tag:theconversation.com,2011:/uk/topics/yvette-cooper-16501/articlesYvette Cooper – The Conversation2023-10-11T11:38:27Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2139232023-10-11T11:38:27Z2023-10-11T11:38:27ZLabour’s immigration policy: will focus on ‘security’ win an election?<p>Labour’s immigration policy is starting to take shape. Migration, historically, has been a <a href="https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-319-64692-3">tricky issue for the party</a>. So it’s perhaps not surprising that they are taking a leaf from the Conservative playbook by focusing on border security. But Labour has shifted the villain from asylum seekers to smuggling gangs. </p>
<p>Speaking at Labour party conference, the shadow home secretary, Yvette Cooper, announced a new cross-border unit of hundreds of police officers to go after smugglers. Labour leader Keir Starmer has vowed to <a href="https://www.channel4.com/news/keir-starmer-promises-to-smash-people-smuggling-gangs">“smash the gangs”</a>, to treat people smuggling on par with terrorism and to use serious crime orders to freeze smugglers’ assets and restrict their movement. </p>
<p>Starmer and Cooper also recently travelled to The Hague for talks with Europol (the EU’s law enforcement agency) about sharing criminal data – something that ended after Brexit. And noises have been made about <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/sep/14/labour-will-treat-channel-people-smugglers-as-terrorists-says-starmer">cooperating with Europe</a> on a returns agreement, where the UK would accept a quota of asylum seekers who arrive in the EU, in exchange for being able to return people who cross the channel. </p>
<p>While not the inflammatory comments of the <a href="https://theconversation.com/suella-braverman-warns-of-unmanageable-numbers-of-asylum-seekers-the-data-shows-we-hardly-take-any-214014">current home secretary, Suella Braverman</a>, Labour’s rhetoric so far still squarely frames asylum as a security issue. This is not the progressive approach some on the left will be hoping for. It feeds into the populist idea that migration is always a crisis, and has an element of inhumanity and utilitarianism – migrants are people, not trade agreements.</p>
<p>But given the public’s current attitudes on migration (nuanced) and trust in the Conservatives on the issue (low), it’s an electorally safe approach.</p>
<p>The suggestion of working with Europe, which gives the Conservatives ammunition to frame Labour as wanting to rejoin the EU, isn’t much of a risk. Brexit and the topic of Europe are arguably <a href="https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/45910-britons-would-vote-rejoin-eu?redirect_from=%2Ftopics%2Fpolitics%2Farticles-reports%2F2023%2F07%2F18%2Fbritons-would-vote-rejoin-eu">less divisive</a> than in the last election. </p>
<h2>Who is this approach for?</h2>
<p>The focus on security is a bid to win back key “red wall” voters who fled to the Conservatives in 2019, and <a href="https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/45511-will-focus-immigration-help-conservatives-among-th">care slightly more</a> about immigration than other groups. This is evident in Starmer’s recent statement that those who oppose his proposals on migration are <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/sep/14/labour-will-treat-channel-people-smugglers-as-terrorists-says-starmer">“unbritish”</a> – a dog-whistle to precisely these “patriotic left” voters. </p>
<p>But the characterisation of red wall voters as <a href="https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/35893-stereotypical-image-red-wall-residents-accurate?redirect_from=%2Ftopics%2Fpolitics%2Farticles-reports%2F2021%2F05%2F17%2Fstereotypical-image-red-wall-residents-accurate">simply anti-migrant isn’t accurate</a>. While migration is a priority, it still sits behind more pressing concerns like the <a href="https://www.labourtogether.uk/all-reports/red-shift">cost of living crisis</a>. Focusing too much, or taking too hard a line on immigration won’t win them voters and could lose some younger left-wing voters who <a href="https://www.labourtogether.uk/all-reports/red-shift">favour increased immigration</a>. </p>
<p>To that end, Starmer has also confirmed that Labour would overturn the new law that stops cross-Channel migrants <a href="https://www.ft.com/content/4b7f862e-3c81-4f34-8013-12f51fe32b01">claiming asylum in Britain</a>, scrap the policy to <a href="https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/keir-starmer-says-he-would-scrap-the-rwanda-scheme-even-if-it-is-legal-and-working_uk_6522972de4b0a32c15bee9df">deport people to Rwanda</a> and end the use of barges and hotels to house asylum seekers. </p>
<p>These are all positive developments for those wanting a more progressive policy, and would at least fracture the current system, which is inhumane and unworkable.</p>
<p>Public attitudes on immigration have <a href="https://www.ippr.org/files/2022-11/a-new-consensus-november-22.pdf">shifted dramatically in the last decade</a>. On the whole, evidence suggests that attitudes have <a href="https://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/briefings/uk-public-opinion-toward-immigration-overall-attitudes-and-level-of-concern/">softened</a> and the UK public now has among the <a href="https://www.kcl.ac.uk/news/uk-attitudes-to-immigration-among-most-positive-internationally-1018742-pub01-115">most positive attitudes</a> towards immigration internationally. </p>
<p>At the same time, the public <a href="https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/infographics/migration-eurobarometer-2018/">overestimate</a> both the number of asylum seekers as a <a href="https://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/reports/thinking-behind-the-numbers-understanding-public-opinion-on-immigration-in-britain/">proportion of immigration</a> and the number of migrants overall. Focusing heavily on asylum seekers or net migration targets will only feed into these misconceptions.</p>
<p>One area where we haven’t heard much from Labour is on labour migration, arguably the more pressing issue in terms of Britain’s economic security. Starmer <a href="https://theconversation.com/labour-sounds-like-the-tories-on-immigration-but-its-policy-goes-back-to-its-trade-union-roots-195221">suggested last autumn</a> that future policy would involve trade unions. If Labour gets the balance right they could craft a more progressive policy that treats migrants respectfully while also gaining support from unions and a disgruntled business sector. </p>
<h2>Will this strategy work?</h2>
<p>The public already <a href="https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/45511-will-focus-immigration-help-conservatives-among-th">trusts Labour more on immigration</a>, and has little faith in the current government to <a href="https://www.ipsos.com/en-uk/trust-conservative-government-have-right-immigration-policies-down-7ppts-march-braverman">deliver on their promises</a>.</p>
<p>Targeting criminal gangs as the security threat on the border might be electorally rational. Labour can talk tough to appease the voters it needs to win back, while keeping with a more ideologically coherent position that doesn’t paint migrants themselves as a problem. As we know from the reaction to Ed Miliband’s <a href="https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/what-starmer-can-learn-from-miliband-s-mug/">“Controls on immigration” mug</a> in 2015, anti-migrant sentiment does not play well for Labour.</p>
<p>As the election nears, Braverman is going to keep talking about asylum seekers, which will <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13501763.2018.1531909">ramp the issue up the agenda</a>. But this is a <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-uks-unworkable-immigration-plans-allow-the-government-to-blame-others-for-its-failure-202207">distraction</a> from her own party’s failures on the issue – and more a bid for party leadership than a stance as home secretary.</p>
<p>The general public’s attitudes on migration are more nuanced than Braverman’s rhetoric would suggest. Labour’s security focus might make electoral sense, but it still pulls from <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/secure-borders-safe-haven-integration-with-diversity-in-modern-britain">old playbooks</a>, both Labour and Conservative. </p>
<p>Starmer could take this opportunity to tell a more positive story about immigration, carve a clear progressive position for Labour and move the discussion away from numbers – a strategy that will never deliver. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/net-migration-how-an-unreachable-target-came-to-shape-britain-206430">Net migration: how an unreachable target came to shape Britain</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/213923/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Erica Consterdine does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Labour has vowed to crack down on smuggling gangs.Erica Consterdine, Senior Lecturer in Public Policy, Lancaster UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1107482019-01-29T21:46:38Z2019-01-29T21:46:38ZBrexit: parliament sends May back to Brussels – what latest amendment votes mean<p>In its attempts to find a way out of the Brexit impasse, the House of Commons has passed an <a href="https://commonsvotes.digiminster.com/">amendment</a> that gives Theresa May the green light to reopen talks with the European Union about what happens to the Irish border after Brexit – a key sticking point in getting her deal through parliament. MPs have also voted to reject a no-deal Brexit. And in a final development on a busy day in the Brexit story, opposition leader Jeremy Corbyn has also agreed to enter talks with the prime minister to find a way forward. But many of these developments raise more questions than they answer. </p>
<h2>The Brady amendment</h2>
<p>The Irish backstop is an issue which has caused frustration not just on the Conservative benches, but also with the government’s confidence-and-supply partner, the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP). The amendment which was passed on this topic was tabled by Graham Brady, a Conservative backbencher and chairman of the party’s 1922 Committee. It commits the prime minister to seeking “alternative arrangements” for the backstop, though during the debate that came ahead of the vote, government ministers repeatedly refused to be drawn on what those alternative arrangements might be.</p>
<p>As the countdown to March 29 continues, this will be seen by many as a sign that progress is being made as there is a majority in favour of an amended deal. Yet in parliamentary terms, the UK is no closer to leaving with a deal than it was in December. The prime minister still has a lot of work to do. </p>
<p>May nevertheless sees the amendment as giving her a firm mandate to return to the EU and seek a new version of the Brexit deal. In a further sign that she has heeded the concerns of her own backbenchers, the prime minister also agreed to sit down and discuss the so called <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/29/the-malthouse-compromise-everything-you-need-to-know-brexit-vote">“Malthouse Compromise”</a> – a proposal on the backstop agreed in secret between Conservative Brexiteers and Remainers and facilitated by some government ministers. It is not a parliamentary amendment but is an important behind-the-scenes movement as the government strives to reach some sort of consensus among MPs.</p>
<p>That said, while the prime minister may have her mandate to push for an amended deal, the EU has said it does not wish to renegotiate terms. In a statement released shortly after the vote, a spokesman for European Council president Donald Tusk <a href="https://twitter.com/Stone_SkyNews/status/1090350715300728834">said</a>: “The backstop is part of the withdrawal agreement and the withdrawal agreement is not open for re-negotiation.” May will be hoping that with 317 MPs firmly behind her, Brussels will shift ground. </p>
<h2>MPs rejected a no-deal Brexit</h2>
<p>The surprise of the night was a narrow eight-vote victory for an amendment tabled by Conservative MP Caroline Spelman and Labour MP Jack Dromey. It aims to prevent a no-deal Brexit, though it does not come with legal underpinnings. Although it’s unlikely that the government thought this amendment would pass, it’s potency is somewhat muted given that the prime minister has consistently said that passing amendments of this form are a waste of time; and that the only way to stop no deal is to vote for a deal. It’s unlikely to mean much, other than emphasising that there is a political will in the Commons to avoid leaving the EU on March 29 without a deal.</p>
