Green Party Re‑Examines Decision‑Making Structures as Membership Surges Under Zack Polanski

Senior Greens are reviewing reforms to the party’s structures to improve effectiveness and representation now that its membership has more than tripled since Zack Polanski became leader.

Under the party’s direct‑democracy model, policy decisions are made only by members who attend one of the two annual conferences. Some members argue that this system risks giving disproportionate influence to organised fringe activists who can travel to the events.

While no final decisions have been made, options under consideration include having local parties nominate delegates to speak and vote on members’ behalf, or retaining the one‑member‑one‑vote principle but introducing online voting to broaden participation.

When Polanski assumed the leadership of the Green Party in England and Wales in September, membership stood at roughly 68,000. It now exceeds 230,000.

“There is a conversation in the sense that a lot of people are saying: the party has changed a lot, and the structures haven’t changed with it,” one senior Green said.

“The current in‑person voting system means only those who can afford to book a hotel and take time off work are able to participate – it is quite self‑selecting. This disparity has always existed, but it is far more pronounced when the electorate grows from 68,000 to over 230,000, reducing the influence of each voter further.”

Another senior figure noted a growing consensus that the system requires overhaul: “When only 0.05 % of members shape policy, something must change. We all know that.”

The party’s member‑led approach is lauded for fostering a wide range of viewpoints, yet it can also spark controversy. A motion at the March spring conference, for example, sought to endorse the statement that “Zionism is racism”.

The motion was postponed due to procedural and technical issues and may be revisited at the autumn conference in October.

Officials attribute many of the party’s current challenges to limited resources needed to manage a vastly larger membership, though financial improvements are gradually easing those constraints.

Conference logistics were handled by a single individual for two decades; this year the Greens have assembled a dedicated team to support the events.

Some senior members argue that Polanski has focused heavily on public outreach and has not devoted sufficient attention to strengthening internal governance, which is essential for gaining additional council and parliamentary seats.

“The leader traditionally acts as a spokesperson rather than the type of leader found in other parties, and I think Zack sometimes hides behind that role rather than making decisions,” one commentator observed. “However, the workload is considerable and he is the only one who can shoulder it.”

There is also debate about whether the current leadership model remains appropriate for a party that now commands a large membership and polls as high as 19 % nationally.

Until 2008 the Greens were led by “principal speakers” rather than a single leader, and even now the leader holds only one vote within the party’s executive committee, which comprises roughly two dozen members.

Critics argue that this limited authority prevents a leader with a strong mandate, such as Polanski—who secured nearly 85 % of the membership’s vote—from making timely policy decisions, forcing reliance on the next conference.

“We need a balance between conference‑set policies and giving the leader some trust and leeway, along with mechanisms to hold them accountable,” a senior figure said. “That would make the party more agile.”

Others counter that Polanski’s frequent public commentary demonstrates an ability to interpret core values and respond to events, and that the membership would resist any overreach.

The party also faces the strategic question of how to position itself against a potential Andy Burnham premiership, following its recent successes in the Gorton and Denton by‑election and its ambitions for the Greater Manchester mayoral vote.

“We must reflect carefully on this and how we remain distinct,” one party insider said. “We have built our reputation as a hopeful alternative on the left of Keir Starmer, and that role may soon be occupied by Burnham.”

Source link