Green Party - doing New labours dirty work

[mutley]

I'm not going to vote for someone because of their race or ethnicity, no. I would vote for them because of their politics.

Didn't say you should, but if we have a candidate who is a socialist, and it turns out they are also the right side of 30, and they're Asian (in a racist society) and female (in a sexist society) then that's another three reasons (as well as their politics) why a big vote for them is very positive.

Or perhaps the Left should stay 'male, pale and stale'?

Do you follow the line that In Bloom does (with refreshing honesty), that even mentioning increasing representation by oppressed groups is 'multicultural' and 'bourgeois'.
Me i'd rather be tribune of the oppressed.

Anyway I'm off, for now.

 

[Fisher_Gate]

Do you remember al-Respeq ever standing against a sitting Greenie? AFAIK, they haven't.

Sheffield Central.

Sheffield City Council Elections
3 May 2007
List of Candidates

Central

ALI, Anwar Respect - Peace, Justice, Equality
AZIM, Mohammad Liberal Democrat
CREASY, Jillian Green Party
LEDBURY, June Beryl The Conservative Party Candidate
MAROOF, Mohammad The Labour Party Candidate


2004 Elections (all out due to Boundary Changes).
Central
The candidate with the highest number of votes will be elected for four years; the candidate with the second highest number of votes will be elected for three years; and the candidate with the third highest number of votes will be elected for two years.

Name of Candidate Description Votes Cast
Mohammad AZIM Liberal Democrat 1276
Patricia Jean BARNSLEY The Conservative Party Candidate 380
Roger Brian BARNSLEY The Conservative Party Candidate 379
Nick Christopher James BRYAN The Conservative Party Candidate 408
Jillian Margaret CREASY Green Party 1305
Jean Margaret CROMAR The Labour Party Candidate 1355
Mohammed Basheer KHAN
commonly known as BASHEER The Labour Party Candidate 1055
Bernard James LITTLE Green Party 1058
Robert MURPHY Green Party 1016
Haq NAWAZ Liberal Democrat 889
Mohammad NAZIR
commonly known as HAJI The Labour Party Candidate 1065
Muhammad ZAHUR Liberal Democrat 590
Turnout: 35.60%

and just for completeness the Greens held the seat last time out in May 2006

Central
Name: AZIM Mohammad
Party: Liberal Democrat
Votes:1036

Name: BRYAN Nicholas Christopher James
Party: The Conservative Party Candidate
Votes:239

Name: LITTLE Bernard James
Party: Green Party
Votes:1159

Name: MAROOF Mohammad
Party: The Labour Party Candidate
Votes:1117

Turnout:31%

Source: www.sheffield.gov.uk

 

[Udo Erasmus]

What is interesting about this is that it exposes the claim made by Matt S. that decision where to stand are taken by local parties. There has been several claims that the local Green party's had made pacts with Respect only to be over-ruled by Green's nationally.

It does seem a little suspicious to stand nowhere in Preston except where there is a sitting Respect councillor.

Now I'm not a huge fan of the Green's, but it seems entirely logical where both parties are not contesting every seat in an area to come to some agreement not to stand against each other if either party has a chance of doing very well (obviously in seats where neither party) will even retain their deposit, then who cares.

The Greens have continually played this game. They stood against George Galloway. Now everyone knew it was a two horse race between Respect and Labour in Bethnal Green&Bow. The Greens had no chance of getting anyone elected in the area but they did have the chance to prevent Respect getting someone elected and they would rather see a New Labour MP get elected than a Respect MP.

They also stood against Respect's second highest candidate Salma Yaqoob in 2005 who came second in Brum.

What is different is that it clear that despite claiming to be socialists, Derek Wall and Sian Berry are determined to prevent Respect getting elected to the point of standing spoiling candidates to help new labour.

 

[JHE]

Thank you, Pingupete & Fisher Gate, for the information about Sheffield Central.

Unless the Respeq-ites are going to say that it is wrong for Anwar Ali (a Trot-supported Mohammedan) to stand in Sheffield Central, Mutley and Udo and so on should be very shy of slagging off the Greenies and their candidate, Vincent Wadsworth, for standing in Preston Town Centre.