<h2>Corbyn agreed to talk</h2>
<p>Jeremy Corbyn, the leader of the opposition, had refused any meetings with the prime minister over the past few weeks, saying repeatedly that he would not do so without preconditions being met, including the prime minister ruling out no deal. As a result, he is the only opposition party leader not to have met with May as she seeks consensus – although it should be noted that she initially extended the invitation to everyone except Corbyn. Yet Corbyn has now had a change of heart following the vote opposing a no deal exit and agreed to a meeting. This could prove highly significant over the next couple of weeks – movement on the Labour benches could help May’s next proposition cross the finish line. </p>
<h2>Grieve and Cooper sunk</h2>
<p>An amendment from Dominic Grieve, the Conservative backbencher who was <a href="https://theconversation.com/brexit-what-does-the-latest-parliamentary-upset-mean-for-theresa-may-109591">largely responsible</a> for forcing the government to come back to the Commons so soon after the meaningful vote last week failed to pass. The same went for Labour MP Yvette Cooper – whose amendment was only supported by leader of the opposition Jeremy Corbyn at the <a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/labour-brexit-vote-no-deal-yvette-cooper-amendment-remain-corbyn-a8752016.html">eleventh hour</a>.</p>
<p>Both the Cooper and the Grieve amendments sought to suspend the usual Commons rules in which the government has control of business, and give more power to the Commons to control the Brexit process. The Grieve amendment would have allowed MPs to vote on a series of options for the withdrawal process, while the Cooper amendment sought to avoid a no-deal Brexit by making it legally binding on the prime minister to extend Article 50 if parliament had not agreed on a final Brexit deal by February 26. More MPs than expected voted against the Cooper amendment – perhaps a sign that Conservative MPs realised the Brady amendment would bring greater rewards. </p>
<h2>What happens next?</h2>
<p>The prime minister has said that she will go back to the EU and seek to reopen the Brexit package on offer. But with the EU currently saying it is unwilling to re-open talks on the deal, it is unclear at the moment what her next steps will be. She will, however, continue to meet with MPs including senior Conservative backbenchers and the DUP as she works towards an amended offer for parliament. With the clear majority voting against a no-deal Brexit, the ticking clock works in the prime minister’s favour. If the only way to avoid no deal is for parliament to take a favourable stance on an amended deal, they may have to support her deal in one form or another. </p>
<p>Parliament has a lot of work to do and it is running out of time in which to do it. There are limited sitting days between now and March 29, including a February recess. Assuming that an amended deal will be passed by the Commons next month, the house will still need to debate, (possibly) amend and pass a withdrawal agreement bill before the designated leave date. We may see the recess cancelled or the announcement of extra sitting days (Fridays could be used) between now and then. Either way, it’s going to be an even busier month for MPs as the Brexit clock ticks down.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/110748/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Louise Thompson receives funding from the ESRC for research on small opposition parties in the UK's parliaments. </span></em></p>MPs want the prime minister to get back to the negotiating table, but will anyone from the EU be willing to meet her?Louise Thompson, Senior Lecturer in Politics, University of ManchesterLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1094732019-01-08T11:29:37Z2019-01-08T11:29:37ZBrexit in parliament: how MPs are trying to block no deal by amending the finance bill<p>As I suggested might happen in a <a href="http://theconversation.com/to-force-a-peoples-vote-on-brexit-mps-could-threaten-to-block-the-budget-104552">previous article</a>, MPs in the UK have put down amendments to the government’s <a href="https://services.parliament.uk/Bills/2017-19/financeno3/documents.html">finance bill</a> to influence Brexit policy.</p>
<p>Amendment 7, proposed by Labour MP Yvette Cooper with Nicky Morgan, Hilary Benn and Oliver Letwin, limits the government’s powers to adjust the law about indirect taxation (for example, VAT and excise duties) after Brexit unless parliament has either agreed to a deal or voted explicitly to accept a no-deal arrangement. MPs voted 303 to 296 to pass the amendment. </p>
<p>More dramatically, New Clause 25, proposed by the Liberal Democrats with the support of the SNP, Plaid Cymru and the Green Party, uses the mechanism of limiting the government’s power to levy income tax and corporation tax (about 38% of government revenue), a power that needs to be renewed every year, to force the government to rule out a no-deal Brexit by default.</p>
<p>Currently, if parliament votes down the government’s Brexit deal, a no-deal Brexit happens automatically. Theresa May is threatening MPs that if they refuse to pass her deal, she will sit on her hands and allow no deal to happen. New Clause 25 changes the situation by linking the government’s own fate to the default option and putting all the other possible solutions to the Brexit problem, currently being excluded by the government, onto the agenda.</p>
<p>The government has authority to charge income tax and corporation tax only until the end of the tax year (April 5). When the House of Commons gave the finance bill a second reading on November 12 2018, under section 1 of the <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1968/2/contents">Provisional Collection of Taxes Act 1968</a> the government gained additional temporary authority to charge the two taxes, based on the <a href="https://theconversation.com/uk-budget-2018-experts-respond-105521">budget resolutions</a> of October 31 2018, until the end of May 2019. Section 1(5) of the 1968 Act, however, removes that temporary authority if during the passage of the bill the House rejects the provisions giving effect to it.</p>
<p>New Clause 25 works by eliminating the renewal of the government’s authority to charge income tax and corporation tax unless at least one of five things happens: the deal is passed, a referendum is called on revoking the Article 50 notice, the Article 50 notice is revoked without a referendum, the government asks for an extension to the Article 50 process, or the House of Commons passes a motion approving a no-deal exit.</p>
<h2>What can the government do?</h2>
<p>If New Clause 25 were to be selected for debate by the Speaker and passed by the House, the government would have a limited range of options. It could still propose its deal, but if the deal loses, the government would need openly to adopt a new policy. It could try to persuade parliament to approve a no-deal exit, but all the indications are that MPs would reject no deal. At that point, to retain its authority to levy direct taxes, it would need rapidly to shift to holding a new referendum or asking for an extension to the Article 50 process (in all probability those options would go together) or revoking the Article 50 notice without a referendum.</p>
<p>The government might also try the extension option by itself, seeking an extension merely to implement a no-deal exit. However, even that option needs parliamentary endorsement since the parallel domestic legal change, altering the date of exit away from March 29 2019, cannot be done without an <a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2018/16/contents/enacted">affirmative resolution</a> of the House.</p>
<p>Could the government simply ignore the vote? In theory it could propose another budget, although that might fall foul of the rule that the House may not decide the same question twice in a session. It could try asking the Queen to end the parliamentary session. That, though, would itself end the government’s temporary authority to levy taxes.</p>
<p>Even in a new session, the government would find it difficult to get its budget resolutions passed before March 29. It might have a better chance of getting a second budget through after the UK leaves the EU but it would have only a few days to do that, given that ending the parliamentary session early would have terminated the extension of temporary authority to the end of May.</p>
<p>Cooper’s amendment has a smaller effect, concerning only adjustments to the relevant taxes rather than authority to collect them at all, but the mechanism is the same. It can be complied with only by passing the deal or letting the House of Commons vote for no deal or the government asking for an extension. The idea is that since the referendum option cannot in practice be achieved without asking for an extension and the immediate revocation option would end any need for the clause itself, those options are covered by implication.</p>
<p>The media reports about these amendments have said that they parallel events in the US, in particular the federal <a href="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6561945/MPs-plan-mount-Donald-Trump-style-shutdown-Government-stop-no-deal-Brexit.html">government shutdown</a>. This is not accurate. The US situation arises out of a refusal to pass authorisations to spend. The equivalent UK bills were passed in March 2018 and bills authorising spending in the next financial year have not yet been proposed. The UK situation concerns not authority to spend but authority to tax. The amendments do not shut down any UK government services, but they do undermine the government’s ability to pay for its spending out of taxation.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/109473/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>David Howarth has received funding for previous projects on constitutional law and legal theory from the Leroux Trust, AHRC and ESRC. He advised the campaign group Best for Britain on its report 'Roads Not Yet Explored: Routes to a Final Say' (27 December 2018).</span></em></p>A cross-parliamentary group hopes to prevent the UK from crashing out of the EU by blocking the government’s taxation powers.David Howarth, Professor of Law and Public Policy, University of CambridgeLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/474492015-09-12T11:18:47Z2015-09-12T11:18:47ZJeremy Corbyn wins Labour leadership election – so what next?<p>What began as something beyond the realms of possibility ended as an inevitability. Jeremy Corbyn’s victory in the Labour leadership election represents – depending on one’s perspective – either the rebirth of the party and the final demise of the careerists who led it astray, or, the deepest crisis in its 115-year history.</p>
<p>Corbyn secured 59.5% in the first round of voting, beating the other candidates by a significant margin. Andy Burnham took 19%, Yvette Cooper 17% and Liz Kendall 4.5%.</p>
<p>Importantly, Corbyn won across all categories of eligible voters giving him what the BBC referred to as a “rock-solid mandate”.</p>
<p>Leadership elections can normally be explained in terms of <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-corbyn-is-winning-and-how-labours-moderates-can-stop-him-45339">unity, electability and competence</a>, with the winning candidate being the one best able to unite a divided party and/or offer the best chance of electoral victory, while looking like a credible prime-minister-in-waiting.</p>
<p>But this Labour leadership contest was not normal. It was decided on an altogether different basis. The combination of an uninspiring line-up of candidates, <a href="https://theconversation.com/well-labour-this-is-what-happens-when-you-crowdsource-a-leadership-election-45177">new selection rules</a> and the shock of the 2015 general election defeat left Labour open to a left-wing insurgency. It appeared to come out of nowhere but was actually <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/Jeremy_Corbyn/11849665/Make-no-mistake-Labour-is-at-war-with-itself.html">five years in the making</a>, with Corbyn its <a href="https://theconversation.com/jeremy-corbyn-the-accidental-labour-leader-47117">unsuspecting beneficiary</a>.</p>
<h2>How he did it</h2>
<p>Ed Miliband’s victory in the 2010 Labour leadership contest, delivered by union votes, marked the start of a new assertiveness in internal Labour affairs by the party’s affiliated trade unions. Since then, <a href="http://news.sky.com/story/1235496/unite-union-threatens-to-pull-labour-support">Unite</a>, under Len McCluskey, has been forthright in demanding a strong Labour platform against austerity. Along with other unions and ginger groups such as the People’s Assembly Against Austerity, Unite has helped create a left-wing narrative against cuts that has taken root within the wider Labour Party.</p>
