Green Party conference – focus on policies

Written By: - Date published: 8:00 am, May 31st, 2014 - 74 comments
Categories: child welfare, election 2014, families, greens, Metiria Turei, poverty, russel norman, schools, sustainability - Tags:

It’s the Green Party Conference this weekend in Lower Hutt.  Metiria Turei was on RNZ yesterday morning, talking about how the main focus for the conference will be on policies.

green_party_leaders_russel_norman_and_metiria_ture_4dec906e26

Metiria Turei on Morning Report

TUREI: We genuinely believe a progressive government is possible after this election.  We’re going to change the government – get rid of National.  But people want to see what that’s going to look like.  And so we’ve got the policies, we have got the solutions,  we have the passion and the experience to put those solutions in place.  That’s what we need to go out and to talk to the community about.

INTERVIEWER: Can we expect policy announcements?

TUREI: Yes, you can expect policy announcements from both Russel and I over the conference. It’s important for us to put out solutions to the public. It’s not enough to just talk about the politics that goes on in parliament.  It’s actually about families, and what families need to do well in New Zealand.

So, the Green Party will start – we’ve been rolling out our policies:

solar homes;

home insulation;

Green Investment Bank;

schools as community hubs;

safe to school – there will be many more policy announcements to come between now and the election – and including the two at the AGM…

Turei also referred to the Greens’ record in parliament:

We have pushed the government to have to take family issues seriously.  Now this government would not be promoting families, but for the Greens, putting inequality, poverty and children at the heart of our decision making, and forcing the government to do the same.

They have been a strong voice for these things, as the medium sized party.  The smaller Mana Party (with just one MP) has also helped to put these issues on the agenda.  Labour have also provided some key policies in these areas.

Turei was asked if the left was being fractured.  She replied clearly and strongly:

Under MMP any government is going to be made up of multiple parties […] So the fact that there are multiple options for voters on the left, who want to see a change of government, is good for democracy. Because lots of voters, lots of choices. If we can see an increase in the vote, that will be great and increase in young people voting that would be great. That means a stronger, progressive government at the end of the day. […] I’m campaigning for the party vote for the Greens. That is my number one priority.

Turei was in her more serious mode in this interview.  But she also can be fun and sociable – as she is seen to be on twitter – and can be serious there, too.

Norman turei waka

The Greens are also making good use of the Internet during this weekend, streaming speeches and policy announcements on their Livestream channel.

Scott Ludlum will be a guest speaker today at 10.30am – 11.30am.

Scott Ludlam is an Australian politician who has been a Greens member of the Australian Senate since July 2008, representing the state of Western Australia.

Metiria Turei will be speaking today at 11.15am – 12.15pm, and will make a policy announcement. [Though this start time seems to overlap with the scheduled end time for Ludlum’s speech.]

Russel Norman will make a policy announcement tomorrow (Sunday) at 1.30pm 1.15pm.

Green Party home for lifeUpdate:

Scott Ludlum, know as a unifier and coalition builder, talked about the example of an Aboriginal family who stoop up against uranium mining and won.  He gave a run down on the onl=slught from Abbot’s government, against climate change programmes, and againt people who have been working to counter climate change and develop clean energy.

He talked of the urgency in countering climate change, and of the role of Green Parties in this internationally.

He also talked of the raft of reactionary policies and practices enacted by the Abbott government.

Ludlum said that power sharing is not a disaster, but is how grown ups govern.  He talked of the importance of negotiating differences towards a solution, with respect for the differences.

And he talked of the need for good political organisation – having hard numbers to show how many votes a party is likely to get, and basing a campaign on that – not on wishful/magical thinking.

Metiria Turei’s speech focused on children – and announced that the party would extend fully funded healthcare from 13-18 years.  She also said the Greens’ policy will provide free after hours health care for all up to 18years.

Pasupial’s transcription of bits of the speech by Turei:

[8:28] “The day a newborn baby is judged unworthy of support given to all other babies, just because of the family they are born into is a dangerous day for Aotearoa NZ. We must not let these insiduous Victorian notions of deserving and undeserving poor infect our moral identity”

Policy Announcement [9:50] “In government, the Green Party will extend free doctor’s visits to all New Zealanders to the age of 18″

[11:50] “Our policy will cost just $29 million a year”

[14:50] “The Green Party is the only major political party prepared to fight for the rights of all children to be treated equally in this country. The GP is the only P who will put our people and our environment at the heart of our economic management.”

[15:09] “Who else; other than the Green Party, will fight for a smarter better fairer and more sustainable future; one that truly lives up to the expectations of our children”

The new policy: Healthy Teens, healthy futures – available here.

Transcript of Metiria Turei’s speech [h/t Pasupila]

‘If not for the Greens, then who?’

Transcript of Russel Norman’s speech on climate change

74 comments on “Green Party conference – focus on policies ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Jenny 1
    31 May 2014 at 10:23 am

    Let us hope that there is comprehensive program to take to task the National and Labour Parties for their ongoing commitments to the fossil fuel industry, using all the available unassailable data and expert testimony to back their case.

