A new or alternative Green Party ?

AGP

Hi there.... Would anyone else out there like to see a new or alternative Green Party ? One that would follow good environmental policies, but also respect and care for ordinary people.

I think myself and a lot of people feel the current green party TDs and leadership have betrayed the people who voted for them in 2007, and this is being born out in the recent local election results. Yet the threat from climate change and global warming is still there, and people like me want to have someone to vote for who will do something about these issues, but I feel I cannot ever vote for the current Green party again as they are now keeping Fianna Fail in power - whose policies are doing so much irreperable damage to our country's future.

We need a new or Alternative Green Party that will only join a government that helps people rather than hurts people, a party that sees our "national assets" as our environment and people, rather than the toxic debts of property developers.

A new Green party that people can be proud to vote for and be a part of. Anyone agree ? If so how could we go about creating an alternative green party ?

turgon

So you want a green party that will go into government with .8% of the government TD's and somehow be able to get full sway. Thats being highly unreasonable.

Robbo

Given the current low ebb of the Greens at a local level, perhaps it would be the time to join them and try to instigate reform from a lower level? It can't be hard to stand out when the general standard is so low.

Do some grassroots work, instigate some change rather than complain to the braying internet that there's no one party that represents 100% of what you believe in.

AGP

yes - a Green Party whose leader and TD's would have had the courage and the principals to stand up at the cabinet table, and say "sorry this is not what our voters put us here to do" and resign when the finance minister and taoiseach start destroying the irish economy and causing severe hardship for ordinary people.

drunkmonkey

I will never in my life vote green again, I used to consider myself a bit of a leftist hippy type, Now I throw my rubbish out the window (I consider it job creation now), the greens have done nothing only take more money from my pocket. Never again!

turgon

The green party TD's, unlike most of their would-be supporters, realise they have instituted more positive change in 2 years in Government than they ever did in their decades in opposition.

The green party TD's also they will get decimated at the next election, so they are taking action that will ensure most of their policy will be introduced.

Shock horror - a green party that want to bring in change rather than wallow in the opposition benches.

And AGP if you suggest the Greens should have resigned when FF started messing up the country then they should have resigned 10 years ago.

Mr Ed

turgon wrote: »

And AGP if you suggest the Greens should have resigned when FF started messing up the country then they should have resigned 10 years ago.

Were the Greens in power ten years ago? I don't think so.

AGP

I think the current green party should have resigned and pulled out at the point where the current government - of which they are a part - started hurting ordinary people with the massive tax rises, unfair spending cuts and at the same time the crazy bailouts for speculatave banks and property developers.
These policies are so far removed from what the green party should be about, that they a complete betrayal of the people who voted for them.

What I'm suggesting is a new Green Party that gets back to basics - Green policies, that also protect and help ordinary people and workers. Rather than what we have now which is Green polices in a government that is causing severe hardship for ordinary people, while looking after big business and property developers and fatcat bankers.

is_that_so

turgon wrote: »

The green party TD's, unlike most of their would-be supporters, realise they have instituted more positive change in 2 years in Government than they ever did in their decades in opposition.

The green party TD's also they will get decimated at the next election, so they are taking action that will ensure most of their policy will be introduced.

Shock horror - a green party that want to bring in change rather than wallow in the opposition benches.

And AGP if you suggest the Greens should have resigned when FF started messing up the country then they should have resigned 10 years ago.

As did the PDs before them. For much of their time in Govt they were the tail that wagged the dog. Pragmatic and understandable though it was for the Greens, politically it was naive and the wrong call. Like the PDs many of their policies can be absorbed and pushed by the larger parties. When the next GE comes around they will have a list of what they have achieved but what will be uppermost in the voters' minds is how "betrayed" they feel and that they are part of this deeply unpopular government. They may come back in due course but is a few years in the sun a justifiable price for a very long road back to political representation?

