by frog
Sometimes I think we over intellectualize things. The Green parliamentary office spent a bit of time and brain power over recent weeks trying to work out how to ensure the government didn’t dominate New Zealand’s role as host of World Environment Day with its greenwash. We came up with some quite clever ideas. Meanwhile, Winston Peters just walked into a radio station and called someone a moron. Problem solved.
Published in Campaign | Environment & Resource Management | Parliament by frog on Fri, June 6th, 2008
Tags: Frog, frogblog, Green aprty, greens, Moron, new zealand, winston peters, World Environment Day
on the trolls and those who are unable to keep on topic
I think the large drop in NZ First polling since the last election is evidence that New Zealand has less morons than it did three years ago (although a few of them may have migrated to the Family Party).
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Is it over-intellectualisation, or is there an issue with balancing the views of the many different constituencies that comprise the Green Party?
I thought, untill about three weeks ago, that the Green Party represented the views of the global green movement, but I’m beginning to doubt that since signing up for this blog, hence my question!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Strings: Not every one who posts here is a Green….so take care with perceptions. NZ Greens are also an independent lot. If you think about it, for ANYONE to decide they are a Green, tey already have to be independent thinker. Being Green has never been a “sheeple” option. It requires a certain independence of mind that sets a person a little bit apart before you even begin to look at policy. A similar dynamic applies to some of the other smaller parties, like ACT or LibertariaNZ, who have a very different vision of the world as compared to the status quo. NZ First people are really just refugees from the “Rob’s Mob” faction of the National Party. Similarly, United Future is collection of minor themes in the mainstream that don’t have a voice that is heard via the major parties.
So “GPANZ” won’t be an echo of the Global Green Movement. Instead, if anything, it is as much an ideas engine feeding back into that movement as a consumer of thought that emerges from it. This is particularly true in the “Anglosphere”. Having elected Green representatives gives NZ Greens more heft. In most English speaking countries, Greens have been excluded by the voting systems. In Canada, the Greens have been winning vote shares as high as 15% and not winning any seats. This “democratic deficit” is one of the major reasons WHY environmental policies in those same countries (Canada, Australia, the US and UK) tend to lag those in other democracies where Greens have been able to make their case in the legislatures, and win the debates based on the evidence, for a generation already.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
The green party is largely a serious and intelligent group. We are trying to deal with issues that are serious, indeed they are critical to our survival, and the solutions need serious consideration. The party (and the people currently in it) don’t need to be any less intellectual.
However, as we become a mainstream party we need to appeal to a wider constituency who may not be as intellectually inclined/cerebral as many of us are. To do this we need straightforward messages with wide appeal, as well as the comprehensive policy to back it up.
Our MPs need to be extremely tough on their colleagues in parliament who pay lip service to the important problems of our times. They also though need to keep arguing the issues and not get into gutter politics and name calling.
It has always amused me how some criticize us for having social policy and not sticking to saving the whales. If only we didn’t push this or that controversial policy, we would supposedly have much more support. Well we are a political force for good in all aspects of governing the country, and we aspire to be more so. We have comprehensive policy and advocate multiple issues. We are not perfect, and even if we were we couldn’t please everyone. The reality is that no group that claims widespread support and comprehensive policies can get everyone to agree on them. We are however a co-operative and inclusive party which encourages a robust policy development process. We generally do our best.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I should have proofed my last post. The last sentance should read: “We generally do a _fantastic_ job”.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
alexking
Erghh…..
And with elitist nonsense like that, is it any surprise the Greens are stuck on 5%.
Did it occur to you that many people do not want a return to protectionism, high taxes and centralised control-freakery? Therin lies your problem, and your solution.
>>not get into gutter politics
The EB will be relieved….
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
We are aware of some major current environmental problems facing our country. We have thought about them, debated them and come up with good solutions to them. Most other political parties either still deny that we have have these problems, or don’t have the guts to do anything real about them.
If you were to profile the greens, and to profile the general population, I suspect you would find we are more at the thoughtful/intellectual end. This is neither good nor bad, it just is. It does not mean the greens are “better” than the average person. However, it does mean there is a gap in our appeal. We are not yet as inclusive as we should be.
