Is an electoral alliance to beat the Tories possible in Hampstead and Kilburn?

 Above from Electoral Calculus website LINK the ward prediction is based on estimates the working for which can be found HERE

Green Party members in Hampstead & Kilburn have mandated an approach to Hampstead & Kilburn's current Labour MP, Tulip Siddiq, with a view to a possible electoral alliance, given her narrow majority and Parliamentary voting record on important Green issues such as opposing Brexit and opposing the renewal of Trident LINK.

The Hampstead and Kilburn Constituency covers 7 wards in Camden and three in Brent. Brent wards are Brondesbury Park, Kilburn and Queens Park.
 
Green Party members will ask Tulip Siddiq for support and commitments on key Green issues in order to consider withdrawing their Hampstead & Kilburn candidate, including but not limited to:

• Campaigning for electoral reform and proportional representation for Westminster.
• Lobbying Brent and Camden Councils for divestment of their pension funds from fossil fuels.
• Urging leader the Labour leader and Labour colleagues to support electoral alliances where appropriate, in particular to stand down and support Green candidates in the Isle of Wight and Brighton Pavilion.
• Regular contact after the election with Green Party members.

Tulip Siddiq has been invited to speak at a Green Party meeting of local members that will take place next week. At this meeting a final decision will be put to Green Party members for a vote.
 
The Greens will also contact the Liberal Democrats in Hampstead & Kilburn with a view to them joining any electoral alliance.
 
John Holmes, Co-Chair of Camden Green Party, explained:

There are a variety of views within Brent and Camden Green Parties on the issue of electoral alliances, and we've had a very healthy debate. We've a terrific Hampstead & Kilburn candidate in John Mansook, and so any decision to stand down won't be taken lightly. We've created a process whereby Green Party members get a say on any final decision, and they will want commitments from Tulip on key Green issues in order to make this a true alliance.

Despite opposition from their respective leaderships Labour and Liberal Democrat members have reached electoral agreements in several constituencies where the non-Tory vote combined would beat Conservatives. UKIP have withdrawn in favour of Brexit Tories in a 'regressive alliance'.

Brent Green Party adopted the following position at their own meeting prior to the joint meeting which selected John Mansook, their Chair, as  Green Party candidate for Hampstead and Kilburn:

Our principled position is that we stand a candidate.  We believe that Green voters are entitled to have the opportunity to vote for their party of choice and a Green General Election campaign will help us build support in our strongest wards for the May 2018 Council elections when we  hope our first Green councillors will be elected. We recognise that some Green voters, faced with the prospect of another Conservative government will none the less make a tactical decision to vote Labour.

Tulip Siddiq signed a letter to the Guardian on Monday calling for the Labour party to stand aside of Brighton Pavilion and the Isle of Wight:

With the progressive vote split, the danger of a Tory landslide and all it means for our country now looms darkly on June 8. It is therefore important to maximise progressive votes and campaigning in some key seats.

She told the Camden New Journal LINK:

It can’t be denied that Caroline Lucas has been a good MP, and I’ve worked with her on several issues including lowering the voting age to 16.

Note: My personal comment would be that there is a danger of voters thinking that electoral alliance deals are a 'fix' by the political parties which are made without reference to them, and that they themselves can make their own tactical voting decisions in constituencies where the parties are finely balanced.

Greens to stand in Copeland on an anti-nuclear and anti-poverty platform

After the controversy over the Green Party's decision not to stand in the Richmond Park by-election there has been an ongoing debate in the party about the pros and cons of a progressive alliance. Local parties are autonomous and it is their decision on whether to stand a candidate.

The Green Party will contest the Copeland by-election on an anti-nuclear and anti-poverty campaign.

Members of Allerdale and Copeland Green Party made the decision to stand last night (January 12th) at the local party’s AGM and a candidate will be selected on January 24th.

Clare Brown, chair of Allerdale and Copeland Greens, said:

We feel it’s vitally important to offer a vote to those people who want to see a fair and sustainable future for the area.
 

