On Thursday (15/12) a by-election took place in the parliamentary constituency of Feltham and Heston. It offered voters in West London the opportunity to cast their verdicts of over eighteen months of the Con Dem nation. The voters chose to overwhelmingly reject the coalition, with both the Tories and Liberal Democrats taking a massive hit.
Unsurprisingly, the broadcasters opted to make the lousy turnout of 28 percent the story of the election. One could almost sense their disappointment that they had to concede the poor turnout was due to stormy weather and the proximity to Christmas, when a big story about political disengagement throughout the public would have been more desirable.
There were few surprises in how the parties responded to the result. It gave Labour the chance to remind the public that Tory policies were "hurting, but not working". There is truth to that claim: Tory cuts, leading to more unemployment, less tax revenue and more benefit payments, therefore putting government finances under more pressure, will not help Britain in the short or long term.
The Tories' responses ranged from the very dignified speech by their defeated candidate Mark Bowen, who paid tribute to the late Feltham and Heston MP, Alan Keen, to the sour grapes from Baroness Warsi, who complained of the election being won with just 12,000 votes. That response is evidence in itself as to how bitterly disappointed the Tories are with the result. Off the back of a fortnight when David Cameron went on a European wrecking mission, much to the delight of the press and a reasonably Euro-sceptic public, little gloss can be put on the 8.4 percent swing to Labour.
Meanwhile, Simon Hughes, the straight-talking Liberal Democrat, somewhat arrogantly conceded the government losses are to be expected when in government. There was no suggestion of an inquest to find out why the voters are deserting the Con Dems, despite their repeated claim of how they are trying to clean up the mess they 'inherited' from the last government. (One of the things I learned from the Feltham and Heston by-election coverage is they still fail to realise the electorate is turned off by the 'inherited mess' line of argument. If I have realised that, why are party strategists yet to do so?)
Unless the Liberal Democrats are more prepared to look inwards at why they are losing so many voters, then the 5.87 percent they polled in Feltham and Heston will become the norm. There is no point being arrogant about the trappings of power, when a 'generation of voters' have been lost. The loss of a 'generation of voters' are not my words, but the words of Liberal Democrat MP, Adrian Sanders.
It is true that governments often fare badly in by-elections, but they usually have to become unpopular first. Labour continued to sweep up by-election post successes, even after their post-1997 election victory. The Feltham and Heston result suggests the Con Dem coalition is already losing the public, with Labour making a comeback.
Election summary; Feltham and Heston 2011: BBC NEWS
Showing posts with label Vote 2011. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Vote 2011. Show all posts
Friday, 16 December 2011
Sunday, 8 May 2011
Vote 2011 review - Lib Dems trounced
Who would be a Lib Dem right now? This week's trouncing in the local election is the latest in a string of calamities since leader Nick Clegg entered the coalition with the Conservatives.
Rocked by student protests, resignations from grassroots activists and the ongoing appearance of fronting unpopular Tory policies have led to the party's collapse in support.
Clegg had, up until now, pushed the argument that the Lib Dems 'did not win the election' suggesting it limited his options. While this is true to some extent, Thursday's results demonstrate the public dissatisfaction with their conduct.
The confusing part is the other mixed messages sent by the electorate. On one hand, the Lib Dems have been punished for what are, in effect, destructive Tory policies. On the other hand, the Tories actually gained seats. Some punishment that is!
It has to be said the British, or more specifically the English, have a peculiar relationship with the Conservative Party. Despite public unease about their policies, people keep voting for them.
It is little wonder the Scottish National Party has made great strides in Scotland. Perhaps the Scots are becoming increasingly sick and tired of being governed by Tories voted for by slavish Englanders and who can blame them? (I am English, by the way.)
So with the Tories emerging more or less unscathed, precisely why was it the Lib Dems suffered most? Political and social scientists will already be hard at work on this, but here are a couple of provisional theories.
Firstly, though there may be two wings of the Liberal Democrats within the party - a left and a more economically liberal right - many of the voters are (perhaps unsurprisingly) social liberals who do not support non-welfarist conservatism. In many affluent areas, the Lib Dems are the Tories' natural opposition. If they have a state-stripping coalition placed in front of them with near 100 percent collegiality, what motivation is there to vote Lib Dem in these areas?
Secondly, there have been some major Lib Dem calamities which have proven totally unforgivable to some voters. On a personal note, I spent three years campaigning to fellow university students that the Lib Dems was the party against student fees. The decision to go ahead with the trebling of fees devastated the Lib Dems' youth vote.
