DESPONDENCY was threatening to engulf Labour this morning as the party braced itself for major losses north and south of the border.
Concern was raised that under Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership the party was falling back and “moving further away from government”.
And in what some interpreted as a significant sign of a lack of confidence in Labour’s chances of winning the 2020 General Election under the veteran left-winger’s leadership, it was revealed that Andy Burnham, the shadow home secretary, was considering quitting the shadow cabinet and running for mayor of Greater Manchester in 2017.
With 45 million people eligible to vote, "Super Thursday" was being seen as the first nationwide verdict on the Labour leader since he stormed to victory with massive grassroots support last September.
But as the first votes came in Labour was taking heavy losses in its share of the vote in Scotland with the prospect of it coming third and while it was holding council strongholds in England there were signs of heavy losses elsewhere.
The silver lining to what was beginning to look like a black electoral cloud is expected to come this evening with Labour’s Sadiq Khan being tipped heavily to win the London mayoral race over his Conservative rival Zac Goldsmith.
But as the first votes began to come in, the potential for an anti-Corbyn backlash was set by Labour backbencher Neil Coyle.
Urging the leader to broaden the political "diversity" of his inner circle, the Bermondsey MP said: "We are moving further away from Government, I think, because we seem to be fixated on some issues that are peripheral and we seem to have a team which isn't projecting either unity within the party or a vision and policies that the voters want.”
Ex-Labour MP and Holyrood candidate Thomas Docherty claimed there was “a direct correlation” between Mr Corbyn’s leadership and Scottish Labour’s performance, which he predicted could leave the party at under 20 per cent.
Deputy leader Tom Watson appeared to be keen to play down expectations, urging disgruntled colleagues to give the party leader time to set out his stall.
“The point is Jeremy Corbyn has only been leader for eight months. We are coming back from a very low base.”
Asked about a possible challenge to Mr Corbyn, the Midlands MP urged his critics to respect the leader’s large mandate. “Patience I would say to colleagues coming out with intemperate remarks.”
Across England, some 2,700 seats were being contested in 124 council contests. Normally, after a general election defeat, the losing party can expect to pick up around 400 seats. But election experts this time around were forecasting that Labour could lose as many as 300.
John McDonnell, the shadow chancellor, said the party's "objective" was to narrow the 6.3 per cent advantage enjoyed by the Conservatives in last year's general election, before making "steady progress" towards victory in 2020. “We are on a clear path to improvement,” he declared.
But the Tories pointed out how the Labour leadership was setting a less arduous benchmark than comparing its performance to that of 2012 when the same council seats were up for grabs and when the then Ed Miliband gained 800 council seats in England.
Nick Morgan, the Education Secretary, said: “Tonight is about the Labour Party performance, a year after the election. At the same period when Michael Foot was leading the Labour Party he won 1,000 seats. This is about the Labour Party and whether it is in touch with working people across the country in places where they need to win seats and it's going to be clear tonight they are not."
Meantime, Ukip leader Nigel Farage hailed a night of "breakthroughs" for the Eurosceptic party, which was hoping to gain its first representation on the Welsh Assembly and pick up seats on the London Assembly and councils across England.
In a separate development, Labour retained its safe Sheffield Brightside parliamentary seat with the victgory of Gill Furniss, widow of Harry Harpham, whose death from cancer after just eight months as an MP triggered the by-election in David Blunkett's former seat.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel