The Greens have not been an environmental party since Jeanette Fitzsimmons. They are a hard-Left Marxist party.
You said about Tamatha Paul: "she didn’t have the tools she thought she would as an MP". The unsaid conclusion from that statement is that she thought she would have unconstrained power. Show me anywhere where Marxism and unconstrained power have worked.
I agree that the Greens need to refocus on environmental issues. However even if they did, I don't believe they'll focus on the environmental ussies that matter in New Zealand.
Our biggest environmental problem isn't emissions. If totsl global emissions were a 2l bottle of milk, our contribution is one half of one drop. That contribution could be pure bleach and no one would notice. Our biggest environmental problem is water. Specifically water quality. Focus on that.
At the moment, all the Greens do is cost us money for zero, absolutely zero, benefit.
I think we have a wider problem than just the Greens. As a community we need our party in government to come under effective scrutiny and challenge from the loyal opposition. This is not happening and it is not just the Greens who are not focusing on their raison d’être.
I appreciate that Labour has to go through a period of soul searching and regrouping. But I want to see coalition policies hauled over the coals. (I voted for ACT.)
Am I to believe that all is well in Fast Track land, with a huge spend, at a breakneck pace, that is potentially open to project stumbles at best and outright rorts at worst? This is an on-steroids riff on Rob Muldoon’s Hail Mary, Think Big, and that could have done with more oversight.
The loyal opposition has a job to do, and we rely on them to do it.
I really loved this comment—it’s such a great point, and I wish more people thought like you. A strong, effective opposition is so important, and we’re really missing that right now. It’s not just about holding the government to account but making sure policies are as solid as they can be. Without that, things can easily spiral into poor decisions, wasted money, or, like you said, even outright rorts.
The Fast Track example is perfect. Ambition and speed have their place, but when there’s no clear accountability, it’s a recipe for disaster.
I also get that Labour needs to regroup, but also think that it’s been one year, surely they have found themselves? Or even just part of themselves? And their political soul searching has come at the expense of real scrutiny of the current coalition government.
Thanks for always sharing your thoughts—I really appreciate how much you care about these issues and always add something valuable to the convo. Nat
Thanks for those kind words. I thought this article was pure ‘Less Certain’. It is passionate, reasoned and articulate.
In particular I find your articles easy to engage with because you are not doctrinaire; you focus in on the issues in an educated, clear and non-vicious way.
Which does make it all the more surprising to me how you can possibly hold the beliefs that you do. (I’m teasing.) John
Exactly right. It is truly heartbreaking, and as you say has many serious political ramifications. You maybe sympathetic to the Party trying to raise significant issues but you will be seen as a traitor., not a political traitor but a MORAL traitor. The drift to being a cult rather than a rational Political Party has happen from the time the Greens entered the Parliament. I could give you the history of where this all went horribly wrong but here are two issues which remain current. 1. Choosing MPs on the basis of moral posturing and labels rather than political experience, established expertise and public profile. 2. Passive Aggressive behaviour is seen as 'moral' and acceptable. it is the 'Green Style'. It make the Greens a nightmare to deal with in a straightforward way. They are and have always been this way. Every statement is seen as a personal testimony of 'correctness'. It means they are extremely internally focused. Inside the Green Party it is in reality very competitive. BUT no one is allowed to compete and competence is NOT rewarded . So, for example, to perform well publicly or have a significant profile is simply an invitation to passive aggressive counter-labelling. I remember well trying to tell the Party what was happening and who was pulling their strings in the parliamentary environment and most especially within the Parties they needed to deal with and the result was that I was seen as a 'nasty' un-Green person and so were others raising very important survival issues. The result is utterly sad....for all of us who need a functioning Green Party.
The Green Party needs to tell it's own history accurately but instead writes unrealistic hagiographies so that it can't scrutinise itself in any kind of realistic way. it just evokes memories of Sainthood rather than self- understanding.
Great analysis. The Greens in recent years seem to have identified that their core voter base is the self-righteous, well-connected and affluent who identify with 'Left' but are largely comfortable with the status quo and are reluctant to share their considerable wealth and status. Palestine makes for great theatre, works for moral posturing and provides excellent sound bites and photo ops. But is largely a distraction. The Greens have become nervous to go anywhere near addressing the core problems we face with the environment and the economy. Not only are these complex questions that require a fundamental realignment in how we create a future for our grandchildren but they require pragmatic policies based on well-formulated evidence and they will cost a lot of money. There are no financial shortcuts here. What is required is more than virtue-signaling and self-righteous posturing - but it seems that for the current crop of Green MPs this is about all they have to offer.
