Could Sedgefield be the big surprise?
July 18th, 2007
- Is everybody taking Blair’s ex-seat for granted?
While all the attention has been on Ealing Southall could Tony Blair’s former seat at Sedgefield be the election that causes the biggest surprise tomorrow?
With a Labour share in 2005 at more than 58 percent this surely should be a certainty. But therein could lie the ingredients for a shock.
For it might be hard to motivate the Labour supporters to go out and vote. At the same time the impression is that the Lib Dems have managed to put the squeeze on the Tory vote and are presenting themselves as the only way of beating Labour.
There is also a long history of partes being punished for needless by elections which have been caused by the sitting MP resigning.
Ming’s party has done this so often even when it appears that there’s a mountain to climb. One factor that might help is what happens to the anti-Iraq war candidate’s vote who last time managed to get into double figures.
I’ve got a small bet on the Lib Dems at 33/1 and also £200 at 6/5 that Labour’s vote share will be less than they got last time.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
Labour 1.03, LD’s 29 on betfair. I would say there seems more value in the second one.
No …. see Jack W’s Pigeon Prediction from previous thread !!
As posted on the previous thread:
Isaby has intelligence from the front line - make of it what you will…
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/politics/littleandlarge/july/firstnewsfromealing.htm
by Baskerville July 18th, 2007 at 6:07 pm
Sorry this would have fitted better on the last thread. No one to my knowledge has explained just why the BNP are not standing in ES. Every week we see local by election results in all sorts of places, multi ethnic or not, with them polling significant numbers.
In my view a white, right wing candidate at ES would have taken at the very least 3 or 4% off the conservative vote (perhaps 1% off labour and the others)ergo the tories will get that much more tomorrow.
By the way I abhor the BNP and all they stand for.
I think that it will depend on turnout, if it’s too low, Labour can have a worry
Short answer No. Your bet on Labour’s share of the vote must be as near a sure fire winner as one gets, though. Congratulations Jack W on a well written, interesting post. Quite persuasive too. Someone mentioned the point about the Sikh independent and of course a really low turnout could just threaten Labour, I would have thought. The Telegraph blogger’s figures suggest Labour and the Tories have an edge of about a couple of hundred votes on the LDs from postal votes( if one takes John Loony’s figures. Not much but worth having…
Does anybody have any idea how many postal voters there were in each constituency?
I would imagine that, since these were “safe” seats and the Labour Party left everybody very little time to organanise postal vote applications, the percentage would be rather low.
And since the Tories are generally pretty good at getting themselves organised, it is probably to be expected that they would get a relatively high percentage of the existing postal votes.
From the end of the last thread :
Ok kiddywinks the news you’ve all been waiting for from Tory pigeon post, other feathered brethren at party HQs, various media outlets, the original horses mouth of Rik W’s nag and the tea lady at GCHQ.
Usual health and wealth warnings apply …. especially returning birdies to their political lofts !!
SEDGEFIELD :
There’s little doubt that this by-election has suffered from having a London by-election on the same day and thus the London based media spotlight has shone far more brightly on a seemingly more interesting contest. Although it is interesting to note that the Sedgefield Betfair market has seen significantly more activity than Ealing albeit both at a pretty low level.
By general consensus Labour’s Phil Wilson is heading for a win in this safe Labour seat. He has run a safe, predictable and some have said dull campaign. Little has been left to chance and the opposition parties have gained little workable traction to mount a vigorious effort, the more so in a short three week campaign.
The Lib Dems have run their usual by-election effort at the seat - lock, socks and sandals. However this effort seems destined to be rewarded not with a win but with a good second place, pushing the Tories into third. By general consent the Lib Dems have run the most inspiring campaign in what must be admitted has been a by-election that has failed to catch the imagination of the electorate. The Lib Dem candidate Gregg Stone seems destined for better things.
The contrast with the efforts of the Tories in Ealing Southall and “up north” is a sight to behold. It would appear that the newly found Conservative progress at by-electioneering doesn’t extend to two in one day, especially if the second seat is north of Watford. Strange as the Tories were second in the seat at the 05 GE. Pride alone would have suggested that Conservatives would have wanted to resist the Lib Dems. However this is not to suggest that Tory candidate, Graham Robb, lacks vigour. Indeed he personally has fought a doughty campaign. Sadly the support effort from CCHQ has been desperate and he can feel mightily let down.
The only other candidate of note has been the BNP’s Andrew Spence who has been making plenty of noise and fury and may surprise with a distant but solid fourth place.
Turnout may be another issue in an uninspired Sedgefield and could help the Lib Dems push closer.
Jack W’s Pigeon Prediction. Labour Win. LibDems second but no cigar.
………………….
EALING SOUTHALL :
The voters of Ealing Southall and neighbouring woodlands can be thankful that PM Brown decided to hold this by-election so quickly and not to delay until the autumn. Surely never have so many forests of leaflets been despatched to the mostly bored and bewildered denizens of this part of London, that is truly a melting pot of multicultural Britain.
There is some nervousness in the Labour camp that having opted for a short campaign that they have been beaten out of the traps firstly by an energized Conservative effort and more recently by the sheer grinding omnipresence of the Renard machine. The Labour cause has not been especially helped by the adoption of a candidate, in Virendra Sharma, who makes a speak your weight machine appear like an accomplished after dinner speaker.
