The average seat hasn’t changed hands since the 1960s
How democratic is Britain? On the face of it, pretty democratic. We tick all the boxes: fair elections, a free press, free speech and assembly, the right to petition and more. But look a little deeper, and there are massive political inequalities that mean the UK is far from as democratic as it could be.
Most of us instinctively know this – that some people have far more of a say than others. And of course, nowhere is perfect. But the cracks in our democracy need dealing with soon if we are not to become democratic in name only, according to a new report by the Institute for Public Policy Research on our ‘Divided Democracy’.
Unfair odds
The cracks are clear to see. In 2010, it took over 33,000 votes to elect a Labour MP, 35,000 for a Conservative and nearly 120,000 to elect a Lib Dem. UKIP got nearly a million votes and no MPs, while the Greens got over a quarter of a million and just one representative. In the process, millions of voters were written off by the disproportionality of the voting system. The fact that some votes are worth much more than others should raise alarms bells.
Nowhere is this more evident than in ‘safe seats’ – constituencies where the same party has been elected for decades, with little chance of them being challenged. In the 2010 General election, the Electoral Reform Society were able to call the winners in nearly 400 of Britain’s safe seats. Out of a list of 382 MPs we got two wrong. This election we’ve predicted a similar number of seats. Sadly, it looks like we’ll be mostly right again.
The average seat hasn’t changed hands since the 1960s, while some haven’t switched party since the reign of Queen Victoria. Holding a seat this long means parties build up major incumbency factors, and other parties give up on fighting for them.
The result of this is that parties focus on the small number of marginal seats – while the rest of us are ignored. It’s a postcode lottery – and like most lotteries, most people end up losing.
There are other ways our democracy is stacked in favour of some voters more than others. Between 2001 and 2010, just 224 donations from 60 sources made up nearly 40 per cent of the three main parties’ donation income. This raises inevitable suspicions about donors buying influence. Three-quarters think big donors have too much influence, and 61 per cent believe the whole party funding system is corrupt and should be changed.
These problems are reflected in people’s attitudes to our democracy. According to IPPR’s research, just one in four people from ‘DE’ (traditionally working-class) backgrounds think our democracy serves their interests well, half the figure for more middle-class AB individuals. Participation in democracy is still greatly weighted by class and age, something which can only damage the policy agenda.
At the same time, formal participation in politics has collapsed (perhaps with the notable exception of Scotland). Just one per cent of the population now belong to political parties, a quarter of the figure 50 years ago, while turnout among the young in particular has plummeted – a trend that is set to continue. And when certain groups don’t vote, it’s likely that they’ll be ignored by policy-makers.
It doesn’t have to be this way. These political inequalities are unusual by European standards – most advanced democracies have far higher levels of participation in politics among the young and a far smaller voting gap between demographics.
Where do we go from here?
Improving our democracy and levelling the playing field therefore requires modernising the way we do things. So, some solutions.
In this multi-party era, we need a fair electoral system where everyone’s votes count equally. We need a say over who votes on our laws – instead of leaving much of it to unelected Lords. And we need a cleaner party funding system, so people aren’t put off by the suspicion that donors are buying influence.
All of these are just a start, of course. Democracy can and should go much deeper. In the wake of the Scottish independence referendum, we need to have a UK-wide conversation about where power should lie. And for democracy to flourish, that conversation must be led by citizens. A ‘Constitutional Convention’ of citizens discussing the future of our democracy would be a great way to lay out a clear path for reform.
The IPPR’s next report will set out their own response to the problem of political inequality. But we all have to start taking the problems with our democracy seriously. We need to see real reform of our system in order to meet the promise which democracy makes to its citizens.
Josiah Mortimer is communications assistant at the Electoral Reform Society. Follow him on Twitter
To reach hundreds of thousands of new readers and to make the biggest impact we can in the next general election, we need to grow our donor base substantially.
That's why in 2024, we are seeking to generate 150 additional regular donors to support Left Foot Forward's work.
We still need another 124 people to donate to hit the target. You can help. Donate today.
45 Responses to “Our ‘democracy’ is stacked in favour of certain voters”
Leon Wolfeson
AV is not PR. Please do some basic research.
Also, we should have federalism and not EVIL.
Leon Wolfeson
“Treason”. You’re ignorant of the basic constitutional setup of this country!
Leon Wolfeson
Eh? What was on offer was AV, which isn’t proportional.
STV *is* proportional, it’s just one of the worst commonly used forms of it. Also, did you just say Labour is leftist? Wut?
The reality of PR is that we’d see the existing coalitions (“parties”) shattered, and new ones arise – well, the Tories might be able to hang together in some form, but Labour would be replaced as Syrzia replaced the old party of the “left” which discredited itself utterly among the left.
Anyway! PR is a good idea, and I support specifically MMP.
ForeignRedTory
‘What? Plenty of democracies have checks and balances against the tyrrany of both the majority and the minority.
Many democracies have the Euro as their coinage.
That does not make having the Euro a prerequisite of Democracy.
‘Find me a democracy where there’s actual voter choice where liberal values don’t exist!’
India, Indonesia. Notice that India and Indonesia recently had dramatic shifts in political polarity.
‘One great example of “democracy” without liberal values and thus voter choice is Russia
Take away the scare-quotes, and for once you might make sense.
Liberal values mean that the individual has the right to withold his absolute and unconditional obedience to the People.
That is NOT the Rule of the People,ergo that is NOT Democracy. Liberals do not accept the Divine Right of Majorities,and that is exactly why Democracy needs to be purged from liberal influebces. Ditto for any other objection to the absolute power of the Group over the Individual,. of the Whole over the Part.
ForeignRedTory
That is quite possible,since I was born abroad,and did not have a reason to be overly interested in British politics until I was about 40. It;s not quite relevant when you live in another country with its own issues.
Nonetheless, Constitutions can be altered through the Will of the People, just like any other Law or Regulation.
But no hiding behind Statute can ever be deemed a valid excuse for a sub-part of the Group, be it a Faction or an Individual, to fail to subordinate itself unreservedly to the Primacy of the Group.
Ben Gurion was absolutely RIGHT in utterly crushing the opposition in the Altalena Affair.. I have been wondering about for years, but the trouble caused by Riek Machaar in South Sudan resolved the matter for me. The Cog that refuses to turn with the Whole Machine cannot be tolerated.