Shadow cabinet election results in full

Yvette Cooper tops ballot. Peter Hain, Ben Bradshaw and Diane Abbott all miss out.

We weren't expecting the shadow cabinet election results until 9pm, but Labour MP Barry Gardiner has just leaked them on Twitter. Below are the 19 MPs who have made the cut.

Notable casualties include former cabinet ministers Peter Hain, Ben Bradshaw, Shaun Woodward and Stephen Timms, as well as Diane Abbott, David Lammy and Stephen Twigg. Hain, who was a key Ed Miliband supporter, will be particularly disappointed not to have been elected. But Diane Abbott's failure comes as no surprise. The right loath her socialist politics and the left haven't forgiven her decision to send her son to private school. Elsewhere, Tessa Jowell, one of the few remaining Blairite ultras, will be pleased with her performance.

As widely predicted, Yvette Cooper topped the poll with 232 votes, putting her in pole position for the shadow chancellorship. In total, the shadow cabinet contains 11 women (out of 25), not far off Harriet Harman's original target of a 50:50 split.

1. Yvette Cooper: 232 votes

2. John Healey: 192 votes

3. Ed Balls: 179 votes

4. Andy Burnham: 165 votes

5. Angela Eagle: 165 votes

6. Alan Johnson: 165 votes

7. Douglas Alexander: 160 votes

8. Jim Murphy: 160 votes

9. Tessa Jowell: 152 votes

10. Caroline Flint: 139 votes

11. John Denham: 129 votes

12. Hilary Benn: 128 votes

13. Sadiq Khan: 128 votes

14. Mary Creagh: 119 votes

15. Ann McKechin: 117 votes

16. Maria Eagle: 107 votes

17. Meg Hillier: 106 votes

18. Ivan Lewis: 104 votes

19. Liam Byrne: 100 votes

They join the following Labour MPs and Peers who are already members of the shadow cabinet:

Ed Miliband, Leader
Harriet Harman, Deputy Leader
Tony Lloyd , Chair of the Parliamentary Labour Party
Rosie Winterton, Shadow Chief Whip
Baroness Jan Royall, Shadow Leader of the House of Lords
Lord Steve Bassam, Chief Whip in the House of Lords

The Defeated

Emily Thornberry: 99 votes

Peter Hain: 97 votes

Fiona MacTaggart: 88 votes

Barbara Keeley: 87 votes

Vernon Coaker: 85 votes

Patrick McFadden: 84 votes

Helen Goodman: 80 votes

David Lammy: 80 votes

Stephen Timms: 79 votes

Chris Bryant: 77 votes

Shaun Woodward: 72 votes

Gareth Thomas: 71 votes

Kevin Brennan: 64 votes

Roberta Blackman-Woods: 63 votes

Diane Abbott: 59 votes

Stephen Twigg: 55 votes

Tom Harris: 54 votes

Ben Bradshaw: 53 votes

Iain Wright: 43 votes

Barry Gardiner: 41 votes

David Hanson: 38 votes

Ian Lucas: 34 votes

Wayne David 30 votes

Huw Irranca-Davies 28 votes

Chris Leslie: 26 votes

Rob Flello: 15 votes

Mike Gapes: 12 votes

Alun Michael: 11 votes

Eric Joyce: 10 votes

George Eaton is political editor of the New Statesman.

Photo: Bulent Kilic/Getty Images
Show Hide image

We need to talk about the origins of the refugee crisis

Climate change, as much as Isis, is driving Europe's migrant crisis, says Barry Gardiner. 

Leaders get things wrong. Of course they do. They have imperfect information. They face competing political pressures. Ultimately they are human. The mark of a bad leader is not to make the wrong decision. It is to make no decision at all.

David Cameron’s paralysis over the unfolding human tragedy of Syrian refugees should haunt him for the rest of his natural life. At a time when political and moral leadership was most called for he has maintained the most cowardly silence. 

All summer, as Italy, Greece, Hungary and Macedonia have been trying to cope with the largest migration of people this continent has seen in 70 years, Downing Street has kept putting out spokespeople to claim the government is working harder than any other country “to solve the causes of the crisis” and that this justifies the UK’s refusal to take more than the 216 refugees it has so far admitted directly from Syria. The truth is it hasn’t and it doesn’t.

