At a time when the promises of globalisation appear to be failing, it seems like the right time to develop systems promoting unity and cohesion in Aotearoa. To begin this process, I would humbly suggest, that our foreign minister, being statesman-like while overseas, then resorting to bullying and abusing local media back at home, would do better by employing a less emotional, more reasoned approach. His party deputy Shane Jones resorts to cynical, abusive language when asked the hard questions. He was also recently reported as saying “the leader is never wrong” after said leader’s statement, “Maori are not tangata whenua,” a sentiment that Shane disagrees with. Talk about confusing korero.
Shane also disagrees with our high level of immigration, while at the same time pushing very hard for rapid, extensive resource exploitation projects which will require thousands of skilled workers that we haven’t got and will have to source from overseas, putting even more pressure on our infrastructure. If you feel a bit confused by this and all your fast-track stuff Shane, may I offer you two words – “slow down.”
I could be wrong, but I presume that most of our politicians are on board with climate change. So in view of the long-term commitments we have signed up to, shouldn’t we be fast tracking the uptake of alternative energy systems – initiatives like making it mandatory for all new-builds to have solar panels and incentivising their uptake for existing housing, and taking advantage of the ample wind and tide resources we have?
Perhaps we could fund it by a wealth tax, which polls have shown, a majority of voters would support.
Of course, oil and gas will be required during the transition period towards alternative energy, but is fast tracking long-term oil and gas exploration projects that take us in the opposite direction the way to go? I can’t see the logic in that, but Shane defends these policies using his usual “unicorn thinking” analogies when confronted with the question of rising sea levels in Pacific countries like Kiribati and Tuvalu, and the potential future climate-induced catastrophes that await us here at home.
The coalition leaders are big on evidence-based policy-making, but when faced with this evidence, the profit motive often takes priority. The Act leader is a master of answering questions with another question that he says needs further research. So, he avoids having to give a logical answer. How about considering the scientific evidence that unless 60% of existing oil and gas and 80% of coal stay in the ground, there is no chance of coming anywhere near the goals we signed up to.
What are we going to tell our grandchildren when they ask, “Why didn’t your generation do something to stop the effects of climate change? Why was our environment so compromised in the name of economic growth and what did you do to preserve it?
Speaking of unity, our future deputy PM David Seymour is planting the seeds for serious division in the country with his slippery logic justifying a possible treaty referendum. Do we really need this fear mongering in these times of turmoil? Do we really need a minority libertarian party of predominantly white, well-off New Zealanders, telling us what the treaty means.
One would think that given Act’s obsession with personal property rights, they would be fighting tooth and nail for Maori land rights.
And enabling all this is the National party leader, our PM. There is a widespread perception that he and his party have compromised too much in their dealings with their very much in the minority coalition partners. I would have to agree.
We live on a planet with finite resources. Do we really want more billionaires in the world? Are we ever going to moderate our mad scramble for more and more stuff, most of which will, in 50 years’ time, be in the ocean as micro-plastics or in a rubbish dump, as disposed of consumerism. It’s time for unity, a coming together of all races and religions with considered compromising debate on contentious issues, to develop a way of living which is beneficial for all, not just the fortunate few.
So, in addition to the recipe I have offered above, I would also respectfully suggest we send minister Shane on a taxpayer-funded holiday to Kiribati to assess sea level rise outcomes, with the condition that he doesn’t charge personal entertainment expenses to his parliamentary credit card.
Winston could possibly benefit from some domestic press relations supervision, while David could spend some useful time at a Te Tiriti workshop.
I am not sure where we could send Christopher Luxon, perhaps to assertiveness training classes? All these men undoubtedly believe they are doing the right thing for the country. It’s just that, according to some polls (but not the ones Trevor Ammundsen cites), there are a growing number of voters who, like me, have the different view, that the country should be governed with more emphasis on humanity and unity and a little less on economics and division.
