Was Paddy Ashdown behind the Guardian story?
June 20th, 2007
Could the ex-LD leader be being courted by Gordon?
After a morning of denials, rumours, claim and counter-claims there is a suggestion that the person behind the Guardian story is the former leader, Paddy Ashdown, who was involved in the 1997 linkage between the Lib Dems and Labour.
According to the blog by the Daily Mail’s Ben Brogan “Westminster rumour has it that it came from a briefing by Lord Ashdown to Alan Rusbridger, the Guardian editor, which explains the “staff reporter” byline.”
There was also the statement that no “Lib Dem MPs” would be joining Brown which left open the question as to whether a peer might be in the offing.
Given that Ashdown is relatively independent and has time on his hands now his Bosnian role has come to an end this would seem to be entirely feasible. Will it happen? That’s hard to say but Ashdown did try awfully hard in the late 1990s to build a relationship between his party and Blair but found it difficult carrying his troops with him. Maybe this time he could make his own decision without having to worry too much about his party?
If it happened it would be a great coup for Brown.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
Can you get odds for Paddy as Foreign Secretary? (This is a betting site after all!)
And not necessarily a disaster for the Lib Dems, providing that Ashdown remains a Lib Dem!
It would show that Lib Dems can be taken seriously as politicians.
As a Lib Dem, I may not object to this, depending on the role given.
I posted this on the last thread at 145, reposting here
“Newsflash! Benedict Brogan’s fantastic blog has the scoop!
“staff reporter” = higher than Sir Michael, actually the paper’s editor
source: Paddy Pantsdown
Brown: holds LibDems in contempt
result: LibDems in Westminster furious at Ming!
“Gordon deal with Ming? Don’t hold your breath
The Guardian’s odd story this morning has caused ructions among the Lib Dems. Westminster rumour has it that it came from a briefing by Lord Ashdown to Alan Rusbridger, the Guardian editor, which explains the “staff reporter” byline. It’s true that the Chancellor wants to find ways of bringing people from outside the Labour family into front-line roles, but with the Lib Dems tanking in the polls, he’s under no pressure to reach out to the yellow peril. The truth is he’s fairly contemptuous of the Lib Dems and what they stand for. This story says far more about growing doubts inside the party about Sir Ming’s leadership.”
http://broganblog.dailymail.co.uk/2007/06/gordon_deal_wit.html
by Test June 20th, 2007 at 12:52 pm”
Mike S should also note that Brogan’s story says LibDem MPOs not happy with Ming (it was Ming who had these meetings) and Gordon Brown contemptuous of the LibDems.
What does the future hold for Ming? Already his party are down 5% in the polls (8% in YouGov). He stares at a loss of a third to a half of MPs if an election is called without a pact with Labour.
In opposition he has little say in the big decisions of Govt and he is not getting any younger. If Ashdown was appointed to “Minister for electoral reform”, then the opportunity to leave a legacy that almost guaranteed 100+ LD MPs would arise.
Ming of course views this also from Scottish and not Southern/Western eyes where I believe most of his MPs are based.
Off-topic - can I use the site’s new wagers page to offer money against Andrea finishing his dissertation on time?
Yes this new angle to the story (and let’s be honest this is just another unconfirmed rumour) doesn’t entirely explain why the meeting was between Gordon and Ming, does it?
Menzies Campbell has now gone on record as saying meetings have taken place:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,2107270,00.html?gusrc=rss&feed=11
The question about who joins the cabinet is completely secondary to the principle that the LD’s and Labour party are working together again.
I am not in the least surprised, but I can think of a lot of past Lib Dem voters who will be.
The point that I shall be making at every opportunity in my constituency from now on is that there is proof positive that the Liberal Democrats will prop up Labour; and that if you want a change at the next election you shouldn’t vote LD.
I am tempted to write Ming a thank-you note.
4. If they do this the Lib Dems might as well roll over and die.
Gordon will not give them electoral reform in return - dream on. Too many Labour MPs wouldn’t allow it, cause they’d lose their seats.
And when Lib Dems are seen as Labour in all but name, their centre right support will melt away to the Tories.
They will be like the male angler fish, theoretically a seperate organism, but actually a tiny and embarrassing appendage umbilically attached to the bloated and much larger female.
The Lib Dems are headed for a big can of whup-a$$ at the next election anyway; if they do this they might teeter on the edge of oblivion.
Paddy A was taken in by Blair in 96/97 and it seems quite likely he haas been taken in by Brown. He is ambitious and another old politician who sees his last chance at the oval table slipping away, perhaps?
oh bgger i just snapped the plastic fork that came with my lunch
6. Marcus, on the previous thread you said (I may paraphrase slightly) “these rumours are true - no denial has been issued”.
Since when Ed Davey and Ming have said:
“For the record, there is no prospect of any Liberal Democrat joining the Brown Government”
Now you are backtracking into:
“The question about who joins the cabinet is completely secondary to the principle that the LD’s and Labour party are working together again.”
So you accept the rumour was not true about LDs joining the Cabinet, but feel that politicians meeting other politicians equates to a cross-party conspiracy?
How are the LDs propping up Labour? By Ming buying Gordo a pint?
Julian H didn’t hey actually say there is no prospect of a LibDem MP joining the cabinet?
