Which Party Cares?

Sugar isnt fat so its healthy. I will find you an "expert" that says that. (yes I know you will counter with an expert that says its fat thats healthy) seriously Sanitarium is nowdays just a food company. Compared to other food companies like say Nestle they do pretty well

Why are you picking on Wayno? Honora took it off thread. Oh and sugar is one of the true evils of the earth.

everything in moderation. Even Winston

Ha. This thread has Barely begun to go off topic compared to others.

Sorry for going off-topic, guys (yet again). I'm more in line with Kreig's philosophy on wandering off-topic. I know it's annoying to some folks and actually outlawed by Matthew but sometimes I can't resist indulging in my little tangents. My comment was in response to this question posed by lloydy in previous comment in this thread: "Corporate tax, indeed business isn't squeaky clean, how an earth Sanitarium the food company producing Wheetbix and other products manages to pay 0% tax?" Maybe this was meant to be a rhetorical question... I confess I don't see some posts because I've blocked someone. You could always block me then you won't have to see my meanders.

Polluted Paradise - People and Power Aljazera investigation on NZ fresh water pollution DOC shelving environmental reports that are highlighting environmental issues https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OEO60_8_kME https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_uQXCJKRcLM

Anyone know anything about the outdoors party?

Thats Alan from the Fush n hunt website The manifesto is all very sensible. Funding for conservation and recreation. Even supporting toxin use where it is for pests. But then look at his private posts on the website threads about past 1080 drops. Bit less evidence based or balanced

FMC's assessment: "The Outdoors Party favours beefing up the Walking Access Commission, including extending its powers to negotiate establishment of the Queen’s Chain along all rivers and the foreshore. It wants mandatory public access arrangements on all land sales under the Overseas Investment Office’s jurisdiction. It wants to impose a quota on the number of tourists (for the whole country or just for specific places wasn’t clear), noting that introducing a tourist tax will earn money but do nothing to stem the capacity issue in the conservation estate. The Outdoors Party notes a fall in DOC funding in real terms against the corresponding tourism increase, and says its policy is to increase DOC funding substantially. The party thinks Te Araroa should be balloted to manage and control numbers. It doesn’t support Predator Free New Zealand 2050, citing concerns including the name (pointing out that various native species are predators), funding, property rights and managing unwanted species on private land. However, it seems this disquiet is partly underpinned by an antipathy towards use of aerial 1080." The party's direct and full response to FMC can be read in the PDF linked from the end of the page at https://wilderlife.nz/2017/08/political-parties-say/ Each to their own, but personally I'd prefer to vote for a party with more rounded policies beyond a single focus issue, and I disagree quite strongly with its approach to pest management, so not for me.

I think Outdoors party is anti 1080. . Being anti poisons use is not a bad thing, but I think they believe the solution is simply ditch it and replace it with ground trapping - which is naïve IMO. Like Peter Dunne found when he was aligned with the previous "outdoors party" (think that was the name), they would find the solution is far more complex.