    Let us hope that the Greens publicly announce War On Climate Change, and vow for the good of future generations to in 2014 make action on climate change and CO2 pollution an election issue, forcing the Labour and National parties to defend their positions.

    No more of THIS!

    • phillip ure 1.1
      31 May 2014 at 10:36 am

      well..seeing as ministerial-ambitions have blurred their bottom-lines into invisibility..

      ..and that the greens plan to sign up to labour ministerial/cabinet-responsibilty to support all of the govts’ drilling/digging-plans/policies..

      ..yr ‘hope’s wd seem futile…

      • karol 1.1.1
        31 May 2014 at 10:40 am

        Are you listening to Scott Ludlum on mining in Western Australia – and considering what we (including the Green Party) can learn from it for NZ?

        • Jenny 1.1.1.1
          1 June 2014 at 5:18 pm

          Are you listening to Scott Ludlum on mining in Western Australia – and considering what we (including the Green Party) can learn from it for NZ?
          karol

          I have, and the first thing I learnt from Scott Ludlum was that he came here to learn from us.

          Thank you all for making Jess and myself so welcome since we got here.

          One of the principal reasons for accepting your invitation was to be able to learn….

          Scott Ludlum

          Scott Ludlam spoke of being inspired by New Zealand’s anti-nuclear example. Which moved him to become involved in the Australian anti-nuclear movement, in particular the movement against uranium mining.

          @ 3:20 Minutes:
          ….one of the undercurrents of the Australian Greens, and the West Australian Greens, is opposition to nuclear technology. And that is one of the first political memories I have of this place. Though having spent most of my life on the road, or in Australia, it was your Prime Minister telling the United States navy and the US government that, ‘the Alliance is fine, and that the historic partnership is very important to us, but actually, you can leave the nuclear weapons and the nuclear warships at home, that is not something which we consider in this country, to be adding to our security by any measure at all.’

          What an extraordinary powerful thing to do. And that stuck with me as well, that this is quite a plucky place…..

          It was none the less an example that you provided to the rest of the world that really stuck with me.

          Scott Ludlam

          Scott Ludlam spoke of his first anti-nuclear campaign, his first ever foray into politics.

          If there is anything we can learn from the example Scott Ludlam gave. It is this; Activism led by the Aboriginal People in alliance with environmentalists is what stopped the Kakadu uranium mine.

          (We saw this powerful truth borne out here in the Alliance between Greenpeace and Te Whanau te Apanui that drove off Petrobras and stopped all deep sea oil exploration off their coast.)

          My first political campaign….

          …what did it for me was what occurs at the other end, the opposite end of the nuclear fuel chain to the nuclear weapons that your Prime Minister contested on the entry into Kiwi ports which is uranium mining…..

          @ 5:15minutes:
          At a place called Jabaluka in the Northern Territory it’s a mineral lease in the heart of one of the most important conservation areas in Australia, Kakadu National Park. It is a world heritage area and it has been continually inhabited for at least 40,000 years and it is listed on the world heritage register for both cultural and environmental reasons and its an extraordinary part of the world. And it happens to have three mineral leases or it had at that time, three uranium leases carved out of it, one is an operational mine the Ranger Uranium mine, one of the largest in the world, one is a place that was recently taken off the map at kungara, another uranium lease at nurlangy and one is Jabaluka and that is one of the largest high grade uranium deposits that’s left in the world. And when the news broke in 1997 that they were going to impose another uranium mine on that country, the traditional owners the aboriginal people from that area said no we have had this for twenty years we don’t want it again and they called for help and Evonne Margarula one of the senior women speaking for that part of the world did a national speaking tour and I as a scraggly 28 year old was in the audience when she turned up in fact I was one of the orgainisers and I helped organise it when she came across to Perth and I ended up at that blockade and it was an incredibly powerful teaching moment for me as a young person without much engagement in politics to realise that an aboriginal community a family could stand up the Northern Terrritory government to the Australian Government and Commonwealth Government and the Mining Industry and to the global nuclear industry and win. There is still no uranium mine at Jabaluka. In fact last year the remaining surface site works were removed and taken away. And that was quite a powerful way to start environmental campaigning when you realise that if your organised if your smart if your bolshie that you stick up for yourself that you call for help when you need it you can win.

          And so that was my first foray into politics.

          And that has kept me going ever since.

          Scott Ludlam

          Another point we can take from Scott Ludlam’s speech is that while the Australian Greens pledged confidence and supply to Labor, they refused to go into formal coalition with a government committed to Business is usual. And despite having no formal binding arrangement got a number of things passed.

          @ 9:10 minutes:
          We came out of an ‘informal coalition’, coalition is probably too strong a word, but an agreement, with the former Labor Government that we would not block supply, that we would not crash the budget, that we would not support no confidence motions in exchange for progress on some of the policy areas that we hold most closely to our hearts…..

          That was seen as something of an illegitimate agreement by the Coalition, by the opposition Liberal and National Parties, who didn’t enjoy at all the idea that you could be doing negotiations almost in the way that it happens here and has been happening in European parliaments for decades…..

