Tony Otim
Green
Suffering from Brexistential Despair
Posts: 11,892
|
Post by Tony Otim on Dec 8, 2022 21:34:56 GMT
And the first ones of 2023:
CANNOCK CHASE DC; Etching Hill & The Heath (Con resigned)
Candidates:
FOLEY, Darren (Labour)
HARRISON, Laura Caroline (Conservative)
2022: Con 728; Labour 535; Chase Comm Ind 150; Grn 103
2021: Con 1189; Lab 427; Grn 131
2019: Con 805; Grn 291; Lab 246
2018: Con 797; Lab 379; LD 153; Grn 110
2016: Con 500; UKIP 451; Lab 389; LD 144; Grn 47
2015: Con 1311; Lab 909; UKIP 672; LD 429; Grn 153
2014: UKIP 494; Con 473; Lab 333; LD 199
2012: Con 426; Lab 379; LD 310; Lib 93
2011: LD 817; Con 799
2010: LD 1312; Con 1279; Lab 798
2008: LD 619; Con 590; Lab 168
2007: LD 684; Con 438; Lab 238
2006: LD 773; Con 382; Lab 258
2004: LD 969; Con 327; Lab 207
2003: LD 687; Con 243; Lab 217
2002: LD 1075,865, 858; Con 372, 323; Lab 217, 212
Vacancy is for the 2022-2026 term. Darren Foley has contested the last 2 elections here for Labour
Current Council: Con 23; Lab 9; Chase Commuity Ind 3; Grn 2; LD 2; Ind 1;
UTTLESFORD DC; Great Dunmow South & Barnston (Residents for Uttlesford resigned)
Candidates:
CAVANAGH, Ben (Labour)
FLAWN, Lorraine Anne (Liberal Democrat)
HERBERT, Kerry Ann (Residents for Uttlesford)
LOVEDAY, Tom (Conservative)
2019: R4U 978, 970, 865; Con 551, 472, 438; Lab 202
2015: Con 1412, 1364, 1273; R4U 1066, 1019, 842; Lab 379, 319; LD 344
Lorraine Flawn stood for the Lib Dems in Dunmow division in 2021.
Current Council: Residents for Uttlesford 23; LD & Grn Alliance 8 (5 LD, 3 Grn all of the Greens were elected as Residents for Uttlesford); Con 5; Uttlesford Ind 2; 1 vacancy
|
|
|
|
Post by michaelarden on Dec 9, 2022 14:04:02 GMT
And the first ones of 2023: CANNOCK CHASE DC; Etching Hill & The Heath (Con resigned) Candidates: FOLEY, Darren (Labour) HARRISON, Laura Caroline (Conservative) 2022: Con 728; Labour 535; Chase Comm Ind 150; Grn 103 2021: Con 1189; Lab 427; Grn 131 2019: Con 805; Grn 291; Lab 246 2018: Con 797; Lab 379; LD 153; Grn 110 2016: Con 500; UKIP 451; Lab 389; LD 144; Grn 47 2015: Con 1311; Lab 909; UKIP 672; LD 429; Grn 153 2014: UKIP 494; Con 473; Lab 333; LD 199 2012: Con 426; Lab 379; LD 310; Lib 93 2011: LD 817; Con 799 2010: LD 1312; Con 1279; Lab 798 2008: LD 619; Con 590; Lab 168 2007: LD 684; Con 438; Lab 238 2006: LD 773; Con 382; Lab 258 2004: LD 969; Con 327; Lab 207 2003: LD 687; Con 243; Lab 217 2002: LD 107. 5,865, 858; Con 372, 323; Lab 217, 212 Vacancy is for the 2022-2026 term. Darren Foley has contested the last 2 elections here for Labour Current Council: Con 23; Lab 9; Chase Commuity Ind 3; Grn 2; LD 2; Ind 1; That has to be one of the most spectacular collapses of Lib Dem vote post 2010. Looks like it was based on a couple of individuals? |
|
|
|
Post by phil156 on Jan 4, 2023 10:35:29 GMT
They both count on Thursday evening
|
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Jan 5, 2023 13:31:37 GMT
Previews from andrewteale here: medium.com/britainelects/previewing-the-essex-and-staffordshire-by-elections-of-5th-january-2023-4d25369f91bcOne thing worth noting in Uttlesford is that it was planning issues, specifically the submitted draft local plan, which lost the council for the Conservatives in 2019. With Stansted airport on the edge of the district and the M11 giving good London connections, Uttlesford had a lot of development pressure. The new administration withdrew the plan and has been merrily refusing developments they don't like - resulting in the developers successfully appealing. So poor were Uttlesford's stats for defending its refusals that in February 2022 it was the first planning authority to be put into special measures. Developers can now bypass the council and submit their applications directly to the Planning Inspectorate. |
|
pl
Non-Aligned
Posts: 1,664 
|
Post by pl on Jan 5, 2023 14:20:05 GMT
Previews from andrewteale here: medium.com/britainelects/previewing-the-essex-and-staffordshire-by-elections-of-5th-january-2023-4d25369f91bcOne thing worth noting in Uttlesford is that it was planning issues, specifically the submitted draft local plan, which lost the council for the Conservatives in 2019. With Stansted airport on the edge of the district and the M11 giving good London connections, Uttlesford had a lot of development pressure. The new administration withdrew the plan and has been merrily refusing developments they don't like - resulting in the developers successfully appealing. So poor were Uttlesford's stats for defending its refusals that in February 2022 it was the first planning authority to be put into special measures. Developers can now bypass the council and submit their applications directly to the Planning Inspectorate. Frankly, the Residents For Uttlesford administration is fairly dire. And I say that as someone with over a decade of experience in Tower Hamlets, including during the Rahman era! But that does not automatically mean that R4U supporters don't like their approach to planning issues.... The consequences of the R4U they might not like, though.... |
|
|
|