We need to keep going hard on ideas, policies and politics, keep inviting others to join us and/or work work with us, keep widening our support and keep raising our vote. I make no apology for having the best grasp on policy of any political party. Ultimately we need the greens if we are to survive.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Well here in New York we had the french guy climbing the times building and unvailing a banner. I got caught up with the second guy climbing as i was on the bus going along 42 street coming home.
I loved the fact that every cop in New York decided they needed to be there.
I feel for the guy since he’s probably going to spend the rest of his life in a maximum security prison.
Also since the stunts closed 8th avenue all those cars were sitting there idling producing lots of green house gases
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
alexking
And you think others haven’t?
If your ego will allow it, try to entertain the idea that others have a) thought about the problems and b) arrived at different solutions.
>>If you were to profile the greens
Personally, I’d put them in the idealist and naive camp, along with some failed Trotskites who have hitched a ride. You’re providing a fine demonstration of the former. I’m guessing you’re young.
>>Ultimately we need the greens if we are to survive
Hilarious.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Actually, we are the only major political party in this country that has seriously considered the major environmental problems facing us. We’re the only ones prepared to implement solutions in a timely manner.
It’s not good enough to say “What problems? I can still find one or two apparent scientists on the net who don’t agree with the IPCC”.
It’s not good enough to say “We know our scientific advisors are signaling major problems ahead and the sooner we start to address them the better. Lets whimp out and do nothing until it’s too late.”
More and more people are coming to recognise that time is up on the way we’ve traditionally wasted and abused our natural resources to run our economies and our society. Those of us in positions of political leadership have a duty to make the required changes for the good of humanity.
There will always be those who hark back to the good old days of cheap oil. They would prefer to drive their cars into oblivion than face the facts that we need to live sustainably. For those people the next few years are going to be an uncomfortable.
My challenge to the greens:
If Obama can win against Clinton in the US, why can’t the Greens get more votes in the NZ General Election than Labour? That’s how we need to be thinking.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
OK
Here’s a perspective from someone who deep down believes in the “green” philosophy, but has a problem voting for the party as it sits today.
THere is constant reference to “left” and “right”, and it is acknowleged by almost all the people I speak to that both National and Labour are ‘centrish’ as that is where the biggest public support can be found. This is not surprising really, as the wild swings that were characteristic of changes in Government in the 20th century wre in the end found to be counter-productive for those countries that experienced them. The underlying philosophy of the green movement is neither socialist nor conservator, it can and should be enactable into law irrespective of which side of the political continuum is in power at any point in time.
The bottom line (to me,) is that the GPANZ should occupy the DEAD CENTRE of the spectrum, and so be able to work to achieve its objectives with either of the ‘centrist’ parties. Indeed, I believe that is the place where the Maori Party should also position itself. Both these parties have policies and philosophies that are held by supporters of their basic philosophies from both sides of the continuum.
However, for better or worse, the GPANZ has become branded with the “further left than Labour” tag, through its own actions since first becoming a force in the New Zealand House of Representatives. (I’m not going to discuss the Maori party any further, I am not their constituency.) This brand positioning means that when considering giving my party vote to GPANZ, I have to take into account that I might end up seeing another “no smacking” bill come into the house – I’m a father to seven and grandfather (so far) to four; having raised children I know that there is, occasionally, a need for chastisement to go with lesser enforced disciplinary methods and abhor that Act of this Parliament. I also have to consider the potential for further Bills softening the enforcement of law and order; I don’t want graffitti in the city I live in, and I certainly don;t want it on the walls of my property. There are other issues that I might unknowingly be voting for, that are more likely to represent an extreme left view of the world than a central one, and to be honest, I don’t subscribe to the extreme left’s views.
