22 seats for Greens so +18 since last GE. 12% vote share versus 6%.
But 2nd in another 38 seats.
Compare to Reform with 28% votes but 324 seats.
So Greens need 6x more votes per seat than Reform.
A messed up system.
If you really want to feel depressed / want to leave the UK, just take a look at the UK wide data 😭
www.moreincommon.org.uk/latest-insig...
Oh crap.
Polling shows Reform will lead in my constituency.
I think you’ll find Labour and Lib Dems are heavily pushing their green credentials.
That we could do this all day long shows it isn’t unique to one party and there is a clear tension between national policy and local deployment that needs to be tackled, not stampeded on, otherwise it will fuel anti-renewable sentiment and embolden reform, tories etc.
“Green councillors have said they are astonished with the decision by Labour and Liberal Democrat councillors to vote against the installation of solar panels on the top level of the St Martins Gate car park”
lol.
worcester.greenparty.org.uk/2025/03/19/g...
This from three months ago!
Green councillors voting in favour of a solar farm.
shepwayvox.org/2026/01/21/r...
Have I done that?
I’ve defended the right to have an opinion on the type of energy transition, specifically the ownership model and site appropriateness.
You seem to be saying that renewable development should proceed unquestioned.
That just untrue.
Sure, the perfect being the enemy of good is right in some cases. But to say Greens usually block any development is nonsense.
This discussion was never about whether this specific project is right or jot, but about the misrepresentation by the original poster for political point scoring.
This discussion was never about whether this specific project is right or jot, but about the misrepresentation by the original poster.
Greens also support solar farms like this. Taking an example of 1 (or a handful) councillor out of >800 and saying the entire party opposes solar deployment like this is clearly total nonsense and rather lame political point scoring.
This is not a Greens issue. It is common across all parties, where they support renewables nationally, but individual councillors sometimes oppose specific local projects. Highlights the tensions on renewable deployment.
It’s not just one though is it.
I’m not here defending her overall position, but I think there are legitimate discussions to be had on the balance between community and public ownership vs PE ownership.
As I said, the OP implying the Green Party is against renewable energy is guff.
Energy production seems pretty critical infrastructure to me…
There is a weird part of whatever the Labour movement is these days, in that the private sector must be worshipped at all costs as an almighty saviour. Thatcherism is alive and well and wearing a red rose
👋🏼 @labouruk.bsky.social
Read the Palantir “manifesto”.
Be deeply alarmed.
@zackpolanski.bsky.social is right. Government cannot be reliant on Palantir.
*people* (including people from all parties) oppose renewable infrastructure.
Green Party policy supports both rapid solar deployment at scale and community ownership. Anyone saying otherwise is lying.
Why care about who owns critical national infrastructure?
Great case you make there buddy.
Obviously not but the original poster claims that the greens oppose renewables, because one councillor questioned the ownership structure of a solar farm.
When people talk in such nonsense binary ways they drive ridiculous debate.
Versus community owned relating to asset appreciation and surplus production. More money will exit the system than will be seen in return.
So I can assume you believe the PE funding model for national infrastructure to be a positive one without question?
Yes. You know it isn’t just about that, right?
As I said elsewhere, if you think the PE model is a net positive for society and cannot be challenged then own it. It’s an opinion I disagree with.
As I said, if you think that the Private Equity model is a net positive for society then that’s your opinion and you are entitled to it. At least own it.
The fund and the investors. Before you use the “our pensions” argument, average bill payer with pay more out in inflated bills than any return.
Community solar delivers far greater benefit per £ without requiring a PE extraction investment model.
If you prefer PE model over public your choice.
I don’t agree with the “car parks first” comment in the article. We clearly need scale and speed.
But ffs guys, we’ve got to learn what private equity has done to critical national infrastructure and not repeat the same mistakes.
Ie a just transition.
Why do Labour think it is a problem to oppose passing over critical energy infrastructure to Macquarie Asset Management, the PE investor in the article. Aka the ‘Vampire Kangaroo’ who screwed over UK utilities at Thames then Southern Water. Extracted billions whilst loading with debt, then exiting.
The PE investment for the project in the article is from Macquarie Asset Management. Aka the ‘Vampire Kangaroo’. Same that screwed over UK utilities at Thames then Southern Water. Extracted billions whilst loading with debt, then exiting.
But you’re cool with that I guess.
I’m shocked, *shocked*, that Labour are expanding oil and gas extraction.
The Greens are not ‘opposing renewables’.
"The basic thing is that these shocking schemes are [proposed by] foreign investors looking to make a profit out of our ridiculous energy prices”
She clearly has a point on the need for a just transition to renewables.
Meanwhile, Labour…
Help me out, why is it homophobic?
That’s true