Sean Fear’s local election commentary
October 28th, 2006-
Previewing the London Assembly Elections
The London Assembly was established at the same time as the London Mayoralty. It is sometimes compared to the Greater London Council, although its powers are actually very limited by comparison.
It has 25 members in total, of whom 14 are elected by first past the post, and 11 by a London-wide top up list, which allocates the remainder of the seats by a form of proportional representation. Each constituency covers two or three boroughs.
In 2004, the Conservatives won 9 seats at constituency level, and Labour won 5. The Conservatives failed to win any additional seats, but Labour won 2. The Liberal Democrats won no seats at constituency level, but won 5 of the additional seats. Neither the Greens nor UKIP won any seats at constituency level, but each party won 2 additional seats.
The next election will be held in 2008. Ten of the fourteen constituencies can be regarded as safe. Ealing/Hillingdon, Barnet/Camden, West Central, Havering/Redbridge, Bromley/Bexley, Croydon/Sutton and Merton/Wandsworth will be retained by the Conservatives. North East, City and East, and Greenwich/Lewisham will be retained by Labour. This leaves four constituencies which will be keenly contested.
Bob Blackman beat Lord Harris to win Brent/Harrow with a lead of just 4,686, in 2004. The results from this year’s local elections suggest that the outcome will be similar in 18 months time. Tony Arbour has a lead of only 4,067 in South West, over the Liberal Democrats. This seat includes the Liberal Democrat strongholds of Richmond and Kingston. Crucially though, it also includes Hounslow, where the Liberal Democrats are weak. If the Liberal Democrats were unable to win this seat in either 2000 or 2004, I cannot see them doing so next time. The Liberal Democrats’ best chance of a win, at constituency level, is likely to be in Lambeth/Southwark, where Valerie Shawcross has a majority of 5,475, and where there is still a fair-sized Conservative vote to squeeze. Labour did very well in Lambeth in May, but I expect they will still struggle to keep the Liberal Democrats at bay in 2008.
-
This leaves the most marginal seat of all, Enfield/Haringey, where Joanne McCartney beat the Conservative, Peter Forrest, by a mere 1,574. Crucially, UKIP polled over 10,000 votes here.
It is unlikely that they will do that well next time, as the election is not being held on the same day as the European Parliamentary elections. That should certainly assist the Conservatives. As against this, Labour clearly outpolled the Conservatives in this May’s local elections, across the constituency, and has strong representation in both Haringey and Enfield. By contrast, the Conservatives now hardly feature in Haringey.
At the London-wide level, the Liberal Democrats will probably lose one seat if they win Lambeth/Southwark. If Labour were to lose Enfield/Haringey and Lambeth/Southwark, they would almost certainly gain a London-wide seat. The Conservatives are most unlikely to gain any London-wide seats, unless they lose a couple of seats at constituency level. Given that a Conservative vote at London-wide level will probably be a wasted vote, then a canny Conservative voter might choose to give his second vote to another centre right party, such as UKIP.
Without such tactical voting, UKIP are very likely to fall below the 5% threshold and not get any representatives elected. The British National Party, on the other hand, and Respect, both only just fell short of 5% in 2004, and are both likely to clear that barrier next time. In fact, if the BNP can win 8 or 9% of the London wide vote, which seems likely, they will take two seats on the Assembly. The Greens should be able to retain their two seats.
Thursday saw four contests:
Alnwick DC, Amble West Lib Dem. 237 Ind 94 Con 90 Lib Dem gain from Independent.
Blyth Valley BC, Hartley Lab 413 Lib Dem. 361 Con 285 Labour hold, but a strong swing to the Liberal Democrats.
Chester City DC, Newton St Michaels Con 518, Lib Dem 497, Lab 197, Green 24 Con gain from Lib Dem. Although the Liberal Democrat vote share rose by comparison with May, this is still a very good result for the Conservatives, in a seat which has no recent tradition of electing Conservatives.
