Oldham's lessons for Labour

---

Pollsters and psephologist will pore over the result in Oldham for the next few weeks as the only actual concrete example of how voters are reacting to the recent developments in politics, particularly the coalition government.

While certain polling organisation tend to predict elections fairly accurately, politicians and parties are quick to dismiss them if the picture they are presenting isn’t entirely favourable.

The same can’t be said for an actual election result, albeit a by-election.

The outcome in Oldham and Saddleworth wasn’t entirely as expected, although a Labour victory had been seen as something of a foregone conclusion throughout the campaign.

The national polls are consistently predicting Labour a few points ahead of the Tories and up to seven points in some polls (although, with polls, it is always wise to adopt the exact opposite approach to that of the media – ignore the exciting results and take the boring, steady ones into account).

The Lib Dems are consistently polling at around eight per cent.

However, based on this, although by-elections tend to generate unpredictable results, in Oldham the Lib Dems significantly over-performed, Labour performed slightly below expectations and the result for the Tories was terrible.

So, the question political commentators and party strategists will be asking over the next few weeks is what, if anything, can we take from this result.

It is no secret that, although the result looks bad for the Tories, their campaign was half-hearted at best.

In addition, to dispatch Baroness Warsi as their by-election big-hitter, the secret weapon they hoped would woo the good people of Oldham, demonstrated that they didn’t hold out high hopes of winning this seat.

I suspect that Cameron had hoped for a slightly better result for his party in Oldham but I doubt he will be losing any sleep over the next few days.

The performance of the Lib Dems, which confounded expectations, has released some of the pressure on Clegg within his own party and perhaps strengthened the coalition for the long-term.

Those who say this was an utterly disastrous result for the coalition as a whole seem to be getting a little carried away.

This was a Labour held seat in the North West (where cuts to public services are keenly felt) and after standing on a platform of opposing cuts they retained it with an acceptable majority.

The Lib Dems, however, shouldn’t see this as proof that their unpopularity has been exaggerated and that the polls are simply wrong.

Whilst Labour’s wise decision to quickly cast the previous MP, Phil Woolas, adrift meant that any negative repercussions at the ballot box for his actions were limited.

I suspect that the Lib Dems, and in particular their candidate, were rewarded by many voters for their role in the recent controversies.

As for Labour, the result in Oldham was satisfactory if unremarkable.

Anything less than a victory with a comfortable margin would have invited questions over Ed Miliband’s leadership and given impetus those mischievous sections of the party who still pine for his brother.

Internally, MPs and strategists expected to win by a bigger margin and many thought that the Lib Dems to pushed into third place.

There was also a sense that some Labour commentators deliberately talked up their party’s expectations to put pressure on their leader if the inflated expectations were not met.

It is perhaps a minor victory for Ed Miliband over these elements in his party that the outcome of the by-election was sufficiently positive for Labour to maintain the confidence in his leadership which seems to be growing steadily.

It is also useful for him to be able to paint the result as a real disaster for the coalition, even if I don’t necessarily agree with this analysis.

There was also a sense throughout this by-election campaign that the party was united, enthused and energetic – something which I have not felt for several years.

However, there are two significant warnings for Labour here. The first is that, despite the unpopularity of the Liberal Democrats, they are determined, energetic and even ruthless campaigners and, due to this, will often confound expectations.

Phil Woolas will testify to this.

The second warning is that the coalition parties have demonstrated that they are able to cooperate during election campaigns and might benefit from tactical voting.

It's purely speculative, but I’d be very surprised if the Lib Dem vote was not boosted at the expense of the Tories’ by the anti-Labour voters voting tactically for the coalition partner they deemed most likely to win.

If this trend was translated across the country in a general election it could make a significant different to the outcome.

Avoiding a potential disaster in the Oldham by-election should give Ed Miliband a much-needed confidence boost and present him with an opportunity to carve out a new platform for his leadership.

The media, and more crucially, the electorate, have still not developed a definite picture of him and the vision he and his party have for Britain.

Since the last general election Labour has been behaving a little too much like a third party – being defined by what they oppose (bankers, cuts, Tories etc) rather than what they propose.

This is understandable and fairly typical for a party going into opposition after so long in power, but the Oldham and Saddleworth by-election should act as a starting-pistol for the Labour leader to develop and present to the electorate a clear vision of what he and his party stand for in the post-New Labour era.

Alex Bryce is researcher to a Labour MP.