Which sounds incredibly plausible. After all we in the Green Party have our fair share of daft policies and daft people. Just not quite so many of them as in most of the other parties and as soon as you start to examine the accusation that everything we say is silly and what they say is wise it rapidly falls apart.
Start by reversing the statement. If we don't want our political representatives to be nice but silly perhaps what we need is for them to be nasty but sensible. I happen to think that there are times when this is indeed necessary. Some of the cold hard calculations that Churchill undertook in the depths of the war were very nasty indeed but you can make a very good case for many of them being necessary in order to defeat Hitler. So I accept that nasty but sensible can be the right thing to do in certain circumstances.
Nasty and stupid it is harder to defend. Ask yourself this simple question. Were the Greens a bit silly to say that the Iraq war would be a horrible mistake. Looking back with the benefits of hindsight were all those in the Conservative Party and the Labour Party who told us with such gravitas that it was necessary to invade wise? Is Iraq actually any better off now after all those deaths than it was under the horrible regime of Saddam Hussein? Was it really so very sensible to predict that once we'd invaded the country would quickly become a safe, secure democracy in which peace and love blossomed for all? Or were the Greens right to say that it wasn't very sensible to launch an unprovoked invasion of another country in order to rid it of weapons of mass destruction that a UN weapons inspector had already shown to be non- existent?
So if our insistence on not sacrificing lives in an unnecessary war was not silly then perhaps Green campaigners were being silly when we argued that austerity was not necessary and that it was being inflicted on the wrong people as an ideological choice. Perhaps all those right wing economists were right and it was necessary to take a bit of pain in order to get the economy back under control? The only trouble is that their idea of sensible was to dump the regulations on high street banks that kept those banks safe for generations and allow speculators to gamble more than three times the value of the entire world economy on obscure financial instruments causing an immense financial crash. Their next idea of sensible was to get the Bank of England to print £375 billion and pump it into the banking system to bail out the very people who caused the economic collapse in the first place. Then they thought it would be sensible to cut taxes for the rich whilst forcing middle and lower income earners to take pay cuts and watch their public services being run into the ground. Apparently it is sensible to pay the rich more to incentivise them whilst it is wise and necessary to pay the poor a lot less in order to do the same.
By comparison to these silly right wing fantasies some of us were responsible enough to argue that we should be using quantitative easing to actually help the real economy and proposed investment in science and new technology. We followed the entirely orthodox theory that during a recession it is usually wise to invest in changing your economy and making it more sustainable instead of pouring good money after bad into a financial sector that no one has bothered to properly reform in the 8 years since the crash.
Then there is the other silly little issue that Greens will insist in banging on about. The survival of the human race and the protection of the only planet that we are able to live on. Stupidly and irresponsibly we will keep on insisting that a technology that relies on burning fossils that you dig out of the ground has a limited shelf life. Particularly if it releases so much carbon dioxide into the air that all serious scientists think we'll be lucky to keep global temperature rises down below 3 degrees centigrade. Stupidly we think that when every year seems to be the hottest on record, glaciers and ice shelves are melting rapidly and we have increasing numbers of floods and storms then we need to act and act quickly. Curiously that doesn't mean that we silly little Greens don't want to pay over the odds for the French state to build a nuclear power station for the UK using money borrowed from the Chinese state and technology which has never been used successfully anywhere else. Foolishly we will keep on insisting that it is cheaper, quicker and more effective to subsidise a massive programme of insulation of buildings and workplaces to reduce usage. Equally curiously we don't think that the solution to a problem caused by burning fossil fuels is to wreck the countryside by indulging in fracking so that we can burn even more. Childishly we want our businesses to be leading the way into the next phase of technology by becoming world leaders in rapidly expanding green energy not stuck in the fossilised ways of the past with an outdated fracking industry.
Silly as we are we persist in saying that our dependency on oil results in us sending a great deal of money and weapons to Saudi Arabia that end up being used to finance religious extremism around the world. Daft woolly minded thinkers simply don't seem to understand why those serious sensible commentators employed by the newly cowed BBC tell us in measured voices that we must bomb yet another country in order to calm down terrorism but must also supply the Saudi source of this terrorism with weapons in order to protect our citizens jobs. Foolishly we will insist on saying that protecting us from the spread of terrorist ideology from Saudi Arabia or sending practical financial help to secure Tunisian democracy might be wiser long term strategies than killing lorry drivers in Syria in the hope their relatives will understand it is all in the cause of democracy and freedom.
The final contribution of all these deadly serious right wing thinkers has been to get us to spend the better part of the last year debating whether we should be in or out of the EU without bothering to develop any clearly thought through and workable proposals for how we are going to do it. As a believer in democracy I fully accept that people have followed the advice of these incredibly sensible people and we must now prepare the policies that the UK will follow once we are out of the EU.
We can, perhaps, be forgiven if we refuse to remain silent and defer to the greater wisdom of the right when it comes to deciding what those policies should be. We might also be forgiven for insisting that we would rather like to be able to vote again once we have seen what these very wise and sensible people have actually negotiated rather than what they have promised us so honestly and sincerely. After all - with their track record would you trust them to get it right?