Allies of Jeremy Corbyn have insisted his leadership will continue if Labour loses one or both byelections in Stoke-on-Trent and Copeland on Thursday.
The party is optimistic of hanging on in both contests, triggered by the resignations of two sitting MPs, Jamie Reed and Tristram Hunt, to take up new jobs.
However, the electoral battle is still thought to be close and unpredictable, particularly in the Cumbrian seat of Copeland, where the Conservatives have played on Corbyn’s historic opposition to nuclear power.
There is more confidence among Labour activists about Stoke, given Ukip leader Paul Nuttall’s difficulties in the campaign, but defeat in either long-held seat is likely to prompt renewed questions about Labour’s ability to appeal to voters.
Diane Abbott, one of Corbyn’s closest allies, said she was confident he would lead the party into the 2020 election, and there was no need for a succession plan.
“These are difficult byelections, they’re going to be quite tight,” she told Sky’s Sophy Ridge. “We are hopeful of winning both of them but it’s really important that every Labour supporter comes out to vote.
“And if we lose one or we lose both, I think the party will go forward. It has to go forward.”
Asked whether there would be questions over Corbyn’s leadership if one or both seats are lost, she said: “No, no. I mean there are people who have been opposed to Jeremy from the very beginning, I’m not one of them and I think we have to move forward.”
Speculation about Corbyn’s future in charge began anew after reports last week that Labour had conducted polling in the north of England about the appeal of Rebecca Long-Bailey and Angela Rayner, considered two possible candidates to replace him. This was strongly dismissed by the Labour leadership, with Corbyn rejecting rumours that he was prepared to name a date to hand over to another candidate as “fake news”.
At the same time, Labour MPs who oppose the leadership are showing very little enthusiasm for the idea of mounting another challenge this year, and prefer the idea of battling to stop allies of Corbyn changing the rules at party conference to make it easier for a leftwing successor to make it on to the ballot paper.
One Labour MP, who has been a frequent critic of Corbyn, said MPs were continuing to refrain from public criticism because the leader would have to go on his own terms if he wanted to give up the job.
“There is no appetite for another contest this year,” she said. “And besides, it’s not like we have an obvious candidate.”
Sadiq Khan, the Labour London mayor, also dismissed the idea of replacing Corbyn if the byelection results are bad, as he was questioned about the results in an interview with ITV’s Peston on Sunday.
“He’s won two leadership elections in the space of two years. I think that issue has been settled,” he said.
Polling suggests that Labour is nationally in a difficult position, with support at its lowest level since Gordon Brown was prime minister in 2009, trailing the Conservatives by around 14 points. There is recognition among senior Labour figures that something must be done to reverse the situation, regardless of the byelection results.
If the party lost in either seat, supporters of the leadership would be able to point to Tony Blair’s intervention on Friday suggesting Brexit could be blocked, despite Corbyn’s decision to whip his MPs in favour of article 50.
On Saturday, the Labour leader described Blair’s speech as “unhelpful”, while a string of Labour MPs also questioned the timing of the comments in the week before the two byelections in strongly leave-voting seats.
SCENARIOS
WINS BOTH
A win in both seats would be hugely important for Corbyn, showing the continuing power of Labour as a brand in two seats where the party has been historically dominant. It would also be a reflection of Labour’s strong ground game and activist base, as well as the public’s unhappiness with the state of the NHS locally trumping any goodwill for the Conservatives over Brexit. On top of that, a win in Stoke would heavily diminish Ukip leader Paul Nuttall’s claims to be a threat to Labour in the north of England.
LOSES COPELAND
A loss in Copeland would be easier to explain, as the constituency is highly dependent on jobs in the nuclear industry, which Corbyn has historically opposed on principle. He has repeatedly said there is a place for nuclear power in the energy mix during the campaign, but that position contrasts with the Labour leader’s years of antipathy to nuclear power. That said, it would be a blow to the party to lose a seat it has held since its inception in 1983, with the Conservatives likely to seize on it as an example of Labour’s waning power in the north of England.
LOSES STOKE
This would symbolically be a worse loss for Labour than Copeland, because it would hand Ukip its first elected MP who is not a defector. The loss of such a heavily leave-voting seat would also point to wider problems with the party’s mixed messages over Brexit, despite Corbyn’s decision to whip MPs in favour of voting for article 50. Labour aides would be able to point to Tony Blair’s intervention in favour of reversing Brexit as an unhelpful factor. But it would undoubtedly create serious worries in the party about its ability to appeal to working-class communities.
LOSES BOTH
This would be the nightmare scenario for Corbyn and raise questions about his ability to continue as leader, coupled with continuing poor national polling. However, neither his supporters nor critics have a viable candidate as a successor and there is little appetite within the parliamentary party for another leadership election. But there would undoubtedly be calls for a serious rethink of strategy and redoubled efforts to concentrate on the tactics needed to win elections.
View all comments >