Everyone is tired. Everyone is ebullient. Except the Tories of course. Or Labour for that matter who came fourth in yesterday’s by-election in Chesham and Amersham.
Ed Davey has been doing the rounds of media today. He said he hadn’t expected such a huge swing. The Tory obsession with the Red Wall has meant they had ignored their own Blue Wall. “Last night we punched a hole in it.”
He talked of Chesham and Amersham voters being taken for granted by the Tories. Boris Johnson is not the decent Conservative they used to vote for. The Lib Dems are making progress in the south. Conservative MPs there should be worried.
This is not a flash in the plan by-election result. It is a trend that is demolishing the Blue Wall. Conservatives in the south should be worried.
Speaking on Times Radio this morning, Lib Dem leader Ed Davey said:
I never thought we would win with this huge, huge swing… I think it will send a shock wave through British politics. If this is repeated across the south, literally dozens of seats with go to the Liberal Democrats…
People have been so focussed on the Red Wall, they haven’t noticed the Blue Wall. And it is the Blue Wall across the south where the Liberal Democrats are chipping away. And last night we punched a hole in it.
Ed was asked by Matt Chorley, what the Tories haven’t noticed before their defeat. Why is it that voters are turning away from them? Ed was confident in his reply having been on the ground knocking on doors:
I came here 16 times. And I knocked on hundreds of doors. Listening to people was really interesting. I think they feel ignored. I think they feel taken for granted. And I think quite a lot of Conservative voters don’t like Boris Johnson… [They say] he’s not the decent Conservative they used to vote for.
The environment is a massive issue… and many Conservatives here in the south of England think that is being ignored…
The way that came to a cumulation in this by-election was over planning. Planning reforms that take power away from communities and give it to developers. And won’t produce the sorts of homes that people need…
Matt Chorley: “Just let me get this right. The Lib Dems support HS2 nationally. But you are opposing it locally?” Ed:
Our position is a bit more nuanced than you suggest. We believe we end strong, fast rail links… The concern I have is the way that the company HS2 has gone about its business. You saw that in talking to people. People think they are not being listened to.
Chorley then challenged on the Lib Dems relationship with Labour: “Is there a situation when you pick up the phone to Kier Starmer and say look, the only way we can get the Tories out is if we work together.” Ed argued that does not need to be the case:
The reality is that in most of the seats where we compete against Labour and the Conservatives, Labour are weak as you saw last night. There will be other seats where Labour compete against Conservatives where we don’t have a strong base. There are relatively few areas where we are in competition…
I’m concerned about where we [Liberal Democrats] are making progress. That’s clearly in the south. It’s clearly in the Conservative’s Blue Wall. It is clear that Boris Johnson’s government are ignoring the south. They are saying that they are going after Labour in the north. That’s their choice…
They are ignoring people in areas. Subconsciously ignoring people they are taking for granted. They shouldn’t be surprised if people turn round and say hold on a minute, what about us?…
What was really staggering was that at the beginning of the campaign, I was knocking on doors and people were saying “You are the first politician ever to knock on my door.
Matt Corley asked, is this the big moment when the Lib Dem fight back happens? Is this the turning point? After 11 years you are finally back in the game? Ed wasn’t going for a prediction that could be quoted back at him but said the Tories should be worried:
I think this is a trend. Even in the general election of 2019 where we obviously underperformed and were disappointed, we got three million more votes. If you look at where they went, they were mainly in the [Red Wall]. And we went from third place to second, sometimes good second…
When you look at the May elections, In Oxfordshire and Cambridgeshire, we held on for the first time ever. Big gains there. Big gains against the Tories in Hertfordshire and Wiltshire.
Although Chesham and Amersham was special last night, no doubt about that, it comes on the back of Liberal Democrats making progress. It was probably a symbolic turning point. It was not a flash in the pan. It comes on the back of a trend.
And that’s why if I was a Conservative MP in the south, I’d be worried.
* Andy Boddington is a Lib Dem councillor in Shropshire. He blogs at andybodders.co.uk.
