|
|
Post by Merseymike on Jul 9, 2021 9:46:46 GMT
It was a gain, two months ago was the first time the Tories had ever won that ward. sorry, yes, you are right..... |
|
timmullen1
Labour
Closing account as BossMan declines to respond to messages seeking support.
Posts: 11,823 
|
Post by timmullen1 on Jul 9, 2021 10:07:04 GMT
Which is slightly unusual, given that the trend in these sorts of seats has tended to be the other way. Is it under-sized? I assume the new town area remains intact? Yes, if you browse andrewteale ‘s Preview he goes into some detail. |
|
johnloony
Conservative
Posts: 24,558
Member is Online
|
Post by johnloony on Jul 9, 2021 10:11:09 GMT
Would appear Conservative have gained Markhall (note one word on the declaration paper), Harlow: What "one word" am I supposed to be looking at?? |
|
|
|
Post by Merseymike on Jul 9, 2021 10:13:41 GMT
Is it under-sized? I assume the new town area remains intact? Yes, if you browse andrewteale ‘s Preview he goes into some detail. I meant in terms of the revised proposals - its taken in some villages from its invention, and actually lost a couple in the last revision as Church Langley had increased the population of the town. What is proposed in terms of additional rural areas being added to the seat? |
|
|
|
Post by andrewp on Jul 9, 2021 10:20:07 GMT
Yes, if you browse andrewteale ‘s Preview he goes into some detail. I meant in terms of the revised proposals - its taken in some villages from its invention, and actually lost a couple in the last revision as Church Langley had increased the population of the town. What is proposed in terms of additional rural areas being added to the seat? In the initial proposals one ward is added- Broadley Common, Epping Upland and Nazeing. That would potentially add about another 800 to the Con. majority. |
|
johnloony
Conservative
Posts: 24,558
Member is Online
|
Post by johnloony on Jul 9, 2021 10:21:23 GMT
"I have been a councillor in the London Borough of Southwark..."(Oh, that's interesting. I wonder when Southwark had a Communist councillor?) "I left the Labour Party when that party returned to being a party that supports the Capitalist System."The Labour Party has never returned to being such a party, because it never deviated away from supporting the capitalist system in the first place.
|
|
timmullen1
Labour
Closing account as BossMan declines to respond to messages seeking support.
Posts: 11,823
|
Post by timmullen1 on Jul 9, 2021 10:22:07 GMT
Would appear Conservative have gained Markhall (note one word on the declaration paper), Harlow: What "one word" am I supposed to be looking at?? Markhall as opposed to Mark Hall as it’s been referred to in this thread. |
|
|
|
Post by East Anglian Lefty on Jul 9, 2021 10:37:29 GMT
Mark Hall (which is incidentally where my father spent his early childhood) is certainly somewhere Labour needs to win to have a shot at the Harlow seat, but I suspect if we do win the seat again it won't be down to restoring our old margins there so much as narrowing the gap in the Tory parts of the seat. Mind you, Harlow itself is moving down the target list in Essex and I don't see that changing without a lot more housebuilding in the area. I think that's unlikely. Harlow's middle class areas attract the Daily Mail middle classes, not social progressives And the last housebuilding programme created the Church Langley ward which is full of exactly those sort of people and is impregnably Tory Church Langley was built a couple of decades ago. Given that Harlow is a short train ride from London, it's likely that new residents will overwhelmingly be London transplants, who will bring their politics with them. And most of the Daily Mail middle classes moved out of London to buy a house years ago - London residents in the private rented sector are generally much more pro-Labour, even if they are comparatively well-off. But the issue is that Harlow is largely built out (and the large social rent sector reduces housing turnover) and the Tories in the area (especially those in the Epping Forest bits of the seat) have fought tooth and nail against any large urban extensions to the town. What "one word" am I supposed to be looking at?? Markhall as opposed to Mark Hall as it’s been referred to in this thread. No. The area is called Mark Hall. It's two words. |
|
|
|
Post by Merseymike on Jul 9, 2021 10:41:05 GMT
I think that's unlikely. Harlow's middle class areas attract the Daily Mail middle classes, not social progressives And the last housebuilding programme created the Church Langley ward which is full of exactly those sort of people and is impregnably Tory Church Langley was built a couple of decades ago. Given that Harlow is a short train ride from London, it's likely that new residents will overwhelmingly be London transplants, who will bring their politics with them. And most of the Daily Mail middle classes moved out of London to buy a house years ago - London residents in the private rented sector are generally much more pro-Labour, even if they are comparatively well-off. But the issue is that Harlow is largely built out (and the large social rent sector reduces housing turnover) and the Tories in the area (especially those in the Epping Forest bits of the seat) have fought tooth and nail against any large urban extensions to the town. Will they choose to move to Harlow, though? I have my doubts - there are alternatives and to be frank, almost any others might have more appeal. And because of the high level of social housing, houses to buy are more expensive than might be imagined. The Tory attitude has always mystified me - they opposed Church Langley and yet it has benefitted them politically |
