For all that Labour have been accused of undermining the institution of marriage by allowing civil partnerships for gay couples, their voters are in fact the most likely to be married, with 56 per cent having tied the knot, and the least likely to be co-habiting outside of marriage, at just 12 per cent. (src)I think the party is out of step with its electorate in a number of ways. Whether this is enough to propel Labour voters away from Labour is another matter: being married doesn't necessarily make one supportive of recognising marriage in the taxation system, or make one think that coshing single parents is a good idea. But it does make me wonder whether Labour is hæmorrhaging goodwill. If it is perceived as not caring about even the people who vote for it, then it starts to lose its credibility as people ask what the party is really for. It could be as long a wilderness for the red corner as it has been for the blue corner, before they make themselves electable again.
Wednesday, February 17, 2010
Social conservatism and the Labour party
There was an interesting discussion about a possible shift among evangelical Christians in their political allegiance at John H's blog over the weekend (link). One of the facts I 'prayed in aid' was that Labour has had a history of social conservatism (and that is personal conservatism, not moral authoritarianism). I would say that stems from its roots in the chapels, especially in Wales. As someone once commented, the Labour party owed 'more to Methodism than to Marx.' Here is another piece of evidence supporting my thesis that the Harman agenda is something of an aberration when it comes to Labour's history and profile: