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.

Clive Lewis & Caroline Lucas head up speakers list at Progressive Alliance event next week

From Compass

 Politics is in crisis and the repercussions from the result of the referendum are being felt socially, politically and economically. For many people, it feels like the country is being torn apart.

If we want a politics and economy that puts all of us first, it's time to come together and start building alliances. We need a democracy that listens and responds, that puts the people in control. We will not get there by shutting people out and perpetuating divisions, but by building bridges, alliances common cause.

In the current political chaos the Right are asserting themselves across the political terrain, while most of the Left's focus is on how Labour is pulling itself apart. Only a progressive alliance of all parties, people and movements can flip the debate to one that builds a society that is much more equal, sustainable and democratic. With a general election looming in the Autumn, a popular front of ideas and organisation is the only way to defend what we hold dear and to start to build a society that we can all live in and be proud of.

We are calling a series of public meetings to explore: what could a progressive alliance look like? How possible is it? And what can we do to start to make it feasible?

The first meeting will be on Tuesday July 5th. While this event is in London, local groups are exploring holding simultaneous events around the country. We are working on live streaming the event (details to follow) and will be hosting online discussion and meetings across the country in the coming weeks and months.

SPEAKERS:
Caroline Lucas MP, Green Party
Clive Lewis MP, Labour Party
Amina Gichinga, Take Back the City
John Harris, Journalist
Hopefully SNP & Plaid Cymru speakers tbc

VENUE: Bloomsbury Central Baptist Church, 235 Shaftesbury Avenue, London, WC2H 8EP.
The venue is fully accessible for wheelchair users.

DATE & TIME: Tuesday July 5th, doors 6pm for a prompt 6.30pm start, finishing at 8.30pm

TICKETS: Please click here to get your tickets, spaces are limited.

Tickets are pay what you can to help us cover the cost of putting on the event, if you would like to come but are not able to pay, please do email clare@compassonline.org.uk.

This is about parties and seats - we need to make sure that the Conservatives and Right do not win the next election - but it must also be much richer and deeper. It must be about values and movements; it is a time for all of us to step up and get involved.

This event will launch a series of conversations about a Progressive Alliance that will then continue across the country, linking up with parties, movements and organisations. There has been a lot of talk about the need for Progressive Alliances over the last week, now is the time to start organising.

Green Parties propose talks on progressive alliance post-Referendum vote

This is the text of the open letter that has gone from the Green Parties of England, Wales and Northern Ireland to Jeremy Corbyn, Tim Farron and Leanne Wood urging talks about a progressive alliance.

 Dear all,

In a spirit of openness and transparency, we are writing to you as Leaders of parties which oppose Brexit, to invite you to a cross-party meeting to explore how we best rise to the challenge posed by last week’s vote to leave the EU.

Britain is in crisis and people are scared about the future. Never have we had a greater need for calm leadership to be shown by politicians.

We have a UK Government in chaos, an economy facing a crisis and people up and down the country facing serious hardship. There is an urgent need to make a stand against any austerity and the slashing of environmental legislation, human and workers’ rights that may come with Brexit.

With the growing likelihood of an early General Election, the importance of progressive parties working together to prevent the formation of a Tory-UKIP-DUP government that would seek to enact an ultra-right Brexit scenario is ever more pressing.

This is an opportunity to recognise that a more plural politics is in both the Left’s electoral and political interests. This crisis exposes the absurdity of our first past the post electoral system. Just 24 per cent of those eligible to vote elected the government that called the referendum. The only fair way to proceed is to have a proportional voting system where people can back the politicians who they believe in, rather than taking a gamble and not knowing who they will end up with.

The idea of a progressive alliance has been floated for several years, and proposals have once again been put forward in the context of the current crisis. We believe that the time has come to urgently consider such ideas together in the context of a Westminster Government. We recognise the very different political situation in Scotland, given the strongly pro-EU majority there. We hope that co-operation between progressive parties their can ensure that this mandate is respected, and we will support them to keep all options open.

