Will Gordon get seats like Withington back?
November 30th, 2006
-
Who’ll win battles between Labour and the Lib Dems?
While most of the focus has been on the Tories and Labour we should not forget the other major battle-ground at the next General Election - those seats where Labour and the Lib Dems are slugging it out. And for me nowhere is more interesting than Manchester Withington - where in May 2005 John Leech for the Lib Dems turned round a Labour majority of 11,500 votes increasing the party’s share from 22% to 42.4% in the process.
Such was the scale of the Lib Dem victory here that it even took the bookies by surprise and I cannot recall there even being a betting market.
-
A feature in May 2005 was the level of tactical voting by Tories. On a day when the party was increasing its vote nationally the Tory Withington vote dropped by nearly a third to 10.5% - a move that played a big part in Labour’s defeat.
Manchester Withington is a classic university seat where a significant part of the electorate either works or studies at one of the city’s massive universities. It also has large Muslim populations all adding up to attractive targets for the Lib Dems in the post-Iraq War and post university top-up fees situation.
-
But will those conditions exist next time? Will a Brown rather than a Blair-led Labour be less alien to large sections of the electorate ?
Certainly a consistent feature in the polls over the past year is that a sizeable number of those who supported Charles Kennedy’s party in 2005 say they would vote for a Brown-led Labour. And Iraq, surely, will be much less of a problem for Gordon than it has been for Blair? After all the Chancellor was not the driving force behind Britain’s decision to support George Bush.
In those ex-Labour seats that the Lib Dems now hold, though, even the overall changed political environment might not be enough. The squeeze on the Withington Tories in 2005 shows the potential for tactical voting and you cannot imagine the local Conservative party putting in much effort. After all it is in David Cameron’s strong interest that seats beyond the reach of his party should not go to Labour.
The tactical voting proposition is harder to make where the Lib Dem is not the incumbent and the party might find it quite challenging in seats like Oxford East where it is head to head with Labour but was just behind in 2005.
On a personal note I have very close links with Withington. It is where I was born and brought up and where at the tender age of 16 I was elected to my first political office as Vice-Chairman of Withington Young Socialists. In those days, of course, Withington was solidly Tory and remained so until the 1987 General Election.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
I think this all rather pales into insignificance compared with the news about Chancellor Brown’s child.
I have little time for the man himself and his policies but it does seem he has been most cruelly afflicted when it comes to his children and he has my sympathy.
The fact we lost this seat really really p!ssed of the local activists. Why? cus they all got sent out to other seats which were seen as vunerable which we held, only to find out on the day they had lost their own seat. The result a local party that seems more committed to winning its seat than any i have seen before. Regardless of how the lab/lib battles go I would be amazed if this stays lib dem, it has a good level of labour support in the area added into boot the fact that manchester has the best campaigning operation i know off, from all parties - look at the local election results, i am confident about this seat more than any other in the country will come back to Labour at the next general.
re 2. A big challenge for Labour is how it deals with the Lib Dems when all the campaign rhetoric, certainly from the last three elections, has been focused on “Stopping the Tories”. Labour has not got the monopoly of being the “Not the Tories” party.
Thus it becomes very hard convincing voters in a place like Withington that a vote for a party other than Labour will let in the Conservatives because it is clear to everybody that it simply isn’t true - a challenge made more difficult by the Lib Dem incumbency.
Labour has yet to work out a strategy for dealing with the Lib Dems. It did not matter that much in 2005 - it will in 2009/10.
Labour had a strategy for dealing with the LDs that was very effective outside these “university seats” - portray us as head in clouds liberals who cared more for the criminal than the victim; and as you pointed out the “don’t let the Tories win” was pretty effective too.
Both of these will be harder next time.
If we are now, in or fast, approaching the position where the public want a change after up to 12 years of a Labour government, then Withington will stay as it is, particluarly as the Lib Dems have a lengthy local tradiion in the seat.
Presumably if as Red Flag claims, the local party went off somewhere else, then if it returns, a balanced view suggests somewhere else will have less Labour resources, making that vulnerable!
To clarify… scaring people with the Tories will be harder as they are working overtime to make themselves less scary even if they stop being Tories.
Labour won’t let this seat go without a fight next time. The activists are still fuming about what they see as a dirty tricks campaign. However, Leech has been a popular MP, and most people who have had dealings with him believe him to be a much better constituency MP than his predescesor, Keith Bradley, who has spent a lot of time attempting to slur the Lib Dem since his defeat.
I only moved from the constituency back in March. I know a lot of people in the area and could easily see the seat being won back by a Brown led party.
Still, I did think Leech was very good in parliament yesterday…
1. Eleanor
Kind thought, well expressed. It was nice to note that most PBers were able to drop the polemics for a moment while pausing to sympathise with GB and his family.
2. Redflag
I wouldn’t be so sure. The LDs have a well merited reputation for hanging on to stolen seats.
8. Perhaps so, but a quick glance at the ‘postbag’ section of the local newspaper reveals a very furious Labour minority (but a large minority) who really, genuinely hate this man. I’ve never seen such vitriol about such a minor MP before.
Labour are absolutely determined to reclaim this seat…
9 Well, good luck to them Billy but I’m old enough to remember the LDs taking Bermondsey.
Re. YouGov do we then conclude that Mike is more ‘reliably informed’ than Jack W?
A good point. Another campaign conducted amidst slander and dirty tricks that resulted in a win for the Lib Dems - one wonders quite why we still like them despite occurrences like this!
My point was not that we will take back all or a lot of our seats of the lib dems (all though i think we will) and that leaving the members there will not hurt us in other areas (it will) just that we should never have lost the seat and the local labour party there is gonna go all out to get it back. I know the lib dems have a reputation for holding on to stolen seats but for labour members this loss hurts as much george galloway winning, i know several people who will go there many months before in the run up to the general election and help out for maybe a few days but this combined with the local party sticking in town and being seriousley annoyed means that i think we should get this seat back.
