NORTH-EAST REFERENDUM DATA ANALYSIS REPORT Prepared by: Sean Carey Charles Pattie Martin Smith (University of Sheffield) 7 February 2005 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The referendum in the North East held on 4 November 2004 was the first vote to be held that put the option of an elected regional assembly to people in England. This report outlines an analysis of the results of this referendum. The result was a resounding ‘No’, with 77.9% of votes cast going against the proposed elected regional assembly and only 22.1% in favour. There are 23 local authorities in the North East region, and the majority of voters in each local authority voted against an elected regional assembly. The local authority where voters were most in favour was Derwentside in County Durham, with 29.8% voting ‘Yes’. Whilst in Darlington in the Tees Valley a mere 12.9% voted in favour at the referendum, the lowest ‘Yes’ vote in any local authority. The North East has the smallest electorate of the Government Office Regions, with just under 1.9 million voters. The electorates of the local authorities in the North East differ in size considerably, from Teesdale in County Durham with the smallest electorate of 19,887 to the city of Sunderland with a population of 209,195. The region used a system of all-postal voting and 906,367 ballots were cast in the referendum, with an unadjusted turnout of 47.7%. 12,538 of ballots cast were rejected, 1.4% of all ballots cast, which resulted in an adjusted turnout of 47.1%. The turnout for the referendum was relatively high when compared to other elections in the region earlier in the year. Turnout was 5.2 percentage points higher than in the European Parliament election held on 10 June 2004. In the 6 local authorities in the North East that also had local elections on 10 June turnout was on average more than two percentage points higher at the regional assembly referendum. There was variation in turnout between local authorities in the regional assembly referendum. Whilst the overall unadjusted turnout was 47.7%, turnout was highest in the local authority of Alnwick, where turnout was 57.4%, and lowest in Middlesbrough where turnout 42.1%. We have conducted some preliminary statistical analysis on the referendum data by attempting to place the trends in turnout in the context of socio- demographic differences between the local authority districts. We find that there are associations between the distributions of age, education, occupations, economic activity and homeownership. We find that districts with higher levels of turnout are associated with higher proportions of citizens who are older, more educated, in managerial and professional occupations and own their own homes. In two of the four counties of the North east there was a second question asking the voters of Durham and Northumberland how they would like their local government restructured if a regional assembly was established. The voters of Durham narrowly voted for option A, with 50.6% of the vote, which would have abolished the existing district councils and replaced them with a 2 single tier local authority covering the whole of the county. In Northumberland the vote was in favour of option B, with 56.2% of the vote, which would have replaced the existing district council structure with two local authorities, one for the rural north west and another for the more urban south east of the county. The electorate in the two-tier counties was 631,242, with 304,764 ballots cast (valid and invalid ballots) for the local government referendum question, a maximal unadjusted turnout figure of 48.3%. Turnout for the elected assembly question was slightly higher in the two counties that asked two questions in the referendum, compared with Tyne and Wear and the Tees Valley where adjusted turnout was 46.2%. The number of rejected ballots in the referendum for an elected regional assembly was lower than in the European Parliament elections earlier in the year. Overall, 1.4% of ballots cast were rejected in the referendum, compared to 3.7% in the European elections. The majority of rejected ballots occurred before the count, 1.2% of all ballots cast, and a smaller number, 0.2, rejected at the count itself. The number of rejected ballots for the local government question was proportionally higher than for the elected regional assembly question. There were 10,865 ballots rejected for the second question, accounting for 3.6% of all ballots cast. This was the same proportion of ballots rejected in the European elections in June. The biggest difference between the rejected ballots for regional assembly and local government questions, was the number of ballots rejected at the count. 2.5% of all ballots cast were rejected at the count for the local government question, far higher than the 0.2% for the regional assembly question. 