Is
the Green Party a real alternative?
The Green Party is picking
up support consistently in opinion polls. This has been reflected in an
increase in the party’s membership. Do the Greens really represent an
alternative to the establishment parties? CLAIRE LAKER-MANSFIELD
investigates.
"The doors of British
politics have been blown off by the Green surge". So claimed Natalie
Bennett, leader of the Green Party in England and Wales, as 2014 drew to
a close. Hyperbole? With current polling indicating support for the
Greens fluctuating around the 6% mark, such a charge could reasonably be
levelled. Nevertheless, the Greens clearly hope 2015’s elections will
offer their party its most significant breakthrough so far.
The electoral landscape is
undoubtedly shifting. The breaking down of the two-party system which
has dominated British politics, with historically low combined support
for Labour and the Tories, is an undeniable reality. In agreement on the
fundamentals, the establishment parties see no alternative to continued
austerity. All agree that the bill for this deep crisis of capitalism
should be placed at the feet of working-class people.
Despite the government’s
enormous unpopularity, Labour is failing to achieve a consistent and
convincing lead in the polls, let alone approach the traditional
40-point benchmark for forming a majority government. Its slavish
acceptance of the austerity framework – with shadow chancellor Ed Balls
promising to match Tory spending targets, albeit within an extra year or
so – leaves huge swathes of the population asking ‘what is the point of
the Labour Party?’
This political vacuum is the
context in which the Greens, who struggled to win more than 1% of votes
cast in 2010, have enjoyed growing support. Their aim is to establish
themselves as a ‘UKIP of the left’ and to replace the Liberal Democrats
as a ‘go-to’ party of protest. Certainly their increased membership and
electoral support is evidence of the enormous thirst for an alternative
that exists within society, especially among younger people.
Indeed, the phenomenon of
crisis for the traditional ruling parties and the emergence of new,
insurgent forces (both of the left and the populist right) is one which
can be observed internationally. The rise of Syriza – once regarded in
Greece as a ‘fringe’ left-wing formation – is an obvious symptom.
In Britain, too, the tectonic
plates of electoral politics are shifting. For trade unionists,
anti-cuts activists and young people, the question of a political
alternative is becoming increasingly pressing. The Socialist Party has
consistently pointed out that one of the most important tasks currently
facing the labour movement is the development of mass, independent
political representation for the working class – a genuine alternative
to big-business politics. Without this, workers are left fighting
austerity with one hand tied behind their backs, unable to be fully
effective on the political plane. But where will such an alternative
come from?
A Green surge?
The increased popularity of
the Greens means that some are asking if this party can offer an answer,
and it’s possible to see why. A superficial glance at some of the
party’s headline policies offers potentially encouraging reading. Its
website states that it opposes public service cuts, is against the
‘austerity agenda’, would like to abolish tuition fees, and believes the
government could do more to tackle the climate crisis. Moreover, Natalie
Bennett has argued that her party has ‘shared values’ with the workers’
movement. In a speech delivered at TUC congress in 2012, she asserted
that the Greens would aim to ‘strengthen trade unions’. The party has a
conference policy committing it to "developing closer cooperation with
the unions on matters of shared interest".
The progressive tone of many
of the Greens’ policies, combined with an apparently positive attitude
towards trade unions, makes a refreshing change from the main parties,
including Labour. The Greens have a relatively large profile, with
access to national media coverage. They boast a number of elected
representatives, including one MP, three MEPs, 160 councillors and
control of Brighton council. This affords them a certain degree of
credibility as a viable electoral vehicle.
In recent weeks, the Greens
have enjoyed unusually large amounts of air-time, with the argument over
the make-up of the television leaders’ debates hitting the headlines.
Almost 300,000 people have signed a petition calling for the inclusion
of Bennett in these. David Cameron has cynically added his voice to this
campaign – hoping to see the debates cancelled altogether and aware of
the potential threat the Greens could pose to Labour’s vote.
