Is it wise for Darling to tell lies about the result?
May 5th, 2007
Why spin something that’s so easy to check?
I’ve just heard cabinet minister Alistair Darling talking about the Scottish results on Radio 4’s Today Programme and at least six times he claimed that Labour and the SNP ended up with the same number of votes. If that’s the line that the spinners are taking then it’s a lie and, I would suggest very dangerous.
He was not challenged on the programme about the numbers.
It annoys me intensely when politicians of all parties tell porkies about things which are so simple to check and I would suggest that this spin on what happened is highly dangerous. In my book Darling’s reputation has moved down a couple of notches.
Maybe he’s getting in training to be Brown’s successor as Chancellor which he is second favourite in the betting to get!
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
Maybe he knows what was on the rejected ballot papers?
Well, they’re desperate.
This will be a replay of last spring as Tory gains percolate into the public’s mind over the next few days.
With gains in the North, South west and East Midlands we are the national party now.
The Telegraph and the Times today both say that Shirley Bowes (Conservative, Oop North somewhere) is the first candidate to get zero votes since 1918 and 1860 respectively. Don’t their election journalists do blogging and webbing and forumchatting like the rest of us normal people? They obviously haven’t heard about the “Liberal” Party in Liverpool a year ago.
Dr. Goebbels: Well Hugh, its been a mixed bag of results. A lot of hard working Germans have lost their seats in the south but the Democrats have made absolutely no progress, no breakthrough in the north. Yes, its disappointing to learn we have just lost Berlin (Central) but it is not a reflection on the leadership of Adolf, nor on Karl. We will listen and learn and use this as a springboard for the next contest.
What happened in Bedford Mike? BBC says still NOC but doesn’t give the seats. Cant find anything about your Mayor.
Missing Jack’s sideways look on all of this!!
‘He was not challenged on the programme about the numbers’
On the Today programme? what a surprise.
re 5. What happened in Bedford indeed? We had those new fangled electronic counting machines and the story that was going round was that “ballot papers did not quite fit and each had to be trimmed manually to get them through”. I have no idea whether that is true or not.
With the mayoral result on AV and the council election on FPTP we have all the makings here of a Scottish fiasco.
From the results I’ve got we held onto my ward which was Tory in 2004 and 2005 and gained one other with no losses.
We await the mayoral result.
Chancellor will be Straw. Brown can’t have Scots in three of 4 positions even less so after Thursday. And Straw will have exacted his own price for not challenging Brown.
Exact shares of votes in Wales.
Any sign of Valley Boy, has he been dragged awawy by the men in white coats still screaminr, “But Tamsin has won!”
Reminds you of Saddams spin doctor who claimed they were winning the war as you could see the yanks advancing in the background…
Or George Bush when he said ‘Mission Accomplished’.
Or Alistair Campbell whenever he opened his bilge filled trap.
Labour got battered last night, moreover they deserved to get battered. You’d like to hope that the new administration will bring something different, but Darlings utterance doesn’t bode well.
When R&T produced their Newsnight prediction - based on by-elections in the last 6 months in a three way fight - I was highly suspect of the results they achieved. Not because of the maths but the political geography and local circumstances. Over that period the weekly by-election results had been relatively poor for the Conservativess compared to the previous period. But they were repeatedly in the wrong place for us. Often caused by resignations - people dont like uneccsary election - or in places where the Conservatioves have aweak loacal organisation. On top of that our people dont travel as well as LDs for by-elections. Of course you doubt it yourself - there can not be an explanation for each poor result can there? That is why I was convinced that May 3 would be a good night and that R&T were wrong. Maths is one thing - knowing the local strenghts and factors makes it a whole lot easier.
Re: Scotland. This comment from Darling could well be redundant anyway. It is designed to argue that a Lib/Lab Govt would be legitimate. The problem: Lib/Lab don’t have a combined majority of the seats.
Anyone think the Tories will offer to support Salmond in the First Minister vote, but will not join a Govt that advocates independence? (and, possibly, the local income tax). So an SNP govt, but no independence referendum.
Or would they prefer a hugely unpopular, and getting more so, Lib/Lab govt seen as ignoring the message of the electorate, but at the risk of dramatically increasing SNP support as a by-product?
By the way, the French Prediction competition thread (Round 2) has closed to new posts, although the competition deadline is 9pm tonight.
If it’s possible to add my prediction:
Sarkozy: 53.32%
Royale: 48.68%
Highest score: 68.85%
Andy try again. That’s over 100%. This is not Scotland!
The truth is that a large section of the public are easily duped by politicians. If this wasn’t the case how would Labour have got into power in the first place?
The worst politicians for telling porkies are the Libdems. In Edinburgh North their campaign was based on a poll chart that they said showed that only the Libdems could beat Labour. (What they failed to do was use the right election as comparison.) The result suggests that enough of the electorate were influenced by this to stop the SNP winning the seat from Labour.
Still Tone thought it a good base to build from. I’m sure Adolf said the same after Stalingrad I think.
re 8. I should add that “Big Tall Tim” - who was the first person ever to post a comment on this site won his contest. Tim, it will be recalled, got badly beaten up a couple of weeks ago while out campaigning and ended up in hospital.
12 An SNP led minority government potentially more stable than a minority Lab/Lib Dem one - I can see Conservatives, SNP & Greens voting against more that Lab/Lib Dem administration proposed than a SNP one because with SNP there’s more “give them a chance” than a failed Lab/Lib Dem administration would have.
Greens and Conservatives are the Kingmakers and both would be better served out of government with option on vetoing, in concert with one of Labour or SNP, anything proposed by either option.
Assumes that Margot takes presiding officer role!
