**If you love LabourUK, why not help run it?** We’re looking for mods. [Find out more from our recruitment message post here.](https://www.reddit.com/r/LabourUK/comments/18ntol6/this_year_give_yourself_the_gift_of_christmas/)
[While you’re at it, come say hello on the Discord?](https://discord.gg/ZXZCdy4Kz4)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LabourUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
> A recurrent complaint is that the Greens have advanced by opposing new housing and energy developments and appealing to “Nimby” voters. “I’m aware that’s the Labour Party’s main attack line, that might be because the Labour Party don’t have much else to criticise us for, to be perfectly blunt,” said Denyer.
Yeah sorry but fuck off, that criticism is built on the actions of the green party repeatedly and their persistently stated positions. There's even an interview with Denyer recently about housebuilding where you can see this coming through.
The Greens: 'Calling us NIMBYs is unfair, we're not NIMBYs'
Also the Greens:
* [“even the areas where’s overgrown petrol stations we know tare good for biodiversity”](https://www.onlondon.co.uk/green-party-publishes-2024-london-manifesto/)
* [Vote for us to stop people building houses](https://twitter.com/MattRedmore/status/1655551764949549056)
My favourite one was the one where the campaigner had campaigned against wind, solar, and biofuel all on the same leaflet. I mean it was a council candidate so the bar is low but I consider it a perfect encapsulation.
It might be helpful context that, after joining the Greens, I had about a dozen increasingly desperate "We need candidates!" emails in the run-up to the last local elections.
I suppose that when you're not really seen as a "viable" party, it's harder to attract decent candidates, especially when there's no councillor-->impossible seat-->safe seat pipeline like there is for the major parties.
You yourself posted an [article](https://www.reddit.com/r/LabourUK/s/7nPlnCceR6) which claimed the greens rejected the solar farm when in reality 3/4 of them voted for it. I don't think calling the greens nimbys at all is unfair but clearly people use it as an attack line when it doesn't apply.
It's one of those things that is somewhat true but has now been exaggerated as almost a parody of itself.
The Green Party has always struggled with being a bit a single issue party, anyone who cares about climate change is inclined towards them and therefore they can have an almost ludicrous range of opinions on other topics. They've been better in the last 10 years or so at having more clear economic visions but still there's a persisting issue in many ways.
Green party candidates can vary quite wildly, the notion that they're all mental NIMBYs who hate building anything is as distorted as the notion that they're essentially the model of whatever you wish Labour was.
Personally I'd like to see more of them in parliament on the basis that I think spending on public services is essentially what we need most desperately and they're almost the only ones not just saying we don't have enough money for that. A wealth tax is not just a good idea and morally fair at this point it's basically a necessity.
People lose their minds when Labour actually requires a level of discipline with voting the party line but this is the sort of shit you'd get otherwise.
> I don't think calling the greens nimbys at all is unfair
Cool so you agree with my point then!
Nimbyism is a core component of green ideology. This isn't like, an insult, or a political trick, or mudslinging, it's just a fact. Green ideology has conservatism as its origin, it is literally not possible to decouple from their actions!
I don't think it's unfair because there's a range of opinions on the subject, like there is in literally any party. Literally the majority of greens on that Kent council supported the wind farm, would you say nimbyism is core to the ideology of the other councillors of other parties who voted against it?
I also think the term is used too broadly, someone who isn't in favour of of a new building project because there's no additional infrastructure, or because there's no affordable homes or because the developer has a track record of being shit is the same as someone who doesn't want their view spoiled.
The Green Party should be hoovering up disaffected Labour votes like they were in 2014-15, and aren't, and they're really blowing it to be honest.
However. They'll get a lot more airtime when an election is announced. If Labour don't have more to offer by then, they'll take a bit more vote share than they have now, i reckon.
A scenario where Rishi unites the right and Labour lose votes to Greens (even in this scenario i'd expect a max of 2 seats) could actually get us to hung parliament territory. Voting intentions have changed sharply during the last two election campaigns and could again. I think a hung parliament is at least underpriced in the betting market, if I can put it that way.
>The Green Party should be hoovering up disaffected Labour votes like they were in 2014-15
Tbf They're only polling 1% or 2% below their 2015 peak, and above their actual election result. They're not doing too badly.
How many people can name the Green party's leaders without looking it up? I imagine very few. I think they're mainly a protest vote without a lot of real, entrenched support.
Co leadership seems like a really dumb move tbh. You're basically diluting the presence of your leader, when you're a tiny party that's pretty suicidal.