Anyone who truly wants to solve the causes of the nightmare that is Syria today must look beyond the vicious and repressive regime of Assad or the opportunistic barbarism of ISIL. They need to understand why it was that hundreds of thousands of ruined farmers from Al-Hasakeh, Deir Ezzor and AL-Raqqa in the northeast of that country flocked to the cities in search of government assistance in the first place - only to find it did not exist.

Back in 2010 just after David Cameron became Prime Minister, the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation warned that, after the longest and most severe drought in Syria, since records began in 1900, 3 million Syrians were facing extreme poverty. In 2011 the International Institute for Strategic Studies published a report claiming that climate change “will increase the risks of resource shortages, mass migration and civil conflict”. These were some of the deep causes of the Syrian civil war just as they are the deep causes of the conflicts in Tunisia, South Sudan, Somalia, Libya and Egypt. So what about Cameron’s claim that his government has been working to solve them?

Two years after that Institute for Strategic Studies report pointed out that conflict as a result of  drought in countries like Ethiopia, Eritrea and Somalia had already claimed 600,000 lives,  the parliamentary Committee on Arms Export Controls found the UK Government had issued more than 3,000 export licenses for military and intelligence equipment worth a total of £12.3bn to countries which were on its own official list for human rights abuses; including to Libya, Tunisia, Somalia, Sudan, Egypt and Syria. That was the same year that UK aid to Africa was cut by 7.4% to just £3.4billion. Working to solve the root causes? Or working to fuel the ongoing conflict?

A year later in 2014 home office minister, James Brokenshire told the House of Commons that the government would no longer provide support to the Mare Nostrum operation that was estimated to have saved the lives of more than 150,000 refugees in the Mediterranean, because it was providing what the government called a “pull factor”. He said: “The government believes the most effective way to prevent refugees and migrants attempting this dangerous crossing, is to focus our attention on countries of origin and transit, as well as taking steps to fight the people smugglers who wilfully put lives at risk by packing migrants into unseaworthy boats.”

In fact the ending of the rescue operation did not reduce the number of refugees. It was not after all a “pull factor” but the push factor – what was happening in Syria - that proved most important. Earlier this summer, David Cameron indicated that he believed the UK should consider joining the United States in the bombing campaign against Isis in Syria, yet we know that for every refugee fleeing persecution under Assad, or the murderous thuggery of ISIS, there is another fleeing the bombing of their city by the United States in its attempt to degrade ISIS.  The bombing of one’s home is a powerful push factor.

The UK has not even fulfilled Brokenshire’s promise to fight the people smugglers. The Financial Action Task Force has reported that human trafficking generates proportionately fewer Suspicious Activity Reports (SARs) annually than other comparable crimes because the level of awareness is lower. Prosecuting the heads of the trafficking networks has not been a focus of government activity. Scarcely a dozen minor operatives pushing boats on the shores of Turkey have actually been arrested. But it is not the minnows that the UK government should be concentrating on. It is their bosses with a bank account in London where a series of remittances are coming in from money transfer businesses in Turkey or North Africa. Ministers should be putting real pressure on UK banks who should be registering SARs so the authorities can investigate and begin to prosecute the ultimate beneficiaries who are driving and orchestrating this human misery. They are not.

That image, which few of us will ever completely erase from our mind, will no doubt prompt David Cameron to make a renewed gesture. An extra million for refugee camps in Jordan, or perhaps a voluntary commitment to take a couple of thousand more refugees under a new European Quota scheme. But if the UK had been serious about tackling the causes of this crisis it had the opportunity in Addis Ababa in July this year at the Funding for Sustainable Development Conference. In fact it failed to bring forward new money for the very climate adaptation that could stem the flow of refugees. In Paris this December the world will try to reach agreement on combating the dangerous climate change that Syria and North Africa are already experiencing. Without agreement there, we in the rich world will have to get used to our trains being disrupted, our borders controls being breached and many more bodies being washed up on our beaches.