If those carrying out the review of Scottish Labour need to bear two facts in mind, they are these: three weeks ago, the SNP notched up 903,000 votes; and, the last time Labour won a Scottish election, in 2003, it still only managed 660,000.
So the difficulties which face Scottish Labour are of the mountainous variety. It is, of course, correct that what might be described as transitory issues with the campaign, the leader and individual policies all played their part in the result on May 5th. However, none of these were particularly a problem relative to the SNP during the 2003 campaign, and Labour's vote was still only marginally higher-about 30,000 votes or so-than it was three weeks ago. It would, in my view, be optimistic to believe that we could look at those transitory issues alone and be in a position to match the SNP in five years time.
But there are crumbs of comfort. Scottish Labour has bettered the SNP's total previously, in 1999, albeit on a turnout almost 10% higher than this year, fired by the first flush of enthusiasm for devolution. It was between that election and its second victory in 2003 that Scottish Labour's vote was reduced from 908,000 to the mid-600,000 level it has remained at since. Some of the 1999 vote doubtless contributed to the temporary SSP surge four years later-but analysis has shown that it was largely the SNP which was hurt by the 94,000 votes the SSP put on in 2003, so by far the larger part of Scottish Labour’s lost 248,000, I would suggest, simply stayed at home.
Similarly, Scottish Labour’s showing at Westminter remains impressive. Last year, just over a million Scots voted for Labour MPs. Drawing on Yougov’s day of poll survey, it would seem that somewhere in the region of 200,000 of them voted SNP three weeks ago. That leaves the best part of 200,000 Labour inclined voters from last year who didn’t turn out-and, in all likelihood, have not voted in a Holyrood election since 1999. The victory in 2003 and the close defeat in 2007 created the illusion that we could get by without these voters; but that illusion has been well and truly shattered by the scale of the SNP's victory.
The lesson, I would suggest, is twofold: Scottish Labour has not given a substantial part of its potential support a reason to turn out at Holyrood elections since 1999; and, the reason they need has to be something more than Labour has offered since. Scottish Labour’s problem with these voters is one of motivation as much as it is one of persuasion. They need to be shown why voting for a Scottish Labour Government is as important as voting for a Labour Government at Westminster; and that requires a positive, inspiring vision, and a narrative of how we get there, instead of the essentially reactive, defensive programme Scottish Labour has presented in recent years.
Lessons do require to be learned regarding what I have termed the transitory issues of the campaign. But, unless Scottish Labour is able to supply some vision, some sense of mission, or something which will equally motivate its base, then any improvements in its organisation, campaign or leadership risk continuing to underplay Labour's support in Scottish elections at a time when it has no margin to do so. If Labour continues to treat the Scottish Parliament as something akin to a super council, having only the capability to manage, not to transform, then we can hardly be surprised if our supporters treat it in the same way.
No comments:
Post a Comment