I am, it must be said, becoming a bit of a cynic about Green Party Conference in my old age (I reckon London 08 must be my 12th Conference....nothing compared to stalwarts like Darren Johnson or Elise Benjamin, but a fair few nonetheless). I was fully expecting to go along to SOAS and spend my time mostly whingeing, with a healthy side portion of grump.
I was pleasantly surprised! OK, so there are still a few people at Conference who would make you change train carriages if you met them in real life - but they seem to be getting less and less prevalent. And perhaps it was just the day I chose to attend, but the debate seemed to be radical, sharper and more focused than I can remember it being in the past. I suspect that part of this may be due to collective relief at having mostly passed through the storm of the leadership changes unscathed, and at finally being able to talk about 'getting out there' to change the world...but part of it also seems simply to be that there are more energetic and interesting people out there in the Party at large, doing a greater amount of activism than before. This, I think, is a good thing.
So as to lend some structure to my rambling discourse, perhaps I should lay out what I actually did today:
- Arrived bright and early at 10 am for the Reports from various internal Party bodies. Clearly I didn't arrive at 9 am for the workshops on this reports, that would be insane. As always, an intriguing insight into the inner workings of the Party bureaucracy - and useful to shine a light on them...for example, being able to press the Executive on the rather democratically dubious plans to set up a fundraising/donations Scrutiny Committee whose members will be entirely appointed by GPEX!
- A fascinating panel discussion on the 'Green New Deal' report, featuring a pretty stellar line up....Pettifor, Lucas, Juniper, Leggett and Hines. All of them were, as expected, very interesting - although I must admit that Ann Pettifor's response to my query about the need for anti-capitalist thinking was a bit perplexing. I don't think that Keynesiansim is revolutionary, although apparently she does! Intriguing nonetheless, and my criticisms of the report are very much on the margins...I agree with 99% of it.
- Then, after some quality mingling and catching up with people from around the country, it was Caroline's keynote speech. I must admit to my shame that I had been planning to give this a miss. After all, I thought, I have seen Caroline speak umpteen times by now. I'll go and have a nice cup of tea while everyone else is doing the standing ovation. Matt Follett, to his credit, hoiked me into the hall at the last minute...and I'm glad he did. Caroline was absolutely excellent, and the atmosphere was electric. She hit all the right notes, and I was reminded yet again of why she really is one of the most impressive politicians of her generation. She's got a big task - becoming leader of a Party with negligible infrastructure that often does not want to be led...but if anyone can pull it off, she can.
- Then, after the commotion had died down, some policy discussion...the most interesting of which was the minimum/maximum wage motion. I came into this genuinely undecided, with people I respected on both sides of the debate...but ended up siding with the (losing) maximum wagers. This was mostly because the arguments being put forward against the maximum wage concept seemed to be very flimsy pragmatic constructs to me. People arguing against the original motion had proposed an amendment for a surtax on the super-rich, and yet at the same time were suggesting that we needed to vote down a maximum wage because it would scare off disillusioned Tory voters. Quite what they will make of the surtax alternative in the shires, they didn't quite explain! Not to worry though...the debate was helpful, lively and respectful, and we ended up with a decent policy, even if it wasn't the one I would have ideally chosen.
By this time I was cheery, but also knackered....so I stayed for the first bit of the hustings for GPEX (a few contested elections this year, at least) and then took my leave. Substantially less grumpy than when I had arrived, and buoyed up about the possibilities for the Party in the coming two years.
Make no mistake, we face an uphill struggle. Even standing still in the Euros will be a test, let alone gaining seats for the excellent Rupert Read and Peter Cranie. But before this Conference, I would have said it wasn't possible. After it....I dare to dream.
Matt Sellwood
(a grassroots member finally after seven years, and it feels good!)
Saturday, September 6, 2008
Regional Tables, PR and Fundraising
- So far, grumble grumble, I don't like the venue for conference this year. I'm not going to say I hate it, since, well, buildings have feelings. But in past conferences, there's been a cafe with food in the building. And, in the plenary hall, we've had tables for people to meet others from their region, and we don't this year. The plenary tables seem to be, especially, a good way for Young Greens to network. Bring back the regional tables, and I'll turn my frown upside down!
- I had an interesting chat with the "Unlock Democracy" stall about PR. I asked if people who had more PR than England (i.e. in England, we only vote PR for Euro elections) favour PR for Westminster. He didn't know. It's something to look into. Their steering group has Labour, Lib Dem and Green members, but the Tories seem to show nada/no/zilch interest in PR. To secure PR in Westminster elections, or at least in all local elections (not just in Scotland), we're going to have to rely on the Lib Dems and a hung parliament (i.e. using a promise of PR in local elections to secure their support in a coalition government, whether that is Lib Dem-Tory, or Lib-Lab). PR in local elections in Scotland has led to 8 local Green councillors in Glasgow and Edinburgh combined.
