Polanski’s leadership produced a verdict that was more divided than the party’s recent momentum might suggest, but still clear enough to demand resignation. The striking tension was that the best-liked arguments on both sides were not straightforward endorsements: voters were debating whether his visibility helped or damaged the Greens.
The floor’s strongest Yes case said that keeping him might expose the party’s politics, asking whether “people will wake up to their aims”. Another Yes voice called him “the epitomy if everything that is wrong with British politics”, while the briefest contribution offered only: “Sorry he should know better.”
The No side had the room’s other jointly most-respected argument, delivered with weary relish: Polanski was “doing a pretty good job keeping Greens unelectable”. Others defended the party’s internal timetable — members had chosen him for a two-year term, with the next vote in 2027 — and insisted, “It’s up to the Green party members to decide not us.”
That left the debate talking past itself. Some No voters opposed resignation because his continued presence weakens the Greens, while another called him a “liablity to the country”; a different voice simply praised him as a “Fantastic politician” and wished for more multi-lingual candidates. The platform’s case was therefore less about one settled judgement than competing theories of political damage: remove him, or let him remain exposed.
For a self-selected online chamber, the result reads as a firm demand for change wrapped in unusually ambivalent reasoning: even Polanski’s opponents could not agree whether he was failing or usefully failing.
9 Opinions
No, because the longer he's leader, the less likely they are to get anywhere.
Although he has had some success in recent elections his continued presence reminds the voters just how much of a liablity to the country he and the green party are.
Although now I consider my response I wonder if it’s better he stays as he shows the true face of this party, maybe people will wake up to their aims.
Fantastic politician, wish greens would get more multi lingual candidates. Then at least some would understand their politics!
NO It's up to the Green party members to decide not us
He's the epitomy if everything that is wrong with British politics.
Sorry he should know better.
No - he's doing a pretty good job keeping Greens unelectable, thank you.
The greens are the only party where its members vote for who they want to lead it on a two year term. Zack gained a huge majority from its members in his campaign. The next vote for its members will be in 2027 with it being not so far away an early resignation is not needed.