Loading summary
A
Hello, welcome to Toxic. I'm Martin Rodgers, here with Tony Travers to discuss the recent Oldham West Wrighton by election. Welcome, Tony.
B
Good afternoon.
A
So, first of all, is this a great newsworthy event or business as usual?
B
I think nothing's business as usual at the moment, particularly for the Labour Party. I mean, there's been an extraordinary week with the vote in the House of Commons on Syria ending with the by election, which against the sort of created expectations, perhaps in the media, you know, which had the possibility that Ukip would do very well or even just win it at one point. Labour held on, increased their vote share and I think that inevitably will be read by the leadership, Jeremy Corbyn in particular, as being the best that could possibly have happened. What I think it probably tells us though, is that as is often the case in by elections, the electorate locally decides, well, you know, let's do something a bit unusual here. And of course unusual in this case case is actually almost to replicate the result of the last time this seat was fought at the general election. So it doesn't tell us they never do much about underlying politics, but there'll be a sigh of relief at the top of the Labour Party.
A
So have we seen with this split between the objective vote numbers and demographic numbers which very heavily favour Labour, large majority, large South Asian Muslim population in the state, round about 25% and above, that's the sort of objective figures that Labour has backing it, whereas the more subjective political expectations which talked about the possibility of a Ukip victory. So have we seen a difference between those two?
B
I mean, we'll never fully know exactly what the makeup was of the Labour vote here, but the fact that there's a substantial South Asian vote, a Muslim vote, one of the. One of the groups most likely, I suspect, to come out to respond to an imagined Ukip threat, I mean, that tells us something about this constituency and about the particular struggle that was fought between Labour and Ukip. I'm not sure that tells us anything you could read across to anywhere else, but there are other places like this. But I think the generalizable message from this by election, as from most by elections, is limited, remembering that governments often lose by election in mid term and then win the next general election. So I don't think this tells us anything really much about the Labour Party's future either.
A
So how much of a blow is this then to Ukip, given that expectations were relatively high?
B
I think for Ukip this is a bit of a blow. They only won one seat in the general election. This seemed a reasonable prospect for them, given they had a reasonable vote share in the number of wards in local elections and at the last general election, and that, you know, Labour nationally was in a mess, these were good conditions and yet, lo and behold, they didn't win. And I think the longer Ukip goes on not winning in seats like this, you know, the greater the risk to them is that the electorate begins to see them as incapable of winning. So, you know, it's a bad result, I think, for Ukip.
A
So to just carry on with Ukip briefly, sometimes they've had the advantage of the element of surprise, which, given the expectations, they haven't been able to rely on. Is the makeup of the seat one of the most significant factors that's limited their appeal, or is this part of a longer term decline? Do they still remain a threat to Labour, especially in its heartlands?
B
There's no question Ukip can still take large numbers of votes from Labour in some places, from Conservatives in others, and thus indirectly affect election results and indeed potentially general election results. So that can't be taken away from them. And I think when it comes to the local elections next year, it will be interesting to see if the kind of vote share that they received in the olden by election translates through to winning some seats in a number of northern metropolitan areas off Labour, particularly where there's a significant relatively poor and white population, and so some of the outer cities in the north and even the Midlands perhaps, I think that will be the real test as to how far they can continue to make progress.
A
Do you think it's significant that Ukip's share of the vote increased in this by election, even though the surge that was predicted to some extent didn't materialise? But just on the vote share that has been made of Labour having increased its vote share, Ukip also increased its vote share a little bit. Is this significant?
B
I think the fact that Ukip was seen as the party of potential opposition to the big dominant Labour Party is interesting from their point of view, even though I think the overall result will be pretty disappointing. So, as I say, I think that if we look forward getting a sort of vote share between 20 and 30% or anywhere near that really in a by election is suggestive that when it comes to the local elections, either they do make some further progress, particularly in urban seats in the north from Labour, or if they don't, then we know, or we will know when it comes to the locals next year, that they are going to find it really hard to make much further progress even in local elections, even when conditions are going quite well for them.
A
A lot of prominence has been given to Labour's candidate, winning candidate, given that he has been the head of the council. Is this raising the profile of local government or victory for local government as a route into national government? What local government issues are important here?
