The Hidden Architects of Labour’s Success?

Behind the veneer of electoral success, and by any standards 412 seats is a success of historic proportions, there lies a hidden truth that suggests that the mandate Keir Starmer is claiming is not quite so strong.

Nationally, the turnout for the general election was around 60%. In 2019 it was 67.3%, in 2017 it was 68.8%.

Turnout for general elections during the twentieth century was almost always above 70% and even stretched into the 80s, (the sole exception being 1918). The last time it was above 70% was in 1997. Since then, voting has become less common, dipping below 60% for the first time in 2001 (59.85%). The turnout for 2024 suggests that the electorate were not inspired by the politics on offer.

Labour took roughly 36% of the popular vote

In what must rank as one of the greater ironies of electoral politics, Labour won its greatest electoral success, (412 seats) with 9.7m votes. This came after one of its greatest electoral defeats in 2019 when it only managed to obtain 202 seats with 10.3m votes. 

(For comparison, in that other recent landslide, Tony Blair took 63% of the seats in 1997 -418 seats- with 43% of the vote, some 13.5m votes.)

This is the picture of the 2024 House of Commons, courtesy of the House of Commons Library. (One seat was still to be called.)

The degree to which this result will add pressure for electoral reform is a discussion for another time. The question for today is how can you get fewer votes and still win by a landslide? Though for note, Labour did increase their proportion of the vote, by a massive 1.6%!

As others have commented, it wasn’t so much that Labour won, but rather the Tories lost, spectacularly. And we’d like to reflect upon the role of English and Scottish nationalists in making this possible.

For decades, the SNP have been the power in Scotland. They wiped out Labour, seemingly, and had their greatest success in 2015 taking 50% of the popular vote and 56 of the 59 parliamentary seats. They then embarked on a period of corruption and incompetence. The voters are heartily sick of them, (for now). And whilst John Swinney has issued a mea culpa, the rot had very little to do with the current leadership and much to do with the disillusionment with Sturgeon and Yousaf.

Labour, having taken the people for granted in Scotland were thrown a lifeline by the party that had previously capitalized on their ineptitude. Labour (with one seat yet to be declared) now hold 37 of the 59 seats in Scotland. The Scottish Nationalists have just nine. The Tories and Lib-Dems picked up five and six respectively.

But the big story is the rise of Reform. The decision of Nigel Farage to enter the fray directly gave impetus to the Reform campaign. With only five MPs and 14% of the vote, although impressive given their starting position, this looks like any other minor party; bigger than the Greens, but a fraction of the Lib-Dems.

This is illustrated in the BBC graphic below.

Between them, the Tories and Reform took 38% of the popular vote, but they have one third of the parliamentary seats achieved by Labour who took 34%. 

The Tories dropped 20 points in 2019. The main beneficiary was Reform which took 14.3%, as illustrated in this graphic from the Independent. There is little to suggest that disaffected Tories went to Labour.

Reform has clearly benefited from dissatisfaction amongst Conservative voters. But the real winners of that dissatisfaction have been Labour. Reform may have picked up the votes, but Labour got the seats.