Skip to main content

Green Party internal democracy in poor health?

I am blogging from the Green Party Conference main hall. The Party has just decided not to go ahead with a ballot of all members for the post of External Comms Co-ordinator, a post for which I had wished to stand.
I am not willing to participate in a sham of democracy. So I am not now going to stand. I wanted to campaign before all members, not the the small fraction who can come to Conference. I am deeply saddened that my effort to become involved more in the national party through subjecting myself for democratic internal election has been stymied, because this Party has not as yet been willing to come out clearly FOR internal democracy.
There is one chance left for the Party to prove that we still care deeply about the democratic culture of our Party. One way left for us to give ALL members a chance to vote. One remaining way in which Party members at Conference - for others now do not have a voice - can resolve this situation. It is this: Jason Kitcat and I are urging any Party members at Conference who read this post to support democracy: Please vote Re-Open Noms (RON) for External Comms co-ordinator, to force a postal vote of all members. (If RON wins the election here at Conference, then Jason and I WILL go ahead and stand in a ballot of all members for this post.)

Comments

Kaihsu Tai said…
Thanks for this explanation. I will vote RON now, and for you and Jason when there is a postal ballot.
Unknown said…
Correction: it wasn't the Party that decided to disenfranchise the membership, but 50 people who voted against putting the election to a postal ballot against 37 people who voted for it.

When less than 100 people have the power to cut 97% of our 9,000 members out of choosing who runs our media and communications, things need to change!
Anonymous said…
And what was the upshot of this?

Popular posts from this blog

Medialens under the lens, over Syria and Libya: Becoming the new Dave Sparts?

I have long been an active supporter of Medialens ( http://www.medialens.org/ ). Like many others, I have supported them with money, time, tips, and I have been proud to have done so. For they have done very important groundbreaking work over the years challenging the inanities and distortions of the 'mainstream' media. They have for example written important critiques of mainstream media coverage of dangerous climate change, of Iraq Body Count, of the corporate nature of most of our media, and much more besides. They have held the corporate media to account time and again. They ought to be saluted for all of that. It is therefore with a sense of deep regret (as well as of some foreboding) that I have finally to write to address the ways in which, lately, some of the wheels seem to be coming off their wagon. An early warning sign perhaps was their long-running spat with George Monbiot, over the Rwandan genocide and the terrible atr...

'Scandal' over hacked climate-science emails at UEA: Don't believe the hype

The 'scandal' of the hacked emails from Environmental Science at UEA ( http://www.uea.ac.uk/mac/comm/media/press/2009/nov/homepagenews/CRU-update - this includes a direct rebuttal of the single seemingly most-damaging email, the 'trick' email), my University, has been gotten out of all proportion in some of the right-wing media, old and new. I have now read a good number of the 'worst' of the hacked emails. I also know a few of the protagonists personally, and for human-interest value the hacked emails certainly do offer some tidbits. But: When the dust settles, I predict that the climate-deniers will be left holding onto hardly anything, here. There is so far as I can tell at this (still-admittedly-early) stage no significant scientific scandal, and most importantly absolutely no reason to doubt any of the fundamentals of the science of manmade climate change here, just a few unpleasant or silly or (at worst) unwise and bad-practice emails. Scient...