A Green City Council

April 28th, 2014 at 1:18 pm by David Farrar

The Daily Mail reports:

Welcome to the Green Republic of Brighton and Hove.

 

Starting with just one councillor in 1996, the Green Party’s rise to power in Brighton has been unprecedented and rapid. In 2010  there was the election of Caroline Lucas as the MP for Brighton Pavilion – the party’s first Westminster seat – and then came the capture of the city council just a year later.

 

A clever mix of protest, pavement politics and promises of change proved popular with residents, many of them families forced from London by soaring house prices, students, or those attracted by the city’s liberal approach to life.

 

In 2011, the ousted the Conservatives to become the largest group on the council with 23 seats. According to their leader Jason Kitcat, this was to be the future of British politics.

So what have the Greens done once they finally gained power? In Tasmania, the result was a Government so bad they got wiped out at the polls, and Labor vowing never to deal with them again. How has it gone in Brighton?

‘Winning was the worst thing possible for them,’ said one opposition councillor privately. ‘You can see they still want to be popular the whole time and dislike responsibility.’

The Green honeymoon was short-lived. Take the surreal story of an elderly elm tree.

First the Greens voted to upgrade a roundabout in the city called Seven Dials, but then found that there were protests to protect the 170-year-old tree beside the site. Eco-warriors camped out in the branches and pinned poems to the trunk. The national media showed an interest. So the Greens switched sides, joined the campaign to spare the 60ft elm from the chop and then spent a small fortune altering their own traffic scheme.

Then there was its manifesto pledge for ‘Meat-free Mondays’, which would have banned bacon rolls and beef pies from council-run staff canteens. It led to complaints from manual workers and the proposal was ditched.

Residents were similarly  surprised at Green plans to introduce livestock to one of the main routes into the city  as part of a ‘speed reduction package’. The scheme was deferred after protests.

If we do manage to end up with a Labour/Green/Winston/Mana/DotCom Government it will be very amusing for political pundits. Less so I suspect for voters!

The governing party is fatally split with, inevitably, divisions erupting into the open. Unlike other political parties, Greens do not ‘whip’ members into line to get policies passed, and meetings can descend into rows more suited to the Punch and Judy shows down on the beach.

A slim majority of moderates under amiable council leader Mr Kitcat have fought ceaseless challenges from a cabal of hard-Left councillors led by his deputy Phelim Mac Cafferty, a prominent gay activist.

The different factions are known  as ‘mangos’ (green on the outside yet yellow, like Lib Dems, in the middle) and ‘watermelons’ (green on the outside but red in the middle). The groups sit apart in the chamber during council meetings.

So serious are their differences that outside mediators were reportedly called in to reconcile the two sides. Mr Kitcat narrowly survived the latest attempt to depose him only last month – thanks to the support of his Polish-born wife Ania, a fellow moderate on the council.

And as an example:

When refuse workers went on strike against efforts to stop long-standing Spanish practices in working hours and to harmonise pay with female council staff, they were supported by the watermelons – Mr Mac Cafferty and eight colleagues.

According to one councillor, some  of these staff earned more than £50,000 a year by manipulating allowances and overtime payments. ‘They must be the highest paid bin drivers in the country,’ he said.

The strike last June led to the strange sight of the council leader telling binmen to get back to work, while his deputy joined the picket line as rubbish piled up in the streets.

That’s almost as bad as having a country’s foreign minister campaign against the Government’s trade agreement with China!

A 74-page report on ‘Trans Equalities Strategy’ to eliminate discrimination and avoid discomforting transsexuals asked for gender- neutral toilets and transgender-only sports sessions. Doctors were also urged to stop identifying patients according to gender on forms at GPs’ surgeries.

Residents are being offered the category ‘Mx’ (for Mixter) alongside Mr, Ms and Mrs on council forms. This prevents ‘an unnecessary sense of exclusion and frustration to be forced to accept a title  that doesn’t reflect someone’s gender expression.’

Focusing on the big issues.

They might heed the words of one Brighton shopper I met.

‘They seemed to have so many fresh ideas,’ she told me. ‘Now we just roll our eyes at any mention of the Greens – they’ve turned out even worse than the others.’

Now I’m not saying the NZ Greens will end up the same way, but it is fair to point out that the Greens have never had to actually govern – and governing involves compromise. The Alliance fall apart in Government because they could not reconcile the wishes of their activists with the reality of being in Government. Some Green parties have managed to successfully work in Government – such as in Germany. But others have failed – such as in Tasmania and Brighton.

Tags:

46 Responses to “A Green City Council”

  1. Manolo (14,065 comments) says:

    Now I’m not saying the NZ Greens will end up the same way…

    Shit, yes.

    The communist Luddites will act this way (and worse); while socialist Labour goes weak at the knees and panders to their lunatic demands. God help NZ if they gain political power.

    Vote: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. thePeoplesFlag (256 comments) says:

    Ah yes, the Daily Mail – David Farrar’s preferred choice for informed journalism.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 3 Thumb down 30 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. metcalph (1,434 comments) says:

    Introducing livestock to roads as part of a speed reduction package? Sounds like Brighton has a problem with legal highs er… synthetic drugs there.

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. RRM (10,020 comments) says:

    Oh the NZ Greens in Govt would be EXACTLY like this. They are children.

    You only have to look at the infantile antics of “Dr” Norman as reported in various threads on here to imagine what would happen.

    Vote: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. Huevon (223 comments) says:

    Brighton is a shithole. The Greens can have it.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. Tom Jackson (2,553 comments) says:

    The German Green Party has had some problems, but is generally a successful political party both in and out of government. Remember that the UK still has FPP, so it’s not as friendly to the development of minority parties.

    Ultimately, Green parties seek to transform the material basis of society, either incrementally or radically. Most of the internal disputes are between the incrementalists and radicals, but this is quite normal.

    It’s funny to see people complaining about the Green Party, when by the standards of someone living in 1960 today’s society is subject to heavy environmental regulation. I’m old enough to remember when it started. Anyone else remember the plethora of anti-littering campaigns in the 1970s?

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 13 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. OTGO (562 comments) says:

    ” According to their leader Jason Kitcat, this was to be the future of British politics.”

    Relax and have a Jason Kitcat!

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. Tom Jackson (2,553 comments) says:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Environmental_Protection_Agency

    Whoever founded that must have been a motherfucking communist…

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 16 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. edhunter (552 comments) says:

    This is why I found the Maori Party’s pragmatism so refreshing. Better to be in government compromising on most bills but getting some compromises from National to the benefit of their voters, as opposed to the Gweens & Mana stuck permanently in the purgatory that is the cross benches… or maybe that’s their Nirvana happily spouting nonsense policy they no will never ever be put into practice.

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. Tom Jackson (2,553 comments) says:

    or maybe that’s their Nirvana happily spouting nonsense policy they no will never ever be put into practice.

    What the Greens are saying now will be common sense in 40 years time. Try suggesting to people in 1950 that they not chuck litter out of their car windows.

    Yesterday’s lunacy is today’s common sense.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 3 Thumb down 23 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. tas (646 comments) says:

    The only reason the Greens are able to gain votes off Labour is because they’ve never actually had to take responsibility for their policies. Once they make it to cabinet, they will lose support.

    Vote: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. Tom Jackson (2,553 comments) says:

    The only reason the Greens are able to gain votes off Labour is because they’ve never actually had to take responsibility for their policies. Once they make it to cabinet, they will lose support.

    Like the German Greens whose results have improved steadily over the years?

    You folks are trapped in the 1970s. If you want to read wacky environmentalism, go pick up a copy of “The Greening of America” or any one of the oddball 1970s environmental tracts, or go look up the policies of the old Values party. The current NZ Green Party seems staid and conservative by comparison.

    Modern environmentalism looks like this.

    http://www.earth-policy.org/images/uploads/book_files/pb4book.pdf

    Note the complete absence of nudity, drum circles, polyamory, yoga, etc.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 17 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. GPT1 (2,123 comments) says:

    To use the language of the left I am shocked that Red Russ has refused to rule out banning bacon. Cue headline “Greens to ban bacon”.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. Kea (13,359 comments) says:

    the German Greens whose results have improved steadily over the years?

