Local Council by-elections 13th October 2022

[batman]

and with respect I can't agree with James Doyle that Labour deserves any positive score in his GWBWI. It was not a good municipal week for Labour. Perhaps next week and weeks thereafter will be better.

[batman]

Oct 14, 2022 8:58:37 GMT Merseymike said:

Allowing Keith Vaz and his cronies to take over Labour in Leicester East does not appear to be a very good idea

my strictures against Keith go back well over 40 years, dating back to when I knew him at university. I tried extremely hard to nip his political career in the bud by defeating his bid to be our parliamentary candidate in Richmond in 1983 (he was selected very narrowly over a straight-down-the-line Trotskyist, whom I supported & still know slightly) but was sadly unsuccessful. My warnings all proved to be justified.

[middleenglander]

Epping Forest: Waltham Abbey South West - Conservative gain

Party	2022 votes	2022 share	since 2021	since 2019	since 2016	since 2015
Conservative	260	55.2%	-13.9%	+17.2%	+13.6%	+9.2%
Green	211	44.8%	+39.6%	-17.2%	+21.2%	+31.4%
Labour			-19.8%
For Britain			-5.8%
UKIP					-34.9%	-31.6%
Liberal Democrat						-9.0%
Total votes	471		57%	59%	63%	26%

Swing: Green to Conservative 17¼% since 2019 but Conservative to Green if particularly meaningful 26¾% since 2021, 3¾% since 2016 and 11% since 2015

Council now:  36 Conservative, 13 Loughton Residents, 4 Liberal Democrat, 2 Green, 2 Independent, 1 British Democrat

Gloucester: Tuffley - Conservative hold

Party	2022 votes	2022 share	since 2021 "top"	since 2021 "average"	since 2016 "top"	since 2016 "average"
Conservative	502	34.9%	-13.5%	-13.6%	-8.4%	-9.8%
Liberal Democrat	487	33.8%	+28.3%	+28.0%	from nowhere	from nowhere
Labour	451	31.3%	-2.7%	-3.5%	-0.1%	+2.5%
Independent			-12.1%	-11.0%
UKIP					-17.8%	-18.7%
Green					-7.5%	-7.8%
Total votes	1,440		92%	97%	93%	97%

Swing:  Conservative to Liberal Democrat 21% since 2021

Council now:  24 Conservative, 11 Liberal Democrat, 3 Labour, 1 Independent

Hartlepool: Trostan - Labour hold

Party	2022 B votes	2022 B share	since 2022	since 2021 "top"	since 2021 "average"
Labour	450	50.8%	+0.1%	+14.9%	+16.1%
Independent	280	31.6%	+4.7%	-10.6%	-10.3%
Conservative	124	14.0%	-8.5%	from nowhere	from nowhere
Liberal Democrat	32	3.6%	from nowhere	from nowhere	from nowhere
Reform				-22.0%	-23.4%
Total votes	886		59%	37%	39%

Swing:  if entirely meaningful Labour to Independent 1¼% since May but Independent to Labour 12¾% / 13¼% since 2021

Council now:  14 Conservative, 13 Labour, 4 Independent, 2 Independent Union, 2 Putting Seaton First, 1 Hartlepool People

Leicester: North Evington - Conservative gain from Labour

Party	2022 votes	2022 share	since 2021	since 2019 "top"	since 2019 "average"	since 2015 "top"	since 2015 "average"
Conservative	3,441	49.6%	+11.4%	+32.7%	+33.2%	+32.5%	+32.2%
Green	1,790	25.8%	+22.2%	+20.0%	+19.8%	+20.7%	+20.2%
Labour	1,563	22.5%	-26.7%	-49.9%	-50.0%	-47.8%	-46.6%
Liberal Democrat	100	1.4%	-2.1%	-3.5%	-3.7%	from nowhere	from nowhere
TUSC	45	0.6%	-1.1%	from nowhere	from nowhere	-2.9%	-3.2%
Reform			-1.3%
For Britain			-1.0%
Independent			-0.9%
Communist			-0.5%
UKIP						-4.0%	-4.0%
Total votes	6,939		103%	97%	100%	84%	92%

Swing:  Labour to Conservative 19% since 2021 by-election, 41½% since 2019 and ~ 40% since 2015

Council now:  49 Labour, 2 Independent, 2 Conservative, 1 Liberal Democrat

Stockport: Edgley & Cheadle Heath - Labour hold

Party	2022 B votes	2022 B share	since 2022	since 2021	since 2019	since 2018
Labour	1,172	53.0%	-18.8%	-19.5%	-17.8%	-20.9%
Liberal Democrat	840	38.0%	+29.7%	+32.0%	+30.1%	+29.2%
Green	200	9.0%	+1.3%	+0.5%	-2.2%	+2.8%
Conservative			-10.2%	-13.0%	-10.1%	-8.1%
Reform			-2.0%
UKIP						-3.1%
Total votes	2,212		73%	63%	87%	96%

