4 Reasons Why The Green Party Are Secretly Terrifying

Following on from Exeposé Features’ interview with Natalie Bennett, President of Freedom Society Liam Taylor blows the whistle with four reasons why he thinks the Green Party need to come under closer scrutiny.

“Anti-science, anti-business, and downright antihuman.” These were the words used to describe Greenpeace by one of its founders and key members upon explaining why he left the organisation that he had helped build from the ground up. Harsh accusations, the latter two of which in particular would perhaps take most people by surprise, given that most people seem to view them as merely well -meaning if a bit naïve. Here are four reasons why the same description could be given to the political wing of the environmental movement, whose leader recently graced our campus with her presence:

1) They’re scared of progress.

Nearly all technological progress throughout human history has been opposed by one group or another; sometimes out of genuine moral concern but other times out of fear and ignorance. In the past when these groups found themselves unable to win the argument they would resort to violence and unfortunately that is sometimes still true today. Take the knee-jerk and violent opposition to GM Crops. The Green Party’s London Mayoral candidate Jenny Jones supported the vandalism of a non-profit research lab and the irony of an environmental group vandalising the efforts of scientists trying to discover a more environmentally friendly way of feeding an ever growing human population was apparently lost on her.

If we ask nicely, maybe our crops will just feed more people without our intervention.
Photo Credit: KevinLallier via Compfight cc

 

We wouldn’t tolerate roving bands of rednecks tearing down wind turbines so why should we tolerate this kind of vandalism when it’s done by glorified hippies? Because of some kind of technophobia they are opposing the only shot humanity may have at producing enough food to feed itself. Of course they’re perfectly within their rights to oppose technological progress and corporate agriculture if they wish, but perhaps it might be appropriate to at least offer an alternative that won’t result in Malthusian collapse and mass starvation in third world countries.

 2) They hate science.

We’ve already seen that on issues apart from climate change, the Green Party are not exactly on the best of terms with science. I could talk about their ludicrous demands of providing homeopathy, essentially extortionately priced water, on the NHS but I trust my fellow students at Exeter to be smart enough to realise why it’s a terrible idea. However, perhaps it is worth mentioning their opposition to nuclear power on the grounds that it is “elitist and undemocratic”. The perceptive among you may notice that this makes absolutely no sense. How can a method of energy technology be undemocratic, or elitist for that matter?

Wind farms are well known for their more open and transparent democracy.
Photo Credit: Storm Crypt via Compfight cc

Of course they can’t, it’s just that a large chunk of the Green Party believe those words are just another way of saying, “bad”. Now, there are legitimate concerns to be had about nuclear power but it is considerably safer than popular imagination gives it credit for. Even when an outdated 40 year old reactor in Japan got hit by an earthquake and tsunami there wasn’t a single casualty from the radiation. Nonetheless, every form of generating energy has its good and bad points but at the end of the day we need to keep the lights on and injecting this kind of nonsense about nuclear power being “elitist and undemocratic” into the debate does nothing to help us find the best ways of doing that.

3) They are at war with economics.

It’s quite common among politicians of all stripes to think that they can manipulate the laws of economics at will but the Greens are perhaps one of the worst when it comes to believing that they can simply ignore economic reality. In truth, you cannot ignore the laws of economics or overcome them with sheer political will any more than you can ignore the laws of gravity. It is a common trope that we consume too much and their manifesto openly states that limitless economic growth is bad. Let’s just consider the implications of that. When the economy crashed in 2008 we consumed less, inequality was slightly reduced and carbon emissions fell. In one stroke we took a significant step closer to achieving some of their key goals but it hardly felt like the first steps towards some kind of green utopia.

In fairness, his carbon footprint is negligible.
Photo Credit: Hotpix [LRPS] via Compfight cc

Wanting to reduce carbon emissions is all well and good but when you to decide the only way to do that is by raising the price of energy (whether through higher taxes, more regulation or more expensive renewables) then you will get less growth and ultimately a poorer society. The idea that without economic growth living standards (especially for the poorest) can be maintained let alone improved is a dangerous delusion. How can someone rally against poverty when they explicitly advocate policies that can only ever increase it? Well, conveniently…

4) They don’t care about you

We have a situation where a party is pretty openly advocating policies to increase energy prices and reduce economic growth in the name of sustainability. What’s perhaps not obvious at first glance is that these policies are incredibly regressive; they disproportionately hurt the poor more than anyone else. Existing green energy policies have already significantly increased energy prices and are set to be responsible for a further increase by close to 50% in coming years, and that’s with massive subsidies for renewable energy. It’s not going to be the well-off who suffer the most but the people who are already struggling to heat their homes, keep the lights on and fuel their cars to be able to get to work. But it’s not just the poor in this country who would suffer.

The average household power bill is forecast to cost more than some nations’ space programs by 2025.
Photo Credit: Peter Guthrie via Compfight cc

Consider the human costs of applying this logic to the poorest parts of the world. The reason an earthquake that hits the US kills far fewer than one in Indonesia is that economic growth and development allow for better emergency services and the building of earthquake-proof buildings. Poorer countries’ chances of developing and escaping poverty are sacrificed upon the altar of the greater good because the focus on a utopian ideal often blinds people from the true human cost of their ideas. Isn’t that ultimately the problem with all utopian ideas, however good the motivations that fuel them are? As the old adage goes, the road to hell is paved with those same good intentions.

Liam Taylor

If you want to give a defence of the Green Party, get in touch via comment@exepose.com. Is this an accurate representation of the Green party? Are they in fact the only party prepared to seriously tackle climate change and other environmental issues? Leave a comment below or write to the Comment team at the Exeposé Comment Facebook Group or on Twitter@CommentExepose.

The Grass is always Greener…An Interview with Green party leader Natalie Bennett

Image credits: Niklas Rahmel

With Natalie Bennett, leader of the Green Party, making an appearance on Streatham Campus, Features Editors James Roberts and Imogen Watson talked to her about fracking, Australia and being a woman in politics. Scroll to the bottom to see the video interview in collaboration with XTV Online.

It’s a quiet Saturday afternoon and the Green Party are taking over campus. Natalie Bennett has shale gas on her mind, and is preparing to introduce a video starting Exeter’s fightback against fracking. “We’re on the path to catastrophic climate change,” Bennett explains with an urgency rarely seen outside the Green Party, “we have to leave at least half of our fossil fuels in the ground.” No doubt, Natalie Bennett is on a mission that’s far bigger than Queens LT1.

Bennett arrives early for our interview. Our unnecessary large and unthinkably excitable XTV camera crew are still hurriedly scurrying around with cables and lenses, yet Bennett seems utterly unphased. “If you think this is bad, you should try being in a BBC studio,” she says warmly, before beginning some gentle politician’s patter about our respective degree courses and her own experiences as a journalist and civil servant in Thailand. “I couldn’t speak to most people there,” she jokes, “I had to get into taxis with something written down and hope for the best.”

The first thing that strikes you when meeting the leader of Britain’s fifth largest party is her Australian accent. “My accent is classless,” Bennett explains, “it’s quite useful really.” She was born in Sydney, and worked for many years on provincial Australian newspapers before her big break in Bangkok. Was it in the Australian bush that she was first bitten by the political bug, we ask? “Australian country politics is mainly conservatives, and people who think conservatives are soft and wussy and not good enough on the death penalty. There wasn’t much politics to be involved with,” Bennett answers with a chuckle. She is surprisingly adamant about her own real world credentials for a civil servant-turned-journalist-turned-politician, perhaps aware of the particular public wrath reserved for the cloistered and the careerist. “I joined the Green Party on 1 January 2006,” she recounts with an intriguing mix of precision and surprise, “seven years later, here I am, leader of the Green Party!” Despite her genuine warmth, Bennett is clearly a cool political operator in British Green politics.

Currently the only female party leader in Britain, Bennett has a lot to say about the role of women in politics, explaining that her “first politics is feminism.” She is worried that, in 2013, women do not have enough of a role in decision making at the top tables. “There are very few women making decisions which run the country, outside Theresa May,” she points out with no small dose of exasperation, “and I think that really is a problem.” Bennett is acutely aware that her election as leader marked “the first time a woman leader had taken over from another woman leader in British political history.” Will she be handing over to another female party leader when she leaves office? For the time being, Bennett is committed to both running for a parliamentary seat and remaining as leader, unlike her predecessor and Exeter alumna Caroline Lucas, MP for Brighton Pavilion. “The seat I’m likely to stand in is in London,” says Bennett assuredly, “and it’s no more than twenty minutes from the Millbank studios of the BBC and Sky, so it’s quite handy.”

Presumably then, we can expect to see much more of Natalie Bennett on our television screens; much like Caroline Lucas herself, who was recently arrested at a protest against fracking in Balcombe. Bennett is startlingly forthright about the prospect of her party’s foremost eco-champion appearing in court. “The Green Party has always believed that sometimes non-violent direction action is an essential step because people just don’t hear otherwise,” Bennett states with rehearsed certainty. With an impish smile and knowing glance, she adds, “we were getting a lot more attention after she was arrested.” Clearly, then, despite her ambition to become a London MP, an attachment to the established political process has yet to manifest itself.

At the same time, Natalie Bennett seems both encouraged and off put by the recent success of their friends on the fringe, UKIP. “You can understand a number of reasons why UKIP is attractive,” she says, though quickly pointing out the considerable ideological differences between them, “a lot of [their supporters] just look back to some golden age of the 1950s that they think existed, and would like to go there.” Are there similarities between these two very different maverick movements? “A lot of UKIP voters are disillusioned Tories who think that the Tories are horribly incompetent in government,” Bennett explains, adding, “Which is true.” Beyond this, and the somewhat mischievous tendencies of their party leaders, one cannot help but feel that Bennett sees little else in common. On the attack, she deplores that “UKIP has what sounds like a superficially simple message that looks attractive to some people: if we just got out of the EU and stop immigration, everything would be wonderful, sweetness and light.” Her contempt for their policies seems as clear as her jealousy of their performance. Green with envy, indeed.

Caroline Lucas, Bennett’s predecessor.
Image credits: Robin Hood Tax

How then will the Green Party catapult themselves to a main part on the national stage? For Bennett, who spent much of her time as an understudy to Caroline Lucas’ rise to stardom, success lies in proving “the Green Party is more than an environmental party.” Policies like the campaign for a living wage, which recently attracted attention here on campus, form the basis of her drive to “absolutely change direction” in Britain. “We need to create jobs you can build a life on,” Bennett passionately pronounces, “and live within the limits of the one planet.” While these policies have yet to infiltrate politics proper, Bennett clearly seeing universities as a good place to start: “and the one that I always mention in universities: we believe in zero tuition fees.” Apparently, with a new Green Society on campus, Exeter maybe poised for its own Green revolution.

So what’s ahead for the Green Party in the 2015 election? “Brighton Pavilion did it, and any seat in the country could do it too,” Bennett prophesises. Change in the political climate or not, after 2015, the grass may be Greener on the other side.

James Roberts, Features Editor

Interviewed by James Roberts, Features Editor and Imogen Watson, Online Features Editor

Comment With: Environmental Society

Exeposé Comment caught up with Nick Howe, President of Exeter Environmental Society to discuss the Green Party, fracking and their new role on campus.

Exeposé Comment: Given Exeter’s green credentials, why has it taken this long to develop an environmental society on campus?

Nick Howe: Well, it’s funny you should say that. There actually was one back in my first year, way back in 2011, but they just sort of disappeared without a trace. Apparently there weren’t enough people to keep a committee going. I’m often asked this and I think that it’s in part because of Exeter’s green credentials that it hasn’t happened. Why have a society for something you have already achieved? Personally I think there’s always more that you can do and importantly there needs to be a place for environmentally minded people to come together and meet one another and come up with projects to run throughout the year, which is why I founded the society. Additionally there are so many things under the umbrella of environmentalism that there is the question of what to do with it.

“Personally I think there’s always more that you can do and importantly there needs to be a place for environmentally minded people to come together and meet one another and come up with projects to run throughout the year, which is why I founded the society.”
Photo Credit: Exeter Environmental Society

EC: How difficult was it to find support this year?

NH: This was more difficult than I thought it would be, especially given the fact that in trying to find out more information about how to set up a society I had accidentally made one, so then I was under time pressure too! Mostly it wasn’t that there was lack of interest, it’s that everyone I knew was going into their final year and didn’t know if they could realistically make the necessary time commitment. So, I ended up emailing departments and the like and through that I found my committee. Getting people interested has never been a problem. Our generation seems to be very enthusiastic about the environment, climate change and what we can do about it and our membership has exceeded all of our admittedly conservative estimations.

EC: What’s your opinion on fracking developments in the UK?

NH: I’m very pleased with the refusal of the public to back such a motion. The protests in Sussex are just the first of many to come. Especially, I feel that as the fracking development moves towards the so called ‘desolate north’ they will encounter plenty more resistance. As a resident of the North I can safely say that we are proud of our countryside and aim to preserve it. Fracking represents another instance of refusing to accept that fossil fuels are running out. There would not be such a drastic proposal otherwise; fracking causes scarring to the landscape and has reportedly caused earthquakes, pollutes water and most importantly is just producing more fossil fuels and keeping us under the illusion that there’s plenty more out there if we just dig further and use more extreme measures to extract them.

EC: With the Green Party Leader Natalie Bennett having given a talk last weekend at the university, to what extent do the views of the Green Party match up with those of EnviroSoc?

NH: The Green Party match up quite well with EnviroSoc; crucially they believe in reducing our carbon outputs. Changing policy and the way we live our lives is the only way to mitigate and prevent further anthropogenic (man-made) climate change, which of course we endorse. Also, it’s nice to see a woman as a leader of a major political party and we wish them the best of luck in the upcoming European elections, as with these there’s proportional representation so there’s a great chance of more Green MEPs being elected and making real change in Europe (they’re actually 12% in the polls which beats the lib dems’ 10%!) The only difference I think between us is that we have a large number of scientists and engineers in our society and we have more people who believe that there can be real answers in technology, whereas the Green Party are more heavily focused on conserving what we have now. Personally I think we need a combination of both to really help protect the planet.