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Six council by-elections, spread over two days
Carers remain forgotten in government's welfare overhaul
Steffan Aquarone's Commons debate on coastal communities
Getting things done - Saggar Street - an update #dundeewestend
Loving our neighbours
Getting the basics right
Nick Baird
Jonathan Calder
Roland
Joseph Bourke
49 Comments
Déjà vue, mes amis!
David Gaulke on R4 World at One interesting. States clearly the opportunity for Libdems to clean up in the South if they steer a pro business (right of?) centre. May sound a bit like Orange book but if you’re talking numbers, there’s heaps more seats to take off the tories if we keep ourselves far enough away from Labour and the Greens.
5 weeks ago I dreamt about a landslide, but warned of caution because Batley and Spen is soon to follow.
All our hype over Chesham will be to nought if the Tories win in Yorkshire.
Did anyone else go to the Batley Club in 60’s and 70’s. Lots of great acts there, remember Sinatra.
It’s not quite as arresting a visual image as Boris and his JCB, maybe get a bigger hammer next time Ed!
“Did anyone else go to the Batley Club in 60’s and 70’s. ?” Yes, indeed, Theakes. Saw Lonnie Donegan there.
Grew up in Spen Valley and helped to re-establish a genuine Liberal Party there in 1962 when Jim Pickles (the Judge) was to be our candidate. All of that, along with Huddersfield Town, the Beatles, and a Triumph Vitesse convertible made life interesting back in those days.
Having known her (and her family), and remembering what she did for my aged parents, I make no apologies for saying Kim Leadbeater would make a fantastic MP.
This result is a wake-up call to the Tories (though I half hope they ignore it), but also to Labour. This result makes it crystal clear that many of their own supporters voted tactically and they should be grateful and behave in a way that makes it more likely to be reciprocated and ultimately repeated at the next election.
I hope that Labour keeps Batley, but if not it will hopefully do a bit more waking up. Unfortunately, the noisiest current & past Labour party members are more likely to use it as an excuse to cause disruption.
The Tories losing one of hundreds of MPs isn’t going to mean much to them this Parliament, not with a comfortable majority, but one extra MP is a big deal to us. Beyond the reporting of the by-election result, she will help with our visibility and help to spread the load of our hard-working parliamentary group.
At risk of stating the obvious, I hope we’ve gained some new activists in the area who will help to ensure Sarah can stay engaged with the electorate during the rest of this term, and that some of those who helped at the by-election will be able to return for the kind of constituency wide leafleting well in advance of the next election that will be important to ensure this win is consolidated.
There are seats we can take from the Tories, but we’ll almost certainly need tactical support from local Labour and the Greens to do so. While we need policies that won’t scare off the Tories we need to switch, it should not be at the expense of alienating that tactical support. I don’t think pro-business requires us to be right-of-centre anyway. Scrutinising the problems of the Brexit deal and offering to get a better one will be central. Lots of people in constituencies like that value environmental and ethnical standards and want a work-life balance.
Before anybody gets over exuberantly intoxicated with the Chesham result (and I wish Sarah Green every success), they should take a look at the local election results on Mark Pack’s website today in other parts of the UK (including another lost seat in Scotland) before they get too carried away.
Mr Pack’s website : The other by-elections this week
JUNE 18, 2021 – 12:26 PM
David Raw: David you are not going to diminish my pleasure at witnessing something I thought would never happen in my lifetime, whatever happened elsewhere.
I am delighted this morning, but also apprehensive. It is truly exiting to believe that the Liberal Democrats could win dozens of Tory seats in the South of England at the next election, but also worrying how the party would play its hand if the next election resulted in a hung parliament. Anything less than the Liberal Democrats working with Labour and the SNP to remove the Tories from power will be a massive betrayal of the second chance that voters may be willing to give the party
@ Barry Lofty No intention to do that, Barry, merely a plea to take a measured view of things….. and I completely understand your pleasure at the Chesham result.
I’m taking a measured view. This win could give us the increase in credibility that Orpington produced after 1962.
To substantially misquote Mrs Thatcher, sing, to the tune of Veni Emmanuel:
Rejoice, Rejoice,
Chesham and Amersham
Shall herald they comeuppance
Oh Johnson.
