Discussion:
Here's fucking hypocrites
Add Reply
JohnO
2020-03-05 05:42:27 UTC
Reply
Permalink
https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2020/03/non-ministerial-green-mps-average-flight-spending-trumps-other-backbenchers.html
Tony
2020-03-05 06:14:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by JohnO
https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2020/03/non-ministerial-green-mps-average-flight-spending-trumps-other-backbenchers.html
But "the expenses are offset by planting trees"
How many have they planted?
HitAnyKey
2020-03-05 06:23:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Tony
Post by JohnO
https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2020/03/non-ministerial-green-
mps-average-flight-spending-trumps-other-backbenchers.html
Post by Tony
But "the expenses are offset by planting trees"
How many have they planted?
And how does planting a tree offset an expense, I wonder?
Tony
2020-03-05 06:27:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by JohnO
Post by Tony
Post by JohnO
https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2020/03/non-ministerial-green-
mps-average-flight-spending-trumps-other-backbenchers.html
Post by Tony
But "the expenses are offset by planting trees"
How many have they planted?
And how does planting a tree offset an expense, I wonder?
To understand that you would have to be a member of a Green Party that actually
does not believe in green issues. A party hiding behind false green rhetoric.
Crash
2020-03-05 07:08:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Thu, 05 Mar 2020 00:27:13 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by JohnO
Post by Tony
Post by JohnO
https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2020/03/non-ministerial-green-
mps-average-flight-spending-trumps-other-backbenchers.html
Post by Tony
But "the expenses are offset by planting trees"
How many have they planted?
And how does planting a tree offset an expense, I wonder?
To understand that you would have to be a member of a Green Party that actually
does not believe in green issues. A party hiding behind false green rhetoric.
Loading Image...


--
Crash McBash
Rich80105
2020-03-05 08:26:15 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Thu, 05 Mar 2020 00:27:13 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by JohnO
Post by Tony
Post by JohnO
https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2020/03/non-ministerial-green-
mps-average-flight-spending-trumps-other-backbenchers.html
Post by Tony
But "the expenses are offset by planting trees"
How many have they planted?
And how does planting a tree offset an expense, I wonder?
To understand that you would have to be a member of a Green Party that actually
does not believe in green issues. A party hiding behind false green rhetoric.
This one?
https://sustainablenz.org.nz/
Tony
2020-03-05 19:22:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Crash
On Thu, 05 Mar 2020 00:27:13 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by JohnO
Post by Tony
Post by JohnO
https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2020/03/non-ministerial-green-
mps-average-flight-spending-trumps-other-backbenchers.html
Post by Tony
But "the expenses are offset by planting trees"
How many have they planted?
And how does planting a tree offset an expense, I wonder?
To understand that you would have to be a member of a Green Party that actually
does not believe in green issues. A party hiding behind false green rhetoric.
This one?
https://sustainablenz.org.nz/
Off topic.
The Green Party of NZ of course.
Rich80105
2020-03-05 19:46:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Thu, 05 Mar 2020 13:22:20 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Crash
On Thu, 05 Mar 2020 00:27:13 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by JohnO
Post by Tony
Post by JohnO
https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2020/03/non-ministerial-green-
mps-average-flight-spending-trumps-other-backbenchers.html
Post by Tony
But "the expenses are offset by planting trees"
How many have they planted?
And how does planting a tree offset an expense, I wonder?
To understand that you would have to be a member of a Green Party that actually
does not believe in green issues. A party hiding behind false green rhetoric.
This one?
https://sustainablenz.org.nz/
Off topic.
The Green Party of NZ of course.
You have not demonstrated that the Green Party do ot believe in green
issues - its a bit like saying National do not believe in tax cuts . .
.

Try again, Tony - and just because you have some unsupported opinions
does not make answers you are uncomfortable with "off topic."
Tony
2020-03-05 19:53:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
On Thu, 05 Mar 2020 13:22:20 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Crash
On Thu, 05 Mar 2020 00:27:13 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by JohnO
Post by Tony
Post by JohnO
https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2020/03/non-ministerial-green-
mps-average-flight-spending-trumps-other-backbenchers.html
Post by Tony
But "the expenses are offset by planting trees"
How many have they planted?
And how does planting a tree offset an expense, I wonder?
To understand that you would have to be a member of a Green Party that actually
does not believe in green issues. A party hiding behind false green rhetoric.
This one?
https://sustainablenz.org.nz/
Off topic.
The Green Party of NZ of course.
You have not demonstrated that the Green Party do ot believe in green
issues - its a bit like saying National do not believe in tax cuts . .
.
Try again, Tony - and just because you have some unsupported opinions
does not make answers you are uncomfortable with "off topic."
Only you or someone with similar issues would see the NZ Green Party in any
other way than the one that I have described. An opinion held by many.
I was not uncomfortable with your off topic post, simply noting that it was
indeed off topic. Crash however was on topic.
John Bowes
2020-03-05 21:32:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
On Thu, 05 Mar 2020 13:22:20 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Crash
On Thu, 05 Mar 2020 00:27:13 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by JohnO
Post by Tony
Post by JohnO
https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2020/03/non-ministerial-green-
mps-average-flight-spending-trumps-other-backbenchers.html
Post by Tony
But "the expenses are offset by planting trees"
How many have they planted?
And how does planting a tree offset an expense, I wonder?
To understand that you would have to be a member of a Green Party that actually
does not believe in green issues. A party hiding behind false green rhetoric.
This one?
https://sustainablenz.org.nz/
Off topic.
The Green Party of NZ of course.
You have not demonstrated that the Green Party do ot believe in green
issues - its a bit like saying National do not believe in tax cuts . .
.
Try again, Tony - and just because you have some unsupported opinions
does not make answers you are uncomfortable with "off topic."
Rich you can't stay on topic for more than two posts on a good day! Besides Tony's "unsupported" opinion is worth far more than your pointless waffle!
George
2020-03-05 19:14:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Thu, 05 Mar 2020 00:14:06 -0600
Post by Tony
Post by JohnO
https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2020/03/non-ministerial-green-mps-average-flight-spending-trumps-other-backbenchers.html
But "the expenses are offset by planting trees"
How many have they planted?
Forestry have planted the usual number of seedlings.
The northland mafiosi managed to get a bunch of seedlings destroyed and
there are no billion planted this year...
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Rich80105
2020-03-05 10:13:53 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by JohnO
https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2020/03/non-ministerial-green-mps-average-flight-spending-trumps-other-backbenchers.html
Why is getting around New Zealand talking to New Zealanders
hypocritical, JohnO?
Crash
2020-03-05 20:57:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
Post by JohnO
https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2020/03/non-ministerial-green-mps-average-flight-spending-trumps-other-backbenchers.html
Why is getting around New Zealand talking to New Zealanders
hypocritical, JohnO?
They are doing too much of it Rich, using fuel that they believe is so
destructive to our climate that they have refused permits to find new
supplies.

They are all list MPs, therefore they have no mandate to travel the
country - outspending electorate MPs to do so. They can use a number
of communication options to talk to whomever they wish to that do not
involve travel (let alone by air).

For their inspiration they might consider how other climate activists
approach travel:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voyage_of_Greta_Thunberg

Note: I do not endorse anything that Greta Thunberg says, I am using
this as a cite purely in the context of my post.


--
Crash McBash
JohnO
2020-03-05 21:06:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by JohnO
https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2020/03/non-ministerial-green-mps-average-flight-spending-trumps-other-backbenchers.html
Why is getting around New Zealand talking to New Zealanders
hypocritical, JohnO?
They are doing too much of it Rich, using fuel that they believe is so
destructive to our climate that they have refused permits to find new
supplies.
They are all list MPs, therefore they have no mandate to travel the
country - outspending electorate MPs to do so. They can use a number
of communication options to talk to whomever they wish to that do not
involve travel (let alone by air).
For their inspiration they might consider how other climate activists
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voyage_of_Greta_Thunberg
Note: I do not endorse anything that Greta Thunberg says, I am using
this as a cite purely in the context of my post.
--
Crash McBash
Indeed. They could have cycled instead of aircraft.

Or used web conferences.
John Bowes
2020-03-05 21:34:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by JohnO
https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2020/03/non-ministerial-green-mps-average-flight-spending-trumps-other-backbenchers.html
Why is getting around New Zealand talking to New Zealanders
hypocritical, JohnO?
They are doing too much of it Rich, using fuel that they believe is so
destructive to our climate that they have refused permits to find new
supplies.
They are all list MPs, therefore they have no mandate to travel the
country - outspending electorate MPs to do so. They can use a number
of communication options to talk to whomever they wish to that do not
involve travel (let alone by air).
Kind of you to not mention the size of their carbon footprint. The thing they go on and on about wwhile achieving zero in reducing it:)
Post by Crash
For their inspiration they might consider how other climate activists
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voyage_of_Greta_Thunberg
Note: I do not endorse anything that Greta Thunberg says, I am using
this as a cite purely in the context of my post.
--
Crash McBash
Rich80105
2020-03-05 22:57:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by JohnO
https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2020/03/non-ministerial-green-mps-average-flight-spending-trumps-other-backbenchers.html
Why is getting around New Zealand talking to New Zealanders
hypocritical, JohnO?
They are doing too much of it Rich, using fuel that they believe is so
destructive to our climate that they have refused permits to find new
supplies.
Rubbish, there are still quite a few permits for trying to find new
supplies. New Permits were rightly stopped as the price the market was
prepared to pay was getting uneconomic for taxpayers, and the risks
too high - we have already found that many previous contracts for
exploration and mining had inadequate provisions for clean-up - and
clean up at sea is just so much harder and more expensive for
taxpayers . . .
Post by Crash
They are all list MPs, therefore they have no mandate to travel the
country - outspending electorate MPs to do so.
There are only 8 of them, and the whole of New Zealand is their
electorate. All MPs have a madate to keep themselves well informed so
that they can best represent the views of their supporters and for all
New Zealanders.
Post by Crash
They can use a number
of communication options to talk to whomever they wish to that do not
involve travel (let alone by air).
As can other MPs, including Ministers. But that is for them to judge,
not you.
Post by Crash
For their inspiration they might consider how other climate activists
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voyage_of_Greta_Thunberg
Note: I do not endorse anything that Greta Thunberg says, I am using
this as a cite purely in the context of my post.
Still it is good that you support Green principles, and are prepared
to advocate for them. It is however not just Green MPs that should be
able to do this - we need better transport options for all New
Zealanders.
Crash
2020-03-06 00:03:29 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by JohnO
https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2020/03/non-ministerial-green-mps-average-flight-spending-trumps-other-backbenchers.html
Why is getting around New Zealand talking to New Zealanders
hypocritical, JohnO?
They are doing too much of it Rich, using fuel that they believe is so
destructive to our climate that they have refused permits to find new
supplies.
Rubbish, there are still quite a few permits for trying to find new
supplies.
New Permits were rightly stopped as the price the market was
prepared to pay was getting uneconomic for taxpayers, and the risks
too high - we have already found that many previous contracts for
exploration and mining had inadequate provisions for clean-up - and
clean up at sea is just so much harder and more expensive for
taxpayers .
Totally incorrect:
https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/planning-future-no-new-offshore-oil-and-gas-exploration-permits

