Tony Blair’s against it. Ed Balls is for it. Billy Hayes of the CWU and Paul Kenny of the GMB union are against it. Peter Hain and Jon Cruddas are for it. And now that centre-left campaign group Compass is calling for it, a number of their Labour members are up in arms about it.
Several Compass members, such as Leeds city council Labour group leader Keith Wakefield, have resigned their membership, while others are staying in the group but unhappy after Compass announced last week it was backing tactical voting in order to keep the Conservatives out at the election. It followed a poll in which members voted by 467 votes to 93 to back voting for “the best placed progressive candidate”.
They say: “This means that Compass is now calling on every progressive voter to back the Labour candidate wherever Labour can win. But if Labour stands no chance against the Tory candidate it makes sense that the best placed progressive candidate is backed by every progressive voter.”
Some of the complainants linked to Compass have put their names to a letter in today’s Guardian – not everyone who signed it is a Compass member, but the inclusion of regular Compass meeting attender Billy Hayes is interesting.
Others have put the statement at the end of this post together. Tom Miller, parliamentary candidate for Woking and lapsed Compass member, Tom Copley and Joe Riches, both of Compass Youth’s organising committee, have signed.
Compass did anticipate criticism of course, and responding to his critics, Compass chair Neal Lawson says that it’s about “stopping the Tories and being honest” and that he wants Labour to get the best possible return. Guardian columnist and Compassite John Harris writes here in support of tactical voting.
Anyway, right or wrong, the dispute – which looks like it will overshadow Compass’ hopes of influencing the direction of the Labour party after the election – points up an internal tension in Compass: is it a cheerleader for Labour’s centre left, with its cosy relationship with Jon Cruddas and frontbenchers like Ed Miliband, or is it a broader progressive movement of many colours and supporting none? At the moment, they seem to be trying to do both, and attracting hostility as a result.
More on this in Tribune on Friday.
“It was with great sadness that we felt it necessary to resign from Compass following its decision to call on people to vote tactically against the Labour Party in certain seats.
We have particular difficulty with this decision where it would mean a vote for the Liberal Democrats. We do not regard the Lib Dems as a progressive party, particularly given that it voted against the National Minimum Wage, called for strike action in public services to be banned and called for Britain to abandon the Working Time Directive and overseen cuts in services where it has shared power in local government with the Conservatives. No party that would even contemplate coalition with the Conservatives should be regarded as progressive, yet in today’s Financial Times Nick Clegg raises the prospect once again and even downgrades the importance of electoral reform – making such a coalition even easier to negotiate. Labour is also far from perfect; it needs much improvement, and Compass is vital to this. But this move will only make the task more difficult.
We note that Councillor Keith Wakefield, leader of Leeds Labour group, has also resigned, and we support his decision. Lib Dem candidate Greg Mulholland attacked the Child Trust Fund as a ‘gimmick’, but the Compass email suggests this seat is at risk from Tories, despite being a LibDem/Labour marginal. Lib Dems in Leeds, in coalition with Tories, attacked public sector workers repeatedly during their strikes for fairer pay and conditions.
Even if Labour finds itself in the unwelcome situation of needing to reach an agreement with the Liberal Democrats, its national share of the vote will be key. Mr Clegg’s unprincipled criterion for coalition is not about policies, but how many votes (or seats) Labour or the Tories get. We therefore cannot advocate voting against Labour candidates as Compass has proposed, in fact we believe it undermines the goal of a progressive, reforming government. To achieve that we must now be – supporting Labour candidates in all seats and campaigning for a maximum Labour vote.”