We look forward to your response,

Natalie Bennett, Leader of the Green Party of England and Wales

Alice Hooker-Stroud, Leader of Wales Green Party

Steven Agnew MLA, Leader of the Green Party of Northern Ireland

Caroline Lucas MP, Brighton Pavilion

The Green Party bids farewell to Natalie Bennett and will have new leader in September

 

A very human leader Pic: documentary.com

Announcement from the Green Party

Natalie Bennett, Leader of the Green Party of England and Wales, has announced that she will not to stand for re-election in the Leadership elections, which take place this summer and culminate at the Green Party’s Autumn Conference.

During her hugely successful two-term, four-year stint as leader, Natalie has guided the Party through a period of extraordinary growth and increasing impact.

Under Natalie’s leadership, the Party has increased its number of MEPs by 50% in the 2014 European Elections, recorded its best-ever result in a General Election in 2015 (amassing over one million votes for the first time and saving 123 deposits compared to 4 in 2010) and, most recently, recorded its best-ever performance in London elections, where Greens are now the undisputed third party.

Membership of the Green Party of England and Wales has increased five-fold under Natalie’s watch, supported enormously by her efforts to engage with and inspire local and regional parties from Stroud to Solihull, Sunderland to St Ives.

The party broke in to the televised Leaders’ Debates ahead of the May 2015 General Election and Natalie used the high-profile media opportunities to share widely Green Party values and policies.
Reflecting on her successful spell at the helm, Natalie said:

I have been proud to lead a party through a period of phenomenal expansion and increased impact. With the support of our passionate members and supporters we have been able to achieve much in a relatively short period.

The Green Party offers a genuine alternative to the tired status quo and I am proud that Greens do politics differently.

There’s greatly increased public understanding that when you want the honest, caring, committed view – one that isn’t guided by the views of the latest focus group or fear of a tabloid backlash but by fundamental principles and values – you should come to the Green Party.

Looking to the future, in which I intend to remain fully engaged in Green Party politics, I’m confident the Green Party is going to become increasingly influential on the political scene. We’re the only party with a platform that recognises the essential interrelationship between economic and environmental justice – that we must have a society in which no one fears hunger or homelessness while we collectively live within the environmental limits of our one fragile planet.

 Richard Mallender, Chair of the Green Party Executive, commented:

On behalf of everyone in the Green Party I thank Natalie for her outstanding leadership over the past four years. Without Natalie we would not have been able to achieve all that we have achieved. I am delighted that Natalie will remain active in the party - her support will be invaluable to the new Leadership team as we continue to grow.

Nominations for the Green Party Leadership elections open on 1st June 2016 and close on 30th June. A campaign period will run from 1 July until 24 July, at which point the one-month balloting period begins. The new Leadership team will be unveiled at the Green Party’s Autumn Conference in early September.

Note from Wembley Matters

The leadership of the Green Party is rather different from the more traditional leadership of other political parties.  The Greens previously did not have leaders ,but 'Spokespeople', and the leadership model was only adopted after a vigorous debate.

However in many ways the leader is still a spokesperson as policy continues to be made by the twice yearly conference, with positions in between decided by an elected committee of the party.  This means that the leader cannot make up policy on the hoof and causes problems when TV or radio interviewers expect immediate answers assuming the role is the same as that for traditional parties. The process is sometimes cumbersome but in my view more democratic.

With policy decided by Conference there is less scope for a leadership contest based on policy differences, although differences in emphasis will be significant.  In some ways, Caroline Lucas, the only Green MP, has been more free to put forward policies such as the 'progressive alliance' and this creates some tension at times with some members wary of being bounced into post facto policy.

Within the party there are different perspectives ranging from 'deep greens' very much concerned with prioritising the environment and eco-socialists who see capitalism,  by its very nature, as not being able to deal with the challenge of climate change.  A particular issue that differentiates the green left from the Labour Party is the latters emphasis on economic growth, which is also the basis of capitalism's need for ever expanding markets. The eco-socialist left looks to a socially useful economy rather than a natural resources gobbling, climate change inducing, consumerist economy.

