The London School of Economics and Political Science Through the Looking Glass: Controversy, Scandal and Political Careers Jessica Tarlov A thesis submitted to the Department of Government of the London School of Economics for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy, London, July 2012 1 Declaration I certify that the thesis I have presented for examination for the MPhil/PhD degree of the London School of Economics and Political Science is solely my own work other than where I have clearly indicated that it is the work of others (in which case the extent of any work carried out jointly by me and any other person is clearly identified in it). The copyright of this thesis rests with the author. Quotation from it is permitted, provided that full acknowledgement is made. This thesis may not be reproduced without my prior written consent. I warrant that this authorisation does not, to the best of my belief, infringe the rights of any third party. I declare that my thesis consists of 55,480 words. Statement of conjoint work I confirm that Chapter Seven was jointly co-authored with Dr Nick Vivyan and Dr Markus Wagner and I contributed 33.3 % of this work. Statement of use of third party for editorial help I can confirm that my thesis was proofread for conventions of language, spelling and grammar by Kate Rosengarten of Kateproof. Contact details available upon request. 2 This thesis is dedicated to my parents who always pushed me to answer the difficult questions and to take the time to do so properly. Professor Torun Dewan has been a tremendous supervisor and I am grateful to him for his input throughout this process. Professor Simon Hix has reassured me every step of the way that this day would come and I thank him for his positivity, guidance and support. Markus and Nick have both taught me an incredible amount and I have appreciated their help enormously. 3 Abstract This work measures whether MPs are held individually accountable for their actions through a novel analysis of the 1997 and 2010 UK general elections. Previous research suggests that MPs’ behaviour has little effect on their careers; however, developments in the media’s aggressive reporting style, the rise of personality politics and decline in traditional voting patterns indicate that this is an opportune time to examine the effect of political controversies (including scandals) on MPs’ careers. This analysis focuses on three crucial stages that form a chain of accountability: (1) exposure: the media publicises the controversy and a perception is formed; (2) internal sanction: an MP retires before an election; (3) electoral sanction: voters punish MPs at the polls. Data on MP-specific controversies between the 1992 and 1997 and the 2005 and 2010 elections was sourced from The Times, The Guardian, The Daily Telegraph and their respective Sunday editions. This work also contains an original analysis of the 2009–2010 MP expenses scandal that utilises British Election Study panel survey data to examine how information on MP malfeasance affects voters’ perceptions of MPs. The findings indicate that political controversy is linked to whether an MP retires, with those MPs from the governing party driving the result in both the 1997 and 2010 elections. Overall, voters do not hold MPs responsible for their actions at the polls. Analysis of the expenses scandal supports these general findings: constituent perceptions of their MPs’ expenses behaviour respond to public information, but do not translate into election results. Internal sanction is shown to be the most powerful form of political accountability in the chain. While identifying any individual MP accountability is novel, the overall results are in line with traditional analyses of the strength of party politics, and indicate the importance of electoral system design for accountability. 4 TABLE OF CONTENTS Declaration .......................................................................................................................................................................... 2 Abstract ................................................................................................................................................................................. 4 LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................................................................................... 8 LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................................................................................................ 9 Chapter 1: Introduction ............................................................................................................................................... 10 1.1 A period of crisis ................................................................................................................................................. 10 1.2 What matters to the public? ........................................................................................................................... 13 1.3 Testing the waters .............................................................................................................................................. 16 1.4 A preview of what is to come ........................................................................................................................ 18 1.5 Findings at a glance ........................................................................................................................................... 20 1.6 Chapter plan ......................................................................................................................................................... 22 Chapter 2: Literature ..................................................................................................................................................... 23 2.1 Where do we begin? .......................................................................................................................................... 23 2.2 Media ....................................................................................................................................................................... 24 2.3 Support for political actors and institutions .......................................................................................... 28 2.4 Specific and diffuse support ........................................................................................................................... 29 2.5 Accountability and institutional context: room for the personal vote? ...................................... 33 2.6 Political accountability ..................................................................................................................................... 39 2.7 Partisan effects and political judgements ................................................................................................ 44 2.8 Concluding remarks .......................................................................................................................................... 50 Chapter 3: Case selection, definitions and coding ............................................................................................ 51 3.1 Case selection ....................................................................................................................................................... 51 3.2 Source selection .................................................................................................................................................. 54 3.3 Approach and coding ........................................................................................................................................ 55 3.4 Descriptive statistics ......................................................................................................................................... 65 3.5 Concluding comments ...................................................................................................................................... 69 Chapter 4: MPs and dependent variables – asking the right questions .................................................. 70 4.1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................................................... 70 4.2 Background ........................................................................................................................................................... 71 4.3 Dependent variables ......................................................................................................................................... 72 4.4 Standing down ..................................................................................................................................................... 74 4.5 Controversy and vote share ........................................................................................................................... 77 4.6 Background characteristics ........................................................................................................................... 78 5 4.7 Descriptive statistics ......................................................................................................................................... 83 4.8 Predicting political scandal ...........................................................................................................................