Sean Fear’s local election column
September 9th, 2006For Labour’s sake, Tony Blair must go now
Regular readers of this site will know that I am not one of New Labour’s greatest fans. In fact, I would be happy to see the Labour Party go the same way as the Liberals in the 1920s. Nonetheless, I am not being cynical in offering my opinion that the sooner Tony Blair goes, the better for Labour.
Tony Blair’s own opinion poll ratings are dreadful. YouGov’s BrandIndex and MORI are at one in giving him ratings of –40% or worse. These are as bad as Margaret Thatcher’s ratings in the Summer of 1990, and it is clear that Tony Blair has become a terrible liability to his party. Matthew Parris’s prediction that while Margaret Thatcher left office respected, but not liked, and John Major left office liked, but not respected, Tony Blair would leave office neither liked, nor respected, is being borne out.
This has potentially terrible consequences for Labour in next May’s local elections. Despite years of losses, Labour will still be defending over 3,000 seats in May. Most of these seats were last contested in 2003, when Labour won the equivalent of 30% nationwide, and some were contested in 2004, when the party won 26%. So long as Tony Blair remains as Prime Minister, I cannot see Labour even managing to win 25% of the vote in May. That is, Labour will achieve a lower share of the national vote share than even the Conservatives did, in May 1995. Labour’s share of local council seats is already at its lowest level since 1978, and it is set to fall even further next year.
I would not expect Labour to perform particularly well next year, regardless of who is Labour. But I do not believe the party will suffer the same degree of damage at the polls as it would with Tony Blair at the helm, such is the degree of public antipathy to him. A loss of perhaps 1,000-1,500 seats, under Tony Blair, would do further damage to Labour’s already-depleted activist base, and reduce the party to little more than a shell outside some of its heartlands.
So my view is that the sooner Tony Blair goes, the greater the number of seats the party will hold on to in May.
Last night brought more bad news for Labour:-
North Somerset UA, Pill: Independent 360, Labour 353, Lib Dem 202, Conservative 147. Independent gain from Labour. Until last night, this was a rarity – a safe Labour ward in Somerset.
Warrington UA, Poulton North: Lib Dem 1,358, Labour 505, Conservative 209, Green 43. Lib Dem hold. This result showed a very big swing to the Lib Dems in a marginal ward, compared to May.
Sean Fear is a London Conservative activist and writes a weekly column for politicalbetting.com.
MessageSpace Advertising
Defending 30/26% of the vote surely talk of losing 1000+ seats is pretty fancifal?
The result in Pill, North Somerset is remarkable, the previous (Labour) member died after holding the seat for many years (20+) i.e. was a Woodspring District Councillor
Labour has recently formed an administration with the Lib Dems, the first time Labour has had any power since North Somerset was formed. I doubt if that was a factor given that the Independent who won was, in fact, the former leader of the Lib Dems and North Somerset Council prior to 1999
1. Not necessarily. One problem that Labour faces now is that tactical voting appears to be working against it in some cases - Thursday’s results being two examples. It’s difficult to explain the drop in Conservative share for any other reason when the party is well up in the polls compared with when the seats were last fought.
Also, Labour’s heartland vote isn’t safe. This is a much more serious danger. In the past few years, Labour has lost control of Newcastle, Sheffield and Liverpool although not permanently. If it can lose those when the opposition is sufficiently organised it could lose anywhere, and the opposition is now more organised. That could be the Lib Dems as in the above examples, but equally it could be the BNP as in some East London or Metropolitan council areas, or Respect (although not often), but in most places it will be the Conservatives. Many more councils have Conservative and Labour as the two largest parties than any other combination.
In my own local Council, Labour won 14 wards out of the 30 in Bradford last year, but of these all but two were either by less than 200 votes or were wards that another party has won in the last five years.
In the direst political crisis, such as the mid-90s, the Conservatives had strongholds that despite much grumbling and discontent would still vote Conservatives back. I’m not sure the same is now true of Labour in the same position.
p.s. I think the word ‘leader’ is missing at the end of the first sentence of the fourth paragraph
Interesting result in Warrington - I suspect now elected, the party worked the ward hard.
I believe that the Warrington by-election was a Liberal Democrat gain from Labour. The Lib Dems now hold all three seats in the ward.
Thanks once more Sean, and also David for a characteristically clear and intelligent comment.
The only difficulty I have with your analysis is that they are not reflected in the betting patterns. A Q4 resignation remains a relative longshot - say 5-1 in real terms with Betfair. Are you overstimating TB’s difficulties, or are the markets wrong (in which case a splendid betting opportunity presents itself)? I’m not sure myself. I think it is very difficult to see how all this will pan out and would advise caution in placing bets.
Your views on the betting angle would be very welcome.
All sides are underestimating the gap left when TB leaves. He is still the towering politician of the age.
Comparing the main players to lightbulbs, TB is 100w. DC say 27w and GB 23w. Or it could be the other way round. It doesn’t matter at the moment, as both look so weak compared with the master. When he’s gone, though, it will matter a great deal. And then even grandpa Ming will shine. He will still be outshone, but the gap will be tiny compared with now.
TB unpopular with the floating voter? Easy to think so, but what’s changed for those individuals since they re-elected him 16 months ago?
7.”but what’s changed for those individuals since they re-elected him 16 months ago? ”
that the challenger was Michael Howard and not David Cameron.
Labour’s fragile peace is shattered
http://news.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=1332092006
The fragile truce between Tony Blair and Gordon Brown was dramatically shattered yesterday when supporters from the rival factions mounted attacks on each other, dashing any prospect of a peaceful handover.
Past and present ministers lined up to warn Mr Brown he could not assume he would inherit the premiership unimpeded. Mr Brown’s supporters retaliated, saying Mr Blair should resign before Christmas. And in a move destined to add fuel to the fire, the Prime Minister will today make a speech on the “way forward” for the country, in what Labour insiders believe is a deliberate attempt to tie Mr Brown to the Blairite agenda.
- the more this continues (please) Brown will be damaged goods.
Sean’s commentary is as lucid as always, but perhaps places too much weight on two by-elections, one of them complicated by an independent - without knowing how he or she is regarded locally, it’s very hard to draw wider conclusions.