There is no mention of pricing or risks - it is all about a perceived
Climate Change issue.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
They are all list MPs, therefore they have no mandate to travel the
country - outspending electorate MPs to do so.
There are only 8 of them, and the whole of New Zealand is their
electorate.
No it is not. 100% of NZ is covered by a Maori electorate and a
non-Maori electorate. None of those electorate MPs are Green party
members. All Green party candidates for electorate seats were not
elected. The Green party therefore has no mandate at all.
Post by Rich80105
All MPs have a madate to keep themselves well informed so
that they can best represent the views of their supporters and for all
New Zealanders.
So what's your point. There is no reason to use aircraft transport
for this.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
They can use a number
of communication options to talk to whomever they wish to that do not
involve travel (let alone by air).
As can other MPs, including Ministers. But that is for them to judge,
not you.
Post by Crash
For their inspiration they might consider how other climate activists
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voyage_of_Greta_Thunberg
Note: I do not endorse anything that Greta Thunberg says, I am using
this as a cite purely in the context of my post.
Still it is good that you support Green principles, and are prepared
to advocate for them. It is however not just Green MPs that should be
able to do this - we need better transport options for all New
Zealanders.
Irrelevant and laughable rubbish.



--
Crash McBash
Rich80105
2020-03-06 00:57:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by JohnO
https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2020/03/non-ministerial-green-mps-average-flight-spending-trumps-other-backbenchers.html
Why is getting around New Zealand talking to New Zealanders
hypocritical, JohnO?
They are doing too much of it Rich, using fuel that they believe is so
destructive to our climate that they have refused permits to find new
supplies.
Rubbish, there are still quite a few permits for trying to find new
supplies.
New Permits were rightly stopped as the price the market was
prepared to pay was getting uneconomic for taxpayers, and the risks
too high - we have already found that many previous contracts for
exploration and mining had inadequate provisions for clean-up - and
clean up at sea is just so much harder and more expensive for
taxpayers .
https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/planning-future-no-new-offshore-oil-and-gas-exploration-permits
There is no mention of pricing or risks - it is all about a perceived
Climate Change issue.
That rticle is about _new_ offshore permits. Thee are quite a number
of _existing_ permits that allow continued explortion for up to
somewhere around 25 to 30 years.
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
They are all list MPs, therefore they have a mandate to travel the
country - outspending electorate MPs to do so.
There are only 8 of them, and the whole of New Zealand is their
electorate.
No it is not. 100% of NZ is covered by a Maori electorate and a
non-Maori electorate. None of those electorate MPs are Green party
members. All Green party candidates for electorate seats were not
elected. The Green party therefore has no mandate at all.
There are more than one of each of Maori and other electorates. In
addition party votes are used to elect additional elected membrs of
parliament. The only party with elected MPs that does not have list
MPs is ACT.
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
All MPs have a madate to keep themselves well informed so
that they can best represent the views of their supporters and for all
New Zealanders.
So what's your point. There is no reason to use aircraft transport
for this.
It is efficient. I appreciate that you have a personal view that MPs
should not use aircraft, but I doubt if there is any MP who has not
used travel by air since being elected.
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
They can use a number
of communication options to talk to whomever they wish to that do not
involve travel (let alone by air).
As can other MPs, including Ministers. But that is for them to judge,
not you.
Or you, but you do seem to be trying to judge some . . .
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
For their inspiration they might consider how other climate activists
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voyage_of_Greta_Thunberg
Note: I do not endorse anything that Greta Thunberg says, I am using
this as a cite purely in the context of my post.
Still it is good that you support Green principles, and are prepared
to advocate for them. It is however not just Green MPs that should be
able to do this - we need better transport options for all New
Zealanders.
Irrelevant and laughable rubbish.
So do you believ that National and Labour MPs are wrong to travel by
air? I doubt many would agree with you, Crash.
Crash
2020-03-06 22:05:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by JohnO
https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2020/03/non-ministerial-green-mps-average-flight-spending-trumps-other-backbenchers.html
Why is getting around New Zealand talking to New Zealanders
hypocritical, JohnO?
They are doing too much of it Rich, using fuel that they believe is so
destructive to our climate that they have refused permits to find new
supplies.
Rubbish, there are still quite a few permits for trying to find new
supplies.
New Permits were rightly stopped as the price the market was
prepared to pay was getting uneconomic for taxpayers, and the risks
too high - we have already found that many previous contracts for
exploration and mining had inadequate provisions for clean-up - and
clean up at sea is just so much harder and more expensive for
taxpayers .
https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/planning-future-no-new-offshore-oil-and-gas-exploration-permits
There is no mention of pricing or risks - it is all about a perceived
Climate Change issue.
That rticle is about _new_ offshore permits. Thee are quite a number
of _existing_ permits that allow continued explortion for up to
somewhere around 25 to 30 years.
That's obvious from the link title. What's your point?
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
They are all list MPs, therefore they have a mandate to travel the
country - outspending electorate MPs to do so.
There are only 8 of them, and the whole of New Zealand is their
electorate.
No it is not. 100% of NZ is covered by a Maori electorate and a
non-Maori electorate. None of those electorate MPs are Green party
members. All Green party candidates for electorate seats were not
elected. The Green party therefore has no mandate at all.
There are more than one of each of Maori and other electorates. In
addition party votes are used to elect additional elected membrs of
parliament. The only party with elected MPs that does not have list
MPs is ACT.
How it that relevant? My point is that the Greens have no mandate to
travel the country by air.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
All MPs have a madate to keep themselves well informed so
that they can best represent the views of their supporters and for all
New Zealanders.
So what's your point. There is no reason to use aircraft transport
for this.
It is efficient. I appreciate that you have a personal view that MPs
should not use aircraft, but I doubt if there is any MP who has not
used travel by air since being elected.
You are wrong. I did not say that MPs should not use aircraft. Read
what I said again - it is in the context of Green MPs being amongst
the highest spenders in flight expenses as in the article posted by
JohnO. If you cannot keep abreast of the points being made by the OP
and myself, have the good grace to refrain from posting your
ignorance.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
They can use a number
of communication options to talk to whomever they wish to that do not
involve travel (let alone by air).
As can other MPs, including Ministers. But that is for them to judge,
not you.
Or you, but you do seem to be trying to judge some . . .
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
For their inspiration they might consider how other climate activists
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voyage_of_Greta_Thunberg
Note: I do not endorse anything that Greta Thunberg says, I am using
this as a cite purely in the context of my post.
Still it is good that you support Green principles, and are prepared
to advocate for them. It is however not just Green MPs that should be
able to do this - we need better transport options for all New
Zealanders.
Irrelevant and laughable rubbish.
So do you believ that National and Labour MPs are wrong to travel by
air? I doubt many would agree with you, Crash.
No, and I have never said this. My comments, and those of the OP, are
specifically about Green MPs and their spending levels on flights.
Read what I said again - it is in the context of Green MPs being
amongst the highest spenders in flight expenses as in the article
posted by JohnO. In this context your post attributing my beliefs is
baseless and an outright lie.


