Labour voters less likely to get vaccinated

Perhaps counter intuitively, Conservative voters are more likely to get vaccinated against Covid-19 than Labour voters.  Some of this can put down to socio-economic and demographic differences, but there is still an effect after these are controlled for.  Why this should be so is unclear, given that in the US it is Republicans who are less likely to get a jab (and indeed Trump got booed by his own supporters when he revealed that he had had a booster).  It may be that some Labour voters do not trust messages from a Conservative Government: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/conservatives-are-more-likely-to-be-vaccinated-than-labour-supporters/

Inflation was an issue in 1921

With inflation threatening to rise to 6 per cent, there was a cost of living crisis 100 years ago.

The Leamington Spa Courier was preoccupied with the cost of living crisis and high prices in Leamington at the end of October 1921.  ‘It is generally agreed that in Leamington, as elsewhere, the housewife is being charged far too much for meat and other articles of food, and the time has arrived when a substantial drop will have to be made.  People simply cannot afford to pay, and it is a question as to how much longer they will be able to hold out.’

‘That butchers are demanding prices of the average housewife which, when compared with the wholesale charges, are unwarranted, was illustrated at the meeting of the Warwick Joint Hospital Board on Wednesday, when it was reported that good quality was being supplied to the Heathcote Hospital at 1s 6d a lb.  (£3.75 in 2020 prices).  The housewife would be glad to receive similar treatment. It may be argued by the butcher that public institutions get a preference owing to their requiring large quantities, but this cannot apply to Heathcote where there are six patients – the size of an average family. 

It is clear that some butchers are not as desirous of grabbing the last penny as others, and there are shops in Leamington where meat can be had at fairly reasonable prices.  The housewife is advised to seek them out.   Enquiry will soon show, and it it worthwhile – if indeed it is not a public duty to do so.  Bring the butchers into closer competition.   Where prices are obviously too high, why not transfer custom elsewhere?’

The Mayor, Councillor England, intervened in the debate: ‘I feel very strongly so long as the prices of foodstuffs are kept up we cannot expect a drop in the standard of wages, and until we get a fall in wages, we shall continue to have unemployment.’    [1921 saw a severe post-war recession and unemployment was at 11.3 per cent.  After rising by over 15 per cent in 1920, inflation fell in 1921].

‘Mr Leonard Lees of the Master Butcher’s Association was cynical when we told him this morning that the farmers might conceivably help consumers in the fight against high prices by arranging a direct supply.  “They would find there is not so much in it after all,” he said.  “The butchers lost money after control went off, and we had a shocking time for six months.”   The farmer’s point of view is quite reasonable, however, and as a consumer he naturally expects retail prices to bear some relation to what he gets for his cattle in the market.’

‘The failure of retail prices to move in line with producers’ prices costs the consumers 2.25d per lb on his beef, 5d per pound on his mutton, and 2.5d on his loaf.  Or, put in another way, had the consumer benefitted to that extent, the Ministry of Labour cost of living index on October 1^st, instead of being 110 per cent, would have only been 103 per cent above the 1914 level.  At Banbury the fight has had beneficial results.  Yesterday well-fed English mutton was sold at 8d a lb (£1.65 in 2020 prices) and the vendor’s stall was cleared in an hour.   

The reduction in the price of bread in Leamington has come to pass, so that the quarter loaf now cost 11.5d over the counter and one shilling if delivered.  (£2.50 at 2020 prices).   The Birmingham and District Master Bakers’ Association last night decided to reduce the price to 11d at the counter from Monday.  Why cannot Leamington bakers follow suit?

[From the Leamington v. Kettering programme]

Farmer support for Tories slides

Farmers are traditionally Conservative supporters, but a poll for Farmers Weekly shows that support has fallen to 57 per cent with farmers complaining that the Government does not understand their needs and problems.   The main beneficiaries are the Liberal Democrats, although only up to 17 per cent, admittedly more than their current national polling level: https://www.fwi.co.uk/news/farm-policy/farmer-support-for-conservatives-on-the-slide-fw-survey-reveals

Historically large scale farmers have been overwhelming Conservative supporters with some holding posts in their constituency associations.   Smaller scale farmers, particularly in remoter areas, have been more inclined to support the Liberal Democrats and the Nationalist parties.

Could this be a factor in the North Shropshire by-election?

