Haven't A Cluedo
Philip Collins makes a valid point with his opinion column in The Times which is that Labour have a political mountain to climb in the south of England and the Midlands, so they need to choose a leader and devise a strategy that's makes sense outside of what remains of the Labour Party's heartlands.
In other words, there's no point in piling up the vote's where Labour's already ahead because winning big or winning bigger doesn't bring the vector any extra seats.
Labour’s strategy is unfathomably stupid
By Philip Collins - The Times
The supposed Ukip threat in the north is not the real problem. It’s the south where Labour needs to make inroads
Let us be quite clear about the identity of the culprit. The Labour party has been slaughtered but it was not the SNP that did the deed and it was not Ukip. They were accomplices to the act but it was carried out by the mortal enemy of the Labour party, the Conservatives. Yet if Labour MPs are any guide to the membership, the Labour party is going to select a leader on the assumption that it needs to refight all the battles it won and abandon the battle it lost. The party is preparing a political strategy of quite unfathomable stupidity.
Labour MPs in safe seats have returned to Westminster the victors in a fight against Ukip. They heard, from their left-behind working-class electorate, anxiety about immigration, crime and welfare. They fear this discontent means that Ukip might do to Labour in England what the SNP has done in Scotland. Prone to over-complicating politics, and encouraged by pollsters and commentators who should know better, Labour MPs are saying that the party faces three separate battles — against the SNP in Scotland, the Tories in the south of England and Ukip in the north, the greatest of which is the last.
This line of argument is common among supporters of Andy Burnham in particular, yet the notion that Labour’s problems lie in the north is preposterous. Labour increased its share of the vote in the northwest more than in any region apart from London. The party won 51 of the 75 available seats and, of the 24 it lost, 22 were won by the Tories. Labour holds 26 of the 29 seats in the north east and 33 of the 54 in Yorkshire and the Humber. Nineteen of the other 21 are held by the Tories.
The threat, even in the north, comes from the Tories, yet Labour MPs from the region are too bothered by Ukip. This despite the fact that, in the northwest, Labour is 31 points ahead of Ukip. Across England as a whole, Ukip lies in second place in 120 seats but only 44 of them are held by Labour. Why assume, in any case, that Ukip has not hit its peak? This is a party that manages to have a discipline problem in parliament even with a single MP. Ukip is by no means the English counterpart of the SNP. The existential threat to Labour is a nightmare nobody need have.
Even if Ukip does emerge as a serious party, which is doubtful, an overt appeal to people inclined that way is a purely defensive manoeuvre. Labour cannot gain a single seat this way. Indeed, too hard a concentration of shoring up the north would probably cost seats. If Mr Burnham is tempted, as he is, to harden Labour’s line against immigration, he will risk Labour’s superb performance in the open metropolis of London where Labour increased its share of the vote more than anywhere else in England. The problem the Tories faced — protect your illiberal flank and lose your liberals — will become Labour’s problem.
If Labour’s position in the north is a problem, then would that it had the same troubles in the south, where the party has all but disappeared. Labour has as many MPs in Sheffield as it does in Bedford, Cambridgeshire, Hertfordshire, Norfolk and Sussex combined. There are more Labour MPs in Liverpool than in all of Berkshire, Buckinghamshire, East Sussex, West Sussex, Hampshire, Kent, Oxfordshire and Surrey — and more in Manchester than the sum total in Avon, Cornwall, Devon, Dorset, Gloucestershire, Somerset and Wiltshire.
It does not get a lot better for Labour between north and south. Labour won a seat less in the East Midlands in 2015 than it had in 2010. In the West Midlands, Labour gained just one seat and that was from the Liberal Democrats. The point is that Labour’s most important fights are against the Tories in England and they are losing much more than they are winning. There are not enough seats in Scotland, Wales and the urban north of England to make good the shortfall. Back in the days when Labour won elections, its pollster Philip Gould used to conduct his focus groups in Watford because it was the sort of place the party needed to win from the Tories. Unless Labour picks a leader who understands Watford it has no chance at all in 2020. That much is clear.