There are clear differences between us and the other parties and we welcome this opportunity to campaign on our priorities, which include sustainable energy and standing against nuclear power, as well as anti-poverty measures and exposing the lie of austerity.

With Labour looking set to select a pro-nuclear candidate the Greens will campaign for clean power in Copeland.

Jonathan Bartley, co-leader of the Green Party, said:

The Greens are the only party in Copeland campaigning against nuclear power, to defend the NHS and for a close relationship with Europe.

Voting Green is a vote for a renewable energy revolution which would create thousands of jobs in Copeland.

Allerdale and Copeland Greens are dedicated to ending poverty and inequality in their local community and creating a fairer society by putting forward the bold policies we so desperately need.

The issues behind the Green Party's Richmond Park furore as Green Left calls for transparency

Green Left*, the eco-socialist group with the Green Party, has issued the following statement over the controversy over the Richmond Park by-election, which includes allegations over undue pressure on local members to stand aside for the Liberal Democrat candidate in order to defeat Zac Goldsmith and a donation to party funds (eventually refused) to encourage them to do so. LINK

Green Left  welcomes the Green Party Executive's and Green Party  Regional Council’s decisions to consider the serious  issues raised in the so-called ‘Richmond Report’. Transparency and accountability are essential in this process.  We look forward to the Green Party 2017 Conference democratically arriving at a clear policy on the ‘Progressive Alliance’. furore

The 'Progressive Alliance' put forward by Caroline Lucas and Jonathan Bartley in their co-leadership campaign is itself controversial within the party, putting aside the specific issues around the Richmond Report.

I have recently summed up the various positions thus:

Following some of the discussion, mainly on FB, it seems that there are several positions from Green Party members on recent moves on the 'Progressive Alliance' (PA) (a Venn diagram may be useful!)

1. Those who are for a PA & think that the Lucas-Bartley overwhelming leadership mandate and the fact that a PA was their main platform justifies their current position
2. Those who are against a PA BUT think that -ditto-
3. Those who are for PA but think that Lucas - Bartley have usurped the constitutional role of the membership in making policy
4. Those who are against PA AND think that -ditto-
5. Those who think that a PA is necessary to get rid of the Tories perhaps even in this parliament
6. Those who think that a PA is the only way to get PR in 2020 and thus have more Green MPs in 2025 (little mention how many more Ukip or other far right MPs there may be)
7. Those who think that Lib Dems are progressive on social issues, climate change but right-wing on the economy
8. Those who think think that the Lib Dems are beyond the pale because of their previous record in Coalition
9. Those who are for us holding our noses and reaching a deal with ANY party that will support bringing in PR during the 2020-25 parliament.
10. Those who want to add other redlines to any deal with other parties including austerity, climate change

I think ten is enough for now, although there is also the issue of political campaigning with other parties and organisations on common issues outside of any electoral deal.

In the Richmond case the argument about progressing the campaign for the introduction of proportional representation through deals with other parties (though Labour isn't playing ball) was supplemented by the argument that getting the Tories out should be the primary aim and that would be furthered by reducing the narrow Tory majority in Parliament.

That view was countered by the one that suggested the by-election was an ideal opportunity to show-case the Green Party's policy on opposing ALL airport expansions as essential in reducing emissions to help deal with global warming and climate change.

* I am chair of Green Left

Amidst widespread disquiet Green Left calls for review of Green Party decision not to stand in Richmond Park by-election

Caroline Lucas's tweet last night

Green Left, the eco-socialist current within the Green Party, of which I am chair, issued the following statement this afternoon:

Green Left calls for a review of the decision not to stand in Richmond Park leaving voters a choice of candidates from parties with a record of supporting austerity and not seriously aiming to tackle climate change by opposing all airport expansion.

Green Left supports a full meeting of all members in the Richmond Park Constituency  with all members invited, to reconsider  the decision not to stand  a Green candidate  in the forthcoming by-election given issues relating to party democracy.

The statement follows debate within Green Left discussion lists and on many Green Party facebook pages. It is important to note that the disquiet is not limited to Green Left and has been expressed by a broad spectrum of members.