But I suppose it would be expecting too much to expect the Social Workers or their Mohammedan masters to agree...

 

[Bernie Gunther]

<snip> There has been several claims that the local Green party's had made pacts with Respect only to be over-ruled by Green's nationally.<snip>

I thought the claim was precisely the opposite, that local Green Party branches decide what they're going to do and getting a contrary decision from the national party, for example as would be required for some sort of pact with the SWP, would require a conference vote?

Which is why central committee based parties have such trouble trying to do deals with the Greens, because there is no executive, in the sense they'd understand it, to make an executive decision on any proposed deal.

 

[Udo Erasmus]

Typing mistake.

What I meant to say was that when the Greens stand against credible Respect candidates. Matt S and the like say these decisions are taken at the local level.

It seems that what is going on is the reverse. Local party branches have made pacts with Respect not to stand against each other, only to be over-ruled by the leadership of the Green Party nationally who put up paper candidates against people like Respect Cllr. Michael Lavallette who don't do any leafleting or canvassing but are only there to sabotage him getting re-elected. For the Greens rather a New Labour Cllr. than a Respect cllr.

Why have the Greens chosen to stand in no wards in Preston except the one that has a sitting Respect councillor?

 

[JHE]

Why have the Greens chosen to stand in no wards in Preston except the one that has a sitting Respect councillor?

Why has al-Respeq decided to stand in Sheffield Central? (There's nothing in the Koran about having to make jihad in that particular ward.)

 

[Bernie Gunther]

Was the candidate standing against Lavalette a paper candidate put up by the national party to sabotage Respect, rather than put up by the local party to get elected? I hadn't heard that before. Do you have any evidence for that?

 

[Fisher_Gate]

Was the candidate standing against Lavalette a paper candidate put up by the national party to sabotage Respect, rather than put up by the local party to get elected? I hadn't heard that before. Do you have any evidence for that?

It's a different Green candidate in Preston Town Centre to last year's; but last year, the Green candidate produced no leaflets, did no canvassing and did not even bother to turn up the count(!); the election agent was a Green councillor in Lancaster 22 miles away. It's circumstantial but all the evidence sounds like a put up job - "wrecking candidate" - to me. No evidence of any activity in 2007 by the Green Party so far.

The Respect candidate in Sheffield Central is running a campaign and has produced leaflets and posters; there have been Respect public meetings in the Constituency and a public meeting with Galloway - the constituency is the same one stood in by Maxine Bowler, Respect candidate in 2005 general election (also called Sheffield Central) when she got 1,284 (4.6%) to the Green's 1,808 (6.0%). All the evidence I've heard is that Central ward is the logical place for Respect to stand after the Burngreave ward that Bowler came second in last year. I warned last year that it is the Greens who have more to lose by failing to come to an agreement with Respect.

 

[pingupete]

The Greens have continually played this game. They stood against George Galloway. Now everyone knew it was a two horse race between Respect and Labour in Bethnal Green&Bow. The Greens had no chance of getting anyone elected in the area but they did have the chance to prevent Respect getting someone elected and they would rather see a New Labour MP get elected than a Respect MP.

They also stood against Respect's second highest candidate Salma Yaqoob in 2005 who came second in Brum.

It's been said before and it will be said again, who stood against who first? Na, na, na, na, etc... etc... It gets boring, but once again for the record. Udo - are you saying there is a "pact" between Preston Respect and Preston Greens?

No such thing exists. There were arrangements in a number of London boroughs in 2006, but I'm not aware of any such arrangements anywhere else in the country. If you have been told such a thing exists, you are being lied to.

Speaking from a Green perspective (try and empathise with me here if you are a committed Respect supporter) about the history of this, Respect stood against Jean Lambert and Caroline Lucas in 2004. They were sitting MEPs, our two highest profile people. Respect standing risked an extra Tory or Labour MEP in those regions. Your leadership also chose to stand in the London Assembly elections, which lost us our 3rd Assembly seat that year, if you accept the premise our votes overlap.