Meanwhile, the so-called
‘Green surge’ is a phenomenon that the party’s PR department is keen to
convince us of. Green Party membership has risen relatively sharply over
the last year. Including the Scottish Greens, they now claim to number
over 40,000 and to have outflanked the UK Independence Party (UKIP).
Younger people make up a significant portion of their membership and
voting base. Up to a fifth of 18-24 year-olds have indicated support for
the Greens in some polls, with 25% of students estimated to have voted
Green in 2014’s European elections. The Young Greens claim 8,000
members.
The party’s base
Given these increasing levels
of support, it is perhaps not surprising that some are asking if it
might not make sense for anti-cuts campaigners and trade unionists to
get behind the Greens. But do they genuinely offer us the desperately
needed alternative to the pro-big business parties? What are the class
interests represented in their politics?
For Marxists, the crucial
question that needs to be asked is, can an alternative party offer a
political voice to the working class? Is it able or likely to play a
role in developing the self-confidence of workers to fight cuts and win
improvements? Does it base itself on socialist policies and fight for an
anti-capitalist programme? Such an organisation would need to be based
upon workers’ organisations – primarily trade unions – and armed with a
socialist programme which represents, in essence, an ideological
summation of working-class interests.
To reach a conclusion on
whether the energies of fighting workers and socialists could be well
spent in offering support to, or even joining and participating in, the
Green Party, it is necessary to carry out an assessment of its
character. This means examining the programme of the organisation, as
well as its composition and structure. The Greens’ record when they have
been tested in elected positions flows naturally from these, and
provides us with concrete evidence of the party’s current and potential
future role.
At present, the Green Party’s
primary base of support is among professional and more middle-class
layers in society. According to YouGov, an estimated 63% of its voters
are from ABC1 so-called ‘social grades’. While the party has ambitions
to win support from a broader section of workers, and does of course
have some support from other layers, it is clear that it has not as yet
been able to make any serious inroads into the working class.
The social make-up of the
Greens’ support base is contrasted to that of the hard-right populist
UKIP, a majority of whose support is from lower-paid and manual workers,
as well as from pensioners and the unemployed. The vacuum created by the
failure of Labour to offer a credible alternative has allowed UKIP to
encroach upon territory considered to be working-class heartlands. This
was dramatically demonstrated in the Heywood and Middleton by-election
which UKIP came within 600 votes of winning from Labour. In contrast,
the Greens’ target seats for the 2015 general election are primarily in
areas with high student populations. Nevertheless, should the party have
the right kind of programme and structure, it would certainly be
possible to envisage it developing a base of support among workers in
the future.
When examining the party’s
programme, it is perhaps worth noting, at the outset, that the origins
of the party lay firmly outside the workers’ movement. Indeed, initially
named PEOPLE, it was certainly not conceived as a party of the left. One
of its founding members and election candidates was Edward Goldsmith –
son of the Tory MP Frank Goldsmith and uncle of Tory MP Zac Goldsmith.
His politics was mainly based around romantic notions of ‘getting back
to nature’, ideas which he combined with extreme social conservatism and
even some fascist sympathies. So the Greens’ left-wing image is a more
recent phenomenon.

Ambiguous nature
Nonetheless, it is the
party’s programme in the here and now that needs to be analysed. And a
cursory glance at the prominent policies supported by the Greens could
leave many socialists feeling that there is a lot we agree on. Their
website states that their philosophy is one of ‘fairness’ and that they
stand for politics which benefits people and the planet.
Recently, they prominently
declared support for a £10 an hour minimum wage – a demand initially
raised by the Socialist Party and the Bakers Food and Allied Workers
Union. But the small print they attach to the policy is evidence of
their broader approach to politics. They argue that £10 an hour would
only be possible by 2020, ostensibly to allow businesses time to adjust,
and by which time inflation would have reduced the value of the wage.
Clearly, the party feels that it has to balance the needs of workers
against the interests of big business. While it may feel it appropriate
to tip the scales slightly further towards workers, it does not see
itself as having ‘picked a side’.