--
Crash McBash
Rich80105
2020-03-06 23:02:29 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by JohnO
https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2020/03/non-ministerial-green-mps-average-flight-spending-trumps-other-backbenchers.html
Why is getting around New Zealand talking to New Zealanders
hypocritical, JohnO?
They are doing too much of it Rich, using fuel that they believe is so
destructive to our climate that they have refused permits to find new
supplies.
Rubbish, there are still quite a few permits for trying to find new
supplies.
New Permits were rightly stopped as the price the market was
prepared to pay was getting uneconomic for taxpayers, and the risks
too high - we have already found that many previous contracts for
exploration and mining had inadequate provisions for clean-up - and
clean up at sea is just so much harder and more expensive for
taxpayers .
https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/planning-future-no-new-offshore-oil-and-gas-exploration-permits
There is no mention of pricing or risks - it is all about a perceived
Climate Change issue.
That rticle is about _new_ offshore permits. Thee are quite a number
of _existing_ permits that allow continued explortion for up to
somewhere around 25 to 30 years.
That's obvious from the link title. What's your point?
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
They are all list MPs, therefore they have a mandate to travel the
country - outspending electorate MPs to do so.
There are only 8 of them, and the whole of New Zealand is their
electorate.
No it is not. 100% of NZ is covered by a Maori electorate and a
non-Maori electorate. None of those electorate MPs are Green party
members. All Green party candidates for electorate seats were not
elected. The Green party therefore has no mandate at all.
There are more than one of each of Maori and other electorates. In
addition party votes are used to elect additional elected membrs of
parliament. The only party with elected MPs that does not have list
MPs is ACT.
How it that relevant? My point is that the Greens have no mandate to
travel the country by air.
And you are wrong - they have the same mandate for travel as any other
MP. If you can find any different rules that apply to some MPs and not
others that support your opinion feel free to post . . .
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
All MPs have a madate to keep themselves well informed so
that they can best represent the views of their supporters and for all
New Zealanders.
So what's your point. There is no reason to use aircraft transport
for this.
Of course there is if it is the best way to achieve the objectives all
MPs should have.
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
It is efficient. I appreciate that you have a personal view that MPs
should not use aircraft, but I doubt if there is any MP who has not
used travel by air since being elected.
You are wrong. I did not say that MPs should not use aircraft. Read
what I said again - it is in the context of Green MPs being amongst
the highest spenders in flight expenses as in the article posted by
JohnO. If you cannot keep abreast of the points being made by the OP
and myself, have the good grace to refrain from posting your
ignorance.
Explained above - they have only eight to cover all New Zealand. If
you want to fix that, get more people to vote for the Green Party.
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
They can use a number
of communication options to talk to whomever they wish to that do not
involve travel (let alone by air).
As can other MPs, including Ministers. But that is for them to judge,
not you.
Or you, but you do seem to be trying to judge some . . .
Nope, all MPs should be treated the same as regards being able to
discuss issues with New Zealanders.
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
For their inspiration they might consider how other climate activists
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voyage_of_Greta_Thunberg
Note: I do not endorse anything that Greta Thunberg says, I am using
this as a cite purely in the context of my post.
Still it is good that you support Green principles, and are prepared
to advocate for them. It is however not just Green MPs that should be
able to do this - we need better transport options for all New
Zealanders.
Irrelevant and laughable rubbish.
So do you believ that National and Labour MPs are wrong to travel by
air? I doubt many would agree with you, Crash.
No, and I have never said this. My comments, and those of the OP, are
specifically about Green MPs and their spending levels on flights.
They have not broken any rules that I am aware of. I note your critism
and I do not agree with it.
Post by Crash
Read what I said again - it is in the context of Green MPs being
amongst the highest spenders in flight expenses as in the article
posted by JohnO. In this context your post attributing my beliefs is
baseless and an outright lie.
Someone will always be the highest - does that make them wrong?
Crash
2020-03-07 00:59:57 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by JohnO
https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2020/03/non-ministerial-green-mps-average-flight-spending-trumps-other-backbenchers.html
Why is getting around New Zealand talking to New Zealanders
hypocritical, JohnO?
They are doing too much of it Rich, using fuel that they believe is so
destructive to our climate that they have refused permits to find new
supplies.
Rubbish, there are still quite a few permits for trying to find new
supplies.
New Permits were rightly stopped as the price the market was
prepared to pay was getting uneconomic for taxpayers, and the risks
too high - we have already found that many previous contracts for
exploration and mining had inadequate provisions for clean-up - and
clean up at sea is just so much harder and more expensive for
taxpayers .
https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/planning-future-no-new-offshore-oil-and-gas-exploration-permits
There is no mention of pricing or risks - it is all about a perceived
Climate Change issue.
That rticle is about _new_ offshore permits. Thee are quite a number
of _existing_ permits that allow continued explortion for up to
somewhere around 25 to 30 years.
That's obvious from the link title. What's your point?
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
They are all list MPs, therefore they have a mandate to travel the
country - outspending electorate MPs to do so.
There are only 8 of them, and the whole of New Zealand is their
electorate.
No it is not. 100% of NZ is covered by a Maori electorate and a
non-Maori electorate. None of those electorate MPs are Green party
members. All Green party candidates for electorate seats were not
elected. The Green party therefore has no mandate at all.
There are more than one of each of Maori and other electorates. In
addition party votes are used to elect additional elected membrs of
parliament. The only party with elected MPs that does not have list
MPs is ACT.
How it that relevant? My point is that the Greens have no mandate to
travel the country by air.
And you are wrong - they have the same mandate for travel as any other
MP. If you can find any different rules that apply to some MPs and not
others that support your opinion feel free to post . . .
https://www.greens.org.nz/climate_action

Should be read in the context of the cite in JohnO's original post.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
All MPs have a madate to keep themselves well informed so
that they can best represent the views of their supporters and for all
New Zealanders.
So what's your point. There is no reason to use aircraft transport
for this.
Of course there is if it is the best way to achieve the objectives all
MPs should have.
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
It is efficient. I appreciate that you have a personal view that MPs
should not use aircraft, but I doubt if there is any MP who has not
used travel by air since being elected.
You are wrong. I did not say that MPs should not use aircraft. Read
what I said again - it is in the context of Green MPs being amongst
the highest spenders in flight expenses as in the article posted by
JohnO. If you cannot keep abreast of the points being made by the OP
and myself, have the good grace to refrain from posting your
ignorance.
Explained above - they have only eight to cover all New Zealand.
They don't have the mandate to outspend all electorate MPs - who have
a genuine justification to get out into the electorates.
Post by Rich80105
If you want to fix that, get more people to vote for the Green Party.
Again words fail me. My posts support JohnO's original post exploring
the apparent difference between Greens policy and Greens in action.
Any fix is up to them.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
They can use a number
of communication options to talk to whomever they wish to that do not
involve travel (let alone by air).
As can other MPs, including Ministers. But that is for them to judge,
not you.
Or you, but you do seem to be trying to judge some . . .
Nope, all MPs should be treated the same as regards being able to
discuss issues with New Zealanders.
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
For their inspiration they might consider how other climate activists
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voyage_of_Greta_Thunberg
Note: I do not endorse anything that Greta Thunberg says, I am using
this as a cite purely in the context of my post.
Still it is good that you support Green principles, and are prepared
to advocate for them. It is however not just Green MPs that should be
able to do this - we need better transport options for all New
Zealanders.
Irrelevant and laughable rubbish.
So do you believ that National and Labour MPs are wrong to travel by
air? I doubt many would agree with you, Crash.
No, and I have never said this. My comments, and those of the OP, are
specifically about Green MPs and their spending levels on flights.
They have not broken any rules that I am aware of. I note your critism
and I do not agree with it.
My posts support JohnO's original post exploring the apparent
difference between Greens policy and Greens in action.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Read what I said again - it is in the context of Green MPs being
amongst the highest spenders in flight expenses as in the article
posted by JohnO. In this context your post attributing my beliefs is
baseless and an outright lie.
Someone will always be the highest - does that make them wrong?
The question is 'Does that make them hypocrites?'


--
Crash McBash
Rich80105
2020-03-07 03:50:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by JohnO
https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2020/03/non-ministerial-green-mps-average-flight-spending-trumps-other-backbenchers.html
Why is getting around New Zealand talking to New Zealanders
hypocritical, JohnO?
They are doing too much of it Rich, using fuel that they believe is so
destructive to our climate that they have refused permits to find new
supplies.
Rubbish, there are still quite a few permits for trying to find new
supplies.
New Permits were rightly stopped as the price the market was
prepared to pay was getting uneconomic for taxpayers, and the risks
too high - we have already found that many previous contracts for
exploration and mining had inadequate provisions for clean-up - and
clean up at sea is just so much harder and more expensive for
taxpayers .
https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/planning-future-no-new-offshore-oil-and-gas-exploration-permits
There is no mention of pricing or risks - it is all about a perceived
Climate Change issue.
That rticle is about _new_ offshore permits. Thee are quite a number
of _existing_ permits that allow continued explortion for up to
somewhere around 25 to 30 years.
That's obvious from the link title. What's your point?
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
They are all list MPs, therefore they have a mandate to travel the
country - outspending electorate MPs to do so.
There are only 8 of them, and the whole of New Zealand is their
electorate.
No it is not. 100% of NZ is covered by a Maori electorate and a
non-Maori electorate. None of those electorate MPs are Green party
members. All Green party candidates for electorate seats were not
elected. The Green party therefore has no mandate at all.
There are more than one of each of Maori and other electorates. In
addition party votes are used to elect additional elected membrs of
parliament. The only party with elected MPs that does not have list
MPs is ACT.
How it that relevant? My point is that the Greens have no mandate to
travel the country by air.
And you are wrong - they have the same mandate for travel as any other
MP. If you can find any different rules that apply to some MPs and not
others that support your opinion feel free to post . . .
https://www.greens.org.nz/climate_action
Should be read in the context of the cite in JohnO's original post.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
All MPs have a madate to keep themselves well informed so
that they can best represent the views of their supporters and for all
New Zealanders.
So what's your point. There is no reason to use aircraft transport
for this.
Of course there is if it is the best way to achieve the objectives all
MPs should have.
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
It is efficient. I appreciate that you have a personal view that MPs
should not use aircraft, but I doubt if there is any MP who has not
used travel by air since being elected.
You are wrong. I did not say that MPs should not use aircraft. Read
what I said again - it is in the context of Green MPs being amongst
the highest spenders in flight expenses as in the article posted by
JohnO. If you cannot keep abreast of the points being made by the OP
and myself, have the good grace to refrain from posting your
ignorance.
Explained above - they have only eight to cover all New Zealand.
They don't have the mandate to outspend all electorate MPs - who have
a genuine justification to get out into the electorates.
Post by Rich80105
If you want to fix that, get more people to vote for the Green Party.
Again words fail me. My posts support JohnO's original post exploring
the apparent difference between Greens policy and Greens in action.
Any fix is up to them.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
They can use a number
of communication options to talk to whomever they wish to that do not
involve travel (let alone by air).
As can other MPs, including Ministers. But that is for them to judge,
not you.
Or you, but you do seem to be trying to judge some . . .
Nope, all MPs should be treated the same as regards being able to
discuss issues with New Zealanders.
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
For their inspiration they might consider how other climate activists
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voyage_of_Greta_Thunberg
Note: I do not endorse anything that Greta Thunberg says, I am using
this as a cite purely in the context of my post.
Still it is good that you support Green principles, and are prepared
to advocate for them. It is however not just Green MPs that should be
able to do this - we need better transport options for all New
Zealanders.
Irrelevant and laughable rubbish.
So do you believ that National and Labour MPs are wrong to travel by
air? I doubt many would agree with you, Crash.
No, and I have never said this. My comments, and those of the OP, are
specifically about Green MPs and their spending levels on flights.
They have not broken any rules that I am aware of. I note your critism
and I do not agree with it.
My posts support JohnO's original post exploring the apparent
difference between Greens policy and Greens in action.
There is no difference. If there are better options then I am sure the
Green Party people use them, but for many trips, flights are the best
or only option. They like other MPs are busy - they have commitments
to attend Parliamnet when in sessin, but also a need to travel to
meetings around the country.
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Read what I said again - it is in the context of Green MPs being
amongst the highest spenders in flight expenses as in the article
posted by JohnO. In this context your post attributing my beliefs is
baseless and an outright lie.
Someone will always be the highest - does that make them wrong?
The question is 'Does that make them hypocrites?'
I note you didn't attempt to answer the previous question, but to
answer your question, no, having higher travel needs goes with being
determined to consult as much as possible, being in a small party with
effectively an electorate that covers all of New Zealand, does make it
difficult for them not to incur high travel costs.