    Because they started doing sensible things, like abandoning windmills and other fantasies.

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. Tom Jackson (2,553 comments) says:

    Because they started doing sensible things, like abandoning windmills and other fantasies.

    That’s sort of my point. A small party is tolerant of radicals and dissension and allows for much ideological experimentation. The burdens of holding a larger party together result in the streamlining of policy and reduction of diversity. That’s what’s happening to the NZ Greens now.

    It’s what never happened to the ACT party, which could never get beyond being a collection of weirdos with odd and incompatible obsessions.

    Here’s the set of Green principles.

    The Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand accepts Te Tiriti o Waitangi as the founding document of Aotearoa New Zealand; recognises Maori as Tangata Whenua in Aotearoa New Zealand; and commits to the following four Principles:

    Ecological Wisdom: The basis of ecological wisdom is that human beings are part of the natural world. This world is finite, therefore unlimited material growth is impossible. Ecological sustainability is paramount.

    Social Responsibility: Unlimited material growth is impossible. Therefore the key to social responsibility is the just distribution of social and natural resources, both locally and globally.

    Appropriate Decision-making: For the implementation of ecological wisdom and social responsibility, decisions will be made directly at the appropriate level by those affected.

    Non-Violence: Non-violent conflict resolution is the process by which ecological wisdom, social responsibility and appropriate decision making will be implemented. This principle applies at all levels.

    I expect the fourth and fifth and to a lesser extent the first to become much less important to the Greens as time goes on. Note that those are the more “hippyish” principles.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 19 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. All_on_Red (1,645 comments) says:

    There’s not one country in the world where Green energy policies and job creation has worked. It’s clear that one of the ways to cure poverty is through the provision of cheap energy. The Greens by sticking blindly to their ideology obviously don’t care about the poor as every energy policy they have makes it worse for the poor. Anyone would think they live in castles and wear $2000 jackets…

    “Equally serious are the social consequences of the Energiewende and they should be of special concern for a party that defines itself as defender of the interest of the “many not the few”, i.e. the lower income groups and poorer sections of society. It is the majority of the German population that is facing a growing burden because of the country’s energy policy that, if it continues, might over time become a trigger for social unrest.
    Germany’s electricity prices are already the highest in Europe, 40 to 50% higher than the EU average and twice as much as in the US. The government in Berlin conceded recently that already 6.9 million households live in energy poverty defined as spending more than 10 per cent of their income on energy. This is largely a result of the surcharge for renewable energy. Between 2000 and 2013, electricity prices for households have increased 80 per cent in real terms, according to the OECD and the IEA, the International Energy Agency. But this is not the end of it.
    The overall sum that consumers have to pay through their energy bills will rise from 25 Billion Euro this year to 30 Billion Euro next year. And so on. The problem will get worse in the years ahead because of the guaranteed feed in tariffs for wind and solar and when even more of the expensive and intermittent electricity supply will come on stream. It is not without bitter irony that social democrats seem to be content with an energy policy that profits the better off, the house- and landowners, who have roofs and land for turbines and solar panels.
    The arguments against the extensive use of these highly inefficient forms of energy are well established. Wind and solar photo voltaic are intermittent and need conventional backup; the higher the percentage of electricity created by wind turbines and solar panels the more expensive it becomes because it needs conventional back up by fossil fuel power stations. When not running all the time they are even more expensive, the price quickly spirals out of control, especially when one adds the cost of subsidising the energy intensive German industries, in order to prevent them from leaving the country – an expensive policy the Commission wants to stop. ”

    http://policy-network.net/pno_detail.aspx?ID=4612&title=Energy-policy-in-Germany-Big-problems-in-Europes-powerhouse

    Also, you just know that when the Greens start getting satirised on TV that the end is nigh.

    http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-London/2014/04/23/Germany-discovers-sense-of-humour-loses-faith-in-green-energy

    People like Tom Jackson are just Luddite old fossils. Have we reached ” peak Luddite”? I reckon we have .

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 22 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. Tom Jackson (2,553 comments) says:

    There’s not one country in the world where Green energy policies and job creation has worked.

