The wind seemed to be blowing right in the sails of the European Greens in the late 1990s. The movement, born in the 1960s, seemed to have stepped into a new era where grassroots support started translating itself into parliamentary success, both at a national and a European level.

The European Federation of Green Parties had been born earlier that decade and in 2004 it eventually became an official party in the European Parliament.

There were, and still are, few greens in power but there were significant exceptions back then; German Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer being the most notable. A decade or so later, however, Mr Fischer has been elbowed out of government by the country's second grand coalition between Christian Democrats and Social Democrats.

The environment is the talk of the day, even becoming the subject matter of an Oscar-winning documentary. But the greens seem to be still struggling to establish themselves.

What is more, almost every party on the list now claims to be green in some way or another, which begs the question: Is there still space for Green parties in Europe? Ms Lunacek, spokesman for the European Greens and MP for the Austrian Green Party Die Grünen, passionately believes so. "It's a question of credibility," she says.

Mainstream parties may well have co-opted the green policies in their rhetoric, she insists, but most of them do not really believe in it.

"We might not be seen anymore as the avant garde by some," she concedes, "however, there is one asset we still have but we need to redefine and re-spell it, which is that we are still credible in this area. We're credible in the way we have always been consistent in our message.

"Take nuclear energy," she explains. "We've always been saying that it is no way to create energy because we don't know where the waste goes and there's uncertainty about the risks involved. Other parties have been changing their ideas - sometimes it's yes, then it's no."

Her recent visit to Malta, incidentally, was related to the struggle of Malta's own Green party, Alternattiva Demokratika, which was a founder member of the European Federation of Green Parties, back in 1992, but still waiting for a parliamentary breakthrough.

One of the main roles of the spokesman is to support Green parties that are not represented in the European Parliament, she explains. "Our presence in Malta before the local council elections was a way to show that support for AD. Without keeping in touch with the grassroots, the Greens do not stand a chance on a global level, in our case a European level. Think locally, act globally is not simply a slogan.

"This is the challenge we face and, in this sense I think you're right," she says, adding that the role of the Greens in mainstream politics "is to make it clear that without Greens and environmental NGOs and civil society, the others would not be saying anything."

Will the Greens then perennially be assigned the role of watchdogs for mainstream politics and is that not the role of civil society?

"Yes, that is the traditional role we have had and which we will continue to have for a while - the world will not change overnight, it takes time. On the other hand, most of our parties, some in government, others in opposition and even at a European level, are trying to formulate our own policy and we have been doing that for a very long time."

Ironically, in the era of so-called post-ideology, the Greens plan to consolidate a holistic political philosophy, which has already underpinned the work of individual Green parties all over Europe.

"Recently we had an important position paper on the future of Europe, on energy efficiency, where we had a detailed document with concrete proposals. The same applies to social issues, securing a basic social net to safeguard individuals from the prevailing precariousness of the labour market."

There was a certain reluctance to engage economic issues head on by some within the Green movement but that too is changing. One of the main items on the agenda at the party's recent meeting in Berlin was precisely climate change and the economy.

The issue brings us closer to a subject that straddles both of her main political interests: the environment and foreign policy. How does she feel about the fact that the US manages to persuade European countries to endorse its military agenda, while the same European ally states cannot convince the superpower to budge on climate change?

The problem, she points out, lies in the fact that Europe is weakened on the international stage by not having one voice. "I think it was Henry Kissinger who asked: "Who am I calling when I call Europe?' It's true though."

"The project of building the political EU is not finalised unfortunately; not least because of the uncertain status of the European Constitution with its good and bad aspects," she says. "The EU Constitution gave a certain form and a strong basis for a common foreign policy."

"That did not happen, I would say, particularly because of the UK and France, which also have a seat on the UN Security Council. They are not interested in having a common European foreign policy; they do their own and this is obviously detrimental to a common policy.

"The smaller countries that would profit from this common policy have not managed to persuade these two countries, nor Germany to an extent... We would be able to state more forcefully that the Kyoto Protocol cannot be ignored any longer and would have more clout if we act in a united way."

Here, the subject hits closer to home as she spontaneously mentions illegal immigration. The idea that Green parties favour complete open-door policies is mistaken, she says, while at the same time pointing out that Europe is a continent of immigrants.

"We don't want to cut ourselves out. However, migration has to be something which you can control for the benefit of both sides."

Europe, she says, has to tackle the issues at source and has to improve the way it manages illegal immigration. On this point, she stresses that the Greens believe in burden sharing. That is, a system whereby countries on the mainland help the countries receiving illegal immigrants from the south and east.

"In the case of Africa, if you have a situation where you cannot make enough money to sustain yourself or your family, of course you are going to think of moving on. Especially if the image you have of Europe is that of the Promised Land.

"Because even the people who have succeeded in migrating are living in poverty and have to deal with racism but they don't tell that to their family at home. You don't like to tell your family that you are not well off. So I think it is important to get this picture right."

Also, in terms of long-term strategy, she mentions development. "I think Europe needs to pay more, not in terms of development aid but in terms of the real economic transactions it has with the African continent. Most of Africa is rich, but hardly anything remains there.

"If companies are taking out natural resources they should pay for them. I'm not saying there is no problem of corruption and mismanagement - but that is only part of it.

"As for Europe itself, I think it is important we work on racism and integration. This does not mean they have to drop their own identities altogether but, yes, there are certain values here which they have to respect."

Sign up to our free newsletters

Get the best updates straight to your inbox:
Please select at least one mailing list.

You can unsubscribe at any time by clicking the link in the footer of our emails. We use Mailchimp as our marketing platform. By subscribing, you acknowledge that your information will be transferred to Mailchimp for processing.