|
Post by yellowperil on Sept 19, 2019 10:52:50 GMT
The Peterborough Telegraph has been through the expenses returns. (Limit was £100,000 as for all Parliamentary byelections) Lisa Forbes (Labour) £82,708.32, including £7,357.72 on Facebook ads, £9,823 on other adverts, £12,685.04 on printing, and £600 to hire the Holiday Inn for a Gordon Brown speech Mike Greene (Brexit Party) £76,656.61, including £2,620.30 on newspaper adverts, £9,271.49 on Facebook, and £21,420.20 on printing. Also includes £8,400 on security. Paul Bristow (Conservative) £91,206.32, of which printing was £44,113.45, and £7,889.27 was media and digital advertising. The transport expenses were nil. Beki Sellick (Liberal Democrat) £26,880.44, with printing covering £17,737.40 and advertising totalling £1,977.52 John Whitby (UKIP) £7,822, of which £6,340 was for printing leaflets. Peter Ward (Renew) £17,984 including £4,677.23 on Facebook advertising, £1,200 on digital marketing and £5,579.76 on digital advertising, all for 45 votes. Patrick O'Flynn (SDP) £18,599.35 for the scarcely better total of 135 votes. Joseph Wells (Green Party) £10 but the Peterborough Telegraph has reminded them that a visit by Natalie Bennett incurred £15 more. Alan Hope (Loony) £nil. Later in the paper there's a full page advert for Mike Greene. Perhaps worth putting those expenses and votes they "bought" alongside, at least for the major players: Labour £82,708 and 10,484 votes BxP £76,656 and 9,801 votes Con £91,206 and 7,243 votes LD £26,880 and 4,149 votes SDP £ 18,599 and 135 votes Renew £ 17,984 and 45 votes UKIP £ 7822 and 400 votes GP £10 and 1,045 votes MRLP £0 and 112 votes I assume the other 6 candidates also had nil returns like the Loonies, and between them garnered 506 votes. What conclusions should I draw? Maybe if you are looking for value for money don't look to the Conservatives, who are even rather worse than Labour at getting a return on their investment, and LDs are significantly better than either without doing brilliantly, either. Brexiteers, on the other hand, might have spent more and won if they had really believed in themselves? They should have bought out UKIP? One just have to assume SDP and Renew were spending to buy something different than actual votes ? The Green Party are brilliant at getting something for nothing as long as they weren't interested in a serious campaign. Or of course expenses returns aren't worth the paper they are written on, and should be up for a major fiction prize?
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Sept 19, 2019 10:56:03 GMT
Patrick O'Flynn really jumped the gun joining the SDP and then through some kind of sense of honour sticking with it even after the Brexit party had emerged. He would have been well placed to take the BP nomination here had he not done that and possibly would have performed better*. Presumably he would also still be an MEP (unless he had won here of course)
*By which I mean performed better than Mike Green did, not better than Patrick did as an SDP candidate which is a given
|
|
|
Post by lennon on Sept 19, 2019 11:24:19 GMT
The Peterborough Telegraph has been through the expenses returns. (Limit was £100,000 as for all Parliamentary byelections) Lisa Forbes (Labour) £82,708.32, including £7,357.72 on Facebook ads, £9,823 on other adverts, £12,685.04 on printing, and £600 to hire the Holiday Inn for a Gordon Brown speech Mike Greene (Brexit Party) £76,656.61, including £2,620.30 on newspaper adverts, £9,271.49 on Facebook, and £21,420.20 on printing. Also includes £8,400 on security. Paul Bristow (Conservative) £91,206.32, of which printing was £44,113.45, and £7,889.27 was media and digital advertising. The transport expenses were nil. Beki Sellick (Liberal Democrat) £26,880.44, with printing covering £17,737.40 and advertising totalling £1,977.52 John Whitby (UKIP) £7,822, of which £6,340 was for printing leaflets. Peter Ward (Renew) £17,984 including £4,677.23 on Facebook advertising, £1,200 on digital marketing and £5,579.76 on digital advertising, all for 45 votes. Patrick O'Flynn (SDP) £18,599.35 for the scarcely better total of 135 votes. Joseph Wells (Green Party) £10 but the Peterborough Telegraph has reminded them that a visit by Natalie Bennett incurred £15 more. Alan Hope (Loony) £nil. Later in the paper there's a full page advert for Mike Greene. Perhaps worth putting those expenses and votes they "bought" alongside, at least for the major players: Labour £82,708 and 10,484 votes BxP £76,656 and 9,801 votes Con £91,206 and 7,243 votes LD £26,880 and 4,149 votes SDP £ 18,599 and 135 votes Renew £ 17,984 and 45 votes UKIP £ 7822 and 400 votes GP £10 and 1,045 votes MRLP £0 and 112 votes I assume the other 6 candidates also had nil returns like the Loonies, and between them garnered 506 votes. What conclusions should I draw? Maybe if you are looking for value for money don't look to the Conservatives, who are even rather worse than Labour at getting a return on their investment, and LDs are significantly better than either without doing brilliantly, either. Brexiteers, on the other hand, might have spent more and won if they had really believed in themselves? They should have bought out UKIP? One just have to assume SDP and Renew were spending to buy something different than actual votes ? The Green Party are brilliant at getting something for nothing as long as they weren't interested in a serious campaign. Or of course expenses returns aren't worth the paper they are written on, and should be up for a major fiction prize? When it comes to these sorts of comparisons - I always think that it's more accurate to include the £500 deposit as well (for those that don't retain it) Makes the 'Vote per £' numbers slightly more sensible / realistic for the smaller players,
|
|
|
Post by markgoodair on Sept 19, 2019 12:49:38 GMT
Works out at £7.89 per Labour vote £7.82 per Brexit Party LTD vote £12.59 per Conservative vote £6.49 per Liberal Democrat vote £137.77 per Renew Vote £19.56 per UKIP vote and just under a penny for each Green Party vote.
|
|
|
Post by yellowperil on Sept 19, 2019 15:30:12 GMT
Perhaps worth putting those expenses and votes they "bought" alongside, at least for the major players: Labour £82,708 and 10,484 votes BxP £76,656 and 9,801 votes Con £91,206 and 7,243 votes LD £26,880 and 4,149 votes SDP £ 18,599 and 135 votes Renew £ 17,984 and 45 votes UKIP £ 7822 and 400 votes GP £10 and 1,045 votes MRLP £0 and 112 votes I assume the other 6 candidates also had nil returns like the Loonies, and between them garnered 506 votes. What conclusions should I draw? Maybe if you are looking for value for money don't look to the Conservatives, who are even rather worse than Labour at getting a return on their investment, and LDs are significantly better than either without doing brilliantly, either. Brexiteers, on the other hand, might have spent more and won if they had really believed in themselves? They should have bought out UKIP? One just have to assume SDP and Renew were spending to buy something different than actual votes ? The Green Party are brilliant at getting something for nothing as long as they weren't interested in a serious campaign. Or of course expenses returns aren't worth the paper they are written on, and should be up for a major fiction prize? When it comes to these sorts of comparisons - I always think that it's more accurate to include the £500 deposit as well (for those that don't retain it) Makes the 'Vote per £' numbers slightly more sensible / realistic for the smaller players, fair point, but I wouldn't take my comments above too seriously.
|
|