Russel Norman and playing politics

Russel Norman and the Green Party have launched a ‘Spring offensive’ to try and get enough signatures for their asset sale petition to initiate a referendum.

Greens launch drive for asset sales referendum signatures

“The Government’s asset sales programme is in crisis and the referendum campaign is on a roll,” said Green Party co-leader Russel Norman.

He’s right, it is a campaign by Greens – an extension of the election campaign and relitigation of the parliamentary process.

“If the Government delays the holding of a referendum then they are playing politics with the issue against the will of New Zealanders.

That’s the height of hypocrisy, Greens are playing politics by hijacking the Citizen Initiated Referenda process to promote their politic views.

CIR are supposed to be a means of citizens expressing their opinion to politicians, not yet another way politicians can argue amongst themselves.

“It is only fair that a referendum is held as soon as possible to give the overwhelming majority of New Zealanders who oppose asset sales the chance to cast a vote against them.”

Greens keep claiming they are giving the people a chance to express their view via the petition and possible referendum, but if this were the case they would taking a balanced approach to guaging opinion.

The real Green motive?

This statement from Norman highlights their actual motive – they have a strong and fixed political opinion and they are using CIR to try and generate a vote of no confidence against a Government policy.

This is a blatant abuse of both the CIR and parliamentary processes. Greens are either cynically abusing our democracy, or they are abusing it through ignorance – so certain of their rightness that they think any means justifies their campaign. The latter is a repeating major flaw in Green thinking.

What was the Green position on the last CIR?

The Green Party were not so keen on listening to the vote of the people in the last CIR on smacking – they (along with other parties) chose to ignore the voice of the people then.

They are selectively ignoring or using CIR to suit their own political objectives, and the voice of the people is used went it fits convenience, or ignored when it doesn’t suit them.

Not arguing for MOM share floats

I’m not arguing for or against the MOM share float programme here – on that I’m not sure if the Mighty River Power float should go ahead at the moment, Solid Energy seems best left off the programme until a major improvement in their outlook, and certainly I prefer that not all the power companies were floated this parliamentary term.

I’m arguing against a misuse and abuse of our democratic system.

CIR should be for citizens

CIR should be for citizens. I’m totally opposed to any political party using CIR to promote their own political agendas, in effect the are petitioning themselves, which is absurd.

Is Russel Norman blind to his misuse of our democracy, or blatantly abusing it? Whichever it is he is certainly hypocritically playing politics while he accuses others of doing that if they don’t play his game.

Previous Post
Leave a comment

5 Comments

  1. 1. I am quite surprised Norman in his conquest for an earlier point scoring moment to 2014, should be allowed to use CIR like this. It is not designed for political agenda at all.

    2. Delaying the sale of these assets is another potential point score for those in the opposite camp claiming water is subject to ownership and a claim for a negotiation needs to be done beforehand, for Maori, to have compensation in form of a kind of leasing of water or some shares in these assets smacks of total greed.

    3. For the minority of Maori who want ownership – they are making me lose respect for Maori as a whole – and I hate it.

    Reply
  2. Steve W

     /  3rd September 2012

    The CIR process is open for all citizens to use to seek a non-binding referendum on any topic they see fit. The group seeking this referendum on assets sales includes the Greens and Green party members all over New Zealand most definitely are putting a lot of time an energy into it.

    This is entirely appropriate. This is what the CIR law is for your. Perhaps your antipathy toward the Greens has clouded this simple fact.

    There is nothing wrong or inappropriate in a political party – or parties – along with other organisations seeking such a referendum.

    Reply
    • QUOTE: “There is nothing wrong or inappropriate in a political party – or parties – along with other organisations seeking such a referendum.” UNQUOTE

      Can you point to the legalese on this please. Great debate – constructive.

      PS I am not against the Greens.

      Reply
    • I’m not against the Green Party, I’ve voted for Greens in the past and support some of what they do now. I’m just calling them on politicians hijacking one of the few ways citizens can tell politicians what they think.

      Politicians using/abusing CIR is totally inappropriate. In effect they are petitioning themselves, which is ludicrous. MPs have parliament, citizens have (ineffectual) referenda, and there should be a clear distinction.

      Reply
  3. Darryl

     /  3rd September 2012

    I agree with Quentin.
    Delaying the sale of these assets is another potential point score for those in the opposite camp claiming water is subject to ownership and a claim for a negotiation needs to be done beforehand, for Maori, to have compensation in form of a kind of leasing of water or some shares in these assets smacks of total greed.
    Russell Norman is just full of his own self importance.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s