In response to the OP's question, I would say no. New/Smaller parties that become popular often have a brief sojourn but through political naivety or a determination to stay in power, are shown to be "all the same". As past elections show FF, FG and even Labour can absorb large falls in their votes and still live to fight another day. Smaller parties cannot and the ones who do come up with attractive policies can find those policies appearing in the manifesto of the larger ones anyway, which over time makes them irrelevant.

turgon

Mr Ed wrote: »

Were the Greens in power ten years ago? I don't think so.

That was my point.

AGP wrote: »

I think the current green party should have resigned and pulled out at the point where the current government - of which they are a part - started hurting ordinary people

They started hurting people 10 years ago.

AGP wrote: »

These policies are so far removed from what the green party should be about, that they a complete betrayal of the people who voted for them.

So believe the Greens should have a 100% control over government, even though they only have 8% of the TD's?

AGP wrote: »

What I'm suggesting is a new Green Party that gets back to basics - Green policies, that also protect and help ordinary people and workers.

The Green Party are doing this. They now that the best way for them to implement their policies is to stay in government.

turgon

is_that_so wrote: »

As did the PDs before them. For much of their time in Govt they were the tail that wagged the dog.

Except the PD's sacrificed their policies and became FF under a different name. The Greens are still pursuing their Environment and Democracy policies. The Dail By-Elections were called by whom, the Greens or FF?

is_that_so wrote: »

politically it was naive and the wrong call

Yeah so they sacrificed political gain to introduce governmental change. And you look down on that?

is_that_so wrote: »

Like the PDs many of their policies can be absorbed and pushed by the larger parties.

But not to the same extent.

is_that_so wrote: »

they will have a list of what they have achieved but what will be uppermost in the voters' minds is how "betrayed" they feel and that they are part of this deeply unpopular government..

Green Party achieves positive change. Electorate ignores this. Tbh, that says a lot more about the electorate than the Greens.

is_that_so

turgon wrote: »

Except the PD's sacrificed their policies and became FF under a different name. The Greens are still pursuing their Environment and Democracy policies. The Dail By-Elections were called by whom, the Greens or FF?

Yeah so they sacrificed political gain to introduce governmental change. And you look down on that?

But not to the same extent.


Green Party achieves positive change. Electorate ignores this. Tbh, that says a lot more about the electorate than the Greens.

So did Noel Browne for all the good it did him, but that's politics.

My interest is in the politics of it. Smaller parties in Ireland don't get too many chances and over time have tended to fade away and disappear. What's so controversial about that? The Greens took a chance with a mandate the electorate in general did not give them. That will be remembered in the same way that Labour were punished for Spring's delusions, despite the fact that the Rainbow up to 1997 was a fairly decent government.

As for the electorate, well that's what they do and there is really no point in having a go at them. They are the ones who choose who gets elected. One could equally argue that they were not in their right minds voting for the Greens. Collectively they are sensitive and will punish perceived slights and insults to their intelligence.

AGP

My thinking is that a new alternative green party - totally seperate from the current one - can field candidates in the next election, and maybe win a couple of seats and play a part in a new rainbow coalition with FG and Lab. In this way green policies could still be implemented, but as part of a much fairer and more caring and social government that will help restore the economy and look after ordinary people.

drunkmonkey

What green policys do you want to see?

Why do we need a green party, why not just a green minister within the existing government, it dosen't take a whole party to come up with some simple, constructive ideas and I don't mean more taxes.

The greens are destroyed for a generation and rightly so because of there spinless stint in government.

turgon

is_that_so wrote: »

The Greens took a chance with a mandate the electorate in general did not give them..

If they had no mandate, how did they get 5 TD's?

is_that_so wrote: »

As for the electorate, well that's what they do and there is really no point in having a go at them.

Why not? Corruption is what FF just do too so should we exempt them from criticism? Your statement is a bit wooly.

AGP wrote: »

In this way green policies could still be implemented, but as part of a much fairer and more caring and social government that will help restore the economy and look after ordinary people.