But you probably knew that - the thread is really more about someone
using any excuse to bash another party . . .
Crash
2020-03-07 17:51:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by JohnO
https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2020/03/non-ministerial-green-mps-average-flight-spending-trumps-other-backbenchers.html
Why is getting around New Zealand talking to New Zealanders
hypocritical, JohnO?
They are doing too much of it Rich, using fuel that they believe is so
destructive to our climate that they have refused permits to find new
supplies.
Rubbish, there are still quite a few permits for trying to find new
supplies.
New Permits were rightly stopped as the price the market was
prepared to pay was getting uneconomic for taxpayers, and the risks
too high - we have already found that many previous contracts for
exploration and mining had inadequate provisions for clean-up - and
clean up at sea is just so much harder and more expensive for
taxpayers .
https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/planning-future-no-new-offshore-oil-and-gas-exploration-permits
There is no mention of pricing or risks - it is all about a perceived
Climate Change issue.
That rticle is about _new_ offshore permits. Thee are quite a number
of _existing_ permits that allow continued explortion for up to
somewhere around 25 to 30 years.
That's obvious from the link title. What's your point?
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
They are all list MPs, therefore they have a mandate to travel the
country - outspending electorate MPs to do so.
There are only 8 of them, and the whole of New Zealand is their
electorate.
No it is not. 100% of NZ is covered by a Maori electorate and a
non-Maori electorate. None of those electorate MPs are Green party
members. All Green party candidates for electorate seats were not
elected. The Green party therefore has no mandate at all.
There are more than one of each of Maori and other electorates. In
addition party votes are used to elect additional elected membrs of
parliament. The only party with elected MPs that does not have list
MPs is ACT.
How it that relevant? My point is that the Greens have no mandate to
travel the country by air.
And you are wrong - they have the same mandate for travel as any other
MP. If you can find any different rules that apply to some MPs and not
others that support your opinion feel free to post . . .
https://www.greens.org.nz/climate_action
Should be read in the context of the cite in JohnO's original post.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
All MPs have a madate to keep themselves well informed so
that they can best represent the views of their supporters and for all
New Zealanders.
So what's your point. There is no reason to use aircraft transport
for this.
Of course there is if it is the best way to achieve the objectives all
MPs should have.
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
It is efficient. I appreciate that you have a personal view that MPs
should not use aircraft, but I doubt if there is any MP who has not
used travel by air since being elected.
You are wrong. I did not say that MPs should not use aircraft. Read
what I said again - it is in the context of Green MPs being amongst
the highest spenders in flight expenses as in the article posted by
JohnO. If you cannot keep abreast of the points being made by the OP
and myself, have the good grace to refrain from posting your
ignorance.
Explained above - they have only eight to cover all New Zealand.
They don't have the mandate to outspend all electorate MPs - who have
a genuine justification to get out into the electorates.
Post by Rich80105
If you want to fix that, get more people to vote for the Green Party.
Again words fail me. My posts support JohnO's original post exploring
the apparent difference between Greens policy and Greens in action.
Any fix is up to them.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
They can use a number
of communication options to talk to whomever they wish to that do not
involve travel (let alone by air).
As can other MPs, including Ministers. But that is for them to judge,
not you.
Or you, but you do seem to be trying to judge some . . .
Nope, all MPs should be treated the same as regards being able to
discuss issues with New Zealanders.
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
For their inspiration they might consider how other climate activists
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voyage_of_Greta_Thunberg
Note: I do not endorse anything that Greta Thunberg says, I am using
this as a cite purely in the context of my post.
Still it is good that you support Green principles, and are prepared
to advocate for them. It is however not just Green MPs that should be
able to do this - we need better transport options for all New
Zealanders.
Irrelevant and laughable rubbish.
So do you believ that National and Labour MPs are wrong to travel by
air? I doubt many would agree with you, Crash.
No, and I have never said this. My comments, and those of the OP, are
specifically about Green MPs and their spending levels on flights.
They have not broken any rules that I am aware of. I note your critism
and I do not agree with it.
My posts support JohnO's original post exploring the apparent
difference between Greens policy and Greens in action.
There is no difference. If there are better options then I am sure the
Green Party people use them, but for many trips, flights are the best
or only option. They like other MPs are busy - they have commitments
to attend Parliamnet when in sessin, but also a need to travel to
meetings around the country.
None of which is relevant. The point is that they spend more on air
travel doing this than most MPs, which is incompatible with their
climate change stance.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Read what I said again - it is in the context of Green MPs being
amongst the highest spenders in flight expenses as in the article
posted by JohnO. In this context your post attributing my beliefs is
baseless and an outright lie.
Someone will always be the highest - does that make them wrong?
The question is 'Does that make them hypocrites?'
I note you didn't attempt to answer the previous question, but to
answer your question, no, having higher travel needs goes with being
determined to consult as much as possible, being in a small party with
effectively an electorate that covers all of New Zealand, does make it
difficult for them not to incur high travel costs.
But you probably knew that - the thread is really more about someone
using any excuse to bash another party . . .
--
Crash McBash
Rich80105
2020-03-07 22:45:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by JohnO
https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2020/03/non-ministerial-green-mps-average-flight-spending-trumps-other-backbenchers.html
Why is getting around New Zealand talking to New Zealanders
hypocritical, JohnO?
They are doing too much of it Rich, using fuel that they believe is so
destructive to our climate that they have refused permits to find new
supplies.
Rubbish, there are still quite a few permits for trying to find new
supplies.
New Permits were rightly stopped as the price the market was
prepared to pay was getting uneconomic for taxpayers, and the risks
too high - we have already found that many previous contracts for
exploration and mining had inadequate provisions for clean-up - and
clean up at sea is just so much harder and more expensive for
taxpayers .
https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/planning-future-no-new-offshore-oil-and-gas-exploration-permits
There is no mention of pricing or risks - it is all about a perceived
Climate Change issue.
That rticle is about _new_ offshore permits. Thee are quite a number
of _existing_ permits that allow continued explortion for up to
somewhere around 25 to 30 years.
That's obvious from the link title. What's your point?
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
They are all list MPs, therefore they have a mandate to travel the
country - outspending electorate MPs to do so.
There are only 8 of them, and the whole of New Zealand is their
electorate.
No it is not. 100% of NZ is covered by a Maori electorate and a
non-Maori electorate. None of those electorate MPs are Green party
members. All Green party candidates for electorate seats were not
elected. The Green party therefore has no mandate at all.
There are more than one of each of Maori and other electorates. In
addition party votes are used to elect additional elected membrs of
parliament. The only party with elected MPs that does not have list
MPs is ACT.
How it that relevant? My point is that the Greens have no mandate to
travel the country by air.
And you are wrong - they have the same mandate for travel as any other
MP. If you can find any different rules that apply to some MPs and not
others that support your opinion feel free to post . . .
https://www.greens.org.nz/climate_action
Should be read in the context of the cite in JohnO's original post.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
All MPs have a madate to keep themselves well informed so
that they can best represent the views of their supporters and for all
New Zealanders.
So what's your point. There is no reason to use aircraft transport
for this.
Of course there is if it is the best way to achieve the objectives all
MPs should have.
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
It is efficient. I appreciate that you have a personal view that MPs
should not use aircraft, but I doubt if there is any MP who has not
used travel by air since being elected.
You are wrong. I did not say that MPs should not use aircraft. Read
what I said again - it is in the context of Green MPs being amongst
the highest spenders in flight expenses as in the article posted by
JohnO. If you cannot keep abreast of the points being made by the OP
and myself, have the good grace to refrain from posting your
ignorance.
Explained above - they have only eight to cover all New Zealand.
They don't have the mandate to outspend all electorate MPs - who have
a genuine justification to get out into the electorates.
Post by Rich80105
If you want to fix that, get more people to vote for the Green Party.
Again words fail me. My posts support JohnO's original post exploring
the apparent difference between Greens policy and Greens in action.
Any fix is up to them.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
They can use a number
of communication options to talk to whomever they wish to that do not
involve travel (let alone by air).
As can other MPs, including Ministers. But that is for them to judge,
not you.
Or you, but you do seem to be trying to judge some . . .
Nope, all MPs should be treated the same as regards being able to
discuss issues with New Zealanders.
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
For their inspiration they might consider how other climate activists
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voyage_of_Greta_Thunberg
Note: I do not endorse anything that Greta Thunberg says, I am using
this as a cite purely in the context of my post.
Still it is good that you support Green principles, and are prepared
to advocate for them. It is however not just Green MPs that should be
able to do this - we need better transport options for all New
Zealanders.
Irrelevant and laughable rubbish.
So do you believ that National and Labour MPs are wrong to travel by
air? I doubt many would agree with you, Crash.
No, and I have never said this. My comments, and those of the OP, are
specifically about Green MPs and their spending levels on flights.
They have not broken any rules that I am aware of. I note your critism
and I do not agree with it.
My posts support JohnO's original post exploring the apparent
difference between Greens policy and Greens in action.
There is no difference. If there are better options then I am sure the
Green Party people use them, but for many trips, flights are the best
or only option. They like other MPs are busy - they have commitments
to attend Parliamnet when in sessin, but also a need to travel to
meetings around the country.
None of which is relevant. The point is that they spend more on air
travel doing this than most MPs, which is incompatible with their
climate change stance.
Of course it is not - they are doing their job. If there is a more
efficient way of travelling I am sure they would do it, but nobody is
asking any MP not to make themselves avaiable to all New Zealanders.
If National MPs had come out with the highest cost, you would
undoubtedly have accused those from other parties as beng lazy, which
would have been just as stupid. .
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Read what I said again - it is in the context of Green MPs being
amongst the highest spenders in flight expenses as in the article
posted by JohnO. In this context your post attributing my beliefs is
baseless and an outright lie.
Someone will always be the highest - does that make them wrong?
The question is 'Does that make them hypocrites?'
I note you didn't attempt to answer the previous question, but to
answer your question, no, having higher travel needs goes with being
