jeanette fitzsimons was just on national radio..
announcing the trial-separation/partial-divorce from national..
and she threatened/promised more vigorous anti-govt agitation from the greens…
this is to be welcomed..
tho’ she was asked a pertinent question..
as in..’why not have a full divorce..?’
she cited areas that are still ‘working’..
as the reasons not to..
namely..the house insulation program..
..and the cycleway..
now..correct me if i’m wrong..
but should the greens call in the lawyers..for the property division..
that national would not can the housing insulation program..
and that program will always be known as a fitzsimons/green party initiative..
full divorce..or not..
so..?
the other reason given..is the cycleway..
while yes..the greens will always support it/the concept..
but this cycleway is clearly a key/national initiative..
not a green party one..
so..once again..’so?’..
it seems to me..purely on a political science level..
that there is very little/s.f.a. reason for the greens not to go for that full divorce..
and to emerge as the loud/urgent/agitating opposition party..
..that they must become..
..surely..?
