by frog
With all other minor parties failing to make it over the 5% threshold, the Green Party is now the undisputed number three in the House.
The only question remaining is whether or not our number 9, Kennedy Graham, will make it into parliament. With special votes and the magnifying effect of the NZ First throw away party votes, it is highly likely. This would mark a return to full strength for the Greens after the minor party bloodbath of 2005.
I am hoping that I have got the comments working properly again for new posts, and that we can take up our post election discussion here… So much for normal transmission resuming!
on the trolls and those who are unable to keep on topic
If this appears it would appear to be working
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Considering the pasting for the centre-left, growing the Green presence in Parliament by 33% (or 50% if Kennedy Graham makes it) is a real acheivement. I would have liked to have seen more – we all would – but we’re still there and we’re bigger and better than before. That will have to do for now.
On the North Shore, we have out Google Docs all lined up for the next run and maybe local council elections in two years. We won’t have to re-invent this infrastructure every three years, so we already have a head start on any future elections.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I do hope Kennedy makes it. I was lucky enough to take one of his classes last summer at Canterbury, and he has such an inspirational viewpoint. He’d be a true asset to parliament and to the greens.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Increased vote slightly.
Influence reduced to near zero.
Own goal, I’d say.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“Fingers crossed” for Kennedy Graham!
I hope enough of our Kiwi travellers, expats and other Special Voters have done their bit and “Party Voted Green”.
Kennedy has the skills and background to make a VERY valuable contribution as part of the Green Team in Parliament … especially in the potentially troubled times ahead over the next few years.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I have to agree with BluePeter. Yet again the Greens have failed to connect with ordinary New Zealanders. Dippy bill boards just didn’t cut it.
It should be very easy to make the connections between Green policies and the concerns of citizens. To use a very simple example – pitching tax rebates or signficant grants for installing solar hot water heating as saving households serious money on an ongoing basis.
But this kind of practical thinking seems to escape the Green hierarchy. Unless the party sharpens up, it will stay on the fringe.
Growing bugger all presence in Parliament by 33% still amounts to bugger all.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Bradford is easily the Green’s best asset, i think she has alot of integrity-or would like to think so. She should have been front and center in the campaign and let rip, i think she’s honest enough that she would have gotten a lot more right than wrong if given the resources. The child smackin issue should be a winner though, and got group thinked into a loser.
And if you think National arn’t going to implement some kind of conformity to the global NWO driven carbon agenda you’ve lost all yur marbles.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
>>she should have been front and center in the campaign and let rip
You wouldn’t have got over 5%.
You REALLY need to get out more, as you clearly don’t understand middle New Zealand.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Kudos to the Greens for increasing their number of seats during a strong rightward shift.
The next 3 years should prove to be interesting…
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
middle new zealand needs to be woken up, not further dumbed down.
Bill and Ben party, Roger Douglas, Britney Spears, bigger financial bubbles than great depression n a currency speculator as p.m.
brilliant times…… wat happened to the NZ i grew up in aye.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Well, I just did the sums, and you guys need another 12,000 special votes (this is without factoring in other parties) to get another seat. Ironically, National may once again be at risk of losing a seat.
I have to say congrats to you for doing well, and you just need to keep it up and not drop down in votes again (I have found over the years that a minor party does well in an election, then drops off, then does well again – NZ First and you lot are good examples).
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
>>middle new zealand needs to be woken up, not further dumbed down.
They’re awake. They just don’t like your message.
>>wat happened to the NZ i grew up in aye
It moved to Australia.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Actually, I made a mistake. I should have said another 3,500 special votes. I did the sums for ACT by accident. I think you guys might actually make it and get the ninth seat.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
12000?
That sounds a bit low – there are 200000 specials out there, so that’s only 6%. But I would have thought that we’d get 10% easily.
I mean, I know probably 20 Green specials just in my little circle.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“They’re awake. They just don’t like your message.”
Bah, i think the DSC party got two write ups in entire election, about skodas and cup cakes they were.
And it seems there was alot of foul pool being put into action on the streets from indications b4 election.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Alright, 15500 then.
Simple.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
9 Green MP’s does put a silver lining on this result. Ken will be fantastic, I saw him at a debate and was very impressed.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
What I meant was that you needed a further 3,500 votes (like I said above, the 12,000 was a miscalculation) additional above and beyond what other parties get in the specials (assuming that it is evenly distributed) to get an additional MP.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Even….
No… Not only no but HELL no. After S59 Sue Bradford is a liability with the electorate. She may be OK with Greens but she has NOT represented the environment first. She has been branded, perhaps unfairly but branded nonetheless, as a member the social policy gestapo.
The public perception of her is not entirely of her making but putting her up front now would be the end of us. I doubt if she will, in her lifetime, be able to overcome the handicap of S59. I’d like to think it possible, but I don’t.
Finally, I don’t reckon this was a “pasting”… describing it that was is wrong. What it was, was a shift of a couple of percent overall. Labour got whacked pretty hard. We picked something up. Winston First was never left of center that I recall. Consider what it would have taken to add Labour, Green and Maori and get the numbers to govern. NOT a big swing. Just enough.
Curious, for some of the more knowledgeable here to answer. Is it possible to get a situation where EITHER block could form government? It would seem so. Ambiguity in the decision may not be wrong, but it IS a curiousity to me.
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I was pleased to see during the campaign that the s59 amendment bill was not actually mentioned much. Both leaders avoided it during their debate, probably because both supported it. I thought at the time it was a bad call for the greens politically even though I agreed with the legislation, but I now it seems I was wrong about that.
I blame Winston for the National/Act government. If he had kept his cool, admitted to his mistakes instead of throwing his toys out of the cot, NZF would have got over 5% and the greens would have been part of government. He was also trying too hard to hold on to Tauranga, a lost cause, and not grow his party vote. Rimutaka was out of the question. I was the candidate there last election, and they are very conservative (on the libertarian/authoritarian axis), so would not have voted for someone like Ron Marks who abandoned his wife and children and gave the fingers in parliament. I think I lost votes just for not being married with children (though I made it clear I was heterosexual).
On the whole I think the Greens ran a professional campaign, and an increase in the party vote during a swing to the right is certainly an achievement. The only gripe I had is them knocking Winston ( a potential ally) instead of concentrating on getting votes towards the end.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“I blame Winston for the National/Act government. ”
I blame Labour, for choosing to go with NZF. I do not understand why on earth anyone would want to even consider NZF, except as a party of last resort. If there is one thing I am glad about in this campaign it is the fact that the Greens ran a very principled line on NZF.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
bj,
The answer to your query is YES! With a close result for the major parties it is possible for there to be two major blocks that could potentially form a Government.
This gives a degree of negotiating power to whichever small party/parties decide(s) to be “King Maker” … (but whatever that group decides is not forgotten by the Electorate in future elections).
The funny little group of surviving “has beens” (masquerading as serious Political Parties) is an indication of this phenomenon.
(For examples of this, Google back through the political histories of Winston Peters, Rodney Hide, Peter Dunn, Roger Douglas and you will see political coat-changing and rather large egos supported by inattentive voters!)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Just briefly re Kennedy Graham:
If the Greens get the same percentage boost (about 0.23%) from Special Votes as occurred last election, then Ken will be Green MP number 9.
National will have one less MP as a result but National/Act still has a large majority.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“It should be very easy to make the connections between Green policies and the concerns of citizens.
[...]
But this kind of practical thinking seems to escape the Green hierarchy. Unless the party sharpens up, it will stay on the fringe.”
I agree with Kotare. The Greens are perpetually consigned to 5-8% (which is near extinction if anything bad happens) if they cannot appeal outside the base.
The large majority of New Zealanders do care about the environment, healthy food, ethical foreign policy, human rights, and climate change, to name a few. But these things are not core issues for the great majority of voters, and when it comes down to it they will vote for ‘security’ issues. Health, education, economic wellbeing. The Green Party has policies that address these (although are still lacking on the hospitals and doctors side of health – something that the party needs to address). The Greens just do a terrible job in presenting these to the public.
But you have to realise, people don’t vote for the Greens as an adjunct to Labour (if we were in a Labour Alliance 99 type situation things would be different). They vote for parties in their own right, and want to see that the Greens are safe hands on all issues of importance to them.
People say the Greens are watermelons, hiding a red core behind green – they are right in a way, because the Greens have solid economic and social policies which they do very little to publicise. Sue Bradford has built a profile, fighting for youth wages, $12 etc., but it was woefully underutilised in the campaign.
The Greens have a history of running clever and beautiful campaigns. They don’t work very well. It’s time to rethink this approach, and just go for simple and straightforward, getting policies people care about out there.
Most importantly, the Greens need to work to build the ground campaign, and take lessons from Obama. Let’s run a 70 electorate strategy, and find people who the community respects and put them forward as Green representatives. Labour is so bad that by rights we should be on 15% right now. I’ll be back in NZ soon, and look forward to a plan to take that much.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Good and solid result for the Greens but not a great result. Pitty.
I can just hope we can put the brakes on government for three years (or should I rather say put the accellerator to their brakes?)
I’d like to see the Greens stay on the campaign path. Why wait three years? Get a group to continue the effort for 2011. The ads & stuff were great and the Greens can really build upon that. It will give more visibility to the people and when it comes to election time the Greens won’t have to ramp-up they will already be there.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I hope that the Greens will run full-scale campaigns in South Auckland in 2011. These electorates could be massive for them, but there obviously isn’t any awareness that every improvement to workers’ rights during the Labour administration has come through the Greens or the Progressives, NOT Labour. It’s embarrassing to see people who have far more to gain from a Green party vote than a Labour vote only giving a few hundred votes our way. Having strong candidates seeking the electorate vote would potentially boost the party vote considerably (and without sending them over to National).
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I think the main reason we are still in the 5-7% range is that we failed to convince voters that we know what to do about the economy. That was what voters needed reassurance on in this election campaign. We were ready to promote ourselves in the economy of 6 months ago, with rising oil prices and a runaway housing market. But when the tide turned suddenly, the voters wanted parties that had a reputation for answers to a wide range of economic conditions.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
>>>But you have to realise, people don’t vote for the Greens as an adjunct to Labour
Is it worthwhile for the Greens to make a strong play for the core Labour Voters — especially those that have a tinge of green? The Greens really need to be a ‘major’ party in this country for it to have any eco-environmental leadership in this world.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
>>we failed to convince voters that we know what to do about the economy.
You don’t.
You really thinks this shows you know what you’re doing?
http://www.greens.org.nz/policy/summary/economic
Where are the costings?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
>>any eco-environmental leadership in this world
You need to give that up as a goal. The world does not follow New Zealand.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Another thought, for what it’s worth. Perhaps the mooted referendum on MMP should be encouraged in the hope that an even fairer voting system could ensue. STV should be considered for the Electoral vote (Mr Dunne would probably have not survived). We should also seriously think of easing the rather high 5% threshold (to around 3%) to minimise wasted votes. Furthermore, we should re-examine the validity of the party of an electorate winner being exempt from the threshold restriction.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
>The world does not follow New Zealand.
That is a relief to hear…… especially in our new political circumstances
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
It’s true
I don’t know why people use that as a goal. Anyone who has spent anytime overseas knows what level of influence we have.
Roughly the same as Costa Rica….
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
After some number crunching, and ALL THINGS BEING EQUAL (which they never are), if the Greens get 8.2% or more of the special vote, they will likely pick up an extra list seat.
BUT Labour are very close to picking up that same parliament seat.
The Greens may well overtake National, but will also have to overtake and stay in front of Labour.
Does anybody have a link to info about how the special votes usually split for each party?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
And especially as we’re now well behind the world leaders on many issues.
The Economist has an interesting write-up on prostitution at the moment, which is very complimentary of the laws NZ has enacted. This is one area where we have led the world, with worthy results.
http://www.economist.com/world/international/displaystory.cfm?story_id=12516582
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
>>”And I wonder if in 20 years time whether there will be people who look back at 2008 and say `I am really glad I voted for tax cuts rather than future of our children’.”
Not very gracious, really.
It should read:
“And I wonder if in 20 years time whether there will be people who look back at 2008 and say `I am really glad I voted for tax cuts AND the future of our children’.”
The arrogance that you’re the only people who care about kids turns a lot of people off.
You should really drop it next time round. Focus on problems and solutions.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
It wasn’t mentioned during the campaign, but ask anyone about the Nanny-State and you will get S59 back in the first sentence.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
As opposed to your arrogance in believing that any kind of decent future is possible for all our children whilst continuing to willfully exploit finite resources, continue to ‘go for growth’ with no thought for the consequences, contaminate the atmosphere with billions of tonnes of CO2, acidify the oceans, & so on & on into oblivion.
Our ‘arrogance’ is to believe there is a better way!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
>>Not very gracious, really.
Fair comment. But it is hard to be gracious in defeat when you truly believe that we are still heading in the wrong direction, and now even more so. One is inclined to become saddened in the belief that time is fast running out for this once beautiful and bounteous planet as we know it
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
In New Zealand, we simply don’t have the sustainability problems you’re trying to make out. We have few people and significant natural resources.
>>Our ‘arrogance’ is to believe there is a better way!
That’s where we differ. I think you vastly overstate the problem, offer uncosted solutions, then you wonder why only 7% of the electorate takes you seriously.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
And we have Rodney “the UN says climate change stopped in 1998″ and his band of merry “rip up the RMA” men in a likely government, and a cohort of the same within National.
The environment isn’t something you can change back. Once it’s destroyed, the changes are often irreversable.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
>>One is inclined to become saddened in the belief that time is fast running out for this once beautiful and bounteous planet as we know it
Sure, but again, I think the problem is overstated. Key can’t destroy the planet, and he can’t rescue it.
Let’s choose our battles, eh. Water quality is a good starter for ten….
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
”And I wonder if in 20 years time whether there will be people who look back at 2008 and say `I am really glad I voted for tax cuts rather than future of our children’.”
I was astonished at that comment made by Jeanette.
Sour grapes any one? She actually attacked the NZ public!!!
I don’t know anyone who voted National because of tax cuts, Jeanette just dosen’t get it, the attitude behind her comment is why the election did not go to the left.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I think one difference between BP’s thinking and Greens’ is that he always states things in terms of NZ – “In New Zealand, we simply don’t have the sustainability problems you’re trying to make out. We have few people and significant natural resources.” whereas we are generally thinking on a more global level, as part of a wider Green movement.
Of course we’re (for now) underpopulated and have lots of space – we’re all right, Jack! Who cares about the rest of you? – but that is not the case elsewhere and if we go on polluting our waterways and soil, it won’t be forever either.
We are part of the world and have a responsibility to do our bit to treat the planet and people as well as possible.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
>>Of course we’re (for now) underpopulated and have lots of space -
I’m afraid to look on us as ‘underpopulated’ (rather than ‘not overpopulated’) worries me somewhat. It seems to imply that we have not yet reached a somehow optimum level of population and, as a corollary, should be striving to get there.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
BluePeter: “Middle New Zealand” feels a bit let down by the lies they’ve been told when you take the time to explain – and show them – what the Section 59 law change was all about.
I usually get them to read the old law and the new one and then we discuss what it really means.
“Why didn’t I read that in the newspapers!?” they ask……..
Quite. Why not….
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“I’m afraid to look on us as ‘underpopulated’ (rather than ‘not overpopulated’) worries me somewhat. It seems to imply that we have not yet reached a somehow optimum level of population and, as a corollary, should be striving to get there.”
Rubbish.
It means we don’t ham string our economy on some ideological crusade.
We can ultimately do far more for the environment by turning the ship slowly in a common sense mannor. The left would have capsized us before any real progress was made, we have a chance now to do it right.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“BluePeter: “Middle New Zealand” feels a bit let down by the lies they’ve been told when you take the time to explain – and show them – what the Section 59 law change was all about.”
More rubbish
Middle NZ can pick an ideological crusade a mile off and the anti smacking bill was one of them.
But by all means continue in your logic, it will only ensure a second term for a Key lead govt.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Have I heard this right? Has Cullen resigned today?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
>>>We can ultimately do far more for the environment by turning the ship slowly in a common sense mannor. The left would have capsized us before any real progress was made, we have a chance now to do it right.
Oh well. I hope that we can do all this nautical manoeuvring in unpolluted waters then
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
>>hey’ve been told when you take the time to explain – and show them – what the Section 59 law change was all about.
Middle New Zealand saw straight through your charade.
I know the Greens views on child discipline. Those views have been around for some time. The law change was a trojan horse to help implement those views.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
> if the Greens get 8.2% or more of the special vote, they will likely pick
> up an extra list seat.
Correction:
Assuming 7.5% of the special votes are disallowed or informal, the Greens need 8.33% or more of the (valid) special vote to pick up a seat.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
My girlfriend wanted to vote for Kennedy Graham,
so I just had to tie her up for the day,
I explained to her that politics is about power, I released her this morning only after extracting a written confession that she likes to be tied up,
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
>>We are part of the world and have a responsibility to do our bit to treat the planet and people as well as possible.
You need to choose your battles.
It’s no use pretending you can solve problems you can’t, especially if that pretending has real opportunity costs. For example, you could spend a lot of money making no difference to AGW, or you could spend more money on education.
We don’t have a money tree…..
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Chaining up girls is good fun. I liked it. I liked the feeling of power.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
>>My girlfriend wanted to vote for Kennedy Graham,
By your own standards, Peter, you have some strange friends. Is she your English teacher?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
BP
Policy is not implementation, it is policy. Whatever your expectation in terms of costing, it is clearly not appropriate to the level of a policy and providing this BS requirement at every opportunity does not enhance your credibility.
I truly do not know what you are complaining about in that policy. If it were a detailed implementation plan it’d be lacking.
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
First of all, congrats on expanding your caucus.
I don’t know Kevin Hague, but Catherine, if you’re reading this, good on you – you’re a hard worker and deserve to be in Parliament.
Dr Kennedy Graham is a great intellectual – at times, he reminds me of Ron Paul. At least for his foreign policy remarks anyway. I wouldn’t mind him being a Parliament…although that means a loss of a seat for the centre-right.
Winston’s gone, and this in itself calls for a huge celebration. The Asian communities are ecstatic. Good riddance to the xenophobe and crook.
And bye-bye to Tizard too. What a waste of space.
Back to the Greens… Yes, a return to the caucus size of pre-2005 means a 50% increase in MPs.
But, sorry to say, the biggest victory of all belongs to ACT – with a 150% increase in caucus size.
And the return of Rogernomics Part II! I can’t wait.
Alright, I’m off now to continue partying. I’ll reply to all your abuse when I’m back.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
BP
Key can’t destroy the planet, but he CAN destroy a hell of a lot of New Zealand.
With Rodney Hide and Sir Roger to help… I think I need to go to the pharmacy for some aspirin and vaseline.
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Bummer. I Voted, but a lot of greens don’t, it would seem. The Right kept their base from last time as the left faded, though you guys at least got the vote back that was on loan to Labour thanks to Winston promising to govern with the largest major in ’05 and everyone “compromising”.
Turnout in the poor seats was key for the left, and it didn’t really happen. Worse as the years go by. One might suggest Labour is far too focused on winning the middle, and Jim just can’t draw the left on his own (especially after killing the Alliance, all for a single pro-war vote, idiot, enjoying your 1 seat again, Jim?).
The Greens hold the city youth vote well enough, Labour’s got the center-left (thus driving the lefts social-conservative vote right instead of to a more economically centered Dunne and Peters).
Damn it. There it is again. The margin drives the conservative center vote right. It’s liable to kill off the Greens one day too; the Nats can survive 60% of their voters staying home one election, but you guys can’t. It’d be wise to look at that sometime.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
BP
Fixing global warming isn’t all that expensive if real costs and real money are used to do the calculations. Putting anything like a credible value on ensuring that there is a civilization for our grandchildren to be a part of here in this neck of the woods no matter what happens elsewhere… or how the climate changes… that’s hard.
Energy independence for NZ? Rodney hasn’t got any answer at all. Neither does Key. Not for the long haul.
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
BP – you have such specific advice for our party that you deliver with such certitude. I wonder if you would consider becoming a Green party member, joining our policy discussions, where many (but not all) of our policies are costed, and putting your excellent advice to proper scrutiny?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
tussock Says:
November 9th, 2008 at 4:05 pm
> Bummer. I Voted, but a lot of greens don’t, it would seem.
I understand that National and Labour put a lot of energy into making sure their supporters get around to actually voting. That’s going to be one of the things we need to work on for next time.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“I don’t know why people use that as a goal. Anyone who has spent anytime overseas knows what level of influence we have.”
Funny, but I did spend 5 years overseas, in Japan. And people there respected New Zealand because of the nuclear issue, which New Zealand did lead on. There is a special relationship between New Zealand and Kobe because the port of Kobe was the only part of Japan to follow New Zealand’s lead and ban nuclear ships.
I also heard positive reports about our racial harmony. The T of W may not have been fully honoured but having a treaty at all instead of simply using “rights” of conqest was a major step. So that’s two things New Zealand leads on. New Zealand has also led on votes for women, and the Plunket system.
It is however behind Europe and some US states on animal welfare.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I red
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
One campaign criticism from above to respond to:
As far as getting our message out goes, we spend less on advertising in print media than most other parties. The editorial bias came out promptly.
Have you noticed the two-party bias in the media over the past 3 – 4 weeks? Right down to the TV channels not running a leaders’ debate with leaders from all parties?
I went to a lot of candidates’ fora in Wellington; these were routinely not reported in media, even though media attended. Hearing from their own mouths what other parties’ candidates espoused in the way of policy and core values was very educational.
Shame most of the electorate missed out on hearing about that, ‘cos apart from one sarcastic & condescendingly reported piece in the Dompost, only Capital Times regularly did a round-up question to all the candidates.
Most of the green membership are engaged & capable of recognising, and dismissing, this bias; but mere citizens going about their daily lives, who are not political insiders, didn’t stand a chance of evaluating the ‘minor’ parties in this election race. It says a lot about the media self-selecting ‘winners’ and ‘losers’ early on, and hammering home points to the anxieties of the electorate.
The fourth estate has taken on pretensions of ruling/kingmaking in other countries, this is something we have avoided here up ’til now-ish, but I ‘m concerned that a pattern has been set that will be continued.
In my experience of campaigning for Green electorates, this has been one of the best election campaigns in the past decade. We’ve grown the vote by 33%, added 2 MP’s, and maybe 3 to Parliament, and mobilised a huge force of young campaigners and young voters. All of these seem like good outcomes to me!
Arohanui ki a koutou katoa, nga kakariki, e hoa maa.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I just want to say a very big thank you to all who helped support the Green campaign through this election. My family certainly appreciate your efforts and are very grateful.
We can get there. Eventually the common kiwi will evolve enough to accept that we need to look after our planet and our fellow human.
Historically, we have been about ten years behind the rest of the world. Hopefully things will not get too screwed before the bulk of of our population catch up.
Good luck to us all.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Thankfully the bulk of kiwi voters haven’t evolved into total Utopian airheads. Bad luck communists.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Duuuuuuuuudddddeeee, there was something I was supposed to do yesterday
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
BP.
You write: “You need to give that up as a goal. The world does not follow New Zealand.”
You might be interested to read about New Zealand’s role (in particular Peter Fraser) in the foundation of the United Nations. Whilst Fraser failed to prevent the five main powers gaining veto rights in the security council, he still had a much greater influence on the foundation of the UN than would be expected for someone from such a small country.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Now starts the campaign for 2011. We’ve learned a lot and we’ll build on our strength for next time. I think 15 MPs should be our goal for then. We aimed for 10 and got 8 or 9…. not too bad.
Heightening economic and environmental problems worldwide will play into our hands in the next three years as we build the party stronger.
There is some valid (and contradictory) criticism and advice above in this thread, but a lot of aspects of truth in much of it.
I just want to comment on a couple of points – Sue B being ‘tarred’ by s59.
A week is a long time in politics and 3 years is a lot longer. Just because she ran one very effective campaign doesn’t mean she can’t go on to new and better things. The work she did for children was fantastic despite political opponents painting it – incorrectly – as intruding on personal rights. (The personal right to assault others.) Sue B _is_ one of the most effective campaigners we have and if campaigning for the right thing turns some people off, so be it.
And katie, I agree with much of what you say on media bias, but it didn’t really affect the Greens as much as other parties. In fact they reported the polls and gave the Greens a larger slice of publicity arguably than our vote entitled us to.
For any new party with good ideas coming into the political game, don’t expect the media to give them a “fair” go. The only way to get into the game is for you and I and a strong group of like minded people to get the message out directly ourselves.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I’d call it disappointing. With the world more concerned about the world than ever before, 6.4% is a slack result. Going Labour prior probably shot both your’s and labour’s chances of re-election. You nicely dragged party votes away from Lab and not from Nat. Have you noticed that where you stood an electorate candidate the total of the Labour candidate and the Green candidate was often more than the winning National candidate.
As many have said it’s the socialist agenda that prevents the public embracing the Green message. MANY people I know would love to see green Green polices in government, instead we see red/green activists in opposition. Duh!
“Bradford is easily the Green’s best asset” I’d reword that slightly and replace ‘best’ with ‘worst’. I’d suspect if you asked non-Green voters to put a name to why they didn’t vote Green it would be hers. Whether deserved, or otherwise, she is seen as the scary side of this political party. Keith is seen as literally harmless, Jeanette as a genuine greenie, Russel as, well kinda nothing. The rest? who knows?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
The Bay of Plenty Times also consistently ignored the Green Party throughout the campaign. the Kiwi Party with far fewer votes actually got more coverage than the 3rd biggest one.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
There were two instructive comments above. One was that we shouldn’t expect the media, who were actively exclusive of the Greens in this and previous elections, to give us a fair go. The other was that when you actually explain things to people, they often agree with you and go – “why wasn’t I told this in the papers?”
I’ve been greatly inspired by the Obama campaign recently, and I think that two things stand out.
We need to expand the ground game, and make the greatest number of personal contacts with voters possible. It shouldn’t just be the province of a few enthusiastic individuals, but should be an organised nationwide effort. In every electorate. I’m not blameless here either, but we can’t just focus on key electorates and ignore the rest. I’m sure we can do this.
The other thing is to get the funding base as wide as possible, so that the party can campaign with the big ones. Get people owning the campaign (as above) and this isn’t so difficult. The right are likely to rip up electoral law to allow themselves to spend how they want and use proxy money, and we have to be prepared to fight.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Sir Roger is back!!! That is awesome news, hopefully the National/Act government can get started selling state owned assets and cutting costs and reducing red tape and taxes.
Maybe I might return to NZ now that the wicked witch is dead!!!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Kioere1 georgedarroch: I see the bare bones of the future campaign to get rid of MMP. Both Fairfax and APN have decided to focus on the two main parties. The purpose will be to marginalise the minor parties. Cut off their air. They are also conditioning the public to think in FPP terms – two parties. The only ones that matter. The rest can be ignored.
Once conditioned to think lik that, any campaign to retain MMP will be marginalised before it even starts.
The foundations of the anti-MMP campaign are already being laid. Like in Ontario last years……almost 40% of voters supported MMP in their referendum, but not ONE of the 56 daily newspapers in Ontario. You’d think that – staistically – that wouldn’t be the case…….
The campaign to ditch MMP is already underway……we saw it in this election.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“Maybe I might return to NZ now that the wicked witch is dead!!!”
Leave your hateful spite overseas, please. This kind of constant personal abuse directed towards Helen Clark (and any other powerful woman in the Labour Party) has become the norm from the right in the last 5-6 years, and I see it continues unabated.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
> The environment isn’t something you can change back. Once it’s destroyed, the changes are often irreversable.
Really? To take an extreme example, if human (which environmentalists regard as the plague) disappeared entirely from the face of the earth one day, how long would it take before there was no trace of them every being there?
100 years? 1000 years? 10,000 years? On a geologic scale, this is a blink of an eye.
London had awful smog in the 60s, it is gone now. Britain’s beaches were ful of sewerage only 10 years ago, but much cleaner now.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
On the election, I have three questions:
1. Why did the Greens announce before the election that they would go only with Labour? Did it really increase their vote? Didn’t that just turn off National voters with a green tinge?
2. The children billboards certainly got the party noticed. On election eve they interviewed the little girl on TV1/3. But environmentalists don’t come across as child-friendly. They ban smacking, push up power prices, encourage small cars and houses, take a dim view on disposable nappies, etc. It’s dishonesty, isn’t it?
3. What is all this about slowing economic growth? Do you really think that is a vote winner?
3. Why is Jeanette Fitzsimons so unhappy about right wing politics? Or is environmentalism every bit as incompatible with economic freedom as I suspect?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Yes environmentalism is incompatible with right wing politics. the so-called economic “freedom” means the the freedom of a few rich and powerful businesses and individuals to amass huge wealth at the expense of the rest of us and the environment. So they lobby for a cut in the minimum wage, so that workers miss out, elitist education so that the poor can stay poor and not gain any opportunities, policies to keep unemployment high so they have a malleable -work force, anti-union legislation, lax animal welfare laws so that they can exploit as much profit as possible from already overstressed and suffering animals, gut the RMA so polluters can trash the environment, and then when the whole house of cards comes crashing down they socialise all their losses by arranging their liability so the local councils and government have to clean up their mess, and bleat to “nanny state” to bale them out.
Roger Douglas is a case in point. He is a factory farmer who caused extensive suffering to pigs, polluted a large part of the Manukau and then wanted to run the country the same way he ran his pig operation; callously and incompetently. Which is why I am pleased he is not getting a ministerial post. I would have strongly considered emigrating if he was in charge of education.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
In terms of numbers you’re number 3. In terms of influence you’re behind National, Act, United Future, The Maori Party, and Labour. Second to last cab off the rank behind the irrelevant progressives. You’re lucky Helen Clark didn’t resign before the election, you would have had even less votes.
That`ll teach you for indicating that you`ll go with Labour when that was a futile decision.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
kiore1 Says:
November 9th, 2008 at 10:14 pm
Yes environmentalism is incompatible with right wing politics. the so-called economic “freedom” means the the freedom of a few rich and powerful businesses and individuals to amass huge wealth at the expense of the rest of us and the environment.
……………………….
Are Amish left-wing or right wing?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Interesting election – I’m content for two reasons:
1. NZF disappearing; and
2. Green’s getting 2 or 3 more MPs.
It will be interesting to see whether the world economy sorts itself out, sends oil prices through the roof, and starts to sap some of the Nats support. I suspect that the rise in oil prices in the first half of this year contributed to Labour’s demise. Given that we are currently in the midst of a notable global slow down it’s amazing prices are still so high ($60 USD/barrel last time I checked).
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Left wing social policy could be said to ignore trade offs and unintended consequences (or as Sue Bradford’s poster states “blame the system* — Fight!”)
* never the individual
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
The Greens were described on RNZ (this morning) as being on Labours left; this makes the Greens confusing to the public.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Kiore, you complain about right-wingers and the RMA, yet let us not forget who brought in the RMA in the first place.
What Key, et. al. want to do is modify the RMA so that you don’t end up with NIMBYs complaining about wind turbines being erected near Waiuku. How fair is it that we cannot get progress in New Zealand because of some luddites that will be partly impacted.
Indeed, to utilise another environmentally friendly example, the Eastern Line in Auckland looks likely to be the last one electrified because the ARC is concerned about RMA issues.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Alexking
Failing to recognize what is and is not an assault and DEFINE it was something that the electorate will NEVER excuse. The opportunity was there and VERY clear at the time, to make a law that every New Zealander would get behind and applaud, and which would win us a step away from the “nanny-state” label and a reputation for mature and rational decisions. It would have been absurdly easy to get a major boost in our standings AND a law that would have stopped abuse. I can forgive, forget and still vote Green because I reckon the environment is more important and less reversible than a badly worded law. The bulk of the electorate is not able to balance things that finely.
“The Right Thing” was to stop child ABUSE. You are trying to force everyone to conform to some idealistic form of child-rearing, abolishing the almost perfectly effective learning tool developed by 40 million years of evolution.
YOU may think it is “the right thing” but most of New Zealand wanted to spit in your eye for telling them how to raise their kids, and THEY JUST DID!
This isn’t a freshman philosophical debating society, it is a political party. Leave the irrational idealism at the door. If our answers can be made palatable to the masses, we should make them so. The battles we HAVE to fight are difficult enough without making new enemies.
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Pete :
In New Zealand, we simply don’t have the sustainability problems you’re trying to make out. We have few people and significant natural resources.
Yeah right… remind me where your petrol comes from?
Short-sighted optometrist :
But environmentalists don’t come across as child-friendly. They ban smacking
Do you ever proof-read yourself? Or is that a deliberate non sequitur? Made me laugh anyway.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“What Key, et. al. want to do is modify the RMA so that you don’t end up with NIMBYs complaining about wind turbines being erected near Waiuku.”
Sorry, but this statement is completely incorrect. As with much legislation in NZ, this was a world leader in making projects consider all outcomes before they were approved. As such, there are indeed hurdles, such as considering the wishes of affected communities, and evaluating negative environmental impacts. These are the hurdles the National Party wants removed, and that the ACT Party are extremely keen to see gone.
There were already moves afoot to allow non-local environmental issues to be considered under the RMA, and to streamline it somewhat for minor projects – which Labour was dragging their feet over.
While the changes are likely to allow more environmentally friendly projects to go ahead, these are likely to be far outweighed by the large number of environmentally destructive and socially unwanted projects that are currently stopped under the RMA. We will have to wait and see, but given the composition of both the front and back benches any change is unlikely to involve strong environmental protections.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I’ve been wondering why the polls mostly over-estimated the Green vote, and the answers are clear in this thread :
Ground game. I was involved in Get-out-the-vote operations in the late 70s and early 80s (for Labour), and it’s hard work and absolutely vital. The problem for the Greens is that being an exclusively list party, intuitively it doesn’t seem worth the effort, and also it is very hard to have the numbers on the ground to go door-knocking.
I believe this needs a re-think. A huge effort is required to do advance door-knocking to identify the support, there’s really no way around that, but it can be spread over the whole three-year electoral cycle. With modern technology (call centres, email etc) the election-campaign part is made easier. Getting out the “soft” Green vote could easily make 1 or 2 MP’s worth of difference.
Greens as “Labour’s left” : yeah that’s a shame, and I’ve said so since 1999. The demise of the Alliance was a tragedy for NZ politics : indeed, who’s pushing the interests of the poor, who’s motivating them to participate in the political process? Labour is fighting for the centre, and the Greens are saddled with something which is not our natural role : we need an ally to our left, to which we can cede leadership on the “Sue Bradford” issues.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Why doesnt the greens work with national?
National and labour are basically the same anyway. The national party has been pushing the enviroment more than the labour party. They have their own green wing. They plan to release an alternative trading scheme, take costs of alternative fuels off and more…
Why not greens and national? To me, looks like national may be more on the green agenda than labour! (Social policy obviously aside).
The national party would get major cred from middle new zealand if it can work with maori party or the greens, and theyll just look like the same cringe-worthy old rich white men if they stick with just act. IMO.
I dont want the greens to sit on the sidelines for this. National has talked big on the enviroment, and in my mind this is an oppurtunity for nature, and sustainability.
We shouldnt be sidelining ourselves here…….the new national party can work with the greens – and id rather have it that way for the next three years…
My 2c…
Congrats on more seats everyone! (A little by little we gain, each year but also remaining steady and with loyalty. Eventually well get there….! In the meantime, thank god for the voice of reason the greens win for all of us)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Optimist. Our current ecosystems and environments formed under conditions that we are very rapidly changing.
While things do eventually return to an equilibrium, that equilibrium is not necessarily an optimum one for humans, and as you acknowledge, that return varies tremendously across time scales – anywhere from decades to millions of years (in the case of the Antarctic ice-cap).
I have no doubt that large animals will survive well into the future. This is a completely different question from whether we leave our great-grandchildren with a planet conducive to a comfortable human existence.
I’m not sure if this is a strong answer, but I think that with something as all encompassing as the state of the pale blue dot we live on, the precautionary principle is by far the most rational.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Why the Greens decided to make their preferences clear – http://blog.greens.org.nz/2008/10/20/greens%E2%80%99-preference-for-post-election-talks/
On matters of policy, they were both bad but there was much much more to work with from Labour.
