Smith’s & Key’s Enchantment With Climate Change Mythology Emphasizes Need For New Party

Of course there needs to be something said in respect of Nick Smith’s current espousal of the climate change cause and that is that back in 2005 they were talking Carbon Tax, whereas today the talk is all about Carbon Trading Schemes. Its a concept that is greeted with enthusiasm among governments and their cronyists. Like most schemes dreamed up by socialists to artificially construct or influence markets, it is in fact deeply flawed. So far, the real winners in emissions trading have been polluting factory owners who can sell minor cuts for massive profits, and the brokers who pocket fees each time a company buys or sells the right to pollute.

Under the Kyoto Protocol, companies in nations with Kyoto targets can avoid making expensive cuts to their own emissions by paying companies in countries like China to make cuts instead. The problem with that theory is that China has no cap on carbon emissions. Companies there can take the payments they receive from overseas polluters and build more factories using coal fired electricity.

The carbon market has collapsed in the EU, (and elsewhere) due to a surplus of credits arising from lax limits on carbon production. In actuality, due to the shonky trading that does go on, and other failures of the scheme, many experts now claim a carbon tax would have been a much more effective solution. The only way to make carbon trading work is to impose severely restrictive caps on industry. These caps would have to be so restrictive any government introducing them would be guaranteed a short time in power. So at the bottom of it all are the taxpayers and voters, who are being forced or coerced into supporting a scheme they don’t believe in. Awake now to the scam that climate change really is, they are not prepared to bear the financial brunt of the bad judgment of political fools like Nick Smith and John Key.

At the moment the government is planning a review of Smith’s current scheme, but not with a view to cutting it back. They’re actually considering stronger measures. Idiocy in view of NZ’s current fiscal position. Farmers too need to snap out of their lethargy on this issue. They are exempt until 2015. So what? If National continue to stubbornly promote this costly and non-productive farce, and loot taxpayers to pay for it, the need for a third/new party becomes even more evident. Farmers should look at putting money into such an endeavour. There is obviously no profit for them in continuing to support the vacuous Key and Smith and their spineless hopeless UN enthralled acolytes.

18 thoughts on “Smith’s & Key’s Enchantment With Climate Change Mythology Emphasizes Need For New Party

  1. The third party either has to be Winston or Libertarianz.

    The Nat/Lab coalition has to be punished.

    Ideology aside, the political status quo in this country has to be challenged while we still have a right to vote. Their has to be a wake up call made in the Beehive.

    The ignorance of those who will not vote is also apalling.

    This country could still be turned around if enough voters got sick and tired of the current agenda and said enough is enough. And isn’t National’s bare faced betrayal enough??

    Like

  2. Wiki, are you trying for the next Tui billboard? The Libz are a 1000-joke vote and their policies are anathema to common sense. Winston is the single-most venal and corrupt politician in New Zealand’s history.

    Like

  3. Yeah, I agree with Gantt.
    We need a totally NEW party, not a rehash of the current sorry assortment on offer. We need nothing less than a New Zealand Tea Party along similar lines as that in the U.S. A party built upon things like … Oh, I don’t know … HONOUR, INTEGRITY, TRUTH, FAMILY VALUES, & LIMITED GOVERNMENT.

    Like

  4. KK, Totally agreed, but too late for this election. At least another stiff dose of Liarbour-Lite is needed so the sheeple can remove the scales from their eyes.

    Nice idea, but where do 60 government ready leading Tea Party types suddenly come from? Certainly not from the current shallow pool that should be, as Oswald is won’t to oft say, heavily dosed with chlorine. Most potential leaders that might be of some use are already neck deep in the trough, rabid greenie communist types or blinded with rose coloured views of the real world.

    GG, the current alternatives are not pretty. Liarbour – definitely a Tui. Libz – a joke. Winston, yes he will get in. People wishing to teach Key a lesson will not waste their vote on Liarbour or the greens, or not vote thus giving to them by default, but vote for Winston purely out of spite.

    Like

  5. A serious attempt to form a new party would hinder efforts to oppose the ETS and Marine and Coastal Area Bill.

    ACT already strongly opposes these pieces of legislation. People may have objections to ACT and/or its leader. However, the election could be as soon a 6 months away. ACT has not been able to do near as much as it would have liked to. I think it would be easier to build up the number of ACT MPs than try to reach the 5% with a new party. I cannot see a new party gaining an electorate seat.

    Most votes a new party that opposes these pieces of legislation would gain come from ACT.

    Like

  6. Chuck, Rod Hide is one of the few MPs I have some time for but you have to face reality. ACT have been totally assassinated by the mainstream media. In the last opinion poll they hardly registered. As much as I admire your persistence and loyalty to and your belief in the party, the truth is they are going nowhere. A new party would have the momentum and traction ACT just cannot seem to get.

    Like

  7. Keep it simple, the NZ Conservative Party…

    With a simple few page Constitution and democratic candidate selection…

    Like

  8. Red, ACT were assassinated by the MSM, in a vicious and coordinated campaign that has been going on for years. It’s also a fact that those bullet-wounds in both of ACTs feet are self-inflicted.

    Chuck, FWIW I think ACT will retain a presence in the next Parliament. The good people of Epsom are astute; they know ACT is the only brake on John Key and his cabinet’s Obama-esque empirical tendencies. Hide will make it back, and bring some ACT MPs with him. I don’t think he’ll get the same run in 2014.

