Coming of Age

The Green Party [of England and Wales] has had a few ups and downs over the years since it was formed as the Ecology Party back in the 1970s. The peak of popularity in the late 1980s [I think] sadly evaporated but there has been steady progress since then.

As in all organisations, and in particular political ones, there is a tension between the Fundamentalists and the Modernisers, and between the relatively small group of Activists (who attend Conference and decide policy) and the Membership at large.

The most recent was the question of having an elected Leader instead of Principal Speakers, one of each sex. There was a clear majority amongst the Activists for the status quo, but an overwhelming majority for change in the ballot of all members.

The Green Party now have an elected Leader, in the form of Caroline Lucas, who is also the one and only Green MP in the House of Commons.

The next change is imminent. There is a clause in the Constitution that when the membership reaches a certain level the party must consider moving to a delegate conference structure. The consequence of this is that Conference decisions are much more likely to reflect the will of the whole membership rather than the assumption that those who have hitherto attended conference are representative of the party as a whole.

This could get interesting, particularly if the will of the party conflicts with the view of the activists. We could see some toys thrown out of prams, but at the end of the day it offers the opportunity for the party to mature into a viable and credible political force on a National scale.

Already we are seeing some signs of maturity and the vision that comes with effective Leadership.

Caroline Lucas appears to have recognised the party’s Obsessive Compulsive Disorder (OCD) on Israel/Palestine and has spoken out against the Palestine Solidarity Campaign’s use of a pre-Israel map on its logo as being provocative. The PSC have close links with the party.

And in a second piece in the Jewish Chronical (dubbed by some within the party as J-Crap) she speaks about how the party’s position could be related more sensitively. This is particularly important given that the context of the debate means it can easily, and often does, descend into anti-Semitic discourse. As she says in the piece “"I recognise the language can be an issue."

And so it is! Take these two recent press releases from the Party on the “Flytilla activists” who tried to enter the West Bank at a time when known organised protests were to take place. Very careful, measured and restrained language – “detained”. One. Two.

Then compare with the #NOTW version of the sensationalist elements of the blogsphere. Here the activists were “arrested and unjustly imprisoned, subjected to unfair treatment and beaten up”. [No links - they are not hard to find.] Of course they would say that wouldn’t they? Is it any different to the Students being kettled? Had they tried to break out there would undoubtedly have been some bruises to show the Police had acted unreasonably? Note that the Police here did not put the kettle on for the Teachers…… why was that, I wonder? Something to do with behaviour perhaps?

But to cut back to the core principle of the Green Party, Caroline Lucas is again on the money with her interview for the UK Huffington Post -

“Until recently I think the wider green movement and the green party included in it were too much focused, understandably, to waking people up to the climate crisis that would be rather than attracting people by painting a positive picture of what a zero carbon economy could look like. And I think fear isn’t a great motivating influence.”
For her, the green movement is about improving people’s lives – tackling the problem of fuel poverty, creating jobs and growth.

As the man said, "May you Live in interesting times".