|
|
|
Post by pepperminttea on Jul 9, 2021 10:57:53 GMT
I think that's unlikely. Harlow's middle class areas attract the Daily Mail middle classes, not social progressives And the last housebuilding programme created the Church Langley ward which is full of exactly those sort of people and is impregnably Tory Church Langley was built a couple of decades ago. Given that Harlow is a short train ride from London, it's likely that new residents will overwhelmingly be London transplants, who will bring their politics with them. And most of the Daily Mail middle classes moved out of London to buy a house years ago - London residents in the private rented sector are generally much more pro-Labour, even if they are comparatively well-off. But the issue is that Harlow is largely built out (and the large social rent sector reduces housing turnover) and the Tories in the area (especially those in the Epping Forest bits of the seat) have fought tooth and nail against any large urban extensions to the town. Markhall as opposed to Mark Hall as it’s been referred to in this thread. No. The area is called Mark Hall. It's two words. It depends on whether the new residents would be renting or buying. If there's high rates of renters (even ones with decent jobs) then yes the area would shift towards Labour. If most are buying, as is most likely in an area like Harlow which is still relatively affordable, then the Tory majority would be compounded. One of the most important factors as to whether a voter is likely to pick Tory or Labour is whether they own property (particularly if it's unmortgaged) and the collapse in rates of Home ownership in London (exasperated by sky high rents) is the primary cause of the Conservative collapse in the capital. Conversely many areas of the 'red wall' that have swung right recently have pretty high rates of Home Ownership and their realignment into the Conservative column was merely sped up by social issues/Brexit. |
|
|
|
Post by Merseymike on Jul 9, 2021 11:03:37 GMT
Church Langley was built a couple of decades ago. Given that Harlow is a short train ride from London, it's likely that new residents will overwhelmingly be London transplants, who will bring their politics with them. And most of the Daily Mail middle classes moved out of London to buy a house years ago - London residents in the private rented sector are generally much more pro-Labour, even if they are comparatively well-off. But the issue is that Harlow is largely built out (and the large social rent sector reduces housing turnover) and the Tories in the area (especially those in the Epping Forest bits of the seat) have fought tooth and nail against any large urban extensions to the town. No. The area is called Mark Hall. It's two words. It depends on whether the new residents would be renting or buying. If there's high rates of renters (even ones with decent jobs) then yes the area would shift towards Labour. If most are buying, as is most likely in an area like Harlow which is still relatively affordable, then the Tory majority would be compounded. One of the most important factors as to whether a voter is likely to pick Tory or Labour is whether they own property (particularly if it's unmortgaged) and the collapse in rates of Home ownership in London (exasperated by sky high rents) is the primary cause of the Conservative collapse in the capital. Conversely many areas of the 'red wall' that have swung right recently have pretty high rates of Home Ownership and their realignment into the Conservative column was merely sped up by social issues/Brexit. Hard to know whether this is an age or a home ownership effect, though - given that the vast majority of unmortgaged owners will be over 50. I'm just not sure that those who do decide to buy when moving out from rented accommodation in London would necessarily choose Harlow, though, given its not exactly the most picturesque or cultured town, even in Essex! because while it is 'relatively' affordable, its not as cheap as might be imagined, because of the relative short supply owing to the high number of social housing renters. |
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Jul 9, 2021 11:08:00 GMT
