The depth of trouble the New Zealand Government is in has been made clear by this article in a Chinese newspaper. The article will have been approved by the Chinese Government.

During the seven-day Spring Festival holiday which ended on February 10, New Zealand was not ranked in the top 10 overseas tourist destinations on online travel platform lvmama, a spokesperson told the Global Times.  

Some Chinese tourists are considering dumping their plans to travel to New Zealand this year as a way to punish the country.

“Is it a kind of robbery? New Zealand stabbed us in the back but asks for our money? This is double-faced,” said a 30-something Beijing-based worker surnamed Li who identified himself as a patriot. 

Li has saved 15,000 yuan ($2,218.6) for a trip to New Zealand this year, but he plans to cancel the trip and travel to neighboring countries over resentment toward New Zealand’s move. 

What stokes industry insiders’ worries more is Chinese tourists’ personal safety regarding a new law in New Zealand, which enables customs officials to examine electronic devices at the border. The law took effect on October 1, 2018. 

New Zealand is a member of the Five Eyes global cyber-surveillance alliance. The members, led by the US, have all talked about banning Huawei from participating in local 5G network construction, according to media reports. “I cannot tell if the new law is related to Huawei’s case. But if the diplomatic rift escalates, stakes that Chinese visitors will be targets are high,” a worker at a major online travel platform who spoke on condition of anonymity told the Global Times. 

“How warmly a country treats tourists could also affect Chinese citizens’ choices of travel destinations. Bilateral travel exchanges need to be carried out in a good environment,” Xu Xiaolei, manager of marketing at China’s CYTS Tours Holding Co, told the Global Times.  

China is very important to New Zealand’s tourism industry. Last year, 450,000 Chinese visited New Zealand, making China the nation’s second-largest source of international tourists after Australia. 

So this is the Chinese Government saying that they are preparing to reduce tourism to New Zealand.

The Government’s decision to ban Huawei has been seen as an act of economic sabotage against China, so of course they were going to respond. We have banned their most successful company. This is equivalent to a country banning Fonterra from exporting to them.

What makes this even worse is that New Zealand hasn’t gained any benefit from joining the US campaign against Huawei. The US still won’t join TPP. The US won’t do a FTA with NZ. We didn’t even manage to get an exemption from their steel tariffs.

It takes a special level of incompetence to piss off our largest trading partner (whom we do have an FTA with) at the behest of another country, and not even gain anything in return.

But hey I’m sure Winston will sort it all out. Who better to fix the relationship with China that the man who campaigned against us having a FTA with them and built his career on attacking Asian immigration.

One News reports:

A new advertisement by the National Party has been called out online as being sexist towards women.
The video depicts a man simply explaining Labour’s KiwiBuild scheme missing targets, to a woman.
Some people have criticised the ad a “patronising” towards women, outdated and “embarrassingly awkward”.
One Twitter user slammed the ad, describing it as: “Mansplaining, sexist symbolism & fear based marketing. Embarrassingly awkward.”

National will be delighted that woke activists on Twitter are so stupid they managed to get all this free publicity for the advertisement.

From Hansard:

However, at present, there are 172 written questions that have not received a final reply. Many of the replies were due in December, but one was due in May last year. It appears that written questions are not working as they were supposed to as an accountability mechanism, so I intend to award the Opposition 10 additional supplementary questions each day until the end of this sitting block or until all the questions due last year have received their final replies—whichever comes first. I will review the situation again in the next sitting period.

That’s a huge and consequential slap to the Government. Very firm action by the Speaker.

CHRIS HIPKINS (Leader of the House): I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. Anticipating this issue would come up, my office contacted your office last week to find out how many questions you still had concerns about and was told by your office that you would not supply that information. It’s very difficult for me as the Leader of the House to follow up and ensure that those questions are answered if you will not supply me with that information.
SPEAKER: Just being very directly responsive to the member, I do not regard it as my responsibility to ensure that ministerial offices are well managed. I indicated through my office to the member’s office that there were many Ministers involved—very close to the majority of Ministers involved—and that the warning to get up to date should be a general one rather than directed at the specific individual Ministers.
If Ministers’ record-keeping systems are not good enough to know that they have overdue questions, then I think the Minister responsible for Ministerial Services should do some sort of review of their offices to make them more efficient.

