No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
The British Political Scene Since the General Election
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 01 August 2014
Extract
A general election has been aptly compared to an instantaneous photograph of a galloping horse. It is a static representation of a public opinion that is by its very essence perpetually changing, and a newly elected House of Commons has not yet met before it is in a sense out of date and no longer fully representative. Even if a general election photograph had permanent significance, it would be open to the criticism of inaccuracy at the time of taking. Readers of this Review are aware of the misleading character of the British electoral machine—of the fact that whenever more than two candidates contest a constituency, the one elected may very well represent but a fraction over a third of the electorate; so that election statistics show a serious discrepancy between the distribution of votes and the allocation of seats.
On the eve of dissolution, the House of Commons comprised 400 Conservative, 162 Socialist, and 46 Liberal members, with seven Independents. The new House comprises 289 Socialists, 260 Conservatives, 59 Liberals, and seven Independents. This distribution of seats, we have said, does not accurately correspond to that of votes cast, since the Socialists polled 8,370,005 votes, the Conservatives 8,641,170, and the Liberals 5,295,308. The usual explanation of the discrepancy is that the Labor party had all the luck of the three-cornered contests in which a minority candidate was returned. This, however, happens to be false; that luck went to the Conservatives: of 313 successful “minority” candidates, 153 are Conservatives, 122 Socialists, and 38 Liberals; while of 291 seats held by a clear majority, Socialists have 166, Conservatives 105, and Liberals 20.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © American Political Science Association 1929
References
1 These figures vary slightly according to the classification given to certain Independent members, who are usually in fact closely connected with one of the three parties.
2 Which, of course, they would have had, and fifteen more, had their seats corresponded to their actual poll.
3 The spirit of unity created by the war was the real destroyer of the barrier that divided the Church from Dissenters. Even disestablishment is no longer a live issue among the latter; it is demanded only by some of the Catholic sections of the Anglican Church.
4 The areas in which Liberalism remains strong are precisely those in which there remains a strong Nonconformist tradition—Cornwall, Devon, Bedford, East Anglia.
5 “Nothing whatever did the late Government so much harm as the feeling which spread throughout the country last year that they had a chilling and unlucky touch in Anglo-American relations.” Observer.
6 I am indebted for the details following to an article by Professor Laski in Time and Tide for June 7.
7 Women are still debarred from sitting in the upper house, even if peeresses in their own right.
8 A possible compromise would be the passing of a statute authorizing the creation of Lords of Parliament, sitting in the upper house, but without a peerage—on the analogy of the Lords of Appeal. But this legislation would require the consent of the upper house and is equivalent to permanent upper-chamber reform.
9 It might, as in France, enable cabinet posts to be entrusted to non-members of Parliament.
Comments
No Comments have been published for this article.