Re: On Scots/Welsh Labour

[Ed George <edgeorge@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

In relation to Domhnal's (well-made and very welcome) comments, I'm
appending below a note I wrote last year.


****************


Now that the dust has settled, it is clear that the Left's analyses of
the recent British state general election have, practically without
exception, completely missed the essential point of what happened. A
typical view taken is to say that across the British state - in England,
Scotland and Wales - the Socialist Alliances, and the Scottish Socialist
Party made a modest but significant inroad into disillusioned Labour
voters, building a platform for the future. All the constituent parts of
the project stand happy with the result. And then there are those who,
taking the contrary position, point out that, however pitiful Labour's
vote may have been, that of the Socialist Alliances and the Scottish
Socialist Party taken together are dwarfed by comparison. Yet to argue
the issue in these terms is to completely misunderstand the new stage of
divergence within British state politics that the election highlights.
In order to appreciate what is going on, it is necessary to look at the
results not on a British state level, but first to examine what happened
in each of the national constituent parts of the British state (and
excluded from what follows, for obvious reasons, will be the north of
Ireland).

First, how are we to judge the performance of the Socialist Alliance
campaign in England? While it is indeed bizarre that Labour's landslide
at Westminster was founded on only around a quarter of the electorate, I
think it is difficult to go on from this to argue that there is anything
in the figures that vindicates the decision to run the Socialist
Alliance campaign. Outside three constituencies in which special factors
came into play, the overall average percentage poll of under two per
cent (in an election in which the turnout was staggeringly low anyway)
hardly indicates the emergence of anything like a significant layer
within the workers' movement breaking from labourism to the extent that
they are prepared to vote _against_ it. These kinds of numbers are what
are often called a 'BT vote' - i.e. 'family and friends'. So while the
degree of co-operation among the groups of the far left may be
gratifying, the actual content of this joint work rather seems far less
so.

But this in England. In Scotland, on the other hand, the 72,000 votes
won by the SSP does seem to have passed some kind of threshold. (And it
is again necessary to point out that there was no formal link between
the SSP and the Socialist Alliances.) In Scotland it really does look
like there is a different process underway - reflected this time round
by the vote for the SSP, but building on patterns already evident in the
way in which the old Scottish Militant and, to a lesser extent, the SWP
in Scotland have evolved. Not for nothing did Militant call their exit
from the Labour Party the 'Scottish Turn'; but by the same token the
different outcomes north and south of the border are plain to see.
Politics in Scotland seems to have been moving at a different rhythm
than in England for some time now, a significant fact that socialists in
Britain have to be able to understand and work with.

And what of Wales? Here the situation appears different again.
Commonplace in analyses of the election is the fact that Plaid 'did a
lot worse than expected', or some such [1]. One is tempted to ask
'expected' by whom? By some within Plaid I expect, but when did a small
party in a bourgeois democratic election ever do as well as it publicly
expected? The very same point could be made about the Alliance. In fact,
by any standards, Plaid did in fact remarkably well indeed, if a
comparison is made with the last British state general elections in
1997. Looking at the _total votes cast_ for the main parties in both
elections, we can see that not only was Plaid the only party to increase
its vote in Wales, but that it increased its vote by a whopping
twenty-one per cent.

Why was this so? Who were these new Plaid voters? Looking at the
figures, it is difficult to avoid the conclusion that they are former
Labour voters fed up with the current direction of the Party, especially
when it is born in mind that the biggest swings from Labour to Plaid
(again calculated using actual numbers of votes cast) tend to be
clustered in the traditional Labour bastions of the south Wales
coalfield. That this is so can be largely explained by the fact that
Plaid's policies are in general not only to the left of Labour's, but
also appear to be more in line with the aspirations of the latter's own
traditional supporters. This is not to say that Plaid, whose political
space these days appears a version of social democracy seen through
Welsh nationalist spectacles, has changed in nay fundamental way its
nature (at least not yet). But the critical point is that for a good
swathe of traditional Labour voters, it seems, a vote for Plaid is seen
as a vote in defence of the welfare state and public services: Plaid's
appeal to Labour voters would seem to lie in the popular perception that
Plaid are better defenders of traditional 'labourist' interests - are,
in fact, better 'Labourists' - than New Labour itself. As Daniel
Morrissey perceptively put it in a pre-election issue of Socialist
Outlook,