For 26 years I had a Father-in-Law who was extreme left wing, the strongest memory of him I have is being called into my daughter’s school to be asked why she thought the Prime Minister’s name was Mrs. Cow! (Her Grandfather lived with us during the week as he worked in the London headquarters of one of the more militant Unions as an elected council member, when the six o’clock news was on TV, my children were encouraged to watch it (my daughter at the time of the offence was seven), every time Mrs. Thatcher’s face appeared on the screen my F-i-L was say “silly old cow”, I’m sure you get the drift. What my experience with him boils down to was ‘things will be very different, come the revolution’ was something he truly believe in – but in the meantime he was happy to benefit from my (his term) capitalism and live in luxury (he was true to his roots, and didn’t offer to pay for anything on the basis that my family should share what it has with the less well provided for
)
Anyway, enough of that. I’m having problems thinking about putting my x where the party the name of which reflects my beliefs, but many of the policies of which do not. I guess it’s time for me to shut up on here and leave it to you folks to do your own thing on it.
TT.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
well Obama isn’t a socialist so that might help a lot.
So maybe the greens should think seriously about a platform that is focused on creating a sustainable new zealand instead of focusing and getting distracted with issues of social justice, what actually is social justice other than some far left wing speak.
There are members within the green party that do not hold socialist views I happen to be one.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
If we share the wealth why do I need to work.
If we then all take my view point everyone dies.
Now as a green and someone who cares about the enviroment I like to look to nature for answers. However when it comes to socialism I see nothing like it in nature, if you don’t pull your weight in the herd you die.
These people who love to believe that the “Star Trek Utopian future awaits us all” are denying nature and its that very denial and belief that we are somehow seperate from nature that has us in the very position that the green party is supposed to be dealing with.
Nandor puts it best when he says the green party isn’t Left wing or Right wing its a new wing.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Alex
Are your posts a wind-up?
I don’t see the Greens “implement(ing) solutions in a timely matter”. I see them grandstanding about environmental issues, but putting most of their energy into social policy.
>>It’s not good enough to say “What problems? I can still find one or two apparent scientists on the net who don’t agree with the IPCC?.
There are many people who agree with AGW and disagree with the IPCC, let alone those who disagree with both, of which there are many. It is not good enough for you to jump to conclusions, and impose ineffective “solutions”.
>>More and more people are coming to recognise that time is up on the way we’ve traditionally wasted and abused our natural resources to run our economies and our society.
>>There will always be those who hark back to the good old days of cheap oil.
There will always be those who hark back to living in caves.
>>They would prefer to drive their cars into oblivion than face the facts that we need to live sustainably.
If Telslas were available here, I’d buy one tomorrow. There are cheaper electric cars coming soon. That problem solved, but keep your head buried in the sand if you so wish. I’ll be passing you at 100 kmph….
>>For those people the next few years are going to be an uncomfortable.
Not for me, it isn’t.
Now, the Greens COULD receive as many votes as Labour. However, in order to do that, you need to refocus on the New Zealand environment and take a realistic position on matters social and economic.
The far left is dead. People don’t want it. Build a bridge and get over it.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
can you release my post please…
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I see nothing like it [Socialism] in nature
It might be that you’re not looking hard, or that you’re just looking the wrong way. But animals look after each other on a regular basis, and work together on collective projects for the common benefit. They even co-operate between species – I’ve seen on several occasions species working together to protect the young or weak of another species. Of course, we can’t simply look at nature and say this is how we should do it; we have moral and political philosophy to to grapple with these problems. But your seemingly blanket assertion is contradicted by many counterexamples.
And the assertion that the Greens are “far left” is ludicrous. They very much support the existence capitalism and private enterprise (of course operating under some constraints, but every government does this). Far left would be advocating the collective ownership of the means of production, and many other things.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
The UN wants to lift food tarrifs and biofuel subsidies.
What say you, intelligent Greens?
And how about this:
Link carbon taxes to global temperature. If the temperature rises, the tax is charged. If temperature stablizes, the tax rate is stable. If it decreases, we get rebates. Render the original tax neutral by compensatory reductions in income and company tax.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I say ‘at long last’. Tarrifs and Subsidies distort the market.
Another reason we should remove the effective subsidies on use of the New Zealand commons and impliment a market based carbon trading system.