However after a slow start Labour has got its one speed fits all by-election train up and running and certainly has pulled no punches as it attempts to avoid hitting the buffers. Canvass returns both personal and telephone have been “solid, encouraging and better” as the campaigned rolled. Labour HQ are delighted that neither the Lib Dems nor the Conservatives have managed to push the other aside and become the main and highly visible challenger. Nevertheless there is some nervousness that the voters are intent on protest. Protesting not at any issue in particular, as no one single issue has dominated, but that it’s a by-election and that’s what the Britsh do !!
If ever a shrink wanted to see a cross section of the hopeful, the deluded, the optimistic, the energized and the frantic in a political campaign they had to look no further than the Conservative campaign in Ealing. By almost equal measure, every day the Tories have felt they were winning, falling behind the Lib Dems and edging second place ….. and often within the same five minutes.
The Conservatives have lacked for nothing in their effort to have Tony Lit elected and certainly initially they had the momentum. And yet as polling day has drawn closer there appears to be a realization in the Tory camp that victory is slipping from their reach despite a full and enthusiastic effort. Some still hope for a surprise win yet the consensus in CCHQ is that Labour is too entrenched, the Lib Dems too stuborn and that Lit is a little too “Blair camera friendly” to have pulled off what would have been a remarkable win.
To say there is frustration in the Lib Dem camp is to say that the Pope is a religious type of guy !!! it was essential for the Lib Dems that they established themselves quickly as the only alternative to Labour. They have failed to do so, as for once the Tories failed to play dead at a by-election. Additionally there has been much gnashing of teeth at the local profile of Tony Lit - an asset that Rennard would have died for. The Lib Dems own candidate, Nigel Bakhai, has performed well enough but like much of the Lib Dem performance he has failed to catch the mood or tempo required of the usual Lib Dem by-election victories.
There remains a confidence in many of the Lib Dem volunteers that their “under the radar” Dunfermline look-a-like campaign will win the day. However those at the heart of the campaign appear resigned to a “near miss at best”.
Jack W’s Pigeon Prediction : Labour Hold. Runner Up - Who knows !!
by Jack W July 18th, 2007 at 6:04 pm
Tressage I don’t know on what basis but John Loony thought 3000 odd would have been cast in ES ( he had the figure for numbers applied for which was obviously a bit higher). If the Telegraph blogger is right they split Lab 30 Con 30 LD 23.
Anyone want to guess the ES result? I couldnt access the competition spreadsheet. I’ll say
Labour 36%
Tories 29%
LD 27%
9 Even assuming that split is correct you would expect Labour certainly and to a lesser extent the Conservatives to have done rather better with the postal votes .
So, even after the opening of the postal votes, there are still no straws in the wind of any great significance.
Many thanks to Jack for his very interesting comments, though. It seems that both contests are open, to a greater or lesser extent, all depending on the turnout.
I can see why Lib Dem campaigning really annoys the Tories.
“Conservatives can’t win here”
Yeah get over it, when was the last time you won a general election you shower of shite! And the Newcastle and Durham thing is just irrelevant.
Mike, you are right that the Sedgefield campaign is under the radar and could provide a shock. I don’t think it will but it might. I even covered it on my blog.
I suspect what the Northeast needs is any other party than Labour because it would at least energise the debate and get things moving.
As for Southall the clever money seems to say “who knows”
11 In my experience the postal votes tend to favour the most established party in the area. If those figures are correct (and sampling postal votes is a very inexact science at the best of times) then Labour will be extremely worried.
8. Yes thanks Jack W. Hope you enjoy your pigeon pie.
Re Stonch, “I can see why Lib Dem campaigning really annoys the Tories.
“Conservatives can’t win here”
Yeah get over it, when was the last time you won a general election you shower of shite! And the Newcastle and Durham thing is just irrelevant. ”
Many thanks for that Stonch, I’ll have to buy you a beer sometime
BTW, how did the bike buying go?
14 - the North East needs a separatist party!!!!
Given that Labour’s has more members in this constituency than any other in the country you would expect that the lion’s share of postal votes would be there’s. If this is correct then it’s an indication of the scale of the Lit affect that everybody was dismissing.
I know Jonathan Isaby personally and have great respect for him as a journalist - but somebody might have been feeding him a line. On top of that there’s the fact that most of the postal voters probably cast their ballots BEFORE the Lit-Blair picture hit the streets on Sunday.
Re 18, Stonch, actually I think it needs a link up to the motorway network and some serious rail links both freight and passenger.
Re 19, Mike, so on that basis Mike you think what? It is all in play? Conservatives worrying Labour?
Mike How good are the LDs at postal voting? Has the law change meant that it all has to be done locally now which would help them? What do you make of Rennard hanging his hat on specific figures? Is that evidence of desperation to save second place to preserve MC’s leadership or evidence of real confidence in at least a strong second place? What’s your take on it all from an LD perspective?
7 - The pictures of Lit shaking hands with Blair came out after the postal voting (or was it in middle of it), so I would think, that he did better among the postal voters than among those who will cast their vote in Thursday.
As I said yesterday, if Sedgefield moved like neighbouring Hartlepool did in the 2004 by-election, the LibDems would win by 300 votes. And Hartlepool was a lot less of a seismic movement than Hodge Hill, Brent East, or Leicester South….
All to play for I am sure.
Will we know the results tomorrow night or will it be Friday morning?
Test. Friday in the wee hours surely although you usually get good indications about midnight or so as hints of the outcome get broadcast. Of course there could be recounts either for first or second place….
