Voting behaviourJoan Garrod

FOTO

LIA

Voting behaviour

Falling turnout

Politicians from all parties are increasingly concerned by the falling turnout rate

at UK elections, particularly general elections.

The turnout rate measures the proportion of those who are eligible to vote who

actually do so.

There are two related problems:

A growing number of people, especially first-time voters and those

from minority ethnic groups, are not registered to vote, thus making themselves

ineligible.

Even among those registered to vote, a growing number fail to actually cast

their vote.

Turnout at local elections, by-elections and European parliamentary elections is

much lower than at general elections.

Voting behaviour

Turnout at general elections

The following table gives the UK percentage turnout at general elections

in selected years.

Year Turnout Year Turnout

1945 72.8 1992 77.7

1950 83.9 1997 71.4

1964 77.1 2001 59.4

1979 76.0 2005 61.4

1987 75.3 2010 65.1

Voting behaviour

Why people don’t vote (1)

In December 2013, ICM Research carried out a survey for the Guardian

newspaper.

They interviewed an online sample of 2,023 adults aged 18+ between

20 December and 22 December.

The following slide shows some of the reasons non-voters gave for

not voting.

Voting behaviour

Why people don’t vote (2)

Voting behaviour

From the same research, here are some people’s feelings towards politicians.

Why people don’t vote (3)

Voting behaviour

Reasons for not voting

Political parties, both in and out of government, appear to have a problem

inspiring trust among the electorate, and also in presenting themselves as

sufficiently different from one another.

The Guardian research showed that:

64% of respondents identified the failure of governments to honour their

pledges as something that would put them off voting

26% regarded the parties as ‘so similar that [voting] makes little difference’

Voting behaviour

Role models?

Recently, two well-known figures revealed that they had never voted — they were

the former England footballer Michael Owen and the comedian/broadcaster Russell

Brand. It has been suggested that high-profile figures such as these revealing their

lack of participation in voting would put off some people, especially younger voters,

from taking part in elections.

Discussion point:

To what extent do you think that younger voters might be influenced

by these views?

Voting behaviour

It’s not just turnout that mattersWhile there is understandable concern at falling turnout rates, there seems to

be an even greater problem for UK democracy — the growing inequality in

turnout.

Participation in elections is falling fastest among the young and the least

affluent.

This means that the well-off and older voters have a disproportionate

influence over government policies.

Such unequal turnout reduces the incentives for governments to respond to

the interests of non-voters. This leads to the growing conviction among non-

voters that politics has little to offer them and does not represent their

interests, making them even less likely to vote.

Voting behaviour

The growing gap

In 1987, there was a four-point gap in the turnout rate between the highest income

groups and the poorest of the electorate.

In 2010, the gap had increased to 23 points.

If we take ‘young voters’ as those aged between 18–24, and ‘older voters’ as those aged

66 and over:

in 1970, the gap in the turnout rate between young and older voters was

18 points

in 2010, the gap had increased to 32 points

This is significant because research shows that those who vote when they are young are

more likely to continue to vote as they get older. It seems now that younger people

are less likely than those from previous generations to get into the habit of voting.

Voting behaviour

Consequences (1)

The Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) published a report, ‘Divided

democracy’, in November 2013. Part of the report was an analysis of the impact

of the 2010 spending review on voters and non-voters.

This showed that those groups who voted in the 2010 general election faced cuts

worth 12% of their annual household income.

However, groups of non-voters faced cuts worth 20% of their annual household

income.

The cuts had a disproportionate effect on the young and the poor — precisely those

groups who are least likely to vote.

Voting behaviour

Consequences (2)

The IPPR analysis also showed that:

Those with annual household incomes of less than £10,000 stand to lose the

equivalent of 41% of their average income through cuts.

Those with annual incomes of over £60,000 will lose on average £2,104,

representing just 3% of this group’s average income.

The average loss in services and benefits amounts to £1,850 per voter,

compared to £2,135 per non-voter.

Voting behaviour

A solution?

Clearly, non-voters are at a disadvantage in terms of government policies.

The IPPR argue that the best way to boost political participation among hard-to-

reach groups is by compulsory voting. This is currently practised in about a

quarter of the world’s democracies, including Belgium and Australia. In

Belgium, the turnout has averaged 93% in the elections since 1946, while over

the same period the turnout in Australia has averaged 95%.

Voting itself is not required by law — what is compulsory is attendance at the polls.

Discussion point:

What do you see as the advantages and disadvantages of such

systems?

Voting behaviour

A compromise? (1)

The IPPR report proposes a compromise — namely that first-time voters in the

UK should be obliged to go to the polls, on the first occasion that they are eligible

to vote.

They would only be compelled to attend — ballot papers would have a box

entitled ‘None of the above’ in order for voters to register that they did not wish to

cast a vote for any of the candidates listed.

The IPPR suggests that to ensure a high participation rate, there should be a small

fine for non-attendance.

Voting behaviour

A compromise? (2)

The IPPR’s arguments for this proposal are:

having been to the polls once, young voters would be more likely to continue

going in the future

politicians would be forced to pay attention to young voters and their interests

Discussion point:

What are your views on this proposal, given the knowledge of the

disadvantages of non-voting?