          It was seen as a bit of disaster by the Coalition who didn’t enjoy it at all.

          Even a quick scan of the [NZ] Herald and the way some of the commentary and the reporting of that period of time is being reported here, you might be getting the sense that it was a catastrophe that it was a period of appalling chaos, and of course it wasn’t, even though the conservatives attempted to paint it that way, a lot of very important business got done, a lot of legislation was passed, a lot of very important legislation, including things like the clean energy act. which has made a measurable impact on the green house gas profile of one of the most energy intensive economies on the planet….

          Scott Ludlam

      • Murray Olsen 1.1.2
        31 May 2014 at 9:16 pm

        Will you ever forgive them for not making legalisation of cannabis their flagship policy?

        The Greens are the only party taking a mature approach to the IP/Mana electoral arrangement, and as far as Laila Harré is concerned, unless you are privy to something the rest of us don’t know about, you’re just repeating Trotter’s slurs.

        I’m waiting to see what they come out with on drilling and mining, because I have heard a couple of things that worry me. We’ll know tomorrow. In the meantime, they’re coming out with other policies, such as the one on teenage health, that I really like.

        • phillip ure 1.1.2.1
          31 May 2014 at 9:39 pm

          “..I’m waiting to see what they come out with on drilling and mining, because I have heard a couple of things that worry me..”

          norman has already said the greens will vote to support labours’ drilling/mining-policies..

          ..what more do you need to know..?

          ..and my obsrvations about harre/greens are my own..

          ..thought long before trotter wrote his piece..

          ..(and yr first line is just funny..)

        • Macro 1.1.2.2
          31 May 2014 at 10:07 pm

          “I’m waiting to see what they come out with on drilling and mining, because I have heard a couple of things that worry me. ”

          Why don’t you look up the Policy on line Murray?https://www.greens.org.nz/conservation/mining

          I don’t think you have anything to worry about. Catherine has been very active here (the Coromandel) as well as many others actively working to oppose mining and drilling, asking question after question in the House, and speaking against mining and drilling – I hardly think that the Greens will suddenly change their policy against mining and drilling over night.

    • karol 1.2
      31 May 2014 at 5:29 pm

      Just for you, Jenny. At the bottom of the NZ Herald article on Turei’s speech today.

      Co-leader Russel Norman will speak tomorrow, when he is expected to launch the party’s climate change policy.

  2. phillip ure 2
    31 May 2014 at 10:32 am

    the elephant in that room has to be laila harre..

    ..with the party members looking at the leadership..

    ..and thinking:..’why on earth did you not give laila harre a high spot on the green list…?
    ..please explain..!..”

    • karol 2.1
      31 May 2014 at 10:38 am

      This is about Green Party and its policies, not personalities – and it’s not about driving wedges between left wing parties.

      • phillip ure 2.1.1
        31 May 2014 at 10:46 am

        “..and it’s not about driving wedges between left wing parties..”

        what are you saying there..?

        ..how is noting green cabinet-responsibilities..and the laila harre issue.shot-in-own-feet..

        …’driving wedges between left wing parties’…?

        ..it is making an observation of easily-provable-facts..

        ..or are you saying this thread must only b pro-green..?

        ..cd u plse clarify the nature of yr concerns/admonition..

        • karol 2.1.1.1
          31 May 2014 at 10:52 am

          We can debate differences. But your comment there looked more like wedge politics and focused on personalities rather than more substantive issues. There is a very real danger of fanning edge politics, right now, in the service of the right.

          The left will benefit from respectful debate and negotiations between left wing parties and positions.

          Your other comment about mining was critical, but about policies, politics, etc. is a good example of debating the substantive issues.

          • phillip ure 2.1.1.1.1
            31 May 2014 at 11:11 am

            ?..?..

            phillip ure..

          • Populuxe1 2.1.1.1.2
            31 May 2014 at 3:05 pm

            Well let’s focus on policies then. The only conceivable reason that Harre has decided to lead the Internet Party is she has unfinished business – free education. That rather suggests the Greens don’t see that as a priority.

            • karol 2.1.1.1.2.1
              31 May 2014 at 3:23 pm

              It doesn’t look like the “only conceivable reason” to me. Harre gave it as A reason why she was interested in joining IP. I actually don’t see free tertiary education as one of the priorities for IP on their website.

              The Greens, on the other hand, have a strong commitment to children and young people, and eventual free education is part of their tertiary ecucation policy. – to be worked towards over time.

              • Populuxe1 …
                31 May 2014 at 3:35 pm

                I doubt she’s doing it to make NZ currency digital. I’ll concede that it’s not on the website, but there must be some significant policy difference somewhere that appeals to Harre.

                For the record I would be very happy with a government with the Greens in it, IP/Mana not so much.

                • karol …
                  31 May 2014 at 3:41 pm

                  It may not just be the policies that attracted Harre. It may have been the idea of working with Mana, but also of being in a leading role. She also has been working for CTU’s get out the vote campaign. She may see IP as a good way of engaging young, politically disengaged, potential voters.