Rotherham MBC, Rotherham West Lab 1024 BNP 606 Ind 538 Con 146 Lab hold. This continues the recent run of good results for far-right candidates. The Independent candidate was a councillor in this ward until May, and only narrowly lost to Labour.
Sean Fear is a London Tory activist
MessageSpace Advertising
The real interest will be how UKIP/BNP will do. If they do well, and continue to do well over the next three years,(unfortunately) this could effect the next GE.
I expect there will be a lot of sick PR-fans out there if their beloved system of “fair votes” lets in a couple of BNP GLA Members.
This demonstrates the fiddlability of top-up seats. Any sophisticated electorate will learn to use an alternative party as a proxy for one likely to win a lot of FPTP seats. This applies to the GLA, Scotland and Wales.
If in London we had a Tory2 party and a Labour2 party, the result last time would have been something like Tory+Tory2 = 13, Labour+Labour2 = 9, LD = 2, and one seat Goodness Knows.
The /only/ way of eliminating this risk is to limit the election to a single stream, (and for me the only fair system is STV).
why would a canny voter vote for the UKIP nutters? Conservatives want UKIP to do as badly as possible, and would be better of voting for Respect, to keep UKIP down. Keeping UKIP alive will not benefit the Conservatives in the long run, but Respect are obviously no threat.
Cllr Little: If Democracy means anything, it means that the vote of a racist carries the same weight as the vote of a saint.
Any deviation from this rule means that we have to start deciding who is “acceptable” and who isnt, and who to discriminate against - which is necessarily a subjective process, and itself brings democracy into disrepute.
It is said that violence is never the way to make a political point if you live in a democracy. But this maxim is meaningless if the democracy you live in deliverately discriminates against certain voters or parties. It gives credence to the claims by extremists that democracy is a farce and is hypocritical; it allows them to wear the clothes and rhetoric of martyrs; and it allows them to recruit disillusioned non-extremists to their cause, and persuade them that violence is their only option.
Can someone list the Constits and majorities, ie Brent/Harrow, is it Labour held etc.
4. Indeed. And that’s the first time I have ever seen UKIP described as ‘centre-right’, as opposed to….well….
6. Brent and Harrow constituency is held by the tories with a 3.7% majority over Labour
7 - I came across an article earlier today describing Vladimir Luxuria as “centre-left” and Alessandra Mussolini as “centre-right”…
7. “A bunch of fruitcakes, loonies etc” quoted by one leading Conservative perhaps.
9 - Phil, You’ve been morally and political corrupted by I wonder whom…
By-Election Results: Thursday 26th October 2006.
Alnwick DC, Amble West
LD Ian Hinson 237 (56.3; +21.6), Ind 94 (22.3; -19.7), Con 90 (21.4; +21.4).
Majority 143. Turnout 26%. LD gain from Ind. Last fought 2003.
Blyth Valley BC, Hartley
Lab 413 (39.0; -9.1), LD Anita Romer 361 (34.1; +16.5), Con 285 (26.9; -7.3).
Majority 52. Turnout 27.2%. Lab hold. Last fought 2003.
Chester City DC, Newton St Michaels
Con 518 (41.9; -0.1), LD Molly Hale 497 (40.2; +8.1), Lab 197 (15.9; -2.9), Green 24 (1.9; -5.2).
Majority 21. Turnout 46.2%. Con gain from LD. Last fought 2006.
Rotherham MBC, Rotherham West
Lab 1024 (44.3; +3.8), BNP 606 (26.2; +26.2), Ind 538 (23.2; -15.0), Con 146 (6.3; +6.3), [LD (0.0; -21.3)].
Majority 418. Turnout 26.3%. Lab hold. Last fought 2006.
Stroud TC, Stroud Valley
Green 149 (53.8), Ind 46 (16.6), LD Emily Janke-Pearson 45 (16.2), Ind 37 (13.4).
Majority 103. Turnout 17.5%. Green gain from Ind.
Please note:
The figures for percentage change are based on the details of the results from the last time that there was an election in the ward by statute in the May (or sometimes June) elections, rather than by any by-election. We use the figures in The Local Elections Handbook by Colin Rallings & Michael Thrasher.
