Submitted 3 weeks ago by BrikoX@lemmy.zip to unitedkingdom@feddit.uk
https://www.thecanary.co/uk/news/2026/03/28/green-party-conference-votes/
The Green Party conference has voted in favour of a motion opposing nationalisation of “the five largest energy supply companies”
Very deceptive headline, they’re still pro-public ownership. I used to get updates from Canary, but headlines like this that are solely intended to stir the pot are why I unsubbed.
Interesting that The Canary is now publishing this type of nonsense about the Greens. I always suspected they were more committed to ragebait than to any specific politics. This is evidence in favour of that thesis.
“Public Ownership” is that evasive term used to avoid nationalisation. Share-holders can be described as a form of “public ownership”. Perhaps they would have been better to say “state ownership”.
I’m starting to get the impression that the Green Party is going to have to work hard to hold itself together over the next 3 years. The different factions are already straining and showing the divisions. I wouldn’t be surprised of a Your Party-style bust up at some point.
This is the GREEN party?? 😭
MrPoletki@feddit.uk 3 weeks ago
The motion called for the deletion of a previous commitment that:
The five largest energy supply companies will be nationalised.Instead, it called for the insertion of:
As natural monopolies with, at present, high profit margins, electricity national transmission and regional distribution will be brought into public ownership.And it wanted to insert a position that “electricity generation and storage” are not natural monopolies and should therefore:
have diversity of ownership including private, public, municipal and community schemeswewbull@feddit.uk 3 weeks ago
Ok. I’m confused. So which was the final position? It sounds like they retained