<p>The <a href="https://theconversation.com/well-labour-this-is-what-happens-when-you-crowdsource-a-leadership-election-45177">new selection rules</a> opened the door to this left-wing revolt – though not before moderate Labour MPs, seeking to “widen the debate” in the leadership contest, helped Corbyn pass the nomination threshold of 15% of Labour MPs. Under the new one-member-one-vote rules, individuals could sign up as full members, as affiliated supporters for free via their unions or as registered supporters for just £3. The contest was dogged by controversy, with accusations of left-wing <a href="https://theconversation.com/whoever-wins-the-labour-partys-entryism-panic-will-come-back-to-bite-it-46637">entryism</a> as well as Tory trouble-makers applying to vote, then claims of a <a href="http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/08/labour-purging-supporters-jeremy-corbyn">purge</a> of Corbynites.</p>
<p>Once Corbyn was on the ballot, his allies mobilised. The potential electorate increased from under 200,000 in May to 550,000 in September. A coalition of idealistic youngsters, anti-austerity union activists and grizzled left-wingers returning to the party they quit in disgust under Blair has proved to be a large part of that dramatic increase.</p>
<p>They delivered victory to Corbyn against the odds. Much of this victory was achieved online, with Corbyn’s cyber-left supporters spreading his message, <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/jeremy-corbyn-supporters-accused-of-launching-snpstyle-cyber-attacks-on-labour-leader-rivals-10452587.html">denouncing his opponents</a> and encouraging others to sign up to vote. This contest has been Britain’s first social media leadership election – though in the eyes of Labour moderates, it became a <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/sep/06/labour-moderates-leadership-jeremy-corbyn-tony-blair">flash-mob democracy</a>.</p>
<h2>Holding onto power</h2>
<p>During the contest, Corbyn regularly called on registered and affiliated supporters to become full party members – not least because he hopes they will provide a firm base of support now that he is leader. Only as full members will they be able to participate in Labour policy-making and in the selection of parliamentary candidates.</p>
<p>That is vital because Corbyn enjoys very little support among Labour MPs. Several big-hitters, including leadership hopefuls Yvette Cooper and Liz Kendall, have already <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/Jeremy_Corbyn/11859694/Jeremy-Corbyn-faces-a-dozen-shadow-cabinet-resignations-if-he-wins-Labour-leadership.html">ruled out serving</a> in his shadow cabinet. Within minutes of Corbyn’s victory, Jamie Reed, the shadow health minister, had resigned. Many others are biding their time and waiting for him to fail.</p>
<p>Certainly, Corbyn’s authority would be undermined if, say, he voted against future UK military action in Syria but a majority of his MPs backed it. The EU referendum could have a similar effect. Hence, Corbyn will need to show that he enjoys a wider mandate within the party, perhaps holding conference votes or even membership plebiscites to demonstrate that the grassroots are with him.</p>
<p>In the longer term, he will need to deal with potential threats from Labour MPs. To this end, some have raised the prospect of reintroducing <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/sep/06/tom-watson-corbyn-supporters-mandatory-reselection">mandatory reselection for MPs</a>, harking back to a Bennite-inspired rule from the 1980s that helped left-wing constituency activists to keep moderate MPs in line. Such a move would require a change to Labour’s constitution to be passed by the party conference, but given that the unions – most of which back Corbyn – hold 50% of the votes, it would be possible.</p>
<h2>How long has he got?</h2>
<p>For Labour MPs opposed to Corbyn, the immediate future looks bleak. There’s no formal mechanism to hold a confidence vote in the leader, though an unofficial vote could be held. They would have to wait a year to challenge Corbyn for the leadership, which would require a candidate to be nominated by 20% of Labour MPs.</p>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/94565/original/image-20150912-19828-oad5x0.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/94565/original/image-20150912-19828-oad5x0.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=630&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/94565/original/image-20150912-19828-oad5x0.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=630&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/94565/original/image-20150912-19828-oad5x0.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=630&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/94565/original/image-20150912-19828-oad5x0.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=791&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/94565/original/image-20150912-19828-oad5x0.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=791&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/94565/original/image-20150912-19828-oad5x0.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=791&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Tom Watson has been elected deputy leader.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">BBC</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>That could be feasible but under the current selection rules there is no guarantee that the result of the voting among party members would be any different. Moreover, there is no certainty that Corbyn will simply fail and lose support quickly. He will have powerful backers from the unions and among the new members, as well as strategic and managerial input from a committed <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/Jeremy_Corbyn/11820890/The-five-pillars-of-Jeremy-Corbyns-bid-to-run-Britain.html">backroom team</a>. Moderates will hope that the newly-elected deputy leader, Tom Watson, will prove a restraining influence.</p>
<h2>Panic on the right</h2>
<p>The Labour right finds itself in the worst situation it has ever been in during the party’s history. It is much worse than the 1980s when <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/932797.stm">Michael Foot</a> was leader. Foot was chosen by the MPs themselves and had served in the Callaghan government. Corbyn is an outsider, an inveterate rebel and a standard-bearer of the far-left. </p>
<p>In the 1980s, a section of the Labour right split away to form the <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/march/26/newsid_2531000/2531151.stm">SDP</a>. The fate of that party is a <a href="http://labourlist.org/2012/03/labour-vs-the-sdp-31-years-on-who-was-right/">cautionary tale</a> for today’s moderates about the potential consequences of a split. But if the left remains in control, Labour’s polling plummets and the moderates find themselves in the cross-hairs of local Corbynistas looking to remove them, some may decide that an SDP-Mark II is the least-worst option.</p>
<p>In the meantime, Corbyn will need to argue his case to voters for left-wing policies that they have hitherto shunned. The government will politicise issues on which Corbyn is on the wrong side of public opinion. Corbyn supports unilateral nuclear disarmament – voters do not. The government wants to find £12 billion in welfare cuts, including reducing the benefit cap. Voters support welfare reform, but Corbyn strongly opposes it. Voters accept the <a href="https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/umkary60am/YG-Archives-Pol-Trackers-Government%2520Cuts-040515.pdf">necessity for cuts</a> to reduce the budget deficit, but Corbyn and his union backers made opposition to austerity a central plank of their campaign. Corbyn favours immigration and a generous approach to asylum-seekers, but voters, despite recent events, prefer a more <a href="https://yougov.co.uk/news/2015/09/06/no-increase-syrian-refugee-numbers/">restrictive policy</a>. And while a majority supports renationalising the railways, the issue isn’t deciding many votes. If nothing else, the next few years will test to destruction the theory that it’s possible to win an election from the left.</p>
<p>The Conservatives will believe that with Corbyn’s victory, all their Christmases have come at once. David Cameron has already staked a <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/11858320/David-Cameron-Jeremy-Corbyn-is-unfit-to-lead-the-Labour-Party.html">claim to the centre-ground</a> that Labour looks to be vacating. The Tories will present themselves as the only party that can be trusted to defend the country and manage the economy. They will paint Labour as extreme and unfit to govern, and will be enthusiastically assisted by the Conservative-supporting press.</p>
<p>Labour is entering uncharted waters. Whatever the future holds – a left-right civil war, defections and splits, attempted coups, a return to left-wing street politics of marches and demos – one thing is certain: British politics is changing in a dramatic way.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/47449/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Tom Quinn does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Left-wing candidate storms to victory in first round of voting.Tom Quinn, Senior Lecturer, Department of Government, University of EssexLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/473782015-09-11T05:33:36Z2015-09-11T05:33:36ZCorbyn cometh: has 21st-century UK protest politics just fully bloomed?<p>The unthinkable has happened. Jeremy Corbyn <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2015/sep/12/labour-announces-leadership-election-result-with-corbyn-tipped-to-win-politics-live">has won</a> the Labour leadership election by a landslide, easily taking more than the other three candidates put together. With a huge groundswell of support from the several hundred thousand people who have joined the party since the last election, the radical democratic socialist has snatched Labour from under the noses of the establishment. </p>
<p>It comes at a time when the UK <a href="http://www.hansardsociety.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/Audit-of-Political-Engagement-11-2014.pdf">has never been</a> more disillusioned with mainstream politics. The major parties are viewed as too similar, made up of representatives who are far-removed from the experiences of ordinary people – step forward Corbyn’s rival leadership contenders. What we are not used to is these perceptions affecting political participation. The way in which we used to register our discontent was by passively rejecting party politics. <a href="http://samples.sainsburysebooks.co.uk/9781317524328_sample_1076582.pdf">Only around</a> 1% of the electorate are members of a political party, compared to nearly 4% in 1983 <a href="http://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/SN05125">for example</a>. </p>
<p>Corbynmania may be challenging this trend, however. In an extraordinary period in the history of the Labour party, an avowedly left-wing candidate has generated a level of support and enthusiasm that <a href="http://www.versobooks.com/books/1447-ruling-the-void">we don’t tend to associate</a> with modern UK politics, or indeed with established democracies. The full implications of these events are as yet unclear but they may have sparked an appetite for a more participatory model of politics in this country. </p>
<p>At the end of 2014, Labour membership <a href="http://samples.sainsburysebooks.co.uk/9781317524328_sample_1076582.pdf">stood at</a> 193,000, having not exceeded 250,000 since 2000. Then came <a href="http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2014/01/how-labours-proposed-new-leadership-election-system-would-work">Ed Miliband’s changes</a> to the party rules for leadership contests, aimed at extending democratic engagement. These created a selectorate of three groups – members, supporters and trade union affiliates. </p>