My word, talk about a mass rejection! Con -24%, Lab -36%, Lib Dem -16%. Was this something about St. Neot's or did this part of Cambridgeshire in the locals reject all parties in a similar way? Surely *you* should see this as a positive vote for the Greens? It does seem in the "Tory" shires people are voting quite a bit for non-Tories at the moment which may be something that is bubbling up. The Tory strength shouldn't though be underestimated - particularly at a parliamentary level. And also the electorate are distributing their favours (and votes!) between all four possibilities - Labour, Lib Dems, Greens and independents. It has to be said that if it hadn't been for the coalition years (and everything else had been the same - which of course it wouldn't have been!) the Lib Dems would be absolutely "coining it in" in areas such as these - and that they are not shows they still have some way to go to overcome the reticence of people to vote for them stemming from that period. I have no knowledge of Huntingdonshire but it seems from afar doing some research that this is quite a strong area for independents within Huntingdonshire. An independent won (just!) the county council division which the ward is part of this year. Independents won all 3 seats in 2 other wards in St Neots (presumably - the ward titles have St Neots in them!) - under the banner "Putting St Neots Residents First" in 2018 when there were all-up elections. And these seem to have combined with other independents that were elected to form the 10-strong Huntingdonshire District Council Independent Group. But the independent who won didn't stand as part of the "St Neots Independent Group" banner (which is registered under with the EC) en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_Huntingdonshire_District_Council_electionwww.huntingdonshire.gov.uk/media/5321/election-of-county-councillor-for-st-neots-east-and-gransden.pdfapplications.huntingdonshire.gov.uk/moderngov/mgMemberIndex.aspx?FN=PARTY&VW=LIST&PIC=0search.electoralcommission.org.uk/English/Registrations/PP6403www.huntingdonshire.gov.uk/media/5392/statement-of-person-nominated-st-neots-east-ward-8-july-2021.pdfDon't fall into the trap of overthinking all this. These are simple local elections of local people to lpcal office on low polls in an era of release from lockdown for some and continued inputted fear in others, all against a background of the mid-term of a long entrenched party with a very big majority. Thus the choice is sensibly made by a small minority of the electorate on a basis of personality, who they know, whom they like and he who looks as if he might look after the patch best. Most local elections at such times are hardly regarded at all in party political terms by most electors. Read nothing into these rural wards at all. The young man in Devon did well because they liked him not because he was Labour. He will have achieved it 'despite' being Labour. |
|
|
|
Post by yellowperil on Jul 9, 2021 11:21:14 GMT
Would appear Conservative have gained Markhall (note one word on the declaration paper), Harlow: What "one word" am I supposed to be looking at?? Markhall |
|
timmullen1
Labour
Closing account as BossMan declines to respond to messages seeking support.
Posts: 11,823
|
Post by timmullen1 on Jul 9, 2021 11:24:31 GMT
Markhall as opposed to Mark Hall as it’s been referred to in this thread. No. The area is called Mark Hall. It's two words. Whatever it may be called, the Council’s official documentation last night had it as one word. |
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Jul 9, 2021 11:25:16 GMT
Yes, if you browse andrewteale ‘s Preview he goes into some detail. I meant in terms of the revised proposals - its taken in some villages from its invention, and actually lost a couple in the last revision as Church Langley had increased the population of the town. What is proposed in terms of additional rural areas being added to the seat? As andrewp has said the only ward being added is Broadley Common, Epping Upland and Nazeing (electorate 1,768) but as you note this doesn't even compensate for the areas lost in 2010. Broadley Common and Nazeing were in the Harlow constituency from 1974 until 2010 and additionally North Weald Bassett (with c. 4,000 voters) and that area is not returning so the constituency will still have a smaller rural hinterland (at least in terms of electorate) than it did before 2010. |
|
|
|
Post by michael2019 on Jul 9, 2021 11:34:53 GMT
Don't fall into the trap of overthinking all this. These are simple local elections of local people to lpcal office on low polls in an era of release from lockdown for some and continued inputted fear in others, all against a background of the mid-term of a long entrenched party with a very big majority. Thus the choice is sensibly made by a small minority of the electorate on a basis of personality, who they know, whom they like and he who looks as if he might look after the patch best. Most local elections at such times are hardly regarded at all in party political terms by most electors. Read nothing into these rural wards at all. The young man in Devon did well because they liked him not because he was Labour. He will have achieved it 'despite' being Labour. Possibly! And it's a fair point. And there were clearly a lot of unusual factors in play last night - as indeed I was pointing out! I think what is interesting that for example in the late '90s - people just went out and voted Labour as they wanted Labour to win the General Election. And that persisted