The outcome of this policy, which was to smash the Lib Dems to pieces, was a result beyond they wildest dreams of even the most tribal Conservative.
That is assuming the Tories did not already forecast the impact of forcing through the student fees legislation. As Vince Cable stated earlier today, the Tories are tribal. It would be no surprise if their strategists were canny enough to realise who would pay the political price for for increased student fees. Shame on the Lib Dems for falling for it.
For many students and former students alike, campaigning for the Lib Dems is now untenable. How can they expect to retain their vote? Nick Clegg and his band of dodgy policy salesmen cynically toured university campuses with a signed pledge to abolish student fees. In my view, this gave the policy more salience than a typically breakable manifesto pledge. There is no question the issue of student fees should have been a red line in the coalition agreement. The number of Lib Dem voters between the ages of 18 and 25 who are lost forever does not bear contemplation.
I have worked alongside dedicated grassroots Lib Dems. Some of them were worryingly too liberal for their own good, others more rugged, but all of them worked hard fighting Tories up and down the country. They would fight for every single vote. Every letterbox was an opportunity. Every doorstep was a point of access to a potential voter. All their best efforts lay in tatters because of their useless/useful* (delete as appropriate) idiot.
Their failings surfaced on Thursday for all to see. It was the day Britain returned to two-party politics (simply replace Conservative with SNP north of the border). In the unlikely event the Lib Dems gain enough seats to force another hung parliament, I cannot see them rushing into another coalition any time soon.
Rocked by student protests, resignations from grassroots activists and the ongoing appearance of fronting unpopular Tory policies have led to the party's collapse in support.
Clegg had, up until now, pushed the argument that the Lib Dems 'did not win the election' suggesting it limited his options. While this is true to some extent, Thursday's results demonstrate the public dissatisfaction with their conduct.
The confusing part is the other mixed messages sent by the electorate. On one hand, the Lib Dems have been punished for what are, in effect, destructive Tory policies. On the other hand, the Tories actually gained seats. Some punishment that is!
It has to be said the British, or more specifically the English, have a peculiar relationship with the Conservative Party. Despite public unease about their policies, people keep voting for them.
It is little wonder the Scottish National Party has made great strides in Scotland. Perhaps the Scots are becoming increasingly sick and tired of being governed by Tories voted for by slavish Englanders and who can blame them? (I am English, by the way.)
So with the Tories emerging more or less unscathed, precisely why was it the Lib Dems suffered most? Political and social scientists will already be hard at work on this, but here are a couple of provisional theories.
Firstly, though there may be two wings of the Liberal Democrats within the party - a left and a more economically liberal right - many of the voters are (perhaps unsurprisingly) social liberals who do not support non-welfarist conservatism. In many affluent areas, the Lib Dems are the Tories' natural opposition. If they have a state-stripping coalition placed in front of them with near 100 percent collegiality, what motivation is there to vote Lib Dem in these areas?
Secondly, there have been some major Lib Dem calamities which have proven totally unforgivable to some voters. On a personal note, I spent three years campaigning to fellow university students that the Lib Dems was the party against student fees. The decision to go ahead with the trebling of fees devastated the Lib Dems' youth vote.
The outcome of this policy, which was to smash the Lib Dems to pieces, was a result beyond they wildest dreams of even the most tribal Conservative.
That is assuming the Tories did not already forecast the impact of forcing through the student fees legislation. As Vince Cable stated earlier today, the Tories are tribal. It would be no surprise if their strategists were canny enough to realise who would pay the political price for for increased student fees. Shame on the Lib Dems for falling for it.
For many students and former students alike, campaigning for the Lib Dems is now untenable. How can they expect to retain their vote? Nick Clegg and his band of dodgy policy salesmen cynically toured university campuses with a signed pledge to abolish student fees. In my view, this gave the policy more salience than a typically breakable manifesto pledge. There is no question the issue of student fees should have been a red line in the coalition agreement. The number of Lib Dem voters between the ages of 18 and 25 who are lost forever does not bear contemplation.
I have worked alongside dedicated grassroots Lib Dems. Some of them were worryingly too liberal for their own good, others more rugged, but all of them worked hard fighting Tories up and down the country. They would fight for every single vote. Every letterbox was an opportunity. Every doorstep was a point of access to a potential voter. All their best efforts lay in tatters because of their useless/useful* (delete as appropriate) idiot.
Their failings surfaced on Thursday for all to see. It was the day Britain returned to two-party politics (simply replace Conservative with SNP north of the border). In the unlikely event the Lib Dems gain enough seats to force another hung parliament, I cannot see them rushing into another coalition any time soon.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)