No problem for thıs Lib Dem if Paddy civilizes the cabinet by joinıng Nick Palmer there.
I have every confidence in Andrea - just no money to wager!
7 - more A-Level standard attempts to write dancing prose.
Paddy Ashdown in government would be difficult for the LDs. Imagine that Labour do something that the LDs go up in arms about, ID cards or another bloody war. What does Ming do? Ask Paddy to resign? And if he won’t? Expel him?
11. Likely, yes. I copied and pasted from LibDemVoice:
http://www.libdemvoice.org/ed-davey-slams-guardian-smears-913.html
Not sure if they’ve misquoted.
11 Hey=he=Brown. Sorry, very sloppy writing.
6 Conservative campaign literature is well known for bearing little or no relationship to truth .
Please let all this be true…
Even some of it. Even the lingering rumour or idea is enough to cause damage.
It’ll be a biggest bloodbath we’ve ever seen in being able to take the Lib Dems apart in my neck of the woods if any Labour / Lib Dem love-in occurs.
Here’s hoping.
Matt.
Julian H; I am not backtracking at all. On the other thread Matthew JG Partridge was saying the story wasn’t true, it was.
The evidence is that Menzies Campbell is sympathetic to Labour and hostile to the Conservatives and therefore the idea that the Lib dems are open minded to *whoever* comes forward with a programme they can sign up to in a hung parliament situation, (Kennedys fall-back position), has been blown out of the water for as long as Ming is leader.
13. Stonch, given that you are a monotonous nitwit obsessed with real ale, WHO ALSO HAS A BEARD, it ill behoves you to make accusations of cliche.
Otherwise, I agree with about the ID cards thing. It would be impossible. This Guardian story is a canard.
16: Yes, the Tories are getting tiresome on this, probably because of the whole “save Dave” thing and needing a distraction. It reminds me a lot of the David Laws “defection” saga…
{Osbourne, in corridor): Hi David, wanna defect?
{Laws, walking past}: Eh? No.
{Tory spinner, gleefully}: See - negotiations took place!
I must send Paddy a thank you email
4. Sean T said “Gordon will not give them electoral reform in return - dream on. Too many Labour MPs wouldn’t allow it, cause they’d lose their seats.”
According to plausible calculations, if AV had been in operation on the notional boundaries in 2005 Labour would have gained another 27 seats from the Tories, losing only 4 to the LibDems by comparison. For most shares of the vote a similar pattern applies.
20 - Ah but does he also wear an Arran jumper and listen to folk music? Now that truly would be a cliche.
6 - Mark do you remember you’re spin about how the Scottish Tories were all set to prop up Labour at Holyrood? Seeing as that proved to be untrue perhaps you’re not in the best position to lecture Marcus?
16. Jeez, Mark; steady.
Remind me. Who was it who advised their party activists “be wicked, act shamelessly, … stir endlessly”, and “don’t be afraid to exaggerate”?
The party who invented the dodgy bar chart.
” Conservative campaign literature is well known for bearing little or no relationship to truth . ”
Exsqueeze me…
Surely you actually mean:-
Lib Dem campaign literature is well know for bearing little or no relationship to truth.
It’s a quantifyable fact that the Lib Dems lie - not just present things in a way favourable to thier political stand point.
I say it because I can prove it.
Matt.
19 - seanT I like one thing about you - you always respond in kind without a hint of pomposity.
23 - I do neither! However, I am not averse to folk music and doubtless as I age I will become drawn in by it’s charms and association with beeriness.
24 - Marcus doesn’t this fact tell you something: on every thread you participate in, you end up desperately defending something you said earlier, claiming not to backtrack, but in fact doing just that. Switch on brain before talking.
“but found it difficult carrying his troops with him”
Ever the master of understatement Mike!
25 No Matt , I meant what exactly what I put .
23 Yes Max , I agree that I was mistaken , I believed what Scottish Conservatives were saying was true - silly me .
Will a Lib Dem win in Ealing Southall quieten the Ming rubbishers here?
Surprisingly lıttle comment on PB. Suppose everyone at the bookıes followıng Peters tips!
22 Rod
It seems that Brown could give the LDs prop representation in the form of AV and maintain a Labour majority. How likely is a hung parliament under AV and would the LDs prefer a different system ?
21 - I’m not sure you should do that yet Benedict. Roger suspects this story is the work of Andy Coulson and when has Roger ever been wrong about anything?
In saying that though I’m sure my colleagues in the neighbouring constituency will be very happy with whoever is responsible for this story.
Re 9, Stonch, Oops…
Re 32, Max,
The Alternative Vote system is a big improvement over FPTP, because at least it allows you to vote for the party that you actually prefer, and then choose the least-disliked alternatives in your second and lower preferences, i.e. no more tactical voting.
But AV sure as hell ain’t proportional, i.e. a party with say 35% of first preferences might still end up with 60% of the seats. No idea whether the LDs would still accept it, as a stepping stone towards a much more proporitonal STV with multi-member constituencies.
OT. Following the thread a few days back, if anyone still fancies a punt on a GE this year, Hills are currently offering 14/1. I put a small amount on with Ladbrokes at 16/1 a month or so back, but their price has since dropped to 5/1!