<p>Supporters and full members <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/aug/26/labour-leadership-election-party-to-check-voting-history-of-new-supporters">have come</a> to the party in large numbers, generating substantial fees in the process. Of the 554,000 eligible to vote in the current election – which is after the party’s <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/aug/20/labour-leadership-election-rejected-supporters-express-their-anger">weeding out</a> of illegitimate sign-ups – 293,000 are full members (fees vary, but can be £50), 113,000 are supporters (fees £3), and the remaining 148,000 are trade union affiliates. While Corbyn has been most popular among the union sign-ups, <a href="https://yougov.co.uk/news/2015/08/10/corbyn-pull-ahead/">he has</a> enjoyed widespread support among all three groups. </p>
<p>On the face of it, participation in UK politics has obviously been enhanced by the Labour leadership campaign – albeit perhaps in a shallow form given it was possible to sign up for the price of a latte. The real test of engagement will be whether these £3 supporters remain involved. Harriet Harman <a href="http://www.sunnation.co.uk/5-things-we-learned-from-harriet-harmans-andrew-marr-interview/">has suggested</a> this group will naturally convert to full membership to influence policy, but these are probably false hopes.</p>
<h2>People power</h2>
<p>The Corbyn surge may also have wider implications. The swell of enthusiasm for this radical candidate involves rejecting right-wing austerity economics, inequality and elitism, and it has the feel of a mass movement. Clearly the UK is not immune to forces that have already been evident in <a href="http://revolting-europe.com">European</a> and <a href="http://occupywallst.org">US politics</a>. The Corbyn message has appeared authentic, sincere and consistent, not labels commonly attached to politicians. </p>
<p>Perhaps even more important has been its sense of hope and optimism, reminiscent of the <a href="http://www.yesscotland.net/thankyou.html">Yes campaign</a> in the Scottish independence referendum. A positive vision can be inspiring, particularly at a time when many citizens in the UK and elsewhere are desperate for some good political news. Corbyn recognises that popular trust in politics is critical and requires nurturing. This is why he advocates a Labour party built on genuine input from the grassroots. </p>
<p>Corbyn’s campaign has taken the shape of a traditional style of politics, namely the political meeting. He has addressed more than 100 meetings and rallies, with many spillover talks and many people turned away – further echoes of the Scottish Yes campaign – and this has combined with a modern, professional and energetic online campaign. </p>
<p>What we are observing in Labour politics might even have been inspired by events north of the border. Remember that Yes backers the <a href="http://www.scotsman.com/news/uk/boost-for-snp-as-membership-hits-100-000-mark-1-3725308">SNP</a> and <a href="http://www.scottishgreens.org.uk/news/membership-surge-sets-up-strong-scottish-green-mp-campaign/">Scottish Greens</a> both experienced a dramatic increase in membership following the referendum. There <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/liberaldemocrats/11600345/Why-are-so-many-people-joining-the-Liberal-Democrats.html">was even</a> a rise in membership of the heavily defeated Liberal Democrats following the general election. Note the break from the past here: until recently, membership increases were associated with election success, not failure.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/94411/original/image-20150910-27309-amqzco.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/94411/original/image-20150910-27309-amqzco.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/94411/original/image-20150910-27309-amqzco.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=398&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/94411/original/image-20150910-27309-amqzco.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=398&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/94411/original/image-20150910-27309-amqzco.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=398&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/94411/original/image-20150910-27309-amqzco.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/94411/original/image-20150910-27309-amqzco.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/94411/original/image-20150910-27309-amqzco.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Scotland’s latest export?</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.shutterstock.com/cat.mhtml?lang=en&language=en&ref_site=photo&search_source=search_form&version=llv1&anyorall=all&safesearch=1&use_local_boost=1&autocomplete_id=&searchterm=Yes%20Scotland&show_color_wheel=1&orient=&commercial_ok=&media_type=images&search_cat=&searchtermx=&photographer_name=&people_gender=&people_age=&people_ethnicity=&people_number=&color=&page=1&inline=205896952">EQRoy</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>A new politics?</h2>
<p>Put this all together and it begins to look like we may be entering a new age of protest politics, born of deep disillusionment with the political mainstream. Voters on the centre-left may be persuaded that a viable alternative exists and politicians who can articulate this alternative might inspire a new generation – in a reversal of the <a href="http://www.britannica.com/topic/New-Right">politics that ended</a> the social-democratic consensus of the 1970s. </p>
<p>Then again, we must bear in mind that the politics of party membership is unrepresentative of the electorate at large. What wins an internal party debate is unlikely to win a general election. Conventional wisdom suggests this will be protest to no end. That won’t stop the Corbynistas hoping that this is the beginning of a reshaping of the ideological debate in UK politics – and perhaps even a new model of democratic politics. But for them to be right we’ll still need to see the sort of sea change that has not happened in this country for a very long time.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/47378/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Lynn Bennie does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>As the Labour Left’s fourth choice of candidate prepares to take the party reins, he may have taken the lead from Scotland’s Yes campaign and ushered in a new age in UK politics.Lynn Bennie, Reader in Politics, University of AberdeenLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/460972015-09-01T17:54:59Z2015-09-01T17:54:59ZWhere do the Labour leader contenders stand on immigration?<p>Two stories have dominated the British news agenda this summer – the migration crisis in Europe and the Labour leadership contest. With the vote on the latter fast approaching, it’s worth considering where the candidates stand on the former. </p>
<p>The jury is still out on why Labour failed to appeal to enough of the electorate in the 2015 election. What is certain is that it lost voters to UKIP (as well as the SNP). Again, there are probably many reasons why many traditional Labour voters plumped for UKIP but one of them is plainly that Labour failed to convince this cohort that it had a sound immigration policy. </p>
<p>With public concerns over immigration consistently rising, and neither Labour nor the Tories <a href="https://yougov.co.uk/news/2015/04/15/health-tops-immigration-second-most-important-issu/">“winning”</a> the debate, it’s becoming clear that no centrist party knows which way to turn.</p>
<p>So what are the candidates in the Labour leadership election offering by way of immigration policies? Can they do better than Ed Miliband?</p>
<h2>Jeremy Corbyn</h2>
<p>Immigration is not among the <a href="http://jeremycorbyn.org.uk/priorities/">11 key policies</a> that front runner Jeremy Corbyn “is standing to deliver”.</p>
<p>In the upcoming EU referendum, free movement will necessarily be a big issue. Corbyn’s position on the UK’s continuing participation in the Union after negotiations is precarious. He sees a need for more trade union involvement and argues that the UK must demand reasonable levels of working rights to seal the deal. But this will not be on the table as David Cameron seeks to <a href="http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/26c75976-4fc5-11e5-8642-453585f2cfcd.html">negotiate</a> new terms for the UK.</p>
<p>Corbyn’s support for trade unionism means he is naturally concerned about wages for low skilled work being undercut by immigration. This is similar to Miliband’s views so we might expect Corbyn to propose something akin to Labour’s election promise to tackle the <a href="http://www.labour.org.uk/manifesto/immigration">exploitation of migrant workers</a>.</p>
<p>Nonetheless Corbyn has said that the debate on immigration has been <a href="http://jeremycorbyn.org.uk/articles/m-star-the-poisoned-debate-on-immigration/">“poisoned”</a>, and has criticised his party’s weak defence on the issue. He has campaigned on behalf of asylum seekers, and emphasises the important role that <a href="http://www.labour.org.uk/blog/entry/watch-labour-leadership-hustings">mosques</a> have played in supporting refugees. But this all means he sits awkwardly between being suspicious of internationalism while championing migration and multiculturalism. </p>
<h2>Yvette Cooper</h2>
<p>As the former shadow home secretary, Yvette Cooper has more to say on immigration. Her policies are, unsurprisingly, not dissimilar to those touted by Labour in its 2015 campaign.</p>
<p>In her ministerial role, Cooper did a lot of apologising for Labour’s “mistakes” on immigration, and has <a href="http://press.labour.org.uk/post/102953239474/yvette-cooper-speech-labours-approach-to">parroted</a> the need to address the real concerns people have on immigration.</p>
<p>She has said in the past that Labour would call for the EU to provide <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-30091574">dedicated funding</a> to help regions cope when their populations rise as a result of immigration. It’s a novel idea but how it would operate in practice remains to be seen. </p>
<p>Like Corbyn, Cooper claims that the challenge is to face up to the exploitation of migrant labour by making it a crime, saying that such exploitation is modern day slavery. Yet like her former leader and her fellow contenders she maintains that EU citizens should not be allowed to claim benefits for at least two years.</p>
<h2>Andy Burnham</h2>
<p>Andy Burnham seems to have the least to say on immigration, although he’s very keen on his catchphrase <a href="http://www.andy4labour.co.uk/andy_s">“freedom to work is not the same as freedom to claim”</a>. Burnham’s statements on immigration are indistinguishable from the 2015 campaign, and in many respects, those put out by the government. </p>
<p>He warns that the EU referendum risks being lost unless there are significant changes to EU migration. And – you guessed it – he also wants to ban EU citizens from claiming welfare benefits until they have worked for two years.</p>
<p>Burnham has mentioned the possibility of EU funding to plug the gap in costs to public services in areas most affected by migration, but this seems to be an afterthought lifted from Cooper. He claims that “people have legitimate concerns about immigration”, and that Labour therefore needs “real answers to these concerns”. As a prospective leader one would think Burnham should be supplying some answers but we are yet to hear what these real solutions are.</p>
<h2>Liz Kendall</h2>
<p>According to Liz Kendall, the final Labour leader contender, the solution is to reintroduce an Australian style points-based system, as people are fed up seeing migrants <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/liz-kendall-says-she-wants-an-australianstyle-pointsbased-immigration-system-10328214.html">“scrambling on to lorries from Calais”</a>. Advocating the same policy as <a href="http://www.ukip.org/ukip_launches_immigration_policy">UKIP</a> tells you something about where Kendall sits on this issue. She claims that <a href="http://www.labour.org.uk/blog/entry/watch-labour-leadership-hustings">“terrorism and migration are global challenges”</a> and that we must “get real over controlling immigration”. </p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"596602886550851584"}"></div></p>
<p>Kendall has also <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/11657740/Blairite-Labour-leadership-contender-Liz-Kendall-backs-taking-benefits-away-from-EU-migrants.html">talked about</a> taking tax credits away from new migrant workers, on top of restricting access to benefits and social housing. Despite this, she has repeatedly <a href="http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2015/06/liz-kendall-offers-tentative-support-for-cutting-benefits-for-eu-migrants/">dodged questions</a> about whether she would support restricting benefits for EU migrants – a seemingly odd move given her fairly clear position on the issue, not to mention <a href="http://www.lizkendall.org/launching-labours-plan/">her endorsement of Miliband’s pledge</a> on this. Apparently she <a href="https://twitter.com/mhallward/status/619246623890259968">hated the mugs</a> though. </p>
