A week on from the election, what can we learn?

Citypress Head of Public Affairs, Tom Anelay, reflects on the early narratives that have cemented themselves around the general election and how they will impact Labour’s approach in Government.  

We won’t know the true story of the 2024 general election for a while – certainly until the British Election Study is published. But political and media narratives of who won and why are usually written long before that. In turn, these early narratives impact the way we are governed.  

What is fairly well established is that this election was lost by the Conservatives many years ago. Its reputation for competence has fallen off a cliff since 2020 – dropping from a high of 46% to a low of 14% just weeks before the polls opened. Voters punish you for being bad at governing and for the Conservatives, who have traditionally won elections by being perceived as the safer and more competent party, this was fatal.  

By contrast the Labour Party made boring competence the central pillar of its election campaign. Voters felt safe (albeit unenthusiastic) knowing that a Sir Keir Starmer led Labour Party would be in Downing Street and voted for whoever was most likely to get their local Conservative kicked out – whether that was Labour or Liberal Democrat. There is a strong argument that this also resulted in the growth in support for the Greens and Reform, although Reform’s voter base is particularly complicated.   

Labour have promised that the boring competence that got them into office will continue in Government. Yet it seems unlikely this can last. Even boring competence requires choosing sides and in politics those you oppose rarely go quietly. There is a media machine accustomed to feeding on Conservative drama that needs feeding.  Plus competence is practically powerless in the face of many geopolitical and sociological trends – there are many things that national governments are too scared to tell voters they simply cannot do.  

But if boring competence won’t be sufficient to maintain power, what else will impact the way Labour govern?  

This electoral context is infinitely more complicated than just a story of Conservative failure and a Labour party which projected safety. It was an election in which four in ten voters didn’t bother turning up – the lowest level since 2001. It was also a return to declining support for the three major parties after the 2017 and 2019 Brexit elections, with half of Liberal Democrat, half of Conservative and a third of Labour voters switching parties since the last time they were at the polls. In the end, only the Greens (+4%) and Reform (+12%) increased their vote share by more than two per cent.  

With so much voter apathy and volatility, the average majority has dropped from circa 11,300 in 2019 to just 6,600. It’s a confusing, complicated picture which is different in every part of the country.  

On a seat-by-seat basis, this has led to a ton of interesting results. The electoral map of the UK has been redrawn. Labour is still the party of cities but so too are the Greens (and some Independents). The Conservatives and SNP are now almost wholly rural parties. The so-called Red Wall turned red once again and the Liberal Democrats reached new heights in the South West.   

Demographic support is similarly challenging for Labour. Higher household income voters are more likely to vote Labour than lower household income voters. And by winning seats outside it’s urban heartlands Labour now represents a much more economically and socially conservative electorate. Meanwhile support amongst ethnically diverse voters has continued to crash. In areas with large Muslim populations, Labour support dropped by a third, losing traditional strongholds like Leicester South, Blackburn, and Dewsbury & Batley, whilst Leicester East – which is 40% Hindu – saw the sole Conservative gain of the night. 

The implications of these geographic and demographic changes should be significant. With Labour MPs now representing the majority of the green belt will the Government have to temper its promised reform of planning rules? Will losing seats in cities to the Greens and Independents impact their devolution plans? Will holding a poll lead amongst high income household mean taxes on workers are off the table for the whole parliament? With Independent candidates running successful social media and community backed campaigns on single issue platforms – mainly Gaza – how will this impact foreign policy or other highly contentious policy decisions (NHS reform?).  

None of this matters when it comes to votes in parliament – the power of a 181 vote working majority is something to behold. But it does matter when policy is being debated before it reaches the voting lobby.  

Labour has a majority of marginals. It’s your choice of metaphor: sandcastle or jenga tower? But given the size of majorities we’ve just seen overturned, few constituencies are safe. The hundreds of new MPs joining Parliament tomorrow will already be thinking about re-election.  

The result of all this is that political strategy has to be a lot more nuanced, a lot more local, and that it has to account for the actions of far more political parties. Governing is about choices. Who do you favour, who do you oppose? What gets funding and what doesn’t? Who gets a pay rise? Who gets taxed more? Where does the investment go?  

Labour has to answer these questions because in 2024 it was safe to vote for them. Everyone wanted the Conservatives out. But in five years voters may need a reason to vote for Labour and competence is unlikely to be enough.