The British Green Party exposes its totalitarian mentality (Robert Henderson)
by Robert Henderson
The British Green Party expose their totalitarian mentality
The British Green Party has put its undemocratic cards blatantly on the table. One of their most recent policy statements is a “ 10 point flood response plan” . Point number three is of especially interest:
“3. Get rid of any cabinet Ministers or senior governmental advisors who refuse to accept the scientific consensus on climate change or who won’t take the risks to the UK seriously” (http://greenparty.org.uk/news/2014/02/14/green-party-launch-10-point-flood-response-plan/)
The leader of the British Green Party Natalie Bennett enlarged on this in an interview with the BBC conducted by Ross Hawkins (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-26187711). These exchanges took place:
Hawkins: “ Every , as this [the 10 point plan] says, senior government advisor who refused to accept the scientific consensus on climate change as you describe it shouldn’t be in their post; every one of them?”
Bennett: “Yes. We need the whole government behind this. This is an emergency situation we’re facing now. We need to take action. We need everyone signed up behind that.”
Hawkins: “ And, I am not reducing this to the absurd; that literally would include every senior government advisor , i.e., it could be the Chief Veterinary Officer ; it could be any advisor whether or not they are directly connected with the issue of flooding? “
Hawkins: “And you would see them removed from their posts?”
Bennett: “We would ask the government to remove them”.
Bennett: “It’s an insult to flood victims that we have an Environment Secretary (Owen Paterson) who is a denier of the reality of climate change and we also can’t have anyone in the cabinet who is denying the realities that we’re facing with climate change.”
This is the voice of the true fanatic, so captured by an ideology that any dissent from the “true way” becomes heresy which must be eradicated. For Bennett it is not enough to have policies implemented , only those who unreservedly support the policies can be tolerated in government even if they are not involved in implementing the policies themselves.
In short, Greens want the debate on man-made global warming to be officially over as far as the government is concerned. They belong to the one class of person who should be denied a public voice, namely the class of those who would deny a public voice to others.
Bennett is a very odd sort of public campaigner. I know her personally because we were both members of a group trying to stop a laboratory handling dangerous toxins being built in the centre of London next to St Pancras station. (The site is approximately 100 feet from my front window).
Because all the major Westminster parties were wildly in favour of the project the only chance of stopping it was to show was to show that the bidding process was tainted. This I did comprehensively using the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) to obtain documents which showed unambiguously that Gordon Brown had illegally interfered with the bidding process. Further details including the Brown documents can be found at http://livinginamadhouse.wordpress.com/2012/09/09/the-new-leader-of-the-greens-knows-how-to-keep-mum/
Despite being a Guardian journalist with ready access to the media, Bennett refused to use the material and the campaign comprehensively failed because it was reduced to using bog-standard street politics: going on marches, making banners, sending deputations to the local council and so on.
Why wouldn’t Bennett use my FOIA material? I could never get a meaningful answer out of her. All she would say was that it wasn’t of public interest, a self-evident absurdity as it not only struck directly at the sale of the land, but was of general public interest because a Prime Minister had interfered in a bidding process for an enterprise he favoured. On the face of it the story appeared to be right up the Guardian’s street.
Perhaps she refused to use the material because she could not claim the information as her own. Surprisingly for a journalist she made no attempt to use the FOIA herself to aid that campaign.