I note the ICM poll today that reports over a third of Labour supporters and 20% of the general public wanting TB to change his mind and fight the next election! (No, it won’t happen.)
I think lengthy controversy on the leaving date would continue to damage Labour, but a leadership contest will not (necessarily). The main players appear to have recognised this - it was noticeable that Clarke’s controversial interviews were all about the next leader and not at all about the date issue.
The market is simply wrong about Q4 2006 (let alone Q3). I’d give 20-1 odds against it happening. Whether one likes it or not, the changeover is clearly going to be in the first 7 months of 2007.
10.”I think lengthy controversy on the leaving date would continue to damage Labour, but a leadership contest will not (necessarily). The main players appear to have recognised this - it was noticeable that Clarke’s controversial interviews were all about the next leader and not at all about the date issue.”
If the Clarke’s interviews are a sign of how the contest will develop, it’s hardly encouraging for Labour.
Talking about the date would have been less damaging than picturing the Chancellor as some sort of mad person.
10. Thanks Nick. That’s the cue I have been waiting for. I now believe I can safely hold my lay position on Q4 and turn my attention back to this afternoon’s St Leger, on which I have some very firm opinions!
10 - I agree with your comment Nick, that local by-electons have local factors. A weel kent face in the ward will always attract votes away from the party candidates or up the vote for a party. It is far too away from the elections as these elections will be effected by events up to polling day. They may show an anti party trend - and something for those on this to discuss each week.
Despite some fierce twitching I think things in the Labour Party have now settled down. No one has emerged unscathed but things like this have of long term consequences in politics. Only bad policies can do that which is why Blair is where he is. I agree with David that for charisma all the other leaders past and present don’t compete. But his time has gone.
Despite a nasty few days Brown has emerged the winner. Blair arrived back from his holiday in effect announcing he would go on and on. Ten year plans and loads of ‘initiatives’. Brown knew his hubris was killing the party and had no choice but to act. He realized the best chance for a renaissance would be a new leader brimming with initiatives pointing the party in a new direction.
This was impossible with Blair who was destroying the party each day he stayed on. Brown knew it would be bloody but he had no choice. And he seems to have succeeded. Blair is now emasculated and will soon slink off leaving Brown as the only show in town
should have typed
‘and something for those on this site to discuss each week.’
13 - “weel kent” so nou we hae ta scrieve in Lallans?
So that’s Gordon’s grand plan for his first 100 days…
17. Blair currently speaking on News 24.
RE 10, Nick Palmer, I note your comments of yesterday. I thought there would be more resignations because I thought the coup attempt would be better organised. It wasn’t.
What Sean is saying is that Tony Blair will lose you councilors at the May elections. I think he is right, not based on the by elections of last Thursday, but on the mood in the country, and a host of opinion polls.
We are talking about the destruction of your activist base. Labour no longer can raise the money for campaigning with out them.
In short, it is not looking good for Labour at the next general election.
What should have happened before this week is that Tony should have looked at the best interests of the party and stood down.
What has happened is a highly damaging botched coup attempt that will cause serious damage to Labours prospects in May no matter what happens next.
In short, if any Labour plotters are reading this, if you are going to mount a coup, do it properly
Yes Nick council byelections often have local factors but you cannot escape the fact that in Warrington 300+ people who voted Labour in May did not do so in September and the reason for that is national rather than local . The Somerset byelection is rather more complicated with the Independent but again in a ward wher Labour normally poll 60-70% of the vote they lost the seat . As in all but 1 byelection in the last 4 months also fought in May the Conservative vote in Warrington went down - there is a pattern and it is pretty clear what it is .
Got to laugh at some of this. Brown has emerged the winner? Because he has pushed the departure date forward by a month?
Whereas it is absolutely clear that their are a substantial number of very senior figures in the Labour Party who will do anything they can to stop him becoming leader. Including endangering the Labour Party in the process!
18. I read this week that a mainly union-owned bank lent Labour several million pounds recently to cover other debts that I assume were due for repayment. While raising money may be more difficult, I don’t think the unions will let Labour starve, though they might start demanding something for their help.
Two greater problems with the potential loss of seats are the loss of people to campaign - councillors are often the most active activists and their position as such requires them to be, and the fact that people are getting out of the habit of voting Labour. In the Tory party, we went through several cycles of unpopularity during the 80s and early 90s but the public always came back at the general election; after 1992, they went away and stayed away. There’s only so much tension the electoral elastic will take before it snaps.
You missed the point alex. Blair cannot now stitch up the party for the next X number of years with “Long term plans”. He’s finished. He might as well go now. He’s being allowed a few months to pack his bag that’s all. Brown is the new leader and he’s going to hit the ground running. Who cares that a few malcontents don’t like him. When he becomes leader we’ll make up our own minds.
7,8 — what has changed is not Cameron for Howard but the economy and the electorate. Money is getting tight for a lot of people, not least because of energy prices. And as time goes on, there are more voters for whom rising housing prices are a curse rather than a blessing, who are getting into debt at university, and (going up the age scale) whose retirement plans are looking shaky.
Brown’s challenge is not to make people love him, it is to make their lives affordable.
Gosh Sean a Tory activist trying to wish the Labour party away, don’t think I’ve ever heard that before. What people like you will never understand is how much some people just hate the Tories (not me). When I used to travel around the country the sheer hate felt for them (unjustified I’m sure) amazed me. In Scotland in the eighties the bitterness felt for the then Tory government was unbelievable. Many people who vote Labour/Libdem don’t do it because they are great supporters, but because they just hate the Tories, for reasons often which seem irrational. The present government is obviously now disintergrating, its demise is self evident, (the Times editorial gives a good explanation why) but don’t anyone go thinking that with three years to go (possibly) that Mr Cameron is a shoo in, there’s a long way to go yet!
20. In relative terms, Roger’s right: Brown was the winner. Blair has had to publicly concede a date (more or less) and within the next year, no other contender has emerged, Charles Clarke has ended any remaining hope he had. But the amount of political capital he’s spent getting there and the amount of grief he’s take in the process makes Roger’s comment similar to saying that the British won the Battle of the Somme.
24 - coldstone you are right. After 18 years and many hardships in some parts of the country, the chaos of the Major years was the final straw. This is now dissipating and it is why Cameron has worked so hard to neutralise the remaining suspicions and shift the party to a new stance.
