Written evidence submitted by Professor Pete Dorey, Cardiff University (VUK 45)

This a broad-ranging inquiry, and so I have focused on a few specific aspects, in order to ensure that my submission is as concise as possible.

In particular, my submission focuses on the main reason for: a) declining electoral turnout and b) declining support for the two main (Conservative and Labour) parties. This is because the two trends are closely related: as people become more disengaged or disillusioned with the established political parties, they either cease to vote on a regular basis, or switch to ‘other’ parties.

I therefore argue that declining electoral participation, and growing support for parties such as UKIP among those who do vote, are both signs of increasing public dissatisfaction with traditional parties and their policies.

Cynicism and volatility are both increasing, and the political beneficiaries are increasingly ‘populist’ or ‘anti-establishment’ parties who appear to offer something new, are perceived to be more ‘in touch’ with the concerns of ordinary people, and are untainted by the apparent policy failures and/or scandals which have affected the main parties. 

1)   Declining identification with/loyalty to a specific party

Declining loyalty to mainstream political parties is known, among political scientists, as partisan dealignment, and means that a growing number of voters have become ‘detached’ from a particular party. As Graph 1 shows, whereas 45% of voters identified strongly with a particular political party in the 1960s, less than 10% did so by 2005.

Figure 1: the Decline of Party Identification[1]

Crucially, the overwhelming majority of these ‘strong identifiers’ had aligned themselves with either the Conservatives or Labour Party, and had voted habitually and loyally for ‘their’ party prior to 1970, with only a very small number switching to ‘the other’ party.

This ‘strong identification’ with a particular party meant that for very many people, voting for ‘their’ party was seen as a duty, come rain or shine – hence the higher electoral turnout overall during this period.

What reinforced these strong and stable patterns of party loyalty and allegiance was the link between social class and voting, with the overwhelming majority of the middle class voting Conservative, and the majority of the working class supporting the Labour Party, prior to the 1970s. Consequently, ‘third parties’ were severely squeezed, and struggled to attract support; the Liberals, for most of the 1950s, were reduced to just 6 MPs and 2.5% of the national vote, for example.

However, since the 1970s, and more especially since the 1990s, several factors have contributed to a decline in party allegiance and loyalty among many voters, as illustrated in Figure 2, and thus to the wider phenomenon of ‘voter disengagement’.

Figure 2: Changes in Conservative and Labour support in Britain since 1970 (%)

2) Declining deference and trust in general

A major political science study published by in 1963[2] revealed the British people harboured strong trust in their political institutions and leaders. For example, it was reported that 46% of people in the UK expressed pride in their governmental and political institutions (compared to just 7% in Germany and 3% in Italy). The same study revealed that 77% of UK citizens believed that national governments improved material conditions, while a mere one per cent opined that national governments made no difference.

However, by the first decade of the 21st Century, such reverence had declined dramatically. According to a recent British Social Attitudes survey[3], the proportion of British people who trusted governments all, or most, of the time fell from 33% in 1991 to 20% in 2010. During the same period, the proportion who confessed that they ‘almost never’ trusted governments rose from 14% to 33%.

An Ipsos MORI poll confirmed the damaging impact that the 2009 MPs’ expenses scandal had on public cynicism towards MPs, for by May 2009, 62% of respondents believed that MPs put their own personal interests first (up from 46% in 2006).[4]

Meanwhile, another Ipsos MORI poll, in 2013, reported that only 18% of British people trusted politicians to tell the truth (while 89% trusted doctors, and 86% trusted teachers, to be truthful).[5] 

Ipsos MORI’s polling has also revealed that whereas in 1973, 14% of people averred that the British system of government needed ‘a great deal of improvement’, this figure had risen to 37% by May 2009.[6]

3) Changing social and economic structure

For much of the twentieth century, strong party identification was very closely linked to social class; most of the working class voted Labour and most of the middle class voted Conservative. In Labour’s case, many occupations fostered a sense of solidarity and, in some cases, a community spirit (such as in pit villages around coal mines).

However, changes in occupations and the labour market, due to automation, de-industrialisation, globalisation, and technology, have destroyed many former jobs, and while new jobs and careers have been created, the notion of a clearly identifiable or homogenous Labour voting working class has declined. 

The middle class, meanwhile, has also increasingly experienced changes in the workplace which have, to some extent, weakened their former status, security and privileges. Technology is now rendering some middle class jobs ‘de-skilled’ or even unnecessary (cash dispensers and online banking, for example, means that banking is not the safe, solid, job-for-life, that it once was), while other white-collar jobs are now subject to ‘casualisation’ (fixed-term contracts, zero-hours contracts), more extensive and rigorous performance management (and so a diminution of professional autonomy and creativity), and the need for greater ‘flexibility’ (longer or more unsocial hours of work), have all changed the nature of what it means to be middle class in occupational terms. 

Partly as a result of these changes, the erstwhile link between occupation or social class and support for a particular political party has weakened, as indicated in Figure 3.

Figure 3: The weakening link between social class and support for a party (% of each class voting for the ‘main’ parties).[7]

Put starkly, well under half of the middle class now supports the Conservative Party, and well under half of the working class now votes Labour. This, of course, underpins the earlier point concerning ‘partisan dealignment’; the declining identification with, and hence loyalty to, a specific political party. This reinforces the trend both to increased support for ‘third’ parties, and a greater propensity not to vote at all.

4) Perception that mainstream politicians are ‘out of touch’ with ordinary voters

An increasingly common complaint about MPs and the main political parties is that they are remote from the lives and concerns of ordinary voters, and do not listen to or heed what people actually want. A survey conducted in November 2007 revealed that a remarkable 79% of respondents disagreed with the proposition that ‘I have influence over the government's policies’, while only 13% agreed.[8] The complaint that politicians are ‘out of touch’ with most British people derives from three factors.

The first is a perception that the voices and views of ordinary voters are generally ignored by governments, because the latter are perceived to pursue their own partisan agendas; the interests of the party are prioritised over the interests and wishes of the electorate. This in turn fosters a view that parties and governments have regularly failed to take seriously the public’s perennial concerns over issues such as immigration, crime, the EU, etc. 

The second sense in which MPs are often viewed as being ‘out of touch’ is because of the relatively narrow range of educational and occupational backgrounds that MPs tend to emanate from. Labour, for example, has long ceased to be a working class party in terms of the backgrounds of its MPs, most of who are now university-educated and often emanate from careers in education and local government.

Similarly, the Conservatives are viewed by many voters as being drawn from a narrow range of careers, such as finance and law, after having been to public school and Oxbridge. Of course, the current government especially is sometimes viewed as being dominated by Old Etonians and Bullingdon Boys (it does not matter whether this is an inaccurate and unfair perception or sweeping generalisation; what is important, and thus damaging, is that enough people believe it to be the case).

Equally importantly, a growing number of politicians, both in the Labour Party and the Conservatives, have only ever had careers in politics, either via local government, or working for their party prior to becoming MPs. An increasing number of MPs started out as ‘policy wonks’, researchers or Special Advisers (SPADs) for their party before entering Parliament, or worked for a think tank. This reinforces the perception, among many voters, that politicians are ‘out of touch’ and live in a closed ‘Westminster bubble’, having never experienced the ‘real world’ that ordinary people live and work in.   

The third reason why the Labour and Conservative parties are increasingly seen as ‘out of touch’ with ordinary voters is their respective relationships with corporate interests. A very recent poll revealed that 46% of people believe that the trade unions have too much influence over the Labour Party, while 44% averred that the Conservatives’ relationship with big business was more problematic than Labour’s links with the unions.[9] 

5) Perception that governments are ‘losing control’ of key issues and decisions

Rightly or wrongly, a growing number of voters believe that irrespective of the party in government in Parliament, many of the key decisions affecting Britain and its people are taken elsewhere, beyond Westminster or Whitehall, in ‘the City’, the boardrooms of multi-national corporations or, of course, Brussels. This perception weakens public faith in the ability of politicians to address various issues, because these are seemingly beyond their control.

This, in turn, reinforces the attitude that it does not really matter or make much difference which of the main parties is in Office, because many key decisions are often determined elsewhere, or imposed on the government from above or outside.  

6) The (perceived) ideological stance of the two main parties

In one key respect, the Conservative and Labour Parties are in an increasingly difficult situation in terms of regaining support among their former voters, due to an inconsistency or tension among the electorate itself. British voters have tended to eschew strong ideologies or political extremes, and have prided themselves on their ‘common sense’ moderation. Consequently, when either of the two main parties appeared to be moving away from the centre ground, they have lost support. Labour lost support in the 1980s when it lurched to the Left, while during the late 1990s and early 2000s, the Conservatives were widely viewed as having moved too far to the Right (hence Theresa May’s 2002 lament that they had acquired a reputation as ‘the nasty party’).

Of course, in such a scenario, the logical response is to move back to the centre ground, which is precisely what ‘New’ Labour sought to do, and the Conservatives subsequently attempted when David Cameron became Party leader in December 2005. However, this now poses a new problem for Labour and the Conservatives, namely a perception among many voters that the two main parties are virtually indistinguishable, and no longer offer a genuine or distinct choice on polling day.

For example, whereas 88% of people perceived there to be a ‘great difference’ between the Labour Party and the Conservative s in 1983, only 13% still did so in 2005, by which time, 44% deemed there to be ‘not much’ difference’.[10]

Again, the consequence is either a decline in electoral turnout and growing disengagement from a ‘democracy without an effective choice’, or increased support for ‘third’ parties who do appear to offer a distinct or meaningful alternative. Thus have some former Labour voters (who felt alienated by New Labour) switched to the Liberal Democrats, Greens or the British National Party, while the ‘modernised’ Conservative Party sees a growing number of its erstwhile supporters switching to UKIP. To quote W. B. Yeats, ‘things fall apart, the centre cannot hold’. Many other former supporters of the two main parties simply stay at home on polling day.       

