|
|
Post by casualobserver on Aug 3, 2025 21:05:23 GMT
I recall in Chester at that time that, except in the most partisan wards, all of the political parties put forward fewer candidates than vacancies in the ward "because voters don't like giving all their votes to one party". Even then, that widely accepted 'received wisdom' among local party workers perplexed me There is no evidence of that happening post-reorganisation in 1974. Labour did not always put up a full slate in safe Tory wards but otherwise it looked a very partisan council. Prior to reorganisation it was probably very different. I distinctly recall a conversation I had about this issue at that time. Checking back to the actual election results for 1973-1979, I see that you are entirely correct. I'm either suffering from false memory syndrome, or someone was pulling my leg! |
|
|
|
Post by casualobserver on Aug 11, 2025 15:00:02 GMT
- The detached part of Bisley & West End isn't (or wasn't, when the recent Surrey review started) a separate polling district, but looking at a map of it I think its electorate is likely to be in single figures. Electoral Services at Surrey Heath tell me that the Bisley exclave has four voters out of 7045 for the Bisley & West End ward as a whole. |
|
johnloony
Conservative
Posts: 27,146
Member is Online
|
Post by johnloony on Aug 16, 2025 3:12:53 GMT
During the whole period of the merger negotiations between the Liberal Party and the SDP in 1987-1988, there were no parliamentary by-elections during that period so no opportunity to see how and whether the opposing factions within and between the two parties would deal with the situation in terms of having candidates standing (or not).
What tended to happen in local council by-elections during that period? How many of them had Liberals and SDP standing against each other, or doing joint agreements or local peculiar arrangements?
|
|
|
|
Post by richardh on Aug 16, 2025 5:55:50 GMT
I think it was by-elections like this that persuaded Liberal and SDP members that a merger was necessary.
Richmond by-election, 1989
Party Candidate Votes % ±%
Con William Hague 19,543 37.2 −24.0
SDP Mike Potter 16,909 32.2
SLD Barbara Pearce 11,589 22.1 −4.9
Labour Frank Robson 2,591 4.9 −6.9
Green Dr Robert Upshall1,473 2.8
Monster Raving Loony David "Lord" Sutch 167 0.3
Independent (politician)Anthony Millns1 113 0.2
Corrective Party Lindi St Clair 106 0.2
Liberal Nicholas Watkins 70 0.1
Majority 2,634 5.0
Turnout 52,561 64.4
|
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Posts: 5,423
Member is Online
|
Post by YL on Aug 16, 2025 6:51:37 GMT
I think it was by-elections like this that persuaded Liberal and SDP members that a merger was necessary. Richmond by-election, 1989 Party Candidate Votes % ±% Con William Hague 19,543 37.2 −24.0 SDP Mike Potter 16,909 32.2 SLD Barbara Pearce 11,589 22.1 −4.9 Labour Frank Robson 2,591 4.9 −6.9 Green Dr Robert Upshall1,473 2.8 Monster Raving Loony David "Lord" Sutch 167 0.3 Independent (politician)Anthony Millns1 113 0.2 Corrective Party Lindi St Clair 106 0.2 Liberal Nicholas Watkins 70 0.1 Majority 2,634 5.0 Turnout 52,561 64.4 No, the merger had already happened, as can be seen by the third placed candidate being labelled as "SLD", i.e. Social and Liberal Democrats, the original name of the merged Lib Dems. The SDP standing in that by-election was the continuity SDP led by David Owen made up of people who rejected the merger; likewise the Liberal candidate who came last was a continuity Liberal. As johnloony says there were no Westminster by-elections between the 1987 General Election and the merger being completed in March 1988; the first by-election of the 1987-92 Parliament was Kensington in July 1988 which already had separate SLD and SDP candidates. I suppose a hypothetical for those who like alternative history is what would have happened to the SDP and Lib Dems had the SDP won Richmond as they were not so far off doing. |
|
|
|
Post by yellowperil on Aug 16, 2025 7:42:23 GMT
