NICOLA YOUNG: Bombing changed our thinking

SUNK: The blowing up of the Rainbow Warrior at an Auckland wharf on July 10, 1985 was a coming of age for New Zealand writes Nicola Young. PHOTO/FILE A-170510SPLWARRIOR2

WHAT were you doing this time 30 years ago?

I was a 12-year-old school kid who was shocked to learn that French secret agents had blown up the Greenpeace ship Rainbow Warrior in Auckland Harbour, killing photographer Fernando Pereira.

It was a coming of age for New Zealand and for me personally.

I was already well on my way to becoming an environmentalist driven through a love of nature and the outdoors, but this act of terrorism reinforced for me that even in our precious part of the world, taking a stand had real consequences.

Our proud position of being nuclear-free had cost someone his life.

I wonder what he would make of it now - this blatant act of violence is one that strongly influences what it means to be Kiwi. July 10, 1985 is a serious date in our history books.

Greenpeace protesters were in the news again in the past week, this time climbing our Parliament buildings highlighting the need for stronger action by the New Zealand Government on climate change.

One of the climbers, Verena Maeder, wrote in the newspaper about her motivation. She said: "What on earth would get a mother of two teenagers and small business owner to put her 40-year old body on the line like this?

"Why go to such lengths, break the law and risk a prison sentence? ... I did not do what I have done lightheartedly. I did it because I feel that we need to do everything we can to draw attention to the urgency of climate change. We've spent two precious decades in fruitless debates, but have done nothing to curb our greenhouse gas emissions. We need action, not words or targets ... I want to stand on the right side of history and let my actions speak louder than my words."

Then this week the targets for reductions in carbon emissions that New Zealand will take to the global talks in Paris later this year were released. While the Minister Tim Groser described the targets as "ambitious", they are only a small shift from previous commitments and well below others' - Europe has set a target of a 40 per cent reduction on 1990 levels by 2030.

I suppose I should be grateful that we are increasing our target, however modest that is, and not going backwards! Our total emissions have been increasing, so we need stronger action if we're going to achieve even these paltry goals.

There have also been claims this week of the Government manipulating the figures to make them sound better. The standard approach, like the Europe example, is to compare with 1990 levels; however, the announcement this week of a 30 per cent reduction by 2030 was against a 2005 level. But this use of "lies, damned lies and statistics" approach didn't last long - it was recalculated quickly as a 11 per cent reduction on 1990 levels - not quite as impressive.

So yes, it is an increase on the previous unconditional target of a 5 per cent reduction, but doesn't make it easy to get to our 2050 goal of a 50 per cent reduction. More importantly though, it means we're not doing our bit to slow down the impact of climate change on our planet.

All these numbers matter if we're going to put a lid on climate change - to stop sea level rise, melting polar ice, increasing wildfires, droughts and heat waves, intensifying storms, more floods and the damage we know all too much about - plus the astronomical economic cost that goes with it. There's not just a cost with taking action - no action or not enough action will cost us dearly.

"You can't sink a rainbow" is the Greenpeace slogan of my youth, but nuclear-free is no longer the top issue for environmentalists du jour - it's all about climate change and these numbers count.

-Nicola Young has worked in the government and private sectors in Australia and NZ and now works from home in Taranaki for a national charitable foundation. Educated at Wanganui Girls' College, she has a science degree and is the mother of two boys.