Is this the end of the Greens?

[samFFC]

The secrecy of the Greens might cause some issues down the line, should they seriously push to become a bigger party.

True - but is that not what generally separates smaller and bigger parties - smaller parties have a smaller base so can put everything out in the open - good and bad. The bigger parties have more groups/factions/etc. to please and so this less practical and less wise to do?

 

[Crawb]

Good. Rhiannon was practically Socialist Alternative. If you want a radical far left party, join that.

The Greens should very much only occupy the left/centre-left on the political spectrum if they want to be a major party - which they do it seems.

Di Natale kicking even more goals.

 

[Maggie5]

The secrecy of the Greens might cause some issues down the line, should they seriously push to become a bigger party.

No bigger issue than the way this current government conducts business under secrecy.
Won't do them any harm as there is little to be secret about.

 

[Father Jack]

So how should this have been done? How much of a say should the rank and file get in a reshuffle? I'm guessing that the relative lack of focus on a smaller party means that these things can just simply be announced and done with.

 

[samFFC]

So how should this have been done? How much of a say should the rank and file get in a reshuffle? I'm guessing that the relative lack of focus on a smaller party means that these things can just simply be announced and done with.

I think there was discussion amongst rank and file and it was announced (discussed?) at a meeting of members and MPs.

Just not the wider voting base.
That seems reasonable given that is how most parties tend to run.

 

[Crankyhawk]

O'Dwyer has been on shaky ground for a while.

O'dwyer never had much in the way of political talent or savvy if performance at student union level is anything to go by.