    Once upon a time there were no countries in which nuclear power or the welfare state had worked. Now they’re everywhere.

    People like Tom Jackson are just Luddite old fossils.

    Hardly. You just don’t understand the modern environmental movement. Like I said above, you are taking as representative ideas that either have been abandoned or are in the process of being abandoned. Modern Green politics lacks the utopianism of its ancestors. Trying to develop solar energy and other renewables is not Luddism. Hell, as I’ve said before, if you want a completely privatised market in electricity, you should be supporting the development of domestic solar with all your might, because it will make an almost completely unregulated market in electricity feasible.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 19 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. All_on_Red (1,645 comments) says:

    ” You just don’t understand the modern environmental movement. ”
    Patronising much? Typical from the moralising I know best green jerk you are.I understand The effect of Green policies very well.

    Vote: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. Than (496 comments) says:

    Tom, just because some ideas that were considered lunacy decades ago are now mainstream, it does not follow that every idea currently considered lunacy will be mainstream in a few decades. A hundred years from now when people look back on the history of power generation, I strongly suspect wind and solar power will be viewed similarly to how zeppelins are viewed in the history of air travel; dead-end technological sideshows, whose inherent limitations make them completely non-competitive.

    Vote: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. gazzmaniac (2,307 comments) says:

    Is Tom Jackson a piss take like Sir Cullen’s Sidekick?

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. Tom Jackson (2,553 comments) says:

    Tom, just because some ideas that were considered lunacy decades ago are now mainstream, it does not follow that every idea currently considered lunacy will be mainstream in a few decades.

    Nice straw man.

    The tide of history is with the environmental movement. As I said above, the average 1950s person would regard our level of environmental regulation as mad. People who complain about the environmental movement rarely notice what it has already accomplished.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 20 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. All_on_Red (1,645 comments) says:

    Tom
    The tide is going out on your sort of environmental movement.

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. Tom Jackson (2,553 comments) says:

    Patronising much? Typical from the moralising I know best green jerk you are.

    I don’t belong to the Green Party, and nor do I vote for it.

    Why is it my fault that you folks are all thick as pig shit, and not in a small way, but in a really big way? Farrar is the only non liberal here who isn’t a complete retard, and he’s politicking most of the time.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 19 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. Tom Jackson (2,553 comments) says:

    The tide is going out on your sort of environmental movement.

    I guess it does look like that from the care facility in which you reside.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 16 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. Ross12 (1,454 comments) says:

    A quote from the author of the BishopHill blog. I think I would substitute Greens for the word environmentalist

    “At a dinner last night I found myself sitting next to a gentleman who was previously prominent in local politics and we had a very interesting chat. He was disparaging about environmentalists, saying that they were the same people that the Labour party had struggled to remove thirty years ago – the Trotskyists, the Militant Tendency and the like.’

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. Than (496 comments) says:

    No it’s not a straw man Tom, it’s exactly the argument you are trying to make, and it’s a logical fallacy.

    The environmental movement has succeeded in changing social norms so that some things that would have once been considered lunacy are now the norm. All that tells us is that’s it’s possible some ideas now considered lunacy will become mainstream, but it certainly does not guarantee it. Given the wide range of concepts covered by the heading “environmental” it’s almost inevitable that some will become mainstream, while others will fall by the wayside and be forgotten.

    Vote: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. UrbanNeocolonialist (310 comments) says:

    The Greens and environmentalists as a group are incredibly harmful to people and the environment. Their uneducated anti development and anti-nuclear activities have resulted in a world almost entirely dependent upon fossil fuels for primary power.

    If the money their campaigning has resulted in squandering on trying to power the world with unicorn farts and buying Green indulgences from the 3rd world (Kyoto), as well as funding Millennialist IPCC fantasies had instead been put into building nuclear plants, etc then the Western grid would by now be getting very close to being entirely nuclear powered, and wouldn’t have needed to fund expensive middle eastern conflicts. It’s a moronic rear-guard action on their behalf, as fossil fuels won’t last and the world will inevitably be almost entirely nuclear powered in a 100 years (you can’t get the energy density required for efficient transport any other way).

