2024 UK Election – the Tories finally lose power

Welcome to my 200th blog post, the first since the 2024 UK General Election.

In what came as a shock to absolutely no one, the Conservatives lost. Badly.

Today the corridors of Westminster felt like the first day of school. 334 new MPs have come in to get their passes working, set up their email and find a desk. A couple of freshers nervously asked if they were allowed on the red carpet/ the House of Lords end (they are). Many were walking around steering in awe at the statues and artwork and excitedly looking around the Commons.

The election result was a massive swing against the Tories. 121 MPs will be the lowest number of Conservative MPs elected in the party’s history. Labour is by far the largest party and will govern with a majority of 172. Below are the full results showing the results for all MPs and parties elected:

PartySeatsSeats (change) Total VotesShare of the Vote
Labour412+2119,704,65533.7%
Conservatives121-2516,827,31123.7%
Liberal Democrats72+643,519,19912.2%
SNP9-39724,7582.5%
Sinn Fein70210,8910.7%
Independent6+6564,2432.0%
Reform UK5+54,117,22114.3%
Green4+31,943,2656.7%
Plaid Cymru4+2194,8110.7%
DUP5-3172,0580.6%
SDLP2086,8610.3%
Alliance Party10117,1910.4%
UUP1+194,7790.3%
TUV1+148,6850.2%
The 2024 UK General Election results

In 2019, Labour received 10,269,051 votes and won just 202 seats. In 2024, Labour received 9,704,655 votes but won 412 seats. In 2017, Labour won 12,877,918 or 40% of the vote, compared with 33.7% of the vote in 2024.

I will come back to the elephant in the room, the lack of proportionality in the First Past the post-electoral system.

The feedback on the doorstep is reflected in the numbers above. Many voters were undecided leading up to the election and unenthusiastic about either main party. When pressed, it became clear many former Conservative voters would not be supporting that party again. 2024 was the election that the Tories lost, and badly.

On the surface, 33.7% may not seem like a strong result for Labour, in terms of overall support. We need to consider some of the following factors:

  1. Tactical voting played a significant role in this election. Many would-be Labour voters living in places like Devon voted Liberal Democrat to stop the Tories. Curiously, the Liberal Democrats went from 3,696,419 votes, equating to 11.6% in 2019, whereas on Thursday their total votes went down to 3,519,199, but due to lower turnout, this equates to 12.2% of the vote. The Lib Dems now have 71 MPs, instead of the 8 they got in 2019.
  2. The voter coalition built by Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour in the 2017 election of younger progressive voters, has now moved to the Greens. On Thursday the Greens received 1,943,265 votes equating to 6.7% of votes cast. In 2019, the Greens received 865,715 votes or 1.1% of the vote.
  3. In New Zealand or other countries with more proportional voting systems, it is common to look at the centre-left and centre-right bloc rather than just what the parties received. Labour and the Greens together received 40.4% of the vote compared with the Conservatives and Reform who received 38%. The Liberal Democrats were largely targeting Tory seats this election. They stood on a broadly social democratic platform and made it clear that unlike 2010 they would not support a Conservative Government after the election. So adding their 12.2% to the Centre-left bloc we get to 52.6%.
  4. So while First Past the Post has produced a result that is not proportional, and in my view is an appalling voting system, a different voting system like the one used in Germany and New Zealand would have still resulted in a Labour Government (though almost certainly in coalition) and a crushing defeat for the Tories.

The UK Electoral Reform Society have put together modle showing what the result would have looked like using the Additional Member System used in Scotland and Wales:

https://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/how-the-2024-election-could-have-looked-with-proportional-representation/

The problem with this is that if there were a different voting system, people would likely not vote the same way.

The broader problem with the proportional representation debate in the UK is they tend to advocate only specific alternative voting systems like AMS or AV. This election result will rightly see more people call for proportional representation. Just as New Zealand did before changing voting systems in 1993, UK voters need the opportunity to explore all viable alternatives to First Past the Post.

Those who blame the rise in Reform for the Tory Party’s misfortune need to look at the bigger picture. In 2015 UKIP, Farage’s old party, received 3.8 million votes compared with Reform’s 4.1 million last week. While Farage’s new political vehicle certainly cost the Tories votes in key marginals, there is evidence of former Labour voters also switching to Reform.

The Conservative Party lost because their vote went from 13,966,454 votes or 43.6% in 2019 to 6,827,311 or 23.7% in 2024. The number of people who voted Tory halved in just five years. Why? Their response to the pandemic, party-gate, the Liz Truss mini-budget and their failure to manage the small boats crisis in the channel. They were terrible at managing the economy allowed public services to decline.

In terms of the two major party’s vote share, in 2019 the Labour and the Conservatives together received 75.% of the vote, and in 2017 82.3%. Last week the two combined received 57.4% of the vote.

One feature in this election is the 6 independent candidates, many of whom ran on the issue of Gaza. In one case it caused former Labour front-bencher Jonathan Ashworth to lose his Leicester South seat. Other senior Labour MPs such as Wes Streeting or Jess Phillips saw their majorities reduced drastically as many Muslim voters abandoned Labour for Independent candidates, or refused to vote. Starmer’s Labour Party was initially reluctant to call for a ceasefire in Gaza. Had there not been a significant swing against the Conservatives, Labour losing support from large sections of the British Muslim community could have been very damaging.

Former Labour Leader Jeremy Corbyn was also elected as an Independent MP in Islington North. Again, his position on Gaza was a factor in Corbyn’s success.

In Scotland, support for the embattled Scottish Nationalist Party (SNP) collapsed. Labour now has 37 of Scotland’s 57 seats, compared with one seat in 2019. It would be a mistake to view this as a collapse in support for Scottish Independence as a cause. A Norstat/Sunday Star Times poll published just a fortnight ago found that 47% of Scots still support independence, while 47% support staying in the union. Other recent polls on Scottish independence have also been quite close. The election result, rather than spelling the end for Scottish Independence, instead may result in the SNP being the main political vehicle for this cause.

In Northern Ireland, Sein Fein won the most seats. This is consistent with the most recent Stormont and local government elections in Northern Ireland. The decline of the Democratic Unionist Party post-Brexit has in part fuelled division on the Unionist side with two other rival parties challenging them.

Wales no longer has any Conservative MPs. Labour has controlled the Welsh Senedd since it was created in 1999. Despite the recent scandal surrounding Vaughan Gething the new Welsh First Minister, Labour continue to dominate politics in that nation.

This was a change election. Not only is there a new Government, but politics will be different. After this election, there are 264 women MPs, a record in Westminster. The Cabinet will also have more women than any before it. There will also be more MPs from ethnic minority backgrounds, though there is some concern that this diversity is not fully reflected in the cabinet.

Britain has been in decline in recent years. It will be difficult for the incoming government as they inherit a poor economy, crumbling public services and a country whose standing internationally has diminished considerably since Brexit. It is no wonder voters lacked enthusiasm during this election.

For Labour, the next five years will be an opportunity to show the country they can be trusted with power. Things will be tough and any honeymoon could be short-lived. That said, voters will take time to forget, let alone forgive the mess left by the previous Conservative administration. While people may not yet be enthusiastic about Labour, they can could no longer stomach the Tories.

Jeremy Corbyn was not fit to be Prime Minister. But is Starmer?

It is said that there is a thin line between bravery and stupidity. Posting a link to my blog post which said that Jeremy Corbyn was not fit to be Prime Minister, to the ‘Labour London Left’ WhatsApp group. I will leave it to the reader to decide which one that was.

The full quote is below:

The 2017 election proved there was significant support for social democratic policies (eg national care service, public ownership of rail, electricity, water etc, and funding public services properly). But weak leadership on Brexit, failure to respond properly on antisemitism and now his appalling position on the Russian Invasion of Ukraine have shown Corbyn was not fit to be Prime Minister. But nor was Boris Johnson, as the Privileges Committee have confirmed.

https://nickkelly.blog/2023/07/09/decoding-the-doorstep-insights-from-canvassing-uxbridge-and-south-ruislip/

Jeremy Corbyn was and still is not fit to be Prime Minister. I say that as someone who took time off work to actively campaign for Labour in 2019. I also say this as a Labour member who supported the 2017 and (with some criticisms) the 2019 Labour manifesto policies, many of which would not have been there had Corbyn not won the 2015 UK Labour leadership race.

My ‘Why Labour Lost’ series of posts published after UK Labour’s 2019 election defeat (see links below) outlined the many and varied reasons for this result. Not all of it was Corbyn’s fault, nor indeed his faction Momentum. But they made serious errors and at times simply stupid calls.

More recently, Corbyn’s position on the Russian invasion of Ukraine in the last 16 months has shown that he lacks political judgment.

Shortly after the Russian invasion of Ukraine, I wrote the following of leftists who were opposed to giving military aid to help the Ukrainian resistance:

On the left, many are still influenced by the analysis of Lenin during the First World War and just before the 1917 Russian Revolution that in an inter-imperialist conflict socialists should be standing up to their own ruling class. During the First World War, there were strong arguments for working people not to align with the Tsar in Russia or other imperialist leaders in that conflict. It is dangerous to simply apply this idea to the current conflict without understanding that the context is different. There is a strong argument that people should be holding their own government or ‘ruling class’ to account during any situation like this. Ultimately, the decision to invade Ukraine was Russia’s, but there is still a question of what the governments and in particular NATO members could have done to help prevent this and what they can do now. Sadly, some on the left and drawn both bizarre and quite dangerous conclusions based on the premise that their role is to stick it to their own ruling class. Bizarrely, some socialists still mistake Russia to be some sort of socialist/anti-imperialist power, thinking that there is some residue influence of the 1917 revolution.

https://nickkelly.blog/2022/05/03/the-russian-invasion-of-ukraine-an-act-of-aggression/

Corbyn’s position of opposing military intervention and instead trying to negotiate a peaceful settlement is at best naive and at worst giving tacit support to the Russian Government and Vladimir Putin.

Back in 2003 when I was active in opposing the invasion of Iraq, one of our key slogans in Peace Action Wellington was “peace with justice and self-determination”. Any “peace settlement” with Russia right now would involve at the very least, ceding territory taken by Russia in 2014 and probably some of the ground taken in 2022. This ‘peace’ would not involve any justice or self-determination.

What Jeremy Corbyn, the Stop the War coalition and others taking this position are doing is not progressive, left or indeed socialist. It is supporting imperialist expansion. Further, and this should be self-evident, if NATO and Western governments fail to stop the Russian invasion, this will not serve the interests of working people. That this distorted world political view still infects sections of the left is astounding. That Corbyn subscribes to it, frankly discredits him as a serious political operator.

But I can understand why people on the Labour left would not like this assessment. Even more so at a time when various left groups and individuals such as director Ken Loach have been kicked out of Labour.

And there are serious questions about Labour’s current direction. Labour, whilst winning the Selby and Ainsty by-election, narrowly lost the Uxbridge and South Ruislip byelection. Whilst most attribute this to the Labour Mayor of London extending the Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ) to outer London, this was not the only reason. On the doorstep, Starmer’s Labour Party may not have been as polarising, but nor were people excited by it. In fact, many were unclear about what it stood for. Labour improved its percentage of the vote in Uxbridge and South Ruislip significantly, but it still failed to make it across the line. This should be a cautionary tale ahead of next year’s General Election.

In my blog post earlier this year on whether UK Labour can finally win, I argued that the left needs to accept that the 2019 election was a devastating loss, in no small part the result of poor decisions by Corbyn and his team. Equally, his opponents in the party have still failed to seriously reflect on why Corbyn was able to easily beat them both in 2015 and when they tried to remove him in 2016.

The 2017 Manifesto included policies such as renationalising rail and water companies. It opposed austerity and called for decent funding for the NHS, a national care service, a properly-funded national education service and stronger employment law that strengthens collective bargaining. These are mainstream social democratic policies in many other European countries.

Why did it take a member of the hard left Socialist Campaign Group becoming the leader of Labour for it to put forward a mainstream social democratic manifesto, rather than an over-triangulated, incoherent and frankly visionless positions it too often had prior to Corbyn? In a country where life expectancy is stalling, younger people are economically worse off than their parents, where over a million people are waiting for social housing and incomes have been falling for years, there is a real mood for change. Not just a change of government, but of policy. This does not mean a sudden lurch left, but a serious and costed programme that prioritises the needs of the many, not just the few.