,
Did the Tories see it coming? Surely they should have seen what was going on ‘on the ground’. Mind you, their candidate claimed to be 6ft 9ins and the ground for him would be a long way down. I understand his problems and I’m only around 6ft 4ins!😀
I’m really pleased for Barry Lofty after all he’s written about C&A recently. Just to think, C&A was where I used to buy my clothes until they moved back across the Channel.
Brad Burrows should be careful what he wishes for. Just as many Tories were willing to ‘lend’ their votes to Labour back in 1997, it might be that they will be prepared to do the same to the Lib Dems whenever the next GE takes place. 40% of the potential electorate is basically conservative with a small ‘c’. It’s not a crime; but a fact of life we need to get used to. It’s not likely to change in a hurry and, in any case, Mr Simpson, I quite like ‘orange’ as a colour!
Sorry, Brad, that should have been ‘BARROWS’.
If Lab lose Batley then it will incentivise the Tories to keep pushing into Lab Heartlands abs incentivise Lab to go harder to the left, also making it hard for Starmer to hang on. If someone like Angela Rayner took over then it would perversely all play into Lib Dem hands.
Now I hate the idea of the Tories winning another seat but….
@ Barry Lofty,
I can’t imagine any decent person wanting to diminish your pleasure Barry. I can’t say that I have ever on the odd occasion that I now read through posts on Liberal Democrat Voice considered you ( or indeed David Raw), less than worthy of my admiration as my sort of Liberal Democrat.
I am thrilled that Sarah Green has toppled one member of the most despicable, UK governments, one that has made me ashamed and embarrassed to be British.
Well done to her, to all the activists who supported her, and also the natural Green and Labour voters and members who used their precious vote to vote tactically.
Enjoy the moment Barry. Bask in it. And then consider how important it is, under the current electoral system, for parties to temporarily stop doing the political Right’s work for them by attacking each other rather than the main enemy. If one really wants to rid this country of a government of ‘chancers’ , we need political strategists to mirror the behaviour of tactical voters.
But hey, take time to just bask in the moment. You deserve it.
Message for Ed…It was a great win due to ‘serious’ hard work…Please leave stupid ‘wall demolishing’ to Johnson..
@David Raw
Hi, Eeyore !
Well – as you know full well local by-elections in Scotland are odd and as Mark P explains because they are conducted under STV/AV with several councillors being elected in each ward at full council elections to just one councillor (normally) being elected at a by-election. So in “first preferences” we moved from 4th to um… 4th albeit with a reduction of about 11%.
If you were a Roman Emperor surveying a vast empire – you would still think what a tiny empire you had – because as in Asterisk – a small part of Gaul hadn’t been conquered!
Still keep up the good work pointing out how terribly we are doing and how terribly we run things – not like in the days of Gladstone when you were young! Seriously! Caesar needed someone whispering in his ear that he was mortal.
@John Marriott
“40% of the potential electorate is basically conservative with a small ‘c’. It’s not a crime; but a fact of life we need to get used to.”
Hi, John! Appreciate the point – not everyone is going to agree with us. But I’d settle for 60% – indeed I’d settle for 5% if it was concentrated like the SNP in some 50 seats. This is trotted out and it depends how you define small ‘c’ conservatism. Certainly a time traveller from the fifties would find the country shockingly socially liberal. And one from the 19th century almost near-communist with all our free Government handouts. But it is good to point out that some don’t want to travel as fast to (supposed) “utopia” as we do! And indeed some want to travel in the opposite direction!
Continuing on the initial theme (C & A), one could add that this wasn’t just any by election victory; this was an M & S by election victory by any standards. However, it IS only a by election. We’ve been here before. Just remember how important it is to be sensible and realistic about what you can achieve. The Lib Dems need to take on board Jayne Mansfield’s wise advice and try to work with others over the next few years. That’s why the result in Batley and Spen is possibly a better indicator of political trends than was C & A.
Jayne Mansfield: Thanks for your kind thoughts, yes I will enjoy the moment but come back down to earth soon enough and quite agree about the opposition party’s getting together to rid us this government.
Oh wise ones – Confucius he said:
Do what is right – for no good can arise from the devious* – only shame!
* This, most certainly, includes decisions based upon statistics.
