The next Green leader must mobilise an alliance to kick out the Tories
A year ago, alongside six other Green Party MEPs, I was elected to the European Parliament in a vote that no one expected to happen, even just weeks earlier. The Green Party celebrated its best ever result in the European Parliament, the People’s Vote campaign was gaining ever-greater momentum, and after a third failed attempt to deliver Brexit the government was paralysed and rapidly losing the will to live.
Now, just a year later, we have a Tory government with a huge majority (proving to be just as incapable but for very different reasons), Brexit has gone ahead, and Donald Trump is eyeing up the NHS. So what went wrong?
As incapable as he is in dealing with the coronavirus, we have to recognise that – in Boris Johnson – the Tories have a leader who can engage and impress working class voters and toffs alike, by saying what people want to hear in a convincing manner, regardless of whether he has any intention of delivering it. This was the man who told (i) his party there would be no border in the Irish Sea, (ii) the Irish there would be no border in Ireland, and (iii) the English that we were leaving the customs union and the single market. Most of us know that these things are mutually exclusive, but he didn’t care.
And now we have the third highest number of deaths in the world from the coronavirus, a test-and-trace system that doesn’t work, and a prime minister who’s spent the last two months telling us to stay at home also tell us that his advisor did the ‘right thing’ not to stay at home. But despite all this the Tories are still the most popular political party in the UK.
Worrying times indeed for our democracy, not just because it’s made voting Tory acceptable for large swathes of the population – it has also normalised the lying and the double standards. And meanwhile 4.2 million children live in poverty in the UK, the number of people reliant on foodbanks is exploding, and we are very likely on the verge of the greatest depression the world has ever seen.
So what do we on the left do about it?
We’ve been here before. Faced with the prospect of five more years of austerity, Brexit-obsession and climate-wrecking policies, Greens in 2017 led the calls for a ‘progressive alliance’, actively pursuing agreements with other ‘progressive’ parties and unilaterally standing down in 38 constituencies. The Lib Dems stood down in two constituencies and the Women’s Equality Party stood down in one. Labour didn’t stand down in any.
According to Compass, ‘progressive’ candidates received 5.7% more votes in constituencies where there is an electoral pact. As a result it is highly likely that the Greens’ unilateral action in these constituencies ultimately had the effect of removing Theresa May’s majority.
Politically, however, we paid a heavy price: less than half the vote of just two year’s before, a dramatic reduction in parliamentary ‘short money’ (which goes towards funding Caroline Lucas’ office) and no reciprocal action at all from Labour. Indeed, worse than that, the experience of 2017 seemed to make Labour expect the same again in 2019. When I stood as the Green parliamentary candidate for Brighton Kemptown last year I received a huge amount of pressure, verging on harassment, from Labour activists telling me to stand down or I’d “let the Tories in”.
And yet, again in 2019, Labour failed to join the so called ‘Unite to Remain’ alliance, partly because as in 2017 Labour mistakenly thought they could win without any alliances, but also simply because Labour was not a Remain party. As a result, the Unite to Remain alliance was a complete failure, with just one gain and one loss leading to a net gain of absolutely nothing but a bad taste left in the mouths of Green supporters who witnessed the Tories win with an overwhelming majority, whilst they couldn’t vote Green but were asked instead to vote for the austerity-supporting Lib Dems. Politically, we should not have aligned ourselves with the Tory-light Lib Dems, something I spoke out against on many occasion.
So why might it be different now?
It’s clear from the previous attempts at progressive alliances that they will only work if the largest ‘progressive’ party, Labour, is on board. The irony is that if Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour party had embraced the ‘progressive alliance’ in 2017 there is every likelihood Labour would have won and Jeremy Corbyn would be Prime Minister. But so many in Labour are still wedded to the idea that Labour is a ‘big’ party who can ‘win’ on their own… although the evidence shows the opposite. First past the post no longer works in their favour.
Apart from this blind doggedness, there are also practical reasons why Labour didn’t join the party: there was very little time to debate it within the Labour Party and we were too close to an election. Labour, the argument went, would look ‘weak’ if it entertained the idea of a progressive alliance. Clearly ridiculous, this shows the mindset of an old-fashioned gammon party where cooperation is considered a weakness.
With Keir Starmer, it is still too early to tell which way Labour will go. Clearly a lot less radical than Corbyn, Starmer presents us with an opportunity to focus on social justice and fighting austerity, and give those on the left of Labour a home. We cannot simply carry on appealing, in the main, to educated, white, middle class people. This is quite apparent at the moment, with the Black Lives Matter protests. I would like to see our new leaders, as well as those on GPEx (the Green Party Executive), to be diverse in colour, region and class. Only then, will we begin to broaden our appeal and better represent the diversity of our communities.