The Party's decision to give equal weight to environmental and social justice has informed the development of policy over  last few years and contributed to the 'Green Surge' of new members in reaction to the neoliberalism of the Labour Party pre-Corbyn.  The Green Party Trade Union Group and Green Left have been reaching out to sections of the labour movement. The Green Left Facebook has nearly 8,000 members and is a lively forum for eco-socialist ideas in the movement.

Inevitably perspectives on the Labour Party under Corbyn, assessment of Labour's developing policies on the environment, economy and voting reform will inform the Green Party's summer of debate, but the unique nature of the Green Party will shape the discussion.

London Green Party's decision not to recommend a Mayoral second preference debated

George Galloway's battle bus was parked in Church Road today.  He could be heard bellowing to an empty street.

 Motion passed by London Fed, Monday 18 April

That the London Federation of Green Parties has great reservations about the policy positions on inequality, road building, airport expansion, and estate demolition of both so-called front runners for Mayor of London, and does not feel able to make a positive recommendation to Green voters in this election for a candidate who should receive their second preference vote for Mayor.

There have been a number of exchanges on Twitter regarding the London Federation of Green Parties decision not to recommend a second preference to voters in the London Mayoral vote. Here is the official statement following the decision:

The London Federation of Green Parties has announced that it cannot make a positive recommendation for either Sadiq Khan or Zac Goldsmith as an option for green voters‘ second preference in the election for Mayor.

Last month, the Party set out four ‘red lines’ on road building, airport expansion, estate demolition and inequality, against which they have now assessed the Labour and Conservative candidates’ policies and campaigning.

Neither candidate has provided guarantees against taking backward steps on air pollution and congestion by building new roads and expanding airports, and neither has made clear how they will take effective steps to stop the loss of thousands of council homes through estate demolitions.

No Mayor of London has ever won a majority vote on first preferences and in three of the four previous elections London Green Party decided to recommend its supporters back Ken Livingstone – as an Independent in 2000 and as the Labour candidate in 2008 and 2012 – as the best choice for the second preference votes of its supporters.

In a statement following its meeting last night, the Federation said:

Greens in London want positive change and a Green Mayor is the best way to deliver that. But Londoners will be able to give two candidates for Mayor their support, and to elect more Greens to the London Assembly.

The next Mayor could do a lot to tackle air pollution, housing and inequality, but he or she could also make the situation far worse. Unfortunately, neither Zac Goldsmith nor Sadiq Khan have ruled out major road building, which would create more congestion and pollution. Nor have they ruled out airport expansion which will make noise, pollution and climate change worse.

Despite their promises to act on London disastrous housing market, neither Sadiq Khan nor Zac Goldsmith are offering specific promises to reverse the proposed loss of 7,000 council homes from demolition schemes already in the planning pipeline. These backward steps are unacceptable.

Sian Berry, Green candidate for Mayor of London said:

The Greens have grown in strength and experience over 16 years and our policies stand alone as the best ideas for London in this election. We are the only party that will say no to big road building, airport expansion and forced estate demolition.

I know my supporters will have their own thoughts about who will get their second preference vote. But Zac Goldsmith and Sadiq Khan have both failed to provide the guarantees that they will not make a bad situation worse in London either by increasing pollution with new roads and expanded airports or making the housing crisis even worse with the loss of thousands of council homes in estate demolitions.

I want Londoners to have clean air and a decent, affordable home. The only guarantee of that is a Green Mayor and a strong group of Green representatives on the London Assembly.

 End of statement

Readers may be interested to know that the previous decision to back Ken Livingstone was made after he accepted an invitation to meet with the London Federation and I remember the lively Q&A and subsequent discussion that took place before a decision to back him as our second preference was made.

I understand that Sadiq Khan has not responded to a similar invitation.

A YouGov poll for the Evening Standard today puts Sadiq Khan (Labour) on 31% and Zac Goldsmith on 20%. Khan's lead has increased from 7% in March to 11% now.   However 25% still 'don't know' and 8% do not intend to vote.

Sian Berry is supported by 6% ahead of Lib Dem Caroline Pidgeon on 5%. UKIP is marginally in front on 7% while George Galloway for Respect is 'hardly troubling the scorer.'

 The Standard says the poll suggests that the mayoralty will be decided on second preference votes

Once included, without 'don't knows' and 'would not vote', and weighted by likelihood to vote, the Labour contender is on 60% and Richmond Park MP 40%

I would be cautious about that in the light of recent failings by pollsters and with the 'doughnut' effect of voters in the outer London boroughs favouring the Tories (Brent and Harrow excluded).

There is a lively debate going on inside and outside the Green Party on the Federation's decision.  Here are some of the positions I have since the announcement of 'no second preference'.

People are capable of making up their own minds. It would be patronising for the Green Party to tell people how to vote.

The election of a Tory mayor would be a setback for ordinary Londoners. The Labour Party should see how important this is and talk to the Green Party to seek agreement on its 'Red Lines'

There is a big difference between a Khan and a Goldsmith victory and its impact on London and nationally, and on the current struggle between the Blairites and Corbynites in the Labour Party.

The Green Party decision will backfire as the Tory's racist campaign against Khan continues and intensifies.  We will be accused of not being serious about class politics and a progressive alliance.

The suffering imposed on Londoners by Labour councils implementing cuts, as instructed by Corbyn and McDonnell,  explains why they don't want a Labour Mayor either. Nobody said there is no difference between Goldsmith and Khan but it may be academic if you are a council tenant being socially cleansed by a Labour council.

A defeat for Khan will be seen as a defeat for Corbyn and will undermine any hopes of a progressive alliance to take on the Tories.

Only the Greens have the policies to make real change in London on these vital issues and a vote for a Green Mayor and Green Assembly Members is the only guarantee that such policies will be implemented.

The London Green Left blog on second preference can be found HERE

Brent Uncut (if only!) event on March 12th

At the Green Party Conference there was a discussion on whether we could work as part of a 'progressive alliance with the Labour Party. Opinions and experiences were mixed with some claiming that although Momentum had come out of the Corbyn leadership campaign it was little more than an election machine for the Labour Party who would back any Labour candidate, regardless of whether they supported anti-austerity or Corbyn, as a defeat would be seen as a blow for Corbyn.  I hope to post a video of the discussion later.

Meanwhile Brent Momentum has sent out the following invitation. Brent Momentum's event is called Brent Uncut, although of course Brent Labour Council has cut local services to the bone as a consequence of central government slashing local governnment finances. I  would be interested in any comments you wish to make.

What would Brent look like without austerity? Brent Momentum with Brent Trades Council and Brent Fightback presents Brent Uncut: Fighting Austerity for a Better Borough. Come along for a day of workshops and discussions, with:

Shelly Asquith (National Union of Students), Melissa Benn (journalist, writer, campaigner), Dawn Butler MP,  Muhammed Butt (Leader, Brent Council) and Michael Pavey (Dep Leader, Brent Council).

Participate in workshops on: education, transport, health, energy/climate, housing, PREVENT, welfare/disability and culture.

Brent Uncut will be held from 10 - 4 pm on Saturday 12 March 2016 at  Neasden Methodist Church, Neasden Lane North, NW10 0AF.

Please sign up and share via Facebook.

You don't need to be an expert or have been to events like this before. Everybody has great ideas and contributions to make for how we can improve our local area. Come along and be part of the movement for a more democratic, equal and decent society.

In solidarity,

Team Momentum

Previewing the Green Party Autumn Conference

The Green Party will be assembling for their Autumn Conference in Bournemouth tomorrow at a time when we need  to  come to terms with the Corbyn victory and what it means for the left in general and the Green Party in particular.

In the above interview Caroline Lucas sets out Green Party's positive welcome for a socialist led Labour Party, although that is a long way from the Labour Party itself democratically adopting socialist policies.

