Check out this column from Michael Taube about the Green Party. I agree with his assessment that the Green Party should be disappointed with their election results. In my opinion they are just a place to park a protest vote at the moment. Further, there is some confusion on what side of the left-right spectrum they fall. I think one of their main problems starts at the top. Jim Harris (again, in my opinion) does not have the prescence of a leader and he seems to be the sole face of the Party. The need new leadership, including the broadening out of their spokespeople. They need to try harder to get on panels and political shows, and they should get as many people out there as they can.
They should have the money to do this and so far they have wasted their $1.75/vote/year. Anyways on to Michael Taube.
...a lot of pundits felt the Green Party was going to do better. Their 2004 popularity numbers exceeded the 2% barrier needed for federal funding, which meant they had over $1 million in their war chest. As well, their leader, Jim Harris, received more public exposure than ever before.So, why didn't the Greens have an electoral breakthrough?
First, Canadian voters still don't perceive them as being anything more than a fringe party. Although Green candidates have been elected to city councils in Ontario and B.C., they've been shut out provincially and federally. In fact, support for the Greens in B.C. -- where they should do well -- dropped from 12% in the 2001 provincial election to 9% in 2005.Second, many Canadians have still not been properly exposed to the Greens. Most associate this party with the environmental movement and little else. Also, Harris was left out of the last two federal leaders' debates, an event that would likely have boosted his public profile. Until he is allowed to participate and explain his party's platform, the Greens aren't going anywhere.
Third, the NDP enjoyed a political renaissance during this federal election. Although the Greens have a fiscal approach to the environment -- their federal leader is an ex-PC, after all -- the party platform is left of centre. Thus, the only way to win votes is to take support away from New Democrats. But the NDP gained 11 new seats and an increase in popular support in 2006, meaning the Greens were out-muscled by their main political competitors.
... If the Greens can't get away from the image of being a one-trick pony that attracts ex-hippies and young radicals, they are bound for failure. By increasing their political reach, they could eventually take away NDP support and win some federal seats.
Don't laugh. It has been done in other countries.
Comments (6)
Say it with me all together now — “The first past the post electoral system screwed the Greens!”
Posted by Greg | February 3, 2006 1:47 PM
Posted on February 3, 2006 13:47
It doesn’t help that many of their candidates are positively annoyingly loony.
In my riding, the candidate was a fine woman, and aside from the CPC candidate, the green candidate would have been my choice.
But, the guy from the other side of town, well, let’s just say the term moonbat applies. I actually heard him say, during a debate, that the Bible condoned spousal abuse, child abuse and slavery. Uh-huh…
Posted by paul | February 3, 2006 2:07 PM
Posted on February 3, 2006 14:07
Paul Martin lumps the Green party and the NDP with the Liberals as “the Left”, as if they are all on the same page. Our green party candidate explained in great detail why they are actually to the far far right in most of their policies. They do not consider themselves “progressives” like the Liberals, the NDP and even the Communist party. They prefer to be thought of as Libertarians- where personal responsibility is the key instead of socialism. Was this correct?
Posted by maria | February 3, 2006 2:07 PM
Posted on February 3, 2006 14:07
I don’t know why the media lumps the Green Party with the NDP. Unlike Green parties in the rest of the world, the Canadian Green Party under Jim Harris is not a left wing party. Jim Harris is vying for the same ground as the Liberal party—people who used to vote PC and haven’t found a home with the Conservatives.
Posted by Una | February 3, 2006 2:19 PM
Posted on February 3, 2006 14:19
Arguably the Green Party in Canada is unique. It is the only Green Party that runs on a conservative financial platform (my favorite description of it being: corporations are free to make money, but they have to do so in an environmentally responsible fashion) but is as far or further to the left as the NDP with their social platform.
It’s a very interesting combination of typically conservative (libertarian/small-c ones, rather then neocons) financial and personal issues along with a typically liberal (small-l, modern perspective) stance on social issues. Plus they emphasize the environment which is generally a good thing.
Personally I like them. It’s the CPC sans socons, more socially left, and a heavy focus on the environment. Or the NDP with financial sanity and no big brother knows best mentality.
I disagree wholeheartedly with their position on nuclear power, but I disagree with lots of (otherwise intelligent) people about that.
Oh, and given what? 5% of the vote they should have on the order of 15 or so seats. FPTP screwed them, as the poster noted above. Go PR! Specifically New Zealand’s MMP system :)
Posted by Keller | February 4, 2006 8:40 AM
Posted on February 4, 2006 08:40
Thanks for the kind words about the column, Greg.
Posted by Michael Taube | February 11, 2006 5:20 PM
Posted on February 11, 2006 17:20