Green leader Natalie Bennett (right) with Leanne Wood of Plaid Cymru and Nicola Sturgeon of the SNP. Photo: Getty
Show Hide image

The rise of the "anti-Ukip" party: how the Greens are hammering Labour

Ed Miliband's worst nightmare.

Until a few months ago, Labour thought that its passage to power was simple enough. Hold onto its core vote, scoop up angry left-wing voters disaffected with the Liberal Democrats, and watch Ukip and the electoral system do the rest.

The assumption was that Labour would not face pressure on its left. That belief has now been shattered – and not only by the SNP. In 2014, the total membership of the Greens, including both the Green Party of England and Wales and the Scottish Green Party, rose from 15,000 to 35,000, just 9,000 fewer than the membership of the Lib Dems. Almost 300,000 people have signed a petition demanding that the Greens be included in the TV debates before the general election.

Worst of all for Labour, the Greens now average six per cent in the polls, compared with one per cent at the last general election. Their support more than doubled in 2014. Relatively few of the new Green supporters voted for Labour in 2010, but around a third are former left-leaning Liberal Democrats: exactly the segment of the electorate that Labour regarded as its "firewall" in 2015. “A Green vote of six per cent would probably be enough to prevent Labour from getting an overall majority,” explains Adam Ludlow from the polling firm ComRes.

As 2015 has already highlighted, the Conservatives might just be the Green Party’s best friends. In attacking Labour’s spending plans as “unfunded”, the Tories are goading Labour to deny the charge, as George Eaton notes. But by seeking to win fiscal credibility, Labour has to accept that it will not reverse some cuts many on the left regard as unpalatable. Doing this opens up political space for the Greens to parade its anti-austerity credentials and, to those on the left, paint an unflattering contrast with Labour. 

While the “Green surge” has even got its own hashtag on Twitter some perspective is needed. The Greens failed to make any impact in by-elections this Parliament and, while it gained an MEP in May, its national vote was actually slightly lower than in the 2009 European elections. While the party makes much of its appeal to voters disaffected with the Lib Dems, those who voted for the Lib Dems in 2010 are actually more likely to support Ukip than the Greens today.

Still, Labour is confronting the fact that the rise of the Greens – even if it has not been on the same scale as Ukip’s – could stop Ed Miliband becoming Prime Minister. In October, the shadow justice secretary Sadiq Khan was appointed as chair of a new Labour Party unit on the Green Party. A few weeks later he visited Brighton Pavilion, which Labour is trying to win back from the Greens. The constituency is Labour’s 19th top target seat, the sort of seat it needs to win to be the largest single party, let alone win a majority.

On a crisp Saturday morning at the end of November, I repeat Khan’s journey. The caricature of Brighton – and the traditional Green stronghold – is North Lane, with its copious juice bars and shops like Vegetarian Shoes. When I meet Caroline Lucas, the Green Party’s first MP, it is not there but on the less affluent London Road, where she is manning a Green Party stall. Several shops, including the one behind the stall, have fallen into disuse, and graffiti covers their shutters.

That the Greens are campaigning here is evidence of a party attempting to expand its support, though the process is not easy. “They’re very middle-class,” a train driver tells me outside the 99p store opposite. Despite efforts to forge links with trade unions, 61 per cent of Green supporters today are ABC1s.

Still, Lucas has established a rapport with her electorate that would be the envy of most MPs. A grannie asks for a selfie. Two young girls have dragged their parents out to meet Lucas. Another woman, who has the look of a middle-aged bohemian, interrupts our chat. “You do wicked work. Thank you so much,” she says. Most importantly of all, Lucas appeals to voters who would not normally support the Greens. “I’m not a green believer,” a cab driver tells me. He loathes the Green-controlled council who “make life very difficult” for him and hopes they are defeated next year. But he will still be voting for Lucas. “She’s the only person in Parliament who talks sense,” he says. “She’s not hidebound by party politics.”  

Developing an appeal beyond her party base is essential to Lucas’ chances of winning re-election. In 2011, Brighton became the first ever council to fall under Green control (although it does not have a majority, it has more councillors than any other party). Many locals – even those well disposed to Lucas – have not found the experience a happy one. The council has an appalling recycling record: 302nd out of 326 councils. A bin strike led to a week of rubbish amassing on the streets. Shopkeepers in the market on London Road also grumble that exorbitant car parking prices and a 20mph speed limit imposed in much of Brighton have "crippled business," as Patricia, who owns a family fishmonger’s, tells me. 

The Green Party’s rule in Brighton has often made for an unedifying spectacle. In the summer of 2013, a councillor attempted to conduct a coup against Jason Kitcat, the Green leader of Brighton Council, by enlisting the support of a Labour councillor over direct message on Twitter. Labour gleefully leaked the correspondence. The Greens have also tried to organise a referendum to get public support on a council tax rise of 4.75 per cent. And this year another Green councillor, Ben Duncan, was expelled from the party after calling soldiers “hired killers”.

“The basic problem that they have is they haven’t really decided whether they want to be a party of protest or a party that actually runs an administration,” says Neil Schofield, a Green councillor who defected to Labour last August. “They seem to be very divided between people who use the council chamber as a platform and people who want to get things done.”

Yet Lucas has largely risen above the problems in Brighton. Even Schofield describes her as “a very conscious, very able MP who has a really strong public profile”, and, “has used her platform in Parliament to raise really important issues.” A recent poll by Lord Ashcroft gave Lucas a ten-point lead in the constituency, having been neck-and-neck with Labour in the constituency last June. “I’m sure she will hold her seat,” admits one senior Miliband aide.

Astutely – and, to Labour, disingenuously – Lucas has distanced herself from Brighton council since standing down as Green leader in 2012. “There are lots of things I would have done differently to the council,” she says, citing her opposition to the council’s handling of the bin strike. She calls the experience of leading a council “an inevitable learning curve” for the Greens.

Labour has not seemed quite sure how to respond. “We agree on a number of positions,” says Purna Sen, Labour’s candidate in Brighton Pavilion. The difference? “We have to not just protest, which is what Caroline Lucas does, but to govern.” Privately the Miliband aide says, “We’ve found the best line of attack is to attack the Greens as an upper-middle class lifestyle choice.” But, if this a reason why the Greens have failed to make any inroads in Labour’s northern heartlands, the line lacks traction with many Green supporters further south. Here, Labour is trying to flatter the party and its voters instead. Sadiq Khan recently praised Lucas, saying they “agree on a great many things.” But he warned: “every vote for the Green Party only makes it one vote easier for the Conservatives to win.” In Britain’s messy multi-party politics, ‘Vote Green, Get Tory’ is the new ‘Vote Ukip, Get Labour’.

In Brighton and beyond, the Greens are hammering Labour for not being left-wing enough. “Welcome to Brighton: Home of the true opposition in Parliament”, a Green Party billboard declared during last year’s Labour Conference in the town. "PS – Labour is down the hill on the right." If the message wasn’t clear enough, the revolving billboard had a checklist of policies that the Greens advocated and Labour, by implication, did not: saving the NHS; fighting austerity; the nationalisation of railways; and scrapping Trident. To this list can now be added a wealth tax – more radical than Labour’s offer of a mansion tax – and a more liberal stance to immigration.

As Ukip has risen, so all main parties have hardened their position on immigration. This has been a boon for the Green Party, allowing it to shape a new identity as the antithesis of Ukip. “One of the things that the rise of Ukip has done is actually just remind people that there is a greater variety out there,” Lucas explains. “Labour has got caught up in the arms race of who can ‘out-Ukip’ Ukip.”

The Greens are benefiting from their new status as the anti-Ukip party. On the doorstep with Labour’s candidate Sen, I encounter a woman in her 40s who has been a Labour supporter for most of her life. “In normal circumstances there’s no question I’d be voting for you,” she tells Sen. But there is a problem. “I really hate seeing how the Labour Party nationally aren’t standing up to Ukip,” she says, citing the party’s rhetoric on immigration. “In the context of the crap with Ukip and everything to have other voices coming in is so good.” She is planning to vote for Lucas next May, though her vote in the council elections will probably be for Labour.

Where Ukip is fond of saying it is “not on the right or left”, as Nigel Farage told the New Statesman in November, the Greens are very ostentatiously positioning themselves on the left. They are open to the fact that their policies place them much closer to Labour than the Conservatives. When I ask Lucas about whether the Greens are attracting Tory voters, she admits “I haven’t come across that personally myself.” And while Farage says that he could support any government if it offered him a referendum on the EU, Lucas is adamant that “I will never vote for a Tory government.” Indeed, the Greens hope to counter Labour’s argument about the dangers of fragmenting the left-wing vote by arguing that more Green votes “will push Labour as well to be more radical.”