Greens stood GE candidates in Bethnal Green and Bow in 1997 and 2001, therefore it was no surprise we stood in 2005. We stood GE candidates in 3 Birmingham constituencies, and we had stood in Sparkbrook and Smallheath before in 1997. Again, not really a big surprise. Unlike the SWP elements in the coalition, I have a huge amount of admiration for Salma Yaqoob. One of my non-politically aligned regrets is that she didn't get a Parliamentary seat. I think she could have helped Respect's develop more internal democracy from that position.

Last year in the 2006 local elections, 2/3rds of the seats contested by Respect had previously had a Green candidate standing. As I've said, in some areas local Greens and Respect did come to an arrangement, but really your national leadership just targets where they think the best results will be. Local arrangements or calls to the Greens to be nice and give way to Respect are attempts to maximise your own chances.

Given the history, from our perspective, why do you expect us to do you any favours at all? Sorry to actually get pissed off, I should know better, but after reading and posting to this thread today I've been in touch with Sheffield Greens. Any guesses? (I note FG has just posted on this)

A full colour Respect leaflet already out in Central ward? My immediate reaction is to recommend to the local party in Preston to run a campaign with our University resources in Town Close. Why the hell not? Can anyone in Respect give me a half decent reason why we shouldn't? Hell, why don't we throw the maximum allowable expenditure at it? If as FG says, paper candidacies are a sham, let's show you the full monty.

We can take the loss of a councillor in Sheffield Central, however regrettable. Can Respect take the loss of your only councillor outside of London and Birmingham? To stand, we obviously accept as part of the democratic situation, but to actively campaign against a sitting Green councillor in a marginal ward while you are throwing rocks at us online? Very silly, very bad political judgement by your leadership once again.

We are decentralised, and local parties make their own decisions, but don't think that doesn't mean we can't mobilise national resources when needed, and that we can't find out what is going on in different areas. I can't tell the local party in Preston what to do, but believe me, I think the will is there to campaign. I also have the ability to move national resources their way.

Do you seriously think we were devoting vast resources or attention to a coalition only able to stand candidates in 42 seats? We are campaigning in favour of getting our 40+ target candidates elected and re-elected and increasing our vote in the 1350+ other wards we are standing in.

While I admire the sheer hard work put in by the many, many Respect activists I have encountered, I think your leadership makes terrible decisions, and I suggest you need to improve or remove them. Otherwise you end up with situations like this one.

 

[In Bloom]

Do you follow the line that In Bloom does (with refreshing honesty), that even mentioning increasing representation by oppressed groups is 'multicultural' and 'bourgeois'.

Hey, if you're going to suggest that what "the oppressed" need is more people of the same colour as them to "represent" them, then you're advocating multiculturalism, which originates with the modern bourgeoisie. Ultimately, this Respect candidate would no more "represent" the majority of working class, Asian people in this country than any of the white, ostensibly socialist males currently pushing through PFI and foundation hospitals in parliament represent me, even in the laughably unlikely circumstance that she gets in.

Whatever happened to the days when the Swaps at least had a class analysis?

 

[Fisher_Gate]

...

A full colour Respect leaflet already out in Central ward? My immediate reaction is to recommend to the local party in Preston to run a campaign with our University resources in Town Close. Why the hell not? Can anyone in Respect give me a half decent reason why we shouldn't? Hell, why don't we throw the maximum allowable expenditure at it? If as FG says, paper candidacies are a sham, let's show you the full monty.

We can take the loss of a councillor in Sheffield Central, however regrettable. Can Respect take the loss of your only councillor outside of London and Birmingham? To stand, we obviously accept as part of the democratic situation, but to actively campaign against a sitting Green councillor in a marginal ward while you are throwing rocks at us online? Very silly, very bad political judgement by your leadership once again.
... I can't tell the local party in Preston what to do, but believe me, I think the will is there to campaign. I also have the ability to move national resources their way.

While I admire the sheer hard work put in by the many, many Respect activists I have encountered, I think your leadership makes terrible decisions, and I suggest you need to improve or remove them. Otherwise you end up with situations like this one.

The problem with this is that the Green Party in Preston is virtually non-existence.

