Can Labour recover to win in 2020? History says one thing, and the polls another
The 2015 General Election saw the Conservatives win a majority, seemingly against all odds, with Labour expected to perform much more strongly. Alun Wyburn-Powell looks at the historical precedent for Labour to recover and take the next election in 2020, arguing that while the polling suggests an insurmountable challenge, history suggests that it is possible.
Before the 2015 election most people assumed that it would bear the strongest similarities to the previous election in 2010, with a close vote, a hung parliament and another coalition. The pollsters and, largely as a result, almost everyone else were wrong. With hindsight, it was nothing like 2010, with the SNP surge in Scotland, the Liberal Democrats’ reduction to a rump no bigger than the party’s position in the 1950s, Labour’s failure to win the most marginal seat from the Conservatives and UKIP actually going down from two seats to one after dominating the headlines for most of the parliament.
The last election when the polls failed to predict the result was in 1992, an election which seems to have the most similarities with 2015. John Major won a surprise victory with an overall majority of 21 seats to keep the Conservatives in power.
If the opinion polls failed to give us a steer, could history have given us a better idea of what to expect at the 2015 election? There are some parallels with 1992, but then a Conservative leader was facing his first election, although his party had won the last three contests with an overall majority. The Labour leader in 1992, Neil Kinnock, was facing his second battle after losing his first, unlike Ed Miliband who was previously untested at the polls. If we looked for examples of elections at the end of coalition governments, we would have few examples and contradictory evidence. At the end of the wartime coalition in 1945, Labour, the junior coalition partner stormed to a landslide victory. Going back to the previous end-of-coalition election, the 1922 result was a victory for the larger coalition party, the Conservatives.
We have to face the uncomfortable reality that virtually every poll was wrong in terms of predicting the outcome of the 2015 election and that history offers no exact parallels for us to draw on. We have to accept that we cannot know the future.
Perhaps the best approach is not to start at the top, worrying about the overall result, but to build up a picture from the component dynamics. Here, both history and the polls did have something constructive to offer.
The polls did predict the SNP victory. Scotland has had a more volatile political history than the rest of the mainland – from being a Liberal stronghold in Victorian times, to having a Conservative majority in the 1950s, to being a Labour heartland in the later 20th century and now with the SNP leaving only one seat each for Labour, the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats (and all those with majorities of under 3,000). History records that when Scotland moves, it moves dramatically, and it doesn’t tend to swing back again. This is not a promising outlook for the Labour Party.
The history of the SDP in the 1980s gave us a strong steer on the likely prospects (or lack of them in terms of seats) for UKIP. The peak opinion poll rating for UKIP was 25%. This compares to a peak figure of 34% for the Lib Dems before the 2010 election (when they lost seats) and 50.5% for the SDP/Liberal Alliance in 1981. At the following election in 1983 the SDP only won only one new seat.
The 2015 Liberal Democrat collapse was more extreme even than the 1924 result, when the Liberals went down from 159 MPs to just 40 at the end of the first Labour government. Liberal leader Asquith had stood aside and allowed Labour to form their first administration. Labour proved to be safe, competent and unadventurous in office and the Liberal Party looked redundant. The lesson in 1924 seemed to be to take power whenever possible. The lesson from 2015 seemed to be the opposite.
The consequences of prediction errors can be serious and the examples manifold. Paddy Ashdown admitted that his 2015 Lib Dem election campaign was completely ‘blind-sided’ by the polls. The polls gave a misleading picture of support for Scottish independence in 2014, which resulted in panic offers of more devolution. The UKIP surge in the opinion polls changed the other parties’ stance on immigration. Neville Chamberlain achieved an 80% approval rating when he was following his appeasement policy before the Second World War.
Many commentators are now saying that Labour’s challenge in winning in 2020 looks unsurmountable, with the required swing likely to be unachievable. Here the polls suggest one thing and history another. If 1992 was the most similar election to 2015, history suggests that David Cameron’s majority may dribble away over the course of the parliament, as did John Major’s larger 21-seat majority – in both cases with the issue of Europe at the heart of the debate.
In the election after 1992 the Conservatives lost by a landslide. From this perspective, the Labour Party’s task at the next election does not look too onerous and history also records that the party did recover from only 52 seats in 1931 (fewer than the Liberal Democrats had earlier this month) to an outright majority just two elections later.
—
This post represents the views of the author and not those of Democratic Audit or the LSE. Please read our comments policy before posting.
—
Dr Alun Wyburn-Powell is the author of a biography of William Wedgwood Benn, first Viscount Stansgate. He can be found on Twitter @liberalhistory and writes a blog.
