Green supporter policies

[Danny]

as a matter of intrest Danny DO you differ from the main party on anything>?

Hhhhmmmm, good question. I don't really think so, I may be more moderate then some of our members, but I wouldn't say I disagree with party policy [unless they vote no to the EC]

[Realism]

As if we didn't know already. How about the real ones. Economics and european unity etc

Right I understand this now and fair play to you guys for starting this kind of thread.

Yes I disagree with the policies of Comhaontas Glas on many fronts. This is not incompatible with membership of CG. The key thing is that members agree totally with the principles, which are very very general to allow flexible policy positions on all the key areas. I agree with the principles in entirety, otherwise I guess my membership would be untenable in some way.

You see CG is in my mind a baby, as other posters have remarked on before. It will mature in time, but we must give it time. The present membership is the present membership. It has changed and will change further. This I hope will be a change to my liking. Otherwise I will find myself in greater disagreement with the party's policies.

The main policy of difficulty for me is: European integration. I do not feel the party has grasped this for what it is. To me the building of the European way is a great achievement for us and we should not be negative the way CG has been. European cooperation may seem like bringing about zero effect politically and economically for some people, but this is a grave error. Europe is in many ways federal, in that it reaches into the member states to protect their citizens from unsafe food, water and the like, and from economic collapse. The laws emanating from the transnational democratic system of council and parliament are working their way towards giving power to European citizens in the form of stabilising regions affected by conflict - recent example being the Ukraine - , developing the continent of Africa for the mutual benefit of Europe and Africa - this policy however is not working and lacks teeth, it requires radical reform - and upholding and strengthening their human rights. By using the rule of law to keep an eye on each other (member state and extra-EU countries) the EU is moving towards being able to steer the world towards peace, prosperity and democracy. But the Greens here Ireland seem to grasp none of this, and will not rise to the fight with other European Greens to push forward and reform the EU's policies for peace, sustainability, and social and economic stability. If CG got this I think the electorate would really like it.

In the area of economics and the language in general that CG uses, it could stop going on about the environment all the time. Or at least have the economic part as equally important a player. This is probably evident in a lot of press releases by the party however, though the overall message is incoherent and lacking in this vital quality. The perception is out there that all we talk about is recycling plants and renewable energy. But we can't just ignore the entire economy as if we don't want that. Focusing on these fringe areas of the economy is really going to brown off those voters who don't give a damn about them - and that's the majority. The majority want jobs and that means in anything. To marry ecology and the economy should be the key, and that means that we say it over and over again. We fully support economic growth (and want to use other indicators to gain a fuller picture of life) and should try to castigate the government on every issue of the economy and ecology.

Now I will stop wasting time.

[Danny]

Several problems there Realism. Firstly, there is a conflict in CG among some members between 2 of our 7 founding principles: 'All political, social and economic decisions should be taken at the lowest effective level. '
and 'The need for world peace overrides national and commercial interests. '

In your determination to reach the second of these founding principles, you have scant regard for the first-a pretty crucial one. It's a case of finding a balance between the two. We need to oversee a slow development of the EU, shooting down any extra unnecessary powers and reforming what we have now.

As for our focus on the environment, I fully agree. However, some of the problem is the media. When they think economics,health,education they go to FG for a centre right opinion and Labour for a centre left opinion. Another problem is our limited time in the Dail due to us being below 7 seats. What we therefore need to do is bypass the mainstream media and use grassroots action. Letters to the Editor in local papers, stalls, newsletters etc. This is the only way we will get our message across in the Short term.

[smiffy]

In your determination to reach the second of these founding principles, you have scant regard for the first-a pretty crucial one. It's a case of finding a balance between the two

Isn't that why the word "effective" is there in the first one?

[Danny]

In your determination to reach the second of these founding principles, you have scant regard for the first-a pretty crucial one. It's a case of finding a balance between the two

Isn't that why the word "effective" is there in the first one?

Yes, we must stress 'effective'. The lowest effective level to combat Global Warming, AIDS terrorism etc. is at international level. But when it comes to Health, Education etc. the lowest effective level is national/local.

[earthfirst]

You see CG is in my mind a baby, as other posters have remarked on before. It will mature in time, but we must give it time.

A strange metaphor. So SF and FF are pensioners. If CG is a baby, the PDs must be still in the womb?

The present membership is the present membership. It has changed and will change further. This I hope will be a change to my liking. Otherwise I will find myself in greater disagreement with the party's policies.

Given by what you are going on to suggest, you seem to be hoping that the Green membership will become less environmentally aware (at the
same time as the general population is becoming more environmentally aware, which would be both strange and unlikely.)

In the area of economics and the language in general that CG uses, it could stop going on about the environment all the time. Or at least have the economic part as equally important a player. This is probably evident in a lot of press releases by the party however, though the overall message is incoherent and lacking in this vital quality. The perception is out there that all we talk about is recycling plants and renewable energy. But we can't just ignore the entire economy as if we don't want that. Focusing on these fringe areas of the economy is really going to brown off those voters who don't give a damn about them - and that's the majority. The majority want jobs and that means in anything. To marry ecology and the economy should be the key, and that means that we say it over and over again. We fully support economic growth (and want to use other indicators to gain a fuller picture of life) and should try to castigate the government on every issue of the economy and ecology.

We certainly do not support economic growth for its own sake. But that's pretty much an irrelevancy in our current situation. With peaking oil and gas supply, economic growth in our fossil-fuel-dependent global economy will become impossible. So I'm not going to oppose growth any more than I'll oppose the sun going down in the evening. What we need to do is to prepare for the contraction in economic activity and put in place legal, fiscal, monetary and social structures which will enable people to live decent lives under a very different system. And we need to ensure that the coal-owning countries leave the stuff in the ground otherwise the climate is f**ked and then we'll really be in trouble. (that's of course assuming it's not f**ked already) And yes the economy after the oil peak will be all about recycling and renewable energy.

(I can't imagine why we should talk about jobs when there's full employment.)

[david]

I agree that the perception of CG is one of focussing entirely upon issues which most people erroneously believe peripheral to their lives.

Given the almost total lack of concern shown by any other party to those issues, then that perception can be regarded as a success.

And, if CG carries on purely in this light, it will result in a 'told-you-so' situation (by which time, it will be too late.)

So, whilst most members of CG agree broadly on principles, can or should they employ a 'spin doctor' to shift this public image whilst retaining those principles? A sort of, "look lads, we're going to tell the public this but you and I, knowing the spin, really mean that" type of thing? - only what every other party in the world does, after all. It's unfortunate that honesty is central to the green movement - it may keep them out of government.

One of my biggest gripes regarding green policies is this: we shouldn't need a green party although experience tells us green parties are totally, absolutely essential. I believe every single one human being on this planet should be green, whatever his or her politics.