One key quote is her response to a question on whether the Green Party itself is a socialist party:

"...Sometimes words like socialist can be more problematic than they are worth in a sense because  people will bring different baggage to what the term means for them. If you're asking is the Green Party fundamentally committee to the redistribution of wealth, to equality and social justice, absolutely 'Yes' it is and I don't think there's any difference between any of us on that."

She indicates that the main difference with Corbyn is that for the Greens these policies are seen through the lens of challenging climate change, the biggest challenge facing human-kind, so that issues such as the nature of an ever expanding consumer led capitalist economy contributing to the depletion of world resources and the acceleration of global warming are paramount.

She is positive about the potential for progressive alliances which is ironic because Green Left, the Eco-socialist grouping within the Labour Party were not successful in their bid for an official  Fringe Meeting on  'A principled or pragmatic progressive alliance?'

However GL are going ahead anyway and holding the meeting outside the conference venue at  The Goat & Tricycle 27-29 W Hill Rd, Bournemouth, Dorset BH2 5PF 8-11pm on Saturday night.

An issue discussed in Lucas' interview which will loom large at the Conference is the Green Party's position on the EU Referendum.  There will be a panel on EU Referendum: the Green 'Yes' at 1pm on Saturday which Lucas will chair.

Basically the party position is Yes to a referendum but Yes to reform. This position is now under strain, not just because Cameron's negotiations may result in dilution of the progressive aspects of the Social Chapter, but the searing experience of Greece in trying to challenge neoliberalism and austerity, TTIP and the failure of the EU to deal humanely and effectively with the refugee crisis.  This means that somew on the left and some trade unions are now leaning towards a socialist 'No' on the basis that the potential for reform is so much pie in the sky.

Later on Saturday at 6.15pm Caroline Lucas will chair a Panel on "Climate Countdown to Paris" which will discuss strategies and alliances to bring pressure on the December talks so that they are more ambitions both in terms of eventual impact on global warming and in terms of speeding up the response.

On Sunday afternoon at 2.30pm following the General Election result there will be a panel on 'How to get PR: What needs to happen to ensure there is never again a repeat of the unfairnessof the 2015 General Election?' The panel includes Neal Lawson of Compass and Robin McAlpine of the Scottish referendum campaign and chair of Common Weal.

Alongside this in the plenary sessions members will be actively engaged in making policy. Members have prioritised a motion on housing into the No.1 slot.

Will Corbyn end the 'dented shield' in local government?

Congratulations to local Labour Party activists who worked hard in the Corbyn campaign. As one of them remarked to me at the 'Refugees Welcome Here' demonstration yesterday 'this is only the beginning of the struggle.'

The Party's adherence to neoliberalism, the anti-Corbyn Parliamentary Labour Party, and the role of democracy within the party, including Party Conference, are just some of the areas where battles will need to be fought.

On social media today it is clear that some Greens have decided to throw in their lot with the Labour Party, and this includes a number who left Labour for the Greens when they thought Labour had 'lost its way'. However others have stated their intention to stay with the Greens on the basis that eco-socialism is a separate strand of political thinking in contrast to Corbynism which remains committed to 'productivism' LINK

Although this still leaves space for a 'progressive alliance' with the Labour Left on some issues there are problems on the ground with the positions adopted by Labour locally.

Most local councils are beginning their budget process this Autumn ready for April 2016.  Even Conservative council have said that they can no longer provide effective services with the planned cuts in funding.

Labour councils have adopted a 'dented shield position' up this point which means implementing the cuts rather than taking a principled stand against them and setting 'illegal' budgets. This was also true of the minority Green council in Brighton.  In the process services have been cut to the core and out-sourcing has become the norm with some handing over to the voluntary sector.

So how will 'dented shield' councils such as Brent adapt to the new leadership and will this mean that at last they make common cause with anti-austerity and trade union campaigners who have been challenging the cuts both in terms of their necessity and of the damage that they cause?

