I found an Act Party Billboard:
Monday, September 08, 2008

[edited by moderator for unnecessary abuse]
http://tinyurl.com/6r6d67

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Eredwen…
In response to your question, Samiam’s comment raises another interesting question:

samiam Says:
A sub 10% poll rating and an allergy to working with National are the main problems I can identify.

If the Green party could (hypothetically) tolerate a coalition with National, and thereby increase it’s vote beyond 10%, would you consider doing so?

It is a huge stumbling block for me that the Greens seem to remain shackled to a larger party that seems to be bleeding our productive sectors dry.

I’d love to vote Green if it was more business friendly.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Share a smelly one with us jh.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

The problem is eredwen that in these times of great change and there being a great vacuum as to how we develop a sustainable economy etc, we have a dominating group of you who come fired up with a ready made set of solutions: solutions which are mostly old and smelly.
Your favourite poly’s are dinosaurs.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

A sub 10% poll rating and an allergy to working with National are the main problems I can identify.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

samiam, (and others with similar “concerns”)

Of course I share your concerns about the Environment and the future !!!

I joined the Values Party when it formed in the Early 1970′s …

Where Greens are now has taken a lot of vision, planning and hard work, including changing the old FPP voting system to MMP so that AotearoaNZ could have a representative Government (that the Greens can be a part of)!

Currently we have only six very hard working Green MPs in PARLIAMENT.
We MUST, however, have a Spokesperson for every portfolio.
Parliament does not deal with matters concerning the Envoronment all day and every day! (and isn’t ALL human activity potentially of concern to “the Environment” ?)

To be considered seriously by the Electors our MPs must be able to give the Green point of view on ALL MATTERS …

We have intelligent educated and hard working MPs dedecated to the job. We have a network of intelligent, educated and hard working members in every Electorate in the country.

In Local Body elections we now have some sitting members.

This is what we must do to be taken seriously as a Political Party … and thus be able to speak effectively for the Planet and the Environment.

Our Number 1 Leader Jeanette Fitzsimmons (an academic who is expert in the subject) holds the Environment Portfolio …

What is your problem with this ?

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

“constantly groveling in the political leaf-litter”
great line (if a little graphic for a Green supporter-I see trotters and curly tails)

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

samiam – I think the Green MPs do see the “opportunity cost in pushing …”
but weigh it up, do it anyway, because they, like so many others who care deeply about the environment, can’t stand by and watch injustice, whether to nature or to their fellow humans. I think they are taking a realistic, humanitarian approach. It does make their path much more complex, agreed, but a simpler line (environment only) is not viable in reality. A single pole is not as stable as a tipi. Better to have 4 ‘pillars’ to hold up your temple than one. (excuse the mixing of metaphors)

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Now that’s shame eredwen. My reason for being here is the frustration I feel at the party, I feel has the best opportunity to safeguard our environment for the future, is constantly groveling in the political leaf-litter of around 5%. For me and sooo many people I talk to green issues weigh very heavily on their mind and they would LOVE to vote for an environmental party. They, and I, rate environment way above Children’s Affairs, ACC, Gambling, Community & Voluntary Sector, Economic Development, Employment, Housing, Industrial Relations, Internal Affairs, Mental Health, National Library & Archives, Racing, Regional Development, Small Business, Social Services as core reasons to vote Green. Another way to look at it is that Labour or National are the parties likely to lure votes on the above issues, what we need is the Green party to get around the cabinet table to guard the environment. The problem is that the Green party just doesn’t see the opportunity cost in pushing a socialist utopia when a centrist environmentalist stance would gain so much more leverage.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Adding to my previous post:

My comments are general for frogblog overall. They do not relate to this thread alone, and I am pleased to add that there are some remarkable exceptions to the current trend! (These exceptions are often produced by the excellent communication with visitors by other Greens.)

Well done everyone!

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

eredwen, if you take the attitude that ‘someone on the internet is wrong and I must correct them’, you’ll never get outside!

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

frog, toad, and assorted Greens and Green supporters

Some of our “guests” here seem not to have progressed beyond the 14-year-old-male stage of “smart replies for every occasion, whether appropriate or not”.

Because they can remain anonymous, they feel free from that adolescent’s fear of “making a dick of himself” in public … so the situation is even worse.

Purile behaviour, with a noticeably increasing level of adult aggression added, is the major reason that females are heavily under-represented on frogblog (and, I believe, on blogs in general).

Unfortunately despite the large Green input, frogblog is NOT the exception that it would be if “Green Behaviour” was expected (and reinforced) here.

Frankly, despite the excellent work done by “frog et al” I now find that I come here more out of a sense of duty than for any personal satisfaction, and that is rather sad.

eredwen

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

as I said before jh, there’s little point in my involvement in your crusade. Littlies Magazine sounds like a powerful force for good though
I did laugh though at your citing Family First and Farrar polls (as gospel then going on the say,
” However Sue Bradford and the Greens are hardley likely to commision a poll not in their favour are they.”
Nice!

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

That is a recent poll BTW.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

“what Kiwi parents thought (80% or so against)� mantra. Waving that dodgy flag points to a fundamentalist and I’d be wasting my time and yours trading viewpoints.

Of course proponents of Sues bill try to diminish the poll results : such as commisioned by Family First and executed by David Farrars company . However Sue Bradford and the Greens are hardley likely to commision a poll not in their favour are they.

87% of parents against the anti-smacking law
The http://www.littlies.co.nz poll asked “One year on, do you think the anti-smacking Bill has proved to be effective?” 87% said No, and a further 7% were unsure. Only 7% said it was effective.

According to their website, Littlies Magazine is the country’s fastest growing and only monthly parenting magazine. They reach more families with children 0-5 years than any other parenting magazine in New Zealand (81,000 families).

http://www.hawkesbay.co.nz/index.php/200808033091/News/Local-News/87-of-parents-against-the-anti-smacking-law.html

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

eredwen – I’m finding samiam’s reasoning and questioning fair and reasonable.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

samiam et al

Fascinating replies …
rather like trying to reason with a determined toddler …

(Maybe “what you guys need is a good smack”)?

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

jh – you don’t trust the parliamentary process. You also put words in my mouth (not a good idea when you quote me on the same page,
“almost unaminous” becomes “unaminous support” etc.)
Nevertheless, I understand your points. I enjoyed your comment,
“For one thing Labor members were coerced” and wonder what your take is on the National Party’s block vote
The rest of your opinion on what happened is just that. You are pushing a barrow and I’m not impressed with your use of the,
“what Kiwi parents thought (80% or so against)” mantra. Waving that dodgy flag points to a fundamentalist and I’d be wasting my time and yours trading viewpoints.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Author: greenfly

I do think though, that an idea that is clearly wrong would be revealed by at least some opposition from members of parliament. This idea of Sue’s got almost unanimous support from almost every MP. It should be very hard to then point to one person and say, “you forced this on us against our will” as so many of you have done.
……………..
You are disingenuous; the fact that MP’s voted for it is not the same as “no opposition” or “unanimous support”.
For one thing Labor members were coerced. They block voted (from memory). Given the speeches leading up to the first readings of “Sues” bill it is clear most MP’s didn’t support a ban on smacking. Nationals response was more “oh well, lets get on with it with these compromises and (hopefully) Labor will take the rap”. Lets face it our “elected representatives” knew what Kiwi parents thought (80% or so against) and if Bradford and co were honest they would have admitted that there was considerable doubt that mild smacking was harmful. When Dr Millichamp presented her contrarian evidence (“groundbreaking” Dunedin Study) Sue Bradford questioned her motives.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Oh, and the minor detail of good policies.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)