    Their infiltration and suborning of planning processes to suit their hateful luddite world view make it a struggle to get by for large swaths of our population with their supply restrictions leading to massively increased costs for housing. Ironically it is the poor that the left wing claim to represent that truly pay the price in worse standard of living due to Green dominated planning department shit-headedness.

    So thank you to Greens, Greenpeace et al, you’re misanthropic planet-hating fuckwits who only survive as a political force because your supporters are by parts delusional, uneducated or plain stupid.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. Longknives (4,878 comments) says:

    Ha! ” Meat-free Mondays”!
    The Left really are complete fuckwits…
    (I shouldn’t laugh NZ Greens will implement far,far worse when they come to power..)

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. Kea (13,359 comments) says:

    Have we reached ” peak Luddite”? I reckon we have.

    All_on_Red :)

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. greenjacket (486 comments) says:

    Tom Jackson wrote: “Why is it my fault that you folks are all thick as pig shit, and not in a small way, but in a really big way? Farrar is the only non liberal here who isn’t a complete retard, and he’s politicking most of the time.”

    What a brilliant way to win over the readership of this blog to your views Tom. I am sure you are really going to win a lot of converts this way.
    Or even better, why don’t you stop commenting on this blogsite, and set up your own blogsite where you can write about how anyone who disagrees with you are a “complete retard”.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 22 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. ChardonnayGuy (1,215 comments) says:

    According to something that I read about Green politics back in the eighties, their primary dichotomy is between ‘realists’ and ‘fundamentalists’ (albeit of the deep ecology persuasion, one suspects). In the case of Germany, the realists gained the ascendancy and as a consequence, the SPD/Green coalition was able to govern stably and successfully for several years. Has something similar happened to the New Zealand Greens? Russell and Metiria aren’t Jeanette and Rod, Sue Bradford and Nandor Tanczos are no longer caucus members, and one suspects the wilder fringes of the green movement burnt out when their eco-populist moral panic against GM crops failed.

    Are you sure that you really want to hear more about Germany? For one thing, look at the way that the Free Democrats tanked at the last Bundestag election- largely due to Guido Westerwalle’s manic populism. When Merkel’s tide finally starts to go out, count on the CDU/CSU being in deep trouble and without coalition partners.

    Added to which, the ALP is well to the right of the New Zealand and British Labour Party and heavily factionalised. It’s not hard to be to the left of that, although Australian foreign policy conservatism and climate change denial extremism have no close counterparts here.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. kowtow (8,771 comments) says:

    Tom Jackson ,

    The relatively few people who did own cars back in the 1950’s would never have dreamed of throwing rubbish out the window.

    In the same way they wouldn’t have spat in the street or playing fields as we see so many celebrity “sports men” do now.

    We have far less manners and common sense than they did.Maybe that’s why governments have become so fond of legislating everything!The way Tom likes it.

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. kowtow (8,771 comments) says:

    Talking of Greens and nutty policies ,don’t forget it was the far right of labour (yeah right) Hand Shandy Jones who wanted us to have crap shower heads…….and he couldn’t work with the Greens!

    Labour also wanted to ban decent light bulbs….

    We weren’t too far from lunacy either and I think it was that extremism displayed by labour that frightened a few voters at the end of a long Labour run.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. Kea (13,359 comments) says:

    that’s why governments have become so fond of legislating everything!The way Tom likes it…As I see it ,tobacco has been selected by the health nazis as a first gaol to “eliminate”.

    Surely this is not the same Katie demanding the government bring in even more laws telling us what we can smoke ? LOL :)

    Talking of which ,I suspect some campaigning for banning this shit are using it as a Trojan horse to decriminalise cannabis….

    …..they can fuck off too.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. Kea (13,359 comments) says:

    “Labour also wanted to ban decent light bulbs….”

    The Klarken beast did in fact ban real light. She wanted us bathed in the harsh frigid light glare of communist light bulbs. You can not buy proper light bulbs in my town now.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. unaha-closp (1,180 comments) says:

    A few years ago there were piles of rubbish in the streets of Naples, guess who was governing party of the region?

