more and more to primary health providers. They say hospitals are overrun already, due to lack of GPs? that sounds bullocks to me. GPs are trained, equipped and experienced in general health with anything of significance requiring a consultation with a specialist, investigative procedures (tests, imaging etc). It is the lack of competent specialist and the specialists care and support (e.g. equipment, health practitioners etc) that underpins "treatment" side of health. And nothing in restructuring will improve that unless that was also one of the objectives of restructure. But Little have clearly mapped up the future: More of us will be stopped at the GP gates, with access to meaningful services denied (or at least delayed).

With all due respect, do take some time and research the need for better primary care in NZ before jumping to conclusions.

Reducing the primary care gap (6% of Kiwis aren't enrolled with GPs) could help reduce the need for urgent surgeries later down the track through early intervention. This decreases the cost of treatment to public, relieves demand pressures on our limited medical resources, and ensures better outcomes for patients and their families.

https://www.nzdoctor.co.nz/article/undoctored/study-reveals-primary-heal...

Better primary care and a primary care designed to stop access to treatment are two different things. What politicians, bureaucrat and health practitioners publicly talk about is the former, while what they actually implement and deliver is the latter. I am not a scientist, but I am willing to bet that enrolling the 6% unenrolled people, will have negligent impact on actual demand on specialist care. Sure, there are public health measures (such as better diets, avoiding alcohol and drugs, reasonable exercise, healthier and warmer homes, better dental care, improved hygiene and infection prevention etc) that can be taken to make a general public healthier. But they have very little to do with "GPs" in all reality.

We are talking about "treatment" side of things here (when doctors are involved) and GPs are not the primary force in that. They just slow down access to specialists (and equipment and facilitates and support they need). That is where the bottle neck is. That is where the system will continue to underperform. Rearrange other tiles however you like. But unless you are focusing on easing access to specialist (e.g. by increasing their number) you are just averting attention from the issue by rearrangement. And the GP layer of health system is to block, delay and complicate access to specialists. The more troops you send in that trench, the stronger indication that you want to stop more people accessing what is behind it.

ditto on Health reforms

Mahuta's speach should be applauded by all NZers.

a good relationship with China is increasingly becoming not only a necessary bur also a sufficient condition for NZ's better future.

11
up

Xing, we urgently need to end our toxic relationship with Winnie the Pooh.

I understand your 'necessary' - you are stating that NZ's future will be better if we continue to trade and interact with China. The alternative being a future that is worse.
But you also say 'sufficient' which can only mean NZ's future would be better with a good Chinese relationship even if we had seriously bad relationships with Australia, USA, the EU, Japan, the UK, etc. That would put NZ in a situation like Tibet and doesn't promise a better future.

12
up

China is turning into a very dangerous 'friend'.. Best we try to quietly tiptoe away. And that is what Mahuta said, quietly.

It is a dangerous situation. The US has so far failed in its attempt to foment rebellion in Hong Kong and Western China. The US economy and social system continues to fracture and decline at the same time. Along with this there has been humiliating defeat in Afghanistan and impotency in Syria.

You would have to be hopelessly naïve to believe the US want to see a free and prosperous democratic China that is five times richer than it is now. No, they want to bring it down economically, maybe to something like a large Philippines.

Personally speaking, a large Philippines is much better than a giant Hitler's Germany.

We cannot tip toe away, our whole economy is now based on trade with them. We have chased the highest dollar returns in the same get rich quick way the rest of the world has been doing for decades and now we are crying foul. The likes of Trump are the biggest hypocrites going, business went there to increase their profits and now they are rich and it doesn't really matter what happens, they suddenly develop a conscience.... China is bad.

Getting rid of DHBs and PHOs is good. But a single large civil service setup running all hospitals is a concern.
A funder provider split would be the way forward, but I haven't found that in the announcements so far.

You will have the exact same number of layers. Instead of a DHB board, you will have a DHB management unit. You will have new units and titles and a different authority structure. But not a different number of people involved. I expect that there will be more people in admin and governance roles than before.
ON a seperate note, i find it really alarming that Little said"I want to stress this reform is about doing better with what we have. It is not about cutting services,". This, together with his emphasis on "primary health providers" (read gatekeepers of access to public health, those responsible to keep people waiting, delay any treatment, those who just ask people to wait and see if they will get better on their own etc) gives me a very clear indication that is exactly what they are going to do. They will make it harder and harder for people to access expensive health services by stopping them at the primary health provider gate.

I recently came across a layer of "primary health care"" i didn't know existed before
My doctor sent me on a referral to local hospital for a procedure that would fix a problem that currently requires medication every day, so i could get off the pills.
First contact at the hospital was a doctor who's sole objective was to prevent me from having the operation.
He decided that i could keep taking the pills and save the country some money, and wrote a report that basically said my doctor was an idiot for trying to get me an operation and improve my life and get me off the prescription drugs.
Great healthcare system that i have paid into for the last 60 years.

Almost grounds for a complaint to the DHC? Essentially you are being denied health care. What are the side effects of the medication you are on? Do some research, a lot of medication is not 100% effective, but only delays the time when physical intervention is required. That Doctor might have been in breach of his duties.

There is a saying in my mother language that "a knife will never cut its handle". Complaining to those who have implemented the very system to reject people seems futile to me.

That's a great saying - I will be borrowing it.

No but it will cut its handler though. That is why those in high places employ others at the cutting edge. In other words the upper hierarchy owns all of the authority but none of the responsibility or injury, when the blade slips.

Dreadfull stories from Emergency housing.

https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/440897/emergency-housing-woman-beate...

The 49-year-old grandmother was left so terrified she refused to go back into any form of shared living.

Those at the coal face say there's not enough oversight, with families mixed in with gang members, and many places rife with crime and intimidation.

And there are further warnings about the significant potential for abuse and sexual violence, with one Auckland charity saying women escaping from an abusive home can end up going back after staying in emergency housing, because at least "they know that violence".

Severe concern too about the plight of children; in some cases taken out of school, cut off from their communities and confined to their motel room by their parents because it's too dangerous to venture outside.

There were posts here last year of trouble brewing central Auckland.
Easter, Napier, Rotoura no spare accommodation for EH taken it all.

It would be a great opportunity to sign on a long term food contracts with China. There's no better timing than this- lots of sustainable earnings to be made.

you sound more native than a new born.

You sound like a good old fashion bitter quitter- your own countrymen may think you're a loser.

Agriculture in NZ is based on resource draw-down (fossil energy, phosphate, elsewhere forest/land, soil (both quality and quantity).

Sustainable is therefore not a word which describes it.

As usual, your proposal is flawed. An increase in agricultural activities will be paramount in consuming the excess phosphates generated by dairy farming. NZ does not produce the type of fossil energy needed to run tractors, there will not be disproportionate fossil fuel drawn down from NZ's oil reserves.

Up-scaling agriculture provides economic surplus and is good for the natural ecosystem.

Spin and bullshyte.

"An increase in agricultural activities will be paramount in consuming the excess phosphates generated by dairy farming"
Bollocks. Bowie sang a song about that, once....

"NZ does not produce the type of fossil energy needed to run tractors, there will not be disproportionate fossil fuel drawn down from NZ's oil reserves."
Who said anything about NZ? Mine was a global comment. And it's not just to run tractors, it's fertiliser, trucks, roads, ports, shipping, plastics (pipework, tanks etc). .

"Up-scaling agriculture provides economic surplus and is good for the natural ecosystem."
That is a total untruth. Economic surplus is bank-held digits; real wealth would be remaining energy and resources - including food-producing capacity. And Agriculture, as practiced in NZ, has trashed the 'natural ecosystem' - displaced it completely.

I can't believe someone can be so barefaced. Spin on behalf of?

Hunty has burnt extra coal because of dry year water shortages, and maintenance on the gas lines/production.

Both of those thing would have happened with or without the exploration ban.

To quote your own link
"There are currently 31 active exploration permits in
New Zealand, 22 of which are offshore. These permits
cover an area of 100,000 sq kms, nearly the size of the
North Island. The last of these ends in 2030. However
if a new discovery is made, a new mining permit may
have a duration of up to 40 years. There are also 27
existing producing fields, some of which could last to
2050.
Oil and gas permit holders have a number of existing
rights under law which will continue following today’s
announcement"

The ban on awarding new exploration blocks will influence things in the long term. In the meantime we should have increased our renewables, though we desperately need larger lake storage IMO.

OMG, i didn't realise your colleague had recently published an article explaining this:

"The system would probably be under the same strain if oil and gas companies were still able to get new exploration permits."
https://www.interest.co.nz/opinion/109993/deep-dive-whats-causing-wholes...