1-well done Eleanor for getting the first post in reminding us of some perspective.
Topic - I understand there was a key by-election in Withington earlier this year. I don’t know the details, but I think there had been a LD->Lab defection on the council, and local LDs were worried about losing the seat. However they held comfortably, and John Leech was involved in the campaign, a good sign for the next GE.
If Gordon Brown had any sense at all, he would realise that being anything like a decent father to two young children, one of whom has serious disabilties, is not possible while holding down a senior job in government THE WAY THEY DO ‘GOVERNMENT’ AT THE MOMENT.
zebidee - what the hell is that supposed to mean?
15. That, of course applies to that little green to$$er too. But then childcare is women’s work isn’t it?
Last election, Labour was so sure of itself in Manchester that it sent ‘troops’ from both Withington (and other parts of Manchester) and Rochdale into Oldham East for months before the General Election to supplement those from Ashton etc.
Will they have any ‘troops’ left by the time the next election comes around/ or will all the Labour Students have flown out to Iraq/Afghanistan as ‘volunteers’, seing that Tony B’s appeals to the NATO countries are falling on such deaf ears?
16. Redflag, what it means is that being a Cabinet Minister is a presently 100-hour a week job. Perhaps it needn’t be if the top people were not all such control freaks, but it is at present. You cannot do that job properly at all and be a decent parent to young children, even those without disabilities. Look at what happened to Mark Thatcher.
Of course, if you are a Tory toff, you slough-off your parenting responsibilities to the private sector. Send them to public school from the age of six!
to be honest zibidee, i don’t beleieve that a high pressured job and being a good parent are mutually exclusive, indeed in all honesty i find the manner in which you are making you point somewhat insensitive. I know that you may be trying to make a serious point about the state of british government but in all honesty im not sure this is the best method of doing it.
Labour is set to select their Withington candidate earlier next year. It’ll be a woman (it’s an AWS)
Labour had a decent result in local election this year (they naturally were outpolled by the libdems, but by a less margin than in 2004 locals). They managed to hold Chorlton ward (that was a split Lab/LD ward in 2004). Actually then in the summer, the LD councillor for Chorlton (and apparently one of the top Leech’s donors) defected to Labour
zebidee - but Carol turned out alright.
14. tpfkar, I think you’re confusing with the Gorton South byelection (which was in Gorton constituency). I think the Liberals/Libdems have held that ward (in its various form) since late 80’s
18. Was Zebidee the author of that famous guide to Lib Dem candidates which called on them to ‘act shamelessly’ and ’stir endlessly’?
Assessing the political future of Withington is tricky. Unlike LibDem/Con marginals where there is a reasonable amount of form to guide us, there really is very little to help us on first term Lib Dem imcumbants in previous Labour seats taken at a general election.
Chesterfield springs to mind where the swing was only 0.5% to the Lib Dems after the first term in 2005. By-election Lib Dem gains from Labour are IMO a different beast - Birmingham Ladywood, Rochdale, Bermondsey, Leicester South all offer different outcomes.
Much will depend on the ability of Leech to dig in and present himself as better value than A N Other Labour MP. We may be sure of one thing, the Lib Dems will be determined to keep a toe hold in Manchester as much as Labour will be to stub the toe hard !
There certainly will be an interesting betting opportunity in the seat market for Withington. Will it be the North Norfolk of 2009/10 ??
…………………..
11 Wag. I always bow down before the altar of Mr Smithson in the reliability stakes. I remain his O so humble and least deserving servant and utterly unworthy of comparison.
Jack W Heep.
Long term Manchester Withington has never been a natural Labour seat although demographic changes have made it less Conservative than it used to be , Labour will find it very much harder to retake the seat than they imagine . The idea that they lost in 2005 because they sent their activists elsewhere is laughable . A look at the 2004 local election results in Withington would have told anyone with a bit of political nous that they were in serious trouble here just as the LibDem gain in Solihull should not have been the shock that it was .
25. Mark, the 2004 local result wasn’t so different from Gorton result.
Mike interesting article as ever. I can’t see how a resergent Conservative party can’t damage the Lib Dems unless the Conservative voters get more tacticle than they seem to have a reputation for.
O/T I thought these comments by a US State Department official re. Britain’s involvement in Iraq were very interesting.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;jsessionid=ZDUEKMJGUNL25QFIQMFSFF4AVCBQ0IV0?xml=/news/2006/11/30/wusuk30.xml
Sinn Fein used to have a nickname for Blair - ‘the naive idiot’. It seems to be borne out to some extent by these remarks.
Adding to Andrea’s post. Don’t know details of Gorton South incumbency - sure Andrea has the info as usual. BUT - referring to red flag’s contention about Manchester’s Labour campaigning operation, and claims by others of “Lib Dems’ dirty tricks”. I saw some of the Labour literature for that byelection - if that wasn’t vicious, dirty tricks, and verging on the libellous, I don’t know what was. I actually suggested it be shown to the police (not sure if any outcome on that).
And yet, despite the vitriol the Lib Dems came through with a pretty similar majority as previously. Frankly, I have to say, maybe I come from a “soft” part of the country, some would allege, but it is no wonder many are pi$$ed off with politics and politicians if that was they could do.
Sure no-one cares, but my first parl byelection as a Young Lib activist was in Gorton 1967 (whatever happened to Terry Lacey, the radical Young lib who stood as the candidate there??)
The Tory shortlist for Hereford (one of their top targets against the libdems) is: Giles Inglis-Jones, Emma Moffett, Jesse Norman and Bob Seely.
http://www.herefordtimes.com/news/htnewsround/display.var.1048261.0.hopefuls_line_up_to_fight_next_election.php
Nick Palmer, is the same Bob Seely who was your 2005 opponent?
Last post - sorry left out a ‘was’. If that was all they could do.
