Greenpeace converts John’s office

34 comments on “Greenpeace converts John’s office ”

• Comments are now closed

1. higherstandard 1

   31 October 2008 at 3:26 pm

   Excellent,

   So diary farming ,our largest export earner, is the main cause of “climate crime” in NZ – the further these green twats are from power in NZ the better for everyone.
2. Lampie 2

   31 October 2008 at 3:29 pm

   Actually our biggest exporter gets attacked on our clean green image so we do have to take it seriously
3. coge 3

   31 October 2008 at 3:45 pm

   Ready made lawn requires constant watering, how is this enviromentally sound? For what, to score nonsensical political points?
4. Roflcopter 4

   31 October 2008 at 3:53 pm

   How many trees were executed in the making of those props?
5. the sprout 5

   31 October 2008 at 3:57 pm

   The Herald hates this sort of political participation – no profit in it, and it only promotes community interests.
6. principessa 6

   31 October 2008 at 4:02 pm

   Where are his Electorate Staff? Slacking off on the job…
7. Tane 7

   31 October 2008 at 4:02 pm

   coge, roflcopter. Your jokes aren’t just old, they don’t make sense. Environmental activists stand for sustainable use of resources, they don’t argue that no one should ever use resources. That would be absurd.
8. Scribe 8

   31 October 2008 at 4:07 pm

   Pesky National. Creating work for tree fellers AND dairy farmers. What a disgrace.

   captcha: melee large
9. Lampie 9

   31 October 2008 at 4:10 pm

   “Where are his Electorate Staff? Slacking off on the job ”

   In the Parnell office
10. Felix 10

    31 October 2008 at 4:21 pm

    Not just absurd, it would be incredibly stupid.

    coge and roflcopter couldn’t be that incredibly, unbelievably stupid could they?
11. Spam 11

    31 October 2008 at 4:30 pm

    So by what percentage have New Zealand Forestry stocks decreased under the Labour government?
12. Quoth the Raven 12

    31 October 2008 at 5:41 pm

    This is a great artilce:What I heard John Key Say
    There’s lots of good material there.
13. Roflcopter 13

    31 October 2008 at 6:01 pm

    Tane “coge, roflcopter. Your jokes aren?t just old, they don?t make sense. Environmental activists stand for sustainable use of resources, they don?t argue that no one should ever use resources. That would be absurd.”

    Correct, but they also advocate not wasting it in the first place. Needless wasteage would be absurd.
14. Erik 14

    31 October 2008 at 7:06 pm

    Actually, its not great political theatre. No one can get a good political message out. It drives me nuts.

    OK, I’m middle New Zealand. What does some grass squares put over a lawn, some pine trees and a cow mean?

    I know what it all implies, but I spend all my days reading about politics and listening to interviews. Theres just no explanation, like farming>pollution>waterways>long term effects. Short term profit, kids unable to swim in poisoned waterways, ass falling out of the industry or more poisions to cover the old poisons so it can continue poisoning.

    Theres any number of ways to make it meaningful to people who don’t read this page, but no one does it. People here (reading this page) need to realise (Esp Dr Cullen) that New Zealanders don’t know much about this stuff, or more importantly, the implications of the dairy industry’s methods. Or any others.

    People have such a negative impression of the greens because they don’t get a good message out. I honestly wonder if they pay people or consultants or someone to do PR for them. If they do, what a disaster. Wonder how much they charge, I need a job…
15. Felix 15

    31 October 2008 at 7:34 pm

    Roflcopter,

    Your computer is a waste of electricity.
16. randal 16

    31 October 2008 at 7:41 pm

    and space
17. Chris G 17

    31 October 2008 at 7:53 pm

    Erik,

    Good points.

    I’ve always thought the greens have done a average-poor at best PR job. But I reckon the last 2-3 years they’ve really stepped it up. Far from optimum but they are getting better. I’ve always thought they need to project an image of “We’re just regular people who care for the environment, its protection is important because it underpins society” rather than play in to the tory image of them as tree hugging bufoons.

    Thankfully ~%10 of NZ tends to agree with the Green ethos. Good on them I say.
18. higherstandard 18

    31 October 2008 at 7:57 pm

    Chris

    If the greens were indeed just regular people who care for the environment they would likely attract a larger vote.

    But there’s a lot more to the greens than just caring about the environment.
19. Chris G 19

    31 October 2008 at 8:04 pm

    I dont think a Whole lot more. Obviously they’ve got their social justice elements, but environmental concerns underpin most of their decisions

    They definately scrubbed up so to speak though in the last few years, agree? marked by an increase in polling.

    Plus if you want to suggest theres a ‘lot more’ to certain minor parties. I think you’ve got culprits in the light of Maori party, UF, ACT.
20. Brett Dale 20

    31 October 2008 at 8:06 pm

    Harmless stunt, but once again the Greens have to use these types of stunts for attention, there has yet to be an honest debate about GE and Climate change, the greenies would rather play on emotion.

    I wonder how many cars greenpeace use to take all that stuff to Key’s office?
21. Macro 21

    31 October 2008 at 8:53 pm

    “Where are his Electorate Staff? Slacking off on the job ‘
    Off getting a big Mac for the rubbish bag – so that the local dog could have another feed.

    HS
    “So diary farming ,our largest export earner, is the main cause of “climate crime’ in NZ – the further these green twats are from power in NZ the better for everyone.”
    The greatest green house gas emitter in NZ is the dairy herd. And NZ is the 6th greatest green house gas emitter per capita in the world. The further you and your like are from power in NZ the the better for EVERYONE and that means you and your like as well!
22. jo zinny 22

    31 October 2008 at 8:55 pm

    HS, “Excellent,” — Agreed. BTW: dairy farming is not a problem so long as it is capable of looking after itself environment-wise. Growth in such industry for the sake of growth is non viable unless or until that extra looking after is adequately and intelligently dealt to.

    Brett Dale, maybe a good answer to your point will turn up on RNZ around 5.10pm Sunday. When Kim Hill takes the party folks through what they are gonna do on climate change and stuff
23. peteremcc 23

    31 October 2008 at 9:45 pm

    Of course the EFA didn’t get in the way of this stunt.

    None of those signs are authorised.

    It just ignores the law completely, like all the parties that voted for it have been doing all year.

    [lprent: You can always lay a complaint to the EC and help clarify the law (I don’t think it will get far). Otherwise you can do the boring whining.]
24. TBA 24

    1 November 2008 at 3:35 am

    Common Peter, that law wasn’t made for them. It was made for everybody else to have to try and comply with.

    Oh I know guys The Standard tells us that its having no impact at all however I prefer listening the opinion of experts so feel its a real concern when I read comments like:
    “Dr Helena Catt has outlined the difficulties the commission is having with the new Electoral Finance Act, describing it as containing significant “obscure” sections and uncertainty which had stifled political activity.

    “It is clear that having uncertainty remaining within the regulated period has had a chilling effect on the extent and type of participation in political and campaign activity.”
25. higherstandard 25

    1 November 2008 at 7:28 am

    Macro – LOLAYYB

    You could slaughter NZ’s entire diary herd and it would make zero difference to the climate, the economic effect on the country would be dire. While I support the greens in their efforts to make dairy framing cleaner in the sense of avoiding polluting the waterways etc but the climate change argument used as a rationale to beat up and tax dairy farming is just a screwy exercise in the flagellation of our most important primary industry.
26. lprent 26

    1 November 2008 at 8:09 am

    TBA: You obviously don’t know much about laws and how they’re made, do you?

    Virtually every bill has sections that don’t work as intended after it is passed. Either the courts make a ruling on it clarifying the interpretation, or parliament amends the legislation, or in this case the administering body decides on their own interpretation.

    That usually takes years. In the meantime the people who may be at the edge have to take a punt about their interpretation. We did about our interpretation of multi-author blogs which is ambiguous. There have apparently been a number of complaints against this site.

    In effect you’re arguing that people who are too gutless to become a test case should deserve special consideration. To participate is to take risks. Something that various groups appear to have forgotten.

    The reality is that all that really has to done to reduce risk for most of the risk adverse is to register as 3rd party, and keep in the spending limits. Otherwise if they don’t think that they are electioneering, then take the risk of a complaint to the EC. Otherwise just fed the money to a political party.

    In anycase they have to be transparent about who they are and what they are doing.
27. Felix 27

    1 November 2008 at 8:29 am

    LOLAYYB??? At young Yiddish boys???

    I think I’m going to have to stop trying to decipher these acronyms.
28. max@gmail.com 28

    1 November 2008 at 9:35 am

    groan – a lame green/labour ploy worthy of 4th form students. zzzzzzzzzzzzzz
29. max@gmail.com 29

    1 November 2008 at 9:37 am

    i suppose after yesterdays melbourne abortion…
30. Erik 30

    1 November 2008 at 11:36 am

    Chris, I agree that they have improved. One of the saddest parts about that is Nandor leaving; its probably been good for the party’s image. Just because he has dreads and may have puffed the hydro doesn’t mean he isn’t completely reasonable and smart.

    However, I would expect the skateboard and being happy probably made middle NZ (for want of a better term) think he is somehow deficient since ‘normal’ people don’t do those things.

    I agree the new ads are slick, and definitely in the right direction. I think their message needs to be both “this is what is happening (waterways, whatever)” and “this is what we would do about it” to avoid being the gloom party. Use an angle of keeping the big parties honest and forcing them to keep moving in the right direction. Explain what the effects of the light bulbs are (one less power station or whatever), of insulating houses (better overall public health, lower health spend, lower electricity use, happier people) and quantify it all, tie it together and make it clear.

    Their purpose is to highlight issues which have significant effects on public health and the environment, which there are many of but which will not enter the public awareness or the government agenda without them. Sometimes they strike me as well meaning people, absolutely with the right ideas but without the PR and performance skills. But then I think Bill Clinton is the gold standard for that, maybe I’m asking a bit much…
31. Pat 31

    1 November 2008 at 11:52 am

    As a monthly donor to Greenpeace, I find this stunt pretty dumb. Greenpeace phoned me up the other night asking for more money to support their stupid forestry protest. I respectfully declined.

    Note to Greenpeace. Some of your donors were raised on dairy farms. Some of your donors will be voting for John Key.

    How about lobbying the world’s real climate criminals, like China.

    I am seriously close to cancelling my monthly A/P.
32. Quoth the Raven 32

    1 November 2008 at 12:06 pm

    Pat – Make some sense why don’t you China is the world’s biggest poluter because they make all the crap that consumerist westeners love to buy. Buy! Buy! Buy! They have become the world’s factory. Even so with a billion people in that country per person their pollution is a lot less than the U.S’s and probably ours too. Reading your comments in the past I can’t understand how you ever became a member of green peace and as a member are voting National (most of them sitll think climate change is a conspiracy). I’m not a even a member. You’re a person riddled with contradictions Pat.
33. higherstandard 33

    1 November 2008 at 12:23 pm

    Yes Pat

    Get with the programme – everything is the West’s fault.

    Which is why we must make sure NZ’s population and carbon footprint is minimised because that will save the world …….. oops just a sec.
34. Quoth the Raven 34

    1 November 2008 at 12:44 pm

    HS – Take it back to kiwiblog.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS