This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2015/aug/19/labour-leadership-the-key-demographic-challenges-facing-the-party

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Labour leadership: the key demographic challenges facing the party Labour leadership: the key demographic challenges facing the party
(about 2 hours later)
Can Labour win the next election? There are no shortage of polls suggesting that one or the other of the principal leadership candidates can lead the party to victory: “Jeremy Corbyn is unelectable”, “Corbyn is the most popular candidate among voters from all parties”. Or “Andy Burnham is best placed to beat the Tories”. Can Labour win the next election? There is no shortage of polls suggesting that one or the other of the principal leadership candidates can or cannot lead the party to victory: “Jeremy Corbyn is unelectable”, “Corbyn is the most popular candidate among voters from all parties”or “Andy Burnham is best placed to beat the Tories.”
Yet it is difficult for pollsters to ask questions about how well different candidates would fare in a general election because such queries are hypothetical and ask respondents to imagine a situation for which they don’t yet have all the required information; who can be sure what voters will think in May 2020 (never mind next week)? Yet it is difficult for pollsters to ask questions about how well different candidates would fare in a general election, because such queries are hypothetical and ask respondents to imagine a situation for which they don’t yet have all the required information. Who can be sure what voters will think in May 2020, never mind next week?
However, it is also possible to take another approach: to examine some of the key demographic challenges that Labour must overcome in order to win next time. It is possible, however, to take another approach by examining some of the key demographic challenges Labour must overcome to win next time.
This approach focuses not on the future merits or otherwise of Corbyn, Burnham, Yvette Cooper and Liz Kendall but whether Labour can win over sufficient numbers of key voter groups – whether students or pensioners, renters or homeowners, white collar workers or manual labourers. This approach focuses not on the future merits or otherwise of Corbyn, Burnham, Yvette Cooper and Liz Kendall, but whether Labour can win over sufficient numbers of key voter groups, whether students, pensioners, tenants, homeowners, white-collar workers or manual labourers.
The scale of the challengeThe scale of the challenge
Labour won 232 seats in May. Labour won 232 seats in May. This implies that the party would need to win another 94 more seats on current boundaries, and possibly more than 100 following impending changes, to secure a majority in 2020. Even if the party were to reverse all its losses in Scotland, which it won’t, it would still need the majority of its parliamentary gains to come from the Conservative party.
This implies that the party would need to win 94 more seats on current boundaries (and possibly more than 100 following impending changes) to secure a majority in 2020. And even if Labour were to reverse all its losses in Scotland – which it won’t – it would still need the majority of its parliamentary gains to come from the Conservative party.
That’s the scale of the challenge.
The further difficulty for Labour is that the list of seats it needs to win is not only long, it is geographically distributed across the country. And the voters that Labour needs to win over is just as diverse. The list of seats Labour needs to win is not only long, it is geographically distributed across the country, and the voters that Labour needs to win over is just as diverse.
According to Ipsos Mori data, in 2015 Labour lost votes from (as compared to the 2010 election) in relatively equal numbers to the Conservatives (8%), Ukip (6%), the Lib Dems, SNP and the Greens (all 5%). According to Ipsos Mori data, when compared with the 2010 general election Labour lost votes in relatively equal numbers to the Conservatives (8%), Ukip (6%) and the Lib Dems, SNP and Greens (all 5%) in May.
The losses to the SNP are of course more dramatic due to the fact that the switchers are all concentrated in Scotland’s 59 seats, where Labour lost all but one of its 41 seats. And it is worth bearing in mind that Ukip’s growth in percentage point terms was slightly larger in Labour-held seats than in Tory-held ones. The losses to the SNP are more dramatic, because the switchers were all concentrated in Scotland’s 59 seats, where Labour lost all but one of its 41. It is worth bearing in mind too that Ukip’s growth in percentage point terms was slightly larger in Labour than in Tory-held seats.
Scotland Age, class and geography
The extra conundrum for Labour’s next leader is what Labour needs to do in Scotland to win back seats from the SNP is different to what the party needs to do in the north to fend off Ukip’s challenge and to what it needs to do in the south to take on a dominant Tory party. The added conundrum for Labour’s next leader is that the party will need to take different tacks to win back seats from the SNP in Scotland, fend off Ukip’s challenge in the north of England and take on a dominant Tory party in the south.
