The real lesson of Holborn and St Pancras is a warning to Labour

THE Holborn and St Pancras election result has been hailed as a triumph for Labour and an electoral disaster for the Greens. It was neither. In the 2019 general election, with Keir Starmer as candidate, Labour won 64 per cent of the constituency vote. In 2024 Labour won 48.9 per cent — despite Starmer’s unqualified support for Israel and an already explicit determination to put arms expenditure before welfare. In 2026 Labour had a good candidate with strong local credibility and a new and more populist party leader. Yet what happened? The Labour vote fell again: 45.2. By contrast the Green Party increased its vote from 4.8 per cent in 2019 to 10.4 in 2024 and 33.8 in 2026. The Green Party, as might be expected, took strong positions on the environment — including opposition to further drilling in the North Sea. It called for the nationalisation of Thames Water, the cancellation of Trident and active support for nuclear disarmament and nuclear non-proliferation. Its conference position on Palestine was for “one state” for both the Palestinian and Jewish populations — although Zack Polanski himself had supported the “two-state” position of the UN and the Palestine Liberation Organisation. The party also maintained its traditional support for EU membership, for rights to self-determination in Wales, Scotland and the North of Ireland and backing for the Kiev government’s territorial claims in Ukraine. So, yes, strong elements of populism and maybe political naivete. But in Holborn it left the two far-right parties with just 8 per cent of the vote between them, the Tories with 7 per cent and the Lib Dems with 3. In what is still the honeymoon period for Andy Burnham, this election result should be a wake-up call for both the Labour Party and the wider trade union and labour movement. Already too many of Burnham’s apparently transformative policies have suddenly and surprisingly faded away. The rebirth of council housing has turned into a vague promise of a bit more money for housing associations. Public ownership of bus transport will actually mean franchising private bus companies. Public ownership of water now seems to involve greater public oversight of bankrupt enterprises — and something similar for energy. And currently, despite a good and insightful start on regional decentralisation, combining the seizure of powers from the Treasury with the creation of strong regional alliances, much will depend on how far the developing global financial crisis, and Britain’s vulnerability to it, freezes further development. So, will John Healey’s Budget in three weeks’ time slam the door on this and any earlier promises of a rebirth of a genuine welfare state and a modest move back towards public ownership? Will it, on the other hand, still give billions a new “air-drop” nuclear bomb, as previously initialled by Starmer, along with the military hardware required for participation in the EU’s resuscitated Nato? This is why the emerging policy crisis is critical not just for the future of the Labour Party but also for the trade union and labour movement. The International Monetary Fund has just called for higher interest rates to choke off currently dangerous levels of speculation. The Bank of International Settlements has done the same. Who is going to be hurt? It won’t be the speculators. It will be those who lose their jobs, are faced with higher mortgages and all of us paying higher prices for basic necessities. That is why the politics of this crisis are also a matter for trade union and labour movement. The progressive elements of Burnham’s programme are its own property. They come from repeated motions at trade union conferences. The movement must engage before it is too late and be ready for the October 28 Budget. Zack Polanski is taking on Labour’s Sagal Abdi-Wali in a contest shaped by Gaza, housing and the fallout from Keir Starmer’s collapse. ANDREW MURRAY reports Green Party leader confirms he is looking to fight Holborn and St Pancras by-election