Darling does have the right name to carry the title Comical Ali.
An election again in Scotland within 6 months?
I cannot see a deal without ministerial cars (do they have them in Scotland?) for the smaller coalition partners will hold.
After Darling Cancelled all the English tram schemes while he was minister of Transport despite tens of millions already being spent on preparatory works (Edinburghs Tram Schemes are of course going ahead) his stock could not sink any lower among the many many supporters of these vital public transport solutions.
This will not be forgotten at the next election and Cameron was very wise to unequivically support Trams as an environmentally sound form of transportation. (It as of course the Conservatives, not Labour, who authorised and built the current English Tram systems in Manchester, Sheffield and Croydon and took Nottingham beyond the point of no return.)
This Liverpool/Manchester/Tories comment repeated ad nauseam in all parts of the media to-day seems to me a pretty vacuous one if you interpret it in practical terms (I know it’s just a soundbite really). The Tories lost their last parliamentary seats in these cities 20 years ago,winning that election by 102. They won the following election as well. If the point is that they have n’t got any councillors ie footsoldiers in these cities to try to win seats at general elections , there are loads of other places where they stand a realistic chance of winning seats where it would be worthwhile putting the effort in.
Gotta go out - my daughter’s showing off the flat she’s just bought - but I did see on the BBC website that those Councils, of whatever party, which had introduced fortnightly refuse collections, were the most likely to change hands. As the much-missed one might say, it was a rubbish election
Darling was about right. Not the biggest sin of a politician to make a ’rounding error’ in favour of his own side.
The big stories are whether grandpa Ming can be forced out (probably not). In the interests of his party should he resign? If the answer is not obvious, you are not trying….
Similarly, should GB allow his name to go forward as leader of his party? The interests oh his own party and his own are different. Which will he choose? Another tough one.
14,
D’oh!
Meant “Royale, 46.68%”
Oops.
In summary:
Sarkozy: 53.32%
Royale: 46.68%
Highest score: 68.85%
3
She got zero votes in Tony Blair’s ward in Sedgfield - this was the real story and was well covered in last night’s Look north programme.
Listening to Radio Scotland’s Newsweek programme this morning the reporter at the Highland’s count at Inverness was giving his report on the campaign from ‘The reporter’s notebook’ a feature of the programme. What he said was interesting in that when the List vote was finally tallied for Highlands and Island the initial seat allocation given by the Returning Officer was Labour 4 SNP Nil. It does help to have a Mathematic Professor as one of your agents at the count, who said ‘rubbish’ or words to that effect and suggest they re-calculate. They did, apologised for their mistake and it was 3 Labour and 2 SNP. So if it had not been challanged things may have not turned out they way they did.
26 Presumably as a paper candidate she didn’t live in the war and neither did her proposers. Better to have left it uncontested as Labour did in thousands of seats.
11 - “On top of that our people dont travel as well as LDs for by-elections.”
That’s because they’re all pensioners
28
She might have been a paper candidate, but she was NOT a happy person….
wasn’t “darling” a character in blackadder? he was an arsehole in that too!!
Strange line in the Sun today. They want to choose the winner but dare not take the plunge?
“Cameron has two years to build on Thursday night’s success and prove he is up to being Prime Minister.
He will be fighting Gordon Brown, a brilliant and experienced operator who knows he must pull rabbits out of his own hat to persuade voters to give Labour a fourth chance.
Brown remains a formidable force. He emerged as the moral victor in Scotland despite the narrow Nationalist win.”
How, I wonder is Brown a ‘moral victor’ and where is the evidence of his being and ‘brilliant operator’? After two election disasters in a row in his own back yard? If he can’t do the business in Scotland how will he manage in Middle England?
And as for the Daily mirror, it more like the Beano today with this first line of its elections story:
“DAVID Cameron tried to put a brave face on Tory election results yesterday …..”
26 if you think that was the real story, I won’t stop you enjoying your moment. Maybe it helps in soothing the pain of a thrashing at the polls.
28 - don’t proposers have to live in the actual ward? You do get a few results where candidates get fewer votes than their 10 nominations. (I know candidates themselves just have to live or work in the council area as a whole.)
Mike, it annoys me too, doubly so when they can spin lies that cost good people seats, that are not so easy to check.
10 Jez- of course Labour deserve to get battered- 10 years of economic prosperity, low unemployment and inflation, extra investment in schools, police and hospitals, total crime down. They deserve to be punished.
And with economic growth expected to continue, people in the UK getting more prosporous, low unemployment and inflation, with continued investment in our public services, and standards rising, and the architect of our stable economic growth due to be PM, they are surely facing electoral meltdown. The public have had enough of this sheer incompetence.
You Tories are all getting sillier and more exciteable by the day. The British public collectively have far more common sense than the Tories . They do like to give governments mandates during electoral cycles, but during general elections will vote in their own interests, and unless the economy declines into doom and gloom (much hoped by partisan wealthy Tories) will probably stick with Labour.
8&27.Mike & Marcia, these stories do not surprise me as much as they should. Is there a record for the longest it has taken to declare a result?
Considering the problems that they had getting some of the ballot boxes to the Highland count how can Mike’s Mayoral election result still not be in?
Mike though the Bedford web site doesn’t seem to give results - their link doesn’t work, results now on the BBC. Conservatives gain 2 and Lib Dem gain 1 - both from others. Mayor re-elected but no figures that I can find.
Mike- have to say your lead today shows a bit of OCD anti Labour traits. A bit of rounding- that is all.
Look at Andy Cooke- his Sego and Sarkozy predictions somehow do not tally. Easily done comrade Smithson.