In the UK Labour Party, people are divided into binary factional groupings of Corbynistas or Blairites. Loyalty to leaders and personalities over policy is not limited to Labour or UK politics. But it is frustrating nonetheless.

UK Labour is on course to win the next general election, whenever that may be. Its long-term success in government will, as I have argued previously, require the different factions of Labour to work together. The left need to accept that the Corbyn project failed, and move on. The right needs to accept that voices to the left of Third Way centrism have a legitimate and important place both in Labour and in political life.

Below are the links to my ‘Why UK Labour’ lost blog posts:

Why UK Labour Lost? Part 1: Historical Context

Why UK Labour lost? Part 2: UK Labour’s strange loyalty to First Past the Post

Why UK Labour lost? Part 3: Its Brexit Innit

Why UK Labour lost? Part 4: Oooo Jeremy Corbyn

Why UK Labour lost? Part 5: Antisemitism

Why UK Labour lost? Part 6: New Labour and Blairism

Why UK Labour lost? Part 7: Momentum and the Corbynistas

Why UK Labour lost? Part 8: what it takes to win?

Why UK Labour lost? Part 9: What the party needs to do now.

UK Labour – can they finally beat the Tories?

Labour in the UK currently has a double-digit lead in polls ahead of the Conservatives. The Polls immediately after the Truss/Kwarteng mini budget gave Labour their biggest lead ever, with a lead of 33% over the Tories. This has since fallen back to a 20% lead, still making Labour the strong favourites were an election to be called today. For this reason, there will be no election in the next year if the Conservatives have anything to do with it. The next election must be held at the latest in January 2025, and in all likelihood will be sometime in mid-2024. Given how terribly the Government has performed, it is hard to see how they could make it back even if the economy begins to recover.

However, just as one should never underestimate the UK Conservative Party as an electoral force, one also should never underestimate the UK Labour Party’s ability to clutch defeat from the jaws of history. It is just under two years ago that Labour under the current leadership of Keir Starmer lost the Hartlepool byelection, a so-called red-wall seat previously held by Labour since 1964. Much has happened since then but given how quickly things change in the current political climate, who knows what will be happening in 2024.

After the last UK election, I wrote a series of posts assessing why the UK Labour Party Lost. Shortly after this, a leaked report showed that factionalism was so bad within Labour that members of the Party head office tried to sabotage the 2017 election for the party as their favoured faction was not in charge. At the time few could see Labour making it back to power in 2024, with many predicting that Boris Johnson would be Prime Minister for the coming decade.

Writing those posts got me some interesting feedback. My post critical of the role of the ‘Blairite faction’ resulted in various Labour members associated with Progress and Labour First contacting me to say that I was obviously an insane Corbynista and dangerous. Later that day I posted another post critical of the role Momentum had played in the 2019 election, to which various supporters of the Corbyn loyal faction accused me of being a Blairite and a dangerous right winger. Whilst it was water off a ducks back to me, it showed how deeply divided and unwilling to engage all factions were at that time.

Starmer was elected Leader of the party in April 2020 having run on a platform of trying to bring the factions together. Specifically, Starmer’s campaign would continue the popular policies from Labour’s 2017 manifesto would be the ‘basis of the Party’s ‘foundational document’ for policy under his leadership. This recognised the fact that whilst Corbyn and the Momentum faction supporting him had become quite unpopular, the social democratic platform Labour ran on in 2017 was popular, more so than the party in itself. Now, in 2022, Starmer has said this document is being put to one side and instead the party will be “starting from scratch” leaving many to ask, what will Labour’s next policy manifesto look like?

The backdrop of course is the coronavirus pandemic and the economic chaos it has caused, followed by the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Added to this is the economic ineptitude of the Truss and Kwateng mini-budget has meant the UK find itself in a very difficult economic situation. The challenge for Labour now, is that it needs to be seen both as credible economic managers who can repair the damage caused by the current government, yet also present a programme that addresses growing inequalities. In particular, it needs to address the fact that most people under 40 in the UK are now significantly worse off financially than their parents were at that age. The younger voters who supported Labour in the 2017 ‘youthquake’, who were disproportionately disadvantaged after the last decade of austerity, are looking to the opposition to address the growing inequalities and to create a new social contract that works “for the many, not the few.”

