Could Labour adopt Green policies in response to their growing popularity?

[JustAlice]

There was a phase when Reform's popularity was rising and Labour started adopting some of their promises, like toughening immigration laws etc.
Can they do the same but looking up to Greens now? Haven't they started already, removing 2-child benefits cap?
But, in contrast to Reform, I can't imagine what is actually driving increasein Green's popularity other than pro-muslim vibe/antagonism to Reform, and what's there for Labour to copy. Any suggestions?

Maybe next Labour PM will be Muslim or from a city with vast Muslim population, like London or Birmingham?

The masses wanted Brexit - look how that went
Most people want capital punishment returned too

Labour need to pursue some policies that generate growth and wealth and to stop appealing to the masses

theyre the traditional protest vote, that’s all. People are horrified at the increase in reform but disillusioned with labour (and the conservatives just screwed themselves over with infighting and splits). People think “oh yes greens - I care about the planet” and don’t look more widely.
The most sensible centrist party is actually the Lib Dems but they don’t seem to understand they are alienating people (particularly women) with their trans stance.

I read that Labour wants to junk their voting at 16 plan, because that would benefit the Greens rather than Labour.

The Greens are all about Gaza and men with fetishes and terrible economics.

I was thinking Libdems are for that. But I have no idea what they actually stand for, like pro-immigration?

Nationalisation of energy and water utilities is popular but Labour have not implemented them. Wealth taxes on billionaires would be popular but that’s not happening either.

All Labour politicians, especially the ones on the front benches, are interested in is what makes them rich, and the billionaires will not continue to fund politicians who will not protect their existence.

No chance of significant change here now except in the other side of collapse.

I don't think enough people care enough about nationalisation, so it's an extra work that will unlikely bring more votes.

You're wrong about nationalisation - ask anyone who lives with sh*tty Thames Water - most people would welcome renationalisation of water - last I heard it was about 80% support bringing water companies back into public ownership.

Majority of customers want Thames Water to be nationalised

@thedramaQueenAnd who can afford the investment needed? Not the government! It’s waaaaay too much money. Look at the issues! Then look at the cost. Public ownership is still going to cost us - people don’t work for nothing and the infrastructure repair costs are staggeringly high. We need defence spending so that will come first.

It’s about to go bankrupt and tax payers are already bank rolling it so might as well own it!

Protecting things like the water systems is part of our defence imagine what would happen if enemy of the state decided to destroy that or take it out! We’ve all be screwed. Water and utilities shouldn’t be owned by foreign investors it you’re concerned about defence.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cg7z7ddmd5eo

Who do you think is going to have to pay for this… we are ultimately! This is why public opinion is in favour of nationalisation!

I am moving from Labour to Green. A signal to Labour that they need to move left not right if they want my vote again. I live in a big uni city in the North and the predictions are that many of these cities will turn green this week.

I have actively listened to Zack Polanski’s podcast and agree with many of his ideas. Have a scan of the Spotify list and you will get a headline of what they stand for outside of Gaza and the Environment. Better funding for education and protecting the NHS are a good start!

I think people are dissatisfied with labour so are finding any parties to counter them and green is better than reform in thier view.

I dont think Its a love of green policies as such.

Im also suspicious that foreign interference realises either reform or green would destabilise the country and so is pushing both (not at a local level). I think it was proven brexit was influenced from abroad..

The cost would be considerably lower without dividend payments and telephone number salaries. Nationalisation of water should be a top priority.

The main reason the Green Party is so popular among young people is that it brings a message of hope. I certainly find it appealing for exactly that reason.

I hate it when political parties suddenly change (or starting to have!) policies when they are in trouble . What the electorate deserves is value, principles, policies and strategy, right from the start, and well explained. And anyway, people aren’t voting for the Greens only over their environmental policies-they attracted by the very left politics that the Labour Party has abandoned. People also like that they support Palestine and don’t think that Israel is doing the right thing, and that they can see the difference between antisemitism and Zionism.

Labour could nick the idea of rejoining the EU ....