If they turned up at Stop the War demos and activities ...
If they organised petitions and campaigns around matters of local enviromental concern - and goodness knows there are enough of them ...
If they were active in the University and organised campaigns and election candidates around students union elections to put the Green perspective ...
If they were active around a broad range of political activities, include the recent highly visible and open 'Save the NHS campaign' ...
If they organised a stall in the city centre on the Flag Market to promote the Green Party's policies to a wider public ...
If they organised a public meeting or open members meeting ...
If they had a website with local contact details and something about local activity ...
If they wrote a letter to the local newspaper (which will print anything), for instance opposing the movement of Trident nuclear missiles into Preston (so the drivers can have a p--- break!)

If they did even one of these things ...

then I would have some sympathy with them wanting to move into the electoral arena ... and would even want to help them in some way, such as nominating a Green candidate in my ward (as a past Green voter myself I .

But ... they are not doing any of these things in Preston. The only thing they have done consistently over the last 5 years is go round getting 10 signatures to stand against Respect in Town Centre and then disappear ... Respect do all of these things and many more.

I've some sympathy with your outlook pingupete, and you know I'm a critic of the SWP within Respect, but frankly the whole thing stinks ... the only conclusion that I can draw in Preston is that your sole purpose in standing is to stop Lavalette being reelected, whereas it is clear that the Respect campaign in Sheffield Central is about building wider support for Respect. And if a casualty of that is that a Green councillor loses a seat, they have only themselves to blame by not negotiating or discussing it, in my view.

 

[mutley]

Hey, if you're going to suggest that what "the oppressed" need is more people of the same colour as them to "represent" them, then you're advocating multiculturalism, which originates with the modern bourgeoisie. Ultimately, this Respect candidate would no more "represent" the majority of working class, Asian people in this country than any of the white, ostensibly socialist males currently pushing through PFI and foundation hospitals in parliament represent me, even in the laughably unlikely circumstance that she gets in.

Whatever happened to the days when the Swaps at least had a class analysis?

The oppressed (and exploited) need a whole load of things. Having socialists elected is just one. Having socialists elected who are from minority backgrounds is another. Mass struggle on a huge scale is a slightly important third. And the list is not complete.

To Pingupete. It's as real shame, because what you are saying leaves me with a determination to never give the Greens any slack in any united front activity (in the unlikely event that they actually do any) and to widely publicise their every mistake (ie Leeds). Also to argue very hard at every opportunity with ppl not to vote for them, ever, which isn't where I was before. There you go.

 

[In Bloom]

The oppressed (and exploited) need a whole load of things. Having socialists elected is just one. Having socialists elected who are from minority backgrounds is another. Mass struggle on a huge scale is a slightly important third. And the list is not complete.

When has having socialists elected done any good whatsoever? Come to that, when have Trevor Phillips and all the other scumbag "community leaders" who claim to represent minority and "oppressed" groups done anything of use to working class people of any race or gender?

 

[Ungrateful]

Seems a trifle odd to hear SWPers complain about splitting the vote, when in Scotland, they are deliberately doing this. They are the only active group engaged in SOLIDARITY (or rather as it seems to be promoting itself -- TOMMY SHERIDAN'S SOLIDARITY) the split from the SSP. Where they are standing directly against each other in nearly every constituency.

Unlike the GREENS versus RESPECT, in which there are clear distinctions in ideology and political programme -- there seems no substantive policy difference between the SSP and TOMMY'S SOLIDARITY. The only exception, in the case of the latter (so the allegation goes) is whether a former leader has the right to expect other's to perjure themselves in Court for the leader's financial benefit.

I should add I am not, nor ever have been, a supporter of the SSP. But it would help a confused Scottish resident if SWP-supporters might explain their apparent double standards.

 

[Fisher_Gate]

Seems a trifle odd to hear SWPers complain about splitting the vote, when in Scotland, they are deliberately doing this. They are the only active group engaged in SOLIDARITY (or rather as it seems to be promoting itself -- TOMMY SHERIDAN'S SOLIDARITY) the split from the SSP. Where they are standing directly against each other in nearly every constituency.

Unlike the GREENS versus RESPECT, in which there are clear distinctions in ideology and political programme -- there seems no substantive policy difference between the SSP and TOMMY'S SOLIDARITY. The only exception, in the case of the latter (so the allegation goes) is whether a former leader has the right to expect other's to perjure themselves in Court for the leader's financial benefit.