36.Considering the leaked memo from Labour on how to spin the election results some of the suggestions are sounding hilarious now when you look at the political landscape. It has not stopped them from trotting out the line though.
Listening to sky news paper review last night was the worst example, the editor of the New Statesman seemed to imply that the tories only did well in the South and that the Conservatives could win a GE with just that part of the country!
Labour lost twice as many seats in England as the Lib Dems - both had similar numbers at the start. Labour lost seats in Wales and Scotland. Labour have had a bad election -perhaps they should change their leader!
One silver lining in the electoral chaos clouds, at least they’ll have to go back to trusted methods rather than have the postal voting/electronic counting farce. having seen them bring the whole system into disrepute and put the whole result in question that idea of ‘progress’ is as dead as a very dead dodo.
It is, isn’t it? They aren’t aren’t so arrogant and out of touch to try it again?
Are they?
So we’re arguing about deciimal points! This is taking nerdery beyond the call of duty!
Incidentally I just got a very funny email from Scotland. The mood seems to be that those too stupid to read the voting papers-which I understand were simple enough for most ten year old-have called into question Scottish education!! They’re saying it’s brought shame on the nation!!
It would be good to have Jack back. We need his humour badly
Re 17, Mike,thanks for the info and well done Tim.
Witan listen carefully to the Daily Mirror. Kevin Maguire, their political editor, looks destined for Downing Street as Gordon Brown’s spin doctor.
Re 29, Stonch, our activists are getting younger as our voters in Mid Sussex, what is more the LD’s councilors are all getting old! (Well, most are anyway)
44 - Perhaps you should speek to a few more people before deciding what the public mood in Scotland is. I can’t speak for other Scottish posters but a number of people I’ve spoken to are really pissed off and not one of them has patronised those who got it wrong by blaming it on stupidity.
The system was made needlesly complex, not enough information was given before hand and they should never have held council and parliament elections on the same day.
46 - Judging by his regular comments on Radio 5 you would have thought he’d started allready.
46 blue moon Maguire has said he does not want the job…….. Apparently Brown wants a Frank Luntz rater than a Campbell.
44.”I understand were simple enough for most ten year old-have called into question Scottish education!!”
That is right Roger, you bring all these voting changes in at once. Put a cross here, a number there and then throw a new counting system into the mix. One observer yesterday noted that they were giving training on the job during the night as to how to interpret rejected papers.
As for blaming the education system, well I can’t say that I am impressed with standards these days but Labours “statistics” are impressive.
As I pointed out on an earlier thread just to get 100,000 spoilt ballot papers into perspective. “Wonder what would happen if the UK GE result ever came down to 100,000 votes in a bunch of key marginals, nay could not happen could it??????”
BBC says total Cons gain 882 now. Any chance of 900? Who is yet to declare?
Incedently the Conservative party now has more councils in the North of England than Labour, more councilors in the North West than Labour and more MSP’s than the Liberal Democrats, twice as many AM’s as the LD’s.
We are the largest group in Birmingham and Brighton and Hove, we have taken Plymouth Labour and Torbay (well done Marcus and team).
No doubt some fools will still spin the lie that the Conservatives are the party of the south or south east!
48.Max, I have to say that all anyone can talk about is the voting fiasco.
Phone yesterday in Scotland was interesting. First person stopped on the street in Aberdeen said they had already realised that they voted incorrectly, and the 2nd did not receive their postal ballot but had to help a neighbour fill their one in because it was confusing!!
Re 51, Test, there can’t be any more left can there? I left the count at Mid Sussex at 9.45 PM after what I thought was the longest count in the country!
Isn’t it true that something like 98% of voters got it right? Wouldn’t this suggest that it wasn’t the complexity? Any time anyone has to fill in any kind of a form some will get it wrong. Maybe some don’t speak the language so anything that needs a written explanation will cause problems?
were the Scottish mistakes on the second vote, on the first or on both?
Labour are just simply liars - the SNP win the popular vote in Scotland they are the party the Scots want. In the 2005 GE the Tories narrowly won the popular vote in England but got a Labour government and Labour think this is a mandate for government? Please give England her Parmiament back even if that means independence.
PS who would benefit if the 100000 Scots votes were not spoilt - my gut feeling is the SNP.
53 - Apparently one elderly man filled in his voting paper in front of the officials in the polling station to ensure he was doing it correctly. The whole thing was shambolic.
The worst thing is that it was recommended by the Arbuthnot commission that local elections be held on a seperate day but this wasn’t listened to for purely selfish reasons.
49 On reflection ‘rater’ is probably more accurate than ‘rather’.
The more I hear and read about the Labour operation the more I wonder why this spin about Brown-the-Brilliant-Operator comes from.
Blair won elections: he used Brown as a human shield while the latter’s reputation was high to win an election in 2005 but was Brown really in charge of the campaign after ousting Milburn or did he just think he was?
Brown’s petulance in the Scottish election about forbidding extra powers to the Scottish Parliament if the SNP won also shows a lack of judgement and sensitivity, and the inevitable conceit of someone who now believes his own spin about his powers and skill?
Wasn’t the count stopped in Scotland somewhere.
Well after all the adrenaline - when are the next opinion polls out?
Not sure where Breckland is but from their website:
“Notice regarding Breckland District and Town and Parish Elections
The Council will continue the count for the above elections on Tuesday 8th May at 11am. All ballot papers will be securely stored over the Bank Holiday period. The count will take place at Elizabeth House, Walpole Loke, Dereham, Norfolk NR19 1EE.
The Council apologises for any inconvenience caused to our residents. We would like to thank all of our staff who were involved today for their hard work and support. We would also like to thank the candidates and agents for their patience and support today.
