OPINION
The Greens are green alright and not just in the environmental sense. They are green when it comes to sorting out their own internal issues. Chlöe Swarbrick tells the small number of people who bothered to turn up to the party conference that it is her intention to make the party the biggest on the left. Then almost straight away she illustrates what they would look like in government by dithering over the Darleen Tana issue. Chlöe says there are a lot of divergent opinions in the party and it is important that everyone gets to have a say.
It appears this problem, which has beset the party since at least March, is going to drag on still longer. There will be a special meeting on 1 September and at this meeting 200 party delegates will vote on whether to use the waka-jumping law to oust her from Parliament. That will be the best part of six months since the issue first came to light. Chlöe said they wouldn’t write to the Speaker seeking the removal of Tana unless they had the clear support of the party membership.
Are we to believe that this is how they would run the country? i.e., every piece of legislation would have to be agreed to by the party membership before it went to a vote in the House. Imagine how much legislation would pile up while they took a month to organise a meeting so the party membership could vote on it. Imagine if a third world war broke out, which is highly likely if Kamala Harris wins the presidency: the Greens would presumably want their membership to have a vote on any potential involvement in probably a month’s time.
Are we supposed to take these people seriously? They are vacillating over an issue even Labour would have sorted out, while trying to make out that they are the ones who should be in charge of the country. Spare me. Who are they trying to fool – other than themselves? The weekend’s shenanigans proved what a disaster they would be should they be given the levers of power.
If they can’t sort out a MP from their own party how do they except the majority of voters to have the confidence to vote them into government. It beggars belief. Just look at them. They are a perfect illustration of exactly who they actually are: and they want the voting public to take them seriously. How can we? They are as fit for office as much as Kamala Harris is fit for the American presidency.
Both are a frightening thought. In both cases the Peter Principle applies. Dr Laurence J Peter was a sociologist, lecturer and business consultant. In his 1968 book, he states, “In a hierarchy every employee tends to rise to his level of incompetence.” In today’s environment you would have to include ‘her’. The principle is appropriate when referring to Harris, Swarbrick and Ardern. These three just happen to be women, but there are many male politicians just as fit to wear the same hat.
The Greens spent last weekend highlighting why they don’t deserve our vote and they couldn’t have done a better job if they had tried. If it wasn’t obvious before the weekend then it should be now. They are no more an environmental party than they are economic wizards. At the next election they deserve to take a bath (something else they couldn’t run).