Though, remarkably, not to many Labour MPs who are liable to veer towards the candidates — Andy Burnham and Yvette Cooper — whose message makes them more comfortable. It is hard to believe that it is only two weeks since the eccentric long-ago era of Ed Miliband ceased and Labour contrived to lose seats against a not- especially-competent government led by a not-especially-popular prime minister. If any further illustration is needed of the stupidity of a party talking to itself, Labour MPs should worry about where they did well in 2015. Ed Miliband’s musings on capitalism were very effective at piling up votes in seats Labour already held. The Labour vote went up 27 per cent in Birmingham Hall Green. There was a leap of 16 per cent in Liverpool Wavertree and a rise of almost 19 per cent in Poplar and Limehouse. All those extra votes for no gain at all.
Surely, they are not going to do it again. To stress the north of England rather than the south is a form of assisted dying for the Labour party, which Lord Falconer, who is running Andy Burnham’s campaign, ought to know all about. Labour doesn’t need a leader who can bring back the north. The only way Labour MPs could suggest anything madder would be to propose a leader who was very popular in Wales. Or France.
A leader who was popular in Scotland would be a start, of course, but over time the Scottish people will tire of their government. The SNP will be subject to wear and tear just like every other party. Labour does need to wait in Scotland and it does need to rebuild but it does not need to despair. In Scotland things are already so bad that they can only get better. In the Labour heartland in the north, Labour cannot define itself against England as the SNP does. Meanwhile, Labour has all but died in the south of England and it is very poorly indeed in the Midlands. This is like a giant Labour party board game for MPs called (We Haven’t Got A) Cluedo.
Politics is a simple trade and it is the start of obsessive madness to devise separate, fine-grained strategies for different places. Labour lost for the most obvious of reasons, as work commissioned for the TUC shows so starkly. People thought Labour would spend too much and be too generous with benefits. People hugely preferred the Tories on the economy and thought David Cameron a better bet as prime minister than Ed Miliband. Labour needs to look for leadership and competence and then trust that those two virtues really do work everywhere.
Let us be quite clear about the identity of the culprit. The Labour party has been slaughtered but it was not the SNP that did the deed and it was not Ukip. They were accomplices to the act but it was carried out by the mortal enemy of the Labour party, the Conservatives. Yet if Labour MPs are any guide to the membership, the Labour party is going to select a leader on the assumption that it needs to refight all the battles it won and abandon the battle it lost. The party is preparing a political strategy of quite unfathomable stupidity.
Labour MPs in safe seats have returned to Westminster the victors in a fight against Ukip. They heard, from their left-behind working-class electorate, anxiety about immigration, crime and welfare. They fear this discontent means that Ukip might do to Labour in England what the SNP has done in Scotland. Prone to over-complicating politics, and encouraged by pollsters and commentators who should know better, Labour MPs are saying that the party faces three separate battles — against the SNP in Scotland, the Tories in the south of England and Ukip in the north, the greatest of which is the last.
This line of argument is common among supporters of Andy Burnham in particular, yet the notion that Labour’s problems lie in the north is preposterous. Labour increased its share of the vote in the northwest more than in any region apart from London. The party won 51 of the 75 available seats and, of the 24 it lost, 22 were won by the Tories. Labour holds 26 of the 29 seats in the north east and 33 of the 54 in Yorkshire and the Humber. Nineteen of the other 21 are held by the Tories.
The threat, even in the north, comes from the Tories, yet Labour MPs from the region are too bothered by Ukip. This despite the fact that, in the northwest, Labour is 31 points ahead of Ukip. Across England as a whole, Ukip lies in second place in 120 seats but only 44 of them are held by Labour. Why assume, in any case, that Ukip has not hit its peak? This is a party that manages to have a discipline problem in parliament even with a single MP. Ukip is by no means the English counterpart of the SNP. The existential threat to Labour is a nightmare nobody need have.
