Shades of Green – “cracks in the green revolution”

Greens have not been united on everything in the past, but in opposition they were at least able to appear to be largely working together.

A simple reality of being in Government means that those MPs who are ministers – James Shaw, Julie Anne Genter and Eugenie Sage, and to a lesser extent Parliamentary Under-Secretary Jan Logie, have heavy workloads, and have had to make decisions that follow the will of Government rather than the ideals of the party.

The other four MPs have much more of a free rein, and three of them in particular are fairly prominent doing their own things on social media.

Image result for shades of green

It is now effectively a party of two halves.

And party has been particularly divided over their historic strong opposition to ‘waka jumping’ type legislation and their current opposition, and their decision to vote in favour of Winston Peters’ controversial bill.

Green supporters often react badly to criticism – some of them fervently believe their own hype and can’t countenance any possibility they and their ideals may not be perfect.

So they are not likely to take Matthew Hooton’s column in the Herald today very well – Cracks in the green revolution

True Greens are not concerned about climate change, poverty or endangered species per se, but see them as mere symptoms of the real problem, which is capitalism and the population growth it allows.

I wouldn’t call them ‘true Greens’, that’s a label more appropriate for Jeanette Fitzsimons and Rod Donald, but there is a strong green mantra that social revolution is the main aim, with the claim that that will somehow fix environmental problems.

Hooton describes the current shades of Greens. James Shaw:

Far from having Norman’s True Green whakapapa, Shaw is a Wellington technocrat more at home at his former employer PwC than at a radicals’ rally.

He is part of a three-strong faction in Parliament but the other members are Labour’s David Parker and National’s Todd Muller, with whom he is trying to establish a multiparty consensus on climate change that might not save the planet but would certainly destroy the party.

Many Greens seem to abhor any attempt to work with ‘the enemy’, National.

Recently appointed co-leader Marama Davidson:

Davidson joins Hone Harawira as the only genuine radicals to have become party leaders.

It’s unsurprising that Davidson declined to participate in post-election negotiations with Labour.

Such processes are far too bourgeois for someone who deeply believes the New Zealand state is illegitimate.

Davidson may lead a faction of one in Parliament but she is a cult figure among Green activists who plan to insert her disciples into key party positions at its AGM this weekend.

The rest of the Green caucus:

Julie-Ann Genter is the smartest Green Minister and a genuine expert on transport and urban planning but her American heritage is a problem among the base.

Eugenie Sage is a genuine environmentalist rather than True Green but gets no credit for her wins on oil and gas, conservation funding and plastic bags.

Jan Logie worries more about the spirit of Te Tiriti o Waitangi than about the details of the Paris Climate Accord.

The party’s longest-serving MP, Gareth Hughes, is on the outer, having been overlooked for promotion despite more than eight years in Parliament.

Hughes has a very low profile. He has championed environmental issues, but seems to have lost any drive he may have had – and that’s debatable. He is perhaps best known for his ‘Hey Clint’ moment, asking a staffer what he should say.

Chloe Swarbrick, 24, and Golriz Ghahraman, 37, compete to be the darling of the party’s millennials with their eyes on the longer term.

Swarbrick seems to have taken on her job as MP seriously and has been prepared to work with any other MP or party to try to achieve some wins, especially on cannabis law reform. I think that her efforts so far have been impressive, more so because she is a first term MP.

However Ghahraman has stumbled from controversy to controversy on social media. She joined with Davidson and supporters this week claiming to be female and non-white victims.

Are Davidson and Ghahraman a serious threat to ‘the establishment’? Or are they more of a threat to the Green Party.

While the Green ministers have low profiles buried in their portfolios, the party revolutionaries have time to get attention. I’m not sure this face of the Greens is attractive to the soft Green voters they need to rebuild party support.

All the Green MPs are learning the realities of being a part of Government, and this will evolve over the current term.

They have major challenges in trying to avoid being split by fights for power that any political party (ok, except NZ First and ACT) have.

If Davidson and her supporting faction see a revolutionary takeover within the Greens as necessary on the road to drive out ‘the establishment’ then the Greens are in for challenging times.

Will they split or grow?

