admin

The Gorton and Denton By-election has rightly prompted much soul searching for the Labour Party. One particular piece of analysis arising from the catastrophic defeat is that “Blue Labour”, the party’s socially conservative tradition, should be repudiated. A return to “True Labour, not Blue Labour” goes the cry. But what is “True Labour” and how does an ever narrowing interpretation of it help our movement fulfil its historic purpose – to act as a vehicle for working people to govern our great country?

For some, the history of the Labour Party is viewed through a prism of relentless, linear progressivism. In this narrative, the movement has always been a vanguard for social revolution, making the emergence of “Blue Labour” feel like a grit-toothed betrayal – a foreign body injected into a purely progressive bloodstream.

I do not write this piece to trash the social progress that was made under the last Labour government. We should celebrate and continue to defend The Equality Act, equal pay, greater diversity and acceptance in our institutions, including within our politics. We must defend these things particularly as it comes under attack from the populist right, and we should say clearly that the mainstream of this country has no desire to go back to the bad old days where racism, homophobia, misogyny and other social evils were more prevalent.

However, to suggest that a focus on the traditional values is “alien” to Labour values isn’t just a political critique; it is a profound rewriting of history. If you peel back the layers of the movement, you find a plurality of traditions holding our historic coalition together, of which Methodism, trade union protectionism, and a deep-seated desire for social stability are a key part.

The oft-quoted phrase that the Labour Party owes “more to Methodism than Marx” is more than a catchy aphorism. The early pioneers of the movement were often socially conservative figures who viewed the excesses of raw capitalism not just as an economic failure, but as a moral one.

Their primary concern was the protection of the “moral economy.” This included:

• The sanctity of the home: Early unions fought for a “family wage” specifically so that the domestic sphere could be protected from the industrial machine.
• Communal discipline: The movement was rooted in self-improvement, temperance, and a strict ethical code.
• Localism: The focus was on the parish and the branch, not a borderless global utopia.

It is one of the great successes of neoliberalism that we have been convinced that “radical” and “conservative” are polar opposites. We are told we must choose between a left which is socially liberal and or a right wing which is socially conservative. Both of which have accepted the dominance of free market orthodoxy.

However, for the Labour movement, the most potent periods of change occurred when radical economic reform was fuelled by conservative social values. The two are not only compatible; they are often mutually dependent. To rebuild a broken economy, one needs the “social glue” that conservatism provides. A radical socialist program – nationalisation, wealth redistribution, the empowerment of unions – requires a high degree of social trust and solidarity.

The 1945 Attlee government – the gold standard of radical Labour achievement – was culturally traditional. They built the NHS and the welfare state not to dismantle the British way of life, but to fortify it. They were radical in their means because they were conservative in their ends: the health, dignity, and stability of British families.

Modern progressives often view “radicalism” as synonymous with “disruption.” But for a worker, radicalism is the tool used to achieve stability. You nationalise the railways or protect the NHS not to cause a revolution, but to ensure that the foundational things in life remain predictable and secure. In these times of global insecurity, the security of those things we most hold dear as a country and in our communities is a potent political message.

By dismissing the socially conservative streak of the movement as an aberration, we risk alienating the very heartlands we should aspire to represent. When the “Red Wall” crumbled, it wasn’t necessarily because the voters moved; it was because gradually, over decades, the party’s centre of gravity shifted toward a metropolitan liberalism that felt increasingly judgmental of parts of the tradition that founded it.

It’s not just potential Reform voters who could find some appeal in a Labour party talking which places fairness, security and tradition at the core of it’s message. Despite the vehement disrespect for working class communities shown by Zack Polanski when talking about social care workers, we should note that in Gorton and Denton Hannah Spencer secured the support of a coalition of voters who would once have cast their vote for Labour, by focusing on the bread and butter things that most people, regardless of their background, care about. Am I going to be able to afford to put food on the table or heat my home? Can I afford to go on a holiday this year? Is my community divided?

Blue Labour isn’t a Tory-lite infiltration. It is a reminder that work is a vocation, not just a contract, that relationships matter more than abstract rights and that patriotism is a valid expression of solidarity, not always a precursor to prejudice.

To purge the “Blue” from Labour is to lobotomise the party’s own memory. We must stop treating social conservatism as a stain to be scrubbed out and start seeing it for what it is: a foundation stone of the British working-class experience. If Labour wants to win again, it cannot retreat into a comfort zone of any one part of its coalition. It must not lean into the fragmentation of our politics but instead reach back out towards the things that unite us – a radical desire for security, community and a good life that resonates with our historic base.

Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.

The post Connor Naismith MP: ‘Why Blue Labour is a key component of True Labour’ appeared first on Politics.co.uk.

This year marks 25 years since the devastating 2001 foot and mouth outbreak. For many, it is a distant memory. For our farmers, it is not. It is a reminder of how quickly disease can bring rural Britain to its knees and how fragile our biosecurity truly is.

The scale of that crisis remains staggering. According to the National Audit Office, more than six million animals were slaughtered. The total cost to the UK economy exceeded £8 billion, with at least £3 billion falling directly on taxpayers. Entire rural economies shut down. Tourism collapsed. Livelihoods were destroyed. Communities were traumatised.

This was not simply an agricultural crisis. It was a national crisis.

Today, we face new and growing threats. African Swine Fever is sweeping across Europe and edging ever closer to our shores. Experts estimate an outbreak here could cost at least £100 million, with the impact falling heavily on pig producing regions like Norfolk. Our farmers know what is at stake. They are watching anxiously and asking whether we are truly prepared.

Biosecurity is national security. It protects our food supply, our rural economy and our national resilience.

One of the greatest risks comes from illegal animal product imports. Too many people still believe that bringing back a little cheese or cured meat from abroad is harmless. It is not. These products can carry devastating diseases. One sandwich in the wrong place can trigger catastrophe.

We need a far more coordinated national effort. The Home Office and Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs must work together to strengthen bio border enforcement. I strongly believe we must open a new border control post at Dover. It is unacceptable that vehicles can travel more than 20 miles inland before checks. We must also redouble enforcement at smaller ports and airports, the cracks through which illegal meat can enter.

Investment in science is welcome. The £1.4 billion redevelopment of facilities at Animal and Plant Health Agency Weybridge, led by the Animal and Plant Health Agency, alongside £200 million to upgrade biosecurity infrastructure, will strengthen our diagnostic capability. But science alone is not enough if our borders remain vulnerable.

We also face a crisis in veterinary capacity. The Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons has reported a 68% drop in new EU registrants between 2019 and 2021. This shortage threatens our ability to monitor disease, protect public health and sustain international trade. Changes to the Veterinary Surgeons Act 1966 must go beyond consumer costs. It must deliver root and branch reform, expand training places and empower vets to protect our national biosecurity.

As the first Labour MP for South Norfolk since 1950, I take seriously my duty to speak up for our farmers. From avian influenza to African Swine Fever, they face constant threats. They need a government that recognises the seriousness of this moment.

The lesson of 2001 is clear. Disease does not respect borders. Complacency carries a cost measured in billions.

We cannot afford to learn that lesson again.

Biosecurity must be placed at the heart of our national security strategy. The safety of our farmers, our food and our country depends on it.

Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.

The post Ben Goldsborough MP: ‘Biosecurity must be placed at the heart of our national security strategy’ appeared first on Politics.co.uk.

It’s fair to say that British democracy is in ill health. Labour has inherited rock bottom public trust in politics and a state wracked by austerity. We are working to show that government can deliver again, and this Labour government has rightly set to the task of addressing the myriad problems left us by fourteen years of Conservative government.

Much of that work is not a quick fix – it is hard yards. We know it will take at least a decade to set things right. But if the foundations of our politics are not able to deliver stability then every bit of progress we make in this parliament is at risk of being swept away. Governing under first past the post is building on sand.

At the last general election, 58% of people who voted ended up with an MP they did not vote for. Unusually, despite the overwhelming parliamentary majority it produced, that election did little to restore public trust in democracy.

With at least five parties in contention across the UK, May’s local elections are set to continue and accelerate the UK’s 60-year trend towards political fragmentation. It is neither sustainable nor democratic for governments to be elected on an ever-diminishing fraction of the popular vote.

Dozens of leading academics have now warned that Westminster’s voting system is headed for chaos. They are not alone. Last month, business leaders came out in favour of electoral reform. They – like we – can see it would create the political stability and consensus required to deliver the long-term investment required to address the housing crisis, the cost of living and rebuilding our trading relationships with Europe.

Labour must not be complacent about the risk of inaction. An outdated electoral system is not just a matter of fairness – it is also a critical vulnerability for interference in British politics and the security of our elections. If extreme parties can win on 30% of the vote, it lowers the bar at which international threats from dark money and disinformation begin to destabilise our democracy.