Can Labour recover to win the 2020 election? History says one thing, and the polls another https://t.co/3qwCMePedV
You say that the history of the SDP gives us an idea of what might happen with UKIP. Surely if you look at what has happened with UKIP (a 20 year history, gradual advance and then a breakthrough or two over the past 15 years) we are talking of a situation nearer to that of the SNP? Speaking of this to others (all of whom oppose UKIP) they try to tortuously deny that possibility ito convince themsellves (phew) that it will make UKIP go away; but if you listened to those first few results coming through, Sunderland etc (“UKIP in second place” every time) it reminded me of what started to happen in Scotland when I was a teenager there. If I were a gambler, that is that road I would point to for UKIP, not the flash-in-the-pan elitist SDP one.
No amount of media coverage slagging off UKIP and saying “it’s all over” (the Telegraph, Mail et al in 2010 for example) will achieve anything. Except that the party’s opponents will do even less to halt its advance on the basis that the Daily Mail has told us it is all over.
Can Labour recover to win in 2020? History says one thing and the polls another https://t.co/PXcQ8444KH
What historical parallels are there over the election? A good read from @liberalhistory via @democraticaudit https://t.co/qi6mIAlOKi
Can Labour recover to win in 2020? History says one thing, but the polls another. https://t.co/3qwCMePedV
Can the Labour Party win the 2020 election? History says yes, polls say no. @democraticaudit https://t.co/3qwCMePedV
The polls suggest that Labour will find it very hard to win in 2020. History suggests that it is perfectly feasible. https://t.co/3qwCMePedV
What are the prospects for #Labour recovery? Look to history as well as polls advises good piece on @democraticaudit
https://t.co/W8AxjGAJHw
Can Labour recover to win in 2020? History says one thing, and the polls another. https://t.co/3qwCMePedV
“History records that when Scotland moves, it moves dramatically, and it doesn’t tend to swing back again.” https://t.co/pIQVWj2VB7
What are the historical precedents for Labour winning the 2020 election? https://t.co/3qwCMePedV
Can the Labour Party win the 2020 election? @democraticaudit https://t.co/3qwCMePedV
I’m sorry, but history DOES NOT suggest a different outcome (the polls are neither here nor there). The lead Labour managed in 1997 (to win well over 400 seats, note) is LESS than it needs in 2020 to win a majority of 1. Labour got a swing of 10.5% in 1997; they need a 12% swing in 2015. And Labour’s opponent in 1997 was a weak, exhausted, inept, despised Conservative government the likes of which had never before been seen. There is no historical comparison for a party recovering from the devastating electoral position Ed Miliband has inflicted on it in one swing.
If you want a ray of light it is our electoral system. We have a system that rewards winners: it realigns behind the public mood. Hence, even though people were hand-wringing about whether Labour could ever win again after four defeats in 1992; and while so-called experts kept telling us the Tories needed an 8 point lead for a majority of 1 in 2015, the reality is that if the public vote for change, the system delivers it – usually in a more dramatic way than the pure numbers suggest.
So Labour may not need to be 12 points ahead if they recover in Scotland, or if the Lib Dems regain many of the seats they lost to the Tories, or if a less polarising Labour leader manages to distribute their vote better instead of piling it up in areas already dead to the Conservatives. Those are three huge “ifs” – which is why the correct parallel with 2015 is 1987: Labour is almost certainly too far adrift to close the gap in one go, but the right leader, doing the legwork to revive the party can probably get it to a position of being ready for a majority in 2025.
You are right that the electoral system makes almost meaningless these long term predictions. When I was a child in Scotland, and the SNP were on their first serious advance, simply all predictions were that it would ‘be bound to’ have a greater impact on Labour than the Conservatives. The total reverse happened. Factors pull in two ways and if the excitement/sensation of the day is to try and make it stand up that “x party can never ever win again” then the newspapers will distort the stats to “prove” the point. Nice story but cack in the end. And you need to factor in, against Labour, all those 2nd places that UKIP achieved in Labour seats – ominous for Labour, as this was v similar to the SNP all those years ago. Once a party can come second, it tends to be seen as ‘the alternative’ (may? may not? one’s own bias might lead one to say “No way” or “for sure”…but it’s a possibility).
Even with all the opinion polls, historical analysis etc, we really do have to accept that we cannot know the future, even in the very short term. Five years is a very long time in politics.
Perhaps you will at least agree with the last line of paragraph 4?
What are the prospects for Labour in 2020? It depends on whether you look at history or the polls. https://t.co/3qwCMePedV
Can Labour recover to win in 2020? History says one thing, and the polls another https://t.co/3qwCMePedV
Can Labour recover to win in 2020? History says one things, and the polls another https://t.co/RRdgg3jUlM
Can Labour recover to win in 2020? History says one things, and the polls another https://t.co/veLBiYKTFq #Option2Spoil
Can Labour recover to win in 2020? History says one things, and the polls another https://t.co/R2bsruQxda
“@democraticaudit:Can Labour recover to win in 2020?https://t.co/Wap9nbzXKV” Best sentence: We have to accept that we cannot know the future