Cookie Notice

However, this blog is a US service and this site uses cookies from Google to deliver its services and analyze traffic. Your IP address and user-agent are shared with Google along with performance and security metrics to ensure quality of service, generate usage statistics, and to detect and address abuse.

Tuesday, 31 July 2012

UK Party membership hits new low

Well at last they've caught on, and now what I've been repeating on this blog since 2007 is official, namely that the combined memberships of the UK's three main political parties is now fewer than 1% of the UK electorate (that's electorate, not population). A HOC library paper that passed me by in June has the detailed analysis.

They also suggest what I've long pointed out - that the decline isn't due to our general reluctance to pay subscriptions. The National Trust has 3.8m paying members, and even the Women's Institute now has more members than the Conservative Party. 

So with the memberships of the big, central Statist parties in freefall, the public voting with their feet in droves and the people fed up with the lot of them, what do you imagine Christopher Kelly's recent inquiry concluded? Yep, that's right - that we keep the dying parties in their places with a tsunami of our tax cash. It's a bit like nominating the mummified corpse of Lenin as the next Russian president.

Will these idiots not see that the pressures for political reform cannot be wished away, ignored or tackled by theft, fraud and corruption of public funds? No perhaps not. Like cornered rats (and since the last post, apols to rats) they'll go for the throat first. 

NB even the Commons figures are exaggerated; the number of Labour members not more than six months in arrears with their subs is probably 30,000 lower than the quoted figure. 


Umbongo said...

"It's a bit like nominating the mummified corpse of Lenin as the next Russian president."

They already have, if pictures of Putin's botox job is anything to go by

Oldrightie said...

If you take out the enforced Labour subs from Trades Union members their membership would be in the hundreds!

WitteringsfromWitney said...

Have once again linked to a post by you, R - with a few views of my own on the ramifications posed by your original assertion.

Woodsy42 said...

"The National Trust has 3.8m paying members, and even the Women's Institute now has more members than the Conservative Party. "

Maybe we should be asking them to put some candidates at the next election? Anything to try and break the closed party system.

WitteringsfromWitney said...


An admirable suggestion - but God forbid that the NT, or the WI, ever stood candidates .

Why involve what are, in effect, unelected quangos when it is us, the people, that are 'sovereign'?

C'mon, W42 - get real?

DeeDee99 said...

As the vast majority of the electorate recognise that the 3 main parties aren't interested in their views and don't work for their benefit, it really shouldn't be TOO difficult to get them to stop voting for them.

So why do they? Is it because of fear; apathy towards politics in general or pure tribalism?

Whatever, it is preventing the change that so many people obviously want. There must be a way to break through and make them understand that LibLabCON are making them poorer and their views on the future direction of the country irrelevant.

G. Tingey said...


Many moons ago I was a "shop steward" - I increased Union membershop by a large amount, by reassuring people that Liebour-party subs were NOT compulsory.
All but one of the new members I signed up were given their "contracting-out" forms before their union membership applications.
Curiously enough "management" were not happy about this, can't work out why!

PS - at that time, I was actually a member of the old Liberal Party.
But I resigned when I found that they were just like all the others .....