I get the impression from Newsnight that behind the scenes Lab and the Lib Dem’s are working together. So in Chesham, Labour activists went on Holiday and in Batley Lib Dem’s are doing something in similar. I hope this is true. Right now it’s in both parties interests to give each other a break
Christian Davis:
Under FPTP there are counter-intuitive conclusions to draw. By targeting Conservatives who are turned off by Johnson, a Lib Dem campaign in Batley & Spen could help Labour, by reducing the Tory total.
The message from C & A is clear. Non Tory parties need to ‘work together’, whatever that entails, if they are going to beat this shape shifting chameleon. It will be interesting to see what the Lib Dems and Greens do in Batley and Spen, or rather, how little they do. I would say that the same might be applied in Scotland and in Wales.
Mind you, after the massive pass the opposition parties dropped when they received the ball back in the Autumn of 2019 I’m not holding my breath. As my opponent, Douglas Hogg, said in his acceptance speech after the count in Sleaford and North Hykeham Parliamentary Constituency election back in 1997; “Tories always win in the end”. On that occasion it was probably the 8,000 or so votes I managed to get in third place and the nearly 3,000 that the Referendum Party candidate received in fourth that stopped Labour’s young Sean Harriss from doing the well nigh impossible and overhauling the now Lord Hailsham. There was a twinkle in his eye when he said it, aimed clearly at the hordes of blue rosettes in the audience. That has been reality seemingly for ever where I live. And the answer? Compromise? Pragmatism? Realism? You make your choice. If not, it will again be a case of divide and rule.
We started to demolish the Blue Wall in the 1990s; I’m surprised Ed doesn’t remember. It was going quite well for about a decade. Then a bloke came along and promised to double our number of MPs over the course of two general elections. It’s the only thing that anyone has ever said in a leadership campaign that I can remember. I didn’t believe him so I voted for the other bloke, who lost. The bloke who promised to double our number of MPs over the course of two general elections almost destroyed the party! That helped the Tories to rebuild the Blue Wall that we’re facing now.
@Peter Residorf. You are correct -the promised ‘doubling of MP’s over 2 GE’s’ was in reality the biggest net loss since 1970 in the 2010 GE and near annihilation in 2015.
But don’t forget that prior to that we had also started to breach the Red Wall too. Gaining Chesterfield in 2001 was only the 3rd gain from Labour in a GE since WW2, but in 2005 we gained 11 from Labour -unprecedented since Labour replaced the Liberals as the second Party of British politics back in 1922. We had also taken control of traditional Labour urban areas at Council level, such as Chesterfield, Newcastle and Sheffield.
In all the very justifiable pleasure at the brilliant win in Chesham, the tone of some of the official statements worries me a bit. Have we ceased to be a national Party? Do we only aspire to represent so called Core Vote areas of educated, urban, professionals in London and the South East?
It is not just that the Greens and Labour also see their future as fishing in the same constrained pool -where, as Jonathan Friedland pointed out in the Guardian yesterday, there are not enough voters to turn the Cons out of Government. It is also that, surely, as a serious political party rather than a niche pressure group, we want to be relevant to the lives of people in the Midlands and the North too? If we cease to have anything to say to people who live on the Council Estate I grew up on in Sheffield, or to those in Chesterfield I represent now as a Cllr and previously as an MP, then what would be the point of continuing?
The Liberal Democrats need to start again somewhere and Chesham and Amersham is as good a place as anywhere, The area may have changed somewhat since my days, but even the so called prosperous South has people who live on council estates and others who do not aspire to be the educated, urban professionals referred to, I should know I have been educated at the university of life as did many of my contemporaries with whom I grew up alongside.
When the celebrations finally do die down it might be time to reassess what kind of party the Lib Dems wish to become. The C&A campaign was principally based around opposition to HS2 and the Tory plans to liberalise planning laws.
The Conservatives most progressive policy, IMO, was for more homes to built especially in the SE of England where they are needed.
So it looks like the winning formula as discovered by Sarah Brown is somewhat at odds with stated Lib Dem and progressive principles. It doesn’t make any sense to want an ever ending supply of overseas workers to run the NHS, to pick our apples and strawberries etc etc ie all the jobs that British workers are supposedly too lazy to do, and at the same time want to deny them any chance of finding somewhere decent to live.
