Labour should withdraw its candidates in the 30 seats where there is a clear fight between the Tories and the Lib Dems.
Our guest writers are Guy Lodge and Leo Ringer of the Institute for Public Policy Research
Ed Balls and Peter Hain have today both urged voters to vote tactically to keep the Conservatives out of power. Unsurprisingly Balls and Hain have more to say about Lib Dem voters in the 100 or so Labour-Tory marginals: Balls would like them to ‘bite their lip’ and back Labour on May 6th. Conversely, both hint that Labour voters should support the Lib Dem candidate in those seats where Labour has no chance of winning.
But if Labour was seriously committed to building a ‘progressive alliance’ it might go further than simply urging tactical voting. A much bolder way for it to demonstrate its enthusiasm for a realignment of the centre left would be for it to withdraw its candidates in the 30 seats where there is a clear fight between the Tories and the Lib Dems. Assuming the Labour vote would switch to the Lib Dems rather than to the Tories, then such a move could see the Lib Dems take at least 10 seats from the Tories on Thursday, including the seat of Oliver Letwin in West Dorset.
It would also help the Lib Dems defend a further 10 seats from the Tories, including the Eastleigh seat of the party’s home affairs spokesman Chris Huhne. In other words should Labour withdraw candidates in these seats they could easily deprive the Tories of at least 20 MPs. Nor would this affect Labour’s national share of the vote – they are desperate to avoid coming third overall – since they poll so few votes (roughly about 10-15 per cent) in Tory-Lib Dem marginals.
Labour should be prepared to stand down candidates in these seats without insisting on the Lib Dems returning the favour in Tory-Labour marginals. This is about Labour showing its commitment to cementing a ‘progressive alliance’ in British politics – something it has failed to do while in power, and which it has only returned to very late in the day.
And who knows where it might lead? Should there be a hung parliament there could be another election later this year – might this be the moment when the old Gladstone-Macdonald electoral pact of the Edwardian age is formally revived? The Lib Dems might be more encouraged to look at this if Labour helped them out on May 6th.
Left Foot Forward doesn't have the backing of big business or billionaires. We rely on the kind and generous support of ordinary people like you.
You can support hard-hitting journalism that holds the right to account, provides a forum for debate among progressives, and covers the stories the rest of the media ignore. Donate today.
25 Responses to “Labour should withdraw candidates in Lib-Con marginals”
emilia
Much as I do not want a Tory government, in denying choice to the electorate, I think it would be profoundly undemocratic, particularly when the true extent to which the Lib Dems are really a progressive party economically as well as socially is still very unclear. It’s not a given that a Labour supporter would necessarily vote Lib Dem if there was no Labour candidate in every marginal constituency.
I also think doing this unilaterally without a similar agreement with the Lib Dems would be suicidal for Labour when Nick Clegg has already stated that total overall vote would in his view provide a greater mandate than the number of MPs. Given the Lib Dems’ performance in local government, I would be very worried about Labour handing them a mandate which they will then use to determine matters in favour of the Tories, either by actively supporting a Tory government or refusing to cooperate with Labour or forming a coalition with Labour in which the cost is too high in terms of progress on issues of social justice.
Ian
I disagree with this too, but not necessarily for such lofty reasons. The bottom line is, it will backfire. The media will accuse Labour of being cynical and desperate, and Nick Clegg will probably make a similar statement. I’m sure he’s sick of all the “I agree with Nick” stuff. He holds all the cards and he knows it.
Various centre-left media sources seem to be constantly saying that Labour and the Lib Dems could and should form a progressive alliance and run the country together – most notably the Guardian, who have put all their eggs in one basket. This assumes that the Lib Dems will even want to do this. I just can’t see it happening without Labour winning the most amount of seats. If the Tories get more seats than Labour, Clegg will not prop up a Labour government that have basically just been beaten. The only way Labour could win the most seats is if Lib Dem voters do vote tactically, but I can’t see Clegg’s hordes of converted followers really engaging with it on that kind of level. In any case, a formal coalition or alliance with either party risks splitting the Lib Dems. I can’t see Clegg making any formal deal.
Confused of Croydon
This would only be remotely feasible if we had a cast iron guarantee that the Liberals would not back the Tories in a hung Parliament. And that we are most certainly not going to get. Indeed, given the number of local councils in which the Libs and Tories are in coalition, I think this would be an extremely risky thing to do.
Jeff Myers
RT @leftfootfwd: Labour should withdraw candidates in Lib-Con marginals http://bit.ly/abFJsY
Modicum
Labour and the Liberals should have formed an electoral pact like this generations ago. At a bare minimum both parties should abandon their asinine objection to tactical voting. It is crazy to split the progressive vote like this, and a pact would be in the interests of both parties.
The notion that fielding separate candidates in all 600+ constituencies gives voters real choice is wrongheaded. Under the current electoral system that ‘choice’ is an illusion.
In safe seats there is no choice at all and in marginals the only real choice is between the two leading parties. It is best to recognise that fact, and then to get the most possible out of the system by tactical voting and the strategic withdrawal of candidates in certain constituencies; then try to introduce electoral reform as soon as possible so that these kind of tactics become unnecessary.