28 Well, it’s a view, Fred, but it’s heavy on opinion and light on evidence.
As for ‘naive idiot’, it’s name-calling, isn’t it? Sinn Fein have been called a few names in their time.
That bookshop doesn’t seem to have Mein Kampf….
On a serious note and, I don’t mean this in anyway maliciously, but Prescott yesterday appeared like he was in the early stages of some neuro-degenerative illness. He just seemed all wrong as if he didn’t know where he was. Is there something wrong?
Though I know from a young Liberal in GTR Machester (one of us but defected) thinking the tories were doomed to third place nationally, He stood in Bolton but refused a seat in manchester saying Leech was hated by the local party and he wouldn’t dream of being one of his cllrs.
33
One of the journalists interviewed last night by Adam Boulton said it was because he was having problems with his dentures.
Re 15 Zebidee, You are right that Gordon Brown can’t meet his family responsibilities AND be PM the WAY it is done at the moment. With a bit of luck that means government wil be better run. The way civil servents seem to run ministers is that they seem to want to keep them too busy to think and see the bigger picture.
If there is any man who can overcome these personal tragedies it is Gordon.
32. PtP, I think Sinn Fein would be better calling him the closest thing they’ve had to a friend in the top post in UK politics..whether Blair knows it or not. Naive is maybe not the term but in his desire to do deals, the parties here know he can be run around a bit. Sinn Fein know this better than anyone.
I think Blair was sincere enough over Iraq in his convictions,he just didnt follow it up with the thorough and boring details of the practicalities.
Prescott, the problems in his private life, have obviously taken their toll. He is also showing the signs of being ‘demob happy’ he’s had enough.
It will be interesting to see, how the sad news about GB’s child affects his poll ratings. GB’s problem has been he often appears ‘distant’ will this soften his image.
Withington is not a traditional Labour seat. Like a number of other seats the Lib Dems did well in last time it has high student/academic, muslim and liberal profesisonal populations. Typically these seats were good for the Tories in the eighties then swang Labour in the nineties and have now swung Lib Dem.
Leech, though never the most charismatic MP, is concentrating on his seat, digging in well and doing all the things it is sensible for first time incumbents to do.
24 - you didn’t list Brent East. How many people predicted after the by-election that Sarah Tether would hold that seat in 2005?
I very much doubt that Labour will get back Withington. The student vote will stay LD (why should Gordon get them back?)and I doubt the Moslem vote will come back in a hurry; there’s still Afghanistan to complain about and the Iraq wounds lie deep.) The one question for me is how well will the LDs squeeze a Tory vote that’s on the up nationally. It’s not impossible that the Tories could get say 15% in Withington in a good GE; voters who were squeezed once need to be resqueezed and may be resistant when they feel more positive about the Party. However, the LD MP should get a decent first term bonus. LD hold.
Like Eleanor I was very sad to hear about GB’s child; not as bad a situation as DC’s child but bad enough.
35. Less dramatic but certainly an explanation.
39. Lets hope it doesn’t. I say that on the basis that the last thing we want is a ‘whos kid is worst’ situation over Cameron and Brown.
Terrible sounding, I know but its not beyond the realms of possibility in this game, there are some very exploitative people in politics.
40.”24 - you didn’t list Brent East. How many people predicted after the by-election that Sarah Tether would hold that seat in 2005? ”
Looking at the 2001-2005 LD byelection gains…
Leicester South: uninspiring LD MP, decent Labour campaign. Labour gain
Brent East: good constituency Libdem MP, pretty bad Labour campaign. LD hold
40/41 Withington was Conservative throughout the 60’s and 70’s . The Conservative vote share in this year’s local elections went down to 9% . I lived in this constituency when I was at Manchester Uni in the late 60’s .
46. 9% wasore thn I got in 2003 in Withington
Andrea at Leicester South the Lib Dem vote went up by 2,797 between the byelection and the General. Tories went up 1,753 respect down 1,0004 and Labour up 8,068.
At the byelection Labour voters couldn’t be bothered to vote. The opinion polls (well ICM) show turnout currently likely to be in the low 50s - Turnout could do for Labour at the next GE - the votes wont neccessarily go anywhere else.
Respect down 1,004 -sorry
sorry should be was more than i got
28 Fred Its not really surprising that SF should use the old Leninist concept of ‘useful fool’ for TB.
Can’t see many LD gains from Labour returning to them. Most were Tory seats fairly recently. Withington, Leeds NW, Cambridge, Hornsey, Falmouth & Cambourne, Bristol West, Yardley, Cardiff Central.
Re: 51 - And what’s the chance of the Tories taking them back? From third?
How do we put democracy into a hung parliament?
Re 52 Correct. They are the seats that refelct what the city intelligentia think. I think in Leeds north west and Birmingham Yardley. Due to an active Tory party in those cities Laobur could actually go into third place. But considering Liverpool and Manchester has no Tory presence as of yet I believe the fight will be tighter, between Labour and the Liberals, there. Although personally I think in the next couple of years Tories will reappear in the Manchester et al. I not sure whether they will be returning first of all in Manchester Withington. Maybe Wythenshaw or Manchester Blakely. An area less keenly fought over and one that is more taken for granted than Withington.
44 - I agree with your analysis but think that ‘uninspiring’ is an undeservedly generous description for the former member
I lived in the constituency at the time of the election and I think the reasons given for LD defectors (Irag War & Top Up fees) are massively overstated. It was very much a local campaign with local issues, primarily the “survival” of the local hospitalw hich was never really at risk. It was certainly clever of Leech although a little dirty for my tastes particually for soemone who doesn’t even live in the constituency.
If its AWS the front runner has to be Ruth Turner, assuming she is not sentenced in the cash for peerages scandal! She was active in the constuency for years and as far as I know still has a house there.