Swing:  Labour to Liberal Democrat 24¼% since May, 25¾% since 2021, 24% since 2019 and 25% since 2018

Council now:  28 Liberal Democrat, 25 Labour, 4 Conservative, 3 Independent Ratepayers, 2 Green, 1 Independent

[Chris from Brum]

Oct 14, 2022 8:10:51 GMT timmullen1 said:

The point wasn’t meant to be Leicester specific, although the general drift towards the Conservatives amongst Indian Hindus identified by the BES was probably a factor in Leicester, but was, as I actually typed, rebutting the allegation that Labour had a “tin ear” towards Muslim voters, when the BES found little slippage in support for the Party particularly amongst Pakistani and Bangladeshi Muslim voters.

There has certainly been what can be called "disappointment" among the Kashmiri muslim voters of Birmingham about SKS's lukewarm attitude towards support for their aspirations concerning the fate of Kashmir; he's seen as far too willing to listen to the Indian side (i.e. he hears both sides).

Now Kashmir is not a UK domestic political issue, and the ability of the UK government to do anything other than take the blame for the botched partition is very limited, so I think SKS is doing the right thing.  But there are a couple of hundred thousand Kashmiris in Birmingham who think otherwise.

[The Bishop]

Oct 14, 2022 8:29:16 GMT yellowperil said:

Okay , there were special factors in several of last night's by-election results, but across the board that was an appallingly bad night for Labour, almost beyond belief given the national opinion polls. You can't help wondering whether the national state of play induced complacency?

Epping Forest- no candidate. Vote share therefore lost 19.8%.
Gloucester- from second place and expected gain down to third. Vote share lost 2.7%
Hartlepool - first place held, as was vote share (but only +0.1%)
Leicester- from first placeto third, vote share lost 26.7%
Stockport- first place held, but vote share lost 18.8%

So Hartlepool was as good as it gets! Who'd have thought it.

Come on, you can't count a seat where we didn't stand

Leicester really is sui generis, as already stated I don't think Truss got mentioned much in the Tory campaigning materials there. Gloucester and Stockport were both effective opportunist efforts by the LibDems (I say that in a factual rather than derogatory sense on this occasion) but are likely to have a limited longer term impact. Though yes, the irony of Hartlepool easily being Labour's best result is noted - who would have imagined that in May 2021?

[John Chanin]

The Liberals are notoriously good at by-elections, where they have a machine that can flood small areas with workers (and tendentious leaflets). Sometimes incumbency then allows them to retain seats at subsequent elections. The Conservatives and Labour tend to just use their local members. This won’t be good enough unless there has been regular campaigning work prior to the by-election.

Nonetheless I would really expect national polling figures to be reflected in local contests, and until they are I am disinclined to believe that the polls reflect anything like what would be actual voting behaviour in a national election. Perhaps we will see a Labour gain in Thorpe St Andrew or Long Eaton.

[Sibboleth]

Oct 14, 2022 8:02:26 GMT towerhamlets said:

...but it's certainly inadvisable to nominate an avowed Hindu nationalist considering the recent communal issues in Leicester.

This is the critical point really. There has been an increase in communal tensions in Leicester for a number of years and the electoral impact (which is about the least significant part, actually) has been continued movement, beyond that seen at the 2019 General Election, towards the Conservatives amongst Hindu voters in the city. Recently these tensions have escalated to the point of actual riots: not a situation likely to calm things down electorally. Running a candidate from the Hindu community with a radical profile in this context might seem clever, but is actually really stupid as the radicalized section of the electorate right now won't have any interest in voting Labour, but people from the other community will have very little interest in voting for that candidate for entirely understandable reasons. I would say that the local Party need to be put in special measures: what's going on is clearly not their fault, but they don't appear capable of reacting in anything other than the most stupid ways imaginable and that's not actually acceptable.

Needless to say, anyone extrapolating national trends from this is clearly engaging in what the kids these days call 'cope'. It would be like finding national significance in the Conservatives gaining seats in and around the Manningham district of Bradford in the mid 1990s.

[Pete Whitehead]

The Gloucester result was in many ways the best Conservative performance given the absence of the special factors at play in the two wards they gained.

[The Bishop]

Oh the polls are pretty "real" - the often astonishing focus group findings in the last week or two bear that out (and focus groups *tend* to skew to the right if anything, as many of us have long been aware) Next week's contests, apart from seeming to be intrinsically less promising for the Tories, will be the first where all votes will have been cast since the mini-budget and its disastrous fallout. For that reason alone, I await the outcome with interest.

