Monday 19 September 2011

Green Party launches 'For a Richer New Zealand'

"A richer New Zealand"? - Yeah right - in the face of Peak Oil and a global economic meltdown!

The Greens really HAVE lost it as far as I'm concerned.

I've been told that any message has to be "90% positive".  Either there has been a collective loss of reality or a lurch to the right in the party (and an effort to 'mainstream').  What happened to the messages about Peal Oil and climate change (taken a back burner by the looks of things).

18 September, 2011

The Green Party today released their 'For a Richer New Zealand' advertising campaign.

The aim of the campaign is to ask New Zealanders to vote for real prosperity this election.

The campaign creative will appear from next week on the Green Party's hoardings, leaflets and website. It is aimed at promoting the Green Party's goals for the next three years on clean rivers, green jobs and bringing children out of poverty.

"We want a New Zealand that is richer in the things that really matter - strong communities, a beautiful, well cared for environment and a clean, green economy that works for everybody," said Dr Russel Norman, Green Party Co-leader.

"A truly richer New Zealand will be powered by a clean, green economy that is based on green jobs and innovation," said Dr Norman.

Green Party Co-leader, Metiria Turei added, "In our vision for a richer New Zealand, every child has enough to eat, our rivers are clean enough to swim in and our jobs are good for the environment and the economy."

"Living in a richer New Zealand is about much more than economic growth - it is about living in a beautiful country where we look after the environment, it's about living in strong communities where people feel connected to each other.

"A truly rich country is one where everyone gets a fair go," said Mrs Turei.

Helping the Green Party communicate their vision is creative agency Running with Scissors. Co-director, Friday O'Flaherty explains their involvement;

"With the Green Party we have co-created the strategy that presents a simple and honest portrayal of their collective intent. Their execution is sincere and natural, giving voters a true picture of the Green Party and clarity around what they are voting for."


  1. The Greens are pointing out that there is more than one way to be rich. Not that material wealth is the only form of rich.

  2. That does not seem to be inherent in the message. Promising green jobs and an end to child poverty in the face of resource depletion, rapid climate change and (above all) a collapsing economy based on debt is dishonest.

    The Green Party I joined espoused "the Limits to Growth" - now there has been such a 'mainstreaming' and embracing of parliamentary politics that the Party has truly lost its way.

    The last time I even heard Peak Oil mentioned was back in 2005 from Jeannette Fitzsimmons. Of climate change there is hardly a mention - the message has to be 90% positive when in all honesty there is nothing much to positive about.

  3. Its a shame when people that seem to be able to look at the world with both eyes, still produce one-eyed rants if the evidence does not suit their preconceptions.

    If you want a political movement to stay marginalised, then you don't want a political movement.

    If you want peak oil and climate change to be mainstream issues, then you must bring them into the mainstream.

    You cannot bring issues into the mainstream as a political party if you are marginalised and ineffective.

    Please open your other eye and think critically and strategically. If you can think about this from another perspective you might even learn something.

    You may even be able to help, rather than offering one-eyed rants.

  4. As a political vehicle for these issues, the Green Party's job is to take these issues into the mainstream, and they are following solid science in order to do this.

    We are in the unsustainable position we are in because too many people deny science when it is available to us, yet your position here also denies available science.

  5. "We are in the unsustainable position we are in because too many people deny science when it is available to us, yet your position here also denies available science."

    You seem to have an obsession with science. What science do you think I'm denying? - physics, astronomy, geology, atmospheric science?
    I'm fine with all of those.

    Do you think I am a climate change denier?

    Or are you trying to apply the word "science" to a bit of social research that justifies a certain position - and then accuse those who don't agree with your strategy of being "unscientific"?

    I do have an issue with that.

  6. Hey Robin
    Good on ya M8!
    Speaking truth to power! Kia kaha!

    The Greens are NOT an activist party. They made the conscious decision to change to a political strategy party on the change over from Values. Unfortunately they still ride on the coat tails of activism, and bring many folks in believing they're still there. They are not. They rejected peak oil as an issue when we (peak oil activists) screamed at them from 1999 to 2004. They chose to instead, have a secret internal leadership strategy policy NOT to talk about it until 2005, after oil went to US$50 a barrel.