The May Labour NEC discussed local government issues and included this statement: LINK

Since May 2010 local government has had its funding dramatically cut. Many Councils have had their funding cut by 50% or more. This majority Conservative Government seeks to continue to cut Councils even further and puts vital public services at risk. These cuts are unsustainable and threaten services across the board, including in education, health, social care, fostering and adoption and community safety. We called on colleagues across the Labour movement to work together with Local Government to defend the vital public services our communities rely on. We look forward to working closely with Trade Unions, MPs and others to fight for a fairer deal for local government.

I think it is not just a fight for a 'fairer deal' for local government but for its very survival. In addition to the campaign  over funding there is also the need to preserve the role of local government in providing services with a public sector' ethos and purpose. This means challenging the privatisation of our education system that has taken place through academies and free schools, the out-sourcing of adult social care, children's services and youth provision.

Brent Council has eroded that ethos and undermined the role of democratically  accountable local government by accepting, and sometimes promulgating, the idea that services can be better provided by the private and voluntary sectors.

Only a few Brent Labour councillors nailed their colours to the Corbyn mast during the Labour election campaign and its leader, Cllr Muhammed Butt, argued against his CLP backing Corbyn.

This leaves the Labour Group on Brent Council out of line with both the party nationally and locally. There should be some interesting discussions ahead.

Despite Corbyn the impossibility of tackling climate change within capitalism remains the key issue for eco-socialists

The old politics is crumbling, not just in Britain but across our continent. We now have the chance to embrace a movement based not on greed or fear, but on resilient local communities, people working together and a stable economy that works for generations to come. I truly hope you win the contest on 12 September – and I look forward to continuing to work with you to bring about the progressive politics that has inspired us both for so many years...

Caroline Lucas' open letter to Jeremy Corbyn published in the Independent LINK  has created a lot of discussion and comment, not all of it complimentary.

When members of the Labour Party have asked me to join the party I have often replied, only half-jokingly, 'I can't. I'm a socialist!'

Now it looks as if that is what the Labour Party itself is saying to some of those who have joined recently as a result of Jeremy Corbyn's leadership campaign.

I haven't because I am committed to eco-socialism and a member of  Green Left. This is what we said in 2006:

 “Activists in the Green Party have founded Green Left because many Greens believe the only path to an ecological, economically and socially just and peaceful society has to be based on an anti-capitalist political agenda.”

You can read more about Green Left's political position HERE but for me a key issue is that climate change as a result of human activity is such a threat that we have to change that activity. We cannot continue expanding industrial production without limit as the processes involved will accelerate climate change and eventually threaten humankind and other species.

To change to a sustainable economy requires separating wants from needs, ending the artificial creation of demand through advertising,  stopping the plundering of the earth's finite resources, and creating an economic system based on cooperation rather than competition and exploitation.

This is the opposite of neoliberalism which monetises everything from education to water and has no regard for the damage it causes to people and planet.

Corbyn's campaign although sharing many of the Green Party's policies does not address this fundamental issue at the heart of the planetary crisis.  The Labour Party he will inherit as leader, if elected, is still committed to the neoliberal agenda, albeit a slightly softer version than the Tory one, and it will be a huge battle to change that commitment as the reaction of the Blairites, the bulk of the media, and the Establishment have shown.

The Labour leadership campaign has highlighted one issue for me regarding democratic policy making. All the candidates seem to be putting forward policies as individuals, reflecting the party's move away from the sovereignty of conference when members can put forward motions about vital issues and principles, debate and vote on them - it is now a top-down process.  The leadership campaign, rather like a General Election, gives rank and file members just one chance to vote on policy through choosing one of the candidates rather than a say in formulating policy.

The Green Party  still makes policy democratically at its two Conferences a year with a process that includes pre-agenda discussions, pre-conference prioritisation, conference workshops culminating a debate on the floor of the Conference. The leader has no more say in these debates than rank and file members.  The Autumn Conference will be after the winner of the Labour contest is announced and any alliances or pacts will be subject to Conference debate and decision making.

