Sadiq Khan has a further four years as Mayor of London ahead of him after securing a record-breaking third term in office. He won with a 3.2 per cent swing in his favour, the second highest vote total in UK election history and the second largest margin of victory by share of the vote of all contests for the mayoralty to date. There will be deeper analysis of all the London elections outcomes over the coming weeks. But based on some cursory analysis of the mayoral result, here are my top ten takeaways
1. SADIQ KHAN IS A PHENOMENAL CAMPAIGNER
He has never lost an election, a record stretching back to his school days. As an MP he defended his marginal Tooting constituency from a Conservative onslaught in 2010. He was an outsider when he sought to become his party’s mayoral candidacy for 2016, and some thought his number was up this time. But he has proved his doubters wrong.
2. KHAN TOOK SUSAN HALL’S CHANCES MORE SERIOUSLY THAN DID MANY IN HER PARTY
Khan repeatedly warned about the chances of Susan Hall winning the election for the Tories. Some of this might have been a deliberate strategy to mobilise Labour’s base and stir activists from their slumber. But Khan’s camp was also genuinely fearful of the Tory campaign and, it would appear, took her chances more seriously than many on her own side. Right up until the final days, the media were still reporting anonymous briefings against Hall from within Tory ranks.
The lack of high-profile support from Rishi Sunak and other ministers was very noticeable. Perhaps that was partly Hall’s choice – a way of distancing herself from a party that is unpopular in the capital. But some of it looked like a definite decision by Tory high command to cut her loose.
3. THE TORIES NEED TO GET OVER THEIR OBSESSION WITH KHAN
Elections for Mayor of London inevitably focus on personalities, but the Tories need to get past their obsession with Khan. He is catnip to them, sending them into a frenzy. For three elections in a row they’ve sought to whip up support by targeting him as an individual, and there’s been more than a hint of a dog whistle about some of it.
It was telling that Hall’s manifesto mentioned Khan by name 18 times – four times more than her own name and 17 times more than that of her party. Her campaign’s final election broadcast, put out just a week before election day, was more about Khan than her. All of this breaks the cardinal rule of not talking about your political opponent by name. It would be interesting to know how many voters were put off Hall by her repeated negative references to Khan.
After eight years he isn’t as popular as he was. But as a top academic noted just a few weeks ago, most politicians would give their right arm for Khan’s approval levels after so long at the top. He was nowhere near as unpopular as the Tories thought and this distracted them from thinking about what matters to Londoners and coming up with a persuasive and positive offer for voters. As others have noted, you can’t expect a city to support your party if you are constantly doing that city down.
4. HIGHER TURNOUT IN OUTER LONDON DOESN’T AUTOMATICALLY HELP THE TORIES
In the final days of the campaign there was fevered speculation that the contest was closer than opinion polls had been suggesting. The decision by London Elects to publish turnout figures on the Friday, the day before the count and declarations, added to this, creating a vacuum filled by rumour, briefings and ill-informed gossip. Some political journalists should reflect on their social media commentary on that day.
The turnout figures showed that higher numbers had voted in Tory-leaning outer London boroughs than in Labour’s inner city heartlands. Yet the results showed a swing to Labour in every suburban London Assembly constituency except Brent & Harrow, which saw a small swing the other way, and the Tory stronghold of Bexley & Bromley where there was no swing at all.
5. INNER LONDON IS A WASTELAND FOR CONSERVATIVES
Hall managed to out-poll her party in London as a whole, yet her share of the mayoral vote was the smallest achieved by a Tory mayoral candidate for 20 years. Her results in inner London make particularly grim reading for her party.
The five biggest swings away from them to Labour were in inner London Assembly constituencies, with Khan capturing over 60 per cent in two of them and over half in another three. By contrast, Hall’s vote share fell below 20 per cent in Lambeth & Southwark, North East and City & East. In each of these, Khan’s share rose by over eight percentage points.
Khan came out top the West Central constituency, covering the boroughs of Westminster, Kensington & Chelsea and Hammersmith & Fulham, for the first time. In addition, Labour’s candidate won the seat, which had previously been Tory-held throughout its history.
In other Assembly contests in inner London the Tories fell from third place in 2021 to fourth in Lambeth & Southwark, and from second to third in Greenwich & Lewisham. They were again third placed in North East. They held on to second in City & East, but this time finished just 10 votes ahead of the Greens. Inner London looks set to become a Tory-free zone at the general election.