Sorry that should be Sarah Green.
You seem to be mixing up your Sarah brown field sites with your Sarah Green field sites.
@Paul Holmes
One of the successes of 1997-2005/2010 compared to 1983-1992 was that we concentrated our vote. 5% can get you 50 seats if you are the SNP. It is clear that our first tranche of gains will be the Tory “home counties” seats. In fact some of these such as Cheadle, Hazel Grove, Harrogate and Knaresborough etc. happen to be in the North. The quicker we can do that and gather low hanging fruit, the quicker we can move on to more difficult seats.
None of us like it that we went backwards but that is the reality of the situation. And you know full well the “chicken and egg” situation that we often face – no-one votes for us because no-one votes for us….
Nobody denies we always need more houses wherever! It is where and how they are built that concerns many of us and the threat of taking away any local voice on these matters that bother we ordinary citizens. Property developers are happy to construct large estates with the least preparation costs to make even more profits ,which also enables them to donate even more to Conservative funds and so it goes on! I thought we were living in a democracy and perhaps C+A has proved that we do?
It’s good to see the Conservatives pegged back, but I think it’s reasonable to raise concerns about how, and the party that is being built here. (NB I’ve left so I’m not necessarily in close contact with current trends but feel I know enough to comment).
I think it’s reasonable to see the campaign in Chesham &Amersham as small ‘c’ conservative and localist — don’t build that railway here, don’t build on our greenbelt, don’t manage our council badly, London can’t tell us what to do, maybe a number of us regret what we’ve lost in leaving the EU, and maybe some of us feel the current Prime Minister is a bit boorish and doesn’t keep his promises and principles and some of his friends are getting carried away with being rude to footballers taking the knee.
Although there’s a little bit of devolutionist, democratic liberalism in, there, it’s hard to see a full mandate for the wider range of Lib Dem policies — particularly the various ones arising from the ‘radical’ left / identity-politics factions of the party. Whilst Munira Wilson may be right to say the Tory Right has overplayed the ‘war on woke’ (particularly with regard to race), it may still be true that the liberal left has overplayed the appetite for a war on the ‘anti-woke’ and some aspects of the culture war may still have legs).
In particular, if the party wishes to smile on democratic localism and ‘we do it our way round here’, it needs to ask itself what it does when its ‘radical’ and ‘progressive’ policies (whether the social or the economic ones), draw it into tension with its localist and small-c-conservative tendencies, apart from trying to keep the relevant activists and voters far enough away from each other so they can’t see each other.
I hear a few people talking about getting the balance of power in the next Parliament which I assume is code for another coalition. Some people never learn. Still it was a wonderful victory and contrary to some reports BBC Radio 4 did give it plenty of attention in the morning bulletins from at least 6 am onwards.
I cannot call on any scientific evidence for the following; but I have always been fascinated by the statements of winning candidates, when they affirm that it is their intention to represent ALL electors regardless of political allegiance. Good on them if they do. However, besides representing a constituency, Ward or Division, those elected under a party banner will usually be expected to tow the party line.
I wonder how many electors actually vote for the person, or because of a particular issue, rather than the party? At council level, this is often the case; but I would doubt whether this happens at parliamentary level, except under exceptional circumstances, which were possibly in play last Thursday. I quite admire the MP or councillor, who votes according to their conscience . I fully understand Edmund Burke’s words about where, in his opinion, an MP’s loyalties should lie. However, whether you consider yourself to be a representative or a delegate, if you ignore the concerns of your electors you deserve to be given a strong message. So, in opposing HS2, Ms Green would have had my backing. Sometimes you do have to bite the bullet, as happened with tuition fees, although even there were exceptions as was the case with former Lib Dem MP, Stephen Lloyd, who resigned the party whip in 2018 over Brexit.
My former MP, Tory, Stephen Phillips, went up in my estimation, when he stood down in 2016, citing “irreconcilable differences with the current government”. He could have resigned the whip or followed the example of another Lincolnshire MP, Quentin Davies, who defected to Labour in 2007; but obviously preferred a clean break, for whatever reason. It’s a pity more elected members do not have the courage of their convictions. Mind you, it made no difference in the subsequent by election, which the Tories comfortably held.
