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:

The 1906 election

Imagine you are Prime Minster, with a majority of 130 (and in practice a majority of more like 350 on most issues given how small the main opposition party was). You call a general election on a point of principle, and end up not merely without a majority but in fact 60 seats short of having even a majority of just one.

Not perhaps a very impressive result.

Yet this was what happened in 1910. Within four years, the 1906 Liberal landslide was gone and the Liberals were dependent on other parties in order to stay in office.

Before saying something about how 1906 happened, it is perhaps worth reflecting on this uncanny parallel with that other great landslide government – Labour’s 1945 government.

It too started with a huge majority – 146 in 1945 – but by 1950 shrunk it to a tiny majority of just 5 – and within 20 more months the Tories in government.

So, although both the 1906 and 1945 governments are regularly labeled great, I’m sure you will understand why I – from the party’s Campaigns and Elections Department – would rate them slightly less great!

Doubtless Lloyd George and Attlee didn’t deliver enough leaflets.

(Actually, if you were to ask me which politician of the 20th century was least likely to have delivered Good Morning leaflets, I think Attlee would have been near the top of the list).

One aspect of 1906 appeals rather more to the party campaigner in me. Years later, Herbert Gladstone boasted as to how he made a profit for the Liberal party on the campaign. And not just a small profit – the campaign had cost £100,000 but he had raised £275,000 – a profit of £175,000. In modern money that is a cost of around £8.5 million and a profit of nearly £15 million.