by James Valentine
Officially Labour won in Stoke on Thursday but the real result is that the Brexiteers lost. This was supposed to be UKIP’s high point – their triumph, when they would have fatally undermined the Labour party, possibly leading to an apocalyptic decline, such as that suffered in Scotland. But the idea that “Leave” voters would apply transfer their preferences to a contest where that choice was not on the agenda was a fallacy. Labour faint hearts, worried about election chances in “Leave” constituencies, should take note and start standing up for Britain’s future in Europe.
Mr Nuttall losing in Stoke will still not mean the end of UKIP. It merely confirms a pattern – the previous leader Farage was after all a multiple election-loser. UKIP is a chaotic party run by dubious individuals but it will continue to appeal to xenophobic and anti-immigrant feeling, now made more “respectable” following the Referendum vote. But the result puts paid to the idea that some Labour constituencies, primarily in the North are vulnerable to UKIP purely because of their high “Leave” component. And it can’t just be put down to Nuttall’s lamentable campaign. Copeland was clearly a disaster for Labour, but under entirely different circumstances, the UKIP vote plunged.
So why has this happened? The European Union, as such, has not been the most important issue for electors. Pollsters such as YouGov have repeatedly shown that when salience of voting issues is measured then “Europe” or “the EU” comes well down the list, after the immigration, the NHS, crime and so on. But if you offer the electors a choice about Europe, they will always give negative answers. This is what happened at the Referendum. A proportion of electors who never vote at General Elections turned out. And voting against the “EU” was widely interpreted as a vote against the political establishment and a reaction to economic austerity.
When I canvassed in Stoke I found that electors were ready to talk about the Labour party – for and against. Some clearly did not like Corbyn (which is why Labour’s success is the candidate’s own – Jeremy really can’t take much credit). There was a general “anti-politics” sentiment and a feeling that Stoke had been “left behind”. But not a single elector mentioned Europe, the EU or the Referendum. And this was in a constituency with one of the highest “Leave” votes in the UK.
In the event it did not do the candidate – who has apparently described Brexit as “a massive pile of shit” – any harm to be strongly identified as a Remainer.
And no-one mentioned Blair. Certain Labour scaredy cats, including those from the moderate wing of the party, have attacked Blair for his recent pro-Remain speech, saying he should have delayed it until after the by-elections – the theory being that Labour Leave voters would get upset and punish Labour at the ballot box. Category error! A forced question doesn’t necessarily reflect electors’ priorities.
The exaggeration of the EU’s salience comes from the tiny, vociferous minority of sceptics – the silly old fools on the Tory benches who made Major and Cameron’s life hell and continue to haunt Mrs May. These are for the most part quite well-off individuals who really don’t care if the country goes to hell in a handcart as long as their ideological opposition to Europe is satisfied. And, of course, this EU exaggeration is supported by their allies in the Tory press and even the BBC. Their propaganda continues relentlessly, but Labour should equally relentlessly stand up for working peoples’ interests.
The message for Labour is therefore that their MPs in “Leave” constituencies should stop fretting about their seats and those in “Remain” constituencies can happily voice their constituents’ views, knowing that it is unlikely to harm the party’s prospects in general. Of course, Labour must take account of the Referendum, but people did not vote for lower living standards and the consequences will last for generations. The manner and consequences of various Brexit scenarios must be spelt out. Labour MPs would have been better to vote against Article 50 or abstain. They should at least now start fighting for the best possible Brexit terms, or even a new referendum if the government is unable to negotiate a successful exit.
