<<< back to Articles Index
An Assessment of the Performance of Right of Centre
Parties in the 2001 General Election
by David Ball
The Ghost of the Referendum Party
In assessing the performance of the parties of the right it is necessary
to take into account this missing party. In the 1997 general Election its
candidates polled in the 1% – 4% range in the majority of seats. Even if
some of its supporters did not vote this time, those that did must have
gone somewhere. In fact it is possible that voters politically aware enough
to support it then could have turned out in disproportionate numbers this
time, and looking at the votes of the minor parties it would be safe to
assume that a good percentage of the voters returned to the Tory fold whence
they mainly came. This may mean that of those who voted Tory in 1997 a
small percentage could have actually switched to Labour and the Liberal
Democrats, with the numbers being more than counterbalanced by the ex Referendum
voters turning out in larger numbers.
The Conservative Party
The fact that the appalling result in 1997 was about to be repeated
was probably obvious to all, although the party leadership naturally could
not admit this. The percentage share increase in the Tory vote was so marginal
as to be hardly statistically significant, and the only question is now
whether they can in the next four years somehow recover from this sustained
lack of public support.
Why then did the fortunes of the Tory Party fail to rise over the last
four years? The theory that is rapidly becoming the accepted version of
events is that the party moved too far to the right and alienated its former
centre ground voters. In fact looking at the positions of the three major
parties, on many issues the Tories were very much occupying the same ground
as Labour. Mr Hague at one point expressed a desire for an Asian Prime
Minister, which could hardly be described as extreme right wing! Similarly
the way the party hierarchy shouted down John Townsend and forced his humiliating
climb-down did nothing to encourage anyone to move to the Tory Party on
grounds of race. Labour has appeared to be tough on crime and has to some
extent stolen this Conservative issue. The Tories are now openly tolerant
of homosexuality and their ‘free market’ economic policies have been largely
adopted by Labour, and in some cases, like the privatisation of Air Traffic
Control, pushed beyond what even Mrs Thatcher thought possible!
Thus far from alienating its ex middle ground supporters it is possible
that they could in reality discern very little difference between Labour
and the Conservatives, and in the end decided to stick with the devil they
knew rather than chancing it with a Tory Party seemingly still at war with
itself.
The latter remark touches upon the divisions on Europe. This is the
party’s Achilles’ Heel and will remain so unless it finally splits. The
two wings, with the anti-federalists being the larger at present, are philosophically
poles apart and will continue to skirmish for the foreseeable future. A
party divided on such an important issue will continue to appear weak to
the public.
Additionally the party has still not lost the odour of corruption that
clung to it in the latter years of the Major Government. People still remember
what went on then, and when faced with the appalling practices of the Labour
Government quite rightly spotted the hypocrisy of the Tories complaining
about them.
Finally the leadership of William Hague has to be called into question.
He was undoubtedly a fine Parliamentary debater and could often best Tony
Blair; it was very sensible of the latter to avoid a television debate
as he could only loose support as a result of it and not gain any. Unfortunately
comments over the years about drinking 14 pints et al are the kind of gaffes
that are not easily forgotten and forgiven. The idea that Portillo will
somehow be more attractive to the voters is a misnomer, and his past may
well alienate a large percentage of the ordinary members. A change of leader
will not in itself necessarily turn around the fortunes of the Tory Party.
The UK Independence Party
This organisation is well known for factional fighting, and the knives
will be currently being well honed! Its performance can best be described
as dismal, and the money it lost in deposits alone is a major loss to any
future anti-Euro campaign. The party persists in fighting mainly National
elections with very few Council seats ever being contested, and its policies
are mainly on the EU issue. Allegedly they published a more comprehensive
set of policies this time, but the standard leaflet despatched in large
numbers dealt solely with their European Policy.
Their electoral tactics are the reverse of what is required to actually
achieve anything. Only by building a local base can they ever hope to get
anywhere nationally, and that means having local policies on issues that
are far distant from lofty discussions on the merits of the single currency.
In many respects they are logically correct in that everything in the UK
is now to some extent affected by the EU, but they electorate are not aware
of this and tend to see parties which base all their emphasis on Europe
as being out of touch. A strong position on Europe is a vote winner, but
only if issues such as Health, Education and Transport are given their
correct weight in the minds of the electorate.
It is possible that after this immense effort that achieved nothing
UKIP will disintegrate over the next few months. The only alternative is
to reform themselves dramatically, which would even include a change of
name.
The Far Right
The number of candidates fielded by the far-right was substantially
down on the 1997 election. The BNP gained a substantial vote in three constituencies
in the North West with this almost certainly resulting from both the Oldham
and Leeds riots, and the rising tensions over the preceding few years.
Elsewhere the vote for them was patchy with better results than 1997 being
obtained in some seats and worse in others. The reality is that, leaving
aside the three North Western seats, nowhere in the country is the far-right
anywhere near even challenging the main political parties. There are no
far-right councillors anywhere in the country and it is highly unlikely
that a parliamentary breakthrough will be achieved without a local one
happening first. The far-right would have been better off concentrating
on the council elections rather than the national poll. The problem is
that many of the issues that arise in local elections are not of interest
to the majority of active far-right supporters, and that the hooligan element
will continue to make them unelectable, especially in the crucial battleground
of middle England. Indeed some of the groups seem to exist mainly to get
involved in political trouble with their electoral approach being a bit
of an afterthought.
The far-right will not achieve anything in the country unless there
is a major breakdown where the fabric of society is threatened. Even after
the explosion in Oldham the BNP was unable to attract more than 25% of
the white vote in one part of the town, which is under half of what they
would need to actually win the seat. The idea that society is about to
collapse was possibly a tenable theory in the mid 1970s, but the establishment
has proven well able to manage the decline of Britain in a manner that
prevents the extremes of both right and left from ever having an opportunity
to make substantial headway.
Conclusion
There is a vacuum in British politics between the broad centre and the
far-right that can be best described as the populist right. The only party
really positioned partially in this ground is UKIP who truthfully on many
social issues are middle ground. Daily Mail and Daily Telegraph readers
actually have no political party that represents their views. There is
a gap that needs to be filled, and that is where the Freedom Party is heading!
<<< back to Articles Index