Post by minionofmidas on Jan 5, 2023 14:27:52 GMT
Developers can now bypass the council and submit their applications directly to the Planning Inspectorate. Frankly makes you wonder why Britain still bothers with local elections at all... |
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Jan 5, 2023 14:56:06 GMT
Developers can now bypass the council and submit their applications directly to the Planning Inspectorate. Frankly makes you wonder why Britain still bothers with local elections at all... If local authorities were given a free choice about whether to accept new homes, most would decide they weren't having any and the housing crisis would get a lot worse. At present there's a reasonable compromise: the number of new homes is worked out centrally, and each council gets a number. The council can choose where to put them but it can't choose not to have any. If you don't like that, then beware because the most practical alternative is the 2020 White Paper approach in which councils mark zones on the map and then don't have any ability to object to specific developments in the zone. |
|
carlton43
Reform Party
Posts: 50,887
Member is Online
|
Post by carlton43 on Jan 5, 2023 16:03:43 GMT
Frankly makes you wonder why Britain still bothers with local elections at all... If local authorities were given a free choice about whether to accept new homes, most would decide they weren't having any and the housing crisis would get a lot worse. At present there's a reasonable compromise: the number of new homes is worked out centrally, and each council gets a number. The council can choose where to put them but it can't choose not to have any. If you don't like that, then beware because the most practical alternative is the 2020 White Paper approach in which councils mark zones on the map and then don't have any ability to object to specific developments in the zone. The Centre always knows best. It knows what is good for us. If it says it is good for us then it is good for us and we must do it. Democracy at work. The people get to choose. Always providing they make the correct choices. If they don't they are totally ignored. And our overriding desire is to see much more of this devolution where local people get to enact what we tell them to do. Devolution works. Let us have regional governments. Provided always that sensible Metropolitans take all the decisions for them. We all agree then. Good! |
|
|
|
Post by minionofmidas on Jan 5, 2023 16:42:23 GMT
Frankly makes you wonder why Britain still bothers with local elections at all... If local authorities were given a free choice about whether to accept new homes, most would decide they weren't having any and the housing crisis would get a lot worse. At present there's a reasonable compromise: the number of new homes is worked out centrally, and each council gets a number. The council can choose where to put them but it can't choose not to have any. If you don't like that, then beware because the most practical alternative is the 2020 White Paper approach in which councils mark zones on the map and then don't have any ability to object to specific developments in the zone. What housing crisis? I'm seeing a house prices crisis, which is not the same thing at all. The causes are complex and not wholly understood. Low interest rates are an important part of the puzzle: the monthly price of buying a house is what interests me as a potential first time buyer the most, and it hasn't gone up anywhere like overall prices have. A lack of affordable housing is not going to be fixed by any amount of private housebuilding this side of judgment day, anyways. Developpers literally have no incentive to build towards actual needs. By the time a functional community arises, or not, in the new development, they'll have sold their houses. That's a classic market failure. Given all we know about the difficulties of central planning, of forecasting demand especially, excuse me for sharing carlton's skepticism about the numbers "worked out" centrally. And yes, NIMBYism is a problem that's going to arise with local control over planning, and obviously a localist party like R4U is going to be built on NIMBYism. I see no reason to not believe you there, and also when you say they've been incompetent! But I'd be more sympathetic if we were talking about, say, Brentwood. Affluent inner suburbs (and central Greenbelt policies) preventing more housebuilding is why people move out to commuterland in the (objectively: former) countryside beyond Dunmow - and climate policy if nothing else dictates we should try to stop them from doing that. (Specific setup of planning policy varies from country to country and I am, obviously, no expert on Britain. I suppose that shows.) |
|
|
|
Post by robert1 on Jan 5, 2023 23:26:04 GMT
Tories have won in Uttlesford Con 375 RFU 238 Lab 115 LD 88
Given how far back the Conservatives are in the polls, it is ironic that they gained the last council seat contested in 2022-Redcar and the first in 2023
|
|
|
|
Post by batman on Jan 5, 2023 23:28:16 GMT
So, John not so loony after all.