7) The conduct of parliamentarians in the House of Commons

Quite apart from sundry financial and sexual scandals which some MPs have been embroiled in since the 1990s, another reason for growing public cynicism and declining respect concerns the conduct of (some) parliamentarians in the House of Commons itself. In particular, a recent study by the Hansard Society[11] has revealed that 67% of the public believe that Prime Minister’s Question Time (PMQT) entails ‘too much party political point-scoring instead of answering the question’, while 47% deem it to be ‘too noisy and aggressive’. A third of the public also confessed that PMQT ‘puts me off politics’, with many people using adjectives such as ‘childish’, ‘pointless’, ‘over the top’, ‘dishonest’ and ‘out of touch’ when asked to describe their view of PMQT. 

This is particularly ironic given that one of the original arguments advanced in favour of televising Parliament was to bring it ‘closer’ to the public, and enable voters to see what their MPs did at Westminster. The actual outcome, sadly, has increasingly been to reinforce public disillusionment with their elected representatives, and strengthen the perception that too many MPs and Ministers are cocooned in their own Westminster bubble, or engaged in some kind of self-indulgent political game in which ‘victory’ does little, if anything, to address the concerns of voters.[12] Similar views were expressed in a YouGov survey (conducted on behalf of the Fabian Society) of people who did not vote in the 2010 general election.[13]   

8) Increased support for ‘third’ and ‘populist’ parties

Along with declining electoral turnout, one of the notable results of voters’ disillusion with mainstream parties is that among those who do still bother to vote, a growing number are casting their vote for parties other than the Conservatives and Labour.

This is clearly reflected in the increased support for the Liberal Democrats in England since 1992, Plaid Cymru in Wales and the Scottish National Party (SNP) north of the border. Support for both Plaid and the SNP has clearly reflected a surge in nationalism in Scotland and Wales, deriving in large part from a perception, particularly since the 1980s, that the two main parties in Britain are London-centric, and therefore insufficiently attuned or sympathetic to the cultural distinctiveness and regional concerns of Scottish and Welsh citizens.

Of course, the use of a partly-proportional electoral system (the Additional Member System) for elections to the Scottish Parliament and the Welsh Assembly has also boosted support for ‘regional’ parties, because it means that there are fewer ‘wasted votes’ – a vote for Plaid or the SNP is much more likely to ‘count’ than it would under the first-past-the-posy electoral system.   

Some of the ‘third’ parties who have recently attracted increased electoral support might be termed ‘populist’ or ‘anti-establishment’ parties, of whom the British National Party (BNP) and the UK Independence Party (UKIP) are the two most obvious examples. Such parties exploit public dissatisfaction and disillusionment with traditional parties and leaders by portraying themselves as being ‘out there’ with ordinary people against the allegedly out-of-touch political establishment or elites in London.

The BNP has sought to attract electoral support mainly from erstwhile Labour voters by claiming that the Labour Party has become too middle class and distant from the day-to-day concerns of ordinary working class voters, particularly on issues such as immigration. Underpinning this claim is the changing social and educational background of most Labour MPs; much more middle class, and far less proletarian, than it was decades ago.

UKIP, meanwhile, bases much of its electoral appeal on promoting the view that the political establishment has repeatedly disregarded the views of millions of ordinary British people over Britain’s membership of the European Union (EU), and the latter’s increasing influence and power. Part of UKIP’s growing appeal is the notion that Labour and the Conservatives alike have effectively colluded in a conspiracy to mislead the British people, and stifle a serious debate, over the nature of the EU, and its alleged threat to British independence.

Again, this implies that the mainstream parties are virtually the same, and so do not offer voters an effective choice or alternative.

Furthermore, parties such as the BNP and UKIP depict themselves as ‘clean’, unsullied and untainted by the alleged betrayals, corruption, dishonesty and policy failures which they attribute to the mainstream parties. These ‘populist’ parties claim to speak the truth which, they claim, the political elites have a vested interest in concealing or disguising from the British people. In this context, parties such as the BNP and UKIP simultaneously reflect and reinforce growing public cynicism towards ‘establishment’ politicians and mainstream parties.

In can therefore be seen that disillusionment with mainstream parties and politicians has had two main consequences. The first is disengagement from the political system, as manifested by declining turnout. In the most recent elections, more people have not bothered voting, effectively adopting a ‘none of the above’ stance. It should be emphasised that non-voting does not always or automatically reflect apathy; it can derive from a ‘rational’ and conscious decision that it is not worth voting.   

The second consequences is that among those who so still turn out to vote, support for Labour and the Conservatives has declined, while support for ‘third’ or ‘populist’ parties has increased significantly.

I will leave it to others to suggest ways and means by which political disengagement and declining turnout in elections might be reversed, and political trust restored.

10 March 2014