Starmer’s election also gives us an opportunity to start a conversation with Labour about how we can achieve our shared goals of ousting the Tories at the next election. The idea that Labour can do it by themselves is plainly ridiculous – whether they are mature enough to see that only time will tell. But we cannot allow ordinary people to bear the consequences of their ineptitude and short-sightedness.
We need to step up to the plate, lead the way and organise. Now is the time to act. The road ahead is fraught with risks, but the prospect of the Tories remaining in power indefinitely should be enough to focus all our minds. We are far enough away from the next General Election to effectively mobilise an alliance, so that there is only one anti-Tory candidate in every single seat.
And only then do we have a chance to kick out the Tories, once and for all.
This article is the eighth in a series on the forthcoming Green Party of England and Wales leadership election. Bright Green has invited a number of Green Party members and activists to contribute their views on what the next Green Party leader should deliver. The articles in this series can be found here.
PS. We hope you enjoyed this article. Bright Green has got big plans for the future to publish many more articles like this. You can help make that happen. Please donate to Bright Green now.
Image credit: YouTube screen grab
What we need to recognise is this: The Tories have an 80 seat majority. They plan to make voter ID compulsory and to make changes to the electoral boundaries – most commentators expect that to strengthen them by around another 40 seats. And this does not even take account the real possibility that despite everything Scotland might go independent and lead to a loss of another 40/50 anti-Tory seats. There is 0.0% possibility of the Tories introducing PR. Therefore by the next election we could be looking at the Tories being virtually unbeatable. Now maybe people feel that is “fertile ground” for the Green Party to grow. Maybe/maybe not. But it will be a catastrophe for tackling climate change or changing the voting system, and a catastrophe for public services, for black and minority ethnic communities, for the vulnerable and for all those we support. That is why we MUST at least try (though there is no guarantee of success) to create the best possible opportunities to defeat the Tories at the next general election. If there is a better way than that suggested by Alex, please tell us what it is. And if it is simply “wait till the masses finally see the light and flock to the Green Party and we win a parliamentary majority”, then please wake up and come back to reality.
What’s new?
We need to offer a truly radical socio-economic programme, that offers a way forward. UBI.
Vote for us, we’re the nicest people and the greenest, and we will work with the two parties, that have tried for a century or more to make society more just and failed, and we’ll all stumble along together, does not appeal to me.
Tell it how it is.
If we had waited for the general population to be “ready” to vote Green, the show would never have got on the road. One of our great strengths is that we have been principled, not vote-chasers. Let’s not throw this away. There is no point in winning office if the officer has no power to do anything, That is just a good way to confuse the electorate and ourselves.
What we should be concentrating on now is how society has to radically change away from destructive consumerism, and fabulous inequality and waste. That is what has to change now, and quick.
The main tool that I can think of to bring this about, is UNIVERSAL BASIC INCOME set at a level that has a strongly redistributive effect, and offers a real improvement in the life of the poor.
By the time we have another General Election, there is a strong possibility that we will have had a couple of year of something like a government of
” national unity”. My view is that once Boris has been ditched, there will be a sort of ” coalition” of the willing to sort out the huge economic and social crisis we will find ourselves in. Please do not take this as an expression of support for this likely development. But we have to be prepared for all scenarios. The only thing we are certain of is that there will have to be a very interventionists state to avoid the catastrophe. And that is where our Green policies will make total sense: Basic Universal Income and Basic Universal Services ( Green Energy , Health, Education, Housing, Transport and properly funded local governments)+ decision making devolved at the lowest possible level. You know the rest…
Alex said
“I would like to see our new leaders, as well as those on GPEx (the Green Party Executive), to be diverse in COLOUR, REGION and CLASS. Only then, will we begin to broaden our appeal and better represent the diversity of our communities”.
HEAR HEAR
Sian and Jon, thank you for your service.
You can continue to help but you are too white, too posh and too london.
Never heard such claptrap. Progressive Alliance did not work in 2017. It did not work in 2019. It does not work. It does not work. It does not work. It does not work.
You only get concessions by building strength as a party, not weakness in stepping down.
In towns up and down the north, midlands and wales Labour councils have been awful. If you tell people to vote Labour you will just send working class people to the right in greater numbers.
You will also send a message that undermines the ability of the Greens to win a second MP and even more councilors. You will also give Labour less incentive to improve there policies and culture.
People talk about electoral reform but there is no chance of that unless either Labour decides to back it or we manage to return a hung parliament. The Greens standing down make both of those things less likely.
It seems there is a number of members in the Green Party who keep pushing these progresive alliance agendas they are the unwitting troops of those who seek to destroy the green Party.
We have tried such alliances before and they have not worked. In any case, the Green Party can win over small c conservative voters in rural areas/small towns at least at a local level e.g. in Suffolk.
The Green Party instead needs to stand in as many constituencies as it possibly can so that more Green MPs can be elected.
Completely agree with Alex’s article – well done!
The Tories do not have a majority…of votes. They gained 40% of the popular vote, and 60% of seats in the Commons. So instead of panicking in the face of this interminable undemocratic injustice, stop and pause for thought.
