Strong local vote is vital in Mayo election

The voting traditions and patterns in our state, since its foundation over 100 years ago, have been remarkably consistent.

As we enter into another general election, it’s important to remember the significance of geography in our electoral politics. For all the talk of policies, potential coalition partners and all the rest, sometimes voters just want to back their local man or woman in the race for a council, Dáil or European seat.

In political science terms, this has been termed as ‘friends and neighbours’ voting, which was best described by the academic Nuala Johnson in the late 1980s when she wrote that ‘friends and neighbours' voting was "the propensity for a candidate to receive a greater proportion of support around his/her home area than elsewhere in a constituency".

Mayo, in particular, is a fine example of that. Geographically, it is one of the largest, if not the largest, constituencies in the country. That means that even though as a county Mayo is one, there are several distinct areas in it. Much like the way in GAA administration there are divisional boards, at local government level there are different municipal districts.

I had the opportunity to take an in-depth look at how Mayo voted in the 2011 and 2016 general elections through research carried out at University College Cork over two years, in 2018 and 2019. This study considered the impact of ‘friends and neighbours’ voting in the Irish general elections of 2011 and 2016 by examining the tally data of 289 candidates across 20 constituencies, including Mayo. This process revealed several intriguing patterns and showed that ‘friends and neighbours’ voting is alive and well in Mayo.

For a starting point, I took a look at the vote received by each candidate studied in Mayo over the course of the two elections in their local polling booth, i.e. the one closest to their home base. When all the data was considered for all of the candidates, this figure came to 45.3%. So, close to one in two voters backed the candidate living closest to them in these areas.

For comparison, for candidates in the other constituency included in the case study, Dún Laoghaire, the same average figure was 19.5%.

A major discrepancy between Mayo and Dún Laoghaire is not a surprise, for several reasons.

There are push and pull factors involved here, not least the implementation of a strict vote management strategy by Fine Gael in Mayo in both elections. This saw the four candidates in 2011, for example, assigned certain areas in which to canvass in order to maximise the party’s chances of four seats.

This, by and large, saw candidates focus on their own local areas: Michelle Mulherin in Ballina, Enda Kenny in Castlebar, Michael Ring in Westport and the late John O’Mahony in east Mayo. This strategy created ‘friends and neighbours’ voting to a large extent, as candidates had to go in search of votes in their own local areas almost exclusively.

But, on the flip side, ‘friends and neighbours’ voting is also influenced by other factors. As mentioned earlier, geography plays a big part: would someone living in Westport be more inclined to vote for a Westport candidate as opposed to one in Ballina? More often than not, they would, particularly if there are two or more candidates of the same party and if they are voting on the basis of a preference for a specific party.

If you’re not voting for a party as such, perhaps you are motivated by the desire to have a local person achieve high office so they can bring investment and government funding to the area. This is another reason for voting local.

In contrast to many urban areas, most people living in Mayo will be natives of their locality or have strong family ties to a particular place. Perhaps these have been reinforced by engagement with local sports clubs, educational and religious commitments and so forth. This all helps generate a sense of belonging in a locality, which may be absent in an area like Dún Laoghaire where so many people in that area have moved into the area as opposed to growing up there.

So which candidates displayed the strongest level of local support in 2011 and 2016 in Mayo? 

When the numbers were crunched, Ballina’s Michelle Mulherin displayed the strongest evidence of ‘friends and neighbours’ voting in both elections. This means that the bulk of her vote came from the polling stations closest to her.

Interestingly, the candidate with the least evidence of ‘friends and neighbours’ voting was Michael Ring.

This is not a reflection of poor local support for Ring - on the contrary, the Westport boxes consistently show a high rate of support for the Fine Gael veteran - but rather it underlines his ability to win votes from all over, not just his local bailiwick. That, for political parties, is the star quality they look for in their candidates.

In addition, the candidate with the second strongest local vote was Rose Conway-Walsh of Sinn Fein. This was something of a surprise, given she was the only Sinn Féin candidate in the field in 2016 and therefore able to canvass votes all over the county.

However, it may underline a geographical reality in that Conway-Walsh received huge backing in the Erris area, a barony which generally considers itself distinct from the rest of the county.

The overall research endeavoured to identify what factors had the biggest impact in revealing ‘friends and neighbours’ in a given area. After six different variables were taken into account, whether a constituency was rural or urban was the main driver of this evidence.

As Mayo goes to the polls again in the coming weeks, you can be sure candidates of all persuasions are keen to get their ‘friends and neighbours’ onside to give them the best possible chance of securing election.