- The report from our Treasurer was interesting this morning. Don't get me wrong. Khalid Hussenbux has been a star. But, due to some penetrating questions about the "Westminster Fund," it came to light that the party has hired a fundraiser as an independent contractor. There will be a five-person panel set up to scrutinise any donations proposed/accepted, but there has been (by whom?) a decision not to elect people to this panel, and the fellow is already employed without a panel put in place. The idea is to raise a substantial amount of money from people who are not currently members. This is a great idea! Our entire elections budget is the same as what the Tories spend in one target constitutency! We need more fundz to be able to secure 4 MEPs and 2 MPs over the next 2 years. But, there had been no detail in the entire report from GPEX and in the Treasurer's report specifically. Fundraising needs to be more transparent. Heck, if this had been more widely known, it could motivate grassroots members who feel the party needs more funds to compete on a more equal playing field.
- I had an interesting chat with the "Unlock Democracy" stall about PR. I asked if people who had more PR than England (i.e. in England, we only vote PR for Euro elections) favour PR for Westminster. He didn't know. It's something to look into. Their steering group has Labour, Lib Dem and Green members, but the Tories seem to show nada/no/zilch interest in PR. To secure PR in Westminster elections, or at least in all local elections (not just in Scotland), we're going to have to rely on the Lib Dems and a hung parliament (i.e. using a promise of PR in local elections to secure their support in a coalition government, whether that is Lib Dem-Tory, or Lib-Lab). PR in local elections in Scotland has led to 8 local Green councillors in Glasgow and Edinburgh combined.
- The report from our Treasurer was interesting this morning. Don't get me wrong. Khalid Hussenbux has been a star. But, due to some penetrating questions about the "Westminster Fund," it came to light that the party has hired a fundraiser as an independent contractor. There will be a five-person panel set up to scrutinise any donations proposed/accepted, but there has been (by whom?) a decision not to elect people to this panel, and the fellow is already employed without a panel put in place. The idea is to raise a substantial amount of money from people who are not currently members. This is a great idea! Our entire elections budget is the same as what the Tories spend in one target constitutency! We need more fundz to be able to secure 4 MEPs and 2 MPs over the next 2 years. But, there had been no detail in the entire report from GPEX and in the Treasurer's report specifically. Fundraising needs to be more transparent. Heck, if this had been more widely known, it could motivate grassroots members who feel the party needs more funds to compete on a more equal playing field.
Things I've not yet blogged about
The last two days have been a bit hectic and more importantly it's been difficult to blog - I'll try to sort that out. Just to fill you in on a few things I've not yet discussed;
- The leadership hustings (which seems weird to discuss now the election's over) including great speeches by Adrian and Caroline and a disappointingly... strange... speech from Ashley who hasn't quite recovered from telling the world on his blog that he wanted to have dinner with Hitler and his subsequent inability to explain why.
- Women only meetings. Almost the first thing to happen at conference was a dispute about two women only meetings that are timetabled for today and tomorrow. This is the women in name group (which is a caucus for women in the party) which starts in less than an hour and the launch of "Green Party Women" tomorrow afternoon.
Sharar Ali, well known face and dapper gent of the party, put it to conference that as an open and inclusive party the Greens should not be excluding members from any meetings it holds at conference. It was one thing to say groups should have a right to get together but another to say that a members conference was not entirely open to the members attending.
Rupert Read and Molly Scott Cato gave good speeches on the rights of groups to have their own space and organise separately at times - in the wider context of the wider party.
However I think it was Hazel Dawe who swung the crowd when she got up and argued that she had not got involved with the women's group precisely because she felt it excluded members. she felt that the "concrete ceiling" in society that presented a barrier to women's advancement did not exist in the Greens, who, in her words, "promote and enable women".
I surprised even myself by abstaining in this vote after hearing the argument and Shahrar (who is standing for the equality and diversity post in the party) won the day my a small, but healthy, margin. So today's meeting will remain women only - as that is established practice in the group - but the launch of the new group would not exclude men, particularly as their would be an associate membership category for supporters.
I still haven't convinced myself either way on this but I'm really glad the debate was raised.
- Much more importantly I was given a 9/11 truth movement leaflet on my way in to conference. It boldly proclaimed that if I dismissed David Icke I would be dismissing the entirety of quantum physics - which sounds like something I do not want to do. Actually, unlike the US party the UK Greens are mercifully free from this sort of rubbish and it really stood out that this was a lone leafletteer on the fringes of the party with no support or resonance among the members.
