Environmental Democratics Party

hullaballoo

This is my first post in Politics, so I hope I've managed to get the forum right.

I've been long thinking about the state of the environment. It's an issue that both interests and concerns me. Now, unlike other countries, we do not have an environmental party that has any sort of economically feasible policies.

The Green party are too socialist, and their environmental policies would destroy the economy.

Waste management can potentially be hugely profitable, and environmentally friendly waste management is no exception. In fact, there was a case in Ireland recently where a certain ex-rugby player had set up a business that took in money at every stage of its operation. Unfortunately for him, and us, the government were too slow to grant him licences to carry out his business at a sustainable level: by the time they renewed his licence to give him greater scope to process waste, his business had expanded beyond the bounds of the new licence.

His idea was this: he took in waste to a site he owned by the truckload. He charged for this waste to be admitted onto his plot. Then, he infested the mountains of waste with a certain variety of worm (Tiger Worms, I think). All these worms do is eat and grow. A by-product of their appitites is their excrement, which as it happens, is a very valuable and environmentally friendly fertiliser. Furthermore, these worms were worth a fortune in themselves as bait for fishermen. Every fisherman in the land would pay top dollar for a few of these giant worms.

So, apart from the initial outgoings in terms of purchasing land and a few worms, this operation made a profit at every single stage.

What did the government do? Exploit the profitability? No. Support the operation? No. They shut it down. They used the licencing flaws and some tax issues to take this man out of the game.

One of the best business enterprises of our time was closed by the government because they felt this man was making too much money.

So what about a new green party? A splice between the Progressive Democrats and the Green Party. Would you vote for them?

My idea is that they would be able to form a competent government in terms of every other aspect of government, including Health, Business, Finance, Education etc., but that the environment would be their watch word. The above story illustrates that a public enterprise like that could be quite profitable for the state.

Aside from the economics, there's a huge need in this country to maintain the natural environment that exists. We all know that there are beautiful parts of Ireland, but there's little wildlife here. Personally, I don't see how any of the current political parties could build on the success of the Irish economy in a green way, so is it time for an Environmental Democratics Party?

Jackie laughlin

I think within green politics they used to call the type of people to whom you object "watermelons": green on the outside and red on the inside.

You have put your finger on an essential problem for Eco-politics. Any party can have green policies but would they be liberal policies or social democratic policies?

You seem to favour eco-policies as long as they are consistent with profits.

The present Green Party are quite like FF in trying to be populist.

oscarBravo

Sounds like a party that would get my vote.

Múinteoir

hullaballoo wrote:

This is my first post in Politics, so I hope I've managed to get the forum right.

I've been long thinking about the state of the environment. It's an issue that both interests and concerns me. Now, unlike other countries, we do not have an environmental party that has any sort of economically feasible policies.

The Green party are too socialist, and their environmental policies would destroy the economy.

Waste management can potentially be hugely profitable, and environmentally friendly waste management is no exception. In fact, there was a case in Ireland recently where a certain ex-rugby player had set up a business that took in money at every stage of its operation. Unfortunately for him, and us, the government were too slow to grant him licences to carry out his business at a sustainable level: by the time they renewed his licence to give him greater scope to process waste, his business had expanded beyond the bounds of the new licence.

His idea was this: he took in waste to a site he owned by the truckload. He charged for this waste to be admitted onto his plot. Then, he infested the mountains of waste with a certain variety of worm (Tiger Worms, I think). All these worms do is eat and grow. A by-product of their appitites is their excrement, which as it happens, is a very valuable and environmentally friendly fertiliser. Furthermore, these worms were worth a fortune in themselves as bait for fishermen. Every fisherman in the land would pay top dollar for a few of these giant worms.

So, apart from the initial outgoings in terms of purchasing land and a few worms, this operation made a profit at every single stage.

What did the government do? Exploit the profitability? No. Support the operation? No. They shut it down. They used the licencing flaws and some tax issues to take this man out of the game.

One of the best business enterprises of our time was closed by the government because they felt this man was making too much money.

So what about a new green party? A splice between the Progressive Democrats and the Green Party. Would you vote for them?

My idea is that they would be able to form a competent government in terms of every other aspect of government, including Health, Business, Finance, Education etc., but that the environment would be their watch word. The above story illustrates that a public enterprise like that could be quite profitable for the state.

Aside from the economics, there's a huge need in this country to maintain the natural environment that exists. We all know that there are beautiful parts of Ireland, but there's little wildlife here. Personally, I don't see how any of the current political parties could build on the success of the Irish economy in a green way, so is it time for an Environmental Democratics Party?

Are yoiu going to set it up yourself? Or just theorise about it?

hullaballoo

M&#250 wrote: »

Are yoiu going to set it up yourself? Or just theorise about it?

I'm thinking about it. Or at least, I'm thinking about going about it. I'm just a student at the moment, but it's something I'm very strongly interested in.

Jackie laughlin

Why not just join the PDs? I'm not being rude or dismissive but they would implement green policies as long as they were consistent with private wealth creation.

hullaballoo

Would they? Have they? Not to my knowledge.

