Labour finish third as Tories retain Newark

The Tories have held Newark, with UKIP in second and Labour in third. The result appeared a foregone conclusion in the final days of the campaign (one of the reasons why there was no LabourList liveblog last night – apologies to those who were hoping to see one). That sees the Tories majority reduced, but on a lower turnout.

As for Labour – how bad a result was this? Coming behind UKIP still doesn’t feel good, but clearly it’s something that all major parties will have to get used to – UKIP are the party of 2nd place in by-elections at the moment.

But despite some talk in the immediate aftermath of the European elections about the Shadow Cabinet being encouraged to campaign there, this was never a by-election that Labour was taking seriously – not spending much money or committing much time or resources to the campaign. By way of comparison, UKIP took the seat very seriously, and the Tories the everything at the seat – including four (yes, four) visits from the Prime Minister, in what is their 44th safest seat. For Labour, winning was never considered a serious prospect, and were squeezed by two parties who were taking it far more seriously. There are also suspicions that some Labour and Lib Dem voters may have tactically voted for the Tories to keep UKIP out. Anything to stop Roger Helmer becoming their MP, perhaps.

And while we’re talking about being squeezed – the Labour vote looks positively whopping compared to the mere 2.6% the Lib Dems managed to accrue.

So Labour shouldn’t be too disappointed with this result then? Well – that’s not entirely true either. Our voteshare is down on 2010 and because Professor John Curtice (who those of you who keep up with our election coverage will know I think a great deal of) told the BBC:

“The truth is that they [Labour] should be on tenterhooks as to whether they will win the seat. That swing that they would need, it is less than the Labour Party achieved in Norwich, less than the Conservatives achieved in Norwich in the last Parliament, less than Labour achieved in Dudley West, Wirrel South just before they won the 1997 election. When oppositions look as though they are on course for government, the kind of swing that is required for Labour to win has been relatively common. To that extent, we have to ask ourselves, why is it we are not asking the question, could Labour win this? It is all of a piece, as a result of the recent elections, Labour do not have the enthusiasm and depth of support in the electorate that make them look like an alternative government.”

John’s analysis is right, but 2015 is not going to be a repeat of 1997 – unfortunately we are not on course for a landslide. We may not even be on course for a majority. And whilst John references Norwich North in 2009 when the Tories took the seat from Labour with a big swing, the Labour Party were blamed for booting out a popular local MP. Campaigning on election day there was one of the toughest experiences I’ve ever had as a Labour member – despite Mercer’s wrongdoing, it seems the Tory Party were not similarly punished.

So although the kind of swing required to take Newark for Labour might be the kind an opposition would be aiming for a year before a big election win, Labour HQ certainly never felt that was likely. The result announced overnight will either confirm that they were right – or that we should have campaigned harder – depending on your outlook.

One person who has campaigned hard is the Labour PPC Michael Payne (ably supported by Chris Bryant MP). Payne said last night that he will be “holding Robert Jenrick to account right the way through to the General Election”. Labour winning in Newark wasn’t to be in 2014, and is highly unlikely to be in 2015 – but good luck to Michael in the year ahead.