Member log in

Greens promise democracy and keeping public assets

Restoring democracy, funding public transport, and helping Christchurch City keep its assets were main planks of the Greens Party launch today.

The launch was appropriately held in the Christchurch Botanic Gardens visitor centre.

In addition to a rousing speech by leader Russell Norman, Christchurch spokeswoman Eugenie Sage talked about the issues most affecting Canterbury.

The Greens announced a $462 million investment in transport and establishing a single body called Christchurch Transport to take over the functions currently split between the city council and regional council.

A planned rugby stadium as part of the government’s earthquake rebuild blueprint would be placed on hold to remove any pressure on the city council to sell assets to fund it.

Environment Canterbury would be returned to full democratic elections in 2015; and the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority’s emergency powers would be scrapped and power returned to the city council.

Ms Sage says three more years under National would see assets sales, increasing transport woes and lack of democracy.

She says National has had its turn and it is time for someone else to have a go.

Other initiatives include a $60 million investment in clean heating, and funding for planting the cleared red zone.

c.hutch@clear.net.nz

More by Chris Hutching

Comments and questions
13

This all sounds great and makes sense to me. They're also one of the few parties talking sense around Internet governance. But I find it hard to separate the Greens from their Communist stance on social policy and for that reason alone would NEVER vote for them. In this case the baby gets thrown out with the bathwater.

I have only ever voted for National, but I would consider voting for Greens now on the basis their more wild and wacky policies would have close to zero chance of being implemented.

However, it would be good to have a party with good representation in parliament that does have a positive stance on issues such as citizens' privacy and a long view of the strategic value of land ownership.

Huh? you have always voted National but would now consider the Greens. So in effect you would be ok with a Labour/Greens/Mana/Internet coalition? As stated above the Greens and in fact all minor parties, can promise the earth as they will never have to deliver as they will always be the minority party in any government.

I think if you wished to vote the Greens and they had not ruled out working with national it could be a viable conscience for National. Even Labour/Green was not too crazy until we see a tie up with Mana and Internet. That’s not only crazy but down right scary.

The problem is that the Greens can't guarantee anything, as they will be a minor coalition partner. So they can safely promise the earth knowing full well they will never have to stick to their promises.

So what exactly are you voting for if you vote Greens? Who knows.

You are voting for a hard-left government.

"Restoring democracy,....

....Ms Sage says National has had its turn and it is time for someone else to have a go."

So, in the greatest of all democratic battles where the best ideas win the election, Sage and the Greens think democracy should be "suspended" so the Greens can finally "have a go" after nearly 25 years of trying?

"Diddums & Last Cab off the rank" to her...

With that kind of logic and attitude - it's no wonder the Greens will still be trying in another 25 years...

Too bad she couldn't utter the same platitudes the day after the Greens & Labour fiscally sabotaged all of NZ Inc with their "power policy"

Ms Sage - if you want a turn at Government, you have to earn it with the best viable and fully costed policies... then sell them to all of NZ.

Fully-costed? That's no fun.

Have Russell and his co-leader got Labour's approval for this, or is it just pie in the sky wish-list dreaming? Still, it's only $462 million for transport and $60 million for something else. Shouldn't be a problem for a minor party in a coalition. A few billion more on top of Labour's already promised billions, and that's before Winston first extracts a few baubles; and then there's Hone and Dotcom's lot. Can't wait for this lot to actually meet each other.

So according to Ms Sage, forests, a recycling operation, a bus company, a fibre broadband outfilt and an under-performing airport are assets, but a rugby stadium is not. They all bleed ratepayer money at about the same rate, so it's hard to see what the difference is.

The most likely explanation for this asymmetric treatment is that the typical Green likes trees, recycling, public transport, and the internet (with airports being a necessary evil), but hates rugby.

I wonder what the greens would think of democracy should we have a referendum on getting rid of the ETS & it was decided to get rid of it.

Hope they promise to remove the GST on organic sandals.

A bit late the buriied Cashmere- Papanui tram tracks should have been dug up a decade ago. Wacky thats the entire Seymour Banks denial.

If and I say this with tongue in cheek that the loony left actually get to form a government I wonder how many weeks or days they could be there before it all implodes. What a circus that would be? Mind you if they do get maybe that would fix the high dollar problem.