Can the British opposition win elections?

After the war on Iraq the British public called Blair a liar, the majority of voters did not trust him yet he brought Labour to a historic third term win on 5th May. Already many of the Labour MPs are calling for him to step down before the end of the term and make way for Gordon Brown. It is partly the expectations of the Labour candidates to be serving under the leadership of Gordon Brown, rather than Tony Blair that led to this third term consecutive win for Labour. Yet there is more to it.

The explanation of this paradox is as simple as old. Some people call this curiosity the “British paradox” whereby they mean the particularity of the British majority voting system. In 1992 the Labour Party won 271 mandates by gaining 11.6 million votes; in 2001 Labor won “only” 10.7 million votes but received a total of 413 mandates. In the recent May 2005, Labour won 356 seats based on 9.5 Million votes, while the Conservatives won only 197 seats from 8.7 Million votes.

On the one hand this result just reflects the impact of the majority voting system, which always favors the winning team. On the other hand, the gains in parliamentary seats are also due to the re-delineation of electoral boundaries. Blair has been able to redefine the voting districts to his party’s advantage, whereas the Conservatives suffered from this tactic. This should sound all too familiar to the interested Malaysian public where components of the political system such as majority voting system and the Prime Minister’s power of setting the polling date are prevalent features.

Of course there are various other factors at play, but it is rather the particularity of the voting system and the possibility of re- delineating electoral boundaries as well as the Prime Minister’s power of setting the polling date that seem to be the predominant factors that have an impact on the elections results. This is how the system makes it all the more difficult for the opposition to win elections.

[ Back ]