web analytics
The Standard

140,000 for a clean energy future

Written By: - Date published: 9:45 am, July 25th, 2012 - 10 comments
Categories: energy, Environment, Mining - Tags:

The biggest petition to Parliament in 3 years was presented yesterday with Greenpeace’s 140,000 signature call for the Government to halt subsidisation of fossil fuels and invest in a clean energy future instead. 140,000 signatures is a remarkable achievement. Predictably, it got a nasty response from the Government. Their ugly attitude is turning off voters.

10 comments on “140,000 for a clean energy future”

  1. Bunji 1

    Phil Heatley’s comments were appalling. I can’t find the worst one from Radio NZ news last night, but “”I understand Greenpeace run these petitions from time to time about all sorts of issues, they don’t hold particular weight with me…” is pretty bad too.

    140,000 is an awful lot of people to just write off.

    And his arrogance in the House that he doesn’t take advice from the Green party when they raise questions about what preparations they have for anything going wrong…

    It’s just more nasty arrogant stuff from this government, and yes their ugly attitude will continue to turn off voters…

    • Enough is Enough 1.1

      Its fine to be upset about Healtey and National being brain dead and doing silly things, but Bunji politics is a nasty business. Dont get wound up about the Nats being nasty to the Greens. They are polar opposites. They will always be nasty to each other.

      Channel your energy towards their policies. Not their ‘nastiness’. Otherwise we begin to sound like cry baby fat face Whaeloil.

      • Bunji 1.1.1

        I don’t expect National to take any notice of the Greens or Labour.

        As much as anything it was the tone, just displayed the inner nastiness. Contrast with Simon Power – I didn’t agree with a lot of what he did, but he was willing to listen, and engage in debate. Maybe that’s why he didn’t last…

        Most of those left seem willing to write off large numbers of voters, as well as the parties that represent them. They swear an oath to govern for all, and they should listen. But I’m not overly upset about it – that tone, that arrogance, that ugly attitude comes through, and voters are naturally turned off, with the ensuing result being lower support. It’s best when they display their true colours.

  2. Tom Gould 2

    Eddie, what was the government’s ugly response? Just the usual arrogant, dismissive, belittling of anyone who is not a true blue Tory sycophant? Or was there more?

  3. infused 3

    read the comments on the 3news site.

  4. OneTrack 4

    Greenpeace should just keep getting more signatures until they have the 300000 for a CIR. Why didn’t they do that in the irst place?

  5. xtasy 5

    All this is well intended, somehow justified and should usually send a signal.

    But wake up to bloody reality, please!

    Democracy is largely DEAD! It does not mean much these days! We had the Mixed Ownership Bill introduced to Parliament, then go through a Select Committee process, where 99 or more per cent of submissions stiffly and resolutely opposed the drafted law and rejected it – or at least asked for substantial submissions to change it.

    Yet the government did completely ignore and walk over that supposedly democratic process and passed the law against majority public rejection, against majority submissions and against even economic interest.

    So what are petitions to have a referendum, which will not be binding and thus be ignored by this government, supposed to achieve?

    At the same time, what is this high numbered petition of 140,000 signatories supposed to change, when a government does simply not give a damned shit about democracy and does what it wants disregarding?

    I agree with a lot of “green” and environmentally friendly” policies, proposals and actions, but with recent experiences with certain Green Party MPs, who are actually quite “fluffy” and “wishy washy” about what they actually will do and stand for, I am losing much faith in that party at a very high speed!

    There is lack of a good combiantion of pragmatism, resoluteness, principles, logical and rational planning, and instead too much talk, too many slogans and too much preteded competency and smartness as of recent.

    Russel Norman comes across well, but the rest are fading into the back-ground and do not convince at all. Is it becoming a one man leader party like NZ First, or what the hell is going on?

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

Public service advertisements by The Standard

Current CO2 level in the atmosphere