Rapid growth means structures need to change and give leaders greater control, Polanski says in Guardian article

• Zack Polanski: How we’re transforming British politics

Zack Polanski has signalled a potential overhaul of the Green party’s cherished grassroots democracy, calling for leaders to have greater control over strategic direction after a divisive vote equating Zionism with racism.

The Green party leader has also questioned whether political parties should seek to define what members believe, in his strongest criticism yet of a motion that has provoked bitter divisions, international condemnation and calls for his resignation.

Everywhere the PM turns, he finds generous adversaries. They have made his early days in No 10 so much easier

I don’t know where Andy Burnham found his magic lamp, but I hope he’s taking good care of it. In the early hours of Friday morning, the genie that’s looked so kindly on him these past few months granted him yet another wish, with a byelection win in Holborn and St Pancras. It was just the latest gift for a prime minister for whom things keep going right – and who is especially blessed in his choice of opponents.

Let’s start with that win in London, where Labour’s Sagal Abdi-Wali defeated the Green party leader, Zack Polanski. It’s easy to miss how rare such a victory is. As the veteran psephologist Peter Kellner pointed out, this was a win that “defied history”. If the past half-century were any guide, Labour should have lost, thanks to a “truly dreadful record” defending its own seats when in government and facing a byelection challenge from the left or centre-left, the likes of the Greens or the Lib Dems. The average swing against Labour in such contests had been 24%. “On those figures,” wrote Kellner, “Polanski should have won at a canter.” But he lost.

Jonathan Freedland is a Guardian columnist

Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here.

A byelection win is a fillip for Andy Burnham and shows Zack Polanski must confront the failures damaging his party’s credibility and appeal

By holding Holborn and St Pancras, Andy Burnham’s Labour has shown it can attract liberal and left-leaning voters. The seat has substantial numbers of young adults, students, professionals and Muslims – offering fertile ground for the Greens’ ecopopulism. However, Labour prevailed. Having won leave-voting Makerfield in June, Mr Burnham can now claim an appeal that bridges Labour’s divided electorate. It’s worth noting that turnout in London was low and Labour’s vote share fell 3.7 points. But that compares with an average 19.3-point fall in four byelections under Mr Burnham’s predecessor. The new leader clearly has bought Labour breathing space and checked the Green advance.

The Greens more than tripled their vote share in the constituency to 33%. But they were beaten. Labour’s Sagal Abdi-Wali took 45% in Sir Keir Starmer’s former seat, leaving Zack Polanski’s ambition of entering parliament unfulfilled. For a party that began the year promising to turn voters’ hunger for change into a serious challenge to Labour, this was a sobering moment. The passing of a motion declaring “Zionism is racism” at its conference probably cost the party support – though the result in central London alone cannot definitively say that. There is a separate question of leadership. Mr Polanski now says he would have voted against the motion. Why, then, did he not make his opposition clear when it mattered last weekend?

Zack Polanski has lost the Holborn and St Pancras byelection to Labour’s Sagal Abdi-Wali. Despite the Greens increasing their vote share from 2024, Polanski had the cloud of the ‘Zionism is racism’ row hanging over his head.

Now there are questions over his leadership and whether he can steer the party through the ongoing Zionism row. Will the Greens remain a fringe party?

There was a real chance of a Green byelection win in Holborn and St Pancras. He made bad decisions and cost his party dear

As ever, among all the noise triggered by Labour holding the seat of Holborn and St Pancras, the most plain-spoken and undeniable analysis was provided by that sage and national treasure John Curtice, of Strathclyde University. The result, he said, echoed national opinion polls and reflected two undeniable facts: that the Greens are in need of a period of contrition and reflection, and Labour ought to be slightly less than ecstatic.

Andy Burnham’s party, with a majority of 3,364, he said, showed they “are in a much better position than they were six months ago, but still not as popular as they were in 2025”. The Greens, meanwhile, remain “a more significant player than historically they have ever been”, but have lost much of the ground they gained during Zack Polanski’s first year as leader, when the serial failures of the local MP – one Keir Starmer – provided him and his party with such a glorious succession of political opportunities.

John Harris is a Guardian columnist

Sagal Abdi-Wali defeats Green party leader Zack Polanski to retain the Holborn and St Pancras seat for Labour

• Labour fends off Green party to win Holborn and St Pancras byelection

Activists in Camden have suggested the Greens’ decision to back the anti-Zionism motion has cost them votes in the byelection.

Councillors for both Labour the Liberal Democrats told the Press Association that voters had informed them they would not be backing the Green party after it passed the motion last weekend calling Zionism racism.

It is clear now we will come a close second in this by-election. Taking the fight to Labour in one of its safest seats shows just how far the Greens have come.

Voters want us to keep Labour’s feet to the fire on affordable housing, public ownership of water and the climate crisis. Greens will be there every single day, holding Labour to account and demanding the change people voted for.

Zack Polanski has led energetic campaign for the Greens, while Labour will hope to hold on to Starmer’s old seat

Voting has opened in the Holborn and St Pancras byelection, a contest seen as a key gauge of Andy Burnham’s ability to energise voters and whether Zack Polanski’s Greens can still peel off support from Labour’s left.

Polanski, who leads the Greens in England and Wales, is standing for his party in the north London constituency, previously held by Keir Starmer before he stood down as an MP shortly after resigning as prime minister.

Veteran leftwinger has been ‘in exile in the east’ in Russia and not been to Holborn and St Pancras constituency since campaign began

George Galloway has been elected seven times to parliament, but his attempt to succeed for an eighth this week, in the London seat formerly held by Keir Starmer, is undoubtedly his most curious effort yet.

Since the byelection campaign began, the leader of the Workers party of Britain has yet to set foot in the UK, let alone the Holborn and St Pancras constituency, because he is in what he describes as “self-exile” after being questioned by counter-terrorism police at Gatwick airport a year ago.

On the eve of the byelection, Polanski’s pledge is to keep the government ‘in check’. It may not be enough to stop a drift back to the political margins

Only a few months ago, in the spring, there was a sense of giddy possibility about the Greens. Zack Polanski’s radical new leadership felt fresh and dynamic, especially compared with those of the other parties. Former Labour supporters, in particular, were switching to the Greens in huge numbers, Green candidates were winning across the country, and the party was second behind Reform UK in some national polls.

Like Reform, the Green party presented itself as a revolt against a failed status quo. Unlike Reform, the Greens’ urgent stance on the climate crisis gave them a potent moral authority: even many people who did not support them believed that the Greens were right about the most universal issue.

Andy Beckett is a Guardian columnist

Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here.