E il clima? Come è cambiata la messaggistica del Partito dei Verdi nel 2026

Because they’re no longer a single issue party but becoming a major alternative for left-wing voters.

because Labour in abandoning the left have left the goal open for them to score and take all those talking points away from them instead of being a single issue climate party.

> But this isn’t the full picture. Climate, nature and the environment did emerge as key talking points in the Green’s media interviews and debates during the campaign. For instance, during the BBC’s candidates debate, Spencer linked the cost of living with energy prices, highlighting how the Greens would nationalise energy industries and insulate our homes, while challenging the other parties on donations from fossil fuel companies.

> In other media appearances, Spencer talked about a range of local and national environmental issues, from poor air quality in Manchester, to insulation and fuel poverty – framing nature and environment as ‘every day parts of life’. She emphasised how she will be ‘really firm’ on the climate emergency, particularly on climate impacts like flooding and impact on green spaces.

> In the leaflets we analysed, there was a clear focus on local-level green policy issues, like waste and water, including fly tipping, recycling and water companies (52 mentions); local transport and planning issues – such as bus services (19); as well as the need to protect the local environment, green spaces and wildlife (18).

Weird that the loudest voices saying “what about the climate?” in reference to the Greens always seem to be the same ones who mocked, ignored, or fought them when they *were* talking about the climate. Me thinks they’re are just contrarions, at best.

I think it’s a pretty good strategy. Ultimately, making people care about largely intangible threats like climate change and biodiversity loss is difficult when the wolf is at the door. I’m not saying those aren’t deeply important issues, I’m just saying the immediate effects aren’t apparent every day to the average voter.

So instead, the Greens are talking about reducing energy bills through renewable energy sources, they’re talking about making public transit cheap and reliable, and they’re talking about reintroducing green spaces so that we don’t spend our entire lives surrounded by concrete. These are all positive effects we could personally experience from these policies, but they also have the effect of reducing CO2 emissions, reduce air pollution in cities, and help preserve biodiversity.

Because they’ve copied the Reform model and become a primarily single issue populist party.

We had them knock our door yesterday funnily enough and after the usual opening “are you voting for us why not” – the chap started talking about Gaza pretty much straight away followed by Islamophobia/migrant stuff and LGBT.

But when I asked how much is the energy price cap – he didn’t know and even his guess wasn’t close.

Didn’t have an answer for how they balance LGBT rights with Mothin Ali as their deputy leader either actually. But left me with a leaflet.

Tbf though I’m finding this with all the parties – the actual cost of living for families is so far down their talking point agenda, hardly any candidates seem to have any idea of what day-to-day life looks like for actual working class people.

[removed]

Green parties have to fight to get genuine traction, so they bring in anyone they can: this unfortunately includes disenfranchised folk who are typically not welcome in mainstream parties because of their reductive viewpoints that are largely disconnected from actual political realities. 

Any moderately successful Green movement worldwide inevitably gets invaded by identity-focused idealogues and their pet identity issues become the primary focus. There will never be a genuinely climate-focused party because of this simple fact.

A constituency that is self-selected will always advocate for their own interests. They can’t look beyond these issues into the wider idea of, perhaps, having to balance myriad issues and the fact that when they are in power they will need to step out of their echo chamber and deal with people with bigger issues than identity. 

I mean, just look at the average redditor… Could you actually imagine them being in charge of a barbecue let alone a country? 

I want to see them balance their LGBTQ policies with their new found love of Islam. That debate is going to be interesting- maybe they can agree to put a blow up pad at the bottom of the building they are thrown off? Like stuntmen have – winner, get to throw them off buildings but also not harm them.

They’ve clearly moved on but in fairness, almost no one talks about climate change anymore. It’s basically a dead issue now.

I think that’s the beauty of Zack Polanski. He has gently made the greens more electible based on what voters are really concerned about. Like cost of living and wealth redistribution, which are left things but are of a bigger priority to the main stream at the moment.

The environment is super important but everyone already knows that the greens are trusted on that.

They also have to seen as less extreme by the average voter. Nuclear disarmament or completely leaving NATO is seen as very extreme by the average voter. Even voters that are soft left.

Like I dont mind nuclear disarmament, leaving NATO sounds pretty shaky to me. Giving up nuclear power is bonkers in my eyes. But I love the current greens and would likely vote for them now as ex labour member and voter.

Because they’re no longer a GREEN Party, the majority of their membership now is ex_left-wing Labour/Momentum supporters.

They’re Green in name only – compare say Polanski, with the previous leader Lucas.

Zero connection with or interest in the environment. The current Leadership and new membership see it as a vehicle for left/progressive politics. rather than for Green politics.

Its entryism in its purest form.