If we are to ally with other parties, it should be on the question of electoral reform. Perhaps now that Labour have little chance of forming a majority government with the loss of their Scottish and Welsh support. maybe they might be interested in electoral reform. Their membership crtainly is.
There has been an enourmous breakthrough in consciousness of the ecological crisis the green movement has been pressing for so long, which is wonderful.
Is this a victory? In one sense yes, but it also means that the Green Party cannot claim to be the only green party, all will be claiming so, and not always dishonestly. We certainly do not have a monopoly of ideas about green technology, and this should not sadden us.
The way forward for the Party is to advocate a massive redistribution of wealth in society, and the end of consumption and enrichment being the main aim of existence, without which there is no hope of averting the rapidly looming ecological deadlines. There is a bumpy road ahead, and we must be ready for it. The slogan “We’re greener than you!” will not meet our purpose. Nor will a big increase in our popular vote do so, unless it is on the back of the right social policies.
Our flagship policy should be social justice and UNIVERSAL BASIC INCOME, combined with progressive taxation to redistribute wealth to a significant degree, which would also move us on from the plethora of minority rights campaigns we have now, which so confuse the people they leave out.
You made some good points but the idea of a universal basic income has been a difficult issue to sell to the voters, perhaps those who receive it could contribute to society in some way, or perhaps subsidise open university courses or have universal eviromental work programs.
This would build up a sense of value in society
To Jason –
Times have changed. People were receptive to Furlough and welcomed it.
A basic income is as all citizens DO contribute to society in some way.
Don’t let anyone tell you different.
The December 2019 election figures were not quite as dire as you make them, though quite bad enough: a Tory minority vote of 43.6% (not 40%) was distorted by First Past The Post to give a majority 56.2% (not 60%) seats in Parliament — the famous 80 seat majority that the Tories fraudulently boasted gave them “a second mandate for Brexit” (when they had no first mandate anyway: given the 2016 result was invalidated by lying, fraud, etc).
However, from the point of view of any chance of a progressive alliance having any chance of winning aginst the Tories in 2024, the most important thing about the 2019 Tory win was that it was achieved by only 51,000 votes in 40 constituencies. And allegedly Labour’s campaign was shambolic: directed by someone inexperienced, at first lacking targetted seats, then compensated by the progressive addition of too many targets haphazardly chosen and lacking enough volunteers to cover them all.
Given the iniquities of FPTP, it is incredibly important for Opposition parties to exploit its weaknesses — and the fact that in 2019, an 80 seat Parliamentary majority could be got with only 51,000 votes means that targeting the right constituencies by efficient electoral campaigns is of the highest importance in 2024.
Opposition parties can have the best policies and the best candidates but, especially with the Green party’s limited resources, with FPTP this means nothing unless the right constituencies are targeted with highly effective campaigns.
Apart from anything, this means that the Greens need to become as sophisticated as much larger parties in assembling information on voters: on being able to identify and concentrate on “persuadables” — not with the dirty tricks of eg Cambridge Analytica harvesting illegal user data and using cyberwarfare persuasion techniques, but using every possible legal resource.
It also needs to be remembered that FPTP will never be changed unless the Tories are defeated: and this alone justifies a progressive alliance with the objective of winning an election for one purpose only: to legislate for Proportional Representation, repeal the Fixed Term Parliaments Act, and dissolve itself to hold an election under PR (preferably with STV in multi-member constituencies). Only in this way can we have genuine democracy at last, instead of our current “elective dictatorship” — no exaggeration given the unconstitutional performance of Johnson & co. in government.
Despite the best efforts in 2017 and 2019 of a number of outfits (especially Scientists4EU) in advising voters in marginal constituencies and safe seats on tactical voting, and despite a very large number of tactical votes in 2019, this still made at best only a marginal difference to the result and is not in itself any answer to the fundamental problems of FPTP, that it is unrepresentative and therefore undemocratic.
So the best hope for 2024 is that — established by Make Votes Matter — currently 75% of Labour members are in favour of Proportional Representation but, as yet, only one third of Labour MPs are: so there is work to be done in identifying and persuading at least another third. Fortunately MVM, the Electoral Reform Society and Compass are all on the case: but it seems likely to need a very great effort to persuade the dinosaurs that in 2020, it is really shameful that Labour as a party should still support FPTP for the sake of occasional advantage in a Labour-Tory duopoly which delivers twice as many Tory governments as Labour governments — and all at the expense of smaller parties having the Parliamentary voice and votes they deserve in any genuine democracy worth the name.
And arguably, without converting the dinosaurs — convinced that Labour is the only “progressive” party, with the right to stand candidates at all — the prospects for forming a progressive alliance will remain as poor and as difficult as before.
Four years is not long to achieve such a change in outlook for long-established convictions of Labour superiority and entitlement.
Interesting, but no mention of Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland?