Look at who did best in the three segments

Given how much is going to be wagered on the Labour leadership in the next four months I thought it might be useful to examine in detail what happened the last time the party’s system was used – for the deputy job in June 2007.

Labour uses the Alternative Vote system in an electoral college made up of a third to MPs and MEPs; a third to individual members, and a third to members of affiliated organisations, mainly trade unions.

So bear in mind when you look at the tables below, each of the first three columns adds up to 33.33%.

Round 1: all six in

Candidate	Unions	Members	MPs/MEPs	Total
Cruddas	9.09%	5.67%	4.63%	19.39
Harman	4.35%	8.04%	6.54%	18.93
Johnson	4.55%	5.53%	8.08%	18.16
Benn	4.93%	7.21%	4.27%	16.4
Hain	6.64%	3.87%	4.81%	15.32
Blears	3.77%	3%	4.99%	11.77

Round 2: Blears out and next preferences re-distributed

Candidate	Unions	Members	MPs/MEPs	Total
Johnson	5.91%	6.35%	11.47%	23.74
Harman	5.15%	8.80%	7.29%	21.23
Cruddas	9.64%	6.01%	4.74%	20.39
Benn	5.56%	7.93%	4.74%	18.22
Hain	7.08%	4.24%	5.10%	16.42

Round 3: Hain out and his votes redistributed

Candidate	Unions	Members	MPs/MEPs	Total
Johnson	7.81%	7.31%	12.78%	27.90
Harman	7.12%	10.15%	8.61	25.88
Cruddas	11.01%	6.58%	6.30%	23.89
Benn	7.39%	9.29%	5.65%	22.33

Round 4: Benn out and his votes redistributed

Candidate	Unions	Members	MPs/MEPs	Total
Johnson	10.25%	10.7%	15.39%	36.35
Harman	9.46%	13.82%	10.29	33.58
Cruddas	13.61%	8.81%	7.65%	30.06

Round 5: Cruddas out and his votes redistributed

Candidate	Unions	Members	MPs/MEPs	Total
Harman	16.18%	18.83%	15.42%	50.43
Johnson	17.15%	14.5%	17.91%	49.56

What I find striking are the big differences between the candidate performances in each section of the electoral college. Thus Cruddas had an overwhelming lead with union members, Harman was top with individual party members while Johnson led amongst MPs.

Would the same apply with Harman if she chose to ran? Who would top the union and MP sections?

Mike Smithson