POLLWATCH
Centre Ground or No Man's Land?
The guerrilla election
|
It has been a tough election for centrists
– once the leading force in British politics. David Cameron’s ‘modernisation’
strategy has stalled. Ed Miliband has disowned New Labour. The Lib Dems are now
a rump party.
Once upon a time, a commitment to centre
ground politics was the hallmark of a party serious about government. In
keeping with Westminster tradition, I will use military and sporting analogies
to explain.
If you imagine two armies facing each other
on an ancient battlefield, or a rugby scrum with the ball at the hooker’s feet,
then the aim in each case is to gain territory by inching forward over an
imaginary gain line. This is the principle of “swing”.
When parties are locked in a head-to-head
contest, their leaderships need only pay their own side sufficient attention to
maintain motivation. Their loyalty ought not to be in question because the
common cause is fighting a monolithic opponent: the “forces
of conservatism” or the “socialist
disease”.
The wide spectrum in between is contested
territory, and resources are piled into fighting elections on this ground.
The
guerrilla election
But if you start to introduce attacks from
the flanks, the energy spent inching forward over the centre ground is not
always easy to justify. The sacrifices at the flanks can become as costly as
those on the main front.
The Lib Dems were the first party in
British politics to exploit this, but it is only in the last few years that a host
of different parties have started to influence elections in a big way.
In many ways the 2015 General Election has
now taken on the qualities of a guerrilla campaign. Attacks
and mishaps
that would cause serious damage to a regular force are brushed off by the
plucky insurgents of UKIP, the SNP and the Greens, who know their terrain and often
have the mobility to evade their more powerful but cumbersome opponents.
So we arrive at an awkward equilibrium: the
electoral map now a patchwork of parochial conflicts. The character of a Lib
Dem-Labour battle in inner London is quite different from a UKIP insurgency on
the East Coast or a Conservative-Labour contest in the suburban North West.
Those
Conservative-Labour marginals can be misleading: their existence implies a
direct battle for votes between the two major parties. In fact, they daren’t do
the hard work – the really hard work – of trying to reach into each other’s
territory. Instead, they prefer to consolidate their strongholds and tighten up
against insurgents.
|
|
|
The widely forgotten Nick
Clegg versus Nigel Farage debate ahead of the
European elections was typical of most debates in British politics at the
moment. They deliberately spoke to completely different audiences, despite the
pretext of a head-to-head contest. They were both trying to take votes from
Labour and the Conservatives, rather than each other.
Recent ComRes
research for the Electoral Reform Society suggests this fragmented landscape is
here to stay. The question is which strategy will work best for a party wanting
to form a government.
|
|
No
shortage of advice
Conservative campaign strategist Lynton
Crosby has a strong track record under preferential voting systems in London
and Australia, and proportional voting in New Zealand. His leaders have built
up huge Conservative blocs to take on Labour opponents.
But after flirting for so long with
centrism and modernisation, switching to Mr Crosby’s knuckleduster game could
lend Mr Cameron the air of the opportunist rather than the “big tent”
statesman.
Look
to Canada
So perhaps the
Stephen Harper premiership in Canada is the best
model for both Mr Cameron and Mr Miliband. After leading minority governments
from 2006 to 2011, he finally won a working majority in 2011 – all under a
first-past-the-post voting system.
He focused on keeping his side together,
being a key figure in the Unite the Right
movement which created the modern Canadian Conservative Party – and then built
from there.
Ed Miliband seems to
be following a similar blueprint. The only problem is that even ‘core vote’
politicians can still fail on their own terms. For every Michael Howard
steadying the ship, there seems to be an Iain Duncan Smith or Michael Foot
losing the troops.
|
|
|
|
|
Follow ComRes on
Twitter for the latest polls and analysis:
@ComResPolls
|
|
|
|
Author:
Andy White
Head of Innovation
|
Be
prepared for GE2015 with the new ComRes Election Toolkit:
|
The
2015 Battlebus is an online survey of 1,000 adults living in the 40 most
marginal constituencies where Labour and the Conservatives share first and
second place between them and battle head-to-head to get their candidate
elected. This survey offers unique access to the opinions of those voters who
will win or lose the election for the main parties - all at omnibus price
levels.
In
the run up to the election, and whilst the parties are drafting their
manifestos, this research tool is ideal for ensuring that each of the parties
know the importance of your policy issues to those who will be decisive in
getting them elected. This can be very powerful for lobbying material or for
generating media hits.
|
|
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comment is open to all feel free to link to this blog.