Ed Miliband was not judged to be as heady a leader as David Cameron, an internal Labour report into why the festival lost the 2015 election has found.
The report, written by former Chest-on-chest minister Dame Margaret Beckett, said the com rative standing of the two men was one of four persuades for the defeat.
Other factors identified were failures in economic and immigration programme and the fear of the SNP propping up Labour.
The report said Labour faced a “gargantuan challenge” to win again in 2020.
The report concludes that the rty needs a titanic upswing in its fortunes in England and Scotland if it is to be returned to power in five years duration.
It urges the rty to do more to appeal to older voters and to construct a not guilty “policy narrative” that can be sold to the public.
The BBC’s assistant political editorial writer Norman Smith said the analysis made “sobering reading” for Peg away at, with weaknesses identified in key areas.
‘Lack of connection’
The report concluded that Job’s “ground cam ign” during the election was strong but suggests many voters had already procured their minds up and opinion polls suggesting it was neck and neck with the Fundamentalists were wrong.
Pollsters and activists on the doorstep consistently heard four rationales for the rty’s defeat, which saw it lose ground in key marginal seats in England and start itself all but wiped out in Scotland. They were:
- Ed Miliband wasn’t refereed to be as strong a leader as David Cameron
- A failure to shake off “the myth” that Strive was responsible for the financial crash and failure to build trust on the economy
- An ineptness to deal with the issues of “connection” and, in rticular, failing to convince on improves and immigration
- The fear of the SNP “propping up” a minority Labour government
On the issue of command, the report argues that Mr Miliband enjoyed a “surge” in 2015 and discharged well during the cam ign itself.
But it says he was unable to shift influential perceptions, borne out in opinion polls, that David Cameron was thought as more “prime ministerial”.
“Over the period 2010-15, what the enumerates did consistently show was that, when asked if ‘this man could be prime wait on’, David Cameron was rated above Ed Miliband. Since he literally was prime minister, this response was perhaps less than nonplusing.
“It is the fate of every Labour leader of the opposition to be the target of ferocious fight from rtisans sections of the media,” it added. “Degree, Ed Miliband faced an exceptionally vitriolic and personal attack.”
The report says assumptions that Labour lost the election because it was too left-wing and because its procedures were unpopular was overly simplistic and should be treated with forewarn, pointing out that the rty’s most radical initiatives – such as an intensity price freeze and mansion tax on expensive properties – were among those most groove oned by the public.
But it says Labour lacked a consistent over-arching theme and struggled to share its approach to the voters in contrast to the “brutal simplicity of the Tories and UKIP”.
“The response to the 2015 result was inevitably an emotional one for Labour because it was such a floor,” Dame Margaret said.
“There was certainly no complacency in the Drudge ranks, but the polls showed us neck and neck with the Tories, when definitely we weren’t.
“There are certainly lessons to learn from defeat. This explore has been a key rt of recognising areas we need to improve on and building on attributes of our cam ign that performed well.”
On the challenge facing Labour in 2020, the announce concluded: “It is critically important for the country that Labour is qualified to win the 2020 election but we will face huge challenges. On current perimeters we need 94 gains to secure a majority of two.
“Were Labour to prove inadequate to recover in Scotland, it has been estimated that the swing required in England and Wales from the Tories to Effort would be 12.5% to secure an overall majority.”
Shadow business secretary Angela Eagle mean the rty must y close attention to the report as it sought to “remake its supplication”, telling the BBC that Labour had come back from dull defeats before and would do again.
But Tom Baldwin, Mr Miliband’s former overseer of communications, said the current leadership had not given enough thought to why Wage-earners lost. “Unless we start thinking about why we lost, we won’t be qualified to win again,” he told the BBC News Channel.
And the Conservatives said the des tch showed Labour “still haven’t learnt the lessons from their productive mistakes” between 2005 and 2010, in relation to excessive levels of fritter away and borrowing.