|
|
|
 Op-ed: Having stayed up into the wee small hours to watch the Stoke Central and Copeland by-election results Thursday as they came in this brief report is relatively late in the day. So first the result. The Labour Party held Stoke Central but lost Copeland to a Tory candidate. The world and its wife has already had their say and the knives are out for Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn but the big loser is UKip and its party leader Paul Nuttall. This woman is watching BBC daily politics as she writes and first things first the Labour MP for Cumbria John Woodcock is sharing his twopenneth. Mr Woodcock, like Jamie Reed who quit Copeland triggering the by-election, has been vocally against Jeremy Corbyn from day one. Obviously then this woman wonders what he and others of the same mind said on the doorstep campaigning in Copeland. To be fair Mr Woodcock Friday did not lay the blame at Corbyn's door but he hardly put in a reassuring performance. So a few thoughts from a Labour Party voter, supporter and party member. BRexit, Article 50 and immigration Both Stoke and Copeland voted heavily to leave the European Union in last year's referendum. Old new Labour In the last week old new Labour stalwarts, and some would say fat cats, John McTernan, Alistair Campbell, Tony Blair and Peter Mandelson received a great deal of mainstream publicity and it was all about the UK staying part of the EU. Hardly a vote winner in two BRexit supporting constituencies. Timing of Article 50 debate The debate held so close to these two elections drip fed uncertainty about Labour's European intentions. Clive Lewis resigning his shadow cabinet position because of the Article 50 vote was picked up by the mainstream media who ran with it as negative spin. The two MPs who resigned in Stoke and Copeland Tristram Hunt and Jamie Reed opted to trigger by elections on the same day. That left the Labour Party defending two constituencies on same day. Both these men were supporters of old new Labour. Both often appeared to be in the wrong political party. Appointment of election candidates Other parties were already campaigning on the ground by the time Labour had selected its candidates. They were selected locally which means candidates suit the constituency Labour party but not necessarily the residents. So the Labour Party needs to fine tune its selection process and speed it up. Voters need to see a candidate when a campaign starts not just a party. They need to know who wants their votes. Does UKip have any relevance in 2017? Paul Nuttall was the candidate that kept on giving in Stoke. He may claim there was a dirty campaign against him but he was shown to be a liar more than once. Having failed to win various elections previously Mr Nuttall must surely be considering his position as a would be MP? He remains an MEP and party leader but for how much longer? In Copeland the Tory vote was up and UKip vote down. It appears a straight transfer of UKip to Tory helped the Conservative candidate win. Boundary changes Boundary changes in 2010 brought traditional Tory voters into the Copeland constituency and the Labour majority was cut. This means those quoting old voting history in Copeland forget that is not relevant in 2017. Further planned boundary changes will continue this trend shoring up the Tory vote. Here in Hull West and Hessle similar changes are planned. Progressive alliances Progressive alliances are back in the room following Thursday's by elections. Some believe it is the only way to beat the Tories in 2017 and beyond. Final thoughts The labour party needs to:
But when Copeland, an area where the local hospital is under threat, goes blue we need to toughen up and focus as a priority. WE all need a kick up the bum and the reboot button reset. By elections are often protest votes against the government. Thursday it seems a majority of voters in Copeland and Stoke expressed they are content with unelected PM Theresa May and her government. We need to ask them why. Was it all about BRexit and Sellafield jobs in Copeland?
0 Comments
|
