Ed Miliband is the new Labour leader in the UK. The younger Miliband edged his brother David in a very tight election. Ed Miliband’s win would not have been possible had the electoral system applied by the Labour Party been the same to the one employed nationally. The Labour Party uses the alternative vote (AV) system to elect its leader while elections in the UK are held under a plurality system known as first past the post (FPTP).
The basic difference between the two systems is that while the AV system requires a candidate to win the absolute majority of votes cast, in the FPTP system a relative majority suffices. Voters in the AV system rank candidates, 1, 2,3 etc similarly to the way we vote in Maltese elections, while in the FPTP system electors are only asked to mark their preferred candidate. Since David Miliband won the majority of first preferences, in this election he would have emerged as the winner had the party employed the FPTP system. There is another reason why the junior Miliband won. The Labour Party has three electoral colleges, the MPs, the party members and the affiliate associations, mainly trade unions. Each college represents a third of the vote. Support for the senior Miliband was stronger in the MPs’ and members’ colleges but very weak in the affiliates’ college. Ed Milliband had the full backing of six out of 11 trade unions and this proved to be a determining factor in the final round, when he surpassed his brother by just over one per cent. In the last round, Ed Miliband won six per cent more than his brother from the unions’ college. The unions’ support led to his victory. But what price is he now expected to pay for their support?
The bookmakers have already said that they think that Labour, led by Ed Miliband, is less likely to win the next general election. Unions, generally known for their militance, are not very popular with Britain’s middle class. Neil Kinnock, a former Labour leader at a time when Margaret Thatcher fought the unions, was not popular with the British. In this leadership election, Mr Kinnock backed Ed Miliband and his support may have been instrumental in rallying unions’ support for the younger Miliband. Now the unions expect the new leader to rally behind them in the weeks and months ahead when they react to austerity measures to be announced by the government.
The militant unions are likely to call a number of strikes in the weeks leading to Christmas and Ed Miliband’s leadership will be immediately put to test.
Will he be unconditionally supporting the unions and the strikes? If so, will he become more or less popular with the British public? I have a feeling that he will have no honeymoon period in his new post. Tough decisions lie ahead. Ed Miliband has to choose whether to pay back the unions for his election by supporting their actions against the government, or to take a completely different route and seek ways to garner popular support for his party from the British public by being more moderate in his actions.
The UK’s general election may still be years away but Ed Miliband should remember that his post is not guaranteed to last until then. Between 1997 and 2004, the Conservative Party changed three party leaders because they were not seen to be delivering. The driving force behind these removals was the 1922 committee made up entirely by Conservative backbenchers. The Parliamentary Labour Party (PLP) is a similar committee and this committee is also powerful.
Given that Ed Miliband is not as popular as his brother within the PLP, he has to be very careful. If in the coming months and years the opinion polls show a decline in Labour’s support, Ed Miliband may face an internal revolt.
It is unlikely that an eventual revolt will be headed by his brother, but then given the chance to head the party and the possibility of taking the premiership one never knows what games David will be willing to play.
This is all speculation. However, the performance of Ed Miliband will surely be under Labour’s scrutiny for a long time. Tough choices lie ahead for the new Labour leader who will have to weigh his decisions wisely.