80 Comments

  1. Corky

     /  August 17, 2018

    Hooten nails it. Will they split or grow? I’m on record as saying they will split…literally. Should that happen it’ll be great news for the Right….both Green parties will sink.

    • Blazer

       /  August 17, 2018

      you’re on ‘record’ so much…but can never find out…where.!

      • Corky

         /  August 17, 2018

        That’s because you choose not to look out of embarrassment. Tell you what, I will bookmark all my predictions so you can check up on me…just in case I’m lying.

        I’m down-ticking you for willful ignorance.😃

      • Kitty Catkin

         /  August 17, 2018

        Geez, Blazer, now look what you’ve done. You’ve encouraged him.

    • robertguyton

       /  August 17, 2018

      Hooten comments on The Greens?
      Valuable commentary, to be trusted /sarc

      • Corky

         /  August 17, 2018

        But of course, Robert. An unbiased eye is like ultraviolet light in a dark motel room, it sees all the unsavoury stains.

        • robertguyton

           /  August 17, 2018

          Hooten searches for stains and where he can’t find them, makes them.

          • Corky

             /  August 17, 2018

            Isn’t that politics? The art of spin and perception?

            • robertguyton

               /  August 17, 2018

              Stain-making in motel rooms? There’s another name for that.

            • Corky

               /  August 17, 2018

              Yeah, a Green-Over.

            • Kitty Catkin

               /  August 17, 2018

              Only one kind of UV light shows stains, a ‘blacklight’.

              Ultraviolet is used for many things, including insect control and sterilising surgical instruments.

  2. Alan Wilkinson

     /  August 17, 2018

    Golriz and Marama are threats to sanity only. Probably their own before anyone else’s.

    • robertguyton

       /  August 17, 2018

      I met and talked with Marama Davidson at the weekend. She seemed very sane to me. Intelligent too, and personable.

      • Alan Wilkinson

         /  August 17, 2018

        She is on a different level from Golriz. Her problem is a fixation on what she knows to the exclusion of what she doesn’t know.

      • sorethumb

         /  August 17, 2018

        I believe an arrest is imminent in the rape threats (etc) on facebook (the ones what she got rid of)?

        • Gezza

           /  August 17, 2018

          Interesting. Why do you believe this? What is your source?

        • Gezza

           /  August 17, 2018

          (the ones what she got rid of)?
          Apparently with advice she recovered them & provided them to the police. I read that somewhere.

          • sorethumb

             /  August 17, 2018

            Fake News

          • sorethumb

             /  August 17, 2018

            I think you’re right Geeza we will learn any day now who the perpetrator was?

            • Gezza

               /  August 17, 2018

              Unlikely. Probably all happening on the down-low.

              The best we could hope for is that “a person is currently helping the police with their enquiries”. If that.

              They might just taser him in the knackerss & bash the bugger up. Serve him right.

    • Maggy Wassilieff

       /  August 17, 2018

      These 2 Greens look High Maintenance for the NZ tax-payer.
      GG’s accommodation costs are higher than other MPs and
      MD’s and GG’s travel expenses look pretty exorbitant for the 3 months.
      https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/106310719/full-list-of-mps-expenses-shows-spending-topped-21-million

      • Kitty Catkin

         /  August 17, 2018

        The reason people are down on GG has nothing to do with her sex or race;it’s her personality. Her stupid lie about being the first woman to be Minister of Defence when she isn’t the Minister and wouldn’t be the first woman if she had been was a witless move.
        What else is she lying about ?

        MD displays one of the classic signs of narcissism; lashing out at anyone who challenges her inflated self-image. How dare they question the narcissist’s egomaniacal self-esteem ? Can it be that there may be some truth in it ? Spit, hiss, slashhh…..

  3. robertguyton

     /  August 17, 2018

    “True Greens are not concerned about climate change” says Hooten.
    Here’s my letter to the editor of The Southland Times published in yesterday’s edition.

    “Climate change
    Southland has to pull its weight where climate change is concerned. We don’t want to be thought of as slackers by the rest of the country and there’s plenty we can do to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions. Fonterra has promised to turn off the coal burners at Edendale and make their milk powder using renewable energy, as soon as they can; “”Our targets are ambitious and our commitment to meeting them is resolute, because there is no alternative with climate change,” says the Fonterra spokesman.