And a big face slap to Chris Hipkins who basically has said that the offices are so dysfunctional they don’t even know which questions are overdue. Considering all questions are online, it should be trivial to find out.

No Right Turn notes:

Ministers playing bullshit games over written questions has been a theme of this government right from the beginning. And they have been repeatedly called up on it by the Speaker. In the process, they make work for themselves and bring parliament and the political process into contempt. But that’s what happens when you have a government of childish, petty control-freaks.

What a very apt description.

Stuff reports:

Up to three quarters of what KiwiBuild adds to housing investment will be offset by lower investment by the private sector, the Reserve Bank warns.
On Thursday morning, Reserve Bank governor Adrian Orr told MPs that there was considerable pressure on the construction industry, which meant that where the government built houses, others which would have been built will be “crowded out” by a shortage of land or labour.
“If they were going to build 100 houses, that means that between 50 and 75 houses elsewhere aren’t built,” Orr told a select committee.
In a statement linked to the monetary policy statement released this week, the central bank gave explicit assumptions about the extent to which it will eat in to the amount of house building which would have happened anyway.

“The construction sector is currently facing capacity constraints, which means that KiwiBuild developments may crowd out other private developments, particularly in the near term,” the Reserve Bank said.
“The bank has assumed that half to three quarters of what KiwiBuild contributes to residential investment will be offset by crowding out of other private investment over the forecast horizon.”
The bank warned that because of the time it takes to get going, the short term addition to the housing market would be virtually nothing.
“In the 2019 fiscal year, the Bank assumes that the net contribution of KiwiBuild to residential investment is almost zero, as the KiwiBuild programme is in its infancy and the construction sector is capacity constrained.”

So the net contribution of Kiwibuild is almost zero. The farce gets stronger.

Stuff reports:

Parliament’s powerful Finance and Expenditure Committee has collapsed at its first meeting with accusations flying between the two major parties over whose fault it is. 
Under Parliament’s strict procedural rules, the entire schedule for the committee has had to be abandoned because a quorum was not obtained.
But why a quorum was not obtained is now the subject of fierce debate, with neither side conceding ground over who was at fault. 
National’s MPs on the select committee maintain the meeting was killed because only “four out of seven” Government MPs showed up on time.

Once again Labour shows a new level of incompetence. There is nothing more basic than getting MPs to turn up on time to select committees. All other Governments have managed it. Excuses such as an MP was sick is just that – an excuse. The whips would have known this in advance and their job is to assign a replacement.

Now, the prime minister has been forced to weigh in and chastise her MPs for failing to show up on time. 
“My expectation is they do their jobs and there are no excuses,” she said. 
“I absolutely have an expectation that MPs fulfil their roles and requirements while they are in this complex.”

I understand this is not the first time – that Government MPs are habitually late.

Aside from more than 20 members of the public who had taken time off work to give evidence and submit on some of the items, Finance Minister Grant Robertson was also scheduled to appear in front of the committee later in the day, as well as Pike River Recovery Agency chief executive Dave Gawn and his officials. 
These meetings are some of the only occasions at which ministers are required to front to MPs to be held accountable for their agencies’ business. 
A quorum might have been obtained had the National MPs stepped back inside the room. But serious constitutional questions have been raised over whether Opposition MPs should outnumber Government MPs on such a powerful committee in anything other than the rarest of circumstances.
Under standing orders, a meeting has to have a quorum and that has to be obtained no later than 10 minutes after the meeting is scheduled to start. After that 10 minute deadline the meeting has to be abandoned, effectively because there is too much business before Parliament that cannot be delayed.

But National made the wrong decision to not assist the Government in getting a quorum. Sure you want to make the Government look incompetent, but you forgot that it stuffs over members of the public who have gone to some time and expense to appear. The submitters interests should have come first.

The public hate this sort of stuff, and the arguing over who is at fault – hence they conclude a pox on both their houses. Labour won’t be defeated because the public care they are late to a select committee. Labour will be defeated because they are not delivering on housing, health and education.

What National would have been smarter to do is use the absence of Government MPs to seize temporary control of the committee and elect one of their own as Chairperson. Another possibility would be to vote to hold an inquiry into something the Government opposes. That would teach the Government a lesson, without dicking over the submitters.