I’m not sure the former Grand Vizier, Plenipotentiary Extraordinary, Principal Envoy and Ambassador Maximus would have much to do with a mere Cabinet post unless it carried SBS powers to “deal” with lesser beings in the government !! …. now there’s an idea !!
…………………
BTW thanks to Kevin, John O and Benedict for your assistance against “Test” on the previous thread.
However ….. I was mortally wounded by “Test’s” shattering and mordant badinage and in mortification of my sins and in supplication to Stewart Jackson, I have decided to become the founding member of SALIVATE :
Stewart Arse Licking Indisputably Valuable After Tory Enemas
OT. Why “Team Hillary” is difficult to beat :
http://www.observer.com/2007/hillary-s-mean-machine-scores-hit
Well I call that a handsome post Jack W! your best acronym yet. I have clearly misjudged you
What does your ARRSE say about LD prospects in the forthcoming by-election?
37. Post of the day.
On his World Servıce talks last week Paddy thought that getting the economy goıng (a la Germany post war and Bosnia under his highness) was more important than democracy.
Sounds if Brown might need hım in the next few years. See B of E split down the middle re interest rates: Governor wanted to stop economy dead, luckily out voted!
The problem with AV for the Lib Dems is that they would become a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Labour Party.
Personally, I think AV combines all the faults of First Past the Post with the faults of PR.
OT. A RCP take on PM elect Brown :
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/06/meet_britains_new_prime_minist.html
………………………….
39 Test. I see you come from the Baldrick school of irony :
“It’s like goldy and bronzy, only it’s made of iron.”
………………..
On Ealing Southall - Too much R there. Labour to be shat upon from a great height. Boundary changes help Labour considerably, so not as good a prospect for the yellow peril as might first appear.
Jack W but isn’t it fought under the old boundaries… given the time of the death. Anyone know?
31. It depends what you mean by “likely.” If you model all plausible outcomes in shares of the votes for all parties, the “area” comprising hung parliaments is about the same (perhaps even slightly larger) under AV as under FPTP.
However, if you are using as your starting point the last election(notional or otherwise) or current opinion polls, then Labour and LDs benefit significantly at the expense of the Tories, reducing dramatically the prospect of a HP.
While last year I did an analysis of HP under FPTP and found it to be highly likely, and that’s still the case, a few weeks ago I cautioned those who might take a punt on a HP to consider what would happen if GB went for AV.
The original Crosby Thesis(I) is valid so long as FPTP remains.
Crosby Thesis(II) is that GB probably will go for AV….thus nullifying Crosby Thesis(I).
43 Jack W , Ealing Southall byelection will be fought on old boundaries .
But Ealıng Southall - just down the road from Notting Hill - surely Cameron wıll walk it!
“Boundary changes help Labour considerably, so not as good a prospect for the yellow peril as might first appear.”
I had thought the new boundary’s hadn’t yet passed all the formal hurdles. This was one reason behind speculation about a snap general election.
A few quick calculations show that if AV was introduced it would seriously handicap the Tories, depending on how the all critical LD second preferences split. The “handicap” is the increase in their lead the Tories would requre to achieve the same result under AV as they would under FPTP.
AV would effectively lock the Tories out of power for the forseeable future.
Which would lead logically to the following LibDem strategy….
Extract AV from Labour now (Labour really don’t have much choice if they want a majority next time)
Extract STV from the Tories in the future (the Tories won’t have much choice if it’s their only hope of a sniff of power again)
44/46 Test/Mark S. “Well done Wilson … I wondered who’d spot that one first !”
http://www.bfi.org.uk/features/tv/100/images/titlepics/13.jpg
On thread: I always thought the rumour had been that Brown was amongst those who opposed Blair’s wish to bring the Lib Dems into coalition anyway, despite the size of the 1997 landslide. It doesn’t say much for his confidence in the Labour MPs he might put into Cabinet, if he’s looking further afield (though I wouldn’t blame him if he did - cupboard looks a bit bare to me).
Apologies for awful grammar and spelling. Also for “ganging up” on poor Jack W…
RodCrosby but you assume that voting patterns would stay as they do now. I believe that a change in the voting system would alter the balance of voting substantially.
One thing would happen under AV; there would be more independent candidates standing.
At our directly elected mayoral contest (under AV) we had thirteen candidates in all.
46,47. By-elections are always fought on the existing boundaries.
The Tories came within 9.0% of victory in the 1992 general election. To be on course for victory at the next election Cameron’s Tories should be running Labour very close here in a by-election, but of course they won’t, and we’ll hear the usual excuses about “unrepresentative”, etc….
51/51 Timothy/Rod. So I’ve heard !!!
53 - How can anyone doubt how representative by-elections are. After all the Lib Dems excellent performance in Bromley has been mirrored in all opinion polls and council elections since.
RodCrosby: given the interest in AV recently it would be great if you could do one of your features on possible outcomes - preferably compared to the one you did on FPTP. If you could do some kind of AV swingometer which allowed the distribution of LD preferences between Lab and Con it would be better. Please?
52. I don’t make too many assumptions. My swingometer allows many scenarios to be modelled. I personally think that if AV was introduced, most voters would go to the polls initially with the same mindset as they have now(whatever that is!). It would take a few elections for the vagaries and nuances to become apparent to the relatively few who would try to take advantage of them. I also don’t see why there would be a plethora of candidates. The chances of winning for minor candidates would not increase, nor would the chance of saving a deposit really.
