Labour’s position on the Heathrow vote shows once and for all that it isn’t green

Today parliament is scheduled to vote on a new runway for Heathrow Airport. It could and should, be very close. Shadow chancellor John McDonnell is loudly proclaiming on Twitter his opposition to the plan, while the government, on its own, doesn’t have the numbers to get it through.

Some Tory MPs, mostly those with constituents under the flight path, are going to be abstaining. Boris Johnson, yes the MP who swore he’d lie down in front of the bulldozers to stop Heathrow, is conveniently on a plane somewhere – not offering his vote of opposition, not putting his body on the line, but which still means that there’s one less vote for the Heathrow plan.

The SNP support is at least uncertain – although that it should be considering it at all is certainly telling when it makes claims to green credentials. But odds are that the vote will be for Heathrow to go ahead. For Labour is not whipping its MPs to vote in opposition.

It’s not wholeheartedly opposing a development that blows a great hole in Britain’s promises to cut carbon emissions. It’s not wholeheartedly opposing a development that will greatly worsen air pollution in a city where thousands die every year as a result of it. And it’s not acknowledging at all that this is an outdated white elephant, built on a model of development now entirely discredited – neoliberal globalisation. If it did those things, it would be imposing the strongest possible whip on its MPs to vote against the runway.

I can see the Twitter troll coming at me now: the Greens don’t whip, so why are you demanding that Labour do it for this vote?

Well, first, that is the way the Labour Party works – their choice – and to not do it in this case is an expression of the lack of seriousness, the lack of focus, on this crucial vote. But more than that, the Green Party doesn’t whip, on this and other votes, because we don’t need to.

Green political philosophy is built on the understanding that you can’t have infinite growth on a finite planet. We know that having to live within the physical limits of our fragile, massively abused home, isn’t ultimately a matter of politics, but physics. It isn’t a choice, but the only option for a future that offers security for us all. We have to live, as Kate Raworth puts it, within the doughnut. No Green would vote for an expansion of Heathrow. And I’d suggest there’s a lesson in that.

If you want a realistic government, one that understands the economy is entirely a subset of the environment, that the ecosystems we entirely depend on for life are under massive strain, there’s only one government to have, a Green one. Others might put on layers of “greenwash”, make promises or the right noises, some of the time. But they won’t be committed, be prepared to stand up for what they’ve said – or stand with the people who are.

There’s a good chance the new Heathrow runway will never get started – the economic case doesn’t stack up – but if the bulldozers do arrive, the people already thinking about the campaign to stop them know the Greens will be with them, just as the anti-fracking protection camps and campaigns around the country know that it is the Green leadership, the massed Green members, who’ll be standing with them in front of the frackers’ lorries.

On my recent visit to Preston New Road in Lancashire, where Ineos has been forced to resort to the expensive courts after having been rejected by the people, campaigners were again asking me “where’s Jeremy Corbyn?” Luckily I’d told them a year ago, when they asked the same question, not to hold their breath.

If you want politicians who you know will stand shoulder to shoulder with campaigners, will always provide their votes for a secure, sustainable future for all, you need Green politicians in office.