Stuff reports:

“It is totally unsatisfactory to be determining electorate boundaries that can effectively determine who will be the next Government on the basis of guesswork.”
Smith said the 2020 election should be conducted on the basis of the existing boundaries from the 2013 census, and then a new census carried out in 2021 so the following elections could use new boundaries.
He said National was not ruling out “alternative action” if this did not happen but would not elaborate on what this might be. 
The National Party would have the power to effectively torpedo the Representation Commission, or settle the matter in court.

I strongly support this also. A non completion rate of 10% or greater is too high too trust the data for electoral boundaries.

Also holding the next census in 2021 will get back to the traditional pattern of being in a year ending with a 1 or a 6 which the Christchurch earthquakes disrupted. This will help with long-term comparisons.

If the Government refuses to see sense on this, National can prevent the Representation Commission from functioning. The Commission is only quorate so long as both the Government and Opposition nominated members are present. If the opposition nominee refused to attend, then the Commission could not legally make any decisions.

Hopefully it won’t come to that and National and Labour will work out a sensible solution that means everyone has confidence in the boundaries data.

The Herald profiled Agnes Loheni, who replaces Chris Finlayson in Parliament:

It will be a proud moment for Loheni, who grew up in a state house – with up to 15 family members in three bedrooms – on McGehan Close, the “dead end” street that epitomised hopelessness for former party leader Sir John Key.
She went on to graduate with an engineering degree from Auckland University, and had a two-year OE based in London before starting a family business that became a trailblazer in contemporary Pasifika fashion.

From a state house to an engineering degree and then her own business. A great example of National being a party which attracts people who reflect what it means to have equality of opportunity.

“There was roughly a family in each bedroom and always people sleeping in the lounge, because at that time our families were coming from Samoa. It was a hub where we supported each other as they made a new life in New Zealand.
“There were rituals, prayer every night, communal eating, some adults staying at home looking after children while others went to work.
“Looking back, it was one of the sweetest memories for me. It was a very secure, loving home with lots of uncles and aunts, and no shortage of cousins to play with. There wasn’t a lot of money, but an abundance of aspiration.”

Aspiration is so important, and almost the opposite to the politics of victimhood where you are taught not to aspire but to blame others.

“We were just working from a room in the downstairs of our home, and some people came in and saw some of our stuff hanging up, and asked if it was for sale.”
They decided to take a leap and, with a small business grant, opened a small store in Apia. It had 90 dresses on opening day – and they all sold in four days.
“We were excited, but then we panicked because we had an empty shop.”
All four sisters joined the business, which they named Mena after their mother Filomena.
“She’s such a key influence in our lives and the inspiration for it. We were doing the designs and printing the fabric, but she was the expert dressmaker and would say to us, ‘No, you can’t do that dress like that, you have to do it this way.’
“Within five or six years, the downstairs room at our house became like a factory of 20 staff. Women sewing, men printing, buckets of fabric paint everywhere.”
Loheni worked in all facets of the company, including teaching herself how to use software to make digital prints.
She returned to Auckland as the business grew, and today Mena designs are sold in Samoa, Auckland, and online throughout the world.

A great success story.

She joined the National Party because of its values of “enterprise, hard work and personal responsibility”.

Which her life reflects.

As well as running a successful business, she is also a mother to five children ranging from eight to twenty years old.

The Herald reports:

A new national body will take over all of New Zealand’s 110,000 polytechnic students and 140,000 apprentices and industry trainees in a massive shakeup proposed today.
The proposed NZ Institute of Skills and Technology will take over programme design and administration for all campuses of what are now 16 separate polytechnics.

If you’re an optimist then this might reduce costs, bureaucracy and lead to a more unified sector.

If you’re a pessimist it will result in an inflexible centrally controlled system that won’t deliver what students want.

I suspect it will be somewhere inbetween.

The plan is designed to avert a crisis which has seen many polytechnics slide into deficits because of a 19 per cent slump in domestic enrolments between 2010 and 2017, as the buoyant job market lured young people straight into jobs instead of training.

I’m not sure that is a problem. The idea is to provide what young people want. If the job market is so buoyant they move straight into employment, is that a bad thing?

There is no indication in the Cabinet paper or Hipkins’ press release that any of the existing polytechnic campuses would be closed, and the Cabinet paper says “there may be more or fewer main campuses than the current number of ITPs [institutes of technology and polytechnics]”.

Of course there will be fewer.