James Valentine is Deputy Mayor and Town Councillor for Kempston, Bedfordshire
Tags: Article 50, Brexit, EU, Gareth Snell, James Valentine, Jeremy Corbyn, Stoke Central
Don’t know why I’m bothering replying to this sh@te ,but if you add up the Tory vote who now accept brexit and th Ukip vote ,it came to 51.3% of the vote there,
On a fairly low turnout ,so th Ukip vote plunged as some Ukip went Tory, you know what,they use to vote labour 20 years ago
If the Tories had swings to the in both areas, then it only proves that brexit isn’t a Ukip brexit,it’s a labour brexit,and as such where both areas were Brexit ones,and asking class areas,what it means is that labour’s a Brexit vote went to the Tories
Farage was a multiple loser because it took 20 years to establish Ukip, in FPTP which works against new parties, the SDP being an example, but when the SDP took votes,it meant with the electoral system the Tories got in through the middle,of allowing the labour vote to fall
Labour win despite Snell, and despite Cobyn ,and no one I know who lives there had even heard of blurs speech they’re that disinterested in media politics, they voted labour, for the same reason as they did 2 years ago, they always have done
but people did not vote for lower living standards
a. Prove that their living standards will fall. Not woith a forecast (that’s speculation not fact) – and definately not with a forecast from a company that gets more wrong than it gets right (which is all of them incidentally).
b. I, and every BREXIT voter I know, do not expect this to be easy or painless.
You are factually wrong on other points as well – some quite major and I will highlight those tomorrow. Your article as a result, qualifies as ‘fake news’.
I would very much love to think that Labour one in Stoke because we had a superb candidate and nobody worried about his position on the EU, but that would be kidding myself.
UKIP lost because Nuttal went into self-destruct mode. He was caught out because of the Walter Mitty like lies he has been telling for years. That shouldn’t surprise us the far right parties seem to attract characters like that. It’s like moths to the light. It’s not that Labour doesn’t have these sort of people. One only as to think of Keith Vaz or Chris Bryant in his underpants. It’s that these characters are outnumbered by just fairly normal people with a healthy level of altruism, something that the far right has always lacked.
You seem to have missed the fact that in Stoke the combined UKIP and Conservative vote was >50% and well above the Labour vote.
You also can’t have it both ways with wanting remain supporting MP’s voicing their constituents views in remain seats but then remain supporting MP’s voicing their own views in leave seats.
Article 50 will be triggered and the UK will leave the EU one way or another. It is irreversible and too late. I was a remain voter and a Conservative. It will happen. Theresa May rules unchallenged and the Conservative dominance of the 20th century will now extend into this century. They continue to be the most successful political party in the western world.
You seem to have missed the fact that in Stoke the combined UKIP and Conservative vote was >50% and well above the Labour vote.
You also can’t have it both ways with wanting remain supporting MP’s voicing their constituents views in remain seats but then remain supporting MP’s voicing their own views in leave seats.
Article 50 will be triggered and the UK will leave the EU one way or another. It is irreversible and too late. I was a remain voter and a Conservative. It will happen. Theresa May rules unchallenged and the Conservative dominance of the 20th century will now extend into this century. They continue to be the most successful political party in the western world.
The terminological inexactitude in the opening sentence ruins the article, yet I forced myself to continue reading.
Brexiteers, as I’m sure James knows exist in all parties.
The only thing one can factually conclude from the vote, is that in a low turnout Labours proportion of the vote went down, while that of UKIP, the Tories & Lib-Dems went up.
I could postulate, note James postulate not state, another possible future scenario. In Stoke the likely Brexit vote was split between Tories and UKIP. While a proportional increase for the Lib Dems suggests they picked up, probably from Labour a few Remain votes.
Moving into the heady pleasures of political speculation, one can see UKIP collapsing as threat in the North (crap party, dickhead leaders.) With the voters they took from Labour moving to a resurgent Tory Party based upon immigration and brexit tendencies, with the Lib Dems picking off disillusioned ‘soft’ socialists from Labour.
Hmmm, a brave one the poster is. Much flaming he will receive.
Was wondering what people thought of Tom Watson’s speech earlier today. Very eye-opening as to how Labour intend to operate from here on in. Just in case you didn’t watch it, besides confirming that Corbyn will not be standing down, he said:-
1. There is no such thing as a progressive/rainbow alliance and Labour will not be entering into one at ant level.
2. Labour is the only progressive party.
3. Only Labour can actually beat the tories.
4. Anyone who wants the Tories out, doesn’t vote Labour, but votes for some one else such as LibDem, SNP, Green etc etc is actually helping keep them in Office. He took particular delight in specifically saying the LibDems in particuular kept a tory government in office for 5 years.