I should add I am not, nor ever have been, a supporter of the SSP. But it would help a confused Scottish resident if SWP-supporters might explain their apparent double standards.

As a supporter of Respect who opposed the split with the SSP, I agree with you. The wrecking action of the SWP in Scotland does not help their cause one jot in England. I am disappointed Galloway is throwing his lot in with Sheridan too - ironically both the SWP and Galloway were hostile to the formation of the SSP anyway (the SWP stood their own candidates in 1999 and Galloway stood as Labour). [The CWI position is more inconsistent - just barmy].

I am happy that in continuing to support both the SSP and Respect, I at least have consistency in my personal position.

Of course in the Local Government elections in Scotland more parties standing against each other is not a particular problem, because they are using STV for the first time and in most wards (3/4 member) the left and green parties only stand one candidate and can encourage transfers to each other with only the marginal likelihood of 'leakage' of left wing voter power. In the List vote for the Parliament however, having two left wing slates is a serious mistake as their votes will serve to eliminate each other. Hopefully all the polling evidence is that the SSP will take the bulk of the left vote, with the reckless Solidarity being the loser.

 

[Jografer]

That by standing only in the wards where the Labour vote is weakest, and being in direct competition with the Green Party, it shows that Respect would rather help New Labour try and bury a radical challenge than give other voters the chance to vote for an alternative.

Yup, I'd consider voting green (& have done in the euro elections) but I'd never vote Respect...

 

[Udo Erasmus]

It is strange that the only ward in Preston the Green party leadership want to contest is the one of the Preston councillor has done most on environmental issues, In Preston, Respect councillors have made good progress in passing a major motion promoting public transport, rapid transport systems & trams which now have become part of Preston's overall transport plan.

This is not untypical of the Green Party.

People will probably known about Blaenau Gwent. After Peter Law's death there was a by-election. New Labour poured everthing into their campaign to regain the seat - to make sure that the Law phenomenon was a temporary blip. Cabinet Ministers were visiting the constituency on a regular basis.

It was a clear two-horse race between Dai Davies/Trish Law standing on an old labour platform and the Blairite Labour candidates.

The Green Party had little chance of retaining their deposit but nevertheless John Matthews (leading up the list this month for South Wales Central) stood.

Socialists recognised that the best result in Blaenau Gwent would be if new labour didin't retake it. By standing the Green PArty had no chance of getting elected but they could have done new labour a valuable service by helping them retake the seat by taking votes away from Davies/Law.

 

[chilango]

Why would the Green Party not stand against Respect? they are rival political parties...

 

[chilango]

...and whats all this assumption that greens who regard themselves as some kinda socialist should automatically defer before candidates who the SWP decide are socialist (Peter Law ffs!) if it suits their agenda?

 

[Udo Erasmus]

To Chilango. If the Green Party were contesting every seat in Preston - no problem.

It seems odd that the only seat they choose to contest is one which has a sitting RESPECT councillor who has an excellent environmental record.

It is one where they will be unlikely to retain their deposit or get elected. However, they could take enough votes of RESPECT to ensure that New Labour get elected.

I agree that Peter Law was not a radical left candidate. Nevertheless, I would argue for the left as a whole it was better that an independent "old" labour candidate win than new labour who were desperate to regain the seat.

 

[Jografer]

It is one where they will be unlikely to retain their deposit or get elected.

No deposit needed to stand in local election, 10 signatures, that's all.

Who says they can't win?.. a choice that is up to the electorate I guess, including the choice of voting labour, called democracy..

 

[Udo Erasmus]

There might also be an argument for standing against the Green Party where their councillors are in coalition with the Tories (like Leeds for example) or where they have voted for cuts in local services and neoliberal attacks on working people, as quoted previously:

In the London Borough of Lewisham, as reported in the socialist in March, the Greens voted with Labour for a budget that will result in £800,000 of cuts, threatening community education services. Darren Johnson, the leader of the Green group, and a prominent figure in the party nationally, called those opposing the cuts irresponsible.

