Dunfermline

[Deleted]

Oct 28, 2013 22:08:23 GMT greenchristian said:

To sum up the last few posts: my Scottish colleagues are not nationalists, but enough of them support Scottish independence (presumably on pragmatic grounds) that it is their official policy.

Or they are secret anarchists working towards the deconstruction the state in its entirety.

[Tony Otim]

Oct 28, 2013 22:08:23 GMT greenchristian said:

To sum up the last few posts: my Scottish colleagues are not nationalists, but enough of them support Scottish independence (presumably on pragmatic grounds) that it is their official policy.

Well this particular one opposes independance on pragmatic grounds, at least at this particular juncture. I view it as a side issue to my membership and support of the party. TBH, I'm not sure it has a huge impact on our vote. Our strongest area is Edinburgh, which is hardly a hotbed of nationalism and our strongest wards i suspect will not be the ones with the highest Yes vote.

[Deleted]

It's a shame that we probably won't be able to analyse the results of the referendum by ward...

But if we could, it wouldn't entirely surprise me if Meadows & Morningside produced the lowest Yes of anywhere in Scotland. That said, I think it's also the kind of area where a distinctly Green pro-independence campaign could persuade people to vote Yes who might not otherwise think of doing so -- which is partly why I think that the Yes activists I met the other day who told me that we should refrain from criticising Alex Salmond or the Scottish Government in public until after the referendum were grossly misguided.

[johnr]

Oct 28, 2013 22:08:23 GMT greenchristian said:

To sum up the last few posts: my Scottish colleagues are not nationalists, but enough of them support Scottish independence (presumably on pragmatic grounds) that it is their official policy.

I know of several people who would be quite strong supporters of the Greens in SCotland if they didnt keep talking about independence. The consitutional question is nothing to do with what the Green party is all about - the environment, most of which action is on the very small, local scale, or on the large, international scale. 

Whether Scotland is independent or not will make no difference to the environmental outcomes for the people in Scotland. 

[Deleted]

We're about a lot more than 'the environment'.

[greatkingrat]

Oct 28, 2013 17:33:28 GMT AdminSTB said:

Slightly relevant so I might as well post here, I've just added the 1974 Fife Regional Council elections to Scottish Elections.

www.scottishelections.org.uk/scotland/lold/1974/fife.php

You can get some idea of the boundaries of the wards by looking at the original LGBCS reports, although there aren't any maps.

[The Bishop]

Oct 29, 2013 11:45:40 GMT @benjamin said:

We're about a lot more than 'the environment'.

Of course, but that is ultimately your "raison d'etre".

I am evidently not alone in being a bit surprised with how much *some* Scottish Greens are consumed by the independence question.....

[johnr]

The impression one gets is to be heard in the Scottish Greens, you have to be in favour of independence.

Now dont get me wrong - I'm not suggesting that the Greens ought to be in favour of the UK either, let alone being in Better Together. Its just that the constitutional question is so utterly irrelevant to what they are about.

Also, Benjamin, if by "We're about a lot more than 'the environment' you mean being a left-wing party (which again is something that comes across a lot in the media) then you are missing out on a lot of support that way. I know of many people who are broadly sympathetic to the sustainability agenda who are right wing. Although I've never asked them about their political views (probably Tory or Nat, if I were to guess), they would never vote Green in a million years. If people want to vote for a left-wing party, there are plenty out there (one might say there are TOO many!), so I cant see the point of yet another.

[East Anglian Lefty]

I don't think there's much more doubt that there would be room for a centrist liberal-green party, but it seems equally clear that the current activist base is neither interested in being nor able to be that party. What's slightly more interesting is why there don't seem to have been any attempts to create such a party in Scotland, where STV makes it much easier for it to establish itself.

[Deleted]

Oct 29, 2013 14:40:06 GMT The Bishop said:

Oct 29, 2013 11:45:40 GMT @benjamin said:

We're about a lot more than 'the environment'.

Of course, but that is ultimately your "raison d'etre".

In the same way that the raison d'être of the Labour Party is 'ultimately' to represent trade unions. I can't speak for Labour, but it's probably fair to say that most of the active members that we've gained over the past 15 years or so are not driven primarily by a concern for the environment per se.

Oct 29, 2013 15:02:36 GMT johnr said:

Also, Benjamin, if by "We're about a lot more than 'the environment' you mean being a left-wing party (which again is something that comes across a lot in the media) then you are missing out on a lot of support that way. I know of many people who are broadly sympathetic to the sustainability agenda who are right wing. Although I've never asked them about their political views (probably Tory or Nat, if I were to guess), they would never vote Green in a million years. If people want to vote for a left-wing party, there are plenty out there (one might say there are TOO many!), so I cant see the point of yet another.

I'd be happy to see a general realignment of Scottish politics whereby the Greens and certain more left-wing sections of the SNP, Labour and perhaps even LibDems were in the same party. But I'd find it hard to campaign for current Labour or SNP economic policies with integrity, though I accept that others feel able to compromise more.

If right-wing environmentalists want to form their own party then they are welcome to do so. I'm just not convinced that we could appeal to those people without losing both much of our current support and our ideological foundations. I really don't think that ridding ourselves of economic policies would do us any favours either. That said, it's interesting that the recently hyped 'Common Weal' project has managed to find support amongst both the Scottish Greens and Jim Mather.

Oct 29, 2013 15:22:30 GMT A Brown said:

They could perhaps take a look at the Swiss Liberal Greens or the Austrian Greens (Europe's most successful Green party).

We could, though neither Austria or Switzerland has any meaningful equivalent of either the LibDems or the SNP, which may go some way to explaining why those parties have been able to find a sizeable niche.

[greenchristian]

Oct 29, 2013 16:06:29 GMT @benjamin said:

Oct 29, 2013 14:40:06 GMT The Bishop said:

Of course, but that is ultimately your "raison d'etre".

In the same way that the raison d'être of the Labour Party is 'ultimately' to represent trade unions. I can't speak for Labour, but it's probably fair to say that most of the active members that we've gained over the past 15 years or so are not driven primarily by a concern for the environment per se.

Indeed. If it hadn't been for the social justice side of our policies, I almost certainly wouldn't have joined.

[Deleted]

I guess I'm allowed to come out in favour of the St Andrews West Development now that I'm no-longer a council candidate.

[Deleted]

Shirley-Anne Somerville gives up the ghost.

www.heraldscotland.com/politics/referendum-news/losing-snp-by-election-candidate-leaves-yes-job.22584941

[piperdave]

Purely to lob a hand-grenade into the Green nationalist debate, I was always led to believe that Green philosophy included the principle of subsidiarity: power at the lowest appropriate level to achieve the aim. If Scotland is the most appropriate level to wield power on the majority of day to day issues, then it would be entirely appropriate for Greens to support independence. Presumably it's also why they are in favour of dealing with the big environmental issues at European and international level.

If that's not the case, can someone tell me prior to May 2014 so I can switch my vote elsewhere?

[johnr]

Nov 21, 2013 19:03:15 GMT piperdave said:

Purely to lob a hand-grenade into the Green nationalist debate, I was always led to believe that Green philosophy included the principle of subsidiarity: power at the lowest appropriate level to achieve the aim. If Scotland is the most appropriate level to wield power on the majority of day to day issues, then it would be entirely appropriate for Greens to support independence. Presumably it's also why they are in favour of dealing with the big environmental issues at European and international level.

If that's not the case, can someone tell me prior to May 2014 so I can switch my vote elsewhere?

In which they are saying that there are no decisions which need to be taken at a UK level. From an environmental point of view (given the energy market, if nothing else) that is completely wrong.