Over on his work blog, The Voice’s Mark Pack is using 1993 as the yardstick to judge this year’s elections results by:
The year 1993 is turning out to be the benchmark for the Liberal Democrat performance in Thursday’s elections. Though no-one (including myself) was talking of 1993 before Thursday, two numbers both point to that year.
First, it looks as if the proportion of local councillors who are Liberal Democrat will be back to 1993 levels once the final results are in today. Second, the April ICM poll put the party on 15% – the same figure as in April 1993, also one year on from a general election. The equivalent Aprils in other Parliaments since then all saw higher ratings for the party – 16%, 18% and 21%.
So how bad is returning to 1993 levels of popularity for the party?
For Mark’s answer to that, read the full post here.
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
"The old savage England": D.H. Lawrence visits the Stiperstones
Church Green video
Thinking of standing for election or re-election next year? Helpful questions to consider
Endometriosis and acetylation
Henry
Daniel Walker
David Raw
48 Comments
It will be interesting. I think we’ve lost a lot of support from the anti-establishment left, hopefully as much as we’re going to lose. Over time we have the opportunity to build a new support base.
Agreed – I just hope that support base is made up of more people who actually share Liberal Democrat values and less people who think we’re a surrogate Labour Party to suckle on whenever Labour do something particularly egregious.
Well, it doesn’t look like you’re going to be troubled by having the wrong sort of voter for quite some time.
In the GE after 1993 we more than doubled our MP numbers, from 20 to 46 , I think.
As in 1993 we dont face a GE for 4 years, we are following a long term strategy. This year was always going to be the low point, if we can handle this without panic or recrimination we have a bright future.
” if we can handle this without panic or recrimination ”
Can someone lock Huhne in a cupboard for th next four years?
It’s not often that you see a political party actively encouraging the departure of substantial parts of its vote so that it can retain ideological purity.
Not a party that lasts long anyway.
A bright future? you must be joking.Long term strategy? As a councillor for 32 years who survived last night , I am fed up of short term strategy of throwing away years of building in a year.I joined the Liberals because they were against the Two Party system supported by a corrupt electoral system.I always felt we were against the rotten Britsh political system .
We have now jumped in with that system and will be annhiliated.( and look whose gained? the two old parties) I think its time to let ‘our more professional leaders’ get on with the job and admit our dream has been totally destroyed.
Also dont think I am some ‘air headed idealist’ who can’t deal with responsiblilty.We should never validate a system so funadamentally unfair…we should have stayed on the outside until change came….you may say the ‘long march’ strategy was wrong but look what the alternative has done.
I have never felt so depressed and disolussioned in 35 years …
@paul barker
You’ve been predicting losses of around 200 council seats for the last few weeks. You might want to rethink your relationship to reality, it seems a little bit out of kilter.
I have a similar background to Peter – “I am fed up of short term strategy of throwing away years of building in a year” – that sums up the coalition, end it now. If those in the leadership want to act like Tories, then leave and join them. I said after the coalition was formed that it would be a disaster and so it is for us, the ordinary Lib Dem activists.
I am surprised that any experienced Lib Dem would wish to discuss these attrs in a public forum. (and I write as someone who had a substantial swing to him in the ward since 2010)
Peter how can anyone be against the two party system and not welcome the third party into government?
This annihilation is rooted in decades of two-faced campaigning that was always going to damage the party when it came to power. Returning to 1993 levels of popularity, when Labour was the party of opposition confirm this, and that the rise in popularity over the past ten to twenty years has been due to the left’s rising dissatisfaction with New Labour rather than any real growth in Lib Dem identity.
@paul barker – in Scotland, the party hasn’t just stopped at going back to 1993 – we’ve gone back almost to the 1960s in terms of share of the vote. As a candidate who has just lost their deposit – in total a cost to the party in Scotland of over £20,000 – I’m not panicking, but I am very, very angry. Add to that the loss of support from the Scottish Parliament, the resulting difficulty in fundraising, and the fact that we’ve lost vital people like Iain Smith, Mike Pringle and Mike Rumbles from the Parliament it makes very, very bleak reading.
To simply say – as the English party seems to be saying – that it’ll be alright in the end, I’m sorry but for us in Scotland it’s not much short of a disaster.
Tony.The reason some of us are using a public forum is that ‘nobody will listen to me anyway’ so I might as well after years of repressing it scream in public! and stop pretending its all Ok really.
“This annihilation is rooted in decades of two-faced campaigning that was always going to damage the party when it came to power. Returning to 1993 levels of popularity, when Labour was the party of opposition confirm this, and that the rise in popularity over the past ten to twenty years has been due to the left’s rising dissatisfaction with New Labour rather than any real growth in Lib Dem identity.”
Hail. Head. Hit. There will always be a tribal Labour vote who will vote for them whatever. Chasing that is a hiding to nothing.
We need to carve out a distinctly Liberal position in all areas and secure the liberal vote voting Tory and Labour. Being “lefter than thou” isn’t the answer.
I suppose that although going back to 1993 seems pretty terrible there is a certain artfulness in making the comparison because it invites the thought that recovery is inevitable. It’s not. In 1993 the party did not have the trust problem that the tuition fees debacle has caused, nor were they toxified by the Tories. And of course the biggest difference is they were not in government and parties in govt almost always lose support.
I think the student fees thing has poisoned the public’s view of the Lib Dems for the next decade or two. In fact it could be much WORSE in two decades time. In 20 years time there will a be an angry generation of young adults up to their eys in dept for the rest of their working lives. They’ll know older people were never saddled with this and that it came about because Clegg and many Lib Dem MPs broke their personal pledges, not manifesto commitment, pledge, it was a personal pledge to vote against any increase in fees.
Did you see the results in Scotland? Only 3 regions left to declare their AMS seats and the Lib Dems have only got 4 seats so far and a string of lost deposits. They lost every single FPTP seat except two remote island seats. 8)
The Lib Dems used to get a lot of support from well educated young people, they’ve totally alientated them now and fractured the support that was left.
I think around 1/5th of sitting Lib Dem MPs are Scottish, not because they have more support there but simply because it’s much easier to come first under FPTP in Scotland on low support due to their being four big parties to split the vote.
Now have a look at the Scottish results, it was deserved. I voted Lib Dem in 2007 but switched to SNP/Green this time because of what you guys did to the young in England with tuition fees, just because it doesn’t affect me personally doesn’t mean I don’t care. You simply cannot do something like that and be allowed to get away with it.
On AV I just spoiled the ballot, “no I don’t want to replace one bad system with another, especially as AV can be less proportional”. Either give me the chacne to vote for some form of proper PR or don’t try and pretend you’re interested in making any meaningful change to the status quo.
@AndrewR ‘And of course the biggest difference is they were not in government and parties in govt almost always lose support’
Clegg’s predeceesors for the last 60 years clearly did well in your view by keeping us out of Government
@david – I suppose by the same logic young people won’t vote labour becuase they broke their pledge on tuition fees (and unlike us they actually won the election)
Mark Pack is correct to dust off the ’93 position for the party – I can identify with this – I was a hard-working Conservative Councillor in 1993 and lost my seat in Crouch End, Haringey by over 800 votes as the electorate punished the Conservatives for the follies of the Major Government and “Tory Sleaze”. Many many hard working Libdem Councillors will feel bruised and let-down today but we should not start lashing out at our national leadership or start fighting among ourselves. Instead I think a period of reflection is in order, including a period of silence from our MPs and Ministers – there is nothing more demoralising for Libdem activists than seeing our MPs “on Manouvres” or giving unattributable briefings as though they couldn’t wait for the polls to close before the knives came out. This period of silence should include Peers and former leaders to allow our activists to recover and take stock. With regard to the AV vote, this was a tactical own-goal on our part – we should have known the Tories would play dirty, so we should have gone for PR/STV in England and Wales (Scotland and NI have it already) which would not have needed a referendum and would have had the support of many Conservative Council Leaders and MPs. It would also have avoided the risk of defeat in the referendum. We did not make a good enough case for AV, but we must find new support, new policies, and new ways of getting credit for our work in government, our support will increase again but we will have to work hard for it.
