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.

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.

Red Pepper on 'How red are the Greens?'

The latest Red Pepper, delivered today, has How red are the Greens? as its cover story with additional articles inside. It is edited by Michael Calderbank who is a member of the LRC and a local Brent activist with whom I have campaigned on various local issues.

The cover story by Andrew Dolan is fairly friendly and attributes a drop in Labour support on the left and the support of the young  'in part a consequence of the Green Party's opposition to the austerity politics that Labour has committed itself to. The Green's policies of rail nationalisation, social housing construction, a rise in the minimum wage and free education represent an attractive alternative to a demographic traditionally located on the left and more likely to express dissatisfaction with neoliberalism and austerity than those already entrenched within labour and property markets.'

However he quotes research by James Dennison that on specific economic policy issues those planning on voting Green in fact tend to be less left wing that Labour voters. 'What clearly separates likely Green voters from those of other parties, UKIP aside, is that a far higher proportion express a lack of trust in MPs in particular and UK democracy in general.'

He goes on, 'Accompanying the Green's leftward policy shift has been a new rhetoric comparable to that deployed across Europe. Talk of "the people" , of "us versus them" and even of "revolt" is now commonplace In Green Party publications and speeches and carries some legitimacy when considered in relation to the party's well-publicised support for various grassroots struggles and the involvement of the Scottish Greens in the Radical Independence Campaign'.'

After examining the prospects of the Greens winning more seats and holding on to Brighton Pavilion (according to him not terribly good) he says on tactical voting 'A newly emboldened Green party has little interest in such tactical anti-Tory consideration. Rather its eyes are fixed on the opportunities that may arise should '"politics as usual" and the austerity it entails continue. The party's recent talks with thee SNP and Plaid Cymru, and their stated intention to "unite wherever possible to battle the Westminster parties' "obsession with austerity", hint at the possibility of a changed political landscape: one in which the idea of the "other parties" including the Green Party, transforming growing popularity into power is more than just a pipedream.'

Joseph Healy, billed as a founder member of Green Left and ex GP International committee, writes a pessimistic article suggesting that the Greens chances of not disappointing their supporters if the get into any government are 'not good' based on what happened in Ireland, Czech Republic and France.

Hilary Wainwright in Out of their seats writes 'Caroline Lucas is perhaps currently the one (MP) able to speak most openly and clearly about what is on voters' minds: austerity and is daily consequences, and what is needed is parliamentary terms to end it.'  Quoting Lucas saying that a progressive alliance could do more in the next parliament Wainright goes on: 'Although the 'we' might in parliamentary voting terms be only one MP, in Lucas the Greens have had a real political force in parliament - a force driven not only by her personal capacities, which are immense' but also by a political methodology that could well be adopted by the progressive alliance as a whole. Lucas's effective parliamentary initiatives against fracking and the energy companies, for public ownership of the rail system and for reinstating the NHS have been the result of immersion in extra-parliamentary campaigns and public debates..A bit like Tony Benn, she thereby giver further confidence and strength to the movements in society and their ability to shift public consciousness with a clear and persuasive political message.'

Reviewing Caroline Lucas's recently Published Honourable Friends? Parliament and the Fight for Change, Ian Sinclair having praised the book as 'an absolute joy to read - accessible, fast paced and entertaining - and often funny too'  concludes..'Cogent, rational and humane Honourable Friends? confirms why it is essential all progressives work to make sure Lucas continues as an MP.

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.

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

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.

A Green's place is in the movements

The Green Party is committed to advance its cause through standing in elections but importantly its members are  also involved in many movements for environmental and social justice.

At General Election time the focus is inevitably on election campaigning and there is a danger that this takes away from other, broader campaigns.  In London with the Assembly and Mayoral elections happening next year we could end up continuing on the electoralist road and putting all our energy into getting Green Assembly members elected.

This is important but I would argue that with the Tory's forming a new administration that will renew the war on the poor and the vulnerable that our energy should also go into participating in and building the movements challenging neoliberal policy on  the welfare state, benefit caps, gentrification and social cleansing, reckless plundering of the world's natural resources, fracking, industrialised schooling and the demonisation of migrants.

The Green Party's  Philosophical Basis states:

We do not believe that there is only one way to change society, or that we have all the answers. We seek to be part of a wider green movement that works for these principles through a variety of means. We generally support those who use reasonable and non-violent forms of direct action to further just aims.