The Treasury expresses alarm in the paper that decisions are being made “without a clear indication of the likely overall financial implications of the changes proposed, including short-term transition costs and enduring funding changes”.
“We do not think that sufficient analysis has been undertaken of the options for enduring funding system changes proposed for consultation,” the Treasury says.
“We consider that consulting on these funding system changes is likely to create sector expectations about future funding, without Cabinet having oversight of the associated financial implications.”

Doesn’t sound like it will save money!

Stacey Kirk writes:

The Government could well be on a hiding to nothing here, made worse in part, by a deft political move from Bridges. 
Labour has promised tax reform, in particular a capital gains tax. It will be the centrepiece policy in a report from an expert working group the Government convened, in part to keep the recommendation of such a tax at arm’s length.
Labour wanted to be able to say, in effect, “it’s what the experts recommend”.

But it isn’t. There was no consensus from the actual experts. It is a majority decision pushed through by the politician appointed to chair it.

And in his opening salve, Bridges ran the ball straight up the guts and hit the Government where it hurts by committing to a policy of indexing income tax brackets to inflation. 

It’s widely accepted as good policy – the Government had the option of endorsing it or rubbishing it. Finance Minister Grant Robertson has chosen the latter, which will make for an interesting contortion should the tax  working group recommend it. Which it may well do, because it’s an inordinately fair tax policy. 

National will be campaigning on no longer taxing people more due to inflation. Labour will be campaigning on a platform of not just retaining the tax on inflation, but also wanting to tax you more if you have KiwiSaver, own a business, own a bach, own a lifestyle block or have parents who die.

Which one is fairer?

There’s no grey here, this has the potential to be disastrous for the Government if it cannot get on top of construction and start putting nails through wood. 
But Ardern is surely fuming that minister Phil Twyford made the admission when he did, that the Government didn’t have a hope in hell of reaching its first target – now abandoned. 
Overseas and unable to manage the fallout of Twyford’s verbal diarrhoea, Ardern was left to feebly refer only to the 10-year target of 100,000 houses – probably a moot point given failure is directly proportionate to the prospects of a second and third term. 

Maybe they’ll just cancel elections, so we don’t have any until 2029?

Stuff reports:

Victoria University of Wellington remains tight-lipped on whether it will continue its fight to change its name – despite overwhelmingly negative public sentiment and government disapproval of the plan.
During the institution’s first council meeting for the year, held on Monday, members were asked “to consider” the decision by Minister of Education Chris Hipkins not to approve a change of the university’s name to the University of Wellington.
What that period of consideration did not do, however, was make any decision on whether the name change fight would rage on or be dropped entirely.

The Council need to accept reality. A legal name change is not happening and won’t be approved. Even if they were mad enough to try and judicially review the Minister’s decision, at best they’d get a decision saying the Minister has to reconsider. And do they really think it would be a different decision second time around?

If they do decide to fight on, then it will be time for a new Council.

The Herald reports:

The controversial Saudi sheep deal been shut down, which the Government says will save about $1 million.
The deal was made to set up an agribusiness hub in the Saudi desert for Saudi businessman Hmood Al Ali Al Khalaf, which would be used to showcase innovative New Zealand farming operations.

Good. This was one of the more dubious decisions made by the last Government. Labour were right to criticise it, and right to halt it.

The Herald reports:

Diplomatic links with China appear to have plummeted to a new low as Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern is given the cold shoulder by Beijing and a major tourism promotion is postponed by the superpower.
Ardern was scheduled to visit China early this year but the invitation has been put on hold.
The 2019 China-New Zealand Year of Tourism was meant to be launched with great fanfare at Wellington’s Te Papa museum next week, but that has been postponed by China.

The initiative was announced by the Key Government almost two years ago when Chinese Premier Li Keqiang was in Wellington.

Richard Davies, manager of tourism policy at the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment, said: “China has advised that this event has had to be postponed due to changes of schedule on the Chinese side.”
Officials are now working with China to reschedule the opening.
Ardern said after the Cabinet meeting yesterday that the official visit to Beijing is being worked on. Late last year she was on standby to visit but said they could not co-ordinate their diaries. New Zealand sources in Beijing say her first visit to China is not expected any time soon.
The decision by the Government’s chief spy agency, the GCSB, to axe Chinese telco giant Huawei from the Spark 5G broadband rollout is seen by China as New Zealand taking sides with the United States. The Trump Administration publicly asked its Five Eyes partners not to do business with Huawei.