Mike Shaugnessy has published a full  account on the London Green Left blog HERE so I will make a few brief points:

ISSUES RELATING TO PARTY DEMOCRACY

1. Local parties are autonomous in the Green Party and it is up to them to make decisions on standing in elections or by-elections. It is not a decision of the national leadership. In this case two local parties cover the constituency and after a meeting of the Richmond Party the existing Green candidate after discussion decided to stand down in order to promote the Liberal Democrat candidate who has more chance of defeating UKIP-backed Zac Goldsmith. Her statement can be read HERE.  However in this case Jonathan Bartley co-leader, was present, by prior invitation, at the Richmond Party meeting that discussed the by-election and Caroline Lucas the other co-leader was at the Kingston meeting. There are allegations that voices were raised at the Kingston meeting which was less amenable to standing down, although a majority reluctantly went along with it following the Richmond decision.  It is further alleged that the Green Party Executive Election Co-ordinator, a former co-ordinator of the Richmond and Twickenham Green Party (she has since moved elsewhere), also made her views known to her former party. The Green Left call seeks to address these issues which may have put the local parties under unjustified pressure.

This is the notice put out for a meeting on Tuesday November 8th in Richmond Park (Details)

2. A wider discussion has taken place about the changing nature of the Green Party leadership. Our  leadership is constitutionally different to other parties. In the Green Party policy decisions are made by the members after thorough discussion on web forums, workshops at conference and finally debate and voting on the conference floor. The Progressive Alliance policy, passionately pursued by Lucas-Bartley, has not had as thorough debate as it merited. Some members fear that in their dedication to the Progressive Alliance cause, reinforced by participation in the think-tank Compass,the leadership are dragging the membership along in their wake.  In between conferences the leaders have the party's philosophical basis as a guide as well as our (probably too many) detailed policies. There is a political committee that advises in between conferences that is consulted on current issues - however 'things move fast; cannot justify wide-reaching fundamental policy changes however well meant.

ISSUES RELATING TO STANDING IN THE BY-ELECTION

3. The case for standing down is that this is a chance to reduce the Conservative majority in the House of Commons by electing the Liberal Democrat. This would be an example of the Progressive Alliance in practice which would help a more anti-Tory alliance at the General Election in 2020. The argument against is that the Liberal Democrats helped create the austerity strategy that we are still fighting and which has done so much damage to to society. The Liberal Democrat candidate herself has few progressive credentials and has supported Nick Clegg's praise for the Lib Dem role in the Coalition Government.  More widely many Greens do not accept that Lib Dems are 'left' - they may share some more libertarian stances on social issues with the Green Party but on the economy they are still wedded to neoliberalism.

4. No other party is opposed to ALL airport expansions on the grounds of air pollution and air travel's contribution to climate change. This by-election with an electorate sympathetic to environmental issues, one of which has dogged them for decades, is a fantastic opportunity to put Green Party policies on the environment, especially on the overwhelming issues of climate change, as well as those on social justice issues, centre stage.  An opportunity that will be thrown away if Greens do not stand.

5. The idea of not standing, but to continue campaigning on these issues, will make little sense to the electorate. The elector, on the doorstep, patiently listening to an earnest Green party campaigner, explaining why they are not standing, is likely to be perplexed if not apoplectic.

THE DIRECTION OF THE GREEN PARTY

6. I am an eco-socialist because I believe that climate change is the greatest issue facing us and furthermore one that cannot be solved within the present economic system which is powered by consumerism. In turn consumerism necessitates increased production and thus more emissions of harmful green gases and the plundering of the planet's finite resources. For the survival of the planet. and human, animal and plant species we need an entirely different economic and social structure.

7. We are not going to solve those problems merely by electoral means, surrendering all that urgency and campaigning, to machinations to get proportional representation introduced in 2002. Yet the Green Party has moved to electoralism as its main focus to the detriment of campaigning. In fact the campaigns (non election) has been cut to zero so you will look in vain for new Green Party placards on marches such as yesterday's on libraries.   As someone remarked in discussions over the weekend we will end up knocking on doors without any 'in-between elections' activity to talk about except campaigning for electoral alliances.  Of course a political party seeks power but it is also a campaigning organisation. Interestingly this reflects some of the current debate within the Labour Party.