Even if Ukip does emerge as a serious party, which is doubtful, an overt appeal to people inclined that way is a purely defensive manoeuvre. Labour cannot gain a single seat this way. Indeed, too hard a concentration of shoring up the north would probably cost seats. If Mr Burnham is tempted, as he is, to harden Labour’s line against immigration, he will risk Labour’s superb performance in the open metropolis of London where Labour increased its share of the vote more than anywhere else in England. The problem the Tories faced — protect your illiberal flank and lose your liberals — will become Labour’s problem.
If Labour’s position in the north is a problem, then would that it had the same troubles in the south, where the party has all but disappeared. Labour has as many MPs in Sheffield as it does in Bedford, Cambridgeshire, Hertfordshire, Norfolk and Sussex combined. There are more Labour MPs in Liverpool than in all of Berkshire, Buckinghamshire, East Sussex, West Sussex, Hampshire, Kent, Oxfordshire and Surrey — and more in Manchester than the sum total in Avon, Cornwall, Devon, Dorset, Gloucestershire, Somerset and Wiltshire.
It does not get a lot better for Labour between north and south. Labour won a seat less in the East Midlands in 2015 than it had in 2010. In the West Midlands, Labour gained just one seat and that was from the Liberal Democrats. The point is that Labour’s most important fights are against the Tories in England and they are losing much more than they are winning. There are not enough seats in Scotland, Wales and the urban north of England to make good the shortfall. Back in the days when Labour won elections, its pollster Philip Gould used to conduct his focus groups in Watford because it was the sort of place the party needed to win from the Tories. Unless Labour picks a leader who understands Watford it has no chance at all in 2020. That much is clear.
Though, remarkably, not to many Labour MPs who are liable to veer towards the candidates — Andy Burnham and Yvette Cooper — whose message makes them more comfortable. It is hard to believe that it is only two weeks since the eccentric long-ago era of Ed Miliband ceased and Labour contrived to lose seats against a not- especially-competent government led by a not-especially-popular prime minister. If any further illustration is needed of the stupidity of a party talking to itself, Labour MPs should worry about where they did well in 2015. Ed Miliband’s musings on capitalism were very effective at piling up votes in seats Labour already held. The Labour vote went up 27 per cent in Birmingham Hall Green. There was a leap of 16 per cent in Liverpool Wavertree and a rise of almost 19 per cent in Poplar and Limehouse. All those extra votes for no gain at all.
Surely, they are not going to do it again. To stress the north of England rather than the south is a form of assisted dying for the Labour party, which Lord Falconer, who is running Andy Burnham’s campaign, ought to know all about. Labour doesn’t need a leader who can bring back the north. The only way Labour MPs could suggest anything madder would be to propose a leader who was very popular in Wales. Or France.
A leader who was popular in Scotland would be a start, of course, but over time the Scottish people will tire of their government. The SNP will be subject to wear and tear just like every other party. Labour does need to wait in Scotland and it does need to rebuild but it does not need to despair. In Scotland things are already so bad that they can only get better. In the Labour heartland in the north, Labour cannot define itself against England as the SNP does. Meanwhile, Labour has all but died in the south of England and it is very poorly indeed in the Midlands. This is like a giant Labour party board game for MPs called (We Haven’t Got A) Cluedo.
Politics is a simple trade and it is the start of obsessive madness to devise separate, fine-grained strategies for different places. Labour lost for the most obvious of reasons, as work commissioned for the TUC shows so starkly. People thought Labour would spend too much and be too generous with benefits. People hugely preferred the Tories on the economy and thought David Cameron a better bet as prime minister than Ed Miliband. Labour needs to look for leadership and competence and then trust that those two virtues really do work everywhere.