    Even the big polluters are joining the campaign to turn back the tide of seriously damaging climate events that are right now frying the northern hemisphere.

    But not the National Party.

    Instead of working with Southlanders, they’ve chosen to try to alarm us, frighten us with veiled hints about “trouble” and “unaffordable sacrifices”.

    In other words, it’s business as usual, according to National’s “climate change” spokesman, Todd Muller, and local National Party MP, Sarah Dowie.

    Who, I wonder, will explain that head-in-the-sand thinking to Todd and Sarah’s grandchildren when they ask,

    “What did we do here in Southland when we learned how serious climate change was?””

    • Alan Wilkinson

       /  August 17, 2018

      If you are serious about climate change in Southland you should be planting pineapples because nothing else you do will make any difference to the outcome though it may make you poorer if it is sufficiently silly.

      • robertguyton

         /  August 17, 2018

        “If” I’m serious…are you in doubt about that? I can’t be trying hard enough here to convey my position…
        I’m not planting pineapples; loquats, feijoada, fig, passionfruit, katakana, bamboo, avocado, yes, but pineapple, no; I don’t especially like them.

        • Alan Wilkinson

           /  August 17, 2018

          Good to hear. Bananas? I like our little kiwi ones. And custard apples. Yum. Things are looking up from swedes and oysters down there.

          • robertguyton

             /  August 17, 2018

            Not warm enough for bananas here on the south-east; I’d like to grow those small, sweet bananas we sometimes get in our organic shop; much, much nicer than the standard supermarket bananas. I’ve never tasted a custard apple but hope to one day. We’ve had some seriously worrying issues here with our swedes; the genetically-messed-with HT swedes killed hundreds of cows, cruelly, and the oyster farms got smashed by disease just recently and had to be destroyed; the wild oysters too, have suffered at the hand of man (that’s us) and almost completely wiped out by dredging practices. Deep Green thinking would have prevented those disasters, Imo. One day…

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  August 17, 2018

              Hadn’t heard about the swede problem. I thought the wild oysters had the parasitic infection?

            • robertguyton

               /  August 17, 2018

              The wild ones (surprisingly) have been declared free of the bonamia parasite…it was the farmed ones that were devastated. A related organism swept through the wild beds years ago, almost destroying the lot. The HT swede issue is an example of genetic meddling gone wrong. Not only were cows poisoned to death, many, many more suffered near-death conditions that would appall anyone who saw them first hand.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  August 17, 2018

              Ok, so it was the original wild bed infection I read about. After they recovered from that were they then impacted by bad dredging? I thought there was a management regime on them.

              I see there was a huge cock-up at Wrightsons with the swede seed variety this year following on from the initial disaster:
              https://www.odt.co.nz/rural-life/horticulture/company-faces-after-swede-mix

            • robertguyton

               /  August 17, 2018

              Dredging practices have a devastating effect on the benthic communities of the strait. Disease takes hold and it’s all on. The true state of the resource is unknown to me at the moment, and probably to anyone else; those are difficult waters to investigate. Most extractive industries wreck the environment, in my opinion. Those that are out of sight are most vulnerable.
              Selling those swede seeds again was appalling, Imo. Human error, apparently.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  August 17, 2018

              Well, the Bluff oyster dredging has been going on for a very long time before hitting these troubles. That suggests to me that it can be managed properly and something changed.

              Is there any indication the HT swede problem was or should have been known before the initial introduction here? It seems to be one dependent on conditions as some herds were affected and some weren’t.

            • robertguyton

               /  August 17, 2018

              Hmmm…like all extractive industries, technology gains means greater take/harm. In any case, what was once “okay” doesn’t necessarily stay that way; harvests are good until they aren’t; colonies get exhausted. On top of that, all industries have pirates who don’t respect the need for longevity of resource; it’s how we roll.
              The dangers of herbicide tolerant food crops and the technologies used to produce them have been extensively discussed in public by The Greens and lower-case greens since…forever. Farmers haven’t taken note and are presently looking forward to genetically-engineered pasture grasses which will be fantastic in the way HT swedes were, Imo. There’s a basic principle lacking from these industries and therefore environmental harm ensues.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  August 17, 2018

              Anything new introduces risks as well as opportunities, Robert. The trick is to management and ensure that those taking them bear responsibility and costs of the outcomes.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  August 17, 2018

              oops “to manage them”

            • robertguyton

               /  August 17, 2018

              Glyphosate and Roundup are not the same thing, Alan.
              Thanks for the interesting discussion today, I appreciate your views and their tenor. I have to get outside now and prune apple trees.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  August 17, 2018

              Yes, it was a good discussion. I learnt stuff. Cheers. (Took two ute loads of prunings out to the back road yesterday. Got a few spikes in my hands in consequence.)