IS CORBYN THE ANSWER?

8. I think this is addressed by 6 above. Even under Corbyn, Labour is still fixated on economic growth which has all the drawbacks I have mentioned.  On issues such as proportional representation and climate change John McDonnell may be ahead of Corbyn but the growth issue remains.  There may be areas in which there can be future co-operation such as socially useful production replacing weapons manufacture on the Lucas model but that seems far away at present.  Labour's nomination of Christian Wolmar to fight the Richmond Park by-election is a clever move with some arguing that he is 'as green as a Labour Party member can be without being a member of the Green Party' - but that is attached to an individual rather than to Labour Party policy.

9. None of this means that a progressive alliance, preferably a progressive socialist alliance,  could not be formed and make a significant impact on the General Election. On day to day issues, especially those such as housing, workers' rights, welfare reform, the NHS,  support for the public sector, we have much in common with Corbyn's Labour but still need to keep our unique identity and policies without getting submerged.

GREEN LEFT POLICY ON ELECTORAL ALLIANCE

Green Left welcomes the move to discuss campaigning and electoral alliances leading up to the next General Election.

Green Left has always promoted the idea of working together with the left, where we share values, and that, as much as possible the Green Party should be included in this, lending support to and endorsing Eco-socialists who are members of other parties. We did this by supporting Salma Yaqoob in parliamentary elections.

This needs further discussion with members and we welcome consultations, about it, taking place.

Green Left members with our positive standing amongst others on the Left are able to positively engage people outside the GPEW who share our values and therefore should take the initiative locally in promoting discussions with individuals, progressive groups and other left parties, such as the Jeremy Corbyn led Labour Party.

Any left alliance must be committed to introducing PR for all future elections and the 'Best Placed Left Candidate’ should be a consideration in marginal seats.

Pro-Heathrow Cllr Stopp throws his hat into Richmond by-election ring

Sam Stopp, the Labour councillor for Wembley Central, has signalled via Twitter, that he intends to put himself forward as the Labour candidate for Richmond in the wake of Zac Goldsmith's resignation over Heathrow.

The Liberal Democrats are the second party in Richmond and Labour MP Clive Lewis has urged Labour to stand down to enable a Tory defeat.

Stopp is adamant that Labour should stand and has said he will stand on a pro-Heathrow third runway ticket advocating growth and job creation.

Stopp was a supporter of Yvette Cooper's leadership bid and this time round supported Owen Smith, declaring that he was embarrassed by Brent Central's support for Corbyn.

He rejects any notion of a progressive alliance whilst we still have a first past the post elelction system.

Cllr Stopp is Chair of the Labour Campaign to End Homelessness.

Progressive Alliance Panel at Green Party Conference

Friday 2 September, 18.30-19.45
Progressive Alliances: The case for cross-party working and why it could be a game-changer for the Green Party

This session will explore the various options that collectively get called a 'progressive alliance'. It will launch a new book on this, “The Alternative”, which has been co-edited by 3 of our panellists. Signed copies will be available for sale afterwards. It will also launch the Green House report, The Green Case for a Progressive Pact, which will also be on sale at the event.

