Jeanette launches ambush in Paraparaumu

We had been getting stories from the provinces that National MPs were telling voters that they wanted to pull out of Kyoto or that they wanted to exempt farmers from agriculture.  So Jeanette decided to find out for herself what the story was by leaping out from a coffee bar as John Key passed by on his Coastlands mall walkabout:

Jeanette and Key

“While National’s ETS policy states: ‘A well-considered carefully balanced ETS is the best tool available to efficiently reduce greenhouse gas emissions across the economy’, National candidate Chris Tremain told a meeting at Wairoa that National would reassess what obligation agriculture should carry under the ETS.

“Of further concern, is Otago candidate, Jacqui Dean telling audiences that National will not include agricultural emissions in the ETS at all, but will make other taxpayers foot the bill instead – despite National’s minority select committee report on the ETS stating ‘National does not believe the agricultural sector can or should be excluded from this bill, as it is such a large contributor to New Zealand’s emissions’.

“At the Hawke’s Bay A&P Show last week, National party activists said that National was even considering going as far as withdrawing from Kyoto, which even Australia has joined and the US is highly likely to.

“I am pleased to hear today that National is committed to the Kyoto Protocol but I am still concerned that farmers may be getting an even softer ride under the ETS than they were under the current legislation.

“It is crucial parties and the public know what alternative proposals National has to meet that challenge, and who has the correct version of the ETS according to Key,” Ms Fitzsimons says.

65 thoughts on “Jeanette launches ambush in Paraparaumu

  1. This sort of nudge, nudge, wink, wink, from the Nat candidates has been going on for some time now. Reading the farming newspapers from the provinces is a good way to keep up with what’s really being said on the ground. Nice outing.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  2. >>even considering going as far as withdrawing from Kyoto

    Wo-hoo!

    Go National!

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  3. Nothing else to do but try and ambush a party with proper policy to get NZ out of the hole the socialists have got us into.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  4. So you’re talking about the Nats policy of an emissions trading scheme, or their (not so) secret agenda to trash it after the election?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  5. GW D calls it ‘proper policy’ – shudder! All of our worst fears, confirmed!

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  6. Not “all” Greenfly….. :)

    Did Jeanette travel to Coastlands by train or car?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  7. Jeanette said she was having problems getting an appointment with John Key.

    Gee, I wonder why that might be Jeanette, perhaps he is not interested in talking to somebody who has sworn to do whatever it takes to keep the Nat’s from power.

    Does Jeanette take her orders from Clark?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  8. With stations conveniently located at each end, I’d lay money on the train.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  9. The Nats have said they won’t support the $billion state house energy efficiency initiative, have they said, or does anyone know their reasons?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  10. “Jeanette said she was having problems getting an appointment with John Key.”

    No, she said “John did not respond to my offer back in June to share with New Zealand how National would change the current ETS, nor was he prepared to debate with me and other leaders on TV, so I felt my best option was to corner him in Paraparaumu today.”

    “Gee, I wonder why that might be Jeanette, perhaps he is not interested in talking to somebody who has sworn to do whatever it takes to keep the Nat’s from power.”

    He refused in June after actually saying he wanted to discuss the ETS with Jeanette. Then he conspired with Helen to shut everyone else out of the debates.

    “Does Jeanette take her orders from Clark?”

    As much as your Rodney does from Key.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  11. “The Nats have said they won’t support the $billion state house energy efficiency initiative, have they said, or does anyone know their reasons?”

    Smith gave two reasons. He said it was inefficient, but didn’t say why. He also said it was unfunded by Labour because he couldn’t find it in the PREFU documents, though it is there. He later said National had committed $15 million a year to home insulation for state housing and announced $35 million for an upgraded solar water heating scheme. But the $54m funding needed to insulate and provide clean heat for all remaining state houses over five years was won by the Greens in the last budget round.

    I can only assume this is “not invented here syndrome”, not to mention that Smith has problems either knowing or telling the truth.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  12. Energy efficiency is inefficient?
    Hmmm I might have to go away and think about that one for a while!
    As a ‘stimulate the dead economy spending initiative’ I thought it might quite appeal to them.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  13. Jesus Christ!!!! You Greens just don’t get it, you are playing with my money. If I want my house insulated I will pay for it myself. I don’t want anyone else paying for it and I don’t want to pay to insulate anyone elses house. Get your scaly green hands out of my wallet.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  14. Bryan – the greens found here in the pond have hands that are smooth and moist, rather than ‘scaly’ (it’s a common misconception). If you want roads, will you pay for them yourself? Electricity? Police protection? Just curious.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  15. big bro – forgive my naivety, but you’re Kiwiblog’s Big Bruv, right?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  16. Not being on a benefit i.e. working, I do pay for electricity myself, a foreign concept to Green Party supporters I know.

    Happy to pay road tolls for decent motorways – I live 10 minutes from work. When I do use the car I pay that little thing called petrol tax, GST, ACC etc ??? Again I know Green Party voters all use public transport and probably struggle with this concept – another form of tax-funded benefit.

    Happy to pay tax for the police and a decent armed forces. Keep the crims, protestors and other layabouts from stopping me getting on with business.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  17. so bryan,you’ll pay for what you want, and not waste your hard earned lucre on anyone else in society, no matter how needy or unable to provide for themselves (there are those less able than yourself, presumably) Are you a heartless chap?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  18. BP said: Did Jeanette travel to Coastlands by train or car?

    She travelled by train BP. I know because I was involved in making the arrangements.

    Always pushing for an attack line, aren’t you BP. Green MPs travel by train or bus (or in the case of at least Keith and Russel, cycle) where the travel time is reasonable and.or the public transport services exist.

    Of course they have to travel by private car or air (the least sustainable options) frequently as well. That is an indictment on existing public transport, not on Green MPs.

    But with the economic downturn and decreased government expenditure options, an Auckland-Wellington bullet-train won’t be an option in the near future. More’s the pity, so we’ll all still have to fly when our work takes us there.

    Or will the private sector come to the party and out of their generosity build a line for one for us BP?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  19. Private cars are only slightly less sustainable than scheduled bus services. Unless three people share the ride then the bus is definitely less sustainable than the private car. This is substantially due to the completely different responses from car and bus buyers following the ’70s fuel price shocks. Car buyers damanded and received substantial fuel economy improvements. Bus (and train) buyers rested on their laurels and continue to trade on a redundant perception of greenness that nowadays is little more than greenwash.

    Fortunately companies such as UPS and Fedex are driving some of the most important developments in urban commercial vehicle environmental advancements. Volvo, Mercedes and Allison have upsized those same initiatives to the ten tonne category so bus buyers can walk the walk instead of merely talking the talk, at a price, as one would expect for new technology. But with PT users reputation for having short arms and deep pockets the big question is where will the money come from to green the bus fleet?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  20. “Unless three people share the ride then the bus is definitely less sustainable than the private car.” :oops: If three people share the car ride, then the bus is definitely less sustainable than the private car.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  21. Sad refection on Greens marketing skills that their co-leader has to “leap” out of a coffee shop to grap any headlines. Pathetic.

    Where are the features and benefits of the ETS? Cant find any on the Green web site!

    Surely if the Greens had the courage of their convictions that the ETS is a beneficial price to pay (plus hace 100% faith in a victory for Labour at the polls) they would have Jeannette standing on a “soap box” in the mall shouting how good the ETS will be for the voters.

    Instead she tries to grab headlines in a negative, and some would say underhand, manner. A stunt that only drew headlines (in the electronic mail services anyway) on Stuff. And then only in the headline not the story.

    Cant see many voters changing to a Green vote with that sort of negaticve behaviour.

    Except for a negative headline from Bradford decrying the National scheme to support recently made redundant workers, she has been making few waves.

    Well Sue time to stand up and have a go at Labour for their redundancy support scheme.

    The one which is basically the same as Nationals BUT is only for dual income families.

    Any single income family is out of luck.

    Go Sue, get some headlines.

    When will the Greens ever learn about marketing? You know features and benefits and all those things that will make the voters give the Greens a double tick?

    So far, except for their excellent billboards, it has been sadly absent.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  22. Gerrit – “When will the Greens ever learn about marketing? ”
    I think it happened a few months back (or hadn’t you noticed? The ‘ordinary folk’ in my part of the world certainly have and comment on the ‘green message’ frequently.) Softly, softly, catchee monkey. For all that, with billboards like those, what more do you need to do :-)

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  23. You really don’t have a clue. You can find one in all the coverage of Winston, which itsn’t exactly about all his positive policy positions. When you let the media know that you’re launching something, their only question is, will there be a stunt? If the answer is no, they don’t show up. We talk more positively about our programme than most, but that doesn’t get cut through in the media, so you don’t hear about it. Perhaps if people stopped watching the shows currently put on TV, a change might occur. Sadly, coverage is headed in the opposite direction.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  24. Gerrit – in case you haven’t noticed, Clark and Key have conspired to get the media focus almost solely on them, and the media ahve bought into this. TV3 cancelling the Leaders’ Debate because they would not front if other Party leaders were there was the most obvious example. And not how the NZ Herald is doing a “Clark/Key” number each day, but no other Party is having their Leaders’ diary profiled in this manner.

    Key refuses to front with Jeanette on climate change (or on any other issue for that matter) – how else do expect she should have put the challenge to him. Jeanette is not going to be shouting from the rooftops about how good the ETS is because it is not good. The Greens backed it as a “better than doing nothing” option, and are actually very critical of it in several respects.

    As for Labour’s welfare package, it is appallingly discriminatory. It is contrary to the NZ Bill of Rights Act, in that it discriminates on the basis of employment status – i.e. “They will have to have been in the workforce for at least five years to be eligible.”

    This leaves people who have been out of the workforce for periods ineligible. For example, construction workers and those who work on temporary assignments throu temp agencies (people in both these categories will almost never have five years in the workforce without periods of unemployment) will not get the partner-non-means-tested allowance.

    It also discriminates against young people who have not had sufficient time since finishing study to have been five years in the workforce – again in contravention of the NZBORA.

    And it discriminates against those who have chosen to take time off work to care for children, but have been back in work for less than 5 years (mainly women).

    I suspect the reason the Greens haven’t commented yet is that National is scheduled to release further detail of theirs today, and it would be better to address both of them together, comaparing them with what the Greens propose.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  25. >>She travelled by train BP. I know because I was involved in making the arrangements.

    Nice to see people walking the talk. Good-oh.

    >>Always pushing for an attack line, aren’t you BP.

    Yes. And remind me what is it you do?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  26. >>will the private sector come to the party and out of their generosity build a line for one for us BP?

    No, because a bullet train would be a titanic waste of money.

    But feel free to start a rail company yourself. If you can make the numbers work, I’m sure you’ll have venture capital lining up.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  27. Bryan “If I want my house insulated I will pay for it myself”
    These are state houses so they are ‘your’ house. It seems to me that spending tax $$ on this is way more sensible than spending them on hospitals, power stations, power pylons etc that are the consequences of the poor thermal performance of what is the satus quo. I’d say ‘you’ pay either way.
    You are welcome to set up an insulation company and actually benefit form it.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  28. But that still leaves ‘us’ to pay for the hospitals etc. I hate tax as much as you do, and I know those houses should have been built properly to start with,but selling them won’t fix the problem. I am a landlord and there is NO incentive for me to insulate rental properties.
    I’d rather my tax $$ go towards fixing the cause of the problem than wasting them on the results of the problem.
    Inefficiency offends me, it needs sorting, fixing it is a good investment on many levels.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  29. Sorry, have to jump in here. Why do you “hate tax”? I’m with you on “Inefficiency offends me” – that it does, greatly – but surely tax itself is not inherently a hateful thing? It’s just an easy means of sharing the burden of providing those services that we collectively need, out of individual contribution, innit? The “price” to pay for being in a society. Tax isn’t “those bastidges in gubbmint stealing my money” – it’s just the bit that gets taken out before I get to my money. If I want more of that part I can get it through motivating for a raise/training/getting a different job/working harder… there are lots of options.

    Now before I am widely misinterpreted:
    – I am strongly in favour of eliminating inefficiency in government spend and making sure the tax take is wisely spent. Of course there are vastly divergent views on how that should take place, there’s the nub of our political problem. This should primarily be the job of the bureaucracy though.
    – I personally pay a fair bit of tax as I’m sure I’m verging on being a “rich prick” in some people’s eyes at least. (I prefer “comfortably middle class, but with modest requirements” :)
    – National claims to be inherently more efficient than Labour but so much of that view is ideologically based it’s hard to assess. Considering the whole problem (not just the money), I would score them both poorly.
    – The Spondre’s of the world seem to believe that individual will is the source of all goodness, which view is rather obvious drivel. If we were so damn good at managing the whole by solely benefiting the parts the world would not look like it does today.