<p>All things considered, there is little to separate the immigration policies of the so-called New Labourites in this leadership contest. As on so many other issues, Corbyn stands apart from the pack. But his ideological vision doesn’t lend itself to producing a coherent immigration policy either.</p>
<p>Just as the narrative about Labour causing the recession became fact, with all the contenders claiming they got it wrong on immigration there is little room for any debate. Yet with Labour’s socially conservative <a href="http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/08/labour-are-becoming-toxic-brand-warns-jon-cruddas">voters long defected to UKIP</a>, and the <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/news/prime-minister-pledges-to-control-and-reduce-immigration">Tories adopting Miliband’s policies</a> unnoticed, perhaps it is time for a change in tack.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/46097/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Erica Consterdine does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>A run down of what each has to say on the top issue of the summer.Erica Consterdine, Postdoctoral Research Fellow in Immigration Politics & Policy, University of SussexLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/464182015-08-20T17:03:33Z2015-08-20T17:03:33ZCorbyn may be unelectable — but so are his rivals<p>Labour Party HQ is on red alert. The election of Jeremy Corbyn as Labour leader is seen as a real and dangerous prospect by the majority of the Parliamentary Labour Party. Countless <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-33959130">party grandees</a> have warned members of the dangers of turning Labour into a protest movement and some talk openly of <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-33873722">suspending the contest</a>, coups and guerrilla tactics in desperate moves to stop Corbynmania.</p>
<p>Corbyn’s supporters say he has energised the leadership contest and attracted thousands of new party members and supporters. His <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/11810783/Jeremy-Corbyn-My-Labour-critics-should-be-happy.html">critics</a> say he cannot secure an electoral majority at the 2020 general elections. But it is far from clear that any of the <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/08/14/jeremy-corbyn-would-win-more-votes-at-general-election-poll-finds_n_7989800.html">other three contenders</a> can either.</p>
<p>So far, no one has shown that they understood the causes of Labour’s defeat in 2015 and the problems social democracies have had all over the world following the global financial crisis. Instead, they have preferred to talk about micro policy ideas, such as free childcare and sex education policies. None seem to fit into a larger narrative.</p>
<p>The truth of the matter is that the Labour Party is stuck in a very deep hole. <a href="http://www.fabians.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/The-Mountain-to-Climb.pdf">Research</a> from the Fabian Society shows that in order to secure a majority in 2020, Labour needs to gain at least 106 seats in very different parts of the country. Considering the forthcoming constituency <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-reforming-britains-electoral-system-will-be-harder-than-ever-41631">boundary changes</a> and the advent of <a href="https://theconversation.com/2014-the-year-the-old-guard-woke-up-to-multi-party-politics-35775">truly multi-party politics</a>, that task seems like mission impossible.</p>
<p>In order to win, Labour needs to find an electoral formula that attracts Tory voters in the south of England and UKIP voters in the Midlands and north-east of England. In Scotland it needs to attract SNP voters and the south-west and English urban centres cities it needs to pull in Liberal Democrat and Green voters. None of the current contenders to the leadership of the Labour Party has so far shown that they are able to pull off this very difficult electoral trick.</p>
<h2>Reframing the debate</h2>
<p>Andy Burnham, who offers a more personable version of <a href="http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/politics/2012/07/what-milibandism">Milibandism</a>, lost his position as front runner as a result of Corbymania. Next to Corbyn he looks bland, confused (he attacks Corbyn’s lack of credibility but offers him a role in the shadow cabinet) and at times desperate.</p>
<p>Yvette Cooper looks like safe pair of hands, exudes competence and has the poise to face David Cameron at the dispatch box. But she is far from inspiring or exciting. Her <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/aug/13/yvette-cooper-jeremy-corbyn-policies-not-credible-labour">feminist version</a> of Milibandism (her bid focuses on childcare and on tackling gender inequality and sexism) may sound sensible but it is hardly the stuff that enthuses voters.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/GUC4Ux2sfvA?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Yvette Cooper interview on Newsnight.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Liz Kendall is the only candidate that offers a break with Milibandism (though many of her flagship ideas come from the party’s 2015 manifesto). But she is seen as inexperienced and is paying a heavy price for her association to the <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/general-election-2015/politics-blog/11630650/Labours-Blairites-are-rallying-around-Liz-Kendall.html">Blairite wing</a> of the party.</p>
<p>Kendall’s strategy of telling <a href="http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2015/06/yvette-cooper-and-liz-kendall-put-in-strong-performances-at-fabian-hustings/">“hard truths”</a> to Labour members is not paying off – as her <a href="https://yougov.co.uk/news/2015/08/10/corbyn-pull-ahead">position in the polls</a> suggests. She is probably the only candidate with the capacity to attract former Conservative voters from the south of England but she could lose the party many votes in the north-east of England and English cities. Worse still, she may have no impact at all in Scotland.</p>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/92573/original/image-20150820-7243-1urure5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/92573/original/image-20150820-7243-1urure5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=746&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/92573/original/image-20150820-7243-1urure5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=746&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/92573/original/image-20150820-7243-1urure5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=746&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/92573/original/image-20150820-7243-1urure5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=938&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/92573/original/image-20150820-7243-1urure5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=938&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/92573/original/image-20150820-7243-1urure5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=938&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Andy Burnham.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/photographicleigh/6245805143/in/photolist-avVogz-aFmF2n-aFmF7p-aFmFb2-aFnR38-8LkScg-ryDAd9-7VUtGf-5YLUH9-8ojsar-8om7m3-8VYumh-8t3C4c-fr7Edg-6M2X9i-aFsUm2-8ojs7c-8ojrNa-8onvC3-8ojrV6-8ojiPk-8onx8C-8ojrHk-9AfHVk-djgbD8-8nK98T-8onAsS-8onzt7-8ojqgB-8onyvo-8onv8E-aFmF4x-77FGNv-aFqUNx-8LkS2H-8oxK5v-aFqUZZ-aFqUSz-8onyZu-wXfU2x-aFmFea-aFmFhk-7p2Z1J-psS24M-85jp6J-8LoScs-7Tr7e4-7Tr73g-8sMuXp-85ggQT">photographic-leigh/flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Meanwhile, Corbyn seems to have understood that there is a growing constituency of citizens that is hungry for a different style of politics and for alternatives to austerity. His problem, however, is that an equally large number of voters reject his ideas.</p>
<p>With slight differences in emphasis, Burnham, Cooper and Kendall like to present their proposals as “grown-up”, credible and in contrast to the “loony-left” politics of Corbyn, which will condemn Labour to eternal opposition. But what none of them can explain is why those supposedly responsible <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/politics/ng-interactive/2015/aug/13/labour-leadership-candidates-comparison-burnham-cooper-corbyn-kendall">policies</a> have in the past decade condemned European economies to stagnation and European social democratic parties to electoral oblivion.</p>
<p>They seem to accept the narrow confines of the political debate that are set by the right. From the economy to welfare, from immigration to the relationship between state and market, they seem unable to reframe the debate.</p>
<p>None of them have anything specific to say about how they can make democracy relevant in an age of globalisation, though they all promise to “empower citizens”. So they accept that some form of austerity is the only cure for the deficit. They comply with the view that the welfare state has been made unsustainable by the workshy, that migrants are responsible for housing shortages and low pay, and that the only thing Labour can offer is some palliative relief to the inescapable realities of the world. The problem with these allegedly realistic stances is that they are not responsible and, more seriously, make Labour a redundant party.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/46418/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
Labour Party HQ is on red alert. The election of Jeremy Corbyn as Labour leader is seen as a real and dangerous prospect by the majority of the Parliamentary Labour Party. Countless party grandees have…Eunice Goes, Associate Professor of Politics, Richmond American International UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/453392015-08-04T05:27:21Z2015-08-04T05:27:21ZWhy Corbyn is winning – and how Labour’s moderates can stop him<p>The Labour leadership election captured people’s attention when a <a href="https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/ul79cmahd5/LabourLeadership_150721_day_one_W.pdf">YouGov poll</a> in late-July put Jeremy Corbyn in the lead. Now, he is the most popular candidate among trade unions and grassroots Labour activists, having been endorsed by <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/jeremy-corbyn-tops-labour-leadership-vote-of-constituency-groups-10432254.html">162 Labour constituency parties</a> – ahead of Yvette Cooper, Andy Burnham and Liz Kendall – and by six unions, including Labour’s two biggest affiliates, <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-33707321">Unite and Unison</a>. </p>
<p>Yet Corbyn’s lead is by no means unassailable. If one of the moderate candidates in the race is to deprive the veteran leftist of victory, he or she will need to address Labour’s current electoral fatalism and convince members that the party can still end up in government after the next election, provided that it remains united. </p>
<p>It’s useful to look at the Labour leadership race in the context of research on party leadership contests. One theory, developed by <a href="https://books.google.co.uk/books/about/Choosing_a_Leader.html?id=Q3OFQgAACAAJ&redir_esc=y">Leonard Stark</a> and deployed by <a href="http://www.palgrave.com/page/detail/electing-and-ejecting-party-leaders-in-britain-thomas-quinn/?isb=9780230219618">me and other</a> researchers, assumes that there is a hierarchy of selection criteria that guide the process of choosing a leader, and these criteria match parties’ three fundamental goals: internal unity, winning an election and implementing policy in government. </p>
<p>Selection criteria in leadership contests reflect these goals. If a party is divided, the successful candidate is usually the one who is “acceptable” to the broadest range of party opinion and can unite the party. If disunity isn’t a major problem, the strongest candidate on “electability” should win. If the candidates are indistinguishable on that, the choice will turn on “competence” – mainly in relation to running a government but also leading an opposition. </p>
<h2>Burnham the unifier, but Corbyn still on top</h2>