A detailed read of the
Greens’ 2010 manifesto is also very revealing. In this, they pledged to
match the then Labour government’s target of halving the deficit by
2013. They argued that this would be achievable without substantial cuts
in services but by carrying out increases in taxation instead. A close
look at the tax policies again reveals the unclear nature of their class
loyalties. While they advocated an increase in corporation tax (if only
by a measly 2%) they also supported a range of regressive taxes. These
included several taxes on consumption, often dressed up as
environmentally friendly, which would take no account of the consumer’s
ability to pay. These included a reintroduction of the fuel duty
escalator and increased VAT on flights.
Underlying the seemingly
ambiguous nature of the class interests distilled in the policies
promoted by the Greens is the fact that, on the most fundamental level,
they lack a clear ideological anchor. Politics is indeed concentrated
economics. Socialist ideas represent, in a concentrated form, the
economic interests of working-class people.
Despite the presence of a
number of individual self-professed socialists within the Green Party,
these ideas are in no way foundational to the organisation. Without this
foundation, the Greens are forced basically to accept the economic
framework laid out for them by capitalism. This puts the party in a
straitjacket and, in the absence of structural mechanisms allowing
workers’ organisations to bring their weight to bear within it, means it
ultimately comes down on the side of the ruling class and the
established order.
The Greens’ organisational
structure is far from being of passing interest. It is a clear indicator
of the potential (or lack thereof) that exists for the working class to
exert its influence within the party. At present, the democracy of the
Greens is based purely on individual membership. There is no facility
for trade unions to affiliate as collective bodies and to be afforded
democratic rights within the party. Indeed, while the Greens may wish to
court the unions, the party wrote in its 2010 manifesto that it wished
to "end the corrupting effects of both big private and trade union
donations to political parties, and bring in a system of fair state
funding". Here, it equates democratic organisations which represent a
collective voice for millions of workers with unaccountable individual
members of the super-rich elite!
The trade unions represent
the workers not just as individuals but as conscious members of a class.
While the Greens may well be happy to accept large donations from the
trade union movement, they are not, and do not want to be, a party over
which workers’ organisations can have ownership and control.
The Green Party may promote a
range of progressive policies – for example, abolishing tuition fees –
but it has no mechanisms built into its structure that would allow
workers and young people to prevent its leaders from acting in a similar
way to, for example, the Liberal Democrats when they were tested on the
issue in 2010.
The Greens’ structure can be
contrasted to other emerging formations on the left – most notably in
Britain the Trade
Unionist and Socialist Coalition (TUSC). TUSC includes the RMT
transport union as well as the Socialist Party, many leading trade
unionists and other socialist organisations. Within the coalition
structure the trade union components have the power to veto decisions,
including those made on candidates and the political platform, allowing
for genuine accountability to the workers’ movement. Similarly, the
Labour Party was originally established at the beginning of the 20th
century as ‘a party of the unions’ and other working-class
organisations, including co-operatives and the Women’s Social and
Political Union.
Green cuts
The actual record of the
Green Party is in many ways the logical consequence of its political and
structural foundations. Nowhere have these consequences been made more
starkly clear than in Brighton, where the Green Party has a minority
administration which controls the council. Elected on an anti-cuts
ticket, many were expecting that Britain’s first Green council would
offer a refreshing alternative to the slash-and-burn approach of both
the Tories and New Labour. The reality has been nothing of the sort.
Like most councils, Brighton was hit with an enormous cut to funding
from central government. But far from mounting a serious fight-back –
acting as a line of defence against the vicious Con-Dems – the Greens
obediently passed on the pain.
More than £50 million-worth
of cuts have been inflicted on the city since the Green council was
elected – resulting in its huge unpopularity locally. Over the last
month, when attacked (hypocritically) by Labour’s chief whip in the
Lords for delivering 50% cuts despite being elected on a no cuts, no
privatisation ticket, one Green councillor responded in the New
Statesman by arguing that the electorate should have paid more attention
to the small print. According to him, the Greens only ever pledged to
resist service cuts imposed on local councils "to the greatest possible
extent". Evidently, in the minds of Green councillors, the greatest
possible extent was not at all.
