James Shaw's address to the Green Party conference.
I'm not at the conference so these are from my notes from the youtube video.
Somewhat evangelical in my view. Starts out by laying out an ideal (for him) Aotearoa where people hop in their electric cars after their beach holiday (which is immune from sea level rise) and drive off home with freight trains running alongside (related question, when did James Shaw last have a beach holiday in New Zealand). He then spends most of the next 30 minutes;
- On climate deniers, climate denial and the 'new climate deniers'
- Simon Bridges (the leader of the National Party).
Those are the main points of this speech. It lacked substance, very much so. The main point was that Simon Bridges was a climate denying devil and that the 'new climate deniers' were so 'dangerous' because they sounded 'so reasonable'. These claims were then repeated throughout the speech. It's a funny old world where the Green Party co-leader (who looked very much like the actual leader as there was no co-compering from Marama Davidson) concentrates 90% of his speech on climate denial and talks up climate deniers. Interesting too that he had such a good handle on its stages as it's my view that he didn't learn of those stages by doing an online course through Queensland University. Nothing like a bit of narcissism I guess.
He also claimed that the Greens were part of a government that had done more for the environment/climate change than the sum total of all previous governments over the last 30 years. I think Helen Clark could probably challenge that. It was also a pretty neo-liberal period (and still is) so it's not such a big claim really, although it probably is (i.e. if it was true it's not such a big deal, but in reality it's very unlikely to be true).
Some other statements that need more investigation...;
2050 world will need 50% more food than now. 70% of reefs will die due to acidification.
.....purely to try and find their source*.
I was more unimpressed than I thought I would be. Absolutely no substance. All very vague on the detail of actions. But lots of negative concentration on those who are (supposedly) worse (i.e. deniers who are mostly paid by big oil, like Shaw's old agency 'Future Considerations' is).
Don't fall for the anti Bridges rhetoric. Shaw, like most 'new Greens' is more in line with National than Labour. As are his sponsors.
And re those biosphere destroying sponsors and just for fun, here's James' old boss at Future Considerations, a former Shell and Unilever man, applying for some work.
* Update 10th August 2019. Think James' office might have come up with these, one seems to be from FAO.org and the other from IPCC