Written By: - Date published: 2:03 pm, February 29th, 2008 - 67 comments
Categories: national, scoundrels -
Tags: national, scoundrels
National MP for Northland, John Carter, is ‘up in arms about a decision allowing inmates from Ngawha Prison to play in the Whangarei and Districts Rugby League competition.’ This kind of activity is an important part of rehabilitation.
In case you are wondering, yes, this is the same John Carter who, in 1995, rang fellow National MP and racist John Banks’ talkback show pretending to be a Maori dole bludger named Hone. That forced Jim Bolger to sack him as Government Whip. 12 years later, he’s reached lofty heights as National’s Spokesperson for Local Government.
Ironically, he’s ranked 19 in the party, so he wouldn’t even make National’s league team.
Facebook
Twitter
Scoopit!
The public’s boredome with a third term government Yes that must be it.
Not a lot of 4th term governments in NZ’s history (or the history of most democracies) – and there’s a reason for that.
And I would most humbly suggest that passing legislation in the face of overwhelming public distaste for said legislation is a sin – at least in the public’s eyes.
Such as? Outside Heraldland there never was much interest in the EFA – witness the puny public turnout to the marches. And as for S59…
Fair point regarding National’s support of Section 59
HS you have surprised me – is there hope for rational discussion after all?!
Captcha – loon score – are you trying to tell me something ?
Yup – vote Labour!
my kids’ school their teachers are far better than when I was in the education system.
Agreed – schools these days are fantastic places. Mind you, I was educated in pretty much the Dark Ages.
The public’s boredome with a third term government Yes that must be it.
Not a lot of 4th term governments in NZ’s history (or the history of most democracies) – and there’s a reason for that.
And I would most humbly suggest that passing legislation in the face of overwhelming public distaste for said legislation is a sin – at least in the public’s eyes.
Such as? Outside Heraldland there never was much interest in the EFA – witness the puny public turnout to the marches. And as for S59…
Fair point regarding National’s support of Section 59
HS you have surprised me – is there hope for rational discussion after all?!
Captcha – loon score – are you trying to tell me something ?
Yup – vote Labour!
my kids’ school their teachers are far better than when I was in the education system.
Agreed – schools these days are fantastic places. Mind you, I was educated in pretty much the Dark Ages.
I have no idea why my comments sometimes appear twice.
rOb said:
“But in recent memory the most egregious political sins committed by either party were those of the Hollow Men / National party in the 2005 election campaign. This isn’t a matter of opinion, it’s a matter of the historical record.”
Could you actually be any more partisan and biased if you tried?
because you’re double awesome.
can we make BB’s copmments appear half the time?
Sounds like he just got in from a night on the sauce
rob
I am more likely to vote Labour than Green is that good enough for now ?
Re schools:I think in general you’re right but it does depend very much on the teachers, Board of Trustees and parents we’re lucky with all three in my kids case.
All I will confess to is double grumpy with the nonsense trotted out by the Right. But Steve, 4:45am? That’s commitment!
HS, any vote on the Left works for me, but I suspect that the chances of you voting for either are pretty close to zero.
I’m a big fan of the Greens. To tell you the truth I sometimes wonder if they’re the only sane party in parliament. It’s a common claim on blogs that unfettered capitalism works much better than the alternatives. Like comparing a speeding V8 sports car with an ambling horse and buggy. Which is true in many respects, until you take note of the fact that the sports car and the buggy are both about to hit a brick wall. I think I’d rather be in the horse and buggy at that point.
The brick wall in that analogy is finite planetary resources. I’m not convinced that unfettered capitalism is equipped to deal with a world of limited resources and environmental crises. The only people who have recognised this for decades, and done their best to warn us, are the Greens. All power to them I say.
There you go, have fun with that one. (I’m out in the real world today and can’t reply.)
Exactly Rob
You can’t keep having growth if you have not got a planet from which to grow. The Tories and the Lab Party are two sides of the same coin in my opinion, just arguing about how to share the spoils.
It is now undeniable that the planet is in crisis and unless we do something and do something fast , our Grandchildren will face a very different world, to the one we have now
And Rob is right only the Greens seemed to ones to have recognised this.
We made the mistake of not listening to them decades ago perhaps we should start now.
Taking r0bs analogy a step further, and in a slightly esoteric way…
The Buggy has no safety systems – hit the wall even at a minor speed, and the occupants are in a world of hurt (not to mention the dearly departed horse…)
The Sports car, on the other hand, has crumple zones and restraint systems – shock absorbers in an economic sense; free floating exchange rates, interest rates, prices acting in a responsive manner, so on and so forth. End result is that you can have a bigger accident with much much less personal injury.
