That would have cost Greenpeace a lot of money

July 18th, 2013 at 8:25 am by David Farrar

The Herald reports:

has erected a huge billboard in central Wellington accusing Energy Minister of misleading Parliament over a meeting he had with oil company Shell.

The billboard, at the corner of Manners St and Cuba St, is almost 300 square metres and says: “Simon Bridges Pants on Fire”.

Greenpeace said Mr Bridges misled Parliament over his contact with Shell about a controversial Crown Minerals Bill amendment covering deep-sea protests.

The sanctions were rushed into law in May without public consultation

It later emerged Mr Bridges had met Shell in February, two weeks before taking a paper on the protest changes to cabinet. …

Mr Bridges said while the Opposition and Greenpeace may wish otherwise, there was no conspiracy.

“I was not, at any time, lobbied by Shell or anyone else to make the changes to the Crown Minerals Act … I met with Shell, but the issue was not discussed. Ministers regularly meet with business. However, decisions are made by Cabinet.

I wonder how you’d feel if you donated money to Greenpeace thinking they will use it to help the environment, and instead they spend what must be at least ten thousand dollars on a billboard to call a Minister a liar (without proof). Their money, they can do what they want with it.  But remember they are fighting in court for the right to be a charity not a lobby group.

greenpeacebillboard_460x230

 

At least they used a nice photo.

He said he was “chuffed” about the billboard.

“As a boy from Tauranga, I’ve always wanted my name up in lights in the big city. Now it’s happened and I managed to get Greenpeace to pay for it.”

Simon should ask them to do one in Tauranga also – should help increase his already massive majority.

Tags: ,

40 Responses to “That would have cost Greenpeace a lot of money”

  1. Ryan Sproull (7,153 comments) says:

    Lobby group spends campaign money on publicly promoting campaign message in shock spending-money-exactly-how-you’d-expect scandal!

    [DPF: Thank you for confirming they are a lobby group, and not a charity. Presumably you support them not being able to get tax free status]

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 19 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. Zapper (1,021 comments) says:

    More like “Lobby group who think they’re a charity show massive hypocrisy by spending money on a political ad”

    Vote: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. adze (2,126 comments) says:

    The Green Party better watch out – there’s a new kid on their turf, and they’ve got money!

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. joana (1,983 comments) says:

    There is a new kid on the bill board..

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. mavxp (483 comments) says:

    The ladies will be after a piece of him on Friday night, what with the hotness in his underwear now the talk of the town :)

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. Kea (12,841 comments) says:

    “As a boy from Tauranga, I’ve always wanted my name up in lights in the big city. Now it’s happened and I managed to get Greenpeace to pay for it.”

    Perfect response :)

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 23 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. Chris R (70 comments) says:

    I would be flattered if I were Bridges.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. Kea (12,841 comments) says:

    When I read that poster I had no idea what it was about, but assumed it was promotional. I thought he might have been a sportsman or media personality. Good looking chap and a great photo.

    The legislation he passed was a cracker too. He can’t put a foot wrong this boy :)

    Vote: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    what must be at least ten thousand dollars on a billboard to call a Minister a liar (without proof).

    How do I know he’s lying? His mouth is open…

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 0 Thumb down 26 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. thedavincimode (6,759 comments) says:

    ross

    Top effort. To think that you’ve only had all day to think about it!

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. BigFish (132 comments) says:

    Greenpeace is an advocacy group for the environment.
    There’s nothing inconsistent about this particular campaign. It’s the sort of thing the average Greenpeace donator would likely support.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 20 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. Kea (12,841 comments) says:

    Greenpeace is an advocacy group for the environment.

    It used to be many years ago. Now it is an extremist and radical political force with the goal of destroying modern industrial society and capitalism. This is a view shared by its founder who is now an outspoken critic of Greenpeace.

    Like all the big environmental groups, it was long ago over run by hard line socialists out to destroy modern society. They should be listed as what they are, a terrorist group, and be banned from operating in the country.

    Vote: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    “As a boy from Tauranga, I’ve always wanted my name up in lights in the big city.”

    As lies go, that is a whopper.

    So, Bridges grew up in Tauranga? No, he was born in Auckland, went to Te Atatu college and then Auckland University, becoming a lawyer and practising in Auckland. He only moved to Tauranga in 2001 when a Crown Prosecutor role came up.

    Christ if the city slicker can’t even tell the truth about the basics, what hope is there that he can tell the truth about anything else? To be fair, he seems to be following the example set by his dear leader.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 4 Thumb down 22 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. Kea (12,841 comments) says:

    ross69, Thanks for giving us Simon’s CV. He sounds like a very accomplished man.

    Thanks for confirming he is from Tauranga too. You sound like a keen supporter. Good luck in the election and I reckon your man Simon will nail it :)

    Vote: Thumb up 20 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    Thanks for confirming he is from Tauranga too.

    Auckland is the new Tauranga? :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 15 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    But it is good to see Bridges the liar exposed. Next I hope we’ll see a billboard listing all of Key’s lies and broken promises.

    Hang on a minute… is there a billboard big enough?!

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 18 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. hj (7,023 comments) says:

    Imagine Catherine Delahunty:
    “One man one vote: the limited concept of conservative Pakeha”

    actually I like the idea of billboards as a protest as when we had the the coastal coalition…. don’t wait for Cowbell Live.

