They must be dreaming
08wire has a video that reckons Helen Clark and Jeanette Fitzsimons dream the same dream. It’s a shame that Helen Clark doesn’t do much about it when she wakes up. The video says that Labour is ‘against poverty, against waste, against pollution… against excess’. That’s certainly true of its rhetoric, but so far its actions have been pro-climate change, pro-excessive motorway projects, pro-wasteful deforestation, pro-polluting our waterways and, at times, pro-leaving behind the children of beneficiaries as it tries to shore up its ‘mainstream’ vote.
I’m inclined to put together a video of edited highlights of Helen and John Key agreeing on, well, most anything, but I don’t think I could keep it to just 44 seconds like 08wire did for Jeanette and Helen.
The first two comments below the post kind of sum up the debate best for me. George Darroch notes ‘Feel good nonsense. You have a nice soundbite.’ He then links to what Jeanette Fitzsimons actually says.
Meanwhile r0b sums up the confused position many Labour Party supporters are finding themselves in where they are supporting a party they hope will eventually do the right thing while also realising that there is another party out there that is already doing it.
Good stuff. I’m a member of the Labour Party, but for policy I’m more Green. I’ve donated to the Greens, and voted for the Greens. Locally in our electorate we try and work with the Greens.
r0b, it’s simple. You can join here.
July 16th, 2008 at 2:43 pm
Both asleep.
July 16th, 2008 at 3:27 pm
Labour is constrained by the failure of all on the centre-left to communicate their values and vision for New Zealand to the wider community and gain support for it sufficient to overcome the post-election bashing a new labour-lead government gets from the business community.
If the parties supporting the present government won enough seats, Labour, in particular, would not be as sensitive to programs hostile to its own aims and goals.
July 16th, 2008 at 3:29 pm
Hey Frog
Cheers but I’m not confused at all. In my opinion Green issues need to be advanced in every party, not just one. If I can help Green policy to go more “mainstream” within Labour then I think that’s a useful contribution.
Also, Labour lets me work for the Left agenda more effectively. Love the Greens to bits, but in my part of the country you’re not spectacularly well organised, whereas Labour has an effective team and tools I can plug in to.
So, I appreciate your frustration with Labour. You guys have been right on the environment for decades, Labour is only just waking up, and is acting far too slowly. I agree! But from my point of view working within Labour is the most effective option.
Hope that any Greens that see Labour as “the enemy” can get over it. We need each other…
July 16th, 2008 at 3:33 pm
Oh c’mon frog, play fair. Almost every time Helen and John Key agree on stuff, Helen says it first. It’s hardly her fault that John can’t do ideas of his own.
And you well know that working together we’ve cut poverty around here, improved the lot of the disadvantaged, started (yes, I accept only started) to face the challenge of climate change, and so on. You and us together, frog!
Go on, turn that frown upside down. Just for a moment. Doesn’t it feel good to feel good sometimes.
July 16th, 2008 at 3:37 pm
That bit “against excess” you’ll note goes BOOM… I think that’s their dig about where the Greens and Labour differ
July 16th, 2008 at 3:48 pm
I tell you what 08wire; you get rid of that ridiculous LPG campaign that insinuates Labour’s empty rhetoric on the environment is somehow linked to the Greens’ long standing commitment and action on the environment, or even better, get your friends at Labour to demonstrate by action rather than speech some real commitment to the environment (the Emissions Trading Scheme would be a good place to start), and then I’ll stop bagging you for tarnishing our Green reputation by association.
And I’ll smile.
In the meantime I’m going to keep calling you for greenwashing a grey Labour party.
July 16th, 2008 at 4:01 pm
Dearest Frog
If you care about the issues you will advance them any way you can. If you care about the parties then you’ll worry about “our green reputation” and whether it is getting “tarnished”.
You haven’t become so institutionalised that you worry more about the parties than the issues, have you Frog?
July 16th, 2008 at 4:04 pm
Oh, frog frog frog.
I think your own party’s claim is that your long standing commitment to the environment (which I heartily salute) shamed Labour into any and all of its action. I pretty much agree with that, no matter what the current Labour leadership claims.
So Labour action (such as it is so far) and Green principles ARE related, and you are on the path to victory in your number one issue area. Be happy about that - I know at least some senior Greens who are. To be sure, you haven’t made it just yet, but you’re on the path. That’s a good thing for you, and you should be justifiably proud.
Yes, some of Labour’s action is weaker than you’d like - weaker actually than I would like. So step in and get dirty and make it better. I’m confident that’s Russell’s stance - and I for one look forward to him succeeding.
On Monday we’ll post what we think the next step on the path to policy success might look like for the Greens - if you both play hard and play ball. We think you’ll like what we’re predicting.
