First party: the trajectory for the UK Conservative Party, 1945-2023
UK governments, 1945-2023
First party (but …): Conservatives
No parties … Tories and Conservatives (notes)
…
The Conservative Party conference, Autumn 2023
The headlines
The polls
The three main parties: the hexagon of orderings
The hierarchy of competition, 1
The constituency orderings, 2019 to 2024
Regions and constituencies: density-dependent survival rates?
…
Modelling the 1945-2019 trajectory
The hierarchy of competition, 2
…
Differing opinion in the Conservative party …
… The Case for the Centre Right
Part 1
UK governments, 1945-2023
Looking at the seventy-eight post-war years, 1945 to 2023, there have been twenty-one elections and elected governments.[1] Conservatives (C) have won eleven elections (52%); Labour (L) have won nine (43%); and a Conservative-led coalition [C] has won one (5%). The Conservatives have been in power for forty-eight years (62%) and Labour for thirty years (38%).
The twenty-one governments, 1945-2023:
L L; C C C; L L; C; L L; C C C C; L L L; [C]; C C C
The governing party has won thirteen elections (70%) and lost seven (30%). (Note: the win in 1945 is not included). A once-governing party has won the next election 77% of the times (seven out of nine occasions), a twice-governing party has won the next election 57% of the times (four out of seven occasions), a thrice-governing party has won the next election 25% of the times (one out of four occasions), and a four-times-governing party has won the next election 0% of the times (one out of one occasion). In short, governing parties age: they are likely to win a second election but increasingly unlikely to win later elections.
The phrase ‘continuous-party government’ refers to a period where one party has been in government continuously, possibly over a number of elections. There have been eight completed continuous-party governments, the present ninth government still running. (Note [C] is taken as a separate government.) The median duration is 6 years. There have been: 2 one-term; 3 two-term; 3 three-term; and 1 four-term government. So the median age of governments is two terms. There have been ten Conservative prime ministers (five of them in the last fifteen years) and five labour prime ministers. See Table 12.3.
Table 12.3 The nine continuous-party governments
party period years prime minister(s)
Labour 1945-1951 6 Atlee
Conservative 1951-1964 13 Churchill, Eden, Macmillan
Labour 1964-1970 6 Wilson
Conservative 1970-1974 4 Heath
Labour 1974-1979 5 Wilson, Callaghan
Conservative 1979-1997 18 Thatcher, Major
Labour 1997-2010 13 Blair, Brown
Cons. with LD 2010-2015 5 Cameron
Conservative 2015-2023+ 8+ Cameron, May 2016,
Johnson 2019, Truss 2023, Sunak 2023
First party (but …): Conservatives
Since 1945 the Conservative party has won more elections and been in power for more years than Labour. In the period 1922-1935 the party won six out of seven elections (the exception being 1929) and had most votes in all of them. Previously the Conservatives/Tories and Liberals/Whigs alternated with fluctuating fortunes. So it is appropriate to say that the Conservatives are the first party but there are various qualifications to add to that - including ‘not always’ and ‘not totally’. And there is the contemporary qualification that the party is currently in a bad place.
Not only is the party first in politics, it is also first in society. Indeed it is first in politics because it is first in society. Part of what is involved here is discussed in Chapter 2 of “Britannia…”:
Britannia: Three Prime Ministers and a Queen
No parties … Tories and Conservatives (notes)
[This section has overlap with one in the report on the Liberal Democrats.]