Chris Rennard on Sedgefield:
“My analysis is that turnout in the traditional Labour areas is likely to be very, very low. In the areas which should be more Liberal Democrat / Tory (a surprisingly large part of the constituency), we are clearly winning the tactical argument. I also think that we are picking up the vote that went to anti-Iraq war campaigner Reg Keys in 2005.”
And from the last thread, Chris Rennard on both byelections:
“As the campaigns move to the crucial closing stages, it is clear that the Conservatives are in trouble and Labour are in danger.
We have made a very big effort, so thank you to everyone who has already been, sent a donation or done telephoning.
Finishing strongly in Sedgefield
In Sedgefield, we are becoming stronger challengers every day. Greg and his team have been fighting a fantastic campaign. We need as much help as possible today - and of course from very early tomorrow. It is really worth helping if you can get there.
Recount in Ealing southall?
In Ealing Southall, the Tory campaign has backfired spectacularly. They have been hurt by the revelation that the Conservative candidate helped raise funds for Labour just before they appointed hm.
We have a very real chance of electing Nigel Bakhai tomorrow if enough Liberal Democrat supporters turn up to help our campaign during today and of course from VERY early tomorrow.
I have been speaking to Willie Rennie and Sarah Teather this morning and they both agree that this has the feeling of eve of poll in their by-election campaigns !
Will there be a recount in Ealing Southall?
The result really is on a knife-edge.”
email sent 14.18 today.
I really don’t believe Sadgefield will be a surprise for one big reason. The popularity of Tony Balir in Sedgefield. Yes he may have gone, but the idea that the people of the constituency will want to kick out the Party that gave them their own PM and a decade of publicity the local area would never have had otherwise would be astonishing. Out of loyalty to Blair these people will stick with Labour at this point. I’m not saying it can never change, but not this time.
This might be another Ashfield Mike with outraged voters telling the outgoing party what they think of being made to vote in an unnecessary election but I doubt it. Lab win me thinks.
9. Sorry to spoil the party but if that blogger is right about the postal votes then a bet on the Lib Dems should be in order. Their postal vote machine will have been poor beside the other two, especially Labour. So in that range is interesting. Also it suggests 17% others.
To be honest I do not believe a word of it, and feel that more fool anyone who does.
27. Not quite the same I suppose, but Finchley went Labour in 1997, and Kinross nearly went SNP (sans 53 votes) in Oct ‘74 when Douglas-Home stood down. Clem Attlee’s old stomping ground of Walthamstow West went Tory by 62 votes in a by-election in 1967, a fortnight before he died.
Well, I have just put my prediction in.
When Mike S titles a thread with a question, why is the answer, almost invariably, an emphatic No?
Re. Reg Keys. It’s pretty clear had he not been a candidate in 2005, 99.9% of his vote would have gone to the LibDems… On that basis, a Leeds Central, Brent E, Leicester, Hodge Hill or Hartlepool swing would see the LDs take Sedgefield, and a Dunfermline or Bromley swing would be a very near miss..
The “Telegraph bloger” was “….a source inside the Tory campaign…”
I don’t think we should rely on it!
32. Because he poses unlikely outcomes that offer generous odds.
“Could the Tories hold K&C?” wouldn’t be much of a thread.
17 - I went to Evans and they said they don’t sell a bike without a mechanic there to check it out. He was off sick, so I’d have to come back tomorrow. Think I’ll go to Cycle Surgery on my lunch hour.
Re 36, Stonch, That’s what I call service Not!
(Why not have someone else available to do the checks?)
BTW, my predictions for Ealing Southall are on my bog, Sedgefield will be later.
35. Indeed, good point!
However Mike’s threadheads do sometimes remind me of the old journalistic saw: that a newspaper headline posed as a question almost always invites the response No.
Was Hitler Jewish? Did Elvis really fly to Mars? Is THIS the Loch Ness Monster?
etc
Me goes and reads Benedicts Blog….
No, let’s be honest, Sedgefield won’t be a surprise. And I am not too sure about the Lib Dem “squeeze” either. The leaflet you show, Mike, is all about complicated tactical stuff which interests activists but I think the Lib Dems overrate its appeal to ordinary electors. At ES last weekend I noticed that the Lib Dem leaflets included, yet again, the flipping stock photograph of two horses racing and the slogan “it’s a two horse race” and I can’t be the only one who thinks, my God, this gets boring.
The problem for the Lib Dems is that Iraq has lost its sting as a negative issue and they have no policies, or, if they have, they are not memorable and they change too often. The other factor that could make a difference is a “big” personality as leader but then they are stuck with poor old Ming, who must be wishing he had taken up Gordon’s offer after all…
38. “Is Soames a Vegan?”
37. “BTW, my predictions for Ealing Southall are on my bog”
- this is an interesting and original new approach, but doesn’t one say in the bog rather than on the bog?
Traditionally the Conservatives do much better amongst postal voters than amongst voters as a whole. It’s to do with them winning more votes from pensioners and pensioners being more likely to have postal votes than younger people. If the Telegraph’s figures are really true (and is there any evidence for that?) it means the Tories are probably headed for third, with it being between the Liberal Demcorats (who have been weak in the area for a long time and so unlikely to have organised many postal votes) and Labour. Tomorrow will tell us all who is right!
I’ve just been reading through the Dunfermline thread on the day before. All the talk was that the Lib Dems had just won the postal vote count and the speculation was whether the party could beat off the SNP to come in second place.
