Labour may never win back its former supporters who jumped ship to the Conservatives on 7 May and robbed it of any chance of victory, according to the most detailed investigation into why people deserted the party at the election.

This is one of many devastating conclusions reached by two former Labour election directors who have conducted a series of focus-group interviews with previously firm Labour backers, all of whom voted Labour in 2010 but switched to the Tories this year.

The risk for Labour is permanent irrelevance | Patrick Diamond Read more

In a report summarising their findings from five key marginal seats, Alan Barnard and John Braggins say disillusion with Labour among such voters is now so profound and deep-seated that it is unclear whether Labour will even be a relevant force at the next election.

“These voters are a hair’s breadth from becoming Conservatives,” says the report, which is being sent to all four Labour leadership candidates. “Labour is now at risk of becoming irrelevant even to voters who have been lifelong supporters.” It adds: “As things stand many of these voters are for the Tories to lose at the next election.”

Analysis of the election result has shown that, although Labour gained support as people deserted the Lib Dems, it also lost a large number to other parties. Of all those who voted, 6% were people who had voted Labour in 2010 but who chose other parties. Of these, a third (2%) went straight to the Tories.

Barnard and Braggins, who now run a company, BBM Campaigns, which conducts political and business campaigns, held 90-minute focus group sessions in May and June with separate groups of men and women chosen because of their previous loyalty to Labour. In all five seats – Halesowen and Rowley Regis, Croydon Central, Southampton Itchen, Watford and Pudsey – the Tories won, as the surges in support Labour had anticipated failed to materialise. The focus groups gave savage assessments of Labour, which they said lacked economic credibility, and Ed Miliband, who they saw as unfit to lead the country – so much so they believed he had permanently damaged the party’s brand.

“These voters didn’t see Ed Miliband as a prime minister. In fact, many people in the groups laughed at the prospect of him being leader of the UK.”

The report, Listening to Labour’s Lost Voters, adds: “Suffice to say that the brand of Labour has been damaged massively by these voters’ inability to perceive him as a capable and competent prime minister. Their image of Labour as a political party with a leader that was open to derision clouded all their thinking about a renewed Labour party and what Labour needs from its next leader. These voters really struggled to imagine a Labour party with a strong, confident leader in the future.”

Former Labour home secretary Jacqui Smith said: “The research suggests a crisis for the party more fundamental than the last time we lost an election we expected to win, in 1992. It suggests changes of an even greater scale are needed than those which turned Labour into election-winning New Labour.” She added: “Voters questioned not just our policies, but more fundamentally what Labour is for and whether we can ever have a credible leader again.”

The interviewees, all of whom were in work and were aged 30-65, believed that Labour had left the economy in a mess and that the Tories had gone some way towards putting it right. Even those who believed the 2008 economic crash was not the fault of the Labour government blamed Labour for spending and borrowing too much. One focus group agreed unanimously they would not vote Labour again until the party had been returned to government and had shown it could run the economy responsibly.

Demoralised, dejected and defeated, Labour faces a fight for its very existence Read more

These people would not themselves switch back to Labour but would wait until others voted them in, and until they had earned back respect. This means election 2025 will be the earliest they would consider voting Labour again.

Most believed Labour did not offer the average family the prospect of a better life. Instead, it wanted to tax people who had done well and made themselves wealthy through hard work, so that it could help the worst off and those on welfare, ignoring those in the middle. It was also seen as anti-business, in the pocket of the unions and not tough enough on immigration. “Immigration is the topic that, left to their own devices, the respondents would have talked about all night. Their central arguments, across all groups and repeated frequently, were along the lines that our country is full, our country is broke and public services are creaking and cannot stand extra strain.”

What voters said



‘If he’d gone [Ed Miliband] last year, I would’ve voted Labour.’ Paula, Halesowen & Rowley Regis

‘Labour should own up and admit they got it wrong. They came across as muddled and didn’t know what to do. They seemed to be on the side of people on the social not people in the middle like us.’ Elaine, Croydon Central

‘People shouldn’t be allowed to sit at home and live on benefits if there’s work to be done. Benefits were all right when they were first brought in, but now, for some people, they seem to be a way of life.’ Mike, Croydon Central

‘It’s not up to the government to provide good jobs; that sounds like the nanny state. It’s down to businesses … and Labour came across as anti-business.’ Dave, Watford

‘They’ve got to sort the unions out – it’ll be risky … but the country will benefit.’ Nigel, Watford

‘It might be the moral thing to look after those refugees, but we can’t let them in while we’ve got two million unemployed.’ Tim, Pudsey