An yet if was the Scottish Lib Dems that worked really hard and gained free tuition fees in Scotland. Scotland have punished a good team and local parties for a mistake of a Westminster government by voting for a party who wants nothing to do with a UK government in the first place. It messes with my head.
We should have disassociated ourself with the English party as much as possible and reminded those that the SLD are NOT part of the coalition government but a completely fedral separate arm of it. We didn’t and have paid so with considerable cost (both financial and political). Something I doubt we’ll ever properly fix.
Although from a long term point of view, returning to 1993 levels is not the worst thing in the world, the fact is that we want to go forwards, not backwards. The higher ratings in the parliaments afterwards suggest Lib Dems can turn things around, and I believe this is true, particularly with Ed Miliband as Labour leader and the Tories’ ineptness at policy-making.
However, we have only got out of previous low ratings by adapting and changing. In 2007, when we suffered big losses in the elections, we changed leaders. I’m not suggesting we should necessarily do that, but we need to do something significant.
First, we should not be the Torie’s mouthpiece in announcing cuts and other bad news. Second, we need to negotiate harder, and get significant concessions on policies people care about. Third, we need to make ourselves more distinctive, stand our ground and make it clear where we agree and disagree. I know Cabinet Ministers can’t really do this, but a prominent, well-liked party spokesman should do this (maybe Paddy Ashdown?). Fourth, we need to shout from the roof tops of our lobbying successes and how this benefits our supporters (or do it more effectively).
The coalition means we are in a straight jacket. Leaving the coalition could mean playing into Labour’s hands, but staying may mean playing into the Tories’ hands. I personally don’t think we would be damaged if we left. If we need to break out of the straight jacket to shore up our support, then so be it, Lib Dems need to be more opportunistic and more perceptive how things are seen. We can’t take our supporters for granted anymore. There always the possibility that the UK economy will do badly, given the recent unimpressive news on growth before the cuts have even come in, so things can definitely get worse for us. I don’t want to see Lib Dems apologising for the lack of success in the economy next year, while Tories watch with delight again.
I don’t think that you’ve factored in all those councils elected on thirds – which if you repeat yesterday’s performance will be lost next time. It would be an interesting exercise to see which of the councils you currently hold will be lost when the next third come up for relection. Remember if it isn’t hurting it isn’t working.
PS when can we expect a post from the LibDem council leader in Nottingham??
“First, it looks as if the proportion of local councillors who are Liberal Democrat will be back to 1993 levels once the final results are in today.”
But in reality it’s a lot worse than that, because in all probability the party is going to experience at least two more years of similarly disastrous local election results. How far back would that take it? The 1970s? Even in 1979 the Lib Dems polled nearly 14%.
@Simon McGrath
“I suppose by the same logic young people won’t vote labour because they broke their pledge on tuition fees (and unlike us they actually won the election)”.
Yes Labour did break that pledge – and didn’t the Lib Dems make a great fuss about it! In the Lib Dems case it wasn’t just any old pledge to be negotiated away in the coalition agreement – it was all tied up with signing that damn petition and winning the trust of first time voters with the “We’re different – you can trust us” message.
David’s right, of all the promises to renege on it’s pretty silly to choose the one that people will be reminded of for years to come, every time they look at their bank statement.
Surprised no one has pointed to the Council result in Eastleigh and its correlation to signs that the local MP may be developing a backbone?
The results in South Lakeland weren’t too bad either – although no where as good as in Sheffield.