    So, ACT has one more parliamentary session to clean up its ACT (so to speak). FWIW, here are my suggestions:
    1. Dump Roy. She’s a good MP, but there must be a punishment for trying to assassinate the Leader. Hell, Liarbore even executed Hulun’s Chosen One. Roy must be dumped, or given a list spot so low she understands the concepts of crime and punishment.
    2. Re-assign Douglas. He’s brilliant and you can’t afford to lose him. Probably the sharpest thinker in the Parliament. Certainly no peer on financial and exonomis matters. He’s also electoral poision. He should be your lead Policy Strategist. His “Who Really Cares” series on Facebook should be the backbone of ACT’s 2011 campaign. The problem with that, of course, is that you need to find someone else either willing to be Douglas’ glove-puppet, or equally brilliant. Tough ask.
    3. clean up your message. Find 3 issues that resonate with voters and hammer them. Continuously. Again, Douglas’ “Who Really Cares” series could give you this. This session you’ve been distracted by your internal issues and the SuperCity.
    4. Bring back Newman. The NZCPR and the Coastal Coalition have a lot of readers/fans/contributors from outside ACT’s traditional base. You need her.

    I recently posted elsewhere that I don’t think any party or candidate deserves my vote in 2011. That includes ACT, not because its policy platform is lacking, but because internally you’ve been a circus, causing your support base to fall below the margin of error. I would like to give my party vote to ACT. Please give me a reason to do so.

    Like

  9. “4. Bring back Newman. The NZCPR and the Coastal Coalition have a lot of readers/fans/contributors from outside ACT’s traditional base. You need her.”

    I cannot help but laugh at some of the bloggers comments. They are less informed than Coddington.

    Do you not think Muriel might have something to say regarding if she wants to join ACT and stand as an MP. The same applies to Brash.

    I think it would be fantastic if Brash and Newman joined ACT and made themselves available. Sadly, I do not think it likely to happen.

    Like

  10. “I cannot help but laugh at some of the bloggers comments. They are less informed than Coddington.”

    That’s a bit harsh Chuck. 🙂 I think most commentators here see some value in ACT but don’t believe it can rise from the ashes.

    I’d be interested to hear why you think the Muriel option wouldn’t work. (that’s if I’ve interpreted your view correctly). Are you suggesting Newman and Brash might already be formulating plans for another party?

    Like

  11. “As much as I admire your persistence and loyalty to and your belief in the party, the truth is they are going nowhere. A new party would have the momentum and traction ACT just cannot seem to get.”

    That would very much depend who stand high on any list. I have heard unconfirmed rumours about who might be standing. I certainly will not repeat them here but I would certainly not write ACT off because of its present low polling.

    If a new party started and the candidates were considered too right wing by the MSM they could do the same to them as they do to ACT.

    I hope all right of centre voters delay making any decision until closer the election when they see ACT’s list and policies which will be election issues.

    I might add that ACT is much more than Rodney. John Boscawen has highlighted the ETS and legislation over the beaches. Hilary Calvert is new and inexperienced but she is a very fast learner.

    Like

  12. Then quite frankly, ACT is stuffed. Without a headline act (‘scuse the pun) such as Newman or Brash, your current line-up lacks a vote-grabber. Honestly, except Boscawen they’re all too tainted or too new & unknown to draw a crowd. Boscawen is excellent and hard-working, but he’s not leadership. And I’ve heard he’s not too popular with the “business lobby”. He’s out fighting the fight on the same issues as Newman, which is why I mentioned her.

    Hide will grab Epsom in 2011, which will (thankfully) see ACT back in the Parliament, but you need a significant line-up rebuild before 2014. It needs to include at least one headliner because if it doesn’t the smiling waving fool will stand someone electable in Epsom and that will signal the end of ACT.

    And since, if ACT sticks to its principles, it is effectively the Parliament’s conscience, that would be a great shame.

    Like

  13. I hope all right of centre voters delay making any decision until closer the election when they see ACT’s list and policies which will be election issues.

    I don’t know many right-of-centre voters who have made their decisions yet. I sure haven’t, but as I’ve said before, I haven’t in the current term seen any candidate or party deserving of my vote.

    ACTs problem is not its policies. It is the internal circus. Telling Peter to Tashkoff was a good start, but a larger clean-out is needed.

    Like

  14. “’d be interested to hear why you think the Muriel option wouldn’t work. (that’s if I’ve interpreted your view correctly). Are you suggesting Newman and Brash might already be formulating plans for another party?”

    I know Muriel very well. I am a member of her forum. She was a terrific MP. I think it would be fantastic MP if she choose to put herself forward. I am sure she would get a high place on the list.

    However, contrary to may peoples view of politicians. It is a very hard and demanding job. You are away from family. You cannot afford to do anything wrong in you personal life – even get in argument over a parking space.

    On top of that ever party has internal disputes that makes augments on the blog seem mild.

    I hope this clarifies my point.

    Like

  15. “If a new party started and the candidates were considered too right wing by the MSM they could do the same to them as they do to ACT.”

    Maybe. I think ACT’s problem is with its public profile, and that problem exists because they have stubbornly refused to recognise the media as an enemy force.

    Any new right wing party has to acknowledge that the media is controlled completely by the left. The most important part of any such party’s election plan must be to have as a priority, a strategy for combating and dealing with the hostility of the left wing mainstream media.

    I say confront them as Sarah Palin has done. If NZ’s socialist condition is ever to change, the left wing mainstream media, who are the vanguard of socialism/ Progressivism, must be defeated.

    Any new party starting up, and planning to draw NZ out of the socialist mire, must be prepared to attack the media, or they might as well not even try.

    Like

  16. Hone Harawira, Sue ‘give me ur kids’ Bradford are combining to form their own party.

    Both despised by the electorate yet potentially a threat under MMP.

    So I read in HoS today.

    I would rather vote Libz who have actual quality people and can help change direction in this country. Those that disagree are ,I suspect, Nat/Lab infiltrators employing desperate measures to keep socialism intact through the age old tactic of mockery.

    In any alternative is better than the present reality. AND betrayal.

    Like

Comments are closed.