Keith Davis
Chief Executive and Returning Officer
Breckland Council”
re 40 & 44. In the past I have attacked both Tory and Lib Dem politicians for mis-representing numbers. Charles Kennedy, Ming Campbell, David Davis and IDS are all culprits who have been attacked in the same terms on this site. If Cameron does it he will incur my wrath as well.
55 - About 5% of votes were spoiled compared to 0.8% in 2003 and in 1 in 6 constituencies the majority was less than the number of spoiled votes.
Imagine if that was to happen in the next Westminster elections and one party beat the other by 1 seat!
56.Andrea as I understand it the STV system for the locals did not have the same problems as the Holyrood system, but then I think that who ever took the decision to introduce so many changes at once is the culprit.
Although Roger might not think that 2% of the people who actually made the effort to vote not getting their voice heard is a small price to pay and their own fault, me I think it is a bloody shame for democracy. And the concerns and warning about what actually developed on the night were well documented before hand and so those in charge can’t even say use the defence “on hindsight” these problems should have been addressed.
Breckland council had 42 Conservative Councillors and no Lib Dems!
37. Tyson, an impressive list. Don’t forget the minimum wage, tax credits and gay rights reform. A necessary counter-balance to the Conservative euphoria today.
I think that you would agree with me, when I say that the country would be in worse shape now if the Conservatives had been in power these last 10 years. The problem for me is that IMHO the Labour government have been very poor in ABSOLUTE terms. They really are only the “lesser of two evils.”
Don’t be shy to admit to the failures of this administration: Iraq and the mythical “War on Terror”, Europe, Devolution (incredibly badly handled), Pensions, wastage of taxpayers money on consultants/ domes/ olympics /other white elephants, timidity of reform in public services, letting the Right-wingers control the Immigration debate, Sleaze from the “whiter than white” party etc. etc
OK - so John Major’s government was worse, and would probably have carried on being worse. But don’t you find it just a little dispiriting having to defend a party on the basis of “We not very good, but at least we are not as bad as the others”? I do, and I find it very difficult to vote on that negative basis.
As a Labour activist, I think it’s time to go back to giving postal ballots only for those who are away, or infirm. Without the secrecy of the polling booth, there’s just too much scope for pressure or intimidation. I know someone who voted one way when her parents wanted her to vote the other way. In the secrecy of the polling booth (even with her father looking from across the room) she was able to do so. It would have been a different story with a postal vote.
Apart from the stories of imams telling people how to vote in inner cities, what about all those parents in the Home Counties who’ve probably threatened to disinherit their offspring if they don’t vote Conservative?
I would be interested to know what the combined spoilt ballots and figures for those who did not receive their ballot papers in time were?
Oh for the good old days when you just wandered into a polling station and put your cross in one of the boxes, it was old fashioned and simple but it meant that everyone got their say and mistakes were kept to a minimum. You have to hand it to Labour in just 10 years they have managed to undermine and break our confidence in the voting system with their continued meddling of something that was never broken.
Re 61, Icarus, what a c*ck up! I thought 13 hours was long, but two days! What a shambles!
58
‘The worst thing is that it was recommended by the Arbuthnot commission that local elections be held on a seperate day but this wasn’t listened to for purely selfish reasons’.
Presumably the reason for ignoring this advice was Labour thought their were advantages for them with the new shambolic system.
Last year widespread postal vote fraud,this year 100,000 discarded ballots in Scotland,the banana republic is becoming a reality.
Hopefully one of GB’s new eye catching initiatives will be to book UN election monitors to supervise next year’s elections in the UK.
64. Chris, I was looking at Glasgow council results and there were mpre than 200 rejected papers per ward. and the majority was for “Voting for More Than One Candidate”.
Re 65, Icarus, a Lib Dem free zone, fantastic!
Re 67, Richard what about those who have socialist leaning parents who would disown them if they voted Conservative? It works both ways!
Either way it is wrong, and my LD opponents and I agree that postal votes for all is a bad idea!
71.Thanks Andrea, I did not see the figures but was listening to the BBC Scotland coverage of the story which implied there were less problems. Why am I not surprised at the figures you give, remember we could not find any figures for the spoilt ballots in the 2003 locals to compare them after the result on Thursday.
In Craigton ward in Glasgow, once the tories were eliminated (stage 7), just 3 candidates were left in the game: 2 Lab and 1 Solidarity. The Solidarity woman got more transfers from the Tory’s elimination than the Lab candidates
(ok, the majority were not transferable votes)
what annoys me more is interviewers who are so ill prepared that they encourage the politicians to lie.
Andrea as I understand it voters didn’t seem to have trouble ranking the voters in the local elections. The trouble came in the Parliamentary ballots because voters were stupidly given one ballot paper for both votes. There was one side for each vote with the FPTP vote on the left and the list vote on the right. The voter was reminded that he/she had two votes with two arrows pointing to the different sides of the ballot. Then underneath that there was in smaller letters on each side a reminder that it was only one vote on either side. It appears that voters saw the two votes advice and typically voted twice for FPTP candidates without differentiating the order of preference and not at all for the list vote. One of the two votes could have counted if the voter had put 1 or 2 in the box to indicate preference because counting officers were supposed to try to ‘determine the intent of the voter’ but if, for the sake of example, you put a cross against the SNP candidate and one also against the LD candidate both would have to be disregarded because no one could tell which was your preference. Of course any undervote was lost because the list vote side was blank! Some may also have voted twice on both sides and fallen foul of the same problem. There were also complaints that counting staff were inconsistent in allowing or disallowing particular marks in the box. Although you were instructed to put a cross other marks could count if your intention was clear enough. In the old pencil and paper days returning officers would gather together the election agents and go through the dubious ballot papers with them. Usually people were pretty reasonable about it. This time I guess there were so many that all the decisions were being taken arbitrarily by counting staff leading to accusations of bias by some Party supporters.
Aberdeen Central had a re-count (according BBC). Was it the only seat with a recount?
May I take a stab in the dark on the matter of vote share that I freely admit I am no expert on.
The Conservatives have fielded a greater % of candidates than the other 2 parties and relative to their councillor base the LDs have fielded a greater % than Labour.
If the vote share is calculated only in wards where all 3 field a candidate then if Labour retreat to their core areas would they not be artificially inflating their vote share? Likewise the Conservatives maybe diluting their vote share and the LDs vote share is actually slightly better than Labour’s not 1% worse?
Could the real picture be C 42%, Labour 24% and LD 27%?
I agree with what most others say about postal voting, different voting systems, and electronic counting.
Why do some people believe that making something more complex makes it more efficient? Prior to 2000, you needed a good reason to have a postal vote, electoral fraud was miniscule, spoilt ballots were miniscule, and manual counting was quick and efficient. Why change something which is simple, effective, and honest?
As to Scotland, it is obvious that the council elections should have been held on a different day.
77.blue moon, excellent summary of the actual problems. I knew how the system would work on the day, had a look to see how adequate the instructions were in the polling booth and thought them woeful considering the changes and the confusion which could arise.
“There were also complaints that counting staff were inconsistent in allowing or disallowing particular marks in the box.”
Afleitch also tried to point out this inconsistency yesterday and one or two other posters were quick to condemn him for mentioning his concerns!!!!
79 What makes the projected vote share exercise so artificial in this round of elections is that only a minority of the seats actually see contests between all three main parties. Many contests in the Shires are just between two parties, or one party and a minor party, or independent.
Overall figures for gains and losses give a much better picture.
As far as our activist not travelling as much to campaign it is little to do with age and more do with being involved in their local community and not just seeing their political activity as a mission. It is something that they mostly do as part of where they live - not the thing that defines them.
79 very interesting analysis
Take Northamptonshire the LibDems did well but only where they stood - 44 in Northampton, only 15 elsewhere in the whole county. So what gains they had were at the expense of not fighting at all elsewhere and targetting. Tories fought across the county and Labour over most towns at least.
I am sure that our real vote share was above 40%.
Perhaps a cchq boffin is crunching the numbers even now to get actual vote share that can then be translated to notional national.
82.”What makes the projected vote share exercise so artificial in this round of elections is that only a minority of the seats actually see contests between all three main parties”
but the projected figures are made using a sample of wards. I suppose they tried to make it as much representative as possible.
Even if Labour has not contested many wards in Con heartlands, there should be enough Con safe seats with Lab present to use them in a sample.
Some weeks ago Sean Fear asked Lab and LD posters, what would they have voted in straight Con/UKIP contests as there were some of them in areas where Lab (and LD) were weak. Sean, do you know who won them?
Bedford: Mayoral election
Despite what Mike S previously described as “the best leaflet he has ever seen” and an enormous (and expensive) campaign, the LDs lost (again) to an independent. Not for the first time, the good people of the town have shown their spirit of independence. I am sure they will do the same at the next general election. Get your bets on now.
ChrisD I’m not taking sides on whether counting staff were fair or unfair, simply making the point that if there are a lot of dubious ballots the stakes get higher and, almost inevitably, counting agents are under great scrutiny as a result. In a sense every time they made a decision they were casting votes just as much as voters coming to the polls. Even if inconsistent treatment of different papers was inadvertent Party supporters are not necessarily going to give them the benefit of the doubt.
I’ve just checked the BBC website. With 310 councils counted, the tories have more councillors that ALL the other parties plus independents/RA added together:
ie Conservatives: 5215
Everyone Else: 5100
(Libdem 2159, Labour 1857, other 1084)
Since one of the two remaining councils is Warwick where there were boundary changes so all seats were up for election and last time had 14 labour 9 libdems and 6 others I reckon the tories have a chance of 900 gains.
88, fingers crossed!
88. But the Tories don’t have councillors in Liverpool and Manchester and therefore had a terrible night…. *yawn*
Re 40, 62. I also heard this on the Today programme this morning and was suprised that it wasn’t challenged. Mike is right. The SNP won on the share of the vote, no matter how you round the results. And although I’m no fan of the SNP, there is an important symbolism in gaining the greatest share of the vote.
I do agree with Nick Palmer’s earlier comments that the PR system did its job relatively well of the seats reflecting the the share of the vote. However, in terms of the system, that there were so many ’spoilt’ ballot papers is truly appalling. Whether it changed the outcome of the election - perhaps the smaller parties were hurt slightly? perhaps not - is arguable. What is definitely relevent is that a) it will impact of people’s trust in the electoral system and b) that the practicalities of the vote - ie should the region and constituency votes be on the same ballot paper etc. etc. - are important to get right.
If people are confused by the act of voting, and find it hard to cast their ballot, in the long run this can only have a negative effect on turnout. There is a lot to be said by keeping the act of voting as simple as possible - even if this means that the administration of the election, the counting etc, is more complex. I may be alone in this, but I do think the “polling station experience” is important. Did anyone else in Scotland find such small things as being told not to fold your ballot papers, not using ‘traditional’ ballot boxes, somehow symbolically grating?
People shouldn’t be arguing about such things as electoral cock-ups - they should be debating the toss about real issues, pros and cons of local income tax, energy policy etc. etc. etc.