                  Harre must have liked many of the Greens policies to have been working with them.

              • phillip ure …
                31 May 2014 at 5:07 pm

                harre said one of the first things that impressed hr about the internet party..

                ..long before she was a gleam in their eyes..

                ..was their policy of free education..to tertiary-level..

                • karol …
                  31 May 2014 at 5:19 pm

                  Yes – one. Not the “only conceivable reason“, as stated by Pop..

                  The interview with Harre on The Nation, she says this.

                  And in that new style of politics one of your most important policies is free tertiary education. Well your sponsor and party visionary has criticised this government for spending during recession times. Do you agree with that criticism because that’s how you keep policies like that afloat?

                  Well one of the deciding factors for me was the issue of tertiary education. As many observers I have been watching the development of the Internet Party. I was from absolutely from the side lines watching the negotiation of the agreement with the Mana movement.

                  But you have to spend to get that, and he has criticised It –

                  And right from the get go the Internet Party had made free tertiary education one of their core principles.

                  But if it is such a core principle, why can’t I find it on the IP website? If it’s there, it’s not easy to find.

                  In contrast, I had no difficulty finding the GP Tertiary Education policy, with it’s commitits to debt free education and to work towards free tertiary education.

                  Great if the IP is commited to free tertiary education. I just don’t see it as a deciding factor in choosing between the IP and the Greens. Other things Harre mentioned, like engaging with young politically disengaged (potential) voters, seem more significant as deciding factors to me.

                  • weka …
                    31 May 2014 at 10:26 pm

                    The GP have been developing their policies over decades, the IP over weeks. I’m not that impressed with the IP website myself, but I can understand why they don’t have much detail up yet.

                    • Tracey …
                      1 June 2014 at 10:27 am

                      As opposed to national who are waiting for everyone else to put theirs on the table before lying about theirs

            • weka 2.1.1.1.2.2
              31 May 2014 at 10:28 pm

              “The only conceivable reason that Harre has decided to lead the Internet Party is she has unfinished business – free education. That rather suggests the Greens don’t see that as a priority.”

              Harre has stated multiple reasons for joining the IP. AFAIK she hasn’t said anything about why she is not with the GP. I think you are speculating on nothing there Pop.

      • cricklewood 2.1.2
        31 May 2014 at 11:16 am

        Judging by some of the comment from certain Labour Mps the only wedge being driven will be straight down the middle of the labour party…

    • Stephanie Rodgers 2.2
      31 May 2014 at 11:28 am

      One thing I haven’t seen many people consider is that Laila may not have wanted a position on the Green list. I have no idea if that’s the case, but there’s a definite “Laila Harre has no free will” meme going around.

      • bad12 2.2.2
        31 May 2014 at 12:20 pm

        Stephanie Rodgers, i don’t want to drag the conversation too far into this, as Karol says, the Post has the intent of focusing on the policies, But,

        My understanding surrounding the internals was that Laila was hired on as a ”political adviser” which caused a flurry of concern in some quarters about the ”need” to be spending scarce resources on such an adviser in the vein of, if there was not enough ”political wisdom” within the Parties current MP’s then we all might as well pack up and go home,

        The rest is as they say, history…

        • Stephanie Rodgers 2.2.2.1
          31 May 2014 at 3:45 pm

          I don’t see how this relates to the point I was making. Yes, she worked for the Greens. That’s not the same as pursuing a place on the Green Party list.

  3. Jenny 3
    31 May 2014 at 10:32 am

    Let us repoliticise John Key!

    The Greens say anthropogenic climate change is real and we have a detailed wonk-friendly exposition on our website, but for this election we are running with “jobs, kids, rivers”. Oh no… MEGO…

    What’s happened is that climate change, the ‘elephant in the room’, has been swallowed up whole by the ‘snake in the room’ of politics. Along with all other serious political issues.

    This snake is the real theme of the election. Russell Brown calls it the politics of absence. Brown says “cultivated political absence… shapes the almost unprecedented popularity of John Key”. John Key’s political success is because of this successful strategy of “de-politicising” himself.

    Hot Topic

    Let us mercilessly ‘out’ John Key as a willing tool of the polluters and plutocrats, and a traitor to all future generations, Let us all make climate change an election issue. Don’t let the the snake (Key) eat the elephant in the room.

  4. karol 4
    31 May 2014 at 10:47 am

    Scott Ludlum is talking about how any Clean Energy programmes have been sabotaged by the Abbott government in Aussie – and how anyone in the oublic sector who has got “climate” on their CV has been sacked.

    And all of the reactionary politics coming from Abbott’s government.

    Edit: Ludlum now talking about the urgency of dealing with climate change – something shared by Green Parties internationally.

  5. Pasupial 5
    31 May 2014 at 11:17 am

    Meteria Turei speaking on livestream now; looking fairly glamorous as she talks about children full of love and marmite… “Who if not for the Greens will stand up for our children?”

    • BM 5.1
      31 May 2014 at 11:37 am

      $5000 dollar jackets do that.

