What is tactical voting and how could it affect the general election result?

Rishi Sunak ended months of speculation on Wednesday and announced a General Election on 4 July.

The prime minister, outside the steps of 10 Downing Street in the pouring rain, said: “Now is the moment for Britain to choose its future.”

However, research has suggested the Labour Party has consistently been ahead in opinion polls. On average, Labour is on 44 points, 21 ahead of the Conservatives.

Britain’s leading election expert Professor Sir John Curtice said the Conservatives face a “major challenge” to hold on to power and that the election is “for Labour to win”.

The Tories may also face more challenges with undecided voters and tactical voting.

Recent polling by Best for Britain showed in some constituencies, 36 per cent of people are undecided. It also identified 510 “tactical voting seats” where the Tories are vulnerable to losing.

But what exactly is tackle voting and how influential will it be in the General Election?

Tactical voting is when a voter casts their ballot for the candidate they believe is most likely to defeat another party’s candidate (usually the Conservatives), even if this candidate is not necessarily their first choice.

Some see this as a necessary practice due to the UK’s ‘First Past The Post’ (FPTP) voting system. Under FPTP, it is the candidate who gets the most votes that wins.

It may seem like the most democratic system to decide a winner at first glance, but many argue that FPTP does not always produce results that reflect the political leanings of the area.

This is because some parties are much more politically aligned than others. For instance, in areas where the votes for Labour and the Liberal Democracts outweigh that for the Conservative candidate, but neither beat them alone, the Conservative candidate wins.

However, the results would indicate that the majority of voters in this area support more progressive, left-wing or centre-left politicians.

Groups such as the Electoral Reform Society (ERS) campaign to change this, pointing out that the MPs elected to parliament rarely reflect the popular vote.

For instance, at the 2019 general election, 11.5 per cent of people voted for the Liberal Democrats, but they only secured 1.7 per cent of seats. The Conservatives’ 43.6 per cent, on the other hand, translated to 56.2 per cent of seats.

The ERS promotes voting systems that are designed to tackle this issue, such as the Single Transferable Vote or Alternative Vote where voters can rank candidates by preference.

However, in 2011 the UK was given a referendum on switching the way people vote to the Alternative Vote system, where the votes against it were nearly 68 per cent.

Tactical voting could work, if it was carried out en masse. However, despite talk of tactical voting at most major elections, there is little evidence that it has made an impact in the past.

There are many seats in the UK where a sustained tactical vote campaign would have changed the final result. For instance, in the 2023 Uxbridge by-election, the Conservatives secured 13,965 votes, while Labour secured 13,470.

Meanwhile, the Greens gained 893 votes, coming in third. If all these votes were instead tactically given to Labour, it would have been a victory for the party in Boris Johnson’s former seat.

It is a similar story for the seat of Somerset North East, held by Jacob Rees-Mogg since 2010. In 2019, Mr Rees-Mogg secured 28,360 votes, while Labour and the Lib Dems combined secured 26,053.

It is possible a combined effort could’ve secured the seat for either party, although neither has assented to a tactical voting pact in the past.

However, the Lib Dems won the seat of Somerton and Frome for the first time since 2010 in last year’s by-election, with tactical voting thought to be a major factor. The Labour vote share had dwindled from 12.9 per cent in 2019, to just 2.6.

“It is no secret that some Labour and Green party voters lent us their votes in Somerset and we are very grateful for their support,” said Lib Dem leader Ed Davey.

“In many seats across the south-west, voters at the next election will be faced with a similar choice between the Liberal Democrats and the Conservatives.”

Polling experts have said an increase in tactical voting is “bad news for the Conservative Party”, but there may still be some three-way marginal seats between the Tories, Labour and the Lib Dems.

Chris Hopkins, political research director at leading polling consultancy Savanta,told The Independent: "Voters have got increasingly sophisticated in understanding how in a first past the post system, their vote can be as effective as possible.

“In particular this is bad news for the Conservative Party, where there will be plenty of natural Labour supporters in the the South West who will back the Lib Dems, as they know they are their best chance of getting rid of the Tories.

"That being said, because of the forecasted size of the swing from Conservative to Labour, there are some three-way marginals where Labour and the Lib Dems may be unwilling to step aside. That could mean voters are told different things about who is 'most likely to win here', and could lead to split, enabling some Conservative MPs to hold on."

Campaigners have also added tactical voting will help deliver a “progressive government”, but warned the first-past-the-post system (FPTP) must be changed to better represent voting intentions.

Neal Lawson, executive director at Compass, told The Independent:“We desperately need a progressive government, and tactical voting will no doubt play a vital role in helping to deliver one - but voting tactically without conditions only entrenches the pendulum politics that grinds us all down and alienates voters from the political process.

“The worry is that without a commitment to changing the system, tactical voting enshrines the abusive nature of First Past the Post and forces voters to continue voting tactically for ever more.

“If Labour does win the next election on the back of lent votes, they should commit to getting rid of FPTP and replacing it with a system that can better represent the progressive majority that already exists in this country.”

Naomi Smith, CEO of Best for Britain and founder of tactical voting platform, GetVoting.org, said: “Our polling shows 13 million Brits are ready to vote tactically for change, and these voters will be key to a defeat that would keep the Tories out for a decade and the difference between deliverance or defeat for the likes of Rishi Sunak, Jeremy Hunt and Liz Truss.

“Best for Britain will be helping voters get it right at GetVoting.org with expert constituency level insights and voting recommendations before polling day.”