As a supporter of the so-called progressive alliance, I welcome the Lib Dem victory in Chesham and Amersham. Clearly, thousands of Labour voters decided to support the Lib Dems as the party most likely to challenge the Tories. Keir Starmer didn’t seem to mind this movement of voters.
In the interest of building an alternative movement and cross party alliances, will the Lib Dems be advising their supporters in Batley and Spen to support the Labour candidate?
@Simon Hebditch
Thanks for your comment.
The Labour party didn’t advise its supporters to vote Liberal Democrat in Chesham and Amersham – although clearly thousands decided to do so.
And the Labour party also put out its leaflets in Chesham and Amersham saying to vote Labour and one would expect nothing less of an independent political party.
There were some Labour voters in C&A that did not want to support the Lib Dems. Obviously people vote according to what delivers the most “political benefit” for them and they should have that choice. And unless we get a similar system to that for mayors etc. where you can express a second preference if you first doesn’t get enough support from your fellow voters – many will vote differently than they would “ideally” if they lived in a different constituency. And of course we did give the people of Britain the opportunity to adopt such a system and they decided not to in a referendum. With it has to be said the rather lukewarm support of the Labour party and Labour MPs.
I am sure that Labour will be pumping out the leaflets in B&S to Lib Dems to explain the situation to them just as the Lib Dems did to Labour supporters in C&A. And it looks as if half of Lib Dems in B&S may be switching with the Lib Dem rating down from 4.7% to 3% in the Survation constituency poll.
But I am not sure that either Labour or Lib Dem leaders can – even if they wanted to – direct independently minded voters as if they were some army there to do their bidding.
@nvelope2003
Article 24 of the Lib Dem constitution outlines how the Liberal Democrats would act in the event of “Support for a government which contains other political parties”. And Mark Pack wrote an article on it at https://www.markpack.org.uk/130878/the-triple-lock-lib-dem-procedures-in-case-of-a-hung-parliament/
https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/libdems/pages/376/attachments/original/1588326107/Federal_Constitution_of_the_Liberal_Democrats_april_2020.pdf
He noted: “this applies not only to full-on coalition but also to any situation in which the Liberal Democrats will “support” a government that contains at least one non-Lib Dem.”
Essentially Mark says that this is essentially what happened in 2010 with the parliamentary party in consultation with the Federal Board and the Federal Policy Committee coming to an agreement with other party(ies) if they do and now an automatic referral to a special conference of all members for agreement.
The reason to outline all this is to say that it given the experience of the coalition, I think it might be some time before our MPs vote for a full coalition given the fate of Lib Dem MPs in 2015 – let alone the party as a whole at a special conference.
But… I think we do need to be thinking about what happens in the event of a hung parliament as I guess there is roughly about a 1 in 4 chance of it happening at any given election….
Michael 1: Apart from the arithmetical error (4.7% going down to 3% is not half), what makes you think a third (as it actually is, approximately) of the Lib Dem vote is going to Labour on the basis of that Survation opinion poll? It also shows Labour at 41%, down from 42.7%), and a rise in the Tory share by 11 percentiles to 47%. Also the poll was done before the C&A result came out, and before the more dedicated Lib Dem activists in C&A who now have nothing else to do will have gone to B&S to campaign. probably mostly in those areas where we have some strength at the local Council level. And we will probably moistly take votes that would otherwise go to the Tories.
I absolutely agree that we cannot direct our supporters to vote for another party according to an agreement or even by unilateral action. Yes, it worked for the Brexit Party, but that’s because the BP was a Nigel Farage fan club whose supporters would do whatever he told them to. I can’t say anything about Labour, but the Lib Dems are certainly not a party that’s simply the tool of its leader.
Looks like you’re quite happy with FPTP this time around?
PS the Survation poll for Batley & Spen has George Galloway on 6%. I think Labour will need to focus on squeezing “Gorgeous” George’s vote more than on squeezing the Lib Dems (whose share is both too small to matter and probably unsqueezable anyway, the anti-Tory voters already knowing to vote Labour). This may be a tough one, as his vote is mainly Corbynistas who just want to embarass Starmer and really don’t mind if the Tories win as a result.
Douglas Beckley: What is your point? Lib Dems got 56% of the vote in C&A. Many proportional systems also have by-elections to fill casual vacancies, in which case the candidate with the most votes wins. Only one candidate can win if there is only one vacancy. What are you expecting? A job share? In any case, it’s the system, and we have to play by it, however we might feel about it.
@Michael1. You ignore my point that we used to be able to win seats as varied as Cheadle, Chesterfield and Ceredigion. Now we seem to celebrate the fact that we are confined almost entirely to affluent, urban middle class seats around London and the South East.
I thought we believed we should be more, not less, diverse as a Party!
@Alex Macfie
“Michael 1: the arithmetical error (4.7% going down to 3% is not half),”
Oh… you’re right – I was dividing 1.5% by 3% – I got my denominator wrong! And you don’t want to do that!
The movements between parties is a little more complicated than you say. Firstly George Galloway is standing, (as you say in your PS) a former MP for Bradford West & he’s on 6% in the Survation poll & is thought by commentators to be attracting Muslim voters – who in general are heavy Lab voters.
Probably benefitting the Tories also is:
There’s no Brexit Party candidate (3.2% at the General)
And probably as there is no Heavy Wollen District Independents candidate & they got a hefty 12.2% at the General Election. Of course we don’t know who their “second preferences” were. But Wikipedia does note: “Its leader is Aleksandar Lukic, who was the chairman for UKIP’s Dewsbury, Batley and Spen branch until 2017.”
Probably helping Labour is the Greens withdrew their candidate after “highly offensive” social media posts from about 10 years ago and didn’t replace him – https://www.examinerlive.co.uk/news/local-news/green-candidate-batley-spen-election-20757312
You’re right to point out that we don’t know who the former Lib Dems are switching to – I was pointing out that they *were* switching from the Lib Dems unbidden – although at least before C&A we were lower in the polls than at the General so that (probably) accounts for the lower rating.
You’re also right to point out that there’s an opportunity for us to attract Tory Remain voters – who as you say may not want to support Labour but may be possibly us especially now after C&A & 23% of Remain voters in B&S in the poll were supporting the Tories. And post-C&A is a good time to be knocking on doors!
On the poll – it’s only a sample of 323 (after undecideds etc. are taken out) so at a guesstimate a margin of error of perhaps +/- 6% (Survation doesn’t give an MoE) so that could be a Lab lead of 6% or a Con lead of 18%!
There is also some speculation that pollsters may under-sample Asian/Muslim voters so that could be a bigger vote for Galloway which might lower Labour’s vote but also a lower vote for the Conservatives (as there might have been too many non-Asian voters proportionately in the poll).
so…. !!!!!
—
As you pointed my error out – I have to say “moistly” [sic] taking votes – does rather intrigue me 🙂 !!!!!
@Paul Holmes
Come on!
I won’t be celebrating anything until we have won 650 seats! Well – OK may be a sip of champagne at 326!
There are important points.
Firstly we followed the same trajectory of winning “affluent middle class” seats in 1997 and went on – with immense hard work – to win seats like Chesterfield. But ’97 (and 2001) gave us the credibility to win in places like Chesterfield.
As increasingly between 1997-2010 (but mainly not until *after* 1997 or 2001) we *are* winning at a local council level in inner cities a bit more in places like Liverpool, Sunderland etc. Now this is tough and very hard work – because Labour voters haven’t forgiven us for the coalition and austerity – even if Labour didn’t leave us any money. But we are doing it and thank God we are because there is nothing worse than a Labour “single party state”.
And we can bemoan and decry the coalition as much as we want. – but unless you have acquired a TARDIS we can’t change history!
You said earlier on LDV that during this year’s locals you were finding a more positive response to us – and I notice that you made gains in the Chesterfield area.
We run Portsmouth City Council which had a stonking Labour majority on the council up until and past 1997. And Portsmouth has some of most deprived wards and neighbourhoods in the country. And we would have “won” Portsmouth South on this year’s local election results – although that will be tough to replicate at a General.
Secondly we are clearly at best at 1992 (roughly there in England). We can hate that we are not further ahead. But we have to go through 1997 yet…
And unless it is different from every other time winning C&A will mean a 4%-6% poll boost – and that will have an effect in EVERY SINGLE ward and constituency in the land – poor and rich.
Actually I pointed out that there are seats in the North we are on track to winning. We are on track for Cheadle, Wales is Wales and I have no doubt that we will win back Chesterfield in the future – although it wasn’t in our first wave of wins last time. And we already represent the seat the furthest from London.
As you know you can be the Alliance in ’83 and get 25% of the vote and 23 seats or you can be the Lib Dems in 1997 and concentrate that vote a bit and get 17% and 46 seats. Now being the Alliance in 1983 won’t win us Labour facing seats any quicker indeed the exact opposite.
Michael 1: That was quite obviously a typing slip, very different from a mathematical error! It’s an eternal annoyance that the comment section of this site doesn’t have an edit function, so typos are set in stone for eternity (or for as long as LDV exists).
So in effect Ed Davey is boasting the Tories are becoming the party of the Red Wall, of Hartlepool – of decent hard-working working-class folk who pay their way and do the right thing – while the Lib Dems will become the party of the Blue Wall – of southern middle-class NIMBYs who couldn’t give a stuff about the working poor, of greedy people who want it all for themselves. This is not something to boast about. Davey claims these NIMBYs used to vote for a “decent Conservative” but that Johnson is not one; it is more true to say the new Lib Dem voters are the ones who are not decent.
John Marriot: One knows that the resignation of Stephen Phillips as MP for Sleaford and North Hykeham was genuinely principled by the fact that he did not stand in the consequent by-election. Quite a contrast from the vanity flounce of Zac Goldsmith whose resignation triggered the Richmond Park by-election, which he hoped would return him on a wave of admiration for his supposed act of “principle”.
nvelope2003 19th Jun ’21 – 4:01pm…………..I hear a few people talking about getting the balance of power in the next Parliament which I assume is code for another coalition. Some people never learn………….
There is nothing, inherently, wrong with coalitions (formal or informal); however, like marriages, they should be entered into carefully.
Sadly, in 2010, we had a leadership who believed that ‘commitment to principles’ (tuition fees, NHS, secret courts, extr bedrooms, etc.) were for ‘ordinary’ members.. Afterwards, like the leadership of our ‘senior partner’, they moved onwards and upwards; financially if not morally…
Coalitions, again like marriages, require compromise but there will also be ‘red lines’ that neither partner should ask the other to break…
Congratulations to Sarah Green and everyone who campaigned and achieved a fantastic result.
This result shows that the party is broadly on the right track. Yes, local issues were a big factor but a 25% swing is enormous and suggests that there is wider disenchantment with this government in many parts of the country.
The way forward is to focus on seats like C&A going forward. We also shouldn’t abandon our USP of being pro-European.
It has always been the case in recent decades that Lib Dem support has been concentrated in the South of England and Scotland. That was the case in 2005. So we need not be bothered about it.
expats: The Liberals and Liberal Democrats have been involved in coalitions or arrangements with other parties in 1910 (Irish Nationalists), 1916 (Conservatives) 1918 (Conservatives) 1923/24 (Labour Party), 1929 (Labour), 1931 (National Government), 1939 (Wartime Coalition), 1976?) Labour, 2010 (Conservative). Apart from the 1939 wartime coalition all these deals with other parties resulted in disaster for the Liberals particularly the support for the 1923/24 Labour Government which caused the collapse of the Liberals as a party of Government falling from 159 seats to 40 of which only 8 were held in seats also contested by Labour and the Conservatives, some of the others unopposed or where one or other of the big parties did not always contest the seat.
I do not think the Liberal leaders were all idiots. They were probably doing what they thought was for the best but they were wrong and the lesson is quite clear. No deals with other parties as they always result in harm for the party if not complete disaster as in 1924 and 2015. Most Liberal Democrat voters would vote for one or other of the big parties and some for the Greens if there was no Lib Dem candidate but if the party does a deal with the party they dislike most they will be upset and vote for the one they dislike least next time.