[Sibboleth]

Oct 14, 2022 9:40:00 GMT The Bishop said:

Though yes, the irony of Hartlepool easily being Labour's best result is noted - who would have imagined that in May 2021?

The telling thing is that if we look at the pattern of results seen over the past few months, then Labour's best result being in Hartlepool is exactly what you'd expect. It does seem fairly clear which sections of the electorate are the most livid at present, and it's exactly those you'd expect in conditions of material crisis.

[yellowperil]

Oct 14, 2022 9:40:00 GMT The Bishop said:

Oct 14, 2022 8:29:16 GMT yellowperil said:

Okay , there were special factors in several of last night's by-election results, but across the board that was an appallingly bad night for Labour, almost beyond belief given the national opinion polls. You can't help wondering whether the national state of play induced complacency?

Epping Forest- no candidate. Vote share therefore lost 19.8%.
Gloucester- from second place and expected gain down to third. Vote share lost 2.7%
Hartlepool - first place held, as was vote share (but only +0.1%)
Leicester- from first placeto third, vote share lost 26.7%
Stockport- first place held, but vote share lost 18.8%

So Hartlepool was as good as it gets! Who'd have thought it.

Come on, you can't count a seat where we didn't stand

Leicester really is sui generis, as already stated I don't think Truss got mentioned much in the Tory campaigning materials there. Gloucester and Stockport were both effective opportunist efforts by the LibDems (I say that in a factual rather than derogatory sense on this occasion) but are likely to have a limited longer term impact. Though yes, the irony of Hartlepool easily being Labour's best result is noted - who would have imagined that in May 2021?

Actually, I think that might have been the biggest avoidable failure of the week. Had you fielded a candidate  in Waltham Abbey and made any sort of effort you could probably have won.  I guess you might the same thing of the Lib Dems, tbf.

[Sibboleth]

Anyway, I do genuinely believe that while the Conservatives would not actually win Leicester East in a General Election held today, they would come a lot closer to doing so than in more than a few East Midlands constituencies where they won large majorities in 2019. And that, probably, they would be more likely to hold Harrow East than most apparently 'safer' seats in London.

[The Bishop]

Oct 14, 2022 9:54:57 GMT yellowperil said:

Oct 14, 2022 9:40:00 GMT The Bishop said:

Come on, you can't count a seat where we didn't stand

Leicester really is sui generis, as already stated I don't think Truss got mentioned much in the Tory campaigning materials there. Gloucester and Stockport were both effective opportunist efforts by the LibDems (I say that in a factual rather than derogatory sense on this occasion) but are likely to have a limited longer term impact. Though yes, the irony of Hartlepool easily being Labour's best result is noted - who would have imagined that in May 2021?

Actually, I think that might have been the biggest avoidable failure of the week. Had you fielded a candidate  in Waltham Abbey and made any sort of effort you could probably have won.  I guess you might the same thing of the Lib Dems, tbf.

I think the decision may well have been made to give the incumbent a clear run, and he wasn't that far off.

Maybe if the poll was delayed a few more weeks, he might have edged it.

[yellowperil]

Oct 14, 2022 10:05:15 GMT The Bishop said:

Oct 14, 2022 9:54:57 GMT yellowperil said:

Actually, I think that might have been the biggest avoidable failure of the week. Had you fielded a candidate  in Waltham Abbey and made any sort of effort you could probably have won.  I guess you might the same thing of the Lib Dems, tbf.

I think the decision may well have been made to give the incumbent a clear run, and he wasn't that far off.

Maybe if the poll was delayed a few more weeks, he might have edged it.

I understand that point, and it was  a difficult decision for everyone - but far from giving the incumbent ( if you really can call him that in the circumstances) a clear run, we finished up giving the Tory a clear run instead. I wonder how many "Tory" votes would have gone elsewhere  if the only alternative was  not a  candidate who really didn't seem to have been in a very stable state. Agree the position might have been very different with a few weeks delay, but then it wasn't.

[mattbewilson]

Oct 14, 2022 10:00:48 GMT Sibboleth said:

Anyway, I do genuinely believe that while the Conservatives would not actually win Leicester East in a General Election held today, they would come a lot closer to doing so than in more than a few East Midlands constituencies where they won large majorities in 2019. And that, probably, they would be more likely to hold Harrow East than most apparently 'safer' seats in London.

I hope you're right but there's a perfect storm in Leicester at the moment. Claudia Webbe, Labour's historic weakness amongst the hindu community, the brief dip in support amongst Muslims after what was a very high level of support and the protests that have been taking place. I think Deepaks defection was a sign that there is a change in the wind there. A friend told me he expects half a dozen Tories to be elected in May.

[jamesdoyle]

Oct 14, 2022 9:00:10 GMT batman said:

and with respect I can't agree with James Doyle that Labour deserves any positive score in his GWBWI. It was not a good municipal week for Labour. Perhaps next week and weeks thereafter will be better.

Well them's the numbers!

Seriously, though, I understand what you're saying - I expected it to come out much worse for Labour than it did. Leicester - despite 'special circumstances' - was very poor for Labour, and they underperformed elsewhere. I think that crucially, they underperformed but still managed to hold seats.

What I would say is that two gains for the Tories makes it look much better than it is for them. Two gains would normally be a very good score, but one was essentially a certain gain from the start, while the hold in Gloucester was just enough.

The increases in LibDem votes (and the decent showing by the Epping Forest Green, given the circumstances) does indicate to me that what the polls might be masking is that there is an 'Anyone But the Tory' vote which in national polls is defaulting to being aggregated under Labour.

What I would dearly love to know at the moment is how the LibDems are doing for resources, both financial and manpower. I don't think Labour will be able to work all the potential targets the national figures are offering them, so some will fall to the LibDems to work. Given that there seems to be some tacit understanding about co-operation (or non-aggression) at national level, the key might be how many the LibDems can work. 

[listener]

Back to reality - there are 15 Conservative defences in the next 5 weeks.

[maxque]

Oct 14, 2022 8:45:11 GMT matureleft said:

Oct 14, 2022 8:29:16 GMT yellowperil said:

Okay , there were special factors in several of last night's by-election results, but across the board that was an appallingly bad night for Labour, almost beyond belief given the national opinion polls. You can't help wondering whether the national state of play induced complacency?

Epping Forest- no candidate. Vote share therefore lost 19.8%.
Gloucester- from second place and expected gain down to third. Vote share lost 2.7%
Hartlepool - first place held, as was vote share (but only +0.1%)
Leicester- from first placeto third, vote share lost 26.7%
Stockport- first place held, but vote share lost 18.8%

So Hartlepool was as good as it gets! Who'd have thought it.

Fair. There are undeniably local circumstances - Leicester’s results show both how adept Labour must have been in the past in working with the grain of different communities, how fragile that grasp can be and how other parties can have the same skill. Stockport looks like a nasty local political dispute. Gloucester looks like a party that has failed to look after its campaigning ability through a long decline from local strength. 

But in 1995-7 when last Labour was at these levels in the polls these factors tended to matter little - a rising tide floated almost all boats. The Labour support is broad but pretty soft. That’s a great opportunity for us - people are prepared to listen to Labour who haven’t been so inclined for quite a while. But they’ve far from made up their minds. 

Stockport was also a case of LDs targeting a ward they don't usually target (it's a safe Labour ward, when they have so many marginals in Stockport), due to new boundaries putting a big chunk of the current ward into a LD-Labour marginal ward from next year.

[owainsutton]

Oct 14, 2022 9:48:26 GMT John Chanin said:

The Liberals are notoriously good at by-elections, where they have a machine that can flood small areas with workers (and tendentious leaflets). Sometimes incumbency then allows them to retain seats at subsequent elections. The Conservatives and Labour tend to just use their local members. This won’t be good enough unless there has been regular campaigning work prior to the by-election.

Nonetheless I would really expect national polling figures to be reflected in local contests, and until they are I am disinclined to believe that the polls reflect anything like what would be actual voting behaviour in a national election. Perhaps we will see a Labour gain in Thorpe St Andrew or Long Eaton.

If a local by-election takes place with as little local campaigning as the average voter encounters in a general election (i.e. bugger all), the vote is likely to trend with polling.

Conversely, if every person being polled was subjected to six weeks of intense campaigning by one or two parties (big or small) prior to being asked how they'd vote tomorrow, the polls would show lots of wild swings depending on who was campaigning where.

[Adam in Stroud]

Oct 13, 2022 23:21:57 GMT @europeanlefty said:

The LibDems in Gloucester did a number on us with one of their sodding bar charts again. This one showing the composition of the city council as though it's somehow relevant

Unsurprisingly, I think it is entirely relevant, and I was astonished that people on here didn't seem to be factoring it into their predictions.

In 2021 Labour lost seven councillors, three to us and four to the Tories, confirming us as the second largest group on the council and reducing them to three councillors. That included our retention of Podsmead, previously won from Labour, who finished third there in both the by-election and the 2021 city-wide elections. Of the 26 Tory councillors, Lib Dems were second to 12, Labour to 12,  (an Indy and an unopposed making up the balance.) Since then we've taken another ward off the Tories in a by-election.

This isn't some sort of freak result; I don't know quite how Gloucester Labour have become so crap, but crap they certainly are and the main issue facing the Lib Dems in Gloucester is explaining to the electorate that we are the challengers to the Tories. On current trends I'd be pretty confident of us taking Tuffley in 2024.