The Gorton and Denton by-election, held on Thursday, February 26, 2026, has become a lightning rod for debates on multiculturalism, generational divides, and the evolving face of British politics. What was once considered a safe Labour seat has transformed into a fiercely contested battleground, with the Greens, Labour, and Reform all vying for supremacy in the run-down edges of Manchester. The campaign’s intensity, and the controversies it sparked, have left many observers wondering whether this by-election marks the start of a new era in UK politics—or just a particularly vivid chapter in its ongoing transformation.
At the center of the drama stands Zack Polanski, the Green Party leader, who has injected a dose of youthful energy—and not a little controversy—into the proceedings. According to The Telegraph, Polanski is seen by supporters as a political fashionista, someone who “displays not a skerrick of principle nor attachment to anything except what is modish in the moment.” Yet, this very quality may have helped the Greens stand out, especially among younger voters disillusioned by what they see as Labour’s dithering and Reform’s inability to connect.
Green Party candidate Hannah Spencer, a plumber by trade, has been campaigning vigorously in Levenshulme and the surrounding areas. Photographs of Spencer surrounded by enthusiastic Green supporters have become emblematic of the party’s energetic approach. The Greens’ campaign has not only been visible but also innovative, leveraging social media and a “great social media game,” as one observer put it, to make the other parties look tired by comparison.
But it was the Greens’ decision to release election materials in Urdu and Bangla that truly set the campaign alight. In Gorton and Denton, only 82 percent of residents speak English as their main language, making it one of the most linguistically diverse constituencies in the country. The Urdu ad, aimed at reaching voters who might otherwise feel excluded from the political process, was met with both praise and sharp criticism. Some saw it as a gesture of inclusivity, an attempt to reach out to communities often left behind by mainstream politics. Others, however, viewed it as a divisive move, one that risked reinforcing linguistic silos rather than breaking them down.
According to The Spectator, critics argue that “addressing the electorate along sectarian lines is not inclusive. In fact, it is exclusive.” The concern is that such tactics might deepen social divides, especially for those with limited English proficiency, who already face barriers to accessing services and participating fully in civic life. The article goes further, suggesting that the necessity for Urdu-language electioneering signals a broader failure of multiculturalism and integration—an uncomfortable truth that, it argues, many progressives are reluctant to confront.
The controversy escalated when Polanski responded to criticism of the Urdu ad with a tweet: “The right wing trolls hated seeing our campaign video in Urdu. So here it is in Bangla instead.” With Bangla being the main language of 199,000 Britons, this retort was interpreted by some as a bold embrace of multiculturalism, and by others as a provocative gesture designed to rile opponents. As The Spectator notes, “Polanski, the progressive, the believer in multiculturalism, casually exploits Bangla… as a punchline to troll those objecting to sectarian campaigning.” The move was lapped up by some in the media, but others saw it as dangerously self-indulgent, warning that such tactics could stoke resentment rather than foster understanding.
The by-election itself became a proxy for larger debates about national identity, generational change, and the limits of political correctness. Labour, once dominant in the area, appeared to be struggling. Party leader Keir Starmer visited the constituency but notably avoided meeting members of the public, a move that some interpreted as a sign of the party’s uncertainty. Meanwhile, Reform—represented by candidate Matt Goodwin—failed to connect with local voters, despite expectations that the party might make significant inroads, especially among older residents.
The Greens, on the other hand, seemed to capture the zeitgeist. Described in The Telegraph as “nimble, enthusiastic, with a great social media game,” the party attracted a surge of young supporters. Polanski, dubbed the “vibes man,” made the other leaders look “staid and scripted,” offering a message of hope, connection, and openness. The party’s platform, which included pledges to bring back education maintenance grants for college and sixth form students and to ensure apprentices are paid properly, resonated with younger voters eager for change. Yet, as some critics pointed out, the Greens’ plans were often not fully costed, raising questions about their practicality should the party ever approach government.
Amid the excitement, there were warnings about the dangers of treating politics as a fashion statement. The Spectator article cautioned that “encourage some identity groups to think or vote along sectarian lines, and you give licence for others to do the same.” The piece argued that the English left has been fortunate in its opponents so far, but that the rise of a more radical, ethnically nationalist party in the future could be a real risk if current trends continue unchecked.
Despite these concerns, the Greens’ campaign demonstrated a willingness to challenge the status quo. They pulled the conversation to the left, forcing Labour to defend its record and Reform to clarify its appeal. The attacks between parties were often personal and sharp: Starmer called Reform “toxic” and labelled the Greens’ policy of legalising drugs “disgusting.” Meanwhile, Spencer, the Green candidate, faced patronising remarks but persisted, embodying the party’s outsider appeal.
For many residents, the by-election was about more than party politics. It was an opportunity to express frustration with the pace of social and demographic change, to demand greater integration, or to embrace a vision of a more open, multicultural Britain. The generational divide was stark: older voters tended towards Reform, while the youth appeared to flock to the Greens. Labour, caught in the middle, struggled to articulate a compelling vision that could unite these disparate groups.
As the dust settles on the Gorton and Denton by-election, one thing is clear: the old certainties of British politics are fading fast. The Greens have shown that energy, inclusivity, and a willingness to disrupt can pay dividends, even in unlikely places. But the controversies surrounding language, identity, and integration suggest that the path forward will be anything but smooth. The battle for Britain’s political future is just getting started, and Gorton and Denton may well be remembered as the place where the next chapter began.