Thread by @ShahrarAli

Eve of Leadership Ballot: Open Letter from Shahrar Ali (personal not official GPEW) to Siân Berry. A courteous appeal to Siân on her Negative Voting Announcement, Resignation Letter & Fostering Active Debate. #RealityCheck @sianberry
Can also be read here electshahrar.co.uk/shahrar-ali-op…

PDF statement also here electshahrar.co.uk/s/Shahrar-Ali-…. Edited thread follows. #RealityCheck

Negative voting in Leadership elections

I was disappointed and upset to see you (Siân) actively campaigning yesterday (31 August) against three of the leadership candidates, including me, by publicly advocating that members should place RON ahead of us.

I would like to set out why I think this behaviour falls short of the standards we expect from our Leaders and how your recent public pronouncements have put me, as a candidate in this election, in a situation where I feel that I must now speak out.

My overriding objective is the well-being of the Party and to this end I am convinced that we must find a way to settle our differences and unite around urgently tackling the pressing crises faced by humanity.

Most people would regard it as an unwritten rule that an outgoing incumbent would not try to exert undue influence over the election of their successor. There is a potential conflict of interest, just as it would be improper to sanction your chairing one of our hustings events.

By writing off four of the candidates as being unworthy of election, you are effectively sowing the seeds for further division and conflict should one of those candidates or a pair succeed, contrary to your wish.

Your resignation statement, “active anti-transphobia” and inconsistency

I have refrained from responding in any way to your resignation statement of 14 July 2021 (sianberry.london/wp-content/upl…) but now feel bound to say something.

Your statement avoided naming me as the reason for your dissatisfaction with the appointment of our spokespersons and the alleged inconsistency between those appointments and the Party’s position on trans rights and inclusion.

However, since the official spokesperson launch on 7 June, no other spokesperson has been subjected to an onslaught of mob abuse over social media alleging transphobia; and it is clear to everybody who has been following the matter that you could only have had me in mind.

I think you do me a disservice not to contact me directly over your stated concerns, which remain vague, or even to use internal processes to evidence your allegations. Whilst I wouldn’t wish complaints upon anyone, you do know how to use such processes; of which more shortly.

Instead, I believe, the course of action you have taken has facilitated, however unwittingly, a climate of hostility towards me. You gave an interview on 17 July (Open Democracy) advocating for “active anti-transphobia”.

Some members have taken this as a call to attack me further, citing that very phrase. I am sure you would not seek to stir up a hostile environment towards me, which could endanger my personal safety and those who most relied upon me.

Had many, many friends in the party not stood up for me or called out this hostile campaign for what it was, I don’t think I could have survived it.

I would like to ask you, however, to ask others to desist from such behaviour and take greater care yourself not to make statements which could reasonably be interpreted as about me – at least not before you have taken steps to have them proven first.

Siân, I see inconsistency between your attitude towards me in a recent election – where I was also a candidate (following an STV ballot), helping you and others to get elected – and your position on my candidacy now.

This inconsistency is not something I have had to face only now. In 2019, you sponsored a complaint against me on behalf of the Campaign Against Antisemitism, alleging antisemitism. Following investigation, this complaint was dismissed in all respects: greenparty.org.uk/news/2020/02/0…

Rumours have been circulating about your role and I have decided to confirm it – I think members have a right to know. I have never received any kind of acknowledgment from you about the considerable stress that put me under.

Fostering Active Debate

In basing my leadership campaign on the three crucial issues of climate emergency, women's rights, and free speech, I am confident that all of us in the Party are united in caring about these issues.

In expressing my support for women's rights, I am in no way minimising the importance of LGBTQI+ rights. I am convinced that the way forward within the Party – & wider society – lies in mutually respectful dialogue to ensure everyone's concerns are heard and taken into account.

Nor am I going to sit on my hands when I see bad decisions being taken or thought justified as if they were truly Green. I cannot condone the hostile environment which former MSP Andy Wightman had to suffer when he wanted to vote for an amendment in the Scottish Parliament ...

.. which would have protected the right of rape victims to choose to be examined by someone of the same sex. I believe the funding of women’s refuge Rise in Brighton, which was providing a vital same-sex service, was something we should have done more to support.

I cannot remain mute while brilliant women campaigners in our party have felt compelled to leave because they cannot discuss their sincerely held convictions about the threat to same- or single-sex spaces or services.

Communication problems have resulted in many people feeling that their concerns are not being taken seriously. I want to encourage a culture of openness and mutual respect so that these matters, which naturally elicit strong feelings, can be debated in a compassionate manner.

Kindness is sometimes overlooked in the heat of the moment, especially in the heat of exchanges on social media. I hope that, if elected, I can help to facilitate our all working together in the Party to find the way forward on these complex issues.

I end with a personal plea. Firstly, please respect the integrity of the Leadership elections (in your current role) and recognise that members may reasonably disagree about whom is best placed to lead the Party over the next few years.

Secondly, why not come to me directly to discuss any concerns you might have about statements I have made or motions I’ve put to conference? Here we are engaging in lively discussion in 2016 – it can happen!

Why don’t we ask someone we both trust in the party to facilitate such a discussion – a genuine invitation for dialogue? Only by tackling these communication problems we can move forward together in our united determination to face the environmental crisis that threatens us all.

Member apology 2019: “I failed to intervene when there were attendees who were clearly out of line. I should have taken the time to challenge their tone and encouraged them to be more constructive or else desist. It was a hostile unacceptable environment. I apologise.”

Member apology 2018: “I would like to apologise for my conduct during the last few weeks. I have reflected on my online behaviour and I have realised that I have been unreasonably negative and critical of you. I am sorry for this approach and my actions.”

ENDS.