Now, for finite global resources you’re absolutely right – it’s untested territory. BUT it’s also untested territory for any other system of political/economic management you care to name or advocate.
All we can do is look at more localised or less broad crises, and infer from there. In almost every case I can think of, the economically ‘free-er’ nations have come out better off…
outofbed
I suggest you go back to bed and take your medication.
The world has for many generations probably been a different place than ones grandparents remember it. That’s called progress and is why we have higher standards of living and life expectancy than any other time in recorded history.
Carbon dioxide is produced in far larger quantities by many natural means: human emissions are miniscule in comparison. Volcanic emissions and carbon dioxide from animals, bacteria, decaying vegetation and the ocean outweigh our own production several times over. If you buy into the global warming debate and the desire for carbon neutrality you really have been duped by those in power.
captcha – to kensington ….but why I ask ?
Higher Standard
Seems it not just me who has been duped:-
The “consensus” about anthropogenic climate change entails the following:
1) the climate is undergoing a pronounced warming trend beyond the range of natural variability;
2) the major cause of most of the observed warming is rising levels of the greenhouse gas CO2;
3) the rise in CO2 is the result of burning fossil fuels;
4) if CO2 continues to rise over the next century, the warming will continue; and
5) a climate change of the projected magnitude over this time frame represents potential danger to human welfare and the environment.
These conclusions have been explicitly endorsed by:
Academia Brasiliera de Ciências (Bazil)
Royal Society of Canada
Chinese Academy of Sciences
Academié des Sciences (France)
Deutsche Akademie der Naturforscher Leopoldina (Germany)
Indian National Science Academy
Accademia dei Lincei (Italy)
Science Council of Japan
Russian Academy of Sciences
Royal Society (United Kingdom)
National Academy of Sciences (United States of America)
Australian Academy of Sciences
Royal Flemish Academy of Belgium for Sciences and the Arts
Caribbean Academy of Sciences
Indonesian Academy of Sciences
Royal Irish Academy
Academy of Sciences Malaysia
Academy Council of the Royal Society of New Zealand
Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences
In addition to these national academies, the following institutions specializing in climate, atmosphere, ocean, and/or earth sciences have endorsed these conclusions:
NASA’s Goddard Institute of Space Studies (GISS)
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
National Academy of Sciences (NAS)
State of the Canadian Cryosphere (SOCC)
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
Royal Society of the United Kingdom (RS)
American Geophysical Union (AGU)
American Institute of Physics (AIP)
National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR)
American Meteorological Society (AMS)
Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society (CMOS)
These organizations also agree with the consensus:
The Earth Institute at Columbia University
Northwestern University
University of Akureyri
University of Iceland
Iceland GeoSurvey
National Centre for Atmospheric Science UK
Climate Group
Climate Institute
Climate Trust
Wuppertal Institute for Climate Environment and Energy
Royal Meteorological Society
Community Research and Development Centre Nigeria
Geological Society of London
Geological Society of America
UK Centre for Social and Economic Research on the Global Environment
Pew Center on Global Climate Change
American Association for the Advancement of Science
National Research Council
Juelich Research Centre
US White House
US Council on Environmental Quality
US Office of Science Technology Policy
US National Climatic Data Center
US Department of Commerce
US National Environmental Satellite, Data, and Information Service
The National Academy of Engineering
The Institute of Medicine
UK Natural Environment Research Council
Office of Science and Technology Policy
Council on Environmental Quality
National Economic Council
Office of Management and Budget
The National Academy of Engineering
The Institute of Medicine
UK Natural Environment Research Council
Australian Government Bureau of Meteorology
Engineers Australia
American Chemical Society
American Association of Blacks in Energy
World Petroleum Council
The Weather Channel
National Geographic
The following companiesagree with the consensus:
ABB
Air France
Alcan
Alcoa
Allian
American Electric Power
Aristeia Capital
BASF
Bayer
BP America Inc.
Calvert Group
Canadian Electricity Association
Caterpilliar Inc.
Centrica
Ceres
Chevron
China Renewable
Citigroup
ConocoPhillips
Covanta Holding Corporation
Deutsche Telekom
Doosan Babcock Energy Limited
Duke Energy
DuPont
EcoSecurities
Electricity de France North America
Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand
Endesa
Energettech Austraila Pty Ltd
Energy East Corporation
Energy Holding Romania
Energy Industry Association
Eni
Eskorn
ETG International
Exelon Corporation
ExxonMobil
F&C Asset Management
FPL Group
General Electric
German Electricity Association
Glitnir Bank
Global Energy Network Institute, Iberdrola
ING Group
Institute for Global Environmental Strategies
Interface Inc.
