Peter Hoskin

A dreadful turnout

There are two major stories behind the headline results this morning: the rejection of elected mayors and the low voter turnout. Of these, I think the second is the most significant. You can apportion some of the blame to the dreary weather, if you like. But, still, a predicted turnout figure of 32 per cent? That’s hardly encouraging.

First, though, we shouldn’t exaggerate the situation. This wouldn’t be the lowest turnout figure for any local election in history — but the lowest since 2000, when the figure was less than 30 per cent. And it’s also true that turnout has risen for the past three general elections, even if we’re still some way down on the 83.9 per cent achieved in 1950.

That said, however, politicians should still be concerned by today’s numbers. Not only is 32 per cent terribly low in itself, but it has come at a time when, in theory, the public are more connected to politics than ever before.

Comments

Join the debate for just $5 for 3 months

Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for $5.

Already a subscriber? Log in