<p>Thanks to YouGov’s poll, we can put the theory to the test in the current Labour leadership contest. The poll asked electors eligible to vote in the one-member-one-vote ballot to state their principal reasons for supporting their preferred candidate. As the table below shows, clear differences are evident between the supporters of each candidate.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/89943/original/image-20150728-9853-15hj6l6.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/89943/original/image-20150728-9853-15hj6l6.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/89943/original/image-20150728-9853-15hj6l6.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=301&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/89943/original/image-20150728-9853-15hj6l6.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=301&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/89943/original/image-20150728-9853-15hj6l6.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=301&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/89943/original/image-20150728-9853-15hj6l6.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=378&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/89943/original/image-20150728-9853-15hj6l6.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=378&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/89943/original/image-20150728-9853-15hj6l6.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=378&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Labour Electors’ Motives for Supporting Each Candidate.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/94enqtd1fz/LabourLeadership_150721_day_two_W.pdf">YouGov/The Times. Notes: All figures are percentages except those in parenthesis, which indicate ranking of motives for supporters of four candidates. Supporters of each candidate are those respondents saying they would give their first-preference vote to that candidate. </a>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Corbyn’s supporters – who constitute the largest group in the sample – were completely distinct from those of the other candidates. Barely any cited electability (winning in 2020) or acceptability (uniting the party) as reasons to support him. Corbyn appeals to those who want Labour to change direction completely, even if it means short-term disunity and lower electability.</p>
<p>Instead, on these figures, Burnham is the <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/jul/31/andy-burnham-interview">unity candidate</a> in the contest, and he also does well on electability and competence. Not far behind is Cooper, and she too appeals on all three selection criteria. In contrast, neither Kendall nor Corbyn is a unifier and both could <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/jul/31/corbyn-supporters-risk-return-to-labour-splits-of-1980s-says-burnham">split their party</a>. Despite being strong on electability, Kendall’s Blairite politics are unacceptable not just to the far left but also to Labour’s soft-left mainstream. Meanwhile, Corbyn would be unacceptable to the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs. </p>
<h2>Fatalism and fresh faces</h2>
<p>So Burnham should be well-placed to win the leadership contest, but it is Corbyn who leads the race. The answer to why this is so lies in a combination of Labour’s new selection system and an incapacitating sense of electoral fatalism. </p>
<p>The <a href="https://theconversation.com/explainer-how-political-parties-choose-their-leaders-41534">one-member-one-vote system</a> gives votes to party members, trade unionists who have been signed up by their unions as “affiliated supporters”, and “registered supporters” who have paid a £3 fee and confirmed their agreement with Labour’s values. A surge in membership of 68,000 since the 2015 election – a 35% increase – has brought in large numbers of left-wingers and worked <a href="https://theconversation.com/well-labour-this-is-what-happens-when-you-crowdsource-a-leadership-election-45177">strongly in Corbyn’s favour</a>.</p>
<p>This has combined together with a fatalism that has descended on the party after its May election defeat. Not only was the defeat unexpected but <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-did-labour-lose-and-where-next-for-the-party-41629">so was its scale</a>. There is a feeling among many inside and outside the party that it lost not only the 2015 election but also the 2020 election. </p>
<p>Add to that the sense that none of the contenders in the Labour leadership contest looks to be an obvious general election winner and it becomes understandable why electability appears such a low priority in the contest. Many Corbyn supporters may believe that their man cannot win the 2020 general election – but that neither can any of the other candidates. Voting for Corbyn then becomes a free hit: if Labour cannot become a party of government any time soon, why not make it a more effective party of opposition that takes on the Tories’ austerity agenda and unite it on that basis? </p>
<h2>Not over yet</h2>
<p>For Burnham or Cooper to defeat Corbyn, they would need to challenge this fatalism by arguing that the next election is not already lost. The Conservatives’ majority is only 12 seats. If Labour could win back just 30 of the 87 mainly marginal seats it lost to the Conservatives in 2010 (and largely failed to regain in 2015), not only would the Tories fall short of a majority in 2020, they would struggle to form a minority government. In an era when 80-90 seats are routinely won by smaller parties, including the Scottish National Party, hung parliaments are more likely than they were in the past. </p>
<p>Labour’s moderates would have to argue that it is important for the party to stay in the game in anticipation of another close election result, and not throw it away by choosing a leader who would split the party, lacks prime-ministerial credibility and has a narrow electoral appeal. It is easily forgotten that many Labour left-wingers – including Dennis Skinner – accepted this argument in 2010 when they put electability before ideology in supporting David Miliband.</p>
<p>Unity, electability and competence are the holy trinity of leadership contests. The polls suggest that Burnham is well-positioned on all three, with Cooper not far behind. To make it count, each must show the Labour party that they can unite it, probably on a moderate anti-austerity platform, and convince it that there is still all to play for at the next election. If they can do that, one of them could yet overhaul Corbyn.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/45339/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Tom Quinn does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>If anyone other than Jeremy Corbyn is to become the next Labour leader, they will have to address the party’s fatalism about 2020.Tom Quinn, Senior Lecturer, Department of Government, University of EssexLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/432892015-06-15T16:08:06Z2015-06-15T16:08:06ZEverything you need to know about the Labour leadership contenders<p>A group of four candidates has emerged with enough votes to stand in the contest to find the next leader of the Labour Party. North London MP Jeremy Corbyn scraped together the required backing at the eleventh hour to secure a place in the <a href="http://labourlist.org/2015/06/whos-backing-who-and-who-did-endorsers-vote-to-be-leader-in-2010/">line up</a>, alongside Andy Burnham, Yvette Cooper and Liz Kendall.</p>
<p>This will be a long campaign, since the winner will not be announced until September, but we can already make a few educated guesses about what the hopefuls will stand for and what their chances are of making it to the top.</p>
<h2>Andy Burnham: the frontrunner</h2>
<p>The <a href="http://theconversation.com/labour-has-some-deep-soul-searching-to-do-before-it-picks-a-new-leader-41541">early frontrunner</a> is Andy Burnham. He has been in parliament since 2001 and has worked as health secretary; culture, media and sport secretary; and chief secretary to the treasury. Since the 2010 election, he has been shadow secretary for both health and education. He is the only candidate who stood in Labour’s last leadership race.</p>
<p>An early buzzword in this leadership race has been “aspiration”, and it’s worth noting that Burnham was talking about <a href="http://labourlist.org/2010/08/andy-burnham-launches-aspirational-socialism-manifesto/">“aspirational socialism”</a> back in 2010. He accepts that Labour has lost its <a href="http://news.sky.com/story/1498642/burnham-im-my-own-man-with-my-own-views">“emotional connection”</a> with millions of people, but believes that the 2015 manifesto was the <a href="http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/06/were-beginning-see-outlines-labour-leadership-race">“best one”</a> he has supported in four general elections. Not a Corbyn-like socialist, Burnham should appeal to Labour’s moderate left.</p>
<h2>Yvette Cooper: the centrist</h2>
<p>Yvette Cooper was elected in 1997. She has been health minister; chief secretary to the treasury; work and pensions secretary; and shadow home secretary. She has positioned herself in the <a href="http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/06/labour-leadership-candidates-clash-eu-and-past-plp-hustings">centre</a>, saying that “We need a Labour party that <a href="http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/yvette-cooper-standing-labour-leadership-5693661">moves beyond</a> the old labels of left and right”.</p>
<p>Cooper has has made an early play for the business vote by calling for a <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-32784980">“fresh start”</a> to undo the “anti-business” image the party developed under Ed Miliband. Cooper’s focus on the need for a secure and affordable <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/06/08/yvette-cooper-ed-miliband_n_7532786.html">home</a> for everyone highlights wider problems such as insecurity and instability. Her commitment to end <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/labour-leadership-contest-yvette-cooper-pledges-to-end-child-poverty-within-a-generation-10318315.html">child poverty</a> is also an important part of this push for widening security and should convince some to lend her their support.</p>
<h2>Jeremy Corbyn: the wild card</h2>
<p>The left’s candidate, Jeremy Corbyn, stands out as the only one to <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/jun/11/labour-jeremy-corbyn-clear-alternative-tory-austerity-needs-presented">reject austerity</a>. An MP since 1983, he is a long-standing campaigner against war and for workers’ rights.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/85070/original/image-20150615-5825-14kguy9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/85070/original/image-20150615-5825-14kguy9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/85070/original/image-20150615-5825-14kguy9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/85070/original/image-20150615-5825-14kguy9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/85070/original/image-20150615-5825-14kguy9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/85070/original/image-20150615-5825-14kguy9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/85070/original/image-20150615-5825-14kguy9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Corbyn: a late entry from the left.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/garryknight/15024926027/in/photolist-BQk2m-3j3y7Y-88dRYf-3iY8XT-oTGF3K-8ZatUS-3j3uR1-hE5oza-nLBzmg-s8dHeh-bqWtzH-bqWtzT-bqWtzn-gdpYhh-oc4DBp-eePTCN-ayiG4i">Garry Knight</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Some may see him as too Old Labour, but his views on certain economic issues chime with mainstream opinion, such as the feeling that too many firms “are able to avoid paying <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2015/jun/09/boris-johnson-hosts-his-lbc-ask-boris-phone-in-politics-live">their fair share of tax</a> in the UK”. Arguing that more government cuts will lead to <a href="http://www.totalpolitics.com/blog/449916/jeremy-corbyn-gets-to-17-nominations-for-labour-leader-and-tells-tp-i-donand39t-want-charity.thtml">inequality and poverty</a>, his alternative economic strategy will be based on protecting the welfare state and closing the poverty gap.</p>
<h2>Liz Kendall: the reformer</h2>
<p>Liz Kendall, who only arrived in parliament in 2010, is seen as the “change” candidate. Kendall has support from New Labour quarters, and the modernisation tag associated with Tony Blair has been attached to her.</p>
<p>The shadow social care minister supports tuition fees, free schools and <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/jun/07/liz-kendall-warns-labour-break-habit-hoarding-power-centralisation">devolving more power</a> from Westminster. She accepts George Osborne’s <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/jun/10/labours-liz-kendall-i-have-no-problem-aiming-for-budget-surplus">budget surplus</a> idea and has adopted a clear line on benefit cuts, supporting the Tories’ proposed cap of £23,000 per family.</p>
