Things can’t only get better

By Hopi Sen / @HopiSen

Talking to Labour friends, there seems to be a feeling abroad that Labour is destined to recover ground at the next election.

This is not the case.

I shall now adopt the mantle of Prophet of Doom.

In our history, a majority Labour government has left office as a result of an election defeat four times – in 1951, 1970 and 1979 and 2010.

In two of the next three elections – in 1955 and 1983 – we lost significant ground. Only in 1974 did we win back seats.

Looking at the Tories, we see a similar picture. Since Attlee’s landslide, a Tory government has lost office three times – in 1964, in Feb 1974, and in 1997. In each case they did no better, or significantly worse, in the next election – in 1966, in Oct ’74 and in 2001*.

Looking at the record coolly, it is more likely than not that Labour will lose ground at the next election.

A few factors suggest this could be the case.

First, our 2010 election result was very effective in terms of seats for vote share. We got 257 seats for 29.7% of the vote. In 1997 John Major got 165 seats for a percentage point more.

As various leadership contenders have said, this wasn’t Labour’s 1997.

It was worse.

In 2010 we benefitted from voters’ distrust of the Conservatives. Can we rely on that next time?

It’s also quite possible that redrawn boundaries, political funding changes, and voter registration systems might hurt Labour more than the coalition. After all, we’ll be the only ones without a say in the system.

On voter registration, it is a good thing, and Labour should support our own proposals to cut fraud. That said, we know from America that voter registration rates are a political weapon. If individual voter ID registration results in a drop in electoral rolls, it is more likely to be poorer voters who drop off the list.

Next, a loss of ground in Scotland and pro-coalition tactical voting could cost us seats. We got a fantastic result in Scotland this time, which seems to be attributable to Labour recovery since losing power in Scotland, a lower support for the SNP, little Tory headway and stronger support for Gordon Brown than in England. Not all these factors will be present next time.

As for tactical voting, why don’t we assume that the 60% or so of voters who currently support the government now represent the coalition’s maximum tactical voter pool. There will be attrition, of course, but some can be afforded.

If I were running a Tory marginal campaign, I’d be be trying to identify those voters who like what they’re seeing so far, and reminding them that the best way to support the coalition would be to back the Tories.

Finally, next time we might get a significant increase in wasted votes. Take Richmond, or Yeovil, or Dorset West. Unhappy Lib Dems might come to Labour, but it won’t do us much good. Billy Bragg might not vote Lib Dem next time, but it won’t matter much to the coalition.

Nor should we rely on AV to help us. If the coalition is regarded as successful by current supporters, we could find ourselves on the wrong end of a 55-45 drubbing in marginal seats. There are seats where this will benefit us (Withington, Brent) but they are outnumbered by seats like Gedling, Wirral South, Hammersmith and Fulham and so on where it could hurt us.

Why am I being so depressing?

Because if we are to win the next election we need to confront the fact that it will be a hard and difficult slog.

It’s not just the playing field that could be against us – the politics could be tough too. Even if unemployment remains high, there will be a lot of people who either don’t notice or don’t mind this. The Tories have won elections with high unemployment before.

On public services as the long term investment benefits of the last four years will still be in the system for the next two or three. The new schools and hospitals we built won’t stop looking impressive just because no more are being built.

On the economy, there will be many who sympathise with the government’s agenda of cutting back, even (perhaps especially!) if it results in a double dip recession.

There is no guarantee of a bounce back in opposition. We have to work for it, and much of the work will be against the prevailing political tide.

Whatever leadership candidate you support, this is no time for the Labour Party to believe that differentiating ourselves from both New Labour and the coalition will be enough to recover. It won’t be.

Merely changing, or listening, or being different will not win us the election.

The hard work of developing a new set of policies is only just beginning. Here’s an uncomfortable thought: it won’t be the nice stuff that make us feel good like increasing minimum wages, overseas aid, or volunteering that decides the next election.**

It will be the grit of policies on transport, industry, jobs, tax and crime. We can’t afford to ignore those issues, and neither can those who would suffer from two terms of a Tory government.

Our leadership candidates shouldn’t either. Even if it’s easier to talk about minimum wages or greedy bankers.

Leading isn’t compiling a list of adjectives that describe a popular party.

It’s confronting the issues that stand in the way of building one.

—

* Ah, you might say – but that was before fixed term parliaments. Well, we don’t know yet if the coalition might decide an election is in the urgent national interest at an electorally conveieient time. Such things have been known.

** Nor will it be “nasty” stuff like immigration – where politicians face awkward limit that there’s not much more they can do. Points vs cap is a marginal argument in current immigration, in truth. The idea that Blair and Brown were “soft” on immigration, post about 2000, is ludicrous.

This post was first published on Hopi’s blog.