What does coming in second in Witney actually mean for the Lib Dems?

I have been striking a note of caution for a while now about the potential for the Lib Dems to rise from the ashes. Local by-election results have been seized upon by both Lib Dem supporters and detractors as proof of the party being born again – I have been less convinced. Despite the Brexit vote and the meltdown of the Labour Party, the national polls have not favoured the Lib Dems, at least not as yet. This, to me, is more indicative of where things stand for the party as opposed to local election results, which after having lost literally thousands of local seats during the course of the last parliament you would be expecting some gains to take place anyhow.

But yesterday was the Witney by-election and an interesting result for the Liberal Democrats. They came second to the Tories in what is a very safe Conservative seat, increasing their vote share from 6.8% at the 2015 general election to 30.2%. Even I cannot sneeze at that. Clearly there was something there to make people want to vote Lib Dem all of a sudden in that seat, even if was just to “send a message”.

Here’s what I think the lessons from Witney are:

1.The single market issue is easily the Lib Dems’ best policy, electorally speaking

Liz Leffman, the Lib Dems’ candidate, ran pretty heavily on a platform of Britain remaining in the single market v hard Brexit. I wasn’t sure this was going to work beforehand; there was a lot of talk about Witney having voted to Remain, but given Cameron was their MP and he campaigned so hard on staying in himself (from the position of PM as well), I thought perhaps it was simply the Cameron factor that had caused this. After yesterday’s result, I don’t think so. There is clearly a genuine space for a pro-business, pro-single market party and Witney demonstrated that with the right candidate the Lib Dems can capture this portion of the electorate. Tory voters put off by the hard Brexit, socially conservative messaging of the May government, basically.

2. But in order to capitalise on this the Lib Dems need to have the right candidates – and the right national message

Liz was a local business woman with a decent knowledge of how the single market works who as a councillor had mostly worked on reversing cuts in rural areas. This combination – pro-business while being in touch with rural concerns around possible post-Brexit cuts – could be a powerful combination for the Liberal Democrats, and the Witney demonstrates this. Liz showed where the Lib Dems need to be if they are to win by-elections like this in the future, as opposed to a soggy, soft-left approach that is already being attempted by several other parties, not least of which is Labour in many parts of the country.

3. The problem for the Lib Dems – and every other party besides the Tories for that matter – is that the UKIP targeting is working for May already

UKIP slipped to 6% in an Ipsos Mori poll this week. It’s only one poll, but it is still interesting after the Witney result, one which saw UKIP slip from a strong third with almost 10% of the vote in 2015 to fifth and 1,354 votes yesterday. While the Lib Dems might be able to pick off centrist voters as the Tories become more UKIPy, one has to wonder if they will capture enough of them to make up for the Conservatives being able to mop up ex-UKIP voters. This is the essential crux of May’s electoral policy and it will be fascinating to see how it plays out.

matt (bristol) says

21st October 2016 at 13:02

A pedant writes – no ‘H’ please in your headline, deceased soul and RnB divas were not involved.

The potential problem for the LibDems is that the approach you describe (if it really is viable) turns a lot of things on their heads.

It makes Tory seats in wealthy, educated pro-remain rural and semi-rural areas potential targets, but poorer rural areas with strong ‘leave’ majorities become weaker ground for the party.

But often the former constituencies are unworked by the party, and the latter are where our troops already are.

To illustrate what I mean – when Ken Clarke stands down from Rushcliffe, it may well be very fertile LibDem territory under your premise; and what about Wokingham, with a strong Remain majority represented by John Redwood, of all people? Is he now vulnerable if Brexit turns nasty?

And how would you now rank seats in those local authorities as LibDem targets against, say, Taunton Deane, Sedgemoor, Torbay, Cornwall, all places where we used to think LibDems had fortresses, but Remain lost out big-time?

Building a strong identity for the party as the pro-business Remain party expects local activists to turn on a sixpence and build organisations in places they are historically weak or have given up on parliamentary representation, whilst it junks years of ‘social democrat’ and ‘social liberal’ thought and groundwork, requiring Orwellian work on the history of the party and people’s popular narrative for it from a LibDem Ministry of Truth.

(It also probably may not have much traction as an idea, if we’re honest, outside southern England … maybe it’ll work in parts of Scotland. I don’t know).

I’m not saying no, but it’s a hard and treacherous road to get to where you think the party should be. The potential risks are as big as the potential gains.

Comments

matt (bristol) says

21st October 2016 at 13:02

A pedant writes – no ‘H’ please in your headline, deceased soul and RnB divas were not involved.

The potential problem for the LibDems is that the approach you describe (if it really is viable) turns a lot of things on their heads.

It makes Tory seats in wealthy, educated pro-remain rural and semi-rural areas potential targets, but poorer rural areas with strong ‘leave’ majorities become weaker ground for the party.

But often the former constituencies are unworked by the party, and the latter are where our troops already are.

To illustrate what I mean – when Ken Clarke stands down from Rushcliffe, it may well be very fertile LibDem territory under your premise; and what about Wokingham, with a strong Remain majority represented by John Redwood, of all people? Is he now vulnerable if Brexit turns nasty?

And how would you now rank seats in those local authorities as LibDem targets against, say, Taunton Deane, Sedgemoor, Torbay, Cornwall, all places where we used to think LibDems had fortresses, but Remain lost out big-time?

Building a strong identity for the party as the pro-business Remain party expects local activists to turn on a sixpence and build organisations in places they are historically weak or have given up on parliamentary representation, whilst it junks years of ‘social democrat’ and ‘social liberal’ thought and groundwork, requiring Orwellian work on the history of the party and people’s popular narrative for it from a LibDem Ministry of Truth.

(It also probably may not have much traction as an idea, if we’re honest, outside southern England … maybe it’ll work in parts of Scotland. I don’t know).

I’m not saying no, but it’s a hard and treacherous road to get to where you think the party should be. The potential risks are as big as the potential gains.

Comments

Leave a Reply Cancel reply