Additionally, the PDs don't prioritise the environment the way I'm suggesting it should be prioritised. I think environmentalism can be used to be profitable in and of itself. I'm not talking about implementing environmental policy where it fits with economic objectives, but rather the opposite.

So far, my political agenda and ideologies fit most succinctly with the PDs, and that's why I think a new party that took a leaf out of their book and, say, a leaf out of the Greens in Germany's book would be perhaps the best option for Ireland in the future.

I mean, this isn't something I thought of the second before I posted this. I'd like to think I thought it through.

Naturally enough, there are/will be gaps in my ideas. I'm hoping that they will be ironed out to some degree through the discussion on this forum.

So far, Ireland's record with regard to the environment has been abominable. Successive governments have put off the implementation of EU Directives and failed to enforce regulations time and time again. Now, we're not the worse offenders, but for a nation of people who are proud of our landscape and has forty shades of green, we are letting ourselves down.

I'm trying to measure the level of support for this to determine whether I'm a crackpot, or whether this idea could be taken further. I know the natural inclination on boards is to respond where you disagree with what is being put forward, but it might be beneficial to respond positively if you do agree with me.

The_Minister

The recent PD conference had quite a large segment focused on renewable energy and the enviornment. They unveiled a fairly good green-economy balanced policy (30% renewable energy by 2015).

You are right though, the PDs would tend to care more about the economy then the enviornment.

Jackie laughlin

A PD would say that if environmentalism can be profitable, then the market will respond.

Sure, Ireland's record is dismal but that is because doing anything very much would be electoral suicide, upset some area of business, or both.

The argument to be won is that global warming is so serious that it overrides many other considerations.

ballooba

Jackie laughlin wrote:

A PD would say that if environmentalism can be profitable, then the market will respond.

Except where regulation and semi-state protectionism gets in the way of access to the market e.g. Airtricity.

Jackie laughlin

Ballooba,
Yes, that is what a neo-liberal would say.

ballooba

Jackie laughlin wrote:

Ballooba,
Yes, that is what a neo-liberal would say.

It was a fair comment. The market has responded and they were told to pee off in case they might unsettle the ESB. FF/PD are now proposing that we burn bone-meal in power stations. They seem to be going backwards rather than forwards. They should be actively encouraging wave and wind power.

hullaballoo

Ireland's record is dismal since the 1970s. The environment isn't something that has just cropped up in the current term of government.

Aside from that, it is my belief (and this is where my idea may falter first) that predominantly, Ireland's population would prefer to sustain the environment. At least, I believe, they would wish to sustain it if the proper information was available as to what we face if we do not.

Now, I'm not naive enough to buy the global warming scare that seems to have captured the hearts of the mass media. I have enough about me to recognise the cyclical nature of the climate as a whole. The evidence available shows that the levels of greenhouse gases in the earth's atmosphere fluctuate, and that they have, in the past been much higher.

Granted, the last time they were much higher, an ice age ensued. So, would it not be better to prepare for this, and invest heavily in damage limitation? Should we not operate a policy that puts priorities in order? I.e., on the grand scheme of things, the environment is the most important issue. To me, this is undeniable. Secondly, for Ireland at least, sustaining the economy in anticipation (and indeed the wake of) an economic downturn (potentially precipitated here by the current height of house prices *yawn*).

Jackie laughlin

I'm a very, very recent and reluctant convert to global warming being caused by human activity. I'm well aware of previous cycles. (Incidentally, there's a prog. on Ch.4 - I think - tonight which takes this line.) I am now convinced that it is necessary to adopt policies to arrest or slow the degradation of the upper atmosphere. I don't think that this means revolutionary change but it does mean change. It may mean damaging - even destroying - some industries, while encoraging others. It will mean convincing people to change lifestyles at least a little.

I like this party - sign me up please.

The great global warming swindle is on channel 4 tonight at 9pm.
It's viewable online (as are all ch4 programmes live and recorded) on the ch4 website-all you have to do is register with them.
You can watch them on Irish ip's no problem unlike other sites eg U.S channells.

Unfortunately UCD broadband will probably block the thing as usual.

MontgomeryClift

Why the objection to what people here call 'red' policies? Labour governments have a better record than PD governments on economic issues. The real boom ended under FF and the PDs and was replaced by a construction boom, reduced competitiveness, a quadroupling of inflation and a speculative housing bubble (which is now bursting). So you'd like more of this, but with a side order of environmentalism?

hullaballoo

MontgomeryClift wrote:

Why the objection to what people here call 'red' policies? Labour governments have a better record than PD governments on economic issues. The real boom ended under FF and the PDs and was replaced by a construction boom, reduced competitiveness, a quadroupling of inflation and a speculative housing bubble (which is not bursting). So you'd like more of this, but with a side order of environmentalism?

No, not a side order of environmentalism. That's exactly the opposite of what I want. If that was what I wanted, I'd join the PDs. I want environmentalism with a side-order of economics.

