The Standard

Missing in action

Written By: - Date published: 10:15 am, April 6th, 2026 - 48 comments
Categories: 2026 oil crisis, Christopher Luxon, Donald Trump, energy, International, israel, national, nicola willis, same old national, uncategorized, us politics - Tags:

Throughout the world responsible Governments are preparing for the worst.

Their pessimism is justified. Donald Trump has taken to try and resolve the war by insulting Iran by 5 am truths. His latest truth is to warn them to “[o]pen the Fuckin’ Strait, you crazy bastards, or you’ll be living in Hell.”

This is the American Leader that tore up the Iranian Uranium deal even though it was working because it had Barak Obama’s signature on it, and who on two different occasions bombed Iran while negotiations over a new Uranium deal were under way even though Iran had offered to rid itself of Uranium just before the second hit.

He is the leader who ordered the hit that killed the Iranian leader which also killed his daughter, granddaughter, and son-in-law and possibly injured the Leader’s son who then became Iran’s replacement leader not to mention 150 or more school kids and teachers in a neighbouring school. His forces have targeted urban areas including civilian areas and universities and conducted a number of attacks that on initial analysis appear to be war crimes. This sort of behaviour is not engendering of good diplomatic relations.

And Trump’s proxy Israel is doing its best to prolong the war by taking out anyone capable of negotiating a peace deal, hitting Iranian oil fields and strategic assets, laying waste to South Lebanon and some of the more insane members of the Israeli Government are urging the Israeli Govenment to use nukes.

In terms of insane behaviour Israel and the US have repeatedly hit the Nuclear Power Station at Bushehr in Iran. If containment is breached then most of the Gulf State’s water supply will be contaminated. This could be a country ending event.

This is all insane. If it was not happening in real time it would appear to be a particularly morbid and far fetched piece of fiction.

Chances of this settling down quickly are approaching zero. Chances of a long and extreme disruption to the supply of oil and a myriad of oil dependent products such as fertilisers, plastics, electronics, pretty well everything you can think of, are depressingly high.

But it will not happen overnight. Matters will slowly get worse and to improve things will take sustained action and a great deal of commitment. A bit like dealing with climate change which this Government is also spectacularly bad at.

So what has been our Government’s response to the crisis so far?

Limited calculated assistance for working families only, the minimum required to slow down softening political support. Nothing for poor people or students or the elderly. Experts have justifiable called it pretty dismal.

Compare this with other nations, taken from this Herald article:

  • Australia has a leader who has taken a leadership role. Victoria has free public transport for one month, Tasmania has free buses and ferries until July 1. The federal government has halved the fuel excise on petrol and diesel for three months and cut the heavy‑vehicle road user charge for three months.
  • South Korea has reduced public‑transport costs, and limited fuel sales/quantities. Unfortunately for us it has capped fuel exports and stopped naphtha exports.
  • The Philippines and Pakistan governments have both introduced four‑day workweeks to lower fuel consumption.
  • Sri Lanka has made Wednesdays a public holiday for government institutions to reduce travel and energy use.
  • Indonesia has designated Fridays as work‑from‑home days and limited fuel sales to 50 litres per person per day.
  • Thailand has imposed energy‑conservation measures for civil servants including limiting air‑conditioning use and relaxing formal dress to short sleeves. nzherald.co.nz
  • India has invoked emergency powers to boost production of LPG to address cooking‑fuel shortages. nzherald.co.nz
  • Myanmar has imposed a fuel‑rationing system.
  • Vietnam plans to remove or stop import tariffs on fuels.
  • And in the European Union members have been told to prepare for prolonged disruption, several countries have announced tax cuts/subsidies and Germany has limited how often petrol stations can raise pump prices to only once per day.

Verity Johnson puts it well about Luxon’s performance when she says this:

We’re not dumb. We’re a smart, energetic nation; but we’re being treated like a bunch of hysterical fragile teenagers, just told it’ll all be fine, and the adults have got this.

It’s the one thing you can guarantee will make us panic. Not being talked to. Not being led, not being reassured, just being left on your own, in your head, imagining the worst, and told it’s all fine … whilst you replay 5 years ago.

Except what if this time there’s no diesel this time for deliveries? What if there’s curfews and no car days and you depend on foot traffic? What if consumer spending evaporates – again – and there’s no wage-subsidy-esque relief for business? What if, if, if, if….

