Rejoinder to Yesterday's Talkback Post - Morning of 09/03/2005

Leighton Smith continued his onslaught against Minister of Conservation Chris Carter's decision not to allow the development of the Whangamata marina to go ahead. An interesting point was made to me earlier this morning regarding this issue. Talkback hosts / radio and TV newses all questioned his 'veto' of the development, as if he were breaking some consitutional convention. But it wasn't actually a 'veto' at all. The law requires Ministerial consent for such developments, because national interests aren't taken into account at the Environmental Court level. The pro-development talkback hosts managed to shift the debate away from this issue which could've potentially undermined their own interests. For evidence that this slant affected public debate, look no further than my post below. I too fell for the line of 'judicial interference'. In hindsight it was rather naiive of me to buy into it. Still, it goes to show that in the interest of objective debate and discussion we need a greater variety of opinion from talkback hosts. We need opinions from everyone from Lindsay Perigo to Matt McCarten. That way restriction of debate by single-minded political interests can be avoided. Objectivity and truth require honest, open and expansive discussion - something surely lacking in the damp cold rodent-infested cave that is talkback in this country. (norightturn has a good take on the Whangamata issue)