determined to consult as much as possible, being in a small party with
effectively an electorate that covers all of New Zealand, does make it
difficult for them not to incur high travel costs.
But you probably knew that - the thread is really more about someone
using any excuse to bash another party . . .
Crash
2020-03-08 06:29:42 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by JohnO
https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2020/03/non-ministerial-green-mps-average-flight-spending-trumps-other-backbenchers.html
Why is getting around New Zealand talking to New Zealanders
hypocritical, JohnO?
They are doing too much of it Rich, using fuel that they believe is so
destructive to our climate that they have refused permits to find new
supplies.
Rubbish, there are still quite a few permits for trying to find new
supplies.
New Permits were rightly stopped as the price the market was
prepared to pay was getting uneconomic for taxpayers, and the risks
too high - we have already found that many previous contracts for
exploration and mining had inadequate provisions for clean-up - and
clean up at sea is just so much harder and more expensive for
taxpayers .
https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/planning-future-no-new-offshore-oil-and-gas-exploration-permits
There is no mention of pricing or risks - it is all about a perceived
Climate Change issue.
That rticle is about _new_ offshore permits. Thee are quite a number
of _existing_ permits that allow continued explortion for up to
somewhere around 25 to 30 years.
That's obvious from the link title. What's your point?
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
They are all list MPs, therefore they have a mandate to travel the
country - outspending electorate MPs to do so.
There are only 8 of them, and the whole of New Zealand is their
electorate.
No it is not. 100% of NZ is covered by a Maori electorate and a
non-Maori electorate. None of those electorate MPs are Green party
members. All Green party candidates for electorate seats were not
elected. The Green party therefore has no mandate at all.
There are more than one of each of Maori and other electorates. In
addition party votes are used to elect additional elected membrs of
parliament. The only party with elected MPs that does not have list
MPs is ACT.
How it that relevant? My point is that the Greens have no mandate to
travel the country by air.
And you are wrong - they have the same mandate for travel as any other
MP. If you can find any different rules that apply to some MPs and not
others that support your opinion feel free to post . . .
https://www.greens.org.nz/climate_action
Should be read in the context of the cite in JohnO's original post.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
All MPs have a madate to keep themselves well informed so
that they can best represent the views of their supporters and for all
New Zealanders.
So what's your point. There is no reason to use aircraft transport
for this.
Of course there is if it is the best way to achieve the objectives all
MPs should have.
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
It is efficient. I appreciate that you have a personal view that MPs
should not use aircraft, but I doubt if there is any MP who has not
used travel by air since being elected.
You are wrong. I did not say that MPs should not use aircraft. Read
what I said again - it is in the context of Green MPs being amongst
the highest spenders in flight expenses as in the article posted by
JohnO. If you cannot keep abreast of the points being made by the OP
and myself, have the good grace to refrain from posting your
ignorance.
Explained above - they have only eight to cover all New Zealand.
They don't have the mandate to outspend all electorate MPs - who have
a genuine justification to get out into the electorates.
Post by Rich80105
If you want to fix that, get more people to vote for the Green Party.
Again words fail me. My posts support JohnO's original post exploring
the apparent difference between Greens policy and Greens in action.
Any fix is up to them.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
They can use a number
of communication options to talk to whomever they wish to that do not
involve travel (let alone by air).
As can other MPs, including Ministers. But that is for them to judge,
not you.
Or you, but you do seem to be trying to judge some . . .
Nope, all MPs should be treated the same as regards being able to
discuss issues with New Zealanders.
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
For their inspiration they might consider how other climate activists
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voyage_of_Greta_Thunberg
Note: I do not endorse anything that Greta Thunberg says, I am using
this as a cite purely in the context of my post.
Still it is good that you support Green principles, and are prepared
to advocate for them. It is however not just Green MPs that should be
able to do this - we need better transport options for all New
Zealanders.
Irrelevant and laughable rubbish.
So do you believ that National and Labour MPs are wrong to travel by
air? I doubt many would agree with you, Crash.
No, and I have never said this. My comments, and those of the OP, are
specifically about Green MPs and their spending levels on flights.
They have not broken any rules that I am aware of. I note your critism
and I do not agree with it.
My posts support JohnO's original post exploring the apparent
difference between Greens policy and Greens in action.
There is no difference. If there are better options then I am sure the
Green Party people use them, but for many trips, flights are the best
or only option. They like other MPs are busy - they have commitments
to attend Parliamnet when in sessin, but also a need to travel to
meetings around the country.
None of which is relevant. The point is that they spend more on air
travel doing this than most MPs, which is incompatible with their
climate change stance.
Of course it is not - they are doing their job.
They are list MPs. This does not require any air travel.
Post by Rich80105
If there is a more
efficient way of travelling I am sure they would do it, but nobody is
asking any MP not to make themselves avaiable to all New Zealanders.
List MPs do not have such a role mandated of them. They have no
mandate whatever to 'make themselves available'. Electorate MPs
certainly do. All electorate MPs are either Labour or National, yet
the Green MPs as outlined in JohnOs article outspend them on air
travel despite the Green's climate change agenda.
Post by Rich80105
If National MPs had come out with the highest cost, you would
undoubtedly have accused those from other parties as beng lazy, which
would have been just as stupid. .
I have not mentioned National and your conjecture above is simply
laughable - the sort of irrelevancy of a debater who has lost the
plot. It should have been very clear from my first post that I am
targeting Greens hypocrisy as was JohnO. Nothing more, nothing less.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Read what I said again - it is in the context of Green MPs being
amongst the highest spenders in flight expenses as in the article
posted by JohnO. In this context your post attributing my beliefs is
baseless and an outright lie.
Someone will always be the highest - does that make them wrong?
The question is 'Does that make them hypocrites?'
I note you didn't attempt to answer the previous question, but to
answer your question, no, having higher travel needs goes with being
determined to consult as much as possible, being in a small party with
effectively an electorate that covers all of New Zealand, does make it
difficult for them not to incur high travel costs.
But you probably knew that - the thread is really more about someone
using any excuse to bash another party . . .
--
Crash McBash
Rich80105
2020-03-08 08:04:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by JohnO
https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2020/03/non-ministerial-green-mps-average-flight-spending-trumps-other-backbenchers.html
Why is getting around New Zealand talking to New Zealanders
hypocritical, JohnO?
They are doing too much of it Rich, using fuel that they believe is so
destructive to our climate that they have refused permits to find new
supplies.
Rubbish, there are still quite a few permits for trying to find new
supplies.
New Permits were rightly stopped as the price the market was
prepared to pay was getting uneconomic for taxpayers, and the risks
too high - we have already found that many previous contracts for
exploration and mining had inadequate provisions for clean-up - and
clean up at sea is just so much harder and more expensive for
taxpayers .
https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/planning-future-no-new-offshore-oil-and-gas-exploration-permits
There is no mention of pricing or risks - it is all about a perceived
Climate Change issue.
That rticle is about _new_ offshore permits. Thee are quite a number
of _existing_ permits that allow continued explortion for up to
somewhere around 25 to 30 years.
That's obvious from the link title. What's your point?
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
They are all list MPs, therefore they have a mandate to travel the
country - outspending electorate MPs to do so.
There are only 8 of them, and the whole of New Zealand is their
electorate.
No it is not. 100% of NZ is covered by a Maori electorate and a
non-Maori electorate. None of those electorate MPs are Green party
members. All Green party candidates for electorate seats were not
elected. The Green party therefore has no mandate at all.
There are more than one of each of Maori and other electorates. In
addition party votes are used to elect additional elected membrs of
parliament. The only party with elected MPs that does not have list
MPs is ACT.
How it that relevant? My point is that the Greens have no mandate to
travel the country by air.
And you are wrong - they have the same mandate for travel as any other
MP. If you can find any different rules that apply to some MPs and not
others that support your opinion feel free to post . . .
https://www.greens.org.nz/climate_action
Should be read in the context of the cite in JohnO's original post.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
All MPs have a madate to keep themselves well informed so
that they can best represent the views of their supporters and for all
New Zealanders.
So what's your point. There is no reason to use aircraft transport
for this.
Of course there is if it is the best way to achieve the objectives all
MPs should have.
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
It is efficient. I appreciate that you have a personal view that MPs
should not use aircraft, but I doubt if there is any MP who has not
used travel by air since being elected.
You are wrong. I did not say that MPs should not use aircraft. Read
what I said again - it is in the context of Green MPs being amongst
the highest spenders in flight expenses as in the article posted by
JohnO. If you cannot keep abreast of the points being made by the OP
and myself, have the good grace to refrain from posting your
ignorance.
Explained above - they have only eight to cover all New Zealand.
They don't have the mandate to outspend all electorate MPs - who have
a genuine justification to get out into the electorates.
Post by Rich80105
If you want to fix that, get more people to vote for the Green Party.
Again words fail me. My posts support JohnO's original post exploring
the apparent difference between Greens policy and Greens in action.
Any fix is up to them.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
They can use a number
of communication options to talk to whomever they wish to that do not
involve travel (let alone by air).
As can other MPs, including Ministers. But that is for them to judge,
not you.
Or you, but you do seem to be trying to judge some . . .
Nope, all MPs should be treated the same as regards being able to
discuss issues with New Zealanders.
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
For their inspiration they might consider how other climate activists
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voyage_of_Greta_Thunberg
Note: I do not endorse anything that Greta Thunberg says, I am using
this as a cite purely in the context of my post.
Still it is good that you support Green principles, and are prepared
to advocate for them. It is however not just Green MPs that should be
able to do this - we need better transport options for all New
Zealanders.
Irrelevant and laughable rubbish.
So do you believ that National and Labour MPs are wrong to travel by
air? I doubt many would agree with you, Crash.
No, and I have never said this. My comments, and those of the OP, are
specifically about Green MPs and their spending levels on flights.
They have not broken any rules that I am aware of. I note your critism
and I do not agree with it.
My posts support JohnO's original post exploring the apparent
difference between Greens policy and Greens in action.
There is no difference. If there are better options then I am sure the