Cynics might suggest that electoral reform cannot happen without a minor party forcing Labour’s hand – and that electoral reform is just one of many negotiating chips for a coalition deal. That received wisdom is now dangerously outdated. In the 1950s, Labour and the Conservatives won over 90% of the vote. In 1997 that figure was 74%. In 2024? Just 57%.

This trend is reaching a critical tipping point. Five parties are now crammed into a two-horse race across England – six in Scotland and Wales – making elections increasingly random. First past the post is turning British elections into a gamble with the country’s future, recently described by The Economist as “Slot Machine Politics“. Treating our democracy as a bargaining chip in an age of populist anti-democratic movements would be an act of reckless complacency – one that could see British politics follow America’s descent.

There is another way. Labour has a proud tradition of democratic reform – we remain the only party to introduce fair, proportional parliaments across the UK in Wales, Scotland, London and Northern Ireland. This Labour government can still build consensus for an alternative, but it must do so urgently. We need a national commission on electoral reform to examine the electoral system and recommend a modern alternative to first past the post.

We must not bind our party – or the country’s – fate to a broken, unfair democratic system and this clearly failing status quo. The Westminster system is crumbling. Labour must rebuild it – or we will find ourselves under the rubble.

Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.

The post Labour must not bind Britain’s fate to the failing electoral system appeared first on Politics.co.uk.

The Gorton and Denton by-election is historic by any measure.

The result marks the first time that the Green Party of England and Wales, which has existed in one form or another since 1973, has won a parliamentary by-election.

In fact, the Green vote share (40.7%) was four times larger than their previous best by-election performance (Somerton and Frome in 2023). Less than one year ago in Runcorn and Helsby, the first by-election this parliament (and pre-Polanski), the party polled at 7.0%, placing fourth. 

Historically, parties returned with landslide majorities have proved resilient in the initial by-elections of a new parliament. Not so this government. And the nature of Labour’s recent routings has been remarkable. The result in Gorton and Denton means that the first two by-elections of the parliament have been won by Reform UK and the Greens – parties beyond the established mould of the British party system. There is no obvious precedent for such a pronounced anti-incumbent and anti-establishment turn in the electorate. The mould is breaking. 

In Gorton and Denton, the Greens (40.7%) and Reform candidate Matt Goodwin (28.7%) placed first and second – together accounting for 69.4% of the vote. The last time Labour finished third in a by-election it was defending was in Mitcham and Morden in 1982. 

It should also be noted that the Conservative candidate in Gorton and Denton won just 706 votes (1.9%); this, the party’s worst-ever performance at a parliamentary by-election, has cost Kemi Badenoch’s party its £500 deposit.  

The deeper one delves, the more history appears to have been made.

The contest represents the first by-election in Great Britain since the 1945 Combined Scottish Universities election in which neither of the two best-performing candidates came from the Conservative Party, Labour, or Liberal Democrats (excluding the Rochdale by-election in 2024, which was fought under highly unusual circumstances).

Hannah Spencer, new Green MP for Gorton and Denton, is the first of her party to win a seat in the North of England. Spencer’s election means that, after nearly 100 years of continuous representation, the Gorton area of Manchester will not have a Labour MP. The old constituency of Manchester Gorton was previously one of Labour’s safest seats in the country. 

Spencer overturned the sixth-largest Labour majority to fall at a by-election since the Second World War.

Gorton and Denton, the Green Party’s fifth-ever commons seat, was one of only 70 seats nationwide where Labour won more than 50% of the vote share in 2024. Its 13,413-vote majority made it Labour’s 38th safest seat. The turnout on Thursday stood at 47.5% – just 0.3% below the 47.8% recorded at the general election.

The result is the first time since Rochester and Strood in 2014 (when Ukip and Mark Reckless displaced the Conservatives) that an ideological rival has taken a seat from the governing party in a by-election. That contest followed the more symbolic Clacton by-election in which Douglas Carswell triumphed at his former party’s expense. 

Ukip’s de facto successors, Reform UK and the Brexit Party, posed a considerable if uneven threat to the Conservatives from 2019 to 2024. But it failed to steal any seats from the Tory government during its tenure. After coming close as the Brexit Party in the 2019 Peterborough by-election, Reform did not secure over 10% of the vote again until February 2024 (Wellingborough). 

***Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.***

Hopefully that is suitable historical context to establish the significance of the Green victory in Gorton and Denton.

The result underlines that the Green threat to Labour and Keir Starmer, the subject of some speculation in recent months, has materialised. The Green Party has announced itself as a clear, present and probably existential threat to its rival on the left.

