Could Hartlepool mark the end for Tony Blair?
September 28th, 2004
-
Is the Prime Minister’s job on the line on Thursday?
With just two days to go before voters in Hartlepool go to the polls a leading Guardian commentator has suggested that a victory for the Lib Dems could mark the end for Tony Blair.
As part of extensive by-election coverage in the paper today Martin Kettle speculates:-
It has been a long time since a party leader’s future hung on the future of a byelection. But it is true of Blair and Hartlepool on Thursday. If the Liberal Democrat Jody Dunn manages to suck up the anti-Labour vote to defeat Labour’s Iain Wright, then Blair’s grip on power would be rocked. Blair has sometimes said that he would not hang around if he thought he was a liability to his party’s electoral chances. Defeat for Labour on Thursday would leave him staring that conclusion in the face.
The more intriguing scenario, though, concerns the aftermath of a Labour victory. If Wright is elected to replace Peter Mandelson, then Labour will judge that the electoral sea-wall has held against the high tide of disaffection with the Blair government. A Wright victory will lead Labour to conclude that Blair is safe to lead the party into the general election.
It all depends on the scale of the Labour victory. Mandelson had a 38-point lead when he retained the seat in 2001. If Wright sees off the challengers with a win of that kind, then Blair is entitled to conclude that the worst is over. But if the lead is down to single figures, Labour MPs all around the country will be looking down the barrel of a gun. And that could start a process that even Gordon Brown’s hard-wired caution may be unable to resist.
Whether such speculation will help or hinder the Labour campaign we shall have to wait and see. It will certainly motivate the Lib Dems and enable them to move on from their candidate’s unwise comments on her blog.
-
It’s also likely to demoralise those Labour activists who would love to see the Prime Minister move on - could their efforts be keeping Tony Blair at Number 10?
William Hill, meanwhile have introduced a new market on “Blair standing down before the next General Election takes place”. The price of 14/1 seems generous and is certainly worth a punt although it is not yet available online. Let’s hope that it is not one of those William Hill markets that seem designed to attract media coverage - not bets. It is much better value than laying Blair at about 7/2 to be Labour leader at the General Election on the betting exchange market.
On the Hartlepool election itself William Hill’s re-entry into the market with Labour at 1/6 and the Lib Dems at 7/2 has caused the betting exchange prices to move sharply. We’ve always said that if the Lib Dems start to sniff victory then the prices will fall rapidly. It will be interesting to see if there are many takers at 7/2.
A good feature of the Betfair betting exchange market is that you can monitor how much money is going on and at what price. The message from the market at the moment is that there’s little support for Labour at the 1/4 that’s available there but that Lib Dem backers are not coming in either.
-
From the way the betting markets are operating we conclude that neither the Lib Dem or Labour activists are very confident.
As well as the Martin Kettle commentry the Guardian has an extensive feature on the by-election campaign that is well worth reading, though, irritatingly, you can only access part one of it online.
picture - http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-images/Politics/Pix/pictures/2004/02/26/blairbig.jpg
MessageSpace Advertising
Part 2 is at http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,3604,1314297,00.html.
Guardian also has this relevant piece
Decca Aitkenhead
Tuesday September 28, 2004
The Guardian
Labour party members in Hartlepool are threatening to deselect their candidate before the general election, even if he wins Thursday\’s byelection.
Unhappiness with the national party\’s control over the candidate\’s selection process has prompted some to boycott Iain Wright\’s campaign. Fewer than half of the town\’s 25 councillors have actively taken part.
Keith Fisher, a former president of the Hartlepool branch, and member for 30 years, said: \”Regardless of how this Thursday\’s election goes, I predict there will be a new candi date standing here for Labour in the general election.\”
When Peter Mandelson announced in July that he would be moving to Brussels, the local party made it clear it did not want him to be replaced with another outsider.
Twenty-six nominations, including several town councillors, Mr Mandelson\’s former election agent and a former local MEP, were submitted, and then vetted by Labour\’s NEC. The NEC presented the local party with a shortlist, and Iain Wright was the only Hartlepool name on it.