The Greens have not been an environmental party since Jeanette Fitzsimmons. They are a hard-Left Marxist party.
You said about Tamatha Paul: "she didn’t have the tools she thought she would as an MP". The unsaid conclusion from that statement is that she thought she would have unconstrained power. Show me anywhere where Marxism and unconstrained power have worked.
I agree that the Greens need to refocus on environmental issues. However even if they did, I don't believe they'll focus on the environmental ussies that matter in New Zealand.
Our biggest environmental problem isn't emissions. If totsl global emissions were a 2l bottle of milk, our contribution is one half of one drop. That contribution could be pure bleach and no one would notice. Our biggest environmental problem is water. Specifically water quality. Focus on that.
At the moment, all the Greens do is cost us money for zero, absolutely zero, benefit.
I think we have a wider problem than just the Greens. As a community we need our party in government to come under effective scrutiny and challenge from the loyal opposition. This is not happening and it is not just the Greens who are not focusing on their raison d’être.
I appreciate that Labour has to go through a period of soul searching and regrouping. But I want to see coalition policies hauled over the coals. (I voted for ACT.)
Am I to believe that all is well in Fast Track land, with a huge spend, at a breakneck pace, that is potentially open to project stumbles at best and outright rorts at worst? This is an on-steroids riff on Rob Muldoon’s Hail Mary, Think Big, and that could have done with more oversight.
The loyal opposition has a job to do, and we rely on them to do it.
Hi John,
I really loved this comment—it’s such a great point, and I wish more people thought like you. A strong, effective opposition is so important, and we’re really missing that right now. It’s not just about holding the government to account but making sure policies are as solid as they can be. Without that, things can easily spiral into poor decisions, wasted money, or, like you said, even outright rorts.
The Fast Track example is perfect. Ambition and speed have their place, but when there’s no clear accountability, it’s a recipe for disaster.
I also get that Labour needs to regroup, but also think that it’s been one year, surely they have found themselves? Or even just part of themselves? And their political soul searching has come at the expense of real scrutiny of the current coalition government.
Thanks for always sharing your thoughts—I really appreciate how much you care about these issues and always add something valuable to the convo. Nat
Hi Nat
Thanks for those kind words. I thought this article was pure ‘Less Certain’. It is passionate, reasoned and articulate.
In particular I find your articles easy to engage with because you are not doctrinaire; you focus in on the issues in an educated, clear and non-vicious way.
Which does make it all the more surprising to me how you can possibly hold the beliefs that you do. (I’m teasing.) John
Exactly right. It is truly heartbreaking, and as you say has many serious political ramifications. You maybe sympathetic to the Party trying to raise significant issues but you will be seen as a traitor., not a political traitor but a MORAL traitor. The drift to being a cult rather than a rational Political Party has happen from the time the Greens entered the Parliament. I could give you the history of where this all went horribly wrong but here are two issues which remain current. 1. Choosing MPs on the basis of moral posturing and labels rather than political experience, established expertise and public profile. 2. Passive Aggressive behaviour is seen as 'moral' and acceptable. it is the 'Green Style'. It make the Greens a nightmare to deal with in a straightforward way. They are and have always been this way. Every statement is seen as a personal testimony of 'correctness'. It means they are extremely internally focused. Inside the Green Party it is in reality very competitive. BUT no one is allowed to compete and competence is NOT rewarded . So, for example, to perform well publicly or have a significant profile is simply an invitation to passive aggressive counter-labelling. I remember well trying to tell the Party what was happening and who was pulling their strings in the parliamentary environment and most especially within the Parties they needed to deal with and the result was that I was seen as a 'nasty' un-Green person and so were others raising very important survival issues. The result is utterly sad....for all of us who need a functioning Green Party.
The Green Party needs to tell it's own history accurately but instead writes unrealistic hagiographies so that it can't scrutinise itself in any kind of realistic way. it just evokes memories of Sainthood rather than self- understanding.
Great analysis. The Greens in recent years seem to have identified that their core voter base is the self-righteous, well-connected and affluent who identify with 'Left' but are largely comfortable with the status quo and are reluctant to share their considerable wealth and status. Palestine makes for great theatre, works for moral posturing and provides excellent sound bites and photo ops. But is largely a distraction. The Greens have become nervous to go anywhere near addressing the core problems we face with the environment and the economy. Not only are these complex questions that require a fundamental realignment in how we create a future for our grandchildren but they require pragmatic policies based on well-formulated evidence and they will cost a lot of money. There are no financial shortcuts here. What is required is more than virtue-signaling and self-righteous posturing - but it seems that for the current crop of Green MPs this is about all they have to offer.
Well said, Natalia!