The General Election 2024
The result
Starmer carrying a priceless vase was seen as a metaphor for Labour's approach to this election. All Labour had to do was not do something stupid. Also, avoid giving the Conservatives any policies they could attack. This meant committing to no tax increases in income tax, VAT and corporation tax and reducing Labour's commitment to spending on green projects. While this left them open to accusations of not being honest about the economy, ultimately it worked.
How did the Voting System perform?
The campaign for electoral reform in the UK received a boost following what is being called the most disproportionate election in history. Reform advocates and experts noted the significant imbalance in the recent election results. Labour managed to secure a 174-seat majority with just 34% of the popular vote, prompting concerns among long-time reform proponents. Darren Hughes, the chief executive of the Electoral Reform Society, highlighted the need for change, pointing out the glaring disproportionality of the outcome. Nigel Farage, from Reform UK, also criticized the current first-past-the-post (FPTP) electoral system as unfair, as his party garnered 14.3% of the vote but only secured five seats, making it the third largest party by vote share. Similarly, the Green party, which received 6.8% of the vote, only managed to secure four seats.
If the UK used the additional member system of PR for the Scottish and Welsh parliaments, Reform would have won 94 seats across the country on Thursday and the Greens 42, according to the Electoral Reform Society. It noted that Labour and the Conservatives had received their joint lowest vote share on record, and for the first time, four parties had gained more than 10% of the vote.
Unusually the Liberal Democrats under Ed Davey benefitted form FPFP because they ruthlessly targeted resources at winnable seats rather than focusing on vote share. As a result, they won a record 72 seats, up from eight in 2019, despite a similar vote share of about 12%. One Lib Dem insider said: “It’s not that we like first past the post. But it’s fair to say that we had to use the system in front of us and play the board that was there.”
Analysis of the results at the cross-party pressure group Make Votes Matter found that 58% of voters did not choose their MP. The group’s spokesperson, Steve Gilmore, said previous election results using FPTP had also been “disproportional and unrepresentative”.
In 2015 the Conservatives won a majority with 36.9% of the vote, and in 2017 they had to form a minority government with 42.4%. Then in 2019, they landed an 80-seat majority on a vote share increase of 1.2 percentage points.
So does this election strengthen the case for electoral reform?
Yes
The result was even more disproportional than usual. In the 2017 election, the UK’s ‘first-past-the-post’ electoral system operated relatively proportionately, as the Conservatives and Labour had high levels of support, and squeezed out support for other parties. In 2019, however, FPTP reverted to its historic pattern, awarding a huge ‘bonus’ of seats to the Conservatives with 44% of the vote. However, in 2024 Labour had a landslide with just 34%.
Some minor parties have been treated very unfairly. Reform gained more votes than the Liberal Democrats but won only 5 MPs where the LD's won 72.– placing them third in terms of seats in Westminster – they received 12.2% of the vote. Reform UK received a larger share of the votes (14.3%), but only secured five seats.
Again an election using FPTP ensured that one of the big parties would govern. While the electorate showed a spread of opinion from populist right to green the result was another predictable victory for an establishment party. Labour's manifesto was notable for its lack of ambition and continuity with Conservative levels of tax and spending so no real change?
This feeling was summed up when during the BBC leaders debate the biggest round of applause was reserved for audience member Robert Blackstock.
“Are you two really the best we’ve got to be the next prime minister of our great country?” he asked.
Millions of voters were faced with a choice of wasting their vote- ie voting for a candidate with no hope of being elected or voting tactically ie not expressing their political convictions.
No
It depends on what you want from a voting system. FPTP makes it hard for potentially extreme parties to win many MPs and acts as a break on fluctuations in popular support. Reform could claim to be the successors of the Brexit Party but even so, they are very new and very inexperienced. A proportional system would have sent a large number (80 or 90) of inexperienced and rapidly selected MPs into Parliament. Given Reform's problems with the suitability of its candidates this might well have resulted in many very unsavoury characters in the House of Commons ie racists.
FPTP delivers strong governments. With a low turnout and divided electorate, a proportional system would have resulted in a government which was unable to govern alone. A hasty coalition agreement would have resulted in a government no one voted for as opposed to a Labour government which was at least the most popular party at the election.
You could argue that the election showed a vote for 'change'. The electorate may have been unsure about what kind of change but it was against the status quo. A coalition, which was unable to do much would have been unable to deliver this change.
The high levels of tactical voting show that sophisticated and intelligent choices, aided by advice from websites, can be made by voters using FPTP. So its not only multi-candidate systems which allow electors to make tactical choices. 2024 shows that with the aid of tactical voting sites voters can exercise the same kind of choices presented by majoritarian systems such as AV.
Although Labour has a huge majority on a low level of support tactical voting likely meant that Labour voters chose Greens or Lib Dems in an area such as the South of England where the Labour candidate had little hope of winning ie Labour may well have been more popular than it appears.
Reform UK MP McMurdock (furthest right) pictured arriving at the House of Commons with (L-R), Lee Anderson, Nigel Farage, Rupert Lowe and Richard Tice
Reform UK has confirmed McMurdock was jailed for assaulting a former girlfriend.
Did Labour win or the Conservatives lose & how important are campaigns anyway?
The Conservatives did not manage to narrow the gap between themselves and Labour in the polls during the campaign which was their hope and expectation. A snap election at a time chosen by Rishi Sunak might have been expected to make some inroads into Labour's lead in the polls but it didn't.
A soggy PM kicks off the campaign
The Conservative campaign was defined by mishaps and mistakes, from its sodden start, to the PM's early D-day departure, to another Westminster saga, where some Tories were alleged to have bet on the date of the election, and are being looked into by the Gambling Commission.