It is not clear how the current Labour leadership will address this, with the prevailing thinking in the party now being that people on the left have nowhere else to go, and the priority for Labour now being to win former Tory voters over. The risk is that younger voters and voters on the left become disillusioned and stay at home, or cast a protest vote for The Greens or some other candidate. This may not seem a problem now, but if polls begin to narrow by 2024, stay-home or protest-left votes in a First Past the Post electoral system could be fatal in marginal constituencies.

The current Labour leadership wish to put as much daylight as possible between the Party now and the Corbyn years. This has meant distancing themselves from some of the more popular parts of the 2017 manifesto, including public ownership of rail, energy companies and other public services, despite most party members and the British Public favouring nationalisation in this area. Starmer and shadow chancellor Rachel Reeves have said such policies do not stack up against the Party’s fiscal rules. This could create tension for a future Labour Government. Internally, the Government would be fighting both the ‘soft’ and ‘hard’ left on these issues. Also, many voters, not only those who vote Labour, would become frustrated if the private companies continue to profit from a rail system that’s expensive and unreliable or an energy market that forces people into poverty.

At the same time, those on the left of Labour need to accept a few hard facts. The 2019 election defeat was a devastating loss caused in no small part by missteps, poor tactics and wrong policy calls by Corbyn, his advisors and Momentum. Also, Labour may have increased its vote considerably in 2017, but despite losing seats, the Tories also increased their overall percentage of the vote and got more votes than Labour.

Jeremy Corbyn’s suspension from the party has seen hundreds of members, including many branch chairs, have their membership also suspended for allowing motions of solidarity with Corbyn to be moved. Corbyn’s comments in response to the antisemitism report were ill-advised, but so too has been this clumsy night of the long knives against his supporters in the party. The party has suspended members or excluded them from MP selecton for sharing articles from proscribed organisations, mostly socialist. In the case of one Milton Keynes Councillor Lauren Townsend, she was blocked from standing as an MP for liking a tweet about Sturgeon testing negative for Covid-19, hardly an act of supporting a political rival. Labour also expelled filmmaker Ken Loach, maker of ‘I, Daniel Blake’, again for associating with proscribed organisations rather than actually belonging to them.

Corbyn has done himself absolutely no favours with his frankly idiotic position on Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, calling on the west to stop arming Ukraine and aligning with the Stop the War coalition’s position which appears more critical of NATO than Russia. This has now made it very easy for Starmer’s team to say that Corbyn will not have the whip restored. The left has now spent two years wasting energy trying to defend Corbyn and campaigning for him to get the whip restored. This absolutely plays into the hands of their opponents who now have good reason to expel leftists for not showing solidarity with Ukrainians.

Compare this to the US Democrats where Jo Biden’s former rival Bernie Sanders is now chair of the Senate Budget Committee, and a clear pact was made between the left and the moderate factions of the party to help beat Trump in 2020. Electoral politics is about building coalitions. The left in the UK needs to accept they alone do not have majority support and need to work with what they term the “soft left” and more centrist factions to win. The current Labour leadership need to ensure that the left still has a stake in Labour winning, and give enough to motivate the left to vote and campaign for Labour. In 2020 the Democrats learnt the hard lessons from 2016 when Sanders supporters were shunned by Hillary, resulting in many not supporting her campaign after the primaries and ultimately allowing Trump to win. In 2020, the Biden campaign made sure the left had a stake in a Democrat victory, and it paid off.

The fact is that to win elections, especially in a First Past the Post electoral system, a party needs to build a coalition of support. In 1997, UK Labour was able to build a coalition which in addition to the people who’d supported it throughout the Thatcher years, voters who’d supported the Thatcher project and its broad economic programme, but by the mid-1990s wanted something new, more socially liberal and slightly more moderate economically. This coalition held for three elections, but in 2010 many from this group of voters had drifted to the Lib Dems under Nick Clegg or back to the Conservatives under David Cameron who promised a more socially liberal and compassionate conservative party.