85 in our district council where it was Conservative v UKIP the Cons won 6:1 against UKIP ( candidate also stood for Parish Council and didn’t make it there either - think UKIP against her name on DC election damaged her chances as PC is non-political).
Benedict - Conservatives in charge of the council - count cock up - probably just a coincidence but …..
Just wanted to say thanks very much to Mike and Robert Smithson for all their hard work on this site over the last few days. It has been a tremendously exciting election, particularly in Scotland, enhanced greatly by the betting opportunities and the articles and threads on PBC. I gain far more insights from PBC than BBC nowadays. Uncle Smithson has supplanted Auntie in my book. I’ve no idea how much hard work does go into running this site but I imagine its considerable.
94 Agreed - I have had a great two days - shame we did not get to the recent bash - 2 of us bought tickets but work stopped us going - Great Fun - thanks.
85 It would be handy if the indicatd how they come up with this projection. My understanding (which may be completely wrong) is that they have always based the projection on a sample of wards contested by all three of the big parties.
Dont wait for Warwick. It appears they were another pilot for electronic counting of some sort and it appears to be another grade 1 fiasco.
The count has been suspened until may 8th
See:
http://www.warwickdc.gov.uk/WDC/Council_x2c_+government+and+democracy/Elections/Elections+2007.htm
My take on Mid Sussex has this headline, “Labour keep their head whilst all about them lose their’s!”
You can find it here:
http://aconservatives.blogspot.com/
Wow elections are hard work. Turnout in Mid Sussex was up. What about else where?
(It was down earlier in the day but picked up as the day went on!
94 ditto, the BBC is so left wing,I end up turning off the Telly, they just spout New Labour spin IMHO.
One can imagine a scenario with David Cameron winning the 2010 election with say a majority of 25, the BBC will still be telling us that it’s hardly a sweeping endorsement………
96.”My understanding (which may be completely wrong) is that they have always based the projection on a sample of wards contested by all three of the big parties. ”
That was my assumption too. And that’s why the number of uncontested wards shouldn’t have a great impact (if a safe Con ward hasn’t Lab this time, they can simply pick another safe Con ward with Lab present in its place in the sample)
87.Blue moon, I agree but as I pointed out in an earlier thread one observer felt that the counting staff were being trained on the job. I think that different interpretations of the rejected ballots in different counts would cause party political interpretations to occur.
97. From the Warwick Council website:
“The councils used electronic scanning technology to count ballot papers for their elections, and shared counting venues.
The Department of Constitutional Affairs (DCA) will be looking to the councils to provide further evidence about the benefits of automating the counting process”
Hmm. This is why I say keep voting simple and don’t mess around with it. We’re having postal voting fiascos, electronic counting fiascos, 100,000 ballot papers rejected in Scotland…
Why oh why has this government presided over such chaos, yet taken so little notice? It is damaging democracy in a nation where the simple polling booth and cross on a piece of paper worked fine for generations.
Thanks New Labour.
90. of course this has absolutely nothing to do with conservative voters voting tactically for Libdem to keep out labour. Its well known that Manchester and Salford between them elect enough Labour MPs to form a majority..shurely shome mishtake
Of course the tories winning a record 10 seats in Salford is not worth mentioning.
However, the problem with the BBC’s projections is that, because of the high number of uncontested seats, those where there were three-party battles might well be unrepresentative of the wards as a whole. All in all, I’m not convinced by them.
Breckland District Council
Breckland council will use electronic scanning technology to count ballot papers for its elections.
The use of electronic counting will provide further evidence about the benefits of automating the counting process.
South Bucks council will pilot remote Internet and telephone voting, during the week before polling day and on polling day itself. South Bucks council will also use electronic scanning technology to count ballot papers for its elections, specifically using commercially available scanning hardware.
Stratford and Warwick councils will use electronic scanning technology to count ballot papers for its elections, and will work together to utilise shared counting venues covering the combined area of the two authorities.
The use of electronic counting will provide further evidence about the benefits of automating the counting process, and in particular this pilot scheme will enable us to assess the processes and potential economies of scale available where authorities combine to carry out the counting of ballot papers.
These councils, who have not managed to produce results, were amongst 12 trial councils - sounds like the trial was complete failure - back to the drawing board.
Baxter gives the conservatives a 96 majority on 41/27/26 which seems a little low given that similar figures were obtained in the ‘83 election where they got a 140 majority.
70 john you are not alone in this thought. See this cartoon today.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/index.jhtml;jsessionid=GXOAPSA3RVRXNQFIQMGSFGGAVCBQWIV0
Breckland are also not resuming counting until may 8th
Re my 94. I was referring to the astute political insights and betting opportunities found in Mike’s articles and from some contributors in the threads. I didn’t mean to suggest for a moment that the many “barking” views expressed here by some were more representative of the real world than as reported by Auntie.
Re 96 Sean Fear ”My understanding (which may be completely wrong) is that they have always based the projection on a sample of wards contested by all three of the big parties. ”
Re Andrea “That was my assumption too. And that’s why the number of uncontested wards shouldn’t have a great impact (if a safe Con ward hasn’t Lab this time, they can simply pick another safe Con ward with Lab present in its place in the sample).
Thanks Sean and Andrea for the response.
But if in all the results there are more 3 party contests where the Conservatives are standing paper candidates then the chances of those paper candidates appearing in the sample must increase. Hence why the vote share result is diluted. 10% more candidates could easily dilute vote share by 1%.
“Richard what about those who have socialist leaning parents who would disown them if they voted Conservative?”
