Labour’s little looming local difficulties
August 24th, 2005
Birmingham Council House
Why Labour did too well in 2002
With the main electoral cycle over for the year, the next broad ballot box test for the parties will be May 2006’s English local elections in 176 urban and rural councils.
Local elections are not a perfect test of the parties’ national standings – local issues of course play their role, and turnouts are typically low. But historically they have been an opportunity for a protest vote against the government party. The results can shake a party’s confidence in its leader, particularly as the swing in vote share to the opposition tends to be magnified by differential turnout – while supporters of the government often sit it out at local elections, opposition voters are more likely to take the opportunity of getting out to show their anger at the government.
So is Tony Blair at risk from the aftershocks of a bad election performance next May?
The London borough and district council seats up for contention were last fought in 2002, when the Conservatives under Iain Duncan-Smith were making little headway in the polls. The Conservatives trailed on vote share in those elections by 3 points: by historical standards a disappointing performance for an opposition during a government’s second term. The metropolitan seats, on the other hand, were fought in 2004 which was a much worse year for Labour.
Although Labour has lost some councils which were once its strongholds (for example, Birmingham, England’s largest local authority, which has been controlled by a Conservative/Lib Dem coalition since 2004), the party has certainly not been wiped out locally. 61 of the 176 councils to be contested next May are still run by Labour or by Labour/Lib Dem coalitions. Labour still has a lot left to lose. In fact, with local elections often combining a protest vote against the local council with a protest against the government, the councils Labour still holds may be those where it does worst.
4th May 2006 has the potential to be a bad night for Labour. At this stage of the government’s life, the differential turnout effect at local level will be strong: the longer a government goes on, the more reluctant its supporters to turn out at anything but General Elections. Given this, there is no guarantee of Labour recovering to its 2002 performance, or even holding its poor 2004 share. With only English councils being contested next year, Labour will not have the advantage of its Scottish and Welsh strongholds being in play. Even in the relatively high turnout of this year’s General Election, the Conservatives were the narrow victors in the popular vote in England. And the Liberal Democrats made inroads in traditional Labour areas (though many Lib Dem victories at parliamentary level are built on the back of control of the local council, which creates the possibility of an anti-Lib Dem swing among voters who want to make their protest on local rather than national grounds).
Cantor Spreadfair has a spread of 118-133 weeks for the length of Blair’s 3rd term, corresponding to him remaining Prime Minister until August–November 2007. So the markets are not predicting that he will be blown off course by his local difficulties. But if there is going to be a wobble next year, the aftermath of 4th May might be the occasion for it.
As always, comments are very welcome from all site users, whether they are newcomers or regulars. In particular, contributions from people with knowledge of the areas where elections are taking place would be very interesting.
Philip Grant
Guest editor
Mike Smithson is on holiday until 5th September.
MessageSpace Advertising
Perhaps pure anti-Labour partisanship should make me treat you kindly, but I’m very sceptical. It would be quite extraordinary if the local elections in a not particularly interesting year for locals were what finished Blair off. Do any history buffs know if this has ever happened. John Major had some abominable results in the 1995 local elections, which probably contributed to the pressure that made him resigned and refight the Tory leadership that June. But he won 2/3 of MPs’ votes in that contest and stayed Prime Minister another two years. Similarly, the Conservative landslide in the 1968 local elections following Enoch Powell’s Rivers of Blood speech did not stop Harold Wilson staying Prime Minister another two years, and entering the 1970 election as the man everyone expected to win.
I sincerely hope your articule is correct. In Bury South we have been camapign in two of our target wards for some time and are now starting on our third. Looks like it could be a bad day for Labour in Bury as long as our leadership doesn’t cock it up.
1 - on balance I agree with the market sentiment that he isn’t going to go. But in terms of seats lost there’s a good chance that it will look worse than 1995.
Really? Major lost two thousand councillors in 1995. What sort of losses are you expecting next May?
If it was 2,000 then I have misremembered (or overestimated how bad 1991 was). [By the way, do you have a web source for 80s/90s summary results?]
Re 4
I’m expecting a wipe out of labour in Bolton, I think In the Northwest labour will lose Manchester to the Lib Dems and the tories will gain one at least possibly 2 councillors in Manchester. In the surrounding Suburbs it will be a bad night I think Bury will be NOC, Bolton will be a fight between Lib Dem and Tory. With the tories with the upper hand Lib Dems have suffered some devestating infights in its heartlands of Westhoughton widely reported in the Bolton Evening News. I think Rochdale, Oldham and Tameside will see losses to the Lib Dems and Tories. In Stockport I can see Labour losing all of the council seats they are defending
I think it’s fair to say that the results in London are going to be very poor for us.
In areas like Hammersmith, Croydon etc… I can see us getting pushed back by the Tories on the back of their strong election performances there.
In the inner city things are more confused. In places like Brent, Greenwich and Camden the LibDems stand to make gains but are unlikely to push us from control, though its quite possible that they might push some to NOC, but as things stand I doubt that will be the case.
In Newham and Tower Hamlets, “Respect” is likely to play their hand and look likely to at least emerge as the second largest party in TH and potentially also in Newham. Newham’s huge Labour majority will mean we still hold the borough quite comfortably though the majority will go down, Tower Hamlets is more unpredictable and we stand to lost a substantial number of councillors to “Respect”… meaning that TH is likely to slip into NOC, though how the parties will end up I really don’t know.
Outside of London, things look better for Labour IMHO.
Certainly Birmingham and Newcastle are up, or at least some wards, I think Liverpool is up to (?)
In Birmingham I don’t know what will happen, but the seat up in Newcastle favour Labour and its likely Labour will retake the council and probably put in a great deal of work to do so. Liverpool has a huge LibDem majority however the council seems to have alienated a large section of the community concentrated in the predominantly white working class areas of the city so Labour should be able to claw back some wards… nothing spectacular though.
Where else is up?
Speaking of the NW, S Penketh, any views on Hynburn? With Labour and the Tories are so finely balanced it’s always interesting to watch.
A thirs will be up in Liverpool next year.
7 - Birmingham is up in thirds. 2004 was all-up due to boundary changes, so this time the third-placed councillor in each ward from 2004 will be defending.
5 - Sorry, I’m going from memory rather than a web site. I’m very sure the figure was ~2k losses in 1995, though.
7 - Hammersmith will indeed be one to watch. Greg Smith, who masterminded Greg Hands’ 2005 campaign in Hammersmith & Fulham - the fourth best Tory result anywhere in the country, I saw yesterday - is also running the Conservatives’ 2006 local election campaign there.
Ben at 7 - there is almost no chance that Labour will retake Newcastle. The seats up do not favour them - quite the opposite, with the 3rd placed Labour seats being up for re-election in split wards like South Heaton.