Next, it would be an error though to assume that Labour performed poorly with all voters in May. It would be a mistake, however, to assume that Labour performed poorly with all voters in May. According to Rob Ford, a senior lecturer in politics at the University of Manchester, “the more a seat looked like London – young, ethnically diverse, highly educated, socially liberal, large public sector – the better Labour did, on the whole”.
According to Rob Ford, a senior lecturer in politics at the University of Manchester, “the more a seat looked like London – young, ethnically diverse, highly educated, socially liberal, large public sector – the better Labour did, on the whole”. The party did well among young people in 2015, registering a 7.5 point swing from the Tories among 18 to 24-year-olds and a four-point swing among 25 to 34-year-olds, according to Ipsos Mori data. It led the Conservatives by 43% to 27%, among 18 to 24-year-olds and by 36% to 33% among 25 to 34-year-olds.
Labour was able to achieve a favourable swing among young people in 2015 – registering a 7.5 point swing from the Tories among 18- to 24-year-olds, and a four-point swing among 25- to 34-year-olds, according to Ipsos Mori data. Labour led the Tories in 2015 among 18- to 24-year-olds by 43% to 27%, and by 36% to 33% amongst 25- to 34-year-olds. Labour also led the Tories among voters in social class DE, the “semi-skilled and unskilled manual occupations, unemployed and lowest grade occupations”, by 41% to 27%. It was ahead among private and social renters by 39% to 28% and 50% to 18% respectively, and among black, Asian and minority ethnic voters by 65% to 23%.
Labour also led the Conservatives among voters in social class DE (the “semi-skilled and unskilled manual occupations, unemployed and lowest grade occupations”) by 41% to 27%. The Ed Miliband-led party also was ahead amongs private and social renters (by 39% to 28% and 50% to 18% respectively), and again among black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) voters (by 65% to 23%).
However, among all these groups, turnout was lower than the overall level of voter turnout of 66%. For example turnout among young people under 24, it was 43% and among 25- to 34-year-olds it was 54%.
Some might argue that the solution would be to ensure that turnout increases among all these groups. But the problem with this approach is that Britain as a whole does not look like London.
For example, even if you were to assume that turnout among young people was nearer to the rest of the population, and that these new young voters supported Labour in significant numbers, the party would still – all else remaining equal – fall short. That’s because there are only a dozen or so constituencies where there are young people in sufficient numbers to make a difference to a seat’s outcome, such as Canterbury and Plymouth Sutton & Devonport.
When it comes to students alone, the potential impact is even smaller and limited to around 10 seats such as Hendon, Lancaster & Fleetwood and Lincoln. While the number of marginal seats where non-UK born voters have the potential to decide an outcome is just as small.
Voter turnoutVoter turnout
Among all these groups, however, turnout was lower than the overall level of 66%. The turnout among people under 24 was 43% and among 25 to 34-year-olds it was 54%. Some might argue that the solution would be to increase turnout among all these groups, but the problem with this approach is that Britain as a whole does not look like London.
Even if you were to assume that turnout among young people was nearer to that of the voting population as a whole, and that the new young voters supported Labour in significant numbers, the party would still – all else remaining equal – fall short. That’s because there are only a dozen or so constituencies, such as such as Canterbury and Plymouth Sutton & Devonport, where there are young people in sufficient numbers to make a difference to the outcome.
When it comes to students alone, the potential impact is even smaller and limited to around 10 seats such as Hendon, Lancaster & Fleetwood and Lincoln. The number of marginal seats where non-UK born voters have the potential to decide an outcome is just as small.
It is also naive to assume that any increase in voter turnout in any demographic would be entirely to the benefit of one party.It is also naive to assume that any increase in voter turnout in any demographic would be entirely to the benefit of one party.