3 INTRODUCTION This report aims to provide an analysis of the patterns in the data from the referendum for an elected regional assembly in the North East in November 2004. In particular we focus on highlighting the patterns of the outcome of the regional assembly question and the corollary question on the restructuring of local government in Durham and Northumberland. We also demonstrate some of the main themes in the pattern of turnout across the region, in particular in placing turnout for the referendum in the context of previous referendums in Britain and in previous elections in the North East. We also provide some statistical analysis of selected socio-demographic variation between the council districts and how these may relate to differences in turnout. We have attempted to demonstrate these trends using straightforward tables and figures appropriate for a general audience. REGIONAL REFERENDUM RESULTS The referendum for an elected regional assembly in the North East on 4 November 2004 resulted in an overwhelming vote of ‘No’. Only 22.1% of votes cast were in favour of the elected regional assembly, with 77.9% of votes against, almost a 4:1 ratio. The result was so resounding that it soon led the government to cancel similar referendums in the North West and Yorkshire and Humber. The government had already postponed these in summer 2004, but the result in the North East meant they were not put back on agenda. This outcome bucked the recent trend of high profile referendums resulting in positive votes and constitutional change. The referendums on constitutional change that took place in 1997 and 1998 were all approved by the voters, with a narrow majority in Wales, but comfortable majorities in Scotland, Northern Ireland and London. The voters rejected previous referendums on Welsh and Scottish devolution in 19791. The only national referendum to take place in the UK approved remaining in the European Economic Community in 1975. 1. UK constitutional referendums (%) Turnout Yes No EC membership 1975 64.0 67.2 32.8 Scotland 1979 63.8 51.6 48.4 Wales 1979 58.8 20.3 79.7 Scotland 1997 60.4 74.3 25.7 Tax-varying powers 60.4 63.5 36.5 Wales 1997 50.1 50.3 49.7 Northern Ireland 1998 81.1 71.1 28.9 London Mayor 1998 34.1 72.0 28.0 NE regional referendum 47.1 22.1 77.9 1 In the case of Scotland a majority did vote in favour of devolution in 1979, but less than 40% of the electorate that was required. Denver, D. (2002) “Voting in the 1997 Scottish and Welsh Devolution Referendums: Information, Interests and Opinions”, European Journal of Political Research, 41:827-43. 4 100 90 80 70 60 % 50 40 30 20 10 0 Turnout 'Yes' Vote Scotland 1997 Wales 1997 Northern Ireland 1998 London 1998 North East 2004 Figure 1. UK constitutional referendums compared However, there have also been lower-level referendums in recent years which have resulted in a number of rejections from the voters. 30 local authorities in England held referendums on elected mayors in 2001 and 2002, with 11 voting in favour and 19 against. 7 of these local authorities were in the North East, where voters in Berwick-upon-Tweed, Durham, Sedgefield and Sunderland voted against having an elected mayor and voters in Hartlepool, Middlesbrough and North Tyneside, voted in favour. There was a large range in the share of ‘Yes’ votes in the region, from a low of 26.2% in Berwick-upon- Tweed to a high of 84.3% in favour in Middlesbrough. 2. Results of mayoral referendums in the North East in 2001 (%) Yes Turnout Middlesbrough 84.3 34.0 North Tyneside 57.6 36.0 Hartlepool 50.9 31.0 Sedgefield 47.2 33.3 Sunderland 44.0 10.0 Durham 41.0 28.5 Berwick-upon-Tweed 26.2 64.0 Voters in each of the North East’s 23 local authorities voted overwhelmingly against the elected regional assembly. Differences across these authorities ranged from the highest ‘Yes’ vote of 29.8% in Derwentside to the lowest in Darlington of 12.9%. Of the 4 counties that make up the North East region The Tees Valley stands out as having the least amount of support for the proposed elected regional assembly, with an average of just 16.7%. County Durham saw the highest level of support at 27.2%. 5 3. % Vote share for Yes/No regional assembly question by region, county and local authority Yes No Co Durham 27.2 72.8 Chester-le-Street 26.0 74.0 Derwentside 29.8 70.2 Durham 28.9 71.1 Easington 27.3 72.7 Sedgefield 27.7 72.3 Teesdale 18.4 81.6 Wear Valley 25.8 74.2 Northumberland 23.0 77.0 Alnwick 19.2 80.8 Berwick-upon-Tweed 20.7 79.3 Blyth Valley 26.2 73.8 Castle Morpeth 22.0 78.0 Tynedale 19.7 80.3 Wansbeck 27.7 72.3 Tyne & Wear 22.4 77.6 Gateshead 24.5 75.5 Newcastle-upon-Tyne 24.5 75.5 North Tyneside 21.6 78.4 South Tyneside 21.6 78.4 Sunderland 20.0 80.0 Tees Valley 16.7 83.3 Darlington 12.9 87.1 Hartlepool 16.8 83.2 Middlesbrough 19.2 80.8 Redcar and Cleveland 16.4 83.6 Stockton-on-Tees 17.5 82.5 North East 22.1 77.9 6 Figure 2 Vote share for Yes/No regional assembly question by region 30 25 22.1 % 20 15 10 Alnwick Berwick Durham Stockton Tynedale Teesdale Easington Hartlepool Darlington Newcastle Wansbeck Sedgefield North East Gateshead Sunderland Blyth Valley Redcar & Cl Wear Valley Derwentside Chester-le-St Middlesbrough North Tyneside Castle Morpeth South Tyneside LOCAL GOVERNMENT REFERENDUM RESULTS Voters in the two-tier local authorities in Northumberland and County Durham were faced with two questions in the November 2004 referendum.