Siân Berry has a new website. This pleases me.

The Green Party Conference finished today - so regular updates should resume soon, along with a write-up of my conference. In the meantime, enjoy the best bits of Caroline Lucas’ inaugural Leader’s speech:

And, for good measure, Adrian Ramsay’s Deputy Leader’s speech too:

Nice, no?

Quoth Carole Walker of the BBC:

Green spin doctors (yes they really do exist) insist there is no question of the party abandoning its principles

Absolutely.

Doug is the resident Green here, but I can stray onto his turf long enough to spread the word of Caroline Lucas’ election as leader.

By all accounts she was the better candidate (although I am disappointed that only two people stood), and she deserves all congratulations for the resounding gulf between herself and Ashley Gunstock.  Jim Jay has more.

From an anti-Caroline Lucas leafleteer outside the Conference door:

And before you simply dismiss David Icke (whom the Green Party “establishment” likes to demonise), please consider that in doing so you’d be refuting the findings of modern Quantum Physics and a mass of political and historical evidence, plus the collective knowledge and wisdom of the indigenous peoples around the world who have oral traditions going back thousands of years.

Indeed. We cannot keep everyone happy, it seems…

EDIT: You may note from the above that I’m at the Green Party conference this weekend. Blogging may therefore be sporadic; I will, however, be making unusually regular use of Twitter.

Charles Clarke has taken to the New Statesman in order to…Well, its not clear exactly. The content is muddled and unclear in intent. Knowing Clarke my imagining was that it might live up to the hype which The Guardian dutifully gave it. In reality it seems not to be about the future of Labour, but rather an attempt at apologism for Blairitism. He segues between arguing that we shouldn’t be blathering on about the past (Blair), blathering on about the past (Blair), pinning down precisely what he thinks the term means and pretending that he thinks the term is meaningless.

There are some snipes at Gordon Brown though, described as, in reference to Blair, “His Chancellor” and blamed for Britain not joining with the Euro. There is also a spot of self-analysis that is amusing when the context is considered:

The rise of terrorist atrocities, including London in 2005, identified Tony Blair with tough efforts to strengthen security, sometimes at a perceived cost to liberty.

“Perceived”, yes. Because house arrest does not constitute a true breach of liberty, its just that people might see it that way. I would suggest that Taking Liberties be viewed by anyone fooled even for a moment that Clarke is some form of cuddly teddly bear. The scenes with the fellow locked inside his house and restricted to an entirely arbitary section of his surroundings especially.

But if there is some actual point to the article its that we all have to stop being mean to the Blairites which ruined the party. Otherwise Labour will face oblivion. One can not help but think that perhaps Clarke’s position on his party’s future is inspired by his own position. Come the next election is seems increasingly unlikely that Clarke will be unseated by no other than a Green Party candidate. Yes, the unreconstructed leftist Greens with their plans to nationalise and set up people’s banks.

So the notion of this unrepentant rightist tossing in his hat to any forthcoming leadership race, or even triggering one, is surely one which can only be met with wry amusement. Brown’s position does seem dire but he, at least, looks set to retain his seat. I suppose in this respect, though, he is not representative of the average Labour MP, and thus Clarke may have the edge within the PLP purely on grounds of empathy.

Clarke describes the suggestion that “Labour under Blair became a party of the centre right” is “deceitful nonsense”. It seems only fitting that he, as the man who served as Blunkett’s follow-through and actually appeared to have done his (futile) best to outdo the raging reactionary adulterer that he should lose his seat to some genuine socialists. This article demonstrates exactly why he deserves what is (hopefully) coming to him.

A Press Release from Caroline Lucas floated its way into my in-box yesterday. It provides ample illustration of (one of) the reasons I intend to vote for her:

“We need to double the number of Councillors we have over the next few years. We need to find the next generation of Green councillors.

“We need to create the next Green success, like Norwich, Brighton, Lancaster and Oxford.

“Where we are established like Liverpool, Bristol, Cambridge and Solihull, we need our council groups to grow and set the agenda. We need to give Green councillors the help to succeed.

“Rural successes in Stroud and St Ives need to be repeated.

“Many cities, like Newcastle, Durham and Cardiff could easily have Green councillors and Green MPs. We need people to join and help us win elections to these councils.

“We need new members to join, and we need to actively invite community activists to join. The Green Party is the natural home for anyone who stands up for their local community, local jobs and services: that’s what the Green Party is all about.

