> The rebels claim: “Ross is the guy behind the curtain, the Peter Mandelson figure who runs the show essentially. That’s not widely known – because he doesn’t want it known.”
This might be the funniest thing I read all day.
Goodness, what a long piece on the opinion of a couple of folk. Think he wrote ‘rebels’ 20 times; this doesn’t make the group any larger.
The smaller the party the more vicious the internal battles are. I’ve no inside knowledge on the accuracy of this article or the size of the rebel faction, but I have heard anecdotes that Greer enjoys being a real cunt to people not on his team.
No doubt more will become known of the size and amount of discontent of the rebel group in the weeks to come. It does seem to an outsider as if the Green Party sold out,when we all know that is the function of the mainstream political parties..
>The anger among Green Party rebels is palpable. Some are close to tears.
Oh baby. This is why I follow politics
>“Ross oversees what the party does on a day-to-day basis and he oversaw the deal. There’s no checks and balances,” it was said. Around 50% of executive committee members were said to “have personal connections to Ross, Patrick or Lorna”.
Rebels are outraged at the Greens being “walked over”, and say an “unhealthy culture” exists where “there’s no disagreeing with the leadership”.
This won’t sit well with a lot of the Green activists on here who have been going on about how democratic their party is in recent weeks.
>Harvie, Slater and Greer were accused of “knowing months in advance” that the Scottish government would roll-back on climate targets yet “did nothing.
Ooft!
I’m taking most of the utter pish some journalists are writing with a bucket of salt. Absolutely nothing to say anything in that article is true.
I seriously don’t like Greer, Harvie or Slater, but they clearly realised that if they ever want to be more than a fringe party they need to learn to compromise and appeal to a broader spectrum of voters. The rebels maybe want a return to the Green’s core values, which in a way makes sense and is an admirable position to take, but it is incompatible with actually being in power to deliver on at least some of the things they want.
This article is a very interesting read – and I do suggest folk read it in its entirety.
The allegations against Greer are very serious, and as stated in the article the party does have a Complaints and Conduct process which by all accounts is functional and takes its job seriously. If this group of rebels can back up their really horrific claims then I wonder why they haven’t gone through this process?
> The source added that rebels “have bullied women, they’ve an appalling record on the way they treat women … If people thought what they’re accusing Ross of was even half-way true, he’d have been hauled in front of the conduct and complaints committee.
I couldn’t verify one way or another whether Greer is the ‘misogynist bully’ the rebels claim. It sounds like the rebel group are known for being particularly vindictive, misogynistic and toxic too – and are most likely behind the slew of anonymous press releases.
What I will say is that this claim
> They say opposition had been building to the deal and there was a “substantial proportion of the party” prepared to vote against. They’re confident that if the vote had been held, the numbers were there to collapse the deal. One said between 70-80% of members were “anti-BHA” after the climate target climbdown.
Is absolutely untrue. The letter that sparked the EGM – by using a legitimate democratic party process – received less than 150 signatures in a party of 8000.
That’s not to say people weren’t seriously discussing the concept. I think its safe to say that the EGM would have been a really interesting debate about our future as a party, as a country and how best to effect change – whether we’re more effective in Government or in opposition.
Ultimately, I have to say that from being in member’s spaces the preference was to push the SNP into making concessions, and unshelving BHA policies in order to maintain the agreement. Most people like and respect Patrick and Lorna. There is definitely some truth to there being a bit of a hierarchy and a gap between party HQ/leadership and staffers, councillors, and then obviously rep groups and members. Any party could do with more decentralisation and more democratic routes for members to call the shots.
Equally, I have to say it’s the most democratic party I’ve ever been in. A lot of the folk who the rebels would consider “rosslers” are very helpful, compassionate and professional people who work hard in a party with few resources and not much in the way of funding – because they believed in the difference we were making while in Government.
Clearly there’s some deep and bitter history going on in the factional sections. I certainly hope there’s no truth to Greer being a “Starmer” of the party but I concede the possibility. I don’t know enough. I do know any leftist organisation within reach of power is vulnerable to Starmers. Would suggest folk watch [Al Jazeera’s The Labour Files](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=elp18OvnNV0&pp=ygUaYWwgamF6ZWVyYSBsYWJvdXIgZmlsZXMgMSA%3D) for insight on what our future UK Government is going to be like.
I have to say the accusations of Greer being the “puppet master” sound pretty hyberbolic and ridiculous. It totally takes away the agency of his colleagues and is honestly just demeaning. Again, if they have evidence of it surely they could do something with that?
Politicians desperately clawing to protect their own privileges yet again.
A party with 8000 members obsessed with sexuality & gender politics has had to much sway over Scottish government policy. I think the environmental improvements the greens originally stood for was a positive trajectory for humanity but the last 15 years they have been obsessing over fringe issues.
Chief Small Fist in about again.
Could be a green leadership purge then?
Bu k out VA
>Rebels are furious that the SNP gazumped them, booting Greens from power before they had the chance to vote the BHA down at an emergency meeting.
>They say opposition had been building to the deal and there was a “substantial proportion of the party” prepared to vote against. They’re confident that if the vote had been held, the numbers were there to collapse the deal. One said between 70-80% of members were “anti-BHA” after the climate target climbdown.
I for one and shock; haven’t we been told repeatedly that there was no way the Greens would scrap the BHA on their own and the EGM was just, like, democracy and totally not sus at all.
Also; this article may inaccurate but the internal workings of the Greens really does sound like the worst stereotypes are true. A funny-sad mix of students politics and Twitter.
15 comments
Archive link: [https://archive.ph/XhCI5](https://archive.ph/XhCI5)
> The rebels claim: “Ross is the guy behind the curtain, the Peter Mandelson figure who runs the show essentially. That’s not widely known – because he doesn’t want it known.”
This might be the funniest thing I read all day.
Goodness, what a long piece on the opinion of a couple of folk. Think he wrote ‘rebels’ 20 times; this doesn’t make the group any larger.
The smaller the party the more vicious the internal battles are. I’ve no inside knowledge on the accuracy of this article or the size of the rebel faction, but I have heard anecdotes that Greer enjoys being a real cunt to people not on his team.
No doubt more will become known of the size and amount of discontent of the rebel group in the weeks to come. It does seem to an outsider as if the Green Party sold out,when we all know that is the function of the mainstream political parties..
>The anger among Green Party rebels is palpable. Some are close to tears.
Oh baby. This is why I follow politics
>“Ross oversees what the party does on a day-to-day basis and he oversaw the deal. There’s no checks and balances,” it was said. Around 50% of executive committee members were said to “have personal connections to Ross, Patrick or Lorna”.
Rebels are outraged at the Greens being “walked over”, and say an “unhealthy culture” exists where “there’s no disagreeing with the leadership”.
This won’t sit well with a lot of the Green activists on here who have been going on about how democratic their party is in recent weeks.
>Harvie, Slater and Greer were accused of “knowing months in advance” that the Scottish government would roll-back on climate targets yet “did nothing.
Ooft!
I’m taking most of the utter pish some journalists are writing with a bucket of salt. Absolutely nothing to say anything in that article is true.
I seriously don’t like Greer, Harvie or Slater, but they clearly realised that if they ever want to be more than a fringe party they need to learn to compromise and appeal to a broader spectrum of voters. The rebels maybe want a return to the Green’s core values, which in a way makes sense and is an admirable position to take, but it is incompatible with actually being in power to deliver on at least some of the things they want.
This article is a very interesting read – and I do suggest folk read it in its entirety.
The allegations against Greer are very serious, and as stated in the article the party does have a Complaints and Conduct process which by all accounts is functional and takes its job seriously. If this group of rebels can back up their really horrific claims then I wonder why they haven’t gone through this process?
> The source added that rebels “have bullied women, they’ve an appalling record on the way they treat women … If people thought what they’re accusing Ross of was even half-way true, he’d have been hauled in front of the conduct and complaints committee.
I couldn’t verify one way or another whether Greer is the ‘misogynist bully’ the rebels claim. It sounds like the rebel group are known for being particularly vindictive, misogynistic and toxic too – and are most likely behind the slew of anonymous press releases.
What I will say is that this claim
> They say opposition had been building to the deal and there was a “substantial proportion of the party” prepared to vote against. They’re confident that if the vote had been held, the numbers were there to collapse the deal. One said between 70-80% of members were “anti-BHA” after the climate target climbdown.
Is absolutely untrue. The letter that sparked the EGM – by using a legitimate democratic party process – received less than 150 signatures in a party of 8000.
That’s not to say people weren’t seriously discussing the concept. I think its safe to say that the EGM would have been a really interesting debate about our future as a party, as a country and how best to effect change – whether we’re more effective in Government or in opposition.
Ultimately, I have to say that from being in member’s spaces the preference was to push the SNP into making concessions, and unshelving BHA policies in order to maintain the agreement. Most people like and respect Patrick and Lorna. There is definitely some truth to there being a bit of a hierarchy and a gap between party HQ/leadership and staffers, councillors, and then obviously rep groups and members. Any party could do with more decentralisation and more democratic routes for members to call the shots.
Equally, I have to say it’s the most democratic party I’ve ever been in. A lot of the folk who the rebels would consider “rosslers” are very helpful, compassionate and professional people who work hard in a party with few resources and not much in the way of funding – because they believed in the difference we were making while in Government.
Clearly there’s some deep and bitter history going on in the factional sections. I certainly hope there’s no truth to Greer being a “Starmer” of the party but I concede the possibility. I don’t know enough. I do know any leftist organisation within reach of power is vulnerable to Starmers. Would suggest folk watch [Al Jazeera’s The Labour Files](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=elp18OvnNV0&pp=ygUaYWwgamF6ZWVyYSBsYWJvdXIgZmlsZXMgMSA%3D) for insight on what our future UK Government is going to be like.
I have to say the accusations of Greer being the “puppet master” sound pretty hyberbolic and ridiculous. It totally takes away the agency of his colleagues and is honestly just demeaning. Again, if they have evidence of it surely they could do something with that?
Politicians desperately clawing to protect their own privileges yet again.
A party with 8000 members obsessed with sexuality & gender politics has had to much sway over Scottish government policy. I think the environmental improvements the greens originally stood for was a positive trajectory for humanity but the last 15 years they have been obsessing over fringe issues.
Chief Small Fist in about again.
Could be a green leadership purge then?
Bu k out VA
>Rebels are furious that the SNP gazumped them, booting Greens from power before they had the chance to vote the BHA down at an emergency meeting.
>They say opposition had been building to the deal and there was a “substantial proportion of the party” prepared to vote against. They’re confident that if the vote had been held, the numbers were there to collapse the deal. One said between 70-80% of members were “anti-BHA” after the climate target climbdown.
I for one and shock; haven’t we been told repeatedly that there was no way the Greens would scrap the BHA on their own and the EGM was just, like, democracy and totally not sus at all.
Also; this article may inaccurate but the internal workings of the Greens really does sound like the worst stereotypes are true. A funny-sad mix of students politics and Twitter.