Vote 2010: Policy guide - the other parties
Updated on 06 April 2010
The share of the vote commanded by the main parties has been falling in recent years - from more than 95 per cent before Labour came to power in 1997 to just 57.1 per cent at the 2009 European elections - albeit under a different voting system. Greg Callus looks at the minor parties hoping to profit.
Even allowing the caveat that European elections use a proportional voting system, a full 40 per cent of the British electorate chose to lend their vote to the smorgasbord of parties that polling firms report collectively as the 'Others'.
General Election voting intention polls also suggest a significant increase in support for 'Others'.
In the first quarter of 2010, a marked difference has emerged between the more frequent and recognisable pollsters (YouGov, Ipsos Mori, ComRes, Populus & ICM plus lesser known BPIX and TNS) who are still showing minor parties at between nine per cent and 14 per cent, and the new-and-returning pollsters (Angus Reid, Harris, and Opinium) who are recording scores in the range of 14-20 per cent.
Which firms are correct? We won't know until after Election Day, but it is clear there is some tangible anti-mainstream, anti-politics, and anti-incumbency fervour that has captured the imaginations of a large number of voters in the wake of the MPs' expenses scandal, the 'lobbygate' and 'smeargate' revelations, and the economic crisis.
So what is it about the 'Others' that makes them so attractive to the voters who are fleeing the major parties? And could this change in voting patterns have serious electoral implications? Let's start with the largest of the 'minor' parties: UKIP, the BNP, and the Green Party.
UKIP
The United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP) were the major beneficiaries in the 2009 European elections. It polled in second place, ahead of Labour and the Liberal Democrats, and won the same number of MEPs as Labour.
UKIP's motivated Eurosceptic vote, always more potent at European elections, was especially energised by the refusal of Labour and the Liberal Democrats to support demands for a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty, which was finally ratified in November 2009.
The party inevitably struggles to make known its policies beyond Europe, but it espouses a hard line on immigration, and new leader Lord Pearson recently made headlines by suggesting a ban on women wearing the burqa or niqab in public buildings.
Much of the manifesto is what might have been expected of the Conservative Party of decades past, and for that reason is likely to appeal to former Conservative voters for whom David Cameron is too liberal.
But it will also draw in some working class traditional Labour voters who were prepared to switch to the Conservatives in previous elections, but see Cameron as too much the heir to Blair - whom they slowly abandoned after 1997.
UKIP has never fared quite as well in General Elections, rising from 0.3 per cent in 1997, through 1.5 per cent in 2001, and peaking at 2.2 per cent in 2005 – well short of the 16.5 per cent it won in the European elections of 2009.
The party has never won a constituency election for the House of Commons – its entire Westminster delegation has been the product of defections from the Conservative Party by sitting members.
The party has some councillors, but neither controls nor forms the main opposition on any council. Its best constituency performance in a general election was coming third in Boston & Skegness in 2005, on 9.5 per cent.
But UKIP's strongest regions - the South West, then the South East, West Midlands and the East of England - do offer some promise. There were a number of local authorities where UKIP won the popular vote in the 2009 local elections – North Devon, Plymouth, Torbay and Torridge in the southwest, and Dudley, Newcastle-under-Lyme and Stoke-on-Trent in the West Midlands.
The reputation of UKIP members as disgruntled Conservative Eurosceptic voters is only partially true – the party performed well in some Labour strongholds too, most notably in Hull and Hartlepool, where they secured the popular vote ahead of all major parties.
But the challenge by former UKIP leader Nigel Farage MEP will probably attract more media attention than the other 500-odd seats the party is likely to contest and lose. Farage is running against Commons Speaker John Bercow in Buckingham.
The Speaker is traditionally not challenged by the major parties (except the SNP, whose constitution compelled it to contest every seat in Scotland, including that of former Speaker Michael Martin). So Farage is the leading challenger to Bercow, though pro-EU former Tory MEP John Stevens is also standing as an Independent candidate.
At time of writing, Ladbrokes have UKIP at 3/1 (implying a 25 per cent probability of winning) in Buckingham, with Speaker Bercow favourite at 2/9.
BNP
The British National Party (BNP) is still best known for its policies of opposing mass immigration to the UK, and promoting 'voluntary repatriation' to reduce the numbers of foreign nationals living in Britain.
It is resolutely anti-EU and supports economically protectionist policies normally the province of the far left ('British Jobs for British Workers), alongside far-right policies on national defence and criminal justice.
The BNP reported a surge in membership requests as a result of Griffin's appearance on the BBC's Question Time programme and the protests that accompanied that appearance.
A court decision last year, forcing the party to accept non-white members for the first time, was recently accepted at a party meeting, and though this is unlikely to deflect criticism from serious opponents, it may be that the BNP is now better able to counter accusations of racism and represent itself as a mainstream party.
The focus since Griffin took over the leadership 1995 has been away from matters of race, and a concentration on the 'Islamification' of the UK – even to the extent of approaching Sikh and Hindu communities in solidarity against Islamism. Identity politics aside, the party has broadened its manifesto to include ultra-traditionalist policies on schools, the environment, and housing.
The BNP surprised most pundits by winning two seats in the European Parliament in 2009. Many had foreseen that chairman Nick Griffin would be successful in the North West of England, but few expected the scale of the collapse of the Labour vote in Yorkshire & Humber that saw Andrew Brons elected as an MEP. These two seats were secured with just 6.2 per cent of the popular vote in 2009 – well up from the 0.7 per cent secured in the General Election of 2005.
Griffin will be standing in Barking in East London, where BNP London Assembly member Richard Barnbrook won 16.9 per cent in 2005 - and was only 27 votes behind the 2nd place Conservative candidate.
