Britain, Britain, Britain.
This week’s polling results from Populus make for interesting reading if you’re interested in politics. Whether you’re red or blue, the poll makes for – to put it diplomatically – positive and not-so-positive reading. Peter Riddell summed it up rather nicely in The Times the other day, saying that despite there being a pivotal group being dis-satisfied with Labour, the Conservatives have only improved their position marginally on certain key policy areas. For information, the top-line voting intentions are CON-LAB-LIB-OTH 40%-32%-16%-11%.
But the real issue that I want to look at here is the concept of a two-party state. Are we such a state? We are often compared to America in that we have Labour and the Conservatives, and they have the Republicans and Democrats. There are factions on the other side of the Atlantic, of course there are, but in contrast our ‘factions’ divide from the main party and set up their own. See George Galloway. Election results show that the Liberal Party (in one form or another) has not been the Official Opposition in the House of Commons since 1922 – 85 years! We have to go back 101 years to find the last non-Conservative or Liberal opposition. Even then, it was Joseph Chamberlain who led a separate ‘Unionist’ group after a dispute over tariff reform. Essentially, yes, you guessed it, Conservative.
The results of the polls are interesting. The Conservatives are generally in the 40% - 42% region, with Labour gaining percentages of between 27% - 32%. This shows that while the opposition are consolidating their position around the 40% mark, the general public’s view of the government is fluctuating and their poll ratings remain considerably volatile. This has led to commentators to speculate on whether or not a coalition government could be a realistic outcome from the next general election.
With two or maybe even three years to go, there is still plenty of time for the smaller parties to make up some ground. In October, only 7% of people claimed to want to vote for a party that was not Labour, the Conservatives or the Liberal Democrats. Now, only two months later, 11% of people will vote for a smaller party. I’m no mathematician, but why? It took David Cameron over two months (from August to early November) and an abundance of bad handling on the government’s part to gain 4%. What do the other parties have to offer?
The Green Party
The phrase “the law of unintended consequences” comes to mind here. So much emphasis is being placed upon the concept of living in a ‘greener’ country, with a lot of resources being pumped into encouraging recycling. Are the main parties actually doing better than they think in encouraging ‘greener thinking’ by causing a shift in support to the Green Party?
UK Independence Party
So much talk about Europe and the advantages of being a member of the European Union could be turning people off the two main parties. UKIP “is committed to withdrawing Britain from the European Union” because it believes that it is “bad for Britain's economy and prosperity, but it is an alien system of government that will ultimately prove to be totally unacceptable to the British people”. The President of France, Nicholas Sarkozy, believes that a referendum in the UK would result in one in France. He says that if the treaty were put to the people of France and Britain, then the treaty would fall. Are UKIP on to something here?
Respect
In their latest policy booklet dated April 2006, Respect say that “A vote for Respect is a crucial step towards the creation of a new radical working-class voice that will speak for millions who, through the betrayals of New Labour, have lost their political representation”. If the Blair-Brown coalition really has improved the economic welfare of our country and, in general, made people richer, will people be voting for this party?
British National Party
Always keen to stir up controversy, the BNP stand for lower immigration, British independence and higher-quality education and healthcare. Are the British people really that unhappy with the levels of immigration at present? Have the BNP already ruined their chances of electoral success by allowing themselves to be portrayed as a radical party? After all, if people want British independence and different policies on education, aren’t there already UKIP and the Conservatives?
What can be said in conclusion? I don’t think that there is any definitive answer. Clearly some like UKIP are trying to approach things in a different way, but the fact of the matter remains that at least another fifty years is needed before a credible alternative to the main three parties can possibly be a viable idea.
Matthew Jones
Deputy Chairman (Political), NKCF