Parliament
England 1238-1707
Great Britain 1707-1800
UK 1801-1922
UK & Northern Ireland 1922
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parliament_of_England
Political parties in England
“In England, rival political grouping, reflecting an intensifying conflict between court and country interests, can be detected from the mid-1660s through the 1670s, although these are normally thought of as factions rather than parties.”
embryonic parties: Whigs and Tories
1678-1834: Tories
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tories_(British_political_party)
1834- … 1912-: Conservative Party
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservative_Party_(UK)
1922-2019
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_general_elections_overview
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_Kingdom_general_elections
A century of elections
Research Briefing
Published Wednesday, 09 August, 2023
See the first graph in Section 2.1 on page 7 of the full report.
https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-7529/
full report: https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CBP-7529/CBP-7529.pdf
Northern Ireland in UK general elections
Since 1922 Northern Ireland has a distinctive role in UK general elections. In particular, the Ulster Unionist Party has had links with the UK Conservative Party of varying strengths over the years. In the period 1922 to 1972 the UUP took the Conservative whip in the House of Commons. In the UK general election of 1955, the Ulster Unionists gained 442,647 votes out of a total UK vote of 26,759,729 votes, which is 1.65% of the total vote and this is the UUP contribution to the Conservatives Party’s 49.7% in that year.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elections_in_Northern_Ireland;
https://www.britannica.com/topic/Ulster-Unionist-Party ;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Ireland_Conservatives ;
Part 2
The Conservative Party conference, Autumn 2023
Sunday 1 October to Wednesday 4 October
https://www.conservatives.com/conference/visit
https://www.conservatives.com/conference/agenda
The headlines
Before the conference:
BBC
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics
Laura Kuenssberg: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-66970426
The Observer …
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/conservatives
… 1 October 2023
. https://www.theguardian.com/theobserver/2023/oct/01 :
The Times …
… 2 October 2023
“Make more effort to find a job or face benefit cuts, warns Hunt” 2/1
… 3 October 2023
“PM brings axe down on HS2 in the north” 3/1
… 3/4 October 2023
Prime minister to unveil plans to scale back HS2, overhaul A-levels and improve people’s health in his speech to Tory party conference”
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/rishi-sunak-speech-hs2-tory-party-conference-2023-808ctmthq
BBC
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics
… 3 October 2023
HS2 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66998692
Migration: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66999209
Braverman heckle: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66998189
Farage: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66997104
BBC Newsnight
The polls
Rishi Sunak’s Conservatives have languished at around 28% (20%-35%) throughout 2023. Polls conducted between 15th and 29th September 2023 showed support at around 27% ranging between 24% and 30% (thirteen polls).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election;
The three main parties: the hexagon of orderings
[This section is identical to one in the report on the Liberal Democrats.]
The Conservative party was the winner in the 2019 general election, Labour was next and the Liberal Democrats third. Let us denote this ordering: *C>L>LD.
Restricting our attention to these three main parties, in all there are six possible orderings. The orderings can be arranged in a hexagon – see below. Adjacent orderings in the hexagon differ by an adjacent pair transition in the ordering.
. L>C>LD *C>L>LD
L>LD>C C>LD>L
. LD>L>C LD>C>L
The hierarchy of competition, 1
We can think of a hierarchy of party competition for votes: Conservatives in the two-party contest with Labour; the Lib Dems in a three-party competition with both Conservative and Labour; and Other parties in competition with the three main parties.
Adding percentages
In the 2019 election Conservatives had 43.6%; Labour had 32.1%; and Liberal Democrats had 11.6%; and Other had 12.7%:
C + L + LD + O = 43.6 + 32.1 + 11.6 + 12.7 = 100
There are three independent numbers (percentages) and the Conservative vote is determined by these three:
C = 100 - L - LD - O = 100 - 32.1 - 11.6 - 12.7 = 43.6
Multiplying proportions
However the Conservative vote can also be expressed in terms of a different equation, involving three different numbers. We can think of a hierarchy of party competition measured by the percentage of Conservative votes in the two-party contest with Labour; the percentage of Conservative and Labour votes combined in the three-party contest with Lib Dems; and the three main party combined vote … 57.6%, 86.7% and 87.3%, respectively:
C = (C/(C+L)) ((C+L)/(C+L+LD)) (C+L+LD)
= (43.6/75.7) (75.7/87.3) 87.3
= 57.6 x 86.7 x 87.3 = 43.6
We shall return to the hierarchy of competition in a later section.