Fergus Ewing SNP 16,870 51.5 +10.6
David Stewart Labour 7,125 21.8 +0.9
Mary Elizabeth Scanlon Conservative 3,797 11.6 +1.1
Christine Anne Jardine Liberal Democrat 3,763 11.5 -15.9
Donald MacLeod Boyd Scottish Christian Party 646 2 +2
Ross Scott Durance UK Independence Party 530 1.6 +1.6
Looks like Danny boy will need to start brushing up his prose on the misty peaks – I presume the Ewing clan now have him in their sights.
laura – ” yet if was the Scottish Lib Dems that worked really hard and gained free tuition fees”
Tuition fees are NOT free – they are paid for by the taxes of those in work, many of who have not benefitted from a University education.
@Tabman The voters have rejected that view point, along with every other Orange Book Lib Dem action. You want your party to survive – rediscover it’s social democrat side.
The SNP are the example to follow, a marvellous achievement, it’s extremely impressive the support they’ve gained from being a centre left social democratic party and actually acting like one.
Memory lane….The Dog Lover’s Party, Cyril Smith suggesting the SDP should have been strangled at birth. Those were the days!
I also seem to remember in the early 1990’s there was something that was talked about in hushed terms as “the project”. Coalitions and pacts might not have been openly discussed but there was a desire for the broad, anti-Tory, centre left to come together to secure power in the 21th century.
The problem was that Labour did way too well in 1997 and decided on its own project on its own terms. In 2010 the Tories didn’t do quite well enough to pursue their own project on their own terms.
I wonder which election future historians will consider worst for the Lib Dems?
Anon/whoever wants to answer- I understand the idea of ‘collective cabinet responsibility’ for the reason for not speaking out but I want to ask, is why? In a coalition government of two parties are in power so surely they should be able to speak out on anything that isn’t in the Coalition agreement if they shock horror don’t agree. Clegg has become so toxic because it just looks like he has become a yes man all the time, nodding to Camerons tune. It’s not like the Tories haven’t been quick to say “we ain’t having that” whenever something is put forward by the Lib Dems. We need to be more ruthless.
We are playing in a two party government but I don’t think the rules have changed enough to accommodate that. To our cost.
@Tabman “Tuition fees are NOT free – they are paid for by the taxes of those in work, many of who have not benefitted from a University education.”
Why don’t you and the other bookers just go and be Tories, your attitudes are to the right of the left of the Tory party so you should fit right in, you’ve succeeded in your mission of reducing the party from a national party to a rump in the south with your happy regurgitation of the Daily Mail and Murdoch presses attitudes, well done.
Laura – I was talking to people not affiliated to any party about it (normal voters), and in their mind, the fact they are Secretary of States means they have to agree with every Government policy.
However I don’t see why Lib Dem Cabinet Ministers can’t stress that certain policies have been comprimises and that they would do it differently if we were in government on our own. Or just say they don’t agree on something. Ultimately we are 2 different parties, so wouldn’t one expect disagreements? I don’t know why LD always seems to lack ruthlessness and this always sets us back. It isn’t possible to play by the book.
Not all is lost, this is the first chapter of a book, and the story can end any way.
I voted for you in 2001, 2005 and 2010.
As long as you prop up the Tory regime I will not vote for you again.
At the moment the Lib Dems are facing a wipeout.
This will not change unless the coalition changes or ends.
It really is that simple.
Amy mcleod n I’ve been fighting conservatism since before you were born. When you’re old enough to pay taxes you’ll come to realise why we do well to remember where public money comes from.
“I was talking to people not affiliated to any party about it (normal voters), and in their mind, the fact they are Secretary of States means they have to agree with every Government policy.”
I’d agree once it becomes government policy then CCR holds but every government policy isn’t the same as every government idea, is it? But that’s the trap we’ve been falling into time and time again, a complete lack of differentiation between what the Tories want and Lib Dems want. Now this is aided by us having no real media outlay and an anti-lib dem feeling. Their needs to be swift serious rebuttals from white papers and policy reports for things we don’t like. There has been a few smaller policies ideas that should have been completely been a non-starter, the selling of forests catastrophe was an ideal opportunity for us to put our foot down on a really simple issue. I don’t think we did, and i’m wrong on that it wasn’t fast enough.