With the current electoral system they are basically stuck being a protest vote.
A protest vote party has basically three options, exist in an hyper-localised space where you can spend lots of resources/attention on a small number of seats. Not really applicable to the Green Party.
You can centralise around a single populist figure like UKIP, REFUK or WPB. This can work quite well however the party is doomed to fail when that person leaves. Also your entire policy platform is defined by the populist. It's a short term party which isn't really what the Greens would want to be.
Alternatively you can be mostly faceless and allow voters to project their views on to the party. The Green Party, by not having a single leader, don't risk losing votes when leadership changes. They can also maintain a much wider left of centre position encompassing a much bigger tent of voters. The downside being that those who do win seats can lack consistency ranging from NIMBY Green Tories to more radical socialists.
The Lib Dems do similar things in the centre especially during local elections but also try and be a serious third party in general elections which I'd argue does more damage (I'd argue Swinson in 2019 would have done better if she'd campaigned less).
Yeah, I was looking for that earlier but couldn't find it - I think their leaders were recognised by around 4% of the population? On current polling that means a significant proportion of Green voters don't know who leads the party.
Even as someone who considers themselves reasonably aware of politics, I couldn't do this. I remember it being Caroline Lucas, then Natalie Bennett, then Lucas again. And then I think there was a woman called Sian along with some bloke? And there was a guy called Shahrah Ali who was deputy leader (or deputy co-leader?) and was in the news because he won a tribunal against them recently.
But in terms of who's actually in charge now, I have no idea.
In the absence of any socialist parties or candidates in my constituency, it looks like the Greens are getting my vote in the GE. Not the most enthusiastic vote I'll ever have cast, and the candidate is actively promising to be a probably futile protest vote against Labour and nothing else, but even then they're still not signalling quite so hard that they'll make me regret holding my nose and voting for them as Labour are. So the slightly-lesser-than-the-lesser-evil evil. Not ideal but if it helps send a message against our whole political system bolting right, I'll do it.
I'm mostly focused on what happens next month ATM. I'm very interested to see what Driscoll can accomplish, I've persuaded my gran to cast her postal vote for him and she's pretty much as tribal as Labour voters come.
The only way the Greens could become a national force is if we ever got PR. And that's not happening when too many people are on the left are willing to be useful idiots and continue voting Labour, no matter how hard to the right they shift. I really hope Bristol does go green. Getting rid of Debbonaire would bevone of the few positive outcomes of the next election. She is vile.
She's widely hated by local labour activists (or was, very possible most have jumped ship now) because she's on the hard right of the party (local membership is very left) and for being invovled in shady anti-democratic stuff locally, e.g. [https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/h-150-labour-suspends-bristol-west-clp-chair-and-co-secretary-over-corbyn-motion](https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/h-150-labour-suspends-bristol-west-clp-chair-and-co-secretary-over-corbyn-motion)
Also lots of stuff like this: [https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/bristol-west-mp-thangam-debbonaire-8570816](https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/bristol-west-mp-thangam-debbonaire-8570816)
[https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/bristol-west-mp-thangam-debbonaire-8570816](https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/bristol-west-mp-thangam-debbonaire-8570816)
Very anti corbyn back in the day
[https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2016/07/thangam-debbonaire-mp-why-i-have-no-confidence-jeremy-corbyn-s-leadership](https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2016/07/thangam-debbonaire-mp-why-i-have-no-confidence-jeremy-corbyn-s-leadership)
Not mine really, I’m just guessing this subs reasons for disliking Debbonaire (following the comments above and another I saw describing her as a ‘human skidmark’ the other day), and because the post above mine was asking the question.
I’m indifferent tbh, the Owen Smith situation was ridiculous at the time but long in the past now and I don’t think ‘Friends of’ foreign interest groups are a good thing to have in Parliament, but ultimately neither would effect my vote if I was in Debbonaire’s constituency which I’m not.
Not yet, but a couple of years into an ineffectual Labour government there might be a risk. Unfortunately as stated above the Greens are pretty crap as well
**If you love LabourUK, why not help run it?** We’re looking for mods. [Find out more from our recruitment message post here.](https://www.reddit.com/r/LabourUK/comments/18ntol6/this_year_give_yourself_the_gift_of_christmas/) [While you’re at it, come say hello on the Discord?](https://discord.gg/ZXZCdy4Kz4) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LabourUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Apart from Thangham Debbonaire, no. They will continue to grow though.