The Party-defending seat is the party that the former Councillor (who has died, resigned or been disqualified) belonged to when she or he was elected not the one that she or he may have subsequently belonged to as a result of any defection.
11. I’m innocent, John!
13 - And pure
Sean, the comments about the Chester result claim there is no recent history of there being a Conservative. Surely electing a Conservative in May 2006 is pretty recent history.
If your comment was to be fair it might have said that prior to “this year” there was no history of a strong Tory vote
Sean, you are right the Lib Dems are weak in Hounslow, particularly in Feltham & Heston. In Brentford & Isleworth however, Andrew Dakers managed to push up the LD vote at the GE by over 9%. Cameron may prove attractive to B&I (why Chiswick is not in the name of this constituency I am not clear) residents who voted Labour in ‘97 and ‘01 but who switched to the LDs in ‘05. Where will they go next is the question… But that said, I think you are right that the LDs won’t be able to pick up the seat.
4. Matthew “Conservatives want UKIP to do as badly as possible”
Tory Party head-bangers may wish this Matthew, but the reason that they wish this is the same reason why a lot of Conservative VOTERS would like to support the UKIP: the Europe-haters are actually genuinely open right-wing Tories. Competition in other words.
14. As you know, always pure!
Meanwhile, here’s Italian parliamentary toilets row:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/6094782.stm
18. Oh dear. Why would anyone vote for someone who clearly isn’t quite all there? It is not acceptable for men to use ladies toilets and dressing up as a woman does not make it right.
4, 5, and 17 The whole point of this type of PR (or indeed the Single Transferable Vote) is that to make your vote count, you vote for your second preference as well as your first. The average London Conservative voter is likely to have much more in common with UKIP than with any of the other parties on the ballot.
19. Mrs Gardini is pretty useless (sometimes amusing by how clueless she’s) and linking this thing to sexual violence makes her looking even more miserable than what I thought she was.
She also was pretty bad as an actress.
20 DC. OK. So it’s no AC/DC in the female WC from DC !
22. Jack…DC,OK,AD,DC,WC,DC… you like 2 letters tags
4, 20 - I think not when there is such a lot out there publicisizing that UKIP want to get Labour and LibDem MPs elected. Take this gem from “UKIP Home”
***************************************
We should be working now, in every possible seat where our votes could result in a defeat for a Conservative candidate.
This will help Labour and the LibDems this one time, but it will be the catalyst for UKIP’s growth
*****************************************
http://www.ukiphome.com/comments.asp?sid=735
Of course, this is from the lunatic Chad Noble, but he does boast of his closeness to Nigel Farage and other ‘leaders’ in that party.
22. I could think of more relaxing background music to play in toilets.
O/T but I am watching Treasury questions from Mike’s/Andrea’s link in the previous thread. Please, please, can we have Mr. Brown as Lab PM? Please. Many thanks.
He looks so unutterably pretentious as he says “millions/billions” and then forgets to add the “s” another time and just says “billion” like a normal person (”Twenty billions” “fifteen billion”).
Personally, I would abstain before giving a second preference vote to UKIP as long as their stated aim is the destruction of the Conservative Party.
26 - Easy Commentator - you’ll have Roger, Tyson, snowflake and Dr Jonathan right after you if you go on like that. You’ve got to remember that Gordon Brown is Christ come down from the Cross to these people.
23/25 Andrea/DC. …..or is that AndreaACDC/DC.
……………………
FWIW I heard this afternoon of some internal Labour polling conducted in the marginals that showed Labour doing well in the North, less so in the Midlands and struggling in the South. Broadly it’s inline with much of what we’ve seen in many locals, some polls and the anactdotal evidence of many posters here.
29. Jack. Remember I am AS. A minority that does not get the recognition we deserve.
29. Is London in line with the South trend?
On the Assembly elections, is Gorgeous George leading the Respect list next time?