This "new" green pary would have to do exactly the same thing the current one is.

turgon

drunkmonkey wrote: »

The greens are destroyed for a generation and rightly so because of there spinless stint in government.

What part of forcing FF to have two Dail by-elections was spineless? In the context of the green party being totally and completely unpopular?

is_that_so

turgon wrote: »

If they had no mandate, how did they get 5 TD's?

They didn't actually if you interpret a mandate correctly as

a command or authorisation to act in a particular way on a public issue given by the electorate to its representative

and not the current vague version floating about, that did not extend to joining FF in Government. The expectation was that a vote for the Greens would mean them being part of the alternative government.

turgon wrote: »

Why not? Corruption is what FF just do too so should we exempt them from criticism? Your statement is a bit wooly.

Not at all. I said that it is a pointless exercise, not that they are not exempted, especially if you want them to vote for your party. Upset the electorate enough and they will respond as we have recently seen.

AGP

This "new" green pary would have to do exactly the same thing the current one is.[/quote]

No - thats the point I'm making, a new Alternative Green Party would have to be different to put clear blue water between it and the current Greens. So a new green party would pledge it would only join or stay in any government while ordinary people and workers were being protected from the kind of extreme policies being persued by the current government. So taxes would have to be fair and based on what people can survive on, spending cuts would have to be made in wasteful things rather than in important front line services. The new Green party would be a caring one, that wants to make people's lives happier, better and easier while protecting our environment, wildlife and countryside.

turgon

AGP wrote: »

So a new green party would pledge it would only join or stay in any government while ordinary people and workers were being protected from the kind of extreme policies being persued by the current government.

The extreme policies are necessitated by the actions of previous governments; most of the actions now would be the same regardless of who is in control. So what you are suggesting is that the new greens only stay in government until the going get tough. Is that the kind of party people will vote for? One that, when presented with a serious national problem., will collapse like a pack of cards?

AGP wrote: »

So taxes would have to be fair and based on what people can survive on

"Fair" is one of the most subjective words in terms of politics. I think that getting rid of child benefits and single parent welfare is "fair," but many dont. So in this case two peoples ideas of what is fair is totally different. So how do we decide what is fair? Is it fair to stop governing a country once it gets hard, as your "new greens" will do?

is_that_so wrote: »

They didn't actually if you interpret a mandate correctly as

"a command or authorisation to act in a particular way on a public issue given by the electorate to its representative."

How is 5 TD's getting elected based on green issues not a mandate?

Or am I right in saying that you think the electorate should be told exactly what each rep will do in any situation possible. In this case the candidates must declare what exactly they will do in the billion different scenarios that could face a government.

is_that_so wrote: »

The expectation was that a vote for the Greens would mean them being part of the alternative government.

When you vote for a candidate, you vote to get the im government. People who voted Green "expected" a government including the greens. They got it. If the Green voters wanted the alternative government, why didnt they vote for Labour/FG who promised the alternative government, instead of the greens who were loosely tied to it?

Sand

The OP should search this forum for the words "New" and "Party" and contact the people on those threads for advice on creating their new party.

is_that_so

turgon wrote: »

"a command or authorisation to act in a particular way on a public issue given by the electorate to its representative."

How is 5 TD's getting elected based on green issues not a mandate?

Or am I right in saying that you think the electorate should be told exactly what each rep will do in any situation possible. In this case the candidates must declare what exactly they will do in the billion different scenarios that could face a government.

When you vote for a candidate, you vote to get the im government. People who voted Green "expected" a government including the greens. They got it. If the Green voters wanted the alternative government, why didnt they vote for Labour/FG who promised the alternative government, instead of the greens who were loosely tied to it?

My point was that many of us, in the electorate, did not vote for the Greens to join FF in government, ergo we did not give them that mandate. At no point did the Greens say "vote for us to join FF in government". Had they done so, they'd have lost almost all of their seats. But that was 2007 and the electorate now quite frankly don't much care what the Greens claim.

