This entry was posted on Monday, May 2nd, 2011 at 6:29 am and is filed under act party, coalition management, environment, Foreign Affairs, Health and Safety, national. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
Not quite a mushroom cloud, more like a radioactive water leak into the harbour.
Figures out for commercial nuclear reactors indicates a incident resulting in damage to the core every 5 years for the world wide total of reactors. There have been 12 such incidents since the first commercial test reactor in Los Angeles in the early 60s.
when trolling from Aussie use a NZ spell check. CT should be giving refund. Trevor
You mean like the original intent of the legislation before Clark and others hi-jacked it?
GWW – in over 50 years you are saying there have been 12 incidents. Please tell us the incidents on US Naval ships and the years. There have been massive technology and engineering gains subsequent to each event.
So on the basis that the ships no longer carry nuclear weapons I see no problem with a vist (except for Trev and Labour to beat up their anti-american agenda)
Always involved ships. We ran on that in 1984. Very happy to have Brash’s policy as an election issue. Will get back to Key soon.
Trevor is your polling saying that nuclear ships are a big election issue right now and that people actually believe that Brash would overturn current policy? Or do you just think we’re all too stupid?
Monty , the US navy hasnt never released even a photo of inside the reactor compartment so dont expect any details of incidents. The subs especially have had every other sort of problem but we are supposed to believe the reactors are problem free ?
Trev – Not really wanting to get into an arguement about your scare mongering anti-american prejudices. But as I understand it the original proposal was restricted to anti-nuclear weapons, and was not to apply to the nuclear powered ships. But because of pressure from certain parts of the caucas including Clark, the ban was extended to all things nuclear. Lange relented and the legislation covered powered ships and weapons.
Reality is that it is now 27 years since enacted. The cold war is over. The legislation is accepted by the US as entrenched. The US war-ships no longer carry Nuclear weapons. (Submarines still do). There is no reason not to visit a US warship to our ports.
Except the leftist hate of all things American.
American servicemen & women would spend good money here (when they allowed in)let them come. Of course I make the typical Kiwi pompous assumption they actually want to send their ships here.
Monty – I for one don’t hate all things American. I’ve been there a few times and loved my week in New York, nearly 20 years ago. The only things American I would come close to hating is most of their foreign policy (Afghanistan for starters), the ghastliness of the conservative belt, as personified by religious nutters, Fox News and trumpeted [lately] by the likes of Sarah Palin and now the chief cheerleader, Donald Trump (excuse the pun). I’m not sure how the resumption of visits by American servicemen (and women, presumably) would be welcomed. It would probably be back to them being described as ‘over-paid, over-sexed and over here’, as was a common catch cry during WW2. Maybe the brothels would welcome such a resumption.
Trevor, Wikileaks proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that Phil Goff lied about that.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10695861
“Goff’s problem is that he is embarrassed by the WikiLeaks revelation.
He should look closer to home.
He had no compunction using notes of a private meeting between former National leader Don Brash and a visiting United States delegation to claim New Zealand’s anti-nuclear policy “would be gone by lunchtime” under a National government.
The WikiLeaks documents have something to say on this score too.
Former United States ambassador Bill McCormick wrote in November 2006 that Goff had “misquoted” an Mfat staffer’s notes from the meeting to claim that Brash had promised the nuclear ban would be “gone by lunchtime”.
“Brash denied he intended to get rid of the ban without a referendum, but was unable to respond credibly when Labour said that must mean he was planning to scrap the legislation, which many Kiwis view as an iconic part of the country’s identity,” McCormick said.
It’s notable that Goff refused the Herald’s request under the Official Information Act to release the full notes of the meeting that Brash had with the six visiting Republican senators.”
Thank you for reminding us.
So Cameron as the new official spokesperson for Brash is he now denying saying what he previously agreed that he had said? If Phil lied about what Don said then so did Don.
It is well past time that the ban on nuclear powered ships was removed. We should also be building nuclear power stations.
I’m no ones spokes man.
Wikileaks is clear though, Phil Goff lied. As from what Brash has to say about then and now go ask him yourself.
funny how the right wing mind works – anything any Labour politician ever said can be dragged up years later and that’s fair game, but Brash’s statement on the nuclear-free policy was so long ago it’s irrelevant!
I think Whaleoil is trying to point out that Brash apparently never made such a statement, according to the Wiki docs.
the wiki docs are merely ‘cables’ from US Embassys to the State Dept in Washington.
As the Brash meeting in Washington had no officials from the State dept , how the embassy in Wellington would know what was said is ludicrous. Unless they asked Don Brash ?
Isnt the issue that Brash wasn’t open with the voters about this policy,leading people to wonder what else he was planning to do to make the US happy?
Who cares if Brash said it or not – if he didn’t he should have – end of story.
“We should also be building nuclear power stations.”
For goodness sake go and look at what they cost before shooting off such ridiculous statements.
Whaleoil – does he not have a home to go to?
Don Brash described Rodney Hide as damaged goods. Don Brash is far more damaged that Rodney Hide! I can’t take him seriously as a politician – and all those Big Ben pies are not brain food.
Don Brash seems to be driven by ego. He is not prepared to pay his dues in the political system. ACT is making the same mistake as National did last time – and it will all lead to tears.
It’s kind of ironic that the future of superannuation and the age it applies are being driven by people with government funded and private superannuation schemes. And yes, that includes Cullen and opposition parties too
“New Act leader Don Brash says he would not support a return to the first-past-the-post voting system, although he is not a big fan of MMP either.”
Gee, Brash doesnt want a return to FPP now he is ACT leader rather than National