23rd January
latest news: Anna's sweet and sticky pork buns

autonomous weapons

Raining death: Terminator-like reality?

Sunday, 15th January 2012

Kieran Lawrence looks at autonomous weapons and the effect they could have on modern warfare

Angela Merkel

Leader Profile: Angela Merkel

Wednesday, 11th January 2012

Continuing a series on world leaders, Miles Deverson takes a look at Angela Merkel

Rick Santorum

US Blog: Iowa told us nothing and New Hampshire might do the same

Tuesday, 10th January 2012

Ben Bland examines the fallout from the Iowa caucuses and looks forward to the New Hampshire primaries.

Sarkozy

Leader Profile: Nicholas Sarkozy

Monday, 9th January 2012

In the first of a series on world leaders, Miles Deverson takes a look at Nicholas Sarkozy

David Cameron
James Murdoch
Blue Duck Christmas
Christmas tree
Christmas bauble
Kim Jong-Il
Hamid Karzai
Nick Clegg
White House

An analysis of the political parties 2010

british flag
Monday, 19th April 2010
It can be a confusing time for many people. Another election approaches and as many keen political observers move into the limelight, the general public find themselves inundated with political jargon and complex analyses. In a bid to try and be useful to the average person, I attempt to explore the political parties (and leadership) of the 2010 UK General Election in a more layman manner.

First up, the Labour Party. Historically the party of the working class, they currently hold a large majority. But has their time in charge, now well over a decade, given them a keen knowledge of what the general public want?

Labour

Their manifesto attempts to explain their beliefs and indeed offers us an overall summary. “The argument of this Manifesto is that to deliver a future fair for all we need to rebuild our economy, protect and reform our public services as we strengthen our society and renew our politics.”

At first glance, their policies agree; building a “high-growth economy”, education for “every child”, a “patient-centred NHS” and “democratic reform” fall in line with that belief. Gordon Brown claims that the manifesto is “modern” and “progressive”, but is it? The document deliberately mentions Value Added Tax but fails to promise keeping it level.

Their policies continually discuss the generation of wealth through encouraging investment and supporting entrepreneurs/small businesses. Prior to 1990, this would have definitely been seen as a dramatic shift in priorities but it falls directly in line with New Labour’s history, albeit with a slight shift to the left.

Gordon Brown himself has changed little during the years, despite varied opinion polls. The problems that people once had with him, however, appear to have all but vanished and once more the public seem to be taking him seriously. In the first leadership debate, we see that he’s not afraid to crack a joke at another party’s expense or to stand firm, which is good news to Labour supporters.

A summary: Labour’s policies are similar to those of previous General Elections and, though Gordon Brown is stepping up to the leadership plate, he’s perhaps doing it a couple of years too late.

Conservatives

The Conservative Party are leading the polls and have done so in every single YouGov poll since October 2007. Recently, however, and especially since the leadership debate, they have seen the polls narrow to an almost perfect three-way battle. Their manifesto was written before this drop, but can we tell?

The categories of their manifesto seem to identify their preferences fairly well: “Change the economy; change society; change politics; protect the environment (and) promote the national interest”.

Their economic focus is similar to that of Labour’s, with preferences towards a safer banking system and a trickle-down economy. Their political policies on transparency and openness seem to have likewise permeated every party since the “Expenses Scandal”. Unlike Labour, however, they have plans to massively cull ‘bureaucracy’ by decentralising power and have labelled the environment and international aid as important expenditures. These popularist policies aren’t necessarily indications of priorities, however - their tackling of ‘waste’ is used to fill any budget holes that they find; their environmental policies are nothing but token gestures and their international aid policy only contrasts the BNP: nobody else is indicating the opposite.

Whilst “change” is the label that they are using, their policies still appear to be, in general, remarkably similar to those of previous years. Decentralisation, nationalism and laissez-faire economics show an undercurrent of Thatcherite policy. Though they have emphasised their green policies, support for international aid and have highlighted education and health as areas for improvement, they are definitely still the Conservative Party.

