On the other hand I’m sure youth culture is not going to be wounded by a lack of support from Clark, Dunne, Hide or Anderton. And, unexpectedly, maybe young people are interested in political policies as well as music?

National has this morning bowed to those beating the law and order drum, releasing a parole policy so punitive it makes the United States look like a bastion of liberalism by comparison…

The implications of National’s new policy are considerable. At a stroke, National is essentially disestablishing nearly a hundred years of restorative justice and rehabilitation programmes that are now accepted as the norm in the corrections system.

But, as Espiner notes, the blame for this sort of play to the base vicious streak in each of us lays partly with Labour:

National and Labour have been vying to outdo each other on law and order for some time. Labour’s Phil Goff is arguably to the Right of Simon Power, and under his watch Labour has significantly increased sentences and jail time. It’s had to build three new prisons in its time in office.

Labour has gone against all research and evidence about what works in sentencing, instead repeatedly trying to steal National and NZ First’s ‘tough on crime’ rhetoric by unleashing longer sentences, more punitive measures and less protections for people in our judicial system. Its brinksmanship has pushed National to take the brutal stance it has.
It’s easy to see why.  Anyone who has been the victim of crime has felt that burning need for retribution.  But sadly we know it doesn’t work like that. Tapu Misa noted last week:

A 2003 survey of New Zealanders’ attitudes to crime and punishment showed that we tended to overestimate crime statistics and underestimate the lengths of prison sentences. Even as sentences have lengthened and our prison population has exploded (up around 70 per cent under Labour) and recorded crime has fallen (with the exception of violent crime), we have been convinced of the opposite.

If we are looking around to solutions to violent crime I would have thought the United States ‘three strikes‘ rule was not the most obvious place to begin?

“The one simple provocation I have is just use less. In the midst of this rampant consumerism it is a joy to think in terms of using less, buying less, less in all things except for wine, shoes, chocolate and sex.”

TVNZ and TV3 both had coverage of the events too.

Jeanette’s speech talked to those people who are thinking green thoughts and doing green things and now considering for the first time voting Green:

The Prime Minister says this election is about trust. OK, I’ll sign up to that. Who do you trust to work for real sustainability, not just greenwash? Mother Coke and Father Pepsi, or the Real Green Thing? Who do you trust to take urgent action on climate change and to prepare for rising oil prices? To get our cities moving with a functioning public transport system before they build yet more motorways? Who do you trust to give you the right to know where your food comes from? Who do you trust to keep New Zealand GE free? Who do you trust to invest in preventative health care rather than waiting till you are sick?

Meanwhile Russel focused on the need for the voters to vote with our 900,000 nion-voting children and young adults in mind, both what they need now and what future we will leave them:

In a time when Labour and National are competing as to who has the longest motorway, who has the audacity to call out ‘the emperor has no clothes’ - oil will never be cheap again?

In a time when Labour and National are competing as to who can waste more billions on motorways; who has the audacity to say to the Road Transport Forum we don’t care that you’re funding the Labour and National party election campaigns, we need better public transport.

Only the Green Party has the audacity to say the emperor has no clothes, that building an empire on oil is like building an empire on sand.

Only the Green Party will build a decent public transport system now. We will make it safe to bike and walk to work and school.

The second issue is that looking in the books is useful to know what you have got but you also need to have a peak at what you are likely to have in the future to make wise economic decisions.  We know that the central economic challenges we will face in the next decade are the rising price of oil and all things that rely on oil (such as industrialised food), and our response to climate change. Investing in long term assets that reduce our dependence on oil and protect our healthy climate will give us strong economic opportunities.  Continuing with more of the same won’t.

I’m expecting the account book opening today to be yet another signal that the economic choices we need to be making in the next three years are about warm dry homes, integrated affordable public transport, clean renewable energy and support for local communities, workers and businesses.

The Green’s Waste Minimisation Bill which passed recently should give programmes like eDay a big boost, as manufacturers begin to take a cradle to grave, (or better still, cradle to cradle), approach to managing the lifetimes of their products. The only way we can live sustainably on this planet is to ensure that as with nature, nothing is ever wasted.

Industrial design needs to move away from disposability and planned obsolescence and towards a re-use and re-cycle ethic.

“Don’t vote for the lesser of two evils vote, vote for what is good.”

It’s worth pointing out that Eric Roy and his party do not offset the emissions from their air travel. An average MP’s air travel for one year is ~15 tonnes CO2 equivalent. The Green MPs have been voluntarily reducing and offsetting these emissions out of their own pockets. National does not.

Roy states each tree will offset 250kg over its “growing life”. If that number is correct, the 20 new podocarps which will mature in 500-odd years, will take decades if not centuries to sequester anywhere near the carbon his 6 weeks of driving emits.

Planting native trees is great, especially podocarps in lowland areas, but his mistaken maths suggest the initiative is more theatre than seriousness.

Offsetting emissions is good, but it needs to be robust and the focus should be on reducing emissions where possible. Did Roy consider using a small car for the campaign would be better than a 3 litre ute? Or, even better maybe a bike?

Today we have to come to terms with a new set of circumstances – the emerging reality of Peak Oil and the impact rising fuel prices have on our economy. Rail’s energy efficiency has a new relevance and a new importance.

Did you notice the capital letters?  He must be talking about something important eh?  This is a pleasant improvement on four years ago:

Jeanette Fitzsimons: What does the Minister understand by the term “peak oil”, and when does he expect it to occur?

Hon Dr Michael Cullen: I have to confess that, for once, the member has floored me; I do not understand what is meant by the term “peak oil”.

I guess everyone get there in the end. So is now a good time to talk about the billions of dollars you plan to invest on motorways for private cars rather than on public transport Dr Cullen?