The campaign showed a shift down in support for both main parties.
However, the final result did show a narrowing of support between the main parties with Labour gaining 10% more share of the vote than the Conservatives and not the 20% widely shown in the polls. This may well have reflected tactical voting rather than the success of the Conservative campaign.
Was this a valance election ? All elections are concerned with policies but are also referndums on the government's record in power. If the 2019 election was dominated by one issue 'Brexit' the 2024 election was dominated by the electorate's view of the government's competance. Valance is the image of the party and how well they are liked and trusted. Theresa May identified the Conservative’s valence problem after 1997 when she described them has becoming seen as ‘the nasty party’. In 2024 the problem for the Conservatives was a combination of Boris Johnson, Partygate, and Liz Truss' mini-budget. The result was that the Conservatives had gained a reputation for incompetence.
However, the context was also widespread discontent at the state of the economy, particularly the spike in inflation during 2023 and the perception that the NHS and most public services were in a poor state.
The issue of Brexit still influenced how people voted.How people voted in the 2016 EU referendum still divides the public when it comes to voting in a general election. Half (47%) of those who voted to Remain in the EU voted Labour in this election with just 16% backing the Conservatives. In contrast, Labour came third amongst those who voted Leave in 2016, achieving just 19% amongst this group. Both the Conservatives (37%) and Reform UK (28%) outperformed them. The Liberal Democrats did a lot better with Remain voters (17%) than Leave voters (7%).
Overall the 2024 general election marked the worst performance in the history of the Conservative party, with many prominent figures, including former prime minister Liz Truss and notable MPs like Penny Mordaunt, losing their seats. Labour’s landslide victory can largely be attributed to voters’ dissatisfaction with the Conservative government's handling of the cost of living crisis and internal party conflicts, suggesting that the result was more an anti-Conservative vote than a pro-Labour one.
Seat share of parties other than Conservative and Labour, 1924-2024
However, traditional class and regional alignments reasserted themselves
Labour rebuilt the Red Wall with a vote share of 41%, despite climbing just three percentage points on 2019. The party won 37 of the 38 Red Wall seats, with Ashfield going to Reform UK. The Conservatives lost all 28 Red Wall seats they won in 2019, dropping 24 percentage points.
But for the Conservatives, their heartland fractured
The Liberal Democrats won a majority of ‘Blue Wall’ seats, with the party picking up 23 of these 43 seats that were won by the Conservatives in 2019. Labour’s vote share (17%) didn’t move, but the party gained 9 seats, with the Conservatives reduced to just 11.
In 2019, the Conservatives achieved more support from C2DE voters than ABC1 voters. However, that gradient has now reversed, with the party now back to its pre-2019 standard of having higher support levels with ABC1 voters.
More evidence of a Participation Crisis?
Yes:
Turnout was the lowest since 2001.
At around 60%, the overall turnout in this election reached a historic low. In areas with a Labour incumbent, voter engagement was notably lower, reflected by an average turnout of around 55%
Labour's appeal to young voters declined so while it gained with over 40s nationally it went backwards in 2019 with voters under 40.
However, party membership remains higher than a decade ago with new parties gaining members rapidly. Reform party membership doubled in the 8 days after Nigel Farage announced he would be returning to lead the party. On 31 December 2015, the Green Party of England and Wales announced its membership as 63,219, its highest-known membership to date.
More evidence of partisan dealignment
The two big parties lost support. The Conservatives held onto around half (53%) of their 2019 voters at this election. A quarter (25%) switched to Reform UK, while one in ten (10%) voted Labour and 7% for the Lib Dems. In contrast, Labour held on to 71% of their 2019 voters, losing 10% to the Greens and 8% to the Lib Dems.
In terms of vote share, Labour’s performance in 2024 ranks below average compared with past leaders of the party. (see chart)
One in five voters said they were voting tactically, which suggests the votes for minor parties would have been larger in a proportional system.
The 2024 election was not just a historic win for Labour. A number of other political parties got their highest shares of votes and seats in this election. This increase suggests a notable shift in voter support away from the traditional two-party dominance towards alternative parties, indicating a possible fragmentation of the political landscape in the future.
Labour lost votes as several newly elected cabinet ministers and even the party leader himself experienced a loss in vote share within their constituencies. The issue of Labour's hesitancy over calling for a cease-fire in Gaza alienated many Muslim voters. The share of Muslim voters in a constituency was highly predictive of vote losses for Labour. Five of the seven seats Labour lost were places where Muslims made up over a quarter of the population.
Of people who voted in both the 2019 and 2024 elections, the Conservatives only managed to retain half of their 2019 voters (52%). 13% opted for Labour, while 23% went to Reform UK. The party was squeezed in both directions, with roughly a quarter of voters moving left and a quarter moving right.
Age was an even more significant indicator of voting intention
With every age group over 45, the Conservatives lost more than 25 points compared to their 2019 result. Rishi Sunak’s party lost a huge amount of their middle-aged voters, holding less than half of their 2019 supporters in the 40–60 age range. Their voters under 40 opted for Labour as the main alternative, whereas those over 40 opted for Reform.
Labour gained with over 40s nationally but went backwards in 2019 with voters under 40. The party seemingly had a particular issue with women under 35 in this election, dropping 9 points. Among men under 35, they remained stagnant.
The Greens picked up 14% of the vote with 18-24-year-olds, up 10 points on 2019.
The crossover age at which a voter becomes more likely to vote Conservative than Labour was 64 at this election, up 22 years on the last general election.
