Kay on Greens veto

Martin Kay writes at Stuff:

I must say I was surprised to learn that Russel Norman would stop heroic Burmese freedom fighter Aung San Suu Kyi from addressing our Parliament if she ever succeeds in her fight for democracy and is elected leader of her people.

It seems a bit mean-spirited and hypocritical, given the massive public support the Greens have given her as she campaigns against the regime that has brutalised her homeland.

But that is the inevitable position that flows from the Greens’ decision to block Aussie PM Julia Gillard from speaking to a formal session of Parliament tomorrow.

Norman says the Greens vetoed the speech – which will instead be made three hours before Parliament sits – because they did not want to set a precedent that would put us on a slippery slope which could undermine our  “democratic sovereignty”.

Norman seems to be arguing that if the Greens let Gillard speak, then they’ve got to extend the same courtesy to every dictator, tin pot tyrant and dodgy leader who wants to address to Parliament, too.

What utter rubbish.

Norman is letting principle get in the way of discretion.

There would be nothing stopping the Greens allowing Gillard to address Parliament and later vetoing leaders with whom they have a problem.

The veto by the Greens just makes them look petty.

Also ironic to have someone who spent most of their life as an Australian, protesting against letting the Australian PM address the NZ Parliament.