|
|
carlton43
Reform Party
Posts: 50,887
Member is Online
|
Post by carlton43 on Jan 5, 2023 23:42:56 GMT
Tories have won in Uttlesford Con 375 RFU 238 Lab 115 LD 88
Given how far back the Conservatives are in the polls, it is ironic that they gained the last council seat contested in 2022-Redcar and the first in 2023
That is rather a good win in these tricky times. Something has shifted mood locally. |
|
maxque
Non-Aligned
Posts: 9,299
|
Post by maxque on Jan 5, 2023 23:53:29 GMT
Tories have won in Uttlesford Con 375 RFU 238 Lab 115 LD 88
Given how far back the Conservatives are in the polls, it is ironic that they gained the last council seat contested in 2022-Redcar and the first in 2023
Con 46.0% (+14.2) R4U 29.2% (-27.3) Lab 14.1% (+2.4) LD 10.8% |
|
|
|
Post by andrewteale on Jan 5, 2023 23:55:25 GMT
CANNOCK CHASE, Etching Hill and The Heath - Lab gain from C
Lab 422 C 385
|
|
|
|
Post by jamesdoyle on Jan 6, 2023 0:00:08 GMT
CANNOCK CHASE, Etching Hill and The Heath - Lab gain from C Lab 422 C 385 That's a more significant result than Uttlesford |
|
|
|
Post by batman on Jan 6, 2023 0:09:47 GMT
Yes, it's more relevant to the overall political picture than a Tory gain from a local independent in a normally Tory small town. (Although I know that in years past the LDs had councillors in Great Dunmow.)
|
|
maxque
Non-Aligned
Posts: 9,299
|
Post by maxque on Jan 6, 2023 0:14:28 GMT
CANNOCK CHASE, Etching Hill and The Heath - Lab gain from C Lab 422 C 385 Lab 52.3% (+17.0) Con 47.7% (-0.3) |
|
jamie
Top Poster
Posts: 7,053
|
Post by jamie on Jan 6, 2023 0:27:49 GMT
That Cannock Chase result is one of the best Labour results in a while. Rugeley is a Brexity, post-industrial Midlands town and the ward in question never voted Labour during the coalition, the Conservative vote was more than double the Labour vote in a nationally even year like 2018, and the Conservatives were still a decent margin ahead in 2022.
|
|
|
|
Post by jamesdoyle on Jan 6, 2023 7:31:04 GMT
GWBWI
Lab +69
Ldm +4
Con -13
ASV
Lab +1.2
LDm +0.1
Con -0.2
|
|
|
|
Post by andrewp on Jan 6, 2023 8:56:54 GMT
That Cannock Chase result is one of the best Labour results in a while. Rugeley is a Brexity, post-industrial Midlands town and the ward in question never voted Labour during the coalition, the Conservative vote was more than double the Labour vote in a nationally even year like 2018, and the Conservatives were still a decent margin ahead in 2022. A good Labour result, although not as good as one or two in November. Etching Hill, on different boundaries, voted Lab in 1994/95. If the Greens had stood, as they did last May then the Tories would probably have held. The Tory vote held up pretty well. |
|