It is possible (just) that Labour may retake some seats, but to take control they’d have to gain 9 seats from the Lib Dems. Looking at the results, there are probably only 6 seats within reach for Labour, that is: Walkergate, Ouseburn, Blakelaw, Fawdon, Denton and Westerhope. The rest are either very safe Lib Dem wards, or wards where Labour are currently in 3rd place.
Even to win these 6 seats, Labour would have to perform significantly better than they did in 2004 - and there’s no sign of that at the moment.
Observer not sure helped there previously, Both local Parties in good shape Tories lost a couple of Byelections in the unlikely gains but they are optermistic. Labour still good campaigners round there though, so not sure, properly edge on the tories though. with a whole council election and not byelection. the electorate will bew going of the general mood of the campaign.
11 - fair enough. I could not find information pre-1996 so I have not been able to make it as quantitative as I would like.
11-14. From a BBC article:
“Tories worst ever local performances in 1995 when they lost almost 2000 seats”
How many councils (in areas still labour at GE level) Labour is risking to lose?
The MPs of those areas could become “scared” after a disastrous result and scared MPs are able to do everything (Re leadership).
15 - Thanks. You should look for a researchers’ job Andrea - I thought I was pretty efficient but you can find anything in seconds!
16 - this is where I got the information about control from. I didn’t correlate it to the party holding the Westminster seat though.
Phil,
Thansk for the thread, not so much by popular demand and persistent wingeing.
Ben 2 7,
Like David @ 12 I think you are wide of the mark on Newcastle, I can’t see the LibDems losing control there unless there are some factors I’m not really aware of. What’s your view of the other great LibDem vs Labour battlegrounds? Sheffield, Manchester & Bristol?
On London I think you are absolutely right about Tower Hamlets - hung Council with Respect 2nd & LibDems 3rd and maybe half a dozen Tories (want Sean fear be pleased) and god only knows what kind of Adminstration running the place afterwards. Labour look very vulnerable in both Hammersmith (from Tory gains) and in Brent, where they only have to lose 4 seats for the Council to go NOC (and the LibDems are likely to gain at least that on the back of Sarah Teather’s election). Camden also looks very dodgy for you, while Labour should hold Greenwich and Newham there will be losses, and further ground will be lost in Waltham forest aswell.
What’s your view of Southwark and my own Lambeth, my own view is LDs & Labour trading some seats but on balance net LD gains giving them slim overall majorities in both.
The Tories may be in trouble in Richmond, but make gains against the LibDems in Kingston.
Anyone have any Idea about how the Midlands will fair willl the libs and tories make further gains in Birmingham. Also any Changes of Tories getting representation on Liverpool I hear it’s not good. As I’ve stated previously were really going for Brooklands in Manchester and have a good chance we may even get Central ward.
18. Thanks Book Value.
Sadly there’s no chance to see the tories lose the Bromley council. I was ready to come to UK and wearing “Winning Here” placards!
17. Here (don’t know in UK) MPs assistants and researchers’ jobs are not very well paid. Some are even hired in a non very legal way.
I did have a summary table of the state of the parties in local government from 1976 to 2003 which, frustratingly, I’ve lost. 1995 was indeed the worst performance which any government suffered in one year throughout that period. The Conservatives were pushed into third place in that year (they regained second place in 1999) and held just 13 councils outright.
The Conservatives started their term in 1979 with an outstanding advantage in local government, controlling 220 councils outright , compared to 75 for Labour. Back then, Adur was probably the sole authority controlled by the Liberals. Although Labour never suffered as badly as the Conservatives did in 1995, the cumulative losses suffered by Labour from 1975 to 1979 were huge.
The Conservatives actually did pretty well in local elections throughout the eighties and still had about 9,000 councillors in 1990 (compared to 12,000 in 1979). Labour only became the largest party in local government in 1991. The Conservatives regained some ground in 1992, but then lost nearly 4,000 seats from 1994 to 1996.
21 - it’s a mix here. You’ll never get a vast salary doing it, but there are reasonably paid jobs for full-time researchers, whilst interns are also used for fairly nominal pay.
20 - I’m not that in touch with Birmingham any more (despite the glorious picture at the top of the thread). I’ve a feeling it will stay fairly static. Inevitably councils do some unpopular things, but the postal vote affair and just the sheer length of time Labour spent in power (1982-2004 IIRC) is going to counterbalance that, I would expect.
Bullseye, where would you say the vulnerabilities lie in Lambeth? From my POV, Thornton, Streatham South and Stockwell seem to be the best targets for Labour, whereas the LDs could advance in Vassall and Herne Hill.
22 - many thanks Sean. I’ve edited the article.
Thanks bookvalue
23.”it’s a mix here. You’ll never get a vast salary doing it, but there are reasonably paid jobs for full-time researchers, whilst interns are also used for fairly nominal pay.”
who did you pay you? The individul MP or the party?
Here the problems are when it’s the individual MP to pay the researchers and the assistants: some of them pay their researchers and assistants very low. When it’s the party to give the salary to the researcher teh situation is usually better.
This paper has a graph showing number of councillors by party affiliation since the 70s, but frustratingly no source is quoted so there it is not very accurate:
http://www.parliament.uk/commons/lib/research/rp2004/rp04-049.pdf
It appears 1991 was not too bad for the Tories but 1995 was dreadful as has been said.
27 - here too it can be either, but I think there aren’t all that many party-paid researchers who are dedicated to MPs: they usually do work for the party as a whole.
In the byes caused by the postal vote shenanigans, Labour’s vote certainly suffered, but not, surprisingly, by a huge amount - on an average measure, 4.9% in Aston and 2.8% in Bordesley Green. Probably Labour, after the severe battering its vote received in 2004 and the GE, will remain fairly stable.
I think it unlikely that barring an unexpected disaster in the next 8 months that Labour will do all that badly in nexy year’s local elections . Headline gains/losses will depend on when the seats were last fought and what the party standings were at that time .
London and Unitary/Shire seats last fought in 2002 should see Labour losses to both Conservative and Lib Dem as 2002 was OKish for the Conservatives , good for Labour and poor for the Lib Dems .
The Metropolitan Boroughs had whole council elections in 2004 . This was a bad year for Labour and very good for the Lib Dems so Labour should recover some ground here and make net gains . These as David says will not be enough to retake Newcastle or Liverpool but should stop further council control losses and Stuart and others forecasting sweeping Labour losses in the North West should be prepared for a disappointment .
No doubt some wards and areas will go against the trend because of local factors .
OT. Labour shortlist for Livingston:
Jim Devine (Cook’s agent)
John Duncan (Cook’s former aide)
Hanzala Malik(councillor for Glasgow’s Asian community)
Willie Dunn (West Lothian Council deputy leader and chairman of the constituency party )
John McGinty (local councillor)
SNP shortlist:
Angela COnstance (the candidate last may)
Gordon Guthrie (candidate in Linlithgow last may)
32 - thanks. Any news on the Lib Dem selection?