    Robert Atack has recorded some of this history at

    The important thing to face here is mainstream political parties are bound by current systemic dysfunctionality. It's just the way it is. If voting could change anything, it would be illegal. We're simply voting in caretakers/field managers who run the country for those above them: the corporations, banksters and elites...the so-called democracy is an illusion...we are being farmed. The NZ Green Party does us a great dis-service by continuing to portray themselves as true greens, when they are bright greens, business boosters for "green-tech stability" as described by David Holmgren in
    Like him, I consider this scenario is at best panglossian, and at worst toxic vaporware.

    Under the highly likely collapse, already happening and coming in tipping points and steps, I'm much more interested in either energy descent earth stewerdship, and/or lifeboat building at a community scale.

    Because the Greens operate at a national level, they feel compelled to play a grenwashed mainstream game as a strategy to get in, regardless of what they know of how insane the culture is, how bad The 6th Mass Extinction is, how dramatically unsustainable industrial "civilisation" is....

    We are more likely to hear some truth from Mana, but I keenly feel the loss of McGillyCuddy Serious, as their inspired jestering and showing the emperor had no clothes is sorely missed:
    When they closed down after 1999, they knew The Great Leap Backwards was coming, so most went back to the land to up-skill and prepare.

  7. hat more evidence do we need than the knowledge that the greeds help vote in the ponzie growth based savings scam Kiwi Saver
    With what they know and understand how can they tell an 18 year old that he/she will have a pension in 47 years? ... let alone a life.
    KS is dependent on an average of 3% annual growth = to a doubling of everything in 21 years (if we had the energy etc to survive this long)
    They are criminals or fools.

  8. I see both sides here. I have been a keen fan of green business solutions - even post collapse being enterprising and innovative will be important. When I set up the NZ Environmental Business Network in 93 I had every deep green calling me the devil. In 99 i tried to push a more pro green business approach in the Greens and got ridiculed and shut out. 20 yrs ago was already late but an appropriate time to do the green biz thing. 12 years ago the Greens could have helped their image by belatedly getting on the green biz thing instead of being seen as the pro pot party - but didnt. Now we are 20 minutes past midnight and its really about survival, preparing the lifeboats. Political policy in 2011 really has to be about radical reform (starting with economic) and organizing the criminal trials. Greens are a decade or 2 late and playing suck up politics now makes them insincere. I know you got to get the votes if u want to count politically and thank fk they finally are in double digits at the polls (I used to think both Poles would have melted and they still would be on 5%) but its a different reality now. Even the 350 campaign is tiresome bcoz its a runaway freight train and some fluffing around 10 years late aint going to change much at all. Lucky there is radical economic reform party forming that at least will say what is overdue. wont stop the train but at least it will feel good to say it. Originally it was proposed to call it the Collapse Party

  9. It is the uneducated masses that is the problem, the Greeds could have spent the last 12 years bringing them up to speed rather than focussing on more votes and more children (the Greed parliamentarians have produced more children than any other party,I count at least 8 kids)
    Unfortunately the greeds believe there own crap, ie if we do this, this and this, there will be a bright future for all 'man' kind, when @ 7 billion and counting that is only going to happen if 'they' kill off about 5 billion of us.
    Remove the 9 out of every 10 calories that fossil fuels give us with food production, a population decrees is guaranteed, but due to runaway climate change that decrees will not stop the 'survivors' departing this rock as well.
    So maybe the Greeds are doing us all a favour, by maintaining the statuesque we are going off the cliff at light speed as opposed to the speed of sound.
    The only good thing I can see is the breeding greeds are going to suffer a tad more via their foolishly produced children ... good job suckers ;)

  10. Any thing they do Profit always comes first for every party.

    new zealand nursing jobs

    LED signs


Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.