Starmer and the faction around want to build back the same coalition of voters they had in 1997. The problem is 25 years later, which included a decade of austerity, the voter demographics are more polarised and complex. The Conservative Party in 2022 has been forced to abandon Thatcher economics that Truss and Kwarteng tried to resurrect from the dead, and instead are now raising taxes, including for top income earners. The so-called centre-ground in politics is not the same as that in 1997. In fact, the term ‘centre’ is lazy political shorthand as if voters are easily categorised into ‘left’, ‘right’ and ‘centrists’ the latter swinging between the two and acting as king-maker. It has always been more complex than this, with people being more socially conservative on certain issues or economically liberal on others. The Brexit debate cut right across the old political divides with people across the spectrum, across class devices and cultural backgrounds being completely divided on the issue. A working-class voter in Hartlepool was not considered a swing voter until very recently, nor was an upper-middle-class voter in Kensington. Yet in the 2020s these voters will be part of the much larger ‘swing vote’ that will decide the next government.

Then there are the four nations of the United Kingdom. The majority of UK voters live in England, so inevitably this is where elections are won and lost. Historically, Labour has performed well in Scotland and Wales, with Northern Ireland having its own difficult history and different parties. Labour still performs well in Wales, having controlled the Welsh Senate since its creation in 1999. The 2021 deal between Welsh Labour and the Welsh nationalist party Plaid Cymru has been clever in securing broad support of support within the devolved government there.

The situation in Scotland is nowhere near as rosy. Traditionally, Scotland was a Labour stronghold, yet in the 2019 election, the party won only one seat up there. The Scottish National Party (SNP) have controlled the Scottish Parliament since 2007. There was a small amount of comfort for Labour in the 2022 local council elections where Labour came second to the SNP, but still a long way behind. Even the polls showing Labour with a 33% lead over the Tories nationally, had Labour was far behind the SNP in Scotland. Whilst support for independence hovers around the 50% mark in Scotland, it is consistently higher now than during the last independence referendum in 2014. The SNP have been clever to build a coalition of former Labour left voters and Scottish nationalists including some from the centre-right. By contrast, the various deals being done by Labour with the Conservatives and Lib Dems to stop the SNP risk doing more long-term harm to Labour’s chances in left-leaning Scotland.

For Labour, the strategy to win not only the next election but to start winning more often in the UK is to win over more English voters, as over 80% of the population live there. English voters have traditionally been small ‘c’ Conservative and large the ‘C’ Conservative Party usually do well, especially in the South outside of London. A wholesale return to Corbyn’s era politics is unlikely to shift this. In the short term, Labour with more of a 1997 flavour may win the next election, but it is not 1997, and very soon voters will grow restless.

English voters might be conservative but may see the need for economic reform so more people have opportunities. They will expect serious government interventions in housing, employment, education and transport. Already we have seen a Tory Government partially renationalise the railways, increase taxes to fund social care and lift Univeral Credit (the UK’s universal benefit), things the Tories would not have considered in the 1990s. The fact is society has changed. And in politics. you need to adapt. Traditionally the Conservative Party are much better at this than Labour. Whilst the Tories will probably now lose the next election, but, the size of their loss and Labour’s win will determine how long they spend in opposition. For Labour, winning more often will require nuisance and being adaptable. Yes, learn the important lessons from 1997, but know that times are now different and so too are policies and tactics. The left may not be strong enough to win, but they are still too big a block now to ignore and are more significant than in the 1990s. Like the Biden campaign, Starmer’s team will need to give the left something that means they can at least give grudging support. In turn, the left need to accept that a few important gains are better than none at all and the great cannot continue to be the enemy of the good or even the ok-ish.

The next election could well go to Labour, or at least be lost by the Tories due to their ineptness at running the country in the last few years. Labour’s internal problems have not gone away, it is just that the Conservative Party’s internal issues are now a lot worse and unusually for them have been aired in public. The opportunity for Labour is to build a winning coalition that helps them win not just the next election, but to start winning more than they lose.