Greens churn 1/3 of members

Green membership shows healthy growth of about  33% over the last year – Labour are likely to be envious.

But curiously Greens have also lost about a third of their members over the same period.

From Stuff: Greens conference will see the first incarnation of the left alliance in action

Shaw, who was elected co-leader at the party’s last AGM to replace former co-leader Russel Norman, would also come under assessment for his first year. 

Under the party’s constitution, both leaders were required to stand for re-election. It was unlikely however, any contenders would run against them.  

He set the ambitious target of doubling the party’s membership in the first year, and then doubling it again by the next. 

While the target has not been achieved, Shaw’s goal has seen the party’s membership grow from about 4500 last year, to more than 6000.

“We’ve had 3000 members join in the last year, so there’s been a high level of churn. 

That means they must have lost about 1,500 of 4,500 members and gained twice as many.

I wonder if they are not recording renewals correctly, and some of those losses have actually immediately re-joined.

Otherwise, as Shaw says, that’s a high level of churn.

It would be interesting to know if it is a normal level of churn or if it’s unusually high.

If it’s unusually high then is it a high level of general disenchantment – or is it related to losing Russel Norman (who was replaced as co-leader by Shaw).

Leave a comment

10 Comments

  1. alloytoo

     /  3rd June 2016

    I suspect people join the greens in the naive belief that they are a party of environmentalists with integrity.

    It doesn’t take too long to realize that they’re actually communists with a poor grasp of environmental issues who appear to answer to global eco-terrorists and not their constituents.

    Reply
    • Blazer

       /  3rd June 2016

      is that what you suspect ..Sherlock…what exactly is a global eco terrorist,?

      Reply
      • alloytoo

         /  3rd June 2016

        Greenpeace, a misnamed organisation which sucks up contributions from unsuspecting idiots in order to indulge in piracy on the high seas as well as campaigns against GM crops which if successful would leave millions living in malnutrition and poverty.

        Apart from being disowned by one of their founders, Greenpeace hasn’t actually provided any solutions to the worlds problems.

        Reply
        • Kitty Catkin

           /  3rd June 2016

          As a former longtime member of Greenpeace, I am terribly disappointed with their recent behaviour.

          Reply
          • Gezza

             /  3rd June 2016

            Oh noes. What on earth have they done Kitty?

            Reply
            • Kitty Catkin

               /  3rd June 2016

              (mind goes blank) er….

            • Kitty Catkin

               /  3rd June 2016

              Well, things like occupying the roofs of buildings under the illusion that it will change anything.

            • Gezza

               /  3rd June 2016

              But what about saving the whales? Don’t you want them to save the whales?

            • Kitty Catkin

               /  3rd June 2016

              I wonder how much they still do that sort of thing now. One doesn’t hear of it. Do you know if that disgusting clubbing of little seals still happens ? No animal deserves that. I once clubbed a dying, poisoned rat (I guessed that it was poisoned) as it was semi-paralysed and in distress and being hit on the head with a piece of wood seemed preferable to a drawn out end (and I hated doing it, even so) but to do this to animals for their fur is revolting.

              Remember when PETA from the US complained to and about the seaworld here because fish was on the menu in its cafe and they thought this insensitive and traumatic to the fish in the aquariums ? Even I wouldn’t go that far.

            • Kitty Catkin

               /  3rd June 2016

              There is also a certain hypocrisy in any organisatiion that uses oil to travel to campaigns against oil drilling and uses computers whose manufacture depends upon oil when they are made to publicise the anti-oil message.

              I am cautious of condemning oil drilling when I happily use it and its by-products myself every day and have no intention of stopping using motor transport (buses and an occasional taxi in my case, but they still use oil), electricity, appliances like computers and so on and so forth. I recycle so much that my contribution to landfill is a small supermarket bag that will this time take me three weeks to fill, but I am not prepared to walk from one town to another although I walk everywhere within my own town. We all use oil and it’s utter hypocrisy to condemn it and use it at the same time.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s