The UK has had yet another by-election this month, due to Keir Starmer's announcement, after he had stepped down as Prime Minister, that he would also be resigning as MP for his Central London constituency of Holborn and St Pancras.
Like with the Makerfield by-election earlier in the year, which cleared the way for Andy Burnham, and the Clacton by-election in the summer which Reform leader Nigel Farage had triggered after investigations into his finances, this more recent by-election prompted far more national interest than these usually purely local contests tend to, not only because it had been the former Prime Minister's seat, but also because of the announcement, made by Green Party leader Zack Polanski - who is not himself an MP - that he would be running there.
Ultimately, Polanski failed to get elected at the Holborn and St Pancras constituency, with the seat instead going to Labour's candidate, Sagal Abdi-Wali, who has become Britain’s first female MP of Somali descent. On its own, this was perhaps not overly significant. The seat is as safe as they get, having been consistently held by Labour since the 1960s. However, coming on top of how the Greens have performed nationally in the last few months, as well as the differing reactions to the party conferences held by both parties in the last month, it potentially raises serious questions over the direction the Greens are going in, as well as Polanski's leadership.
After Polanski became leader back in September of last year, the Greens enjoyed a meteoric rise in support, as they attracted many younger voters and those on the left who had abandoned Labour over their dissatisfaction with Starmer's government. Polanski's bold rhetoric on inequality, on the need for radical wealth redistribution and taxes on the super-rich, on the need for a new rhetoric around migration, and on the UK's continued support for Israel and proscription of groups like Palestine Action, appeared to win the Greens many new supporters.
In the month following Polanski becoming leader, the party saw a 70% increase in its membership, with more members than both the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats, and becoming, at least in terms of membership, the third largest political party in Britain. This led to Polanski confidently asserting that the Greens would replace Labour as the main party for progressives and those on the left - a claim that he reiterated as recently as the local elections in May, which saw both an unprecedented loss of seats for Labour and the Greens best ever performance at a local election, following which Polanski stated that the era of two-party politics was "dead and buried."
This however was prior to Burnham's replacement of Starmer as Prime Minister and Labour leader in the aftermath of the May elections, following which there appears to have been a reversal in the Greens fortunes. Not only did Polanski fail to win in Holborn and St Pancras, but the so-called ‘Burnham Bounce’ which has seen Labour go back up to 30% in some polls this month - their highest ratings since November 2024 - has also seen the Greens fall back again down to 11%. This puts them behind only the Liberal Democrats in overall popularity, whilst Polanski is ranked among the most unpopular party leaders, alongside Nigel Farage, and their membership has halved.
Much of this is undeniably down to the effect that Burnham's taking over the leadership appears to have had on Labour's performance, thanks both to Burnham's own personal charisma, as well as his bold rhetoric around delivering genuinely transformational change and a shift in direction from Starmer's government. If the Greens had been for many progressives their way of voicing their dissatisfaction with Starmerism, they may well lose much of their appeal if this no longer holds sway.
This September saw Burnham holding his first Labour Party conference, the tone of which was incredibly enthusiastic, with much of the media attention focusing on Burnham's more personal touch, as seen in an emotional moment when he referenced his recently deceased father in defending the Union, and pledging “to build the kind of Britain my dad wanted to see – and fight with everything I've got to keep it together."
His reiterating of the desire to "break with the direction of the past 40 years," with talk of reversing Margaret Thatcher’s privatisations of housing, water, and energy, along with calling for electoral reform, has likely gone a long way in winning back over those on the progressive left, as will his Foreign Secretary Ed Miliband's tougher approach towards Israel - though as many have pointed out, including the Greens Deputy Leader Mothin Ali, this arguably still does not go far enough.
Meanwhile, some of Burnham's other policies that have been mentioned both before and since - such as an end to the triple lock on pensions, or a ‘National Care Service’ to be free at the point of use - all appear to have strong appeal with the UK public more generally, as well as those on the left and in the Labour Party.
At the same time, however, it's also worth considering how far the Greens’ recent apparent drop in support, as well as their loss in Holborn and St Pancras, may be due to divisions and setbacks within their own party. Their own party conference, which took place immediately after Labour's, and the differences between the two, is perhaps particularly instructive here.
The Greens conference came shortly after Polanski had announced his intention to stand in Holborn and St Pancras, a fact that immediately raised questions about the viability of his leadership should he fail to win in what had always been a safe Labour seat. With his net favourability ratings having already dropped considerably since the Greens’ peak in March, there was a far less triumphalist tone, with Polanski seemingly going from talking about replacing Labour to celebrating having moved them leftwards.
Alongside questions around his continued leadership, much of the media attention around the conference zeroed in on the controversial motion passed ruling that “Zionism is racism,” and what this says about the unity and the perception of the Greens as a whole.
Polanski's unapologetic support for Palestine was arguably a key reason members had sided with him over Starmer at the end of last year, but this motion has also helped to expose some of the divisions within that have arguably been brought about by this new intake of members. The motion was condemned by all of the Greens’ actual sitting MP's, including former co-leader Adrian Ramsay, as well as former leader Caroline Lucas, particularly on the grounds of how it might affect Jewish Greens, and its implications for a two-state solution.
Ramsay described himself as “deeply upset” by the motion, stating that “it doesn’t reflect long-standing Green principles, and it doesn’t reflect my own view,” whilst Lucas added that “there is no single definition of Zionism, and irrespective of the intentions of the people who put that motion forward, I think there is a real risk that it’ll be divisive and could be seen as a sign that Jewish people aren’t welcome in the party.” She has since further raised concerns around entryism in the Green Party, something which will raise memories for many of when Labour had similarly been tarred by the label of antisemitism under Jeremy Corbyn.
Whilst Polanski himself also did not vote for the motion, and has since reemphasised that there is no contradiction between opposing both antisemitism and the actions of Israel, it nevertheless seems that there remain very real divisions within the Greens, with some members having subsequently called for Lucas's expulsion because she was a “shill for apartheid and genocide.”
Increasingly there is a perception, both inside and outside the Green Party, that there is a growing rift between its newer members, driven by left-wing populism, and the ‘old guard’ motivated primarily by environmental concerns. This perception will continue to impact the wider public views of the Greens as a whole, particularly if Polanski remains as leader following the Holborn and St Pancras defeat, as he has insisted he will. But whether this will continue to be a problem for them long term remains to be seen.
Much will likely depend on how long Labour's so-called ‘Burnham Bounce’ lasts - something which, as has been pointed out, may not be relied upon the further Burnham gets into his leadership. Whilst there was a positive atmosphere at Labour's conference, many of Burnham's biggest promises were again pledges he was making for after an election, as he has continued to state he will stick to the manifesto that Starmer had been elected on.
Whether this will indeed be the case will likely not be known for certain until after the upcoming Autumn budget. But if Burnham does stick largely to the policies of Starmerism, and continues to rule out an early election, then those on the left may again turn to the Greens if they show themselves to be the only ones offering genuine change.