There are another couple of points Book Value. Although Labour led by 3% in 2002, most Shire Districts weren’t contested, nor were Wales or Scotland. The BBC estimated that the Conservatives would have been about 1% ahead overall, if the seats which weren’t contested had moved in the same direction as the seats which were. That said, even a 1% lead is not at all impressive for an opposition party in mid term. I would expect the Conservatives to do rather better than that next year, and be disappointed if they didn’t.
Also, all the Metropolitan Boroughs (outside London) had all-out elections in 2004. One third of the seats are up for election this time. I don’t believe that Labour will do as badly in those seats as they did in 2004, so they should make a modest gain from the Conservatives and Lib Dems in those boroughs. I can’t see many such councils changing hands - although unfortunately Solihull will probably be a Conservative loss.
London was a comparitive bright spot for the Conservatives in 2002. As with the rest of the country they led Labour by 1% across the capital that year, but that compared with a Labour lead of 8% in London in 1998, in the previous round of borough elections. Labour still managed to win 15 boroughs to 9 for the Conservatives, but often by the thinnest of margins. A swing of 1% from Labour to Conservative would give the Conservatives control of Harrow, Bexley, and Hammersmith and Fulham. A swing of 3% would probably give the Conservatives control of places like Hillingdon, Croydon, and Merton. So far this year, there have been 21 local by-elections in London, with the Conservative and Lib Dem vote shares up 2% on average, and the Labour vote share down 3% on average.
Labour faces a further problem in London though; namely a rather nasty pincer movement from the Conservatives in some wards, Lib Dems in others, and Respect in the East End. In Camden, Tower Hamlets, and Brent, there are clear areas of Conservative, Lib Dem, and (in Tower Hamlets Respect)support; it’s clear who you should vote for if your motivation is just to deliver a protest vote against Labour. Labour will probably lose control of all three of those boroughs, despite remaining the largest party in each in terms of vote share.
It’s obviously in the LDs interests, moreover, to put up a good fight in Camden in the wards that will be part of Hampstead and Kilburn, as they’ll need to be in a position to squeeze the Conservative vote at the next GE.
Mark the Liberals have proved very effective in Manchester and it will come as no surprise to see them lose the city to the liberals. Also Labour has lost the plot in Bolton since losing control there have been public spats Labour Clubs have closed suchh as Little Levers, leading to tories gaining a councillor there for the first time in 25 years. In Bury we Have seen a gradula loss of seats over a 7 year period. In Tamesade and Oldham Tories and liberals were just pipped at the post of some wards which they have worked well with Labour doing nothing. On the other Manchester Councils which I know nothing I have not commented the only white wash I predicted was Stockport and very Bad results in Bolton and Bury not a northwest wipeout. Remember Bury Labour only need to lose two to go into NOC
34 - I think our posts and expectations are in pretty good agreement , Sean - egg could be on both our faces - LOL
Looking at Birmingham, it is going to be quite complex. The outer city wards should behave reasonably predictably, but the inner city wards may have Respect and/or PJP candidates who will cause unpredictable results. The Con/LDm coalition hasn’t done badly, but hasn’t done that well either and Labour have shown disturbing signs of being a proper opposition recently. Also, remember, the Birmingham Tories have been underperforming for a number of years, anyone expecting substantial gains from Lab to Con is living in Cloud Cuckoo land.
Of the 40 wards up, they can be summarized psephologically (the actualité might be somewhat different)as follows:
Con safe: 8 (Sutton(4 wards), Northfield, Edgbaston, Harborne)
Lab safe: 9 (Kingstanding, Shard End, Tyburn, Erdington, Stockland Green, Handsworth Wood, Ladywood, Lozells & East Handsworth, Soho)
LDm safe: 4 (Yardley(3 wards), Acocks Green)
LDm/Con marginal: 1 (Hall Green)
LDm/Lab marginal: 3 (Aston, Perry Barr, Selly Oak)
Lab/LDm marginal: 4 (Springfield, Moseley & Kings Heath, Sparkbrook, Washwood Heath)
Lab/Con marginal: 1 (Longbridge)
Con/Lab marginal: 4 (Billesley, Quinton, Weoley, Kings Norton)
PJP/Lab marginal: 1 (Bordesley Green)
Lab held but Con long-shot: 1 (Oscott)
Lab held but LDm long-shot: 2 (Hodge Hill, Nechells)
Con held but Lab long-shot: 2 (Bournville, Brandwood)
At absolute worst, the coalition would lose 9 (and I don’t expect that to happen), that would still leave Labour short of an overall majority on the council. From my understanding (which is more limited to SE Brum), Labour are only feeling confident about gaining Billesley and are very worried about losing Moseley & Kings Heath, Springfield, Washwood Heath and Hodge Hill. The Tories are reported to be feeling quite chipper about Longbridge, but not Oscott.
36 Stuart , but these gains you expect for the Conservatives and Lib Dems are not coming from the party standings in 2002 or at the GE this year but from the standings in 2004 when Labour had their worst share of the vote ever ( I believe ) in the Metropolitan Boroughs just 32.6% . Their popularity in the country next year can be a lot worse than now and still be rather higher than in 2004 .
34 - thanks for the comprehensive analysis as always.
One point you make is “I don’t believe that Labour will do as badly in those seats as they did in 2004, so they should make a modest gain from the Conservatives and Lib Dems in those boroughs.” I’m not sure this will be the case - clearly support Labour lost in 2004 came back for the 2005 General Election, but I think a lot of that was a “better the devil you know” vote which won’t bother to come out for Labour in the locals. Instinctively I would think differential turnout was an increasing problem for a government the older it got, but as I said I’m short on the numbers to investigate that.
Iain, are the BNP showing any signs of making a big effort? If they do stand in wards like Longbridge, they could conceivably help muddy the anti-Labour votes and boost their campaign.
Book Value, Labour support sunk to a very low level in 2004, (the BBC estimated an equivalent of 26%). My view is that the BBC estimate was incorrect, but Labour’s support was still under 30%.
Observer at 35, the Lib Dems would have no chance of beating the Conservatives in Belsize, Frognal, and Swiss Cottage, and they won’t waste resources trying to do so, when there are richer pickings to be had in other parts of the borough. They will fight hard in Hampstead Town, which is split 2:1 Conservative/Lib Dem. Holborn and St. Pancras should now be regarded as a Lib Dem target as well, and that also has a substantial Conservative vote left to squeeze.
The City & District of St.Albans will be an interesting fight in 2006. More so as the Tories won the Paliamentary seat from Labour with the Lib Dems pushing upto 25% of the vote (A good 3 way marginal shaping up).
The present 58 seat council as follows :
Lib Dems 29
Con 17
Lab 11
Ind 1
The local Lib Dems will be intent on gaining effective overall control . 20 seats are to be contested with the following marginals up for grabs (incumbent then challenger)
Colney Heath - Tory/LibDem
Harpenden North - Tory/LibDem
Harpenden East - LibDem/Tory
Sandridge - Tory/LibDem
St.Peters - Lab/LibDem
Wheathampstead - Tory/LibDem
On paper it looks like a simple task for the Lib Dems , but they’ve been too often the bridesmaid in the area to take the election for granted and I understand that both Tories and Labour are determined to put in a huge effort to prevent St Albans falling more firmly into the “winning here” column . I would expect turnout in most wards to be in the range 45% - 60% , slightly up on normal .
33. I think the Libdem will select on Thursday (like Labour), while the SNP will announce their candidate on Friday. The tories are MIA.
No women in the Labour shortlist (Peter Law is protesting!)
Mark that maybe true, however, in most of those wards Labour has not worked them. Tories in some of these wards have learnt from the Liberals and are working them. Liberals, though I am loath to say it, are all over the place in Manchester along with tory activity in the two wards i’ve mentioned. The Bolton Labour Party are disintigrating hence good tory results in Bolton especially West. Bury Labour are resiliant however, They are not working my ward such as Radcliffe North which we won in the GE. I grant you in Tameside and Oldham where Labour will still, in my opinon will remain in charge, I am going of just hearsay of friends. But I am still predicting a bad Night in Bolton, Bury and Manchester
18. Looking through the various situations, I noticed the strenght of the tories and Libdems in Bolsover!
Has there ever been a situtation with all the seats of a council held bythe same party?
Does the Reading council cover only the 2 Reading seats at Westminster level? If so, I’m surprised that the tories have so few councillors.
Jack W, the Marshalswicks, Park Street, and Verulam (3 Lib Dem and 1 Con) should be pretty tight as well. I imagine the Conservatives will have carried all of these four wards on May 5th, though it doesn’t mean they’ll do so in May next year.
The real surprise was that Labour, rather than the Lib Dems, gained St. Alban’s in 1997. At that time, the Lib Dems had 40 seats on the local council, and were in a very clear second place in 1992 in the wards that went into the new seat. I expect the seat will actually become a Con/Lib Dem marginal in the future, and that Labour will fade here.
“Has there ever been a situtation with all the seats of a council held bythe same party?”
Yes, Labour have often won 60 out of 60 in Newham, and in the past sometimes won every seat in Tower Hamlets and Hackney.
45 - Good Morning Jack , The new boundaries for St Albans Parliamentary seat make it even more interesting as the Lib Dems outpolled the other 2 parties in the County Council Seats making up the new constituency with Labour a close but not very close 3rd .
“Has there ever been a situtation with all the seats of a council held bythe same party?”
Yes, Labour have often won 60 out of 60 in Newham, and in the past sometimes won every seat in Tower Hamlets, Hackney, and Islington. It’s less likely now because of the emergenece of the Lib Dems, and the minor parties, in local government.
Sean @ 43: What would be obvious targets for the LDs in Holborn and St. Pancras apart from Canteloews and Camden Town with Primrose Hill? While they’ve certainly demonstrated their potential strength here at the GE, they’re far from putting the Conservatives out of contention in other wards. It might be the case that both parties do equally well in boosting their vote share at the expense of Labour, which might limit the damage in terms of councillors.
Any chance of Tory full Control in Coventry and North tyneside
19 – bullseye
On the subject of Newcastle, my friends up there say its looks likely that we can retake the city, what’s more there are a number of wards up which favour us. 9 seats is not that many, in Leicester I know that there is a very high possibility that despite being a smaller council, Labour are well placed to win back that many seats, although some of that will be the Iraq-effect subsiding (as demonstrated in Leicester South after the by-election).
[b]Manchester[/b], looks shaky and after the LibDem win in Withington I don’t know weather to interpret it as a portent of looming disaster or if it might act as a wake up call for the local Labour Party in the city… no doubt the former
But I think we’ll hang on as we have a pretty wide margin for error, though reasonably we should be holding it without trouble, sadly that won’t be the case and the LibDem will run us hard I expect and could even take the council, but as I say I think we’ll hang on.
[b]Sheffield[/b], I think that we should be ok, the LibDems put a great deal into the city last time around and Labour saw them off and while it’s a slim majority I think it’ll hold fast perhaps with some turnover for both sides.
[b]Bristol[/b] I have no idea but the last batch of local elections wasn’t too bad for Labour, so I think the council remains hung, perhaps with a modest increase for the LibDems on the back of winning West, by a far bigger margin that I expected, making them the largest party.
[b]Liverpool[/b], as I say has seen the LibDems not doing to well and Labour stands to make some modest gains, but nothing exciting.
On London I agree, though I think you underestimate the strength of the Camden Labour Party which has by and large been successful at running the area and is a more powerful campaigning machine than many CLPs… though Dobson’s poor showing has to be worrisome. Southwark and Lambeth I don’t know, I think that Southwark CLP seem to be getting their act together of late and might be able to improve the situation a little, Lambeth I just don’t know… though in Wandsworth I think Labour are set to improve their position.
Overall Labour’s position has improved since what really was our nadir back in the spring and early summer of 2004, our position has largely stabilised and that is the general impression on the ground, naturally my experience in Leicester, may be atypical as the city’s results in May where in stark contrast to those in many other party’s of the country. But nationally in many areas Labour’s position has improved and the idea that there will be sweeping losses smacks of wishful thinking on some people’s parts.
51. Thanks. The old good days…
Those situations make me like PR.
Observer @ 41 - There’s a lot less BNP activity than there was at this point in 2004 in the wards I know well (the Hall Green, Sparkbrook & Small Heath & Selly Oak ones). Anyway, the evidence is from our canvas returns that in SE Birmingham the BNP vote came from Labour or previous NV’s and the UKIP vote came from the Tories or previous NV’s.
Does anyone have view on my old stomping ground of Waltham Forest? I’m assuming that the Chingford end will remain resolutely Tory but unsure about the southern half (walthamstow mainly) with sizeable Asian and ‘metropolitan’ representation - Labour coming through despite being squeezed by Respect and the Lib Dems?
Labour are now at the miserable stage of having 59 out of 60 councillors in Newham. It’s been a Labour stroghold even before the modern Labour Party existed: Keir Hardie won West Ham South for the ILP in 1892, and the ILP-led coalition which took power in 1898 is often considered to be the first Labour-controlled council administration in Britain.
58. Who’s the poor 60th councillor?
Thanks Iain. I thought that, if disaffected Labour voters were to move off in the direction of the BNP as well as the mainstream parties, it could limit the damage to Labour. I suppose that the BNP will have better pickings in the smaller Black Country towns.
Observer @ 52, they won Haverstock in a by-election, and I should think Gospel Oak is the sort of place where they could expect to do well. Concerns over Iraq and civil liberties will probably motivate a lot of people in such wards.
Highgate had the most intriguing result in 2002. Labour managed to win all three seats in 2002 on 28% of the vote, with the Conservatives and Greens just a handful of votes behind them. How it will vote this time I’ve no idea, although I think it’s unlikely Labour can win all three seats this time.
Actually, a good performance for the Greens in Camden might be enough for Labour to hang on.
59 - The Christian People’s Alliance, oddly enough.
Andrea - a Christian People’s Alliance councillor in Canning Town South, of all places.
62-63. Thanks. Strange things happen soemtimes!
61. Re Highgate.
Glenda repeated a couple of times that Labout will do bad in the locals (she predicted the GE outcome quite well).
I thought that a good Greens performance is not helpful for Labour if people switch directly from Labour to Greens.
48 Sean . Marshallwick South is safe Lib Dem and in North Tom Clegg has proved to be a popular councillor and I expect him to retain his seat. The 1 Park St seat this time is safe Lib Dem seat . Pauline Buffham in Verulam saw off a strong Lib Dem challenge in 2002 and I expect a Tory hold there.
Redbourn might be an outside Tory gain but Pat Schofield is a doughty election fighter and a Lib Dem hold is the most likely result. In all the LibDems must be very clear favourites for the council , that is if I stand down all my Celtic warriors:lol: Remember Harpenden has one of the biggest Highland gatherings outside of the home country !!
The St Albans parliamentary seat will be very interesting in 2009 , if the Lib Dems move into second place , a huge tactical squeeze on Labour and against the Tories is in prospect , however Labour have proved remarkably resiliant in the past and an almighty scrap over the next couple of elections is likely - excellent !
53 - Stuart Coventry - Nil chance probable Labour gains
North Tyneside - slim but unlikely
54 - Ben - Re Newcastle , I think your friend up North are being very optimistic . Have a look at the 2004 results yourself . The favourable wards for Labour being fought next year are as David earlier pointed out generally ones where Labour are the sitting councillor coming 3rd in a split ward so winning will not gain a seat . Bristol is rather more complicated as all the wards are ony 2 member so not all are fought every year . I have not checked but I think the Lib Dems held the majority of the seats fought this year anyway so could not make many gains but Labour may well hold most of the seats being fought next year . Liverpool - Labour cannot sink any lower than they are so some gains there .
58 - Did Labour not have all the seats in Stoke on Trent till quite recently?
Yes, but the Greens will probably pick up people who would otherwise vote Lib Dem in Camden, even if they are ex-Labour.
Re: 51 & 55: I believe the Tories once won every seat on Bracknell Forest DC sometime in the 80s. I can’t recall the LDs ever holding 100% of the seats on a principal authority. I believe after the 1995 elections, they held 25 out of 26 seats on Oadby & Wigston DC.
A lot of this partisan crystal-ball gazing is meaningless. Back in the autumn of 1981, I was certain the Tories would be annihilated in the 1982 local elections but along came the Falklands War and the rest is history…
In 1995, the Tory vote share fall to 25% compared with 47% for Labour and 23% for the LDs. I believe the highest Tory vote share since 1997 has been 38% in 2000. I think vote share is a far better indicator of what is happening than seats changing hands. The Tories need to be polling well above 40% to be in with a shout of winning a General Election. If Labour can hold above 30% that will be a good result for them while the LDs will be looking to poll above 30% - I reckon to take the LD poll figure and add 10% to give the local election guesstimate.
My guess is that as usual there will be something for everyone next year. Labour will lose seats, finish third in the vote share but still be 28-30%. LDs will gain some seats, lose others but poll at 31-33%. Tories will gain seats from both Labour and LDs but still only be polling 36-38%.
But of course anything can happen between now and then….
61: There’s a fair chunk of social housing, including a couple of big estates, in Gospel Oak, though. They’re unlikely to swing to the LDs unless they work them well, though of course turnout there will work against Labour.
50 Mark . Hi Mark , yes the new boundaries will be mouth watering for the Lib Dems and what with a likely gain in nearby Watford and their good results in last years local County Council seats, the yellow peril is slowly infecting the parliamentary body politic of Highland Hertfordshire - nasty little Whigs - I thought I was safe but these Hanovarians are tenacious , I’ll just have to get my targe and lochaber axe out when the Lib Dems come canvassing
62 - just taken a look at the “list of councillors by party affiliation” page on Newnham Council’s website. Glad they have provided such a comprehensive breakdown of the complex partisan geography of the borough:
http://moderngov.newham.gov.uk/mgMemberIndex.asp?FN=PARTY&J=3
I do like this sort of page in a sort of freakshow way. I wonder what Cllr Jenkins got the OBE for? I’m guessing it wasn’t services to sports and fashion.
71 - Jack, I don’t think you are the only one that likes to wave his targe about.
71 - Speaking of Whigs, Jack W, I found the coat of arms of Sir Robert Walpole rather familiar.
Winning here? Of course it was a one-horse race in those days, really.
73 Stephen. I’m glad to see CK introducing some modern electioneering tactics ! or is he just greeting Mike Smithson !
I for one will be surprised if next year’s local elections are not the ‘worst ever’ for a governing party. My impression is that people have got more and more anti-government in local elections over the last fifteen years or so - perhaps 2002 was an exception? Now that Labour is well past its honeymoon, we can expect a big hit.
I would think Labour HQ will start predicting this gently a month or two before (’many voters like to use local elections to punish governments who have been in power for a while’ or something), and will then be able to claim to be pleasantly surprised or at least that the results were as expected. That should take the heat out of any trouble for Blair. There will be gossip in the Westminster village but it will soon blow over.
Now that’s an unusually specific prediction from me! Of course it will depend on how the new Tory leader is doing (although local Tories seem to be able to do well despite abysmal national performances) and who knows, for some reason Labour may not be in the depth of mid-term blues at that point.
68. If the Greens will improve their score it’s likely their get one of the Highgate seats.
72. at first sight, I wasn’t sure if Councillor Garfield was wearing something on her head.
Cllr Jenkins could have been a shot put champion!
74 book value . Didn’t you just know the Lib Dems would pinch a good election tactic albeit 200 years old !
78 - “Onlie Sir Robert canne spoyle ye Jacobites here!”
53 - re North Tyneside, impossible for the Tories to take control, no matter how many seats they win, as the elected Mayor is Labour. Even if the Tories won all 60 seats, Labour would still run the Council.
However, the Tories do have the chance to take an overall majority on the council over the next few years (but this does *not* give them control.)