for some time - during Blair's honeymoon well up to 2001. In some areas you could at that time put the best local candidate ever up against the proverbial "donkey with a red rosette" and the donkey would win! And this was the case in some of the less Labour voting areas - prob. the Midlands, New towns etc. And you are absolutely right that people answer a different question for local, European (when they existed) elections and parliamentary and even to degree local *by*- elections. As in the May local elections more vote and I suspect more vote on party lines and the turnout is normally greater as there is publicity in the media etc. Nevertheless although they *are* local elections and *by*-elections so people answer different questions - they *do* track opinion poll ratings The BBC Projected National Share (PNS) normally shows the May local elections to be in line with opinion poll ratings - although Lib Dems may do 6%-8% than their poll rating, Tories and Labour 3%-4% less well and there are obv. more voting independent. And although a PNS hasn't been calculated for the Greens - in May they got 11% *where they stood* (which is different from a PNS). So of course you have to disentangle local factors which may be huge in some seats, negligible in others. But the May locals did indicate some problems for the Tories in the Shires - and it does seem that other parties can pick up seats from the Tories - even if they need some helping factors sometimes. What is encouraging for the Tories is that it is split four ways so they may well divide and rule and it is, as you say, at a time of "mid-terms" although it may be a little before "mid-term" due to covid. And in addition to pick up a a seat at a parliamentary level is tough - you are fighting an incumbent and you have to do it not across one ward but many! |
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Jul 9, 2021 11:35:44 GMT
An interesting night with 6 seats switching hands (and almost 7) out of 7! A very good night for the Greens with almost 3 gains! And some stonking increases in votes. Conversely a poor night for the Tories losing votes in most places and only really gaining votes where an independent didn't stand this time Interesting times? No. Not really. Not much significance at all to any party other than the GP who do appear to be successful in target receptive areas where they put the work in. These are low TO summer elections where people have much else on thir minds and are not thinking much in party terms at all. |
|
|
|
Post by evergreenadam on Jul 9, 2021 11:45:26 GMT
I meant in terms of the revised proposals - its taken in some villages from its invention, and actually lost a couple in the last revision as Church Langley had increased the population of the town. What is proposed in terms of additional rural areas being added to the seat? As andrewp has said the only ward being added is Broadley Common, Epping Upland and Nazeing (electorate 1,768) but as you note this doesn't even compensate for the areas lost in 2010. Broadley Common and Nazeing were in the Harlow constituency from 1974 until 2010 and additionally North Weald Bassett (with c. 4,000 voters) and that area is not returning so the constituency will still have a smaller rural hinterland (at least in terms of electorate) than it did before 2010. And yet it is more Tory than ever! |
|
|
|
Post by michael2019 on Jul 9, 2021 11:47:49 GMT
An interesting night with 6 seats switching hands (and almost 7) out of 7! A very good night for the Greens with almost 3 gains! And some stonking increases in votes. Conversely a poor night for the Tories losing votes in most places and only really gaining votes where an independent didn't stand this time Interesting times? No. Not really. Not much significance at all to any party other than the GP who do appear to be successful in target receptive areas where they put the work in. These are low TO summer elections where people have much else on thir minds and are not thinking much in party terms at all. I have answered your points above - which I am in more than some agreement. I perhaps to be clearer should have said that it was a poor night for the Conservative *candidates* and a good night for other party candidates. And it is clearly factually correct about *this* night. Whether it has wider relevance is not a point that I was making. It's up for debate - It might or it might not. As I said above - it does seem that other parties can make some headway in the Tory shires - whether or not that will show up in the next General Election we don't yet know but there are also some encouraging factors for the Tories as I also outlined. But I'd suggest the time for party activists to get worried about their party's performance is when they think everything is going well.... |
|
|
|
Post by East Anglian Lefty on Jul 9, 2021 13:23:07 GMT
No. The area is called Mark Hall. It's two words. Whatever it may be called, the Council’s official documentation last night had it as one word. And their website today and all the election notices therein consistently refer to it as Mark Hall. It's a really obvious typo. |
|