Interesting contrast with today.
42:
37. “BTW, my predictions for Ealing Southall are on my bog”
- this is an interesting and original new approach, but doesn’t one say in the bog rather than on the bog?
I think that after Friday quite a few predictions made on this site will have met with a similar fate.
43 - probably true in Conservative-leaning areas, but certainly not true in traditionally Labour. Certainly here in Salford, if we’re neck-and-neck or just behind in the postal votes in most wards, it usually bodes very well for a good Conservative result.
44 Mike
Remember also Hodgehill. Labour only held the seat because of the postal vote. They won the PV emphatically but lost the vote in the ballot box. On that occasion the PV won out. Who knows what will happen here.
Re 39, Galloglass, The right thing to do
Re 42, Captain Spalding.. Oops… Many thanks for the correction
I meant *cough* blog 
Mike, in Dunfermline the Lib Dems had a fair number of councillors and an organisation in several wards before the election. Therefore they would be galvanised in those areas for a good postal vote. In Southall that basis did not exist. The two elections are different. Southall is much harder for the Lib Dems
because of that history, even so my money remains on them to pull it off on polling day because of their getting their vote out organisation.
Mike Smithson, some threads ago you indicated that a stuffing for Labour would be good as that would get Tom Watson back for something he did at Hodge Hill.
What was it?
32. Sean T. I agree the answer is usually No.
What Mike does, is to pose a question that gives us anoraks a platform upon which to scurry round and espouse our particular views in a fervour of either partisan or punditry excitement. He is providing a service the would otherwise need to be provided by “Care in the Community”.
So yes, the answer is usually No. But let’s thank Mike for the question.
Iain Lindley: Quite simply not true when there is an incumbent facing an insurgency. How many examples of Westminster Election PVs have you experienced anyway? The incumbent is often behind on the PVs. Particularly when LDs are trying to surge. In my experience.
Overall on Southall this was my prediction at 10:30 am with rationale:
Mmmm. Sikhs number just 23% of the electorate. There are few if any of the 12 candidates who are not potential beneficiaries of their votes. Of the 23% a relatively small minority are of the “visible turbaned Sikh” or Khalistani tendancy. Mr Sharma has the endorsement of the main Gudwaras. Mr Lit is the only Sikh in the big three. There will be people betting on the winner with their votes and elbowing for preferment. On the ground there will be whole clans who promise their votes two or three ways!
Seems to me the result can only be rather like this:
1. Labour 35
2. Lib Dem 25
3. Tory 19
4. Rai 9
5. Respect 6
6. Green 5
7 etc - who cares? 1 between them
…
PS Actually UKIP may get a few percent, particularly as the BNP are not standing this time.
I’ll make Rai 7, UKIP 5. Respect and Green 4 each
The beauty of the secret ballot is that all this is pure speculation,most people’s guesses being coloured by their political prejudices.
Roll on Friday morning, when everyone will be explaining why it was a brilliant result for their team
That Telegraph website story has gone. How suspicious…
43. That old assumption doesn’t apply, now that postal votes are available on demand. Iain Lindley is much nearer the mark when he says that the dominant party, locally, is the one that usually gets the lion’s share of the postal votes.
Who is Dr Barry Monk?
Re 55, Will, so it has. Fortunately I have a copy
Benedict your blog looks better with the smaller text, because your posts tend to be short and snappy I think.
55 really. Because it’s illegal to reveal the results of postal counts?
60 what was the story
[Testy might not reply, she isn’t speaking to Stench]
Re 59, Stonch, many thanks, however not all articles are short.
That said long articles tend to go unread I expect
Otherwise there might be more of them.
It was 30 Lab, 30 Con, 26.5 LD?
BBC seriously on the rack tonight
Re 61 Stonch, roughly it was that the PV’s look like putting Labour and Cons neck and neck LD’s trailing by several points.
62 I think blogging isn’t about long articles - otherwise you’re just doing amateur journalism, rather than exploiting the unique ability of blogs to be up to the moment, spontaneous. Of course there are exceptions, when one has something one wants to say.
53. Chris Paul, I would be very surprised if Jasdev S. Rai gets as much as 7%. That is nearly a third of the Sikh vote. I would say Respect 5 Green 4 Rai 3 UKIP 1 Others 1.5.
56. Sean, if you look at the 2004 GLA ward breakdown the Tories did relatively better than Labour on the postal votes (compared to the polling station votes) in every borough.
4. The BNP is almost non-existent in West London. West London is, on the whole, a multi-racial area which has genuinely good race relations. The BNP could pick up some support in Isleworth, and probably bits of Hillingdon, but overall, West London is stony ground for them.
The North East quarter of London is much more racially polarised (as is much of West Yorkshire, the West Midlands, and white flight areas around Leicester, Nottingham, and South Essex) and so is much better territory.
Interestingly, the original BNP won 9% in Southall in 1964, and the Southall Residents’ Association (which was close to the NF) won a couple of seats in 1968, but that’s very long ago.
65 - in ES I assume, as opposed to Sedgefield
Re 63, Test, no 33, 33, and 26.
67 Well 2004 was a rather good result for the Conservatives, in terms of London Assembly seats.
Stonch, your new handle makes me laugh. I also liked it when you changed to ‘left wing ideology blog’. If I were to suggest you changed to “Vote Tony Lit for Ealing”…?
you’re ok for a leftie.
70. if true, wow. IF.
