London mayor Sadiq Khan sparked laughter in the chamber when he addressed Green Party leader Zack Polanski in Urdu during Mayor’s Question Time on Thursday 17 September 2026. The exchange came as Polanski campaigns to succeed Sir Keir Starmer as MP for Holborn and St Pancras, a seat vacated after Starmer’s surprise resignation earlier this month. Khan’s remark, delivered partly in Urdu and followed by an English clarification, highlighted the ongoing debate over linguistic outreach in the upcoming by‑election on 8 October.
The Exchange at Mayor’s Question Time
During the routine questioning session at City Hall, Khan turned to Polanski and said, in Urdu: “Peace be upon you. I was worried that you would ask the question in Urdu, but you asked your question in English. I’ll be spending time in Holborn and St Pancras this week and I’m going to be there. Maybe, maybe we will meet there.” He then switched to English, adding: “I thought as the member is so proficient in Urdu that I would speak in Urdu.” The remark prompted a ripple of amusement among fellow assembly members.
Khan’s team later confirmed that the Urdu greeting was a deliberate nod to Polanski’s recent campaign video, in which the Green leader introduced himself to voters in the language. The mayor, whose parents emigrated from Pakistan to England in the 1960s, has frequently spoken of pride in his heritage and occasionally uses Urdu in public engagements.
Polanski’s Multilingual Campaign Stirs Debate
Polanski’s decision to launch his by‑election bid with a Urdu‑language video was intended to signal inclusivity and to reach constituents who speak the language. The video, released amid his bid to replace Sir Keir Starmer, encouraged voters to back him on 8 October. However, the move attracted criticism from commentators who pointed out that Urdu speakers form a relatively small proportion of the Holborn and St Pancras electorate.
In response to the feedback, Polanski produced a second video in French, only to be criticised for inaccuracies in the subtitles that accompanied it. The back-and-forth underscored the sensitivity surrounding language‑based campaigning in a multicultural constituency.
Reactions Across the Political Spectrum
Labour MP Naz Shah praised Khan’s approach, describing it on Twitter as “pure class” from the London mayor. Her comment reflected a broader appreciation among some Labour figures for the mayor’s willingness to engage with his cultural roots.
Conversely, Katie Lam, the Conservative Party’s local government spokesman, condemned Polanski’s original Urdu video as “attempting to appeal to group‑based grievances by campaigning in foreign languages”, labelling the tactic “poisonous” and calling for a ban on such practices.
The Green Party pushed back, asserting that “democracy doesn’t discriminate by languages spoken” and arguing that reaching voters in their mother tongue is a legitimate and proud part of their outreach strategy. A Greens spokesman added, with a hint of amusement, that “the Mayor is quite funny in Urdu”.
Implications for the Holborn and St Pancras By‑election
Sir Keir Starmer’s resignation has set the stage for a closely contested by‑election, with Labour regarded as the favourite to retain the seat and the Greens identified as the principal challenger. Khan’s light‑hearted yet pointed use of Urdu may serve to energise Labour’s base while simultaneously highlighting the linguistic dynamics that both major parties are navigating.
The episode also raises broader questions about how political candidates balance genuine outreach with the risk of appearing to exploit identity‑based sentiments. As the 8 October poll approaches, the interplay of language, heritage, and party strategy will likely remain a talking point among voters and commentators alike.
Why it Matters
This exchange encapsulates the evolving nature of campaign communication in Britain’s diverse urban centres. By employing Urdu—a language tied to his personal background—Khan not only showcased cultural pride but also nudged the political conversation toward a deeper consideration of how parties engage with multilingual communities. The reaction from rivals and allies alike illustrates that language can be both a bridge and a battleground in contemporary politics, with potential consequences for voter perception and party fortunes in the forthcoming by‑election. As Holborn and St Pancras prepares to choose its next representative, the dialogue sparked by this moment may shape how future candidates approach linguistic outreach, making it a noteworthy development in the run‑up to the vote.
