Labor leader Keir Starmer (right) did not publicly support or oppose Ulez's policies of London Mayor Sadiq Khan. Photo: Ian Forsyth — WPA Pool/Getty Images
Does Sir Keir Starmer really want to stop the expansion of London's Ultra Low Emissions Zone (Ulez)? This is a question looming over the Labor Party's divisions on this issue.
Of course, until the past few weeks there has been little public indication that the Labor leader was a critic of the policies pursued by one of his most prominent regional mayors.
But then came the unexpected setback in taking Boris Johnson's old seat in Uxbridge and South Ruislip 10 days ago, with voters seemingly raising two fingers at Ulez.
And so followed a period of public distancing by the most senior Labor Party MPs from London Mayor Sadiq Khan's proposal to expand the area to cover all parts of the capital. Keir's words were carefully chosen. The day after the Tories held out in Uxbridge, the Labor leader said he would «think about» the voters' message. was able to see it as a toughening of rhetoric, but also something that did not contain details of what Sir Keir wanted.
On Monday, after Sir Keir had the weekend to «think» and work out more a clear position, some new light was shed live on BBC Radio 5.
“We cannot pretend that this is a simple political decision to which you can say “yes” or “no” and ignore the legal content,” the Labor leader told listeners on this occasion.
Instead, the focus was on whether the scrappage scheme, which provides grants to help people replace polluting cars — those that incur a £12.50 daily fee at Ulez — could be more generous.
Cabinet shadow ministers have said that Sir Keir opposes the expansion — Wes Streeting, the shadow health secretary, did so on Friday — but public quotes do not support this. see Ules' predicament as a political headache that needs to be resolved before it goes into effect on August 29, rather than a policy that needs to be stopped.
With Labor ranking high in the opinion polls, Sir Keir has political capital in the bank that he could spend trying to get Mr Khan to delay or abandon expansion if he were so inclined.
Does the Labor leader refuse to do so because, for that matter, he's not really opposed to expansion? Or is it because the benefits of forcing the problem are not worth the cost?
The Conservatives are gleefully trying to exploit Labour's discomfort, and hardly a day goes by without a Conservative cabinet minister publicly urging Sir Keir to say whether he supports expansion or not.
Downing Street knows that divided parties tend not to win elections, which was a factor in Tory ratings plummeting last year when two of their own leaders were sacked amid economic troubles.
London won't be the last of its kind an internal battle
If Sir Keir was going to make peace with Mr Khan, he knows it won't be the last such internal battle. Andy Burnham, the Labor mayor of Manchester, also proposes a Ulesian-style scheme.
Other regional mayors and city councils—many of whom enjoy large Labor majorities that offer some degree of protection against electoral resistance—are doing the same.
And then there is the broader backdrop of Labor political pledges to build on the transition to transformation the UK as a zero-carbon country by 2050 and a looming general election due next year.
Sir Keir tried to find a landing point between politicians to deal with global warming quickly and reassure the public that they would be financially protected from change.
Do your best to stop Mr. Khan's Ulez Expansion, knowing the fragility of the Labor coalition in moving forward on climate issues, will carry with it both political risks and rewards. The question is at hand: does it support the Ulez expansion as of August 29 or not?
However, maintaining the ambiguity in the coming weeks will be easier said than done.
Свежие комментарии