A big yes. If we had growth and people started to feel a bit better off again, people wouldn't be turning to the dangerous alternative parties. It's because we've had 3 decades of crap politicians from the two main parties and most people feel worse off that they're looking for alternatives. That's what caused Brexit and it's what WILL cause a Reform win next time. Unless Labour and the Tories wake up, smell the coffee, and start growing the economy.

That would just polarise the Labour vote - half would want back in, half would want to stay out. Meaning Labour would be out of power for another generation. Again!

A lot of the privatisation was to get private equity to fund all the investments/improvements needed that simply couldn't have been financed by the taxpayer.

Look at the railways. It cost tens of billions for the new rolling stock (compliant coaches) alone due to nearly everything in use in the 80s being non compliant with environmental laws, health & safety laws, disability discrimination laws etc. The taxpayer was already on the hook for tens of billions for infrastructure improvements, i.e. signalling, bridges, plus disability access at stations requiring ramps and lifts to be installed etc.

It's why Brown/Blair had to use PFI to build new schools and hospitals - again, the taxpayer couldn't buy them, so they needed external funding.

You haven’t seen the polls then, or the petitions? Polls are in favour of nationalisation, of trains, utilities and particularly water right now. I don’t really know how anyone can claim that people are not interested.

Privatisation of anything has never, never, been popular, and people have not hesitated to say that at any opportunity - education and housing are other areas. The trouble is we don’t get much opportunity to really express ourselves, and in a country controlled by the rich for the rich, what you mean is that not enough rich people want it. They would of course lose their easy incomes.

Once again I can only say how remarkable it is that ‘the taxpayer’ could afford such things as building the NHS in the first place in a much poorer economy post War. Yet we can’t now.

We are being lied to all the time by those in power, and we all know it. This is no democracy.

No. Aping the Green Party won't help Labour any more than trying to be Reform Lite helped them. They need to focus instead on serious strategies that will at least begin to address the many serious challenges that are facing the country right now. They need to stop squabbling amongst themselves and focus on running the country. And they need to get much, much better at communicating effectively about what they are actually doing.

The Greens and Reform are both popular because people are fed up with the traditional parties and want something different. They are not popular because they have credible policies that will actually fix anything - most people are not scrutinising them to that extent. Hence the bizarre scenario in which we have some voters wavering between Reform and Green. It is a style and a brand that people are choosing - not a serious agenda for change.

Polanski is just another populist like Farage, but just with a left wing flavour. Like Reform, the Greens are offering very simple solutions to very complex problems with very little serious thought about how they would actually implement any of their ideas. It's incredibly easy to promise the moon on a stick if you don't actually have to explain how you're going to deliver it.

The Labour Party's brand is now toxic, as is the Tory brand. I don't think they can easily overcome this simply by presenting a few populist policies. I think their only real hope of not being slaughtered at the next election is to actually find a way of delivering meaningful improvements in people's lives. A growing economy. A functioning NHS. Effective public services. Investment in defence. Opportunities for young people. A solution for social care. People feeling better off etc.

Given the challenges presented by Brexit, the Trump administration and the changing global order; our low productivity and the cost of government debt; our ageing population; the mental health crisis; the polarisation of public debate; and the looming threats from climate change, as well as the myriad other problems which we face as a nation, I don't rate their chances much. But I remain in hope because the alternatives are even worse than what we've got.

@MrsBennetsPoorNervesAreBack what do you think will happen if either Reform or Greens come into power? It's highly likely but I can't imagine.
The only right decisions Labour can make will be hugely unpopular, such as cutting benefits/triple lock, so not happening.
They could replace stamp duty with yearly property tax, making things easier for FTBs or house movers, and start taxing land that has been in trust funds for decades.
I wonder if they are preparing U-turn on immigration. They already moved the debates on ILR from March to November.
They can continue kicking immigrants as they are not voters yet so it will cost them nothing and in line with what the Brits want.
On the other hand, they can leave immigrants alone, hoping it will bring them extra votes at the next elections.

A lot of the privatisation was to get private equity to fund all the investments/improvements needed that simply couldn't have been financed by the taxpayer.

So what happened? That strategy worked really well, didn’t it? I disagree actually, it was part of Thatcher’s selling off the family silver. Pure ideology.