However, dont underestimate the hatred that is building towards Labour!
He’s finished speaking. Comments anybody?
Remember Maggie and Ted or Maggie and Michael or John and the ‘Bastards’ (he resigned half way through)……..
Who remembers any of it and this is no different. I’m not sure that political capital has any value at all.
12. Peter - remember Nick P was pretty dismissive about a changeover before 2008 until very recently. Looking at the comments by Charles Clarke today it seems to me the bloodletting is far from over. Brown increasingly looks a good lay though.
29. Not that recently, Punter. His view changed as events unfolded. So did mine - quite independently as it happened - in plenty of time for me to close out my 2008 position, at a small plus, and enter the 2006 and 2007 markets.
Thanks for your concern but we both had our eyes on that particular ball!
Rik W 26
I must be honest I don’t see any real hatred, there may be dislike, but not hatred. There seems to be almost a strange sadness about it, like some (cliche time) Shakespearean tragedy. After all most people in the last ten years have had it pretty good. There haven’t been any recessions, unemployment has been low and confined to areas which have always struggled. I’ve just come back from Lake Garda, full of Brits having a good time. The passing of Blair could be like losing a Talisman, the end of all that. If Cameron wins, and things turn sour, people will look back on the Blair years with some longing. I’m not confident about Cameron, he makes me uneasy, don’t think he’s got what it takes, think the same about Brown, but at least he’s got some experience.
26 Seriously Rik , I think you are totally wrong in saying there is hatred building up towards the Labour party outside of diehard Conservatives . People may think them incompetent , that they have been in power too long , they may not like some of the things they have done or are doing but there is no hatred on the scale that there was to the Conservative government of the early 90’s .
31/32 - Snap
“regardless of who is Labour” - do you mean “regardless of who is leader”?
28. From John Major’s memoirs (p.715): “That press conference [when John Major appealed to his Euro-rebels not to play up their opposition to the Euro, against the official ‘wait and see’ policy], fresh and unexpected, was the most charged of the election. Even Tony Blair described it as ‘the defining moment of the election campaign’ - though for him it defined his coming victory. It was the culmination of years of division and dissent in the Conservative Party.”
I also found this (remember, written in 1999); p.717: “what I found extraordinary about this episode was Tony Blair’s personal willingness - even after my flat rejection of his charges [of Tory plans to abolish the state pension] - to make accusations about our pension plans that he would have known were false.” Interesting pointer of things to come.
The only real anger at New Labour is from those who are against Iraq and their slavish following of Bush and most people link this specifically to Blair.
Why assume Gordon Brown will automatically become Prime Minister and Labour Leader. Didn’t everyone assume David Davis would become leader of the Tory Party?? …… then up comes Chameron!
Blair could get revenge back on the plotters and call a General Election in May next year. That would fix them and probably save the Labour from extinction!
37 - Blair probably doesn’t have the power to call a general election next May
RE 21, David, Yes the unions won’t let Labour starve, but new Labour?
Still, the loss of activists can be made up a bit with money, and I don’t think they have it.
27 Peter P. Blair - The great communicator. Good speech and analysis. Something of the valedictory about it.
From a betting point of view IMO Brown remains clear favourite. However the events of the past few days have assisted an alternate candidate greatly. Traction will be the problem, although the Clarke/Howe atacks will help.
It is hard to see why Blair does not just name a date.
The United States seems to do all right with term limits and fixed terms, and it is not alone. There is talk of lame ducks yet somehow life goes on.
Had Blair named a date in his Marr “interview” then he and the party would have benefited from the Hong Kong effect — since everyone knew when HK would revert to China, there was no need to blow anyone up to force the issue.
Perhaps Brown too should name an exit date, if only to dissuade ambitious colleagues from wrecking the joint.
41 - it’s because the exit date is enshrined in the system in the US that it doesn’t imply the sort of humiliation it would mean for Blair. Not that he looks particularly dignified without a timetable now.
If anyone is interested according to David Camerons blog on his India trip blog will be making a speech on Monday, the 5th aniversary of September the 11th, in which he will be talking about terrorism and the war on terror.
40. Hi Jack W. Nice to hear from you again.
I actually had the Q4 and 2007 resignation dates more in mind.
I agree there was a valedictory tone in his speech this morning but that’s perfectly understandable. He is going - we just don’t know exactly when and from a betting viewpoint, that is critical.
Brown is clearly hot favorite to succeed and unlike Mike Smithson, I cannot see that there is any mileage in entering that market - certainly not just yet.
I think the difference between the Tories in the 1990s and Labour now is the issue of trust. It is not so much that people hate Labour like they hated the Tories, but that they feel they can no longer trust Labour to make the ‘best’ decisions. This then manifests itself in dislike for the leadership - not hatred, but dislike.
As things stand, the emotions are not there for any Tory 1997, and I doubt there will be by 2009. This is the main reason why I believe the Tories will form the next government, but as the largest party in a hung parliament. If they are to get a majority, they will have to hope for a really disasterous three years for Labour. Even then, such a majority is likely to be slim.
It is clear, to me, that the result of the next general election is up in the air. We cannot confidently say there will be a Labour victory like we were so assured of in 1997, 2001 and 2005. We’re in that strange stage where everyone realises that there’s the possibility of change in government, and over the next year or two finally deciding whether to accept such change or not. This probably depends on the actions of the new Labour leader, and also whether David Cameron is able to come up with policies that are popular with the electorate.
3:
I think that Labour’s rock-solid base of support is actually larger than the Tories’. In 1983, their worst election, they actually had more seats than the Tories have now. This is why the Tories were mocked for “not even having reached the Michael Foot stage”. This was because there are so many parliamenary seats in Scotland, Wales and the North which could never be anything else but Labour.And now the Tories are in a poor position in places like Oxford and Cambridge which they used to hold. Of course since 1983 there has been enormous demographic change in some suburban areas which has also helped Labour.
46. I agree. Labour are guaranteed around 200 MPs in a dire election for them, I think. Whereas the Tories are only guaranteed around 150 MPs.
46 & 47 - Do these “guaranteed” seats “which could never be anything else but Labour” include Blaenau Gwent?