MontgomeryClift

I see now. True, I don't think I've ever heard a Green Party TD ever discuss economics. Then again, I only ever hear Richard Bruton and Ruari Quinn talk economics. Everybody else accepts that there is a 'boom' right now, which there is not.

Jackie laughlin

H'oo,
Are you saying that you want environmental issues to take precedence over neo-liberal economics or are you saying that they must be compatible?

hullaballoo

Environmental issues are key. They take precedence over absolutely every other policy issue.

This makes logical sense (I'm not a bleeding heart, anything but) because of the scale of the danger of not protecting the environment. If you let an issue of economics slide, this will have bad results for many people in the country.

The effects of neglecting the environment are without boundaries. They're not confined to political geographics. It's a world thing.

That said, I can see how a good environmental policy here could foster economic growth. That's exactly what I think should be done. With political pressures, and arguably good consciences, many corporations are looking towards feasable green plants. Do what we did for Intel etc.; build green manufacturing plants and inject government funding into environmentally-friendly and profitable waste management.

P.S. Call me hulla.

johnnyskeleton

It is logical, when we vote, to vote for the party that we wish to see having a majority in the Dail. This is why even the smaller parties have manifestos saying "If we were in power we would".

But I generally vote for the smaller parties, and here's why:

If a small party, such as the greens gain more seats, they have a better chance of being the minor part of a coalition government. So, if for the last 10 years we had had FF & Greens instead of FF & PD, we might have had what you are proposing.

Obviously FF would still have focused on the bottom dollar and kept things ticking over. However, in the same way that I percieve the PDs as having cast a reactionary hue (and unfortunately that is the poliest I can put it) over the last 10 years of government, I think were the Greens in that government we would have seen an environmental streak in everything that was done.

So maybe your ideal government would not be one particular party, but two parties who could buzz off each other, so to speak. Although I agree that the Greens are a bit ridiculous when it comes to economic policy, I believe that if they were in coalition they would forsake their hippy economics and focus on their environmentalism.

By the by, I think that I'll vote for whichever party seems most likely to solve the public transport problems in Dublin.

DadaKopf

The Green party are too socialist, and their environmental policies would destroy the economy.

The 'economy' is doing a good enough job at destroying the environment as it is. No environment, no economy. Without change in the fundamentals of how we do things, we're screwed.

Akrasia

Any party that tries to reconcile expansionist economic growth policies with environmental sustainability is going to run up against a brick wall.

We need to completely change our economic model to a people first system, and abandon the current system that rewards wealth accumulation under the pretext that it is supposed to benefit everyone through the mythical "trickle down effect"

Jackie laughlin

Economic growth and equality are different issues.

Byrno

Hulla if you look at the policies for the Green Party, you'll see that the Greens have a lot of the same policies that you are talking about with regards using environmental problems to improve the economy

e.g.

Green Party Policy Document wrote:

In Government the Green Party will :

* Introduce legislation to prohibit the disposal or treatment of mixed waste streams after a specified date
* Adopt a national goal of increasing materials productivity by a factor of four within a twenty year period, similar to the Dutch Government
* Provide tax relief to businesses and industries who carry out research and development into redesigning products to extend their lifecycle
* End cheap waste disposal and create a market-driven system that competes for the entire supply of discarded materials

http://www.greenparty.ie/en/policies

hullaballoo

My contention is primarily that the Green Party lacks the expertise to draw out those sorts of policies.

Jackie laughlin

Hulla,
Interesting. Is this the hoary old "Ireland Inc." argument: that what we need are not politicians but business people to govern?

hullaballoo

It's more an argument along the lines that a party political should have the expertise for each individual department of government: The Taoiseach should have the leadership skills and broad know-how with regards to each of the individual departments; The Minister for Justice etc. should have at the very least a professional knowledge of the law and its workings, and additionally some sort of commendable record in Human Rights etc.

Practical experience in each field is key. Of course, a little business acumen wouldn't go astray, but it would be idiocy to suggest that a party should comprise no political skill or charisma. Absurdity would abound.

Jackie laughlin

Hulla,
That sounds fine but you did suggest that the problem was that the Green Party lacked expertise. I assumed you meant business expertise and I'm still not sure to what expertise you were referring.

Time Magazine

Akrasia wrote:

Any party that tries to reconcile expansionist economic growth policies with environmental sustainability is going to run up against a brick wall.

I have to strongly disagree. As a fraction of their GDP, western societies have been moving inexorably away polluting industries to service economies. This trend will continue.

We need to completely change our economic model to a people first system

What exactly do you mean by "people"? All economic growth is earned by someone. To suggest the economy is a not a people-first mechanism is laughable.

Hulla, good idea, but I think wrt logisitcs it'd be easier to change one of the parties into an environmentally-friendly party or economically-friendly party respectively.

Byrno

hullaball&#250 wrote:

My contention is primarily that the Green Party lacks the expertise to draw out those sorts of policies.

How do you formulate this viewpoint? From Dan Boyle who comes out with some of the most sensible policies of any of the Finance Spokespeople/Finance Minister? Or Eamon Ryan who is a businessman himself?