Wielding chainsaws
Since being elected to Parliament in 1999, Greens MPs have been at great pains to distance themselves from groups taking “direct action” for environmental causes (e.g. ripping up GE crops). In my view, this decision has two virtues: first, it was a principled stand that a Parliamentary party should be trying to achieve policy progress using legislative processes, not methods which override those processes; second, it was a pragmatic acknowledgement that political parties that undertook direct action in contravention of the law would be hammered by the media and their political opponents.
National MPs, however, don’t seem to feel similarly constrained. First we had Shane Ardern driving on to the steps of Parliament with a tractor, leading him to be charged (though not convicted) with disorderly behaviour. Now we have Sandra Goudie taking part in an illegal chainsaw attack on mangroves.
Now, Ms Goudie is entitled to hate the Resource Management Act and devote her political career to change it so that her constituents can wield chainsaws with glee wherever and whenever they want. But the whole point of being a Parliamentarian is that you try to change society for the better by influencing the law in the way you see fit. You don’t simply say, “To Hell with the law, I’m going to do this anyway.”
Well, at least, that’s what I’d expect good, law-fearing mainstream Kiwis to believe. So, the next time I hear a National MP bleating about cannabis use, I shall remind them of Ms Goudie’s scant regard for the law.
UPDATE: No Right Turn gives Goudie a suitable serve:
What do you call an MP who ran for a party running (along with race-baiting and bribery) a “law and order” platform, who then goes out and wantonly violates the law the very day after they are elected?
A hypocrite would be one answer. Sandra Goudie would be another. The day after she was re-elected as MP for Coromandel, she was helping to vandalise a native mangrove patch. Mangroves, as indigenous plants, are protected under Environment Waikato’s Regional Coastal Plan. But rather than lobby the appropriate authorities to have the plan changed, or work to elect regional councillors who shared their views, Goudie and her friends decided to wade in with chainsaws. In doing so, they not only violated s 338(1)(a) of the RMA, but also displayed their utter contempt for both the law and the democratic process.
September 25th, 2005 at 9:58 pm
You distanced yourself from direct action? When? I remember great controversy when Jeanette and Nandor refused to condemn the actions of the Wild Greens.
September 25th, 2005 at 10:15 pm
David: “At great pains to distance themselves from groups taking ‘direct action’ for environmental causes (e.g. ripping up GE crops)” was perhaps an exaggeration
Green MPs have said on many occasions since being elected that they would not take part in direct action which involved breaking the law, but that they understood why some groups used such methods.
I’m just amused that National MPs have in the past jumped up and down about (for example) anti-GE protestors ripping up crops, saying that they were not using the appropriate and responsible processes for making their political point, yet Sandra appears to have done exactly the same thing here.
I’m not implacably opposed to direct action - and I would hope that MPs of all parties would accept that sometimes, in some circumstances, civil disobedience is justified. (For example, someone in South Africa wishing to protest apartheid by chaining themselves to a government vehicle?) The question is presumably one of balance - how big is the injustice you’re fighting, and how much are you breaking the law? But it just amused me that the “we must all respect the law” party would contain MPs who’re willing to flout it
Whatever next? Tony Ryall chaining himself to the gates of a prison so that early paroles cannot be released into the community?
September 25th, 2005 at 10:19 pm
Well David, I await National’s distancing itself from Sandra’s action.
September 25th, 2005 at 10:43 pm
clearly National see the world as its OK for us to break the law when we don’t agree with it. This kind of attitude seems to be common throughout the right wing, witness Don Brash admitting it is OK to lie to the public in order to be elected to pursue his policies, Peter Dunhill thinking it is OK for him to have bottom lines when its an issue he’s against, but not for other parties to have bottom lines because that is the tail wagging the dog and throwing your toys out of the cot if you don’t get your own way. Or even rich executives thinking its OK for me to cheat on the tax rules so I don’t have to pay so much tax, but it’s not OK for beneficiaries to cheat on benefit rules.
How come they get away with it, when if we do anything we get pilloried?
September 25th, 2005 at 10:51 pm
Stuey:
Goddess! PUNCTUATE!
September 26th, 2005 at 11:59 am
Craig,
Is that the best you can do? Nice comeback dude.
September 26th, 2005 at 12:34 pm
It says something when the greatest legal breaches you can find in a political party as diverse as National are an alleged public order offence and a potential breach of a district plan.
Come on Frog, the Government you support includes members against whom there were finding of a prima facie case for art forgery, and convicted of drunken driving!
September 26th, 2005 at 12:44 pm
Not only is it breaking the Law, but Goudie potentially does economic and environmental harm to the area with what she has taken part in. I just wish people would understand a little more about the environment before they slash and burn. More here:
http://aboutown.blogspot.com/2005/09/it-hurts-me-deep-pain-in-cockles- of-my.html
September 26th, 2005 at 1:40 pm
Why does this woman think that merely because some of an environmentally conscious electorate voted for her, that all of the electorate will condone her sselfish vandalism?
At least “Wild Greens” are attempting to prevent food contamination that would affect the entire community - Sandra Goudie is destroying protected native trees so that a few rich people can go water-skiing without having to drive to the next bay? How unrelatable and out of touch can you get???
I’m sure that there will be no distancing of National hierachy from this action - after all, she is protecting the right of property owners (those withpleasure craft) to get the best enjoyment of their property…;-)
September 26th, 2005 at 1:59 pm
Indeed - how dare those pesky environmentalists encroach on the sanctity of private property.
September 26th, 2005 at 3:47 pm
sorry stuey..but i’ve never thought of you as a goddess..harsh i know..but i’m sure you’ll understand….
phil(whoar.co.nz)
September 27th, 2005 at 1:57 pm
Sandra’s not the only one in National breaking the law. A few weeks back in the farming press Rakaia MP Brian Connell proclaimed that he disagrees with the ban on lead shot, and that he would continue to use it despite the law change. I don’t think National has distanced itself from that either.
September 28th, 2005 at 1:18 pm
Cliff: Seems like yet another example of National’s stance being ‘do as I say, not as I do’.
So, National wants to get tough on crime huh? Oh wait, no - they’re National MPs; they’re beyond the law, hence can’t and shouldn’t be prosecuted.