@ Tabman…It might be the wrong place to ask but if you are indeed a “Orange book” economic liberal can you explain to me how your economic analysis differs from theTories? – Don’t be too technical my A level in ecomomics was a fair while ago.
Interesting to see the results in the North as voters seem to think of Lib Dems as an anti Tory vote (the exception being South Lakeland being a Con/Lib Dem battleground and it’s Tim Farron’s patch), but if we had a progressive left alliance with Labour would the same not have happened in the South ?
The Scottish Libdems did indeed achieve major and lasting policy breakthroughs in coalition with Labour in the first two Scottish Parliaments – I know because I fought Kilmarnock and Loudon and was No 3 in Central Scotland on the list in the 2007 election. Tuition fees, social care and health, PR/STV for local elections and so on …….the electorate still punished us. At Westminster we have been somewhat naive in thinking that when an opportunity arose the Tories would not play hardball, and that the visceral nature of the Tory grassroots would not make be itself felt. Cameron seems to have mobilised Tory (and some Labour voters) to turn out and vote No. A period of silence and reflection on the part of our Parliamentarians is a good idea. To prevent boredom and ward off the temptations of the press I suggest they read up on the Callaghan and Major Governments and their “informal” arrangements with the Ulster Unionists and SDLP, who extracted key legislation and economic and social changes at a time when both PMs lacked a majority.
but if we had a progressive left alliance with Labour would the same not have happened in the South ?
As a southerner I voted for the liberals as a party opposed more to the conservatives than labour, although I don’t support labour.
Admittedly that was in a lab-con marginal, but I feel prouder for it because my vote could have counted if I had voted labour (we ended up with a con MP) but I chose to vote for the lib dems all the same out of principle. Most people who I talked to did so for similar reasons and shared my views on the conservatives and especially the odious Cameron.
You can’t fit the politics into this kind of prism. In any case as far as I know in the south most lib marginals are lib-con marginals, especially in the south west.
@Chris “But in reality it’s a lot worse than that, because in all probability the party is going to experience at least two more years of similarly disastrous local election results. How far back would that take it? The 1970s? Even in 1979 the Lib Dems polled nearly 14%.”
Er according to the BBC we got 15% this time
@Amy “@Tabman “Tuition fees are NOT free – they are paid for by the taxes of those in work, many of who have not benefitted from a University education.”
Why don’t you and the other bookers just go and be Tories, your attitudes are to the right of the left of the Tory party so you should fit right in, you’ve succeeded in your mission of reducing the party from a national party to a rump in the south with your happy regurgitation of the Daily Mail and Murdoch presses attitudes, well done.”
Which bit of what tabman says is not true?
@Simon,
I’ll take that challenge on universities up for you, because it’s a symptom of how badly wrong the Lib Dems have got things.
Our economic health is dependent on graduates. Every profitable industry we have that we expect to get us out of the economic hole we’re in is dependent on graduates to run and staff it. From the pharma industry to high-tech manufacturing, from financial services to the creative arts, it’s all graduates. We need an highly educated workforce to compete globally, because the global workforce doesn’t need and doesn’t want our less educated people. They can get skilled tradespeople from elsewhere that cost less. But the UK HE system is (was) a gold standard around the world. Of course, you’re trying to put a stop to that as well, but let’s not even start to consider the potential effects of the mess the Lib Dems have made of HE.
Unfortunately, too many of you haven’t paid any attention to the practical effects of changes in the labour market in the last 20 years as a result of increasing technological change and globalisation. You’re still clinging to a ‘Not Invented Here’ mentality and an essentially conservative mindset about the nature of industrial change, as well as a very conservative mistrust of the young and the feeling that, somehow, they don’t deserve the same opportunities open to you.