That’s what we need a leader for. To pull us back from the ledge, focus our energy, and unite us. And that’s exactly what we don’t have. It’s clearly not Luxon. It’s never going to be Willis.

The Government appears to be gambling on an increasingly remote chance that everything will come right, the economy will get back on track and they can claim to be the party that has made things better for us. This, and a hatred of collective action, is why they are not doing anything. It is one hell of a gamble to take with our country’s future.

48 comments on “Missing in action ”

  1. aj 1

    Max Fisher explains the movement of oil around the world in this 14 minute video, and if he is correct then it's going to become quite difficult. He has a good resume so unfortunately this explainer is likely to be correct.

    It's quite hard to understand why the CoC is sounding so relaxed about this.

    "A catastrophe bicycling our way" 14 minutes.

    The Iran oil shock is about to hit.

    • Mercurio 1.1

      "It's quite hard to understand why the CoC is sounding so relaxed about this."

      Ideological paralysis.

      • KJT 1.1.1

        The Coalition of Cockups have painted themselves into a corner of their own making.

        After years of criticising Labour Greens for their positive and effective response to covid.

        It is extremely difficult and obviously hypocritical, for the Coalition to take similar necessary actions to prevent and ameliorate, an impending national shut down due to lack of diesel.

  2. Res Publica 2

    There’s clearly a lot of geopolitical risk right now, and it would be naive to assume everything just settles down quickly. But jumping straight to worst-case scenarios doesn’t really help us make better decisions.

    New Zealand can’t control events in the Middle East or global oil markets. What we can do is reduce our exposure over time through electrification, efficiency, and more resilient supply chains.

    And if energy security is worth serious money (and it is), then we should be honest about the choices and lean into them. If National is prepared to commit around a billion dollars to an LNG terminal, then the debate isn’t whether we can afford to act, it’s what we spend that money on.

    Diesel reserves, solar, and electrification are simply better resilience investments. They reduce exposure to fuel shocks over time, rather than locking us further into them, and they’re much harder to dismiss as “waste” when the alternative carries a similar price tag.

    That’s the real political question here. Not whether we act, but whether we keep doubling down on fossil fuel dependence, or actually invest in reducing our exposure to it.

    This current crisis creates a political opening. It shifts the debate onto terrain where the left’s position on resilience, electrification, and reduced exposure is more coherent and defensible. While at the same time it forces the government to justify continued dependence on imported fuel.

    Other countries are taking different approaches depending on their circumstances, but for us the priority is pretty simple: reduce vulnerability where we can and make deliberate choices about where public investment actually improves resilience.

    • Mercurio 2.1

      "This current crisis creates a political opening. It shifts the debate onto terrain where the left’s position on resilience, electrification, and reduced exposure is more coherent and defensible. While at the same time it forces the government to justify continued dependence on imported fuel."

      Yes. We have bided our time, waiting for this opportunity 🙂 We have to, however, balance the opportunity to invest in better forms of energy, with changes to behaviour around the amount of energy we use; we are presently profligate users of energy and much of that use is spurious, in my opinion.

  3. Rakuraku 3

    The COC is quite relaxed about the situation, as there is nothing to panic about at this stage, however it could change at any time. However it will not affect MP's with their big salaries and chauffered limouisins.

  4. Ad 4

    We are getting quickly to the point where it will be too late for an meaningful government action to make any difference. The have left it too late to spend any useful public money. The decision yesterday not to raise fuel excise by 12c will itself have a large impact on decreasing money for transport projects, road renewals, and transport subsidies.

    With 45% of our fuel coming from South Korean refineries, those refineries are now relying on governmnet oil reserves being released to keep going.

    The New Zealand fuel crisis laid bare in nine simple charts | The Spinoff

    It's going to really go down with diesel at the end of April.

    • lprent 4.1

      It's going to really go down with diesel at the end of April.

      Mid-may will be the actual shortage crunch from what I can see on the supply side.

      About the only thing that has been useful economically over the 5 weeks has been the price increases in diesel prices. Up 148.8c (66.58%) over the last 28 days according to Gaspy.

      Now almost the same price as 98 unleaded. But with the RUC tax on top.

      When you look at it since March 3rd, it gets even more extreme.

      According to fuel-tracking app Gaspy, the average price of 91-grade petrol has increased by 39.3% to $3.47, up from $2.49 on March 3.

      Diesel has risen 168.8% from an average price of $1.38 to $3.71.