In Kirklees, West Yorkshire, the three Green councillors were previously part of a joint Lib-Dem/Green administration and allied themselves with the present Tory ruling group in recently pushing through, along with the Liberals, a budget that could result in the closure of three children's nurseries and an increase in home care charges. In return the Greens got a paltry pledge that cavity wall and loft insulation will be provided for homes in the area.

The gap between the actions of Green councillors and their party's 'left' programme to oppose neo-liberalism, is widening all the time, although they have some way to go to match the opportunism of the German Greens. When they were part of the German government, the German Greens ended up backing a ferocious Thatcherite onslaught on the working class and sending troops for the imperialist intervention in Afghanistan.

The trouble with the Green Party is that you can't be a real green without being a red (equally you can't be a real red without being a green)

ECO-SOCIALISM OR BARBARISM - THERE IS NO THIRD WAY

 

[mutley]

No deposit needed to stand in local election, 10 signatures, that's all.

Who says they can't win?.. a choice that is up to the electorate I guess, including the choice of voting labour, called democracy..

Well with no track record of success, no campaign, no leaflets, no canvassing etc etc it would be a bit like Nepal winning the World Cup. Not actually impossible, as such, just very very, very unlikely.

To Chilango: I exactly echo Udo's comments - Greens standing widely in Preston, Ok. Greens targetting the ward with a sitting Respect councillor, and then no campaign, that's just taking the piss.

It just shows that the Greens in no way see themselves as part of a wider movement. Hence the inactivity and insularity on a more general scale. They'll get some seats, but ultimately they're more an interesting symptom of ppl's concern about the environment - they will not lay much of a role in the solution. They're obviously way too sectarian.

 

[chilango]

To Chilango: I exactly echo Udo's comments - Greens standing widely in Preston, Ok. Greens targetting the ward with a sitting Respect councillor, and then no campaign, that's just taking the piss.

Even if your reading of this true...why shouldn`t they?

The Greens and Respect are not allies, are they?

It just shows that the Greens in no way see themselves as part of a wider movement.

"wider movement"? Respect? hmmm. Touch of hypocricy there, no?

The SWPs have always been good at this...setting up fronts and then pretending that this represents a broad movement, and using this as a stcick to beat those who don`t join.

the ANL (mark2) were especially good at this.

I`ll ask again:

Why the hell should the Green Party be "nice" to a rival political party - Respect?

 

[Udo Erasmus]

Well if the Greens can come to an arrangement with the Tories by forming a coalition with them at local government and voting to cut services and support neoliberal attacks on working people, then (if they claim to be on the left) why not in certain circumstances make electoral pacts with Respect not to stand against them?

Why try to unseat a sitting socialist councillor who has the best record in preston of defending the environment and has tirelessly campaigned for green issues? Why choose that particular ward in Preston rather than no other.

As noted, the Green Party have no intention of running a campaign in Preston. They are standing a paper candidate to try and unseat a Respect councillor. If they succeed, he will be replaced - not by a Green councillor - but by a new Labour councillor.

To Chilango. If Respect chose to stand in every seat in the UK things might be different, but as like most small parties we stand only in a small number of seats we see little reason to stand against credible candidates of the left - why not focus our energies standing against more right wing candidates. Hence, we didn't stand against people like Jeremy Corbyn, John McDonnell, Alan Simpson etc. despite them belonging to the war party.

 

[mutley]

Even if your reading of this true...why shouldn`t they?

The Greens and Respect are not allies, are they?

They're not allies, but they could have been, in certain circumstances, given the (at least formal!) overlap in terms of an anti-war, anti-neo-liberalsim agenda. But this act makes me think they're enemies.

"wider movement"? Respect? hmmm. Touch of hypocricy there, no?

The SWPs have always been good at this...setting up fronts and then pretending that this represents a broad movement, and using this as a stcick to beat those who don`t join.

the ANL (mark2) were especially good at this.

I`ll ask again:

Why the hell should the Green Party be "nice" to a rival political party - Respect?

Look, I'm sorry, but STWC is a broad movement. It might not be one that you like, in terms of being critical of the national marches etc, but it is a broad movement. Similarly, if you look at Respect's union work, there is a clear attempt to relate to wider forces (the success of which is of course hotly contested).