As for the question of growth. A serious-injury car crash causes a huge amount of growth in the short term, as the goods and services used in the immediate aftermath are immense. The consequences however are not what anybody would endorse. That person becomes a drain on the economy.
Not all growth is worth pursuing, and not all growth has positive long term consequences or causes long term growth. Growth needs to be sustainable and worthwhile.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Im not sure i really like that reasoning for why not to deal with national….
I mean, you dont protest something in such a way as to make yourself irrelevant. I dont like nationals social policies either. But….
If you go to the national party website, and look at their campaign, youll find enviroment is more central to them (or at least their current image) than it is to labour. ….
This could be an opputunity to call national on their big enviroment talk!
To me, enviroment is a politically neutral issue, and a concern for us all, especially today. Being greens is half social justice, half enviroment, is it really wise to count ourselves out when one half isnt happy?
At the very least, the greens should note all the big talk….its a talking point and potential ciriticism also. But id personally be happy to see them negotiate an enviromental agreement with the nats. Better than doing nothing, and hey, if were going to lock teenagers in boot camps, maybe we can get alternative fules going at the same time!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
BJ,
I understand the points you are making about S59, and how it may have cost the Greens votes. Nevertheless, I tend to think Bradford’s amendment was a good thing. Its not that I don’t support strong discipline for children (which can include smacking), its that some parents definition of smacking actually amounts to child abuse.
Once you’ve seen kids who have been physically abused by their parents, and the parents honestly believe they have done nothing more than administer appropriate discipline, one starts wondering if a blanket ban on smacking might solve more problems than it creates.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
The Greens did badly given the election cycle, which should favour the small party on the obviously losing side. This is why ACT had its best result in 2002, because National voters knew there was no chance, so went elsewhere. Labour voters stuck with Labour, I suggest due to a combination of the recession (the environment is secondary when people face personal economic difficulties), the anti-smacking law (which simply put many people off) and the earnest “telling people what to do” approach. However you are protected from being in government once more, which would have given you three years at best before being damned by the electorate finally turfing out a very tired government.
In addition, for some bizarre reason, three far left parties played around in politics this time – the rump Alliance continues to be some people’s hobby. RAM had a go, but was so Auckland focused that it had no profile elsewhere and couldn’t even get its members to vote for it, and the Workers’ Party flying the red flag of blood dripping Marxism-Leninism. About 3000 votes floated off to that lot.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Samiuela
Defining it in the law was the winning position. It would have left the real abusive parents, and there are some such, a small minority, with no questions as to what was and was not permissible. It would have had the support of 99% of the population, it would have made the opinions of the few who are following some unusual belief system irrelevant. It would have been a popular move for the Green party and moved people to consider us a bit more sane and trustworthy than they have in past.
The law as written doesn’t even prohibit the use of a 2×4. It discusses the purpose of it and leaves the definition and decision up to the policeman taking the report at the time.
I have ALMOST never had to spank either of my children… but even I resent the absurdity of an intrusion that leaves me completely unable to guess what the law is… because the “law” is the opinion of the people sitting at the table next to me and the opinion of the policeman they call and . If I am unlucky I wind up talking to a judge whose OPINION is final. If I am unlucky I am in deep trouble… or contrariwise someone may be really brutal to an unlucky child and get off scott-free. The law does not provide a definition.
That’s why New Zeelanders resent it. Most of them would be unaffected by a law against actual abuse, but everyone is affected by S59 and they know pretty well who they are going to blame for it, Which is why there was a referendum drive.
The law IS going to be changed now, you can count on it, and WE are going to wear it as an epithet for at least another decade. So we lose twice. Something I warned of back when we still had a choice about it.
The fifth principle is survival. The country of New Zeeland shall survive as a civilized society. I don’t dislike this party. It has a lot of good in it… far more than our right-wing guests guess. It has a BIG blind spot because it omits the fifth principle and that omission means that the average citizen doesn’t trust us that much. When we pull a stunt like S59, (and everyone will tag us with it because it was a Green who led the drive) it just makes that mistrust worse.
The EFA was arguable. It could have been a LOT better, but it was arguable and it mostly affects media, whose opposition has more to do with the curtailment of their revenue from the election than any real problem with free speech. Had we done S59 correctly we could have stood the EFA problems… or possibly had the political clout to fix them.
The nanny-state label stuck to us and to Labour. New Zeelanders responded to the nanny-state label as expected. It isn’t a good result to have a lot of people in parliament with NO power to effect change.
We could counterbalance ACT in some areas… but if National does that ACT could just as easily pull the chain on them and National would be forced to look for a new partner or a new election, which means that National is unlikely to cross swords with their lunatic partners on any substantial issue. The difference we COULD have made vs the difference we are actually making is pretty convincing to me. There’s more discussion on the internal forum.
respectfully
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
BJ,
You are a wise sage. Totally agree with your observation and analysis.
Add to the s59 debacle, the shower and food restrictions and the message being painted of “nanny state” had real resounance with the voters.
Problem the Greens now have is that they are branded “left wing” and “red”.
How will the Green marketing department get them from the “left” of “left of centre” and get the vote to 30%?
Or will the party remain always on that 6% threshold and close to oblivion?
Will the Greens take the bull by the horns and try and replace Labour as the centre left party or will they be happy to be “as is” and live on the edge of oblivion?
Because long term, the “green environmental” message you are selling will be enacted by centralist parties. Meaning the very reason for the Green existence will be watered down.
When that occurs you might as well rebrand the Green party as the Alliance party of ultra left wing persuasion. As without the environmental policies that is where you will be sitting in the electoral spectrum.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“are the Amish right wing or left wing”
As far as I can tell the Amish would be conservative on the authoritarian/libertarian axis but definitely left wing or even anarchist as far as their attitude to unlimited greed and power-based authority is concerned.
Regarding the RMA, it is an extremely complex piece of legislation and therefore will always have bits that need ironing out, and it is impossible to please everyone, even all environmentalists. My own criticism is that it tends to overly punish small polluters while leaving the main ones (like the pulp and paper mill at Kawerau) alone.
But this is probably more a problem with a social system allowing unlimited power to psychopathic corporations than it is to the RMA as such. If the Companies Act was repealed so that corporations were not there simply to make a profit to shareholders, if the Kawerau mill had to take into account the local community, the iwi, its staff, anyone living along the Tarawera River and other stakeholders, and if its directors were made personally liable for the pollution of the river and the high cancer rate in Kawerau then it would be possible to operate it with a closed loop system so htat the Tarawera river did not become the “black drain”, and what is more it would create MORE employment in Kawerau not less, while still producing as much product.
Corporate profit would of course go down, but whether you think this is a good or bad thing depends on your values. Personally I find Ayn Rand’s “utopia of greed” far less appealing and less intuitively obvious than Paul of Tarsus’ “root of all kinds of evil” wen it comes to ethical conclusions regarding unlimited economic “freedom”.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I fail to see how a party of 3000 members can elect so many left-wing figures to spots high up the list, including those who believe Te Tirriti was devised by the Arch Angel Gabriel….
I found this comment interesting:
“A marriage of convenience. I’m sure that some on either side don’t realise what exactly they’ve involved themselves in, but there are plenty that do.
There have always been anarchists and socialists in the Greens, who see it as a tool to deconstruct power and give people alternatives to capitalism, but not more than an instrument. Once it’s no longer useful they put it aside… or at least that’s the theory.”
http://www.liberation.org.nz/
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I mean look at how deeply rooted Shawn Tan turned out to be (a Red-Green)…. he now stands for the party that doesn’t believe in AGW.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
On election night TV visited a Green HQ and there were Sue Bradford and Keith Locke……… I didn’t see Treehuggers…….!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
BJ,
Your points on S59 have pretty much persuaded me to change my view. Something still needs to be done concerning child abuse … I’m just not sure what.
Cheers,
Miuela
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
National has offered input from the Greens.
GO GO GO be part of the next three years! Show you can be sensible members of NZ’s government, not just ‘loony lefties’. Our country needs a strong environmental voice IN government…
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
A great result on Saturday for family loving, veggie growing, taxpaying, recycling Kiwi’s.
I read an interesting statistic: The top ten in the Labour Party (pre election) had bred 1 child; the top ten in National around 24 children. They didn’t state the equivalent figure for how many had had jobs outside politics, unions or public sector, this would also have been enlightening.
According to those at an Election Party on Waiheke I attended Saturday night, almost no one voted Green as it was seen as support for Labour and Winston, and Sue Bradford was seen as a real liability.
If the Green Party really wanted to make a difference on Environmental, Social and Economic matters they would be requesting some time with John Key asap and promising support. John is a fair and honest guy, who wants the same good things for the country as most of us – he is also realistic about how to achieve them. Hopefully the damage caused to our economy and society by Clark, Cullen, Sue & co can be undone rapidly, and I look forward to a better place for my kids in the future.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
>>Because long term, the “green environmental” message you are selling will be enacted by centralist parties. Meaning the very reason for the Green existence will be watered down.
Indeed. A very recent ‘Newsweek’ has a leading article entitled ‘The Green Rescue’ which reports how key world leaders (Obama, Brown, Sarkozy and Ban of UN) are pushing a ‘green’ solution to the economic crisis – essentially involving spending huge sums of money to develop green technologies.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I just donated $50 to Wikipedia. I think I’ve got my $50 worth, better than info via toothpaste commercials.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
An analysis of many electorate’s shows that the Greens actually hurt Labour by standing a candidate, had the Greens really thought about this campaign in more detail they would have stood as a list party only.
I have a feeling that the Greens have missed the best chance they will ever have of being part of Government, the Labour party under Goff will move more to the center and even perhaps the center right.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
The Greens would do well to listen to BJ.
He understands where you need to be, much better than any other spokesperson for the Greens I’ve heard.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
>>I have a feeling that the Greens have missed the best chance they will ever have
Yes. Environmental issues are at their peak, and the Greens only get 6.4%.
In the next few years, the public will tire of hardline AGW, especially when Kyoto expires, and the US reframe the debate as being about technogical solutions to energy problems, not societal lifestyle changes.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
As a new dimension to the political scene, I wonder if we could develop an issues based tree (flowchart) system. At the top is a ranking (prioritizing) committee and then the branches where a commitee (moderators) thrash out particular issues> at this level the aim is to clarify the issues (language, metaphors, best explanation, most thorough analysis) in the upper chamber and a lower chamber for red baiter (scrap paper comment level). ?
I think the Greens lack an engine.
Another idea would be instead of relying on mass support for elected representatives require expertise in particular areas to make up the leadership.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
The Greens could have had an election platform of Positive Growth .
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
National now have the opportunity of the century. If they truly are a centerist government and ignore the ranters with right wing ideology, do a good job and keep their noses clean they could be in power for a very long time.
I have this theory that people dont give a damn about policy except those that are extreme and annoying, so leftist policies annoy some people, and rightist polices annoy others, and the trick is to minimise the number of annoyed voters. I think Key may have got that memo. Helen didn’t. S59 and energy efficient showers are good policies, of that there is no doubt, but to many voters they are annoying policies, and one need look no further than this blog for evidence of that.
The other interesting thing is the change bandwagon; Key has climbed on that very sucessfully, but the voters (and the media) have failed to notice that the direction shift here in NZ is in the opposite direction to the USA, the model for change…
This election not one candidate knocked on my door. Slackers, the lot of them.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
East Coast Bays
ADAMS, Paul FAM 3,275
BRADFORD, Sue GP 1,969
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
dbuckley
What electorate do you live in?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
jh
Very good point, the hard left of the Green party would do well to consider Sue B’s unpopularity before making her the new co leader.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
um..!…
http://whoar.co.nz/2008/memo-to-the-green-partyno-plan-b/
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
How is the CV looking Phil?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
how is your (soon-to-be) emasculated rabid far right looking..?..bb..?
here is my take on the election result/campaign..
http://whoar.co.nz/2008/an-eye-catching-billboard-does-not-an-election-campaign-makewither-the-greens/
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
and just for you bb..
http://whoar.co.nz/2008/the-hollow-victory-of-the-actites/
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Yeah, but Phil. You predicted John Key did the wrong thing by ruling out NZFirst, and by implication, would lose because of it.
Wrong.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Phil, Rodney is not stupid.
He will see the big picture – the mandate is center right – and he can’t expect to have any more say than 3.4% allows him to. What is his alternative? He has no other possible partners. Either he makes this work, of he’s likely out again in three years.
Rodney will simply become the “right” component of the “center right” mix.
It’s a much easier mix than Labour + Green.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Hi alistair
RE:
> We have few people and significant natural resources.
Yeah right… remind me where your petrol comes from?
Mine comes from Taranaki, how about yours?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Hi alistair
RE:
> We have few people and significant natural resources.
Yeah right… remind me where your petrol comes from?
Who says we rely on petrol?
There will always be petrol – perhaps not cheap petrol – and once we shift the vehicle fleet to the wealth of alternatives (hybrid/electric/CNG/bio) it is no longer much of issue.
Solved. Next…..
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
# big bro Says:
November 10th, 2008 at 9:55 am
How is the CV looking Phil?
…………..
About 10 years ago Phil joined Richmastery. He put deposits on 10 houses and as they inflated in value (due to credit expansion) his equity increased while those who saved had their value eroded (and first home owners are expected to make up the shortfall). He can now sit on his fat lazy *rse while tenants pay for his lavish lifestyle and call other people *bludgers*.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
BP
Phil missed it by 0.8% ? …and why in the world weren’t Labour and Green people doing strategic voting to keep his air supply open in Tauranga?
He’s a fair to good politician, a little too much soap-opera and a little too obviously false sometimes. All successful politicians lie, simply because the majority of people don’t agree about anything at all.
Still, Phil has a good point about going forward with a “deal” if there’s something on offer. I’ve wondered why we went through that “no national” exercise earlier, and I wondered about the wisdom of savaging the critically wounded (largely self-inflicted) Peters. The problem is what did we ACTUALLY say. Did we state a preference or did we flatly rule out National. I thought we had enough weasel words to make it possible to go with a deal… IF one were offered… but I wasn’t paying all that much attention.
Anybody care to clarify?
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“Once you’ve seen kids who have been physically abused by their parents, and the parents honestly believe they have done nothing more than administer appropriate discipline, one starts wondering if a blanket ban on smacking might solve more problems than it creates.”
There goes the “BAN” ideology again!
What you guys don’t understand is that if you had of defined “resonable force” for legal purposes instead of banning smacking, you would have had every parent in the country supporting the amendment.
But you had to force feed the population extremist human rights ideology and now you have to suffer the consequences.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
BB: I’m in Waimakariri.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
One other thing BP… the environmental problems haven’t “peaked”. You may believe whatever you like, but the tide and temperature will rise regardless.
The current solar minimum will be coming to an end. It should have been much cooler than it was, and when it does you will see the temperatures climbing again, the droughts lengthening, the food supply shortening, and the world entering a permanent crisis. People WILL die.
The idea that it has “peaked” is nonsense. Long term BP… LONG term… is where we come from. That is what fools most people. We look much further ahead.
respectfully
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
kiore1
RE:
“are the Amish right wing or left wing”
As far as I can tell the Amish would be conservative on the authoritarian/libertarian axis but definitely left wing or even anarchist as far as their attitude to unlimited greed and power-based authority is concerned.
>
So there you have the real point that the NZ Greens have not been able to come to grips with. The political framework needs to change, from a continuum to a compass. e.g
. . . . . . . . . . . .CONSERVATIONIST . . . . . . . .
SOCIALIST. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CONSERVATIVE
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .LIBERTARIAN
With this as a playing field, a true ‘green’ party would be in the ‘north’ and could coalesce into a North East or North West government; only a “WEST” government will accept a deep relationship with the current Green party.
While this cannot happen in today’s political playing field, it may happen some time, and when it does the conservationist message will be able to influence policy irrespective of left/right swings.
Today, despite having more MPs, there is less influence over policy than there was last month. With an absolute majority, even without Party-of-one Dunne, there is no need for the Government to listen to the Green Party’s thoughts. When, as seems likely, the coalition expands to embrace the Maori Party in Cabinet, (I would give them the Ministry of Maori affairs and a couple of Under-Secretary positions if it was me,) the Current NZ Green Party will be of les concern to National, putting them totally on the out. A sad place for Gaia’s Guardians, but appropriate given the ‘watermelon’ nature of the party as it is today.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
>>Phil missed it by 0.8% ? …
A large part of NZFirsts poor showing was due to National splitting NZFirsts vote. NZFirst may have polled well over 5% if Key hadn’t of ruled them out. Key neutralised them. It was certainly a calculated risk, but it paid off.
>>and why in the world weren’t Labour and Green people doing strategic voting to keep his air supply open in Tauranga?
Because only political junkies understand strategic voting. Most people are not political junkies.
Even I don’t understand MMP.
>>I thought we had enough weasel words to make it possible to go with a deal…
MMP is confusing. People want clarity. The Greens, once again, misread the electorate.
People do not want wishy-washy, maybe-maybe not, post election backroom deals.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
The fact the guy is pure poison might have been a factor…
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Actually, you could learn a thing or two from Peters.
If you declare you’ll go with the party with the greatest number of votes, you’ll get more power.
You can have all the abstract arguments you like about what MMP is, and proportionality, and first-past-the-post thinking, but I suspect most voters think that the party with the most votes should lead, and they can add a hint of extra green/blue/whatever.
What they don’t want is politicians deciding the makeup of government after the fact.
I think the election result spoke for itself in this regard.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Just had a look at DPF’s blog, and as one knows I have numerously described DPF as a “ranter”. Well, his last few blog posts are examples of maturity and sanity, no ranting at all. Maybe I’ve misjudged the guy, and if this keeps up maybe some humble pie eating will be in order…
One of his contributors ascribes the Nats victory in part to “people like Sue Bradford”, interesting…
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Probably been reading that:
http://dimpost.wordpress.com/2008/11/09/congratulations-are-in-order/
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
BJ
I have a lot of time for your opinions, and I may come across as more belligerent in print than I really am. Imagine a cheeky smirk when you read my posts. I think that would accurately convey the tone I’m after
>>The idea that it has “peaked” is nonsense. Long term BP… LONG term… is where we come from. That is what fools most people. We look much further ahead.
You may be right. What I’m saying is that I’m not convinced that it is a significant problem. It certainly isn’t a significant political problem until people start seeing direct effects.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“One of his contributors ascribes the Nats victory in part to “people like Sue Bradford”, interesting…”
The greens have totally underestimated the publics response to radicals like Sue Bradford, and now you have Kevin Hague to add to that list.
Jeanette revealed her ignorance of what just happened on election night by taking a swipe at kiwi’s for chosing tax cuts over the future of their children.
Tax cuts are not why the left lost this election!
And attacking the NZ public is just crazy!!!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Bro:
An analysis of many electorate’s shows that the Greens actually hurt Labour by standing a candidate
You still haven’t worked out how MMP works, have you? If a Green electorate candidate takes votes from the Labour candidate and lets the Nat get elected, that doesn’t help National or hinder Labour in the overall scheme of things, because the party-list MPs are adjusted accordingly. Best just to vote for who you think will represent your area best. As an expat, I voted straight Green because I don’t know any of the local candidates, but I wouldn’t exclude voting for a Nat as local MP if they were a better-than-average Nat, while supporting a Green/Labour coalition.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Drael :
id personally be happy to see them negotiate an enviromental agreement with the nats. Better than doing nothing, and hey, if were going to lock teenagers in boot camps, maybe we can get alternative fules going at the same time!
I can see your point, and in practice I think you’ll see the Greens continuing to be constructive and helpful in parliament, as they were in previous terms. If we can draft useful provisions and push government legislation in the right direction, that’s well and good. But obviously we won’t be entering into any confidence-and-supply agreement, if they are locking up teenagers in boot camps.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Well when it comes to the environment, I think the greens will be a lot more knowledgeable than Nick Smith.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
>>Jeanette revealed her ignorance of what just happened on election night by taking a swipe at kiwi’s for chosing tax cuts over the future of their children.
Yep. She came across to me as deluded. Does any nation that cuts tax therefore damn the future of their children? History would suggest the polar opposite.
The Green stance, once again, appears religious rather than reasoned.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Not so much “deluded” BP as more deflated.
I think Jeannette realised that she (and the Greens) are never going to be in a position to influence govt policy.
Saturdays election was a overwhelming condemnation of PC, Social engineering and the policies of the left.
The Greens face a very real battle for survival.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
You may have missed Key spending most of the past few years endorsing most of Labour’s really major policies?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
>>The idea that it has “peaked” is nonsense.
No, it must have peaked. Why else have we got a doubting Government with a denialist supporter coming to power?
Sorry for the fippancy, but some of us find it to be a way of coping with imminent disaster.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Further to my above, a decisive vote for National like this would normally also be a decisive swing to the right – not so much this time it seems.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
grrr.. flippancy
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“Further to my above, a decisive vote for National like this would normally also be a decisive swing to the right – not so much this time it seems.”
Which should only make defeat all the more bitter for the left.
The left lost the election due to arogance, interferance, and a contempt for the values of the average Kiwi family.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“Phil missed it by 0.8% ? …and why in the world weren’t Labour and Green people doing strategic voting to keep his air supply open in Tauranga?”
It would have made no difference. The combined Labour, Greens & Winston vote in Tauranga would have been 5000 short of what Bridges got. Going for Mark in Rimutaka would have been better.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
>>Not so much “deluded” BP as more deflated.
I think “the children” has become a metaphor for “the Green Party”. If so, that would make her statement correct.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Blue Peter, The thing about Jeanette and the entire green movement is that money IS NOT top priority – unfortunately in today’s commercial society that is a lot harder to push across, especially when everywhere we go commercialism is shoved in our face – the latest thing that we “must” have. People who vote green tend to say that money is second to society and the environment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
BJ – you are wrong about s59. The issue is very simple, either everyone in a society has protection under the law against assault or they don’t. Instead of beating up the greens for it, remind people that national voted for the ammendment to S59 as well. The problem is one of the perception and your solution is to say that when people are missled about green policy, we should go along with that instead of explaining the truth to them.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Ancient societies, like Rome, were acquisitive. It’s deeply ingrained in our society.
If you want power, then you’re going to need to work with it, rather than against it. I suggest you do all you can to help make green tech the desirable”must have”. This is not rocket science.
People aren’t going to vote for hair-shirts. That message will not play.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
>>BJ – you are wrong about s59.
No, he’s right.
The only way you’ll shift people round to supporting s59 is if you state that gentle smacking as part of parental discipline is not a crime. If you can’t say that, then people will continue to question s59.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Will we see the new government accepting the referendum results and proposing the legalizing of smacking.
Will we what.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“Will we see the new government accepting the referendum results and proposing the legalizing of smacking.
Will we what”
Good, the science supports light smacking and so does the experience of hundreds of thousands of NZ parents.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
greenfly
What you will see is the govt accepting the referendum on MMP.
I think we can safely assume that this we will have no more MMP elections, expect to see the Nat’s offer a choice between FPP and STV, I expect the result to be a resounding vote for FPP.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
The science supports red wine as healthy.
Is alcohol a gateway drug?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“BJ – you are wrong about s59. The issue is very simple, either everyone in a society has protection under the law against assault or they don’t.”
Just as well light smacking is dicipline and not assault then.
It was the greens inability to separate ideology from common sense that contributed to the change in govt. If section 59 was ammended to better define “resonable force” the bill would have been seen by most as responsible govt, the greens would have been applauded by every parent in NZ.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“The science supports red wine as healthy.
Is alcohol a gateway drug”
Actually a very good analogy.
You could also include salt, we need it for good health but to much can harm you.
Smacking is exactly the same, a way of projecting authority to correct bad or harmful behavior without harming the individual.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
shunda – to clarify, smacking isn’t the gateway?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
No surprises there Big Bruv, but what are your thoughts re the ‘other’ referendum?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
On Radio NZ THIS MORNING a Leader of the Green Party said
>”we can draft useful provisions and push government legislation in the right direction, but obviously we won’t be entering into any confidence-and-supply agreement’
>
Surely the Party isn’t this naive? The opportunities for this left on Saturday night! While there will be much gnashing of teeth in select committees, the reality is that the Green Party, by taking the stance it has on the left-right continuum. Rather than taking hold of the centre – for sustainability – the Party has put itself into the position of a non-entity in the new Parliament, seen as being way-left of Labour and so beyond the pale as far as influence in the House is concerned.