53.”I think in Leeds north west and Birmingham Yardley. Due to an active Tory party in those cities Laobur could actually go into third place. ”
sorry, Labour has to perform extremely badly to fall behind the tories in Yardley! According to Wells’ notionals, Lab has 36% and the tories 9.5%!
55. Some of the names mentioned so far are Yogish Virmani, Lucy Powell and Val Stevens.
56. True Glen. I was around and it was a dirty campaign none of the hospitals were threatened or even talk about it until he suddenly started releasing press releases about it out of no where as well. How do you campaign against those sort of tactics. I did like the leaflet though, following criticism of Libs that the hospital was not being closed or any discussion of it being so immediately after the election. The leafelt talked of Lib dems saved your hospital. Nice touch.
52. I suppose Leeds North West and Camborne & Redruth are the only ones with Tory hopes of a gain from third place among those seats. In the other seats they fell too much behind (in Bristol West the boundary changes put them out of contention in that seat)
53. Another example of the “City Intelligensia” seat that was Tory in the eighties then swung back to labour and now has a strong LD presence is Newcastle Central, though the labour vote is stronger there than in Leeds NW and Manc Wi, obviously!
I think on these seeats, it depends very much whether the driving factors in the election are local or national. Usually the LD campaign is stong on the local issues.
However, if the election campaign combines Tories appealing more, a static LD vote, plus a labour/tory squeeze on LD voters (the old horse race argument goes national!) then you can see some labour voters going “home” and some AB’s backing Cameron, reducing the LD vote by enough to allow labour to win some of these seats- even if their own supprt doesn’t go up.
Labour’s money troubles continue according to the Telegraph who say the Smith Institute ‘ with close links to Gordon Brown is being investigated by the charity watchdog. . . . The intervention is the second time in five years that the Smith Institute has come to the attention of the Charity Commission.’
I would say the more salient question for Labour is not can they win Withington back, but can they prevent Gorton going the same way?
59 Brit Spin. I think applying national trends in Lib Dem seats is a tricky business. They usually buck national and even regional swings and operate in a local bubble almost immune to political forecasting. Hence we have the wide variations in the west country, the Withington and North Norfolk swings and losses in Newbury etc.
I think what we can say safely is that once Lib Dem MP’s get past their first term they are inordinately difficult to pick off, not impossible, but mighty hard. This is one of the reasons why a hung parliament appears to me as the most likely option in 09/10. It’s what I’ve called in the past the “Lib Dem Blocking Minority” ie a block of 40-50 Lib Dem MPs so well dug in that sooner or later a hung parliament becomes inevitable.
61. They had a good round of local election this year in Gorton. They outpolled you in the locals (and you usually perform better in locals than in GE).
Then in 3 years everything can change.
63. Labour made 3 gains in Gorton wards last may
Gorton North 2006 Lab 1244, LD 1132 2004: LD 1578/1491/1399 Lab 1326/1227/1180
Longsight 2006: Lab 1687, LD 774 2004: LD 1661/1622/1563, Lab 1134/1128/1121
Whalley Range (the majority of this ward was in the old Manchester Central) 2006: Lab 1637, LD 1158 2004: LD 1999/1943/1650, Lab 1459/1437/1363
Let’s see if they can perform in that way even next year.
Someone earlier mentioned Newcastle…what will be the the Libdem main target in the city following boundary changes?
IIRC the local elections were very good for the Libdems in Newcastle North ward…will it be the top target in the city? Any views?
(it’s the third post in a row by me…time not to post for a while now!
)
65 Andrea. Boo …. you may post again now !
I can help also.
Have I mentioned that I have a blog?
(You can definately post again now Andrea)
40 - Leech mightn’t be all that charismatic, but his PMQs performance was rather more confident than that of fellow party members such as Vince Cable with his shaking hands. Confidence looks good on the TV and Leech could do well within his party if he keeps his seat.
41 - Bear in mind that a lot of the student vote has disappeared with the departure of Charles Kennedy. In our age of personality politics, such things matter a lot, it would seem.
61 - I would say that Gorton will definitely stay Labour as long as Kauffman’s there. With him gone, I think it might be a closer call. Last time ’round there was an Asian Lib Dem candidate who was hugely admired and promoted throughout the Asian community (of whom there are a lot in the constituency). He did rather well, I seem to recall. A similar approach next time could reap dividends for the party.
Agree with jack w about Libdems, Annette Brooke has established herself quite securely in Poole and Mid-Dorset. Don’t think there’s much chance of her being defeated at the next GE.
re 62 Jack W says “Lib Dem Blocking Minority” ie a block of 40-50 Lib Dem MPs so well dug in that sooner or later a hung parliament becomes inevitable.
Very well put. It is a real issue. The factor that could weaken the LDs is that their underlining base has weakened. Although since 97 MPs have gone from 46 to 62, their control of councils has fallen from over 50 to 33.
68 Billy. Kauffman almost seems part of the Commons furniture!He’ll be 78/79 at the next election so may decide to call it a day. Having said that, although not a Kauffman fan, he doesn’t seem to be slowing any and his Commons performances are as robust as ever.
Fred @ 28 on the special relationship — it is a PhD thesis (or several) yet to be written but a fair question nonetheless. What did we get out of it?
Come to think of it, has anything ever come from Tony Blair’s shuttle diplomacy? In the Middle East, he failed to get Bush involved or to restrain Israel. He got nothing from Syria. Nothing from France or Germany over Europe. And he has just failed to get more Nato help in Afghanistan.
On the other hand, President Clinton was very helpful with Northern Ireland. The Olympic Games are coming to London, and the Prime Minister was prominent in that campaign.
70 HF. Some might say that not having a Lib Dem council round your neck is an asset for a sitting Lib Dem MP !!
In essence we now have an enlarged version of the 60s/70s Liberal situation - small blocks of Libs dotted around the country. It just so happened that they’ve slightly grown in both numbers and the regions that there are in. Thus in East Anglia, Clement Freud used to doggedly
hold the Liberal standard, now there is Cambridge, North Norfolk and Colchester, all of which one would reasonably say are safe(ish).