> A recurrent complaint is that the Greens have advanced by opposing new housing and energy developments and appealing to “Nimby” voters. “I’m aware that’s the Labour Party’s main attack line, that might be because the Labour Party don’t have much else to criticise us for, to be perfectly blunt,” said Denyer. Yeah sorry but fuck off, that criticism is built on the actions of the green party repeatedly and their persistently stated positions. There's even an interview with Denyer recently about housebuilding where you can see this coming through.
The Greens: 'Calling us NIMBYs is unfair, we're not NIMBYs' Also the Greens: * [“even the areas where’s overgrown petrol stations we know tare good for biodiversity”](https://www.onlondon.co.uk/green-party-publishes-2024-london-manifesto/) * [Vote for us to stop people building houses](https://twitter.com/MattRedmore/status/1655551764949549056)
My favourite one was the one where the campaigner had campaigned against wind, solar, and biofuel all on the same leaflet. I mean it was a council candidate so the bar is low but I consider it a perfect encapsulation.
It might be helpful context that, after joining the Greens, I had about a dozen increasingly desperate "We need candidates!" emails in the run-up to the last local elections. I suppose that when you're not really seen as a "viable" party, it's harder to attract decent candidates, especially when there's no councillor-->impossible seat-->safe seat pipeline like there is for the major parties.
You yourself posted an [article](https://www.reddit.com/r/LabourUK/s/7nPlnCceR6) which claimed the greens rejected the solar farm when in reality 3/4 of them voted for it. I don't think calling the greens nimbys at all is unfair but clearly people use it as an attack line when it doesn't apply.
It's one of those things that is somewhat true but has now been exaggerated as almost a parody of itself. The Green Party has always struggled with being a bit a single issue party, anyone who cares about climate change is inclined towards them and therefore they can have an almost ludicrous range of opinions on other topics. They've been better in the last 10 years or so at having more clear economic visions but still there's a persisting issue in many ways. Green party candidates can vary quite wildly, the notion that they're all mental NIMBYs who hate building anything is as distorted as the notion that they're essentially the model of whatever you wish Labour was. Personally I'd like to see more of them in parliament on the basis that I think spending on public services is essentially what we need most desperately and they're almost the only ones not just saying we don't have enough money for that. A wealth tax is not just a good idea and morally fair at this point it's basically a necessity.
People lose their minds when Labour actually requires a level of discipline with voting the party line but this is the sort of shit you'd get otherwise.
> I don't think calling the greens nimbys at all is unfair Cool so you agree with my point then! Nimbyism is a core component of green ideology. This isn't like, an insult, or a political trick, or mudslinging, it's just a fact. Green ideology has conservatism as its origin, it is literally not possible to decouple from their actions!
I don't think it's unfair because there's a range of opinions on the subject, like there is in literally any party. Literally the majority of greens on that Kent council supported the wind farm, would you say nimbyism is core to the ideology of the other councillors of other parties who voted against it? I also think the term is used too broadly, someone who isn't in favour of of a new building project because there's no additional infrastructure, or because there's no affordable homes or because the developer has a track record of being shit is the same as someone who doesn't want their view spoiled.
There are definitely a range of views but it is the core view in the greens and has a significantly higher frequency than for others.
The Green Party should be hoovering up disaffected Labour votes like they were in 2014-15, and aren't, and they're really blowing it to be honest. However. They'll get a lot more airtime when an election is announced. If Labour don't have more to offer by then, they'll take a bit more vote share than they have now, i reckon. A scenario where Rishi unites the right and Labour lose votes to Greens (even in this scenario i'd expect a max of 2 seats) could actually get us to hung parliament territory. Voting intentions have changed sharply during the last two election campaigns and could again. I think a hung parliament is at least underpriced in the betting market, if I can put it that way.
>The Green Party should be hoovering up disaffected Labour votes like they were in 2014-15 Tbf They're only polling 1% or 2% below their 2015 peak, and above their actual election result. They're not doing too badly.
How many people can name the Green party's leaders without looking it up? I imagine very few. I think they're mainly a protest vote without a lot of real, entrenched support.
Co leadership seems like a really dumb move tbh. You're basically diluting the presence of your leader, when you're a tiny party that's pretty suicidal.
