Should the 1997 general election be viewed as a 'critical election'?

The Conservative party was rife with problems toward the end of their term, so much so that ‘by the time John Major finally got round to calling the 1997 election, almost everyone knew Labour was going to win, the only question was by how much’. First and foremost the party had great divisions within itself over certain issues especially Europe. The moderates felt joining the European union was necessary and beneficial to the British economy, but the more hard line party rightists argued any form of government intervention was bad whether in be from Brussels or Parliament. Europe was a problem for the Conservatives not only because of how it split the party but the amount of time and energy it took, the party was often criticised for over debating the European issue instead of concerning itself with more pressing domestic issues. This was a sign of party falling out of touch with what the public wanted from its government, the Tory’s seemed to have lost their way. The divide in the party was another problem which for many represented John Major’s weaknesses as a leader, Major never looked at ease with the media as much as Blair or have his opponents skill to use ‘spin’ effectively. He never seemed to come across as convincing and able in his role as Prime Minister or leader of the Conservatives. On many occasions Major didn’t appear to have his party fully in control, this was partly down to their divisions on Europe and inability to move politically in the same direction but also with regards to the breakdown in the party’s image. The Conservatives moved rapidly from being the natural party in power to a party out of touch with Britain and even itself. It was almost as if their own success was their downfall, after a record 18 years in power they no longer appeared to have a grasp pf what was required to form able and popular government. They failed to modernise and appeal to larger base of a changing electorate, the majority of their support came from voters aged over 65. The party was also plagued by the media for reports of ‘sleaze’ in the party. In particularly Neil Hamilton and the ‘cash for questions scandal’, asking questions in Parliament for cash handouts wasn’t what the party needed at a time when they’re honesty and integrity was being bought into question. This was yet another example of Major losing his grip on party activity. Even though they won the 1992 general election the Conservatives began losing the support of the electorate and never looked like recovering. This loss in support of the electorate following the win in 1992 was largely down to despite promises not to raise taxes they did so twice. In the 1992 Tory election campaign the party attacked Labour for their intentions to raise taxes. This raising of taxes resulted in the party’s honesty coming under fire, and furthermore seriously the loss of two by-elections. So the wheels were in motion for the Conservatives to slip up prior to the 1997 election, the party were in a state of disarray they seemed to be on a downward spiral. The party approached the election unprepared for the challenge that New Labour and Tony Blair would mount, they appeared disillusioned and comfortable with 18 years of power behind them. To argue 1997 was critical it is essential to look at the Conservatives at present and the effect of the election on the party. In my opinion the party continued on a downward slope after 1997 because firstly they still focused to heavily on Europe and also because they continued to suffer from bad leadership and an inability to get back in touch with Britain. This was primarily why the party suffered defeat again in 2001, and have failed to show the type of unity Labour expressed when they came into power. An example of both poor leadership and party divides was when the party forced the resignation of their leader Iain Duncan Smith. This split the party in two and more importantly it was done so through the media and with the British public as witnesses to this, at one stage a mediocre farce depicting a play ground row among children. The most convincing Iain Duncan Smith looked as the leader of his party was when battling against his conspirators to remain in power, prior to this he did very little to amount a challenge worthy of mention to Labour or return his ailing party to former glory. Michael Howard was then appointed party leader and in it must be said since his time as party leader the only time he has effectively challenged Blair was with regard to the ‘Iraq Dossier’ and the question of whether Britain should have gone to war in Iraq. Although the party appears united Howard has done little to improve the party image or make the public identify with them once again. Also the party never seem to fully capitalise on any mistakes on behalf of the government or use their advantage of being the opposition to rattle the Labour party somewhat. The effect of the 1997 general election on the Conservative party strongly argue the case for the election being critical, 1997 sent the Tory’s on a downward spiral to a place where they now appear in limbo waiting for some inspiration to return to form and be considered as serious contenders to a ever powerful Labour government.

The 1997 general election had evidently different impacts on the main party’s but I’d now like to look at its impact on the Liberal Democrats. The Lib Dems came into the election well aware that they could not challenge for government with the big two party’s, they instead planned to fight their election on a constituency-to-constituency level. This basically means unlike Labour or the Tory’s they didn’t have many set policies instead what they tended to do was depending upon the main opposition in an individual constituency they adapted their own candidate’s policy to oppose that of the favoured candidate. In places where labour had a more hard-line following they offered a Tory like candidate but with the independence expected of Lib Dem candidate and did the opposite in constituency’s where the Conservatives were more in favour. This allowed them to piece by piece pick off any loose seats left by labour or the Tory’s in places where people were looking for a fresh approach. The party had some success prior to the election in the form of by-election victories at the expense of the Conservatives as well as sweeping council gains. This method of taking on constituency’s one by one meant that during the 1997 general election the Lib Dems made a shift from being another minor party to a clear third option, they progressed on the political stage. Their weakness came mostly in the form of their leader, Paddy Ashdown a nonchalant character often described mockingly by the media as ‘Inaction Man’, and said to be better suited to appearing on television quiz shows then participating in politics. The Lib Dems have always had the luxury of appearing unattached and independent, something Labour and the Tory’s have never been able to do. Also because they have never been in power there are no examples of their inability to govern or reason to question their integrity. The 1997 election proved critical for the Lib Dems because it changed the course of the party and saw them appeal to a new part of the electorate. They have since appointed a new leader in Charles Kennedy, under whom there is talk of the party becoming a third main party or even going on to ‘replace the Conservatives as the second party and main opposition to New Labour’.

The Conservative party won the 1979 general election by a landslide victory, since winning the election they remained in power for 18 years until defeated in the election in question. The 1979 general election was viewed as critical, by comparing the two elections many similarities become apparent. The Labour party were in power, and at the time they were a left wing socialist party who looked to be nearing a transitional period due to changes in the political climate, comparable of course to Major government of 1997 who were stuck on one side of the political spectrum also albeit the opposite side. Labour also experienced problems with economy and they suffered ‘The winter of discontent’, problems they had great difficulty dealing with also very much like the Major government. The Conservatives fought their election campaign by successfully changing the party order to New Rightism, a fresh ideal for the electorate, as was New Labour’s approach. Another similarity can be found in that of both times the winning party’s were led by charismatic and powerful leaders, Margaret Thatcher in the case of the Tory’s in 1979 and Tony Blair for New Labour in 1997. Lastly the two main factors in both elections were the winning party’s gained the middle ground of the electorate and to their favour experienced a change in the partisan loyalties of the electorate.

After considering the effects of the election on the three main parties’ and considering the criteria for what makes an election critical. With the comparison of the 1979 election I must conclude that in my opinion the 1997 general election was indeed critical due to it long term effects on the fortunes of the three parties’ and the way in which the partisan loyalties of the electorate were not only questioned but changed with long lasting effect. Considering Britain current political climate I would expect Labour to remain in power for many years to come, whether under Tony Blair’s leadership is questionable.