The message particularly resonates among students. If the Greens are diametrically opposed to Ukip the contrast is also reflected in their supporters: where Ukip thrives among pensioners who have been left behind, the Greens do best among the disillusioned young. In this year’s European elections, 25 per cent of students voted for the Greens – more than the number who voted for Labour. Up to a quarter of Green supporters did not vote in 2010, compared with 13 per cent of the electorate as a whole. In both Brighton Pavilion and Bristol West, the most likely source of a second Green MP, over 20 per cent of the electorate are students. The Greens’ fate in these seats may be determined largely by how many students vote. This means that the switch to Individual Electoral Registration next May, whereby voters have to register individually rather than by household, threatens to be disastrous for the Green Party. Experts agree that it is likely to result in more students who are not registered to vote.

But however the Greens fare next May, their rise mirrors a wider trend, detectable across Britain and beyond. To every new generation, the notion of loyally voting for one of the two main parties seems more archaic. So far disaffection with the political class in Europe has mainly benefited the populist right, but the radical left – in Spain (Podemos) and Greece (Syriza) – is belatedly catching up. Support for the Greens is comparatively puny, but, as their focus has shifted away from environmentalism, they are winning a hearing with those for whom the main parties are not left-wing enough. With Labour now polling fewer than 35 per cent that makes the rise of the Greens a big problem – in 2015 and beyond. 

Tim Wigmore is a contributing writer to the New Statesman and the author of Second XI: Cricket In Its Outposts.

Show Hide image

Meet the hot, funny, carefree Cool Mums – the maternal version of the Cool Girl

As new film Bad Moms reveals, what the cool girl is to the diet-obsessed prom queen, the cool mum is to the PTA harpy.

I suppose we should all be thankful. Time was when “mum’s night off” came in the form of a KFC value bucket. Now, with the advent of films such as Bad Moms – “from the gratefully married writers of The Hangover” – it looks as though mums are finally getting permission to cut loose and party hard.

This revelation could not come a moment too soon. Fellow mums, you know all those stupid rules we’ve been following? The ones where we think “god, I must do this, or it will ruin my precious child’s life”? Turns out we can say “sod it” and get pissed instead. Jon Lucas and Scott Moore said so.

I saw the trailer for Bad Moms in the cinema with my sons, waiting for Ghostbusters to start. Much as I appreciate a female-led comedy, particularly one that suggests there is virtue in shirking one’s maternal responsibilities, I have to say there was something about it that instantly made me uneasy. It seems the media is still set on making the Mommy Wars happen, pitching what one male reviewer describes as “the condescending harpies that run the PTA” against the nice, sexy mummies who just want to have fun (while also happening to look like Mila Kunis). It’s a set up we’ve seen before and will no doubt see again, and while I’m happy some attention is being paid to the pressures modern mothers are under, I sense that another is being created: the pressure to be a cool mum.

When I say “cool mum” I’m thinking of a maternal version of the cool girl, so brilliantly described in Gillian Flynn’s Gone Girl:

“Being the Cool Girl means I am a hot, brilliant, funny woman who adores football, poker, dirty jokes, and burping, who plays video games, drinks cheap beer, loves threesomes and anal sex, and jams hot dogs and hamburgers into her mouth like she’s hosting the world’s biggest culinary gang bang while somehow maintaining a size 2, because Cool Girls are above all hot.”

The cool girl isn’t like all the others. She isn’t weighed down by the pressures of femininity. She isn’t bothered about the rules because she knows how stupid they are (or at least, how stupid men think they are). She does what she likes, or at least gives the impression of doing so. No one has to feel guilty around the cool girl. She puts all other women, those uptight little princesses, to shame.

What the cool girl is to the diet-obsessed prom queen, the cool mum is to the PTA harpy. The cool mum doesn’t bore everyone by banging on about organic food, sleeping habits or potty training. Neither hyper-controlling nor obsessively off-grid, she’s managed to combine reproducing with remaining a well-balanced person, with interests extending far beyond CBeebies and vaccination pros and cons. She laughs in the face of those anxious mummies ferrying their kids to and from a multitude of different clubs, in between making  cupcakes for the latest bake sale and sitting on the school board. The cool mum doesn’t give a damn about dirty clothes or additives. After all, isn’t the key to happy children a happy mum? Perfection is for narcissists.

