Latest Event Updates
This summer will be busy for politics in the UK as both the Labour Party and Liberal Democrats are elected new leaders of their parties.
It is therefore perfect timing for a trilogy of books on British political leaders. I’ve co-edited two of these on British Labour Leaders (with Charles Clarke) and British Conservative Leaders (with Charles Clarke, Tim Bale and Patrick Diamond). A third, on British Liberal Leaders has been edited by colleagues at the Liberal History Group.
All books begin by considering how we can assess political leaders and the challenges that we face in doing so. Jim Buller and I then set out a statecraft framework (or an adapted version of anyway) as one way forward. Charles Clarke then gives a statistical overview of each leader’s fortunes at general elections. In Part II of each book there are chapters assessing each leader, written by leading biographers of their subject. In Part III we have exclusive interviews with some of the leaders themselves (Tony Blair, Neil Kinnock, William Hague, Michael Howard, David Steel, Paddy Ashdown and Nick Clegg) on how they think we should assess leaders and their reflections on their own time in office.
The books are now available for pre-order.
The contents/contributors to the books that I’ve co-edited are:
British Labour Leaders
Part I: FRAMEWORKS FOR ASSESSING LEADERS
1 Introduction: the British Labour Party in search of complete leadership – Toby S. James
2 Statecraft: a framework for assessing Labour Party leaders – Toby S. James and Jim Buller
3 Measuring the success or failure of Labour leaders: the general election test – Charles Clarke
Part II: ASSESSMENTS OF LABOUR LEADERS
4 Keir Hardie – Kenneth O. Morgan
5 George Nicoll Barnes and William Adamson – William W. J. Knox
6 John Robert Clynes – Phil Woolas
7 Ramsay MacDonald – David Howell
8 Arthur Henderson – Chris Wrigley
9 George Lansbury – John Shepherd
10 Clement Attlee – Nicklaus Thomas-Symonds
11 Hugh Gaitskell – Brian Brivati
12 Harold Wilson – Thomas Hennessey
13 James Callaghan – Peter Kellner
14 Michael Foot – Kenneth O. Morgan
15 Neil Kinnock – Martin Westlake
16 John Smith – Mark Stuart
17 Tony Blair – John Rentoul
18 Gordon Brown – Steve Richards
19 Ed Miliband – Tim Bale
Part III: LEADERSHIP PERSPECTIVES
20 Neil Kinnock on leadership, the Labour Party and statecraft theory – Neil Kinnock, Toby S. James and Charles Clarke
21 Tony Blair on leadership, New Labour and statecraft theory – Tony Blair, Toby S. James and Charles Clarke
British Conservative Leaders
Part I: FRAMEWORKS FOR ASSESSING LEADERS
1 Introduction – Tim Bale, Patrick Diamond and Alan Wager
2 Statecraft: a framework for assessing Conservative Party leaders – Toby S. James and Jim Buller
3 Measuring the success or failure of Conservative leaders: the general election test – Charles Clarke
Part II: ASSESSMENTS OF CONSERVATIVE LEADERS
4 Sir Robert Peel – Richard A. Gaunt
5 Lord Derby – Angus Hawkins
6 Benjamin Disraeli – Robert Saunders
7 Lord Salisbury – T. G. Otte
8 Arthur Balfour – Nigel Keohane
9 Andrew Bonar Law – Andrew Taylor
10 Austen Chamberlain – David Dutton
11 Stanley Baldwin – Anne Perkins
12 Neville Chamberlain – Stuart Ball
13 Winston Churchill – John Charmley
14 Anthony Eden – David Dutton
15 Harold Macmillan – D. R. Thorpe
16 Alec Douglas-Home – Andrew Holt
17 Edward Heath – Mark Garnett
18 Margaret Thatcher – John Campbell
19 John Major – Anthony Seldon and Mark Davies
20 William Hague – Jo-Anne Nadler
21 Iain Duncan Smith – Timothy Heppell
22 Michael Howard – Tim Bale
23 David Cameron – Matthew d’Ancona
Part III: LEADERSHIP PERSPECTIVES
24 William Hague on leadership, the Conservative Party and statecraft theory – William Hague, Toby S. James and Charles Clarke
25 Michael Howard on leadership, the Conservative Party and statecraft theory – Michael Howard, Toby S. James and Charles Clarke
Toby James provides updates on some of the problems that voters have experienced casting their ballot at the 2015 UK General Election (the blog will be updated during the day).
The general election is underway and the polls are open. It is predicted to be a tightly fought contest. But has everything gone to plan organisationally? Allowing millions of citizens to cast their votes and have them counted is a major logistical challenge and election officials are often the ‘unsung heroes’ of democracy. In 2010, after all, there were scenes of chaos in some polling stations, all be it a few. Will the election be well run?
Read more, here
As scholars such as Susan Hyde have documented, it is now an international norm for national elections to be observed by overseas government officials and international organisations. Even governments that intend to deliberately manipulate the electoral process, counter-intuitively, invite electoral observers to document the quality of election.
On Tuesday 5th May I gave an overview of the UK’s systems for running elections, and all of its foibles, to the international observers at a session organised by The Electoral Commission and Dods Training.
I tried to stress three core messages:
- British elections are steeped in history with laws designed many years ago. The effects of laws can change over time, as times change, and may not always be fit for purpose anymore. For example
- The electoral system was designed for a two-party system (which is now creaking)
- The voting process has Victorian origins, requiring people to attend a particular polling station on Thursday, during certain hours (which may not meet people’s lifestyle in the 21st century)
- The cap on spending (set only recently) is not adjusted for inflation (which means that available spending for parties is shrinking – although it is not constraining them yet).
