Ex-Greens Co-Leader Urges Councils to Reject Zionism Policy 2026

Former Green Party co-leader Adrian Ramsay has urged Green councillors to reject the party's newly adopted motion declaring "Zionism is racism" if doing so helps them stay in power in local government. The intervention, reported by The Guardian, exposes fresh internal dissent over a policy that has already strained relations with Labour and threatens local coalitions.

Ramsay, one of the Greens' five MPs, said he was pleased that several Green council groups had already condemned the motion, which was passed at the party's conference and also calls for a single Palestinian state in place of Israel. His public stance puts him at odds with current leader Zack Polanski and the official party line.

What the Motion Says and Why It Matters

The motion adopted at the Green Party conference earlier this month declares that "Zionism is racism" and advocates for a single Palestinian state replacing Israel. It has sparked controversy both within and outside the party, with critics arguing that equating Zionism with racism is antisemitic.

Ramsay had expressed opposition to the motion before the vote but had not commented publicly since. His decision to speak out now signals growing unease among some Greens about the practical consequences of the policy.

The motion's adoption has already had tangible effects: last week, Labour ordered its local parties who share power on councils with Greens to terminate the deals if the local Greens did not disown the policy motion. This ultimatum puts Green councillors in a difficult position, forcing them to choose between party policy and maintaining local governance arrangements.

Ramsay's Call for Clarity and Coalition Preservation

In a statement to The Guardian, Ramsay said that while he understood why Green groups might not want to be "bullied" into action by Labour, it was important for them to be clear about the motion and to maintain coalitions where possible. He emphasised that local cooperation should not be sacrificed unnecessarily.

Ramsay, who co-led the Greens in England and Wales for four years until Polanski took over last year, is a respected figure within the party. His intervention lends weight to the concerns of councillors who fear the motion could jeopardise their ability to govern effectively.

His stance also highlights a broader debate within the Greens about the balance between ideological purity and pragmatic governance. While some activists applaud the motion as a bold statement of solidarity with Palestinians, others worry it alienates voters and undermines the party's credibility on local issues.

Polanski's Position and Party Line

Zack Polanski has said he will not seek to overturn the motion, and the official party line states that the Greens will "not take lectures" from a Labour government that supplies arms to Israel. This defiant posture resonates with many party members but creates friction with those who prioritise local alliances.

The disagreement between Ramsay and Polanski is not a personal feud but reflects deeper divisions over how the party should navigate contentious international issues while maintaining domestic relevance. Polanski's leadership has been marked by a willingness to take controversial stances, whereas Ramsay appears more focused on electoral viability.

Such tensions are not new to the Greens. The party has previously faced internal rifts over issues ranging from Brexit to transgender rights. However, the current dispute over Zionism carries particular weight because it intersects with Labour's willingness to enforce party discipline in local government.

Implications for Local Councils and Beyond

The immediate impact is likely to be felt in councils where Green and Labour share power. Labour's directive to terminate coalitions unless Greens disown the motion forces Green councillors to make a stark choice. Some may comply with Ramsay's advice and reject the motion locally, while others may stand by the conference decision.

This could lead to the collapse of several local agreements, potentially handing control to other parties or resulting in minority administrations. For residents, the practical consequences could include delays in decision-making and reduced stability in local services.

Beyond local government, the row could affect the Greens' national standing. The party has been gaining ground in polls and recently made significant electoral gains. However, controversial positions on international issues can cut both ways: they may energise activists but alienate moderate voters.

• Adrian Ramsay urges Green councillors to reject the "Zionism is racism" motion if it helps maintain local power.
• The motion, passed at the party conference, calls for a single Palestinian state and equates Zionism with racism.
• Labour has ordered its local parties to end coalitions with Greens who do not disown the motion.
• Ramsay's stance puts him at odds with leader Zack Polanski and the official party line.
• The dispute highlights tensions between ideological purity and pragmatic governance within the Greens.

Comparing the Stances: Ramsay vs. Polanski

The table illustrates the divergent approaches within the party's leadership. Ramsay's pragmatic focus contrasts with Polanski's more confrontational style, which may appeal to the grassroots but risks isolating the party in local government.

What to Watch Next

Several Green council groups have already condemned the motion, and more may follow Ramsay's lead. The coming weeks will reveal whether his intervention shifts the balance within the party or entrenches divisions. Labour's stance will also be crucial: if it softens its ultimatum, the pressure on Greens may ease.

Meanwhile, the broader debate about the party's direction continues. The Greens have positioned themselves as a progressive alternative to Labour, but incidents like this raise questions about whether they can translate national momentum into local success without being derailed by controversial policies.

For those tracking the Greens' internal dynamics, the outcome of this dispute will be a key indicator of the party's maturity and its ability to manage dissent. As the party grapples with its identity, the lessons learned here could shape its approach to future contentious issues. The background to this story is set out in Micron Profit Surges Past Apple as AI Memory Demand Soars.

The internal rift over the Zionism motion is just one of several challenges facing the Greens. As the party continues to evolve, its ability to balance principle with pragmatism will determine its success. For a deeper look at related developments, see our coverage of the Jewish Greens leader who may quit the party over the Zionism vote, and the call for Zack Polanski to resign as Green Party leader. These stories highlight the mounting pressure on the party's leadership.

Meanwhile, the Greens are also dealing with leadership changes and controversies in Australia. Larissa Waters resigned as Greens leader due to ill health, and the party has faced questions over a secret dossier on Steele-John. These events underscore the challenges of maintaining unity in a growing party.

In Australia, new leader David Shoebridge has vowed to replace Labor in Australia and declared a red hot fight against the 1%. These developments show that the Greens are attempting to define themselves in opposition to established powers, a theme that resonates with the current UK debate. As the party navigates these turbulent waters, the outcome of the Zionism motion dispute will be closely watched.