David Cameron’s leadership has done them well; despite a poor 2005 election result, they have been ahead in the polls for over two years and their leader has shown both strength and tact. They have marketed themselves well and sought to make themselves appear more down-to-earth. In the recent leadership debate, he avoided saying anything controversial or overly ‘Tory’ but failed to make a major impact - perhaps a succinct summary of his time in charge.

A summary: The Conservatives’ policies are similar to those of previous General Elections and, although David Cameron has dropped recently in the polls, he’s still leading by a few percent.

Liberal Democrats

The recent drop for Conservatives in the polls have been substantially helped by the Liberal Democrats. As recently as a month ago, they were seen as having “no hope of ever coming into power”; they are now almost level in the polls and seem likely to have forced the result to be a ‘hung parliament’ (in which none has a majority and parties are forced to cooperate to pass laws). Their leader fared well in the leadership debates, but how does their manifesto hold up?

“Fair taxes; a fair chance; a fair future; a fair deal”. Equality of opportunity, transparency of politics and environmental support suggests that the manifesto is most definitely liberal. Lowering taxes for the poorest and covering the budget gap by ‘closing loopholes’ - perhaps not the best way of covering a budget gap, but plausible enough. An extra £2.5 billion for schools to help cut class sizes, is another ambitious expenditure increase - and it looks like the cancellation of Trident (which would save £20 billion) is their response, one of the few policies that the Conservatives and Labour completely agree on opposing.

They also support a more proportional voting system and an elected House of Lords, as they have done in the past. Indeed all of their policies fall directly in line with traditional Lib Dem views but with more influence than in previous years, it will be interesting to see which policies they will prioritise.

Nick Clegg hasn’t been unpopular in his party (according to YouGov) since December 2008 and it’s now almost unthinkable. During the leadership debate he was able to market himself as a leader who could stand firm on important issues, ignore the childish bickering and fairly represent the public’s opinion. With more leadership debates in the future, and with all eyes watching him, there’s the opportunity to gain further ground on the two leading parties; but also the opportunity to lose the ground that has recently been made.

A summary: The Lib Dem policies are similar to those of previous General Elections and, though Nick Clegg has helped them to surge in the polls, they have a long way to go if they want to win.

Green Party

The Green Party focuses on the environment, fairness and the economy. They are pressing to reduce unemployment, to boost both minimum wage and pension levels, to push money towards environmentalism and to pay for it by increasing top-end income tax, cancelling Trident and introducing a fixed tax on banker bonuses. Free dental care, free eye tests, free insulation, 340,000 extra houses; the Green Party have really presented themselves as the left-wing alternative whilst stepping slightly away from their firm environmental base. This could easily be the year we see the first Green MP as their popularity is definitely rising on a national level.

United Kingdom Independence Party

UKIP focus on “straight talking”, “freedom”, “Europe” and “the economy” above virtually everything else. Unlike the three big parties, they have a section of their manifesto dedicated to fishing. Nothing else new, though.

Scottish National Party

The Scottish National Party haven’t yet published their manifesto but have stated that it will include proposals for more ‘green energy jobs (in) Scotland” - a risky move for a party based in the oil-rich Scottish economy. Little else has been disclosed, however.

DUP and Sinn Fein

Policy priorities for the DUP include pushing Northern Ireland towards the private sector, increasing education standards and improving hospital facilities. Sinn Fein focus on healthcare, education, the economy and more. The major Northern Ireland parties appear to align on a variety of specific issues.

Plaid Cymru

As the only party smaller than UKIP to release a full manifesto, Plaid Cymru have chosen to again include a pledge to try and bring UK troops home from the Middle East. They are also focusing on pensions, local businesses, environmentalism and the economy.