It’s great spending time with the cool mum. She doesn’t make you feel guilty about all the unpaid drudgery about which other mothers complain. She’s not one to indulge in passive aggression, expecting gratitude for all those sacrifices that no one even asked her to make. She’s entertaining and funny. Instead of fretting about getting up in time to do the school run, she’ll stay up all night, drinking you under the table. Unlike the molly-coddled offspring of the helicopter mum or the stressed-out kids of the tiger mother, her children are perfectly content and well behaved, precisely because they’ve learned that the world doesn’t revolve around them. Mummy’s a person, too.

It’s amazing, isn’t it, just how well this works out. Just as the cool girl manages to meet all the standards for patriarchal fuckability without ever getting neurotic about diets, the cool mum raises healthy, happy children without ever appearing to be doing any actual motherwork. Because motherwork, like dieting, is dull. The only reason any woman would bother with either of them is out of some misplaced sense of having to compete with other women. But what women don’t realise – despite the best efforts of men such as the Bad Moms writers to educate us on this score – is that the kind of woman who openly obsesses over her children or her looks isn’t worth emulating. On the contrary, she’s a selfish bitch.

For what could be more selfish than revealing to the world that the performance of femininity doesn’t come for free? That our female bodies are not naturally hairless, odourless, fat-free playgrounds? That the love and devotion we give our children – the very care work that keeps them alive – is not something that just happens regardless of whether or not we’ve had to reimagine our entire selves to meet their needs? No one wants to know about the efforts women make to perform the roles which men have decided come naturally to us. It’s not that we’re not still expected to be perfect partners and mothers. It’s not as though someone else is on hand to pick up the slack if we go on strike. It’s just that we’re also required to pretend that our ideals of physical and maternal perfection are not imposed on us by our position in a social hierarchy. On the contrary, they’re meant to be things we’ve dreamed up amongst ourselves, wilfully, if only because each of us is a hyper-competitive, self-centred mean girl at heart.

Don’t get me wrong. It would be great if the biggest pressures mothers faced really did come from other mothers. Alas, this really isn’t true. Let’s look, for instance, at the situation in the US, where Bad Moms is set. I have to say, if I were living in a place where a woman could be locked up for drinking alcohol while pregnant, where she could be sentenced to decades behind bars for failing to prevent an abusive partner from harming her child, where she could be penalised in a custody case on account of being a working mother – if I were living there, I’d be more than a little paranoid about fucking up, too. It’s all very well to say “give yourself a break, it’s not as though the motherhood police are out to get you”. Actually, you might find that they are, especially if, unlike Kunis’s character in Bad Moms, you happen to be poor and/or a woman of colour.

Even when the stakes are not so high, there is another reason why mothers are stressed that has nothing to do with pressures of our own making. We are not in need of mindfulness, bubble baths nor even booze (although the latter would be gratefully received). We are stressed because we are raising children in a culture which strictly compartmentalises work, home and leisure. When one “infects” the other – when we miss work due to a child’s illness, or have to absent ourselves to express breastmilk at social gatherings, or end up bringing a toddler along to work events – this is seen as a failure on our part. We have taken on too much. Work is work and life is life, and the two should never meet.

No one ever says “the separation between these different spheres – indeed, the whole notion of work/life balance – is an arbitrary construct. It shouldn’t be down to mothers to maintain these boundaries on behalf of everyone else.” Throughout human history different cultures have combined work and childcare. Yet ours has decreed that when women do so they are foolishly trying to “have it all”, ignoring the fact that no one is offering mothers any other way of raising children while maintaining some degree of financial autonomy. These different spheres ought to be bleeding into one another.  If we are genuinely interested in destroying hierarchies by making boundaries more fluid, these are the kind of boundaries we should be looking at. The problem lies not with identities – good mother, bad mother, yummy mummy, MILF – but with the way in which we understand and carry out our day-to-day tasks.

But work is boring. Far easier to think that nice mothers are held back, not by actual exploitation, but by meanie alpha mummies making up arbitrary, pointless rules. And yes, I’d love to be a bad mummy, one who stands up and says no to all that. Wouldn’t we all? I’d be all for smashing the matriarchy, if that were the actual problem here, but it’s not.

It’s not that mummies aren’t allowing each other to get down and party. God knows, we need it. It’s just that it’s a lot less fun when you know the world will still be counting on you to clear up afterwards.  

Glosswitch is a feminist mother of three who works in publishing.