The local elections showed voters tiring of party politics but not personalities
There were two big winners on 3 May. Not Ed Miliband and Boris Johnson but ‘disenchantment with party politics’ and ‘politics with a personality’. The results were clearly great for Labour, far surpassing expectations. There is no doubt that it is now conceivable that Labour really can win the next election.
But we need to be honest that there was no enthusiasm for Labour – or for any party or politics in general – in the elections. Turnouts were appallingly low right across the board. The government is in crisis, becoming increasingly incompetent, and a toxic combination of cuts and tax rises are hurting families. And yet a massive majority of voters just could not see the point of voting.
Throw in the rejection of directly elected mayors and it all adds up to further evidence of the seemingly inexorable decline in trust that voters have in politicians and the big political parties. This disconnection produced some strange results. On the whole, where there was no one else on offer, Labour benefited from ‘stay-at-home Tories’ and the votes of those who wanted to give the government a kicking. But where there was a more colourful, less mainstream, option, then plenty of voters took that. Respect in Bradford and Johnson in London in particular, but, across the country, the Greens, UK Independence party and English Democrats saw their votes go up. In fact ‘others’ got 15 per cent of the projected national vote.
The hard reality is that Labour’s victory was built on the votes of between 12 and 13 per cent of the electorate. Only 27 per cent or so of people voted for a big party at all. The way that the main parties do politics is failing voters. There is a cosy assumption that everyone is fascinated by political life, an elitism and arrogance in all parties that they know best, and a sense of a system designed to deliver jobs for the boys and occasional girls. Most voters hate it.
Yet at election times we think that if we send voters lots of glossy leaflets that tell them we really care, and promise them something that they want, they will believe us, be grateful and vote for us. What patronising nonsense. People do not believe the parties will deliver when they promise things because their experience is that they do not. We might like to taunt the Conservatives that ‘we’re not all in it together’ but the uncomfortable truth is that voters think that the cap fits Labour equally well.
There will be huge rewards for the first party that breaks this mould. That means running election campaigns that are more than simply the industrial-scale production of clever election material, however well it is targeted. Elections should be about personal contact, social media, partnerships with other local interest groups and local advocacy. We must decentralise power. It could be Movement for Change or something else, but party politics has to start being experienced by voters as something useful.
Our politics must become open and stop being elitist. Advocacy will only happen if people choose to be part of our campaigns. Never again should we select candidates or leaders without directly involving voters. We must stop debating the introduction of primaries and introduce them as a matter of urgency. The primary should be a key starting point of our campaign, an opportunity for us to build a supporter base beyond our membership. Campaigns themselves should become more local and less corporate, with candidates encouraged to be individuals. It will feel messy at first and less controlled. But that is the point. The voters will love it. It will encourage innovation and begin to break down the wall between the majority and the tiny minority of political activists.
If the first winner on election day was ‘disenchantment with party politics’, the second was ‘politics with a personality’. If anyone ever doubted that personality really does matter, the last few weeks should have persuaded them otherwise. George Galloway won Bradford West because voters connected with him and liked him, even though they did not particularly dislike Labour. In London, Johnson outpolled his own party and people from across the political spectrum voted for him. They did so on the whole because they liked him and did not like Ken Livingstone. It may not suit our preferred rational view of the world but it is how voters operate. Livingstone offered cheaper fares and Johnson swore his way through the campaign. People liked the fare cut and preferred a candidate with a big personality.
At the next general election voters will have a general sense of what the two parties are all about. A small minority will vote the way that they always do. But swaths will vote instinctively on the basis of who they feel will do best, who they feel safest with and who they like and are inspired by. The uncomfortable truth is that people still do not trust Miliband and do not see him yet as a prime minister. And Labour’s leader himself sensibly acknowledged this when, as the results were emerging, he promised to ‘work tirelessly between now and the next general election to win [the] trust’ of those who did not vote Labour or turn out at all.
We talk about the need to build trust, but trust is a feeling, an emotion. Labour can win midterm elections or by-elections on the back of the government’s unpopularity. It can have all the policy answers to the country’s problems but if Miliband cannot develop a sense of connection, a sense of trust from voters over the next few years then Labour will lose. Put simply, Labour cannot win a general election unless and until voters look at its leader and are willing to trust him as prime minister. More than anything else Miliband’s job, and the party’s job, is to project him so that trust is built.
Labour’s leader is at his best when he is talking to people and doing question and answer sessions. He should stop making speeches, where he looks wooden, and focus on interaction. Cancel the set-piece conference speech and instead have a series of conversations with audiences. His aides should not worry too much about the questions because he is good at handling people. It will allow people to get to know him, to like him and it will stop him veering off and sounding like an out-of-touch policy wonk. Miliband’s big strength is his human side so let it shine. He should also work on the language used to describe his vision and practise looking relaxed in formal situations. If this sounds like superficial advice, it is not. This matters.
Labour has earned the right to be heard again but has not yet earned the right to be trusted. To do so it needs to abandon the ‘command-and-control’ party politics that so turns voters off. And it needs to understand and accept the increasing importance of the personality of its leaders. But the prize is that the now conceivable prospect of a Labour victory at the next general election might just become a reality.
—————————————————————————————
Peter Watt is a contributing editor to Progress and former general secretary of the Labour party
—————————————————————————————