      Let us have some fake pity for the owners of the ubiquitous Auckland tractors running on the economic basis of a tax break for ‘business vehicles’.

      The RUC rates for something like a diesel Ford Ranger (RUC vehicle type 1) are $76 per 1000km GST inclusive. The typical Ranger tank is 80 litres and has a range of about 800km (ie 10 litres per 100km)

      So (10 * 3.71) + 7.6 = $44.70 per 100km including GST.
      compared to the previous price of
      (10 * 1.38) + 7.6 = $21.4 per 100km including GST.

      Ouch. That kind of price increase will really start to shift usage patterns. I wonder if the price of second hand diesel Ford Rangers has started collapsing yet.

      But actually have pity for productive businesses who actually have productive usage of diesel vehicles, this is going to be catastrophic, even if it only has a medium term effect (ie until the end of this financial year).

      Because that price increase will cascade through the economy with added charges on all transported or construction costs.

      • joe90 4.1.1

        added charges on all transported or construction costs.

        We're at the tail-end of a top to bottom, inside and out, year long home renovation. Costing was done late 2024 with an estimated 28 weeks to complete. Work began mid March 2025, mid April we encountered the first supply issues and by June the original costings went out the window. A couple of big ticket items up 40%, pretty much everything else >10%.

        And of course, way over time, way over budget, and a weeks work from completion, daily vehicle costs are to triple.

      • Graeme 4.1.2

        productive usage of diesel vehicles

        They'll be watching their margins shrink and turn to loss, but it's going to clobber all of us through everything we buy that goes through the distribution chain, via transport costs and shortages. Then inflation spikes, hard, closely followed by interest rates. Then the mortgagee sales start. Things weren't flash in NZ at the start of this, won't be many green shoots around in six months.

    • Incognito 4.2

      The decision yesterday not to raise fuel excise by 12c …

      No decision has been made; they’ve only signalled a decision, at some stage …

      Anyway, it’s all smoke & mirrors, because it is not coming into effect until January 2027.

  5. Andrew Riddell 5

    Is there any evidence this government realises that what is happening and what is going to happen is way, way bigger than how much petrol, diesel and jet fuel we have?

    • Muttonbird 5.1

      I don't think they want to entertain what is about to happen. Dramatic and devastating, or crippling and slow, it's coming.

      This government seems more concerned with differentiating itself from the Labour/Covid government rather than addressing the situation.

      Not a statement goes by without reference to how they are not going to, 'shut down the country like Jacinda did'.

    • PsyclingLeft.Always 5.2

      You would think/hope so? But of course that would be assuming there was any rational thinking,forward looking members in it (and there aren't)

      And they are getting gentle handling by most media.

      As usual most people complain…but dont get activated? (There are many ways to be activated…not all involve placards and marches…)

      So, until shit gets real for them (And like you,IMO that is coming) Keep Aware. Tell others..

    • roblogic 5.3

      Is there any evidence that they take advice or give the slightest fuck about the consequences of their actions?

      No their only aim is power and a short lived ransacking of the public purse.

      I don’t think they can PR spin their way out of this one, despite delusional pieces from govt bootlickers in the NZME oligarch press

  6. roblogic 6

    Luxon's cynical positioning as the anti-Jacinda is blowing up in his face and he deserves it

    Not taking responsibility

    Not showing any leadership

    Not knowing fuck all about his portfolios

    Not willing to announce any policy.

    We are aimlessly drifting into a disaster.

    https://www.stuff.co.nz/nz-news/360960644/verity-johnson-we-dont-have-anyone-believe

  7. mpledger 7

    This English guy (single mother childhood, masters in econ at Oxbridge) had a good point. Govts are getting themselves out of trouble by selling assets but that just makes them less resilient when the next shock hits.

    He also talks about how setting a govt-enforced low price doesn't decrease demand which is what you want. That letting prices go up effects the poor disproportionately and the rich don't really curb their use. I don't think he explicitly said but I think his point was that rationing makes the most sense. The rich are forced to curb their use and the poor aren't hit with such extreme prices. (He goes on a bit of a ramble towards the end but it's otherwise good.)

    "The Iran economic shock is coming. How to protect yourself"

  8. observer 8

    Satire cannot compete with this. An actor playing the role of Prime Minister, very badly.