The Greens form no alliances with anyone, and seem determined to piss of potential allies. I'm sure they'll pick up more councillors, but in the long run they are going nowhere, if the only alliances they ever form are purely opportunist ones based on the arithmetic of the council chamber.

I'm not asking for 'nice' just for them not being deliberate wankers. In vain it would seem.

 

[Fisher_Gate]

To Chilango. If the Green Party were contesting every seat in Preston - no problem.

It seems odd that the only seat they choose to contest is one which has a sitting RESPECT councillor who has an excellent environmental record.

It is one where they will be unlikely to retain their deposit or get elected. However, they could take enough votes of RESPECT to ensure that New Labour get elected.

I agree that Peter Law was not a radical left candidate. Nevertheless, I would argue for the left as a whole it was better that an independent "old" labour candidate win than new labour who were desperate to regain the seat.

There are no deposits in local elections - I suspect the Greens would not have stood in this ward if there had been as they would struggle to do the equivalent, ie reach 5%. They did not manage this in 2006 and that was against a relatively unknown Respect candidate mainly known for stop the war campaigning.

Lavalette is much better known, but particularly has been campaigning around environmental issues, with a successful resolution put to the council on traffic/public transport, an unsuccessful resolution on transport of nuclear warheads (which split the Labour group down the middle) and loads of local campaigning on the dangers of development of the River Ribble and the impact on the local environment.

There are 18 other wards up for election that the Greens could have stood in, only three with Respect candidates (University, St Matthews, Riversway), one with a left wing independent (Deepdale) who is sympathetic to both Green and Respect agendas and hence Respect does not challenge in that ward. In a couple of other wards there are left wing Labour candidates (Brookfield and Tulketh).

That leaves 12 wards representing about two thirds of the Preston population, with no challenger to the main three parties - Lab, LibDem, Tory. Many of these would have actually been likely to be more fruitful territory for the Greens than the one ward they have chosen. This includes the ward they stood in, in 2006 and got their best result in the City (Preston Rural North - Green candidate 7.7% in May 2006 - double what they got in Town Centre ward yet no candidate in 2007).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preston_Council_election_2007
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preston_Council_election_2006
[Thanks to Liam's LibDem mate Doktorbuk for compiling these pages, though there are inaccuracies, eg Ribbleton doesn't have a large muslim population!]

 

[chilango]

Look, I'm sorry, but STWC is a broad movement. It might not be one that you like, in terms of being critical of the national marches etc, but it is a broad movement. Similarly, if you look at Respect's union work, there is a clear attempt to relate to wider forces (the success of which is of course hotly contested).

Respect itself is not a broad movement. It is Respect the Greens are standing against not a STWC candidate.

The Greens form no alliances with anyone

so?

and seem determined to piss of potential allies

.

who?

Respect are not necessarily a group who the Greens see as allies (not that I can speak on behalf of the GP its just a suggestion).

I don`t see Respect as it is now as political ally, I would stand against its candidates with no qualms.

I can`t speak on the specifics of the situation in Preston, I have heard good things about Lavalette, but again, so what?

The Green Party and Respect are rival political parties with different agendas and philosophies. Yet, Respect seem to assume that the two are allied, why?

 

[mutley]

Respect are not necessarily a group who the Greens see as allies (not that I can speak on behalf of the GP its just a suggestion).

I don`t see Respect as it is now as political ally, I would stand against its candidates with no qualms.

For the last time...
your use of the plural 'candidates' indicates that you are still not getting it. The Greens, as FG has outlined above, have a large nember of seats to compete in, but they are targetting the one Respect councillor who's up. General competition from Green candidates i could accept. But the sole candidature in that city of one carefully targeted Green candidate is deliberate hostility. This is a deliberate attampt to hole Respect below the waterline.

I can`t speak on the specifics of the situation in Preston, I have heard good things about Lavalette, but again, so what?

So why target one possible good councillor, and leave al the other neo-liberal muppets uncontested?

The Green Party and Respect are rival political parties with different agendas and philosophies. Yet, Respect seem to assume that the two are allied, why?

I don't assume they're allied. I just didn't think they were actually open enemies. But I'm much enlightened now.