The Green Party

She is an extremely pleasant person as is her co leader. Both the sort of people you could happily spend time with.

But perhaps not the sort of people that you want to be in charge of a country.
Politicians do not have to be 'nice' just capable and realsitic.

Realistic!

I wouldn't want Caroline Lucas as PM, but I would welcome her opinion. I think she appears hardworking, competent, honest and knows her stuff. Richard Murphy (of Tax Justice Network) says her biggest problem is that she needs to learn some economics, but that could be said of most politicians of all parties.

I looked thoroughly at the Green Party in 2015 but found behind the headlines some very strange policies. Economically they wanted to return to the Mrs Thatcher's much discredited monetarist policy, remember Milton Friedman and the policies that led to the rapid rise in unemployment in the 1980s.

I ended up going from possible, if not probably Green, voter to not prepared to touch them with a barge pole Green voter.

Economically they wanted to return to the Mrs Thatcher's much discredited monetarist policy,

Presumably that's why Richard Murphy says they need to learn some economics.

I can't claim to have a great deal of knowledge about economics, other than to feel sure that our present system is a dangerous one, or to know exactly what sort of economic model Caroline Lucas favours.

However, I believe she has quite nuanced and unpredictable views about the economy and about the EU. This is evidenced in an article she wrote in the Guardian in 2003 www.theguardian.com/politics/2003/sep/16/euro.eu, in which she criticised the introduction of the euro, saying - amongst other things - that:

"It [European monetary union] will contribute to a Europe run to the tune of the free market agenda, a rigid monetarist environment with maximum price stability. A Europe where regulation - to protect the environment, human rights or social provision - is frowned upon as an impediment to free trade....."

I don't know whether she has since changed her mind about that, or whether she has, as Richard Murphy, claims, a poor grasp of economics, but she doesn't seem too complimentary about monetarism in this particular opinion piece.

As for Green policies being "unrealistic", I feel that what is totally irrational, unrealistic and wilfully closed-minded is the conviction that we can continue to exploit and degrade our planet in the name of "growth" without there being a day of reckoning.

www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2016/04/12/caroline-lucas-demands-country-by-country-reporting/

guengl-panamapapers.eu/event/guengl-conference-the-panama-papers-one-year-on-fighting-money-laundering-and-tax-dumping/

If it wasn't for people like Caroline Lucas and Richard Murphy, this would not be being discussed now.
The UK can still be a tax haven on leaving the EU.

inews.co.uk/essentials/news/politics/caroline-lucas-green-party-will-reverse-cuts-domestic-violence-centres/

A reason to vote Green?

Why would Caroline Lucas need a good grasp of economics?
May doesn't have one.

A Europe where regulation - to protect the environment, human rights or social provision - is frowned upon as an impediment to free trade....."

But I thought the argument for Brexit was that Europe had too many regulations to protect the environment, human rights or social provision(s) at the expense of free trade

I did not support Brexit but my memory of pre-Brexit days is the UK constantly opposing EU directives on these subjects (for example the Uk opposition to the recent EU desire to ban the use of glyphosphates because they are potentially carcinogenic and also neonicotinoids because they are harmful to bees.)

Economists haven't been that successful in guiding various economies and they often disagree with one another as to what measures should be taken so, yes, I agree with you durhamjen. And since we are in a situation where a very small number of people own half the world's wealth, it would seem that economic theory and practice bears little relation to what most people would consider to be a properly and fairly functioning system.

Caroline Lucas had concerns about the introduction of the euro and the effect it had on certain countries such as Portugal. I see it as a plus that someone who broadly supports a particular system/organisation is nevertheless willing to question some of the elements within it, if those elements are judged to be potentially damaging.

If you want to see about the old boys network that parliament is, you should read Caroline Lucas's book Honourable Friends?

The Conservatives and, I think, Labour were opposed to the Euro, that is why we are not in it. On that subject Caroline Lucas is going with the majority.

British governments of all hues, come to that governments throughout the EU, who have supported it, have questioned almost every element in it at some time or another. The problem is on very few issues has they been in any accord about how it should be changed - and when majority voting was introduced to try and get action, The Brexiteers of all parties and none in the UK used it as an excuse to lobby for the referendum we had last year.

It strikes me that Caroline Lucas is boringly mainstream.

Sorry, I don't undersatnd that post. What does boringly mainstream mean?

The Greens are not as 'alternative' in policies as they would like us to believe. Just espousing policies espoused by the other parties and trying to suggest they are different, or at least this is how posters on GN are presenting them.

What other party supports the basic income?
Or the Green New Deal?

Which other party says this?

"The Green Party is the only party standing up for students and putting young people at the heart of its campaign. Education is a right not a commodity to be bought and sold, and we need a level playing field so everyone has the chance to go to university or college.

“Students need a liferaft in the Brexit storm. They are being ignored in the Brexit negotiations, despite having the most to lose. Funding for our universities is under unprecedented threat. The Green Party will not let young people miss out on opportunities to study, travel and work across Europe because of a decision that they so emphatically voted against.

“Building a better future for young people is an absolute priority and today we are committing to policies that will help us work towards an open, fairer society where everyone has the chance to succeed.” "

www.greenparty.org.uk/news/2017/04/28/green-party-agrees-electoral-alliance-with-women%E2%80%99s-equality-party/

Does any other party have this policy?

www.greenparty.org.uk/we-stand-for/safe-climate.html

Any other party saying this?

www.greenparty.org.uk/we-stand-for/free-education.html

It is not what the Green Party stands for but how economically and practically sound these policies are.

I could draw up a manifesto full of warm cuddly social measures that everybody would want to sign up to, but if they lead to this country going bankrupt and plunging many into poverty and deprivation what good do they do.

If I say that these policies would require basic rate income tax to rise by 10p in the £1, support would disappear like snow in summer.

So the Tories can draw up a manifesto that plunges millions into poverty and deprivation, and that's okay because they are a big party, is that it?
They can borrow twice as much as the whole of the labour governments ever have, and that's okay because they are Tory?

Oh, durhamjen, you know better. I have never expressed any support for the Conservatives, or ever voted for them.

Why is it morally more acceptable for the Labour party to plunge millions into poverty and deprivation but not the Conservatives?

But it's the Conservatives who are doing it.
Labour took people out of poverty.