Should the UK Call Another General Election? The Case for Caution

A public petition demanding a snap General Election has gained over 788,835 signatures in 24 hours, surpassing the threshold required for debate in Parliament. This development has reignited discussions about the cost and consequences of frequent elections.   

The petition arrives just 143 days after the last General Election on July 4, 2024, where a Labour government was elected with a parliamentary majority. Some now question whether another election would serve democracy or strain it.

The Financial Burden of General Elections

General Elections in the UK come with a significant price tag. The 2017 snap election cost taxpayers £140 million. Of this, £98.3 million covered local councils’ administrative costs, such as running polling stations, issuing polling cards, and vote counting. An additional £42.5 million went toward delivering candidate campaign materials, with each candidate entitled to a single postal delivery to every household in their constituency.

Election costs have since risen. The 2019 General Election is estimated to have cost £175 million, while preliminary forecasts suggest the July 2024 election may have cost over £200 million. With a turnout of 59.9%, equating to 28.9 million voters, the estimated cost per vote was £6.91.

A snap General Election in early 2025 could impose another £200 million burden on taxpayers during a time of international uncertainty and domestic challenges.

The Risks of Snap Elections

While some argue for a fresh mandate, others caution against the instability snap elections could bring. Frequent elections risk undermining government effectiveness, destabilising democracy, and draining public finances.

The current Labour government, elected with a smaller vote share than the 2015 Conservative government, faces criticism over its performance. However, the call for another election so soon has raised concerns about setting a precedent of challenging electoral outcomes simply because they are unpopular with certain groups.

The UK’s recent history underscores these risks. Since 2010, the country has seen four General Elections, six Prime Ministers, and a divisive Brexit referendum that upended decades of economic and political stability. Amid these challenges, the passing of Queen Elizabeth II marked a profound constitutional change.

Governance in Limbo

Frequent elections come with significant consequences for the country beyond financial cost, creating a period of political and administrative limbo. During these times, governments operate in a caretaker capacity, limiting their ability to make key decisions or implement long-term policies. This paralysis can have far-reaching implications for the economy and society.

Economic reforms, infrastructure projects, and public service initiatives often stall during election campaigns. Businesses and investors may delay decisions due to uncertainty over future policies, compounding economic pressures. For citizens, unresolved issues such as the cost of living, housing shortages, and healthcare backlogs can worsen, leaving communities without much-needed support or solutions.

The Need for Systemic Change

The debate over snap elections reflects deeper issues within the UK’s political system. Critics argue for electoral reforms that enhance representation and engage voters beyond the ballot box. Instead of frequent elections, many believe the focus should shift to holding the government accountable and ensuring it delivers for all citizens.

Democracy requires accepting results, even when they are unpopular, and working within the system to demand accountability and change. Lessons from the 2016 Brexit referendum highlight the dangers of revisiting decisions repeatedly—a cycle that can erode trust in democratic processes.

A Perspective From Experience

As the author of this article, I bring more than my fair share of experience with elections. Having stood as a candidate in multiple General Elections over the past decade, as well as in numerous local elections, I have witnessed firsthand the challenges, costs, and pressures these democratic processes impose—not just on candidates but on the public, government, and society at large. 

This perspective has also highlighted the urgent need for wider changes to the UK’s political system. From reforming how votes are cast and counted to increasing voter engagement beyond the ballot box, it is clear that our democracy must evolve. A more representative and participatory system would ensure that all voices are heard and that governments are held accountable without the disruption and instability caused by frequent elections.

As the UK faces calls for another General Election just 143 days after the last one, the risks and costs of frequent elections cannot be ignored. At a time of domestic and international uncertainty, stability and constructive engagement may better serve the country. Democracy delivered the current government, and the focus now must be on holding it to account, rather than seeking constant electoral resets.