    “Less tax” has little appeal to me. “More community” is far better as a present goal, “a better world”, “genuine progress” and “greater social resilience” in the longer term – but the major parties aren’t so good at those bits.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  30. There are already funding projects to retro fit houses with insulation. Charitable trusts, such as the Sustainability Trust in Wellington, receive funding from EECA, DHBs, PHOs, city councils etc. to retro fit houses with insulation, most of the funding only discounts the cost of insulation to make it affordable; some of the houses insulated are means tested and are not state houses, land lords/ladies also get discounts to retro fit rental properties. Funding from the health sector helps pay fully or discount the cost of insulation to those with medical problems that require a warm, dry home.

    There are so many benefits to society having warm, dry, healthy homes. It will reduce the amount of people away sick from work and school improving productivity (and possibly education levels ;-) ), reduce the amount of patients seeing doctors and hospital visits which in turn reduces health funding, it will reduce electricity consumption which will help reduce demand and electricity rates, reduce the need for more electricity production and infrastructure.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  31. toad,

    Media exposure is not marketing.

    Regarding the Labour and National schemes for the recent unemployed are both as bad as each other. But where is Sue to shoot down the Labour one? She did the National one.

    As a self employed, we once again dont feature in any scheme. Just paid my GST. Dont even get paid to be a tax collector.

    greenfly,

    Billboards are not marketing. No matter how good they are.

    Same for Valis, media exposure and “lauches” are not marketing.

    If you rely on the media to get your message across. Than you deserve to get no exposure.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  32. “Inefficiency offends me, it needs sorting, fixing it is a good investment on many levels”

    Then Samiam I take it you have paid to insulate your rental portfolio (like I haven’t) despite there being NO incentive for you to do so!

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  33. Gerrit, Sue Bradford has put out a media release (also proposing how the Greens want to address rising unemployment) about it this morning:

    … we also believe [Labour's] plan discriminates against all unemployed people who have been in the workforce for less than five years, or who have had broken labour force participation, for example because of raising children.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  34. I thought that protest backfired on a number of levels, the main one being that the implication is that John Key will win the election.

    Why would you ambush someone who you feel might lose? What would be the point?

    It made Janette look desperate and John look important – important enough to follow round the countryside.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  35. Strings, no I haven’t, but any work I do on them always brings that part of the house up to spec. It’s a shame there isn’t a better tax deductibility on it to make it worth while for landlords to do better.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  36. There are no limits to “worthy” causes the government could spend money on. I imagine in an ideal Green Party world the government ( led by the Green Party of course) would control all personal income and expenditure. The government would decide what was worthy and good for the citizens and what was not.

    We would all work on organic farms, have group hugs every morning anbd travel by electric train or government operated bus to work. There would be no personal transport, no private property, no white flour, no sugar, no tobacco (though lots of dope), surgery would be banned and homeopaths would replace GP’s.

    All foreign ownership of property would be banned, no foreign investment allowed, all Australian banks nationalised.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  37. Considering the ideal Green Party New Zealand I was suddenly gripped by uncontrollable panic: what if it actually came true. Would I need to start making my own vodka from organic potato crop, because being permanently drunk would be my only way of coping.

    I shared my fears with a colleague who reminded me of what happened when the Alliance were in co-allition with Labour: implosion and destruction under the weight of reality. Perhaps a single term of a Labour -Green coallition would be best in the long term after all.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  38. “Same for Valis, media exposure and “lauches” are not marketing.”

    Media exposure was the point of the exercise. It got Jeanette and climate change on the news and in all the papers at a time when the media are distracted entirely on Key, Clark and Winston. No way that is bad.

    “It made Janette look desperate and John look important – important enough to follow round the countryside.”

    You must be kidding. Key is important, no point in denying that. And the coverage has been great. The angles I’ve read are on the two faced nature of the Nats on the ETS, the fact that the old parties have shut out the MMP parties from important debate, and some articles even recalled Rod Donald jumping Brash over the Brethren fiasco, reminding people who the Nats really are. I wish this sort of thing would happen every day between now and the election.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  39. Bryan Spondre Says:
    October 31st, 2008 at 2:32 pm

    > We would all work on organic farms, have group hugs every morning anbd travel by electric train or government operated bus to work. There would be no personal transport, no private property, no white flour, no sugar, no tobacco (though lots of dope), surgery would be banned and homeopaths would replace GP’s.

    If I believed that, there’s no way I’d vote Green. Thankfully I know that you’re just imagining things.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  40. I would at *least* need coffee. And I’m quite sure we wouldn’t need to give up sex though…um right?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  41. Kahikatea- no just extrapolating current Green Party policy i.e.

    pro public transport , anti private transport, anti roads

    anti foreign ownership

    pro alternative therapies including twisting Labours arm into funding policy advisors and reports on it.

    pro increasing welfare payments and income transfer

    anti GE modification

    anti food choice

    etc etc

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  42. Valis – it would have to be organic,free trade coffee grown locally so probably no coffee as we can’t grow it locally

    sex would only permissable if it was not classified as exploitation by the green politburo – as all men are rapists in Green think only lesbians would have sex (and that of course would be sans dildo)

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  43. Kahikatea is right, you’re definitely imagining things. The most PC thing imaginable is organic, free trade coffee from East Timor (available at Common Sense Organics) and we’ll drink it while singing The Internationale and having any sex kinky enough to be considered depraved by some demonstrably sane and upright independent authority – yourself for instance.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  44. Valis,

    Trouble with your “media exposure” is that it is not a controlled message.

    Your interpretation is fastly different than say BP’s.

    Because you dont control the message you cant target the outcome.

    It got the greens about 2% coverage in the papers and a little reaction from the people in the mall at the time.

    Would it persuade any voter?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  45. Yes, yes, mediated comms vs unmediated comms, I know the difference. You need both. And to underestimate the importance of mediated comms is a big mistake in politics. The name of the game in the last two weeks for both types is to remind people that you are there, as there are still a frightening number of undecided’s and soft votes that can be swayed by the last thing they hear. 2% of the papers and 6pm news is way better than 0%. There is no media manager in a political campaign that would argue.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  46. >> 2% of the papers and 6pm news is way better than 0%

    Not if it helped John Key look more leader-like, which in my opinion, it did….

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  47. “John Key … more leader-like”

    You’re taking the piss, aren’t you?

    Leaders need to have a compelling vision, and the (for want of a better word) mana, to be able to inspire people to follow them to achieve it. JK, to be charitable, is a “mostly harmless”, “me too”, “like them only better” model of self-serving git.

    Leader my arse.
    http://www.despair.com/leaders.html

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  48. fwwog .. KYOTO is old … so old fwwog
    so old that it deaded fwwog,
    KYOTO whers that fwwog
    its old like the dead snapper fish what nobody like,
    Winston voting NAT,
    MAORI independent,
    put yous feet web things up fwwog,

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  49. >>Leaders need to have a compelling vision

    New Zealand not turning into an economic basket case is good enough for me.

    What’s the Green vision? Voting for a kid on a wharf.

    Whatever….

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  50. rainman Says:
    – National claims to be inherently more efficient than Labour but so much of that view is ideologically based it’s hard to assess. Considering the whole problem (not just the money), I would score them both poorly.

    “Less tax” has little appeal to me. “More community” is far better as a present goal, “a better world”, “genuine progress” and “greater social resilience” in the longer term – but the major parties aren’t so good at those bits.

    Quite enjoyed your posts rainman.

    You are right about the tax…we should all expect to be generating it, handing it over to the government, and trying hard not to be beneficiaries ourselves.

    I’d probably rate Labour as better at encouraging economic/business variety within our society (ie tax generation), but inherently more wasteful due to too much encouragement of beneficiarism.

    National on the other hand, I would rate as less effective in generating productivity via business creativity, but more efficient in spending the little tax they generate.

    For the first time ever I can’t see clearly which party/coalition will improve this country.

    Too many people pulling in too many directions.

    Help me out here…which way should I vote? (assuming that my bottom line is that I will never vote for any party that accepts a more liberal cannabis stance)

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  51. “What’s the Green vision? Voting for a kid on a wharf. ”
    Way to miss the message, BP. Actually, scratch that – you’re normally a more intelligent commenter, so you’re just being disingenuous as a means of avoiding the debate. Lift your game, won’t you?