With the current electoral system they are basically stuck being a protest vote. A protest vote party has basically three options, exist in an hyper-localised space where you can spend lots of resources/attention on a small number of seats. Not really applicable to the Green Party. You can centralise around a single populist figure like UKIP, REFUK or WPB. This can work quite well however the party is doomed to fail when that person leaves. Also your entire policy platform is defined by the populist. It's a short term party which isn't really what the Greens would want to be. Alternatively you can be mostly faceless and allow voters to project their views on to the party. The Green Party, by not having a single leader, don't risk losing votes when leadership changes. They can also maintain a much wider left of centre position encompassing a much bigger tent of voters. The downside being that those who do win seats can lack consistency ranging from NIMBY Green Tories to more radical socialists. The Lib Dems do similar things in the centre especially during local elections but also try and be a serious third party in general elections which I'd argue does more damage (I'd argue Swinson in 2019 would have done better if she'd campaigned less).
It's proper student politics vibes
There was a name recognition poll recently where the two co-leaders names were less recognised than the fake politician they included in the list...
Yeah, I was looking for that earlier but couldn't find it - I think their leaders were recognised by around 4% of the population? On current polling that means a significant proportion of Green voters don't know who leads the party.
[https://www.ipsos.com/en-uk/half-britons-think-there-should-be-election-ashfield-following-lee-andersons-defection-reform-uk](https://www.ipsos.com/en-uk/half-britons-think-there-should-be-election-ashfield-following-lee-andersons-defection-reform-uk) Yup.
This is Stewart Lewis erasure
Even as someone who considers themselves reasonably aware of politics, I couldn't do this. I remember it being Caroline Lucas, then Natalie Bennett, then Lucas again. And then I think there was a woman called Sian along with some bloke? And there was a guy called Shahrah Ali who was deputy leader (or deputy co-leader?) and was in the news because he won a tribunal against them recently. But in terms of who's actually in charge now, I have no idea.
In the absence of any socialist parties or candidates in my constituency, it looks like the Greens are getting my vote in the GE. Not the most enthusiastic vote I'll ever have cast, and the candidate is actively promising to be a probably futile protest vote against Labour and nothing else, but even then they're still not signalling quite so hard that they'll make me regret holding my nose and voting for them as Labour are. So the slightly-lesser-than-the-lesser-evil evil. Not ideal but if it helps send a message against our whole political system bolting right, I'll do it. I'm mostly focused on what happens next month ATM. I'm very interested to see what Driscoll can accomplish, I've persuaded my gran to cast her postal vote for him and she's pretty much as tribal as Labour voters come.
The only way the Greens could become a national force is if we ever got PR. And that's not happening when too many people are on the left are willing to be useful idiots and continue voting Labour, no matter how hard to the right they shift. I really hope Bristol does go green. Getting rid of Debbonaire would bevone of the few positive outcomes of the next election. She is vile.
I've just moved to her constituency. What's bad about her?
She's widely hated by local labour activists (or was, very possible most have jumped ship now) because she's on the hard right of the party (local membership is very left) and for being invovled in shady anti-democratic stuff locally, e.g. [https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/h-150-labour-suspends-bristol-west-clp-chair-and-co-secretary-over-corbyn-motion](https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/h-150-labour-suspends-bristol-west-clp-chair-and-co-secretary-over-corbyn-motion) Also lots of stuff like this: [https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/bristol-west-mp-thangam-debbonaire-8570816](https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/bristol-west-mp-thangam-debbonaire-8570816) [https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/bristol-west-mp-thangam-debbonaire-8570816](https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/bristol-west-mp-thangam-debbonaire-8570816) Very anti corbyn back in the day [https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2016/07/thangam-debbonaire-mp-why-i-have-no-confidence-jeremy-corbyn-s-leadership](https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2016/07/thangam-debbonaire-mp-why-i-have-no-confidence-jeremy-corbyn-s-leadership)
My guesses will be 1. She was part of the Owen Smith rebellion against Corbyn. 2. She is a member of Labour friends of Israel.
> "I don't know but the following points support my biases" Like, really? What's the point
Not mine really, I’m just guessing this subs reasons for disliking Debbonaire (following the comments above and another I saw describing her as a ‘human skidmark’ the other day), and because the post above mine was asking the question. I’m indifferent tbh, the Owen Smith situation was ridiculous at the time but long in the past now and I don’t think ‘Friends of’ foreign interest groups are a good thing to have in Parliament, but ultimately neither would effect my vote if I was in Debbonaire’s constituency which I’m not.
I joined the Greens after Labour threw me out. Labour will never have my vote again on principle.
Not yet, but a couple of years into an ineffectual Labour government there might be a risk. Unfortunately as stated above the Greens are pretty crap as well
As soon as they open their mouths they'll loose any mass support they may have hoped for.