Council By-elections
Last night's council by-election results:
Ciliau Aeron Ward, Ceredigion CC. PC hold. PC 367 (55.9%, -11.1), LD 247 (37.6%, +19), Con 43 (6.5%, +6.5). Swing of 15.1% from PC to LD since 2008.
Poole Town Ward, Poole UA. Poole People gain from Con. PP 462 (33%, +33), Con 438 (31.2%, -15.9), LD 214 (15.3%, -3), Lab 201 (14.3%, +1.2), UKIP 55 (3.9%, -10.3), BNP 32 (2.3%, +2.3). Swing of 24.5% from Con to PP since 2007.
Dunchurch & Knightlow Ward, Rugby BC. Con hold. Con 832 (49.4%, +1.7), LD 682 (40.5%, -0.8), Lab 149 (8.9%, -0.4), Green 20 (1.2%, -0.5). Swing of 1.3% from LD to Con since May this year.
Haydock Ward, St Helens MBC. Lab hold. Lab 1234 (62.7%, +11.2), LD 540 (27.4%, -9.6), Con 112 (5.7%, -5.8), BNP 82 (4.2%, +4.2). Swing of 10.4% from LD to Lab since May this year.
posted by Luke Akehurst at 9:14 am
11 Comments:
The St Helen's result suggests a major downturn in FibDem fortunes in the NW. If those votes shift to us then we win all the marginals, which is what appears to be happening.
Not to concerned about the Rugby result as that's the sort of ward where we will always be a poor third and where people probably think the cuts aren't severe enough!
Interesting that we didn't contest Ceredigion - are we ceding that seat to PC to beat the FibDems next time?
12:48 pm, December 03, 2010
this is doing the rounds
Poole People gain from Conservative
PP 462 Con 438 LD 214 Lab 201 UKIP 55 BNP 32
1:35 pm, December 03, 2010
Luke your views please on Labour criminals Phil Woolas and David Chaytor??
6:01 pm, December 03, 2010
The Poole result is interesting. The Tories lost over a third of their share of the vote. It seems to be mostly because of a campaign based on an unpopular local issue.
The "Poole Peoples Party" candidate issued the following video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SjjhTBieu_o&
Have a look at it. I'd like to know what others think of it.
7:06 pm, December 03, 2010
Kier
both cases may come to NEC or one of its committees so not allowed to comment as it might prejudge them.
10:30 pm, December 03, 2010
The BNP continue to perform very badly. Great!
10:24 am, December 04, 2010
I can recall when Labour ministers and spokespersons regularly dismissed local council by-election results as being in no way indicative of general election intentions.
Interesting now how so much child like pleasure is derived by the faithful from those self same contests. Rather sad when you see the party clutching at straws despite, or perhaps because of, being devoid of either leadership or policies. Love the blank piece of paper!
11:00 am, December 04, 2010
Bluenote:
It is the rapidity with which Labour fortunes have revived in local by-elections which is heartening. Also don't forget the Tories are starting from a lower local base than Blair did in 1997, meaning Labour is making bigger advances in real terms.
As for the rest, I see little advantage in EdM producing detailed policies when a GE might not be until mid-2015. I know why those who wish him ill in the media are incessantly demanding this. He should ignore them, and could more profitably spend the time improving his interview techniques. I wish him well, but we *don't* need car crashes like the Today programme interview again ;-)
Oh well, forward!
3:37 pm, December 04, 2010
These results, like so many others, confirm that Labour is on the "core vote" path: piling up votes in places that have no real bearing on the outcome of the general election.
But then people who should have known better - like Luke - voted for a leader who repeatedly stated that his strategy was a core vote one and not a coalition building one.
This is why people like Luke will no longer get my vote for the NEC. Either they don't get it or they are so wedded to some form of neo-democratic centralism that they just do what their caucus (in Luke's case 'Labour First' - a group so reactionary - though I am not accusing Luke of involvement in this particular disgrace - they once refused to support Michael Cashman as an NEC candidate - you may draw your own conclusion as to what their real motivation was there) tells them.
Enough of that.
Britain's working people need a Labour government. But we won't get one so long as we follow a strategy that seems to revel in its unwillingness to rebuild an election-winning coalition.
12:52 am, December 05, 2010
Anon 12.52
Just for the record neither Labour First nor Progress, both of which supported me for the NEC, operates a caucus system or offers instruction on how I or any other NEC member should behave. They supported me because I wasn't from the Hard Left. Not voting for me next time will merely ensure a Bennite like Pete Willsman gets elected.
Nor did Labour First have a line on the leadership election - prominent supporters backed each of the 4 mainstream candidates.
Ed Miliband does not support a core vote strategy: he repeatedly talks about targeting the "squeezed middle". He seems to be having some success as we are now on 40% in the polls.
These results do not show what you claim they do. They do show we are doing well in core vote areas like St Helens - surely we want a swing to Labour everywhere? But the other 2 wards contested are not marginal wards they are wards where we started in 3rd place.
Since Ed's election as leader council by-election gains in Swindon, Cambridge, Medway, Crawley and Rossendale all suggest progress in non-core marginal areas.
7:17 pm, December 05, 2010
Haydock may be in a Labour seat, but had 2 of its 3 councillors LibDem until this May. Some areas are clearly more "core" than others, anonymous.....
Your statement is factually inaccurate anyway, as Luke has already pointed out.
Uber-Blairites may have their heads permanently stuck in the halcyon days of the mid 1990s (and yes, they were good - but they are NEVER coming back, so get used to it) - but could they at least not tell lies about our new leader and his strategy??
It would be much appreciated, thanks ;-)
6:05 pm, December 06, 2010
Post a Comment
<< Home