\”We were given a choice of one. We felt railroaded into it, and we\’re seething. Local, long-standing members, not even allowed to stand before their own local party? How can that be? It was shocking - a disgrace,\” Mr Fisher said. \”I can only assume the NEC had an image of what they wanted, someone who\’d say yes to everything and wouldn\’t rock the boat.\”
Ray Waller, a councillor for 41 years, said: \”A number of us were surprised there was only one local candidate, and I think once we have got the election over with there will be a discussion, when we make our minds up whether or not to stick with Iain.
\”I think it would have given Iain more credibility within the party if other local candidates had been on the shortlist, and that\’s a view that most party members would share.\”
Two-thirds of the local party stayed away from the meeting at which Mr Wright was selected.
Robbie Payne, a councillor for the last nine years and cabinet member for four, was one of the nominees rejected by the NEC, and is supporting calls for a new selection process after the election.
\”Iain\’s exactly what New Labour want,\” he said.
Anger intensified last month when it became known that Mr Wright\’s team had offered the local mayor, an independent, a deal for his support. In return for the mayor\’s endorsement, Labour offered to stand a weak candidate against him at the next mayoral election. The mayor has declined to endorse anyone.
Many members are unhappy with the tone of Mr Wright\’s campaign, which has focused on attacks against the Liberal Democrat candidate\’s character, and on a promise to \”clear the streets of yobs and thugs\”.
\”I\’ve worked in every general election since 1955,\” said Mr Waller, \”and it\’s always been focused on the issues.
\”I\’ve delivered leaflets on a couple of occasions this time, and I\’m not very happy with the way personality attacks have been the main focus.\” The budget for a byelection is £100,000, but in the general election the branch will be allowed less than £20,000, and have to rely on local voluntary activists.
This support will not be forthcoming, according to Mr Fisher, unless the selection process is allowed to take place again.
Iain Wright said the NEC\’s choice of shortlist was not a matter for him to discuss. \”We are reinvigorating the party. We have 30 new members as a result of this byelection.\”
Main article is quite a hatchet job especially considering it is the Guardian. I always thought Labour
would win here pretty easily but now I am not so sure. Interesting that the LD\’s are trying to bore the electorate
into submission though - that might help Labour.
Decca Aitkenhead - what a name - that should be on the ballot paper.
Interesting to see the comment re budgets - I\’d have thought that £100,000 for a by-election would breach election spending limits.
Any chance of a book on the result being over turned in the courts?
There are speical rules for by-elections. the limit is 100 000
I was aware that by-elections limits were greater than ordinary elections - but I thought they were something like 4 times - about £30k rather than £100. Anyway having read the article - the claim is made by the Guardian rather than Labour members - but an interesting article nevertheless. Looks like it\’s going to the wire.
At South Leicester Labour spent almost the full £100,000 Lib Dems only £47,000 - Today\’s Guardian article -well worth 55p
, you tight so and so suggests Labour has so little support from local activists that they are paying envelope stuffers .
Was aware that Labour Candidate was weak but typical of Stalinist Labour to upset their local party members. Still too close to call but wondering about risking next weeks housekeeping on the Lib dems at the current prices (this weeks already on!).
I think it comes down to how the Lib Dems deal with the blog issue - from what I\’ve read so far they haven\’t which puts Labour in the driving seat - but these Guardian comments allow them to fight fire with fire and undermine Iain Wright similarly. I\’m thinking at 7-2 next week\’s housekeeping is looking good.
Icarus - I\’m worried about your house-keeping - as a general rule don\’t bet more than you can afford to lose. This is advice that I have not always taken myself
I\’m sure Chris Rennard is busy writing the article the Hartlepool mail didn\’t as we speak…
Re point 3 from Jon, I was at school with Decca Aitkenhead - except that then she was christened Jessica. I presume the Decca emerged when she went off to join the Meeja.
Thanks for your advice (Its only the housekeeping - not the mortgage!) On the basis that \”there is always someone worse off than you - and it is the policy of the Conservative Party to keep things that way\”! - (Beyond the Fringe 1962) What about the poor soul who has £33 on the Tories to win Hartlepool - If that happened I\’d give up drink!!
I have just taken a call from a friend who has been out with the Tories every night for the campaign who has asked me to put £50 on for him on a LibDem win at any odds better than 2/1. I told him that Hills were ofering 11/4 but he said he hadn\’t got time to do that so could I do it through betfair.
