Fully now regretting the Green Party thread because my DMs are now brimming with different and rival interpretations on what the party’s current policy is

Different positions outlined:

- 2016 motion opposing investor courts is still policy, so CETA is opposed

- No it didn’t

- It did but is redundant due to later changes to CETA

- It did but is redundant due to opinions from ECJ

- It did but is superseded by Prog for Govt

Right. Deleting the original tweet (some of it is poorly worded on my part, some of it is contested outright) and starting again from here.

Apologies for repetition…

Before Christmas, members of the Greens' policy council considered four different CETA-themed motions:

- Hold a special convention on CETA
- Instruct TDs/Senators to refer CETA to an Oireachtas committee
- Deem CETA to be unconstitutional
- Hold an internal party debate

Only the policy council itself, or a party conference/convention, can actually set party policy.

So when Policy Council (made up of reps from Leinster House, constituencies, affiliate groups) voted NOT to hold a special convention, the policy was notionally left unchanged.

The only one of those four motions which was approved was for an internal party debate, which as noted does not result in a change of policy.

These votes were held last month, triggering the 'debate' which (I'm told - so caveats!) was partly held last weekend and partly today.

(This is how I came to be aware of this today - for those inside the party familiar with the mechanics, this is all December's news.)

So if the policy is unchanged, what's the policy?

That's the contentious bit because there is no universal understanding of that.

Some people think this motion - adopted by the annual conference in 2016 - remains binding upon the party and that CETA is therefore contrary to Green policy.

Others argue this now invalid, or superseded, for the following (all disputed) reasons:

(a) the investor court system has been amended

(b) ECJ opinions issued in the meantime say investors can't sue over environmental law

(c) the Programme for Government includes this line:

Other arguments are that …

(d) the Greens' GE2020 manifesto didn't explicitly mention CETA, so their electoral mandate doesn't give them license to oppose it

(e) the Greens tacitly dropped their opposition in exchange for other concessions in the Programme for Government

But in short, there's no *universally accepted* position on whether the Greens are, or aren't, in favour of CETA.

(Would a special convention even make that clear? Maybe, or maybe not - if it's a change of policy, would it be enforceable through the Programme for Government? )

Some within the party will convincingly argue to either side of whether CETA is a good idea, or whether the party is actually in favour of it or not.

From what I've seen here today, there's still a way to go before they actually convince each other.

(To be fair, this shouldn't be seen as a unique phenomenon to the Greens - it's not as if Irish political history isn't littered with rival interpretations of the same actions.

Was the Irish State established in 1916? Or 1919? Or 1921? Or 1922? Or 1937? Or 1949? etc etc etc etc)

Anyway.

CETA is still Schrödinger's Treaty - simultaneously supported and opposed, depending on whose argument you accept - but the other Government parties still want to push ahead with ratification next month, so it'll all have to come to a head soon enough.

~fin~