What would increase would be the number of recounts. Not only would you have the existing number of recounts, but all manner of recounts for critical 2nd/3rd/4th place, etc., and existing winners with huge “majorities” but less than 51% of the vote would also be subject to recounts.
The statement also includes in the possibility of Sir Ming crossing the floor, and yes as you say Peers too. Lord Ming even?
The statement also includes in the possibility of Sir Ming crossing the floor, and yes as you say Peers too. Lord Ming even?
Which would lead logically to the following LibDem strategy….
Extract AV from Labour now (Labour really don’t have much choice if they want a majority next time)
Extract STV from the Tories in the future (the Tories won’t have much choice if it’s their only hope of a sniff of power again)
Or, even more likely, extract AV+ from the Tories next time. I think this is what should be aimed for.
My view is that Labour would do less well than they might anticipate under AV, because it would be regarded as a gerrymander.
61. By you Sean, quite possibly. But the great mass of people would buy the line that it was a wonderful “electoral reform”, I suspect.
**** DEFECTION ALERT **** DEFECTION ALERT **** DEFECTION ALERT ****
I’ve just tried to call Rik about this shattering defection !! However Rik’s at Royal Ascot watching his nag run in the “The Old SDP Rump Stakes”
Sadly I hear if the horse doesn’t do the business it’ll be rump steaks all round !!
http://conservativehome.blogs.com/torydiary/2007/06/cameron_meets_n.html
56. I’m putting the finishing touches to the AV-Swingometer now. It also shows standard FPTP outcomes and differences between them, both nationally and for individual seats. And yes, you can model outcomes for all permutations of 2nd preferences. You will need Excel to run it…. I will write something up for a guest slot, and include the Spreadsheet…
Many thanks Rod.
62 No I doubt it. Compulsory postal voting was billed as a great reform in 2004, but many people accepted the argument that it was designed to shore up the Labour vote. Overall, it didn’t help Labour in the way that Labour strategists had anticipated.
Changing the electoral system to AV would serve no other purpose than to maximise Labour’s number of seats (potentially), and many people would see it in that light.
Alan Rusbridger is of course the son-in-law to Lib Dem Peer Lord Mackie of Benshie.
Jack does that mean that Cameron has moved so far to the left that he is now attracting North Korean Comunists into the Tory party?
Sean - actually, pretty much every party other than the Tories would benefit. So that should mean that 68% would approve and only 32% would disapprove.
57. I broadly agree with you Rod.
What we found in the mayoral campaign though was that quite a lot of voters were confused by the concept of second preferences and the Lib dems did very well to educate their supporters not to use their second vote at all.
It would be very interesting to see your model and I hope Mike gives you a guest spot.
By the way there is zero interest in giving any ground on the electoral system from the Conservative high command and I don’t think that will ever change, even if we lose.
69 I don’t see how minor parties would benefit. But in any case, would supporters of minor parties, and/or Lib Dems, want to see Labour winning perhaps 60% of the seats on 35% of the vote? With such an outcome, it would be pretty well irrelevant whether the Lib Dems won 62 or 80 seats.
But I do have a better idea. Why not just disenfranchise Conservative voters? That would achieve your aim far more simply and effectively than mucking around with the electoral system.
68 Icarus. Indeed. My spies also advise me that Cameron will shortly remove to Highgate via sledge dogs and there issue an economic policy statement from atop the tomb of Karl Marx.
….Conservative high command….
Are you havıng a laugh Marcus?
14 - I copied and pasted Ed’s comments from his contribution to The Tall’s earlier thread (http://www.libdemvoice.org/lib-dems-to-join-brown-cabinet-911.html). Ed seems clear no Lib Dem will be joining, not just “no Lib Dem MP”.
I does make me smile how very very excited some Conservatives are at the prospect of Lib Dems joining a Brown government. Are these the same Conservatives that were excited about the prospect of “Orange Bookers” joining the Cameron front bench??
Politico journos just want something to write about. As a Lib Dem It’s quite flattering to be ‘wanted’ by both sides!
O/T. Alan Johnson’s DL price is nosediving on Betfair. Last matched at 1.30. Go Postie!
damn, I was looking at 1.8 with Ladbrokes this morning and thinking that could be a good offer. Now 1.4! that might still be worth having.
76 - Because Guido has tipped him.
New thread - Deputy Leader prediction competition
hmm…
still that is better than nothing!
Only one of Peter’s horses came in for me today.
61 - I think Sean is spot on. Brown doesn’t have the political capital to spend to go for major electoral reform. It would look really, really bad if he did, even if it was a genuine attempt to improve the system.
Re 81, Stonch, if you keep agreeing with us Conservatives we will have to send you a membership pack
82 - Benedict, that’s very kind of you, but my approach to a Tory government will never be much better than grudging tolerance…
Times story online confirming Guardian one
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article1961314.ece
“The offer was made by Mr Brown at a meeting with Sir Menzies Campbell on Monday evening, in the Chancellor’s office and arranged at his request.
Sources close to Mr Brown said the Lib Dem leader undertook to go away and discuss the plan with his advisers, including his close friend Lord Kirkwood of Kirkhope and chief of staff Ed Davey.
Labour MPs suspect it was leaked deliberately by other Lib Dems in attempt to kill the move. Despite the leaking of his proposal, however, allies of Mr Brown insisted that he remained committed to a broader approach to government.”
what would be the internal consequences for the libs if ashdown and carlile accepted government jobs? personally, i’d welcome both into the government, even if they remain lib dems. both very impressive people.
86 I think many LibDems do not want to be seen to give Brown credibility while he is in favour of anti civil liberties measures like ID cards and 90 day detention without trial
Certainly the Times and also Ben Brogan of the Mail are stating there were major ructions in the LD parliamentary party when this was announced.
Just on Ealing Southall since others have already commented. On paper it looks a tad easier than Dunfermline and West Fife, but how soon can they hold it. Labour will surely think speed is of the essence both to capitalise on any good publicity from GB’s arrival and because as both big parties know to their cost a long lead in time simply means more time for the Lib Dem banwagon to gather further steam. I think the Lib Dems should win though. Can’t see it happening before September
53. Utter ***** Demographic change in London is so quick you might as well say the Tories have to win Livepool Toxteth because they won it in 1955 or Labour Norfolk South
42 “Too much R there” ?
O/T
Interesting little snippet of news: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/6220644.stm
Jumping ship?
90. Clearing the decks so he has the option but no decision before February at the earliest when the likely nominees are know to see if he has an opening.
Lib Dem Voice is saying Labour have been canvassing Ealing Southall for the past twoo weeks. Disgusting.
Iain Dale is saying Nick Clegg had a face like thunder. Ok pinch of salt with source, but were the Orange Bookers not kept in the loop. Oh dear to be a fly on the wall at the first Ming Nick chat post Guardian Story
89. While the Tories did do quite well here once, and 1992 isn’t that long ago, the real point I was making - as I’ve made before - is that for Cameron to be on course for anything like a majority, he should be running Labour quite close in a by-election here. Say a 10% swing from the 2005 position (modest by by-election standards) leading to a Lab majority over Con of about 3500. It won’t happen of course. I’d put money on the Tory vote collapsing instead…..
Why should this happen and some people still think Dave’s on course for victory?
I have a theory. People still hate the Tories, but are too polite to say so to Pollsters. A reverse “spiral of silence”, anyone?
Rod LOL, rofl. Sorry but you really dp believe your own PR! By elections are meaningless. The Tories always tank in them. They have not taken a seat from another party in a by-election for 20 years! Meanwhile the LibDems have a consistent record of acing by-elections then tanking at the GE. Look at Dunfermline. Amazing LibDem victory, real Labour thrashing. What happens afterwards? Wretched slide in the polls and over 250 losses to the Tories at the local elections.
By-elections are simply meaningless for predicting GE results and the Tories are nowhere in Ealing Southall.
92. Have you lived in London. Demographic change there is on steroids. This isn’t Norfolk. Anyone can tell you an area in London can change radically in two years never mind sixteen. Ealing Southall has a far different population profile to 1991 I assure you.
There are two other factors. First the current Lib Dems are light years improved organisationally from their predecessors and have one of the best political strategists in his generation in Rennard. In a General Election they are on the whole though outgunned. In a BY Election they are on a equal footing. The days when Lab were the automatic By Election to Cons or vice versa are over
Plus people today are far more tactically aware. Once the press/ local knowledg/ or Lib Dems convince them who’s the likeliest to kick out the Party they most want they all flock to them. Lab to Lib is a Con seat, or Cons to Libs in Lab seat. I still say let’s wait until say a Kent seat came up. If the Tories couldn’t perform well there I’d say your case was irrefutable. Until then it must be debated well
92. Have you ever met a Tory-hater who’s afraid to voice their opinion?
Very sad to hear the news of Piara Khabra’s death.
Just to pick up on a point made by Mark Senior on a previous thread regarding the council by-election in Cleveland ward on 19th July. This ward is not in the current Southall constituency, it is entirely within Ealing North on both old and new boundaries. The areas lost by Ealing Southall in the boundary review are Walpole and Ealing Common wards and around 1,800 voters in Ealing Broadway (to Ealing Central and Acton) plus around 2,100 in Greenford Broadway (to Ealing North).
Labour will want to get the byelection held asap, I would guess they will try to get it held in July. Convention is that byelections are not called until after the funeral of the sitting MP assuming this is in the next few days it could be called next week allowing for an election in late July. Although there is no PPC currently selected there are a number of possible candidates who have been campaigning for selection ( Piara Khabra had announced his retirement ) of whom Sonika Nirwal might be seen as favorite
96 Thanks Kevin L re Cleveland , someone else pointed that out to me except that it appears a small part of Cleveland which came from the old pre 2002 Hobbayne ward is in the old Ealing Southall boundaries .
93 Some Conservatives on Anthony Well’s site are not so pessimistic . They say that the Conservatives ran Labour close in the 2006 Council Elections based on the old boundaries .
On the story of the day , no not the damp squib of Conservative NHS policy , do we now know where the Guardian got their story from - was it
a ) Gordon Brown or someone close to him
b ) Paddy Ashdown
c ) upset LibDem MP’s as suggested by the Times .
“I still say let’s wait until say a Kent seat came up”
I was not aware any Kent MPs about to pop their clogs.
