IF THE GREENS were a party like any other party, would they have given away their “patsy questions” to National? If we were able to put aside our admiration for the Greens’ proud record of being out “in front” of New Zealand politics-as-usual, how would we analyse their surprising decision? If we were willing to say: “They’re all just politicians: neither better nor worse than their counterparts in Labour, National and NZ First.” How would we call it?
We are tempted to answer that first question by saying: “Of course not! No political party with three Ministers Outside Cabinet would ever voluntarily strengthen the hand of their allies’ enemies. Not while those allies and the government they lead remain utterly reliant on their continuing and steadfast parliamentary support.”
It’s easy to imagine both Labour and NZ First struggling to make any kind of sense out of the Greens’ announcement. If, as they insist, the Greens regard their patsy questions as a waste of parliamentary time, then the simple and most politically defensible solution would surely be – not to ask them. Rather than rising to their feet, the Green MPs could spend the whole of Question Time sitting on their arses – as silent and mysterious as eight little sphinxes.
That they have chosen, instead, to give their questions to the National Party must have all the other Members of Parliament racking their brains for an explanation that doesn’t leave the Greens looking like a bunch of impossibly naïve muppets.
“What’s the catch?”, would have been Simon Bridges’ most likely response. “What do you expect from us in return?”
“Who’s the target?”, would have been the response of Jacinda Ardern’s back-room boys: David Parker, Grant Robertson and Phil Twyford.
NZ First would merely have concluded that the entire Green caucus had been taking Ecstasy. “I warned Jacinda,” would be Winston Peters’ world-weary response. “I told her they couldn’t be trusted.”
But, hold on a minute. Is it really impossible that the Greens’ decision was motivated by genuine political values? Why shouldn’t their assurances that the party’s sole intention is to make the government more accountable be accepted? Why can’t it be a case of, as Rod Donald used to say, the Greens not being on the Left, or the Right, but out in front?
The answer is brutally simple. If the Greens really were determined to subject the Labour-NZ First Coalition to the scrutiny of the most informed, articulate and progressive members of the House of Representatives, then they would hardly have given away the chance to do exactly that to Parliament’s most ill-informed, inarticulate and reactionary elements.
Progressive Kiwis have only to ask themselves: “Who would we rather held this Government to account: Chloe Swarbrick or Mark Mitchell? Golriz Ghahraman or Judith Collins?” – to realise that the justification advanced to them by Green Party co-leader, James Shaw, is pure, unadulterated, bullshit.
The Greens as a whole are not out in front on this issue. But the Greens realo (realist) faction is, almost certainly, behind it.
Let us, for the sake of argument, assume that at this point in the race for the Green Party’s female co-leadership, the fundi (fundamentalist) Marama Davidson is out in front.
One of the more substantial planks in Marama’s election platform has been her argument that as a Green MP without ministerial responsibilities, she will be well-placed to raise the issues, and voice the concerns, that are exercising the Green Party membership.
How would that be done? Well, she could ask questions of the Labour-NZ First Coalition Government: questions relating to the CPTPP, oil-drilling and climate-change. She could hold Jacinda and Winston (and James?) to account on their commitment to end child poverty and homelessness. It’s a promise with clear appeal to those members of the Green Party already heartily suspicious of the pig they’re being asked to support – and the poke it came in.
But, just how effective could Marama be if there were no questions to ask?
The idea of putting a muzzle on the Greens’ fundi faction would have enormous appeal to those realo members of the party determined not to blow this long-awaited opportunity to demonstrate that Green Ministers can make a real difference.
It would also be received with profound relief by the apprehensive leaders of Labour and NZ First.
Giving away the Greens’ patsy questions to National has drawn a line in the sand for the members of the Green Party’s electoral college. ‘Cross that line by electing Marama,’ they are being told, ‘and all you will be signalling to Labour and NZ First is your fundamental untrustworthiness. Why? Because stripped of the right to ask questions in the House, Marama will be left with no choice but to keep her party honest by other means – and that can only result in a destabilised government.’