    “Quite enjoyed your posts rainman.”
    Thanks, we aim to please.

    “For the first time ever I can’t see clearly which party/coalition will improve this country.
    Too many people pulling in too many directions.
    Help me out here…which way should I vote? (assuming that my bottom line is that I will never vote for any party that accepts a more liberal cannabis stance)”

    I can relate to the problem, we’re certainly not spoiled for choice. I don’t have a strong anti-cannabis view (not in favour, just not top of my list) so it’s easy for me. The Greens aren’t perfect, and to be honest much though I admire Jeanette I don’t know I’d want her running the country. But they’re important enough an influence that they’ll get my party vote. But if the cannabis issue is too much for you to vote Green (it’s not been front of policy of late, to be fair), yet you’re in the general neighbourhood, I’d think your options are Labour or Maori. (Only including people who stand a realistic chance of being >5%). Tariana’s not keen on the dole either :)

    Remember it’s a “lesser of evils” type decision, for the most part.

    Candidate vote is more tricky. I have no idea who to vote for there. I’m in ECB, so could vote Sue B, but trust me, she ain’t gonna win around here. I won’t vote Murray McCully for as long as my bum points to the ground, and the Labour candidate is a relative unknown, so won’t win either. I hope you have an easier candidate choice! (And if you have any advice on my candidate vote, I’d love to hear it…)

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  52. WTF? Cannabis is your bottom line? Sheesh.

    Even Dunne isn’t blocking medical use any more. So you’ve got left NZF and National? I’m not even sure what parties are still so backward as to deny medical use. Labour would support plenty liberalisation. Is growing hemp a problem for you?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  53. Hemp seems like a nice fibre. I have no problem with it being grown.

    My cannabis concerns are based around the peculiar view developing these days towards law and decriminalisation.

    It just seems odd to me that we should have “pseudo-laws”. ie: if cannabis is illegal, then it’s illegal. The whole concept of “decriminalisation” seems a wishy washy nonsense to me.

    Similarly with the S59 repeal…why make a law that says it’s illegal to hit your kids, but then add a rider saying “but we expect the police to turn a blind eye if it is inconsequential”

    I don’t understand why there seems to be so much pretense. If someone chooses to do something illegal, then they can take the rap for it.

    There should not be an expectation that laws are there for everyone else except us.

    Maybe this is why our politicians are so duplicitous….because they know that no-one has clearly defined standards any more.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  54. greengeek – can’t you differentiate between de-criminalisation and legalisation? To me, it’s degrees of punishment. Short term and long term. Fair and unfair.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  55. Yes, decriminalisation seems the most minimal step called for and would make a huge difference to people’s lives. In the States its compared to a parking ticket. Not allowed, but not something you need be hauled off to jail for either. Seems entirely sensible as opposed to calling half of Kiwis criminals. But your statement was much stronger than that in decrying any liberalisation at all, a la Peter Dunne circa 2002. How about medicinal use? Non wishy washy legalisation even?

    I don’t disagree with your concern re S59, but being entirely black and white seems sure to lead to way more trouble regardless of where you draw the line. The parent/child relationship is so intimate that circumstances become very relevant to determining whether an assault has occurred. I am uncomfortable with the idea of leaving such decisions up to the police – one of the main arguments for decriminalising cannabis is that police are known to use it to do investigations they otherwise wouldn’t be able to do – but in this case it seems the only feasible approach.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  56. One other aspect of decriminalising rather than legalising is that you are likely to see the same pattern that has occured with traffic offence prosecutions. Serious offences that must be prosecuted in a court of law have increased by 25% since 2000. But infringement offences where payment of the fine is prima facie admission of guilt have increased by 100% for the offence of exceeding a speed limit and 200% for other infringement offences.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  57. Kevyn…I don’t fully understand the point you’ve made. Are you saying that traffic infringements have increased hugely since 2000? If so why?

    Was there a law change that led to the increase? Or has the population gone up significantly (which I suspect is true).

    Certainly in Auckland there are now huge numbers of drivers (particularly immigrants) who have clearly not grown up understanding our traffic culture. They just drive differently.

    I guess they are bringing habits from elsewhere, or else have not driven elsewhere at all.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>