This won’t happen in 2006 though, due to the way the seats up for re-election fall - there are quite a few split wards. The only realistic chance of a gain in 2006 is Killingworth. Over the following 2-3 years there are more prospects, and I would expect the Tories to have the majority by 2008.
80 - my sister lives in Killingworth. From what I can tell the “old” and wealthy-looking part of the village is pretty small: is there a substantial Tory vote in the newer parts?
Where can we look up the current total number of councillors by party? And / or, what is the current total number of councillors by party?
There was a recent by-election in North Tyenside where we actually gained a seat from Labour and improved our vote on 2004. However, because the Mayor is Labour, Labour only need 1/3 of the seats to retain control.
North Tyneside seems to be a borough that is rapidly swinging towards the Conservatives, and there was a big swing in Tynemouth at this election. Anyone know why?
I’m not sure that we will see anything like the awful local election results suffered under Major after 1992. That level of punishment, like the famous crushing of Labour in 1968, is truly unusual. As a broad rule of thumb, it seems fair to assume that Labour will lose ground in wards which were last up for contention in 2002 and 2003, and remain stable or make a few gains in those areas which saw locals in 2004, with a big loss overall.
82.Look at the website linked by Book Value @18
Now that Cameron has compared Islamist extremists to Nazis, I’ll expect the Libdems to do a leaflet like this one:
“Winning Here, Winning Here!!!
Mr Cameron compared Islamist extremists to Nazis, Mr Duncan compared tories to Islamist extremists, so the tories are Nazis!
Winning here, winning here!!!”
46 - Stuart , just looked again at the Manchester results , even with targetting the best the Conservatives can hope for is 1 gain Brooklands where the 3rd placed Labour candidate polled somewhat less than his colleagues the missing votes going to the Green candidates but a better Labour performance than 2004 will make even this 1 gain difficult .
69 - Stodge , I think adding 10% to poll figures to give the Lib Dem voting % is on the high side . 5-6% is more realistic based on past performance .
76 - Gavin , I think an abysmal Labour performance will come in local elections in the next 2/3 years but next year is a bit too soon . It has in common with 2002 the fact that it is just 1 year after the GE and the fact that the headline results will be compared with 2004 in the Metropolitan Boroughs will avoid the big hit next year .
82 - Gavin - Follow the link on the top right of the page to Data UK Locals 1996 - . Unfortunately does not go pre 1996 .
The London-centric nature of the media will mean that the results from London will be highlighted more than the others. If Labour are reduced to about 8 boroughs in the capital then that would be their worst performance since 1968, and that fact will be played up.
If you follow the link at 18 the current totals are:
Con 8180
Lab 6515
LDm 4764
SNP 184
PC 181
Oth 2212
88 Sean . I think it’ll depend on if the London results declare early and who of the respective party spin machines get their best results into the media market first . Late news on election night is often no news the next day.
89. At my 85 post, I gave him your link in a hope you would hire me as your researcher when you’ll become MP for Betting Yardley
Dear Mark that maybe so but the results in Central and Brooklands were achieved with work only going in two months before han. The Brooklands seat is being worked with leaflets going out. Just Like liberals have done and gained seats were previously they were no where. I have personally just volunteered to go out and deliever some leaflets next time they go out, apparently next month. Labour in the mean time have done no work in this ward throughout the two years. The candidate is a young rich and very attractive tory that as appaered numerous times on the politics show. I still contend that she has a good shot at it.
P.s our leaflets aren’t quiet like the liberals we don’t make outlandish claims in them in Manchester or Bury. We are still on talking terms with some of our Labour opposites
in lambeth and Southwark i would think a small Labour majority.I would think respect will stand in some of the wards which clearly affects Labour. I would think that Labour would gain at least one seat in Clapham Town adn one in Clapham Common. I would expect also gain one in Stockwell,Thornton, and Princes.As it is joint administration where can the Tories win additional seats they will lose one if not more. Labour are more active on teh gorund and many Libdem coucnillors are not political with any real politcal beliefs rather community candidates and no engagement with the BME community. Labour party very active in parts of Southwark and noticeably getting support
50. As far as I can see the boundary changes to the St.Albans seat for next time are absolutely minimal..the seat electorate rises by 20 as a result of shifts of a few dozen voters in divided wards. So no real partisan impact here. What is clear is that voters in the area vote differently in general and local elections, labour doing much better in the former, worse in the latter
80 - Killingworth ward consists of Killingworth village (small but fairly wealthy and Tory, as you say), plus some large council estates, plus a lot of much more recent private housing. It’s the development of the latter which has turned Killingworth Tory (we gained our first ever seat there last June.)
Sean at 83 - largely due to good campaigning by the Tories. There have been some demographic changes (as above) which has tipped one or two wards, but it’s mainly just hard work. The same old story - a handful of dedicated campaigners can make a huge difference.
Added to that is the extra interest caused by the Mayoral elections, which gave Tories in many parts of the Borough a reason to vote for the first time ever.
North Tyneside is also one of the few areas which has abolished its Conservative Associations to form a single Federation covering the local government area. That means that the weaker North Tyneside constituency gets support from the stronger Tynemouth constituency, helping to win seats in North Tyneside constituency for the first time in 25 years.
Re the good performance in Tynemouth at the general election - that’s down to all the above reasons, plus a well known and hard working local candidate.
I can’t see where a Labour victory would come from in Southwark. They pushed up their vote slightly in Bermondsey on May 5th, but only from a low base, and did well in Camberwell, but the Lib Dems did very well in Dulwich. However, I’ve no reason to believe the Lib Dems are about to be chucked out at local level, and they’re now heavily entrenched on the council.
I don’t know much about Lambeth. Are there any local factors that could boost the Labour vote? Why shouldn’t the Tories pick up the other two seats in Clapham Town, which is socially pretty similar to Battersea?
Can’t see how Raymond can predict a small (or any) Labour majority in Lambeth and Southwark next year. There is no evidence of this locally - must be wishful thinking. To be fair, the informal coalition in Southwark looks a bit shaky, but in Lambeth they look unmovable.
What do people think will happen in Hackney? Labour gained 16 seats there in 2002.
98. The Libdems could make some progress after the good results they got in 2 Hackney seats last may. Labour could lose some voters to Greens and Respect too.
re 97 there is no evidence of what you are saying was is it unshakeable. i would have thought that Labour would win one seat from Tories and thee from Lib Dems where can Lib dems win as they already have majority of Streatham seats.Certainly on the estates no sign of Lib dem strengths or preparation of election is the coalition quite as firm in the parties as on the council many local elctorate Tories unhappy with coalition anyway
I don’t think RESPECT’s appeal will be significant in London as whole, excepting of course TH and Newham. I think, outside those boroughs, they’ll win a smaller proportion of the Muslim vote, and scoop up far left and radical green support, probably putting them in the 10-15% barrier in most wards where they will stand.