	Chair - Zoe Williams has been a columnist on the Guardian since 2000 - previously, she wrote a column for the London Evening Standard.  In her ceaseless endeavour to smash the patriarchy, she contributes to various magazines and news weeklies, including Marie Claire, Glamour, Good Housekeeping, Red and Grazia.  Broadcasting includes Question Time, the Daily Politics, The Politics Show and Newsnight for the BBC; Dispatches and the Channel Four News for Channel Four; a paper review for Sky News; and appearances on the Today programme, Any Questions, Woman's Hour, PM and the World Tonight for BBC Radio Four. She was 2014's Restaurant Reviewer of the Year, 2013's Print Journalist of the Year for the Speaking Together Awards, 2011's Columnist of the Year at the Workworld awards and is author of three non-fiction books, Get It Together: Why We Deserve Better Politics, The Madness of Modern Parenting and Bring It On, Baby.
	Rupert Read chairs Green House (www.greenhousethinktank.org ). He co-authored Green House's report on prospects for a progressive pact and was the Green Party parliamentary candidate for Cambridge in 2015.
	Caroline Lucas was elected as Member of Parliament for Brighton Pavilion in 2010. She served as leader of the Green Party of England and Wales from 2008 to 2012. From 1999-2010 she served as one of the Party's first MEPs and represented the South East region until becoming the UK's first Green MP in 2011.
	Neal Lawson is Chair of the good society pressure group Compass and was author of All Consuming (Penguin, 2009) and co-editor of The Progressive Century (Palgrave, 2001). He serves on the Advisory Board of We own it!, is a Contributing Editor of the social democracy journal Renewal which he helped found and is an Associate Member at the Bauman Institute at Leeds University. He writes regularly for the Guardian and the New Statesman.
	Chris Bowers is a writer and broadcaster, specialising in tennis, environment and politics. He commentates on tennis for radio and television, has written several books, and counts as a tennis historian; he was the founder of the Environmental Transport Association in 1990, and works as a communications consultant for the European Federation for Transport and Environment; and he is the biographer of Nick Clegg. He is a former Liberal Democrat councillor on Lewes District Council, and stood for Parliament for the Lib Dems in 2010 and 2015. More on www.chrisbowers.org.
	Lisa Nandy is the Member of Parliament for Wigan. Since being elected she has campaigned in Parliament to tackle child abuse, to save the Education Maintenance Allowance and against human rights abuses in Palestine. She has fought against low pay and zero hours contracts and campaigned against growing poverty in Wigan and across the country. In September 2015 Lisa was appointed Shadow Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change.

Progressive Alliance misgivings? Emergency Motion for Green Party Conference as Lucas reiterates support for electoral pact

In an earlier posting LINK I wrote about some of the underlying issues that had emerged during the Green Party internal elections campaign. (Voting closed yesetrday) One of these was the 'Progressive Alliance' and misgivings about the way this strategy has emerged have now become the subject of an Emergency Motion to the party conference which begins on September 2nd.

The London Green Left blog has an article giving a range of views about the issue HERE

As with all emergency resolutions priority is decided by the number of signatories.

EMERGENCY RESOLUTION PROGRESSIVE ALLIANCES

The recent political climate, combined with the long-term struggle to achieve proportional representation, has highlighted the need for decisive, cross-party action to demand electoral reform and give the country the best chance of a representative, accountable government. However, ongoing issues with other parties have exposed and intensified hostilities in some areas, and therefore any political strategy proposed by the Green Party of England and Wales which resembles an alliance must be developed both in close consultation with members and local parties, and taking into account issues which would create barriers when putting such an alliance into practice.

It is felt by many that discussions around this so far have taken place without due transparency, and are tantamount to the leadership team and key elected representatives creating policy outside of the democratically mandated member-led process.

Conference instructs GPEx to assemble a working group to carry out a comprehensive, initial consultation with individual members, local parties, and member groups before the idea of a Progressive Alliance is developed any further; and that the responses are used to inform the terms of such an alliance should it become a realistic direction for the party’s future political strategy.

Conference notes: Once an arrangement is proposed, it must be supported by GPEx, and put to GPRC for agreement on behalf of the party, as per Section 11, clause (v) of the Constitution.

Green Party members who wish to support this motion should copy and paste this, signed with their name and local party, to soc@greenparty.org.uk

Meanwhile in an interview with the BBC today LINK Caroline Lucas reiterated her support for an electoral alliance but stressed that was her personal view and ultimately the party had to decide:

In a sign of the determination by the Greens' only MP to boost the party's presence in Parliament, Ms Lucas told the BBC she wants "all the options on the table" when it comes to the possibility of talking to other parties before the next general election.