Green Party people use them, but for many trips, flights are the best
or only option. They like other MPs are busy - they have commitments
to attend Parliamnet when in sessin, but also a need to travel to
meetings around the country.
None of which is relevant. The point is that they spend more on air
travel doing this than most MPs, which is incompatible with their
climate change stance.
Of course it is not - they are doing their job.
They are list MPs. This does not require any air travel.
Of course it does - and most list MPs will use air travel. Can yu
identify any MP that has not used air travel, Crash. Certainly there
is no law against it, and common sense suggests that whatever party
they come from, list MPs should keep themselves well informed on
issues that they are able to vote on.
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
If there is a more
efficient way of travelling I am sure they would do it, but nobody is
asking any MP not to make themselves avaiable to all New Zealanders.
List MPs do not have such a role mandated of them. They have no
mandate whatever to 'make themselves available'.
If they wish to get re-elected then they need to be seen, and if they
are responsible persons they will want to be well informed.
Post by Crash
Electorate MPs
certainly do.
So tell us what rules or regulations distinguish between list MPS and
electorate MPs - or which rules and regulations "mandate" a role for
either.
Post by Crash
All electorate MPs are either Labour or National, yet
the Green MPs as outlined in JohnOs article outspend them on air
travel despite the Green's climate change agenda.
So? They have not broken any rules; they are getting around New
Zealand more.
The article only taled about average spending - was the Green MPs
total spend really more than the spend by National MPs?
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
If National MPs had come out with the highest cost, you would
undoubtedly have accused those from other parties as beng lazy, which
would have been just as stupid. .
I have not mentioned National and your conjecture above is simply
laughable - the sort of irrelevancy of a debater who has lost the
plot. It should have been very clear from my first post that I am
targeting Greens hypocrisy as was JohnO. Nothing more, nothing less.
What a pity for you that you have not found any hypocrisy, althugh
your unwillingness to justify you thinly disguised attacks smacks more
of personal hypocrisy by you, Crash.
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Read what I said again - it is in the context of Green MPs being
amongst the highest spenders in flight expenses as in the article
posted by JohnO. In this context your post attributing my beliefs is
baseless and an outright lie.
Someone will always be the highest - does that make them wrong?
The question is 'Does that make them hypocrites?'
I note you didn't attempt to answer the previous question, but to
answer your question, no, having higher travel needs goes with being
determined to consult as much as possible, being in a small party with
effectively an electorate that covers all of New Zealand, does make it
difficult for them not to incur high travel costs.
But you probably knew that - the thread is really more about someone
using any excuse to bash another party . . .
Crash
2020-03-09 00:11:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by JohnO
https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2020/03/non-ministerial-green-mps-average-flight-spending-trumps-other-backbenchers.html
Why is getting around New Zealand talking to New Zealanders
hypocritical, JohnO?
They are doing too much of it Rich, using fuel that they believe is so
destructive to our climate that they have refused permits to find new
supplies.
Rubbish, there are still quite a few permits for trying to find new
supplies.
New Permits were rightly stopped as the price the market was
prepared to pay was getting uneconomic for taxpayers, and the risks
too high - we have already found that many previous contracts for
exploration and mining had inadequate provisions for clean-up - and
clean up at sea is just so much harder and more expensive for
taxpayers .
https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/planning-future-no-new-offshore-oil-and-gas-exploration-permits
There is no mention of pricing or risks - it is all about a perceived
Climate Change issue.
That rticle is about _new_ offshore permits. Thee are quite a number
of _existing_ permits that allow continued explortion for up to
somewhere around 25 to 30 years.
That's obvious from the link title. What's your point?
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
They are all list MPs, therefore they have a mandate to travel the
country - outspending electorate MPs to do so.
There are only 8 of them, and the whole of New Zealand is their
electorate.
No it is not. 100% of NZ is covered by a Maori electorate and a
non-Maori electorate. None of those electorate MPs are Green party
members. All Green party candidates for electorate seats were not
elected. The Green party therefore has no mandate at all.
There are more than one of each of Maori and other electorates. In
addition party votes are used to elect additional elected membrs of
parliament. The only party with elected MPs that does not have list
MPs is ACT.
How it that relevant? My point is that the Greens have no mandate to
travel the country by air.
And you are wrong - they have the same mandate for travel as any other
MP. If you can find any different rules that apply to some MPs and not
others that support your opinion feel free to post . . .
https://www.greens.org.nz/climate_action
Should be read in the context of the cite in JohnO's original post.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
All MPs have a madate to keep themselves well informed so
that they can best represent the views of their supporters and for all
New Zealanders.
So what's your point. There is no reason to use aircraft transport
for this.
Of course there is if it is the best way to achieve the objectives all
MPs should have.
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
It is efficient. I appreciate that you have a personal view that MPs
should not use aircraft, but I doubt if there is any MP who has not
used travel by air since being elected.
You are wrong. I did not say that MPs should not use aircraft. Read
what I said again - it is in the context of Green MPs being amongst
the highest spenders in flight expenses as in the article posted by
JohnO. If you cannot keep abreast of the points being made by the OP
and myself, have the good grace to refrain from posting your
ignorance.
Explained above - they have only eight to cover all New Zealand.
They don't have the mandate to outspend all electorate MPs - who have
a genuine justification to get out into the electorates.
Post by Rich80105
If you want to fix that, get more people to vote for the Green Party.
Again words fail me. My posts support JohnO's original post exploring
the apparent difference between Greens policy and Greens in action.
Any fix is up to them.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
They can use a number
of communication options to talk to whomever they wish to that do not
involve travel (let alone by air).
As can other MPs, including Ministers. But that is for them to judge,
not you.
Or you, but you do seem to be trying to judge some . . .
Nope, all MPs should be treated the same as regards being able to
discuss issues with New Zealanders.
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
For their inspiration they might consider how other climate activists
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voyage_of_Greta_Thunberg
Note: I do not endorse anything that Greta Thunberg says, I am using
this as a cite purely in the context of my post.
Still it is good that you support Green principles, and are prepared
to advocate for them. It is however not just Green MPs that should be
able to do this - we need better transport options for all New
Zealanders.
Irrelevant and laughable rubbish.
So do you believ that National and Labour MPs are wrong to travel by
air? I doubt many would agree with you, Crash.
No, and I have never said this. My comments, and those of the OP, are
specifically about Green MPs and their spending levels on flights.
They have not broken any rules that I am aware of. I note your critism
and I do not agree with it.
My posts support JohnO's original post exploring the apparent
difference between Greens policy and Greens in action.
There is no difference. If there are better options then I am sure the
Green Party people use them, but for many trips, flights are the best
or only option. They like other MPs are busy - they have commitments
to attend Parliamnet when in sessin, but also a need to travel to
meetings around the country.
None of which is relevant. The point is that they spend more on air
travel doing this than most MPs, which is incompatible with their
climate change stance.
Of course it is not - they are doing their job.
They are list MPs. This does not require any air travel.
Of course it does - and most list MPs will use air travel.
I should have said 'excessive' instead of 'any'.
Post by Rich80105
Can yu
identify any MP that has not used air travel, Crash. Certainly there
is no law against it, and common sense suggests that whatever party
they come from, list MPs should keep themselves well informed on
issues that they are able to vote on.
None of which excuses excessive air travel on the part of MPs from a
party whose policy includes climate change.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
If there is a more
efficient way of travelling I am sure they would do it, but nobody is
asking any MP not to make themselves avaiable to all New Zealanders.
List MPs do not have such a role mandated of them. They have no
mandate whatever to 'make themselves available'.
If they wish to get re-elected then they need to be seen, and if they
are responsible persons they will want to be well informed.
How is this relevant to excessive air travel expenses? Don't bother
trotting out the 'there are just a few of them to cover the country'
excuse again.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Electorate MPs
certainly do.
So tell us what rules or regulations distinguish between list MPS and
electorate MPs - or which rules and regulations "mandate" a role for
either.
I would have thought it obvious that electorate MPs are responsible
for representing their electorate constituents, and many such MPs live
in their electorate as a part of their job.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
All electorate MPs are either Labour or National, yet
the Green MPs as outlined in JohnOs article outspend them on air
travel despite the Green's climate change agenda.
So? They have not broken any rules; they are getting around New
Zealand more.
Yet they have climate change as a core policy.
Post by Rich80105
The article only taled about average spending
That is what both JohnO and I are pointing out.
Post by Rich80105
- was the Green MPs
total spend really more than the spend by National MPs?
Off topic.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
If National MPs had come out with the highest cost, you would
undoubtedly have accused those from other parties as beng lazy, which
would have been just as stupid. .
I have not mentioned National and your conjecture above is simply
laughable - the sort of irrelevancy of a debater who has lost the
plot. It should have been very clear from my first post that I am
targeting Greens hypocrisy as was JohnO. Nothing more, nothing less.
What a pity for you that you have not found any hypocrisy, althugh
your unwillingness to justify you thinly disguised attacks smacks more
of personal hypocrisy by you, Crash.
If you can find any hypocrisy on my part you are wrong. You appear to
be unable to tolerate legitimate criticism of the Greens, Labour or
NZF.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Read what I said again - it is in the context of Green MPs being
amongst the highest spenders in flight expenses as in the article
posted by JohnO. In this context your post attributing my beliefs is
baseless and an outright lie.
Someone will always be the highest - does that make them wrong?
The question is 'Does that make them hypocrites?'
I note you didn't attempt to answer the previous question, but to
answer your question, no, having higher travel needs goes with being
determined to consult as much as possible, being in a small party with
effectively an electorate that covers all of New Zealand, does make it
difficult for them not to incur high travel costs.
But you probably knew that - the thread is really more about someone
using any excuse to bash another party . . .
--
Crash McBash
Rich80105
2020-03-09 01:33:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by JohnO
https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2020/03/non-ministerial-green-mps-average-flight-spending-trumps-other-backbenchers.html
Why is getting around New Zealand talking to New Zealanders
hypocritical, JohnO?
They are doing too much of it Rich, using fuel that they believe is so
destructive to our climate that they have refused permits to find new
