Greens' changed tack shows new realism that may offend purists

The Greens are emphasising prudence and responsibility at every turn, writes Mark Hennessy , Political Correspondent, in a bid…

The Greens are emphasising prudence and responsibility at every turn, writes Mark Hennessy, Political Correspondent, in a bid to win 'soft' supporters

Over the last year, the major political parties have quickly donned the environmental mantle at every turn, all the while insisting that they were always green in their hearts.

The development has at one and the same time made the Greens more central to public debate, and more in danger of finding that their political clothes have been stolen.

Nearly one week into the campaign, the Greens yesterday published a 34-page election platform, "Manifesto 2007: It's Time" in an effort to imprint their ideas on the public mind.

READ MORE

The days of sandals, and woolly jumpers, and, occasionally hare-brained ideas, are long gone. Instead, the Greens emphasise their prudence and sense of responsibility at every turn.

So far, the Greens are proving to be attractive both to those who are genuinely interested in environmental issues, and those who betray guilt about the impact of their own lifestyles.

The Green challenge is to put forward changes that maintain the credibility of a 25-year-old message and yet do not frighten off "soft" support that may not want to pay the price demanded.

In part, the Greens have pulled some punches. In the past, they have argued that major new roads should not be built, and resources should be turned to building railways, cycleways and providing buses.

Yesterday, the message was different in tone. Public transport would have to get massive extra funding, but existing road contracts would be honoured.

Once public transport is dramatically improved, the National Roads Authority would then be asked to review whether some of its planned roads were necessary in the light of such improvements.

The changed tack, even if it offends purists, is a sign of a relatively new Green realism, and one that would require both to agree a post-election pact and to make it work.

In past elections, the Greens were regarded as loonies by most rural voters, and there is little doubt but that that opinion still exists in many constituencies.

However, the Greens have wooed farmers by emphasising the attractions of biofuels, and claim slow, steady progress for Cllr Mary White in Carlow/Kilkenny, particularly.

The message has been softened, too, about widespread one-off rural housing, long disliked by the Greens, but one endlessly popular with rural landowners. Local authorities, it said, should be encouraged compulsorily to buy lands on the outskirts of villages and provide serviced sites near to shops, and schools.

Preference for planning permission should also be given to those who are economically active in their own communities.

Some planning permissions are currently given to people on the basis that they are local to an area and that they have a local housing need, but which requires them not to sell the property.

The rule is roundly abused. To curb the problem, the Greens suggest that those given such permission should have to show annually that they are living in the house. In theory, the proposal is laudable, but, if introduced, it would be deeply disliked by many landowners who want to build where they want, when they want.

Furthermore, the Greens' determination to impose new rules that would hinder development near watercourses, and scenic areas is unlikely to be attractive to many in rural Ireland. Restrictions are necessary, the Greens argue accurately, to guarantee water quality, but many rural dwellers and want-to-be rural dwellers want both clean water on tap and freedom to build.

On urban planning, the party is seeking to build on the planning improvements it has led in Dún Laoghaire and Fingal councils.

On the economy, the Greens, under the leadership of Cork South Central TD, Dan Boyle, have produced careful proposals, designed to withstand assault by the major parties. Income tax rates would stay the same, bar Capital Gains Tax which would rise, while VAT and PRSI rates would be cut because they discriminate against the poor.

While the latter two would be falling, so too would the annual motor tax bill - but the income lost to the State would be made up by fuel price rises, running at 2.5c per year for 10 years.

The change is necessary to change transport habits, argues Boyle, while he acknowledges that a separate carbon tax would add about 6c to a litre of fuel.

Such rises are required because the State faces a €270 million bill under the Kyoto Treaty since Ireland has failed to abide by promises made to restrict carbon dioxide emissions. Citizens will pay one way, or the other, he argues: either to the exchequer by taxes that change behaviour and which can then be reused, or else in Kyoto payments that will be lost to the State. While the move is a sensible one, it may prove difficult to sway voters, since a Kyoto cheque will be written by the exchequer at a far remove from them, while the other is much closer to hand.

Five days into the campaign, the Greens are still seething about campaign leaflets issued by the Progressive Democrats, which, in the Green Party's view, have spread "lies" about the party's policies. In truth, the attacks are a reflection of the PDs' fears that some of their vote could drift to the Greens.