EC: Is EnviroSoc pro or anti-nuclear power? What sources of energy should we be investing in for the future?

NH: I obviously cannot speak for everyone in my society, but I personally do not have a huge problem with nuclear power. The problem with nuclear power is perfecting the technology so that there isn’t a huge amount of waste produced and ensuring that it’s more efficient. Currently, if the technology remains as it is then there’s only about 50 years worth of fissionable materials in the world, which means after then we’re back to square one. It could be an important stop-gap when we’re in the process of creating alternative technologies. The most important thing however, is to reduce how much we actually use now. We need to conserve what we have and make better use of it.

EC: What do EnviroSoc members get for their membership?

NH: Well, other than the opportunity to meet my charming self and my committee on socials and other meet-ups, our members get the opportunity to go on trips! We’re running a trip to Exmouth soon in partnership with the National Trust and in late November we are going to run a trip to the Eden project as well. Next term, we hope to be able to go to the Centre for Alternative Technology, a postgraduate centre in south Wales where they’ll put on talks and workshops for our members. Members will have the opportunity to take part in projects (be on the lookout for our mushroom project!) They’ll meet with other like-minded individuals and we’re going to get in some speakers as well as run a couple of workshops too. For instance, we’re going to run a food foraging course where our members will learn to scavenge from the wild, and when I say the wild I mean everywhere. You’d be surprised what grows everywhere, campus itself is an absolute hive of opportunities to forage for food.

EC: What can Exeter do as a university to lessen its effect on climate change? Will it really make a difference?

NH: Exeter already does a great deal to mitigate it’s effects on anthropogenic climate change, but as I’ve said there’s always more you can do. We’re going to run a petition to prevent the huge wastage of paper during Guild election week and we’re going to attempt to stop various parts of the uni being left switched on for no good reason at night and during the holidays while encouraging people to re-use and recycle as much as they can. In my opinion, moving away from consumerism is not only wholesome but it really makes an impact. As for whether it really make a difference? Well, that’s always the question that irks me when it comes to environmentalism. Does anything really make a difference? The answer is, “Yes, absolutely yes!” Single individuals have made huge impacts on the world so what can you do? Everything. I’m also going to steal a great quote I got from a talk on Environmentalism in Bristol: “When people ask what you are doing and why, you are doing the best you can”.

James Bennett and Dave Reynolds, Online Comment Editors

What can we be doing as a university to improve our green credentials? Is it possible for one person’s actions to make an effect on their environment? Leave a comment below or write to the Comment team at the Exeposé Comment Facebook Group or on Twitter @CommentExepose. If a society or organisation that you are involved in is interested in appearing in this feature, contact us at exepose-comment@xmedia.ex.ac.uk.

Green Party leader on campus for talk

Image credit: Exeter Green Party

Green Party leader Natalie Bennett is to attend a talk at the University of Exeter today, about the effects of fracking on the environment.

The event will start with a screening of ‘Drill Baby Drill,’ a documentary criticising the consequences of fracking, and will be followed by a question and answer session with Bennett.

The free talk is to take place at 18:00-20:30, Lecture Theatre 1, Queens Building and is organised by Exeter Green Party in conjunction with Young Greens at University of Exeter.

Fracking, or hydraulic fracturing, is the process of recovering gas and oil from shale rock by drilling down into the earth before a high pressure mixture of water, chemicals and sand, is directed at the rock to release the gas inside.

The process has revolutionised the energy industry in the US where it is most advanced; this activity in the UK is still in the exploring stage, where companies are drilling test wells. Fracking however carries environmental risks and in 2011 the process was suspended following two seismic tremors in the Blackpool area.

The ‘Drill baby drill’ title is an ironic reference to a term coined by the U.S Republican Party’s campaign in 2008, which expressed support for increasing domestic production of oil.

Journalist by profession, Bennett was elected to her position on in September 2012. Exeter Green Party is the political voice of the city’s strong green movement, who believe that to improve lives of local people we need a fairer society, a healthier environment and a sustainable economy.

Andrew Bell, Exeter Green Party policy officer, said: “This is a fantastic opportunity to learn more about fracking and what it could mean to the South West if it is ever given the go-ahead. It is also a great opportunity to meet the Green Party leader and find out more about our progressive social, economic and environmental policies.”

Alexandra Lapshina, News Team

Follow @ExeposeNews on Twitter and like us here on Facebook.