One in Four: Why Greater Manchester Stayed Home

The biggest story to emerge from Greater Manchester's mayoral by-election may not be who won, but who did not vote. With turnout reported at around 25.14 per cent, almost three quarters of eligible voters chose not to cast a ballot in an election that will determine who oversees policing, transport, housing, regeneration, skills funding and billions of pounds of public investment across the city-region.

The result represents the lowest turnout recorded since the office of Mayor of Greater Manchester was created in 2017. The inaugural mayoral election attracted around 28.9 per cent of eligible voters, participation increased to approximately 34.7 per cent in 2021 before easing to just over 32 per cent in 2024. Even allowing for the fact that by-elections traditionally attract fewer voters than scheduled elections, the latest figure has reignited debate about whether the region's devolved political system is truly engaging the public.

It is a striking contradiction. Over the past nine years the mayoralty has become significantly more powerful. The office now controls Transport for Greater Manchester, the Bee Network, policing through Police and Crime Commissioner powers, the Fire and Rescue Service, adult education funding, strategic planning and large parts of the region's regeneration programme. The mayor also acts as Greater Manchester's principal representative in negotiations with Westminster over devolution and investment.

Despite those responsibilities, many residents appear to remain unclear about exactly what the mayor does. Throughout the campaign, local news outlets, community groups and social media users encountered comments from voters asking whether the mayor controlled local councils, council tax or national government policy. That confusion suggests there remains a considerable gap between the powers exercised by the office and public understanding of those powers.

Several factors are likely to have contributed to the record-low turnout. First, this was a by-election rather than a scheduled mayoral contest. By-elections almost always produce lower participation because they lack the wider publicity generated by a general election or a full round of local elections. Without national party leaders dominating television debates and newspaper headlines, many casual voters simply pay less attention.

Timing may also have played a part. Polling took place during the school summer holidays, when many families were travelling or focused on other priorities. While postal voting allows people to participate away from home, elections held during holiday periods have historically struggled to match turnout achieved during spring or autumn campaigns.

Political fatigue is another possible explanation. Since 2024, voters have been asked to participate in multiple elections at different levels of government. Some political scientists argue that frequent elections can reduce participation over time, particularly where people feel they are repeatedly being asked to vote without seeing immediate improvements in their daily lives.

The departure of Andy Burnham also changed the character of the election. During his nine years as mayor, Burnham became one of the country's best-known regional politicians, often appearing on national television while leading campaigns on transport, homelessness, devolution and Greater Manchester's response to the Covid-19 pandemic. Whether voters agreed with him or not, his public profile undoubtedly helped define the office. This by-election was the first opportunity for voters to choose a successor rather than simply judge Burnham's record.

Campaign visibility became another talking point. While candidates visited communities across the ten Greater Manchester boroughs, many residents commented online that they had seen little evidence of campaigning compared with previous elections. Others said they only became aware of polling day shortly before voting opened. Those comments are anecdotal and should not be taken as representative of the wider electorate, but they echo criticism that metro mayoral elections still struggle to capture public attention despite the growing importance of the role.

The campaign itself was also unusually fragmented. Seven candidates contested the election, offering markedly different visions for Greater Manchester. Labour sought to build on Andy Burnham's legacy of transport integration and devolution. Reform UK focused heavily on crime, public spending and accountability. Restore Britain campaigned on transparency and local democracy, while the Conservatives, Greens, Liberal Democrats and independent candidate each promoted distinct policy priorities. Yet despite this broad choice, turnout remained stubbornly low.

For Rochdale residents, the result matters regardless of party politics. The mayor will influence transport investment affecting the borough, oversee policing priorities through Greater Manchester Police, support regeneration funding, negotiate future devolution settlements and help shape long-term economic strategy. Decisions made by the combined authority often have direct consequences for local services and infrastructure.

Some observers have argued that the low turnout should serve as a warning rather than simply another election statistic. Devolution was designed to bring political decision-making closer to local communities. If only one in four voters participates in choosing the person leading that process, questions inevitably arise about democratic legitimacy and public engagement.

There are no easy answers. Better civic education, clearer communication about the mayor's responsibilities, greater local media coverage and more visible campaigning have all been suggested as ways of increasing participation in future elections. Others believe turnout will naturally recover once the new mayor establishes a public profile and begins making decisions that directly affect residents across the region.

Whatever the explanation, one conclusion appears difficult to avoid. Greater Manchester now possesses one of the most powerful devolved political offices in England, yet public participation has moved in the opposite direction. Whoever occupies the mayor's office over the coming years faces a challenge extending beyond transport, housing or policing: rebuilding public confidence in local democracy itself.