The constituency orderings, 2019 to 2024
Conservatives are anxious to hold constituencies they won in 2019 … and – a much less likely possibility given their place in the polls - keen to win constituencies which they did not win in 2019. The biggest threat in each constituency comes from the party which came second, namely C>L>LD or C>LD>L. Out of their 365 seats, the former constituency orderings greatly outnumber the latter, 80. So the Conservative primary focus is on the much more numerous constituencies where Labour came second in 2019.
In terms of voting percentages … how do constituencies differ from one another? … how do changes in voting percentages differ from one constituency to another? Will the change be the same across all the constituencies? Will the swing be the same? Will the step ratio be the same? Will the transition matrix be the same? ...
… these questions will be addressed in a forthcoming analysis of recent by-elections.
Regions and constituencies: density-dependent survival rates?
[Forthcoming: The ‘historic’ by-elections, 20th July 2023: a modelling approach.]
When, as now, there is a slump in the vote, the step ratio, the survival rate and the transition matrix give much the same ratio or percentage.
Note that the survival rate is an entry in the transition matrix. The transition matrix approach is more sophisticated than the survival rate. The point is that only a few voters are switching to the Conservatives. Note that most opinion polls give the transition matrix in their full data tables and the national single transition rate has been slightly above 60% for the past six months or more.
See forthcoming: The ‘historic’ by-elections, 20th July 2023: a modelling approach.
Sunday’s newspaper reported the Conservative survival rate and the loss rate:
“… a third of those who voted Conservative in 2019 now intend to switch to other parties …” [In other words the survival rate is two thirds.]
The Observer, October 1 1, 8-9; Opinium.
Nationally the Conservative survival rate is 66%. The loss is substantial in all regions but there is some variation across regions: the survival rate varies between 60% and 81%. In order: South 60%, Midlands 61%, Wales 70%, North 72%, Scotland 80% and London 81%.
It is noticeable that regions with a high Conservative percentage in 2019 have a low survival rate in 2023 – and vice versa. In other words there is an inverse relationship between the percentage vote in 2019 and the survival rate now in 2023 … namely, ‘density-dependent’ survival rates. The figures in the Table below are consistent with an equation:
% survival to 2023 = 115 - % vote in 2019
Table Voting for Group A by region in 2019; % survival in 2023
Group A: Conservative, Brexit Party, UKIP
. Group A in 2019 % survival to 2023
V S S=100-V/2 (simple model)
East 58 60/61? 71
East Midland 56 61 72
South East 55 60 72
West Midlands 55 61 72
South West 53 60 73
York & Humber 49 72 75
North East 46 72 77
North West 41 72 78
London 33 81 83
Scotland 26 80 87
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_United_Kingdom_general_election_in_Scotland
Gordon Burt. The Brexit election of 2019. The results. Draft 30 December 2019.
Density-dependent survival rates … the survival of the fittest
A simple model illustrates how the inverse relationship between voting percentage in 2019 and survival rate in 2023 might arise. Suppose each voter has a certain level of ‘Conservative fitness’ f, where f varies between 0 and 100. The population of voters have a uniform distribution over the interval [0,100]. In the 2019 election V% vote Conservative. All these voters are the ones with the greatest Conservative fitness – they are in the range [100-V, 100]. The mean fitness of the group is 100-V/2. Suppose the probability of an individual voting Conservative in 2023 is equal to the individual’s fitness. Then the survival rate S for the group will be equal to the mean fitness, 100-V/2:
S = 100 - V/2
Constituencies
The results of the three by-elections in July show a similar regional ordering with step ratios of 0.47 in Frome in the South; 0.57 in Selby in the North; and 0.86 in Uxbridge in London. Also a one-off local poll in Mid-Bedfordshire in the South shows a step ratio of 0.48. See details about Mid-Bedfordshire and Tamworth below, both due to hold by-elections on October 19.
