Excellent letter in the Guardian today from John Prescott. It is a strong argument for not voting Green as it will do little to bring about action to tackle climate change:
"It is understandable that Caroline Lucas would urge readers to vote Green (Letters, 5 May). However, what she has not said is that a vote for the Green party will do little to bring about an ambitious global agreement to tackle climate change. Within months of the polls closing on Thursday, world leaders will gather in Paris at the conference of parties to adopt an agreement that must set the world on a path towards limiting global temperature increases to two degrees. That agreement can be negotiated only by the next prime minister. If Caroline Lucas goes to Paris it will be to protest, not to negotiate. The real choice, therefore, is between David Cameron, who long ago abandoned his promise to lead the “greenest government ever” and has taken to referring to environmental policies as “green crap”; and Ed Miliband, who, as secretary of state for climate change, brought in the first national piece of legislation in the world to set legally binding targets to reduce carbon emissions (an approach that is now being replicated around the world) and, as leader, has committed to making climate change one of the highest priorities for a Labour government. The important point for voters to bear in mind is that it will be the next prime minister, not the Green party, who will be negotiating on behalf of the UK in December. Miliband has committed a Labour government to pushing for an ambitious agreement in Paris, with a goal of net-zero global emissions in the second half of this century. The best way, therefore, for voters to tell world leaders that they support urgent and ambitious action to tackle climate change is to elect a Labour government".
Labour, House of Lords