Polanski failed to show leadership over Zionism motion, ex-Green leader says

Polanski failed to show leadership, says former Green Party leader

Ninoda.com – Former Green Party leader Caroline Lucas has said Polanski failed to show leadership over a conference motion describing Zionism as a form of racism. Lucas argued that Zack Polanski should have attended the debate and vote, calling the motion divisive and dangerous.

The proposal was passed by members at the Green Party’s annual conference in Brighton. It defines Zionism as an ideology supporting “an ethnonationalist Jewish state” and backs a “single democratic Palestinian state in all of historic Palestine”, including the territory of present-day Israel.

Lucas voted against the motion and said its wording was fundamentally flawed. While she acknowledged that Polanski had been campaigning in the Holborn and St Pancras by-election, she said his absence from such an important internal debate was a serious concern.

“I would have hoped [Polanski] would have been a very strong critic of this motion.”

By-election campaign and calls for a response

Polanski left the conference early to campaign in the Holborn and St Pancras by-election in north London, which followed the departure of former prime minister Sir Keir Starmer. He came second behind Labour, cutting Labour’s majority from 11,572 to 3,364.

After the count, Polanski said he planned to remain party leader. Lucas said the campaign had understandably required his attention, but maintained that Polanski failed to show leadership at the conference and now needed to make his position clear.

“I want him to speak now about what’s happened, I want him to show the leadership that was frankly missing on Sunday.”

Asked whether Polanski should resign, Lucas said the immediate issue was whether he could now provide the leadership she believed had been absent. A Green Party source said internal disagreements can become more intense during an election campaign and that the party approaches such differences differently from Labour.

Why the Zionism motion has caused division

The vote has exposed tensions between the Green Party’s growing membership and its parliamentary representatives. Four of the party’s five MPs opposed the motion. The decision also led to the resignation of the Green deputy leader in Wales and drew criticism from the European Green Party.

Under Green Party rules, a motion supported by members becomes official party policy. It does not automatically have to appear in the next general election manifesto, but it creates a significant challenge for the leadership over how the policy is explained and applied.

Debate has focused on the effect of the motion on Jewish members and supporters. Zionism has different meanings for different people, including many Jews who see it as support for Jewish self-determination or the continued existence of Israel. Critics argue that defining it as inherently racist could make some people feel excluded from party participation because of their faith, culture or community ties.

Supporters have linked the motion to opposition to Israel’s treatment of Palestinians and to support for equal democratic rights in a future political settlement. Critics say the adopted wording goes beyond criticism of Israeli government policy by making a broader claim about Zionism itself.

Polanski’s position after the vote

Polanski, who is Jewish, issued a written statement after the vote saying that nobody should feel unwelcome in the party because of their background, faith or place of worship. He also said criticism of the Israeli state must be kept distinct from antisemitism.

“Antisemitism and criticism of the Israeli state are, and must always be, completely distinct.”

Before the motion was debated, Polanski backed an amendment designed to stop Jewish members facing disciplinary action for attending synagogues that identify as Zionist. Members rejected the amendment. He also sought to change the reference to a single Palestinian state, arguing that neither the Green Party of England and Wales nor the UK government should determine the eventual settlement.

The dispute is now a wider test for the party leader. Critics say Polanski failed to show leadership when members needed clarity, while supporters will look for reassurance that the party can debate the conflict without making Jewish members feel unwelcome.

FAQs for Green Party members and supporters

Does the motion automatically become an election pledge? No. It becomes party policy under the Green Party’s rules, but it does not automatically have to be included in the next general election manifesto.

What is Zack Polanski being asked to do? Lucas has called on him to state his position clearly and explain how he will respond to concerns raised by the conference vote.

Why do critics consider the wording contentious? They argue that the motion’s definition of Zionism may affect Jewish members and supporters who understand the term as connected to Jewish self-determination or Israel’s continued existence.