Labour edges ahead in poll

Labour has pulled ahead of the Conservatives in the latest opinion poll and for the first time since he moved to Downing Street, a majority of voters do not think Boris Johnson has what it takes to be a good prime minister.   There has been no personal breakthrough for Keir Starmer, though: https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/boris-johnson-loses-poll-lead-ipsos-mori-sleaze-scandal-b964945.html

Of course, one must be cautious about the results of one poll and a lead that is within the range of sampling error.   However, it does seem that there are many voters who regard the standards row as more than a storm in a Parliamentary teacup as George Eustice tried to suggest over the weekend to the dismay of many in his own party.

It has been pointed out that it would be even more worrying for the Conservatives if sleaze was not the driving factor here.   One note of caution: the fieldwork was done before the Paterson story broke.  It may just be that the Government is running out of good news.

By simple repetition Labour may be able to cut through its narrative of 'Tory sleaze' and 'one rule for them and one for the rest of us.'

How is internal democracy used in NGOs?

Many campaigning organisations are hierarchically organised and give their members limited opportunities for participation.   Their role is seen as providing funds and mobilising to support campaigns.

But if opportunities are available, do members take them?   I recently voted in the elections for the RSPCA board and was informed that only about 20 per cent of members do vote.   I don't have figures for the largest mass membership organisation, the National Trust, but my guess would be somewhat lower, perhaps 15 per cent.

 

In the case of the RSPCA, there were six candidates for three seats with full information about all of them. You have to vote for at least two to avoid 'plumping'.

The National Trust also uses first past the post, but has a recommended slate of candidates, usually retiring members of the Council, although one of them was not chosen this year.  Some members complain that this is undemocratic, but there is usually a very large number of candidates and reading through all the material would take a considerable amount of time.   If an organisation is well run, my inclination is to re-elect.

For the Consumers' Assocation, which is in many respects a commercial organisation, I was presented with five candidates for five seats and could either vote for them, abstain or vote against.   All elections were online.

The National Trust also had several motions for the annual meeting with recommendations on how to vote.   However, members were left to vote how they wished on trail hunting.  Both candidates and motions reflected the present campaign against the Trust's allegedly 'woke' policies, stirred up by The Spectator.  

Often attempts are made to use such democratic procedures as exist by factions with a particular agenda.

What are the limits of partisan identity?

Some interesting new research on partisan identity: https://ukandeu.ac.uk/voters-brexit-and-the-limits-of-party-loyalty/

Voters who identified strongly with the Conservatives before the referendum, for example, followed the party in becoming more Eurosceptic as the party tacked in that direction. And voters who joined the Conservative Party just after the referendum brought their other views in line with the positions of the party: they soon became more hostile to economic redistribution, for example.

Partisan identities still matter, even in countries, like the United Kingdom, marked by increased electoral volatility and the ongoing decline of traditional political loyalties.

All of this suggests that voters are still influenced by major policy debates. On high salience issues, party loyalty has real limits. Voters seem to care about at least some policies.

Kwarteng sets out his stall

Ambitious business secretary Kwasi Kwarteng has set out his stall as a flag bearer for Thatcherite, free market Conservatism.

There are tensions in the party between the interventionist grand projects favoured by Boris Johnson as 'Heseltine with Brexit' and more traditional perspectives.   These have surfaced in tensions between the prime minister and the chancellor who favours fiscal restraint.

Kwarteng says that there is a need to reassert a strong belief in 'free markets, enterprise, entrepreneurship.'  In a barb he states, 'It's been very difficult to get that message out when we're spending huge amounts of money [on intervention].'

In a dig at his predecessor Greg Clarke he said that his discarded industrial strategy had been 'very, very broad.'   For all its flaws, it was an attempt to give a comprehensive strategic direction to policy.

Kwarteng had to admit that 'fiscal levers' involving tax cuts or extra investment allowances were in the hands of the Treasury: 'That's a conversation we can have with them.'   However, it would be quite a one sided conversation as the business department has always played second fiddle to the Treasury whatever the stance of its secretary of state.

Labour hold red wall seat

Labour have held Batley & Spen with a majority of 323.  This was despite George Galloway taking 22 per cent of the vote, about twice what I had anticipated, indicating that many Muslims (and others) had voted for him. 

It is possible that he took some anti-system votes off the right leaning Heavy Woolen District Independents who polled well at the general election.   His anti-woke rhetoric and social conservatism may have appealed to some of them.

Turnout was low at under 50 per cent suggesting a lack of enthusiasm on the part of Conservative voters. The Conservative share of the vote was down 1.7 per cent.