Re 66, Stonch, yes, with that caveat.
Re 69, Stonch yes.
Re 73, Test, yes if true, large pinch of salt anyone?
Benedict. Actually it was 30 30 23 if true! It adds up to a 200 odd vote difference between the top 2 and the LDs on the basis of J Loony’s estimate of 3000 PVs cast. One respondent to the blog angrily claimed that the Conservatives had pushed out fake PV figures before the Leicester South by election before coming third. I’ve no idea if that’s true or not.
The story about problems with BBC phone competitions etc is leading all the bulletins.
This reminds me of the problem noted on this website with the internet vote on the Labour Deputy leadership where it appeared that the voting was hacked and in particular Hilary Benn’s vote total mysteriously returned to zero.
Whilst this is a different issue to competitions, it is still very much to do with integrity.
I said at the time that this should be reported to Sir Michael Lyons. Does anyone know if this was ever actually reported to him? If not do people think that the issue should still now be reported?
Have the New Boundaries cleared Parliament yet?
Re 76, Blue Moon, I still have the article on my screen and I stand by 33, 33, 26.
Did you want me to post proof on my blog?
71. Sean, I don’t think that’s relevant. My point is that in boroughs where the Conservatives were ahead of Labour overall they were further ahead on the postal votes. In boroughs where they were behind Labour overall they were closer on the postal votes.
I agree with your point about the weakness of the BNP in West London. Feltham/Hanworth is another area where they might have some unrealised potential, but I can’t think of anywhere else..
Benedict I stand corrected although the gap is the same. Advancing age obviously my other points stand, though.
If the figures being suggested for the postal votes are anything near reality the LDs will be pleased.
They are usually way behind on postal votes and improve their share by polling day. They probably won Bromley on the day but had lost the postal vote by more than a thousand.
Re 81, Blue Moon, yes noted.
I didn’t explain myself well. One would expect a Labour lead in postal votes in Ealing Southall (even if the lead is not as big as their lead overall). *If* they’re only running at level-pegging with the Conservatives (and I have no real knowledge that that’s the case) then it implies a considerable swing from labour.
PV figures were only released on a borough-wide basis, so we don’t know how they stacked up in individual wards, but it’s a fair bet that Labour led on PVs in Ealing Southall in 2004.
82 Yes, PVS saved the Conservatives in Bromley.
Agree entirely with SeanF’s analysis. Racial polarison is a neccessary condition for any prolonged BNP campaign, and Southall’s an area where it’s declined, for various reasons.
It’s worth remembering that the Conservatives were supposed to be neck-and-neck with Labour on the PV count in Slough at the GE, although turnout will make the PV figures more important.
84 - Although the Tories appear to have been very well organised in a few of the Ealing wards in 2006. They may have built up a fair reserve of PVs there.
The overall number looks relatively low for the type of seat it is. Maybe Labour haven’t done as much work on PVs in the last few years?
Ealing Southall is hardly an area of Conservative strength so for the campaign to have got the same number of PVs as Labour in such a short period of time is surely a good achievement. I wonder if a a significant number were Sikhs, however, who won’t be able to vote twice!. They would be the easiest to identify through the councillor defectors for a campaign which must have started from scratch a few weeks ago.
Of course it doesn’t mean that the Conservatives will do anywhere near as well in the votes of people who actually cast their votes( for one thing they were cast before the Lit donation affair); it may just be a reflection of good organisation in identifying PV potential and bears out those who argue that the Party’s campaign is efficiently run.
Police investigating the PV leak figures.
On postal votes, note several things:
1. A split of 30/30/27 is all three equal given the LARGE margin of error in counting postal votes.
2. The established local party usually gets a boost
3. The Tories usually get a boost from elderly voters, who are proportionately PV voters and proportionately conservative.
If these dodgy figures are real (an anything fed to the Telegraph has to be from a Con source, and should be treated VERY suspiciously) then I would still think the LDs are quite pleased. It may be that the source that leaked them (if they are real) doesnt understand how PVs usually split, and thinks they are better for the Tories than they are.
The Telegraph have removed the figures on legal advice. I don’t know whether Mike needs to do something about the figures on this site.
has my comepetition entry arrived? I sent it yesterday night, but this evening I got a message back saying delivery failed. So I sent it again tonight…but if the failure message takes the same to arrive than yesterday’s one, I will discover tomorrow if it has failed again
maybe bad for the tories if there’s news of dirty tricks regarding the postal vote tomorow?
Punter, have you seen that Glyn Davies has been officially selected for Montgomeryshire?
And Welsh Cabinet resshuffle has started with Huw Lewis being the first minister to be sacked.
Re 88, Blue moon, “Police investigating the PV leak figures.”
Got a source for that?
On Sky news quoting police sources. I should have said investigating the PV leak on the basis of an official complaint from the Labour Party. Can you email Mike( I haven’t got his email); maybe he needs to remove the figures from this site as the Telegraph have on theirs on the basis of legal advice
Sky Breaking News: Police Investigation in Ealing Southall byelection
96. Oo-er. Maybe it will be cancelled! Or a candidate/agent arrested!
re 95, Got a link from their website?
I have emailed Double carpet and PtP because I don’t have Mike’s to hand either.
it better not be cancelled (im all green!)
Benedict It’s not on the sky news website but it’ll be on their 11 pm bulletin any minute.
Re 100, Many thanks.
Reported on News24 now.
Re 102, Cool, I will catch up on that shortly, I am watching something interesting on Newsnight.
Some people who have posted on here about postal votes are going to have a sleepless night I feel. Parties tend to start pointing fingers at each other and everyone gets dragged in.
Sub-continent’s view of the Southall battle…
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Ballot_battle_in_Little_India/articleshow/2205941.cms
http://www.indiaenews.com/europe/20070718/61340.htm
“If anything, Ealing Southall represents ‘monoculturalism central’. Politics there is now firmly seen to need an Asian mascot. Southall’s politics is far removed from such multi-cultural diversions as choosing a white candidate for an Asian-dominant constituency….”
Explosion Mid Manhattan building collapsed.
The usual Conservative strength in postal votes depends on the level of canvass. Conservatives only send application forms to people canvassed as Conservatives. Most of the central postal vote push was done in pre 2005 GE postal vote campaigns. Seats like Southall would have been done for the 2004 Euro/GLA but not for the 2005 GE. Unless labour operate a very stupid postal votes campaign - or have no canvass which is very unlikely then they should have had a very strong lead at this point. Votes in the bag are good but do not say who will win. Postal vote opening showed a strong c lead in Finchley at the GE - but they were not enough. It just meant the Conservatiives voted earlier. if this sample is a good one it suggest labour are in trouble or have a poor machine. Again you may as well open up a sheep unless you know the patch.
Thanks for that UK Paul. No one here got figures from anyone involved in the count. The careful way in which we all said ‘if they’re true’ shows that. I’m more than happy to tell the police or anyone else that.
The building explosion in mid town Manhattan was caused by a transformer thank goodness.
Ah it’s Tom Watson again, if he is making something of a vague blog posting then maybe really are in deep trouble and I was wrong all along. This could be more interesting that I thought.
..and if Watson is complaining the vite figures are definitely true then.
108 - Well at least it might stop people spinning about things they ‘know’.
Returning to the by-elections. I have no idea or knowledge on the ground. But I would be amazed now if the Tories won Ealing Southall, observing the drift in their price over the last 48 hours, despite arb opportunities provided courtesy of William Hill on the LDs.
I will take out from the freezer and defrost that prepared piece of humble pie, ready for consumption tomorrow night just in case. Alternatively Benedict could look in his freezer and jettison some of those “Unwelcome packs” that increasingly clutter up his freezer and seem surplus to requirements.
Re 108, Blue Moon, a transformer? But it took out a building?
Whilst we are on the subject of postal votes:
Police begin Southall vote probe
An investigation has been launched after a complaint from the Labour Party about alleged electoral offences in the Ealing Southall by-election. The complaint relates to an internet blog entry which claimed to show how many postal votes each candidate had won ahead of Thursday’s ballot.
The article on the Daily Telegraph website quoted “a source inside the Tory campaign”. The Metropolitan Police said the matter is being “thoroughly investigated”.
The complaint was made in writing by Labour’s election agent Ken Clarke, who told police the publication of purported postal voting results appeared to be a “clear breach” of electoral law.
A Met spokesman said: “I can confirm the Metropolitan Police Service has today received an allegation of possible electoral offences in relation to the Southall by-election.
“The allegation will be thoroughly investigated and appropriate action taken.”
Here’s the BBC’s news website link on the ES police probe: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/6905715.stm
A. The numbers on PVs will be (deliberately) all wrong - a piece of naked blagging - and therefore ? no offence I suspect.
B. I stand by the high figure for Rai. That is my estimate of most of the turbaned Sikh element plus his personal clannage. I don’t think more than a third will go to Lit. The rest to Labour.
C. Back to the PVs - I think a lot will walk up because of the uncertainty. Self-witnessed now so even easier than ever to use on the day. Post Office may do a box sweep at 10pm also.
it still may be a terror attack, lets just hope noone was killed.
Apparently so. The explosion caused a nearby building to collapse; this is allegedly from fire department sources. I’m sure they were keen to get the news out asap for obvious reasons
I’ve a number of commens awaiting moderation, so if they all appear at one point it’s not that I’ve gone crazy and posted 3 times the same thing!
Anyway, before Holyrood elections the Indy run a piece saying Labour got 457 postal votes in Ochil and SNP 322 and so on …no-one launched an inquiry in the leak (which could have just been Labour spin)
106: Data from CNN
A transformer has exploded in downtown Manhattan. There are no reports of injuries or deaths and no buildings have collapsed
Andrea I don’t know whether regulations in Scotland are laxer but it’s definitely against the law to leak figures; I don’t know whether it’s against the law to publish them…
Re 112, Stjohn, “I will take out from the freezer and defrost that prepared piece of humble pie, ready for consumption tomorrow night just in case. Alternatively Benedict could look in his freezer and jettison some of those “Unwelcome packs” that increasingly clutter up his freezer and seem surplus to requirements.”
But I am charging you storage
I can’t see any of the main three parties getting more than 29% in ES.
108
‘The careful way in which we all said ‘if they’re true’ shows that. I’m more than happy to tell the police or anyone else that.’
That’s a totally ridiculous post,stop being a drama queen!
Andrea: Maybe the Tories didnt think to report Labour for leaking the Scottish results?
The Tories could be in more electoral trouble if they really are under investigation for “electoral fraud”. The Lib Dem printers will be busy throughout the night printing attack leaflets for knock-up tomorrow if true!
Simon Read the context before posting an idiotic and rude post like that. I was simply responding to another post suggesting that those of us who posted using the figures might be investigated.