<p>Like Cooper, Kendall is “pro-business”, placing great emphasis on <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2015/may/21/migration-figures-out-as-cameron-announces-crackdown-on-illegal-foreign-workers-politics-live#block-555de39ce4b04dea8dd8480a">wealth creation</a> as well as wealth redistribution. Stressing this could broaden Labour’s appeal at a time when small business owners and the self-employed feel that <a href="http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/05/andrew-marr-why-pundits-got-it-wrong-and-what-parties-should-do-next">Labour doesn’t care</a> about them.</p>
<h2>The big issues</h2>
<p>The economy has been central to the debates building up to this final candidate list, with austerity, benefits, business relations and wealth creation all key themes. Unless Corbyn wins, we can assume that Labour won’t challenge the Tory narrative over the deficit. It will support austerity and will focus on capturing the political centre ground, though <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/peter-kellner/labour-centre_b_7305402.html">what this means</a> will need to be considered carefully.</p>
<p>Other concerns such as insecurity and instability have been less talked about. Cooper’s point about housing shows an understanding of the need for security, but low wages and unstable working hours have been less prominent recently. Corbyn’s presence though, should make this a central issue again. But if, in its drive to be pro-business, Labour no longer prioritises these issues, it could encourage the feeling that it doesn’t care about its <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/may/15/ukip-party-labour-heartlands-left">traditional supporters</a>.</p>
<p>There is also the demand for a Blair-like <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/05/10/labour-blairite-election-loss_n_7250950.html">modernisation</a>, but in this debate it is important to remember that New Labour was a product of its time – and that time was 20 years ago.</p>
<h2>Who will win?</h2>
<p>Yvette Cooper’s campaign has so far lacked a central narrative, despite her focus on principled issues such as housing and child poverty. This was a criticism of Miliband’s election campaign that had good individual policies but no overarching vision to piece them together.</p>
<p>Jeremy Corbyn is the only one offering a significantly alternative vision, but many will see him as too left-wing to win a general election. If he wins the leadership contest, he will have to argue against austerity at a time when it is generally believed that there is no money.</p>
<p>The call for a Blair-like modernisation may yet favour Kendall, who can claim to represent a fresh start more than the other long-standing MPs. However, Kendall’s Labour could be seen as “Tory-lite” by some. With the SNP winning huge support in the 2015 election off the back of an anti-austerity message, her approach could end up losing as many supporters as it gains.</p>
<p>Burnham is likely to come out on top as he is currently the best fit for Labour. He is still left enough for those who want Labour to be the left’s alternative. But he is also addressing the demand to modernise by recognising that changes in welfare and friendlier relations with business are necessary to appeal to some non-Labour voters.</p>
<p>Overall though, the main choice is between a new, moderate Old Labour, and a new New Labour.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/43289/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Jonathan Davis does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The nominations are in and a long contest lies ahead.Jonathan Davis, Principle Lecturer in History, co-director Labour History Research Unit, Anglia Ruskin UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/415662015-05-09T15:08:23Z2015-05-09T15:08:23ZAfter the deluge, contenders line up for party leadership contests<p>In the wake of the election result comes the <a href="https://theconversation.com/explainer-how-political-parties-choose-their-leaders-41534">inevitable bloodletting</a> in the parties who fared badly at the hands of the electorate. By lunchtime on Friday the leaders of Labour, the Liberal Democrats, and UKIP had all fallen on their swords. </p>
<p>The annihilation of the Liberal Democrats came as no surprise. Their demise started with the broken pledge over tuition fees. They were seen as a fairly unprincipled, power-hungry bunch who didn’t care whose 30 pieces of silver they took to get a share of government. The Liberal Democrats <a href="http://www.crosenstiel.webspace.virginmedia.com/ldelections/">traditionally used to do well in by-elections</a>, yet their candidates lost their deposits in almost every seat they contested since 2010. The writing was well and truly on the wall. </p>
<p>The party now faces at least a decade in the political wilderness. The SNP could learn a lesson from this. With only 35% of the Scottish vote, they too could lose seats in five years time if they fail to deliver anything of substance for Scotland.</p>
<p>The problem for the Liberal Democrats now is who can lead them back from the brink. All the likely leadership contenders were ousted on Thursday night. Gone are David Laws, Vince Cable, Danny Alexander, and Ed Davey. There is a choice between two experienced politicians; Tim Farron, former party president, and Norman Lamb, Nick Clegg’s former parliamentary private secretary.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/81086/original/image-20150509-22785-1wl8bi4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/81086/original/image-20150509-22785-1wl8bi4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/81086/original/image-20150509-22785-1wl8bi4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/81086/original/image-20150509-22785-1wl8bi4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/81086/original/image-20150509-22785-1wl8bi4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/81086/original/image-20150509-22785-1wl8bi4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/81086/original/image-20150509-22785-1wl8bi4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Is Tim Farron the man to rebuild the Lib Dems?</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/libdems/15473191821/in/photolist-pzyrRL-pi5bB6-pzymVy-pi6gQ1-pzj9Rk-pi6mzb-pi6kR7-pi74j4-pzyp8j-pi6y6q-pi6Sh4-pxxQFb-pi71xH-defRbu-defQST-8DqnJS-kQkemq-kQk7TK-aqdf8s-aqdi7w-aqaDj6-aqdh89-aqdgcS-piAwPD-aqaCdx-aK5xS2-8DnhDe-8Dnh5e-rgbVt4-749xbH-74dtJu-6jrVkD-bpTa5J-5nxxsg-6jhiJA-66EXHR-5nxyoZ-9WcEZX-qZrw29-defPdx-8DnjVK-7KpgKo-7KpfZ9-7Kkkha-aqdekL-8LN6eT-4Nkawc-nZJzu-7KPtE8-5ntMgu">Liberal Democrats</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>For UKIP the only credible contender is Douglas Carswell, the single candidate winning a seat at Westminster. All the support gained in by-elections and in the European elections fell away in terms of seats, despite taking almost 13% of the national vote. Fate dealt them a cruel hand and it’s not surprising Nigel Farage is <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/nigel-farage/11593312/nigel-farage-attacks-electoral-system-after-election.html">calling for a change</a> to the voting system. </p>
<h2>Who’ll keep the red flag flying?</h2>
<p>The biggest leadership problem rests with Labour. For the last three years they have tried to court business and, at the same time, stay loyal to working people and the unions. Under Ed Miliband the “New Labour” values of Tony Blair were cast aside as the party shifted to the left of centre. Despite clear signs, Labour failed acknowledge they were not getting their message across to the electorate. The time has now come to decide what they stand for and whom they want to represent. Going forward Labour needs to find a clear sense of direction. Without that they cannot hope to rebuild a credible party</p>
<p>The writing was on the wall two years ago when Ed Miliband’s leadership was questioned. Instead of electing a more credible candidate to lead them into the election, the party insisted on continuing to back Ed. That was a disastrous decision and one they will regret for many years to come. At the end of the day no one would admit the party elected the wrong brother. There is something deep in the Labour psyche that puts loyalty above common sense. Ed Miliband’s <a href="https://theconversation.com/ed-stone-could-be-a-millstone-in-coalition-negotiations-41209">limestone manifesto</a> monument for Number 10, which later turned into a tombstone, was viewed by many as hubristic.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/81085/original/image-20150509-22733-1dms0jo.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/81085/original/image-20150509-22733-1dms0jo.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=398&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/81085/original/image-20150509-22733-1dms0jo.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=398&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/81085/original/image-20150509-22733-1dms0jo.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=398&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/81085/original/image-20150509-22733-1dms0jo.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/81085/original/image-20150509-22733-1dms0jo.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/81085/original/image-20150509-22733-1dms0jo.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Should we be watching big brother?</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/35952250@N02/4382454550/in/photolist-7Fge4d-by2YBA-bjTf5E-cJva7j-HyckF-dTtzzo-dn23LS-pk3ztm-gHNPMR-boWhXi-brqNin-e97c5X-gHPRep-e9cSY9-cJvhd5-8CRbtm-7FceJi-7zSQEn-cSjPph-dnR7Bf-6z9atm-6z9avs-6z54cn-6z98V1-6z98WC-6z54hv-6z54oM-6z54gt-6z549r-6z54dp-6z548t-6z98QA-6z54fv-br6UDP-qEzdt6-4w4omz-6rbeFj-6r74W4-6rbexQ-pvzn4i-onyH3f-m7wxgK-njVBBW-dZFrJy-oE4DNv-rQabQd-rwuyXQ-6z54bp-6z54kt-7ESFSa">Policy Network</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The party has a choice of potential candidates, but many are tainted by their unswerving pre-election allegiance to Ed Miliband. Chukka Umunna must be a prime candidate. He’s <a href="http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2014/11/blairite-group-progress-plotting-back-chuka-umunna-leadership-bid">seen as a bit of a Blairite</a> and it is questionable whether the party could make that U-turn. Yvette Cooper is ambitious – and must be a <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/mar/02/yvette-cooper-interview-labours-quiet-contender">serious contender</a>, if not the outright favourite. She is a seasoned politician who refused to be drawn on her aspirations on election night. </p>
<p>The shadow education secretary, Tristram Hunt – another Blairite – has a reputation for <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2630549/Public-schoolboys-immoral-people-Ive-met-says-Labours-Tristram-Hunt.html">waging a class war on public schools</a>. As the son of a peer, Baron Hunt of Chesterton, the trade unions would no doubt find him a difficult candidate to support. <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/may/08/andy-burnham-favourite-to-become-labour-leader-if-ed-miliband-goes">Andy Burnham is the pundits’ – and the bookies’ – favourite</a> to succeed Miliband. He was a contender in the 2010 leadership election and held a number of cabinet posts in Gordon Brown’s government. </p>
<p>Former minister, David Lammy, <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/may/09/alan-johnson-labour-aspirational-voters-tony-blair">has also expressed an interest in the leadership</a>, while Alan Johnson – who served in several ministerial posts in the Blair and Brown administrations, has ruled himself out.</p>
<p>There are two outsiders. Ex-special forces soldier <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/general-election-2015/11363724/Meet-the-man-who-should-lead-Labour-after-Ed-Miliband.html">Dan Jarvis</a>, a relative newcomer, to politics is known to harbour leadership ambitions. The question is whether his New Labour tendencies would be held against him. A long-odds contender would be Liz Kendall. Her support for <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2922627/Ed-Miliband-challenged-NHS-privatisation-Liz-Kendall-shadow-health-minister-says-matters-works-using-private-sector-services.html">private providers in the health sector</a> might go against her with the unions, but their control over who leads Labour is much diminished. Last, but not least, let’s not discount the possibility that David Miliband could return to save the party. That would require a lot of Labour soul-searching.</p>
