Thoughts on the UK General Election - April 9th, 2015
The race is hotting and the contest is getting tighter. At this stage; we’ve had a televised interview/debate between Labour leader Ed Miliband and Prime Minister David Cameron of the Conservative Party. Last week, 7 of the major leaders came together to debate and discuss topics ranging from the future of the National Health Service, the British economy and potential changes in British immigration policy. The aim of this piece is not to attempt to second guess the outcome of the election, but more to offer a personal perspective on the issues at hand. In that sense, it is not written with the aim to try to imagine or estimate potential effects of certain parties and their policies. It is more a collection of thoughts and feelings on the current situation.
For reasons varying from my current physical position, writing this in Buenos Aires, and also my fortunate economic and social position of belonging to the most fortunate 10% of the economy; the heart of this election feels very distant. Discussions of University fees, Immigration reform, the future of the National Health Service and employment don't necessarily affect my wellbeing in the same way that they have a major impact on the wellbeing of others. For this reason I feel a very non personal connection to the topics at the very heart of this election. Take, for example, the current issue of immigration in Britain. Luckily for me, no immigrant arriving in the UK is a threat to the employment of my parent. Being a respected, credited and specialised teacher, it is highly unlikely that the wage competitiveness of an immigrant offers enough incentive for students of my parent to switch their demand. Furthermore, the wage competitiveness of most working immigrants who arrive in the UK results in cheaper labour when our family requires it. In this sense, immigration is not only not a threat, but actually an advantage. However, I am conflicted. This election has torn me, in one sense, creating a paradox between my personal feelings and my academic beliefs. As a student of politics and economics it is extremely difficult to create a synthesise between my personal beliefs and my political ideas. The issue of Mansion Tax offers an interesting example of this. Politically and economically I am inclined to believe that progressive taxation and the subsequent redistribution of wealth from the rich to the poor is a good thing. Social inequality poses one of the greatest threats to our current socio-economic harmony; it can tear us apart and divide us. In an economics essay I am more than likely to argue heavily in favour of Mansion Tax. However, the realisation that a vote for Labour might cause a percentage of my friends having to relocate and experience drastic changes to their lives creates a personal dilemma. It is not as easy, perhaps, as merely voting for who your head tells you.
What I actually find most interesting about the General Election this year is how contested it is. It is a credit to the pluralist nature of the British political system that seven parties; the UK Independence Party, the Green Party, the Labour Party, the Conservative Party, the Liberal Democrat Party, the Scottish National Party and Plaid Cymru all stand a reasonable chance of featuring heavily in the leadership of the next British parliament. It is becoming almost certain that the result in May will be that of a Hung Parliament; no outright winner. The hotly contested nature of the race has encouraged the British people to become further involved in the issues. Personally, I don’t resent UKIP, to nearly the same degree as others for the sole reason being that their controversial policies have not only tested the strength of the other parties on their policies and leadership but it has also brought lots of attention to the General Election. Of course, I have academic issues with UKIP, notably the potential alienation and scapegoating of economically and socially beneficial members of our society; immigrants. This causes social unrest and divisions which are not healthy for economic progression and also for the security of the British people. However, there is no denial that UKIP have offered a threat to the potential domination of Labour and the Conservatives following the poor support for Nick Clegg and the Liberal Democrats. Surely it is an inevitable result of a truly pluralist democracy for their to be multiple and varying beliefs and ideas on policies? In that sense, blind criticism of some parties’ beliefs is hypocritical; assuming that those objecting also do not wish a more elitist democracy. In the United States; a voter chooses between the lesser of two evils, at least in the UK there is more choice of evils.
The Scottish Referendum of 2014 was a crucial turning point in the sense that it proved that the British people do indeed care about politics. The criticism that people were apathetic, uninvolved and disinterested was dramatically refuted. Voter turnout for the Scottish Referendum was around 84.5%, a new record, and a total of 80% of young people voted. I hope that this positive trend continues and that the UK General Election will boast a high voter turnout. The coverage of the election, not just by news outlets and analysts, but also on social media imply that British politics is not necessarily as dead and buried as previously thought. The British people want to take matters into their own hands, which is only a positive thing.
