The English and Wales Green Party

[Editors Note: This is bland to the non-political so skip it now unless you have a general interest in politics. This documents workshops I went to and whatnot... Also the next post is going to be more of the same but be more interesting because it will encompass the bit of stand-up comedy I did infront of 200+ people entitled 'How to Americanize the English and Wales Green Party', it 'twas a hoot.]

Today’s September 23rd and I feel like I lost some weight, I’ll find a scale in the next few days. But where was I? Oh yes, Liverpool and the Green Party Autumn Conference at Liverpool Hope University.

Anyhow, so I wake up… Go to have breakfast at the Hostel and its worse and more bland than UPJ Cafeteria food so I eat nothing (I actually spit out the sausage when I tried it, that bad). I dress, get ready, shave and n’at. Than I attempt to walk to the conference. Walk about twenty or so minutes and see I’m going to be late so I get a cab. This would be the daily occurrence, simply because I actually for some reason cannot figure out how to walk their but can find my way home by following signs for the docks. Five pounds later (for a five minute cab ride, talk about a ripoff) I was at the university. But since I only spent five pounds on the cab and not 15 like it would have been if I didn’t walk at all it was bittersweet.

I guess the first thing you need to learn while being in the United Kingdom is not to think of things in terms of dollars as you will not be able to buy anything because its all so damn expensive (except bottled water and transportation).

So anyhow I get to the conference and they want me to pay… Ugh… Luckily I saw Pete who got me in. Basically how the conference works is there are a few classrooms where workshops are held every hour for several hours during the day and then after a few conferences and workshops they all meet in the main room and then when votes on official Green Party of England and Wales comes up they ask for a committee report and suggestion, then debate and then vote. I was a non-voting member, but my moderate American ideologies defientally had an impact as their were various times I got into the discussion during and influenced people, their were even times when I was looked to for advice because of an admiration many people have for the American Constitution, particularly when it came to discussions about the new EU Constitution being thrown around which is popular all over Europe except for the UK apparently.

Anyhow… I have notes and am briefly going to go over all the workshops I went to well at least a few of the more interesting ones. As a role of thumb I tried to go to workshops that dealt more with the mechanical workings of British government, how the party functions and European politics. Though I did go to some more “socialist” workshops and some environmental and some on women’s rights and equality. Overall I think the experience has made me a tit bit more liberal… L

I met a lot of interesting people as well. Particularly of interest was internationally known author Derek Wall who was very very socialist but was very well articulated, very much a poitically astute person. He gave a speech on Ecology and Power, power being a political science term. I also had a good time meeting all of the “Young Greens” who I even went out with a little, though the days were to long to really drink. Sian Berry, the mayoral candidate was also very interesting person as well as just about everyone I met. Because my notes have notes on the conference, workshops and general stuff, I’m going to go by them and may miss a lot of the personal interactions, save for the leadership debate stuff.
Before I do that I do need to give a shout out to this lady Miranda who taught me that I like tea... Infact, I love tea… with a bit of milk.

One more thing about the conference, I had to eat the cafertia food the entire time… Lovely things like cheese and onion sandwiches and other interesting British food. I think in Liverpool is part of the reason why I dropped weight, healthier and disgusting British food and long ass walks to and from the conference. My legs were actually sore by Sunday.

Anyhow, to the notes and to information on the conference. I am going to try and describe a “split” of ideology in the greens that I started to see form in the debates between the socialists and the capitalists and more so between the fundamentalists and the realists of the party. As a political scientist it was quite interesting. Please note I didn’t take notes at every workshop so I might miss some and I’m going to try and be brief.

9/13/07 1200hours
Workshop on Motions D02 and D03.

Motion D03 was about relationships with other parties and political identies in times that their policies are similar to the Green Parties and on how much control the party has over elected members. It suggests that their be a internal study on if the Green Party should work with enemy parties and that their be some kind of mechanism for controlling their elected members and even reprimanding them for acting “ungreen”.