It was naive to think that the Huawei decision would not have serious consequences.

Huawei is arguably China’s most successful company. It is a world leader in technology and shows that China is not just good for cheap manufacturing but also innovation and technology.

Shutting Huawei out of a country is seen as nothing less than an act of economic sabotage against China. Especially when the ban is not predicated on any actual behaviour from Huawei, but simply because it is a company based in China and owned by Chinese.

A smart Government can navigate the challenging relationship between the United States and China. John Key formed incredibly strong personal and professional relationships with both the US and Chinese presidents.

The Ardern-Peters Government has done the opposite. We’ve had the US impose tariffs on us, and China will not be advancing the enhanced FTA negotiations anytime soon. In fact I am sure we will see more and more trade barriers emerge.

Sources in Beijing say China plans trade retaliation and the turning back of an Air New Zealand plane at the weekend may not have been a coincidence. Sources say the airline has been trying to secure extra landing slots in Shanghai without success.
Two-way trade with China trebled over the past decade to $27 billion. “The implications for New Zealand are dangerous at every level,” Burdon said.

And danger that we have imposed on ourselves.

The Herald reports:

A mother in the UK was arrested in front of her children and locked up for seven hours after referring to a transgender woman as a man online, the Daily Mail reported.
Three officers detained Kate Scottow at her home before quizzing her at a police station about an argument with an activist on Twitter over so-called “deadnaming”.
The 38-year-old, from Hitchin, Hertfordshire, had her photograph, DNA and fingerprints taken and remains under investigation.
More than two months after her arrest on December 1, she has had neither her mobile phone or laptop returned, which she says is hampering her studies for a Masters in forensic psychology.

Writing on online forum Mumsnet, Scottow – who has also been served with a court order that bans her from referring to her accuser as a man – claimed: “I was arrested in my home by three officers, with my autistic ten-year-old daughter and breastfed 20-month-old son present. I was then detained for seven hours in a cell with no sanitary products (which I said I needed) before being interviewed then later released under investigation … I was arrested for harassment and malicious communications because I called someone out and misgendered them on Twitter.”
Confirming the arrest, Hertfordshire Police said: “We take all reports of malicious communication seriously.”

What’s sad is this is not some unrealistic future fiction. This is actually happening. You get locked up in jail because you called someone a man on Twitter.

The Herald reports:

Six new affordable KiwiBuild houses in the expensive Wanaka market remain unsold despite being marketed since October for just $565,000 to $635,000 – around $100,000 cheaper than other similar places in the same area.
Homes are being advertised in the alpine settlement and its subdivision Northlake, being developed by private capital specialists Winton, trying to draw buyers: “Live the Wanaka lifestyle in an architecturally-designed and affordable KiwiBuild Home. View our first 10 KiwiBuild homes.” …

Clint Smith, a KiwiBuild spokesman said “as with all property sales, some of the time purchases don’t end up being completed” but for privacy reasons, he declined to say why sales did not go ahead.
The 10 homes were initially offered in a ballot but did not sell.

This suggests we should not just be looking at how many houses get built, but how many actually get sold and occupied by a first home buyer?

Four of the 10 were sold off the plans. One is occupied, two are complete and awaiting council sign off, and one is due for completion late in February.

So in fact only one out of ten occupied.

The latest poll is Newshub Reid Research.

The results are:

• National 41.6%
• Labour 47.5%
• Greens 5.1%
• NZ First 2.9%

I understand the poll wasn’t done last week but is mainly from January. It is curious they waited so long to release it, if that is the case.

January was of course when the PM had huge attention at Davos and issues such as the Kiwibuild meltdown had not really gone full frontal. Governments often get a bump in January as it is the quiet season and there is no Parliament.

So I’ll be more interested in the next poll.

But what is very interesting is that NZ First are below 3% and well on their way to being outski at the election, and also the Greens are also hovering on the verge of outski also.

The next few months will be interesting as both minor parties scramble to get above or stay above 5%.

The Herald reports:

An online petition is pushing for a firefighter fighting the Nelson blaze to be spared deportation.
The petition ‘Stop the Deportation of Steve Webster from NZ’ was set up on Change.org yesterday by friend and former volunteer firefighter Ken Mahon.
Mahon said he began the online petition at 3pm yesterday – without telling Webster – after he saw new social media photo of Webster all dirty from fighting the Tasman fires and decided he had to do something.
“Here’s this guy busting his gut for a country that wants to throw him out. I just thought I’ve had enough of this good guy being treated badly,” he said.

Mahon said he has known Steve Webster for three years through his involvement in the fire service.
“He is a real top bloke,” he said.
Mahon said that as well as Webster being a volunteer firefighter, he would help anyone with anything – from fundraising to shifting house.

He should have been a drug dealer instead of a firefighter. Then he’d get residency from the Minister instead of deportation.

The Guardian reports:

Sir Lynton Crosby offered to work on a campaign to cancel the 2022 Qatar World Cup and get it awarded to another country in return for £5.5m, according to a leaked plan that gives a rare insight into the activities of one of the world’s best-known political operatives.
The detailed pitch document – “a proposal for a campaign to expose the truth of the Qatar regime and bring about the termination of the 2022 World Cup in Qatar” – was written in April last year and personally signed by Crosby.
He said that if engaged, his lobbying firm, CTF Partners, would require £300,000 a month for 18 months to focus on efforts to delegitimise the Qatari government and put pressure on Fifa to “restart the bidding process” and award the World Cup to another country.

Lynton must really not like Qatar as his quoted rate of £5.5m would appear to be heavily discounted.

Normally he would charge over £10m to get the decision of a global body overturned.

The Herald reports:

Numbers published on the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE)’s website show more than 10,000 jobs are expected to be created as a result of Provincial Growth Fund (PGF) announcements made last year.
Of that, 7000 – almost 70 per cent – are estimated to come from just one project: The East Bay of Plenty Regional Development Project Implementation.
This project was allocated just under $240,000 for “funding a position to manage and report on 65 key economic development projects”.

This almost rises to the level of fraud.

Claiming 7,000 jobs are likely to be created by one $240,000 grant is voodoo economics. Hell even voodoo doctors are not that fraudulent.

I’m surprised they didn’t also try to sell them a bridge at the same time.

The latest political party has an initial website here and is seeking 500 members so they can register.

They explain their background:

We believe it is time for a new political party that champions a politics of sustainability.

Sustainability is based on the principle that everything we need for our survival and well-being depends on our natural environment. It means meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. Our focus on sustainability means that we would be able to work with political parties on the left or right of politics to ensure that the environment is always a top political priority regardless of who makes up the government.

Our primary focus is on environmental matters such as clean water, sustainable oceans, protection of our native species, dealing with climate change

They explain that only minor parties in the centre get political power under MMP:

The Mixed-Member Proportional (MMP) system means that minor parties can have a major influence on a government as part of a coalition. The coalition arrangements of the current government allocated billions of dollars to political trophies and slush funds – the price of NZ First support for a Labour-led Government. We have also seen the scrapping of important environmental initiatives like the mandatory installation of cameras on fishing boats because the fishing industry are key NZ First donors and supporters. MMP should deliver better outcomes than this.

NZ First has also stopped the largest marine sanctuary in the world, in the Kermadecs.

The Green Party has made a deliberate decision not to use the leverage that comes with the number of MPs they have in Parliament. Instead of negotiating with both major parties, they have made a decision to always support the formation of a Labour Government meaning that Labour can take them for granted. This is no way to get the best deal for the environment.

Having given away their negotiating advantage, they are in a weak position to demand funding for cleaner beaches and rivers, for modern sewage infrastructure in major cities, for sustainable management of our fisheries, a major upgrade in predator control, nor for the significant increases in science and research funding that will underwrite a modern, sustainable economy.

It is obvious to everyone that NZ First has massively more influence than the Greens, despite getting only slightly fewer more votes. The reason is because they have political leverage.

The Greens have a historic tendency to be suspicious of scientific innovation – particularly in biotechnology – and hostile to business. New Zealand deserves a political party that will work together with the innovators in business and science who will lead the way through the complex and interconnected sustainability challenges of the coming century.

An environmental party that will work with both science and business would be welcome.

If you want to see a party in Parliament that puts the environment first – that is prepared to deal with either National or Labour – and puts clean water, sustainable fisheries, protection of our native species, climate change and a sustainable economy and society at the top of the political agenda, please register your details below.

From what I can tell this is not a blue-green party, Nor it is the red-green party of The Greens. It is a green-green party,