Mark Pack

A very occasional series highlighting a previous post that (a) I still think was actually pretty good, but (b) the server stats say not many people came and read. Just in case you, dear reader, may have been wrong in overlooking this post here it is for your enjoyment once more:

Why wasn’t it “the economy, stupid” in 1997?

At the start of September, Mike Smithson drew attention to the improving figures on economic optimism – and how they haven’t been accompanied by a revival in Labour’s political fortunes:

Like in 1997 the fact the index is “in the black” seems to be having no impact on the incumbent government. The Tories had positive numbers but were thrown out by Blair’s landslide – now Labour is still struggling in the polls …

At a conference of political academics at the weekend I had a long conversation with Professor John Curtice of Strathclyde University who is a strong proponent of this view. He told me “If it was the economy then the Tories would have been returned in 1997 with an increased majority.

The Clinton Presidential campaign of 1992 may have coined the phrase, “It’s the economy, stupid” but it is a political view with a long heritage in British politics. It was Harold Wilson who said, “All political history shows that the standing of the government and its ability to hold the confidence of the electorate at the general election depend on the success of its economic policy.”

So what did happen in 1997?

To find out, read the rest of the post here.