Harold Macmillan, always expressed the hope that Britain would be, what the Greeks were to the Romans: discuss.
OT — Britain is the 29th best country, according to The Economist, whose web site appears to be broken so here is the BBC version.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4020523.stm
75 — ignore that — I’ve followed google to a two-year-old story. Oops.
72. Clinton was happy to support the UK agenda over NI only because it had come so much into line with the pro-Republican agenda he himself supported, I think. I doubt Blair will be remembered by history as a great diplomat, despite his efforts.
72 John L The fact that the Olympics is coming to London might suggest that TB’s international enemies have a sense of humour.
68 - I wasn’t being critical of Leech - more complimenting him for getting his priorities right.
Lib Dem success amongst students was not based on Kennedy but on their consistent opposition to tuition & top up fees, the Iraq War, ID Cards etc.
Lib Dem students have just had a very successful Freshers recruitment campaign with record numbers joining - post Kennedy.
Thank you to eleanor for her kind post at 1, and to Mike for moderating the disgusting one from Chris A on the same subject in last night’s thread (it’s disappeared and I won’t give details). It should maybe give us pause that there is no personal tragedy great enough to stop some people trying to use it to score off an opponent: politics shouldn’t be that much of a blood sport, and perhaps we all encourage it with OTT rhetoric at times?
I don’t know Withington, but what sometimes happens in northern seats that the LibDems capture is that the Tory vote collapses behind them - that’s the real reason why they are so thin on the ground at local level. But the trick is harder to reproduce at parliamentary level, when the national contest makes Tories want to vote Tory. I do know Leicester S quite well: the by-election loss was mostly a mixture of middle-class and Muslim protest over Iraq, apathy on working-class estates and a major Respect effort, and all four factors had diminished by the GE. It helped that Labour’s candidate had a strong local track record.
Which is one reason why he got a bloody nose in the Byelection!!
RE: Jack W. The fact is that LDs build from a councillor base into MPs. When that base goes then their MPs are vulnerable as they dont have the troops to deliver the leaflets.
To illustrate the point about LD Councils, look at Winchester which at the next GE will be in 2 seats Winchester and Meon Valley. The LDs have been steadily losing ground to Conservatives and this year lost control of Winchester City to Conservatives. Add in the Oaten factor and the LD activist base is significantly weaker compared to 05.
“Lib Dem success amongst students was not based on Kennedy but on their consistent opposition to tuition & top up fees, the Iraq War, ID Cards etc.”
or to put it another way - Tuition Fees, Tuition Fees and Tuition Fees.
I think the LD-Lab battle will end up being a bit of a stalemate. Us unable to take many new Lab seats and Lab having trouble retaking seats they have lost to us. Although if Brown calls a snap election it could hurt us, likewise, if he clings onto power for too long it will hurt him (with voters realising he really aint that liberal).
On the subject of his son; I have the uttermost respect for anyone with a disabled child, whatever I might think about them on a political level.
82 HF. I think the Oaten factor makes Winchester a special case and is a likely Tory gain in 09/10.
However whist the councillor base is relevant, it isn’t critical for Lib Dem MPs. If you take Sheffield Hallam, Labour have been pegging away at the Lib Dems in Sheffield council for years yet Clegg appears safe. Part of the reason is that at general elections Lib Dems from surrounding seats pour time and effort into Shefield Hallam and run paper campaigns elsewhere.
What kills a PPC is if the council base disappears completely and with it the local organization and all the activist base. This has hit the Tories badly in the Northern cities and some university towns but so far not the Lib Dems.
80. Politics shouldn’t be that much of a blood sport..
Which just shows that it is Nick. There will be people, including those within your own party, the Conservatives & Lib Dems who would play up personal circumstances which have no bearing on anything of wider concern or note, for their own agenda because there are always zealots with the machine of every party. Ditto the media.
I don’t want Gordon to benefit in the polls from his son’s condition, not because I’m a cold hearted sod, but because I think it sets the wrong course.
On another note, what is this constant use of the word ‘tragedy’ about, in the media? Not only in this case but in so many others. Doesn’t anyone know the meaning of the word?
re 83 What’s the LD position on fees going to be next time?
84 Tistoph. This far out it’s difficult to make more than informed judgements, but I think you are somewhat pessimistic about the Lib Dem/Labour battle.
Whilst the Lib Dems appear vunerable to the Tories in around a dozen seats I’d say the following are perfectly reasonable targets from Labour :
Edinburgh South .. Edinburgh North .. Watford .. Hampstead and Kilburn .. Aberdeen South .. Norwich South .. Durham.
Add to that list the odd “Withington” type gain and a decent haul from Labour shouldn’t be seen as outwith the Lib Dems reasonable expectations.
88. JackW I agree that Labour could lose Aberdeen South and the Libdems have got to be favourites to win because of their position in the last GE. Would also like to see how the SNP/Con vote holds up.
I have fond memories of that constituency because I voted conservative and we won!
85. Jack W - didn’t the Lib Dems win all the wards in the current Sheffield Hallam in May..and rather comfortably so?
66/67
85. Jack, I think LD council base in Hallam wards is pretty strong. On new boundaries there’re 13 LD councillors and 2 tory councillors
I’ll eat my hat if the Lib Dems do not lose seats on balance in the next GE. It’s a Burberry baseball cap…..
What about a Labour Gain in Bethnal Green now that Galloway is off?
I still say that Labour will regain Blaenau Gwent (my personal little hobby horse). Especially if the national election is close.
88. Perhaps Jack, and I certainly hope that the Yellow Peril does better than I think we will. But talking with LD-Lab waverer friends, especially those of student age, gives me the impression that a Brown led Labour Party is likely to receive more support than Blair received in 2005. But it does hinge somewhat on how Brown is received as a PM (assuming he elected leader).
