赶走基尔·斯塔默比看起来更难——党内规则意味着他可以选择继续战斗
Ousting Keir Starmer is harder than it looks – party ru…
The pressure on Keir Starmer is relentless – but any challenge won’t play out like the prime ministerial topplings of the previous government.
对基尔·斯塔默的压力是无情的——但任何挑战都不会像前任政府的首相下台那样发展
Between 2016 and 2024 the UK saw four changes of prime minister by way of a party leadership contest. In that time, even casual observers became familiar with the dramatic process that the Conservative Party uses to topple one leader and select another. Secret letters to the 1922 Committee, the dramatic confidence votes, and then two selected in a dog-eat-dog process to face the final vote by members.
在2016年至2024年期间，英国因党内领导人竞争而更换了四次首相。在此期间，即便是普通观察者也熟悉了保守党用来推翻一位领导人并选出另一位领导人的戏剧性过程。包括向1922委员会发送的秘密信件、激烈的信任投票，以及随后在残酷竞争中选出的两人，最终由党内成员进行投票。
What may be about to happen in the Labour Party will be different in important respects. If the Conservative Party is historically a body with its head in parliament and limbs extended into the country, Labour is more like a mountain with only its peak protruding into the parliamentary arena.
劳工党可能将发生的变化在重要方面将有所不同。如果保守党历史上是一个在议会中拥有首脑并向全国延伸的实体，那么劳工党则更像一座山，只有其山顶伸入议会竞技场。
Even today, Labour has a deep institutional culture and a set of rules that anchor the legitimacy of the leader in the broader party membership as much as in parliament. In the past, Labour’s systems for selecting its leader were as complex as the structure of the party itself. Rules were repeatedly redrawn in factional conflicts between activists, trade unions and the party in parliament.
即使在今天，劳工党也拥有深厚的制度文化和一套规则，这使得领导人的合法性不仅植根于议会，也植根于更广泛的党内成员之中。过去，劳工党选择领导人的制度与党本身的结构一样复杂。在活动家、工会和议会中的党派之间的派系冲突中，这些规则被反复修改。
The modern process is simpler but still presents challenges to anyone tempted to climb the greasy pole. The Conservative process can be neatly separated into two phases: removing the current leader and then electing a new one. For Labour it is different, and depends crucially on what a sitting leader decides to do – resign or stand up to the challenge.
现代过程更简单，但仍然给任何想攀登“滑腻的杆子”的人带来了挑战。保守党的流程可以清晰地分为两个阶段：移除现任领导人，然后选举新领导人。对于劳工党来说，情况有所不同，这关键取决于现任领导人决定做什么——辞职还是迎难而上。
Both processes require a portion of the parliamentary party to demand new leadership – though the bar is higher for Labour at 20% of MPs versus 15% for the Tories. Labour raised this from 10% to 20% in 2021 – specifically to deter challenges.
这两个过程都需要议会的一部分人来要求新的领导层——尽管对于劳工党来说，门槛更高，是20%的议员，而对于保守党来说是15%。劳工党在2021年将这一比例从10%提高到20%——具体是为了阻止挑战。
But from there everything diverges. In the first place, the Labour process requires much more open coordination. The chair of the Conservatives’ 1922 Committee keeps a secret running tally of letters privately sent to express no confidence in the leader. Because of the secrecy, this might even trigger a surprise contest.
但从那里开始，一切都分道扬镳了。首先，劳工党的流程需要更多的公开协调。保守党1922委员会的主席会私下保存一份关于对领导人失去信任的信件的实时统计。由于这种保密性，这甚至可能引发一场意外的竞争。
On the other hand, Labour challengers need to submit a full list of supporting MPs to the party’s general secretary. Currently this is 81 MPs.
另一方面，劳工党的挑战者需要向党的总书记提交一份支持的议员名单。目前共有81名议员。
The general secretary and the 1922 chair are also very different institutional figures. While the latter is an MP, seen informally as a sort of “shop steward” representing MPs’ interests in a variety of matters, the general secretary is a party official responsible to the NEC and usually aligned to the leadership.
总书记和1922委员会主席也是非常不同的制度人物。虽然后者是一名议员，非正式上被视为代表议员在各种事务中利益的“店管”，但总书记是负责全国执行委员会（NEC）的党内官员，通常与领导层保持一致。
Another difference is that the Labour process lacks a confidence vote stage. This means a leader cannot be deposed directly in favour of a fresh slate of candidates. Rather, as confirmed by a 2016 court case involving the abortive post-Brexit “coup” against Jeremy Corbyn, the leader is free to run in the contest without requiring their own list of supporters.