Margaret Hodge, the Minister for Culture, will defend this seat for Labour with Labour's Jon Cruddas defending the next-door (and newly-created) BNP target seat of Dagenham & Rainham.
It is difficult to see evan an outside chance of the BNP being competitive other than in these two constituencies, and tactical anti-BNP voting (and the effect that such campaigns have by increasing Labour turnout) make it a long-shot that the party will secure its first seat at Westminster.
Greens
The Green Party manifesto is understandably dominated by sustainability and environmentally-friendly policies, but the breadth of its policy on economic reform, nuclear disarmament, drug decriminalisation and other areas will appeal to some disenchanted left-leaning Labour and Liberal Democrat voters.
Left-wing voters frustrated at lack of radical action on climate change (epitomised by the collapse of the Copenhagen Summit last year) or unwilling to support major parties and incumbents after the expenses scandal might well choose to lend their vote to the Greens, which could well see them surpass the one per cent of the popular vote they achieved in 2005.
The Greens were disappointed not to increase their MEP count in 2009, though their share of the vote rose to 8.6 per cent.
The Greens have been most successful in growing their base of councillors in cities such as Oxford, Norwich and Brighton. These three cities represent easily their best chances of winning seats in the House of Commons: Brighton Pavilion will be contested by party leader Caroline Lucas (currently 5/6 favourite with Ladbrokes), with Oxford East and Norwich South offering slimmer hopes of a possible second MP.
Respect
If Respect are to keep a foothold in the Commons, it may be by the sitting MP, George Galloway, winning in newly-created Poplar & Limehouse - at odds of 7/1 - rather than the party retaining his current seat of Bethnal Green & Bow, where Abjol Miah is 3-1 to win.
English Democrats
The English Democrats have entered into a multi-party pact with the Jury Team, the Christian Party, UK First Party and Veritas called the Alliance for Democracy, which is expected to contest a substantial minority of seats in the UK.
While the English Democrats enjoyed some success in the 2009 local elections (most notably in the Doncaster mayoral election) the failure of the Jury Team to get any traction with local hero John Smeaton in the 2009 Glasgow North East by-election suggests that even the combined 600,000 votes cast for Alliance parties in the European elections will be insufficient for them to seriously threaten to win a seat at Westminster in 2010.
Independents
Independent candidates are a perennial enigma – in the febrile atmosphere of the post-expenses world, it is not inconceivable that an independent candidate with sufficient celebrity name-recognition and funds could make a serious challenge – the best-known case would be Esther Rantzen in Luton South (where the retiring Margaret Moran was expelled from the Parliamentary Labour Party over her expenses). Rantzen is generously priced at 5/1 at Ladbrokes, but remains a distant third-favourite behind Labour and the Conservatives.
If independents are to win seats at Westminster, it will more likely be incumbent MPs returning for another term - Dr Richard Taylor (Wyre Forest), Dai Davies (Blaenau Gwent), and Bob Spink (Castle Point).
Other MPs made independent by the withdrawal or resignation of the major party whip have all indicated that they will stand down from the Commons at the next election.
Electoral system
Even if the newer pollsters are correct in detecting a massive growth of support for the 'Others', there are structural barriers to them winning seats in a First-Past-The-Post (FPTP) General Election.
The voting system lends itself to larger parties capable of fielding candidates in the full 650 seats: where minor parties fail to recruit candidates in such numbers, they deprive hundreds of thousands of potential voters from fulfilling their intention to support them.
In 2005, UKIP fielded 475 candidates, but the Greens contested only 182 seats and the BNP a mere 117. For that reason alone, it would be very surprising if all three parties mentioned here managed to exceed five per cent of the popular vote apiece.
There is also the issue of tactical voting. In marginal constituencies, where two or three of the main parties all stand a very good chance of winning, many potential supporters of UKIP/Greens/BNP will be unwilling to 'waste their vote' when they could make the difference in choosing a Labour/Conservative/LibDem MP.
Having said this, a recent Ipsos Mori poll highlighted by PoliticalBetting.com found that only 25 per cent of those living in a marginal constituency were positively aware that their seat was marginal.
We can be sure that there will be high-profile anti-BNP tactical voting campaigns from the other parties and from anti-fascist groups. There will also be pressure on minor parties to focus the majority of their funds on the few seats in which they stand a realistic chance.
This disparity of election expenditure is likely to severely impede any significant increase in vote share, and might well prevent the minor parties from securing more than a seat or two between them.
If the minor parties do manage to make an impact on the 2010 General Election (particularly one that goes beyond the 6 seats where they could potentially win) it will be primarily for one of two reasons.
Firstly, with some recent polls pointing to a hung parliament - in which even the smallest party can hold the balance of power - enough voters defecting to the minor parties could play a part in depriving both Labour and the Conservatives of an overall majority.
This could be of greater concern to the Conservatives, given the comparatively widespread and geographically-dissipated support of UKIP.
The second reason is more speculative, but worthy of some thought. Electoral reform, and the possibility of Proportional Representation (PR) or Alternate Vote (AV) systems being introduced for Westminster elections, has long been proposed by the Liberal Democrats, and was mooted by Gordon Brown in recent months.
Though there are many who consider the benefits of FPTP to outweigh those of a proportional system, the impetus for electoral reform might be strengthened if a combined vote of over 15 per cent for minor parties failed to translate into a single seat at Westminster.
On the other hand, a strong showing, particularly by the BNP, might well cause some reticence about introducing PR (even as a coalition-building deal with the LibDems) for fear it would allow for more extreme politicians to become Members of Parliament.
We will need to wait several more weeks before we can assess whether the minor parties met, exceeded, or fell short of their expectations.
Whether or not they manage to win seats in 2010, their collective impact on the final result could still be of critical importance.
Greg Callus is co-editor of the totalpolitics Guide to the 2010 General Election.
