Green foreign Policy

“The Green Party’s foreign policy differs from traditional foreign policies in one overarching way.  The Greens’ worldview is qualitatively different, reflecting the 21^st century rather than the 20^th.

We do not see the world as being composed primarily of an international community of 193 sovereign nation-states.

Rather we see one planet, whose beauty and bounty is shared by humanity with other species. 

We see the human race, informed by centuries of philosophical enquiry and political development, moving carefully and purposefully towards a unified global society, of which all nations are a component part with the natural rights of their peoples fully respected.

Dr Kennedy Graham tribute to Norway - Notice of Motion

This 49^th Parliament has, I believe, had more than the usual share of grief. We have stood in silence over tragedies in Haiti, in Afghanistan, Chile, Australia, Tonga, Poland, and Japan. Here at home we have mourned Pike River and, of course, Christchurch. We know, all of us in this House, what it is to come together to unite in a moment of grief and pay tribute. Yet we have not encountered these past 2 years the depth of evil that characterised the massacre last week in Norway.

Signs of Change - Keynote - Kennedy Graham - Part 2

Signs of Change - Keynote - Kennedy Graham - Part 1

Ken Graham - ENGAGING AN MP CRITIC OF AFGHAN COMBAT OPS

1. (SBU) Summary. On July 15, Charge lunched with freshman Green
Party MP Dr. Kennedy Graham, a former NZ and UN diplomat who recently
questioned the legitimacy of Operation Enduring Freedom in the New
Zealand Parliament. At lunch, Graham eloquently displayed his
extensive knowledge and understanding of global affairs, particularly
climate change and international law. An evident multilateralist,
Graham remained strong in his assertion that a government must, above
all, consider international law when embarking on national action to
advance global security and revealed he has sponsored legislation to
that end. Graham may be a moderating influence on his frequently
radical party. His contribution to party discussion could yield more
pragmatic policy positions which could, in turn, allow for closer
relations with NZ's two biggest parties, the more mainstream National
and Labour. The meeting with Graham was highly positive and
established the makings of a constructive relationship. End Summary.

Imagining a green manifesto

by Claire Browning

The Greens’ policy platform needs as much rebuilding as any other party’s, to make it strong and sustainable


When I was a child, before I put away childish things, about, well, a year or so ago, I used to think that eventually, if I kept my ears open, the Greens would explain themselves to me; if I kept my eyes open, I would figure them out. They had a communications problem, I thought.
I was wrong. Communication is not the problem. In fact, I think that the Greens present a pretty true picture of themselves, and get reported pretty accurately, on the whole.

The Sustainable Economy Conference

Our conference on ‘A Sustainable Economy for New Zealand’ was held in Parliament’s Legislative Council Chamber last Friday.

We’re pleased with the way it went – both the turnout (about 200 people) and the quality of the presentations. The keynote, given by Canadian environmentalist, Dr David Suzuki, was simply outstanding.

So, in my opinion, were the two theoretical expositions that followed, by Dr. John Peet and Assoc. Prof. Marjan van den Belt. But in truth, all presenters gave insightful and thought-provoking addresses and participated in the discussion constructively.

Thanks to our two National and Labour colleagues, Hon. Dr Nick Smith (Minister for the Environment) and Hon. David Cunliffe (Opposition finance spokesperson). We appreciated their decision to join us across party lines. We respected the quality of their presentations.

Pretty much all commentators have said the conference was interesting and successful. A couple, however, saw it as the Greens talking to the greens. Not so. There were many academics, think-tank experts, and others who were certainly not connected to the Green Party and who in fact go to considerable lengths to make that clearly understood.

The aim of the conference had been to strike a dialogue with MP colleagues across all parties, and all members of the general public, on the nature of economics in the 21st century, and the common understanding that might be developed between us. Invitations had been extended to all 122 MPs. Many decidedly non-green individuals had been invited through various networks.

I’m hoping this conference, whose central purpose was a cross-party initiative, will encourage others (and for that matter ourselves) to try this kind of thing again. Parliament’s Legislative Council Chamber is a perfect venue to act as an antidote to the adversarial exchanges that occur in the House, some 20 metres down the corridor. Our economic thinking and the resulting Green policies that come from the conference will be smarter as a result.

My thanks to all who participated in the conference for making it such a pleasant and meaningful event.

Thieving from the kids: Ecological debt and other moral sins

Yesterday was my 18^th wedding anniversary.  It’s been a heart-warming 18 years on the personal front with Marilyn.  I’d marry her again tomorrow – assuming she’d have me.

The day before was less uplifting.  Saturday was Ecological Debt Day.

That is the day humanity has consumed, for the year, all the resources of the planet that it should if the planet is to be sustainable – if we are to pass it on in the same state we inherited it.

What Has to be Done to Get Transparency? Afghanistan and the NZ SAS

The latest reports of coalition forces in Afghanistan handing over detainees to Afghan authorities who then torture them have concentrated the mind here once more in New Zealand.

In Britain, the High Court has upheld a ban on British forces transferring prisoners to the Afghan National Directorate for Security (NDS) because of the risk they may be tortured.

Both Keith Locke and I have raised this issue with the Government in the past, and I did so again yesterday during General Debate.

Question 12 Dr Kennedy Graham International Non-aggression Measures

Dr KENNEDY GRAHAM to the Minister of Foreign Affairs: Is the Government committed to ratifying promptly the amendment to the Rome Statute reflecting the resolution adopted by the states parties to the International Criminal Court at their review conference in Kampala on 11 June 2010, incorporating aggression as a justiciable crime?

Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (Acting Minister of Foreign Affairs): The Government supports the resolution adopted by the review conference. The aggression amendment itself provides that the court's exercise of jurisdiction over the crime of aggression is subject to a decision to be taken by the States parties some time after 1 January 2017. The Government does not intend to ratify the amendment until after that decision has been taken.

1st reading International Non-Aggression Bill

ICC Review Conference & the Crime of Aggression Dr Kennedy Graham

I rise to draw the attention of the House to the quite extraordinary breakthrough that came out of the Review Conference of the International Criminal Court in Kampala last Saturday.

At this Conference, the states parties agreed, against all expectations, to adopt aggression as a justiciable crime in international law. There are many caveats entered into this agreement, and there is a considerable time delay before it becomes justiciable. But the fact that agreement has been reached, on this most critical of all issues of international law, is nothing short of remarkable. I believe it will come to be seen as the most important advance in international peace and security since 1945 when the UN Charter was adopted.

NZ as a Responsible Global Citizen

New Zealand has long prided itself as a country with a strong internationalist outlook. In fact, every country has an internationalist outlook, and most countries instinctively believe their particular worldview is superior to all others. A deep cultural subjectivity drives the foreign policy of every country, generating frequent misunderstanding and mistrust, and occasional conflict.

In the past half-century and especially in recent decades, the international community has changed, with unprecedented global problems (nuclear weapons; natural resource depletion, bio-diversity extinction, climate change) confronting humankind. Yet every country at the UN continues to claim complete national sovereignty, each striving to ‘punch above our weight’.