Surely, not a good thing for the Planet.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“Just as well light smacking is dicipline and not assault then.”
- That’s correct, give another adult a light smack and you will not be prosecuted either.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
>>Surely the Party isn’t this naive?
I’m beginning to think so.
They’ve got no bargaining position whatsoever. National owes them precisely nothing. If they get anything from National, it will be of Nationals choosing, and designed to make National look good.
What am I missing here?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
It certainly isn’t a significant political problem until people start seeing direct effects.
I am afraid I agree with you on this. While the direct effects turn up 30 some odd years after the causative error in judgment, and most people can’t even begin to actually take that sort of timing on-board and reason around it.
In that regard we’re doing quite well to persuade any significant portion of the general public that the problem is real.
My point about Phil was simply that if Winston First had polled even a LITTLE better, Phil would’ve been correct and there’d be a massively dissatisfied National party. Not nearly so sure about Phil’s opinion that this was an error by Key, as there IS the question of how his refusal to have Peters affected the vote. It could have backfired on him. It didn’t. Was this good management or good luck? I’d say the latter. It was too close to be anything else.
****
Ronald Reagan cut taxes and the class stratification in the USA went on turbo-boost. To imagine that this did not damage the prospects for most children in the USA in terms of health and education requires a LOT of imagination. I watched it happen. The mean streets turned into shooting galleries using both drugs and bullets.
The problem is that cutting taxes only works if the tax rate is actually too high and is in fact stifling productive people. That wasn’t the case when Reagan came to office and as a result his cuts lined the pockets of the wealthy. Dubya’s cuts were more of the same for his constituency “The haves and have mores” in his own words. The key I think is to look at the tax levels and the GINI together. Taxes and Government services represent a wealth transfer. I am not bashful about that being the case. Some transfer is essential. How much is necessary is the question.
If the GINI is too high the wealth transfer is not enough, if too low, the transfer is too high. It seems to correlate pretty well with the perceived desirability of living in any given country. A GINI in the high 20′s is IMHO the “sweet spot”. One could I think, compare our political viewpoints based on the target GINI we select.
YMMV of course, but the idea that kids get a benefit from lowering taxes in general isn’t viable as a single rule. It needs a lot more detail and fleshing out because while it can be true in some cases it is NOT going to be true in others.
respectfully
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Well there is some really good news from this election: the ETS will be “gone by lunchtime”.
But the big question really is where now the Green Party.
Slagging off the electorate wasn’t a smart move. The customer is always right even when the customer is wrong. As some above have alluded, the Greens were in some ways more left wing than Labour, but without the ability to capitalise on all those frustrated disposessed left wingers. We’re going to be a centre-ish state for a while, and I’m doubtful that Labour (the coat-tails of whom The Greens have traditionally relied) are going to be a electorally capable party for a while.
The Nats (I think) consider themselves “green enough” for the current political climate, so there wont be much hope of salvation there.
I can’t help but feel an opportunity has been lost, but I’m not quite sure how it could be any other way… Maybe thats the price of principles and/or dogma.
Remember when left wing meant union madmen running the show and right wing meant selling everything in sight? Perhaps those days really are behind us and everything will be shades of magenta…
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Blue Peter said: What am I missing here?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
BP
You got it all I think!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
James.amos – I have pointed out repeatedly what a proper law is. A proper law is SPECIFIC. Anything else is an invitation for the lawyers to dine out at our expense. Anything else is an invitation for the general public to think insulting things about our intelligence… and be correct in their assessment. The protection against assault was NOT abrogated by the existence of S.59, All that section did was to provide for a defence.
It was vaguely worded and so let some assaults go unpunished.
The problem is one of the perception and your solution is to say that when people are missled about green policy, we should go along with that instead of explaining the truth to them.
No it is not. It is a REAL problem with the way the law was worded. I am a Green. I understand it. It is wrong.
I accepted it and I am still a Green because I knew then as I know now, that bad law can be corrected but a failure to provide a timely response to climate change has a fair chance to destroy human civilization.
Which logic causes me to severely doubt the judgment of those who caused it to be promoted within my party as “the only way” to protect children. There are millions of children yet unborn who are potentially affected by the failure of SOME Greens to work out that logic.
respectfully
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“Ancient societies, like Rome, were acquisitive.”
And look what happened to them. Also Easter Island, and more recently Nauru. And how is living within your means considered to be a “hair shirt”. Every religion, every philosophy and every authority figure since the year dot has been telling us that true happiness does not lie in wealth. Now we have a whole lot of right wingers telling them they have all been wrong?
Personally I voted strategically for Winston in Tauranga, and party vote green. I think Winston was incredibly foolish denying he had received a donation from Owen Glenn. If he had not done so, he would now be in parliament. “I did not receive a donation from Owen Glenn” is in the same mould as “I did not have sex with that woman”. In each case the public would have forgiven the act itself, but not lying about it.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
The reason that growth is absolutely necessary is down to debt based financing of the world.
No growth = no growing debt = no debt based money = oops.
Then we would have to return to a system whereby money means something.
Of course, look beyond growth and you get to the old paradox about infinite growth on a finite planet, yada, yada yada…
Enjoyed the equating of Winston with Billy Clinton
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Strings – do you suggest the Greens drop all their principles and become Labour/NZF clones in the middle so they can join National and say they were part of Govt anyway? That would be the quickest way to ditch their current support base. MMP is about parties representing the people that voted for them. Whilst I disagree with BP that they are naive, I agree that anything that they get through will be at the courtesy of the House. Unfortunately for us, Greens are not the majority.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Kiore
RE
>Every religion, every philosophy and every authority figure since the year dot has been telling us that true happiness does not lie in wealth
>
Here’s the issue with those statements.
1. Every religion’s poo-bahs have asked for money from their followers. Look at the Crystal Palace (a TV ministry), whose leaders drive around in Rolls Royce’s, look at the Catholic church, one of the richest instituting in the world, look at the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints which taxes all its members 10% of their GROSS (i.e. before tax) income, look at Islam where some of the richest people are leaders of the religion and/or guardians of holy places. Religions like to tell everyone that true happiness does not lie in wealth, however they also add (overtly or covertly) that creature comforts don’t hurt!
2. Name me such a philosophy that DOES NOT take the same approach as in 1. above. Philosophy and religion are, to most people, interchangeable.
3. Authority figure – hm, again, name me one! I might accept Gandhi, but not his wife or son. Certainly Churchill didn’t fit that mould, not did anyone else I can think of as being a true authority figure, in any country!
I am, as always, open to convincing argument that there is any Religion, authority of ‘philosophy’ that tells its followers that wealth is a bad thing. However, I see you argument so far as being in the ‘fatty foods are bad’ classification, don’t bother telling me that as a result of this I shouldn’t eat chocolate!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
>>And look what happened to them.
They became Europe.
>>And how is living within your means considered to be a “hair shirt”.
It’s not so much living within your means. It’s creating problems where there are none. We don’t have to limit our shower use, population growth (it’s barely moving) roading and car use (forget cheap oil as a necessary motive power, because it isn’t). These aren’t major problems faced by New Zealand.
>>“I did not have sex with that woman”. In each case the public would have forgiven the act itself, but not lying about it.
Yep. Winston did it to himself…
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Excuse my ignorance, but is the Green party still driven by environmental policy? My wife nearly voted Green this time but soon figured out that it would be a vote for a far left wing agenda, so she changed her mind.
I think it is representative of the dilemma for the Green party though. We want to maintain and preserve the environment, so we think about voting Green. Then we find that is also a vote for the hard left, and we are very centre.
The brand may be green, but what’s behind it doesn’t stack up for a lot of us. No matter how much I care about the environment I’m not voting for a left wing agenda.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
>>The reason that growth is absolutely necessary is down to debt based financing of the world.
>
Twaddle! Growth is necessary to support improved life-styles and a growing population. If what we produced today was the same as we produced in, for example, 1945, we would be living on about 800 calories a day. We would also have no heating for our houses other than coal, and no telephones or television.
If you need more examples of the deprivation you would face, let me know.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
>>Strings – do you suggest the Greens drop all their principles and become Labour/NZF clones in the middle so they can join National and say they were part of Govt anyway?
>>
Not at all Pat. What I advocate is taking a position OFF THE LEFT RIGHT SPECTRUM and advocating for sustainability and planetary continuation of the human race, rather than mixing that with left-wing social engineering! With such an approach The Party could be part of any government on the left-right continuum without compromising its heart, and would probably be polling in the high-teens low-twenties (percentage) rather than the current 5%-8% range.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
An environmental party will survive and prosper.
A “Green” Party (Values) will not.
Choose.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“- That’s correct, give another adult a light smack and you will not be prosecuted either.”
What is it about the liberal left that seek to blur every human distinction into a one size fits all bland shade of grey?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“And look what happened to them. Also Easter Island, and more recently Nauru.”
Kiore, Easter Island is a very poor example, as they didn’t have a market based system. Had Easter Island had a market, the price of wood would have increased, encouraging the growth of trees.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
This must’ve been asked before – is it possible for an aspirational political party to have *no* policy on non-environmental areas? Is that what is being advocated?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
what does russel norman actually mean when he says there is no difference between national and labour..?
..is he just blowing hot/green air..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“The brand may be green, but what’s behind it doesn’t stack up for a lot of us. No matter how much I care about the environment I’m not voting for a left wing agenda.”
I agree.
Funny thing is the Greens turn out to be the party of principle after all, to the point of losing an election to uphold left wing ideology.
A true green movement should in reality be a very centrist and be able to work with almost any party. If the Greens think National are right wing by international standards they couldn’t be more wrong. I guess looking to the right from as far left as they are gives them that perspective.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
phil u – futile attempt to appear they don’t favour one party, i’d say.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I’m with strings on this, ditch the left, stick to environmental issues and show how much society stands to gain by adopting those issues. You need to sell the growth potential of efficient practice.
Oh, and did I mention, ditch the left.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
StephenR,
I think there is potential under MMP to be a limited-issue party, certainly.
The strategy being to provide a bolt on to one of the larger parties, post election.
Do we need another major, rounded political party?
If the aim is to occupy to be a major, rounded political party of the far left, then fair enough. I just don’t see such a party being in power for a long, long time.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
StephenR,
I think there is potential under MMP to be a limited-issue party, certainly.
The strategy being to provide a bolt on to one of the larger parties, post election.
Do we need another major, rounded political party?
If the aim is to occupy to be a major, rounded political party of the f*r left, then fair enough. I just don’t see such a party being in power for a long, long time.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
RyanDale Says: The brand may be green, but what’s behind it doesn’t stack up for a lot of us. No matter how much I care about the environment I’m not voting for a left wing agenda.
Whereas it is partially correct that the Green Party has some left-wing ideas, I feel that they are a result of searching for a solution to the ever-worsening environmental problems that we face as a species. I believe that Valis, in an earlier blog provided a very good description of Green Party philosophy and its relationship to the left. The following is an extract:
“Greens see that the old left and right both have the same fundamental problem: reliance on never ending growth. All their solutions are predicated on the economy expanding forever. Both the traditional left and right, be they socialist, authoritarian, communist or democratic, want the pie to grow. Their main argument is how the pie gets cut up, i.e. who benefits. This growth fetish is a big part of what we mean when we talk of Mother Coke and Father Pepsi. Labour and the Nats are very different in some areas, but on this fundamental Green yardstick of sustainability, they look more the same to us than different.”
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Phil
Labour is as BAD as National on environmental issues. ?
Best bet would be if Russel expanded it himself of course. He may do once things have settled some. Remember the question.
respectfully
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
A question for the ever condescending Blue Peter .Define “middle new zealand” Bit difficult for a non bottom feeder like me to understand , as it means different things to different sections of society,do enlighten me?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I know it when I see it.
Those who watch “Dancing With The Stars”, play Lotto, high school education, kinda uninformed generally…..
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“This growth fetish is a big part of what we mean when we talk of Mother Coke and Father Pepsi. Labour and the Nats are very different in some areas, but on this fundamental Green yardstick of sustainability, they look more the same to us than different.”
