You can’t fool all the people all the time
The Weekend Herald’s jury is interesting.
The charge: “Helen Clark’s global warming announcements this week were a token response to something she should have taken far more seriously years ago - by ditching the crown limos for a start.”
Verdict: 9 guilty and 3 not guilty. Seems Labour will need a bit more media spin to convince them yet.
Three comments that I especially liked:
Elliot Johnston: Guilty. “The announcements would never have been made if not for the growing green vote”. Good point Elliot.
Audrey Evans: Guilty. “But we all made a slow response to global warming, in spite of all the warnings from the greens” Typically balanced, but thanks Audrey! [Disclaimer, I know Audrey]
Brian Gubb: Guilty. “Ditching crown limos would also be tokenism. Drastic action is needed, including banning Rumuera tractors.” Excellent point Brian! The Greens highlighted the Crown limos last year but as a symbol of the lack of seriousness of Labour in dealing with greenhouse.
Adrienne Gin: Not guilty. “I don’t recall National making any bold sustainable environmental changes.” Well, that might be true but it doesn’t detract from Labour being in Government for seven years while our greenhouse emissions went through the roof (and still having precious little policy to do anything about it).
So it seems, based on this small sample, that saying “sustainability” a lot still hasn’t had the desired effect for Labour of getting people to believe they care about it.
Which reminds me of the old saying that you can fool some of the people some of the time but you can’t fool all of the people all of the time.
February 17th, 2007 at 9:23 pm
Won’t the Limos just become corporate Wellington taxis? Will replacing them make much difference, really?
February 17th, 2007 at 9:47 pm
No difference what so ever, i cannot wait to see the likes of Gerry Browline and Horomia climb out of the back of a Toyota Prius.
February 18th, 2007 at 8:51 am
The article is another indication that ordinary people know about the issue, are concerned about it, and looking for strong leadership and action from political leaders. And not just in NZ - recent polls in Australia, Germany and Canada have shown this also.
Contrary to conventional wisdom (which claims that the Greens will be squeezed out by Labour and National staking claims to sustainability) this presents a real political opportunity for the Greens, if only you can grasp it. As you point out, for the major parties there is a gap between rhetoric and action and this is where the opportunity lies.
February 18th, 2007 at 12:33 pm
meanwhile, while they debate whether to drive a 4 or 6 cylinder car, check out the blog titled “quiet please’ on the side bar of this blog - what a bunch of dinosaurs - and using high octane LEADED fuel also
February 18th, 2007 at 5:52 pm
In terms of tokenism yes the removal of the crown limos might just be that and a very small step but it does speak of leadership, it even smells of innovation and once that steps in the next step might be an audit of the government vehicle fleet and changes to greener purchasing guidelines to promote the likes of the Prius as one example. Who knows you might even get ministers profiling there own carbon footprints.
February 18th, 2007 at 6:28 pm
haz - have you got a link? BJ
February 18th, 2007 at 8:52 pm
# PeterExitsLeft Says:
‘Won’t the Limos just become corporate Wellington taxis? Will replacing them make much difference, really?’
Yes, they probably will, but I suspect it will also be the death knell of the Ford Fairlane/LTD in New Zealand - the only appeal those cars have at the moment is for people who see them as high-status because ministers use them. but of course that won’t make much difference, because so few people buy them anyway.
The main advantage of making the lives of ministers more environmentally-friendly is that they can now advocate more improvements for the country as a whole without being seen as hypocrites, or at least they will if they can change the scheduling of parliamentary sittings so that they don’t have to fly home to their electorate and back every week.
February 18th, 2007 at 9:05 pm
kahikatea
Ford Fairlane/LTD have never sold in huge numbers in NZ you are right about that but they do sell in huge numbers in Falcon and Fairmont trim.
I seriously doubt that a few less LTD’s on the road is going to lessen NZ’s appetite for large Australian cars.
February 18th, 2007 at 11:26 pm
bb, I too would love to see those ministers gracefully ease out of the back seat of a Toyota Prius. It would probably imprint on my brain in the same way have certain scenes from the movie “Borat”.
However, as bluegarten suggests, to clean up the government fleet, and perhaps eventually the entire organisation, is an example of good leadership, even if it is simply a token.
Perhaps these points could serve as a metaphor for some of us.
message on.
February 18th, 2007 at 11:35 pm
Err, I wish there was an edit function. Where I typed “However” I intended “Maybe”.
And the points certainly serve as a metaphor for parts of my life…
oUt.
February 19th, 2007 at 12:08 am
Interesting that someone styling himself Big Brother would not understand the concept of leadership by example.
February 19th, 2007 at 12:34 am
It will be curious to see what vehicles they replace them with.
They’ll still need to be rather large, comfortable vehicles, I’d imagine.
February 19th, 2007 at 1:14 am
BJ, it is: http://quieterplease.blogspot.com/
February 19th, 2007 at 1:34 am
Someone above raised a good point about MPs’ air travel. Perhaps MPs should go back to their electorates once every two weeks instead - and each time, spend two days in their electorate offices instead of one. ??
February 19th, 2007 at 7:40 am
Does the Green party leader travel back to the Cormomandel by train, bus or Air New Zealand every week?
February 19th, 2007 at 8:18 am
big bruv has a valid piont, you have to lead by example, to be beyond reproach if you have a strong value stance, walk the talk as i mentioned earlier. My fear is that the leader of the Greens goes back by NZ air and has a large carbon footprint, but I am not sure iof this is the case.
February 19th, 2007 at 9:39 am
Air travel by Green MPs has been the subject of some considerable discussion in the party as I’m sure you can imagine. The agreed position is to do as little air travel as possible while still doing the job of serving a national constituency. The MPs offset the carbon emissions from air travel using Landcare’s scheme, from their own pockets. Not that offsetting is the total answer but it is part of the process of starting to put a price on carbon.
February 19th, 2007 at 10:20 am
Does “as little air travel as possible while still doing the job..” translate to a cap on air travel at any point? Have any guidelines been established? Could these be shared on your website as an example to other MPs of other parties - setting the bar, as it were?
February 19th, 2007 at 2:33 pm
Is it Green policy to shutdown international tourism to New Zealand because of the quantities of CO2 generated by what is an entirely unnecessary and frivolous activity?
February 19th, 2007 at 4:39 pm
I would be quite interested in finding out how much air travel MPs are doing. And how the carbon emissions from their air travel compare to their emissions from use of limos etc.
February 19th, 2007 at 7:08 pm
Russel
“Air travel by Green MPs has been the subject of some considerable discussion in the party as I’m sure you can imagine. The agreed position is to do as little air travel as possible”
So does this mean that the co leader catches the train home to the Cormomandel every week and back again to Wellington on Monday night?
February 19th, 2007 at 8:02 pm
Zent
Don ‘t have any formal guidelines.
Prim
We only started the offsetting this year which involves recording MPs’ flights.
bb
No, there is no train to Coromandel. Jeanette flies to Auckland and then drives to Coromandel. Such is one of life’s compromises.
Mouldwarp
No it is not.
February 19th, 2007 at 9:36 pm
Russel
Would it not be greener for her to fly to Hamilton (after all that flight is not made in a jet) and then drive to the Coromandel?
Would that not set a better example?
February 19th, 2007 at 11:40 pm
Or train to Hamilton/Auckland then drive/bus to Coromandel? A lot of reading and email can be done on a train.
It seems to me that a big part of the whole problem is that a lot of people are just submitting to “life’s compromises” … hence people keep flying, driving etc … and on and on it goes, while people keep wondering “what can be done”. The Greens should be taking a real lead, practising what they preach. That’s a way to get change - by pushing at all these barriers at a practical level, until they come down. Greens - get some balls! and do what you’re telling everyone else to do!
February 20th, 2007 at 12:43 am
In some ways the private sector is stealing the thunder of the greens, with some consulting firms having specific travel reduction policies, tied to a carbon / energy footprint for the firm and specific realistic reduction targets. True they do have the electronic network and fairly organic approach to do this. One or two are going beyond this and tying it in with comprehensive offsets and extensive operating environmental managment systems. Of corse this is done in part to market a specific approach and profile the firms as leaders, not followers in their fields of business.
To add salt to the wound one comes to mind which has a very healthy cycling culture.
Yet each of these elements are tied together in a relativley simple way, which is easey to track and maintain.
Would love this approach to be tacken by the greens, perhaps as a start a EMS and TBL report.
February 20th, 2007 at 12:46 am
If we averaged out the total energy used by all the members of the Green Party including our MPs, I know that, per capita, our energy use would be considerably less than that of any other Political Party in Aotearoa/NZ … to put it mildly!
Why don’t you “just-can’t-help-myself” Trolls find something more constructive to do with your time?
You have been politely received here and given “the benefit of the doubt” for a long time now, and the inappropriate content and tone in your posts has been tolerated. You just don’t appear to be getting the message. It reminds me of that old saying: “You can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make it drink.”
Frankly, I have more important things to do, at this critical time for our future (or not) on this Planet, than to bother with the trite comments of our right wing “guests” (examples above).
Time to “grow up” guys! Get out there and educate yourselves about what we are potentially facing here … You certainly aren’t learning much from the Greens!
February 20th, 2007 at 1:08 am
Eredwen lets explore the idea of dioalogue and discussion, the transfer of different ideas, which often leads to learning on how to improve the way you do some thing.
As to right wing perspectives most of the comments have been questions, which give rise to sound andswers or an exploration of how to improve and or change.
February 20th, 2007 at 1:09 am
Prim has a good piont.
February 20th, 2007 at 4:20 am
Bluegarters: I’m not sure why you say the private sector is “stealing the thunder” of the Greens — it sounds like companies are actually promoting our policies for us, which is great! Preaching in the wilderness gets tiring.
The approach you’re talking about seems to address questions of image and social/environmental conscience for companies, and that’s great. But I suspect that it will stay pretty marginal unless it’s boosted by economic incentives. That’s what the Greens want to do : make it easier for companies to do the right thing.
February 20th, 2007 at 5:36 am
Alistair in part I have to agree that the greens are doing great things, in regards to stealing the thunder I should qualify the statement, they may be better at marketing what they are doing even if at a peripheral level and iot only amounts to greenwash but I hope not.
In terms of the wilderness it might be day 39 of the 40. Touch wood.
February 20th, 2007 at 5:37 am
Even the land of Oz with its Wizard may be moving.
February 20th, 2007 at 8:01 am
Eredwen
All I did was point out the hypocrisy of the co leader who asks us to change our habits yet does not lead by example.
This is still a free country and as yet the hard left has not managed to outlaw free speech, the fact that you (as a Green party supporter) show less and less tolerance for those of us who are still prepared to ask questions of any party or individual who puts them self up for public office is something that concerns me.
It seems that you (and here I assume the Green party as well) believe that you and you alone have the answers and if need be you will force them upon us come what may, you attack anybody with a differing opinion as if they were a Holocaust denier and dismiss many as trolls.
As you know Eredwen I believe there is a hidden hard left or communist agenda in the Green party (easy to understand given the likes of Bradford and Locke) this sort of dismissive and desperate post only confirms it for me.
You ask us to get out and educate ourself, would I be safe in assuming that the education you want us to undertake is restricted to publications that support your side of the argument.
Many of us do read about the climate change theory Eredwen, the trouble is that it is a waste of time mentioning it here as you arrogantly dismiss anybody who does not share your opinion as a bed partner of Exxon.
This forum can be great for the Green party, if nothing else it lets the Greens see the work they have yet to do in the electorate to convince the NZ public that they are a viable option.