另一个区别是劳工党的流程缺乏信任投票阶段。这意味着领导人不能直接被罢免，以换取新的候选人名单。正如2016年涉及对杰里米·科尔宾“脱欧后政变”的失败的法院案件所确认的那样，领导人可以自由地在竞争中竞选，而无需提供自己的支持者名单。
As such, if a leader opts not to resign, the fight will be longer and harder than the one Conservative MPs face in the same position. While some recent Conservative contests were more protracted, Liz Truss was replaced in just four days. Labour rules simply do not allow for this speed.
因此，如果一位领导人选择不辞职，这场斗争将比保守党议员面临的相同地位的斗争要长、要艰难。虽然一些最近的保守党竞争更为旷日持久，但丽兹·特拉斯仅用了四天就被替换了。劳工党的规则根本不允许这种速度。
Moreover, while Corbyn survived as leader in the 2016 Labour contest precisely by winning over members in spite of MPs’ opposition, this left lasting scars on the party. It damaged Labour’s credibility, even in the face of an increasingly chaotic Conservative government.
此外，尽管科尔宾在2016年的劳工党竞争中正是通过赢得成员的支持来当选领导人，但这给党留下了持久的创伤。即使在面对日益混乱的保守党政府时，这也损害了劳工党的信誉。
Toppling a prime minister
首相的垮台
Of course, whatever the party rules, the constitution also gets its say. Any leader who is also prime minister must have the support of a majority in the House of Commons and, in practical terms, of their cabinet colleagues.
当然，无论党内规则如何，宪法也拥有发言权。任何担任首相的领导人必须获得众议院多数支持，在实践中，也必须获得其内阁同僚的支持。
Boris Johnson survived the party process but was brought down by the constitutional one, with a little help from Rishi Sunak. The then-chancellor set off a chain of resignations that ultimately made the PM’s position untenable. That may also be what happens to Starmer if the Labour internal process similarly fails to bring him down.
鲍里斯·约翰逊在党内流程中幸存了下来，但最终是被宪法流程推翻的，这在理查德·苏纳克的帮助下得以实现。当时的财政大臣引发了一系列辞职，最终使首相的职位变得站不住脚。如果工党内部流程同样未能将其推翻，斯塔默也可能会发生同样的情况。
Even if Starmer resigns or opts not to run in a contest, the difficulties do not end there. While the Conservatives whittle down the candidates to only two through sequential MP-only votes, Labour allows any MP with the support of 20% of the parliamentary party to face the membership vote.
即使斯塔默辞职或选择不参加竞选，困难也不会停止。当保守党通过连续的仅限议员投票将候选人减少到两人时，工党允许任何获得议会党团20%支持的议员进行党员投票。
The higher threshold, not to mention greater desire for unity in the party right now, will probably lead to fewer candidates than the contests in 2015 or 2020. But it still points to a process that can play out as a protracted multi-faction fight rather than a clean and (relatively) brief succession.
更高的门槛，更不用说目前党内对团结的渴望，可能会导致候选人少于2015年或2020年的选举。但这仍然指向一个可能演变成旷日持久的多派斗争，而不是一次干净且（相对）短暂的继承过程的流程。
The voting system is one member, one vote. So every eligible member’s vote carries the same weight – from a cabinet minister or a union baron to a local activist. It is also preferential, providing more overall legitimacy to the winner who must secure more than 50% of the vote after second preferences are taken into account.
投票制度是一人一票。因此，每位合格成员的投票都具有同等的权重——从内阁部长或工会男爵到地方活动家。它也是优先投票制度，在考虑第二偏好后，为获得超过50%选票的获胜者提供了更大的合法性。
It is also a complex process where the winner may not have won more first-preference votes than the other candidates combined. If this happens, the result could be a leader who commands broad acceptance – but little fierce loyalty.
这也是一个复杂的流程，获胜者可能没有获得比其他候选人总和更多的第一偏好票。如果发生这种情况，结果可能是一位获得广泛接受——但缺乏强烈忠诚的领导人。
Nicholas Dickinson does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
尼古拉斯·迪金森不为、不咨询、不拥有任何可能从本文中受益的公司或组织，也没有披露除其学术任命之外的任何相关隶属关系。