Exactly! You hope that their upbringing will lead them to make the right choices……..but before you know it they start going to gymkhanas and getting in with the wrong crowd….and you notice them wearing pleated skirts with blue cardigans and carrying burberry handbags………and going out with boys called Robin…
It’s at this point that the ugly word disinheritance first gets mentioned……..
re 93 & n94. Thanks to all for their supportive comments. elections are when this site comes into its own. I am only sorry that I did not “slim down” the site earlier enough overnight Thursday-Friday. The demand was massive and I had real problems getting in myself to create new threads.
On the next big election night I’m planning to have automated new threads ready to be published at critical times throughout the night.
A big problem on Thursday was that I took some pictures at a polling station in Bedford and published a couple of them. I liked the one of the presiding officer trying to put up his polling station sign in a high wind. Alas the pictures took up a mass of memory which was loaded and being re-loaded time and time again as users were refreshing the pages.
I have not seen the precise figures yet but I’m pretty certain that this was our busiest period ever.
Thanks to everybody for their contributions.
Re 111, Roger,
Oops. Accidentally posted this next door.
BTW, I haven’t seen it mentioned on here, but apparently the man who attacked ballot boxes in Edinburgh with a golf club was John Swinburne, outgoing and unsuccessfully re-elected MSP for the Senior Citizens’ Unity Party…
Puts Afleitch’s hissy fit into perspective…
by Chrisco May 5th, 2007 at 2:05 pm
I find national vote share projections, let alone the spin industry that grows up around them, very suspect.
The basic methodology is more alchemy than statistical science. What is a typical ward in even the very recent past may not be so typical now. So is it really more valid than an uncorrected opinion poll? Surely that is why the pre-election predictions from Plymouth have been wrong in the last two sets of locals?
Additionally, any projection from these local elections would be difficult to validate as it would be almost impossible to account for the influence of really local factors: swimming pool sales for example.
Local elections, even for the Scottish and Welsh parliaments, are environments where people may allow themselves the luxury of voting very differently than they would for the UK parliament. How many Scottish Tories and Trots voted SNP to get Labour out. Would they vote the same way in a GE? Will the swimming poll be as important in a GE?
I doubt very much that the actual as opposed to notional Conservative vote share was much higher than 38% The number of gains masks the disparity in the smaller rural more Conservative areas/wards and the much larger urban wards . For example in the corresponding 2003 elections . in the district councils 5.5 million votes elected nearly 8,000 councillors the actual Conservative vote share was 39.4% .
In the Unitary councils 1.9 million votes elected 1.625 councillors the Conservative vote share being 32.5% and in the Mets 2.6 million votes elected only 836 councillors with a Conservative vote share of 26.0%
The overall Conservative vote share in England was 34.6% in 2003 , I expect it will be 3-4% higher when all the calculations are done this year but not hitting 40% .
107. Witan I believe that there were monitors from other countries observing the new system up here. I am just imagining their reports about how the mighty have fallen when it comes to being able to preside over safe, simple and honest elections.
116. Stellar performance by your lot in Newport East a real one for the future now. Provided MG resists the lure of ministerial cars. How did Mont majority compare to previous occasion.
Tom Watson has announced he is supporting Jon Cruddas for Deputy Leader. I wonder how many people he’ll bring with him. As a Brownite, it will send signal out to the party that Gordon can work with Cruddas and that there’s interest in his ideas on rebuilding the party (if from self-interesed position if nothing else). Did anyone see the piece contrasting Blears with Cruddas on Newsnight last night? I thought it was a little cruel of them to have a woman with a ridiculous north-western accent read out Blears’ letter to the FT.
This weeks Tribune also reported that Johnson, Cruddas and Harman have enough MPs to be assured of being on the ballot paper, but Hain, Benn and Harman are still canvassing for support.
Yesterday The Sun reported that Harriet Harman was taking out a 10k loan to finance her campaign. Not a good sign really and slightly ironic considering her husband’s criticism of the Labour Party’s dependency on loans during the cash for peerage row.
119.”Yesterday The Sun reported that Harriet Harman was taking out a 10k loan to finance her campaign. ”
well, she had just Ken Follett giving her money.
Oh and Guido has laid his hands on Peter Hain’s campaign budget and expenditure and published it. Goodness knows where he gets this stuff from Hain’s team on - they really should sort out the leaks. Looks like Hain has a fair bit of cash though.
Interesting to read the comments about postal voting and electronic counting. I imagine there were some mutterings among all parties about the lateness of the results as well. Picture the next general election if nothing is changed before then, particularly if it’s combined with the Euros. So the polls have closed…what..no election night programme? No, it’s next week.
Just found the election results pages from the Guardian in May 1995.
The Conservatives lost 1,750 seats, Labour gained 1,200, the Lib Dems 300 and the others the rest.
Now that’s what I call a general election winning performance…
123. If you want a majority of 180+ yes. I think Cameron might settle for 25-50 don’t you think.
There’s only a limited amount comparisons with Labour in the 1992 Parliament can tell you. The Conservative collapse of those years, like the Conservative landslides of 1967 and 1968, were highly unusual shifts which can’t be expected every time an Opposition is putting on real steam. The worst news for the Tories is that it’s simply taken ten long years to get to this point.
Remembering that we had discussed the losses that Labour would sustain in Scotland due to the STV system (which would be not reflected in the numbers we’ve been bandying about for the English councils), I’ve had a wander through the results for the Scottish councils - and it’s not as bad as feared for Scottish Labour.