I think it was by-elections like this that persuaded Liberal and SDP members that a merger was necessary. Richmond by-election, 1989 Party Candidate Votes % ±% Con William Hague 19,543 37.2 −24.0 SDP Mike Potter 16,909 32.2 SLD Barbara Pearce 11,589 22.1 −4.9 Labour Frank Robson 2,591 4.9 −6.9 Green Dr Robert Upshall1,473 2.8 Monster Raving Loony David "Lord" Sutch 167 0.3 Independent (politician)Anthony Millns1 113 0.2 Corrective Party Lindi St Clair 106 0.2 Liberal Nicholas Watkins 70 0.1 Majority 2,634 5.0 Turnout 52,561 64.4 No, the merger had already happened, as can be seen by the third placed candidate being labelled as "SLD", i.e. Social and Liberal Democrats, the original name of the merged Lib Dems. The SDP standing in that by-election was the continuity SDP led by David Owen made up of people who rejected the merger; likewise the Liberal candidate who came last was a continuity Liberal. As johnloony says there were no Westminster by-elections between the 1987 General Election and the merger being completed in March 1988; the first by-election of the 1987-92 Parliament was Kensington in July 1988 which already had separate SLD and SDP candidates. I suppose a hypothetical for those who like alternative history is what would have happened to the SDP and Lib Dems had the SDP won Richmond as they were not so far off doing. Ah, those were the days, Another interesting hypothetical would be to consider whether the then defeated Tory would have disappeared from the face of politics. The Lib Dems in those "salad" days took a while to get themselves established while the Owenites were able more easily to take votes off disaffected Tories. Whoever won that paticular battle, we know who won that war in the end, The real humiliation was for the continuation Liberals finishing well below the lash of Ms St Clair- masochism indeed. |
|
|
|
Post by yellowperil on Aug 16, 2025 8:13:46 GMT
To go back to John's original question. For my own area I had the excuse to go back into my thread about Ashford elections in the historical elections section of this forum. (I'm always glad of a excuse to delve back in to my records). I could only find one instance of a ward with SLD and SDP in competition, the SLD was reasonably well in front and the continuing SDP candidate subsequently came over to us.
|
|
johnloony
Conservative
Posts: 27,146
Member is Online
|
Post by johnloony on Aug 16, 2025 11:02:43 GMT
I suppose a hypothetical for those who like alternative history is what would have happened to the SDP and Lib Dems had the SDP won Richmond as they were not so far off doing. The SDP Mp would have been a de-facto Independent, William Hague would have defeated him in 1992, William Hague might have become Conservative Party leader in 2001 rather than 1997 (Michael Howard would have been leader from 1997 to 2001), otherwise the timeline reverts to normal after c.2005. |
|
johnloony
Conservative
Posts: 27,146
Member is Online
|
Post by johnloony on Aug 16, 2025 11:12:15 GMT
I think it was by-elections like this that persuaded Liberal and SDP members that a merger was necessary. Richmond by-election, 1989… If you “think” such a thing, then you have a very weird idea of how history works. The example you have given has of course got nothing whatever to do with the question I asked. |
|
|
|
Post by stodge on Aug 16, 2025 11:43:26 GMT
I was there, as a Liberal and then Social & Liberal Democrat activist, during 1988-89. I was at Blackpool in January 1989 when the Liberal Party agreed to merge with the SDP. It was a difficult and very emotional time - those opposed to the merger such as Michael Meadowcroft were passionate in their view.
The other side to all this was the Social & Liberal Democrats were in a parlous financial state after the merger. The Owenite SDP was well funded and many of those who had backed the Alliance financially went off with the good Doctor - Paddy Ashdown, whose leadership came about because of all the MPs he was the one least associated with the Alliance, told us candidly we were bankrupt.
Richmond could well have finished the party off had the SDP won but they didn't and it didn't. Some really loyal benefactors kept the show on the road.
|
|
iang
Lib Dem
Posts: 2,233
|
Post by iang on Aug 17, 2025 21:46:50 GMT
It was if I remember rightly an unusual by-election, in that the SDP candidate was a sitting county councillor and had a much greater profile and credibility than the SLD candidate. There wouldn't have been many places where that was the case
|
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Aug 17, 2025 22:52:11 GMT
I've got a copy of "Merger: The Inside Story" by Rachael Pitchford and our late lamented colleague Tony Greaves. It's, as might be expected, fascinatingly bitchy.
|
|
johnloony
Conservative
Posts: 27,146
Member is Online
|
Post by johnloony on Aug 17, 2025 23:05:49 GMT
I've got a copy of "Merger: The Inside Story" by Rachael Pitchford and our late lamented colleague Tony Greaves. It's, as might be expected, fascinatingly bitchy. I remember reading (several times, many years ago) Crewe & King’s book about the history of the SDP (I think it subsequently disappeared from Croydon library and I haven’t seen it for ages). My main memory from that of the merger negotiations was that it was so acrimonious because the two opposite sides (those who thought the two parties were destined to merge, and those who thought the SDP was supposed to be seperate) both saw their version of events as the obvious natural one, and had never contemplated the opposite point of view until it came to the crunch in 1987. |
|
carolus
Lib Dem
Posts: 6,950
Member is Online
|
Post by carolus on Aug 30, 2025 9:15:58 GMT
We have an upcoming triple byelection in Maidstone. When was the last time there was a byelection for all three seats in a ward?
|
|
|
|
Post by andrewteale on Aug 30, 2025 10:22:44 GMT
Just ran a query on the LEAP database for this and got 12 results, but 10 of those proved to be bugs which have now been fixed. That leaves two bona-fide triple by-elections since 2004: the Aston and Bordesley Green polls in Birmingham in July 2005 which resulted from the "banana republic" Election Court cases.
|
|
mrtoad
Labour
He is a toad. Who knows what a toad thinks?
Posts: 459
|
Post by mrtoad on Sept 1, 2025 12:20:44 GMT
This is a niche historical question but I can't think where else to ask it. What was the precise ballot description for Michael O'Halloran in Islington North in 1983? It's usually given as 'independent Labour' but I have a recollection, perhaps from an early edition of Robert Waller's Almanac, that on the ballot it read 'The Labour Party Candidate' and that Jeremy Corbyn's team therefore had to do some work to establish that he was the official candidate?
|
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Sept 1, 2025 12:28:00 GMT
This is a niche historical question but I can't think where else to ask it. What was the precise ballot description for Michael O'Halloran in Islington North in 1983? It's usually given as 'independent Labour' but I have a recollection, perhaps from an early edition of Robert Waller's Almanac, that on the ballot it read 'The Labour Party Candidate' and that Jeremy Corbyn's team therefore had to do some work to establish that he was the official candidate? As given in the Return of Election Expenses (HC 130 1983-84): Jeremy Bernard Corbyn: "The Labour Party candidate" Michael Joseph O'Halloran "The Labour candidate" |
|
mrtoad
Labour
He is a toad. Who knows what a toad thinks?
Posts: 459
|
Post by mrtoad on Sept 1, 2025 12:31:45 GMT
This is a niche historical question but I can't think where else to ask it. What was the precise ballot description for Michael O'Halloran in Islington North in 1983? It's usually given as 'independent Labour' but I have a recollection, perhaps from an early edition of Robert Waller's Almanac, that on the ballot it read 'The Labour Party Candidate' and that Jeremy Corbyn's team therefore had to do some work to establish that he was the official candidate? As given in the Return of Election Expenses (HC 130 1983-84): Jeremy Bernard Corbyn: "The Labour Party candidate" Michael Joseph O'Halloran "The Labour candidate" Thank you so much, David. |
|
|
|
Post by Devil Wincarnate on Sept 10, 2025 18:05:52 GMT
For want of a better place...
The outgoing Bayrou cabinet in France featured four people who have as of today exercised the function of head of government:
François Bayrou, Elisabeth Borne, Sebastien Lecornu, and Manuel Valls.
Has a cabinet in the UK or elsewhere ever featured that many people who have served as head of governments? Italy is possible of course.
|
|
|
|
Post by greatkingrat 🇬🇧🇮🇱 on Sept 10, 2025 18:19:03 GMT
Chamberlain, Churchill, Attlee and Eden were all in the cabinet when Churchill first took office.
|
|
