The Greens are green alright and not just in the environmental sense. They are green when it comes to sorting out their own internal issues. Chlöe Swarbrick tells the small number of people who bothered to turn up to the party conference that it is her intention to make the party the biggest on the left. Then almost straight away she illustrates what they would look like in government by dithering over the Darleen Tana issue. Chlöe says there are a lot of divergent opinions in the party and it is important that everyone gets to have a say.
It appears this problem, which has beset the party since at least March, is going to drag on still longer. There will be a special meeting on 1 September and at this meeting 200 party delegates will vote on whether to use the waka-jumping law to oust her from Parliament. That will be the best part of six months since the issue first came to light. Chlöe said they wouldn’t write to the Speaker seeking the removal of Tana unless they had the clear support of the party membership.
Are we to believe that this is how they would run the country? i.e., every piece of legislation would have to be agreed to by the party membership before it went to a vote in the House. Imagine how much legislation would pile up while they took a month to organise a meeting so the party membership could vote on it. Imagine if a third world war broke out, which is highly likely if Kamala Harris wins the presidency: the Greens would presumably want their membership to have a vote on any potential involvement in probably a month’s time.
Are we supposed to take these people seriously? They are vacillating over an issue even Labour would have sorted out, while trying to make out that they are the ones who should be in charge of the country. Spare me. Who are they trying to fool – other than themselves? The weekend’s shenanigans proved what a disaster they would be should they be given the levers of power.
If they can’t sort out a MP from their own party how do they except the majority of voters to have the confidence to vote them into government. It beggars belief. Just look at them. They are a perfect illustration of exactly who they actually are: and they want the voting public to take them seriously. How can we? They are as fit for office as much as Kamala Harris is fit for the American presidency.
Both are a frightening thought. In both cases the Peter Principle applies. Dr Laurence J Peter was a sociologist, lecturer and business consultant. In his 1968 book, he states, “In a hierarchy every employee tends to rise to his level of incompetence.” In today’s environment you would have to include ‘her’. The principle is appropriate when referring to Harris, Swarbrick and Ardern. These three just happen to be women, but there are many male politicians just as fit to wear the same hat.
The Greens spent last weekend highlighting why they don’t deserve our vote and they couldn’t have done a better job if they had tried. If it wasn’t obvious before the weekend then it should be now. They are no more an environmental party than they are economic wizards. At the next election they deserve to take a bath (something else they couldn’t run).
JC is a right-wing crusader. Reached an age that embodies the dictum only the good die young. This article was first published HERE
Are we to believe that this is how they would run the country? i.e., every piece of legislation would have to be agreed to by the party membership before it went to a vote in the House. Imagine how much legislation would pile up while they took a month to organise a meeting so the party membership could vote on it. Imagine if a third world war broke out, which is highly likely if Kamala Harris wins the presidency: the Greens would presumably want their membership to have a vote on any potential involvement in probably a month’s time.
Are we supposed to take these people seriously? They are vacillating over an issue even Labour would have sorted out, while trying to make out that they are the ones who should be in charge of the country. Spare me. Who are they trying to fool – other than themselves? The weekend’s shenanigans proved what a disaster they would be should they be given the levers of power.
If they can’t sort out a MP from their own party how do they except the majority of voters to have the confidence to vote them into government. It beggars belief. Just look at them. They are a perfect illustration of exactly who they actually are: and they want the voting public to take them seriously. How can we? They are as fit for office as much as Kamala Harris is fit for the American presidency.
Both are a frightening thought. In both cases the Peter Principle applies. Dr Laurence J Peter was a sociologist, lecturer and business consultant. In his 1968 book, he states, “In a hierarchy every employee tends to rise to his level of incompetence.” In today’s environment you would have to include ‘her’. The principle is appropriate when referring to Harris, Swarbrick and Ardern. These three just happen to be women, but there are many male politicians just as fit to wear the same hat.
The Greens spent last weekend highlighting why they don’t deserve our vote and they couldn’t have done a better job if they had tried. If it wasn’t obvious before the weekend then it should be now. They are no more an environmental party than they are economic wizards. At the next election they deserve to take a bath (something else they couldn’t run).
JC is a right-wing crusader. Reached an age that embodies the dictum only the good die young. This article was first published HERE
6 comments:
Chloe of the Greens is acting more and more like Chloe of Waimuiomata (if you remember her).
'Divergent opinions in the party' is code for they are SO intersectionalised they both dislike each other and others policy in equal measures.
They are so disfunctional that to state they operate in a political sense is to suggest an ant colony is both more highly organised and has a collective IQ that surpasses the entirety of the Greens and their supporters.
The Greens make many a third-world political party in parliament seem competent and morally virtuous by comparison. They are beneath contempt.
I agree with your comments about the Greens Mr JC, and the comment of Mr Vlaardingerbroek . Though I don't know if your suggestion that Labour would have dealt with this any quicker is accurate.
Though Stuart Nash and David Clark both got the boot in a matter of about 2 months, Labours dismissal of Clare Curran for telling a few too many porkies took the best part of 8 months, as did the sacking of Meka Whaitiri for doing 3 rounds with her newly hired press secretary. And Mr Wood's was finally given the boot on his 12th or more warning . And these were all Ministers.
The only one sacked with any rapidity was Ian Lees -Galloway. Can't have anyone in the Labour Party having hetersoexual sex with another consenting adult now can we. Not in the NZ Labour Party !
US political columnist Joe Sobran uses the metaphor of a hive of bees, united by a kind of “group mind,” to describe the largely informal body of Leftist Groupthink to the New Zealand Green Party and its supporters belong. There’s no central direction as such, but the bees can sense an enemy, and know when to attack.
Sobran says: “To become a bee in this hive is to surrender, voluntarily and eagerly, your own personality: to submerge the self in a collectivity; to prefer the buzzing cliché of the group to individual thought and expression; to take satisfaction in belonging and conforming to a powerful mass while punishing others for failure to conform ... The similarity to an insect colony - where the individual exists only functionally, being both indistinguishable from and interchangeable with its fellows - is not superficial, it is of the essence. To be an insect is to be relieved of the burden of having a soul of your own.”
Pffft!
Leave Darleen where she is - a piece of flotsam doing nothing. This is a perfect scenario. If Darleen goes, the next cab on the Green List rank, will join the Greens in parliament. He/she looks as beneficial and useful to New Zealand as a hip pocket on a shirt.
Post a Comment