Monster Raving Loony Party

The Monster Raving Loony Party pledged to ensure that politicians stand by their policies or “at least admit that they were wrong”, to send our traffic wardens to Iraq (to give tickets to all “illegally parked” US military vehicles to raise revenus for the Iraqi government) and “make it illegal for superheroes to use their powers for evil”.

British National Party

Obviously, I have to also mention the British National Party. As well as their dubious policies and previously illegal membership rules, they are now being formally investigated by the Electoral Commission after an independent audit: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/election_2010/8620688.stm

Overall Summary

None of the parties appear to have changed too much compared to previous years. The changes, instead, seem to be in the circumstance - the recession and the MP Expenses saga damaged Labour but the recovery and leadership debates seem to be harming the Conservatives. At this point in time, it’s impossible to call this election in any direction and it means that your vote is more important than ever before. So please turn up on May 6 to vote!

For more information about the election, visit http://www.aboutmyvote.co.uk/

Check out The Yorker's Twitter account for all the latest news Go to The Yorker's Fan Page on Facebook
#1 Anonymous
Mon, 19th Apr 2010 11:36am

I think that Gordon Brown would be a better Prime Minister this time around. Good to see him taking on the other two! Go Labour.

#2 Anonymous
Mon, 19th Apr 2010 12:00pm

Gordon Brown is butters. Nick Clegg FTW.

#3 Anonymous
Mon, 19th Apr 2010 5:49pm

How on Earth have you come to understand that, "The public seem to be taking [Gordon] seriously"? Admittedly, he's currently playing second laughing stock to Cameron, but I've not come across anyone who's not hardcore Labour thinking our beloved comrade has any more ability to lead than he does to add up or smile.

#4 Jason Rose
Mon, 19th Apr 2010 10:39pm

I'm not certain I've met anyone who has ever called him 'comrade' - I guess we just move in different circles.

I guess that it could have been phrased more clearly, as could any other mention I made of the public - the actual public generally seem to think "Labour suck", "Conservatives suck", "everyone else stands no chance" - I have read a large number of opinions of the leadership debate and I haven't seen many that criticise Gordon Brown's style and he's being treated more kindly than Cameron - which I would take as an indication that he's being taken seriously?

That's just an attempt at explaining but not my actual rationale; it's not a wikipedia page so it's not needing to be cited. It's a comment piece and I could pick holes all the way through it if I wanted! In my personal opinion, none of the party leaders (including the Green Party, UKIP, Plaid Cymru etc.) is good enough to do the job of Prime Minister justice and I don't really take any of them seriously. But I suspect my job as a commentator is to at least say "chin up"

#5 daisy forecep
Tue, 20th Apr 2010 8:42am

Nice analysis Jason, with a good mix of up-to-date policy information and an overview of the traditional ethos of each party.

I think it's interesting to pick up on the catechism of the Conservative campaign and its inherent incompatibility to Tory values: "Whilst “change” is the label that they are using, their policies still appear to be, in general, remarkably similar to those of previous years. Decentralisation, nationalism and laissez-faire economics show an undercurrent of Thatcherite policy."

Change is just a vacuous buzz word: he means change from the current system, but that certainly isn't progressive according to the average person's socio-economic handbook!

I think it is easy to be overly critical of Brown for obvious reasons. He hasn't been elected, he has inherited a war, and he has followed a charismatic leader and is now against another. That doesn't mean he isn't fit to run the country. I think actually, a sheen of competency and being able to talk the talk like Cameron is more disingenuous, and it upsets me that people won't look past the facade of a television debate and see the competency of a Labour Cabinet that it not massively hierarchical in structure and thus isn't wholly reflective of the person who represents them. If you were to fully look at Labour polcies, you would see that in the current climate these are the only ones that really, to use a cliche, demonstrate a respect for all of society and a desire to improve social mobility. And help EVERYONE get out of the economic mess.

#6 Anonymous
Wed, 21st Apr 2010 8:33pm

Yeah, good analysis. Still not sure who to vote for though!

Add Comment

You must log in to submit a comment.