Green Party Issue

lonesome

Green Party was desperately against Nice Treaty in 2001, why does it keep unusual silence on Lisbon Treaty??

Moriarty

I've moved this to the EU sub-forum.

Going on memory the green party consulted it's membership earlier in the year on how it should approach the Lisbon Treaty referendum. A vote was taken and ~62% (again, if i remember correctly) voted that they should campaign for a yes vote.

The green party rules for these votes are apparently that two thirds of the vote (66%) are required for these decisions to become party policy. This wasn't reached so the party said that the individual members can campaign however they see fit. As a result some members are campaigning for a Yes vote, others are campaigning for a No vote.

The_Minister

You might as well close the thread now.

turgon

Also, in their own words, they had to get practical about it. Now in government, especially as such a small member compared with Fianna Fail, they were probably under pressure to agree. You can say loads in opposition without feeling the pinch.

redspider

Moriarty wrote: »

A vote was taken and ~62% (again, if i remember correctly) voted that they should campaign for a yes vote.

Its remarkable that the 38% against came out even when ALL the GP TD's were fully behind a 'Yes'. This clearly shows a big division within the Green Party, and it has already schismed in membership after the last election (due to the decision to go in with FF, its 'up-to-that point' main target of faults. Whilst the Green Party has new members (some are saying that some of these are 'silent' FFers) and members have left in disgust, it remains to be seen how the electorate will respond to the Green Party come the next local and general elections, and whether the voters 'leaving' will be greater than the new voters 'acquired'. Its a crucial point of development for the party.

Redspider

turgon

Some people like me are rather impressed by the democratic credibility the greens show, and will vote for them as soon as I can.

On the other hand Brian Cowen seems like a dictator. "Vote Yes or you out of the party". Maybe his real name is Brian Stalin. Or Joseph Cowen. Who knows?

Moriarty

I think it might be fair to say that you need to familiarise yourself with how most political parties run themselves if you think that's unsual, you could start here, with specific Irish information here

turgon

Moriarty, I know that parties must exercise some level of control over their members. But I was comparing

Fianna Fail: All members to agree with leader on the Treaty regardless of personal opinions; elected representative forced to campaign for YES (or face expulsion).

vs

Green Party: Democratic election within the party to set a stance on the Treaty, with double majority needed either way. No forced views. Result: no official position but members can promote either side. I was at a meeting where one Green member was advocating YES, the other NO.

Moriarty

You're ignoring that if the 66% was reached the green party would be campaigning for a yes vote and would presumably be whipping their members the same as the other parliamentary parties.

It's nice to see a party membership involved in the decision making, but I'm pretty sure there's another reason you're not taking into account when you see that there was no poll of the membership for FF/FG/Labour: there's no divison surrounding european policy.

turgon

Fair enough!

portomar

lonesome wrote: »

Green Party was desperately against Nice Treaty in 2001, why does it keep unusual silence on Lisbon Treaty??

along with views expressed above, worth noting that all the green tds are in favour, and that eamonn ryan was particularly outspoken in favour of a yes vote as recently as yesterdays irish times. i think for them they think that climate change policy has the best chance of suceeding at a multi-national level, and lisbon will keep the eu working to do this. heard someone at green party confernce say that the partys membership has effectively doubled in the last 18 months.

sink

You know I used to hate the greens, they were too motivated by ideology and seemed to have absolutely no pragmatism. Trevor Sargent was clueless about non-green issues especially business and the economy. Now they're in power John Gormley has surprised me, he seems to be getting what he can done without holding a gun to the head of the economy. He even called for a discussion on nuclear power, which is an amazingly pragmantic for the greens. The environmental extremists in the party are disappointed and I hope they leave because the people that will be left will be sensible, pragmatic and far more electable and green issues will have more of a say in future governments.