Much of this also seems to assume that people gave the Greens number 1s. Apart from Sargent, pretty much every other TD depended on transfers and it is this lack of transfers that will all but wipe them in the next election. The implosion in the local elections shows quite clearly that the Greens were either left off ballot papers or so far down the list that they would never have got enough transfers.

Finally we don't vote for governments, we vote for the local man or woman. If that individual is part of an organisation that has ideas we like it makes them more attractive. If an organisation has got the mix right they'll get more TDs and better placed to form a government.

LostinBlanch

I'd vote for a clean hands (i.e. anti corruption) party. The Greens used to have this as one of their main policies.

But by their shameful decision to jump into bed with FF under Bertie Ahern they effectively endorsed all his previous actions, however questionable they were. Hello John, remember the Planet Bertie speech? :rolleyes:

Some Green party members may wish to disagree with that view, but if so please can we have some brave Gormley apologist explain their support for FF in their Mahon Tribunal vote? Neither is it the view of the electorate, as they showed a couple of weeks ago.

But then again Gormley's crew have also shown that they aren't above stooping to or even beyond, FF's level, remember their failed attempt to politicise the civil service? Or should I say encourage civil servants to become financial donors to the party? This is despite the fact that by law the civil service has to be apolitical? No political party in the history of the state has ever tried such a stroke. If FF or FG or Lab tried this there would be war and rightly so, but it didn't stop the "party of principles" from trying that did it?

Anyway back to the present, Gormley et al have now got the political version of the clap*. That's what you get if you sleep around John . . . . and don't be surprised if you're not popular with people until you've had the all clear and have been seen to show real remorse. But the first thing to do is actually stop sleeping around, pull out even, the sooner they do that, the sooner chance of recovery.

* But it's not all bad, there's only 11 months and counting before Gormley et al get their ministerial pensions. And I for one am glad to know that my vote wasn't wasted. :rolleyes:

starn

Would anyone else out there like to see a new or alternative Green Party ? One that would follow good environmental policies, but also respect and care for ordinary people.

No. I don’t really see the point of the Green Party anymore. Every party has to have some form of envirmental policy now. Which makes the Greens pretty much redundant as I see it

The green party TD's, unlike most of their would-be supporters, realise they have instituted more positive change in 2 years in Government than they ever did in their decades in opposition.

What changes would they be exactly. Banning light bulbs. A minister who cycles to the dail. But has a govermnet car follow hi,m with a change of clothes and his briefcase. Come on Noel Dempsey did more for the envirment when he put a levey on plastic bags then the Greens have done in the last two years.

eoinbn

Green voters need to grow up. Even if the green party were the only party in government they would need to compromise their beliefs to sell them. However given that they are the junior party in government they will need to compromise on pretty much everything expect on a few key issues which make it worthwhile been in government.

Bottle_of_Smoke

Think they're really hard done by. I voted for them and wanted them to be in government, even if it were with Fianna Fail, they wouldn't have got in otherwise yet Fianna Fail would.

Will still vote for them next time.

Executive Steve

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

Think they're really hard done by. I voted for them and wanted them to be in government, even if it were with Fianna Fail, they wouldn't have got in otherwise yet Fianna Fail would.

Will still vote for them next time.

After disappointing me about Tara, disastrous cuts in Dublin public transport, the ongoing debacle at Rossport I wouldn't even consider it.

As for Gormley - his INSANE pet "anti noise pollution" project (google it!) is one of the most dangerous laws I've ever heard a politician come out with.

Triangle

Turgon,
are you saying that getting green issues done by ANY means is acceptable? Morality be damned?

Do you have a line ANYWHERE that you have to stop and ask the question - is this right?

Trig.

Red Alert

The Green Party should have learned their lesson from what happened to the Progressive Democrats. A small party with ostensibly noble aims and clean politics but also harbors an addiction to power once they're in becomes the lightning rod for everyone who hates the government. It took Labour years to recover from their punishment for going in with FF.

