LABOUR under Jeremy Corbyn is seen as more divided, more extreme and less fit to govern than it was under its previous leader Ed Miliband, a new poll has suggested.
The Ipsos Mori research showed the party chief was unlikely to enjoy a political honeymoon after scoring the worst poll rating of any new Labour leader in any of its surveys for more than 30 years.
Mr Corbyn received a net satisfaction rate of minus three; in 2010, Mr Miliband’s was plus 19. Even Michael Foot began his leadership in 1980 with a rating of plus two.
But, on the positive side for the London left-winger, the snapshot of more than 1250 adults said he was regarded as more honest than David Cameron - 54 per cent to 30 – and was less out of touch with the concerns of ordinary people – 39 per cent as opposed to the PM’s score of 64.
Coming towards the end of his second week as Labour leader and just 48 hours before the start of this weekend’s crunch party conference, the snapshot underscored the challenge for Mr Corbyn in winning credibility with the general public.
When it came to competence, just 32 per cent said they thought he would be a capable leader compared to 62 per cent for Mr Cameron while only 23 per cent said the Labour chief would be good in a crisis as against 51 per cent, who believed the Prime Minister would be.
After the row over Mr Corbyn’s failure to sing the national anthem at the Battle of Britain memorial service, 37 per cent said they believed he was patriotic; less than half the 76 per cent, who thought Mr Cameron was.
Compared to the last such snapshot in April, when Mr Miliband was Labour leader, the poll also found a sharp rise in the number of people who believed Labour was divided - up from 38 per cent to 75 – or extreme – up from 22 per cent to 36 – while there was a fall in those who thought the party was fit to govern – down from 40 per cent to 35.
Overall, the poll placed Labour on 34 per cent, five points behind the Conservatives on 39. The Liberal Democrats were on nine per cent, Ukip on seven with a combined tally of five for the Scottish and Welsh Nationalists.
But Liam Byrne, the former Blairite Minister, insisted Mr Corbyn could reconnect with voters, many of whom believed Labour had lost its soul, and that he “can definitely start us on the route back”.
The ex-Treasury Minister, who infamously left a note, telling the Lib-Con Coalition there was “no money left”, argued that his new leader would return some “soul force” back to the party.
"In many ways, he is the craft ale of the Labour movement; he's authentic, he's got strong flavours and he's seen as something different to bland mediocrity of politics," declared Mr Byrne.
The Birmingham MP, a member of the group called "Red Shift", echoed his colleague Jon Cruddas, Mr Miliband’s former policy chief, saying Labour now needed to embrace an English identity.
In a report, the group has outlined 10 "key shifts" it believes Labour needs to make to win a majority in England. Among its recommendations is for the party to fix its "badly damaged" brand by becoming "proud of our roots" and embracing the "politics of English identity". Mr Cruddas believes that, alongside the Scottish Labour Party, there should now be an English Labour Party.
Meantime, their colleague Stephen Kinnock, son of ex-party leader Neil, has argued that Labour needs to “reclaim ownership” of the Union flag and own the immigration debate to win back SNP and Ukip voters.
The MP for Aberavon said: “The separatism of the SNP and Ukip is not driven by patriotism, or at least, not as I recognise and understand that term. Their separatism is a narrow form of nationalism, and nationalism is, in fact, the direct antithesis of patriotism. The time has now come for Labour to reclaim ownership of patriotism.”
Meanwhile, Mr Corbyn has yet to make up his mind about whether or not he will kneel before the Queen when he becomes a Privy Counsellor.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel