As we look back, it is clear that few people wanted this election. There was no real mood for change – far from it. The general public had made their minds up early in the first parliament that they were going to stick with New Labour and give them enough time to get things done. They were not happy, but knew that it took longer than four years to turn things around. William Hague never became a viable alternative prime minister and the memory of the Major years made going back to the Tories unthinkable for almost all those swing voters who had come over to Labour in 1997.
That is why the 59 percent turnout, while disappointing, should not be the cause of undue alarm. If most voters have decided years in advance of an election that there can be only one winner, it is difficult to engage the electorate in the contest once it is underway. But, at the time, no-one involved in the Labour campaign took anything for granted. Four successive election defeats before 1997 made sure of that.
Unfortunately, the media decided that it was a foregone conclusion and that the election should therefore be a referendum on the government. No-one who followed the campaign at all closely can possibly conclude that they were offered balanced, and roughly equal, scrutiny of the proposals of the three major parties. Balanced coverage there may have been, but the policies of the Tories and Liberals were rarely a source of interest to broadcasters or journalists. Labour had retained a massive opinion poll lead throughout the parliament, with one blip at the time of the fuel protests, and so they would be back.
As a result, the prevalent presumption was that the campaign would be boring, with the accusation of style rather than substance being levelled at Labour from day one. In fact, it all began very differently.
The media took a hearty dislike to the Tony Blair election launch at St Olave’s School and announced that this ‘sickly’ event was a big mistake. By contrast, they saw the Hague opening diatribe, from an open air platform in Watford, as a bold piece of theatre which would grip the attention of the nation. And, for days, the media as a whole asserted that Labour had got off to a bad start.
But who was guilty of putting style above substance here? The Blair speech was delivered calmly and addressed the issues of the election. For the mass of viewers who watched the news bulletins that evening, it was an appropriate opening statement from the Prime Minister. By contrast, William Hague, brandishing the hand held microphone without which he rarely spoke for the rest of the campaign, came across as frantic, almost desperate. I have no doubt which approach was better received.
But it didn’t take long before it had dawned on everyone that there were really two campaigns going on. One, devoted to the real issues, in which Labour, the Liberals and the electorate were involved. And a separate campaign in which the Tories were engaged. Of course, the Tory obsession with Europe and taxation got coverage. But the electorate were not listening. They had decided that this was an election about the quality of public services.
That is why Labour stuck firmly to its strategy of economic competence, public services and leadership, culminating in ‘schools and hospitals first’. Meanwhile, we watched the Tories steadily quit the field. Even their much trailed ‘last seven days to save the pound’ disintegrated almost as soon as it was launched. Reduced to urging people not to vote so that there would not be a landslide victory, they lost all coherence and their daily initiatives became risible. No wonder the polls showed that the approval rating for their campaign was minus 44.
So it was left to Labour not only to stick to the issues, but to liven up the campaign. While one or two ‘high profile incidents’ were not part of the plan, the hunt for Oliver Letwin, with ‘missing’ posters and bloodhounds sent round to Central Office, gave a humorous edge to the fundamental point that the Tories did plan massive public spending cuts. And the ‘whiggy’ poster of Mrs Thatcher’s hair on William Hague’s head, focusing on who was really running the Tory Party, coincided nicely with one of the Thatcher forays into the campaign.
Now that the dust has settled on what was the most successful re-election victory in British history, we can recognise the most important theme of the campaign. While the Tories were lost in the wilderness, Tony Blair was using six keynote speeches to set out his programme of far-reaching reform for the second, and hopefully third, term of a Labour government. Just a few weeks into the new government and their significance is already well established.
Labour passed the referendum test in historic fashion, not least because they concentrated on substance and recognised the mood of the country. Indeed there is much to be done. But we should not forget to celebrate the fact that the people of Britain believe that only this Blair government is equipped to do it.