So stay tuned frog. And give yourself a treat - try remembering the good we’ve all done, as well as the good we’ve yet to do.
July 16th, 2008 at 4:38 pm
You get ‘em, Frog
08Wire
08Wire implies the rugged, individualistic, non-dependent, do-it-yourself kiwi attitude. What on earth has that got to do with your paternalistic, socialist party?
July 16th, 2008 at 4:41 pm
>>try remembering the good we’ve all done,
Hilarious.
Let me see now - EFA (disaster), smacking (disaster), environment (SFA), Buy Kiwi Made (Beyond laughable)
July 16th, 2008 at 4:45 pm
>>Oh, frog frog frog
You Greens really are suckers for punishment. Why on earth do you put up with this patronising Labour clownfest?
July 16th, 2008 at 4:56 pm
Yes, you go BluePeter! Call the Greens names! Kick sand in their face! Insult their intelligence! That way they’re bound to choose you?!
You better hope you stay up above 46-47%, because if you dip below there I reckon you guys are in the schtuck.
July 16th, 2008 at 4:58 pm
Paternalistic BP? We’re not the party that has supported legislation saying who we can sleep with, who we can marry, what clothes we can wear in public and who we can associate with, the National Party is! Let’s see. No civil unions, no prostitution reform, outlawing the clothes people can wear on the street or who we can associate with. Oh, and while we’re at it, the National Party will come out tomorrow in support of Labour’s hideous Immigration Bill, which will not only destroy the human rights of immigrants, but citizens as well. And you say that we are the paternalistic, social engineers???
Yeah, right!
July 16th, 2008 at 5:58 pm
“No civil unions, no prostitution reform, outlawing the clothes people can wear on the street or who we can associate with. ”
I see nothing wrong with that. At least our society would have retained some of the values that made us (and indeed, the rest of the Western World) great.
July 16th, 2008 at 6:41 pm
>>That way they’re bound to choose you?!
Couldn’t give a toss. But then I’m not facing a landslide defeat
>>the national Party
I’m not National Party, but if they get rid of Labour, they’ve got my (strategic) vote.
>>I reckon you guys are in the schtuck
If that did happen, MMP would be toast. How long do you think a government with the Greens, Maori and NZFirst wagging the Labour dog would last?
You’d be lucky if you had any party left. In a peverse way, I’m hoping you do win.
July 17th, 2008 at 12:29 am
08wire:
Generally, the Green MPs have been doing an amazing job at this already, despite the tendancy of many members to try and catch up on their sleep whenever the Greens start talking about a serious issue instead of bagging the leader of the opposition.
Frankly, the only way I could see for the Party to be any more effective inside Parliament is to get a bigger share of the vote
john-ston:
What values are those? Bigotry, sexism, and social orthodoxy? Not to mention surrender of sovereignty, racism, and retraction of civil liberties from the Immigration Bill…
You seem to have missed the point that whether you like those ideas or not, they’re all much more paternalistic than the few controversial laws the Green Party has worked with the government on.
Personally, I’m really crossing my fingers that 2008 will finally be the year Winston bows out of Parliament. All signs seem to be that Tauranga is sick and tired of him, and his party is still managing to poll consistently at about 4%.
Keep in mind too that the overhang from the Maori Party’s is likely to be pretty central to the election results too- National could potentially recieve quite close to 50% of the vote and still be unable to form the government.
July 17th, 2008 at 12:33 am
errr, that last statement was addressed to BP. That’s what happens when I comment while I’m low on sleep I guess.
July 17th, 2008 at 12:52 am
I see nothing wrong with that. At least our society would have retained some of the values that made us (and indeed, the rest of the Western World) great.
There was nothing “great” about bigotry and authoritarianism (moral or otherwise), and I am exceedingly glad that they have been eroded and undermined. The state has no business in my relationships, no business in my bedroom, and no business in my wardrobe.
July 17th, 2008 at 8:52 am
Probably meant more of the ‘enlightenment’ stuff than anything…
July 17th, 2008 at 2:35 pm
“What values are those? Bigotry, sexism, and social orthodoxy? Not to mention surrender of sovereignty, racism, and retraction of civil liberties from the Immigration Bill…”
Ever since we moved away from our values (and I wouldn’t call it bigotry), we as a society have crumbled. Compare our society in the 1950s to today; back then, people had respect for property - now they do not; back then, people had respect for life - now they do not; back then, people had respect for people in general - now they do not.
July 17th, 2008 at 10:27 pm
Ari, I agree with your assessment.
I made a prediction before christmas based on a similar feeling about where the parties are heading.
I look forward to seeing how close this guess is:
http://blog.greens.org.nz/2007/12/17/pre-christmas-polls/