By declining to cross the line which Shaw and his allies have drawn in the sand, the representatives of the Green Party branches will be demonstrating their commitment to effecting real change from within the system – and inside the government.
Progressive New Zealand’s loyalty to the Labour-NZ First-Green Government will only be enhanced by the gift of additional questions to the National Party Opposition. In politics, as in war, it is always preferable to have your enemies’ fire coming at you from the front, not from behind – or even to one side.
The real issue is not that the latest public announcement from the Greens was stupid and the justification for it bullshit, the real issue is that the Greens are a bunch of phonies, people who condemn the effects of industrialism whilst promoting continued industrialism, condemning the effects of fractional reserve banking and interest on loans whilst promoting continued use of fractional reserve banking and interest on loans, condemning the effects of globalism whilst promoting globalism.
All of the above reasons (plus others such as the Green’s total silence on Peak Oil) are why I stopped supporting the Greens about 15 years ago, when I saw the light.
Sadly, most Green supporters still have not seen the light. Nor will they because political affiliations are based on emotion, rather than on facts.
100% I am aslo in your corner on this as I left in 2002 when our NGO began fighting for the environment more than the green party was.
Greenpeace is now what the old Green party was in my day back then.
I live in hoe that now Green party is in the Parliament they will return to the old model and now be “National light”
Exactly correct. This is also why farmers continue to overwhelmingly vote National, despite the fact that National has done fuck all for them in forever.
I think that Chris’s distinction between the realo and fundi is an important one – and good to have it out in the open.
The rise of the realo is what put me off the Greens – starting to become just another party. But, where does that leave Chloe and Golriz – we need them.
I am not sure about Chloe at all, she believes in PPPs enough said. Jan Walker should have run for the co-leadership I would trust her more than some of the others.
Shaw’s motivations were obvious from the get go with this traitorous stab in the back of the Green party and Marama- its his way or the highway. Well I say its time for Shaw and his mates to pack their bags and hit the highway! Many of us members have been around a damn sight longer than Shaw’s mob and got the party into parliament in the first place not to be anybody’s patsies (left or right). The Green agenda for change is fundamentally at odds with the neoliberal economic system championed by both National and Labour with only a coat of lipstick in difference between them., You simply cant have an infinitely expanding economic system sucking the life out of the planet for ever which both National and Labour support. As such the Greens are always fundamentally in opposition to Labour and National. The fact that MMP demands cooperation in parliament (which they have always strived for) has never negated the ability of the party to stand up for what it believes in. The gauntlet has been thrown down by Shaw and now is the time for members to throw it back in his face and say on yer bike mate!
I agree with you Masked Moa.
If a pollster rang me today I, for the first time ever, would not back the Greens. It will be very interesting to see what happens in the next poll.
This move of Shaw’s is about as naïve as Meteiria’s handling of her “confession” and will probably have a similar result. What the hell is going on in this once proud Party?
100% agree Garbaldi
‘You simply cant have an infinitely expanding economic system sucking the life out of the planet for ever which both National and Labour support.’
Exactly! Yet try talking to a Labiour supporter or a National supporter about reality! or even a Green supporter: many of them want the comfort of civilization whilst pretending such comforts do not have a horrific price.
In practice voters are always offered a choice between the lesser of two evils, or the lesser of three evils, or the least of a multitude of evils.
Any way you look at it, everything that matters has been made substantially worse, despite the Greens presence in parliament for many, many years. And the fundamental causes of our continuing downward trajectory remain unmentioned by any party.
Judging by what we are reading about America at the moment the long-awaited collapse is not far off. And NZ is totally unprepared, of course, because our politicians are more interesting in playing politics than with dealing with anything that matters.
I must say that when we still occasionally watched TV , and turned on question time, watching the nats ask themselves patsy question after question was rather nauseating ,and usually tipped the balance to switching off.
I can understand the Greens not wanting to present that image. But it does seem that genuine questions could be asked that would inform the public , even sometimes with a critical component . Reflecting that they are somewhat independent, and not invited into a coalition.