    If you don't have time or inclination to read or watch – and frankly, why would you? – here is a summary of Luxon's message …

    "Rhubarb rhubarb what I would say to you is rhubarb rhubarb and more rhubarb …"

    Watch: PM stumbles when asked about Māori National Party ministers in Cabinet | Stuff

  9. Psycho Milt 9

    "This is the American Leader that tore up the Iranian Uranium deal even though it was working because it had Barak Obama’s signature on it…"

    He tore up the deal because he had advisors who don't share the left's astounding ignorance and wishful thinking when it comes to the Islamic Republic. The problem wasn't that the deal had Barack Obama's signature on it, it was that it had a Useful Idiot's signature on it. The Iranian government doesn't just view liberal democracies with contempt, it views us as enemies of Allah who must be brought under sharia or killed, however long that takes. Our governments can kid themselves they're signing an agreement with those people, but they're happy to lie to us and continue secretly working against us because we're instruments of Satan.

    "He is the leader who ordered the hit that killed the Iranian leader…"

    He ordered the hit that killed a theocratic fascist who'd just finished murdering tens of thousands of his own people for the 'crime' of wanting something better than theocratic fascism.

    By all means oppose this war, it looks to me too like a can of worms opened by people who were way too optimistic about what was in the can. But don't pretend or ask Luxon to pretend that the Islamic Republic of Iran was just a regular country minding its own business, and don't do its leaders the discourtesy of imagining they had any intention of engaging in substantive, good-faith negotiations with people they regard as enemies of God.

    • Drowsy M. Kram 9.1

      The problem wasn't that the deal had Barack Obama's signature on it, it was that it had a Useful Idiot's signature on it.

      In May 2018, French president Emmanuel Macron warned Trump not to withdraw from the deal, telling Der Spiegel that doing so could lead to war.

      Australia's prime minister Malcolm Turnbull said he regretted the decision.

      New Zealand's prime minister Jacinda Ardern said the withdrawal was a step backward.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_withdrawal_from_the_Iran_nuclear_deal

      "A step backward" that "could lead to war" – some "astounding ignorance" there.

      Trump promised no wars. Now he’s a Bush-style regime change president [The Guardian, 1 March 2026]
      The America First president who built his political brand on opposing foreign military adventures has unleashed a war of choice aimed at regime change

      One month on from initiating hostilities, again, the self-declared "very stable genius" is threatening to bomb Iran “back to the Stone Ages, where they belong."

      Trump Says US Will Bomb Iran Into “Stone Ages,” Invoking Vietnam Carpet Bombing [2 April 2026]
      The US will bomb Iran “back to the Stone Ages, where they belong,” Trump said of the country with 93 million people.

      President Donald Trump and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth vowed to bomb Iran into the “Stone Ages” in concerning statements on Wednesday night harkening to Vietnam War-era atrocities, as the U.S. and Israel carry out strikes on life-supporting infrastructure in Iran.

      Trump threatens to take out Iran in ‘one night’ if no deal before deadline [BBC, 6 April 2026]

      https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cqj8ep9w1pno

      Sickening stuff – “oppose this war“.

      https://thestandard.nz/open-mike-02-04-2026/#comment-2059435

    • Nic the NZer 9.2

      Israeli and US policies towards Iran have been directly destructive to the policy goals you claim to support. The JCPOA treaty was working as agreed with Iran under the most invasive monitoring of their nuclear program anywhere in the world to demonstrate that.

      It should be clear from the Israeli response to this (getting Trump to leave the treaty eventually, along with a long history of arguing for a US regime change attack on Iran) that the goal was not a nuclear weapon free Iran at all, it was to impede any kind of friendly relationship developing between Iran and the US. If a consequence of that was a nuclear armed Iran, then so be it, the goal of isolating Iran from the west was more important.

      It would be astonishing at this point if Iran is not pursuing nuclear weapons development, because that appears to be the only thing going to deter further attacks. Maybe Israel thinks it will be allowed to periodically carry out attacks (which you refer to with the frankly racist euphemism "mowing the lawn") as it sees fit. Iran is going to need some resolution where that isn't a norm.

      Also worth noting you've already conceded the point that Iran has not been at war with either the US or Israel. All the 'proxy' forces which they have been helping have very legitimate unresolved conflicts with Israel or the US in which they have been engaged. Military supplies and alliances are just an unfortunate part of how the world works these days.

      • SPC 9.2.1

        Does Hezbollah have the right to operate in Lebanon, if its government asks them to disarm?

        Are proxy forces allowed to operate without the consent of the recognised government (case in Yemen)?

        Is it legal to arm non state actors, without the consent of the nation state in which they operate, for the purpose of war on another state?

        In this instance one the nation state has not recognised (neither Lebanon, nor Yemen have recognised Israel)(nor had Hamas in Gaza).

        (arming groups for regime change within the state is more common).

        • Nic the NZer 9.2.1.1

          Not sure what any of this has to do with Iran, because clearly the groups you mentioned are doing this of their own accord. Even calling them proxy forces is a bit of a stretch as they frequently act quite independently from the IRGC. I mean if its illegitimate to arm non-state sanctioned groups then almost everything the US and Israel supply militarily across the entire middle east is illegitimate.

          If Israel and the US were at all functional within international law and the UN framework then multiple of these conflicts would have been resolved long ago, and the actors would more or less be state actors anyway. It's the ongoing Israeli strategy of not settling and resolving multiple conflicts and attempting to divide and play off multiple non-state actor groups within the surrounding states, which means Israel is now in conflict with multiple non-state actors on all fronts.

      • Psycho Milt 9.2.2

        "The JCPOA treaty was working as agreed…"

        Iran's government certainly put some effort into making it appear that way, sure. Behind that cover, it was still working on its goal of destroying the "Little Satan," exporting its psychotic "revolution" to other countries and finding a way to ensure it was protected from any attempts by the "Great Satan" to prevent those activities. To the Useful Idiots, those projects remain invisible no matter how often or how explictly expressed.

        "…which you refer to with the frankly racist euphemism "mowing the lawn"…"

        It's a useful metaphor, and if it were your country that a powerful regional enemy had sworn to completely destroy, you might be less dismissive of a programme of periodically degrading said enemy's capability to carry out its aim.

        "Also worth noting you've already conceded the point that Iran has not been at war with either the US or Israel."

        You wrote 'noting' there, it should read 'claiming.' Also, no it's not worth making the claim, as it's untrue.

        • Nic the NZer 9.2.2.1

          You seem to be mistaking the JCPOA agreement for some fantasy agreement where Iran completely abandons their allies in the middle east. I mean obviously Israel never follows anything it agrees to anyway so that should hardly be surprising. FYI they agreed not to develop nuclear weapons, which was considered a good thing not to have them pursue by almost everybody (unfortunately Israel doesn't really value that objective).

          The problem with the racist euphemism "mowing the lawn" is not that its racist in assuming Palestine (or Iran) should not have developing military capability. The problem is that it entails massive civilian casualties and war crimes committed in every example. It doesn't degrade military capacity it just genocides the population. That's why Israeli's throw it around so freely, they as much care about massacres of the Palestinian population in Gaza as they do about blades of grass getting cut.

          • Psycho Milt 9.2.2.1.1

            "The problem is that it entails massive civilian casualties and war crimes…"

            Do some comparisons with civilian casualties in other conflicts in that region (start with Syria, Yemen and Sudan), then have another think about that claim. And about racism, while you're at it.

  10. Martin Ball 10

    Theocratic is too flattering. They are gangsters who have stolen Iran, ie fascists; killers first, businessmen second and politicians third.. They, finally must be fought. Our problem is that the Americans are, once again, incompetent. We who live in democracies are a minority blithely imagining it is the norm. At some point we will have to fight. Perhaps now. I just wonder why the Chinese gangsters (CCP) did not invade Taiwan last week while the going was good.

  11. Sam M 11

    The $50 fuel relief payment is a close to $400 million dollar gift from taxpayers direct to the fuel companies on top of the gains they are and will make from their massive price rises.

    South Korea has announced it is capping it's fuel exports at 2025 levels. That's it. We can import the same amount of fuel from South Korea this year as we did last year. Any other media stories about how New Zealand will be badly affected , etc are all just what if's and if's (for example "South Korea could ban all fuel exports to NZ" I read somewhere this week. Yep they could, but nah…..

    Currently there is no fuel supply crisis in New Zealand and to suggest otherwise is irresponsible. That doesn't mean we shouldn't be looking at ways to secure our supply in the future, but the media and some politicians and commentators hyping up this oil 'crisis' and fuel supply 'catastrophe' are one of the main reasons we are now paying such huge prices for our fuel at the pump.

