It's all about May

The Greens are both praising and blaming their leader

by Anne Kingston on Monday, November 17, 2008 12:00am - 6 Comments

It's all about May

For a glimpse of factions roiling within the Green Party of Canada, the events of Oct. 19 tell the story. That night, the party’s 26-person federal council sent out a release stating it had unanimously passed a motion confirming its full support for leader Elizabeth May. Only hours earlier, a petition calling for a special meeting to review May’s leadership had begun circulating among the 202 officers of election district associations, or EDAs. Meanwhile, another group was working on a plan code-named “Project June,” as in, “What comes after May?”

Much of this dissent stems from the election, a campaign May rightly calls a “watershed” for the party: the former activist muscled into the leaders’ debates, established the Greens as the fourth national party and upped electoral support by 41 per cent. Yet the true measure of political success—seats—didn’t materialize. May’s bold attempt to usurp Peter MacKay in Central Nova, N.S., proved quixotic. The party’s share of the popular vote, at 6.8 per cent, fell far below the 11 per cent that polls had been predicting a week earlier.

May expresses disappointment that seats weren’t won but frames the outcome more positively: “We’re the only federal party that actually received more votes in 2008 than in 2006,” she says. She boasts that the Greens bested the Conservatives in drawing an uptick in voters: “Mr. Harper won more seats [than in 2006] but had 150,000 fewer voters; we had 270,000 more people voting Green [than in 2006].” Ironically, such talk, with its focus on Harper, is precisely what has Greens signing performance-review petitions.


Not that it appears May is going anywhere, which makes the charismatic leader the biggest challenge facing the party. She’s both the Greens’ major asset and central flashpoint. Even her detractors credit her formidable intellect, ability to inspire and to get the “green” message out. Yet her unwillingness to alter her activist mindset frustrates those who want to build the Greens into an organized political machine capable of delivering seats.

David Cotter, president of the Kitchener-Conestoga Green riding association, likes and trusts May. Still, he put his name on the leadership-review petition. (Post-election, Cotter also briefly set up a website emaygoaway.ca but took it down after a friendly chat with May.) “[Former Green leader] Jim Harris ran a $60,000 campaign in 2006 and got 4.5 per cent of the national vote; we ran a $4-million campaign and won 6.8 per cent,” he says. “You have to have 12 seats to be an official party: we have none. You need one seat for the leader; she chose to run against someone who can’t be beaten.”

There’s residual anger among those who believe May advocated voting strategically to block Conservative victory in certain ridings. In early October May told Maclean’s: “It’s dishonest to say voters should vote Green no matter what because the best thing in terms of the environment is for Stephen Harper not to be elected. At the same time I wouldn’t disown my own party because my candidates are great.”

Bookmark and Share
  • Pingback: Macleans.ca - Elizabeth May: It’s going well, I think

  • tomfaraway

    Sounds like similar conflicts are surfacing in the Canadian Green movement as have been occuring in Europe. Here the fight between the “Fundies” (activists) and “Realos” (political oriented) has at times severely hampered Green chances of success.
    In Switzerland the conflict led to a split within the Greens and the formation of a Green-Liberal Party, which is among the fastest growing parties in the country. For Canadian Greens the question may need to be if being Green naturally means politically left-wing, and where the party can have the most influence for the benefit of the environment.

  • wayne moores

    I wonder why the lazy national media never takes a hard look at Lizzie. Doesn’t anyone else wonder why she never ran in her adopted Canadian home of Cape Breton. In fact as far as I know she didn’t set foot in the place during the election. She had zero roots or possibility of winning in Central Nova. Could it be the people of Cape Breton know her and her antics all too well. Might be a story there if anyone wanted to do some digging. But that would require some work. Far to easy to write puff pieces and bland generalities about our valient crusader out to save the world. God help us!

  • A Reader

    The more I read about May, the more I am convinced that she & her self-serving 60′s activist approach will get the Green Party nowhere. For someone who is not interested in ‘political games’ she sure seems to play a lot of them. The Green Party needs to downplay the activism role & adopt more of a political air to be taken seriously; they also need to replace ‘it’s all about me’ May with a younger leader who is actually dedicated to the success of the whole party. Until then the green party will get nothing more than a passing glance & a seat in the gallery.

  • Pingback: Macleans.ca - Is that all there is?

  • Ex-pat Wayne in Saudi

    The whole “Green” strategy, leadership drama’s etc are all so irrelevant. Any single issue party is doomed to being a rump (see “CCF/NDP” as the ‘medicare’ rump). I think it’s sad that the Canadian parliament is heading the way of Italy’s pizza parliament. If the idea of any political party is to aspire to forming a government then those who run the party need to realize that it’s a major accomplishment for a “middle of the road” party to get 50% + 1 to agree with your positions; and it’s virtually impossible when you’re so far out in left field (or right field like “Reform”) that you even have trouble getting suppport from those who you consider as your idealogical family.
    Don’t get me wrong, I think that diversity of opinion and ideas is vital to progress. But so too is the need for a democratically elected government to hold a “true” majority (50% +1). With this power govenments can make strides into the future (as opposed to baby steps). With minority governments we’re doomed to crawling while our global competitors run.
    To summarize I believe that the Green’s, the NDP, the Communists, the Marijuana party and even the Rhinoceros Party would be better off (as would all Canadians) if they found a way to find representation for their ideas within a two party system (Lib/Con) then let the chips fall where they may at each election.

From Macleans