101. but if they’ll get 5-10% in some areas and the switchers will come from Labour, they could help Labour to lose some seats (and Galloway will be very happy) letting someone else coming from the middle.
Respect might win Valentines in Ilford South, but nowher else outside TH and Newham.
It is, I think, possible to see either LDs or Labour gaining a very small majority in Lambeth and Southwark. The LDs, in both places, have a slightly better chance of achieving success than Labour, but I wouldn’t rule Labour out by any means, especially if Labour can make inroads into LS support.
102. I forgot a thing. I got the impression from the GE results that Respect not standing helped Labour in some seats.
Look at the 2 Hackney seats. Labour lost almost the same % of votes in both seats. Respect wasn’t standing against Diane Abbott, so all the switchers went to the Libdems cutting Abbott’s majoirty in a bigger way than in Hackney South where the switchers went to both Libdems and Respect.
Outside TH & Newham Respect will mainly only be able to put up one candidate in each 3 member ward. Many people will vote 2 Lab, 1 Res or Lab, Green, Res or 1 Res, 2 LD, leading to more split wards where the Tories or LDs pick up the 3rd seat.
106. That’s what I was trying to say @102. There’re some areas outside TH & Newham where Respect could have a decent performance. It won’t have any chance to win, but it could create some troubles.
Same thing for the Greens.
102 - Possibly, Andrea - but, with RESPECT voters splitting their votes, they may deprive an LD councillor, for instance, of the votes need to achieve a clean LD sweep in a target ward. Labour would probably love a situation in an LD target where one RESPECT and one Green candidate stands and muddies the waters.
108. You could be right (look at my post @105).
To be fair I’m a bit confused about what effect it could have. The presence of 2 or 3 councillors wards will make this more confusing (split vote).
94 fred. St Albans in 97 really was a big disappointment for the Lib Dems , but like Bristol West , the Lib Dems were unable to hold back the Labour tide in a seat where Labour also vied to be the challenger. In 2009 if like in Cambridge , Bristol West , Falmouth and Leeds North West this year the Lib Dems are able to mobilise the anti-incumbent vote then Anne Main will be in trouble . More so as there is a very sizeable middle class Labour vote that would comfortably see the back of a Tory MP if these voters had confidence that the Lib Dem was challenging strongly . The Lib Dems taking control of the council and having a high profile candidate in place early would help considerably. I predict a very , very tight struggle in 2009/10.
110. Has anyone on this website ever took in consideration that the Libdems could actually lose seats at the next election?
Not that I think they’ll essentially lose seats.
Yes Andrea, but we that do usually get shot down, a Liberal democrat losing is unheard of my dear.
111 - I thought Rik kept bringing it up when he was here…
Comments about Lambeth - I’d have thought that the Lib Dems should be able to take one of the Vassell seats, partly through gentrification - the Camberwell Road end of Vassell road is increasingly upmarket young proffessionals, and with Bullseye’s improvement in the GE when he didn’t have most LD PPC’s advantages of being the ‘anti-war’ candidate (due to Tally Ho Kate also being Anti-Blair) that should also be helpful
92 - Stuart , I do not mean to disparage the efforts the Conservatives are clearly putting into Brooklands Ward . From what I remember of the area in many parts of the country it would be a pretty safe Conservative ward . True Labour do not work the ward but they won it in 2004 a bad year for them without doing so and indications are that 2006 will not be as bad for them nationally .
True you are following the Lib Dems and putting out lots of leaflets . This will have an effect in getting your vote out ( see my comments on another thread on differential turnout ) but a strong Conservative ( or Labour ) campaign following Lib Dem techniques can never work as well as a good Lib Dem one because there are many voters who will NEVER vote Conservative and others who will NEVER vote Labour never mind how good the campaign and/or candidate . This is because a proportion of the electorate does actually hate the Conservatives and others hate Labour but very few ( outside some posters on this board ) hate the Lib Dems .
Despite all I have said , you have a chance of winning Brooklands but a chance of winning 1 seat out of 32 in a major British city shows how low the Conservative party has sunk in popularity outside the South East of England .
110 Andrea . I think it’s likely that the LibDems and Tories will again swap seats next time and the Lib Dems will take seats from Labour , whether that amounts to half a dozen or a couple of dozen is just too hard to assess this far out .
What is clear is that the Lib Dems have over the past decade learnt how to play FPTP and they are dogged at retaining seats and targetting others , sometimes way outside the “normal” range of swing. They have also reached that mass of MP’s that make it difficult for the media to ignore them , added to which the Tories continuing box of support , almost 12 years now ! , makes the Lib Dems the other viable alternative to voters .
“Events” of course is the unknowable , but the Tories have learnt to their cost that the yellow parrot is decidedly not deceased and many political pundits had egg on their faces after predicting that 97 would be the high watermark for the Lib Dems and they would lose seats in 2001 !
Remember these insidious Whigs have been around for over 300 years , I rather feel they’ll outlive even Bruce Forsyth !! What a prospect , nice to see the Lib Dems nice , not:lol:
111/112 - In all recent elections, the Lib Dems have both gained and lost several seats regardless of whether they have made net gains or net losses overall. It is therefore not unreasonable to consider what new ground they might by eyeing. However, I doubt there is a Lib Dem on here who thinks that a marginal seat like Westmoreland or Withington for example will be a walk in the park in 2009.
115. Concernign Lab/Libdems battles, I only would like to point out that it’s not guaranteeded that after a big swing another big swing will happen. It could happen (Barbara Roche’s seat), but it couldn’t happen (St Helen South, Birmingham Perry Bar, Chersterfield).
If Labour and tories will be neck to neck in 2009, it’ll be more difficult for the Libdems.
Btw, Birmingham seats have very “interesting” names: Selly Oak, Perry Bar, Sparkbrook. Selly Oak seems a name of a soap opera heroine.
Dear Mark
I do agree it is a sad indication that we may only win one ward out of Manchester. However, this was a problem with changing demographics. When i stood in Withington 2003 you could tell that it was once tory, however all these areas suffered a huge increase in student population. Indeed my old employee at a deansgate bar, now lives in Bury south, used to live in Fallowfield 20 years ago (even a millionaire at that point) he and most of his friends moved out of the area away from the students, who gradually creeped into Dibsbury. I found most students, bar the really politically active voted in their home consitiuencies. I was therefore left with a rump of communists, liberals and Labour students and the odd oap tory voter. I remember being chased down one street by a commie student and his flatmates once. However, Student numbers in Dibsbury seem to be dropping and new proffessionals and older proffessionals moving back in certainly shows with the change in the Dibsbury dozens clientle nowadays. Most torys including David Sumberg M.E.P moved out of South Manchester 20 to 15 years ago. Indeed one of Burys Cllrs (wiseman) moved her entire family to Bury 10 years ago From Dibsbury, said it was no longer a place to raise children with all the student antics (some off which I shamefully partook in)
Am I right in thinking that quite a lot of what would be considered as Manchester lies outside the boundary of Manchester City Council, and some of these wards do elect Conservatives? That said, we seem to have consistently underperformed in Greater Manchester generally over the last 25 years.
