Greens rank and file talk revolution

Rod Donald

Unhappiness at the Green Party's poor election campaign is bubbling under the surface but co-leader Rod Donald says it was the victim of the "two-party squeeze".

Some commentators have criticised the party's campaign and talk of the need for changes within the party - even an "extreme makeover" - has appeared on the party's Frogblog internet site.

The election saw the party fall from 7 per cent to 5.3 per cent of the party vote, reducing it from nine to six MPs. Two sitting MPs, Nandor Tanczos and Mike Ward, were casualties.

Talk of the need for changes does not appear to be widespread but it is rare to see it in a party where dissent is usually muted.

The result has reduced the Greens' bargaining power in discussions with Labour to form a new Government - at exactly the time when it wanted a real say in government to advance its policies.

Before the election the Greens were optimistically talking of improving on the 2002 election, but with no touchstone issue such as genetic engineering the party only just made it over the threshold to remain in Parliament.

"Despite our best efforts, and despite making a few mistakes, what overwhelmed us was the two-party squeeze," Mr Donald said.

"Of course we are disappointed about the election outcome. There were lots of things we could have done better. But in terms of weighting I would say the external factors dominated."

As well as the squeeze on the minor parties he said the media did not do the party justice during the campaign and the coverage was not fair.

"We've had more column centimetres since the election than we had in the last two weeks of the campaign, because we were simply shut out by Bob the Builder's private parts and other extraneous items."

The Greens also cite fears from supporters late in the campaign of a National-led Government as one reason for the poor result, as people switched to Labour to head off Don Brash.

The Greens have started an internal review of the campaign.

One particular concern was billboards, which Mr Donald said could have been simpler. Their messages were "cute rather than clear".

He acknowledged the party should have had candidates in all seats, which had been the goal. The five general seats the Greens failed to stand candidates in were all in Auckland - Northcote, Tamaki, North Shore, Mt Roskill and Manurewa. In 2002 the party managed to stand candidates in all but Mt Roskill.

Political commentator Chris Trotter, in a recent Independent column, criticised the Greens for running a poor campaign and cited the "virtual collapse" of its Auckland organisation.

A number of prominent Greens - including MPs Sue Bradford, Metiria Turei and Mr Tanczos as well as senior party figure Catherine Delahunty - have moved to other parts of the country in recent years.

Mr Donald said he acknowledged that "on the surface" the lack of candidates in the five seats suggested a weakness in the organisation in Auckland, but he argued that it was the strength of the campaign on the ground that counted when campaigning for the party vote.

He pointed out that the Mt Roskill seat, for example, went from 52nd best performer in the party vote to 41st.

Mr Donald also believes the Exclusive Brethren attack pamphlets hit their vote, particularly in the provincial areas.

A positive aspect of the campaign was that the party hung on to a bigger proportion of its support than the other minor parties. United Future fell 6.7 to 2.7 per cent and New Zealand First from 10.4 to 5.7 per cent.

Green voters

1999

* Party vote: 5.16% MPs: 7

2002

* Party vote: 7% MPs: 9

2005

* Party vote: 5.3% MPs: 6