O/T Betfair has 3 interesting markets on Sports Personality of the Year. Winner, Winner without Hamilton (who will surely win), and top 3.
This means that you can effectively bet on who you think will be second and third. I’d say young Master Panesar looks very tempting at 12 (11-1) to make the top 3. Should Andrew Murray be injured for Wimbledon, he is unlikely to make the top 3. 3.45 looks very poor value.
100. I’m trying to give an area wher Rod’s thesis maybe indisputably tested.
99. A By-Election is a wildly different kettle of fish. On paper to me it looks easier than Dunfermline an West Fife. Although you never take a By Election on Paper
Totally OT, pure drama at the Under 21 Euros, England vs Netherlands …penalty shootout where everyone has taken penalties and they are going round again.
Still going….its about 13 each at the mo.
By the way how did PtPs pointers fare at Ascot?
O/T again. You know all the allegations about Cameron’s cabinet being full of Etonians, when there are only two.
I believe there are 3 alumni of Reading School (a state grammar) in his Shadow Cabinet, the most for any school - Mark Field, Oliver Heald, Damian Green (is Green still in the Shadow Cabinet, or was he sacked by Cameron?)
Even the Lib Dems have one E(s)tonian!
98. Mark, I think that is a sliver of unpopulated land between the GWR mainline and the Greenford branch line. Whatever, it was worth pointing out the council by-election as it should be a real ding-dong between Lib Dem and Cons, with the winner gaining momentum.
93. Strange that! The Tories were winning by-elections left, right and centre the last time(s) they were on course to move from Opposition to Government…. Ashfield, Workington, Stechford, Walsall, Walthamstow, Leicester, Oldham, and Glasgow Pollok to name a few….
The reasonable conclusion? The Tories will lose the next election by a country mile…..
Even dear old Kinnock managed a few BIG by-election gains - Fulham, Vale of Glam and Mid-Staffs without getting anywhere near Downing Street, yet we are supposed to believe the Tories can flatline at diddly-squat (or go backwards even) and yet somehow zoom to over 100 gains in a couple of years time…
As for Kent? Your argument states the obvious truth. The Tories are already reduced to effectively regional party status - not serious contenders for government….
Just watching PMQ’s (via Sky News’ round up) and Blair was pretty much skewered over prisons, it really is indefensible and he looked as though he knew it. I’m sure that he’ll want to go out with something better next week.
Was it wise for Ming to be wearing, on this of all days. a red tie?
106. The Tories have won GEs very handily whilst losing every by-election in sight. Like I said haven’t taken a seat off an opposing party for 20 years yet took the GEs following.
And you make the argument for me don’t you Rod? Kinnock managed to win by-elections very well, how did that work out for him at Generals?
Or better yet Rod, how has your party fared since winning Dunfermline? Happy with that 14% in the polls and the loss of 250 plus seats to the Tories in the local elections are you?
We *lead* in the polls even during Brown’s honeymoon - and have done since Cameron was elected. We are overwhelmingly the victors in local politics. What planet are you on?
108 I thought you had lost the last 3 GEs .
“14% in the polls” - how many polls?
Miliband on Sky News via ‘Second Life’, can’t tell the difference myself…..
106 Sorry but reading that turns me into a Will L lookalike - the regional party is Labour, being squashed back into urban centres, the North East and Cardiff/Glasgow. Not at all party representative of the country at large - handing over from Blair and his North East sycophants to Brown and his Scots central valley ones.
Talking of Kent, I believe the Tory results there were a bit disappointing. Am I right?
106. See what I said at 94 regarding Lib Dems, Demographic change and tacrical voting. The days when the Lib Dems were forgotten about in By -Elections as well as General Elections are not current. Its barmy to compare the two eras, you might as well compare the multi digital satellit era of our time with the four channel Britain of that age. There have been massive social, economic and cultural changes. I certainly think the overwhelming consensus here is that the next Elections will be close. Who wins, who knows. But I think you’re in a tiny minority if you think as of now that anyone would walk it
112. Not Cardiff. Central has already gone. North is certain to follow. And expect significant Majority reductions in the other two. Glasgow it ain’t
Re 103, Yokel only one came in for me, and regrettably it was not the 20/1 shot!
110 fair enough but of the last 5 polls only one had you above 20%.
If by elections matter like Rod suggests, what the hell happened after Dunfermline?
109. I think his point was they did pretty well between 1982 and say 1993 i.e more than a decade without pinching By Elections gains. Any case how can you compare the Pre Chris Rennard By Election era with now
Libs did pretty well in byelections in the early and mid 70s, also in times following Orpington 1962.
After Dunfermline, Test 117, there has been only one byelection (Bromley) which the Lib Dems very nearly won.
OT the betfair DL market has gone completely mad, on a tip from Guido earlier the money ( not much volume ) got behind Johnson and his price has dropped quite considerably which makes some sense. Some strange person is offering to lay john cruddas at 500. This is the sort of price suitable for backing Elvis to appear at the London Palladium on Sunday night not offering against one of six to win an election who has an outside chance of winning. Even if someone has seen the results ( very unlikely as the counts are being carried out by different organisations ) offering to lay Cruddas aint the way to make money. Benn has drifted right out too but oddly Harman is pretty much where she has been for some time now.
So, let me get this right…
I can’t vote against Labour by voting LibDem?!?