    “Auckland: More people just makes it more liveable”
    “Auckland- cars/ Copenhagen- bicycles”

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. OneTrack (3,108 comments) says:

    ross69 – was it REALLY worth the estimated 10K of supporters donations to say this? And what is it they are actually saying that helps their cause? Basically that they don’t support political parties that aren’t hard-left enough.

    Nasty lefties showing their nasty and puerile streaks. Again. I wish it wasn’t so boring and predictable.

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. dishy (248 comments) says:

    It’s Norman who has been misleading, when he says that protests at sea have been banned. They have been restricted (for example, by distance). The fact that we’re not allowed to drive over 100kph doesn’t mean that driving is banned.

    Vote: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. Manolo (13,783 comments) says:

    The ecoterrorists fucked up big time.

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. RRM (9,924 comments) says:

    :lol: I like his comeback.

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. WineOh (630 comments) says:

    It also speaks volumes about politics of the left, if you can’t string together a cogent & sensible argument attack the man instead in a cheap & public way.

    I used to support Greenpeace, anti-nuke stance and pro-wildlife, but they have taken such a big step off the deep end into grandiose & militant professional political protest and eco-terrorism with professional full time fundraisers that they are not even a shadow of their former organisation.

    Vote: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. flipper (4,068 comments) says:

    ross69 (2,650) Says:
    July 17th, 2013 at 8:30 pm

    what must be at least ten thousand dollars on a billboard to call a Minister a liar (without proof).

    How do I know he’s lying? His mouth is open…

    <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

    More crap from R69.

    The sum of human knowledge ’69 would be increased many times if you kept your mouth shut.

    You are so boringly predictable, and fast approaching serial liar status..

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. Pete George (23,575 comments) says:

    Greenpeace pants are smouldering fiercely. The poster states:

    He also says we can deal with a deep sea oil spill. We can’t.

    But we can, in a number of ways.

    There will always be doubt over whether we can deal with any spill that might occur. There will be potential spills that no one can deal with adequately.

    But we can deal with reasonable protections to prevent spills. And we can ensure deep sea drillers have reasonable plans and capability in place to deal with possible spills.

    So we can deal with spills to some degree.

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. Rich Prick (1,705 comments) says:

    If only I were that photogenic.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. Keeping Stock (10,342 comments) says:

    The biggest blunder is that Greenpeace has pulled this stunt right when the Supreme Court is about to consider whether or not they are a charity or political activists. The learned Justices of the Supreme Court need only wander up to the corner of Manners Street and Cuba Street, and they will have the answer to the case without even having to open a law book.

    Vote: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. Rich Prick (1,705 comments) says:

    Good point KS. When I see youthful dreadlocked idealists on the streets collecting for Greenpeace (or signing up members, or whatever they do) I wonder if they realise how much we appreciate their efforts towards promoting the National Party and keeping the legal fraternity sufficiently soaked in good merlot.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. WineOh (630 comments) says:

    In fact… I suggest a name change is in order. Time to take the ‘Peace’ out of Greenpeace.
    Perhaps recommendations from Kiwiblogers is in order??

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. m@tt (629 comments) says:

    http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2010/11/pushing_the_boundaries_of_truth.html
    Perhaps someone can come up with a list of all the towns and cities that Simon Bridges ‘remembers’ being a ‘boy from’.
    And to be clear, I think Faafoi knowingly lied his arse off, just as Simon is now.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. dime (9,972 comments) says:

    lmao @ the leftists here.

    10 grand! what a waste. that could have paid for 3-4 lunches for greenpeace elites.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. Prince (105 comments) says:

    I heard there have been secret meetings between Greenpeace and the Green party, about coordinating advertising strategies and stunts. This would seem to confirm that. Looking forward to further revelations about the dirty deal, who, where, when.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. jcuk (688 comments) says:

    I have not donated to Greenpieces in decades, or Forest and Bird never.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. jcuk (688 comments) says:

    ross69 (2,650) Says:

    July 17th, 2013 at 10:11 pm
    “As a boy from Tauranga, I’ve always wanted my name up in lights in the big city.”

    Obviously he doesn’t think he has grown up yet ?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. Ed Snack (1,873 comments) says:

    Very amusing, I mean, Greenpeace accusing somehow of not telling the truth. From an organisation that is one organised lie and seems to tell falsehoods in preference to the truth at every possible chance, it does show a galactic sized sense of chutzpah.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. insider (1,028 comments) says:

    @ Pete George

    actually Greenpeace are right re oil spills but for the wrong reasons. With Nearly every marine spill, the vast majority of oil disappears into the environment because oil spreads faster than people can respond and nature is always the first responder. What people can do is mostly window dressing.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. wikiriwhis business (4,016 comments) says:

    Obviously, Greenpeace is being sponsored by BK’s

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. wikiriwhis business (4,016 comments) says:

    let’s not forget Australia. $20 trillion oil reserves.

    Though curiously no comment from Canberra at this time.

    The find is verified and huge but the amount is being questioned in the industry

    reality check for Linc oil find

    http://www.smh.com.au/business/20-trillion–not-reality-check-for-linc-oil-find-20130124-2d8zf.html

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. LiberalismIsASin (290 comments) says:

    BOOORRRING

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. first time caller (384 comments) says:

    Fantastic advertising for Simon, so he’s a hottie… How is this bad?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. niggly (830 comments) says:

    WineOh (193) Says:

    In fact… I suggest a name change is in order. Time to take the ‘Peace’ out of Greenpeace.
    Perhaps recommendations from Kiwiblogers is in order??

    Greenpricks ?

    Greenpus ?

    Greenlies ?

    Greenliars ?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote