New black hole emerging
I was excited last week to learn scientists using radio telescopes were finally able to capture a tangible photo of a black hole. These time and light consuming holes in the universe were previously just mathematical constructs. The red image looked like the Eye of Saruman from Lord of the Rings. Last week, we were also given a snapshot of another reality that many don’t want to know about.
The media revealed Greater Wellington Regional Council had activated a managed retreat policy along 40 metres of the coastal foredunes along Queen Elizabeth Park. This will lead to the relocation of the surf club, a heritage building and the loss of roads and a carpark at an estimated cost of $350K. A GW spokesperson said the threatened coastal erosion would be caused by a big storm or by rising sea levels over 50 years.
No secret, the regional council has been open about this direction for more than a year. It’s just that the media had only now discovered the news. And it comes at a time of rising concern about the impact of climate change. GW’s managed retreat plan affects just 40 metres with a potential impact on just a few built assets. However, the signal this decision sends is huge. A study by Local Government NZ reveals $14 billion worth of coastal local government infrastructure is in danger from sea level rise. Saruman is coming.
Public attention has been focused on carbon emissions, global warming and climate change. LGNZ, while accepting the commitment to mitigation, argues that NZ accounts for only 0.2 per cent of emissions. What is certain, says LGNZ president and Dunedin mayor David Cull, is the effects of global warming. And with central government providing no national guidance or direction on adaptation policy, local councils will increasingly face hefty legal bills due to court action for damages from impacted property owners. LGNZ, which represents 78 councils has trotted out Jack Hodder QC to expose the legal underbelly of this threat. His global research showed an increasing number of climate change-related law suits brought by individuals and communities. In NZ councils don’t have a legislative framework to support our decisions that reflect climate change risks. While ratepayers, through their councils, potentially face significant costs from legal action because climate change risks were not factored into their decisions subsequently resulting in harm.
Mr Hodder warned that without central government planning legislation, the courts would be left to make decisions and creating legal precedents which will hinder proper planning for the implementation of adaptation measures. “Increased litigation will consume council/ratepayers’ resources,” he warned. He said it was only a matter of time before the international examples of such court-led outcomes arrive at New Zealand’s shores, adding that increasingly younger judges would be keen to test the boundaries when such litigation comes before them. Mr Hodder’s paper “Climate Change Litigation: Who’s Afraid of Creative Judges?” It’s a clear shot across the bow of the Government to take the predicament of councils seriously. Councils face litigation risks relating to decisions to limit development. And, in the future, risks related to the consequences of allowing development but failing to implement adaptation measures.
Mr Hodder has given us a picture of a black hole.