      • Pasupial 5.1.1
        31 May 2014 at 11:49 am

        BM

        Still spinning Collins’ attack lines for her? I suppose it’s easier than trying to think of anything new for yourself.

      • Stephanie Rodgers 5.1.2
        31 May 2014 at 11:56 am

        And if she were wearing sackcloth and handknits you’d be attacking her for not being professional enough for national politics. 🙄

        • Draco T Bastard 5.1.2.1
          31 May 2014 at 3:29 pm

          +111

          The RWNJs will always attack no matter what and will often be hypocritical.

      • Paul 5.1.3
        31 May 2014 at 12:23 pm

        Are you actually able to debate policy, or are personality attacks the limit of your political debate?

  6. bad12 6
    31 May 2014 at 11:21 am

    Jenny doesn’t seem to get ”it”, Phillip makes an excellent ”choir boy” for the ”chorus”, National with 40+% of political support, and Labour with 30+% of that support will not support anywhere near what the pair of you would wish to see occur surrounding ”climate change” Legislation,

    The political process is 70-80% reactionary, it always has been, until such time as the negative effects of climate change begins to destroy the current economic and social orthodoxy Governments will sail blithely on,

    The Greens with only 10% of political support if applying ”force” to effect what Jenny and Phillip would require would only be committing political suicide thus ensuring that even the smaller gains in Green policy surrounding ”climate” cannot be furthered,

    To be blunt, IF the worst case scenario surrounding climate change were to occur, a large number of the current generation of today’s voters grandchildren/great grandchildren will not exist upon this planet,

    70–80% of their grandparents/great grandparents who exist today seem not to give a shit, Democracy validates their position, full stop…

    • karol 6.1
      31 May 2014 at 11:34 am

      Well, the Green MPs have continued to talk about climate change, and the urgent need for action to counter it, in the House during this term.

      I don’t see any evidence they have backed away from the issue.

      They also have promoted policies that will contribute to clean energy provisions – supported public transport, solar power, home insulation, etc.

      • bad12 6.1.1
        31 May 2014 at 12:40 pm

        Oh i agree entirely with you Karol, weekly in the Parliaments debating chamber one or the other of the Green MP’s highlights ”climate change” in questions directed at National Party MP’s exposing the lack of action over this fundamental position,

        The fact is tho, the mainstream media, an all important component of today’s political discourse have largely chosen to now ignore the issue unless it is to report the spectacular, ala this weeks ”giant waves are to blame for the retreat of Antartic ice-sheets”,

        The Party realizes that it can only ”strong-arm” the Parliament into passing Legislation bettering the planet and the climate when it has a larger support base, % of the vote, than it at present enjoys,

        The Party also knows that a far far higher % of the voter base understand,supports, and, practices some Green aspects of conservation in their daily lives than actually cast a vote for the Party on poling days,

        It then becomes necessary to broaden the Parties appeal with a full suite of policy that is not necessarily seen as ”Green” where the voters will, having practices conservation measures in their daily lives, ”accept” the wider platform of fundamental enviroment policy,

        That some cannot see this or accept the wisdom of this, simply has me believing that they refuse to accept the reality of Democracy and the constraints this imposes…

        • phillip ure 6.1.1.1
          31 May 2014 at 1:07 pm

          oh..ok..

          ..should we just get pillows fluffed for us..?

          ..to lie on as we slide into climate-change chaos..?

          ..and best shut up!..’cos most don’t seem to fucken care..?

          ..’democracy rules!’..eh..?

          ..good luck with that..!

          ..or..should i say ‘fuck that!’..

          ..and on this issue/policy..that the greens have been open that they will go along with ;labours’ drilling/mining-plans..

          ..will happily be ministers in a government just continuing to drive us towards that environmental-chaos..

          ..sez to me more that they have lost their fucken way…

          ..not me…

          ..and fuck all these cries of ;it’s too hard..!/what can we do..?’..

          ..we can do fucken heaps…

          .here is krugmans’ latest prescription..

          http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/30/opinion/krugman-cutting-back-on-carbon.html?_r=0

          ..and yes..it is all do-able..

          .key quote:..

          “..“..Everything we know suggests that we can achieve large reductions in greenhouse gas emissions –

          at little cost to the economy..”

          (cont..)

          ..and as far as ‘green-policies’ are concerned…

          ..they mean naught when green ministers will be going along with increased carbon-extraction..

          ..all of which begs the question:..

          ..how can they be not part of the problem..?

          ..and how can they not be a bulls’-roar away from being the ‘solution’ we need..?

          ..with ever-increasing urgency..?

          • bad12 6.1.1.1.1
            31 May 2014 at 1:33 pm

            Feel free to make as much ”noise” as you want Phillip, the rest of your elongated ”squirt” i will choose not to reply to in this Post as such an answer to your wide ranging ”squirt” would detract from the Post’s intent…

            • phillip ure 6.1.1.1.1.1
              31 May 2014 at 5:11 pm

              well don’t talk defeatist-drivel then..

              ..’just do nothing!’..eh..?

              ..who else said that..?

              ..that’s right..!

              ..that clown from act..whyte..

