Labour's Liz McInnes won the Heywood and Middleton by-election, but only barely. © Peter Byrne/PA Wire/Press Association Images
Last night, Ukip won its first MP, the Conservative defector Douglas Carswell, in a by-election in Clacton. And in the Greater Manchester constituency of Heywood and Middleton, its candidate John Bickley came a close second to Labour, achieving a 17.65 per cent swing in the vote. Labour only held the seat by the skin of their teeth, with a margin of just 617 votes. Their candidate Liz McInnes took just over 11,600 votes, compared with nearly 18,500 won by her predecessor, the late Jim Dobbin, in 2010.
I spoke to Simon Danczuk, the Labour MP for neighbouring Rochdale and a prominent figure in Labour's by-election campaign, about what lessons his party can take from their (extremely narrow) victory.
What lessons can politicians take from the two by-election results? Both in Clacton and Heywood and Middleton, [this is] quite clearly a rejection of Westminster politics. That's what the public are doing by voting the way they did. I think it's fair to say that in Heywood and Middleton the electorate gave the Tories a good kicking, and if I was [Conservative MPs] Jake Berry in Rossendale and Darwen or David Nuttall in Bury North, both of which border Heywood and Middleton, then I'd be very worried this morning. The Tory vote completely collapsed and went to Ukip
[But] there is a wake up call for Labour as well. I think the results are a real challenge in terms of how Labour fight the general election. I think we need to be aware that the political classes have created a Frankenstein's monster with regard to Ukip, and by that I mean that the public are angry. Across all the mainstream political parties there's been a broad consensus in terms of immigration, welfare, even MPs' expenses, Europe, multiculturalism, and many members of the public are fed up with it.
What lessons are there for Labour in particular? We have to be stronger on immigration. We have to have stronger policies with regard to welfare. We have to speak in a language that our supporters want to listen to [and] stop the sloganeering. We have to allow candidates in the general election to speak their mind instead of trying to control them. And one of the big issues [is that] we cant fight a general election or a by-election on one issue. Yes The National Health Service is very important, and yes the public love the NHS but we can't just think that that is the sole issue on which we can fight a general election. We will not get elected on the basis of public sector workers, students, Guardian readers and the ethnic minority communities in the United Kingdom, we need a much broader appeal than that.
We have some good policies but we have the ability to make them sound technical and unappealing. It's as if we talk from the head and not from the heart, whereas Ukip, to give them some credit, speak in a language that the public understand. And Farage, for all his faults, has the ability to appeal to people. We have to understand that and learn from it. We don't currently have people in the shadow cabinet that can do what he does. If Ed himself can't do it then he needs people in the shadow cabinet that can, because if we don't communicate like that then we will lose the general election.
Should Ed Miliband be worried about his position? No I don't think so. I think he's fairly secure as leader. But I do think it's a sign that we need to change tack in terms of how we approach the general election.
Are there any positive messages to take from the campaign in Heywood and Middleton? Get out and meet the public. That's the key message to take from it. That's what we did a lot of in Heywood and Middleton. [Labour] hadn't done a lot of it [there] before this by-election. The reason that the BNP always did well in Labour strongholds [is that] they did well where we'd neglected the electorate. Ukip, I think, will do well where the mainstream political parties have neglected the electorate. I suspect that's why they did well in Heywood and Middleton: because previously [the voters there had] been neglected by the party.
What is the future for Ukip? I don't think we should run away with the idea that Ukip are a political movement. I think they are a safety valve that's letting off some frustration from the public. They'll carry on for an amount of time but it will be interesting to see [what happens to them]. I think I'd be unwise to predict what their future might hold. They're taking [votes] from everywhere.
Now they've got a member of parliament [there will] be a challenge [for them] in terms of toeing the line. People will be looking at the distinction between what Ukip are saying as a political party and what Farage is saying, and also what is being said by their newly elected member of parliament.
So what do Labour still have to offer voters? We're a party that will look after working people. And that's what [people] have to bear in mind. Ukip have very few solutions to the problems of this country. They will be a disaster in government.
