How much do union nominations matter?

16th July, 2010 10:53 am

UnionsBy Sunder Katwala / @nextleft

How much difference will trade union endorsements make in the Labour leadership?

The truth is that nobody knows for sure. There is a tendency to overstate the influence of union executives in “delivering” swathes of voters, partly a hangover from the days of the trade union bloc vote, so that the 1983 leadership contest was effectively in the bag for Neil Kinnock by teatime on the day the election was announced.

Fortunately, party democracy has come a long way – and candidates need to appeal to several million individual voters, who will not vote as a block.

What we do know is that the last time Labour held a leadership election, union endorsements made almost no difference at all, as can be seen by the lists of formal supporting nominations for the candidates in that three-way contest.

Tony Blair won 52.3% of the affiliated section of the ballot, against 28.4% for John Prescott and 19.3% for Margaret Beckett. The figures for the affiliated section were pretty close to those among individual party members, where Blair won 58.2% with Prescott on 24.4% and Margaret Beckett on 17.4%.

Margaret Beckett had a supporting nomination from the large Transport and General Workers Union.

John Prescott had formal supporting nominations from the following:

Associated Society of Locomotive Engineers & Firemen; Graphical, Paper &
Media Union; National Association of Colliery Overmen, Deputies & Shotfirers;
National Union of Mineworkers; National Union of Rail, Maritime & Transport

While Tony Blair had only the Iron and Steel Trades Confederation – a decade later to become part of the merged union Community, which has nominated David Miliband. (Blair also got rather apt supporting nominations from the Christian Socialist Movement and the Society of Labour Lawyers, as well as Labour students).

So the lesson of 1994 was that nominations had a very weak effect on individual votes in the affiliated section.

However, the candidates are aware that they made rather more difference in 2007, as Patrick Wintour has set out, though the union-by-union figures no longer appear to be publicly available. On the first ballot, Harriet Harman and Hilary Benn did much better among individual members than affiliates, while John Cruddas and Peter Hain did much better among affiliate voters.

Which precedent is more likely to be relevant in 2010?

One might expect endorsements to play a considerably more important role in a deputy leadership contest.

Firstly, there is considerably less national media coverage of a deputy leadership contest, though it is also true that the 2010 race has had less media profile (certainly for any single candidate) than was the case in 1994, where a mid-term contest with Labour so far ahead in the polls made the winner an overwhelming favourite to be the next Prime Minister.

Secondly, there was a much smaller turnout in a deputy race. (From memory, this was as low as 9-10% among trade unions in the affiliated section in 2007, though socialist society turnout – 50% among Fabian Society members – was usually more like that of individual party members). The low union turnout meant that the relative weight of closely engaged union members and activists, perhaps most likely to be engaged with union committee endorsements, would be considerably greater. (My personal guesstimate is that a leadership contest turnout will be at least triple that, and probably higher).

However, perhaps a countervailing difference between 2010 and 1994 is the larger field of leadership candidates, and the more nuanced differences in terms of the political positioning of several of the leading candidates. And if a union endorsement might have some influence on voters’ second preferences, that could well matter in 2010 as it did not in the three-cornered first round victory of Blair in 1994.

This was also posted at Next Left.

Comments are closed


  • News Labour: ‘Rattled’ Cameron can’t claim centre ground

    Labour: ‘Rattled’ Cameron can’t claim centre ground

    David Cameron cannot claim to be in the centre ground of British politics after today’s speech – and his attacks on Jeremy Corbyn show he is “rattled” by the election of the new Labour leader. That is the message from the Labour Party today. While Cameron hoped that his speech to Tory conference would be seen as a claim to the political centre – with focus on poverty, social mobility and housing – Shadow minister Jon Ashworth has hit back, […]

    Read more →
  • Comment A credibility deficit: why Labour’s former winners deserved to lose

    A credibility deficit: why Labour’s former winners deserved to lose

    The recent report from Jon Cruddas confirmed that Labour lost the election because it appeared too anti-austerity, too anti-aspiration and too far in favour of wealth redistribution. The selection of Jeremy Corbyn therefore came as a shock to so many of the political elite, particularly those connected to Tony Blair’s three consecutive election victories. But with conference season drawing to a close, and Corbyn’s shadow cabinet settling into their new roles, for Labour’s modernisers the time begins for self-reflection and […]

    Read more →
  • Comment Featured What we learned from the Tory Conference

    What we learned from the Tory Conference

    David Cameron’s speech finishes up the Conservative Party’s conference in Manchester – so what did we learn this week? 1. The leadership contest is well underway The jostling to replace David Cameron has begun in earnest, with George Osborne, Theresa May and Boris Johnson retaining their places as the frontrunners. Osborne is laying down his marker as a safe pair of hands – only an economic crisis over the coming years is likely to take that away from him. May was […]

    Read more →
  • Featured News Labour hit back at Cameron’s “record of failure” on housing

    Labour hit back at Cameron’s “record of failure” on housing

    Labour’s Shadow Housing minister John Healey has this morning hit out at the Tories’ record on housing and home ownership, as David Cameron prepares to make the topic the centrepiece of his Tory conference speech today. Cameron will pledge to build 200,000 ‘starter homes’ over the course of this parliament, encouraging people into home ownership rather than renting. However, Cameron’s definition of ‘starter homes’ was criticised by housing charity Shelter in August, when they published research showing that an income […]

    Read more →
  • Comment Featured 5 reasons Theresa May is wrong about “mass migration”

    5 reasons Theresa May is wrong about “mass migration”

    Theresa May yesterday took to the podium at Tory party conference and channelled her inner Enoch Powell. In a bid to prove her leadership credentials she made a virulently anti-immigration speech, but it was riddled with inaccuracies. She somewhat confusingly tore apart her own record on immigration as Home Secretary and warned that “mass migration” makes social cohesion impossible. The subtext of this: if you’ve got problems, blame migrants. Here’s why she is so sorely wrong. 1. Migrants aren’t responsible […]

    Read more →
Share with your friends