              ..yr in perhaps surprising company..eh..?

              • bad12 …
                31 May 2014 at 5:21 pm

                Again Phillip i will decline to be drawn into dragging the Post of its intended moot of discussion by any of your abusive little ”squirts” elongated or abbreviated…

          • The Al1en 6.1.1.1.2
            1 June 2014 at 8:47 am

            Laughable how you dismiss the Green parties environmental credentials when you’re advocating for an alliance led by a gumball rallying bloke with 18 emission spewing, petrol guzzling, vehicles like rolls royce drop heads etc…

            If someone said hypocrite, you wouldn’t have a leg to stand on.

  7. Pasupial 7
    31 May 2014 at 11:46 am

    Some highlights of Turei’s speech (any transcription errors are my own):

    [8:28] “The day a newborn baby is judged unworthy of support given to all other babies, just because of the family they are born into is a dangerous day for Aotearoa NZ. We must not let these insiduous Victorian notions of deserving and undeserving poor infect our moral identity”

    Policy Announcement [9:50] “In government, the Green Party will extend free doctor’s visits to all New Zealanders to the age of 18”

    [11:50] “Our policy will cost just $29 million a year”

    [14:50] “The Green Party is the only major political party prepared to fight for the rights of all children to be treated equally in this country. The GP is the only P who will put our people and our environment at the heart of our economic management.”

    [15:09] “Who else; other than the Green Party, will fight for a smarter better fairer and more sustainable future; one that truly lives up to the expectations of our children”

    • karol 7.1
      31 May 2014 at 11:54 am

      Thanks, Pasupial. Will add to the post.

      • greywarbler 7.1.1
        31 May 2014 at 5:21 pm

        This is important to me and everyone who wants to retain a fair distributive society. But as things get tougher we get self-interest and self-justification for classism settling in. Metiria Turei said.:

        We must not let these insiduous Victorian notions of deserving and undeserving poor infect our moral identity”

    • Colonial Viper 7.2
      31 May 2014 at 3:07 pm

      [15:09] “Who else; other than the Green Party, will fight for a smarter better fairer and more sustainable future”
      .

      “More sustainable” is like being “more pregnant.” It doesn’t make sense. Either a situation is sustainable or not.

      And, exponential growth on a finite world in the form of economic growth % p.a. is decidedly unsustainable.

      Yet the Greens have not yet talked about the inevitable conclusion – we must end economic growth, now.

      • karol 7.2.1
        31 May 2014 at 3:37 pm

        “More sustainable” is like being “more pregnant.” It doesn’t make sense. Either a situation is sustainable or not.

        Well, yes and no.

        I agree with your main point, that I’d rather the GP was talking about a sustainably society, and not talking about economic “growth”.

        But sustainability is not the same as being/getting pregnant. Pregnancy happens as the result of one act. A sustainable society would most likely be achieved through a raft of poliies and procedures put in place over time. And there will be disputes as to what actions will ctually result in a sustainable society. To achieve it, a significant proportion of people would need to get behind it.

        Policies that contribute to a “more sustainable future/society” could be steps on the way to a fully sustainable society.

      • Pasupial 7.2.2
        31 May 2014 at 5:47 pm

        CV

        If you can comprehend; “less sustainable”, then; “more sustainable” is the opposite.

        I take it to mean; sustainable for a longer period of time. But with projected; population growth and resource depletion (along with increasing resource inaccessability due to climate change); what is sustainable now may not be so in the future.

        The advantage of “more sustainable… economic management” (NB not “economic growth”) is that there will be more time to change to a fully sustainable economy. [Reading Karol at 7.2.1, I realise that I’m merely restating some of her points – but I’ve typed it now, so may as well post]

        There is also the possibility of economic growth that doesn’t have material resource depletion as a necessary corollary, but it hasn’t shown much sign of happening yet.

  8. outofbed 8
    31 May 2014 at 11:56 am

    Here is a thought..
    With the Alliance reborn massing to the left of Labour and hopefully keeping the bastards honest

    The Greens do not need to hold that position quite so much.

    Maybe this can free up the Greens to focus more on environmental issues and mop up a few
    ‘blue green’ votes on the way.
    This does not mean the Greens moving to the centre , more of ‘not left nor right but Green’

    • karol 8.1
      31 May 2014 at 12:09 pm

      I wouldn’t like to see that happen. We need strong left wing parties in parliament. Ones with a strong and clear left wing values. Such values have long been the basis of the NZ Green Party.

      They were incorporated into the early Values Party early on.

      The Greens have worked long and hard to not be dismissed as a one issue party. They have been leading the way on poverty, inequality, state housing, etc., and have worked hard on policies that embrace people, communties and their environment.

      The idea of some thrid way that isn’t left or right, has been part of the discourse of neoliberal appeasement. Time to ditch it and stand up for truly left wing values.

