The British Labour Party’s leadership election of 2015

Abstract

This paper examines the British Labour Party's leadership election of 2015, which resulted in the unexpected victory of the radical-left candidate, Jeremy Corbyn. It looks at the contest using Stark's (1996) academic model of leadership elections, based on the tripod of selection criteria, acceptability, electability and competence, and finds it wanting. Selection rules, which are downplayed in Stark's model, are then examined, as Labour used a new selection system based on one-member-one-vote in 2015. While these are found to have had some impact, Corbyn's victory cannot be explained primarily by institutions. The paper reconsiders Stark's model and shows that it failed because of the diminished significance of electability as a selection criterion in the Labour leadership contest of 2015. That largely reflected the circumstances in which the contest took place, in the aftermath of a demoralising election defeat for Labour.

Choosing party leaders: Anglophone democracies, British parties and the limits of comparative politics

“…Consistent with developments in other parliamentary democracies (LeDuc, 2001;Kenig, 2009a: Kenig, 2009bCross and Blais, 2012a;Cross and Blais, 2012b;Pilet and Cross, 2014;Cross and Pilet, 2015) they have expanded their leadership selectorates beyond parliamentary elites to include party members (Quinn, 2010), delegates and members of affiliated organizations, particularly trade unions (Drucker, 1981;Quinn, 2004;Wickham-Jones, 2014) and even latterly, in the case of the Labour Party, their affiliated and registered supporters (Quinn, 2015;Dorey and Denham, 2016). Building on a recent comparative study of party leadership selection in the five principal Anglophone ('Westminster') parliamentary democracies (Cross and Blais, 2012a), this article first sets out its theoretical framework that purports to explain why the major parties in three of those countries, including Britain, have adopted such reform.…”

“…The latter were entitled to vote in future leadership elections provided they signed a declaration that they supported the 'aim and values' of the Labour Party and not rival organizations and agreed to pay a modest fee of three pounds. The new system proved to be highly controversial on its first outing in 2015, with allegations that members and supporters of rival organizations had registered to vote (Quinn, 2015;Dorey and Denham, 2016). As with the creation and subsequent reconfiguration of the Electoral College, Labour's new system was adopted when the Party was in opposition, having lost the General Election of 2010, but these were merely necessary, not sufficient, conditions.…”

From the Wembley Conference to the ‘McDonnell Amendment’: Labour's Leadership Nomination Rules

“…Having abrogated their gate-keeping responsibilities, centrist MPs had no way to fight back. 11 The election of Corbyn in 2015 demonstrated the consequences that can follow when MPs waive their institutional rights at the nomination stage. Labour MPs had made a similar gesture to a radical left candidate, Diane Abbott, in 2010 but that contest was under the old electoral college and the MPs knew they would have a second bite of the cherry at the voting stage.…”

Tales of the unexpected: The selection of British party leaders since 1963

“…Ideology again prevailed over electoral and pragmatic considerations in 2015 (Dorey and Denham, 2016;Quinn, 2016), albeit even more so than it had in 2010. The 'front-runner' was In practice, the new system led to a dramatic surge in the number of both 'affiliate supporters'…”

“…'acceptability', 'electability' and, as the only one with no Cabinet or Shadow Cabinet experience, 'competence' (Dorey and Denham, 2016;Quinn, 2016). In 2016, following a vote of no confidence by the Party's MPs, Corbyn was formally challenged by Owen Smith.…”