Green party leadership hustings – snap verdict
Most commentators who have expressed a view think Zack Polanski will win the Green party leadership contest, perhaps quite easily. Voting does not open until Friday and the ballot goes on all month – the results will be announced on Tuesday 2 September. There is a limit to what you can pick up from a single leadership hustings, but there was nothing that was said or that happened tonight that suggests this assessment is wrong. Ellie Chowns came over as decent and reasonable, but Polanski was in a different league when it came to verve, polish and passion. As a member of the London assembly, he was playing to a home crowd, but that alone does not explain why, judging by the audience reaction, he was able to fire them up more. He is a natural performer on a political stage.
In a contest with a small electorate (like the parliamentary Conservative party), public appearances aren’t always decisive because the voters know all the candidates personally, and so other factors come into play. Green party elections were probably like that a long time ago. But the party has more than 60,000 members now, and many who vote will do so on the basis of what they have seen on the media. In this space, Polanski seems the clear winner.
It was a friendly debate. (Perhaps Adrian Ramsay not being there made a difference.) Polanski said there was no disagreement on policy and, from what was said tonight, that seems true. He also claimed there was no disagreement about strategy. (See 6.42pm). That is more spurious, because there are clearly tensions between the Green wing very comfortable with Corbynism (Polanski now – but not when Corbyn was actually Labour leader), and the Chowns-Ramsay wing more alive to the concerns of Tory-Lib Dem-leaning voters. But when Polanski said it was mostly a choice between communication styles, that sounded right.
And the debate about communication means, in effect, how best to counter Nigel Farage. The Reform UK leader was referenced constantly tonight; Keir Starmer and Kemi Badenoch barely got a mention. Chowns seemed horrified by the notion that the Green party had anything to learn from the way Farage campaigns. (See 7.34pm.) Polanski said the opposite. (See 9.43pm.) Given the record of all the others in British politics who have assumed that Farage will just self-implode if left to his own devices, Polanski’s argument was more persuasive.
Has he got what it takes to be a leftwing, progressive Farage? It is too early to tell, but possibly. There aren’t many models in British politics for serious leftwingers who manage to present as charismatic, well-informed, likeable and normal. Ken Livingstone, in his early London mayor days (before he lost his judgment), may be the best example. It is also a lot easier for politicians on the right to be personality politicians, because they do not have to worry so much about censorious party members who police what gets said over policy. But Polanski has certainly got the potential to be a big, leadership voice in the social media era. (Assuming he wins …)
Updated
Chowns says she and Ramsay offer ‘credible’ leadership, saying as MPs they are ‘where political weather made’
And in her final statement Chowns said the Greens needed effective leadership in parliament. She said Caroline Lucas, the former leader, was endorsing her and Adrian Ramsay because she recognised that.
She suggested the party would lose out if the leader or leaders were not sitting in Westminster.
After the media circus of a leadership election has moved on, once we’re back to the day to day business of politics, being there at the centre of Westminster is where the political weather is made.
I wasn’t so convinced of it a while ago, but I absolutely am now. It is so important that our leaders are there on that political platform, able to speak directly, speak truth to power, hold power to account day in, day out, in Westminster.
She said she and Ramsay were offering a leadership that was “focused on winning elections” and “bold and credible”.
Updated
