And more hypocrisy

September 1st, 2009 at 9:00 am by David Farrar

Really needs to stop opposing everything that happened under Labour, just because National may do them also.

First we had him attacking a tertiary funding cap that his Government put in place in 2007.

Now we have him saying:

Labour leader Phil Goff said land went against the 100% Pure New Zealand brand

The Pike River mine is on conservation land, adjacent to and in the Paparoa National Park. It was approved by the Government in 2004. And who was Government then?

So once again Phil attacks the Government for merely thinking about doing something that happened under his Government.

This is not the way to build up credibility.

Tags: , , , ,

17 Responses to “And more hypocrisy”

  1. wreck1080 (3,810 comments) says:

    Lucky for me I am able to see this on the informed kiwiblog.

    However a lot of people do not read kiwiblog so they will remain uninformed.

    Why doesn’t the traditional media report on hypocritical statements from Goff? This is just one of many.

    I am quite disappointed in the investigative skills of NZ political journalists.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. siobhan (278 comments) says:

    wreck – you wouldn’t want the truth to get in the way of a good story, now would you?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. kaya (1,360 comments) says:

    Obviously last week’s double common sense from Goff was a bit of aberrant behaviour. Sad little man.

    http://tinyurl.com/lenfhh

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. gravedodger (1,528 comments) says:

    Arh for the old days when the MSM would have crucified him for his stupidity, Oh well they were the GOOD old days

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. Patrick Starr (3,675 comments) says:

    “attacks the Government for merely thinking about doing something that happened under his Government”

    with the mining issue to one side there are a few Nat supporters who feel the same way

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. GJ (329 comments) says:

    I don’t think you should ever use the world credibility wen you are talking about members of Parliament. They don’t know the meaning of the word!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. MT_Tinman (3,054 comments) says:

    Leave Phil alone.

    He’s doing a great job.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. Cerium (23,344 comments) says:

    “the 100% Pure New Zealand brand”

    Does anyone else find this slogan embarrassing? I like it here, there are some great bits of country and plenty of good people. But we are far from being pure anything.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. projectman (206 comments) says:

    Yes, he’s just the best Labour leader…if you support National!

    Keep up the good work exposing the hypocrisy.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. Chuck Bird (4,773 comments) says:

    So once again Phil attacks the Government for merely thinking about doing something that happened under his Government.

    I would be great if he did this over the anti-parental authority legislation.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. RightNow (6,844 comments) says:

    I have to agree with Cerium, the 100% pure campaign has been based on a lie since Maori invaded NZ. We have slums, we have crappy roads, we have vicious thugs wandering the cities and countryside raping, bashing and robbing tourists and citizens alike, we have poo discharged into harbours and pollution from farms running straight into our waterways.
    It’s a bit late now to say this will ruin our image. Perhaps actually some of the money generated from the mining could be funnelled into cleaning up the bits we do want the tourists to see. Could be a lot of jobs created, or work for the dole schemes.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. Fale Andrew Lesa (473 comments) says:

    I think the government should definitely be investing in Natural Resources within this country, particularly at a time when our Tourism industry is facing substantial cut backs due to the recession.
    Exploring such options is highly viable but I do believe that it is important that we tread slowly and apply caution to ensure that we are targeting the right areas and protecting the right landscapes.

    This is a key area to strategically invest and strengthen our economy – like Australia, countries with investment in natural resources tend to be a lot stronger economically and tend to be more capable at fighting off economic storms.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. Helen (4 comments) says:

    This idea that you can mine conservation land with surgical precision is nonsense – some sort of laproscopic miracle? It is not as simple as digging a teeny hole in a forest and plucking out readily available riches. There is almost always much more involved (eg roads through forests to get large equipment and vehicles in and ore out; significant and often toxic waste discharge from mining activity; pollution of waterways, removal of forest and other habitat of endangered species; where to put the substantial amount of material that is mined out; large and extremely ugly open cast mining; increase in greenhouse gases by burning coal, ground subsidence, and on it goes. The $21 billion tourism industry is essentially based on the attraction of natural, unspoiled environment and wildlife, which does not sit well with mining smack in the middle of wilderness areas. I don’t think guided tours of mines are going to be a winner.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. Ross Miller (1,681 comments) says:

    What in hells name is ‘Phil Who’ doing in making public statements?

    I mean has he cleared them with his Leader?

    He need be careful about criticising actions taken by ‘her’ government or H2 might call him up for a ‘come to Jesus talk’.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. gravedodger (1,528 comments) says:

    And what is so bad about creating access for those of us who through hard work and or advancing years may wish to take a drive along that disgusting advance of humanity and have a geek at the now inaccessable part of OUR HERITAGE

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. RightNow (6,844 comments) says:

    How much of that $21 billion is actually generated from tourists visiting the .0004% of the DOC estate that is being considered? Easy enough to route them elsewhere.
    The likelihood is that this will have close to zero impact on the tourism industry during the mining operations and conditions can be set that the land be left in a better state than when it started. Economically this makes a lot of sense and should appeal to anyone who wants to see NZ economy pick up (which should be everyone). Mineral resources in Australia are a big part of the reason we have such disparity with them.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. mattyroo (1,012 comments) says:

    Cerium Says:

    [quote]“the 100% Pure New Zealand brand”

    Does anyone else find this slogan embarrassing? I like it here, there are some great bits of country and plenty of good people. But we are far from being pure anything.[quote]

    Dead right cerium! If we were 100% pure, we would have nuclear power!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.