          • robertguyton

             /  August 17, 2018

            “The trick is to management and ensure that those taking them bear responsibility and costs of the outcomes.”
            And here, Alan, you and I find strong common ground. Industry doesn’t “bear responsibility and the costs of outcomes” ; witness the decades of legal obfuscation wherever there have been major fubars; oil spills, mass poisonings of communities etc. where Big Industry fights tooth and nail to avoid both accepting responsibility and compensation for the harm they caused; history is littered with such examples and some of them, on an even broader scale, haven’t been tested…yet. Agriculture’s one, oil exploration another where the harm is so great we can’t see it clearly, unless you regard global warming as the consequence, as I do. Will Monsanto pay out to all claimants against Roundup, now that one has succeeded in winning his case against them? Fat chance. What about the rest of the world suffering unprecedented cancers whose claims against Monsanto and co will likely never be made? Because it’s so complex a matter, it’s back to first principles, I reckon, to heal the harm we have done.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  August 17, 2018

              Monsanto was sold to Bayer and Bayer share values have already taken a hit. I haven’t looked into the merits of the case against Roundup and there are a lot of factors – how solid is the science, what are the probabilities Roundup induces or facilitates various cancers, what was known or should have been known when and by whom, who was responsible for making these known to end users and protecting others.

              There is also the cost/benefit consideration – it may have saved a lot more lives than it has cost. The alternatives might be worse.

            • robertguyton

               /  August 17, 2018

              I have looked in the case, Alan, over a long period of time. Your argument (above) for in-action (you’re not calling it either way, thereby supporting the status quo) is the great danger we face as humans; not stopping doing dumb sh*t because “the science isn’t completely settled yet”. While you prevaricators prevaricate, we all go to hell in a handcart. Inaction around climate change is the classic example; fiddling while Rome burns. I’m no fiddler and can form an intelligent view based on my on the ground experience. Have you any idea how widespread and intense is the use of Roundup here in NZ? Make your eyes water, it would. And worse. Farmers can’ti magine not using the “tool” – why, we’d be straight back into the Stone Age, they trumpet. If I wasn’t an optimist, I’d despair! Farmers say, “Don’t tell us what to do. Describe the problem and we’ll find the solutions; we’re innovators! We wouldn’t destroy our own environment!” Hmmmmm. So, farmers, here’s the issue; Roundup. For starters. When you’ve got that one cleaned up, I’ll give you your next challenge: go, farmers, go!

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  August 17, 2018

              Yes, I have a fair idea of how much Roundup and its equivalents are used and use some myself. I don’t see much correlation between that and cancer incidence here? Is there anywhere a chart of glyphosate usage vs non-Hodgkins Lymphoma incidence? I’ve seen various recent studies that show no statistical correlation so I’m inclined to believe that any link is pretty small.

            • robertguyton

               /  August 17, 2018

              Oops! I responded in the wrong slot, Alan (probably affected by the Roundup I used when I was a young man 🙂

            • Kitty Catkin

               /  August 17, 2018

              Don’t waste your passionfruit on birds; the ingrates won’t eat them.

              I was given a bag and nobly left a little in each one for the bird table waxeyes,

              ‘ YUKKK ! We’re not eating THAT !’

            • robertguyton

               /  August 17, 2018

              Probably been sprayed. Waxeyes adore organic apples, especially those from the very old varieties; Keswick codlin, Ribbston pippin, Kentish fill basket…

    • sorethumb

       /  August 17, 2018

      In her increasingly rare spare time, Ghahraman likes to travel with her partner, [alleged] comedian Guy Williams. She also likes to host dinner parties, despite confessing to being a bad cook.

      http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11898165

  4. robertguyton

     /  August 17, 2018

    “Many Greens seem to abhor any attempt to work with ‘the enemy’, National.”
    As a councillor on the Southland Regional Council, I sit around the table with and work alongside of National Party supporters and voters, including personal friends of Bill English, ex-Branch Presidents of the National Party and, more to the point, ex-Deputy Speaker of the House, Eric Roy.
    Just sayin’

  5. sorethumb

     /  August 17, 2018

    Does New Zealand’s biggest city have the economic blues.