    You can't really blame the fuel companies, they're just taking advantage of what is being handed to them and maximizing shareholder profits which makes total sense (from a cold, uncaring corporation person perspective)

    • Incognito 11.1

      LJ [Z Energy chief executive Lindis Jones]: If you look at the price increases, the landed cost of petrol and diesel has increased by well in excess of a dollar. Our net profit margins are about three cents a litre. So our ability to slow that down or not pass them on is absolutely limited. And those price increases are huge, so I absolutely recognise the impact on Kiwi and Kiwi businesses, but with profit margins of three cents, the ability to slow that down or accommodate those price increases is absolutely limited and actually immaterial, given the scale of those price increases.

      https://newsroom.co.nz/2026/03/28/i-heard-it-described-as-the-biggest-energy-shock-in-the-history-of-the-world-it-certainly-feels-like-it/

      Not all ‘fuel companies’ are equal in the NZ supply chain and market.

    • weka 11.2

      South Korea has announced it is capping it's fuel exports at 2025 levels. That's it. We can import the same amount of fuel from South Korea this year as we did last year. Any other media stories about how New Zealand will be badly affected , etc are all just what if's and if's (for example "South Korea could ban all fuel exports to NZ" I read somewhere this week. Yep they could, but nah…..

      There's 20% less oil being sold now.

      NZ get's nearly 50% of its oil fuel from South Korea.

      I can't find the exact figures, but 70% of SK's crude oil comes from the Middle East and the greater portion of that via Hormuz.

      How exactly is South Korea going to supply NZ 100% of our 2025 quantities?

      • SPC 11.2.1

        It is not that bad.

        (It is for gas, because of the 20% decline in Qatar output for 5 years)

        20% of oil goes out of the Gulf, yes. But Riyadh has sent half its oil to the Red Sea port.

        China is getting its oil out of the Gulf. Also there are now arrangements with Iran by Pakistan, India & Philippines as well.

        Oil for S Korea, Singapore and Japan is impacted – but if there is a 2 week period in which ships can exit out of the Hormuz Strait the problem is deferred a bit.

        New Zealand’s close relationship with Singapore has emerged as its best hope of getting through the fuel crisis – even as the crucial agreement that would guarantee us fuel remains unsigned.

        New Zealand-Singapore Comprehensive Strategic Partnership (CSP).

        The CSP focused on business and investment to help more New Zealand firms scale from Singapore into Asia but Wong’s visit also addressed supply chain resilience off the back of the Covid-19 pandemic.

        agreement they would not impose export restrictions on an agreed list of essential goods like fuel, medical and construction-related products in the Agreement on Trade in Essential Supplies (AOTES).

        https://www.thepost.co.nz/politics/360975770/fuel-crisis-old-friendship-could-keep-new-zealands-fuel-flowing

        • weka 11.2.1.1

          It is not that bad.

          I'm not suggesting SK will stop all supplies. I'm saying that Sam's argument that we will have the same quantity from SK as last year doesn't make sense.

          • weka 11.2.1.1.1

            I mean, it might work out like that, but it might not either, depending on a number of variables that NZ has zero control over and we can't predict. As opposed to 2 months ago when it would have been reasonable to assume our oil supplies were stable (relatively, given the general craziness of the Americans and Israelis).

      • SPC 11.2.2

        Korea gets 30% of its oil from other areas

        Of the 70% from the ME, nearly half is from Saudi Arabia (and they are sending half of that out by the Red Sea port).

        So South Korea could receive close to half its normal supplies.

        Korea relies almost entirely on imports for its fossil fuel needs, with about 70 percent of its crude oil sourced from the Middle East. Saudi Arabia accounts for the largest share at 33.6 percent, followed by the United Arab Emirates at 11.4 percent, Iraq at 10.4 percent and Kuwait at 8.5 percent.

        https://www.koreatimes.co.kr/southkorea/others/20260303/middle-east-conflict-raises-alarm-on-koreas-oil-dependence

  12. Stephen D 12

    Simon Wilson on the same subject. He’s gone form the Herald, now on The Spinoff.

    https://thespinoff.co.nz/politics/09-04-2026/the-many-ways-our-government-is-failing-in-its-response-to-the-fuel-crisis?

    ”The opportunity is here for a cultural reset, to establish a more resilient, healthier and, for heaven’s sake, cheaper way of living in this country. If only the government would take it, writes Simon Wilson.”

Leave a Comment