31 - I doubt they’ve selected yet and when they do it will be interesting to say the least but I doubt Gorgeous George will go for the GLA. I just cant see him being interested in what is effectively a glorified county council (if it has even that much power). He might stand for the Euros again though (especially seeing as he will stand down from Parliament - or as BG+B MP at least - at the next election). By the way - he’s selling his house in Streatham right now if anyone wants to nosey around…
32. I suspected they hadn’t selected yet…I was just wondering if anyone heard/read something about it.
If he stands down in BG&B (as he said he would have done), I suppose they’ll select one of the Muslim councillors they now have in TH…what are their chances to hold the seat in pb.comer’s opinion?
31 Andrea. Not sure, as the MP I was chatting with was gossiping about our Gawd.
….and the poll bit was brief.
Bit of a tease I know but if I spill the Gawd goss you’ll know from a cast of one who it was !!
34. Jack, I haven’t understood anything of what you’re saying!
So don’t worry!
35 Andrea. Honourable Jack W says Confucius rains !!
Jack W “less so in the Midlands” is that a euphemism, ie, they are doing badly in the Midlands, or does your source contradict the two ICM polls cited in prior threads that show a 20% + Tory lead in the Midlands, and give a Lab lead there?
So is there a market on how many seats each party will get, and is there any chance of a Conservative majority?
I have been saying forever, 20 seat Tory maj, and was laughed at. 4 months or so back I changed that to 40 seat Tory maj.
Hope I get the credit where it is deserved.
37. I don’t think subsamples in national polls are big enough to make considerations.
Not once; but if there is a trend, particularly one of great consistency.
In 38 I should have said:
So is there a market on how many seats each party will get, and is there any chance of a Conservative majority in the London assembly?
42 - zero chance of a conservative majority - the smaller parties (Green / RESPECT / BNP / UKIP) will retain at least 4 if not gain 1 between them (as a Green party activist I’m hopeful of getting back to 3 seats). The Lib Dems should get about 5. Labour can’t really go below 6. There’s no way the Tories can gain a majority under the electoral system being used.
That said all they will want is to win the mayoralty and get enough seats (9) to block the assembly from changing the budget etc - that will be better than a majority on the assembly.
Many thanks Neil. As a green activist, what do you think of the fact that the last Conservative government cut CO2 emmisions by 7% and this lot have increased them by 4%.
Who do you think is greener?
How much of that increase has to do with the take-off (if you will) of budget airlines?
Re 45 Chrisco, fairly little, it is the likely increase in air travel over the long term that will cause problems with CO2 rather than how much it has increased in the last 10 years. That said I do not have the figures to hand so may be wrong.
41. Is Eastern considered South by ICM?
44. Destroying large swathes of industry and throwing 3 million onto the dole. Great policy, very eco-friendly.
Re 48, Kevin L, that was the early 80’s those figures are 1990 to 1997, and 1997 to date.
37 commentator. My impression was that Labour was clearly performing better in the Midlands than the small subset from the ICM poll indicates. There’s probably a significant element of differential swing in the marginals.
To some degree this is following through from the GE where the Tories performed better in the south and broadly struggled the further north they targetted.
41 Andrea I doubt it; ICM figures I refer to were for the Midlands.
49. Benedict, in that case I withdraw my remark. What do you think are the reasons for the difference and how could the trend be reversed?
51. so where they put Eastern?!
The Midlands figures certainly contain Wales (considering how many Plaid voters they found there)
53 no clue but look at the trend:
“In September, the area called the “Midlands” (includes Wales) had the Tories on 38%, Labour on 31% and the LDs on 21% - in October the Conservatives are on 48%, Labour on 23% and the LDs on 19%.
So, in a month, there’s been a swing of 9% to the Tories. Impressive. Slightly less so when you see it’s on a sample of just 160 or so people. On THAT measure, in October, 77 supported the Tories, 37 Labour and 31 the LDs (in September the figures were 64, 52 and 36 respectively).”
From Stodge
Now OK, small sample but 38 and 48 indicates a large lead whichever way you cut it.
