It's never really been in question with the mainstream parties: but now the drive for economic growth has moved decisively centre-stage.
Who is it, then, that opposes economic growth ? Ans: the Greens. And, I'm willing to hazard, a fair number of the great unwashed assembled outside St Pauls. These, from the Green Party's website:
"money drives growth, which drives consumption, which uses oil, which damages the planet"
"Other political parties strive for ‘economic growth’, which may sound impressive, but ... in a world of finite resources, it cannot make sense to depend on economic growth. Only the Green Party seeks an economic system which recognises the limits of the natural systems of the planet"
And this from Occupy LSX:
"Why do we rely on a global economic system based on infinite growth ... leading humanity and the environment to destruction [?]"
OK, we all understand the arguments: but we need to remind everyone just who's on which side of this fence. Can we perhaps get Miliballs to preach the usual vehement Pro-Growth sermon to the representatives of the 99% on the steps of St Pauls ?
And of course the Greens would rather like to keep their heresy quiet just now, and Caroline Lucas is careful to advocate "growth-in-the-green-economy" whenever she's on Newsnight.
There are rather a lot of battles to be fought just now. But perhaps, when time permits (and if it doesn't look too much like bullying poor Dr Lucas), opportunities might be found to drive a decent-sized wedge between her and the St Pauls brigades on the one hand and, well, everyone else on the other. That's - the whole of mainstream of western politics.
Footnote: Dr Lucas' absence from the encouragingly measured Parliamentary debate on shale gas was noted by her fellow members of the E & CC Committee ... low-profile time, is it ?