If the likes of you and Tabman had actually listened to people like Richard Lambert you wouldn’t be making such dreadful arguments about higher education, because graduates and their increased skills are what we need to keep our economy competitive on a global scale, and their increased spending power is what we need to keep all those support industries, from childcare to retail, humming. The mass employment opportunities for unskilled labour that manufacturing industry used to offer? They’re gone and they are not coming back here. Skilled tradespeople? Only if they can compete on price and quality with those from elsewhere in the EU, and with construction being so badly hit by the recession, there is less need than there used to be. Mind you, at least we’re spared quite so much dishonest nonsense about how important it is that other people’s kids should know their place and become plumbers instead of competing with our own for university places.
It is true that most of the population do not go and will never go to university, but to say that they have not benefitted? Every time they go to the doctors, every time they drive on a road, every time they watch the telly, and every time they write nonsense on the Internet about things they don’t understand properly, they’re benefitting from universities.
The Lib Dems have signed up to an economic policy that demands young graduates help pull the rest of us out of an economic hole, and now you also expect them to pay for the privilege. No wonder they don’t want to vote Lib Dem.
@Tabman “Tuition fees are NOT free – they are paid for by the taxes of those in work, many of who have not benefitted from a University education.”
Nice semantic twaddle, but so what? I’m in work, and I have no problem with a hefty proportion of my taxes going to pay tuition fees and a whole lot else besides. Did you really think we’d all suddenly see the light and respond with, ‘OMG, you’re right, waah, the bastards are wasting MY taxes on EDUCATION which I will NEVER USE! Thank you for stopping them!!’? What a wonderful argument that would be. OMG, waah, they’re wasting MY taxes on LIBRARIES! And training teachers! And speech therapists, which I do not need! And youth clubs, for which I am too old! And free bus passes, for which I am too young! And BODY ARMOUR! That’s not fair! I’m never going to be in a war zone, why should they use MY money on that?! And they’re wasting MY taxes on radiotherapy! That’s not fair! I haven’t got cancer! (I hope).
We know the money fairy doesn’t bring the magic cash. We do that. And by and large we are pretty well-adjusted about the fact that most of it isn’t spent on most of us. What’s wrong with having a town, a county, and a nation that does things well, using our taxes, including things in which we sincerely hope never to have any personal involvement?
@Chris – you assume that i don’t understand the value of a well educated workforce. But whether we need to have nearly 50% of people going to university is far far less obvious. I was more pointing out that Tabman statement is one of simple fact.
I don’t support the increase in fees, I think we should have stuck to the coalition agreement and abstained.
As part of the changes following black thursday Vince should be fired- his mad plan on fees has done us immense damage
The big differnce between 1993 and now is that in 1993 we were in opposition and spent the next four years benefitting from the unpopularity of the Tory government.
This time, the Tories have rcruited us as their human shields, so we are taking the hit for them and will continue to do so unless we change the strategy. Clegg’s message today shows that he has learnt nothing and that the strategy will not change while he remains leader.
@tabman “Amy mcleod n I’ve been fighting conservatism since before you were born. When you’re old enough to pay taxes you’ll come to realise why we do well to remember where public money comes from.”
I very much doubt that unless your in your early seventies or beyond or your late sixties and spent your teens deeply involved in politics. I am present receiving DLA and Invalidity benefit due to an accident ten years ago causing severe spinal damage and subsequent later stroke, so I suppose I should apologise for being in receipt of some of your precious taxes and being such a complete scrounger.
Due to a university education that was paid for by the country as a whole I previously paid very substantial amounts of Taxes over the time I was in work, none of which I regretted paying, I lived a very comfortable life indeed on the income I received after tax.
It would certainly be unfair to categorise your views as Tory from just one post. So I’ve made use of google to read back through your posting history and it appears that you actively dislike social democrats and all your economic views are in line with the Tory right.
So in what way have you fought the conservatives, is it purely from a Libertarian viewpoint? Because as a left leaning libertarian liberal I am well aware that there is also an element in the conservative party that have many libertarian views that are in agreement with mine, this does not make me a Tory or wish to be one.
What exactly differs you from these Tories that you think your home is in the LIb Dems rather than the Tory party? I would really like to know.
@Amy
APPLAUSE