Sometimes by-elections really matter. Orpington. Hamilton. Eastbourne. Glasgow East. Clacton. North Shropshire. Add Gorton and Denton to that list.

For Labour, the contest is unquestionably a calamity – the worst by-election result in the party’s recent history. Labour finished third with a quarter of the vote in what it insisted was a two-horse race between itself and Reform. In Gorton, the party demonstrated that it could not defeat Reform in a seat it has held for decades with overwhelming majorities. On current trends, the 57% of current Green supporters who say they would hold their nose and vote tactically for Keir Starmer’s party in a fight between Labour and Reform UK will be staying put. 

There is a clear echo of the Caerphilly contest, a Senedd Cymru by-election, which took place in October 2025. In both cases, Labour landed in third place behind Reform and an ascendant progressive party. 

The signal these elections send is that Labour is a poor option for progressives concerned about the forward march of Faragism. This psychological watershed, of course, has similarly significant implications for idealistic progressives who have hitherto feared “wasting” their vote with the Greens. 

The simplest summary of the by-election from Starmer’s perspective is that things are bad and getting worse. The result will compound the turmoil that follows May’s elections, surely shortening the prime minister’s stay of execution. 

It is pertinent that Starmer placed himself at the centre of the by-election campaign with his decision to block Andy Burnham, Labour’s best bet, from standing. The prime minister’s blocking manoeuvre reflected a lack of guile and foresight – a level of political myopia that only the narrowest evaluation of one’s self-interest can produce. Even Spencer, the Green candidate, conceded that Burnham is “very popular here” and that “people really respect him”.

Starmer is discovering, as Rishi Sunak once did, that the arrival of rock bottom merely masks further plumbable depths. Labour’s decline, like the Green Party’s rise, is unreasonably well-advanced.

***Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.***

If the Gorton and Denton by-election reflects the state of Labour under Starmer, it is equally a testament to the transformation of the Green Party under Zack Polanski’s leadership.

I recognised that the 2025 Green leadership election was a “turning point” for the party. The Greens appeared on the cusp of unlocking their potential as a populist insurgent on Labour’s left flank. That potential is now being fully explored. 

Polanski has learnt from the Faragist right about how to cut through, organise a political narrative and tell stories to a disillusioned public. “Eco-populism”, simply put, has brought a strategic certainty and self-confidence to the Greens. It has also expanded the party’s appeal beyond a handful of target seats. Gorton and Denton is, in many respects, a different kind of seat from the Green Party’s current collection. 

Adam Ramsay (Waveney Valley) and Ellie Chowns (North Herefordshire), who stood against Polanski in 2025 on a minimalist ticket, routed longstanding Conservative strongholds at the 2024 general election. Ramsay and Chowns owe their place in parliament to the party’s inroads in rural, Tory-facing seats. Meanwhile, Brighton Pavilion, a historic Green stronghold now held by Siân Berry, and Bristol Central (Carla Denyer) are younger, generally irreligious urban seats – natural hotbeds for progressive politics. In these constituencies, over 80% of voters supported remaining in the European Union (EU) at the 2016 Brexit referendum. 

The Green Party’s electoral strategy pre-2024 also spanned years of grassroots activism and progression at the local government level. Before Ramsay prevailed in Waveney Valley, the Greens secured Mid Suffolk council at the 2023 local elections. The party narrowly missed out on an overall majority on Bristol City Council in the 2024 local elections. The Ramsay-Denyer strategy bore fruit, to the surprise of some commentators, at the 2024 general election. For the Green Party, winning four seats under first past the post represented a serious breakthrough and the possibility of sustained political relevance. 

But this victory in Gorton and Denton would have been unthinkable under the Denyer-Ramsay co-leadership or a hypothetical Ramsay-Chowns ticket.

Gorton and Denton is a mostly urban, ethnically diverse constituency with high levels of economic deprivation. An estimated 50% of voters in Gorton Denton supported leaving the EU in the 2016 Brexit referendum. The Greens and Spencer surged from third to first place over a relatively short campaign. In particular, the success of the Green Party in mobilising the constituency’s Muslim population should alarm Labour MPs.

The Greens have broken new ground with the scale, nature and symbolic meaning of their victory in Gorton and Denton. 

Polanski has succeeded, in part, by responding to his party’s obvious political incentives. The GPEW and its sister parties finished second place in 40 constituencies at the 2024 general election; in all but one of these 40 seats, the Greens finished second to Labour. The party effectively exhausted the electoral potential of its “Countryfile conservative” strategy after securing breakthroughs in Waveney Valley and North Herefordshire.

Spencer, a former plumber who joined the Greens in 2022 because she was “so angry at the gap between the super-rich and all the rest of us getting bigger”, could prove a real asset to the party and Polanski in parliament. In her victory speech, she celebrated the defeat of “the parties of billionaire donors”. This allusion to the “pure people”-“corrupt elite” binary suggests Polanski has secured a parliamentary bridgehead for his eco-populism. 

Green surges have been snuffed out before, of course: following the 1989 European Parliament elections (when the party won 14% of the vote) and ahead of the 2015 general election. But Polanski’s success in carving out a foothold for the Greens in an increasingly crowded political landscape suggests the party is not going anywhere anytime soon. Polanski will weaponise the Green victory in Gorton and Denton as proof that his party is the progressive force best equipped to thwart Farage.

The Green leader’s strategy has attracted sizeable media interest because it aligns with the moment: he has cast himself as an insurgent challenging establishment arguments. But social media clicks can only get a party leader so far. For insurgent parties, electoral success is the currency of credibility.

Gorton and Denton proves that the Green Party’s recent success is no mere mirage – the surge is real, and it is coming for Keir Starmer.  

Josh Self is editor of Politics.co.uk, follow him on Bluesky here and X here.

Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.

The post The Green surge is coming for Keir Starmer appeared first on Politics.co.uk.

The announcement by Reform UK that they will “restore Britain’s Christian heritage” and that the nation must “uphold its Christian values” captures the contradictory essence of modern populist politics. Politicians of various faiths and none scrambling to weaponise a religious identity that the British public themselves have left behind and show no sign of wanting back.

In The Times, Zia Yusuf argues that reasserting Britain’s Christian heritage is about “respect and continuity”, framing it as a necessary anchor for social cohesion in an increasingly diverse society. He, alongside others in his party, suggests that young men in particular are experiencing a “meaning crisis” and are crying out for cultural confidence. A return to traditional Christian primacy is the only way to satisfy a growing national hunger for meaning.

This diagnosis is false and the proposed cure is a recipe for division rather than unity.

We must ground our political debate and national identity in reality: Britain is not a Christian country. This is not a radical ideological statement; it is a basic demographic fact. Successive social attitudes surveys and the most recent Census data have painted an undeniable picture. The majority of the population, and an overwhelming majority of young people, do not belong to the Christian religion. Our pews are empty, and the moral and social lives of most Britons are entirely detached from Christianity.

To insist, in the face of this reality, that Britain must operate as a “Christian country” is to govern by nostalgia. Worse, it actively hinders our ability to work towards real national self-confidence. When the state privileges one specific religious identity, whether through the school curriculum, the presence of bishops in the House of Lords, or the rhetoric of our political leaders, it inevitably relegates everyone else to the status of second-class citizens. You cannot build genuine social cohesion by telling the non-religious majority, alongside millions of citizens of minority faiths, that they are merely guests in a house built by and for someone else.

If we want a cohesive society, we must build it on a foundation of shared values. We need a secular, pluralistic state that treats all citizens equally, regardless of their beliefs.

And what of the “hunger for meaning” that politicians like Yusuf claim to be addressing? It is true that in our complex, often fragmented modern world, people are searching for purpose, connection, and belonging. But it is a profound failure of imagination to assume that this profoundly human search must lead us backwards.

The search for meaning in the modern world is not the exclusive property of the religious. For humanists, and indeed for millions of people who live perfectly good lives without God, “meaning”, if we choose to use that word, is not about linking our fate to deities or submitting to inherited traditions. It is about a profound sense of connection, wonder, and meaning that enriches the human experience.

We can find awe in the natural world, in our staggering scientific achievements, in art, in music, and in the incredible, complex tapestry of human connection. We find our moral compass not in ancient texts, but in reason, empathy, and our shared pursuit of a better world. We are the inheritors of a rich secular vocabulary of education, virtue, friendship, and civic participation. These are the tools we need to build a meaningful life and a cohesive society, and they require no religious framework, though religious Britons may find resources in their own traditions to support this common endeavour.

Attempts to resurrect Christian Britain prey on the anxieties of a changing world by offering the false comfort of a mythical past.

We do not need to pretend to be a Christian country to be a good, moral, or united country. Only if we accept what Britain actually is today – a vibrant, diverse, and majority non-religious nation – can we face the future with confidence as a nation.

Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.

The post Governing by nostalgia: Reform’s crusade for ‘Christian values’ offers false comfort appeared first on Politics.co.uk.