She said:

It doesn't make sense for parties of the left to be constantly fighting each other and meanwhile the Conservatives come through and we've seen that time after time in the 2015 general election.

I think what we are looking at is those marginal constituencies where some kind of agreement between progressive parties might be able to make a difference.

Asked whether this meant she was prepared to see a Green candidate drop out of a constituency race so long as Labour did the same elsewhere, the MP for Brighton Pavilion said: "Personally I would".

Vote 'split'

Such a pact could be designed to prevent the "left" vote being split between Labour and the Greens in some constituencies, allowing Ms Lucas' party to target certain seats while offering Labour a clear run elsewhere without Green opposition.

She stressed it was ultimately for the party to decide on what was her personal view on the issue.

Ashford Green Party resolutions on the 'Progressive Alliance'

Earlier in August, with the Green Party leadership context getting underway, I published an article about some of the underlying issues LINK. These include the proposal for a 'progressive alliance' which forms part of the Lucas-Bartley platform.

Their election statement for co-leader proposes in their 'Comprehensive Plan to transform the Green Party':

CRACK OPEN THE POLITICAL SYSTEM by exploring a one-time alliance with other progressive parties at the next election in order to replace our failed electoral system with proportional representation. 

At a recent meeting Ashford Green Party discussed the progressive alliance and passed the following resolutions which will be of interest to Green Party members:

Enforcing the democratic process in regards to The Progressive Alliance


Ashford Green Party believes that any formal national electoral alliance between the Green Party of England and Wales (GPEW) and any other political party should be arrived at through the conventional internal democratic process by which any other policy is agreed.

Ashford Green Party is calling on the leadership and all other members of the party to immediately cease from claiming that the GPEW supports a progressive alliance until a policy is passed by conference or an internal referendum which gives all members a voice on the matter. 

Ashford Green Party is calling on the national GPEW to remain neutral on the issue of an electoral alliance in its use of resources and infrastructure, such as membership emails, website and social media accounts, unless and until a policy proposal is passed advocating that position. This is to ensure neither the supporters or those that oppose the policy proposal have an unfair advantage.

RESULTS – For 16, Against 3, Abstain 2


Opposing an electoral alliance with The Liberal Democrats

Ashford Green Party believes that the Liberal Democrat party has proven itself unfit for governance, having enthusiastically and unapologetically enabled the Conservative Party to deliver an austerity government which hurt the poorest and most vulnerable in Britain. This included the disgraceful cuts to the disabled which has seen thousands of people die. They are also guilty of destroying the trust of young people by going back on their promises over tuition fees.


Ashford Green Party believes this makes them a party whose values are incompatible with the Green Party of England and Wales and should not be considered for a national electoral alliance.

Ashford Green Party is calling on the Green Party of England and Wales not to enter a national electoral alliance with the Liberal Democrat party.

RESULTS – For 10, Against 8, Abstain 3

Opposing an electoral alliance with the Labour Party

Ashford Green Party believes that as long as the Labour Party is suffering a political identity crisis, it would be unwise to form an alliance with the Labour Party.

Ashford Green Party believes that Jeremy Corbyn is an ally to our cause. However, whilst the Labour Party is in its current state, with the majority of its MPs purposefully undermining Corbyn and pushing against our shared core values, Ashford Green Party also believes it would be unhelpful to form any alliance with the Labour Party.

Ashford Green Party does not accept the proposal of helping elect neoliberal Labour Party MPs who do not represent the sort of Labour Party that Jeremy Corbyn embodies, which a formal national alliance would result in.


Ashford Green Party is calling on the Green Party of England and Wales to not enter into a national electoral alliance with the Labour Party, until and unless there is a significant change to the ideals of the parliamentary Labour Party, which both unite the Labour Party and are more in accord with the Green Party’s values and policies.

RESULTS -  For 11, Against 6, Abstain 4

Voting for  Green Party leader, deputy leader/s and the executive closes at noon on Thursday.