International Gas Union
International Paper
International Power
Marsh & McLennan Companies
Massachusetts Municipal Wholesale Electric Company
MEDIAS-France
MissionPoint Capital Partners
Munich Re
National Grid
National Power Company of Iceland
NGEN mgt II, LLC
NiSource
NRG Energy
PG&E Corporation
PNM Resources
Reykjavik Energy
Ricoh
Rio Tinto Energy Services
Rockefeller Brothers Fund
Rolls-Royce
Societe Generale de Surveillance (SGS Group)
Stora Enso North America
Stratus Consulting
Sun Management Institute
Swiss Re
UCG Partnership
US Geothermal
Verde Venture Partners
Volvo
In addition, the scientific consensus is also endorsed by the CEO’s of the following companies:
A. O. Smith Corporation
Abbott Laboratories
Accenture Ltd.
ACE Limited
ADP
Aetna Inc.
Air Products and Chemicals, Inc.
AK Steel Corporation
Alcatel-Lucent
Allstate Insurance Company
ALLTEL Corporation
Altec Industries, Inc.
American Electric Power Company, Inc.
American Express Company
American International Group, Inc.
Ameriprise Financial
AMR Corporation/American Airlines
Anadarko Petroleum Corporation
Apache Corporation
Applera Corporation
Arch Coal, Inc.
Archer Daniels Midland Company
ArvinMeritor, Inc.
AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP
Avery Dennison Corporation
Avis Budget Group, Inc.
Bechtel Group, Inc.
BNSF Railway
Boeing Company
Brink’s Company
CA
Carlson Companies, Inc.
Case New Holland Inc.
Ceridian Corporation
Chemtura Corporation
Chubb Corporation
CIGNA Corporation
Coca-Cola Company
Constellation Energy Group, Inc.
Convergys Corporation
Con-way Incorporated
Corning Incorporated
Crane Co.
CSX Corporation
Cummins Inc.
Deere & Company
Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu
Delphi Corporation
Dow Chemical Company
Eastman Chemical Company
Eastman Kodak Company
Eaton Corporation
EDS
Eli Lilly and Company
EMC Corporation
Ernst & Young, L.L.P.
Fannie Mae
FedEx Corporation
Fluor Corporation
FMC Corporation
Freddie Mac
General Mills, Inc.
General Motors Corporation
Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.
Goodrich Corporation
Harman International Industries, Inc.
Hartford Financial Services Group
Home Depot, Inc., The
Honeywell International, Inc.
HSBC – North America
Humana Inc.
IBM Corporation
Ingersoll-Rand Company
International Textile Group
ITT Corporation
Johnson Controls, Inc.
JP Morgan Chase & Co.
KPMG LLP
Liberty Mutual Group
MassMutual
MasterCard Incorporated
McGraw-Hill Companies
McKesson Corporation
MeadWestvaco Corporation
Medco Health Solutions, Inc.
Merck & Co., Inc.
Merrill Lynch & Company, Inc.
MetLife, Inc.
Morgan Stanley
Motorola, Inc.
Nasdaq Stock Market, Inc.
National Gypsum Company
Nationwide
Navistar International Corporation
New York Life Insurance Company
Norfolk Southern Corporation
Northwestern Mutual Life Insurance Company
Nucor Corporation
NYSE Group, Inc.
Office Depot, Inc.
Owens Corning (Reorganized) Inc.
Pactiv Corporation
Peabody Energy Corporation
Pfizer Inc
PPG Industries, Inc.
Praxair, Inc.
PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
Principal Financial Group
Procter & Gamble Company
Prudential Financial
Realogy Corporation
Rockwell Automation, Inc.
Ryder System, Inc.
SAP America, Inc.
Sara Lee Corporation
SAS Institute Inc.
Schering-Plough Corporation
Schneider National, Inc.
ServiceMaster Company
Siemens Corporation
Southern Company
Springs Global US, Inc.
Sprint Nextel
St. Paul Travelers Companies, Inc.
State Farm Insurance Companies
Tenneco
Texas Instruments Incorporated
Textron Incorporated
Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc.
TIAA-CREF
Tyco Electronics
Tyco International Ltd.
Union Pacific Corporation
Unisys Corporation
United Technologies Corporation
UnitedHealth Group Incorporated
USG Corporation
Verizon Communications
W.W. Grainger, Inc.
Western & Southern Financial Group
Weyerhaeuser Company
Whirlpool Corporation
Williams Companies, Inc.