In 2019 in Mid-Bedfordshire the Conservatives had 59.8% of the vote. Using the above national figure of 66% gives a ‘prediction’ of 39.5% for the byelection; and using the above south figure of 60% gives a ‘prediction’ of 35.9%. In my report last week on the Liberal Democrats, I ‘predicted’ 35.7%, using the national transition matrix. Also a single local poll ‘predicted’ 29%.
In 2019 in Tamworth the Conservatives had 66.3% of the vote. Using the above national figure of 66% gives a ‘prediction’ of 44.4% for the byelection; and using the above south figure of 60% gives a ‘prediction’ of 40.0%.
https://electionresults.parliament.uk/election/2019-12-12/Results/Location/Constituency/Tamworth/ ;
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/sep/30/tamworth-voters-byelection-tories-chris-pincher;
Part 3
Modelling the 1945-2019 trajectory
[Chapter 12: Time series: UK general elections, 1945 to 2015. pp. 244-265. 258
Burt, Gordon. Values, World Society and Modelling Yearbook 2015. 2017. Cambridge Scholars.]
The UK general election in 1945 was held on 5th July (two months after victory in Europe - but a month before Hiroshima on 6th August 1945 and the defeat of Japan). The Conservatives gained 36.2% of the vote (having gained 47.8% in 1935). Ten years later they had risen to a peak of 49.7% - in 1955. Looking at the graph over the period there is something of a downward trend but superposed on this are peaks and troughs …
A common approach is to look at the numbers and look at the graphs and find patterns. A different approach is to hypothesise a model that would generate the numbers and test how good that model is. Below I present the same procedure as in the analysis for the Liberal Democrats. In the last few days though I think the hierarchy of competition approach is better.
The hierarchy of competition approach
“We can think of a hierarchy of party competition for votes: Conservatives in the two-party contest with Labour; the Lib Dems in a three-party competition with both Conservative and Labour; and Other parties in competition with the three main parties.
The Conservative vote can be expressed in terms of an equation, involving three numbers: the percentage of Conservative votes in the two-party contest with Labour; the percentage of Conservative and Labour votes combined in the three-party contest with Lib Dems; and the three main party combined vote.”
Thus the Conservative vote has three components and so the trajectory of the Conservative vote is the product of these three trajectories. The trajectory of the two-party contest is like the swinging of a pendulum with an equilibrium at 50.2%. The three-party trajectory involves jump then slump between the two equilibria as discussed in the report on the Liberal Democrat party. The three main party combined vote shows a downward trend over the period.
The two-party pendulum
Rather than looking at the straightforward percentage Conservative vote, C, we can consider the Conservative share of the combined two main party vote, C/(C+L). The trajectory is similar. Here though the equilibrium share is 50.2%. This model explains 25% of the variation, p=0.04 (Percentage of variation is a quite distinct concept from the percentage of the vote).
In the equation, the percentage x at time t+1 depends on the percentage x at time t; it depends on the equilibrium percentage, 50.2, in other words half the share; the weights are (1-w) and w respectively … here (1-w)=0.53 and w=0.47; and random error ε. The two weights show that the previous percentage has the same weight as does the equilibrium value.
. x(t+1) = (1-w) (50.2) + w x(t) + ε
[Current polls give the Conservative two-party share at maybe somewhere between 34.8% and 42.6% … based on 24/69 and 29/68 respectively. In 2019 it was 57.5% … based on 43.6/75.8.]
The same procedure as in the analysis for the Liberal Democrats
We now consider how we might model the time series for these percentages. A detailed analysis has been carried out for the 1945-2015 period:
(Chapter 12: Time series: UK general elections, 1945 to 2015. pp. 244-265. 258
Burt, Gordon. Values, World Society and Modelling Yearbook 2015. 2017. Cambridge Scholars.)
Let us consider a number of models starting with the simplest models and progressing to more complex models. Note that there have been only twenty-one general elections in the period we are studying and this is rather a small sample size to draw definite conclusions.
.(1) Constant
The simplest model is that the percentage stays constant over time. Clearly this model is false.