126
You really think that the police are going to start interviewing posters from this site,surely you can find some other excitement in life!
Update on Manhattan , no building collapse, steam pipe ruptured.
More detail on my blog.
My earlier post alluded to the idea that behind some screen names might be people who do know what the figures appear to be and only they (and Mike) would know that. Still one person’s leak is another’s betting opportunity….
“Could Sedgefield be a surprise?”
I hope so - I’ve put on £10 at 30-1!
Simon No I don’t particularly but someone else did and I responded to him. If your only contribution to this site is to insult other posters at a fourth form level then I suggest you find someone where else to do so.
John Loony points out that if you attend the opening of postal votes you have to sign a form acknowledging that you know that it is an offence to disclose any information learnt . There does not though appear to be any offence in a 3rd or subsequent party repeating that information .
122. Benedict. You should get a smaller freezer. Living in London, as I recall you do, space must be at a premium. And your leader is all for Green living so you should buy fresh every day and recycle the “Unwelcome packs.” They must be past their “sell by date”.
The only way you will recoup your “storage” costs off me would be in terms of a bet. We will have to frame something mutually acceptable.
Thanks Mark. However, the Telegraph shut down the information on the website on ‘legal advice’ according to Sky. I’m no expert so perhaps they were being over cautious. However, theoretically I suppose anyone who used the information might be asked how they got it so that the police could identify the leaker at the count. I don’t expect to be asked about the figures but on the remote chance that I was I will not have a sleepless night as ukpaul suggested!
blimey I’ve made 33 matched bets so far today on ES. I need a new hobby.
7. c. 4,700 PVs were sent out in Ealing Southall, with c. 3,000 expected back.
9. Specifically, the D.A.R.O. told me that 500 had been opened on Friday, 800 on Monday, and another 1000 expected on Tuesday and 1000 on Wednesday.
4. BNP hasn’t contested parliamentary by-elections for several years; they have concentrated on building up support in local elections. Not enough white population in E.S. to make it a target area. BNP candidate in Sedgefield is prominent local campoaigner anyway, I think.
53. As far as UKIP in E.S. is concerned, I am remembering that UKIP only got 140 votes in Brent East, which is broadly comparable demographically (ish). All the indications I have seen are that Rai, Green and Respect will come 4th 5th and 6th in no particular order, with the other 6 candidates way behind.
60. It is illegal to reveal patterns of how people have voted in the PVs; as far as I know it is not illegal for third parties or media to repeat such information which has been leaked to them illegally.
re 133, Stjohn,”Benedict. You should get a smaller freezer. Living in London, as I recall you do, space must be at a premium.”
No, I live in Mid Sussex as you would know if you read my blog. In fact i am shocked that you don’t!
Two thoughts:
(a) How much campaigning has been going on in Cleveland? Are only the candidates themselves doing leafleting, having been abandoned by all their colleagues concentrating on Southall?
(b) How many people will go to vote in Cleveland today thinking that they are voting in the Southall by-election?
Labour is now more confident about the ES result - several campaigners say we should win unless turnout falls heavily. Still expecting Tories to be second.
The LDs in Sedgfield should indeed soak up the Keays vote so their result is bound to improve markedly, and I talked to a few switchers (one whole family of four said mysteriously that they were keen Labour supporters and would vote Labour at the GE, but were going LD this time - couldn’t work out why) when I was phoning around - but I can’t see them coming close to winning.
Wouldn’t be a bad thing if someone was successfully prosecuted for leaking PV results - it happens too often and distorts the process, especially as it’s easy to tinker with the figures. Of course, it would be a sufficient defence to persuade the jury that the defendant was deliberately lying (since it is only an offence to leak actual data, not to make up stuff) - it’d be amusing to hear the defence trying to prove it, though.
138 Is ther an election in Cleveland? Sedgefield maybe but that is in Co Durham ….
Just back from E&S. My fourth visit over the last two and a half weeks. I’ve been involved with numerous by-elections but have never known one harder to call. Very, very tricky.
My observations from a Lib Dem perspective are as follows:
- Labour slow off the mark
- Tony Lit campaign got off to a strong start but weekend story about Lit’s donation to Labour now has traction. Lab and LD pounding the Lit donation story
- Last few days LD’s have got real momentum with literally hundreds of activists piling into E&S. Today HQ was heaving with people who were turned around very quickly with leaflets and canvassing
- LD poster boards trebled in the last week. Labour up to its usual tricks. We put them up during the day. They pull them down at night and then the whole process repeats itself - yawn.
Hve we got enough momentum at this late stage to win? Well; thats the $64,000 question???
Only prediction I’ll make is Tories third and because Cameron has invested so much politcal capital into this by-election, a third will rebound badly on him.
139 - “(one whole family of four said mysteriously that they were keen Labour supporters and would vote Labour at the GE, but were going LD this time - couldn’t work out why)”
Because voting Lib Dem is what people do at by elections. It’s simply become the done thing - rather like eating Brussels Sprouts on Christmas Day.
By the way, if you get bored tomorrow night waiting for the result, try downloading Real Lives here:
http://www.educationalsimulations.com/
Basically you get a random person somewhere on the globe each time you play, and live his or her life a year at a time, with choices and events appropriate to your surroundings. Just tried it once (time!) - I was an Afghan girl, born to moderately prosperous tenant farmers who drifted in and out of work. Managed to get through school despite illnesses, got a job as a nurse, but then made the fatal error of leaving home, after which various unpleasant things happened. Good educational tool but fun too.