I seem to recall about 150-200 seats loss being mooted as the correct loss for Labour merely moving to STV. Actual figures for Scotland (assuming my arithmetic holds up this afternoon - no-one look at my earlier Seg prediction, please
):
Con: +26
Lab: -135
LD: -11
SNP: +181
Giving overall GB councillor changes (Wales did not have local elections, I believe) of:
Con: +911
Lab: -627
LD: -254
(Awaiting 2 councils results)
Assuming no change to overall councillor numbers (which would probably not be the case, but will give an accurate close-order-of-magnitude estimate) and assuming the two remaining councils were “no change”, total GB councillor numbers (and percentage of all councillors) should be:
Con: 9,393 (43%)
Lab: 5,478 (25%)
LD: 4,454 (20%)
SNP/PC: 549 (3%)
Others: 2,018 (9%)
That’s the largest percentage of GB councillors for the Tories since 1980, the lowest percentage of GB councillors for Labour since before the earliest date on the research paper I’ve got (goes back to 1973) - even worse than 1978 - and the highest PC/SNP percentage ever (albeit rather fortunately rounded up). For the Lib Dems, it’s actually nothing particularly dramatic - still above pre-1995 days and Labour can take some satisfaction that they are still not as low as the lowest Tory shares of 1995/6/7/8 (In 1996, they dipped down to 19% of GB councillors).
Institutional bias might not be the main problem with the BBC. Laziness and inefficiency also play their part.
1. Under-prepared interviewers (see 76, above)
2. Sticking doggedly to predictions throughout the night when it
is obvious they are not working.
3. Using a film clip and commentary, recorded early in the
morning, when Tory gains seem average, in late evening news
without any alteration. All this despite the wealth and
resources of the BBC.
We have final vote shares yet.
123 and 124, The Conservatives went into the 1995 elections, starting from a much higher base than Labour were starting from on May 3rd.
Can’t do in England, until Breckland, Warwick and Stratford are in - which won’t be until Tuesday.
Re. 73, I agree, it’s always wrong, no matter which party is the beneficiary.
What impact will all the chaos have on suggestions by some of Brown’s plan to bring in Alternative Vote for the next General Election? (!)
126. Any idea of the council 1st pref vote shares?
Mark Senior May I ask if you have reviewed your methodology of forecasting local elections from the previous year’s by elections as you forecast 100 LD gains Vs the 300 LD losses that Sky report for the UK.
It does seem that my view stated on here shortly before this election was more correct, that because the LDs were defending half their seats, they just did not have the advantage they have at by elections of concentrating their resources.
But I was wrong on the scale of the LD losses and forecast only -100. I realise I did pay some attention to your writings on the subject.
Part of the problem with this list system is that unless, as the SNP did, you advertise the list vote as being some kind of vote for First Minister, voters tend to view it as of secondary importance. People are always going to consider the ‘x’ they put in the box for the constituency to be their first vote when, in reality, it is their second.
It is early days, but the fairly successful implementation of STV at the council level is a good indicator of its potential for use at Holyrood.
132
Kick it into the long grass where it belongs.
130. Why.
Alan Johnson’s team have issued a letter in the Guardian with 52 peers supporting his bid for deputy.
‘We believe Alan Johnson is that person. Alan is the ideal complement to Gordon Brown. He has significant cabinet-level experience and has proved himself in parliament. From a genuine working-class background, Alan has broad electoral appeal and a strong vision for the future of the party.’
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/labour/story/0,,2073061,00.html
Peers have the same weighting of votes as any other members so this is of limited signifcance. That said some will carry more influence than others. Among the peers is Andrew Adonis one of the most reviled ministers within the party. Not sure that’s a big help to Alan but we’ll see.
135
‘It is early days, but the fairly successful implementation of STV at the council level is a good indicator of its potential for use at Holyrood.’
I thought the concensus was anything but successful.
HF My forecast was not based on council byelection results but on what I thought the Parties would poll in the actual result . I had thought as did many that Labour would poll worse and LibDems better , even so with the actual notional figures given by the BBC for Thursday I would not have forecast 250ish losses . I believe the bulk of those were in a relatively small number of councils which masked what would have been expected to happen from the actual swings that occurred but I am working on analysing the results to find out .
71. Not 200 spoiled in every ward Andrea.
1.5%-2% spoiled ballots on the first run-out of a new and admittedly more complicated voting system is acceptable I would have thought.
141. Chrisco, I said “more than 200 rejected papers per ward”, not in every ward. The Glasgow average should be 214.52 rejected papers per ward. Naturally some have just 130 whilst others have 290 rejected papers
77. blue moon, I am led to believe that most of the double votes went in the list section, which was on the left.
142. But as you always like to remind us Andrea, it is all about the percentages.
The luddites are out in force today
“Technology not properly tested before use by overzealous local government officers” is the story. We are in the learning phase with this technology and not managing it very well. It is a human issue, not the technology.
Personally I hope I never have to go to a voting booth again, as I don’t go to the bank, supermarket,post office for my road tax, travel agent, car and house insurance broker etc etc. All of which require a high level of security. I can use the time for more pleasurable things.
Does anybody think we will not be doing it all electronically in 20 years time. The positive thing to do is get in there and make it work, so that we can gbet voting levels up
139. On the contrary John - the problems were with the Holyrood ballots.
144. Oh, yeah, Chrico, but I was too lazy to work out Glasgow spoiled papers %
In Glasgow in the majority of wards the first 4 (or 3 in 3 members wards) after first preferences were also the ones elected in the end. In very few occasions someone managed to come from the behind.
In Baillieston, I guess SNP told to vote Mason as number 1
Ok thanks Chrisco.
66, Gladstone.
Yes, John Major’s government was a disaster compared to New Labour. I mean, the cones hotline, how could they? Thank God we now have a government whose worst error is just invading a foreign country, illegally, and helping to kill 600,000 people.
Phew!