- Lastly I'll just mention Jean Lambert who I think is a massively overlooked resource in the party. Not just because she's a hard working MEP who does tremendous trade union and refugee work in particular, but because her speech opening conference praised Hugo Chevez, talked of the need for a global vision for a global city (in this case London) and denounced eloquently the "liberalisation" of public services, the arms trade, the BNP. Her whole approach was probably best summed up in the way she tackled GM.
She didn't talk about mutant plants or messing with nature she talked about GM being about corporate power and that we have to oppose them to both protect diversity and the livelihoods of the most vulnerable around the world.
What a star.
- The leadership hustings (which seems weird to discuss now the election's over) including great speeches by Adrian and Caroline and a disappointingly... strange... speech from Ashley who hasn't quite recovered from telling the world on his blog that he wanted to have dinner with Hitler and his subsequent inability to explain why.
- Women only meetings. Almost the first thing to happen at conference was a dispute about two women only meetings that are timetabled for today and tomorrow. This is the women in name group (which is a caucus for women in the party) which starts in less than an hour and the launch of "Green Party Women" tomorrow afternoon.
Sharar Ali, well known face and dapper gent of the party, put it to conference that as an open and inclusive party the Greens should not be excluding members from any meetings it holds at conference. It was one thing to say groups should have a right to get together but another to say that a members conference was not entirely open to the members attending.
Rupert Read and Molly Scott Cato gave good speeches on the rights of groups to have their own space and organise separately at times - in the wider context of the wider party.
However I think it was Hazel Dawe who swung the crowd when she got up and argued that she had not got involved with the women's group precisely because she felt it excluded members. she felt that the "concrete ceiling" in society that presented a barrier to women's advancement did not exist in the Greens, who, in her words, "promote and enable women".
I surprised even myself by abstaining in this vote after hearing the argument and Shahrar (who is standing for the equality and diversity post in the party) won the day my a small, but healthy, margin. So today's meeting will remain women only - as that is established practice in the group - but the launch of the new group would not exclude men, particularly as their would be an associate membership category for supporters.
I still haven't convinced myself either way on this but I'm really glad the debate was raised.
- Much more importantly I was given a 9/11 truth movement leaflet on my way in to conference. It boldly proclaimed that if I dismissed David Icke I would be dismissing the entirety of quantum physics - which sounds like something I do not want to do. Actually, unlike the US party the UK Greens are mercifully free from this sort of rubbish and it really stood out that this was a lone leafletteer on the fringes of the party with no support or resonance among the members.
- Lastly I'll just mention Jean Lambert who I think is a massively overlooked resource in the party. Not just because she's a hard working MEP who does tremendous trade union and refugee work in particular, but because her speech opening conference praised Hugo Chevez, talked of the need for a global vision for a global city (in this case London) and denounced eloquently the "liberalisation" of public services, the arms trade, the BNP. Her whole approach was probably best summed up in the way she tackled GM.
She didn't talk about mutant plants or messing with nature she talked about GM being about corporate power and that we have to oppose them to both protect diversity and the livelihoods of the most vulnerable around the world.
What a star.
Progressive taxation: maximum wage?
There's been some really interesting debates taking place so I'm playing catch up here - but I'll try to get round to everything that others don't cover *eventually*.
Just come out of the first session voting on substantive policy (rather than agreeing end of term reports, conference agenda, etc.). Motions are prioritised by members' ballot so the items that most members are interested in discussing comes first in the agenda, it's part of a really interesting set of systems that allow members more control over their conference than any other party.
First motion was proposed by London's MEP Jean Lambert and was on trade union reps in the workplace. This is one of those motions that essentially has complete consensus and there isn't even a speech against.
Talking about the right of trade unionists for proper facility time it also describes the rights of workers to determine the policies and standards in their workplace - which includes the establishment of environmental reps who would have powers equal to those of health and safety reps.
With some unions going greener and greener it's important we find ways to empower those rank and file trade unionists in the workplace to make their place of work safe and environmentally sound.
Which brings us on the second motion in the batch and one that was slightly more controversial. The ominously named CO2 motion (in that it came second in section C) Pete Murray put forward his proposals for a minimum/maximum wage.
In fact the title does not do the motion justice as it also makes important points about the European working time directive and for the increasing of the UK's minimum wage in accordance with Europe's decency threshold - all good stuff and undisputed. But it's when we come to the concept of a maximum wage (or 100% taxation rate as the motion puts it) that there was more dispute.
Darren Johnson, one of our London AM's who won the backing of the FBU with his campaign for a decent living wage for fire station cleaners, put forward an amendment taking out the maximum and replacing it with a more general call for progressive taxation, ie a tough new top rate of tax that would levy perhaps 70 or 80% taxation on the highest earners.