Indeed, the only idea the
Green council has had for ‘mitigating’ the effects of government cuts
was to force the cost of the economic crisis onto working people in
Brighton in another form: council tax rises. Before its first cuts
budget, it offered residents the opportunity to ‘cut your own services’
in a consultation exercise. Residents who used the web-based ‘budget
calculator’ could experiment with increasing and decreasing funding in
different areas. Those who opted for a standstill budget were informed
that this would result in a 16% council tax increase. Meanwhile a 5%
increase in funding for services would result in a 32% tax rise. Some
choice!
This record can be contrasted
with the fighting approach of Liverpool city council in the 1980s which,
also in a time of austerity, won over £60 million in extra funding from
the Tory government and led a mass campaign of working-class people to
defend its stance against Thatcher. Unlike the Liverpool council leaders
(supporters of the Militant, now the Socialist Party), the Greens have
neither the confidence nor inclination to mobilise the full force of the
working class against the vicious Con-Dems.
On the contrary, the Green
council has brought itself into direct confrontation with some of the
best organised and militant sections of workers in the city. As part of
a so-called equal-pay deal, the council attempted to cut the pay of the
city’s low-waged bin workers by as much as £4,000, ripping up a union
agreement. It even attempted to wash its hands of responsibility for the
decision by appointing non-elected officers to handle the issue. This
provoked wild-cat strike action, followed by a determined and successful
month-long strike of bin workers.
The national level
Damningly, the Greens’
acceptance of the austerity framework means they have failed
spectacularly to make improvements on environmental issues. Brighton
council is ranked 302nd out of 336 local authorities for recycling. It
is no surprise, then, that the Greens’ one MP, Caroline Lucas, has been
forced to distance herself from the actions of her council. But can we
rely upon the Greens to act differently at national level? Could
Brighton council perhaps be dismissed as an aberration?
In fact, even where the
Greens have only a handful of councillors and little to lose by at least
voting against cuts, if not actively campaigning against them, they have
failed to do so consistently. In Bristol they joined a ‘rainbow’ cuts
coalition and are largely indistinguishable from the other parties
within it. Even before the fully-fledged austerity onslaught we are
currently facing, Green votes in Lewisham council propped up a minority
Labour administration making millions of pounds in ‘savings’ on several
occasions.
Moreover, when pressed on the
question of how the Greens might act following this year’s elections,
Natalie Bennett felt unable to offer any guarantees that Green MPs would
act as a defence against cuts in parliament. When interviewed about the
possibility of a hung parliament, Bennett argued that, while the Greens
would not favour a coalition with the Tories, or even Labour, they would
be prepared to vote for potential Labour Party cuts budgets as part of a
‘confidence and supply agreement’.
Internationally, Green
parties have proved very willing to join pro-cuts coalitions and
right-wing governments. In Ireland the Greens have been practically
wiped out by their participation in an austerity coalition in 2007 with
Fianna Fáil (the main capitalist party). Based on a serious assessment
of the record, programme and structure of the Green Party here in
Britain, you would have to conclude that this is not an organisation of
a fundamentally different character to its sister party across the Irish
Sea.
While it is not ruled out
that individual Greens could play a role in the future, including in
aiding the development of a new workers’ party, the Green Party does not
represent the independent interests of the working class. Politically
constrained by the logic of capitalism, neither is it capable of
offering an escape from the terrible environmental crisis the planet
faces.
Should the trade unions take
the bold step of setting up their own political party, building on the
work already done by formations like TUSC, many of the young people and
workers currently looking towards the Greens will readily be won to this
new banner. But the Green Party itself will not be capable of meeting
the aspirations of those workers and young people who have placed their
hopes in it. The urgent task presented to socialists now, and to the
workers’ movement generally, is to build the kind of mass working-class
party which can.