Why did Labour become ‘New’ in the mid 1990s?

Authors Avatar

WHY DID LABOUR BECOME ‘NEW’ IN THE MID 1990s?

The Labour Party won only six of the fourteen general elections and formed the government for a mere 17 of the 52 years between 1945 and 1997.  Moreover Labour held office with a sizeable majority on only two occasions (1945-50 and 1966-70), ruling with tiny majorities for five years and as a minority government for two years.  Also, whereas both major parties' share of the vote declined after 1970, the fall in the Labour vote over the subsequent six elections was more marked.  While its average share of the vote between 1945 and 1970 was slightly ahead of the Conservatives at 46.05 per cent compared with 45.25 per cent, its average vote between February 1974 and 1992 dropped to a paltry 34.3 per cent, compared with the Conservatives' 40.06 per cent.  Between its post-war peak in 1951 and 1992, Labour's vote fell by 2.4 million.

Explanations of Labour's decline can be grouped into the long-term and short-term. First, the contraction of the working class and trade unionism and the expansion of the middle class and of the home-owning sector resulted in an approximate 6 per cent reduction of the Labour vote and an increase in the Conservative vote by about 4 per cent between 1964 and 1987. With the south-east enjoying a prolonged boom and the north sunk in recession, skilled workers in the south-east became more likely in the 1980s to vote Conservative and Labour was ,‘driven back to its Northern redoubts’. Among the new working class living in the south, the Conservatives enjoyed a 46 per cent to 28 per cent lead over Labour in 1987.  Labour remained dominant over Conservative only in the traditional working class of the north of England and Scotland, which voted 57 per cent to 29 per cent in its favour.

The short-term explanation relates to public perceptions of the party's behaviour in office and its internal divisions. The Wilson and Callaghan governments (1964-1970, 1974-79) proved disappointing to Labour supporters and Labour’s failure between 1979 and 1992 also rested on perceptions of its disunity, fostered by its 1981 split (when some leading figures in the party left to form a new Social Democratic Party) and the bitter internal warfare of the early 1980s.  

It is argued that New Labour was a response to Labour’s failings in the past. Labour’s lack of electoral success and the decline of its natural base, the working class were both major contributors to the birth of New Labour. But there were other motivations for the move away form ‘Old’ Labour principals. The success of some Thatcherite values such as widening home-ownership made Labour look out of touch. Changing world economic conditions (the so-called globalisation of the economy, which has intensified competition) meant that Labour had to look outwards, rather than inwards, to a free market world in order to succeed. Also the Wider influences of the collapse of communism, which seemed to confirm the superiority of market capitalism, increased the pressure of change.

Join now!

Electoral reform in the 19th century gave an increasing number of working class men the vote. The Labour Party was set up in the beginning of the 20th century specifically to represent the interest of these newly enfranchised working class men in Parliament. The Labour party owed its existence to the support of the trade union movement, of which links have remained ever since. A process of class dealignment has taken away much of the Labour Party’s natural base. As Crewe put it:

‘In the 1945-70 period, nearly two thirds of all voters voted for their class party. From February 1974 ...

This is a preview of the whole essay