There were good points made on both sides but personally I was in favour of the amendment. As Johnson said a 100% is completely pointless in that previous attempts have found simply massive scale avoidance that rendered the rate fruitless and brought in no revenue.
I had been considering speaking to this but in the end it wasn't necessary. If I had spoken, this is roughly what I would have said. That a maximum wage does nothing that progressive taxation plus judicious use of windfall taxes does not do more effectively. Whilst the Green Party certainly does need a clearer economic policy - and I think the Green New Deal is part of developing that - a maximum wage is a sledgehammer rather than a sophisticated tool.
It's actually simpler to use the formulation that if you earn more you pay a greater proportion of your income as tax. As a propaganda tool that can pressure the powers that be a maximum wage is pointless, a call for a just taxation system does not. When the row about the ten pence tax rate erupted it was because it was patently obvious that doubling the amount of tax the lowest paid in the country pay was completely unfair.
The work Darren and others have done in boosting the wages of the lowest paid is the best and most positive message to send out there - and an example we can follow right now. A maximum wage policy that would require a green party government to enact is simply abstract propaganda that wouldn't win over even one soul to the cause of fighting the corner of the lowest paid.
Having said that once the amendment passed (taking out the maximum wage) we were left with a very good and worthwhile motion which passed without any problem what-so-ever. Just to hammer the point home this was then followed by passing policy on the right to rent for those who've houses have been repossessed and free school meals that would ensure a "minimum requirement that all children are provided free of charge with a balanced, nutritious lunch including local and organic non-GM food, free from additives."
Good session.
Just come out of the first session voting on substantive policy (rather than agreeing end of term reports, conference agenda, etc.). Motions are prioritised by members' ballot so the items that most members are interested in discussing comes first in the agenda, it's part of a really interesting set of systems that allow members more control over their conference than any other party.
First motion was proposed by London's MEP Jean Lambert and was on trade union reps in the workplace. This is one of those motions that essentially has complete consensus and there isn't even a speech against.
Talking about the right of trade unionists for proper facility time it also describes the rights of workers to determine the policies and standards in their workplace - which includes the establishment of environmental reps who would have powers equal to those of health and safety reps.
With some unions going greener and greener it's important we find ways to empower those rank and file trade unionists in the workplace to make their place of work safe and environmentally sound.
Which brings us on the second motion in the batch and one that was slightly more controversial. The ominously named CO2 motion (in that it came second in section C) Pete Murray put forward his proposals for a minimum/maximum wage.
In fact the title does not do the motion justice as it also makes important points about the European working time directive and for the increasing of the UK's minimum wage in accordance with Europe's decency threshold - all good stuff and undisputed. But it's when we come to the concept of a maximum wage (or 100% taxation rate as the motion puts it) that there was more dispute.
Darren Johnson, one of our London AM's who won the backing of the FBU with his campaign for a decent living wage for fire station cleaners, put forward an amendment taking out the maximum and replacing it with a more general call for progressive taxation, ie a tough new top rate of tax that would levy perhaps 70 or 80% taxation on the highest earners.
There were good points made on both sides but personally I was in favour of the amendment. As Johnson said a 100% is completely pointless in that previous attempts have found simply massive scale avoidance that rendered the rate fruitless and brought in no revenue.
I had been considering speaking to this but in the end it wasn't necessary. If I had spoken, this is roughly what I would have said. That a maximum wage does nothing that progressive taxation plus judicious use of windfall taxes does not do more effectively. Whilst the Green Party certainly does need a clearer economic policy - and I think the Green New Deal is part of developing that - a maximum wage is a sledgehammer rather than a sophisticated tool.
It's actually simpler to use the formulation that if you earn more you pay a greater proportion of your income as tax. As a propaganda tool that can pressure the powers that be a maximum wage is pointless, a call for a just taxation system does not. When the row about the ten pence tax rate erupted it was because it was patently obvious that doubling the amount of tax the lowest paid in the country pay was completely unfair.
The work Darren and others have done in boosting the wages of the lowest paid is the best and most positive message to send out there - and an example we can follow right now. A maximum wage policy that would require a green party government to enact is simply abstract propaganda that wouldn't win over even one soul to the cause of fighting the corner of the lowest paid.
Having said that once the amendment passed (taking out the maximum wage) we were left with a very good and worthwhile motion which passed without any problem what-so-ever. Just to hammer the point home this was then followed by passing policy on the right to rent for those who've houses have been repossessed and free school meals that would ensure a "minimum requirement that all children are provided free of charge with a balanced, nutritious lunch including local and organic non-GM food, free from additives."
Good session.
Friday, September 5, 2008
"A Challenge to the membership of the Green Party of England and Wales..."
Conference attracts leafletteers. Some of these leafletteers are special. This from an anti-Lucas leaflet published by the "Whole Truth Coalition":
And before you simply dismiss David Icke (whom the Green Party "establishment" likes to demonise, please consider that in doing so you'd be refuting the findings of modern Quantum Physics and a mass of political and historical evidence, plus the collective knowledge and wisdom of the indigenous peoples around the world who have oral traditions going back thousands of years.The leaflet, written by a disgruntled individual who left the party for fear of a leadership plot, warned members against the dangers of Lucas' "establishment" values.
I find this distinctly encouraging. Importantly, because it's written by an ex-member; the lunatic fringe has left the party. We've long had trouble presenting ourselves as a sane and sensible option for voters, partially because of conspiraloons like the Whole Truth Coalition. Now they're actively against us, it'll be easier to shed that image.
Leadership election results!
The results are in and the Green Party of England and Wales has it's first ever leader and deputy leader.
On a turnout of 37.9% (up from 20% for the principal speaker posts last year) of the 7,565 members I can announced that the results are as follows;
For leader;
Caroline Lucas 2,559
Ashley Gunstock 210
And for deputy;
Adrian Ramsay 2,785
Congratulations to the candidates. In her acceptance speech Caroline spoke of the "honour and responsibility" leading the party in a period when there is "such a vacuum in the mainstream parties" who have no answers for the extra-ordinary problems facing the world today.
Green politics she said was essential to counter "the politics of paralysis".
Ashley, conceding defeat gave warm praise to his opponent. He also described himself as a "Green Party member and will do my best to make the leadership work - but you never know I might be back."
Adrian Ramsay, accepting the post of deputy leader said that up until this point he had been concentrating on building the party in Norwich but we were gaining ground all over the country. Adrian left us with the thought that son we'd have seats in Parliament and the opportunity to put policies into practice.
Charles Clarke and Adrian Ramsay - watch Monday's space...
Has it honestly not occured to Charles Clarke that what is needed is not a change of Leader in the Labour Party, but a huge change of policy-direction?
Here in Norwich [from when I am setting off in 30 minutes for Conference...], in Charles Clarke's own seat, the Labour Party is in free-fall, in 4th place in the seat [at this year's local elections], while the Green Party is in first place. Our experience on the doorstep suggests that this is not because of Gordon Brown nor even because of Charles Clarke -- it is because voters are fed up with New Labour, and want a real change; so they are flocking our way.
Perhaps this is why Mr. Clarke has spoken out so dramatically: because he is now seriously worried that he will lose his own seat. But his prescription for how to save his own skin will not work: under any Leader, Labour is now a Party on the way out. It's the policies (as well as the economy), stupid...
All this adds a piquancy to Adrian Ramsay's acceptance speech as our Deputy Leader (assuming that he isn't beaten by RON - a safe assumption...), on Monday. I am reliably informed (i.e. by Adrian!) that a well-rounded and full-on challenge to Mr. Clarke will form a backbone of his speech...
Here in Norwich [from when I am setting off in 30 minutes for Conference...], in Charles Clarke's own seat, the Labour Party is in free-fall, in 4th place in the seat [at this year's local elections], while the Green Party is in first place. Our experience on the doorstep suggests that this is not because of Gordon Brown nor even because of Charles Clarke -- it is because voters are fed up with New Labour, and want a real change; so they are flocking our way.
Perhaps this is why Mr. Clarke has spoken out so dramatically: because he is now seriously worried that he will lose his own seat. But his prescription for how to save his own skin will not work: under any Leader, Labour is now a Party on the way out. It's the policies (as well as the economy), stupid...
All this adds a piquancy to Adrian Ramsay's acceptance speech as our Deputy Leader (assuming that he isn't beaten by RON - a safe assumption...), on Monday. I am reliably informed (i.e. by Adrian!) that a well-rounded and full-on challenge to Mr. Clarke will form a backbone of his speech...
Wednesday, September 3, 2008
Leadership's time comes
It's good to be back with a Green Despatch...
I concur with Jim's sentiments. This is a historic Green Party Conference; there's no other way -- no better way -- to describe it. [See my recent Total Politics post on the meaning of this Conference, here]
Those of you who have read my recent 'Daily Politico' entry on the Total Politics site will already be aware of how much this whole Leadership thing has meant to me... Now is our chance to start to make it work. I expect that the first-ever Leader's speech will be full-to-capacity, over-subscribed; when was the last time that that happened at our Party Conference?
There's something happening here, and what exactly it is will pretty soon become clear... I can't wait!