<p>The next few weeks will be as entertaining as those in the lead-up to the election. We will see infighting and machinations in all the parties, none more so than Labour. For the past five years it has had both a leadership crisis and an identity crisis. The latter must be resolved before the former can be addressed.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/41566/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Alf Crossman does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Three parties must now choose new leaders. Labour has a number of candidates jockeying for position.Alf Crossman, Senior Lecturer in Industrial Relations and HRM, University of SurreyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/409152015-04-30T05:16:37Z2015-04-30T05:16:37ZFact Check: has violent crime gone up?<blockquote>
<p>In the last 12 months, reports of violent crime have gone up very substantially. It is a very significant increase in violent crime reported in the last 12 months. </p>
</blockquote>
<p><strong>Yvette Cooper, Labour shadow home secretary, speaking on the <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b05sjbbc/daily-politics-2015-election-debates-home-affairs">Daily Politics Home Affairs</a> debate.</strong></p>
<blockquote>
<p>This is pure scaremongering. The fact is that crime has gone down, it’s now at record low levels … both under police recorded crime and the independent crime survey which started in 1981. </p>
</blockquote>
<p><strong>Norman Baker, Liberal Democrat, former minister for crime prevention in the same debate.</strong></p>
<p>Labour also came under fire in this Daily Politics debate for a claim in <a href="http://b.3cdn.net/labouruk/e1d45da42456423b8c_vwm6brbvb.pdf">its manifesto</a> that “violent crimes have gone up”. To check whether violent crime is going up or down, it’s important to note that we have two means of measuring crime. </p>
<p>First, <a href="http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/guide-method/method-quality/specific/crime-statistics-methodology/guide-to-finding-crime-statistics/police-recorded-crime/index.html">police-recorded crime</a> statistics: these include incidents that come to the attention of the police and are recorded by them as “crimes”. Second, the <a href="http://www.crimesurvey.co.uk/">Crime Survey for England and Wales</a> (CSEW): this is a very large, rolling annual survey of sizeable sample of the population. Both sources have their problems, but it is generally the crime survey that is considered the more reliable indicator of the two. </p>
<p>The data from the crime survey is very clear. Violent crime <a href="http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171778_401896.pdf">has been in almost continual decline</a> since the mid-1990s and current estimates suggest it is at its lowest level since the survey was instituted at the beginning of the 1980s. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/79625/original/image-20150428-3080-1uqav8w.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/79625/original/image-20150428-3080-1uqav8w.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/79625/original/image-20150428-3080-1uqav8w.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=409&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/79625/original/image-20150428-3080-1uqav8w.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=409&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/79625/original/image-20150428-3080-1uqav8w.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=409&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/79625/original/image-20150428-3080-1uqav8w.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=514&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/79625/original/image-20150428-3080-1uqav8w.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=514&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/79625/original/image-20150428-3080-1uqav8w.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=514&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Trends in violence 1981 – 2014.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171778_401896.pdf">Crime Survey England & Wales</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>As with all sources of statistics, the CSEW comes with various “health warnings”. It is a household survey and therefore misses a lot of people who live in institutional settings such as prisons or student halls of residence. Until very recently it excluded people below the age of 16. It relies on victims’ reports and therefore cannot deal with so-called “victimless crimes” but, with the exception of homicide, this doesn’t affect violence. </p>
<p>In reality, the care and consistency with which the CSEW is undertaken undoubtedly makes it a reasonable medium to long-term indicator of crime trends. Any remaining doubts about what is happening to violent crime can be dispelled by turning to two other sources of data, both of which lend credence to the picture painted by the crime survey. </p>
<p><a href="http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/crime-stats/crime-statistics/focus-on-violent-crime-and-sexual-offences--2013-14/rpt-chapter-1.html?format=print">National Health Service</a> data on assault admissions to hospitals in England suggested a 5% drop over the past year. The impressive survey work in hospital emergency departments and walk-in centres, undertaken by the Cardiff University Violence Research Group, <a href="http://www.cardiff.ac.uk/news/view/95161-serious-violence-in-england-and-wales-drops-10-in-2014">found a 10% drop</a> between 2013 and 2014 in serious violence-related attendances. This research from A&E also supports the longer-term trend indicated by the CSEW, suggesting that with the exception of 2008, there had been decreases in serious violence every year since 2001. </p>
<p>At this point we should return to Yvette Cooper’s statement for it is important to note that what she actually claimed was that reports of violent crime have gone up very substantially. To check this we need to look at the latest <a href="http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171778_401896.pdf%20">police-recorded crime statistics</a>. Additionally taking Yvette Cooper’s much shorter time period – the last 12 months only – they do support the idea that violent crime generally, and sexual offences in particular, have increased. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/79624/original/image-20150428-3098-1i0os8z.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/79624/original/image-20150428-3098-1i0os8z.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=385&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/79624/original/image-20150428-3098-1i0os8z.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=385&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/79624/original/image-20150428-3098-1i0os8z.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=385&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/79624/original/image-20150428-3098-1i0os8z.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=483&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/79624/original/image-20150428-3098-1i0os8z.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=483&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/79624/original/image-20150428-3098-1i0os8z.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=483&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Selected victim-based recorded crime categories – percentage change 2013-14.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171778_401896.pdf">ONS</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Why might this be the case and how might we explain the difference between the two data sources? The answer, in short, is that these statistics tell us more about recording trends, especially in the short-term, than they do about crime trends. </p>
<p>It’s likely that they are illustrating increased compliance with the rules that govern how the police record crime – so they probably reflect improved recording. These improvements come in the wake of the <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/jan/15/police-crime-figures-status-claims-fiddling">decision in early 2014</a> by the UK Statistics Authority to cease to designate recorded crime statistics as “national statistics” given their unreliability. </p>
<p>However, it seems likely that the increased emphasis that has been placed on improving police activity in the area of domestic violence has also contributed to increased reporting and recording in that area in particular. </p>
<h2>Verdict</h2>
<p>Although the data is reasonably clear, the verdict is complicated. There is some evidence, albeit limited, of increased reports of violent crime, certainly domestic violence, over the past year. However, there is little evidence to support the claim more generally of reports of violent crime going up very substantially. Much more likely is that they are being recorded more accurately by the police.</p>
<p>The real problem, however, lies in using police-recorded crime statistics, especially over very short time periods, to make claims about crime trends. In fact, more reliable measures like the CSEW show violent crime to have fallen over a very long time period, and by a substantial amount – just as Norman Baker indicated in his reply to Yvette Cooper, though he then ruined it by overstepping the mark with his claim that recorded crime was also at an all time low (it is not). </p>
<p>So, Yvette Cooper’s claim is technically correct, though she is on very thin ice. What she could not easily defend is the claim in the Labour Party election manifesto which states quite baldly that: “Violent crimes have gone up”. </p>
<h2>Review</h2>
<p>This is a balanced assessment of Yvette Cooper’s claim. It is generous in describing this as technically correct.</p>
<p>It is clear that once the Audit Commission stopped auditing police recording practice in 2007 the overall recording rate fell. What caused the police to improve their recording rate in 2013-14? The UK Statistics Authority removal of the “National Statistics” designation was clearly one factor. But there was also the highly <a href="http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/public-administration-select-committee/inquiries/parliament-2010/crime-statistics/">critical inquiry</a> of the House of Commons Public Administration Select Committee, and a <a href="http://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmic/publication/crime-recording-in-kent/">series</a> of critical <a href="https://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmic/publication/crime-data-integrity-force-reports/">reports</a> by HM Inspectorate of Constabulary (HMIC). </p>
<p>So long as HMIC maintains pressure on the police to record crime more fully, we can expect to see a divergence between the crime survey trend and police statistics. – <strong>Mike Hough</strong></p>
<div class="callout">The Conversation is fact checking political statements in the lead-up to the May UK general election. Statements are checked by an academic with expertise in the area. A second academic expert reviews an anonymous copy of the article.<br><br><a href="https://theconversation.com/factchecks/new">Click here to request a check</a>. Please include the statement you would like us to check, the date it was made, and a link if possible. You can also email factcheck@theconversation.com </div><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/40915/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Tim Newburn has received funding from a number of government departments, the Economic and Social Research Council, the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, Nuffield Foundation and Open Society Foundations. He is a trustee of the Howard League for Penal Reform. The views expressed in this article are his own. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Mike Hough was involved in designing the British Crime Survey at the Home Office. He has worked for and advised the Home Office and other organisations including HM Inspectorate of Constabulary, the College of Policing, the Prison Reform Trust and the Howard League for Penal Reform. The views expressed in this article are his own. </span></em></p>Labour and the Lib Dems have clashed over whether crime is going up or down. Which is it?Tim Newburn, Professor of Criminology and Social Policy, London School of Economics and Political ScienceLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.