The Greens don’t have a Burnham problem. They have a structure problem

The Greens are in a difficult moment. The last prime minister was one that told us “I don’t dream” so it is hardly a surprise that a new Labour leader could get a polling bounce. Burnham’s comms are exceptional – his first week comprised of effectively tweaking and re-releasing old policies, while playing The Smiths in social media videos yet creating excitement around them. It further exemplifies just how terrible Starmer was as a political leader. 

It also squeezes the political space for Zack Polanski to operate in – but joining the Greens was not about short-term success. Joining the Greens for many came from a long-term analysis that the political bloc Labour represents – metropolitan graduates and post-industrial regions – is falling apart almost inevitably and that the Greens can cohere a new coalition that can champion a socialist politics. So, we should note that there is a Burnham bounce and there is a Polanski plunge in the polls, but that this moment does not necessarily speak to the wider political forces at play. 

There are some big issues facing the Greens that should be examined prior to their autumn conference – strengths and weaknesses – that can show the direction the party is heading in.

Self-inflicted gaffs by Polanski

Polanski and others have demonstrated their naivety in how they have approached high-profile political life and for many this will have become deeply frustrating. 

Polanski’s shooting-from-the-hip approach to X (formerly Twitter) has pulled him into major political debates which he was not prepared for. The most obvious was his response to footage of the police apprehending the Golders Green attacker. Regardless of your position on whether the police used excessive force, what is clear is that Polanski inserted himself into a major debate around the Met Police which he was not prepared for. If we are to learn one lesson from 2017-2019, it is that when we fight on the terrain of our own choosing, we perform well, but when we are pulled into debates where we do not have clear, thought-out political objectives, we crumble.

Polanski’s self-inflicted issues don’t stop there. He also shared a photo on his Instagram of a person with a T-shirt satirically implying Farage could face the guillotine. Obviously, this issue was blown out of all proportion. But equally obviously, it is an issue that could and should have been avoided.

And then we get onto the newly elected Green mayor of Hackney, who has faced recent criticism over the suggested removal of the twinning of Hackney with the Israeli city of Haifa. There is no issue in removal of the twinning, but the deadline set for Haifa’s response to the re-evaluation? 7 October. An indefensible position both on principle and politically. These unforced errors speak to a deep naivety within the long-term Green membership and a need for those with stronger analyses of the media, institutions and politics in general, to step to the fore to give the party greater strength.

Party structures

Fundamentally, the Greens are structured in a terrible way, which produces a set of activists untrained in political debate. The party prioritises consensus decision-making and a style of organisation that avoids decision-making votes or elections.

Unlike every other major party, they do not elect delegates to their autumn conference – instead any member can attend. This generates a structure that rewards the well-off to engage and hurts those with less funds to take the three-day excursion to the south cost. It also creates a party conference likely weighted to men and to the geographical area where conference is held. But it also generates a structure that empowers members who do no actual activism – who may well have never won a debate in their local party – to speak in national debates.

It fundamentally arises from a liberal conception of the role of a political party. Gramsci argues that the party should develop activists, uncover organic intellectuals and empower them to debate their ideas. What consensus decision-making and any-member-can-attend processes do is they prioritise the reflecting of the party back to itself – not the building of a more capable, effective cadre.

The party also has no formalised system for selecting MPs. Instead, each local party decides how best to do it. There’s also no whip on their MPs. So, currently the party has a left populist leader and its MPs can vote any way they chose at any given moment. The tensions are obvious.

These three structural issues obstructing the party from becoming the site of collective struggle around core political positions were due to be challenged in three motions that a group of left Green Party activists were proposing to the party’s autumn conference in Brighton. Unfortunately, all three motions were ruled out of order by the party’s conference arrangements committee on what we believe to be quite spurious grounds. Despite the challenges of pushing for reform of the party’s processes, left activists will not be deterred and we will continue to press for change.

Defence spending

But while a process of socialist modernisation of the party is in hand, there is another process also underway. 

Another, more typical, form of modernisation is taking place. While socialists would recognise the need for the Greens to develop a stronger base, more capable of arguing and organising for a transformative politics, a more liberal-minded section of the party would seek to jettison radical policies in favour of electoral success.

Socialists submitted a radical policy challenging rearmament to the autumn conference. It called for alignment with the TUC, opposition to increased military spending and opposition to war. Meanwhile, an opposing motion has been submitted that calls for a “whole-of-society approach to defence”, a watered-down approach to drone warfare and a nakedly pro-defence sector position that states the sector is “to defend democratic security”. Notably, those promoting the pro-defence motion have briefed the press, including The Spectator.

Class contours within the party are beginning to take shape. But all four motions have been ruled out of order by the conference standing orders committee, potentially delaying confrontation – for now. The future of those motions is in doubt.

The short reprieve is a chance for the left to think seriously about the structures of the party, not least the standing orders committee and to build a Green Party that can survive through the tensions and progress to be a more organised socialist force.