The problem with the green party is that they're so fixated on minor green issues that they've no holistic moral compass. Eamonn Ryan is fixated on bicycles whilst the telecoms infrastructure in the country goes to pot. Gormley seems to be trotted out as the government apologist on a regular basis, presumably as he's not quite as much a train-wreck as Mary Coughlan. When they're asked about it, the greens say it's a-ok because they're pushing the 'green agenda' through government. No wonder they're down the toilet.

sliabhluachra

Reserve your judgements until 2011 and than we will see what kind of a performance the Greens have done.

People tend to forget that the likes of Gormley and Sergant spoke out against the reliability on the construction sector. Sergant was physically attacked in a dublin city council meeting after he showed a cheque that a developer had sent him as he asked who else had got one.

Gormley has been making great roads into the area of regional and urban planning and has cracked down on local elected members acting ridiculously at a micro level without looking at the big picture. It was the locally elected members of Fianna Fail and Fine Gael and to a lesser extent sinn fein and labour who constantly undermined proper planning goals that would have prevented the pain we are suffering as a result of the reliance on the constuction sector.

The greens were the only ones that realised that you cant put a brown thomas in Ballinasloe or what ever ridiculous ideas developers had. I have no pity for them (developers).

Dont start a new party. Get involved in the one tht exists and change it from within. Dont make a bigger tragedy out of the situation. People can be seriously thick but wake up Oil is running out, our summers are erratic in terms of weather, University campuses are catering for massive parking for student accomodation. what do students who live on campus want cars for?? Their lectures are 100metres away. So much more folly

Economic development has to happen but we need to make a money making thing from the environment.

People dont care about the environment but they care about money - Make green jobs viable and they can be. People are slowly catching on. Ireland has the chance the lead the way - don't waste this chance by discrediting the greens. They can only achieve their aims in government, Dev knew that in 1928. Let the light shine in the darkness.

brianthebard

I'm surprised there hasn't been a split in the party already tbh, the line was pretty clearly drawn when they voted on whether or not to go into government. Which makes me think that perhaps the party members at least don't feel like Gormley et al haven't gotten everything wrong. I definitely think its important that a party with a sincere ideological dedication to ecological issues maintains a presence in Irish politics, whether that is the Green party or not remains to be seen.

irish_bob

i actually think the two green ministers are very capable individuals , i just hope they have the stomach to support the tough descisions the goverment will have to make and are not swayed by the kind of wishy washy views that typify its grass roots , im talking in terms of cutting social wellfare and other sensitive areas

Het-Field

Should the Greens suffer a wipeout at the next General Election, it will transpire that they will be behind the Socialist Party, and the People Before Profit Alliance in terms of public reps. Equally, they will have just one more rep the the irrelevant Workers Party.

At that point a new Green movement would probably attempt to establish itself.

I feel sorry for the likes of Roger Garland who built this movement, and Trevor Sergent who built the party's credibility (but who has been anonomous ever since). Gormley and Eamonn Ryan have done more damage to a party then Michael McDowell did to the PDs. They should hang their heads in shame. However, I shall sleep safely in the knowledge that Gormley's seat is gone !

Traumadoc

LostinBlanch wrote: »

I'd vote for a clean hands (i.e. anti corruption) party. The Greens used to have this as one of their main policies.

But by their shameful decision to jump into bed with FF under Bertie Ahern they effectively endorsed all his previous actions, however questionable they were. Hello John, remember the Planet Bertie speech? :rolleyes:

Some Green party members may wish to disagree with that view, but if so please can we have some brave Gormley apologist explain their support for FF in their Mahon Tribunal vote? Neither is it the view of the electorate, as they showed a couple of weeks ago.