118 - Stuart ,
When I was at Man Uni in the late 60’s , my first canvassing was in Gorton in a ward safe for Labour as I was told till doomsday . It may have taken 35 years but both Gorton wards are now held by the Lib Dems .
Sean your correct A lot of Trafford wards are closer to Manchester than Manchesters own wards and they elect tories. Bury & Bolton have had resonable tory council result nothing spectacular recently especially considering Bury 8 years ago only had 4 torys we now have 19. Oldham is sowing faint climers of live and so is Tameside. However Bolton Tory party is looking strong I wish Bury South was as strong but we are picking up the pace. Was strange we also performed very well at GE level, remember we defeated Hazel Bliars in 92 but poor at locals
119 Sean , you are possibly correct in that Trafford home of Man U and the Test cricket ground would commonly be thought to be in Manchester by people living in London . It is of course in a seperate Municipal Borough and a Parliamentary Constituency outside Manchester Stretford .
There is no Manchester Stretford
The consituencty is Stretford and Urmston the Majority of it being in Trafford M.B.C Trafford being very proud of being seperate to Manchester.
I’m keen to know about what happens in Brent. Anybody have any insight or opinion. The political map has changed totally there since 2002, obviously in the East constituency which covers up to 30 council seats. On the face of 2002 figueres the Lib Dems have no chance but if there is a Teather effect there could be up to 27 gains from Labour which would wrestle control from Labour to Lib Dems.
110. Jack W ‘If’, ‘maybe’, ‘possibly’ all kinds of things happen the Lib Dems might have a chance in St Albans…as in many other seats no doubt…(!) but my point was the boundary changes are irrelevant as they are miniscule.
90.”. I think it’ll depend on if the London results declare early and who of the respective party spin machines get their best results into the media market first . Late news on election night is often no news the next day.”
Jack W, I could actually already predict what some MPs will say (no matter what the results will be):
George Galloway: “This is for you, Mr Blaaair. Your hands full of bloood costed New Labour seats. New Labour is dying. I’ll be watch over you” (all said with a creepy voice which could be used as a voice-over in an horror film)
Clare Short: “I’ve no doubt it’s all linked with Iraq. I call for the resignation of Tony Blair, Sir Ian Blair and Cheri Blair”
Charles Kennedy (sourranded by many “winning here” placards): ” We’re the real opposition. Our positive message reached the voters and the voters awarded us”
John Reid: “This was a fantastic result, all achieved thanks the magic presence of Tony Blair”
Bob Marshall-Andrews: “I lost, damn, I lost. Blair, it’s all your fault. F**k you, piece of s**t!” BBC journalist: “but you weren’t a candidate…” Marshall-Andrews: “oh,sorry, I was only practicing”
123 – “being very proud of being separate to Manchester” – Everyone I have ever met anyone from any of these places just outside the boundaries – Stretford, Denton, Droylsden, Prestwich, Middleton etc… - will treat you with puzzled weariness if you try to point out that technically, they don’t live in Manchester. Even way out in the suburbs where I grew up, people in Cheadle Hulme and Marple are much more likely to identify themselves as from Manchester rather than from Stockport. A good way of mildly irritating Man United fans is to point out that their team don’t actually play in Manchester – but if you were wandering around Old Trafford and Stretford it really wouldn’t occur to you that the people around you weren’t Mancunians. And it definitely wouldn’t occur to them.
Most people are fairly ignorant of where actual boundaries lie – if they live in the urban area surrounding Manchester, that’s as much as they need to consider.
Re: 101, 102 & others: As a Newham resident, I expect Respect to put up a full slate of candidates for all 60 seats in the Borough. Last time only Labour got to a full slate - all other parties were well short.
In 2002, as said, Labour took 59 out of 60 seats. That disguises a couple of close finishes for the Conservatives in Manor Park and Little Ilford. In the former, the first-placed Tory was only 140 votes behind the third-placed Labour candidate. The Christian People’s Alliance ran Labour very close in Canning Town South (where there were no Tories, LDs or Greens) topping the poll. The second-placed CPA candidate came fourth, 79 votes behind the third-placed Labour candidate.
Respect polled 20% in both East Ham and West Ham on May 5th. Clearly, if they could siphon off say 10-15% of the Labour vote, Labour could quickly lose eight seats if not more. That said, a number of Wards are held by Labour with 60-70% of the vote if not more.
Lib Dem prospects seem limited with only one second-place last time but I wouldn’t rule out the Greens picking up a seat as individual Green candidates frequently beat both Tory and LD candidates last time.
I’m not expecting Labour to lose its majority but sticking my neck out, I forecast losses of 12-15 seats for the party with Respect and the Tories both picking up half a dozen and the CPA and the Greens picking up the scraps.
123 - I agree Stuart there should have been a , or perhaps a ; between Manchester and Stretford in my post . The point is though that many people down south would think it is in Manchester .
Looking at the 32 Manchester wards , 14 are safe Labour . 10 safe Lib Dem . There will be 5 marginal Labour seats next year 3 marginal with Lib Dem , 1 marginal with Greens and your Brooklands . There are 3 marginal Lib Dem seats all with Labour . Even if all the marginal seats are lost by Labour , they will still retain control .
124, currently, there are 35 Labour, 19 Conservative and 10 Lib Dems on the council.
There is no way the Lib Dems could make 27 gains from Labour, nor does Brent East cover 30 council seats. There are 6 wards wholly within the boundaries of Brent East, and two which cross boundaries.
You are right that the result in Brent East is completely unpredictable. The Lib Dems only ever used to win Queens Park in Brent East, and simply didn’t feature in the rest of the seat at local elections. Most likely Labour will lose seats in Brent East to the Lib Dems (as indeed may the Conservatives).
Labour will probably lose seats in Welsh Harp, and Fryent to the Conservatives, and maybe also in Queensbury. At the same time, all of the Lib Dems’ 9 seats in Brent South are potentially vulnerable to Labour (Labour carried the wards in last year’s London Assembly elections), and Labour may win a seat from the Conservatives in Tokyngton.
The only wards which are easily predictable are Preston, Barnhill, Northwick Park, and Kenton (Con Holds) and Kensal Rise, Stonebridge, Kilburn and Harlesden (Lab holds).
129. Sean Fear, isn’t Queens Park Labour now too?
It’s one of the wards that will go in the new Highgate and Kilburn seat, right?