And since the region includes Wales, which leans Labour, in the actual Midlands it suggests the lead is even larger than suggested by the raw data.
Jack; consider that your source is clearly a Lab insider and will be concerned to put a brave face on things for you. Those with access to internal polls are inner sanctum types, and they do not brief to all and sundry, certainly not against the party interest.
A sample of 160 has a massive margin of error. And its unlikely to have been properly weighted in any case.
It’s not even worth bothering to look at such tiny sub-samples.
55. Commentator, do you think it’s really likely that there has been something like a 15% swing in the Midlands compared to last year?
If you consider the subsamples of the last poll, it would suggest a bigger swing in the Midlands than in the South.
I suppose next year’s local elections will give us more informations
42 The Conservatives would have to win c.45% of the London-Wide vote to win an overall majority. With c.10 parties standing, that’s not likely.
54 I have said before that the subset samples are of little use . If that were not so then the most impressive performance would be the LibDems in theSouth increasing their support from 19 to 28% in the last 2 ICM polls and the Conservative support falling in the South .
57. and they were the unadjusted figures too (I hope I used the right term…or Kevin L will tell me off!
)
57, 58
No I don’t - and of course a subset of 160 is meaningless in a single poll situation. But if that subset comes back with the same result poll after poll, let us say ’subatantial Tory lead’, then it ceases to be meaningless. For small sample size, sustained trend corrects.
RE 52 KevinL, The main reason for the drop under the conservatives is that we took the issue seriously and put in the fuel escalator as an example. That has now run out of credility in 2000, when rather than be rid of it Brown should have been more imaginative and reduced tax on bio fuels.
What can be done, the easiest (sic) thing to do would be reduce tax on bio fuels lots as it can be mixed with regular (particularly diesel). People argue that we can’t grow enough here, but we can buy wheat from the Ukraine at 1/4 of the production price here, so it is only the CAP system and tax regime taht stops us. Whats more there is then less need for sack cloth and ashes green taxes.
Oh dear I feel an article for my blog comming on!
27 All rival parties, by definition, wish to eliminate the Conservative Party. The point of PR is that you have to cut deals with such rivals.
I would rather see UKIP win London-wide seats than Labour, Lib Dems, BNP, Respect or the Greens.
56 commentator. I’ve never found this MP anything other than ruthlessly realistic about polls in particular and politics generally. FWIW this MP believes a hung parliament the most likely scenario at the next GE which clearly means a chunk of Labour MPs clutching a voter driven P45 !! ………. and no Andrea it’s not your Clare !!
62. Commentator, I think if the tories are leading nation-wide, I think it’s realistic to expect them to lead in the Midlands too
65. Jack, I’m sure no-one would have given Clare any internal polls..unless if they wanted the whole world to know about it.
Btw, I see you haven’t replied to my email!
Out of interest Yougov had Labour and Conservatives level at 36% each in the Midlands incl Wales and Populus Con 43 Lab 36 in the Midlands excluding Wales so ICM would seem way out .
66 Andrea. Clare …
I’ve had some trouble with that account and anyway use a different one in Scotland …. no tardiness on my part intended !
68. well, Jack, you can’t change things so many times. Try to be a bit consistent!
Mark did you mean Lab 43 Con 36?
70 No Con were 43 in Midlands excluding Wales but as said before the subsets are pretty meaningless .
Why would you include Wales with the Midlands when a) it isn’t, and b) you have Plaid as a factor there?
26. Commentator - as far as I can see, while a little odd, Brown’s use of billion/billions is consistent. He says e.g. “20 million shares”, “30 billion pounds”, but “an increase of seven billions”, “investment of 136 billions” etc…
Just saw this link on Dizzy thinks. Does this government realise that the taxpayer has to foot the bill every time they go on an ill advised spending spree.
http://www.lep.co.uk/ViewArticle2.aspx?SectionID=73&ArticleID=1847021
73. What would be the right use of million/s and billion/s?
Jack W - ‘your’ MP is clearly correct
Labour is up slightly in the North particularly NW since 05. Down in Scotland and Wales but this will make little difference.