RE 48, Padarn, It used to
48. Of course there’ll be the odd result, based on local factors, that might change the outcome of the odd seat or so. And by-elections, of course. But, nationally, most of these places are virtually guaranteed a Labour MP.
Looking at lists of marginals,it seems quite realistic for the Tories to gain 40-60 seats(including some wafer-thin Lib Dem seats),but beyond the 60-odd seat mark,a very steep cliff exists-maybe a truly ‘hung parliament’ could be coming-whatever,it would keep us amused!
46/7 - probably, although the emergence of the LibDems in many traditional Labour Heartlands has given some indication that this will continue forever. Labour has lost a lot of voters in their safest areas, because they did not need them, and recent years have shown that wherever a threat emerges for the first time in a generation it has proven very difficult to get them back.
45 - Elena
I don’t think coming up with popular policies is the Torys’ problem. In recent elections, their policies have often been popular. Their problem has been that their image has been so bad that voters didn’t care what their policies were; they simply didn’t want a Tory government.
Cameron has set his goal as removing that fear/hatred of a Tory government. He’s tackled it by moving the Tory Party decisively to the Centre ground. So far, it seems to be working: Cameron is more popular than Blair, Brown or Campbell; Tory poll ratings have climbed out of the 30%-33% box; even people like Mandella, Geldof and Zac Goldsmith are now prepared to talk to them.
The Torys’ problem is this: will the public still like their policies after their position switch?
I don’t think I’m “wishing Labour away”. I’d like them to disappear, but I certainly don’t expect it to happen any time soon. I agree that there are millions of people who vote Labour because they hate the Conservatives - a very valuable asset for Labour. OTOH, some such people may be perfectly happy to switch to the Lib Dems, Respect, or the BNP, if they come to dislike Labour.
Labour certainly has more rock solid seats than the Tories. Very safe Labour seats tend to have vote shares at 60-70%, whereas very safe Tory seats tend to have vote shares at 50-60%. That actually works in the Tories’ favour because their vote is more efficiently distributed, but it also means Labour can better survive a catastrophic defeat.
Where Labour also scores, is that in its weak areas, its vote is derisory, unlike the Tories, who are able to get many more vote shares of 20-25% than Labour can. But Labour gets, according to Martin Baxter’s analysis, a lot more vote shares in the range of 35% to 45% than the Tories do, and that’s usually enough to win. In addition, the anti-Labour vote is generally divided, while the anti-Tory vote is often united behind one candidate - tactical voting.
Baxter reckons efficient vote distribution is worth 10 seats to Labour, and tactical voting another 26 seats. The danger for Labour is if people start uniting behind whichever candidate (usually a Tory) can best defeat Labour.
55. People started doing that in 2005, though, because of the unpopularity of the Tories at the time, the Lib Dems benefitted the most from such tactical voting. However, I think it could play a role in 2009. However, this role is likely to be less exagerrated, as I think most people who vote Tory are either die-hard Tory voters or swing voters. Hence there won’t be the same disillusioned voter who’ll simply vote Tory to get Labour out.
1. It depends how far Labour falls. 30% to
Roger, you’re setting yourself up for disappointment again, the way you did with Blair. Keeping the faith when all others have seen the writing on the wall.
Brown is damaged considerably after this week. Add to that the writings regarding his love of authoritarian power, ID cards, an Atlanticist position greater than even Blair has shown, micro ananagement and assaults on civil liberties and it’s only a matter of time before you say ‘I now understand what people said about Brown’.
I don’t know what happened at 57. I was saying a fall from 30% to
57/9 lol
Regarding feelings about labour, if there isn’t hatred of them from liberals after all they’ve done then there must be something seriously wrong with their judgement. Maybe it’s this ‘Stockholm Syndrome’ we keep hearing about.
There are a few different questions here and people need to address them separately.
Who will become next labour leader - probably Brown
Who is likely to be best for labour - not Brown, probably Johnson
Who is likely to be best for the tories - Brown
Who is likely to be best for lib dems - Reid (possibly Brown)
Labour will get what they want and, generally, so will the other parties. Everyone thinks they’ve won and all parties only have themselves to blame if they fail at the next election.
59 - try avoiding < and > signs if your posts are being mangled, Sean.
Thanks. I’ll try again. A drop from 30% to under 25% is quite big under FPTP. To give one example, 22% isn’t enough for the Conservatives to win a single seat in Cambridge, whereas 30% would win them several.
Ed Balls, Yvette Cooper, Jon Trickett and Mary Creagh have launched a legal fight in the High Court against the boundary changes (and Normanton abolition)
http://www.yorkshiretoday.co.uk/ViewArticle2.aspx?SectionID=55&ArticleID=1757068
I am intrigued by the apparent outrage at Clarke’s definition of Gordon Brown as ‘psychologically flawed’. If this is so it makes him the natural successor for Blair whose obvious gross narcissism is his main driving force which, among other things, makes him totally oblivious to his own blatant dishonesty.
I hope that the other side will not rise to six months plus of tit-for-tat with the heavyweight former communist. Better to say “who he?” to snide comments from this masterdebator.
Have you noticed how Clarke makes even John Prescott seeem sylph-like these days? I presume that he has a mirror set at three foot six near the loo in his bathroom so that he can see what is going on down below. It would also be a handy height for Hazel Blears to do her make-up when she comes calling.
Morning! I had the best softshell crab of my life yesterday. Roka, on Charlotte St. Yum.
Er, anyway:
‘No hatred of Labour’? Is this a joke? Has anyone actually talked to anyone Labour in the last couple of years??
The bitterness, anger and revulsion at Labour has to be seen and heard to be believed, you have to feel the spit on your face from a party supporter talking with white-hot anger about his leaders. I have felt that foam.
However, Roger is right. The anger against Labour is different to the anger against the 1990s Tories. Labour are hated for one thing, mainly - Iraq. But they are hated for this with a vengeance, and the hatred goes way beyond T Blair, it takes in the whole New Labour project, all the spinners and Blairites, all the Cabinet Ministers who nodded the war into action, Brown will be a miracle worker if he too escapes the flak from Iraq. He won’t.
There is one more massive difference between the hatred for Major’s Tories and the hatred for Blair/Brown’s Labour.
