DAN HODGES: History will record Zack Polanski as a coward and charlatan who led his once-decent party into political oblivion
A political columnist argues that Zack Polanski failed to confront hard-left influence in the Green Party after delegates passed a motion declaring support for Israel’s existence racist. The article says the conference decisions could damage the party’s reputation and its standing with Jewish members.
It reports that a separate motion intended to protect Jewish members attending synagogues was defeated by 1,026 votes to 684, and that organisers arranged a safe room for Jewish delegates. Polanski was away campaigning in Camden during the conference, according to a social media post cited in the article; the by-election he referred to was in Holborn and St Pancras. The piece is an opinion column and uses strongly critical language about Polanski and the party.
- Green delegates passed a motion condemning support for Israel’s existence.
- A synagogue-attendance protection motion lost by 1,026 votes to 684.
- The columnist criticises Polanski for being absent during the conference.
New here? Start with this
The Green Party of England and Wales held a recent conference where delegates passed motions that have sparked significant controversy. One motion was widely interpreted as declaring Israel's existence racist, whilst a separate motion intended to protect Jewish delegates attending synagogues was rejected by a substantial majority.
Zack Polanski is a leading figure in the Green Party who has been criticised for his response to these conference decisions. The controversy has raised serious concerns about antisemitism within the party and its relationship with Jewish members and supporters.
The incident matters because it reflects how political parties handle sensitive debates around identity and international conflicts. The decisions taken at the conference may affect the party's reputation and its credibility on matters of equality and inclusion.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
A party leader must actively shape their party's direction, especially on matters affecting minority members' safety and wellbeing. Polanski's absence during the precise conference sessions where motions on Jewish protections were debated and voted down represents a significant failure of leadership responsibility. Leaders cannot absent themselves from their party's most troubling decisions and then claim surprise or lack of accountability.
The case against
Electoral campaigns demand party leaders' engagement and justify absences from some conference sessions. A leader cannot reasonably be held accountable for every conference vote, particularly when they were absent for understandable reasons. The criticism conflates legitimate policy disagreement about Israel with antisemitism, which oversimplifies a genuinely complex international question rather than engaging with substantive political debate.