“Often the best way to fight for your local community is to get elected and hit your opponents where it hurts: in the ballot box.”

This is all perfectly true. Local politics affects people as much as anything that occurs at a national level, and often faster and more visibly. If we want to change lives, then we need to win seats on councils across the country.

And if we want to make that change national, then we still need to build that support up locally. People will only vote for Green MPs if they know Greens will make their lives better; and, in many ways, the best way to show them that is to break into the council chamber and stand for them. Our strongest hopes for the next General Election - Brighton Pavillion, Norwich South, Lewisham Deptford - all have highly active and vocal council groups. Voters give Greens a chance on the council, and then they cast their verdict in subsequent elections, local and national. So, if we want MPs, we need councillors first.

Lucas clearly understands that. Her site suggests she knows what the Green Party must do if it’s ever to enact the radical policies that make it different; get Greens in office. That task needs work from the grassroots to convince voters to back us, as this release argues.

Also; that bloggers received this release is instructive, I feel. The leadership elections have been very good to Greens with an interest in the new media. Both leadership candidates maintain blogs or interactive websites, as does Adrian Ramsay and most GPEX candidates. The past week saw Jim Jepps host online hustings for GPEX positions and the leadership. So, the candidates have been willing to engage their electorate in detailed and meaningful dialogue, over the internet; a far cry from the token YouTube videos Labour’s deputy leadership elections last year produced. I feel encouraged.

The Green Party leadership elections managed some media coverage today. Misreported, though, I fear:

A major row is currently brewing which is threatening to split the Green Party in two.

For the first time in their history, the Greens are about to launch a leadership contest involving two candidates, the MEP Caroline Lucas and the actor Ashley Gunstock, best known for his role as PC Frank in the long-running ITV show The Bill.

In the lead-up to the contest, the party’s operational wing, the Standing Orders Committee, took the unusual decision to publish the contact details of 7,000 members to help candidates lobby for votes.

The move has caused uproar in the party, which prides itself on its defence of civil liberties. More than 100 party members have signed an angry letter of protest, questioning the legality of the decision under the Data Protection Act.

Why isn’t this an issue? Because all candidates have agreed not to use membership data. Argument defused.

Assume, though, that the debate had raged - as it did for a short while. That Ashley Gunstock (whose candidacy I missed and shall write on soon) took the letters’ side perhaps provides a hint of where this election might go. The candidates disagreed, and so the leadership debate began in earnest. And with it, the debate on party direction.

Those hoping to restrict campaigning activities claim they stand for a more democratic party. They fear releasing membership details hands power to established candidates, and shuts out the grassroots. It’s a fear worth considering - any debate on democracy needs attention.

But it’s not justified. Internal democracy isn’t furthered by these restrictions on candidates.; it’s shackled. Candidates need access to membership details to make any case. How will members know who says what if candidates can’t campaign? The party gets little media coverage, and only puts out dull and neutral statements. Hardly the swiftest route to mass participation.

Consider, for example, the position of an exciting yet unknown candidate. They might be just what the party needed; but because most members hadn’t heard their name beyond a few lines in an internal e-mail, they’d miss their pitch and so miss that chance. Both the candidates and the members are disenfranchised when the former can’t speak to those with the votes. So, an essential means of participation by the bulk of the membership which actively strengthen the party’s internal democracy.

That’s the difference between the two points of view; and it’s an old one. In opposition, a rump (100 out of some 7000 members signed that letter…) of well-intentioned yet deluded members who want the best for the party but apparently have no means of delivery. In favour, a group focused on providing practical means to further the party’s radical heritage and engaging with members and public alike. Gunstock took the former side; Lucas (assuming the Indy got something right) the latter. That’s the debate so far - and it looks to be the one I predicted. Members have the choice between the wooly insignificance of the past, or the offer of a bright future. I know where I stand on that.

A ComRes poll has Labour on its lowest ever rating.  John Rentoul’s comment is always worth a read.

More interesting, though, is that the Green party’s ratings are specifically listed.  They are currently on 5% - grabbing voters from the declining share held by each of the major parties.  The Green vote is constantly in flux, but this is a very revealing trend.  Far from the Cameron ascendancy, should the Westminster journalists actually be following the rise of the Greens?  Once they have a leader, a coherent image can be deployed and this trend might just break them into the mainstream.