5. That people in Scotland have got to understand that the 1bn of health cuts they are having are as a result of SNP mismanagement not Westminster funding, which continues to increase. Likewise the Scottish education system.
( I assume that this is also the Labour attitude for Wales as well where for SNP read Plaid and Carwyn will be trumpeting a similar message shortly. Likewise Northern Ireland.)
Interesting piece – completely agree. As most Labour voters backed remain surely we should be most concerned about loosing them to the Lib Dem’s if we don’t hold the Government to account properly on Brexit. BTW if you want a laugh I recommend this funny piece on the EU demanding ‘four pints of Nigel Farage’s blood’ as part of any Brexit deal http://www.thesparkmagazine.co.uk/uk/eu-demands-four-pints-of-nigel-farage%E2%80%99s-blood-as-part-of-brexit-deal/
Interesting piece – completely agree. As most Labour voters backed remain
A cpomment that titally ignores reality.
What you mean is “most Labour voters voted Remain, but they are predominantly in the south of England and Scotland and in seats that are already held by other parties. And that is why two thords of Labour MPs, predominantly in Wales, the north of England and the English midlands, voted Leave.”
Which is an entirely different thing and which is a minefield. For example, Labour held Stoke Central – a Labour safe seat, but if that voting pattern was reflected across the :Leave areas, labour would lose dozens of seats to the Tories.
Should Iaugh or cry at this article?
Don’t know..
Waht I do know is anyone who writes “ Labour should equally relentlessly stand up for working peoples’ interests.” apaapears to be living in another world.
After all, Polling is quite clear – the Tories have a major lead in voting intentions for CD and E goups…a lead well above Margin of Error. And since when has unrrestricted immigrtion been in the interests of working people?
No wonder the Party is polling so badly and lost Copeland. With superior attitudes – “silly old fools” – and sneering, it has s sense of unjustified entitlement and taking voters for granted.
Stan most labour remainers won’t vote for the Libdems remembering the coalition and have resigned themselves to the fact Brexit is happening, if they do start voting Libdem , it’ll be over Corbyn surrounding himself with trots, the fact that Labour has to win voters off of Plaid, or ukip ,who voted brixit ,is more important
Tafia, I think if Tom did say that he buys into the idea that those who vote libdems who disagree with the tories, prefer Labour because I Know libdem voters(or their preducssor party) who voted for them in the 80’s disliked the tories wanted them out, but wouldn’t vote labour due to Labour bieng surrounded by idiots
regarding the word progressive, its meaningless one could progress to the right, one could progress to social Neo-liberalism, as away of helping the working class, the working class could progress to being middle class ,or they could consider dong any of those things not progressive
Charles Clarke suggested that their should be a joint party who stand against the SNP in scotland consisting of Libdems, one Nation Tories and Labour
Frank Field suggested that labour should be able to canvass for an eventual, splitting up of the UK both of those are possivle ways of labour getting back votes to win seats under FPTP in Scotland, but having decent policies that appeal to both Social democrats and socially conservative Blue labour types, even then neither will ever happen
I can only assume that the only 2 people who could beat Jeremy in a leadership contest the other being Sadiq, don’t want the job
Incidentally, the Leave vote was largely centred within C2,D,E where over 50% of each group voted Leave. C1 voted about 50/50. So Labour’s target group (and what should be it’s natural support) – the skilled working class and downwards, is rock solid Leave. And consider also:-
C2, D & E represent marginally over 50% of the electorate.
C1 is actually shrinking.
65% of the full time working population earn less than the average wage.
45% of the full time working population earn less than 18,500.
Have a look at that last line in particular. 45% would see Labour returned with a staggering majority that would dwarf even Blair’s. But Labour no longer represents them – because it thinks the answer (amongst other things) is tax credits.