Some of the issues lurking beneath the surface of the Green Party leadership election

Line up at a hustings for leader and deputy. Amelia Womack was on holiday.

Written in individual capacity 

As the great Labour leadership battle storms on amidst thunderous roars, flashes of lightning and torrents of abuse, in a comparatively calm but neglected corner of the political firmament another leadership contest is taking place - for the leadership, deputy leadership and Executive of the Green Party of England and Wales.

News Thump: 'Green Party picks worst possible moment to hold leadership election' LINK takes a well-aimed satirical swipe at the Greens' failure to get even minimal coverage of their election but it is worth looking at some of the issues that are lurking just below the surface.

Some are not specific to this election but reflect longer term issues. An obvious one, now reflected in the Labour leadership contest, is the relationship between the Greens as part of a wider campaigning environmental and social justice movement and the Greens as an electoralist organisation.  The reduction of the party's campaigning (non election) budget to zero means that there will be few, if any, campaign materials available at the Autumn conference.  The recent emphasis on a 'progressive alliance' with other political parties, strongly supported by Caroline Lucas, raises all sorts of issues about electoral pacts, red (green?) lines, and what is meant by the slippery term 'progressive'. Much will depend on the outcome of the Labour leadership election where Labour support for proportional representation will be deal-breaker.

As Caroline Lucas is standing for the leadership on a joint ticket with Jonathan Bartley the progressive alliance has featured in many of the hustings. Concerns have been expressed that this concept has not been fully debated by the membership and rather than emerging from the party's very comprehensive policy making process has come from 'on high'.  Deputy leader candidate Shahrar Ali has called for full internal party consultation on the issue.  It is complicated by the fact that the Green Party is not a top-down organisation with centralised direction but one where local parties have autonomy. Final decisions on whether to contest seats or stand down in favour of an agreed 'progressive alliance' candidates rests with them.

In terms of joint campaigning with other political parties, independent socialists and environmentalists, trade unionists  and community groups this already happens on many issues including fracking, austerity, local government cuts, housing, union disputes, academisation, public transport, library closure and much else.  When we take part in such actions the lack of Green Party campaign material is a weakness.

There are those in the Green Party who view the progressive alliance with scepticism and others who go further in arguing that Greens should stand on their own policies which are inimical to Labour's commitment to economic growth.

The jibe that Ukip is more diverse than the Green Party has enough truth in it to require the Green Party undertake some serious self-examination.  The hustings photograph above illustrates, with the exception of Shahrar Ali (standing) the all-white nature of candidates for the leadership and deputy leadership of the party.  There is also a gender imbalance in the leadership contest with Caroline Lucas the only female although three of the seven deputy candidates are women.

Class is an area when the Green Party has come under attacks as an essentially middle class institution and although the membership is changing with the recruitment of ex-Labour activists and a thriving Green Party Trade Union Group, the public face of the Green Party is still middle class, white and largely London-based.

There are candidates in this election with working class roots or a record of activism in working class communities including Martie Warin from the ex-pit village of Easington in County Durham, and Cllr David Williams  now in Oxfordshire but originally from Salford.  Among the deputy contenders Andrew Cooper has represented the Greens on Kirklees Council since 1999.

The candidiates' views on working with trade unions can be read HERE

Turning to issues specific to this election the one to emerge early on was the joint candidature of Caroline Lucas and Jonathan Bartley LINK. In giving up the leadership previous Lucas had said she wanted to open up the way for more voices to represent the party. Critics immediately suggested that standing for the leadership in 2016 as well as being the sole MP would effectively reduce the number of voices.  Party rules state that if co-leaders are elected then there will be only one deputy (Shahrar Ali and Amelia Womack were previously male and female deputies).  A further criticism was that by announcing their co-leadership bid early on Lucas-Bartley effectively discouraged other candidates. Given Lucas' prominence and well-deserved reputation, others were unlikely to come forward as they would expect Lucas to win.