Given that at least 92% of our population do not believe what the Greens have to say I would suggest that you need to spend a lot more time listening to us and our very real concerns.
Eredwen, I have put all my cards on the table, I care about animal welfare and the cleaning up of our rivers and lakes, these are the green issues that interest me, I have a right to be here as I am a past Green voter and I refuse to be bullied into accepting the hidden agenda as part of my support for some green issues.
February 20th, 2007 at 9:47 am
eredwen
I’m disappointed by such an attitude. I’ve learned a few things while I’ve been here, and like Big Bruv, I’m an ex-Green voter. Don’t I have just as much right to be here, and air my views, as you do?
I’m also surprised that a post on any political blog in NZ would essentially state “agree with us or be quiet”. Why have comments?
I think it is very telling that kiwiblog, and other right leaning blogs, allow and encourage opposing viewpoints, and do not attempt to censor free speech.
The left, on the other hand….
February 20th, 2007 at 11:10 am
Eredwen said: You have been politely received here and given “the benefit of the doubt� for a long time now, and the inappropriate content and tone in your posts has been tolerated.
Text is a poor medium for discussion, but I think you take may comments far too negatively. I am here to argue and push boundaries. An echo chamber is hardly an aspirational goal for a blog. However, I do mean to be respectful.
Can you explain to me why you think my questions about taking an informal discussion on MP travel and converting it to a policy guideline and then putting it out there to set the bar for other MP’s is intolerable?
I genuinely believe it could be a positive move, even if minor in the scheme of things, just as Rod Donald’s bike riding set a positive example.
February 20th, 2007 at 11:47 am
eredwen -
I am not a “troll”. I am expressing my views.
I have voted Green in the past, and more than once. But I do have some concerns.
I feel that you have been very rude to me on this blog on a number of occasions, without good reason, though you have also written posts saying how important it is to be nice to people on the blog. I feel that you have been hypocritical in this regard. There have been times when I have been so angry with your posts that I have sworn never to vote Green again! Way to go Greens, alienating your supporters.
February 20th, 2007 at 1:34 pm
er, why did you all think that eredwen was referring to you? Paranoid? Guilty?
P.S. there is no attempt to censor free speech here, as anyone with half a brain would be able spot by reading frogblog comments, which if you counted them up, you’d probably find about 40% or more of them are right-wing or anti-green in nature.
P.P.S. BB, let he who is without sin cast the first stone. i.e. get out of your hummer before you castigate Jeanette for flying.
February 20th, 2007 at 1:48 pm
I like my BMW. I lead by example, except when the occasional Ferrari and Impreza WRX makes that impossible
Jeanette can fly all she likes. It’s just that when people tell us we shouldn’t fly, while they themselves fly on a regular basis, it tends to be taken with a grain of salt.
February 20th, 2007 at 2:22 pm
Stuey said: why did you all think that eredwen was referring to you? Paranoid? Guilty?
Neither. Just going off Eredwen’s recent comments.
Above, Eredwen used plural (..Trolls..)
and she sweepingly identified ‘our right wing “guestsâ€? (examples above).’ which would apparently apply to several of us, myself included.
She recently commented:
I had carefully read your posts and had come to the conclusion that you are more interested in seeking a reaction (and preferably a lot of attention) from the Greens than in seeking an honest exchange of ideas.
Given that, it seemed a reasonable assumption. Fair enough?
February 20th, 2007 at 2:33 pm
Stuey
I have no intention of getting out of the Hummer as I do not beleive that global warming is man made, however your co leader does, it is her that should be setting the example.
February 20th, 2007 at 6:37 pm
pel said.
.”..I think it is very telling that kiwiblog, and other right leaning blogs, allow and encourage opposing viewpoints, and do not attempt to censor free speech..”
excuse me..!..
farrar runs ongoing cebnsorship..
and zen..who is here demanding a forum.(!)…is a principal in sir humphrys..a rightwing blog collective..
where..if you should dare to question their ‘givens’..you are met with a hail of abuse..and threats of banning..
should you demur..you are banned..
so..really..pel..once again you are shown to be talking a ‘crock’..eh..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
February 20th, 2007 at 7:38 pm
I have made no demands Phil. You were banned at Sir Humphreys for your constantly rude and insulting manner. I’ll leave it to readers at Frogblog to decide on the truth of that statement.