Btw. World AIDS Day tomorrow, lest anyone forget!
90/91 Andrea/Fred. Perhaps not the best example !
89 ChrisD. The badly timed Sproat chicken run !!
92 Yokel. Presently it appears so. I think a Lib Dem spread of around 50-56 is about right.
95. Jack, I think you wanted to say that running the council can be a double sward. HF was arguing that the Libdems usually build their parliamentary wins over solid local council bases.
I think that the 2 positions are not mutually exclusive. A party can have a good council base even if they’re not in power in that particular council. It can easily happen in council that covers more constituency (and not all are LD targets).
96 Andrea. What wisdom !!
95. Jack, theres just bound to be a squeeze come next GE. Politics is going to divide more between red & blue so c50 would be my guess. Ming will probably get the rap but the Lib Dems have a lot of borrowed votes and its not really his fault.
98 Why is there ‘bound’ to be a squeeze any more than there was ‘bound’ to be a squeeze in ‘97, ‘01 or ‘05?
The two largest parties currently have the lowest share of the vote between them than ever before - and their leaders (current and future) are less popular than ever - that is hardly a sign that they are ‘bound’ to squeeze anyone.
Other or both of the largest parties may be in a position to squeeze the Lib Dems next time, but equally the Lib Dems may position themselves to pick up support from either or both.
At this stage the field looks pretty open to me, and it certainly possible that the lib Dems could, for example, gain more seats from Labour than they lose back to the Tories.
97. Jack, behave and don’t mock me!
And run to celebrate St Andrews Day…now a national celebration
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/scotland/6193670.stm
98 Yokel. A “squeeze” will not be enough of itself. Indeed Matthew Paris argued in the “Times” some weeks back that a close election offered the oportunity for the Lib Dems to play the “we’ll keep both the other buggers honest” card.
Further in some parts of the country there is no red/blue battle but a blue/yellow or red/yellow battle. It’s a bit more complex than some would think or hope ….. and more interesting for that.
71 - Jack. Kauffman does indeed seem to be a permanent fixture. He’s of the opinion, apparently, that the ‘new generation’ are out to get rid of his generation from the party (of course, few of them are left, anyway) and so he seems likely to hold on for a while to come. He’ll be a candidate for Father of the House in a few years too, surely and, being as he loves his constituency and has no family, perhaps he’ll do a Heath and carry on with the only thing he really loves. Unless, of course, a local Lib Dem candidate does nobble him.
79 - PTB. I’m pleased to hear about the Lib Dem successes at the Fresher’s Fairs. I’ve just known a fair few students who have switched allegiances in the wake of Charles’ decapitation. It seemed to be to be a general trend, but I’m glad to be corrected.
98 - Yokel, I do think that what you say is worryingly likely. The Lib Dems do seem most unlikely to increase their number of seats. I just hope it doesn’t result in them melting down into a very minor third party once again…
83 My experience in Oxford - where the Lib Dems won the student vote on both constituencies - was that Iraq in particular was a major motivating factor as well as fees as well as a general ‘boot Blair out’ feeling.
68. “41 - Bear in mind that a lot of the student vote has disappeared with the departure of Charles Kennedy. In our age of personality politics, such things matter a lot, it would seem.”
Any Libdem poster’s seeing evidence that their student vote is slipping after the departure of Charles Kennedy?
102.” He’ll be a candidate for Father of the House in a few years to”
After Sir Peter Tapsell, who should be in line for the next Father of the House?
I think it’s someone from the 1970 intake…but who? IIRC it was already discussed here last year and the answer is in the order in which MPs sworn in at the time.
100 Andrea. Naughty !
Benedict White… can you remind me of your email again please?
98 - on what evidence do you say this?
We have a vacuous but pleasant Tory leader who is jettisoning any hints of policies that are unpopular. The Conservative manifesto will be extremely light on detail (as Labour’s was in 97). I wouldn’t be surprised to see the 2009/10 equivalent of the pledge card.
Labour will be led by a heavyweight, with lots of policies, initiatives and targets to discuss in detail and while it will contrast well with Camoron’s ‘Tory Lite’ position, Labour will have been in for 12 or more years and will be blamed as any long term government for all the nation’s ills. There is precious little (if any) evidence of third term government’s increasing their vote share.
The evidence is very much the other way - the Lib Dems and others have over the last 50 years increasing their share at elections. More than 95% of the population voted Labour or Tory in the 1950s, more than 90% in the 1960s, more than 80% in the 1970s etc, down to less than 60% last time.
I would be very surprised if the Lib Dems didn’t pick up at least 20% next time (they polled 19% in 1992 for example) and the others 10%. Getting 40% when there is only 70% available will be almost impossible.
102&104. Would love to know what the figures are for all the main parties student membership. Also think that as politics get more interesting again with a real possibility of a close GE with a hung parliament a likely outcome, could we see students becoming more engaged in politics as a result.
I remember way back in the early 80’s students seemed more interested and active in politics, although I don’t know if that converted to a higher number of students voting.
Due to the finacial straights that all of the main parties are in, especially Labour, surely its time to consider the conceit of fighting every seat. Seats should be divided up into certain/marginal/no hoper. Parties should then withdraw from no-hopers. Those local parties who would not be running a candidate, would be twinned with a marginal, to help and finance. What is the point of wasting time and effort on seats where you have no chance?
102 Billy. Thanks for that, I think Kauffman is safe too.
105 Andrea. Can’t be too many of the 70 intake left and then Alan Beith from the 73 by-election.
Long time back, but to think Beith fought 3 elections in a year (Nov 73 by-election, Feb74 and Oct74) and won by a handful of votes each time !! …. and it all started with a Tory scandal … how times change.