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. Sir Cullen's Sidekick (895 comments) says:

    Sir Cullen’s Sidekick (538 comments) says:
    April 28th, 2014 at 1:37 pm
    Meat-free Mondays

    Tea-free Tuesdays

    Whisky-free Wednesdays

    t-bone steak-free Thursdays

    Fries-free Fridays

    Soap-free Saturdays

    Sex-free Sundays

    NZ deserves the Greens for sure.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. Kea (13,359 comments) says:

    Australia[edit]
    In February 2007, Australia enacted a law that will, in effect, by legislating efficiency standards, disallow most sales of incandescent light bulbs by 2010.[

    …New Zealand[edit]
    In February 2007, then Climate Change Minister David Parker, Labour party, announced a similar proposal to the one in Australia,[63] except that importation for personal use would have been allowed.[64]

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bans_of_incandescent_light_bulbs#New_Zealand

    You read it correctly folks. Labour would kindly allow you to use a proper lightbulb but only for “personal use” :)

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. big bruv (14,156 comments) says:

    What happened to old Toad?

    He used to come here and defend the greens (an impossible task) I have not heard from him or seen him on the blogs for months, I used to laugh at the way he twisted himself into knots trying to convince us (and himself I suspect) that the Greens were anything but bat shit crazy.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. David Garrett (7,548 comments) says:

    To say just because ideas that are now mainstream – like not putting untreated shit in the ocean – were once considered luncy does not mean for a second that every lunatic idea now will one day be mainstream…and as I understand the term, neither is that a “straw man”…

    A wee while ago a truck in California carrying live fish to market crashed, resulting dead fish all over the road…the local Green/animal rights lunatics wanted the local council to put up a plaque “comemmorating the fishes lives”…The day that sort of lunacy comes to pass here I will retire in a permanent soma-coma to any rest home which will have me…

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. scrubone (3,105 comments) says:

    Anyone else remember the plethora of anti-littering campaigns in the 1970s?

    Try suggesting to people in 1950 that they not chuck litter out of their car windows.

    Funny you should mention litter. When was the last time you really saw a serious effort to tidy up litter? It’s been years – and it shows.

    Instead of doing campaigns like that, which actually make the world a better place, we have campaigns to get rid of “carbon”, run by people who fly around the country to tell us how evil… flying is.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. scrubone (3,105 comments) says:

    The tide of history is with the environmental movement.

    Reality shows that some ideas pushed by the environmental movement have merit. Reality also shows that a stopped clock is right twice a day, so big woop.

    “History is on my side” is an argument for people who have no argument.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. Left Right and Centre (2,997 comments) says:

    Ha! ” Meat-free Mondays”!
    The Left really are complete fuckwits…

    Well said that man. That’s insane !! Talk about imposing your bullshit way of life onto everyone else – far out.

    Why not go the whole hog (intended) and say no animal products on Mondays ?

    * * * *

    The world is overpopulated if based on providing each member of the species with some kind of lifestyle anywhere near to that enjoyed in developed industrial economies.

    The missing resource is time. The world’s people are outpacing the time it takes to keep up with them – even if resources were infinite – it takes time to catch up. And the target is stretching out ever further ahead – so not a chance. Resources however are limited – there’s only one planet – and the bottomline is it’s game over. Land has been and is being overexploited and ruined. It’s simply not possible to supply seven billion and climbing people. Even with a stable global population – it just wouldn’t work. Too many !!

    Greens cannot hope to solve the world’s resource issues.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. DJP6-25 (1,389 comments) says:

    They will end up like that. You can bet the farm on it.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. gump (1,661 comments) says:

    The Daily Mail reports…

    DPF – I hope you realise that you’re quoting from a tabloid that infamously endorsed Oswald Mosley and the British Union of Fascists.

    They’re not the most reliable source for political commentary.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. ShawnLH (5,754 comments) says:

    The German Greens seem far more reasonable than other Green Parties around the world. Maybe it’s the German predilection for pragmatism, maybe it’s because they have genuinely tried to stick to the original Green principle of being neither Left nor Right and prepared to work with both sides.

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