But then again Gormley's crew have also shown that they aren't above stooping to or even beyond, FF's level, remember their failed attempt to politicise the civil service? Or should I say encourage civil servants to become financial donors to the party? This is despite the fact that by law the civil service has to be apolitical? No political party in the history of the state has ever tried such a stroke. If FF or FG or Lab tried this there would be war and rightly so, but it didn't stop the "party of principles" from trying that did it?

Anyway back to the present, Gormley et al have now got the political version of the clap*. That's what you get if you sleep around John . . . . and don't be surprised if you're not popular with people until you've had the all clear and have been seen to show real remorse. But the first thing to do is actually stop sleeping around, pull out even, the sooner they do that, the sooner chance of recovery.

* But it's not all bad, there's only 11 months and counting before Gormley et al get their ministerial pensions. And I for one am glad to know that my vote wasn't wasted. :rolleyes:

How about a laugh:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xqkoz7hmc1s

This man now believes Bertie is the right stuff to be Lord Mayor of Dublin???

The man who said no to Nice???

The hypocracy stinks like a two week old fish.

I will never vote for Gormley again.

ednwireland

AGP wrote: »

I think the current green party should have resigned and pulled out at the point where the current government - of which they are a part - started hurting ordinary people with the massive tax rises, unfair spending cuts and at the same time the crazy bailouts for speculatave banks and property developers.
These policies are so far removed from what the green party should be about, that they a complete betrayal of the people who voted for them.

What I'm suggesting is a new Green Party that gets back to basics - Green policies, that also protect and help ordinary people and workers. Rather than what we have now which is Green polices in a government that is causing severe hardship for ordinary people, while looking after big business and property developers and fatcat bankers.

what do you think green policies are there main on eseems to be carbon taxes wait till they get that one through and FF wont oppose it ( more revenue) screw the economy put more businesses under by taking more of what little revenue is left.

the only problem with a new green party is patricia mckenna would probably join

lostexpectation

still say the pds and green should merge.

rcecil

The alternative exists already. Visit www.sinnfein.ie to check the issues you care about.

Working Class Defense
Green Policies
Human rights around the world including Palestine, Iraq and Afghanistan

spank_inferno

rcecil wrote: »

The alternative exists already. Visit www.sinnfein.ie to check the issues you care about.

Working Class Defense
Green Policies
Human rights around the world including Palestine, Iraq and Afghanistan

And the human rights of protestant people of northern Ireland who wish to remain part of the united kingdom ?

And the human rights of Irish service men killed at the hands of SF/IRA over the years?

Please!
As bad as the greens are..... and they are bad.... etc etc

Bob Z

I think the greens were right to go into power with FF. When you vote for a pary you hope that ultimately will be able to make a difference. However i think that the greens were useless at negotiating with FF. A bit too green if you will pardon the pun. I get the impression that the greens are making changes behind the scenes. However to be a successful politician its not so much what as what you are SEEN to be doing. If they had got the road stopped at Tara or stopped corparate sponsorship of political parties or something as high profile.

LostinBlanch

Bob Z wrote: »

I think the greens were right to go into power with FF. When you vote for a pary you hope that ultimately will be able to make a difference. However i think that the greens were useless at negotiating with FF. A bit too green if you will pardon the pun. I get the impression that the greens are making changes behind the scenes. However to be a successful politician its not so much what as what you are SEEN to be doing. If they had got the road stopped at Tara or stopped corparate sponsorship of political parties or something as high profile.

Bob, you're missing the point. They did get what they negotiated for, Gormley and Ryan as ministers, Sargent as a junior minister, and De Burca the unelectable Dan Boyle as senators. So it's not all bad, only 10 months to go until their ministerial / senatorial pensions.

Bob Z

LostinBlanch wrote: »

Bob, you're missing the point. They did get what they negotiated for, Gormley and Ryan as ministers, Sargent as a junior minister, and De Burca the unelectable Dan Boyle as senators. So it's not all bad, only 10 months to go until their ministerial / senatorial pensions.

Yes but they should have negotiated for a better deal; dont you think?