| The Commodification Of Everything - Liz Gordon
I remember being shocked to find out years ago that plain air had a commodity value. I am not talking here about the cylinders of oxygen, nitrogen and carbon dioxide that one can purchase, but about the value of the space above low-rise buildings in cities. The equation went like this: Council A allows buildings in zone B to be built up to a height of (say) 30 metres. The value of a seven metre high building in that zone can thus be valued as the land value, plus building improvements, plus the value of the unbuilt air space (23 metres). Such planning laws have huge effects on the shape of cities, forcing developers to “realise” the value of the property by building up to or near to the maximum height. This is a good example of how commodification shapes the environment around us. A further example is, of course, the unrealised value of what lies beneath our feet, and how colonies have been formed, wars fought and races and cultures exploited in the insatiable hurry of humans to retrieve and make value from the earth. We have learned recently that this greed never goes away, and that even protected areas can be targeted by specious distinctions that find loopholes in conservation laws: and especially that some protected areas are more protected than others! Ironically, we have learned again recently that ultimately humanity (and other forms of life) is left to pick up the tab when things go wrong. 25 years on, the burden of the Bhopal disaster in India, the legacy of Union Carbide’s malpractice, has fallen almost entirely on the ordinary, local, poor, sick citizens of that area, with the transnational perpetrators getting off with tiny fines. The current, ongoing destruction of all things in the Gulf of Mexico, possibly the worst environmental disaster the world has known, is another example that the populace ultimately pays for disasters caused by the exploitation of resources. I know that Obama says that BP must pay – but who really believes that the full, real, long-term cost will be paid by that company, rather than by local fishers and residents? Most effects of commodification are less spectacularly awful than this. Most do not lead to instant, painful death or lingering disease of body or earth. But in the commodification of everything, perhaps the most pervasive threat to life and wellbeing comes from water. Writing in the middle of the wettest Canterbury winter for years, it is hard to imagine that water is a scarce resource. But here in Canterbury, in many other areas of Aotearoa and internationally, water is both scarce and highly valued. With predictions of rising sea levels and land drought, fresh water may well be the oil of the future. The Battle For Canterbury’s Water In some parts of New Zealand, the battle for water has long since been joined. The metering and subsequent charging for water in Auckland was met with a highly innovative battle by the Water Pressure Group. The issues they sought to highlight – especially what happens to families that cannot pay their water bill and are therefore at risk of having their water turned off – have not been resolved. Canterbury is a region blessed with huge aquifer reserves and plenty of very high quality drinking water. But, with increased dairy farming in particular, and a range of other potential irrigation-related uses, we are now in a battle for control with the farming sector, including huge overseas interests, over our water reserves. The issue is both the amount of water, and potential pollution of our groundwater by nitrates and other run-offs. The problem was put baldly by Dr Vince Bidwell (1) in a 2006 opinion piece: “So the simple answer to the question: ‘Do we have enough water in Central Canterbury?’ is that there is not enough for all potential users. There is clearly a balance to be sought between abstraction of groundwater for economic … benefit and the consequent effects on access to high quality drinking water”. The struggle between economic and personal use of water is of interest to CAFCA primarily because of the threat of increased foreign ownership of farming. Irrigation of the Canterbury Plains will make the area a beacon for foreign farming interests, including intensive farming options. Conor English of Federated Farmers responded to the threat of a bargain basement buy-up of farms by foreign interests by saying: “The thing you have got to remember is that whoever owns the farm, they can't take it away. The farm stays here in New Zealand, the animals stay here in New Zealand, the jobs stay here in New Zealand…”.This is all very well, but what he did not note is that the pollution stays here, a potential threat to our precious aquifers (and of course the cost falls on residents). The cost of roads and infrastructure, the irrigation scheme itself, the likely increase in the price of water (Christchurch has water meters on all houses, but they are not currently used to levy specific charges) and the growing scarcity costs will all fall locally. However, as always, the profits will scoot off overseas. Local body politicians often scold Canterbury residents for taking our immensely pure water for granted. But that is simply softening up residents for the coming battle between personal and commercial interests, which, it appears, commercial interests are sure to win. There is, of course, significant public opposition to the water schemes – a full account can be found on Wikipedia – including an organisation called Save Our Water which had two Regional Councillors elected in 2007.With the regional council (Environment Canterbury) disestablished and Commissioners in place, the playing field is further tilted towards economic interests. One of the 2007 Councillors, Rik Tindall, is standing for the Christchurch Mayoralty to bring the debate into this year’s city elections. But with the vultures circling, and the profit-men rubbing their hands in glee, it seems our glorious, fresh, pure, clean, non-chlorinated water is massively under threat. Non-Members:
|
 Return to Watchdog 124 Index |
 |