D J S
[…] As Chris Trotter devastatingly puts it in todays TDB column… […]
I note your use of the phrase “their enemies”, which is spot on.
I suspect the problem here is the lack of recognition from some Green Party members that National are ..The Enemy.
The ‘Left’ are far too polite and far too accommodating politically in NZ.
Its all about ‘conversation’ and ‘dialogue’ and whatnot, which sounds nice, but is in fact not possible with people, like National, who simply have a different setting on their moral, social, economic and environmental compass.
The Greens inertia on the CP-TPP has left me feeling they do not really have much to say in general so this comes as no surprise really.
That said the bulk of my criticism is squarely on Labour who have really not behaved in my opinion like a party of the left since taking office.
As a party member of 17 years I am furious about this – so many questions they should be asking of Labour! And of course the waka jumping bill which they seem intent on still supporting despite widespread anger about their position on this.
I never ever was a Shaw fan he has worked in industries that are so un-GREEN that I think he would find it difficult to accomodate all the views of the Green kaupapa.
He certainly has no credibility on social justice issues whatsoever.
When Golriz Ghahraman’s internal email was published, suggesting that the Greens support the waka jumping bill in return for Labour supporting a National Parihaka Day, I emailed James Shaw saying that these were totally separate issues which should be decided upon their own merits; of the need to be seen to be principled, or to lose more supporters. I got no reply – he was overseas at the time, but some-one would have reading, and I assume deleting.
It’s a skit from the goon show.
Don’t let the greens near the defense portfolio they will be shooting each other to disable the military apparatus as an act of non violence.
I will continue to support the Greens but this latest decision has crossed the line for me to the point where I would like to see someone challenge James Shaw for Male Co-Leader at this year’s AGM. From what I understand. The co-leaders have to be re-elected every year.
It rather depends on the questions handed over to the National Party. Perhaps some questions will be better handled by National wth the Greens will handling the rest. As far as patsy questions are concerned Labour can ask these themselves.
Are you sure, Chris (Trotter), that the realo faction of the green party is actually capable of political machinations of such sophistication (this one in attempt to constrain the fundi faction).
I can’t recall other Green examples of political savvy anywhere nearly so intriguing.
And, anyway, how effective a constraint would it be … it is a whimsical offer to National, not a steadfast contract.
Lots of agro about this, not sure its warranted. Could be a Natz frame up as they need to knockout some opposition for 2020. Greens trying to get their image sorted but got lotsa folks worried instead. Patience req.
The more I see things unfold, the more I feel confirmed in my views before the forming of this government. I warned against it, Labour doing a deal with NZ First, and having them supported by the Greens.
This is NOT good for the political future of all those parties.
Jacinda should have swallowed her opportunism and pride, and let Nats have gone with NZ First, as that would not have lasted either.
We would have had a very unstable government, as NZ First would not have signed a coalition deal with Nats, only offered support on a case by case basis.
The Nats would have suffered, that government would have disillusioned many National voters and NZ First voters, if Labour and Greens would have then fought together, in opposition, they would win enough votes between themselves, in an early election, and be in government before 2020.
This way it will all fall to pieces, as the Greens will lose so much support, they will not be in Parliament in 2020, Labour will at best only stabilise, but NZ First may also be out next election, and Labour will sit there, with no party supporting it, being in the position the Nats were before and after this government was formed, not able to form a government.
I will await with sad and depressed mood the collapse of this stitched up, weak and fragile ‘coalition’ supported by selling out Greens led under useless traitor Shaw, and I fear for the next Nat government, that will probably have another two to three terms.
Desperation as there was before and after the election, within Labour and the other two, to form a government, that was never a good enough motivation and base to form this neoliberal light kind of government.
Shit happens, this shit did not need to happen though.
That was so convoluted and machiavellian that I’m going to opt for the ‘Ecstacy’ rationale.
That is the only thing that would make sense. Simply don’t ask them. Sorted.
What’s the bet that next time the Greens are in Opposition, no government-aligned party will be giving up any of their question to them.
Comments are closed.