Thursday, 24 November 2011

Questioning the Greens

There’s an election on Saturday.

And despite NZ facing the most challenging economic times since records began, and government being both responsible for it and also responsible for making it worse, most people I speak to couldn’t give a shit about it.

And that includes those I speak to in the mirror. (Fear not, folks, they don’t yet speak back. Not all of them anyway.)

Why so little interest?

Perhaps because the differences between two main parties don’t amount to a hill of beans. Not even a small plateful.  (Which is not how you could describe the mountain of debt the government has been racking up “fighting” the economic depression.)

There is so little interest in the contest because you could not slide a ten-year government bond certificate between the two main parties.

One says government debt is way too big and has to come down, yet last year they added to it by an extra nineteen billion dollars, in just one year alone!  The other says government debt is too big, and they want to grow it by only sixteen billion dollars. Or thereabouts. (To which the first party replies that while their adversaries want to spend like drunken sailors, they on the other hand want to grow it by only fourteen—give or take a Treasury paper or two.)

With “differences” like this, no wonder few people give a shit. Except about the trivia.

And no wonder the Greens are emerging as a political force, because whatever else you say about them, they do represent a different point of view.  They do actually make a fundamental challenge to “business as usual” politics. (Where the other parties at least give lip service to worrying about the debt, for example, the Greens don’t bother. They just say we should pour billions more down similar holes, just as long as those holes look like Solyndra. And Spain.)

Yes, they’re still mad as hatters, But no wonder they are allowed to speak utter nonsense and get away with it, because most of the media who should be challenging them on their madness and delusions have been indoctrinated since birth in the same warm, soggy mush that is smeared across all the party’s policy positions.

So to help out the few voters (or journalists) who do want to challenge the Greens (or who know they should have), Liberty Scott has done some spade work for you:

The latter  is

a long list of questions journalists should ask, and YOU should ask if you are thinking about voting Green.   They might make you wonder if the Greens are quite so cuddly and inoffensive as the media makes them out to be.

You can thank Scott later.


  1. If journalists really took the time and asked these questions of the Greens, especially live on air then you'd probably complain that they were receiving preferential attention, a real catch 22.


    this sort of stuff is happening all over the place. Old public buildings are being condemned left right and centre. It is all coming under the guise of EQ standards failure too.

    I guess CHC has given the cabinet the shits, and that is why they are needing to get hold of a few billion to replace all the old infrastructure.

    It is a hard decision, and I would rather see red tape reduced to allow entrepreneurs to get in to provide the reqd infrastructure expecially in Irrigation, Hydro generation, aquaculture and mineral recovery programs, as I believe these will generate massive improvements in employment, and thus improve the expenditure side, as well as improving taxation and Balance of Payments for the nation as a whole.
    The short term propping up of liabilities that is the straight out replacement of condemned buildings is a worry, because the loss of income is being replaced by an expense.

    As for the Greens:
    @Richard: this kind of publicity is the sunlight that the media need to expose the Greens with. People need to understand the real agenda of "the ever so caring" Greens. They hide their anti human goals, the reality is that a significant number of Greens want us to live in communal settings with state ownership of everything, and worse still, some even want us to go back to the dark/stone ages.

  3. @Richard: Actually, Richard, research by the University of Canterbury on election media coverage up till the halfway point says the Greens ARE receiving preferential attention.

    "Media coverage of the Greens has been more positive than for any other party. 51.5% of its total coverage has been positive. On top of that, coverage of the Greens has been higher than for any other minor party at 9.7%."

  4. I could not agree more that there is almost no difference between the two main parties, Peter.

    Its an utterly hopeless situation. Nobody seems to have the slightest idea .

    I'm gonna enjoy watching the Libz on Stratos TV tonight at 8pm...


1. Commenters are welcome and invited.
2. All comments are moderated. Off-topic grandstanding, spam, and gibberish will be ignored. Tu quoque will be moderated.
3. Read the post before you comment. Challenge facts, but don't simply ignore them.
4. Use a name. If it's important enough to say, it's important enough to put a name to.
5. Above all: Act with honour. Say what you mean, and mean what you say.