The result takes the pressure off Keir Starmer with talk of leadership challenges.

It also suggests that, despite Boris Johnson's denials, the Mike Hancock resignation and the way it was handled did have some impact on voters as the only opinion poll had put the Conservatives ahead.

Credit must go to Kim Leadbeater who was clearly an effective candidate well known in the locality.

Some prescient comments on the constituency by Jane Green (more favourable territory for Labour than Hartlepool): https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/jun/23/batley-spen-byelection-labour

Professor Sir John Curtice has noted on Radio 4 that it is not necessarily a turning point for Labour.  Their share of the vote was down 7 per cent and the Brexit vote was lower than in Hartlepool.

The BBC Radio Leeds correspondent suggested on Radio 5 that an open letter from a group of Muslim women a few days before the election may have had some effect.  They named no names, but said they wanted action not words.

The Official Monster Raving Loony Party finished ahead of eight candidates.   The Heritage Party candidate got just 33 votes.

Long Brexit in the Chiltern Hills

The Chesham & Amersham by-election result has produced considerable speculation about the crumbling of the 'blue wall' in southern England.   Here Paula Surridge reflects about the effects of 'long Brexit' that cross pressures electors in their voting choices: https://ukandeu.ac.uk/a-tale-of-two-by-elections/

Could democratic backsliding happen here?

Democratic backsliding is becoming a growing theme in contemporary debates and it is a risk in even the most stable democracies: https://constitution-unit.com/2021/06/10/the-anatomy-of-democratic-backsliding-could-it-happen-here/

Cabinet split over Australian trade deal

A battle royal is in progress in Cabinet on whether Britain should agree a tariff free trade deal with Australia.  Brexiteers think that if a trade deal cannot be concluded with Australia no deals will be possible for the new 'Global Britain'.

However, farmers - already reeling from the phasing out of support payments - are concerned that it could hit their markets and be a precedent for future deals, particularly those with the US and New Zealand.

On one side of the argument is international trade secretary Liz Truss, a popular figure among Conservative activists.   On the other side is Defra secretary of state George Eustice, backed up by Michael Gove.   Gove is concerned that rural areas in Wales and Scotland would be hard hit, further undermining the union.   Reports are suggesting that Boris Johnson may come down in favour of the deal.

Beef and sheep meat would be the main commodities affected, although Australia is also interested in exporting more cheese.   There is a 20 per cent tariff on beef at present which would be phased out over 15 years.   

Will Labour back PR?

Britain in a Changing Europe held an interesting webinar yesterday on the recent elections with contributions by Sir John Curtice, Rob Ford, Spectator political editor James Forsyth, and Paula Surridge.

One topic that came up was whether Labour would move to advocating PR.  Labour was characterised as too weak to win, but too strong to fail like other European social democratic parties.  

It was thought that Labour could not win an overall majority, given Scotland, but could form a minority government with Scottish Nationalist, Plaid Cymru, Liberal Democrat, SDLP, Alliance and Green tacit support.

No one would enter into a coalition with the current Conservatives and even the Democratic Unionists were unlikely to countenance a new confidence and supply agreement.

Labour was likely to pile up big majorities in metropolitan areas which were of little use in overall terms.  PR might therefore seem attractive, although the attitude of the trade unions would be crucial.  In the longer term, PR could damage Labour as left leaning voters would feel more able to support the Greens than in the binary politics produced by first past the post.

As always, much depends on the form of PR adopted.   

The end of the Fixed Term Parliaments Act

A review of the Fixed Term Parliaments Act and my thoughts on its replacement: https://warwick.ac.uk/newsandevents/knowledgecentre/society/politics/fixed_term_parliament_act

Leadership election in Northern Ireland

 An authoritative guide to the DUP election by Northern Ireland politics expert Jonathan Tonge: https://theconversation.com/dup-leadership-election-qanda-all-you-need-to-know-as-edwin-poots-and-jeffrey-donaldson-160670

With such an exclusive election there could even be a tie, but there is no procedure to deal with that.

Thoughts on lobbying

A short summary on some of my reflections on lobbying, having studied interest groups for some fifty years: http://www.culmerraphael.eu/news/lobbying-uk/

First thoughts on election results

Some are saying on Twitter that it is a surprise that voters opted for 'change' in Hartlepool in the form of a Conservative candidate given that the Conservatives have been in office since 2010.

However, I do not think that voters perceive the Johnson Government as another Conservative Government, but as a clear break with the past with a very distinctive leader.