.(2) Independent … the mean
There is a distribution of percentages and the percentage in one election is a random event selected from the distribution and is independent of the percentages in the other elections. An estimate of the mean of the distribution is given by the mean of the percentages over the period (1945-2015), namely 40.5% [actually the equilibrium
in (4) below].
.(3) Independent … bimodal
As in (2). However, noting that the distribution may be bimodal, one can think of a lower mode and an upper mode. The Conservative percentages do not display bimodality.
.(4) Dependent … autoregressive model, AR(1)
Each election percentage may depend on one or more of the previous election percentages … possibly with some random error. The simplest such model is a linear dependence on just the previous percentage. The linear model may correspond to a weighted sum of the previous percentage and the equilibrium percentage, namely 40.5%. This model explains 41% of the variation. (Percentage of variation is a quite distinct concept from the percentage of the vote).
In the equation, the percentage x at time t+1 depends on the percentage x at time t; it depends on the equilibrium percentage, 40.5%; the weights are (1-w) and w respectively … here (1-w)=0.37 and w=0.63; and random error ε. The two weights show that the previous percentage has greater weight than does the equilibrium value.
. x(t+1) = (1-w) (40.5) + w x(t) + ε
.(5) Dependent … binary state equilibria
Not applicable to Conservative percentages – see (3) above.
.(6) Dependent … binary autoregressive model, AR(1) … binary equilibria
Not applicable to Conservative percentages (this model explains only 14% of the variation) – see (3) above.
.(7) Orbiting binary equilibrium models
Catastrophe theory and complexity theory offer a variety of models for switches in the orbiting of binary equilibria. Not applicable to Conservative percentages – see (3) above.
Part 4
Differing opinion in the Conservative party …
Of course there is differing opinion in the Conservative party – as there is in any party. The Observer refers to Tory turmoil.
One set of opinions in the Tory party are discussed in Chapter 2 of “Britannia…”:
Britannia: Three Prime Ministers and a Queen
An opposing point of view is expressed by the contributors to a book that has just come out, timed for the Conservative party conference:
… The Case for the Centre Right
“In recent years, the once familiar landscape of British politics has fundamentally changed. The Conservative Party in particular has undergone a profound transformation. Centre-right values that steered British politics for decades – internationalism, respect for the rule of law, fiscal responsibility, belief in our institutions – were cast aside in the wake of the Brexit referendum to the detriment of UK prosperity, electoral trust and the long-term fortunes of the Conservative Party.
But this radical rightwards shift can and must be reversed. In this bold intervention, David Gauke and other leading figures on the centre right – including Michael Heseltine, Rory Stewart, Amber Rudd, Gavin Barwell and Daniel Finkelstein - explore how the Conservative Party morphed into a populist movement and why this approach is doomed to fail. Together they make the case for a return to the liberal centre right, arguing with passion and conviction that the values that once defined the best of British conservatism remain essential both to the party and to the UK’s political future.”
https://www.wiley.com/en-us/The+Case+for+the+Centre+Right-p-9781509560837
YouTube with David Gauke: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2SNxviJ01Q
David Gauke: https://conservativehome.com/2023/09/25/david-gauke-introducing-a-new-book-that-ive-edited-the-case-for-the-centre-right;
Four years have now passed, and I still struggle to get my head around the fact that David Gauke is no longer in the Conservative Party. The man is sceptical of utopian schemes, uncomfortable with current spending levels, distrustful of radical change and quietly patriotic. Yet Gauke was one of 21 Conservative MPs who lost the whip in September 2019 after voting to take the legislative agenda away from the Government – a move which meant that Britain would not leave the EU …
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/books/non-fiction/review-case-centre-right-gauke-rory-stewart-heseltine/
Gordon Burt, 3 October 2023
THE END
[1] Lambert, Harry. (Ed.) “A history of every general election since 1945 in 12 graphs.” New Statesman. January 6, 2015. Accessed 25 October 2016.
http://www.may2015.com/featured/a-history-of-every-general-election-since-1945-in-12-graphs/.