I\’ve now started backing the Lib Dems. What\’s convinced me is the report in the Guardian that Labour has so few activists that it has had to hire envelope stuffers.
anyone wanting a serious bet on the LDs would do well to open an account with IG binarybet
prices remain
LAB 80 - 85
LD 15 - 20
Sell Lab at 80 or buy LD at 20 amounts to 4/1
their prices were out of line in the July by-elections and they go away with it - will they this time…
I was pretty convinced canvassing (for the Lib Dems) on Saturday but the danger is you dont see the whole picture - I thought that those with all the information looked quietly confident though. Labour vote seems to have evapourated and Respect, and UKIP are actually not bad candidates who will syphon some votes away from Labour - at Leic south there was no UKIP and Respect gathered in quite a bit of the Muslim voters (not many in sunny Hartlepool). The Green candidate is good too which might cost the Lib Dems a few hundred votes but the message seemed to be that the voters want Labour out though Iraq was not mentioned spontaneously by anyone on the door. The task for the Lib Dems is to convince voters by Thursday that Wright is useless. With the amunition available I think I could manage that, so it should be a piece of cake for the awesome Lib Dem by-election team. Just in case however I am planning to drive up Wednesday to deliver the 5am Good Morning leaflet!!!
John what is a binary bet - how does it work? Gently please - I have only just grasped how to lay on Betfair
The by-election expenditure in Leicester South was: Lib Dem £43k; Lab £72k; Con £97k. So the result was pretty much in inverse proportions to the amount of money spent.
The odds on betfair are all binary as well, just expressed differently (reciprocal). Binary means just the same as it does in computing - the result
be either 0 or 1 (in this case 0 or 100). Contrast this with a continuous market like the seat markets at City Index where you can be right or wrong
in various degrees with corresponding impact on the profit/loss.
John, Thanks for that - reminds me of the comment (German I think) \”Why keep things simple when with a little effort you can make them really complicated\”
John, thanks for the tip. Binarybet currently have a \”double your profits on the first bet\” offer. So I have closed out my position… I am now flat with a guaranteed profit (Labour at 4/7 with Paddy, hedged with LDs at 8/1 from Binarybet). Time to enjoy the drama from now till Thursday!
After hearing Blair\’s speeach in which he said he \”could\” apologise over intelligence on WMD, the headlines in tomorrow\’s papers will be devastating. Another nail in the coffin of the Labour hartlepool campaign.
If Lib Dems take Hartlepool, they will be on 30% in national opinion polls and Labour will possibly be 3rd place for at least another month or so. I think pressure for Blair to go would be intense, because of the sheer number of Labour MPs afraid to lose their seats.
The issue of trust and Iraq will not go away. Trust is something that is very hard to regain once it has lost.
I think Blair may have played the best hand he could this afternoon. The people who are galled by his Iraq statement (like me) are probably those who had turned hard against him anyway. His invocation of how dreadful Saddam was may have won some waverers round. (Never mind that the logical implication of that is immediate British expeditions against Zimbabwe, Burma and North Korea).
Why? People forget that he used exactly the same argument before the war - on a number of occasions his line was
\”I may ultimately be proven wrong about WMD etc (because all intelligence is uncertain), but if I am then at least we will have had the positive side effect of removing Saddam - if those who oppose my policy are wrong however… \”{thermonuclear global catastrophy etc}.
It\’s just a mystery to me why he has never reminded everyone that he was never particularly convincing on the subject of WMD at the time (of course everyone was led to believe there was something there but the fact that so much fuss was raised about some missiles that went a dozen or so miles over what was permitted should have raised sizeable doubts about the extent of the program.
NotJody - if Labour are going to cruise it why is the price moving out and why is almost no money going on the party?
But the possibility of being wrong because of the inherent uncertainty of intelligence is one thing - it doesn\’t counter the allegations that intelligence was distorted to fit a course of action that had already been determined. Really Blair needs to gloss over this by stressing how wonderful Iraq is now. It\’s the best he can do, but I can see a problem or two with convincing the whole country…
Yes bookvalue - the why? was directed at your comment that Blair asserting how terrible Saddam was would win over a few waverers. He used the argument before the war and it didn\’t win over many people, and that was when removing him could be presented in isolation as pretty much a no lose situation - for Iraqis anyway.(most of the negatives put forward by opponents has more to do with more intangible concepts like \”upsetting the international community\” or \”destabilising the wider Middle East\”). Of course it\’s not so clear cut now
Emphasis on the \”few\”. He couldn\’t have said much else this afternoon. If he says he never really believed in WMD, that is pretty much an admission of having misled Parliament for the reasons I outlined in post 27. Saying, as you suggest, \”I accepted the possibility I could in good faith be wrong, and I was wrong\” just resurrects the question of his good faith. He\’s now (wisely) attempting to sidestep it by acting like the cop with the heart of gold who sometimes needs to bend the rules to get results.