Our beliefs will bring us into conflict with those committed to material affluence, the accumulation of power and the unsustainable exploitation of the Earth. We are always ready to negotiate with those who oppose us, and seek fair settlements that respect their needs for security, self esteem and freedom of choice.

We will even work with those who disagree with us where sufficient common ground can be found to do so. However, we do not seek power at any price, and will withdraw our support if we are asked to make irreversible or fundamental compromises.

Yesterday's skirmishes in Downing Street protesting at the Conservative election victory presage a likely new wave of direct action in the face of five more years of austerity and cuts.  The issue of legitimacy of the new Government is clear when you consider that Tories won on 36.9% of the vote, when about a third of the electorate (15.8 m people out of an electorate of 46.4m) did not vote, and that the first past the post system meant hat it took many more voters to elect a minority party MP:

The equivalent figure for Conservative has been quoted at 34,000 and Labour 40,000.

The Green vote in 2010 was just 265,187 but the number of Green MPs remains only one. A proportional system would have give 30 Green MPs although the prospect of many more UKIP MPs is a major concern.  A petition for a fairer voting system has been set up HERE

In her speech yesterday Caroline Lucas MP set out her post-election ideas:

The election results have served as a stark reminder that our political system is broken. The time for electoral reform is long overdue. Only proportional representation will deliver a parliament that is truly legitimate, and that better reflects the views of the people it’s meant to represent.

But we must move forward today. While the campaign for electoral reform gathers momentum, those of us wanting to see a fairer, more compassionate and progressive politics must find new ways of working together, a new way to do politics – and put that into practice now. 

Unless we break free of tribal politics and work together to fight austerity, and promote crucial, common-sense climate policies, we’re faced with an incredibly bleak political future. For the sake of all those who’ll suffer most at the hands of the Tories, we must rethink our relations and recognise the importance of our common ground. 

That should include shared platforms and case-by-case electoral pacts, to build a strong progressive alliance to challenge the Tories over the next five years.  Clearly in Wales and Scotland, where there are PR elections for the Welsh Assembly and Scottish Parliament, this doesn't apply, but where First Past the Post continues to distort election results, it should surely be considered.

And one of the first challenges such an alliance will face is ensuring we win the referendum on membership of the EU.

 While we certainly support urgent EU reform, we cannot allow backward-looking Tories to make common cause with UKIP and lead us out of the EU and into the wilderness.

This is all well and good but it sees things very much through traditional party politics, something that has been rejected by thousands of  activists and seen by many ordinary people as irrelevant to their day to day struggles.  A 'new way of doing politics' should mean the Greens participating much more in struggles on the ground, taking part in direct action (something Lucas was prepared to do over fracking') and most importantly learning from these struggles and feeding what has been learnt into Green Party policy and strategy.

Our position as an 'anti-austerity' party needs to be much more fully explored and explained. Although we said  that being anti-austerity was a different way of doing things and was based on a alternative economic model I think Greens failed to  explain what this would mean in real terms in the context of the media obsession with the deficit and national debt.  This made us vulnerable on the media and in local hustings to the cry of 'but where is the money coming from?' and led to our depiction as 'dreamers' and 'idealists' unrelated to the real world.

In short if we are 'anti-austerity' what are we 'pro'? Can we frame that 'pro' positively to convince people that a different economic system could work to their benefit?  Should there be a new name for the People's Assembly Against Austerity  - the People's Assembly FOR.....

Paul Krugman in his influential Guardian article on the 'austerity delusion' LINK expressed astonishment at UK Labour's buying into the delusion and this may well have contributed to Labour's failure in the election - 'if we are going to have austerity anyway, who not vote for the devil we know?'

Unfortunately the initial reaction to Labour's defeat seems to be an attempt by Blairites to reclaim the agenda and push Labour further right - exemplified by Peter Mandelson on the Marr Show this morning say that Miliband's ditching of 'New Labour' was a 'terrible mistake.' LINK

Mandelson's distancing from the trade unions and their role in the Labour Party gives an impetus to the Green Party's work with trade unions, not only encouraging everyone, and espcially young workers, to join unions but setting up direct links locally and nationally.


