Double-standards, spin and rhetoric, where have we heard all this before? It raises the logical problem of whether it is possible to damage the reputation of someone who publicly admits to the trade of politician. I used to think that the House of Reps was supposed to be the dominant House of Parliament because governments are formed mainly from its members. This ill-mannered debating society is under the illusion that it runs the country. However, we all know that its members spend their time deludedly being rude to one another, cabinet, party heavies, pressure groups, lobbyists, businessmen and overseas financiers get on with running the country.

As far as the Greens are concerned for those of you who'd like some clarification on the facts behind the donation and the reasons for it
try the following website:

http://www.theage.com.au/national/web-millionaire-banrolled-greens-20110107-19iw9.html

In NSW politicts there is only one true enviromentalist and that is Ian Choen the rest are socialist reformers. Unfortunately Ian is not standing again for re-election. That means the former Communist / Socialist Party stalwarts agenda is social reformation.

Example: Ultimately in education dictating to parents where their children are to be educated by removing tax payer funds of $800,000 currently given to private and religious schools in NSW from tax payers children who attend schools of the tax payer parents choice.

The Greens are socially divisive of parents responsibility to educate their own children by choice.

The $1.6 million Graeme Wood tipped into the Greens coffers was merely a political decision to be spent on further abuse of the environment. He would have been more environmentally friendly and practical if he had rather purchased large tracts of second grade land and planted a million acre forest. Shows his real concern for green issues - just another social reformer.

Philo,

You need to do a bit more research on the topic - you'd find that what you're saying is stunningly ignorant.

Lexie,
How was the money spent? Was it spent on actual environment betterment or on Greens campaign expenses?

Remember you are speaking to someone who has since 1990 been involved in planting 160 hectare of hardwood forest on privately owned land, with the intention of harvesting at 40 years creating employment and housing and regrowth of a new forest. Greens are about a political agenda and are equally responsible for environmental abuse by humans not about environmental reconstruction.

Lexi,

Bob Brown and the Greens are opposed to financial donations to political parties.

The Greens are a political party.

Therefore their, and his, acceptance of a financial donation goes against their stated policy.

Ergo they and Bob Brown are hypocrites.

The principle is the thing although the principal obviously proved to be moro enticing.