I dont think Labour will cruise it - have a look at S Leicester Gen election and by election votes compared to Hartlepool
They look very similar. In Leicester Iraq was a problem with the middle class university Labour supporters and the large ethnic vote. Their candidate had some baggage but wasn\’t too bad. At Hartlepool the problem for Labour is the Hospital and as with Iraq in Leic \”TRUST\” and the candidate is awful. I think the result will be very comparable to Leic (I didnt visit Hodge Hill)
I wouldn\’t go as far as NotJody — either in claim (there\’s no way Labour will cruise it), or in tone/language — but I have been a bit surprised by some of the comments made on the site. I suspect this is an election that Labour will probably win, but which the Lib Dems might (just) be able to pull off — and to me this ties in with both the flows of the money (insofar as we know them), the recent changes in the odds, and the comments that I\’ve had back from people in H\’pool. Perhaps I\’m just being cynical, but I suspect that some of the comments made above have more than a hint of self-interest in them. Feel free to tell me that I\’m hopelessly wrong!
What is important on this topic regarding Blair\’s speech is how the public will perceive it. I do not think it will taken well.
Headlines tomorrow will be: \”Blair Admits Intelligence Failure\” or \”Blair Admits there are no Iraq WMD: So why did we go to war?\” or \”Blair: I\’m Not Sorry, as two more British soldiers are killed.\” Again it is associated with the question of trust. I\’m trying to think of any newspaper that will paint the conference speech positively.
Any positive domestic policy points will be upstaged by Iraq. The electorate have short memories about intelligence being \”over egged\” to quote an intelligence officer at Hutton, or Scarlet\’s role, now promoted, or who said what, but it is clear that Iraq is a real turn off.
Iraq will be tomorrow\’s headlines and that can only help the Lib Dem vote and damage Labour support.
I\’ve backed the LDs at 4/1 Brian not out of political conviction but VALUE PUNTING conviction.
for the same reason that I backed Labour at 4/7…
I\’ll win the thick side of 5k if Blair goes before the General Election so there is a certain amount of self interest involved in predicting that Labour might get turned over on Thursday.
Talk is cheap notjody…this site is about betting not bullshit. There\’s over a grand up for grabs at 1.25 upwards…feel free…
Brian is probably right I want the Lib Dems to win - I have helped there for Gods sake, and wanting something to happen is a bad reason for betting on it -BUT I really cannot believe the odds against the Lib Dems - It does feel much better than Leic. S. Even if I could offload some of my bet I dont think I would do so - especially not the 8-1 on IG -thanks John
It does seem like a terrible candidate selection by Labour. Jody Dunn is a triumph of style over substance; Iain Wright is more of a no-score draw.
Hartlepool is now turning steadily orange. It is not easy to predict an exact result, but it is quite clear that the result is going to be a lot closer than the odds suggest. The Lib Dems are out-leafletting and out-canvassing all the other parties combined. They have a huge team of people here. A bet on the Lib Dems is far from a dead cert, but it is good value at the odds on offer.
Um am I missing something - there are a couple of references to comments by \’Not Jody\’ - but nothing form him/her on the thread - has this forum started to be moderated? Have the original posts been deleted?
Dan, Not Jody\’s contributions appear in a thread from 26/9/04 re Hartlepool.
Ah got you - I remember the comment now.
http://asdf.3d.net/mac-wireless-keyboard.html http://asdf.3d.net/wireless-keyboard-linux.html wireless keyboard wireless keyboard and mouse logitech wireless keyboard wireless keyboard mouse microsoft wireless keyboard keyboard wireless wireless keyboard review rf wireless keyboard wireless mouse and keyboard
rca wireless keyboard
replica rolex watch…
replica swiss rolex…