6. INTERNATIONAL FACTORS MATTERED LESS IN LONDON
Elsewhere in England, Labour struggled in places with large Muslim populations – most notably Oldham, Kirklees, Bradford and Manchester – because of the party’s initial position on the conflict in the Middle East. Yet the results in London suggest that this didn’t reduce Khan’s vote.
In City & East, which contains the large Muslim populations of Tower Hamlets and Newham, turnout was down, yet Khan’s vote was sharply up and he outperformed Labour’s Assembly seat result. Coming out early and clearly in favour of a ceasefire in Gaza looks to have stood him in good stead.
Over his time as Mayor, Khan has invested considerable efforts in building relationships with London’s different communities. It was notable that he also saw a swing in his favour in Barnet & Camden, with its large Jewish population. However, the swing away from Khan in Brent & Harrow points to the more general steady drift of Hindus away from Labour.
7. FIRST-PAST-THE-POST BIT THE TORIES’ BACKSIDE
The government’s changing the mayoral electoral system, depriving Londoners of the second preference vote they had previously been entitled to under Supplementary Vote, was widely expected to help their own candidate. Yet it doesn’t seem to have worked out that way.
The Green vote was squeezed, perhaps a product of the strong messaging from Khan’s campaign. The Liberal Democrats performed better than in 2021 but in the South West Assembly seat, which encompasses areas where the Lib Dems are at their strongest, voters elected a Lib Dem Assembly member while voting for Khan for Mayor. The upshot was a Labour mayoral candidate attracting the most support in that seat for the first time.
Susan Hall did a decent job of squeezing Reform UK, no doubt helped by running a campaign with a strong Reform flavour. Her problem, though, was that there were fewer Reform voters to squeeze.
Ironically, the part of the London election voting system left unchanged by the government limited the damage to the Tories on the Assembly. The proportional representation element ensured that the number of Tory AMs is higher than it would have been otherwise.
8. THE ULEZ WAS THE DOG THAT DIDN’T BARK
Hall placed cancelling last summer’s ULEZ expansion front and centre of her campaign, but the issue failed to be defining. Much has been written about the policy’s part in Labour falling just short of capturing the Uxbridge & South Ruislip parliamentary seat in last July’s by-election. Yet last week’s London results suggest the Tories learned the wrong lesson from that win.
Polls over recent months have shown the ULEZ drifting down the list of voter priorities. Hall would have been banking on the higher turnout in outer London leading to a corresponding surge in her vote on the back of simmering anti-ULEZ resentment. It didn’t materialise. The swing to Khan in Ealing & Hillingdon, home of Uxbridge, will have been particularly sweet for him.
9. THE DOUGHNUT IS DEAD, LONG LIVE THE HOT CROSS BUN
Boris Johnson’s wins in 2008 and 2012 were attributed to a “doughnut strategy” of maximising Tory support in the capital’s outer ring. Hall’s campaign, particularly in its preoccupation with the ULEZ, was desperate to emulate it. But the results of 2 May suggest the doughnut as a political concept is dead.
This is in part due to the ever-changing demographics of London meaning those of the suburbs increasingly resemble those of inner London. There is no longer a simple distinction to be made between Tory outer London and Labour inner.
A better pastry analogy would be a hot cross bun, with the cross representing Labour areas that span Greater London from Enfield in the north to part of Croydon in the south, from Hounslow in the west to Barking & Dagenham in the east along with almost all of the inner boroughs and centre. Other parties are restricted to outer quadrants: three of them surviving as blue and the Lib Dems dominant in the south west.
10. THE POLLS WERE RIGHT AND WRONG AT THE SAME TIME
The London mayoral election was heavily polled – in stark contrast to mayoral contests elsewhere – and every poll since November correctly anticipated that Khan would would win by double figures.
Yet Khan’s leads varied from ten points to 27. Hats off to Savanta for their finding released on 1 May which was the most accurate, including by indicating, unlike some others, that Hall would get more than 30 per cent of the vote. Given the wide variation in findings, some pollsters would be wise to tweak their methodologies to improve future accuracy.
Nick Bowes is managing director, insight at London Communications Agency and was previously director of policy for Sadiq Khan. Follow Nick on X/Twitter.
Support OnLondon.co.uk and its writers for just £5 a month or £50 a year and get things for your money too. Details HERE. Photo: Mayor of London Instagram.