    • Macro 8.2
      31 May 2014 at 12:35 pm

      The “Green” economy is always going to be an economy based upon equality and a fairer distribution of the earth’s resources – it cannot be otherwise. This was essentially the initial stance of the Labour movement – i.e. a fairer distribution of the profits of production, recognition of the worth of workers, and the needs of people were the primary policies.
      The green economy acknowledges all of the above but goes further in recognising that the economy is but a subset of the environment. Without a strong environment we cannot have a strong economy. Unfortunately the current paradigm of neo-liberal economics sees this the other way round. Labour have in the recent past been guilty of forgetting the primacy of environment over economy with their adoption of the corporate model of globalisation and free trade, at the expense of people and the environment. The thought was that we grow the “economic pie” and everyone gets a bigger slice! Well we know just how wrong that was, and it completely overlooks the reality of a finite world and finite resources. Now Labour is stuck (as is National) in this economic mould of their own making and to back track to a more people and environmental economy is going to be very difficult for them indeed. But for the sake of our children and grandchildren, and for the sake of the planet, we must reform – there is no other way.

      • Draco T Bastard 8.2.1
        31 May 2014 at 5:52 pm

        +111

      • Colonial Viper 8.2.2
        1 June 2014 at 1:52 pm

        The primary lie is the one of exponential % p.a. economic growth.

        Any economic growth today must now be entirely qualitative not quantitative. Yet politicians of all ilks still pay reverence to GDP and export “growth” like it is a mantra which cannot be set down.

        • Tracey 8.2.2.1
          1 June 2014 at 1:55 pm

          Yes. Its not set in stone, we can use any measure we choose. Gdp is a failure as a measure of anything meaningful for the majority of kiwis.

  9. Draco T Bastard 9
    31 May 2014 at 3:21 pm

    Russel Norman will make a policy announcement tomorrow (Sunday) at 1.30pm.

    13:15 is the listed start time. Yes, I know I said 13:30 yesterday – that’s because the email I had said from 13:30 but that same email had Turei speaking today at 11:30 and she had finished by then.

    My bad, misread the email. Still, Russel’s speech is set for 13:15 tomorrow.

    And, after all that, I missed a lot of what Turei said because LiveStream obviously sux.

    • Pasupial 9.1
      31 May 2014 at 5:28 pm

      DTB

      I got a bit of glitchiness when I tried to stream it in large size, but once I reduced window size back to default it went smoothly; even with the replaying sections to transcribe them. I’m using Firefox, if you’re on a different browser it might be that as well.

    • karol 9.2
      31 May 2014 at 5:34 pm

      Thanks, DTB. I have amended the post accordingly.

    • karol 9.3
      31 May 2014 at 5:49 pm

      I used FF. It stopped and buffered a few times, but started back again at the point where it had stopped.

  10. Skinny 10
    31 May 2014 at 8:26 pm

    I wish the Greens well in their election campaign. Really hope the weekend conference rounds out tops for them after not a great week earlier with the MIP and Harre hooking up. To me the Green Party MP’s appear to have the best record of all the party’s for honest, transparent conduct.

    The Right have unfairly labelled them as ‘crazy’ backed up with nasty rhetoric, which sometimes rubs off with the odd flippant comments by some of ourselves (LP members). I think it’s created a degree of paranoia to them and restricts them too much.

    Comparing Green MP’s that I know to Labour’s one, you find the Greens more genuine, less flakey actually. And everything is done by the books relating to lobbying. Other party’s are certainly less transparent in this regard. Quite easy if invited, waltz in to parliament gaining access to MP’s without a reason needing to be declared, just sign in the visitors book and off ya go. It’s little wonder National setup a new HQ handy to parliament buildings. So no tracking of who comes and goes, especially with the press gallery sniffing around.

  11. SPC 11
    31 May 2014 at 11:55 pm

    The commitment for free health visits to age 18 matches that for dental care.

  12. Pasupial 12
    1 June 2014 at 11:55 am

    Vance’s take on yesterday:

    Parliament’s third largest party is so mainstream that yesterday, its keynote announcement was an extension of a recently signalled National party policy…
    It’s a family-friendly, centrist package – in line with a raft of policies announced by National and Labour this year. Surprisingly, it’s universal, not just targeted at low-income families…
    Compared to the two-headed Internet Mana hybrid, the devilbeast of John Key’s imaginings suddenly looks tame…
    At a closed-door session yesterday, members were expected to vote for a stance that means a post-election coalition with National is ”highly, highly unlikely.” (That’s one more ”highly” than last year.)

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/10108802/Once-upon-a-Green-party-conference

    So a bit snide, but actually fairly restrained for Fairfax. We’ll have to see how that contrasts to the reaction to Norman’s speech this afternoon.

    • Colonial Viper 12.1
      1 June 2014 at 1:46 pm

      This is the brilliance of IMP…it makes the Greens look like the sensible, establishment choice (a role that they have been positioning for for quite some time now).

    • Paul 12.2
      1 June 2014 at 1:50 pm

      It’s a fairly trashy article for someone claiming to be a political journalist.

  13. Pasupial 13
    1 June 2014 at 1:38 pm

    Norman speech is live now – will transcribe and post highlights as per Turei’s.

    Jeanette Fitzsimons speaking at start about WOGOCOP (sp?)