Xerox Corporation
YRC Worldwide Inc
So Higher Standard
My Statement Grandchildren will face a very different world, to the one we have now,
and this quote
a climate change of the projected magnitude over this time frame represents potential danger to human welfare and the environment.
Can you see the connection?
And you want ME to take meds … Ye gods
Actually Phil, in my version of the analogy, the ambling horse has enough brains to just stop. Good luck with your crumple zones though!
OOB, I agree that there has been little to choose between Labour and National here in the past. But a while back I chose to join Labour anyway, because I think the Green message is too important to leave to a minority party. It has to go mainstream. The only way to get it main stream is to take over one of the big parties from within!
And it now gives me cause to hope as I see that green policy has been very much coming up through the Labour party grass roots. In public policy releases Labour has started to at least talk the talk. Now they have a lot more work to do to walk the walk.
OOB
Perhaps you should reread my post in relation to our post.
I don’t disagree that ‘anthropogenic’ climate change is due to the factors you state what I take issue with is that anthropogenic factors are the major cause of global warming.
Posting a list of bodies and corporations who have signed up to this ‘consensus’ suggests to me there are a great many who are looking to make a great deal of money out of any global warming that takes place I sure many of this mob were alos wringing their hands about the y2k computer bug which was going to deliver us back to the dark ages.
HS well you may have had a point , but the first few dozen on the list are scientific academies and respected scientific organizations and they agree that
the climate is undergoing a pronounced warming trend beyond the range of natural variability
I guess the key words relating to your post is “Beyond the range of natural variability”
There is no such thing. The climate has varied immensely over the last billion years since it became pretty stable, and that was after it switched from a reducing atmosphere to a oxygen/nitrogen atmosphere.
What people do not seem to understand is exactly how unnaturally invariable the atmosphere and therefore climate has been during human civilization. What we are doing is well within the ‘natural variability’. However it is well outside what our civilizations have had to endure. The question is if human civilisation will be able to withstand the changes.
cap: fumble right
sounds about right to me
Have a look at this section of Photosynthesis: Physiology and Metabolism for an overview for the carbon12/13 fractionation in the atmosphere. The book is pretty old, but there has been no scientific challenges that have passed peer review.
Unfortunately most of the interesting papers are stored under logins.
This is probably more accessible here at How do we know that recent CO2 increases are due to human activities?, especially the added commentary.
This is such basic science….
I espcially liked this comment explicitly answering the same objection as highstandard.
This whole debate is so old. The C12/C13 isotope variability due to releasing fossil fuels was demonstrated methematically in my first year earth sciences in the 1970′s.
Makes me wonder if people actually do learn any science. The downstream effects of increasing atmospheric carbon are even more terrifying than the short run (
argghh it lost part of my post…. oh well
thanx for the links interesting stuff .. So much to read so little time
Helps if you have my reading speeds. I’m an extreme speed reader.
My idea of recreation is a clear day to read about 10000 pages of scifi that I haven’t read. Secondary is a pile of scientific papers or 2-3 history books.
But I never really get the time. But I usually kill at least a book a day
Make that about 5000 pages… I just added up the pages in the last dose of books. Guess I’m slowing down
Damn! I wish I could read like that. Did it come naturally to you, or did you teach yourself somehow?
Naturally – been doing that forever. Of course there is a downside. They don’t write books fast enough..
What’s wrong with this impartial and ponderous blog?
Why aren’t you publishing the latest polls which indicate socialist Labour is winning by a healthy margin and on the verge of securing a fourth term. The Nats are doomed are you should be celebrating.
Where is the winning spirit of Tane & co?
Jealous! One solution to the downside – you could start writing them…
I’ve heard the argument that anthropogenic Co2 is a miniscule fraction of natural carbon emmissions, and have always wondered how people could be so dim as to believe it. About twenty seconds of considered thought is enough to dismiss such a contention.
Carbon is sequestered in many ways. As there is a water cycle, a nitrogen cycle and so on, there’s also a carbon cycle. Part of the carbon cycle involves release of carbon through vegetable matter decomposition, volcanic eruptions and so on. This has been going on for four billion years or so.
Carbon is sequestered (trees, soil and so on) and later released, gradually, naturally and over time (decomposition, eruptions).
Not part of the natural cycle is the burning of trillions of tonnes of fossil fuels (another form of carbon sequestration. What this means is that millions of years worth of carbon sequestered in the earth (in the form of fossilised carbon-based life forms) has been released within the space of two centuries. Take twenty seconds to consider the implications of a massive unnatural injection of atmospheric carbon.
Here Santi, just for you:
http://www.thestandard.org.nz/?p=1262
And remember, patience is a virtue.