Im a green member and alot of my opinions are further right than National, not that that is really saying much these days. But the Green party, despite all the watermelons, is the only party with any rational policy in terms of the continued functioning of human socety. Even national doesint beleive in the market, they bark at labour for over regulating the market yet history shows that what they want is corporate welfare, they care very little for the free market or even a functional market so long as it lines their and their budies pockets.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
One wonders why other parties are expected to have policies on a sustainable economy, environment protection/conservation of resources, when the Greens are being criticised by people for also having “social policies” as well.
The fact is political parties are not one issue/interest but have a whole of government pogramme.
Society itself is something to be preserved and without a whole of society programme a party cannot really function as a representative of the people in parliament. An economy is dependent on the education and “healthy housing” health of its citizens as much as the physical environment.
I suppose those who only trust (or advocate for) the market and the rofit motive of private capital are as at sea on this as they are on what they recognise as the other side of “Green” issues.
When media such as the Herald (given the blatant hostility towards Greens in their Friday pre election editorial in 2005) call for a centrist Greens just focused on environment issues, one has to question their goodwill. I suppose their opinion on the issues such as legisaltion before parliament and proposals which add costs for business and consumers will reveal more about whether they are trying to jump on the bandwagon, to offer lip service to placate the public disquiet while protecting their “real friends” in business and politics.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I support free trade without tariff barriers – though I would bring in a carbon in production tariff/tax on goods in inter-national trade.
We need to bring this “Kyoto? into the (WTO) world trade system. The most efficient (low emission) producers being advantaged in each industry. This should encourage both research and also investment in modern technology.
I would also prefer a carbon based tax domestically.
As for bio-fuel subsidies, the problem is that rising oil cost will make the subsidies unnecessary and only rising food prices will transfer the land back into food production. Thus all the more reason to encourage investment in Third World farming by allowing free trade.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
yes, the ‘carbon in production’ idea is a great one, ive been mulling it over for awhile, but getting the public to accept a proposal that will increase the cost of almost all goods in the short turn may be a chalenge. It would help NZ in many ways if we ever accually impliment a trading schemme. plus it wouldint distort the market, it would halp the market find proper equilibrium, it wouldint really be a tarff so much as a removal of the subsidies foreign non-kyoto countries recieve.
The larhist problem would be evaluating the carbon emmisions of production of goods though, very expensive, even at a very generalised level, unles one could convince the UN to do it.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
What a pleasant change to see a real discussion on frogblog again, without that small band of repetitive hecklers dominating!
I am interested that the old chestnut of “the Greens should stick to the environment and leave social issues alone” is being brought up yet again !
My response to that, as a long time Green, is to repeat what turnip28 said: “Nandor puts it best when he says the green party isn’t Left wing or Right wing its a new wing.”
Our position is consistently “Green”, which in some ways may have the appearance of being “lefter than Left” (and also, in some ways the appearance of being “righter than Right”). However, we are not “Left” or “Right”. We always start from a GREEN perspective.
For example:
We humans, individually and collectively, live as temporary inhabitants on a finite Planet which we SHARE with all the other lifeforms. As good citizens, parents and as “good tennants” (not owners!) we need to leave our home inhabitable for those that come after.
Frankly we (collectively) are not doing a very good job of this! In fact we are doing an increasingly bad job to the extent that that we are causing the deaths of many of our own species, and even endangering our own future ability to survive as individuals and as a species), and are completely wiping out many other species, seemingly without thought, in the process.
Much of this mayhem stems from the pursuit of MONEY which is an artificial construct, originally created as a tool for a more effective exchange of goods (than barter was). Unfortunately money has increasingly taken on a status that makes it more important than human lives (and vastly more important than the lives of other species with which we share this planet).
This is just one example. I could go on … but it is the perspective that is important not the details!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
So the Greens don’t see themselves as left of Labour or as Labour’s lap-dog. But the Electorate does. So who’s right.
Why the Greens are, of course!
Apart from one day every three years…..
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
The greens are Liarbour lap poodles. Fact.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
d4j is a ‘barker’. fact..
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)