You cannot use one policy to say that they are the same; I could say that ACT and the Greens are the same, because they both advocate lower income taxes; I could say that United Future and the Progressives are the same, because they both advocate raising the drinking age.
Labour and National, while they have similarities, are nevertheless, very different.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
National are not so right wing that they are unable to work with a green party, but *the* Green party has ruled out National outright.
It just dosen’t make any sense other than incompatibility on non green issues.
Perhaps a more honest approach for the Greens is to join with the more left elements of the Labour party and completly re-brand.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
shunda – re section 59 – why the anguish? Shouldn’t you be celebrating? The referendum will return the ’80% of all New Zealanders..’ result, the honest Mr Key will overturn the bill ‘quick smart’ and we’ll all be able to get on with our god-fearing ways… won’t they, won’t he, won’t we???
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Blue Peter – linking ‘Dancing with the Stars’ with uninformed – priceless. Hide your head in shame
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
BP Says: Those who watch “Dancing With The Stars”, play Lotto, high school education, kinda uninformed generally…..
Are you referring to the ‘LIVs’ ? The Low Information Voters who are said to constitute a good 60% of the USA electorate. ‘They don’t read new magazines or newspapers, don’t watch documentaries or interviews and they don’t vote early’. I wonder what percentage of us are LIVs?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
>>>Hide your head in shame
Please! That name!! How does it get through the censor?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
People
There is a logic here you are missing. Greens will inevitably be tagged with being anti-growth and against business (as it is conducted in this day and age and with the currency as it is). It IS related to being Green.
There’s a diagram missing in the blueprint for the economic machinery. WHY must growth be constant? WHY is this so important to the economics of the 20th century?
Debt-Based, fractional-reserve, fiat currency.
This is long, I recommend it be viewed almost completely (the end goes a bit over the top).
http://www.notjustnotes.ws/howbanksrobyou.htm
The design of the system is, from the very basis of the money used, dependent on the continuous growth of the economy, the money supply and the debt that creates it. Failing to grow the debt means complete systemic collapse. It CANNOT work without growth.
With that underlying problem, that contradiction of common sense, the economic system is already eating our children’s children. Greens have little choice but to oppose it, though only a few can state the reason as clearly as this makes it. One has to note that on THIS point we find ourselves in close agreement with many Libertarian economic models. Honesty in the currency is required by them as well.
Greens see the REQUIREMENT for growth-at-any-cost (it isn’t optional as a fetish is) as a condemnation of that system when it is applied on a finite planet. It isn’t necessary to say exactly what will break because it is as certain as entropy increasing that something will. Many things are already stretched to their limits.
So there is an aspect of this philosophy which IS really “anti-growth”. It is not anti-technology. It is not anti-business (though we have no respect for “business-as-usual”). It is not even anti-bank, though the bankers in charge of the economy today are some of the most rapacious pirates to ever plunder the planet. Banks themselves can serve a purpose… if they are honest. We have seen how well they trust and treat each other… how in the hell can they expect US to trust them after seeing that?
respectfully
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
So if you finished your education at high school and play Lotto, you’re uniformed?
Crap definition foolish to expect otherwise really wasn’t I?
Sound like the great people who used to work for me. All had opinions all were interested in well reasoned arguments ,all of them liked to discuss the issues . And the majority were keen to expand their knowledge on any given issue. I live in one of the more backward parts of NZ and have seen enormous changes in attitude amongst the “uninformed” over the last 25 years. Families that didn’t tolerate homosexuals, the mentally ill , or women in business now do. We have seen many more women in politics in that time too and as Governor Generals, Chief Justices etc. All down to Helengrad, no ifs no buts.This election campaign has been about the systematic destruction of all of that by dishonest and underhand tactics on the part of the ACT Trolls and the National Party. The role played by the misogynist mafia in the mainstream media needs close and careful examination and discussion. As does the smearing of Winston Peters. A fair fight and a worthy opponent, Helen was entitled to that, and did she get it? No way,so now we have halfwit for a Prime Minister.!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Part of Winstons poor polling could be:
1. People who remember NZ before 1980′s are dying out.
2. Dilution by immigrants from highly populated countries.
3. Being slippery rather than honest.
4. Flogging the people (“Asian” ) rather than the numbers and values issue eg why do we *need* more motorways? Why do we *need* a new city plan etc. [Personally I think the residents have a right to be cautious about new arrivals.... When you bring a dog to another dogs home you let them meet down the street and bring them in the gate together etc..........]
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Well yes. I certainly think that the way our economy is constructed we are likely to get immigrants that come here largely for business reasons (and I mean ‘business as usual’ as opposed to new/green business/technology). It would be rare that these people would have any sympathy for Green values. In consequence, they would support National or Act.
Tourist may come here for our supposed ‘clean green’ image, most immigrants don’t.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Greenfly/orowhana
Any definition is difficult. As I said, I know it when I see it. It’s easier to define the demographic by what they’re not: elite, highly educated, intellectual, overly political.
They’re the demographic New Zealand television targets.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
>>The role played by the misogynist mafia in the mainstream media needs close and careful examination and discussion. As does the smearing of Winston Peters. A fair fight and a worthy opponent, Helen was entitled to that, and did she get it? No way,so now we have halfwit for a Prime Minister.!
Priceless!
The negative campaign was conducted by Labour.
As for Winston, he said one thing, did another, and got called on it. Perhaps you think he shouldn’t be held accountable for it.
>>now we have halfwit for a Prime Minister
Now you’re just being silly….
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
>>>>now we have halfwit for a Prime Minister
Now you’re just being silly….
Key certainly has some huge challenges that will be hurled at him. Both nationally and internationally. I hope he and his team have the wherewithall to cope. I also hope that he can retain his pleasant demeanour and sticks to his assertion that his will be an inclusive government.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Key never worried me the way Bill English worries ms.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
>>Key certainly has some huge challenges that will be hurled at him
Meh. I’ve worked in banking in London, and the New Zealand parliament is genteel by comparison.
I’m sure Key has the “wherewithall to cope”…..
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Keys challenges won’t be hurled at him, they’ll settled gently around him like falling blossoms in the springtime. gently, sweetly, persuasively…
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
mmm…settle, zephyr-like…
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“A fair fight and a worthy opponent, Helen was entitled to that, and did she get it? No way,so now we have halfwit for a Prime Minister.!”
:SHOCK:
WOW, well perhaps if Helen hadn’t approved all that muck raking her party engaged in, the fight may have been fairer and given National a few more votes.
And as far as Key being a halfwit I think you are confusing NZ with the US elections.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“A fair fight and a worthy opponent, Helen was entitled to that, and did she get it? No way,so now we have halfwit for a Prime Minister.!”
WOW, well perhaps if Helen hadn’t approved all that muck raking her party engaged in, the fight may have been fairer and given National a few more votes.
And as far as Key being a halfwit I think you are confusing NZ with the US elections.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
shunda – think Key will repeal the repeal? (Section 59)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“shunda – re section 59 – why the anguish? Shouldn’t you be celebrating? The referendum will return the ‘80% of all New Zealanders..’ result, the honest Mr Key will overturn the bill ‘quick smart’ and we’ll all be able to get on with our god-fearing ways… won’t they, won’t he, won’t we???”
Greenfly its not about section 59 its about why it happened in the first place, and I have little hope of it being overturned.
There is no point in gloating over the election result, I don’t think anyone has that luxury in the current economic climate.
I think you greenies will be suprised at how well this govt may do.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Authority figure – hm, again, name me one!
How about Jesus, Gandhi, the Buddha, Confucius, Socrates, Marcus Aurelius, MichaelAngelo, Wesley, Martin Luther King, Mother Theresa, et.al, et al….
In reply the rabid right only have Ayn Rand and Milton Friedman, plus the powerful opportunists who perverted the teachings of the great religions and philosophies. Even Adam Smith is not as kosher as the right would like to think. After actually reading the “wealth of nations” I was surprised how socialistic he was in some of his thinking, radically denouncing the guilds for the way they exploit the workers. Similar to the employers’ federation or the business round table today.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Labour did do most of the muck raking – they should have focussed on the positives on their tenure (not sure if that’s the right word) which were actually plentiful – despite the cost of it, I think buying back the rail had to be done and was good future thinking. And noone deserved to get out of parliament sooner than Mr Peters, with all his lies and racism – finally the majority of people have spoken on that – but 4.5% were still fooled.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Settling zephyr like…. much as the towers of the World Trade Center did.
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
shunda – surely though, those nasty nanny-state invasions of our rights are going to be swept away by this non-pc National government. The smacking ban must go, that crazy lightbulb ban must go, the outrageous shower head restriction must go, Mr Key will clear the decks because that’s what the people wanted, isn’t it? He will, won’t he?
Is that the smell of ‘dupe’ in the air?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Hello to the national party, after they have taken a valium.
Half or more of their “mandate” is given on three key promises and thats it. Mostly economic, not ideological. All those nearly dead inside white men will have to take a pill, and prepare for extinction.
Welcome to the 21st century.
Mr “smiling assasin” will have to play warrior only in money, or we will call his slyer and ultimately a little questionable win or die attitude. Hes no dope, but can he come up squeeky clean?
I watch in facination, and i also watch with some glee as traditional national party bigots air their bad attitudes on air and in media. You are the past. Die already! lol.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
You sound a little bitter greenfly, all I know is we will not be governed by the most left wing govt in NZ’s history, anything else is a bonus.
I imagine it will take time to see exactly what John Key can do for NZ, you may be pleasantly supprised, are you open to that possibility?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I’m a great lover of ‘pleasant’, shunda and not bitter at all, just following up on the obvious desire the people have shown for turfing out that pc nonsense. Do you think it will happen? Surely it will. The Nats based their 3 year campaign on the interfering Labour/Green pc nonsense – it should be gone by lunchtime, don’t you think?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
HAHAHA!
The bigots have been hiding behind opposition status, now they are leaders, in the media, and they have to stand in the light!
Good luck labour-lite!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
It is a lock as far as S59 is concerned. There will be a referendum. It will be an excuse to revisit the law. The law will be altered. For Key it is a cheap win. It may not be “by lunchtime” but not long after the referendum is completed.
What else will go is open to question, but a fair few things are going to get changed. Some good, some bad.
The problem that won’t be solved is the economy. It is even money whether there will be a recovery even in 2-3 years… and there is at least a 20% chance IMHO, that the whole economy of the planet will have to be re-based on a money supply that isn’t in the control of banks. Free market my left nut. Jefferson said it clearly:
“I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around [the banks] will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs.”
200+ years… you’d think we’d have figured it out.
respectfully
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
A real review of currency, and debt would be a smart long term move IMO.
I wait to see whether the media can get on top of both the energy crisis, and the economic crisis not just in terms of “injections” but in terms of real change, real new exports, and changes in the basis of economy.
Radical, but in the long term, thats the only reality we face. Im completely happy with a low-debt economy especially with a “real value” like gold even, or resources. Local economies face the issue of miles. We have to move beyond this mentality of “some do well, all do well”. Its madness in the current world.
Real talk, on real change is what we need. I seriously doubt our new prime minister can cut the mustard in the truely _new_ times we face.
Middle politics could equally lead us into poverty. Right or left wing politics could lead us into poverty. We need _DEVELOPMENT_ money, not just puny tax breaks. Research and new business. Spending, not tight purses.
We have major money left to be lended. We should use it now, and precisely now to completely overturn our current processes. If we dont, we will all pay – from the pocket.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Bjchip, I’d like to thank you for your many, detailed, fascinating and entertaining posts and links. You are true food for thought.
Keep it up.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Here’s the real hit about the nanny state issue – we get to becoming a nanny state when the Government has to pass laws because some people demostrate that they can’t act responsibly when given the power to make their own choices. A shame most of the people who use the erm nanny state never really think about it
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“But even if we act to erase material poverty, there is another greater task, it is to confront the poverty of satisfaction – purpose and dignity – that afflicts us all. Too much and for too long, we seemed to have surrendered personal excellence and community values in the mere accumulation of material things. Our Gross National Product, now, is over $800 billion dollars a year, but that Gross National Product – if we judge the United States of America by that – that Gross National Product counts air pollution and cigarette advertising, and ambulances to clear our highways of carnage. It counts special locks for our doors and the jails for the people who break them. It counts the destruction of the redwood and the loss of our natural wonder in chaotic sprawl. It counts napalm and counts nuclear warheads and armored cars for the police to fight the riots in our cities. It counts Whitman’s rifle and Speck’s knife. And the television programs which glorify violence in order to sell toys to our children. Yet the gross national product does not allow for the health of our children, the quality of their education or the joy of their play. It does not include the beauty of our poetry or the strength of our marriages, the intelligence of our public debate or the integrity of our public officials. It measures neither our wit nor our courage, neither our wisdom nor our learning, neither our compassion nor our devotion to our country, it measures everything in short, except that which makes life worthwhile. And it can tell us everything about America except why we are proud that we are Americans.
“
Robert Kennedy, University of Kansas. 3/18/68
GDP = Gross Distorted Product
GNP – substitute nihilistic if you wish.
The emphasis is wrong. The measurement is wrong. The currency is wrong. Key is probably not so wise as to identify, much less right these wrongs. He will be lucky if he does not preside over a devastation.
My challenge to him? “I am a pessimist…surprise me.”
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
>>He will be lucky if he does not preside over a devastation.
BJ, this ‘aint the US
We export food.
People need to eat.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Greenfly, Labour have spent 9 years building this beurocratic beast, and it will probably take 9 years to get rid of it.
The economy is going to be a huge challenge and will probably be the issue that makes or breaks John Keys leadership. One things for sure there will no longer be a place for the blatant waste and inefficiency of the previous labour govt.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“The emphasis is wrong. The measurement is wrong. The currency is wrong. Key is probably not so wise as to identify, much less right these wrongs. He will be lucky if he does not preside over a devastation. ”
bjchip, I think you have John Key wrong, he was never a typical currency trader and would appear to be motivated by completly separate ideals, perhaps even similar to those you have spoken of above.
I think Key could be genuine in his belief for a better NZ, his highest ambition in life was not to make money, but to lead the country he loves, much like the previous prime minister.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
>>Even Adam Smith is not as kosher as the right would like to think. After actually reading the “wealth of nations” I was surprised how socialistic he was in some of his thinking, radically denouncing the guilds for the way they exploit the workers.
Not to mention his concern for the ‘endless pursuit of unnecessary things’
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“We export food.
People need to eat”
We import more than we export
We are going down!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Actually that wasn’t really a dig at Key Shunda…
I don’t think one person in 500 would be able to actually pick up on the severe problems with the currency and the measurement. GDP/GNP… they are the common measures throughout the economic world, and almost nobody examines what the actual basis of our money is except the much derided “gold bugs” and a very few others.
Nor, in this situation, have I seen any indication that ANYONE knows how to correct these problems. Here or elsewhere. There will be some companies with enough going for them to survive the planetary equivalent of Ctrl-Alt-Del. of the economy. Some countries.
Which means that we will be lucky if all he winds up with is a recession, (which is actually a depression but the name was changed so as not to scare the horses).
I am attributing to him a reasonably above-average ability but what is needed is something more than that. I won’t be surprised or disappointed if he misses the goal. I expect him to try his damnedest… but the job is too big.
respectfully
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“As for Winston says one thing does another”
Sounds like John (I’ll say anything for power )Key.
Looking forward to all those summer BBQ’s where I can observe the hairy palmed kiwi males at play and still tugging themselves silly over Helen’s demise.
The misogyny has been palpable at all times throughout this election, on the upside most instructive to the younger generation of women who will be voting in the next election and are only too keenly aware of how their future has been comprised by the election of a philosophically bereft ,shallow spineless apology of a man as our (snigger) leader. After the stench of National’s campaign has cleared his weakness will become so glaring even the tragically one eyed Nats will learn to cringe on a daily basis as I do every time he opens his mouth. Even Muldoon could not make me feel so ashamed to be a Kiwi.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
So change in New Zealand is electing another middle aged middle class balding male into leadership … .
Real change is actually in all the reforms which Labour government made which National will now continue, despite opposing them when they were first proposed. The tragedy for New Zealand is that the further positive change which could have been made in the next three years will not occur. Not now there is a National led government opposed to real progress and in place to stop it.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
orowhana
Seek help, Quickly!!
I am glad the left are not in power when I hear left wing bigotry like the above post.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Pot calling kettle black Shunda.
Key is unworthy as our leader he has done nothing for this country,he has not even resided in his own electorate.
He has never run his own business or created a single job for Kiwis.
I was a self employed employer for 16 years and a wealth creator for this country not a parasite like Key . And unlike yourself and Key not a new New Zealander. You need to familiarize your self with NZ’s history The young people who voted like mesmerized sheep for our woefully inadequate new PM are all going to get the a big lesson in Kiwi politics over the next 3 years. National are not only unequal to the task they are very divided. The animosity and disrespect between Key and English visible at every turn.
Key is a puppet and the acceptable “media Face” of the hideous Tory monster. Which will soon break free from his weak and sweaty grasp. He does not have the respect needed to hold a coalition together. Guess I should turn my hand to running a tab on when he’ll be rolled or better still how many attempts there will be . Beats wasting time in here thanks for the space to rant Frog but it’s time to take Jeanette’s words seriously and get the Green policy message out more. I have been inactive (middleage slows one down ) for too long nothing like a creepy loser for a PM to get the blood flowing. Cheers people .
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
bj asked “Curious, for some of the more knowledgeable here to answer. Is it possible to get a situation where EITHER block could form government?”
If I recollect correctly that is precisely what happened at the first MMP election when Peters stunned Labour by doing a deal with National to form a government. A nearly fatal move on National’s part as it turned out.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Ctrl-Alt-Del? The reset button does the same thing faster. Still, as long as your using a keystroke recorder you should recover most of what you’ve typed since your last Ctrl-k-w
I presume you’re using Mirror and dr-dos 3.3? Anything remotely modern will give you Windows Task Manager so that you can amputate limbs at random is stead of shooting to kill.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
The Greens percent of the vote nationally and in most electorates closely matches the percent of journeys made on public transport. Perhaps next election you should pay a bit more to put your ads on the backs of buses instead of on the inside. Stop preaching to the converted
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Kevyn
True and Ctrl-Alt-Del doesn’t always work. Including in Windows.
Usually what happens in Windows is that the game gets a not-quite-competent driver and there’s no focus to take to either the task-manager OR Ctrl-Alt-Del. Sort of like a political system where the leader seizes absolute power. The big-red-switch is then all the recourse you have.
· Using DOS 6.1 and a frankenputer.
Preferred games… anything designed by Ybarra.
· Using Windows for 2-3 other games occasionally.
(unfit for any other purpose)
· Using Linux (Ubuntu) as my workstation and host-server OS.
· Using QNX and LynxOS for real-time work
· Using Solaris and AIX for real work.
respectfully
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
>>Key is unworthy as our leader
Key is worthy as our leader.
Wow. Opinions are easy!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
After a VERY pleasant evening with family, I’m here to answer some points. May the farce be with you!
Firstly:
>> There’s a diagram missing in the blueprint for the economic machinery. WHY must growth be constant? WHY is this so important to the economics of the 20th century?
>
First off, we’re in the 21st Century, but that’s just a technicality. The main reason there must be growth is simple and belongs to nature itself – parental ambition for off-spring. Every parent I have ever met, including mine, me and my children, wants better for their kids than they had. I’ve travelled extensively in 3rd world countries, and parents there have the same ambition. This is complicated by the fact the, as humans, we also want to be ‘COMFORTABLE’ in our old age, and so, in ‘underdeveloped’ countries, couples have more children than the ‘replacement rate’ as a means to ensure they ask for a little from many when they are unable to provide for themselves. This population growth, couple with offspring aspiration, is why there has to be growth of some kind, and everyone of us that posts here on Blog.Green contributes to it. To prove that you don’t, you will have to be living in conditions EQUAL TO OR LESS COMFORTABLE than those of your parents when you were born, and I doubt you can demonstrate that to me.
>>Authority figures : Jesus, the Buddha, Confucius, Socrates, Marcus Aurelius, Michael Angelo, Wesley, Martin Luther King, Mother Theresa
>
A wonderful list of inspirational deep thinkers, but hardly one of “leaders”. Hitler was a leader; sad but true. Churchill was a leader; thank goodness. Helen Clark was a leader; no matter what you think of her politics.
Gandhi was a leader; and look at how well the country he led has done, but some of the others – please, let’s just take one of your list and examine it! The Lord Buddha was not a leader, he was an example who internalised his world and expressed his internalism to others, who wrote down what they thought he had said. His followers today ride around in big cars, collect gold and specie, launch armed attacks on people they don’t agree with, and expect others to pay for everything they do and use – hardly the actions Lord Buddha exampled. (Yes, my wife is Sri Lankan, there is a very large proportion of Buddhist Sri Lankans, and I follow the news there, both through the informed commentators and my extended family’s observations.
Again I say, give me a list of LEADERS, who LED a significant number of people in their sphere of influence, that support your thesis.
Finally
>>we get to becoming a nanny state when the Government has to pass laws because some people demonstrate that they can’t act responsibly when given the power to make their own choices
>
Here is the ultimate expression of the communist attitude. ‘We gave you choices, and you REFUSED to act responsibly and do what we intended you to do, so now we will legislate what you can do!’ Choice means, with the restraint of not impinging on other peoples’ choices, doing WHAT I WANT TO DO, not what someone in power wants me to do.
Remember friend, the truth shall set you free, but it will piss off an awful lot of people first!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
orowhana
You really are a bitter and twisted person.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
i liked your jefferson reference..bj..
..and norman did denounce national on all fronts..not just environmental..
..and hey..!..he/norman also had his part to play in bringing us this nat/act gummint..
..eh..?
..i’ve given him the ‘homer-simpson-memorial-’doh!’-award’..
..for this election.
http://whoar.co.nz/2008/the-08-electionmandatewhat-mandateand-how-the-new-media-sunk-to-the-depths-of-yellow-journalismand-how-the-mainstream-media-became-their-bitchsand-whatabouthowabout-those-fucken-greenseh/
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
doh..!
..i have gone to moderation..
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Orowhana, I can’t let you get away with all that misogynist clap-trap. This election campaign was all about labour (Helen) trying desperately to find something, anything to throw at Key that might stick. It was also about thrashing Winston. Nobody was throwing sh it at the women in politics. Helen, Tariana etc were not singled out for their gender.
If hating men makes you juicy, then you go ahead and have a good time but, please, hate us for valid reasons.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
FillYou
Shame you haven’t gone to work!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Kevyn Says:
November 11th, 2008 at 2:03 am
> The Greens percent of the vote nationally and in most electorates closely matches the percent of journeys made on public transport. Perhaps next election you should pay a bit more to put your ads on the backs of buses instead of on the inside
we did put our ads on the outside of buses – on the back in Dunedin, and on the side in Wellington. I didn’t get a chance to see the Dunedin ones, but the Wellington ones looked great.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
# kjuv Says:
November 10th, 2008 at 8:12 pm
>> Even Adam Smith is not as kosher as the right would like to think. After actually reading the “wealth of nations” I was surprised how socialistic he was in some of his thinking, radically denouncing the guilds for the way they exploit the workers.
> Not to mention his concern for the ‘endless pursuit of unnecessary things’
and his belief that eating meat is a “barbarous practice that will soon fall into disuse”.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
bj asked “Curious, for some of the more knowledgeable here to answer. Is it possible to get a situation where EITHER block could form government?”
if there is a party that is in both possible blocs, then yes. such a party is called a kingmaker.
if the two blocs have no party in common, then it is not possible.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
How many Party members does it take to change a light bulb?
Green Party:
Just one because they are very skilled after changing them all to Energy Saving ones.
Labour Party:
Two; one to change it and a Green Party member to make sure it is not dropped.
NZ First:
Sorry no members left and Winston doesn’t know how.
Alliance:
Three because of their Union rules.
National:
Just one, but they will need two bulbs as, at the first attempt, one is likely to be dropped.
ACT:
None because Rodney says,” We must let the light bulb be responsible and have the freedom to change itself.”
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I see Rodney Hide just scrapped in ahead of Kieth Locke:
HIDE, Rodney ACT 18,583
LOCKE, Keith GP 2,204
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)