    Labour Minister Phil Twyford told a conference yesterday that Auckland’s economic performance is ‘way below’ where it should be.
    https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/new-zealand/2018/08/is-auckland-performing.html

    The distinctive feature of the New Zealand economy is that land is an important input into the productive process. This is obvious with the agricultural,fishing and forestry sectors but it also applies to international tourism. In a simple model of the New Zealand economy where the supply of land is fixed, and New Zealand’s isolation means it is not a ‘natural’ location for the production of a broad range of internationally traded goods and services, then an increase in the labour supply through large scale immigration will reduce the
    marginal product of labour. As a result:

    Real wages will fall

    Owners of land will benefit

    There will be an outflow of ‘native’ labour in search of higher wages in Australia

    The economy will be bigger, but average incomes will fall

    Resources will flow into low value service production.

    This conventional model of the impact of an increase in labour supply is obviously a simplification of a complex reality, but we think that the fixed factor effect is important enough to be considered in any discussion or analysis of the impact of immigration in New Zealand. The official analysis, however, almost entirely omits it. There is a tendency to follow the international literature, where omitting the impact of fixed factors of production is a simplification that doesn’t matter very much, without thinking at all about how New Zealand could be different.

    The model seems to be consistent with some of the observed facts:

    Real per capita export growth has slowed significantly as labour supply has increased

    Labour productivity growth has been very slow

    Census data shows Auckland median income growth was the second lowest of any
    region over 2001-2006, and the lowest over 2006 to 2013. Auckland is the ‘poster child’ of superdiversity. If there was anything in the ‘diversity dividend’ argument Auckland should have been leaping ahead in the income stakes.
    http://www.tailrisk.co.nz/documents/TheSuperdiversityMyth.pdf

    Chloe the Knowie scoffed and Winston Peters on The Nation.

    • robertguyton

       /  August 17, 2018

      For sore thumb:
      “Business and the general financial outlook is in fact quite on track, and absent another GFC, peaks and troughs are perfectly normal.