One thing I think is clear that Labour's attempt to create a 'Tory sleaze' narrative has not cut through with the electorate.   There are a number of reasons for this.  First, it is remote from the immediate concerns of voters.  Second, Boris Johnson being a bit of a rogue is already priced in with many voters.  Third, many voters think that all the parties are as bad as one another when it comes to being on the make.

And some voters think the prime minister is entitled to decent curtains.   There is an argument for saying that the prime minister is now underpaid given his responsibilities or at least is entitled to more expenses.

How farmers voted on Brexit

A lot of myths have grown up about how farmers voted in the referendum on leaving the EU.  Based on a self-selected Farmers Weekly survey, or simply on anecdotal evidence about posters on countryside hoardings, a view has developed that farmers voted overwhelmingly for Brexit.

Up to now we have lacked any hard evidence, but that has been rectified by a survey of farmers reported in the Journal of Rural Studies by Daniel May and his colleagues.

The headline finding is that farmer voting was not greatly out of line with the electorate as a whole.  50 per cent reported voting leave, 45 per cent remain and 5 per cent did not vote.  This implies a higher turnout than the population as a whole, although some who did not vote claim that they did in surveys.

There was a slight tendency for women farmers to be more likely to vote remain.  However, the strongest predictor of voting behaviour was level of education.  60 per cent of those with GCSE or equivalent voted to leave compared with 20 per cent of those with postgraduate education (admittedly a small N).

Dairy farmers voted leave by 58 per cent to 38 per cent and pig and poultry farmers had a 53 per cent to  34 per cent leave lead.  Pig and poultry farmers received relatively little from the CAP and dairy farmers may have seen themselves as tightly regulated by it.

There were some regional differences.   Farmers in Scotland deviated from the trend there with 67 per cent voting leave (51 per cent in Wales).  Farmers in the east and south of the country were more likely to vote remain, but in part this reflected national voting trends.

The 'bring back control' theme seems to have resonated with farmers in terms of their personal perceptions.   Farmers who state that they face too many restrictions imposed by the EU including those on agrochemicals were more likely to vote leave.   For some EU regulations were seen as preventing them making higher profits or having more market power.   Voting for Brexit is perceived as delivering more control over their businesses.

The natural party of business?

I would like to recommend an excellent article I commissioned for Political Quarterly on Labour's economic policy.  Unfortunately, it is only free online for a fortnight: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/1467-923X.12963

It was interesting that in PMQs on Wednesday most of Keir Starmer's questions were in relation to impacts of government policy on business.  Given current tensions between the Conservatives and business, particularly over Brexit, this was part of an effort to show that Labour can be a business friendly party.  It may be recalled that one of Tony Blair's ambitions was to make Labour 'the natural party of business' as well as 'the natural party of government'.

Keir Starmer is encountering choppy waters.  He has boosted Labour's poll ratings by nine per cent by not being Jeremy Corbyn and being competent.   However, that is not enough to pull ahead of the Conservatives, particularly given Labour's weakness in Scotland.

He does across as rather wooden and Boris Johnson's jibes about reading from a brief hit home.

It might be asked why the electorate are not more annoyed with the Government for errors made in handling the pandemic.  First, it is evident that the electorate are prepared to cut them some slack as it was a difficult and unprecedented situation to deal with for which the preparation had focused on the wrong target (a 'flu pandemic).   They are not convinced that an alternative decision-maker would have done much better (although Labour's comments about 'inconsistent messaging' may gain traction).

Second, they consider (with some justification) that the government machine in general might be deficient for handling this situation - not unreasonable given the tendency of central government to operate in 'silos' and a reluctance to let decisions be taken at a local level where there is often more immediately relevant expertise.

Some home truths about the strength of the Conservatives here from Ben Jackson: https://politicalquarterly.blog/2021/02/05/any-illusions-about-the-conservatives-being-swept-from-office-should-be-abandoned-now/

How much would independence cost Scotland?

The LSE's Centre for Economic Performance has published a report suggesting that independence would hit Scotland two or three times harder than Brexit: https://cep.lse.ac.uk/_new/publications/abstract.asp?index=7714

This is, of course, disputed by the SNP who argue that an independent Scotland would be able to attract more inward investment.

Much would depend on any independence settlement, but I would expect England to strike a hard bargain.

This suggests that there might be a case for a two stage referendum: one on the principle, and one on the negotiated settlement.   Of course, as we know from Brexit, identity politics can trump economic calculations.