supplies.
Rubbish, there are still quite a few permits for trying to find new
supplies.
New Permits were rightly stopped as the price the market was
prepared to pay was getting uneconomic for taxpayers, and the risks
too high - we have already found that many previous contracts for
exploration and mining had inadequate provisions for clean-up - and
clean up at sea is just so much harder and more expensive for
taxpayers .
https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/planning-future-no-new-offshore-oil-and-gas-exploration-permits
There is no mention of pricing or risks - it is all about a perceived
Climate Change issue.
That rticle is about _new_ offshore permits. Thee are quite a number
of _existing_ permits that allow continued explortion for up to
somewhere around 25 to 30 years.
That's obvious from the link title. What's your point?
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
They are all list MPs, therefore they have a mandate to travel the
country - outspending electorate MPs to do so.
There are only 8 of them, and the whole of New Zealand is their
electorate.
No it is not. 100% of NZ is covered by a Maori electorate and a
non-Maori electorate. None of those electorate MPs are Green party
members. All Green party candidates for electorate seats were not
elected. The Green party therefore has no mandate at all.
There are more than one of each of Maori and other electorates. In
addition party votes are used to elect additional elected membrs of
parliament. The only party with elected MPs that does not have list
MPs is ACT.
How it that relevant? My point is that the Greens have no mandate to
travel the country by air.
And you are wrong - they have the same mandate for travel as any other
MP. If you can find any different rules that apply to some MPs and not
others that support your opinion feel free to post . . .
https://www.greens.org.nz/climate_action
Should be read in the context of the cite in JohnO's original post.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
All MPs have a madate to keep themselves well informed so
that they can best represent the views of their supporters and for all
New Zealanders.
So what's your point. There is no reason to use aircraft transport
for this.
Of course there is if it is the best way to achieve the objectives all
MPs should have.
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
It is efficient. I appreciate that you have a personal view that MPs
should not use aircraft, but I doubt if there is any MP who has not
used travel by air since being elected.
You are wrong. I did not say that MPs should not use aircraft. Read
what I said again - it is in the context of Green MPs being amongst
the highest spenders in flight expenses as in the article posted by
JohnO. If you cannot keep abreast of the points being made by the OP
and myself, have the good grace to refrain from posting your
ignorance.
Explained above - they have only eight to cover all New Zealand.
They don't have the mandate to outspend all electorate MPs - who have
a genuine justification to get out into the electorates.
Post by Rich80105
If you want to fix that, get more people to vote for the Green Party.
Again words fail me. My posts support JohnO's original post exploring
the apparent difference between Greens policy and Greens in action.
Any fix is up to them.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
They can use a number
of communication options to talk to whomever they wish to that do not
involve travel (let alone by air).
As can other MPs, including Ministers. But that is for them to judge,
not you.
Or you, but you do seem to be trying to judge some . . .
Nope, all MPs should be treated the same as regards being able to
discuss issues with New Zealanders.
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
For their inspiration they might consider how other climate activists
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voyage_of_Greta_Thunberg
Note: I do not endorse anything that Greta Thunberg says, I am using
this as a cite purely in the context of my post.
Still it is good that you support Green principles, and are prepared
to advocate for them. It is however not just Green MPs that should be
able to do this - we need better transport options for all New
Zealanders.
Irrelevant and laughable rubbish.
So do you believ that National and Labour MPs are wrong to travel by
air? I doubt many would agree with you, Crash.
No, and I have never said this. My comments, and those of the OP, are
specifically about Green MPs and their spending levels on flights.
They have not broken any rules that I am aware of. I note your critism
and I do not agree with it.
My posts support JohnO's original post exploring the apparent
difference between Greens policy and Greens in action.
There is no difference. If there are better options then I am sure the
Green Party people use them, but for many trips, flights are the best
or only option. They like other MPs are busy - they have commitments
to attend Parliamnet when in sessin, but also a need to travel to
meetings around the country.
None of which is relevant. The point is that they spend more on air
travel doing this than most MPs, which is incompatible with their
climate change stance.
Of course it is not - they are doing their job.
They are list MPs. This does not require any air travel.
Of course it does - and most list MPs will use air travel.
I should have said 'excessive' instead of 'any'.
Can you show that air travel was excessive for any MP?
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Can you
identify any MP that has not used air travel, Crash. Certainly there
is no law against it, and common sense suggests that whatever party
they come from, list MPs should keep themselves well informed on
issues that they are able to vote on.
None of which excuses excessive air travel on the part of MPs from a
party whose policy includes climate change.
They do not need an excuse to use the most effective means of travel
they can. They have exactly the same obligation as any other MP to
keep themselves well informed, exactly the same need as any other MP
to promote their policies, and exactly the same need as other MPs to
present themselves at Parliament when it is open.
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
If there is a more
efficient way of travelling I am sure they would do it, but nobody is
asking any MP not to make themselves available to all New Zealanders.
List MPs do not have such a role mandated of them. They have no
mandate whatever to 'make themselves available'.
If they wish to get re-elected then they need to be seen, and if they
are responsible persons they will want to be well informed.
How is this relevant to excessive air travel expenses? Don't bother
trotting out the 'there are just a few of them to cover the country'
excuse again.
Who has incurred excessive travel expenses?
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Electorate MPs
certainly do.
So tell us what rules or regulations distinguish between list MPS and
electorate MPs - or which rules and regulations "mandate" a role for
either.
I would have thought it obvious that electorate MPs are responsible
for representing their electorate constituents, and many such MPs live
in their electorate as a part of their job.
So there are no regulations setting out the mandates yuo think should
apply. Once elected, each MP has a single vote - they are all of equal
value when voting on legislation.
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
All electorate MPs are either Labour or National, yet
the Green MPs as outlined in JohnOs article outspend them on air
travel despite the Green's climate change agenda.
So? They have not broken any rules; they are getting around New
Zealand more.
Yet they have climate change as a core policy.
Post by Rich80105
The article only taled about average spending
That is what both JohnO and I are pointing out.
Post by Rich80105
- was the Green MPs
total spend really more than the spend by National MPs?
Off topic.
It was a direct response to "All electorate MPs are either Labour or
National, yet the Green MPs as outlined in JohnOs article outspend
them on air travel despite the Green's climate change agenda." which
prima facie appears to be asserting that total Green spending on air
travel exceeded that of Labour plus National electorate MPs. All that
is needed are the respective figures.
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
If National MPs had come out with the highest cost, you would
undoubtedly have accused those from other parties as beng lazy, which
would have been just as stupid. .
I have not mentioned National and your conjecture above is simply
laughable - the sort of irrelevancy of a debater who has lost the
plot. It should have been very clear from my first post that I am
targeting Greens hypocrisy as was JohnO. Nothing more, nothing less.
Since you have not been able to show any hypocrisy
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
What a pity for you that you have not found any hypocrisy, although
your unwillingness to justify you thinly disguised attacks smacks more
of personal hypocrisy by you, Crash.
If you can find any hypocrisy on my part you are wrong. You appear to
be unable to tolerate legitimate criticism of the Greens, Labour or
NZF.
I have consistently defended attacks on spending by MPs in doing their
job. Yes I did criticise Gerry Brownlee for excessive use of
government limousines many years ago - he was rightly stopped.
I also criticised retiring MPs giving themselves trips to various
conferences while knowing that they would be leaving parliament very
soon after their return, but I have not participated in criticism of
successive Prime Ministers and Foreign Affairs Ministers for their
spending. It is a tiresome trope that implies that those that are
responsible for some important decisions should be impaired in doing
it the best way they can.
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Read what I said again - it is in the context of Green MPs being
amongst the highest spenders in flight expenses as in the article
posted by JohnO. In this context your post attributing my beliefs is
baseless and an outright lie.
Someone will always be the highest - does that make them wrong?
The question is 'Does that make them hypocrites?'
I note you didn't attempt to answer the previous question, but to
answer your question, no, having higher travel needs goes with being
determined to consult as much as possible, being in a small party with
effectively an electorate that covers all of New Zealand, does make it
difficult for them not to incur high travel costs.
But you probably knew that - the thread is really more about someone
using any excuse to bash another party . . .
John Bowes
2020-03-07 19:56:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by JohnO
https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2020/03/non-ministerial-green-mps-average-flight-spending-trumps-other-backbenchers.html
Why is getting around New Zealand talking to New Zealanders
hypocritical, JohnO?
They are doing too much of it Rich, using fuel that they believe is so
destructive to our climate that they have refused permits to find new
supplies.
Rubbish, there are still quite a few permits for trying to find new
supplies.
New Permits were rightly stopped as the price the market was
prepared to pay was getting uneconomic for taxpayers, and the risks
too high - we have already found that many previous contracts for
exploration and mining had inadequate provisions for clean-up - and
clean up at sea is just so much harder and more expensive for
taxpayers .
https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/planning-future-no-new-offshore-oil-and-gas-exploration-permits
There is no mention of pricing or risks - it is all about a perceived
Climate Change issue.
That rticle is about _new_ offshore permits. Thee are quite a number
of _existing_ permits that allow continued explortion for up to
somewhere around 25 to 30 years.
That's obvious from the link title. What's your point?
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
They are all list MPs, therefore they have a mandate to travel the
country - outspending electorate MPs to do so.
There are only 8 of them, and the whole of New Zealand is their
electorate.
No it is not. 100% of NZ is covered by a Maori electorate and a
non-Maori electorate. None of those electorate MPs are Green party
members. All Green party candidates for electorate seats were not
elected. The Green party therefore has no mandate at all.
There are more than one of each of Maori and other electorates. In
addition party votes are used to elect additional elected membrs of
parliament. The only party with elected MPs that does not have list
MPs is ACT.
How it that relevant? My point is that the Greens have no mandate to
travel the country by air.
And you are wrong - they have the same mandate for travel as any other
MP. If you can find any different rules that apply to some MPs and not
others that support your opinion feel free to post . . .
But not the right to travel more than other backbenchers who have to go back to their constituents every week!

