1. Voting Behaviour in the UK 1945-2005
Part C: Social Influences on Voting and Non-Voting
11/12/2018

2. In Part C I provide the following information.
Voting Behaviour in the UK: Part C: Recent General Elections: Social Influences on Voting and Non-Voting
In Part C I provide the following information.
Click here for BBC Information on all post war General Elections
Summary results for the General Elections.
Statistical trends on class, region , gender, age , religion and ethnicity and voting behaviour.
Some information on Non-Voting
This will be followed by Part D in which I provide more “political” information on the General Elections of 1992, 1997, 2001 and 2005.
11/12/2018

3. Voting Behaviour in the UK: Part C: Index
Recent General Election Results
Voting Behaviour and Social Class
Region and Voting Behaviour
Gender and Voting Behaviour
Ethnicity, Religion and Voting Behaviour
Electoral Turnout
11/12/2018

4. Voting Trends
11/12/2018

5. Seats Won 1979-2005 Con Lab “Lib” SNP/PC Other
11/12/2018

6. Voting Behaviour and Social Class 1979-2005
Click here for data from IPSOS MORI on relationships between social class and voting behaviour
However remember the problems of defining social class and the different approaches to the measurement of class dealignment.
The following three slides illustrate the changing relationships between social class and voting behaviour between 1992 and 2005 as measured by the AB, C1, C2 and DE social class schema.
11/12/2018

7. Conservative Social Class Support
11/12/2018

8. Labour Social Class Support
11/12/2018

9. Lib Dem Social Class Support
11/12/2018

10. Housing 2005 Cons Lab L-D Home owners with mortgage 30 39 23
Home owners without mortgage
Council tenants
11/12/2018

11. Regional Voting Trends1997 -2005 [1] [Coloured figures =2001]
Con
Lab
Lib Dem
Nat
Scotland
17.5 [15.6]
15.8
45.6 [43.9]
39.5
13.0 [16.4]
22.6
22.1 [20.1]
17.7
Wales
19.6 [21.0]
21.4
54.7 [48.6]
42.7
12.4 [13.8]
18.4
9.9 [14.3]
12.6
North
22.2 [24.6]
19.5
60.9 [55.7]
49.8
13.3 [17.1]
23.3
N. West
27.1 [28.3]
28.7
54.2 [51.8]
46.0
14.3 [16.5]
Yorks. & Humbs.
28.0 [30.2]
29.1
52.0 [48.6]
43.6
16.0 [17.1]
20.7
11/12/2018

12. Regional Voting [2]1997 ,2001,2005 Region Con Lab Lib Dem W. Mid
33.7[35.0]35.0
47.8[44.8]38.7
13.8[14.7]18.6
E. Mid
34.9[37.3]37.1
47.8[45.1]39.0
13.6[15.4]18.5
E. Anglia
38.7[41.7]43.3
38.3[35.8]29.6
17.9[19.0]21.8
S. East [excl all London]
41.4[42.6]43.3
31.9[31.7]25.5
21.4[21.6]25.5
Gtr. London
31.2[30.5]31.9
49.5[47.3]38.9
14.6[17.5]21.9
S. West
36.7[38.5]38.6
26.4[26.3]22.8
31.3[31.2]32.6
11/12/2018

13. Gender and Voting Behaviour 1974-2005
Click here for IPSOS MORI data on Gender and Voting Behaviour
Click here for IPSOS MORI data on gender, age and voting behaviour in the 2005 General Election
The following 4 slides have been copied directly from the first part of the voting behaviour presentation. You may already have seen these!
11/12/2018

14. Gender and Voting Behaviour [1]
Relationships between gender and voting behaviour are summarised in trends in the so-called gender gap in voting behaviour
The gender gap is defined as the difference between the % Conservative- Labour lead among women and the % Conservative-Labour lead among men.
Calculated in this way a negative gender gap indicates that women were more pro-Conservative than men and a positive gender gap suggests that men are more pro-Conservative than women.
Gender gaps have indeed been negative for much of the post 2nd World War period but have declined in the 1990s and in 2005 there was a positive gender gap.
Click here and scroll down for gender gap calculations from IPSOS MORI
11/12/2018

15. Gender and Voting Behaviour [2]
The pro-Conservative/anti –Labour tendencies of female voters relative to male voters for much of the post-war period were explained by the following factors.
Women were less likely to be in employment than men and when they were in employment, less likely than men to be in heavily unionised occupations where Labour voting was most likely.
It was suggested that for much of the post –war period women could on average be described as having a more traditional outlook on life than men. Not a very convincing argument nowadays , you might think.
On average women live longer than men and older people are more pro-Conservative and anti- Labour than young people
11/12/2018

16. Gender and Voting Behaviour [3]
The extent of relatively pro-Conservative/ anti-Labour voting behaviour among women always varied according to age and social class.
Also from the late 1980s this trend in female behaviour began to be reversed such that in 2005 women were relatively anti-Conservative/pro-Labour in comparison with men.
11/12/2018

17. Gender, Age and Voting in 2005 : IPSOS MORI
11/12/2018

18. Gender and Voting Behaviour [4]
The data on the previous slide indicate that by younger women are particularly pro-Labour and anti-Conservative  perhaps due to long run generational changes in attitudes and values and/or to the return to Parliament of an increasing number of female, Labour MPs and/or to Labour's greater willingness to campaign on female related issues. However many young women may have been dissuaded from voting Labour as a result of UK involvement in the Iraq war and , in any case no pro-Labour gender gap is present in the case of female voters 55+
It will be interesting to see whether this new female support for the Labour Party holds up at the next General Election. What reasons are there for believing that it might not?
11/12/2018

19. Voting Behaviour and non-Class Factors
PJG Pulzer stated that “Class is the basis of British party politics: all else is embellishment and detail.” We do however need to familiarise ourselves with such details: i.e. with the possible effects of region, ethnicity, age, gender and religion on voting behaviour.
Voters in Scotland, Wales and Northern England are more likely to vote Labour than voters in Southern England.
Ethnic minority voters are more likely to vote Labour than white voters.
Catholic voters were more likely to vote Labour than Protestant voters.
In each of these three cases this could be explained partly [but not entirely] by the indirect effects of social class in that the Scots, the Welsh, ethnic minority members and Catholics are also disproportionately likely to be working class [ which takes us back to the Pulzer quotation]
Click here and scroll down for further data and explanations re age, gender, region, religion, ethnicity and voting behaviour.
Note that many Muslim voters withdrew their support from Labour in the 2005 General Election as a result of the invasion of Iraq.
11/12/2018

20. 11/12/2018

21. Variation in Election Turnout by Social Class 1997-2005
All Figures are Percentages
General Election 1997
General Election 2001
General Election 2005
Overall General Election Turnout 71 59 61
Social Grade A/B 79 68
Social Grade C1 75 60 62
Social Grade C2 69 56 58
Social Grade D/E 53 54
11/12/2018

22. Variation in Election Turnout 2001 and 2005 : Affluence and Poverty
2001 differential turnout by seat comparing poorer inner city with affluent southern seats:
Liverpool Riverside = 34%; Manchester Central = 39%; Hackney S & Shoreditch= 47%; Islington South = 47%; Bethnal Green & Bow = 49%.
Oxford W & Abingdon = 65%; Buckingham = 69%; Norwich S = 68%; North Norfolk = 70%; Wyre Forest = 68%.
In 2005 the highest English turnouts were in Dorset West [76.3%], Norfolk North [73.0%] Richmond Park [72.8%] and Mole Valley [72.5%].
In 2005 the lowest English turnouts were in Staffordshire South [37.2%], Liverpool Riverside [41.5%], Manchester Central [42.0%] and Salford [42.4%].
Click here for full information on constituency differences in turnout including maps of the UK and of the major UK conurbations. A very nice link , I think!
11/12/2018

23. Turnout % in 2005 by age cohort
18-34 34
25-34 43
35-44 58
45-54 63
55-64 73
65+ 76
11/12/2018

24. Interest in Politics: Note that declining turnout trends do not prove that interest in Politics is declining.
11/12/2018

25. Electoral Turnout: Useful Sources
The analysis of electoral turnout raises a range of complex issues many of which are discussed in the following sources.
Click here and scroll down for very detailed analysis of the 2005 General Election by the authors of the 2005 British Election Study . Scroll to page 4 for analysis of electoral turnout.
Click here for the Power Report [which provides very detailed information on British Democracy ,electoral turnout and related issues ].
Click here for full information on constituency differences in turnout including maps of the UK and of the major UK conurbations. [Already mentioned earlier.]
11/12/2018

26. Campaigns and Tactical Voting
Campaigns and tactical voting are very important topics within the study of voting behaviour.
I hope to provide information on these topics at some point in the future.
11/12/2018

27. Social Influences on Voting and Non-Voting
The End
11/12/2018