As though in riposte to
our debate on electoral reform, the Conservative poll lead
fell to 2 per cent nationally over the weekend - a margin small enough that, were this a national election rather than an internet poll of roughly 2,000 adults, election experts would translate this outcome to a Labour victory, with a majority of seats no less. Politics being what they are, this, more than any argument, might be what it takes to reverse Tory opposition to a more proportional form of representation.
But how exactly do experts make these translations? If the assumption was that the parties' support would be spread exactly evenly across the country (a silly assumption, but still...), then the Tories 37 per cent support would be in line to capture all 646 seats. Or if, as one popular
seat reckoner assumes, the swing were spread evenly across the country, then the Tories would wind up with 275 seats, up 77 from their current tally but still 46 behind Labour.
This assumption too is, of course, silly, especially given that the exerted efforts of
Lord Ashcroft's team in targeting marginal seats gives reason to believe that the Tory-wise swing might be concentrated “where it counts.” Hence the news that despite sinking poll numbers, the Tories are likely to pick up
a dozen key seats in London from Labour and the Lib Dems. Notwithstanding, some experts hold that the Conservatives will need to be a full 10 percentage points ahead in the general vote to avoid a Labour victory. Which puts them “behind” even if their 2 per cent turns out to have been anomalously low.
As
Geoffrey Wheatcroft's compelling article in the FT suggests, the disproportionality of parliamentary elections hasn't always systematically disadvantaged the Conservatives:
“In 1955 the Tories beat Labour by 344 to 277 seats with no more than a 3.1 per cent lead in the popular vote, and in 1970 by 330 to 287 with 3.4 per cent. Indeed in 1951, the Tories won 321 to 295 seats - and held power for another 13 years - although they were actually behind in the popular vote.”
Indeed, it is a recent phenomenon that Labour has become the chief beneficiary of disproportional representation, currently faring better in seats with low population and low turnout. On one level, the success of Cameron's modernising project could be put down to a Conservative recognition that electoral success under First Past the Post requires disentrenching and broadening support geographically. If successful, it would provide a powerful pragmatic defence of First Past the Post. If it fails, Gordon Brown could remain Prime Minister with less than 30 per cent support amongst those who vote...