“People like the idea of green policies until they stop them doing something or cost money” -Senior Labour figure after the Uxbridge by-election.
Does the Prime Minister believe the climate science? Until a few days ago it was anybody’s guess as he did not talk about it. He usually dodges being interviewed instead preferring vox pop clips when he tells us that the UK is world leading in this and that with little mention of climate warming.
So when it comes to the greatest threat to life on Earth, which wing of his party does he belong to?
Is it the flat earthers who deny climate change is happening and see it as a woke lefty plot aimed at curbing individual freedoms? Or does he go along with the Gavin Barwell and Lord Goldsmith wing who believe the right legislation is in place, but we need to get on with it and resist any backtracking? Then there is the third way – the wing of his party that is fully enthusiastic about targets that have been set for a time when few of today’s MPs will be around (i.e the phasing out of diesel and petrol vehicles by 2030) but in the meantime will weaponize for political advantage any steps to counter climate warming that might inconvenience voters and, in particular, Tory voters. Last week’s Uxbridge and South Ruislip by-election gave us our answer and Sunak’s subsequent utterings confirmed the third way may yet save Sunak’s party from political oblivion.
According to Luke Akehurst writing for Labour First, his party failed to gain Uxbridge and South Ruislip, although Labour increased their vote share by 5.9% (usually enough to take a by-election), but that the Tory vote stood up. This was achieved by framing the election as a referendum on the ULEZ (ultra-low emission zone) scheme. This fed into long held anti-London, anti-Labour Mayor and anti-Greater London Authority feelings in Hillingdon and Uxbridge where voters still pine for the days of belonging to the long-lost county of Middlesex. Labour bet the house that anti-Boris Johnson feelings and cost of living anger would see them home. It did not and the Tories were reminded that a piece of populist and culture war campaigning can overcome apparently insurmountable odds. A lesson they will surely build on.
One of the challenges facing Labour as we approach the next General Election is that pinning the Tories down is bit like grabbing a piece of soap in in a bucket of oil. ULEZ is an example. It was originally Boris Johnson’s idea and had his full support until it did not. The Government apparently supports it as they insisted the Mayor of London extend the scheme to the outer London Boroughs in exchange for a bail out for Transport for London which continued to operate during the pandemic but lost vast sums of money as a result. Let us be clear about the degree of duplicity here. A Tory Minister forced the Mayor of London to extend the ULEZ and then sat on his hands as Tory-controlled outer London Boroughs, plus Tory controlled Surrey County Council, took legal action against the GLA and them campaigned against their own policy in a by-election.
While this must make Sadiq Khan angry, he knows the ULEZ is right and has the support of the majority of Londoners. The petrol and diesel fumes from the oldest most polluting vehicles make people ill and, sometimes, kills them. The Mayor maintains that air pollution in London is a public health emergency, and that there are 4,000 premature deaths a year from toxic air in the capital. The majority of people living in inner London do not own a car, but they are the ones most affected by car fume pollution. Anybody not believing this should take a walk in the morning and evening rush “hours” along the Marylebone Road from the station to King’s Cross – the pollution stings the back of your throat and gives the air an acidic, stale tang. The cars, vans and pick-ups creep along the road, idling at the endless sets of traffic lights pumping poison into the air. Clean air for Londoners is Sadiq Khan’s legacy so little wonder the Tories want to sabotage his programme.
Despite what happened in Uxbridge, hopefully Khan and the Labour Party will not panic which is what the Tories want. If Labour backtrack, the Tory chameleon will change colour again and accuse Labour of backtracking on climate change (policies which enjoy wide public support). They will claim Labour cannot be trusted on the greatest threat facing the nation.
Hopefully, Khan will tweak the scheme to reduce the daily charge impact on the poorest households and improve access to, and funding of, the scrappage scheme. The problem is the Mayor will require more funding from a government who are determined to undermine Khan and deliver the true Tory prize of a Tory mayor at next year’s election.
The by-election has reminded the Tories of the value of campaigns built on populism and culture wars. They will no doubt hunt around Labour’s green policies – the bedrock of their forthcoming election policies and seek ways to undermine them by rebranding parts as adding to the tax burden, infringing individual freedoms, and generally inconveniencing voters (particularly drivers). If Labour backtracks, it will simply play into that agenda. Labour needs to promote its alternative as a better, more positive future built on new green jobs and industries and counter Tory scare mongering and negativity with positivity and hope. In the meantime, it needs to learn the lessons of Uxbridge by not inadvertently punishing its own voters. Going green should be seen as a good thing to do that makes voters lives better as well as saving the planet.
It is perhaps good news for Labour that the Tories have little to offer at the next election beyond the promotion of hate and division – they cannot run on their record. Going into an election on an economic record of low growth, high debts, soaring mortgage costs, record levels of tax and high inflation is not a good look. It was this record that buried Sunak’s party in the Selby and Ainsty and Somerton and Frome by-elections.
However, Uxbridge and Ruislip offers the Tories the possibility of a strategy that might mitigate the worse effects of a pending electoral disaster and perhaps offer the possibility of hanging on to office. If a culture war delivered victory in a traditional Tory part of outer London, why not focus on the well-established hate targets – immigrants, travellers, single parent families, teenage mothers, welfare recipients, the homeless and street beggars? There are some on the Trump wing of the Tory party who would add abortion rights and LGBTQ+ rights to the list.
Uxbridge could incentivise the Tories into spinning the nonsense that Labour intends to introduce ULEZ’s into the suburbs of all the country’s cities and large towns – areas often containing marginal seats. For the Tories, protecting the interests of car drivers has higher priority than the health of inner-city residents who tend not to vote Tory.
The next election could be nasty. Sunak will be well aware that right wing leaders in Budapest and Ankara have recently won resounding election victories by running on agendas of culture wars and populism despite the parlous state of their economies. He will also be aware that voters just this week in Spain steered away from a similar course because of their fear of what a right-wing government might bring.
Labour’s response should be an agenda of hope and optimism while tackling the real problems in voters’ lives (cost of living, healthcare and education) built around the realities of a world being changed by global warming. This needs to be done at the same time as avoiding Tory banana skins on policies that can be spun as punishing voters. They have suffered enough after 13 years of Tory rule.
Comments