    Good background on NZ climate legislation: “no one imagined cap and trade without the cap”

  14. Pasupial 14
    1 June 2014 at 3:34 pm

    Some highlights of Norman’s speech (any transcription errors are my own):

    Jeanette Fitzsimons intro and background (worth viewing!)

    [9:20] Norman speech begins

    [9:50] They used to call climate change; “the biggest issue of our time”, recently I’ve heard it described as; “the biggest issue of all time”.

    [10:30] Understanding what we’re seeing and taking action is a challenge; both politically and psychologically. How we respond to climate change will define us.

    [11: 14] What the climate debate too often fails to capture are the opportunities inherent in what is happening to the planet. In the opportunities that come when we release New Zealanders innate ability to innovate in the face of challenge. Even a big challange. By meeting the challenge of climate change we will transform our economy… and society for the better.

    [12:27] I’d like to briefly touch on some of the latest climate impacts from around the world because I know how easy it is to lose track. The effects of a warming planet can begin after a while to seem like a bizarre science fiction film that is playing in the background of everyday life.

    [14:25] They say time is money and never more so than with climate change. [refererence to Lord Stern skipped, a fair bit of skipping from about 13:30-15:00]

    [16:10] Complacency will destroy our children’s future – which brings me to the current government…

    [16:50] [a (unnamed) visiting] UN Official said, and I quote: “I fondly remember the days when we could look and point to New Zealand for inspiration”. I felt ashamed that successive governments had squandered that reputation…

    [17:20] On a per person NZ now produces twice the amount of greenhouse gases as China and 8 times that of India. We are the 5th highest emitter per person in the developed world.

    [18:55] We cannot expect other bigger countries to reduce emissions if we are not doing so ourselves. Especially when many of those countries are poorer than us. On the other hand, by demonstrating that a transition to a clean economy is both possible and rewarding, we can help spur global action. We are a can-do country. We are not the kind of people who expect others to do the heavy lifting while we sit back. So why sit back on climate change?

    [19:55] The kind of NZ that says we’re so small that we don’t matter is not the kind of NZ I want my kids to grow up in.

    [20:37] Apart from anything else, climate inaction is not a smart economic strategy. Any high carbon economic model has a built-in self destruct mechanism. We should be making every effort to shift our economy onto a more sustainable lower cost low carbon footing.

    [21:30] The estimated potential market share of the global for NZ, available to NZ, is up to 22b annually. To put this economic opportunity into perspective that figure of 22 billion is well over our current export dairy earnings

    [23:28] I believe that governmental excuses for inaction suggest a fundamental lack of faith in NZ businesses, and in NZers ingenuity. The Green Party is not afraid to ask NZ businesses to innovate and at times to lead because we know that they can.

    [24:50] The government’s Emissions Trading Scheme has failed. Hollowed-out and weakened to the point of redundancy, it has accelerated deforestation and driven up emissions. The ETS was designed to incentivise investment in clean technology, emission reductions and the planting of trees: It has done none of these things – in fact it’s done the opposite.

    [26:38] The reality of the ETS is this: NZ taxpayers are subsidising polluters to produce greenhouse emissions at a rate of about $3.80/ tonne.

    [27:15] It’s time to put the failed emissions trading scheme out of its misery.

    POLICY ANNOUNCEMENT [27:54] Today we are announcing that in government, the green party will:

    Firstly; set a goal of carbon neutrality for NZ by 2050. So a net zero emission economy by midcentury.

    Secondly; establish an independent climate commission made up of climate science and policy experts. The commission will advise government on national carbon budgets and best practise to meet them.

    Thirdly; we will end the failed ETS, and introduce a carbon tax on pollution. Every dollar raised from the carbon tax on pollution will go back to NZ households and businesses in the form of a tax cut.

    [30:10] Let me be clear; NZ households will be several hundred dollars a year better off as a result of the climate tax/ cut.
    And finally we will introduce a suite of complementary measures to support the rapid transition to a carbon neutral economy. Dairy will be included in the climate tax/cut; emissions from the dairy sector have more than doubled from 1990 to 2012…

    [31:10] We will however be exempting sheep and beef farming from the initial period as their emissions remain below 1990 levels and continue to fall and indications are the tax would leave them vulnerable.

    [31:55] I you make a mess then you need to clean it up, that’s one of the principles that we all learn growing up and we need to apply it to the climate.

    [34:25] A carbon tax on pollution will not on its own do the job. Which is why the Green Party has a range of complementary measure to bring down NZs emissions. These include…

    [36:55] This is a moment in history we must seize. It’s time for boldness and leadership. Climate change waits for no one. Friends and colleagues; the GP is today making climate change an election issue!

  15. Pasupial 15
    2 June 2014 at 12:27 pm

    Links to full speech transcripts on Scoop (didn’t think of checking over there before, as they rarely update over weekends, would’ve saved much typing):

    http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA1405/S00609/speech-turei-if-not-for-the-greens-then-who.htm

    http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA1406/S00007/green-party-agm-2014-speech-climate-change.htm