IPCC sixth report.

[spread-tee]

That is well out of date now and she is no longer leader, it is true the party believe in public ownership off essential utilities, but also in a mixed economy of private and public enterprise and no mention of collective ownership.

In any case these kinds of labels are not very useful, policies are what the switched on voters are best voting for, but nowadays we seem obsessed with personalities instead.

Desp

[Stinsy]

My point is:

If we want government to act on climate change we need it to be an issue that swings voters form one box to the other on a ballot paper. Those politicians proposing action must also be credible individuals and the party must have credible policies on: Foreign Affairs, Defence, Health and Social Care, Education, and the rest. For me the Green Party doesn't fulfil that.

Cameron won power on a "Vote Blue, Get Green" ticket, but abandoned the "green crap" shortly after forming a government.

Since then no main party has fought an election on green issues. Even the Lib Dems (remember them?) don't seem keen to grab the environmental vote.

The challenge is: How do we get Labour/Tories competing to be the greenest in their manifesto commitments? Our FPTP system of government doesn't allow voting for fringe parties to be anything more than a spoiled ballot.

[Mr Gus]

What the hell stinsy?
That video is simply condescending BS fodder.

Many folk don't own the land their homes are on in leasehold form especially in big cities & even some "new estates", this is Trumpian media ollocks at best

[Stig]

This

The challenge is: How do we get Labour/Tories competing to be the greenest in their manifesto commitments? Our FPTP system of government doesn't allow voting for fringe parties to be anything more than a spoiled ballot.

I live in a 'safe seat' so my vote is worth essentially nothing. I've never bothered to write to my MP as his voting record is 100% following the party whip. If you want political change on green issues (well, any issues really) then you need to campaign in areas with marginal seats.

[Stinsy]

What the hell stinsy?
That video is simply condescending BS fodder.

Many folk don't own the land their homes are on in leasehold form especially in big cities & even some "new estates", this is Trumpian media ollocks at best

If politicians expect votes they must project competence.

I don't understand your point? If government is to build houses they would first have to buy the land. That is obvious! They can do compulsory purchase if they want but it has to be paid for. Claiming you can build good quality housing for £60k a house (including buying the land) is fiscally illiterate!

I want green politicians to be competent. I want them to have sensible policies in on health/education/defence and the rest. I don't want the only green option to be a "well-meaning but thick" idiot whose policies crumble under the slightest scrutiny.

[spread-tee]

My point is:

If we want government to act on climate change we need it to be an issue that swings voters form one box to the other on a ballot paper. Those politicians proposing action must also be credible individuals and the party must have credible policies on: Foreign Affairs, Defence, Health and Social Care, Education, and the rest. For me the Green Party doesn't fulfil that.

Cameron won power on a "Vote Blue, Get Green" ticket, but abandoned the "green crap" shortly after forming a government.

Since then no main party has fought an election on green issues. Even the Lib Dems (remember them?) don't seem keen to grab the environmental vote.

The challenge is: How do we get Labour/Tories competing to be the greenest in their manifesto commitments? Our FPTP system of government doesn't allow voting for fringe parties to be anything more than a spoiled ballot.

Agreed, FPTP leaves a lot of us unrepresented and as you say a vote for anyone other than the main two parties is likely to be a waste. For me though the Green Party have much more credible policies than the others, as you said Tories and Labour campaign on a ticket, then bin it when they gain power. I think trying to promote competition between Tory and Lab to be green-est is a waste of time too.

The Labour party are too busy falling down self dug holes to do anything meaningful for some time to come sadly, probably the only way to get some real progressive policies on the statute is to try and get a rainbow alliance of left-ish leaning politicians, but that also requires co-operation between them of which there appears to be very little.

Greens are slowly gaining traction which to me is better than flogging the other dead horses.

Desp

[AE-NMidlands]

It is a shame the "communist" slur has been aired. The problem with market economics is that each player (company) is only looking to maximise its own gains, and sod the rest (competitors- or all of the rest of us who aren't shareholders. Just look at the recently-revealed southern water scandal, and ongoing problems) Actually the law says that the directors have to do that. The tragedy of the commons etc.

When we desperately need coordinated public transport, loads of social housing, energy, water supply and sewage utilities which aren't just chasing the next buck we just can't afford to let the market rule.
You could say that as we are going to have to integrate all sorts of businesses to save CO₂ emissions then it is going to be impossible to make private companies co-operate without bleeding us dry in the process. The water companies and energy ones too have already been fined for breaking the rules to enrich themselves.
How else do we get a power station (or big transformer) feeding electricity to a trolleybus or tram network with its waste heat going to a (new-build) district heating scheme? Sounds to me like something that would only happen in a New Town which had control over public transport, planning and building regs and other civic co-ordination.
Communist? or reintroducing post-(2nd) war idealism - driven then by necessity and the need to make the most effficient use of resources. What is different now?
A

[spread-tee]

Amen to that AE,

I think there is a role for privateers, but also we need as you say a much better holistic overall plan of where we are going, and plenty of GOVT spending to put the basic essentials in place, stuff like water, transport, energy etc where it is difficult to make a profit whilst still delivering a good service universally. A good defined tax system is also essential to re-price goods and services so we end up without the perverse outcomes where it is cheaper to fly to Scotland say than go by train, and to gradually ramp up the costs of destroying the Planet for EG.

Desp

[Mr Gus]

What the hell stinsy?
That video is simply condescending BS fodder.

Many folk don't own the land their homes are on in leasehold form especially in big cities & even some "new estates", this is Trumpian media ollocks at best

If politicians expect votes they must project competence.

I don't understand your point? If government is to build houses they would first have to buy the land. That is obvious! They can do compulsory purchase if they want but it has to be paid for. Claiming you can build good quality housing for £60k a house (including buying the land) is fiscally illiterate!

I want green politicians to be competent. I want them to have sensible policies in on health/education/defence and the rest. I don't want the only green option to be a "well-meaning but thick" idiot whose policies crumble under the slightest scrutiny.

Not necessarily, if she wanted to (as a borrower of money to fund that many homes,) it may be a 2, 3 stage plan, ..but we'll never know. She was dealt a blow by a constantly interrupting & condescending radio journo in that piece, fairs fair.
For instance , build houses, charge ground rent that buys out plans lease, it's just not clear.
All politicos flail doesn't stop some.of the brass necks fecund types popping back up like a Thames "brown trout"((Diane abbott)) ..similar scenario of screwed up figures on air.

Address the whole damn aspect for "qualities & exclusions, + max power's of parties + representation pertaining to voter area definition for starters then, because you are actually denigrating the smallest, least capable of harm political group compared to that of the big three & all the sh---- that follows them around.
The Tories would thank you for your attempt to keep them in power I'm sure as it plays into their hands nicely.
Ideology is one thing the reality of politicians working hard for the electorate (not the party) is another, thus the all to commonplace scenario of voting for what you perceived to be the least damaging entity.

[linesrg]

I know some people would have us go on a war footing to solve the climate but i would suggest this is unrealistic.

Unrealistic??? The alternative will be war somewhere down the line anyway once the fight for resources starts.

I'd suggest the time for foot dragging is long past.

Regards

Richard