There is of course no single prescribed way to define a winning coalition, yet there is no getting round the fact that Labour’s greater problem is not attracting more young voters. It is in winning sufficient support among those that in May opted for the Tories’ message of economic competence and trustworthiness, and political stability. There is no single prescribed way to define a winning coalition, but there is no getting around the fact that Labour’s main challenge is not attracting more young voters. It is in winning sufficient support among those who opted for the Tories’ message of economic competence and trustworthiness and political stability in May.
The Conservatives gained a 5.5 point swing from Labour with voters aged 65 or above – the age group with the highest turnout (78%). Within the 65-and-over age group, the Conservatives won 47% of the vote compared with Labour’s 23% (down eight points on 2010). The Conservatives registered a 5.5 point swing from Labour with voters aged 65 or above, the age group with the highest turnout at 78%. The party won 47% of the vote for the age group, compared with Labour’s 23% - down eight points on 2010.
While among ABs – the social class with the highest turnout (75%), defined as “households with higher and intermediate managerial, administrative, professional occupations” – the Tories registered a three-point swing from Labour. With ABs the Tories captured 45% of the vote, and Labour 26%. Among ABs, the social class with the highest turnout at 75% and defined as “households with higher and intermediate managerial, administrative, professional occupations”, the Tories registered a three-point swing from Labour. They captured 45% of the AB vote, compared with Labour’s 26%.
Among C1 voters, the country’s largest chunk of the total electorate, the Tories enjoyed a 12-point lead (41% to 29%), unchanged compared with 2010. Among C1 voters, the largest chunk of the total electorate, the Tories enjoyed a 12-point lead by 41% to 29%, unchanged compared with 2010.
In all these cases the Tories enjoyed a far greater margin than the overall election result (38% to 31%). In all these cases the Tories enjoyed a far greater margin than the overall election result at 38% to 31%.
And make no mistake: turnout among these groups will remain high at the next election - and not because these people are “conservatives” but because these groups tend to be more likely to vote, and as a result they have a disproportionately larger sway over any general election. Make no mistake, turnout among these groups will remain high at the next election, not because they are “conservatives” but because they tend to be more likely to vote, and as a result have a disproportionately larger sway over any general election.
All this would indicate that Labour fell short at the last election due to the narrowness of its coalition of voters. A political approach that emphasises more of the same is unlikely to work. All this would indicate that Labour fell short at the last election because of the narrowness of its coalition of voters. A political approach that emphasises more of the same is unlikely to work.
On the other hand, it would be an oversimplification to argue that the party should shun its traditional supporters and be more Tory. Although this might translate into winning voters over from the Conservatives, it would almost certainly mean losing support elsewhere. On the other hand, it would be an oversimplification to argue that the party should shun its traditional supporters and be more Tory. This might translate into winning voters over from the Conservatives, but it would almost certainly mean losing support elsewhere. If anything, the lesson of Scotland is that abandoning and alienating your traditional voters has devastating consequences.
And if anything, the lesson of Scotland is that abandoning and alienating your voters has devastating consequences. At the last election, a record 24.9% of the vote went to parties other than the Tories, Labour and Lib Dems. Given such a fragmented electorate, the task of winning enough seats to form a single-party majority government is even more difficult.
At the last election, a record high 24.9% of the vote went to parties other than the Tories, Labour or the Lib Dems. Within the context of such a fragmented electorate, the task of building a winning coalition for a one party majority government is even more difficult. The choice the next Labour leader faces is not to simply whether to turn to the right and woo people that voted for other parties in May and in 2010, or to chase broadly leftwing voters such as those that have more recently joined the Labour party.
The choice that faces the next Labour leader is not to simply turn to the right, and woo people that voted for other parties in May and in 2010 – or to chase broadly leftwing voters such as those that have more recently joined the Labour party. Ultimately the party’s goal is to be in government, be it in five years or in 2025 and beyond. To win an election, the task ahead is to identify, reach out to and build a coalition of disparate voters in sufficient numbers – and understand what matters to them.
Ultimately the party’s goal is to be in government, be it in five years or in 2025 and beyond. So to win an election, the task ahead is to identify, reach and build a coalition of disparate voters in sufficient numbers – and understand what matters to them.