Or, at the very least, have them classed in the same category as the LibDems, not bundled unfairly into the “others”.

Just a thought.

Adrian Ramsay launched his campaign for Deputy-Leadership of the Green Party today. His message seems simple - he’s a hugely competent activist and campaigner, at the heart of the Green movement.

The campaign website very much sets the tone. It’s slick and to the point; why Adrian’s standing, the reasons to vote for him, and how to help are set out plainly and within easy reach. To summarise each campaign plank in turn, Adrian puts his core values thus:

action as part of a movement

social justice and affordability

action on climate change

anti-privatisation

fair trade

fair treatment of animals and wildlife

So, that’s an outwardly focused, leftish, green approach with a hint of internationalism. Any Green that could fault those as broad principles has perhaps joined the wrong party. He’s not solely focused on Westminster - the desire to have, “more contact,” with, “campaign groups and trade unions,” rather puts paid to that suggestion - and he wants to use that contact to move towards truly Green ends.

Not that Adrian would damage electoral success - far from it. As leader of the first Green Opposition on Norwich Council, he could easily lay claim to teaching the Party how to win council seats. And he does so for this campaign:

Adrian has been a councillor since he was 21, and is now Leader of the largest group of Green Party Councillors in the country.

Adrian was Election Campaign Manager when Norwich Green Party gained its first council seats in 2002. Since then, Adrian has played a key role in increasing Green representation on Norwich City Council from two to thirteen Councillors, as well as adding two Green County Councillors to represent the city at County level.

In the 2008 elections, the Green Party became the second party in Norwich (just two seats behind Labour). Adrian is the first Green Party Councillor to become the Leader of the Opposition on a local authority.

Rather impressive, I feel. Ramsay managed to make the Norwich Greens the most electorally successful local party in the country - and without compromising any level of radicalism. He’s worked with trade unions against privatisation, helped make Norwich a Fair Trade city, and moved to save local services. All of which sounds pleasantly close to his stated values.

This ability - to deliver electoral and practical success without compromising his principles - forms a key plank of his platform. There’s much on his experience, and how it’d provide a great boost in his target constituency of Norwich South. This, for example:

Our message is an urgent one. We need to be effective and organised as a party to get Greens elected to all levels of Government so we can champion and implement Green solutions to the world’s problems. Too often local parties are left to reinvent the wheel as they work to get Greens elected to their local council. Efforts are being made to spread best practice but we need to do more to help local parties and to communicate how our current success stories have come about and how Green Councillors have made a real impact at grassroots level. As a party we also need to be focused on securing the breakthrough into Westminster so ensure we are taken seriously as a national party. Winning in our three target General Election constituencies is the best way to build the party’s profile and credibility across the country. As Deputy Leader, I can bring experience of winning elections to the national party - and holding the position of Deputy Leader would add credibility to our campaign in the Norwich South target constituency and help bring that crucial breakthrough into Westminster a step closer.

So - he wants to build effective parties, at a local and national level. Sounds just about right for a Deputy-Leader. Perhaps more interesting, though, is his vision for the party:

There were understandably strong views on both sides of the leadership referendum debate. I believe that, as Green Party members, far more unites us than divides us. We need to have leadership at a national level that is inclusive, accountable and effective. At a local level I work hard to involve councillors and party members in the running of Norwich Green Party. As Deputy Leader I would see myself as playing a key role as part of a group, working alongside all members of the party Executive to make the party more effective and successful.

We also need to put in place the values and proposals that the two sides of the referendum debate shared. For example, I would support the introduction of a Green Shadow Cabinet, as proposed by Green Empowerment, so that we can have the benefit of a range of specialist speakers, accountable to the party, and so we are not reliant on two leadership figures for all the media coverage and speaking opportunities!

Adrian clearly looks to be pitching himself as a unity candidate between the two factions that emerged last year over leadership. A wise move, I feel, both for the election and if he wins; a Deputy Leader hoping to build the party into an effective force needs to hold appeal for all concerned. If that makes him a middle-of-the-road candidate - then it may well work.

Adrian Ramsay has constructed a virtually watertight campaign. Reaching out to the whole party, and grounding his appeal in an undeniable experience and talent, he presents an effective vision; the party’s radical politics, delivered by a credible and capable organisation. Anyone who does run against him will need to present a hugely attractive challenge - and probably from the outfield (Step forth, Comrade Wall?). Because otherwise, he seems to be just what the Green Party needs.