The workshop came to the conclusion the word “enemy” party should be taken away and their was a general concern that this would leave the elected members unable to compromise and work on their feet and that there is the possibility of a time when parties will co-inside with major green issues and that not allowing the parties support to such motions could be detrimental to some causes. Some felt that it was unethical to work with other parties. The motion passed both in the workshop and conference.

But the reason why it passed was simply to allow the debate to start, it is not passing anything into actual action. The question that will really be debated is…

Do Green Party elected officials do as they see fit
Or is it mandated by the party

No one really showed up to talk about D02 so most of the workshop was on D03. D02 was badly worded and didn’t make sense so it failed.

9/13/2007 1300hours
Workshop on Candidate Selection Process

This workshop looked at doing a review on how the Green Party selects candidates on a national, local and European level. Wants to initiate debate and have proposals for procedures for selecting candidates by the spring conference.

A good quote that sums up the workshop is the following… This was the general consensus…

“…trying to have a consensus and put down a ‘general guideline’ for the local parties that is not too overbearing so it doesn’t get turned down. [The Green Party] Should amend the constitution [of the Green Party] to say when the local party is not being run properly it goes by default to the GPRC [Green Party Review Council] guidelines. We need a mechanism/general guideline on how to select and deselect nongreen candidates.”

Basically the point of the motion this workshop wanted to pass was to see if the current regulations on candidate selections are too overbearing or not over bearing enough with the majority thinking something needs to be done. I forget if this one actually passed the general assembly but I think it did.

9/13/2007
Opening Remarks and Press Office, Emergency Motions, Section D votes/Debate, Organization Motions

Basically this was in the main room where the real decisions about the party are decided and it felt much like I’d imagion a political convention in America would happen only a lot smaller. The first day, being a Thursday had a low attendance as well (though the next 3 days were packed.)

I remember being extremely interested in this, though it would have been a bore for most. They basically did votes based off a straw polls (holding up cards) and if it is close they recount and if someone than doesn’t except the recount they do an actual vote with filling out cards.

The beginning of the conference was a hoot. As the SOC, I forget what it stands for, was supposed to list the workshops earlier than it did and didn’t get the information to all the parties so a motion was put forward to have the SOC apologize and it overwhelming passed to the objection of the SOC. So somewhere in the Green Party minutes of this conference it was officially voted on and officially says something along the lines of “The SOC acknowledges that it has not complied with guidelines and has jeopardized the conference”

Their seemed to be a power struggle between the SOC and the rest of the party over how to run the conference and some arguments broke out. The leader of the SOC finally personally apologized and accepted full responsibility to which this hippie lady (yes, like this lady is what Erin Dougherty will be at 60, full blown hippie w/red hair) and asked what it means to accept full responsibility which was a hoot… What does it mean?

Then it went to concerns that the SOC isn’t doing things right. SOC used its power and position to influence votes on what even comes to conference, SOC had the report late(as mentioned) and attempted to change the way procedure works during the conference. People complained more and did motions to restrict SOC and the influence it caused. Hard to explain without being lengthy but they basically got people to withdrawl votes after the fact about what will be talked about at conference which is against the constitution and bylaws of the party, particularly because they are in a position of power so their was a vote to put those motions back on that table since SOC shouldn’t have done that, it overwhelming passes.

Some motions are voted on, most fail. One of contention that I found was interesting was based on if it took two years of being a party member to be on the Green Party Executive Council or one. A young women suggested that it was anti-youth to have it at two years and that it turns the youth who are interested in the party away… Her motion failed in that not having a two year buffer many of the oldheads felt that the party could be infiltrated by outsiders who get to the head of the executive wing of the party.

During this conference I met Derek Wall and bullshitted with him and his wife a little bit. He is the author of many “Green” books the latest Babylon and Beyond: The economics of anti-capitalist, anti-globalist and radical green movement…. Which he tried to sell to me for 12 pounds (24 USD)… some socialist… lol

While at the table with Wall and the others I got a sticker that said “Green Empowerment, Leadership No Thanks” and wore it. I was told about how they don’t have any one leader and how exciting it is for a party not to have a leader and how good it is. I thought the conversation was weird, I had no idea that this would lead into one of the most interesting debates I have ever seen in my life during the Saturday and Sunday days of the conference… The LEADERSHIP DEBATES… But that’ll be saved for later in this post or next post…

Anyhow, so this part of the conference ended and it was back to workshops… I don’t think I’m going to write about all of them…

The next workshop was at 1730hours (they tell time both in 12 base and 24 base… It gets confusing)…

This workshop was on the “General and European Election Strategy”

It was a very interesting workshop and wasn’t about an upcoming policy procedure but was actually about informing people how the party gets its word out, what needs to be done as England’s fourth party and what the future holds.

Talked about how many people associate the Green Party with climate change and how to change that image…

They talked about their key issues such as climate change, how they should focus on healthcare and hospital closings due to the centralization of the system under the universal healthcare and how that should be stopped, they need to spread the word of energy efficiency(something people actually care about here, they are in general all together more green), housing affordability, their being against the war in Iraq.

To get these issues out and get candidates elected they focus in “key” districts, 3 key districts (resources are limited). Pointed out that a recent poll showed the majority of the public favored Green Policies over other parties when polled without knowing which party they relate to, talked about empowering people, getting information out by door knocking and facebook and everything possible. Real interesting.

Also, it was suggested to print phamlets in Polish because of all the Polish immigrants who are eligible to vote in European Union elections… Other parties seem to ignore the Poles and it can be a sign of strength some suggest.

Talked about legalizing weed and how recently some studies have suggested that mary-jane has before recently long term effects to which a debate came on how the potential candidates can debate that. It was suggested that “In a regulated market weed would not be allowed to be so concentrated that its dangerous” and statistics were given to back the statement.

Its hard for me to indulge in the actual party building stuff, but needless to say at 7,000 strong, with only 2 MEPS (Member of European Parliament) and no MPs (Member of Parliament) things are tough but the statistics of new strategies they have recently tried in some wards shows that it is possible for them to win no matter how under resourced and this gave the local movers and shakers suggestions for repeating that success.

The next workshop was at 1830 and was on making renewable energy environmentally acceptable and mainly talked about how wind turbines can damage animals habits so the ground under them should be grassed over to make it as eco-safe and least environmentally damaging as possible. Their was more jargon but oh well… I was tired by now for these notes.

At 1930 their was a more formal workshop on the Party’s Election Strategy which was wit a powerpoint presentation and really interesting…

Talked about applying campaigns that have been proving to work, targeting necessary wards with significant green support, must combat “wasted vote” feeling from voters.

Issue the party has is it doesn’t have the resources and information, like current information on where it has the most supporters.

OKAY I AM GOING WAY TO INDEPTH WITH THESE WORKSHOPS. AS I SAID INTERESTING TO ME NOT SO MUCH FOR YOU… So I am going to start typing smaller summaries except for interesting parts.

The next day at 9:00am I went to a workshop called “Green Left-How to Change the World” hosted by Derek Wall. Here is where I noticed the divide in the Greens I talked about, espically because it was talked about. Derek Wall put it good when he said something along the lines of “Current Green Movement is a fight between realists who compromise and fundamentalists who don’t believe in the “power politics” and compromise.”

This workshop talk about how to make the world perfect, how to get emissions down by 90%, how to reach the climate targets by compromise and what not. The interesting thing about this workshop is that I would put Mr. Wall in the fundamentalist side more so than the Realist but he makes points for compromise and traditional politics. He even said “Radical politics[aka chaining yourself to a tree to keep a powerplant from being built] works well only in conjunction with other forms of power” and that it needs to be done on a micro(trade unions, more religious people in the party, more community) and macro level(win elections, make change).

He also warned on the danger with radical politics because people can’t relate to it. Now, the issue with Derek Wall comes in the YES! Refrumendum that I will talk about later because I cannot quite place him as a fundamentalist or realist within the party, he’s to multifaceted… Sorry for all the political science jargon, I’m sure this report is going to seem fascinating to Ian and maybe some of my profs and no one else… But I want to do it somewhat in depth, though its not a report and I am getting tired so I’m going to be briefer lol…

Anyhow at 1000hours I went to see a keynote speech by Sian Berry who is a realist, and the mayoral candidate for London for the Green Party, one of the two Principal Speakers(along with Derek Wall) for the party (The term Principal Speaker will be coming up a lot with the rest of this blog post) and a hottie to boot.

She was a realist as she was contemporary, moderate and a professional politician who believed that the “ends justify the means” for getting green motions passed. She also is one that is not looking for a completely Utopian Society unlike some of the fundamentalists… But this will be gone into later when I talk about the divide I saw (likely in tomorrow’s post because I only think I’m going to finish through 9/14 and then do the last two days of conference the next post)

Sian Berry was an amazing speaker and by amazing I mean she possibly gave one of the best speeches I have ever heard making every current candidate for President seem like a bad speaker save maybe Mitt Romney. She gave a speech and delivered her points, had good pathos and stuff. This is what a leader is… Anyhow here’s some paraphrases from the speech that I found interesting:

“Gordon Brown[English PM] thinks you should solve climate change by changing your light bulbs, we think you should solve climate change by changing your government” BOOYA

Read the speech here: http://www.greenparty.org.uk/speeches/55


After the speech their was more of the voting on motions. The only one of real interesting one was about how open government should be… I rather like the workshops more (until the leadership debate, highlight of my life as a young political scientist.)

At 1320 I went to a workshop on Issues face by women from ethic minority communities.

Talked about asylum seekers and issues they face, issues their children face and possible solutions. For example if a women comes to England with her kids to seek asylum she must declare so before she gets through customs and then she is interviewed and asked questions about if she was raped, about the father, ect… In front of the children that can scare the children, so the women often will lie to the customs agent to protect their children…

Also all the forms are in English… (They are more starch on the do English thing than the United States government is it appears).

Also enthic women who are seeking asylum have less access to education, particularly higher education and little to no access to public funds.

This debate was pretty one sided because two of the women were asylum seekers who were also ethnic so no one could argue another point, though I agreed with a lot they were saying. The other issue talked about at this workshop was arranged marriages and how some people do that and how its sudo-slavery. And that immigrants from countries where women are treated poorly need to be educated on how to not lose their culture but at the same time respect women and their rights.

One ethnic man mentioned that ethnic people are not likely to listen to white people and that it should be done by second generation ethic immigrants who can show how they live and how they still maintain their culture and used his own family as an example.

OKAY THIS PART IS IMPORTANT BECAUSE I FOUND IT INTERESTING.

The next workshop I attended was called “Meet the ‘Yes’[proleadership] Campaign.”

There is a divide in the Green Party of England and Wales between those who think the party needs formal leadership to gain more media attention and to attract more members on a national basis. The party currently has two Principal Speakers of opposite gender who serve year terms and they are currently Derek Wall and Sian Berry.

Sian Berry was one of the movers and shakers of this workshop, she mentioned that it is embarrassing to be the Principal Speakers because newspapers spell it wrong, their little and valuable TV airtime is spent with the person asking what her title means and what she does, and that people see the Green Party as a cult when the question “Oh, who is your leader” is asked and people say they don’t have one.

What the Yes! People want to do is make the Principal Speakers elected of opposite gender as a Co-leaders or as Leader and Coleader to simplify it for the press and also give them a vote on the Green Party Executive Council which they currently do not have.

This YES! Idea will not be voted on at conference but will instead be in a November election from all party members and needs 2/3rds of the vote to change the Green Party constitution and bilaws. I couldn’t have told you this by seeing how many people were in favor of this jam-packed room but people are strachly separated in this and it has caused a lot of friction and yelling and almost “fighting” in a party that preaches peace. As an outside observer the leadership issue seemed stupid to me at first as I have also been pro-leadership from my days in the boy scouts to my involvement in clubs to my own political beliefs. But both sides honestly made really good arguments. I helped argue for the Yes! Side at this workshop but afterwards decided to be an outside observer for the most part so I could talk to people in both camps and get the most useful information I can.

The Green Party has a general fear of national leaders because they fear of someone taking over the party or having a “Blare”, a “Bush” or a “Hitler” who runs rampet through the party and ruins its ideological beliefs and values. [I think some in the party would rather have Hitler, lol]. They also are a very grassroot, bottom up organization who clings to the idea that local government is the best government and that having a leader[s] for the national party actually takes away emphasis from the local government… which is a bad thing. These people, the Green Empowerment camp, believe the party has leaders and that they don’t need to be elected that they are natural leaders and that its good to have more leaders not less… And that to be a leader one doesn’t need to be formally called a leader, they cite Martin Luther King Jr. and Gaundi as good examples.

The YES! Argue that it doesn’t change much having a designated leader and that people relate with the idea of a leader and it will make the party better about to compete with other parties and then be able to actually make change. They cite that this argument came up 20 years ago and that the Green Party of England and Wales is in the same place it was 20 years ago and that because of the importance of their message they need a more structured system to gain seats, get MPs and make true change. They cite that the policy only changes the name and gives a vote and has strict recall procedures within the refruredum to make it unlikely for a modern day Hitler to take the Green Party and run with it.

I did add that most Americans would rather vote for someone they can see themselves drinking a beer with than based on policy and that psychologically most people need something tangible to associate ideological beliefs with and with no MPs it is hard to do that a leader may be a good thing. I also cited MLK as a leader to which someone bursted out that he wasn’t elected, to which I wanted to reply that if he was he may have been able to do more… But that leadership, and encouraging leadership is important. IO also pointed out to the lady that interrupted me after the conference that she quoted Gaundi and that he was for political change and supported political familes in India so I spun her example on its head. But then I realized I didn’t want to get too associated with one side or the other so I waned off, except for when I talked to the movers and shakers of the YES! Movement like Sian Berry and when I talked with the Young Greens who actually on Sunday look to me for a neutral analysis for the YES! –v- Green Empowerment debate that occurs on Sunday. It was so great to have 15 people look at me and ask me to decide who won the debate and be genuilly interested in my analysis. Though they all knew I was starchy in favor of YES!

Anyhow after this workshop it was back to the main area for more voting on motions or whatever. They voted on policy issues dealing with minimum wage with many voting against raising the minimum wage because the party is in favor of a “living wage” though they eventually came to the conclusion that a min. wage is okay in the lapse period until they get the living wage. What sucks for them is that not being in power and having no MPs these issues may never get much light unless there is a drastic change in the way people vote in the UK. They also talked about Northern Ireland, Climate Change and meeting the Kyoto protocols and End of Life Care/ Assisted Death.

The first thing that bothered me on a moral level and perhaps the only was the parties support for Assisted Death, a term that made up for Euthanasia/Assisted Suicide. They are overwhelming in favor of it if two doctors approve of it as long as no doctor who has moral objections has to perform it. I couldn’t comphrend how a party against state execution such as the death penalty could be in favor of assisted suicide. I even understand in coma cases, but when someone has cancer or something… that’s rough and all but the cure for polio came out of no where (Well UPMC but whateva)… And what if the cure comes about three days after someone is put down, isn’t that a moral issue? Oh well…

The next workshop was at… um late… haha, my notes don’t say the time for this one… But prob. Like 6ish… It was entitled Safety First! The Campaign to decriminalize sex work. It was interesting and talked about how its stupid that there are studies on why men like sex so much but so few studies on how to help out prostitutes. Literally legalizing it, so was argued, would get the women healthcare and since its their chosen profession it would be okay. The ladies running this conference (whom I actually think were prostitutes) also argued that women involved in prostitution get no protection from violence because to report violence against them criminals themselves, no good benefits of working and are forced to work on the street instead of an establishment. They give stats from European countries with legalized prostitution to secure their case. I didn’t really agree with a lot of what they said but this workshop was more one sided because the two people running it didn’t really take questions. It was interesting but prostitution is, ugh… Like… I find it to be um… I don’t know, I just do not think it should be illegal for STD reasons and what not.

The last workshop of the night was called Meet the MEPs(Member of European Parliament) and was interesting. I will hit on that in a minute… But I forgot to mention the night before I went to a Vegan Resturante after the conference with the young greens and had a glass of wine… YUCK… [Editors Note: I have since found I love wine]. And this night their was an auction and fundraiser and stuff after the last meeting ran by the Young Greens and I won the nicest pen ever that sits in a pedestal and is from the EU… Good shit… But because it’s 2:30 am here and I have a 9am class I need to hurry up and finish this post tonight… lol

Anyhow, the meeting entitled meet your MEPs was one of the greatest of the entire conference for me. The two Green Party MEPs for England are Jean Lambert and Caroline Lucus.

They talked about what they do, what the EU does, about what committees they are on and it was like being in a Dr. Heinisch class all over again. Anyhow what I liked is that the MEPs didn’t dodge questions like other politicians I have met, here is the question I asked Jean Lambert and her response, paraphrased of course…

John Hartman: “How much influence does the European Union have of environmental and social policies and mandates when looking at the sovereignty of the individual nations –vs- the supranational forces at work?”

Jean Lambert-G, MEP: “A lot. May depend a bit if they are law or regulations, but, yes they do have a reach. And remember that every member state has been involved in these-discussions. It is more then influence-it is law. There are the areas, where there are guidelines as opposed to law, where we have an open method of coordination. There is an agreement to what targets should be reached and a vehicle in place to check on it. There is a lot of ‘soft’ policy as well and intergovernmental stuff. So there are different methods that we can use, but there is a lot of reach and a lot of influence.”

A councilor in a local ward also told me that the politicians in his area are working endlessly to get to EU standards for laws that have been passed or their ward can be fined by the EU. So he said it does have reach, he knows first hand.

Anyhow after the conference I talked to Jean Lambert and got her contact information and passed it onto Dr. Heinisch as she said she was interested in working with UPJ to spread information on Green Politics and the European Union to American Students. Possibly having classes email her questions about the EU and being a MEP and getting them answered by an actual MEP… It’s a great opportunity that I hope does not fall through, and was an exciting contact I was able to meet.

Anyhow, off to bed, its 2:46 and I have class at 9am… I also have been at this for quite some time… Glad to say the Steelers won today!!! And what not… I am trying to put this conference in as much depth as I can so when I go back and look at the conference and my time in the UK a year or two from now or ten or twenty I recall all this stuff so I know this post was dry and boring but whatever I tried to make it interesting. This is what I am here for, politics and I figured its important that I show stuff about that… Anyhow next post (hopefully tomorrow) is going to cover the next two days of the conference and will be just as detailed and once I’m off of the conference I should be able to catch up pretty quickly as a normal day does not have as much to talk about…

But tomorrow’s post will be more interesting because it will talk about the leadership debate almost exclusively, Derek Wall’s keynote speech on ecology and power and a bit of Stephen Colbert/Jon Stewart inspired standup I did at the conference review Saturday Night which were a bunch of skits to lighten the mood after a 10 hour day of political debate… I rocked and have a copy of my speech I’m going to post… So tomorrow’s post will be better…