The issue of workload is also being discussed by activists. Previously Natalie Bennett, Amelia Womack and Shahrar Ali shared the official leadership positions supplemented by Caroline Lucas and the Green MEPs.  If Lucas is elected co-leader the official leadership is reduced by one. In addition she will have to combine leadership with the role of MP. As the leader spends a lot of the time touring the country, speaking to local parties and attending events this aspect of the role may suffer although the counter-argument is that Bartley will do the bulk of this work.

Although there is a strong case against the media dictating our leadership structures it is worth considering how the media, especially TV and Radio, will cope with co-leaders. It was a feature of the General Election that interviewers did not really understand that in the Green Party the leader is a spokesperson for policies decided by the membership.  They often expected Bennett to be an expert on every aspect of policy or to make up policy and initiatives on the spot. Combine that with a preference for one recognisable face and voice then we can expect Lucas to dominate the media with a blurring between her leadership and MP roles. Policy and strategy expectations will be deepened by her parliamentary role so on issues such as the progressive alliance she will be pushed to comment beyond existing policy.

Members' deciding policy is a jealously guarded principle in the Green Party and members are likely to oppose any erosion of that role.  Given the growth in party membership there are issues around managing larger conferences (at present any member can attend) and the possibility of switching to a delegate conference. Although the Green Party trumpets its democratic structures the current right of anyone to attend is counter-balanced by the issue of affordability. Despite differing charges for conference admission according to capacity to pay, fares and accommodation are expensive, so those economically disadvantaged are less able to afford to attend.

The concerns outlined above along with members who want to see Ali and Womack continue as deputy leaders has led to some members advocating a vote for RON in the leadership elections. RON stands for Re-open Nominations.  They argue that a  winning vote for RON would both enable a wider and more diverse field to come forward for the leadership and potentially allow Ali and Womack to continue as deputies.

Others argue that RON is extremely unlikely to win, if it did it would be an embarrassment to the party, and despite misgivings Lucas-Bartley is the only real show in town.


Declaration of interest: I have backed Shahrar Ali standing as deputy leader on the grounds of his effective communication skills  and his commitment to internal party democracy. We do not of course agree on everything!

Shahrar Ali calls for Green Party internal referendum on party's Progressive Alliance positions

Shahrar Ali, a contender for deputy leadership of the Green Party, a post he currently holds, has called for a possible internal referendum on the negotiating position the party should hold in an discussion on a Progressive Alliance with other parties.

In a Facebook posting over the weekend Ali wrote:

I've been on two leadership hustings this weekend and I must say one of the most controversial topics of engagement was on Progressive Alliances. I believe there's been a mismatch between our public pronouncements on the matter and member expectation. It's imperative we don't get the cart before the horse.

He followed up this somewhat opaque statement stating:

It does frustrate me sometimes when we [the Green Party] appear to cut corners. Engagement and consultation were never meant to be easy, but it's a mistake to think of due process as an encumbrance. To the contrary, those of us in position of responsibility have obligation to engage and not circumvent. Better decisions will result.

Other posters express concern that the party is moving towards a top-down model where leaders make policy rather than members, The Progressive Alliance idea was strongly backed by Green MP Caroline Lucas LINK who is a candidate for the leadership position on a job share basis with Jonathan Bartley.

Green Left, the eco-socialist grouping within the Green Party of England and Wales,  adopted the following position on the Progressive Alliance at its last General Meeting:

 Green Left welcomes the move to discuss campaigning and electoral alliances leading up to the next General Election.

Green Left has always promoted the idea of working together with the left, where we share values, and that, as much as possible, the Green Party should be included in this, lending support to and endorsing Eco-socialists who are members of other parties. We did this by supporting Salma Yaqoob in parliamentary elections.

This needs further discussion with members and we welcome consultations, about it, taking place.

Green Left members with our positive standing amongst others on the Left are able to positively engage people outside the GPEW who share our values and therefore should take the initiative locally in promoting discussions with individuals, progressive groups and other left parties, such as the Jeremy Corbyn led Labour Party.

Any left alliance must be committed to introducing PR for all future elections and the 'Best Placed Left Candidate’ should be a consideration in marginal seats.