I concur with Jim's sentiments. This is a historic Green Party Conference; there's no other way -- no better way -- to describe it. [See my recent Total Politics post on the meaning of this Conference, here]
Those of you who have read my recent 'Daily Politico' entry on the Total Politics site will already be aware of how much this whole Leadership thing has meant to me... Now is our chance to start to make it work. I expect that the first-ever Leader's speech will be full-to-capacity, over-subscribed; when was the last time that that happened at our Party Conference?
There's something happening here, and what exactly it is will pretty soon become clear... I can't wait!
Tuesday, September 2, 2008
Historic Green Party Conference Starts This Friday
Yes, and we're bloggin
g it!
From this Friday (until Monday) Green Party conference will be taking place in SOAS, in London for the first time in more than ten years.
That's not why it's historic though - it's going to see the election of the Party's first ever leader and deputy leader in its history.
There's also lots of other conference business of course fringes, voting, debate, plenaries and lots of discussions and mingling in the cafes and bars.
You can read the timetable and the agenda at the Party website.
Over the next week and a bit you'll be able to read posts here from members of the party attending the cofnerence. These include Lewisham councillor Sue Luxton (who's also on the conference arrangements committee so it wilol be interesting to hear the insider gossip), prospective MEP Rupert Read, LSE student leader Aled Fisher, and myself Jim Jepps - and many others - we hope!
Stayed tuned.
g it!From this Friday (until Monday) Green Party conference will be taking place in SOAS, in London for the first time in more than ten years.
That's not why it's historic though - it's going to see the election of the Party's first ever leader and deputy leader in its history.
There's also lots of other conference business of course fringes, voting, debate, plenaries and lots of discussions and mingling in the cafes and bars.
You can read the timetable and the agenda at the Party website.
Over the next week and a bit you'll be able to read posts here from members of the party attending the cofnerence. These include Lewisham councillor Sue Luxton (who's also on the conference arrangements committee so it wilol be interesting to hear the insider gossip), prospective MEP Rupert Read, LSE student leader Aled Fisher, and myself Jim Jepps - and many others - we hope!
Stayed tuned.
Monday, February 18, 2008
How was it for you?
Personally I thought this conference was one of the best in a while, not least because it seemed to be more harmonious than recent ones, but also I thought the venue was good and easy to get to, there were some interesting and inspiring speakers and useful training sessions. I thought Rob Smith from conferences committee, along with Leila and John who do the bulk of the organisation, did an excellent job.
One thing I didn't add in my previous post is that as of yesterday I am on Conference Committee. I thought perhaps people might like to use this post to say what they liked/didn't like about this conference, what they would like to see at future conference, suggestions of future venues etc. Polite, constructive and realistic suggestions welcomed!
One thing I didn't add in my previous post is that as of yesterday I am on Conference Committee. I thought perhaps people might like to use this post to say what they liked/didn't like about this conference, what they would like to see at future conference, suggestions of future venues etc. Polite, constructive and realistic suggestions welcomed!
Saturday - elections, elections, elections, blogs and climate change
Meant to post this up yesterday, but didn't quite manage it. Saturday saw loads of elections-related stuff and training for local parties. My day kicked off with a breakfast meeting for our target constituencies - Brighton Pavilion, Lewisham Deptford and Norwich South. I also attended the session on our election strategy, which was positive, but funnily enough I'm not about to report it in great detail here.
At lunchtime there was a big panel session chaired by Derek Wall with our candidates for our top 3 parliamentary constituencies (Caroline Lucas MEP for Brighton Pavilion, Darren Johnson AM for Lewisham Deptford and Cllr Adrian Ramsay for Norwich South). Each candidate spoke passionately about what they had already achieved as a councillor/London Assembly member/MEP and why it is so important to get a Green MP at the next general election. It was a great session and there was a real feeling of the time is now, this is our opportunity to make a breakthrough and elect our first Green MP in Brighton Pavilion.
Obviously I hope we also elect Green MPs in Lewisham Deptford and Norwich South, but Brighton Pavilion is our best chance and I would urge all Green Party members and supporters who can get there to go and help out in the campaign as often as possible between now and the next general election. This was also the message from Adrian and Darren - come and help us in Lewisham Deptford and Norwich South if you can (we're running strong campaigns and expect to do very well), but first and foremost, go to Brighton. A few hundred extra votes or a saved deposit in your own constituency won't have anywhere near as much of an impact as a Green MP in Westminster will do.
To get involved in the campaign to elect Caroline in Brighton Pavilion, call Amy Kennedy on 01273 782 235 or e-mail , to help in Lewisham Deptford e-mail me or call on 020 8690 0658 and for Norwich contact Tom Dillon on 01603 611909.