The point JohnO is making that the minute number of Green backbenchers have no good reason to have the highest costs than other backbenchers Rich. They do not have the right to have higher travel costs than any other party!
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
All MPs have a madate to keep themselves well informed so
that they can best represent the views of their supporters and for all
New Zealanders.
So what's your point. There is no reason to use aircraft transport
for this.
Of course there is if it is the best way to achieve the objectives all
MPs should have.
BULLSHIT! The country is well served with cycle ways and road and rail transport these days!
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
It is efficient. I appreciate that you have a personal view that MPs
should not use aircraft, but I doubt if there is any MP who has not
used travel by air since being elected.
You are wrong. I did not say that MPs should not use aircraft. Read
what I said again - it is in the context of Green MPs being amongst
the highest spenders in flight expenses as in the article posted by
JohnO. If you cannot keep abreast of the points being made by the OP
and myself, have the good grace to refrain from posting your
ignorance.
Explained above - they have only eight to cover all New Zealand. If
you want to fix that, get more people to vote for the Green Party.
That can only happen when the Green party stops acting like rabbid rabbits Rich and stop pushing expensive legislation that is destroying our way of life while actually achieving nothing to improve or negate 'climate change' !
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
They can use a number
of communication options to talk to whomever they wish to that do not
involve travel (let alone by air).
As can other MPs, including Ministers. But that is for them to judge,
not you.
Or you, but you do seem to be trying to judge some . . .
Nope, all MPs should be treated the same as regards being able to
discuss issues with New Zealanders.
Yup and no small group should be irresponsible enough to spend more than other party's with more backbenchers!
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
For their inspiration they might consider how other climate activists
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voyage_of_Greta_Thunberg
Note: I do not endorse anything that Greta Thunberg says, I am using
this as a cite purely in the context of my post.
Still it is good that you support Green principles, and are prepared
to advocate for them. It is however not just Green MPs that should be
able to do this - we need better transport options for all New
Zealanders.
Irrelevant and laughable rubbish.
So do you believ that National and Labour MPs are wrong to travel by
air? I doubt many would agree with you, Crash.
No, and I have never said this. My comments, and those of the OP, are
specifically about Green MPs and their spending levels on flights.
They have not broken any rules that I am aware of. I note your critism
and I do not agree with it.
You aren't aware of very much when it comes to honest criticism of the party you blindly support Rich!
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Read what I said again - it is in the context of Green MPs being
amongst the highest spenders in flight expenses as in the article
posted by JohnO. In this context your post attributing my beliefs is
baseless and an outright lie.
Someone will always be the highest - does that make them wrong?
It does when they're smaller than the other party's and spending more on travel than anyone else Rich!
John Bowes
2020-03-07 19:46:12 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by JohnO
https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2020/03/non-ministerial-green-mps-average-flight-spending-trumps-other-backbenchers.html
Why is getting around New Zealand talking to New Zealanders
hypocritical, JohnO?
They are doing too much of it Rich, using fuel that they believe is so
destructive to our climate that they have refused permits to find new
supplies.
Rubbish, there are still quite a few permits for trying to find new
supplies.
New Permits were rightly stopped as the price the market was
prepared to pay was getting uneconomic for taxpayers, and the risks
too high - we have already found that many previous contracts for
exploration and mining had inadequate provisions for clean-up - and
clean up at sea is just so much harder and more expensive for
taxpayers .
https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/planning-future-no-new-offshore-oil-and-gas-exploration-permits
There is no mention of pricing or risks - it is all about a perceived
Climate Change issue.
That rticle is about _new_ offshore permits. Thee are quite a number
of _existing_ permits that allow continued explortion for up to
somewhere around 25 to 30 years.
That's obvious from the link title. What's your point?
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
They are all list MPs, therefore they have a mandate to travel the
country - outspending electorate MPs to do so.
There are only 8 of them, and the whole of New Zealand is their
electorate.
No it is not. 100% of NZ is covered by a Maori electorate and a
non-Maori electorate. None of those electorate MPs are Green party
members. All Green party candidates for electorate seats were not
elected. The Green party therefore has no mandate at all.
There are more than one of each of Maori and other electorates. In
addition party votes are used to elect additional elected membrs of
parliament. The only party with elected MPs that does not have list
MPs is ACT.
How it that relevant? My point is that the Greens have no mandate to
travel the country by air.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
All MPs have a madate to keep themselves well informed so
that they can best represent the views of their supporters and for all
New Zealanders.
So what's your point. There is no reason to use aircraft transport
for this.
It is efficient. I appreciate that you have a personal view that MPs
should not use aircraft, but I doubt if there is any MP who has not
used travel by air since being elected.
You are wrong. I did not say that MPs should not use aircraft. Read
what I said again - it is in the context of Green MPs being amongst
the highest spenders in flight expenses as in the article posted by
JohnO. If you cannot keep abreast of the points being made by the OP
and myself, have the good grace to refrain from posting your
ignorance.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
They can use a number
of communication options to talk to whomever they wish to that do not
involve travel (let alone by air).
As can other MPs, including Ministers. But that is for them to judge,
not you.
Or you, but you do seem to be trying to judge some . . .
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
For their inspiration they might consider how other climate activists
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voyage_of_Greta_Thunberg
Note: I do not endorse anything that Greta Thunberg says, I am using
this as a cite purely in the context of my post.
Still it is good that you support Green principles, and are prepared
to advocate for them. It is however not just Green MPs that should be
able to do this - we need better transport options for all New
Zealanders.
Irrelevant and laughable rubbish.
So do you believ that National and Labour MPs are wrong to travel by
air? I doubt many would agree with you, Crash.
No, and I have never said this. My comments, and those of the OP, are
specifically about Green MPs and their spending levels on flights.
Read what I said again - it is in the context of Green MPs being
amongst the highest spenders in flight expenses as in the article
posted by JohnO. In this context your post attributing my beliefs is
baseless and an outright lie.
--
Crash McBash
btw it's the Green backbenchers having higher travel expenses than the other parties.
John Bowes
2020-03-06 20:36:19 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by JohnO
https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2020/03/non-ministerial-green-mps-average-flight-spending-trumps-other-backbenchers.html
Why is getting around New Zealand talking to New Zealanders
hypocritical, JohnO?
They are doing too much of it Rich, using fuel that they believe is so
destructive to our climate that they have refused permits to find new
supplies.
Rubbish, there are still quite a few permits for trying to find new
supplies.
Correct rubbish. But yes their are a FEW licences to search for a resource we need and will still need for the foreseeable future! We need to find all the oil and gas we can to prevent us paying higher energy costs in the future because of government stupidity!
Post by Rich80105
New Permits were rightly stopped as the price the market was
prepared to pay was getting uneconomic for taxpayers, and the risks
too high - we have already found that many previous contracts for
exploration and mining had inadequate provisions for clean-up - and
clean up at sea is just so much harder and more expensive for
taxpayers . . .
So put in provisions for clean ups1 However Ardern and her Marxist crony's didn't stop exploration for that the did it because your hero Wussie Normal and Greenpeace wanted it stopped!
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
They are all list MPs, therefore they have no mandate to travel the
country - outspending electorate MPs to do so.
There are only 8 of them, and the whole of New Zealand is their
electorate. All MPs have a madate to keep themselves well informed so
that they can best represent the views of their supporters and for all
New Zealanders.
But according to you it's only the Greens who have a madate. Pity that because of Winston they're making and agreeing to policy that will cost billions and achieve absolutely nothing to mitigate their stupid climate claims!

As to doing it for ALL New Zealanders, it seems the little voices in your head are at work again....
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
They can use a number
of communication options to talk to whomever they wish to that do not
involve travel (let alone by air).
As can other MPs, including Ministers. But that is for them to judge,
not you.
But most of the others don't claim the trees not being planted cover their carbon footprints fool! Besides most of them were voted in by the electorate NOT in power because of the geriatric shyster Winston Peters!
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
For their inspiration they might consider how other climate activists
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voyage_of_Greta_Thunberg
Note: I do not endorse anything that Greta Thunberg says, I am using
this as a cite purely in the context of my post.
Still it is good that you support Green principles, and are prepared
to advocate for them. It is however not just Green MPs that should be
able to do this - we need better transport options for all New
Zealanders.
The Greens don't have any principles Rich. Much like lying Marxists like you!
Loading...