      And guess what, we’re simply not in the trough the the extent the Opposition makes out. Surprised? The naysayers really should pay far more attention to the numbers, ironically to “the people who know” than what lobbyists, shills, PR mavens, and interests with only one set of priorities are trying to impress upon the wider public…
      Kim Campbell thinks that the business community is being rejected… meanwhile the Sharemarket soared.
      Kim Campbell thinks that the business community is being ignored… meanwhile Field Days, which is the premiere event for Agricultural industry, broke sales records, and had the largest ever turnout this year. For some dealers, they simply couldn’t cope with the sheer demand on their products. And that was from a Sector we were assured was “under siege!” no less.
      Kim Campbell thinks that the business community is being shunned… meanwhile the broad settings remain roughly intact, albeit with a few minor tweaks that allow for more worker-centric decision making – and most certainly not at the very direct expense of business entirely.
      The much talked about rise to the $20 minimum is being phased in as appropriate, and whilst smaller businesses complain about the cost (there will be those who will struggle, but again, the Government is not necessarily ignoring them, in fact it is doing much to help them through the process if only people would actually listen and pay attention), we have certainly had some of the worst examples of business taking advantage of workers under the previous Government, all of this being sought to be rectified through strengthening labour relations and making sure, through checks and balances, that when one employs someone, they are actually given their fair dues.
      Kim Campbell thinks that the business community is being belittled… meanwhile the banks (offshore banks in the main, it should also be noted) continue to rake it in, posting record highs year upon year, and this continues uninterrupted. In fact, given the fact that the offshore banks own the majority of capital in this country and control its movement from home mortgages to inter-company lending and almost everything in between, who are the real screws being laid down by when push comes to shove? Well, given the recent downturn (and again slight upturn) in the NZ dollar of late, thanks to the world economic situation, it is actually high finance that sets much of the tone, Government’s be damned.
      In fact, during downturns it is ironic that this is indeed the reason that Key-led Government gave when things went bad: they weren’t wrong all the time in this assessment, we are indeed merely a bobbing cork on an ocean of fiat currency cash printed and retracted as befits the major capital centres of the world, but this reality never seems to apply to Labour-led Governments too when the opportunity for blame rears its head. No, on the contrary, it must be all to do with the economic policies of a Labour / Left-leaning Government. Nothing to do with other issues, cough.
      All governments must work with not only the hand they’re dealt, and with the outgoing National-led Government, the incoming Labour-led one didn’t have the greatest hand to deal with due to the formers shorting of much needed infrastructure, and other areas of the local economy and areas of concern in health, education, welfare and so forth, but also the international waters must be negotiated.
      It’s doing a generally good job, even if it has politically constricted itself through its adherence to the BRR (the Budget Responsibility Rules), which is its way of assuring those in the business community that they will be “fiscally responsible”, though there is no real need to actually have to prove it ahead of time, since the past shows quite categorically that there is actually a good measure of fiscal prudence on record for all to see if they’d care to open their eyes.
      Kim Campbell thinks that the business community is being left completely out of the conversation… but this Government, who supposedly “hates free trade!” according to the Opposition just negotiated a trade deal with the EU, is in the process of improving trade deals elsewhere, has just been on the receiving end of improved bilateral relations in terms of business movement between the US and NZ, and embraced an updated version of the TPP, even if the lattermost of these is still against the wishes of its own voters, this Coalition still pursued what was largely and is largely the very same things a National-led Government would do. Shall we expect the next National Government to strike those all out? Of course not. If they’d concluded those deals would they be championing their acumen on trade and business as a whole as a result? You betcha they would.
      Kim Campbell thinks that the business community is being unfairly demonised… but only 350 business people replied to the last ANZ survey where “confidence was at a 10 year low!”, and yet we are all expected to jump and snap to attention. This, in a country of 500,000+ businesses – the bulk of whom did not reply – is a ludicrous sentiment in the extreme.
      It is literally the 1% crowd throwing a fit and expecting us to fall about in thrall to their whims and fancies without question.
      They, the respondents who typically have the most negative views in such surveys, have regularly and monotonously responded in a downbeat manner to any Labour-led Government, always giving an uptick when a National-led Government takes power, but the reality is the bottom line seldom actually fundamentally moves in ways that would cause the tsunami of despair as is being made out, absent any external factors – and even then, the businesses that are often used to making money hand over fist continued to do so even in leaner times.
      The banks, the financiers, the ones who caused the last great ruction in world economies not only survived, they damn well thrived. Some punishment, some austerity for them!”

      exhALANt

      • Gezza

         /  August 17, 2018

        Downticked for not paragraphing & not citing link or source.

        • Gezza

           /  August 17, 2018

          Kim Campbell thinks the business community is being unfairly demonised… but only 350 business people replied to the last ANZ survey where “confidence was at a 10 year low!”, and yet we are all expected to jump and snap to attention. This, in a country of 500,000+ businesses – the bulk of whom did not reply – is a ludicrous sentiment in the extreme.

          Love it.

          • Alan Wilkinson

             /  August 17, 2018

            What it doesn’t tell you is that the survey is sent to the same 2000 businesses every month covering a range of sectors. Therefore while there may be bias in the overall numbers the trends do show changing sentiment in the same group of business people. In that respect these are not random fluctuations due to sampling but actual changes in business people’s expectations.

            • robertguyton

               /  August 17, 2018

              Only those wishing ill of the Left responded, Imo.
              The more comprehensive survey of business confidence in Southland returned a more believable picture of high business confidence across the board, with intentions to hire staff, the best indicator of confidence in the economy, also high. National are jiggling the stats and bleating load to try to frighten the punters.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  August 17, 2018

              I think it’s reasonable to expect that those most worried about the future were most likely to respond. However, your problem is to explain why that has changed.

            • robertguyton

               /  August 17, 2018

              Their view has changed, Alan, because their favourite political party has been consigned to the Opposition benches and faking despair about the economy is seen as a way to get them back in.

