Why are we letting these "kidnappers" off so lightly?

The media have been sympathetic to the US missionaries awaiting trial in Haiti.

The plight of the American missionaries awaiting trial in Haiti for kidnapping children has been reported pretty sympathetically so far -- even though 22 of the 33 children they tried to take across the border into the Dominican Republic have parents, which is stretching the definition of "orphan" beyond even the one in the dictionary Madonna evidently consults.

On the Telegraph website, Toby Young has posted a short article titled "No good deed goes unpunished" (you get the gist). And even though Toby is a professional provocateur (I attach no opprobrium to the label, by the way), I suspect many Telegraph readers will agree with him, even if some of those commenting on the thread have not.

The overall impression given has been of kindly, God-fearing folk, a little naive -- golly gee, do you have to have documents to take kids that aren't even yours across international frontiers? -- but, in the main, just out to do good.

Imagine, however, as Jon Snow suggested at a Three Faiths Forum talk I attended last week, if a group of Muslims had been discovered doing the taking. There would have been an uproar, he observed.

So why have we let these Southern Baptists, the "Idaho Ten", as they're already being called, off so lightly? I'm afraid the answers are as obvious as they are unpalatable.

Follow the New Statesman team on Twitter.

Sholto Byrnes is a Contributing Editor to the New Statesman
Dan Kitwood/Getty
Show Hide image

I believe only Yvette Cooper has the breadth of support to beat Jeremy Corbyn

All the recent polling suggests Andy Burnham is losing more votes than anyone else to Jeremy Corbyn, says Diana Johnson MP.

Tom Blenkinsop MP on the New Statesman website today says he is giving his second preference to Andy Burnham as he thinks that Andy has the best chance of beating Jeremy.

This is on the basis that if Yvette goes out first all her second preferences will swing behind Andy, whereas if Andy goes out first then his second preferences, due to the broad alliance he has created behind his campaign, will all or largely switch to the other male candidate, Jeremy.

Let's take a deep breath and try and think through what will be the effect of preferential voting in the Labour leadership.

First of all, it is very difficult to know how second preferences will switch. From my telephone canvassing there is some rather interesting voting going on, but I don't accept that Tom’s analysis is correct. I have certainly picked up growing support for Yvette in recent weeks.

In fact you can argue the reverse of Tom’s analysis is true – Andy has moved further away from the centre and, as a result, his pitch to those like Tom who are supporting Liz first is now narrower. As a result, Yvette is more likely to pick up those second preferences.

Stats from the Yvette For Labour team show Yvette picking up the majority of second preferences from all candidates – from the Progress wing supporting Liz to the softer left fans of Jeremy – and Andy's supporters too. Their figures show many undecideds opting for Yvette as their first preference, as well as others choosing to switch their first preference to Yvette from one of the other candidates. It's for this reason I still believe only Yvette has the breadth of support to beat Jeremy and then to go on to win in 2020.

It's interesting that Andy has not been willing to make it clear that second preferences should go to Yvette or Liz. Yvette has been very clear that she would encourage second preferences to be for Andy or Liz.

Having watched Andy on Sky's Murnaghan show this morning, he categorically states that Labour will not get beyond first base with the electorate at a general election if we are not economically credible and that fundamentally Jeremy's economic plans do not add up. So, I am unsure why Andy is so unwilling to be clear on second preferences.

All the recent polling suggests Andy is losing more votes than anyone else to Jeremy. He trails fourth in London – where a huge proportion of our electorate is based.

So I would urge Tom to reflect more widely on who is best placed to provide the strongest opposition to the Tories, appeal to the widest group of voters and reach out to the communities we need to win back. I believe that this has to be Yvette.

The Newsnight focus group a few days ago showed that Yvette is best placed to win back those former Labour voters we will need in 2020.

Labour will pay a massive price if we ignore this.

Diana Johnson is the Labour MP for Hull North.