At lunchtime there was a big panel session chaired by Derek Wall with our candidates for our top 3 parliamentary constituencies (Caroline Lucas MEP for Brighton Pavilion, Darren Johnson AM for Lewisham Deptford and Cllr Adrian Ramsay for Norwich South). Each candidate spoke passionately about what they had already achieved as a councillor/London Assembly member/MEP and why it is so important to get a Green MP at the next general election. It was a great session and there was a real feeling of the time is now, this is our opportunity to make a breakthrough and elect our first Green MP in Brighton Pavilion.
Obviously I hope we also elect Green MPs in Lewisham Deptford and Norwich South, but Brighton Pavilion is our best chance and I would urge all Green Party members and supporters who can get there to go and help out in the campaign as often as possible between now and the next general election. This was also the message from Adrian and Darren - come and help us in Lewisham Deptford and Norwich South if you can (we're running strong campaigns and expect to do very well), but first and foremost, go to Brighton. A few hundred extra votes or a saved deposit in your own constituency won't have anywhere near as much of an impact as a Green MP in Westminster will do.
To get involved in the campaign to elect Caroline in Brighton Pavilion, call Amy Kennedy on 01273 782 235 or e-mail , to help in Lewisham Deptford e-mail me or call on 020 8690 0658 and for Norwich contact Tom Dillon on 01603 611909.
In the evening, alongside spending a fair amount of time in the bar, I went along to George Marshall's “stand-up climate change comedy”. George works for COIN (Climate Outreach and Information Network) and has recently written Carbon Detox. The main thrust of his presentation was that it's no good preaching to people about doing your bit to stop climate change, save the planet, look after the environment etc, as that just alienates lots of people. Images of polar bears, though lovely, don’t relate to people’s everyday lives.
He compared climate change deniers to the pro-smoking lobby (well, some of them are one and the same people being paid to sell a line, as George Monbiot points out here). He also wasn't a big fan of lists, top ten tips to save the planet etc, arguing that if you have ten tips to save the planet and one of them is to stop using plastic bags whereas another is to give up flying, most people will choose the former, when in fact plastic bags have a tiny tiny impact on your carbon footprint and you would probably save far more carbon by giving up flying than not using plastic bags and half a dozen other similar things (there are, of course, many other good, environmental reasons why you should give up using plastic bags, climate change aside).
For me, his talk seemed to folllow on quite nicely from a recent article in Green World magazine about what motivates people. Only about 20% of the population are motivated by 'doing the right thing' (George Marshall calls these people 'strivers' in his book), most of the population needs to have a more selfish or fashion-related reason to change their lifestyle. He showed us a picture of a Victorian living room cluttered with knick knacks, followed by the simplicity of a 1930s art deco room. No one in the 1930s was complaining about giving up the knick-knacks, they just went out of fashion and seemed unnecessary by the 1930s. The challenge is to convince people that the carbon-intensive aspects of our current lives are not essential and to change habits and trends. The Green Party has long led on policies on climate change, but could we be trendsetters and persuade everyone that it is the fashionable thing to do? Looking around the hall at the wonderfully eclectic variety of outfits from neo-Green suits to multi-coloured hand-knitted scarfs and psychedelic waistcoats (ok, sorry Rupert, your waistcoats aren't really psychedelic!), I wasn't quite sure . . .
Anyway, George Marshall's routine was followed by a fund-raising auction for the London Elections Campaign and the traditional Green Party Revue. I tend to be highly critical of the revue, but not actually willing to contribute anything myself, which isn't quite the spirit I know. This conference I thought that while in places as always it was painful to watch, there were also moments that had the hall in stitches. My personal favourite this year was the (also now traditional) Green variation on Monty Python's 'Three Yorkshiremen Sketch' featuring Matt Ledbury, Richard Scrase and Ben Duncan - did anyone record that?
Anyway, that was my Saturday at conference.
Sunday, February 17, 2008
Thoughts on hosting conference
By Adrian Windish
For the last few days I've been busy working at front of house at the Green Party Conference. Over the last 4 years I've been to 7 conferences abound the country, and its a wonderful experience to welcome the many people I've met to Reading. Its feels such so strange seeing so many of the most important Greens in the country come to my home town.
And I'm so proud of my local party. We have stepped up campaigning in the last few months in preparation for the local elections in May when we think Rob White, our target candidate, will get elected. Rob opened the conference with a speech, raising our profile within the Green Party
even more. We have letters and articles in the paper every couple of weeks from a growing group of people, and Robs regular column; Whites Trash.
I'm also proud at how well Reading Green Party are coping with its front of house duties. Its not unlike election day, we have a rota and people take turns being at the desk and attending the conference upstairs. The last conferences I've been to the local parties have seemed to need help
to do this. On election day we have a similar rota for being outside the polling stations. When I joined the party in the spring of 2004 we had only a handful of active members, we couldn't find enough people to stand as candidates. Now we have built up a team of people that enjoy standing, giving people a chance to vote green. Events like elections and the conference help us also by encouraging lots of people to get more involved, I've met local members today I've not seen before.
Being at conference is to be amongst a hothouse of green ideas, many of them quite radical. It really brings it home to members, many of whom come from small local parties like Reading, how different it is to be in the company of hundreds of dedicated Greens. It also brings into
contrast the other parties, they are just grey shadows by comparison, deciding policy by focus group and all chasing the same voters. The Greens are the only ones to discuss and decide policy in such a public way, we aren't afraid of what the voters might think.
www.greenreading.blogspot.com
www.readinggreenparty.org.uk
For the last few days I've been busy working at front of house at the Green Party Conference. Over the last 4 years I've been to 7 conferences abound the country, and its a wonderful experience to welcome the many people I've met to Reading. Its feels such so strange seeing so many of the most important Greens in the country come to my home town.
And I'm so proud of my local party. We have stepped up campaigning in the last few months in preparation for the local elections in May when we think Rob White, our target candidate, will get elected. Rob opened the conference with a speech, raising our profile within the Green Party
even more. We have letters and articles in the paper every couple of weeks from a growing group of people, and Robs regular column; Whites Trash.
I'm also proud at how well Reading Green Party are coping with its front of house duties. Its not unlike election day, we have a rota and people take turns being at the desk and attending the conference upstairs. The last conferences I've been to the local parties have seemed to need help
to do this. On election day we have a similar rota for being outside the polling stations. When I joined the party in the spring of 2004 we had only a handful of active members, we couldn't find enough people to stand as candidates. Now we have built up a team of people that enjoy standing, giving people a chance to vote green. Events like elections and the conference help us also by encouraging lots of people to get more involved, I've met local members today I've not seen before.
Being at conference is to be amongst a hothouse of green ideas, many of them quite radical. It really brings it home to members, many of whom come from small local parties like Reading, how different it is to be in the company of hundreds of dedicated Greens. It also brings into
contrast the other parties, they are just grey shadows by comparison, deciding policy by focus group and all chasing the same voters. The Greens are the only ones to discuss and decide policy in such a public way, we aren't afraid of what the voters might think.
www.greenreading.blogspot.com
www.readinggreenparty.org.uk
Photos and report from Bell fringe
[The last 36 hours have been a whirl, and I've had no time to post... So, catching up a bit:]
Here is a pic of me chairing the Martin Bell fringe that was trailed below and that took place on Friday. I was really happy with how it went.
Some highlights: Bell argued that our Party should be anti-war and pro-peace but also pro-soldier, and that this was the way we could come off well and win on this issue, and not alienate those whose lives we were (amongst others) trying to save; he mentioned the 'remarkable' fact that all 165 Murdoch newspaper editors 'independently' decided to back the Iraq war...;
He called upon the Green Party to cast itself as "the Party of honest politics", and suggested that this was a very plausible string to our bow beside our 'core' issues; he said (drawing upon his experience of having fought the Eastern Region Euro-elections last time -- this is the Region where I am now our Party's lead candidate) "Rupert has a very good chance of winning in 2009; You are a mainstream Party now and deserve such breakthroughs; I wish you every good luck."
Wow! You can't get much closer to an endorsement than that...
The meeting was very well-attended indeed and we had a good debate over the issues; Natalie Bennett (also pictured above) spoke well in responding to Martin; and we had a good lunch together afterward, attended also by our three target Westminster candidates (Caroline, Adrian and Darren), during which Martin gave them (and in particular, Caroline) a number of hot tips on how to operate effectively as a loner in the House of Commons!
Exciting times...
[p.s. For more images from Conference, goto http://www.thisisull.com/politics/309770232_mogreenconference15feb08gallery.html ]
Lighter moments
Best line of the Green Party conference:
“You just can’t keep elections up all day.”
A prize for the latest emergency motion:
“As the Evening Standard reported in 208.”
(Just catching up with the Romans...)
Best apology of the conference:
"I can't provide a detailed workshop report because I picked up the wrong piece of paper - a bar bill instead of my notes."
“You just can’t keep elections up all day.”
A prize for the latest emergency motion:
“As the Evening Standard reported in 208.”
(Just catching up with the Romans...)
Best apology of the conference:
"I can't provide a detailed workshop report because I picked up the wrong piece of paper - a bar bill instead of my notes."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)