The hatred for the Tories came from outside the party, from the left and the centre, from the Celtic fringes and the northern suburbs, from the liberal elite and the urban underclass - from all non tories. This was dangerous for the Conservatives, as soon as people learned to unite and vote tactically - they could kick them out.
The Tories were kicked out.
The hatred for New Labour is widespread across the nation in a mild way - but it is genuinely intense, and at its greatest, within the party! Activists, one time voters, liberal Labourites. The people who hate Labour most are people who once voted Labour and now feel betrayed. This is dangerous for Labour, as it means their core vote could abstain, while the floaters float off to the Tories and Lib Dems.
Labour, too, will be kicked out.
65.Andrea, I can’t believe they even considered this “Mr Balls and his Wakefield district colleagues were forced to submit an application themselves after Labour-controlled Wakefield council, which had controversially decided to gamble potentially hundreds of thousands of taxpayer pounds on a bid to save Mr Balls’ safe Labour seat, announced a humiliating U-turn.”
I am right in thinking that Ed Balls is married to Yvette Cooper who is MP in the neighbouring constituency? Is this another example of political needs being put before the public’s? I suppose that Gordon Brown will need a set of “Balls” when he becomes Labour leader. :D:
Zebidee @ 66 — whilst not agreeing with the tone of your post, it is depressing that we seem to have imported from the US a style of politics where truth is not important.
Perhaps too a disregard for long term economics. The Republicans seem to have learned from Reagan’s term that the electorate agrees with Keynes: in the long run we are all dead. Record deficits and national debt followed in America. Perhaps our equivalents include PFI commitments and pension fund raids.
The end justifies the means?
68. Chris, yes, Ed is married to Yvetter.
Here’s their letter to the local paper to express their reasons for the fight:
http://www.edballs.com/index.jsp?i=2141
I note they’ve the support of:
John Brennan, Rotary Club of Normanton
Frank Clarke, Normanton Golf Club
Trevor Astbury, Alice Bacon Memorial Trust
Janet Abson, Inner Wheel Club of Normanton
Sheila Smales, Normanton Old People’s Welfare Committee
Margaret Howard, Normanton Talking Newspaper for the Blind
Whilst Labour will take a hit in england next year it may not be all bad news. The chaos the lib dems have fallen into in Leicester for example should see Labour gains. The big issue next year is what happens in Scotland and Wales. The polls in scotland are fairly bad for Labour and the fact it is welsh Mps trying to push Blair out speaks volumes for what they think their prospects are next may.
I understand that all postal voters have to re-register this year rather than automatically being included. if this is true no wonder Labour are worried about a lack of workers…
58. The thing about alternatives to Brown is the recognition factor. Politicians register in the pulic consciousness for two reasons - because they are in a heavyweight job, or because they’ve done something wrong.
Have been talking to some non-political friends and the reaction was as follows: Everyone knew who Brown was and credited him for Britain not having a recession these last nine years. Everyone knew without prompting that he’d made the Bank of England independent. Alan Johnson was a case of Alan Who? Hilary Benn - people recognised the Benn name, but it provoked a great discussion about whether Hilary was a girl’s name or not and the consensus was that it was a girl’s name and that he couldn’t get elected with a name like that! Reid - they recognised him as the baldy guy in charge of the airport crisis. Denham, they didn’t recognise. People knew who Charles Clarke was but thought he looked ugly and knew he had been sacked for failure at the Home Office.
Re the other discussion about hatred of parties. People hated the Tories because the Tories lost them a lot of money in the 1991/2 recession. Up until then, people disliked them but tolerated them. Losing people money on business or houses is never ever forgiven.
With Labour and Iraq, yes anti-Iraq people hate Labour bitterly, but there arn’t a big enough group - hence Labour won the 2005 election. Iraq is also abstract - it won’t become concrete unless we lose a lot of men there. hence the Labour party needs to think seriously about extracting our men from both Iraq and Afghanistan.
70. Will this effect the implementation of all the recommended boundary changes if a GE was called earlier rather than later by a new Labour leader seeking a new mandate?
72. “Re the other discussion about hatred of parties. People hated the Tories because the Tories lost them a lot of money in the 1991/2 recession. Up until then, people disliked them but tolerated them. Losing people money on business or houses is never ever forgiven.”
Snowflake, many people are feeling the proverbial “pips squeaking” under this chancellor!
68 - as one of the councillors in Wakefield who put quite a bit of pressure on Wakefield council to complete their ‘humiliating’ U-turn I have to say that there is almost zero chance of the MP’s winning.
Even if their court action succeeds it will do little more then to revise future rules for the Boundary Commission. The only reason they are seeking a judicial review is to delay the progress of the Commission’s work through the Commons so they can fight a general election on the current, favourable, boundaries.
It is political expedience and no more.
75. “The only reason they are seeking a judicial review is to delay the progress of the Commission’s work through the Commons so they can fight a general election on the current, favourable, boundaries.”
They can’t delay it until 2009, can’t they?!
Ok, they could delay until a GE if there’s a snap election, but it’s not a sure thing (the snap GE)
74. Only in Tory propaganda circles. The only issue is energy - and I note that the price of NYMEX sweet light crude is now $67 per barrel, down from $78 on July 14th (a 14% drop, which incidently I said would happen if you recall from discussions a few weeks back). As the speculators continue to be squeezed by global interest rates, the price should drop further. (based on fundamentals, the price should be $45 per barrel)
71. I am not up on Welsh politics, really. Who would be the beneficiaries of a poor Labour result? Plaid? The Lib Dems? Even the Tories?
Could Labour REALLY be forced into second place in Wales? I was of the belief that the electoral system favours them due to the fact that they win an awful lot of the constituencies, and the “top up” seats are a relatively small proportion of the eventual makeup of the Assembly.
Considering the number of seats already selecting on the new boundaries there would be absolute chaos if it didn’t go ahead!
78 - I assumed the point was that Labour might lose enough seats for the opposition to form a viable alternative coalition.
As the speculators continue to be squeezed by global interest rates, the price should drop further.
You are wasting your time on a political betting site.
With skills like this you could clean up in the futures markets.
Sean agree that labour is set for disasterLast time many of district and unitary council seats were up was 2003 whwn Labour stood at 42% in the polls and the Tories 30%
But th emost significant fact about2207 locals will on current opinion poll ratings be a massive triumph for the Tories with huge number of gains in sets and councils -fom both Labour and on current ratings the Lib Dems.