With respect to all here, personal attacks invite a response in defense. That must be boring for the vast majority of readers.
I suggest it would be more productive to leave the comment moderation issues to Frog, and focus on the topics offered for discussion.
February 20th, 2007 at 7:47 pm
>>farrar runs ongoing cebnsorship
He leaves hostile, contrary views, his blog is full of such left/right debates. Daily.
I dare say he gets rid of the odd nonsensical…! illegible…..rambling (!) nonsense for sake of clarity.
February 20th, 2007 at 9:16 pm
Peter, when did Jeanette ever say that people shouldn’t fly? I agree that would be hypocrisy if she did, but she has never to my knowledge said anything of the sort. Prove me wrong!
February 20th, 2007 at 9:39 pm
go on people..!
take up zens’ offer and go over to sir humphrys..
‘barking’ lucyna has started up one her ‘religous threads’..(a weekly event..and always good for the odd jaw-dropping ‘huh..?”..or laugh..)
(think extreme rightwing fundamentalist reactionary catholicism..(polish branch..whoar..!..her house is probably festooned with those hearts with thorns around them..and the like..)
and there has been some major confusion over different timezones..leading to wild-eyed accusations of left-wing-media-conspiracies..
(i mean ..seriously..these people take themselves very seriously..and are pompous to boot..(and (involuntarily) are feckin’ funny..!
their pomposity is why humour is so effective against them..
go over there and laugh at them…
(they can’t stand it..!..they take themselves and their loopy ideas very very seriously…and will brook no scorn/p*ss-taking..
they..and their acolytes..will turn on you like mad dogs..(eh zen..?..)
you will also get such added delights as big bruv ..with his mask off..really letting loose with how he feels about the likes of you greens he has been pretending to talk to/trolling..whoar..!..(again..!..)
be warned..!..it’s ugly..eh..?
and don’t be rude or insulting..
just use humour/logic to dismantle their warped arguments..
(it’s sorta like a vegan blood-sport..eh..?
rightie-baiting..)
phil(whoar.co.nz)
February 21st, 2007 at 1:22 am
“If we averaged out the total energy used by all the members of the Green Party including our MPs, I know that, per capita, our energy use would be considerably less than that of any other Political Party in Aotearoa/NZ … to put it mildly! ”
How do you KNOW this? This is pure posturing, there is probably a case for Libertarianz and the Maori Party to claim the same at least. Wishful thinking more like it.
February 21st, 2007 at 2:57 am
stuey
http://tinyurl.com/36t2t3
February 21st, 2007 at 2:57 am
Stuey,
tinyurl.com/36t2t3
April 7th, 2007 at 1:10 pm
good points made there,however, it should be noted that adrienne gin is a compulsive liar and her childish and immature comments should be ignored by the common mature adult.
and to brian gubbs comment; banning remuera tractors is indeed important,not just on the clean green side of things but for road safety- most of the morons who drive these suvs (not refering to off road hobbyists or farmers who drive land cruisers) think they are invincible and worst off all do not care less about the honda civic they are about to crush as a result of their incompetance.
and another point i wish to make here is that and suv is no safer for the occupants than a normal car with a good saftey rating,however they are FAR more dangerous to other vehicles occupants,cyclists and pedestrians alike.
and as far as banning the crown limos are concerned- im all for it and someone mentined that i they banned limos then they would just use corporate cabs- good point - the australian limos use the same gas guzzling engines as the corporate cabs, these days, a two litre engine is more than enough for a sedan- its time they banned large engines cars in the citys,unless they can reduce the emissions on the big aussie sixes to that of a smaller car (which is possible with small modifications)