So, I am left with… Voting Tory or Abstaining?!?
THANKS MONG CAMPBELL!
Oh dear, the point being Governments routinely lose by-elections(yet may be re-elected), and Oppositions that are on course for victory routinely win by-elections, some Oppositions win by-elections but don’t go on to win Government, but Oppositions that don’t win by-elections NEVER EVER EVER EVER go on to form a Government. Clear?
By the way, if anyone wants a play with the AV-Swingometer you can download it here.
http://www.titanictown.plus.com/AVswingometer.rar
You’ll have to unzip it, it expands to about 5 Meg….
It’s not quite finished yet, only the Console and Results Worksheets are currently active. (Ignore the Chart)
122 Penny loose in brain methinks
what is interesting about this debate on byelections is the fact that everyone seems to have set aside any belief that the tories might win or even come close to winning in Southall. I agree with all the comments about winning a byelection doesnt in itself mean an awful lot, isnt chris rennard good etc etc. However one of the clear indicators that the labour party was on the road to recovery was when it started to win byelections in the late 1980s. Winning Mid Staffs or Langbaugh didnt equal guaranteed success at the next general election but it did show that the Labour party was again a serious contender. If the tory party cannot put up a good showing in this election, which as it is in London will get far more coverage than if it were in some non metropolitan spot, it will say something about their ability to be a contender, a poor showing will only add to the pressure on Dave Cameron.
123 RodCrosby. You are top man! Thanks!
Gladstone now happy as pig in brown stuff.
Had a bit of a play. First conclusion is that the introduction of AV would help take the sting out of the WLQ, provided that the Tory lead isn’t too big. However, things could soon get nasty, once the Tory lead starts to go past 3%.
“These are deep waters, Watson”
123. Just as Labour Govts NEVER EVER EVER served two consecutive full terms until 2001 or NEVER EVER EVER won thre General Elections in a row until 2005. Sorry you’ll have to do better than that. We are in a different world. There are now sixty Lib Dem MPs, a far stronger factor than it ever was in the era you cite when PLP meetings could be held in London Cabs. Yes there always similarities, but there are vast differences as well. I still think Labour can win. But can they also be beaten I think yes. I think that is a reasonable view
124. Re-paste for your view:
25. Fascinating thread. Particularly this bit saying the Lib Dems can only really gain ex Tory seats from Labour. Any views:
The point I was making is perhaps wider- The seats discussed here are iceberg seats if you like- LD now where there used pre 97 to be a hugh tory vote. But look at Streatham, Lewisham West, Birmingham Perry Barr, etc and you will see what I mean. The LDs are now the main challenger in urban seats where the Tories were the challengers. I agree the Tories will probably win in some seats like Carlisle or Tooting to make up the failure in seats like this. But where is that sectional vote that makes up for the loss of the urban middle classes?
by Punter June 18th, 2007 at 10:01 pm
Brown’s Mansion House speech = two words, ‘rod’ and ‘back’ (now make appropriate sentence).
Quite astoundingly inept in its lack of understanding of the problems that have been created over the last few decades.
128 Yes there is a lot of truth in the point you are making . There are too many seats the Conservatives won in 1992 where they are not in contention now and too few where they did not win in 1992 where they are .
127. How is this “different world” beneficial to the Tories? You are really just saying the Tories have never before been in such deep doo-doo, yet this “new paradigm” somehow makes it easier for them to suspend the Laws of Political Gravity….
Logic, Captain?
128 - You mean in seats like Putney!
129 ukpaul. Do you have a link to the text of the speech, please? This sounds intriguing.
116. I’ve been having a look through and I can see they’ve not been running quite up to hopes. I think Peter is there tomorrow, nothing like presence on the ground.
124. Your wish to belittle me with insults or make me sad? I dont understand. Actually I’m not even sure if it was meant to be an insult. Please explain. You are not clear.
Lonely posters (sitting in their pyjamas, eating a ready meal for one) aside…
Previously I have voted LibDem to try and kick Labour out. There is no way I would vote Tory with their tired old Anti-Immigration, Defence and Law/Order! So what am I left with?
Seems to me, the anti-Labour vote has nowhere to go. Abstain or vote Tory. Seems like no choice at all!
131. Duh. It also makes it tougher for Labour as well. I’m simply saying there isd a third force neither Labour nor Tories can ignore now. Labour didn’t have to worry about Liberals in the early Sixties anymore than Tories had to in the late seventies. You have cited the past as an ifallible guide to the future, I have cited something which was cited then as infallible and the turned out to be fallible.
130. No the point someonewas making that I thought interesting was can the Lib Dems can only take Labour Seats that were previously execepting exceptional 83-87 seats for a moment at some brief point Tory in their past. I was asking your view
133 - Sorry, no, I was watching it live.
Yes, the NEVER EVER argument is a bit silly. What about Sean Fear’s stats on local cllr numbers and GE victories? Under that historical precedent we almost have to win!
you can gerrymander stats any way you like but all the by-election victories of the last whatever have done the LDs no good at all at GE time.