RE 82 RogerH, and indeed Sean Fear, I thought 2003 was a bad year for Labour in the locals?
Are we saying it could be even worse for them, and if so how much?
How many seats are up for re election and what is the current party split, as in how many seats does each party currently hold?
31/32 - You are obviously not talking to the same people who I see. And I dont mean Conservatives! There is a group of people who loathe Blair for his wars and US / Bush loyalties. Most of them are on the left of politics and might have been thought to be natural Labour supporters in the past.
Maybe hatred is too strong, but contempt and loathing there certainly is!
83. Labour are defending 3,000 out of c.12,000 seats next year. 2003 was pretty poor for Labour, but (on current form) next year looks a good deal worse.
Whatever Seant says people hated the tories because many lost jobs, business, unnecessarily in the early 1990`s.
People don`t forget that.
My father who voted tory all his life changed because of this, of it aint hurting, it aint working bull, and we will drive inflation completley out of the system rubbish,spouted at the time.
Thet regreted nothing, and we all knew that.
Seant just wants the blue team in again becuase it buggins turn.
However many will want the correct economic policies and Cameron might have them, but no one knows yet.
As for Iraq, that won`t be a reason for voting consevative, Liberal maybe.
RE 85, Sean, do we know how many they were defending prior to that?
Also, what is a good deal worse?
75. Thanks Anthony, do you have any idea how long this process might take? Considering the estimate of the costs the local council were facing, it is going to be very “expensive” for all those involved in the court action.
88 - yes it will be very expensive. The Council spent £35k forming a judgement that there would be a 60% chance of succeeding with and legal action. We also coaxed out the figure of £175k legal fees if the action went all the way.
Should the action fail then there would be the usual obligation to pay for the BC’s legal fees. This would take the figure up to £350k!!
Enough to bankrupt the Wakefield district Labour Party!
89. Anthony, thanks. That is quite a gamble!!
Are there any marginal seats around the Wakefield area?
78 - Elena asks who would benefit most from a poor Labour performance in Wales in the Assembly elections and could they fail to be the largest party after the election.
The current position is (60 seats):
Labour 29
Plaid Cymru 12
Conservative 11
Lib Dem 6
Independent 2.
Labour are hoping to gain the one extra seat they need for a majority (since the Presiding Officer comes from the opposition). Their best hopes are regaining a seat from either or both the independents (very likely to happen in Wrexham, less so in Blaenau Gwent) or gaining a list seat from the Conservatives in the SW and MidWales region.
If Labour do badly they have three very marginal seats in the SW, two of which are Plaid Cymru targets and one a Conservative target. However, if they lose these, they will gain list seats in compensation, unless their regional vote falls considerably.
In the other regions, if Labour lose constituency seats they are unlikely to gain list seats in compensation. Here a tiny swing of one percent or so to their nearest challenger would probably see Plaid Cymru taking Aberconwy or the Conservatives taking Cardiff North and Clwyd West. A large 6% swing would see the Conservatives taking a further three seats whereas an 8% swing would see Plaid Cymru taking a further two seats. The Lib Dems would need a huge swing of more than 9% to take any seat off Labour.
Thus a swing of 8% to the nearest challenger could see the Conservatives taking up to seven Labour seats and Plaid Cymru taking up to five seats, with Labour perhaps regaining two or three list seats. It is a matter of opinion as to whether Plaid Cymru or the Conservatives are better able to achieve such a swing - evidence from Council by-elections suggests that Plaid Cymru are doing better at present. Some of these marginals are three-way marginals and as opposition parties win constituencies from Labour they may lose list seats to other opposition parties - perhaps the Lib Dems best chance of making progress.
I don’t think I can give Elena a definite answer to her questions but I hope the above gives a useful pointer.
Wouldn’t Ed Balls be better off looking for another seat? Or will one be found for him whatever?
84. There are indeed those (mostly on the left) who despise Labour for its closeness to the US. However, the situation is different than Tory-hatred. While the Tories became hated by not only the left but the centre as well and thus lost any chance of forming government for a long time, Labour is hated only by what was once its most fervent supporters.
This is dangerous for Labour, but not in a way that could be easily used against them unlike Tory hatred. Left-wing Labour-haters might vote Lib Dem, they might vote BNP, they might vote Respect, they might (in Scotland and Wales) vote nationalist, or they might not vote at all, but they won’t vote for the primary opposition to Labour, the Tories. While I do expect quite a few Lib Dem upsets of formerly safe Labour seats in the next GE unless Labour pulls its act together quickly, these won’t account for more than 15 or so seats.
78 It’s worth recalling that Labour were very lucky in the Welsh Assembly ellections of 2003. They won a number of seats on knife-edge majorities — including Llanelli (majority 21), Conwy (majority 72) from Plaid; and Cardiff North (540) & Clwyd West (436) from the Tories.
As cymrumark says, it’s very telling that Welsh Labour MPs have been in the thick of the plotting to boot out TB.
Postal votes requiring renewal: not in Broxtowe. We got renewal forms with the boxes ticked, and just sent them back.
Benedict: I think the theory about councillors being almost the only activists is capable of exaggeration. Of the roughly 100 active helpers I had last year, no more than a dozen were councillors, and half weren’t even party members. Of the 50 people currently delivering my newsletter, eight are councillors, and again a significant number are not party members.
This is supposed to be a time when Labour is at a low ebb, right? We’re currently the only party in Broxtowe putting out constituency-wide material and holding public meetings. Of course we hope to get lots of councillors, but the networks built up by active MPs are increasingly important, and because they are partly based on personal loyalty they are relatively immune to the vagaries of Westminster. How much difference local campaigning actually makes is another question, of course! We like to think it will…
By the way, i’m about to shut up for 2 weeks - off to Northumbria.
93. He can always challenge the poor Trickett for Hemsworth. Or getting a total new seat (but there were rumours about Prezza’s seat…but it seems that also Chris Leslie was interested. Mudie and Sheerman already said they won’t make room for him)
There is one think that everyone hates about New Labour - Anglophobia and unlimited immigration. This will finish them for good.