- Major change has been introduced in the area of electoral registration, which will impact on this election for the first time. Individual electoral registration has replaced a system of household registration. This may lead to a decline in already low voter registration rates, although online electoral registration may counteract that. Registration levels, however, are a concern.
- There are aspects of international best practice in the UK, from which many countries can learn, however. One particular innovation is the performance standards scheme.
My slides are here:
I was delighted to be invited to give the Opening Speech at the Association of Electoral Administrators conference in Brighton on Sunday night. The topic of my talk was ‘From here to where? Modernisation of electoral administration in Britain.’
Elections receive widespread coverage in the news and media. Many (normal) people will already be fed up with the media coverage on the UK general election in May, even if politicians, journalists and academics aren’t. But the focus is usually on the outcomes, parties and candidates. It is usually rare that we focus on the mechanics of how the election is run.
This is a major issue in the UK, however, because electoral registration rates are hitting crisis levels. Back in 2012 the Electoral Commission estimated that one in five people are not on the register. This is before the effects of individual electoral registration (IER) are felt, which is widely thought to lead to a decline in registration levels. This week the UK will see a second National Voter Registration Day, organised by Bite the Ballot, to which civil society is being recruited to help drive up registration rates. Even Ricky Tomlinson has added his voice to the cause.
With this in mind, I explored whether the registration and voting process could be made more convenient for the citizen. The methods used to run elections in Britain have Victorian origins. The methods for conducting the poll, for example, has its roots in the 1872 Secret Ballot Act. Society has changed and moved on since then.
I explained that research has shown the following to be effective at increasing registration and turnout levels:
- Election day registration
- ‘Motor voter’ registration
- Online voting
- Weekend voting (or holding elections on a holiday)
- (Caution about) Voter ID
- And we could also add all-postal elections
There is therefore a strong case for making these long term policy goals for 2025.
I stress 2025 and not 2020 because all of these goals would involve significant implementation challenges, which were widely discussed at the conference. And we should listen carefully to the electoral community in moving forward. They are uniquely placed to understand such challenges as they are on the front line of democracy.
As many administrators will tell you, the problem with the proposal for election-day registration is that when people currently register to vote online (it is great that they can now do this) the process is not yet finished. Usually unbeknown to the voter, their details will be checked against government databases before their registration can be verified. Electoral administrators need to time oversee this process. Given that May 2015 will be first election under IER, they will need plenty of time to do this.
Likewise, it will take time to build safe and secure online voting systems. Weekend voting is a challenge because electoral officials struggle to find premises.
Setting longer term goals, however, will allow a sense of direction forward. Electoral administrators, academics, the media and civil society should work together to forge an agenda for how elections can be reformed. This is important so that elections are not reformed with only a 5 year plan, set by governments who will have a watchful eye on how they can change the law to make it easier for them to win their next contest.
Planning ahead, we need to think about electoral administration in the round. The side effects of reforms need to be considered. IER, for example, might have reduced opportunities for electoral fraud. However, as I warned in 2011, it may also lead to reduced registrations, involve extra costs, cause election officials to retire early or outreach schemes to end. Elsewhere, I have proposed a framework for assessing electoral management to encourage us to think about this more holistically.
Most analysis of electoral administration usually ends there. But I think that the ‘back office’ of elections are also important. The policies that affect the people who run elections can facilitate better run elections. This is especially important because it that it is becoming harder and harder to run elections. Many electoral officials are having to ‘run faster, to standstill’. We therefore need to:
- Invest money in elections
- Develop schemes to enable local authorities to learn best practice from one another. (also see: here)
- Simplify electoral law
We need a debate after May about how electoral administration can be improved for the long term. In the meantime, it is all hands on deck to encouraging friends, colleagues and family members to register to vote. Or as Jim Royle puts it more directly:
Gordon Brown announced his decision to stand down as an MP at the next general election this week.
His time as Prime Minister has been much criticised but Jim Buller and I have recently published an article in Parliamentary Affairs arguing that we should factor context into our assessment of political leaders. This leads to a different kind of assessment of Brown.
Gordon Brown has announced his decision to ‘stand down’ as MP last night. Brown had largely stepped back from ‘front-line’ politics after leaving office as Prime Minister but entered the Scottish independence debate in its final throws by making the case that it is ‘better together’. He was quickly described as an ‘unlikely hero’ in many quarters. Although this over-states his contribution, his speech on the eve of the referendum, for some, saved the union.
In contrast, his premiership is often thought to have been a failure….
Read in full on Eastminster.
Coming back from paternity leave this week, I was pleased find the Select Committee on Political and Constitutional Reform’s report on Voter Engagement in the UK had been published.
I was honoured to give to be invited to give oral evidence to the committee earlier in the year. Here are my written submissions of evidence to the committee:
- Voter Engagement in the U.K. – first submission focusing on voting and registration technologies, recommending reforms such as election-day registration, motor voter registration, revisiting internet voting, modernising electoral law and further funding of election officials. This was based on my book and findings about individual electoral registration.
- Voter Engagement in the UK – second submission – focusing on the use of performance standards in electoral administration based on my research on performance benchmarking in Electoral Studies.
- ‘Voter Engagement in the U.K.‘, my oral evidence
I’ll blog more thoughts about the report in the coming weeks…..
Last month I spoke at the prestigious Korean Civic Institute for Democracy in Seoul as part of their annual International Symposium on Civic Education. I presented a paper which gave a critical overview of the UK’s increasingly complex system of electoral governance.
Comments on the paper are very welcome!
While in South Korea, I also had the opportunity to meet with officials from the Association of World Electoral Management Boards that was launched last year, but which already organises an impressive range of training schemes for electoral administrators worldwide. I’m pictured on the right with the A-WEB Director General Kim Jeong Gon.