David @ Tokyo
Perspective from Japan on whaling and whale meat, a spot of gourmet news, and monthly updates of whale meat stockpile statistics6/18/2005
IWC 2005: Chris Carter isn't any less ignorant this year
Well done Chris!
I'm not going to be surprised if he takes similar honours again this year, judging by his pre-IWC comments to the NZHerald.
He was responding to the following comments from a Mr Moronuki of the Japanese Fisheries Agency:
"Countries such as Australia and New Zealand say they would not let a single whale be hunted no matter how healthy whale stocks are. These fanatic anti-whaling countries may also include Italy, Germany and Britain. But there are some other anti-whaling countries that are a bit cooler".
In response:
Conservation Minister Chris Carter, who heads to the annual IWC meeting in Korea today, called Mr Moronuki's comments "extremist" and "militant" and said he did not believe they represented Japan's official position.
Carter should be ashamed of himself, and so should the entire country. Mr Moronuki said nothing controversial, and certainly nothing "extreme". Yet Carter has chosen to describe Moronuki's comments as "militant"? Where on earth did that come from? "Militant" is a word that is more suitably used to describe terrorists than Japanese fisheries agency officials. This comparison is totally inappropriate, and would likely be offensive to all those who have suffered at the hands of terrorism.
Further, "fanatical" is a quite appropriate word to describe the New Zealand government's position on whaling.
Carter seems determined to retain his place on IWMC's "worst list" in 2005:
"We are committed to whale conservation because they are not a plentiful species, they are a much endangered species, and I'm appalled that Japan would engage in such militant rhetoric," he said.
Poor Chris still hasn't figured it out that "whales" are not a species. There are around 80 whale species, and what's more, most of them aren't endangered.
"I'm interested in arguing the conservation values of protecting whales and the economic value."
Nor has Chris come to grips with the difference between "protecting whales" and "conservation". The Japanese position is pro-conservation - but New Zealand's stance is purely protectionist.
He said Mr Moronuki's comments did not provide a "good framework for rational debate"
Pfffffft, perhaps Chris should consider leading by example by getting a clue himself? See above...
Mr Carter said the votes this year were "extremely tight" and could balance out at 31-31 on whether Japan could expand its research programme.
Carter really has bad advisors. The new Japanese research programme can't be stopped by voting in the IWC plenary session. The Scientific Committee has had it's say on the proposed programme, and it's now up to Japan whether they implement it or not. Their right to this is determined by Article VIII of the ICRW, which Carter's government chooses to remain signatory to, not politically motivated voting at the IWC.
It's amazing that this clown ever made it into our parliament.... isn't it?
(fingers crossed)
Archives
June 2004 July 2004 August 2004 September 2004 October 2004 November 2004 December 2004 January 2005 March 2005 April 2005 May 2005 June 2005 July 2005 August 2005 September 2005 October 2005 November 2005 December 2005 January 2006 February 2006 March 2006 April 2006 May 2006 June 2006 July 2006 August 2006 September 2006 October 2006 November 2006 December 2006 January 2007 February 2007 March 2007 April 2007 May 2007 June 2007 July 2007 August 2007 September 2007 October 2007 November 2007 December 2007 January 2008 February 2008 April 2008 May 2008 June 2008 July 2008 August 2008 September 2008 October 2008 November 2008 December 2008 January 2009 February 2009 March 2009 April 2009 May 2009 June 2009 July 2009 August 2009 September 2009 October 2009 November 2009 January 2010 February 2010 April 2010 May 2010 June 2010 July 2010 August 2010 September 2010 February 2011 March 2011 May 2013 June 2013
