Ed Miliband wants the Liberal Democrats "extinct". Since only 1-in-10 target seats are held by the Lib Dems, Labour must instead fight the Tories.
Today’s papers are full of stories about the Liberal Democrats after Nick Clegg’s first week “minding the shop“. Jackie Ashley wisely wraps Ed Miliband on the knuckles for his remarks calling for the “extinction” of the Lib Dems. She is absolutely right and Labour should remember who the real enemy is: the Conservatives.
At the weekend, Ed Miliband told the Kilmarnock Labour party:
“we have to make the Lib Dems an endangered species – and then extinct”.
No doubt the line got a big cheer. But it does not contain any strategic insight. To win an overall majority at the next election under the current electoral system and with 650 MPs, Labour will have to win 67 seats. As UK Polling Report shows, only nine of these target seats are held by the Liberal Democrats. The vast majority – 87 per cent – are Conservative-held seats. Indeed, a Lib Dem collapse would help the Conservatives. A uniform 5 per cent swing against the Liberal Democrats would result in twice as many Conservative gains. The picture barely changes under AV or a reduced House of Commons.
After the weekend excitement over Charles Kennedy’s refuted plans to join Labour, the Independent reveals that other Lib Dems are considering the switch:
“Labour has targeted Mike Hancock, the Portsmouth South MP, as a possible recruit. He admitted that he had received a serious approach from the veteran left-winger Dennis Skinner and refused to rule out defecting. He said: “It’s too early to consider anything.”
“The Liberal Democrat peer Baroness Tonge said she had had “all sorts of chats with the Labour party” and told The Sunday Times she was prepared to resign the party whip if benefits for the poor and unemployed were cut in the spending review. She said: “In the Lords, a lot of senior figures in the party are unhappy.”
All well and good if it happens. But the schadenfreude over the Liberal Democrats poll ratings or Nick Clegg’s poor press is a distraction from the real business of fighting the Conservative party and setting out an alternative story on the economy, society, and Britain’s place in the world.
29 Responses to “Lib Dem schadenfreude is a distraction from the real job of fighting the Tories”
Mike
Agreed we should be moving our sights onto demolishing the real enemy the Nasty Tories
but its so easy to kick the Lib Dems, so many open goals
“never mind the cuts, job loses….we may stop wheel clamping”
Will Straw
Thanks for all the comments. Of course, Labour can walk and chew gum, and any serious party in a three party system has to appeal to as broad a coalition as possible. But Labour supporters need to be clear about the electoral maths.
Under the current system, with AV, and/or with 600 MPs the party’s main fights are in 2-way marginals with the Tories. Yes, in some cases, a few Lib Dem switchers will make the difference. And yes, there is lots to be said for adopting a set of policies that make those who deserted Labour for the Lib Dems want to come back. But if the Coalition does anything to realign British politics, it will be to recreate a 2-party system.
At present, the Tories have extended their lead to 40%. If Labour wants to govern again, it has to win votes from the Tories.
william
at long last some common sense.’If labour wants to govern again,it has to win votes from the tories’.the first thing to do is to admit that the past was dominated by mismanaging the economy and that, in future, no labour party would increase public expenditure above the current gdp growth rate.period.winning votes from the tories means saying goodbye to scottish leaders that the english vote will never again even tolerate.
Ash
Will –
“Under the current system, with AV, and/or with 600 MPs the party’s main fights are in 2-way marginals with the Tories. Yes, in some cases, a few Lib Dem switchers will make the difference.”
Well… I suppose that, in a typical Labour-Tory marginal (where the Tories have a 2,000 vote lead over Labour, say) Labour would have to win over 2,001 Lib Dem voters to take the seat but only 1,001 Tory voters; so in that sense it looks easier to win by wooing Tories. But then it doesn’t seem wholly unreasonable to think that it might be easier to win over 2,001 Lib Dems than 1,001 Tories, just because Lib Dem voters have so much more natural affinity with Labour. And Labour also have to retain their own voters, of course – it’s no use trying to appeal to natural Tory voters if the result is that natural Labour voters desert the party. So I don’t think it’s just obvious that the way to win Labour-Tory marginals is to win over Tory voters; it seems equally plausible that the way to win those seats is to win over Lib Dems. (Certainly in my own constituency it was the flight of Labour voters to the Lib Dems that let the Tories in; the logical thing to do, then, would surely be to focus on winning back those voters rather than appealing to dyed-in-the-wool Tories.)