Re 139, Nick Palmer, “Labour is now more confident about the ES result - several campaigners say we should win unless turnout falls heavily. Still expecting Tories to be second.”
Interesting. My prediction is based on a turnout of about 80% of the former result and taking account of defections etc. just (and I emphasise the JUST) gives it to us.
I can’t see anyone being confident of anything though.
As for the PV leak, yes I can’t see the prosecution getting very far as this is only verification not counting.
(though they do not actually need to remove the actual ballot form its envelope to do that so only need partially open them giving no clue to how the vote is going even if you are good at that sort of thing.)
Rennard speaks on Ealing Southall:
http://www.libdemvoice.org/chris-rennard-a-re-count-in-ealing-southall-challengers-to-labour-in-sedgefield-1028.html
He doesn’t put his head above the parapet unless he knows something.
Also LibDem Voice is reporting a Tory to Lib Dem defection (in Yorkshire).
Apologies Benedict. You’ve caught me out. Any where near Goodwood, which is coming up soon? May not be as Glorious as usual? Always worth following Mark Johnson’s horses at Goodwood, particularly in the longer distance races.
I still think you should consider ditching the freezer none the less. The demand for your “Unwelcome packs” is on the decline.
132. You don’t actually have to sign a form; you are given a form with extracts from the Representation of the People Act 1983 (as amended). It is the responsibility of the agent to ensure that each person attending the opening / verification of the postal votes has read a copy of the form. The bit which is relevant to postal votes says:
“66(2) Every person attending at the verification of the ballot paper accounts or the counting of the votes shall maintain and aid in maintaining the secrecy of voting and shal not -
(a) ascertain or attempt to ascertain at the counting of the votes the number on the back of any ballot paper;
(b) communicate any information obtained at the verification of the ballot paper accounts or the counting of the votes as to the way in which any vote is given on any particular ballot paper.
66(2A) No person attending at the verification of the ballot paper accounts shall express to any person an opinion based on information obtained at theat verification as to the likely result of the election.”
Section 66(2) is the familiar bit I have alway known about, which (I have been advised previously by D.A.R.O.s) means that it is OK if you accidentally-on-purpose see how people have voted, and add up numbers as to parties’ totals, as long as you do not notice (or tell anybody) how any individual voter has voted, based on what you can see of their ballot paper number and name and address on the declaration of identity form.
(For those who have never attended the proceedings of opening of postal votes, it should be explained that it is done with the ballot papers face-down, but it is often possible to see through the paper to see how people have voted).
Section 66(2A) is the new bit, which makes it illegal to tell anybody about the party totals, as well as making it illegal to tell how an individual has voted.
ON THE LEAKS
119. That is absolutely true. Is this just Labour dirty tricks? It was Nick Robinson from the BBC that actually did the leaking of postal ballot results in favour of Labour, and to the detriment of the SNP in May of this year, on national television. And he did it again and again, despite criticism on this forum. I’m sure many will remember.
If its is true that Labour has made a complaint, then they themselves will be under police investigation, along with Nick Robinson, for their prior actions in May.
A third party making a claim about postal ballots is not illegal! They could be lying, they could be telling the truth. Which ever of the two, no crime is committed. That is why Nick Robinson and Labour got away with it.
Although you could argue that a BBC journalist doing it on national television is definitely an attempt to try and manipulate the outcome of the election, through demoralising one set of voters, while encouraging another. This is why I criticised Nick Robinson at the time. On the whole I do think he is a good journalist, he just overstepped the mark on what he did.
A Telegraph blog is obviously directed at only the readers of the blog - this could be thousands or tens of thousands - not on the same level as the millions that would a BBC news programme, with viewers that usually have a high level of trust for what they are watching (obviously trust in the BBC is now at an all time low).
On the whole I would say that being a good journalist is a tough job, and they deserve all possible praise for what they do. They certainly feed us here, and we rely on them tremendously for interesting and informative content. Keep up the good work all. On the whole a great job is done on all sides. In my view standards are good in the British press and media as a whole. There is much free thinking, engaging and interesting information and comment. Let it always be so.
Great, back in time for some tin foil hat madness from Will L!
re 146, Stjohn, about an hours drive from Goodwood, Sussex is a large county.
I have driven there though.
As for the welcome packs there is now unprecedented demand
140. I was meaning the local council by-election which is happening today in Cleveland ward in Ealing. It is in Ealing North constituency; no part of Cleveland ward is in Southall constituency, but they border each other. Cleveland in 2006 was a close Con/LD marginal.
148 - in all seriousness though, what’s this shite about “demoralising voters”? Surely a leak of postal ballot votes that shows your preferred party is doing worse than expected just motivates you to vote where otherwise you might not have bothered?
After all, in 2005 the latter stages of Labour’s GE campaign was all about telling people that if they didn’t vote, the Tories might win
Oh wait a minute….
I’m wasting my life responding to an absolute nutcase….
It’s like asking the man shouting at bystanders in the street who the “fooking b*tch” is, or why everyone should “go fook themselves”
Dan, in fairness, we have to accept that Rennard is one of the most notorious rampers in British politics. I remember endless ramping from him at the last general election, and local elections, in which he promised great things, and all we got was sideways movement.
To be issuing his own ‘personal opinion poll’ involving a sample of 0 is pure nonsense, and has no value. I would sooner bet on