Keir Starmer’s lukewarm response to Ed Miliband’s energy policies reveals a widening rift within the party. His prioritisation of sustainable job creation over “tree huggers” is threatening the party’s unity. The Sunday Times has more.
Ed Miliband gave an animated Powerpoint presentation to the shadow cabinet on his revolutionary energy policies, speaking excitedly of the hope and change he believed they would bring.
His reception from Sir Keir Starmer, however, was decidedly lukewarm.
“[Starmer] thanked him for his presentation, but said he wasn’t interested in hope and change, he was more interested in creating sustainable new jobs to replace jobs in old sectors that were being lost,” said a source. “He then said he was not interested in tree-huggers, before adding to everyone’s surprise, ‘In fact, I hate tree-huggers’.”
The comments surprised some in the meeting, which took place the day after Starmer gave a speech on energy strategy in Aberdeen last month, but they are symptomatic of the divide that exists between him and Miliband.
Those close to the leader believe it is the economic challenge, not climate change, the party needs to focus on. They see Miliband as an eco-warrior who is more interested in the green agenda than the party’s central priorities of jobs, bills and energy security.
A shadow cabinet minister said: “Keir is always trying to anchor the party. Ed will always try to toe the line by saying that the party’s priorities are jobs, bills, energy security and climate change in that order. He can’t help himself, he is a hopey-changey kind of person.”
Morgan McSweeney, Labour’s election chief, is frustrated by those in the party pushing the green policies. A source close to him said: “He sees everything through the prism of electoral success. He sees everything else as a distraction. He wants to throw the excess baggage off the boat and just concentrate on the economy.
He thinks the focus, for example, on the party’s pledge to end all North Sea gas and oil licences has been an unhelpful distraction, and something the Tories can easily weaponise.
In contrast, he wants to see more focus on the party’s Bidenomics-led policies, which amounts to an ambitious plan for creating the industries and jobs of the future.”
Rachel Reeves, the shadow chancellor, and Pat McFadden, the shadow chief secretary to the Treasury, are among the “sceptics” who think the focus on a green agenda is complicating Labour’s key messages. A source familiar with their thinking said: “They want to talk about economic change not climate change.”
Another member of the shadow cabinet said the party risked shooting itself in the foot by becoming obsessed with the climate-change agenda, where there are “very few votes”.
The row has been rumbling on since last year’s annual party conference in Liverpool, when Starmer’s most senior advisers, including Deborah Mattinson, his director of strategy, and Peter Hyman, a former aide, wanted to change the colour of the party’s red rose emblem to green. They argued that commitment to the environment and “green stuff” should be one of the Labour leader’s overarching messages.
They were overruled by others, including the unions, who thought the idea was “mad”, given the inflation crisis.
A senior party source said: “Much of the tensions that exist now are a throwback to conference. There have been those who have been pushing the green agenda, but recent events have shown that tactic could easily backfire, and there is an overriding sense among most in the shadow cabinet that we need to strip everything back and talk about our core messages.”
In recent weeks, Labour has faced scrutiny of policies seen to have been the brainchild of Miliband, including the plan for £28 billion a year in capital spending on green growth and a commitment to ban new oil and gas developments in the North Sea.
Worth reading in full.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.