          • Alan Wilkinson

             /  August 17, 2018

            Yes, but that changed back in November. What has changed since then?

        • robertguyton

           /  August 17, 2018

          exhALANt is the source, as posted. Paragraphing? Must I do everything for you, Gezza? Think of it in the way you might a cryptic crossword in your daily rag; a challenging pastime that sharpens the mind, and paragraph-away!

          • Gezza

             /  August 17, 2018

            Oh – I thought that was just one of your silly exclamations. Sorry about that.

            Not changing it to an uptick though.

            A bit of a chore to read on an iPad2. Too slack on the white space.

            • robertguyton

               /  August 17, 2018

              Down-ticks are grist to my mill. If yournz readers were up-ticking me en masse, I’d drift off to somewhere more interesting.

            • Gezza

               /  August 17, 2018

              👍🏼 (Ok, I’ll keep that quiet & we can both see how many of these silly Rightie buggers fall for it, robert.) 😉

      • Kitty Catkin

         /  August 17, 2018

        A great mass of print with no paragraphs is a turnoff for most people, I imagine.

        • robertguyton

           /  August 17, 2018

          Not me; I read it all, plus the rest of the very long post. It was fascinating. I’ve no issues with alternate forms of text construction; ee cummings fan, me.

          • Kitty Catkin

             /  August 17, 2018

            You wrote it

            It’s a fact that long passages of text are unattractive; the written equivalent of someone droning on without pause.

            I can’t see any connection between a great mass of print and e e cummings (yes, I am familiar with his work)

            • robertguyton

               /  August 17, 2018

              I didn’t write it, exhALANt did; you’ll see I used quotation marks to indicate I was…quoting and named the author at the bottom of the piece.

      • sorethumb

         /  August 17, 2018

        Actually though it is Big Auckland that is the failure. It has been running on real estate services. The Green Party thinking is inline with the globalist Greater Auckland Blog (an excuse for more migration).

  6. Zedd

     /  August 17, 2018

    I attended a green meeting once, where it was a clear message; The Green party are a ‘Broad Church’,, ranging from light green to dark green & every shade between & even red-greens & perhaps a few ‘blue-greens’ (if their truly is such a beast)

    They are all united under the basic tenants of; Environmental & Social Justice concern, appropriate decision making & “PEACE man”

    I think the Natl party is more likely to split/fragment, long before the Green party ! 😀

    Politics 101 at work again, from the Right :/

    • Zedd

       /  August 17, 2018

      as has been said ‘The may have to ‘swallow a few dead rats.. BUT they are better off IN GOVT. than another term n opposition; under Nat-Act’.. 9 loooooong years too many !

      • Alan Wilkinson

         /  August 17, 2018

        We are waiting for them to swallow Winston.

      • Kitty Catkin

         /  August 17, 2018

        As a former owner of many dear pet rats, I must say that that is a cruel thing to say about these lovely animals.

        How about Hyenas Anonymous ?

  7. PartisanZ

     /  August 17, 2018

    They may not be cracks at all … They may be unrecognizable forms of culture tissue …

    If you are accustomed to a totally synthesized, uniform, crystalline chemical sheet in a laboratory petrie dish – Blue OR Red – developed for their safe ultra-consistency – which can only change by ‘failing’ and shattering into myriad pieces, then normal, diverse, organic, Green cell reproduction appears very strange and bizarre to you and can only be explained in terms of your own inorganic experience – safe in uniformity or dangerously fractured and broken …

    In need of antibiotics or Roundup …

    MPs each with a wide spectra of ‘independence’, freedom of conscience and expression being part of government is a wonderful development IMHO … something I’ve always wanted to see happen … compared to the routine, forced and fake uniformity of National & Labour … where not towing the Party line is seen as disasterous and often results in disaster …

    And these independent humans can only get into Parliament, let alone government, by being members of a Party …

    This is probably the REAL ‘Long March through Institutions’. The return of genuine humanity to what has long been highly restrictive ‘roles’ …

    This is the sense in which Parliament remains very like the [Christian] Church of its origins … which it still emulates … its MPs like Priests or Clergy …

    There’s going to be another ‘Reformation’ …

  1. Shades of Green – “cracks in the green revolution” — Your NZ – NZ Conservative Coalition