Brighton debating group's Green "slap down" (From The Argus)
Get involved: Send your news, views, pictures and video by texting SUPIC to 80360 or email us.
Brighton debating group's Green "slap down"
3:00pm Wednesday 10th October 2012 in News By Ben Leo, reporter
A debating society has said they have been given a “slap down” by the Green Party.
The claim comes from Brighton and Hove Debating Society and follows a “rejected” invitation to the Green Party to attend the Society’s next debate – We Have No Faith in the City’s Green Council.
Clive Hamblin, president of the Brighton and Hove Debating Society, said he thought it was about time the Society had a political debate and he was sure the Green Party would attend.
He said: “Our chairman has been chasing them for months. They say we’re picking on them and having a moan. They say they have a by-election coming up and they’re too busy.
“We’ve never quite had a slap down like this from anyone else.”
According to Mr Hamblin, the Green Party declined the Society’s invitation on the grounds that the motion against them was “very biased” and they had conducted research which indicated the Society had members who are “very political”.
Rob Shepherd, member of the executive committee of Brighton and Hove Green Party, said: “We’ve never said they were picking on us.
“When the Society first suggested holding this debate, we agreed that we would take part. However, the East Brighton by-election was then called, which falls two days after the debate.
“We asked them to postpone it for a week or turn it into a by-election event, in which case we’d be happy to attend.”
Mr Shepherd added that it was the first time the Society had proposed a party political motion and this particular motion was a very anti-Green one.
He continued: “They don’t have a reputation for doing anything against any of the other political parties. We have to treat it with care.
“The debate is condemning the Green Party two days before a by-election. We are not refusing to attend, but the timing is not appropriate.”
The Society has been debating for more than 60 years, in topics ranging from moral and political issues to religious, philosophical and sometimes humorous ones.
Recently, they held the motion Screening for Genetic Diseases Is Wrong, in which they invited representatives from the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children.
Mr Hamblin said: “While unfortunate that the local Greens have refused to take part, the debate will take place.”
The debate is on Tuesday, October 16 from 7.45pm at the St John’s Day Centre in Palmiera Square. Entry is £2.
Comments(14)
Martha Gunn
says...
4:12pm Wed 10 Oct 12
The truth is that there is now an avalanche of questions and doubts about the bloated claims and distortions of the Green Party.
Where are the council homes it claims to have built?
Just how did it have any influence whatsoever on exam results results this year?
What is the 'city Living Wage' it claims to have introduced?
These issues need interrogating properly and urgently but it seems we are not going to get the chance. Only answer is to vote them out at the earliest opportunity.
inadaptado
says...
5:20pm Wed 10 Oct 12
Martha Gunn wrote:For crying out loud, the debate is called "We have no faith in the City's Green council". In what universe is not that biased?
How can a motion put up for debate be 'very biased'? And how can a political party run away from a debate because the participants are 'very political'? This is vintage and classic Greenspeak.
The truth is that there is now an avalanche of questions and doubts about the bloated claims and distortions of the Green Party.
Where are the council homes it claims to have built?
Just how did it have any influence whatsoever on exam results results this year?
What is the 'city Living Wage' it claims to have introduced?
These issues need interrogating properly and urgently but it seems we are not going to get the chance. Only answer is to vote them out at the earliest opportunity.
We get it, you all hate the Greens. Then stop whining and do something instead of blabbing in the comments of a newspaper whose readers agrees with you. Or just please just shut the hell up forever.
P.S. I didn't vote them and I don't give a **** if they leave or stay. I'm just sick of your constant moaning.
leobrighton
says...
6:00pm Wed 10 Oct 12
saveHOVE
says...
6:38pm Wed 10 Oct 12
The 18th October election is the reason! All political parties are in what is termed 'purdah' and forbidden to do quite a lot really.
They would have no reason to refuse after the 18th.
PorkBoat
says...
7:18pm Wed 10 Oct 12
Maxwell's Ghost
says...
7:48pm Wed 10 Oct 12
They really are finished as a serious party.
clearbluesky
says...
8:04pm Wed 10 Oct 12
HJarrs
says...
8:18pm Wed 10 Oct 12
I wouldn't have a problem if they also had debates for "We Have No Faith in the City’s Labour councillors and Conservative councillors", which would be fair.
leobrighton
says...
10:52pm Wed 10 Oct 12
Maxwell's Ghost
says...
11:19pm Wed 10 Oct 12
The issue here is the refusal to debate "why the voters should have confidence in the Green Party at this time."
These debates are quite common during any political calendar but I have to say it's quite unusual for any party to decline, particualry when you are a party under siege, but maybe they are now retreating so much they can't be bothered and have surrendered.
I can't see any of them being re-elected. One can only assume that it's every man for himself and they are focussing on their own wards in the hope of getting re-elected as individuals because as a party, there's little hope for re-election, although the opposition have also retreated so it's an odd situation.
Has anyone seen Gill Mitchell or Theobald lead a challenge lately?
HJarrs
says...
8:01am Thu 11 Oct 12
Maxwell's Ghost wrote:So lets get this right. The Green Party only is supposed to take out some prominent people from a by-election campaign to have a jolly evening of naval gazing at a debating society? How ridiculous.
HJarrs, I think the mere fact that Labour and the Tories didn't get elected to control the council was a clear vote of no confidence. The issue here is the refusal to debate "why the voters should have confidence in the Green Party at this time." These debates are quite common during any political calendar but I have to say it's quite unusual for any party to decline, particualry when you are a party under siege, but maybe they are now retreating so much they can't be bothered and have surrendered. I can't see any of them being re-elected. One can only assume that it's every man for himself and they are focussing on their own wards in the hope of getting re-elected as individuals because as a party, there's little hope for re-election, although the opposition have also retreated so it's an odd situation. Has anyone seen Gill Mitchell or Theobald lead a challenge lately?
If you also read the article, the Green Party spokesman said...“We asked them to postpone it for a week or turn it into a by-election event, in which case we’d be happy to attend.”
So, hardly a refusal, but the avoidance of a clear fit-up.
As for your Gill Mitchell and Theobold, as correctly posted above, they put the minority Greens into power. In these circumstances it is to the Green Parties credit that the council functions as such a political split could easily lead to deadlock, still that passes you by. It would appear that Labour and Conservative parties clearly are backing many of the policies that they, you and others are so quick to condemn.
Dealing with idiots
says...
8:16am Thu 11 Oct 12
Maxwell's Ghost
says...
10:28am Thu 11 Oct 12
Now we have a party of extreme, mixed views, with eco tagged on the end.
They wont be re-elected and it could be a disaster for future Green councillors and Caroline Lucas.
BornInBrighton1968 says...
3:27pm Wed 10 Oct 12