Analysed: the results of the 2008 local elections
Last updated: 22pm, Friday May 2 2008
Rarely have local elections proved quite so punishing for the country's ruling party. As Labour reels from its dismal performance at the polls, MSN asks: what does it all mean?
Described (not without a degree of relish, at least in some quarters) as ‘a mauling’, the local elections bore all the bloody hallmarks of a title fight. As the counts reached their conclusions, blow after blow was rained on Labour with brutal, bone-crushing force.
As of late Friday afternoon, the Conservatives have won an extra 256 seats; the Lib Dems gained 34 - and Labour has lost an embarrassing 331. Even more staggering is the share of the vote: the Tories claimed 44% and the Lib Dems 25% (according to projections), leaving Labour trailing dejectedly in third place with 24%. Knock-outs are seldom so absolute.
At time of writing, we're still waiting for a result in the London mayoral elections, arguably one of the most powerful positions in British politics - although at least one bookmaker, spurred on by Labour’s debilitating defeat in the local polls, has already paid out on Boris. A spokesman for Paddy Power said: “After the kick in the ballots that Labour has had overnight, we expect Boris to put the final nail in their local elections coffin.” <groan> Boris is now ahead in eight of London's 14 districts.
Dour versus dashing
Disproportionate living costs, a crumbling economy, voter disillusionment and political infighting have combined to create a new political map that is distinctly hostile to our ruling party. At pavement level, however, many ballots were decided as much by central personalities - Brown’s perceived dourness versus his younger, more PR friendly foes - as policies.
Gordon Brown (who didn’t even bother to stay up for the results on Thursday night, according to the BBC) was quick to blame the economy. And rightly so - it is, after all, in a shambles. But, and pardon me, prime minister, for pointing this out, exactly whose fault is that?
Death knell?
Doom-mongers will interpret the disastrous results as a death knell for the Labour government. After all, had this been a general election, the Tories would have reclaimed the Commons with a massive - and no doubt massively smug - majority. But hold those horses: ruling parties rarely fare well in mid-term elections, which are the electorate’s first real chance to dish out a few judgemental body blows, and a less-than-ideal night at the local polls won’t necessarily spell the end of Labour’s reign (it certainly didn’t during the last two elections).
What it may spell the end of, however, is Gordon’s - or will it? Plummeting so fast in the opinion polls he’s at risk of a terminal nosebleed, our poor prime minister - less than a year into his premiership - has been bludgeoned on all mirthless sides for months. Surely, after so many scandals, his chances of surviving into the next general election have all but evaporated?
Labour mutiny
Certain quarters would have you believe so, but the prospect of an imminent Labour Party mutiny is surprisingly slim - after all, who exactly would take the wheel? The only obvious contender is consumate diplomat David Miliband, who seems disinclined to relinquish his well-suited role as foreign secretary. And at any rate, what message does holding a leadership battle so soon after Blair’s departure really send to the electorate?
One thing’s for certain: where New Labour was once the vibrant face of British politics, today’s Cameron-led Tory party is now the thrusting young buck. With three years under their belt, the Conservatives 2.0 have achieved the almost impossible: turned a once creaking, decrepit machine into a gleaming example of high-tech wizardry which could yet beam its leader straight into number 10.
Snapping elastic
But let’s not get ahead of ourselves. Nick Clegg - also facing his first electoral test - snapped like a piece of worn-out knicker elastic when it was put to him, by a member of the press corps, that the Lib Dems were only hovering up seats because voters wanted to stick it to Labour. Not so, he huffed indignantly: “It’s not because Labour’s doing badly, it’s because we’re doing extremely well.” Which is, of course, missing the point: there is, in fact, a very good chance that he, and indeed Cameron, simply mopped up the votes a disgruntled electorate refused to give to Labour, rather than winning them on their own respective merits.
So, what next? Labour needs to regroup and create some cohesion before the party conferences. In addition to ‘listening and leading’, Gordon Brown needs to consider reshaping his policies - and if he’s in any doubt as to how not to do it, the 10p tax rate should serve as a timely reminder. Cameron et al will continue to capitalise on any mistakes made by Labour, but must also win votes of positive confidence in the party, rather than simply inheriting votes of no confidence in the incumbents. The next general election, as and when it is called, is shaping up to be quite the bruiser.
by Laura Snook, Editor, MSN UK News
May 2 2008
