What’s gone wrong for the Lib Dems?

Unless there is a major shift tonight, this might not be such a game-changer for the third party.

At least something is going right -- Chris Huhne has held on to his Eastleigh seat.

But the results so far are certainly not reflecting the "Cleggmania" that followed the leaders' first televised debate, nor do they live up to the neck-and-neck-with-Labour ratings shown in the polls last week.

There are several possible reasons for this. It's possible the TV debates just didn't have quite as much of an impact as was widely expected. Respondents were likely to treat polls taken immediately after the debate as a poll of who they thought best in the debate, rather than whom they were voting for, regardless of how the question was phrased.

This leads to a second possible distorting factor -- the sheer quantity of polling in this election. The introduction of the daily poll may, in fact, have been counterproductive to the aim of presenting an accurate picture of national mood or voter intention.

Finally, Lib Dem support is notoriously soft. Many people like the idea of the party -- even more so those who were exposed to the party through the leaders' debate -- but, when it comes down to it, feel that their vote might be wasted.

Both of the other main parties played on this, Labour saying that a vote for the Lib Dems would let Cameron in through the back door (certainly a potent tactic among people I know) and the Tories warning of the dangers of a hung parliament.

Perhaps this election won't be quite the game-changer for the third party that many thought it would be just a few weeks ago.

Of course, this could all change as the night goes on. Clegg could yet be kingmaker.

Samira Shackle is a freelance journalist, who tweets @samirashackle. She was formerly a staff writer for the New Statesman.

Photo: Getty
Show Hide image

Jeremy Corbyn secures big victory on Labour's national executive committee

The NEC has approved rule changes which all-but-guarantee the presence of a Corbynite candidate on the ballot. 

Jeremy Corbyn has secured a major victory after Labour’s ruling executive voted approve a series of rule changes, including lowering the parliamentary threshold for nominating a leader of the Labour party from 15 per cent to 10 per cent. That means that in the event of a leadership election occurring before March 2019, the number of MPs and MEPs required to support a candidate’s bid would drop to 28. After March 2019, there will no longer be any Labour MEPs and the threshold would therefore drop to 26.

As far as the balance of power within the Labour Party goes, it is a further example of Corbyn’s transformed position after the electoral advance of June 2017. In practice, the 28 MP and MEP threshold is marginally easier to clear for the left than the lower threshold post-March 2019, as the party’s European contingent is slightly to the left of its Westminster counterpart. However, either number should be easily within the grasp of a Corbynite successor.

In addition, a review of the party’s democratic structures, likely to recommend a sweeping increase in the power of Labour activists, has been approved by the NEC, and both trade unions and ordinary members will be granted additional seats on the committee. Although the plans face ratification at conference, it is highly likely they will pass.

Participants described the meeting as a largely low-key affair, though Peter Willsman, a Corbynite, turned heads by saying that some of the party’s MPs “deserve to be attacked”. Willsman, a longtime representative of the membership, is usually a combative presence on the party’s executive, with one fellow Corbynite referring to him as an “embarrassment and a bore”. 

Stephen Bush is special correspondent at the New Statesman. His daily briefing, Morning Call, provides a quick and essential guide to domestic and global politics.