You clearly like the last say, but on this occasion that is not appropriate. So here goes;

My initial comment was that JK is perceived as a lightweight in global circles. This comment was based on feedback from Asia that in official meetings Mr Key is perceived as likeable, but with surprising gaps in his knowledge and understanding. Moreover, he is inclined to talk up things – such as the FTA with Japan – that he has no basis to do so from the content of the meetings. Mr Key relies on MFAT advice – which while doing an admirable job – is largely under-resourced.

The light schedule at APEC and CHOGM is at it stands. The problem NZ faces is the advent of G20, which is given considerable import in Asia – and has effectively bifircated Asia. This gives India, Indonesia, and Korea greater import. JK can meet SM Lee as many times as he likes, but Singapore is not a member of G20.

For NZ to punch above its insignificant weight, it is going to take a multilayered approach, such as formal bilaterals, informal meetings, and other ministers such as Bill English travelling to APEC (but JK does not want to share the limelight). There is no sign that this is happening.

Foreign policy is presented by the NZ media as a real success for JK, but the reality is a lot more complicated.

I think this represents a reasonable grasp of the facts. Good day.

However, where there is considerable disagreement and skepticism is in the area of climate sensitivity to secondary forcings arising from clouds etc. Thus, the angst thrown at skeptics IMO is misplaced, as the areas in which there is disagreement is where, even strong AGW proponents would agree that there is a lot of unknowns and uncertainty.

I am neutral on the above as I don’t consider myself qualified to form an opinion.

IMO, however, given the uncertainty surrounding the effectiveness or otherwise of an ETS, and the large gaps in knowledge that exist with respect to secondary forcings, it is better to focus on immediate problems that will also have major impacts on C02 emissions rather than waste resources on costly schemes that may not work anyway..

For instance, peak oil will probably address the emissions problem fairly quickly due to the forced necessity for green technologies. Focusing on initiatives such as enabling poor farmers to develop nature reserves to earn money from tourism rather than cutting down forests for farming (as has been done successfully in Africa for instance) will simultaneously help save endangered species and increase the amount of green biomass to absorb C02.

The big advantage of this approach is that it will be much easier to get by-in to solving immediate, obvious problems rather than more uncertain, longterm ones.

Your effort in shooting me down reflects that if you take away foreign policy from JK’s list of credits, not much is left for the first year.

We elected a PM, not a Chief Foreign Minister. All your responses have been about protocol, not substance or leadership,

I did change your nappies. Did disturbing things to my stomach. True it is something that I avoid. However I was a lot better with you than I was with your sister – practice makes it more tolerable over time.

Maybe I should ask mother if you actually ever changed my nappies? Not really a you thing to do!

It has good music and bad music I even have The Sex Pistols in there.

The Sex Pistols are in your music collection because I put them there. So was Bush originally.

Have you got any evidence that Mr Key’s meeting with Mr Li was unsuccessful or produced nothing, or that Mr Key wasn’t briefed in advance, or are you just making up that as well?

There certainly doesn’t seem to be any criticism in the New Zealand media of Mr Key’s meetings with Mr Li. Perhaps despite your poor command of the facts in every other respect so far you might have struck it lucky with this latest claim, but on current form it’s unlikely.

But it also has mediocre music as well.

Now go and google who Li Keqiang is, and why he matters. and we can continue this discussion.

The point remains, JK is a lightweight who uses protocol as a crutch. No front-footing here . ..

If that’s true then why do you have both Fleetwood Mac and Metallica in your music collection?

It should be clear that if China decides to cause snowstorms in areas hit by droughts to stock up on water, it takes that water away from other areas causing unexplained draughts.

Alternatively if it modifies the weather to not rain on it’s Olympic parade this will cause rain elsewere.

To give just one example. Another one would be HAARP.

None of them have the capacity to do much more than deliver handful of bombs a short distance. That’s Pakistan. The others would stuggel to do that much. And that’s just capability, you’d need to show intent.

While horrid obviously, a threat to humanity, it isn’t.

Where’s the beef?

It’s like saying that because the West Coast has only 1% of NZ’s population they ought to be allowed to exempt themselves from paying income tax.