Democracy in Hackney

Chapter Two - Democracy in Hackney

In the 2005 general election turnout in the constituency of Hackney South & Shoreditch was 49.7 per cent while in Hackney North & Stoke Newington it was 49.6 per cent. This compares to a London average of 58.2 per cent and a national turnout of 61.3 per cent. These figures indicate that the problem of voter disengagement is more acute in Hackney than in other parts of London and the rest of the UK.

For the most part this disengagement can be attributed to the profile of the community in the borough. Those groups who are nationally less likely to vote; the young, the poor, and ethnic minority groups are all over represented when compared to the national average.

Also many of the issues that have been discussed more broadly in the opening chapter apply specifically to Hackney. The Labour Party is the dominant political force in the East End of London but this does not, and never has, equated with general popularity.

Poverty, caused mainly by the lack of employment in these areas of London, has often led to the development of cultures which are independent of traditional political systems. The harsh realities of life induce people to develop independent survival mechanisms relying on their own initiative and communal support. Direct action in support of a particular issue or to address a particular grievance is possible but long term support for political parties is, and never has been, a reality in East London.

In addition, political activity in the East End was for most of the past century dominated by activists within the trade union movement. This created a conservative Labour Party keen to protect the status quo for trade union members and not really geared to representing those who were economically disenfranchised. It also created a party dominated by white skilled or semi-skilled manual male workers. The Labour party was therefore unable to effectively represent many of its constituents in East London, including Hackney, more so in times of particular need in the 1920s and 1980s. This problem of being unable to represent the weakest in society persists to this day with East London MPs complaining that their, “local constituency general committee was almost always male, mainly retired industrial workers and mostly councillors.”

The fact that the apparent strength of the Labour Party in East London does not extend to committed support in the community was clearly exposed by the victory of George Galloway in Bethnal Green and Bow in the 2005 general election. The ability of Liberal Democrats, Conservatives, British National Party, Green, and Respect politicians to make inroads on local councils adds to the evidence in support of this point.

The issue of whether MPs can really represent their constituents, or whether they are there to represent their party’s interests, is one of particular concern for MPs in East London. These MPs are under intense pressure to help alleviate social problems but feel unable to really affect policy in Westminster. They are torn between a desire to help constituents and a desire to maintain a stable party and Government.

In the end, despite throwing all their energies into case work, the MPs in the area concede that party considerations, both locally and at Westminster, frequently win out over constituents’ needs. Moreover, for the most part dealing with constituency case work is frequently a matter of directing the constituent to the relevant local authority responsible for dealing with the issue or, alternatively, explaining a decision or policy. The ability of MPs to affect change is negligible.

The political system militates against MPs being effective voices for their constituents. They feel that with the level of Parliamentary majorities that Labour has enjoyed, the increasing use of opinion polls and direct consultation by Government, their role is being undermined and becoming less relevant.

In East London, political communications would appear not to be the main cause of voter engagement. Rather, the primary cause lies in the structure of Parliamentary democracy and political parties in the UK coupled with Government’s growing reliance on other sources of consultation. This is undermining the position of local politicians, particularly MPs. These factors tie in with the issues raised in the previous chapter which discussed potential structural reasons for disengagement.

In constituencies like Hackney South & Shoreditch and Hackney North & Stoke Newington, the near impossibility of effectively representing constituents with such a variety of cultures, ethnic groups and religions, and economic and social differences is compounded. The inability of the Labour party to effectively represent the diverse people of East London is not a modern feature. A Hackney Council survey published in December 1965 found that 71 per cent of what were then termed ‘coloured migrants’ did not vote. Low turnout at election time has been a feature throughout the 20th Century.

The case for media malaise affecting the turnout in East London in view of the history of politics in the area is difficult to make. This supports the earlier conclusion that political communications techniques developed over the last 25 years may have had an impact on voter turnout but are unlikely to be the main cause of disillusionment. It was, as has been argued elsewhere, the heightened ideological debate surrounding the Cold War that had created unnaturally high levels of turnout, and that pre Great War voting figures will over the long term prove to be the norm. Once again, reference to the recent results in the French Presidential elections indicate, that political apathy can quickly be overcome when the need, or perceived need, arises.

Tackling these issues is a complex, if not impossible challenge. Electoral reform, reform of the structure of political parties, reform of the way Westminster operates could all play a part. These possibilities, which have occasionally been discussed at a national level also trouble, perhaps to a greater extent, MPs in East London. Some, or all, of the reforms that have, and still are being discussed, may be desirable and may create a better democracy. But, the fact is that any real substantive changes are unlikely to happen any time soon.

If reform is unlikely, then the role of political communication once again assumes importance. Being able to connect with voters, to explain to them what a representative democracy can achieve for them, and what its limitations are, could help increase participation.

Perhaps the use of new media technologies, used in a local context, and in particular in those areas with particular issues of long term political disengagement could provide a partial solution. They could play a part in educating and integrating local populations in the nature, effectiveness and limitations of the UK’s parliamentary representative democracy. Whether the targets of this communication would have access to the technology needed to receive it is of course debatable. However, falling costs of purchasing and using mobile and Internet technologies, as well the latter’s wide availability in schools and community centres, is greatly facilitating access.
The area around Hackney also faces its own particular issue, namely the transient nature of its youthful population due to large student and immigrant populations. From the late 19th Century, East London was the first port of call for Jewish and Irish immigrants. In the 20th Century these were followed by immigrants from the Caribbean in the 1950s, from Turkey and the Indian sub-continent and from West Africa in the 1970s.

The arrival of new migrants coupled with the departure of older populations either by choice, through upward social mobility, or as a consequence of housing policies of the 1980s, has always brought with it issues of integration. New arrivals, even if they are English speaking, generally are not aware of the way British politics works, do not empathise with the political parties, and are too concerned with issues of establishing themselves and building a life rather than the somewhat remote deliberations of Westminster.

Immigrants are far more likely to turn to religious organisations, with which they have a connection going back to their countries of origin rather than to political parties. Calls to political action may more easily succeed when based around a religious and ethnic identity rather than a political ideology based on traditional British political discourse. This tendency to find representation and a sense of belonging in religion has most recently manifested itself in the rise in attendance at Catholic Churches following the influx from Eastern Europe after the 2004 expansion of the European Union.

That East London has been the first place of settlement for migrants over the years is a fact, and it is safe to assume that new arrivals will not immediately be concerned with party politics. This, together with the structural issues discussed above means that high voter turnout in Hackney is unlikely under any circumstances. However, some communities, including those with Caribbean or West African origins have been established in some cases for fifty years or more and yet still do not really engage with the political process.

For these communities, the structural problems associated with how politicians can effectively represent them, based on their economic conditions and the system of parliamentary democracy in the UK, should be viewed as the main cause of their disengagement. It is to address these more established communities whose political disengagement can be determined as being long term, that the potential use of new media technologies could prove useful.

Hackney provides an ideal laboratory in which to conduct research about voter engagement. All the issues discussed in Chapter 1 manifest themselves in East London, so much so that a 50 per cent turn out at election might well be judged satisfactory. The debate over the impact of media and political communications may not be directly relevant but as has already been argued, even at national level, this issue has not been the main cause of falling voter turnout.

Instead of focusing on new media technologies as a cure for the perceived negative impact of developments in the media and political communications, they should perhaps be looked at as a way of reaching communities in local areas who have a history of permanent disengagement. New media technologies could provide the channel for real contact between local constituency parties and disenfranchised constituents to be established for the first time.