Labour in Glasgow, 1896-1936: Socialism, Suffrage, Sectarianism by J. J. Smyth

Author:J. J. Smyth [Smyth, J. J.]
Language: eng
Format: epub
Tags: Communism; Post-Communism & Socialism, Scotland, Great Britain, Europe, Modern, Political Ideologies, Political Parties, 20th Century, Political Science, Political Process, Social History, History, General
ISBN: 9781788853989
Google: 8flPEAAAQBAJ
Publisher: Birlinn
Published: 2001-02-21T10:33:31+00:00

Conclusion

The fall-out of from the disaffiliation of the ILP will be detailed in chapter six, but here we shall conclude on the divergence between Labour’s performance at the Municipal and Parliamentary polls. Labour’s continuing success in the latter threw into sharp relief its position in the former, where it appeared stuck as a permanent, if substantial, minority. In the general election of 1929, the first held under the equal franchise for men and women, Labour were returned to power at Westminster as the largest single party; while in Scotland Labour gained an overall majority of seats and in Glasgow won ten of the City’s fifteen divisions. On a strictly proportionate basis Labour was over-represented in Glasgow; with 52% of the vote it got two thirds of the seats. Moreover, as in 1922 and 1923 Labour benefited from a split right-wing vote; the Liberals contested four seats in 1929 and their intervention gave Labour victory in Partick.125 Even with these qualifications, however, the contrast with the municipal situation is very clear.

One explanation for this discrepancy may be the more restricted franchise which operated at the municipal level. As discussed earlier (see Introduction) the municipal franchise differed in certain important respects from the parliamentary franchise. Essentially the Representation of the People Act established residence as the qualification for a parliamentary vote but retained occupation as the qualification for the municipal vote.126 This created an anomaly for women in that a single woman could qualify for the local vote at the age of twenty-one while a married woman had to wait till she was thirty. Of more significance, however, was the difficulty that young single men had getting the municipal vote. While the two franchises were much the same for women, in the case of men only one million of the four million men given the parliamentary vote under the 1918 reform, also qualified for the municipal vote.127 Whether and to what extent this had an adverse impact on Labour’s performance in local elections is difficult to establish. One view is that there was no class bias operating, ‘As contemporaries agreed, it was single people, of all classes, who failed to qualify for the municipal franchise.’128

However, irrespective of the judgement of posterity it is clear that Labour felt it was losing potential voters. The Scottish Council of the Labour Party took issue with the 1918 legislation on exactly this point, i.e. the treatment of lodgers, and claimed that the situation was worse than it had been previously. Labour also pointed out the absurdity of single and married women being treated differently and was to call, repeatedly, for a simplified Register based on adult suffrage for national and local elections.129 William Regan, the Glasgow ILP Organiser and a Town councillor, spelt out the electoral impact much more clearly:

The Parliamentary register is infinitely more favourable to Labour than the Municipal register. Thousands of young men (and they are usually Labour supporters) are entitled to the Parliamentary vote on reaching 21, but are disfranchised at the local poll through the absence of a property qualification.

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.