RE 96,Nick Palmer Councilors are not the be all and end all, they are however important.
It is interesting to note how many non party personal helpers you have. They do help.
How many opposition meetings get held regularly anyway?
Outside of elections we don’t here from the Lib Dems where I live.
RE 97, Why? What have you done?
Being at the Llanelli count in 1999, when Labour were booted out by Plaid, the level of shock, and the cataclysmic nature of the political earth quake which had taken place was palpable. it was like that in the town for many weeks afterwards. But although, as Gwynfa says, Labour regained by the skin of their teeth in 2003, I don’t think the psychology will ever again be the same. I feel, as a Liberal, that it was truly liberating.
Cymrumark - Elena asked you about Welsh politics - you also referred to Leicester politics - could you give us a grounding on that?
Snowflake… central banks don’t raise interest rates to squeeze out specs in the oil market. Oil is so volatile than rates would have to be moved miles in order to reliably achieve this effect in any case.
Nor can it be asserted that the fair value of oil is $45. The dole queues of the City are filled with people making wild claims about where the fair value of various assets should be.
What is certainly true is that our Government’s Middle East policies have helped to get oil up to its present lavish level. Hopefully if GB wins he will find a much more effective way to get oil down by abandoning them.
I hope he doesn’t appoint you to the MPC in the meantime, though I wouldn’t mind picking up some cheap assets if he did.
Wales 2007 could be a very interesting test of the extent to which voters are prepared to vote tactically against Labour, given its diverse party system. The byelection evidence in this parliament so far suggests some TV is starting to develop, but an all-out election will be a better test of this hypothesis.
103. “The byelection evidence in this parliament so far suggests some TV is starting to develop”
The third placed SNP in Dunfermline and the third placed Libdems in Livingston weren’t squeezed.
104. Actually I was thinking more at the local level Andrea.
Labour at a low ebb? Depends where you are. They may be going great guns in Notts, but they’re not cutting a rug in Fitzrovia, south Camden.
Everyone in my flat is regularly bombarded with Conservative Party leaflets and newsletters, we get the occasional Lib Dem bumf, not a peep have we heard from Labour in a year or more.
Maybe they think they’ve got Camden in the bag so they don’t have to bother. Sadly, they are probably right. But my most left-leaning, previously Labour flatmate says she is thinking of going Green, having been so neglected by Labour. Course she hates Blair and Brown as well, and then some. A straw in the wind…?
105. Oh, Fred, sorry.
I sometimes wonder how much of the so called “tactical voting” is just the third (fourth,..) party not working the constituency/ward hard and so their soft vote go away. In a GE they can always benefit from the national campaign, in a by-election it’s more difficult.
107. Good point Andrea - difficult to discern between TV and natural ‘vote erosion’. For example, in the two Scots byelections you noted, the Tory vote share was down. Was this TV by Tories knowing their party was in a hopeless position, or voters just not bothering to turn up/dying off etc.? Or a bit of both? That’s why I think the all-out election in Wales will be a better test of the hypothesis that anti-Labour TV is starting to occur.
106. Isn’t Fitzrovia in Bloomsbury ward?
204 “The third placed SNP in Dunfermline and the third placed Libdems in Livingston weren’t squeezed.”
That’s because tactical voting is about excercising a choice not to support a candidate who you do not think can win THAT campaign. Although it often applies from a start-point of the previous result this is not always the case. Indeed, a clever third place candidate with apparent ‘momentum’ can tactically (and selectively) squeeze both others, if they appear lacklustre, - and win.
108. Fred, I think it can be a mix of both.
Returning to the article. Sean is quite right that next year’s local English elections will be bad for Labour unless Blair is gone before they happen. I would add to this the probable loss of control in Scotland and Wales.
Regarding the scale of the losses in the English local elections I suggest it will be nearer a net loss for Labour of 600 seats which is on a base that is already their lowest in 30 YEARS! If the Lib Dems pick up a few hundred and the Labour losses were nearer 1,000 the Lib Dems may even pass Labour.
Nick P is just plain wrong about the effects of these losses, Labour’s base is becoming so weak that it could take a decade to re-cover. Labour’s membership is in reality down below 180K, a drop of almost 2/3rds from 1997.
Not much reaction on this site to Blair’s performance this morning. Not much reaction on the ‘Blair Switch’ betting markets either. It’s still 1-7 a 2007 departure.
112 - Labour’s “probable loss of control in Scotland and Wales”.
Sorry to nit-pick, but Labour do not control either the Scottish Parliament or the Welsh Assembly. In Scotland they are in a coalition government with the Lib Dems and in Wales they are a minority government (29 out of 60 seats).
Does anyone know where one looks up local councilors allowances?
I can’t find them for my district council, or at least I can’t find them on their website.
Nick @ 10
If your price is good for dealing, I want to do up to £1k @ 20/1 please (for a Q4 Blair exit)
Kind regards/please confirm your interest.
TB
115. Which council covers your area?
114 Padern, yes you are correct, but in both cases they are the leading party and may end up with no power.
115 Both of mine required special requests. They do publish them in adverts once a year in a local paper. Watch out that not all items are included, some headings may not be mentioned, suggest you get a councillor to run through what goes unreported.
96
Am I right in thinking that MPs now get large sums of public money to issue newsletters and so help to build up networks of support? Could it be argued that this gives an unfair advantage to incumbents when the General Election comes?
My local MP (Clive Efford) is undoubtedly hard working but appears to be under the impression that council staff report to him. I wonderhow he can find time to think about Iraq, pensions, immigration etc when he seems to be focussed on trying to do councillors’ work.
116. I think Nick’s on holiday TB.
I don’t think he was offering to lay at 20-1 but rather was just expressing his opinion that the current lay prices (about 5-1) were lower than could be justified by any evidence he could see and therefore represented good value.
The amounts on offer on Betfair are very small. You could get a £100 on at 20-1 but not a lot more. It’s a typically illiquid political betting market.
By the way, you didn’t make it entirely clear whether you wanted to back or lay at 20-1. If you are serious, could you clarify?
Somebody asked about Leicester. The Lib dems are in administration with the Tories and the Lib dem group has now split. A number of councillors from outer city council estates have formed a “Focus” group on the council.