Cameron’s appeal in these areas is limited.
However Con are doing well in rest of England.
Conclusion: at next GE Labour’s overall vote may go up slightly (36?) but Con will move to 39 - there will be a disproportionate swing in England excl North which could result in hung parliament.
Stick to million/billion unless you are saying “millions of X” and you should be ok.
77. Thanks, Chrisco!
(BTW - The repeat of Thursday’s fun Treasury Questions has just been shown on BBC Parliament. While Brown was petulant and easily rattled, Balls was truly dire….he just can’t speak coherently).
79. We know you prefer the charm of Dawn Primarolo
Re 79, I will have to watch that one on line.
How bad does Gordon look?
81. I have to say it - pretty damn bad… He tried to do Blair’s trick of turning the focus onto Tory policy with about 5% of the efficacy and 2% of the grace. And then he got all ratty.
80 - Alas, she wasn’t there :(. But Master Timms is a real stunner
81 - He kept running his hand through his (seemingly) unwashed mane.
82, Really? Shame it has not been covered in the main line media.
Is it going to be repeated on BBC Parliament?
81 - Truly awful. And we that that joy to look forward to once a week when he takes over… I just can’t wait!
I know PMQs is not headline news every week anymore, but I am sure that the dour petulance of GB will seep out into the public consciousness just fine! He just can’t do these set piece things.
82. well, the Speaker stopped him, whilst he usually never stops Blair when he avoids the question (SNP MP asked Blair about cash for peerages and Blair practically replied that he won’t answer his question and thet he should have asked about Scotland and he didn’t do that just because he would have exposed the costs of Independence…if that’s replying to a question about cash for peerages and I don’t know what it’s trying to avoid the question)
Well then it looks as if Gordon is our man
PS
Did anyone here on news 24 last night that Yahoo are supplying info to the Chinese about dissidents.
Heres my article here:
http://aconservatives.blogspot.com/2006/10/yahoo-are-spineless-scum.html
Unfortunately I have not been able to find it on there main website
85. to be fair someone should also tell Cameron to stop to shout at every PMQs. This week I was watching it in my living room and my dad was down in the garage. He had to go up to tell me to tone down the volumes of the TV (it wasn’t high) because he was able to hear Cameron speaking even down there.
RE 86 Andrea what the speaker does do is stops Blair talking about Conservative policy past or present when he should be talking about his own.
89. are you sure he always does it?
RE 88 Andrea, Cameron has to shout in order to be able to hear himself let alone anyone else in the chamber be able to hear him. It is very very loud in there.
Re 90, Andrea, no he lets him get away with a bit, but does stop him if it looks like he is just going to bang on about it to avoid answering any questions.
91. Benedict, Blair doesn’t use that tone (Brown will be more like DC than TB) even when he rises his voice. Cameron sometimes looks just angry.
92, Benedict, I think he actually avoids to reply to many questions, especially from opposition backbenchers.
ok after so many critics I made about DC’s tone of voice, not to upset Tory posters too much, I can say he’s actually very clear to understand!
cam does look close to losing it at times. potential I think
96. maybe both him and Gordon will lose it at their first PMQs and they’ll end up in a fight in the middle of the Chamber!
Re 97, Make good entertainment if it happened.
My money would be on a Cameron win, as he is younger
98. But Gordon is fatter…he can jump on him with all his weight!
On the leadership I see Benn has entered the race with strong support. Benn has already stated his preference for Brown. Betting wise it has to be Brown Benn double. Whose taking bets on both?
Cruddas lacks experience and his branding is poor. Johnson made a balls this week. Harmen lacks support and Straw is a rent a candidate. Benn’s branding index is exceptional high by association of name. He also carries Blairite support despite supporting Brown.
Re 99, Andrea but Cameron is younger and nimbler so can dodge the charge
101. Benedict, we should wait and hope in some actions
Headline: “Cheating minister’s wife is back in Beds”
At first I started to wonder “which beds? More than once!”, the I realized it was Bedfordshire
http://www.sundayherald.com/58765
An article in today’s Sunday Herald from the vituperative Paul Hutcheon. This week his attack is on the Lib Dems. Also in the same edition he is reporting an MSP claiming rent for a flat his son owns.
ooops sorry - wrong link
http://www.sundayherald.com/58806
Don’t know if there is any real meat in the story because I have not seen the Times online yet, but sky reporting their headline about Lord Levy, Tony Blair and cash for peerages.
Chris here is the link to that article in the Sunday Times
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-2426786,00.html
Flag burning to become a criminal offence in the UK? Covering your face in demostrations to become a criminal offence in the UK?? (Um, what about Muslim women wearing the veil in protest???) What in the hell is this country coming to????
“Labour MP Shahid Malik, backed the suggestions.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6095260.stm
OK gouys and gals, how can I put this: it’s time to throw these suckers out of Parliament. They’ve done enough damage.
RE 108. Mboy, yes its rubbish, and bizarely I have already written a critical article on my blog. See:
http://aconservatives.blogspot.com/2006/10/banning-flag-burning.html
Mind you the buggers have also banned demonstrations in designated areas with out permission (not that they have to tell you first that it is a designated area)
Amd all this whilst they avoid prosecuting people for as lomg as possible for offences which have been on the statute books for years.
108/109. I agree with the sentiments of it. Must be my ‘John Reid’ streak coming out again… But do agree with you Benedict that it shouldn’t be needed if existing laws were enforced.
I do think there is something wrong though when that fruitcake/tramp has been allowed to ‘protest’ outside Parliament for how many years? Why don’t he get a job!
RE 110, DC, Fruitcakes protesting outside parliament is what democracy is about. How do you think we got enough Liberals on side to get a ban on slavery through?
Blair MUST be arrested, if Levy has said the orders came from Blair and Blair dished out the peerages.
Thank God Blair is going down for something.
111. Yes but not for four years or how ever long it is. He is not doing anything constructive, just making a nuisense of himself. Why don’t he join Respect or something if he is such an anti war person. It’s not the issue, it’s the principle of objectionable individials causing trouble and creating an eyesore. There has been marches through London he could have gone on.
It’s not like he has no right or freedom to protest is it? If he were recruiting for the Conservative Party, I would still say he shouldn’t be there for that length of time.
113. I’d conscript him and send him on a tour of duty in Iraq…Arg! I’m turning in to John Reid!
2. Why on Earth would I, a fan of PR, be “sick” if the system of PR turns out to do exactly what it was designed to do in the first place?
If the BNP were to win a seat or two, I would be disappointed at that fact that so many people had voted BNP, but I would *not* be disappointed that they got the representatives that they voted for.
In fact, I *was* disappointed in 2004 when the BNP and Respect were both deprived of a seat to which they would have been entitled, if the stupid artificial 5% threshold had not been applied.
2/115 that is the nature of such a PR system, that if extremist parties with minority views get votes, then they will receive representation. I agree with MBoy’s point at 5: it is part of democracy that parties many find extremist can be supported. Personally I believe that allowing their views to be heard and ridiculed is often the best way of combating them, rather than allowing them ‘underground appeal.’
This should encourage the more mainstream parties to campaign against them more vigorously. In first past the post, the key aim for stronger parties is to squeeze their vote, as the BNP/UKIP cannot win anywhere at present. However, with PR every voter you can persuade not to vote for a party such as the BNP reduces their chance of getting people elected. As a result, I hope that in areas where the BNP are strong, the other parties will fight them harder than before, (and maybe even keep Margaret Hodge quiet!)
Labour are predicted a pasting in 2007. What will they get in 2008 in London, any predictions. Also is Ken immune to the national tide even if it is strongly against Labour.
117 - My prediction would be Conservative 10, Labour 6, Lib Dem 4, Green 2, BNP 2, Respect 1.
Ken only won fairly narrowly in 2004, so I think if the Conservatives do field a half-decent candidate, they’re likely to win.