Letter: Labour's opportunity in Christchurch

Sir: Your report on Labour's choice of Nigel Lickley as candidate for the Christchurch by-election includes the suggestion that, if Newbury is anything to go by, the Labour vote will be 'further squeezed by tactical voting' (19 June), but I can see no reason for that assumption.

Not only do we start with a basic Labour vote that was missing in Newbury - almost 7,000 votes - but there are other differences between the constituencies and we will be making it clear that voting Labour is the only positive choice for the electors.

It is important that we take the opportunity offered by the by-election to spell out to Christchurch voters and to people in the South generally that Labour has not turned its back on them. At Newbury, Labour supporters were tempted into casting a tactical vote only to hear the Liberal Democrats' message - after the event - that a vote for the Liberal Democrats does not necessarily lead towards a Labour government. The implication is clearly that after all we have been through the Liberal Democrats might well prop up a Conservative government and delay good government and recovery. That will certainly be an issue in the by-election.

Conservative Central Office has already discounted the impact of a defeat at Christchurch so a Liberal Democrat victory would change nothing, whereas a strong Labour showing would send shivers up the spines of ministers and therefore have real influence.

Yours sincerely,

ALUN MICHAEL

MP for Cardiff South and Penarth (Lab)

House of Commons

London, SW1