These councillors will all lose their seats next year and possibly take some other Lib dems with them. If the Lib dems are unable to retain the support from the Muslim community they enjoyed last time they could be wiped out.
before I saw the light I was a Lib dem activist in leicester and helped get many of the “splitters” elected.
91 - Wakefield is down to a 4,000 Labour majority. The new Morley and Outwood constituency has the potential to be marginal because the local Morley Borough Independents who hold many council seats never usually stand in general elections.
93 - Well he is rumoured to be planning a parachute jump into Prescott’s Hull seat when the buffoon steps down at the next general election.
120 Hi Peter..
I thought when Nick (who I respect) said :
“I’d give 20-1 odds against it happening”
That he was up for some so I thought I’d check it out.
As I suspect you may recall being the cany investor you are(and appreciating I’ve not been a hugely active poster recently) I’ve been ‘indecently’ short of Blair, short of Brown, long of Johnson (and long of Benn) since long before it was fashionable (Yippee - I’ve finally got one market by the Gonads !!)
Any ‘Hail Mary’ statements I see in favour of Blair (period) or Brown (short term - subject to circumstances) are just opportunities to average from strength.
Just to be clear, if anyone wants to offer (20/1)on a Q4 Blair departure - I’m an Investor !
Regards
Re 107, 110 There does seem a big element of “going with a winner (or with a candidate with momentum)”. In Dunfermline, for example, the Tories tried to talk a good game, but it was quite apparent actually on the ground that v little was happening. The SNP seemed to get very good local press, and in fact the worst Lib Dem moment I saw was when the local rag reported that the SNP campaign was gaining momentum as we flagged. Some activists started wearing very long faces then! But it became clear 2 or 3 days later that the LD campaign was “outgunning” the SNP, and SNP canvassers I met on the final weekend were clearly unhappy. So like any competitive situation, the “players” and the “crowd” do react to their perceptions of the way things are going!
23. You are an extremely optimistic investor, Tory Boy! I don’t think Blair will go this year but if anybody offered me 20-1 about it I would snatch their arm off, because I could immediately lay it back on Betfair and crystallise a nice little profit, thank you. That’s why I assumed NP was merely commenting on the value in the lay price.
Glad to hear you are on the bright side of the current political markets…and if you do see any 20-1 around, do let me know.
121 thankyou Cymrumark - very useful.
122. “Wakefield is down to a 4,000 Labour majority”
Anthony Wells’ figures don’t place it among the top 114 Con targets, so suggesting the new version is better for Labour than the old (the 114 target according to Wells figures is a 12.2% Lab majority and the old Wakefield had a 11.9% majority)
By the way, Tory Boy, I did hoover up some up the 4s and 5s available on the lay side this morning following NP’s posting but only because it reinforced an opinion I had already formed. Blair’s performance this morning was further comfort for layers of 2006 although there hasn’t been much market reaction….well, maybe a slight drift.
Question, do the Council election predictions for 2007 exclude or include those for the Council elections in Scotland, or are these just for Councils in England? And if these are just predictions for Councils in England, what are your predictions for Council elections in Scotland?
I’m not sure how much of an immediate boost Labour would get from Brown’s election as leader and if there isn’t he would start off his premiership with a thumping morale sapping defeat at the local/scottish/welsh elections. Why he saw the need to get involved in forcing Blair to go a few months earlier than he was going to anyway beats me. Now he’s seen by many as the dagger wielder which may yet provoke a credible challenge to him. And longer term the real problem for GB, apart from his lack of ’soft’ campaigning skills, is the huge question mark about his ability to unite the Labour Party under his leadership. That is surely a necessary, if not sufficient, condition for a Labour fourth term. After his behaviour last week he will find that task immeasurably more difficult.
Ed Balls is more interested in himself than the lifes of his constituents. He has spent hours trying to ensure that the Normanton seat continues to exist but both him and his wife have been notable in their abstance when to comes to trying to ensure that Normanton Fire Station is not closed. The sooner we see the back of Mr Balls the better!!
130 - If he’s planned it properly then Brown should easily get a boost from becoming leader. He is bound to get some positive press at first, especially if he has a lot of voter friendly announcements for people to get stuck into. The interesting thing may be if the Tories will have a series of announcements pre-prepared that they can announce simultaneously to steal his thunder.
“There is one think that everyone hates about New Labour - Anglophobia and unlimited immigration. This will finish them for good. ”
“Our chief weapon is fear, fear and surprise, surprise and fear. Our two main weapons are fear, surprise and ruthless efficiency. Our three main weapons are fear, surprise, ruthless efficiency and an almost fanatical devotion to the pope. Our four main weapons- no. amongst our weaponry are such diverse elements as fear surpri- I’ll come in again. “
128 Fair comment. Tough to argue with that.
As a semi educated outsider to Labour party matters but as a reasonably qualified politico, I just genuinely and honestly
cant see how his position remains tenable into the medium term.
Fairly or unfairly the script is going to be so tedious, debilitating and morale sapping irrespective of any good work he might do in the meanwhile.
Every day will now begin will either a microphone up the nose
and “Prime Minister, can we have your comments about the resignation of the PPC John Bull, Member for Eckythump North
citing his loss of confidence……….
Or ” Prime Minister, this is the first Poll to have the Tories
at (pick your numbers) or ditto Labour at (likewise pick ‘em)
don’t you feel you are damaging their ….”
God forbid any terrorist outrages than might possibly ensue in
the interim.
Be it Brown or whoever else fancies being next up they just can’t allow this drift to continue, it really feels like the final days
of Major to me (Economy is fine, genral public contempt is rife)
rather than Thatcher (Vile, internal disloyalty) at the moment.
Should the two merge, all the current ‘NuLabs’ die in the hole together.
No-one, especially the wannabies can surely afford to allow that to happen.
Certainly well worth a punt on half decent odds with a downside of
Sept 2007 !!
“Prime
132 - The whole thrust of tory tactics has been to boost Blair and contrast him with Brown. I can easily imagine they have a hefty dossier of lines with which to attack Brown if they get the chance.
Now Cameron vs Johnson would be much more interesting. Policy suddenly becomes much more important than personalities.
I wonder, now that a ’stop Brown’ movement seems to be emerging, whether some of the slurs/rumours re. GB’s private life will start to be warmed up again…