Fielding a candidate costs no money unless you lose your deposit. Why should voters in a particular area be deprived of a chance to vote for their favoured party - and it is possible to break out of third place.
Though if you could arrange for no Labour candidates in your part of the world I suspect I would be very grateful…
104 What little evidence there is shows indicates that LibDem support is higher now amongst 18-24 year olds ( which of course is not exclusively students ) than it was at the 2005 GE . Compare the figures for this age group in the October and November ICM polls to their 2005 GE poll . The claims that the student vote has disappeared with Kennedy is simpl;e wishful thinking based on no facts to back it up .
104. After CK left yes, because he left; no.
I think some of our student vote may be wavering a little at the moment. But I don’t think that has anything to do with CK going, more to do with TB saying he will go and the arrival of our friend Dave.
Then again, we shouldn’t forget the weird nature of student politics. Top-up fees are still a big issue for students (and NUS will keep them so), which aids the LDs. As does any anti-poverty/stop climate change campaigning which goes on.
I agree that no money is lost if the candidate does no lose the deposit. But money is still wasted on leaflets, posters etc. Local parties in no-hoper seats, could use any money they raise, coffee mornings, fund raising events on marginals. If the Labour candidate was withdrawn from this seat, it would probably make it an even safer Libdem seat.
I too think that the closer call the next election is, the better for the Lib Dems - both February 1974 and 1992 showed that in a supposedly tight race they can prosper on the “plague on both your houses” vote, although of course in both those elections the outgoing government was Tory. As I have yet to tire of saying, there’s never before been a period of 12 (or so) straight years of Labour government so the next election is decidedly terra incognita for all parties.
I was interested in the earlier discussion of “local” vs “national” issues as salient in constituency campaigns - I daresay I wouldn’t be alone here in expressing an interest in pollsters’ exploring the question, with reference to building up a picutre of which kind of voter is more swayed by which kind of issue.
[108] Absolutely Dan, and I also get a sense of much better organization in Cowley Street too, which might be why the freshers fairs were so much better this year:
[79] Anecdotal evidence, but at the local Uni there were three times the number of Lib Dem students joining this year than last year.
99. Because the country is still only looking to bue or red for government. At this moment and time there is seen to be a genuine contest between the Tories & Labour. Even in 2005, no one believed the Tories were going to make it. Add to that alot of people are tired of Labour and the reality is, if they want Labour out they are not necessarily going to vote Lib Dem unless its clear they are the only people who can kick a Labour incumbent out in particular seat and even then, point 2 below may well negate that gain. By that logic:
1. The Tories are liable to come out better than the Lib Dems in 3 way marginals held by Labour and those seats where they are the main opposition to a Lib Dem incumbent.
2. The fact that the Tories are very likely to be very much in with a chance of winning will l motivate many Labour voters who have defected to the Lib Dems
I’ve always held the view that many (perhaps most) Labour left protest votes that went to the LD’s (and Respect) will go back to Labour if there is a threat of a Tory win. Equally many Tory voters that have went Lib Dem over recent elections will find their way to the Tories under Cameron.
I am very aware there are multiple ways of looking at this, multiple theories and many sophisticated equations but at some point you have to hang yoru hat on a particular outcome and mine is based on the a belief that the British voting public as a whole take a comparatively broad and general view. Whilst tactical voting exists, it is just that, tactical, it isnt going to make the strategic shift that gets parties in or out of power. Whilst I am aware of the likes of Baxter I don’t buy that either.
It’s possible the Lib Dem national vote won’t go down too dramatically but their seat count will go down a fair bit.
101. Jack the above comment is my point about the source of the squeeze. Whether the battle is red/yellow ot blue/yellow, the yellow is likely to come off worst next GE the way things are going.
111 Have just checked and the Beith majorities were Nov - 57, Feb -443 and Oct - 73. Just think of the bar charts !!
105 For Father of the House possibilites you may find this wikipedia page useful - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Newprogressive/Members_of_Parliament_by_seniority
118 yokel , you are making a fundamental error in thinking that voters who voted Labour in 1997 and 2001 but voted LibDem in 2005 for whatever reason are natural Labour left protest voters . Many of them will not have voted Labour prior to 1997 even if they were old enough to have voted in previous elections . Voters today view themselves as much less attached to a particular party than they were even 20 years ago and the non Conservative/Labour vote has continued to grow to around 30% today .
111. Jack, there’s Patrick Cormack, Ken Clarke, Kaufman, Prescott, Strang, Meacher and Skinner…any others?
[118] Actually what evidence there is seems to show the exact opposite- the fall in the Con-Lab total vote is a very consistent trend, so in fact it is just as likely that the Lib Dems get a stronger campaign boost than normal. As Jack says to keep the bu**ers honest.
What do people think about the theory (advanced by LD’s like Hemming) that an emerging Green vote damages the Ld’s more than others.
And expanding this further,if ‘others’ is increasing doesnt this reduce the LD protest vote as much as the con and lab vote?
Interesting programme on BBC Scotland tonight. I wonder if nationalism, devolution and independence will make the top 10.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/scotland/history/scotlandshistory/
118 - you’re making the same incorrect assumption many Tories did in the run up to 1997. Then the story was that many Lib Dems will flock back to the Tories to stop a Labour win and other (left inclined Lib Dems) will want to back the incoming Labour government.
It didn’t happen - the Tory vote stayed flatlined and Labour (in general) won against the Tories where they were second and the Lib Dems won where they were.
The other factor to bear in mind is that we have not reached the point (despite much Tory wishful thinking) that the voters had with the Tories in about 1993/94 - then the hatred was so great there was only going to be one outcome. Now although the government is unpopular it doesn’t (at least to me) have any of the general visceral hatred that the Tories experienced - so there won’t be the overiding aim of voters ‘to get the bastards out’. It doesn’t mean Labour won’t lose seats and votes though.
118. Oh dear Yokel you have committed the cardinal sin of suggesting the Lib Dems will not win more and more seats at every general election…hence the hail of withering responses from our Yellow friends…
Re 107 jon, yes, it is benedictmpwhite at gmail daht com
(there is also a link on my blog)
[127] Oh my dear wag- are you the same kind of Conservative who doesn’t understand percentages (like Bob Spink) and has to resort to sneering when Lib Dems stand up for themselves?
85. “What kills a PPC is if the council base disappears completely and with it the local organization and all the activist base.”
Doesn’t appear to affect Labour Ministers though - Ruth Kelly and Phil Woolas have hardly a councillor between them, and local parties at war internally.
126. “you’re making the same incorrect assumption many Tories did in the run up to 1997.” Sorry Dan but that assumption proved to be correct in 92″ when the election was going to be a lot closer. I don’t think that many honest tories thought they were going to do anything but lose and lose badly in 97, I think the sheer scale was a shock to everyone tory or not.
No political party has a god given right to just automatically improve their GE results simple by turning up and not being Labour or conservative.
130. I think for the Libdems (who usually don’t get much national media attention in some parts of the year), a strong local base is more important than for the “big 2″.
118 “at some point you have to hang yoru hat on a particular outcome ”
But there is no hurry. As things stand, anything is possible. My guess is that Labour will be in a lead in the polls when Blair is gone, but not enough to risk a GE. The big unkwnowns are what will happen to the economy, and in what sort of state will the army get out of Iraq (flotilla of small boats, perhaps?)
Economy being a disaster ought to be better for the Tories (if they get rid of Osbourne). Iraq being an absolute disaster ought to be better for the Lib Dems.
One of the interesting points in between is how To$$er et al will cope with a sustained period behind in the polls (which might not happen of course, but is likely).
85.130. What if the PPC has no council base to start with (or a very limited base?) I find it easier to galvanise my 5 councillors and potential councillors than say the headache of dealing with a ‘ruling’ group.
103 PTB - I think it was a combination of those things as well as the Kennedy factor. He really was extremely popular with the Great British Public.
108 - Remember that three/four years is a long, long time in politics. Cameron and Brown might already be yesterday’s figures by then. Anything really is possible…
112 - Surely the effort of fielding a candidate does cost? They usually engage in some form of leafletting, which costs Central Office.
113 - To suggest that the student vote has disappeared with Kennedy isn’t wishful thinking on my part, but was based on what I’d witnessed. I’m glad to be corrected.
Re: Father of the House. After Tapsell, won’t it go to Clarke? I remember reading that MPs are sworn in in alphabetical order but I may, of course, be wrong.
re 133. Peter - ANY Labour lead is sufficient for the party to win an overall majority in a General Election. They would even just squeeze a majority out of a 35-35 outcome. Brown might surprise us all and go for his own mandate but I cannot see him risking what he has striven for for so long - being PM.
Billy Ruffian - Lib Dems don’t have ‘Central Office’ in the same way as the other 2 parties but even our (rough) equivalent doesn’t fund literature in no hope seats; in fact it doesn’t tend to fund literature at all - that’s virtually all locally-funded.
I’ve been chatting a lot to the national chair of LDYS and he hasn’t spotted any signs of Charles’ departure affecting the student vote - one way or the other. But it is true (as others have pointed out) that we have had very successful freshers’ fayres up & down the country.
BTW your writing style is familiar - did you post on here under another name before (genuine question)?
129. Pot and Kettle spring to mind, dear boy -
‘Sneering- Yeah, OK- Guilty as charged- I do tend to sneer at boneheads.
Snobbish?- Naaw- perhaps unpleasantly arrogant- I think boneheads should be punished for their stupidity.’
by Cicero August 23rd, 2006 at 11:36 am
136 Mike, perhaps I was not clear.
Brown’s problem will be that he does not know what will happen to a putative opinion poll lead over the course of a campaign. If he found himself with a lead of 15% next September I think he would be tempted to have a go. Assuming it is more like 6% I think he will hang on, for the reason you give.
But what would be the impact on the Tories if they found themselves behind again? would they say “s*d this for a game of soldiers, let’s go back to being nasty”?
I think amongst all the heat and light over this thread my main point is that flucuations in % and seats for Libs/Alliance/Lib Dems are not as important as some believe :
Feb 74 - 19.3% - 14 seats.
Oct 74 - 18.3% - 13 seats.
Jun 79 - 13.8% - 11 seats.
Jun 83 - 25.4% - 23 seats.
Jun 87 - 22.6% - 22 seats.
May 93 - 17.8% - 20 seats.
May 97 - 16.8% - 46 seats.
Jun 01 - 18.3% - 53 seats.
May 05 - 22.1% - 62 seats.
The advance of the third party has more to do with careful targetting of resources and a steady build up of regional and localized support over 3 decades. Hardly an overnight success and precious little to do with Baxteresque swings !!
138 How do boneheads like yourself punish themselves - self flagellation ?
140. Election in 92 not 93 !
132 - Certainly truw that a strong organisational base in a seat is important for Lib Dem success. It obviously helps if there is a positive perception nationally as well.
Some posters on this thread have been a bit simplistic though. A good organisation is down to a lot more than just winning council seats. There are numerous constituencies where the Lib Dems dominate the council seats but but do not run effective General Election campaigns and vice versa.
137 - I’d always assumed that literature designed to win seats was funded by those in control of the party rather than at local levels. Ahh well, one learns something new every day!
I used to post on here a fair bit from around the time of the Tory leadership election but reverted to just being a reader of the words of others at some point earlier this year. I just fancied a less dull name than last time
122. Ian Paisley, unless he’s standing down.
131 - ‘No political party has a god given right to just automatically improve their GE results simple by turning up and not being Labour or conservative. ‘
Couldn’t agree more. And with at least three years to the election a lot of assumptions (on all sides) that are being promoted on here will prove wrong.