B
Well, there's no doubt that Jim McMahon was not only leader of Oldham Council, but actually widely seen as a good leader of a well run council. So in a sense, from the Labour Party nationalist point of view, I think he's exactly the kind of candidate that Moderate, non Corbynite MPs would like to see joining their ranks. And I think from local government's point of view, it does tell us something about the kind of people who are coming through, or have been coming through local government as Labour leaders of councils, many of whom are actually much more to the centre mainstream of the Labour Party than the new leadership. And that's going to have to be resolved at the local level, as it will with MPs in Parliament. So I think that the arrival of Jim McMahon is classic and it's classic Labour in some ways. Local government leader gets into Parliament and the big test for Labour from now on is that, you know, to ensure that when other by elections come along, if they do, and when they do that they get equally plausible local candidates of this kind.
A
So finally, if Labour had performed poorly in this election, the pressure on Jeremy Corbyn would have been increased. So given the win and the comfortable majority, it's only fair to, to some extent give him some credit in the same way that he would have been hammered if they'd lost. But what does this result tell us? Is it significant? Can we learn anything from it? Or will it just give him some much needed breathing space at the moment?
B
Well, there's no question that this result will take some of the pressure off Jeremy Corbyn, because I mean, as you say, if he'd lost or just won, it would have emboldened and empowered those, including some in the shadow Cabinet or those MPs in Parliament to say, look, this can't go on, this is the kind of result we're getting that can't be said now. So those who would like a new leader at some point in the near future within the Parliamentary Labour Party, for example, now have to wait a bit further for some other evidence that this can't go on. Corbyn himself has said he will carry on, he's not going anywhere. And so the standoff between the new Labour leadership, particularly the core of it. Jeremy Corbyn, John McDonnell and all of those around then, and the Parliamentary Labour Party lives to. I almost said fight. Another day survives to another day, another week, another month.
A
Great, thank you very much. Tony, you're off the hot seat.
B
Thank you.
Date: December 14, 2015
Host: Martin Rodgers
Guest: Tony Travers
In this episode, Martin Rodgers interviews political analyst Tony Travers about the significance and implications of the recent Oldham West and Royton by-election. The conversation delves into what the result means for the Labour Party, the performance and prospects of Ukip, and the broader political trends in the UK. Travers offers expert perspective on electoral dynamics, candidate selection, and the ongoing tensions within Labour under Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership.
"I think nothing's business as usual at the moment, particularly for the Labour Party...there'll be a sigh of relief at the top of the Labour Party." (00:12, Tony Travers)
"...the generalizable message from this by election, as from most by elections, is limited, remembering that governments often lose by election in mid term and then win the next general election." (01:41, Tony Travers)
"...the greater the risk to them is that the electorate begins to see them as incapable of winning. So, you know, it's a bad result, I think, for Ukip." (02:41, Tony Travers)
"So that can't be taken away from them. And I think when it comes to the local elections next year, it will be interesting to see if the kind of vote share that they received in the Oldham by election translates through..." (03:45, Tony Travers)
"...if they don't, then we know...that they are going to find it really hard to make much further progress even in local elections, even when conditions are going quite well for them." (04:49, Tony Travers)
"From the Labour Party nationalist point of view, I think he's exactly the kind of candidate that Moderate, non Corbynite MPs would like to see joining their ranks." (05:54, Tony Travers)
"Corbyn himself has said he will carry on, he's not going anywhere. And so the standoff between the new Labour leadership...and the Parliamentary Labour Party...survives to another day, another week, another month." (07:30, Tony Travers)
On Labour’s Surprise at Holding Their Ground:
"Labour held on, increased their vote share and I think that inevitably will be read by the leadership, Jeremy Corbyn in particular, as being the best that could possibly have happened." (00:12)
On By-elections as Indicators:
"So I don't think this tells us anything really much about the Labour Party's future either." (01:41)
On Ukip’s Prospects:
"The longer Ukip goes on not winning in seats like this...the greater the risk to them is that the electorate begins to see them as incapable of winning." (02:41)
On Local Government’s Talent Pool:
"...many of whom are actually much more to the centre mainstream of the Labour Party than the new leadership. And that's going to have to be resolved..." (05:54)
On the Temporary Relief for Corbyn:
"...the standoff between the new Labour leadership, particularly the core of it...and the Parliamentary Labour Party lives to...survives to another day, another week, another month." (07:30)
The conversation is analytical, pragmatic, and mildly humorous, with Travers providing cautious, evidence-based commentary and Rodgers steering the discussion through key political concerns.
The Oldham by-election provided a morale boost for Labour and a reprieve for Jeremy Corbyn while underscoring the limits of by-elections as portentous national signals. Ukip’s inability to convert potential into victory casts doubt on their long-term prospects, whereas the ascendance of locally-rooted, centrist Labour figures like Jim McMahon may foreshadow further internal Party jockeying. The episode offers a thoughtful, measured look at the real significance—rather than the spectacle—of by-election results for UK politics.