The process means that our leaders cannot make up major policy on the hoof without it first having been decided by the membership. This probably led to some of the difficulties experienced by Natalie Bennett during the General Election campaign when the media expected her to have the same freedom to make policy as other party leaders.

These differences in the process of policy making will present some difficulties if a Corbyn led Labour Party and the Greens set up some kind of 'progressive' alliance ('progressive' is a vague label claimed by many often conflicting groups - anti-austerity or socialist alliance may be better as a guide to action in this parliament).

The undemocratic structures of the Labour Party, the dominance of the far from radical Parliamentary Labour Party, the behind the scenes machinations of the Establishment and intelligence services (cf my previous article on Harold Wilson and my prediction of dirty tricks over Corbyn's support for Palestine LINK) and media hostility all lead me to fear that Andy Burnham will end up as Labour Party leader but, along with Caroline Lucas, I wish Corbyn well.

UPDATE Brent Labour MPs 2-1 against Welfare Reform Bill

Dawn Butler (Brent Central) and Tulip Siddiq (Hampstead & Kilburn) defied the Labour whip last night and joined 46 other Labour MPs in voting against the Welfare Reform Bill. Liberal Democrat MPs also voted against.

Tulip Siddiq had signalled her intention in a Channel 4 News interview earlier that evening.  Renowned local Tweeter Pukkah Punjabi revised her Storify posting in  the light of Siddiq's stance. LINK

As far as I know ultra loyalist Barry Gardiner (Brent North) obeyed the whip. Gardiner's one attempt at rebellion was against Gordon Brown and unfortunately was ill-timed - just a few days before Big G 'Saved the World' during the economic crisis.

UPDATE Barry Gardiner has told the KILBURN TIMES that Tulip Siddiq and Dawn Butler fell into a Government trap by voting against the Bill:

He explained: “Either we voted for the bill because we supported those of our policies that they’d incorporated into it but in so doing we voted for unacceptable changes to the benefits system such as three million families that are going to lose £1000 or impact on carers from the benefit cap. Or we voted against those regressive policies in the bill but in so doing voted against our own on apprenticeships.

“It was meant to trap us. It was a false choice designed to force us into either opposing our own policies or supporting the evil policies they were putting forward. I’ve always considered that if you’re asked to choose two unacceptable positions the sensible position is to refuse both. That is why I abstained."

The revolt perhaps gives some indication of the core support Jeremy Corbyn may command in the Parliamentary Labour Party. Labour Mayoral candidates Diane Abbot, Sadiq Khan and David Lammy also voted against the Bill.

Ahead of the vote Green MP, Caroline Lucas, said: 

“The Tories are attempting to dismantle our welfare state, and cut back on support given to those who need it the most.

“The bill will slash support for people with ill health including many with mental health problems – new claimants of Employment Support Allowance in the Work Related Activity Group, will see payments cut by almost £30 a week. This is very harmful for people with long-term fluctuating mental ill-health.  It will lock in child poverty for those born into larger families and it will leave Ministers significantly less accountable for their policies by scrapping the current legally binding child poverty targets.  

“It’s also deeply concerning that the bill includes a clause which would allow the Government to further lower the cap on benefits without properly consulting Parliament - thus potentially plunging more children into poverty without MPs even having a debate on the issue.

“It's now down to MPs from all parties to look beyond the politics of today’s debate and focus instead on the devastating impact that this piece of legislation will have on people up and down the country. 
"Our crumbling social security system is on the brink – now is the time to take a stand.

“George Osborne is playing politics with poverty. Failing to stand up to this regressive Welfare Bill would be an utter betrayal of the principle which says that those in need deserve support.  I’ll be joining many MPs from across the parties in voting against the Government’s Bill and making a stand for our welfare state.”

Lucas has spoken of the need for a 'Progressive Alliance' to challenge neoliberalism and austerity and yesterday's vote  gives some indication of the potential extent of that alliance in Parliament. 

Before the vote Owen Jones released a video making the case for voting against the Bill.