'A vote for Plaid is seen a means to defend the welfare state, and
public services generally, from the ravages of neo-liberalism. Secondly,
Plaid represents a greater self-confidence on the part of the Welsh
people, an impatience with the conservatism of the Labour Party and a
determination to develop solutions to national problems at a national
level.' [2]

And, crucially, the pattern of voting in Wales in June - a significant
swing from Labour to Plaid, especially in the south Wales coalfield, and
a pathetic performance by the left of Labour formations - is of course
_exactly_ the same pattern of voting that we saw in the Welsh Assembly
elections in 1999, save the fact that this time round it has been on a
much smaller scale. The reasons for this last feature should be obvious:
the Welsh working class is not stupid, and for the time being it is
going to take the question of Westminster government seriously. But the
pattern that we saw in 1999 is exactly the same, only this time with
smaller numbers. There is a real process here, different to that in both
England and in Scotland.

And this is the really fundamental point. Since the 1970s, the unitary
political system in the British state has been progressively breaking
down, and the fruits of this process are what we can discern in the June
results. The consequence today is that in England, especially in
metropolitan England, there is no significant radicalisation occurring
outside of the organisational or political confines of Labourism. In
Scotland, following on from the particular nature of the poll tax
movement and the specific features of the impact of the national
question, there has appeared a genuine large-scale radical current that
is beginning the break from the dominant current of British working
class politics, Labourism. In Wales, a different process is underway,
with a small but significant shift in political allegiance from Labour
to Plaid.

Aside from all debate on the merits or otherwise of the performance of
the Socialist Alliance, therefore, the real point is that a British
political outlook which does not recognise that England is not Scotland
and Wales is not England is not going to be able to address the real
political developments taking place within the British state working
class movement. What works in one part of the British state is
increasingly unsuited for the others. We forget this at our peril.

León, July 2001


NOTES

[1] See, for one example among many, Alan Thornett, 'New Labour: a
government with no mandate', _Socialist Outlook_ 46, in which the only
reference to Wales in a detailed analysis of the election results went
like this: 'In Wales the SA scored lower than in England with an average
in the six seats contested of 376. Plaid Cymru did a lot worse than
expected.'

[2] Daniel Morrissey, 'Election: Why it's different in Wales',
_Socialist Outlook_ 45.




APPENDIX: A STATISTICAL COMPARISON BETWEEN THE 2001 BRITISH STATE
GENERAL ELECTION IN WALES AND THE 1999 WELSH ASSEMBLY ELECTION.


1. Percentage change in the parties' votes: 1997-1999 and 1997-2001
compared.

                                      %      %
                                    change change
        1997      1999      2001     97-99  97-01

Lab    886,935   384,671   666,955    -57    -25
Cons   317,127   162,133   288,665    -49    - 9
Plaid  161,030   290,572   195,892    +81    +22
Lib    200,020   137,657   189,434    -31    - 5

T/out     74.0      46.0      61.6

METHOD: The percentage change 1997-1999 in each party's vote is given by
100*(V99-V97)/V97 and the percentage change 1997-2001 by
100*(V01-V97)/V97, where V97 = total votes cast in 1997, V99 = total
votes cast in 1999,and V01 = total votes cast in 2001. For the 1997
value the first ballot figure has been used.

SOURCES: figures for 1997 from Ceri Evans and Ed George, _Swings and
Roundabouts_ (Cardiff, 1999), figures for 2001 from
<http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/vote2001/results_constituencies/uk_breakdown/wales_1.stm>.



2.Constituency swings from Labour to Plaid: 1997 - 1999 and 1997 - 2001
compared.


    1997-1999              1997-2001

Const.      Swing      Const.      Swing

ISLWYN      25.0       NEATH       11.1
RHONDDA     24.0  2    MERTHYR     11.0
NEATH       22.0       OGMORE      10.4
SWANSEA E.  21.0       SWANSEA E.  10.2
MERTHYR     20.8       CAERPHILLY   9.7
OGMORE      20.1       ISLWYN       9.1
CYNON V.    19.7  2    B. GWENT     8.7
PONTYPRIDD  19.3       Newport W.   8.6
TORFAEN     18.6       LLANELLI     8.3  2
CAERPHILLY  18.2       TORFAEN      8.2
V. of Glam. 17.9       RHONDDA      7.5  2
B. GWENT    17.1       Alyn & D.    7.4
ABERAVON    16.8       V. of Glam.  7.4
Bridgend    16.0       ABERAVON     7.3
Clwyd S.    15.6       CYNON V.     7.1  2
GOWER       15.6       PONTYPRIDD   7.1
Swansea W.  15.5       Clwyd S.     6.7
Alyn & D.   15.4       Preseli      6.7
Newport W.  14.5       GOWER        6.6
LLANELLI    14.4  2    NEWPORT E.   6.6
NEWPORT E.  14.1       Carm. W.     6.5
Delyn       13.9       Cardiff W.   6.1
Preseli     13.9       Bridgend     6.0
V. of Clwyd 13.5       Swansea W.   6.0
Cardiff N.  12.9       Carm. E.     5.6  2
Carm. W.    12.6       Cardiff N.   5.4
Wrexham     12.6       Delyn        5.1
Monmouth    12.2       Wrexham      5.0
Cardiff S.  11.4       Monmouth     4.4
Cardiff C.  10.7       Cardiff C.   4.2
Conwy       10.7       Brecon & R.  3.9
Cardiff W.   9.8       V. of Clwyd  3.9
Carm E.      9.8  2    Montgomery.  3.6
Clwyd W.     8.1       Conwy        2.7
Brecon & R.  7.6       Cardiff S.   2.6
Ynys Môn     6.5  1    Ceredigion   0.6  1
Montgomery.  6.3       Clywd West   0.6
Caernarfon   4.5  1    Meirionnydd -2.0  1
Ceredigion   2.9  1    Ynys Môn    -3.1  1
Meirionnydd  2.8  1    Caernarfon  -4.2  1

METHOD: Swing calculated by the 'Butler' formula, only using as raw data
not percentage share of votes cast but percentage share of the
electorate. The formula is like this: SWING = ((L1 - L2)+(P2 - P1))/2,
where L1 = the Labour vote expressed as a percentage of the electorate
in the first election (1997 or 1999 depending), L2 = the Labour vote
expressed as a percentage of the electorate in the second election
(2001), P1 = the Plaid vote expressed as percentage of the electorate in
the first election and P2 = the 1997 Plaid vote expressed as a
percentage of the electorate in the second election .

The numbers to the right of the swings indicate the relative position of
Plaid in 1997: 1 signifies that Plaid was the largest party, 2 the
second largest party.

South Wales 'coalfield' and 'semi-coalfild' constituencies are
capitalised. (By 'semi-coalfield' constituency, what is referred to is
either a constituency immediately adjacent to the south Wales coalfield
itself which incorporates a part of the coalfield within its territory
(e.g. Gower), or a constituency immediately adjacent to the coalfield
which is notably similar in socio-economic profile (e.g. Swansea East).)

SOURCES: figures for 1997 from <http://www.election.demon.co.uk/>,
figures for 2001 from
<http://www.telegraph.co.uk/et?ac=002549632124328&rtmo=QeSSzeLR&atmo=rrrrrrrq&pg=/et/missions/election01/vnresa.html>

(To find out where these places are, try taking a look at
<http://www.lgbc-wales.gov.uk/BCW/bcwengconstmap.htm>. The bit we're
really interested in is that clustered bit at the bottom. For how this
area is related to the coalfield itself, see the maps at
<http://homepage.ntlworld.com/ross.cuthbertson/geol_sw/dream%20geol.htm>.)

~~~~~~~
PLEASE clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.