Rod you are right though about the Tories never before having been in such deep do=do. Cameron has been so good and our locals so outstanding that it’s easy to forget we have less MPs than Michael Foot did, given that, largest party status will be a triumph (and it will happen with an outside chance of an absolute majority)
Quick note to Nick Palmer. Thanks for saying nice things about me on the other thread - and no LD Lloyd wasn’t me, and I have no idea what s/he was on about. I love a good conspiracy as much as every other Tom, Dick or Will L, but usually prefer the slightly nuts ones about Lizards running the world through the Masons - they’re much funnier
Re 134, Yokel, but how is he going to get us his tips?
138 Test “…all the by-election victories of the last whatever have done the LDs no good at all at GE time.”
A bit harsh! No - the LibDems have not swept to power in a landslide victory, but on the other hand it has enabled many talented people to get into Parliament and make an impression on the local voters, which then enable them to hold the seat at the next General Election. Along with the strategy of building local supporters via council elections, it has meant a remarkable rise in their status as potential third-party kingmakers.
141 - Exactly, the by election successes of the Alliance period onwards have led to greater numbers of seats being held at the next election. This being because it is easier for lib dems to hang onto seats already won rather than having to win when resources are spread thinly.
If only the campaigns of by elections could be transposed to general elections but that doesn’t happen. This also means that by elections are a very poor way of predicting anything - precedents are useless, they should come with a massive health warning.
140. Oh come onnn…haven’t you done psychic channelling?
138 Test 1987 Conservatives 375 MP’s Alliance/LibDems 17 MP’s
2005 Conservatives 199 MP’s LibDems 62 + Dun 63 MP’s
Re 143, Yokel, no, but I presume you can and pass on the tips?
Completely OT, but interesting article by the Economist:
http://www.economist.com/research/articlesBySubject/displaystory.cfm?subjectid=7294978&story_id=9354590
144 answer 136
Is it worth pointing out that not only did Tony Blair invite members of other parties to do things but got several senior Conservatives to do so?
Penny Dropt - there’s always the Green Party which has the additional attraction of ensuring that you don’t vote for a successful candidate so don’t have to feel any responsibility for the alarming things they do after they get elected (as happens in all parties)…
UkPaul
Alan Beith continues as a senior Lib Dem as a byelection winner from the early 70s. Others from the 60s and 70s helped build the credibility and size of our party as it marched back to political importance again. Without the byelection winning process over nearly 50 years (since Torrington) it is arguable that we would still have the 6 MPs cuddling up in a call box. And we would now be contemplating Gordon Brown’s offer in the same way as (I believe) Churchill made a work-together with-the-Tories offer in the early 50s. At that point acceptance would have literally meant the end of the Liberals. This time the LDs would lose a reputation for sturdy independence, but would survive, and be able to make claims of national UK achievements.
On the labour DL. Sharp price movements today. Not sure why. Betfair make it:
2/7 Johnson
5/1 Benn (did hit 8/1 not long ago)
7/1 Harman
29/1 Cruddas
100+/1 the field.
Increasingly someone’s calling this. Not me. But I hope they’re right.
151 It’s not me either, St John, but I too hope they’re right. It has however given me the opportunity to cover my remaining exposure - Benn - very cheap. I can relax and enjoy the count now.
Btw, can you (or Benedict) ring me on my mobile tomorrow? I’ll be at Ascot and unable to post. I wouldn’t want PB to miss my tips.
They can only get better.
Re 152, Peter, how about I ring you now so you have my mobile, and then you can ring in when you have them, or, what time should I ring you?
OK, I know it’s late, but maybe Rik W might appreciate this…
David Acock, Conservative Borough Councillor for Eastfield Ward, Northampton from 2003 to 2007, has left the Tories to join the Lib Dems. Mr Acock said: “Only the Lib Dems have show consistent principles in opposing ID cards from the start, the war in Iraq and in defending our civil liberties.”
The Guardian has gone again on the news of the meeting between Brown and Campbell in today’s edition, adding a few more details and some internal reaction from Libdem’s. Seems that another meeting had been planned, but this looks unlikely to take place now.
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/libdems/story/0,,2107834,00.html
A couple of strong comments from unnamed sources which might indicate that Campbell might face real difficulties over this.
“The disclosures in yesterday’s Guardian threw the Lib Dems into turmoil with one frontbencher describing it as a “hand grenade” which had destabilised the party.”
“One cabinet minister predicted yesterday’s revelations would hasten the Liberal Democrat leader’s departure.”
Re 155 ChrisD, I was about to blog that! But yes I can see this causing strife that will roll for a while, especially after the Harrogate speech. Many LD’s will be sharpening their knives. (Quite rightly too IMO)
JackW, do you have any information about a list of Jacobite rebels who came from the Kirkmichael parish area in Banffshire? I read somewhere that such a list exists with about 150 names on it.
157. ChrisD. I’ll have a rummage through my library. Although it will take a little time to gather the info.
One book might be especially useful - The Jacobites of Aberdeenshire and Banffshire.
Would you prefer I e-mail the info ??
158.JackW, I have heard that the list might be in the Gordon family papers. It would be great if you could email me, will email Mike Smithson and ask him to pass on my address if he does not mind?
I just missed out on the chance to buy a copy of the “The Jacobites of Aberdeenshire and Banffshire.
159 ChrisD. Fine.
The book is pretty expensive and appears in several different publisher bindings that some obsessives collect !!
I’m unaware if the Gordon family papers are available for public study. If not a letter to the curator might work. Another source is Aberdeen University, which hold