If Labour is re-captured by the Blairites it leaves space for creating a real alternative - not just through a political party but through a movement - and establishing a different way of doing politics through social and environmental movements.

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

Welcome progress on Climate Change at TUC Congress

Welcome progress on climate change was made at this year's TUC Congress. The latest Greener Jobs Alliance Newsletter for October 2017 LINK contains the following reports.
 

Unions want power sector back!

This year’s TUC Congress in Brighton unanimously agreed new, far reaching policies demanding the democratic control of energy and a modern low carbon industrial strategy. An ambitious motion from the Bakers’ Union brings the trade union movement much closer to the vision set out in Labour’s election manifesto. It also brought a dozen delegates to the rostrum, urging the TUC to campaign for the UK’s rigged energy system to return to democratic control, and to work with unions on a cross-sector industrial strategy to tackle ‘the irrefutable evidence that dangerous climate change is driving unprecedented changes to our environment’ 

Addressing TUC Congress: Sarah Woolley, Bakers, Food and Allied Workers Union

The TUC motion LINK proposed in a speech by Sarah Woolley from the Bakers, Food and Allied Workers Union (BFAWU – see picture), has five key demands for the TUC to:

•   Campaign to bring the UK’s rigged energy system under democratic control. 


•   Back a mass programme of homes insulation 


•   Demand rights for workplace environmental reps 


•   Demand that Just Transition in integral to industrial strategy 


•   Consult with unions on a cross-sector industrial strategy focused on our internationally agreed carbon emission reduction targets. 
Sarah Woolley argued that the breakdown of the planet’s climate is a core issue for her union, with its global impacts on food production and distribution. Agriculture and food manufacture, processing and transport accounted for a tenth of the UK’s greenhouse gas emissions. Meanwhile, hurricanes were devastating the Caribbean, while floods in India had caused massive damage to its infrastructure. And the UK’s rigged energy market would not deliver secure, low carbon and affordable energy for all. ‘We need an industrial strategy to confront the realities of climate change. All sectors need their just transition strategies,’ Sarah argued. 
See the full text of the TUC motion on page 7 


Best ever green fringe at TUC?

At one of the best attended green fringe meetings at this year’s TUC, Suzanne Jeffrey, chair of the Campaign Against Climate Change, announced that her organisation was planning a national conference on Climate and Jobs - another world is possible on 10 March 2018 (note date in your diary!). She said the new TUC commitments provided an opportunity for progressive new policies for the labour movement. 

CACC speakers: Chris Baugh, Sarah Woolley, Suzanne Jeffrey, Diana Holland 
 

The Campaign Against Climate Change meeting was backed by the Greener Jobs Alliance. Here’s how union leaders spoke of the need to tackle climate change:

•   Sarah Woolley, BFAWU regional secretary: ‘We need to know much more about the impacts of climate change and explain it to our members. We need to be at the forefront, getting our members trained as environmental reps in the workplace.’ Tackling fuel poverty and bringing energy back into our ownership were two key priorities. 


•   Diana Holland, Unite’s Assistant General Secretary: ‘Jobs and a safe climate...We have to deal with both...we have to make those words Just Transition really mean something for union members.’ We cannot protect transport workers’ jobs without acknowledging the impacts of transport on the environment. For example, Unite is tackling diesel emissions as a workplace health and safety issue through its Diesel Emissions Exposure register LINK  ‘Because we work in so-called environmentally damaging industries, doesn’t mean we aren’t in the game,’ she said. The union is taking various steps to raise awareness among union members and engaging them in consultations with employers. 


•   Chris Baugh, Assistant General Secretary PCS: 
‘We have come a long way in the past year, by focussing on the core issues of just transition and energy democracy.’ In PCS, in Lancashire, PCS members are challenging claims that fracking will create a jobs bonanza, when there are abundant opportunities in other sectors. And at Heathrow, a PCS study on jobs in aviation LINK  has helped inform the debate on the real economic benefits of expanding aviation capacity. 


•   Graham Petersen said the online environmental education courses provided by the Greener Jobs Alliance, including a new unit on air quality, was filling a gap in mainstream trade union education programmes. 


•   Sean Sweeney from Trade Unions for Energy Democracy said that there’s a growing community of unions pushing for public ownership and control of energy as a means of controlling climate breakdown LINK