|
|
Post by lbarnes on Mar 24, 2017 10:06:44 GMT
There's no therefore about it. The test is whether Blackburn with Darwen council controls Holden's employment. If they don't then result stands. If he was then why was it not pointed out earlier and who objected ? Sour Grapes. I think it's possibly more technical than that. In the education sector the position would be that if BwD UA had positions on the Board of Governors/Trustees/Directors of a body employing someone then they wouldn't be able to stand. This definition stops way short of outright control. In fact if BwD even had rights to members on the governing body but somehow didn't take them up then it would also apply. This may explain both the decision and the mistaken nomination in the first place. Of course non-educational organisations might be different but I can't see why. Then again this is election law. Edit, Just seen David Boothroyd's post. That would seem to confirm it. |
|
ColinJ
Labour
Living in the Past
Posts: 2,126
Member is Online
|
Post by ColinJ on Mar 24, 2017 10:11:12 GMT
Do we have the actual voting figures from Higher Croft?
|
|
Harry Hayfield
Green
Cavalier Gentleman (as in 17th century Cavalier)
Posts: 2,922 
|
Post by Harry Hayfield on Mar 24, 2017 10:21:50 GMT
The result was published on Blackburn Labour's Facebook page about 20 minutes ago as: Lab 446, UKIP 169, Con 133 as was this.
"Sadly late on the afternoon of election day we and the Council were notified of a challenge to the eligibility of our candidate, Adam Holden. The outcome of which is that the election result has been declared null and void. As the information only came to light on the day of election it was not possible for the Council to prevent the election going ahead. These circumstances are very unfortunate and were the result of a genuine honest mistake. A further by-election will take place in due course. We thank those voters who took the time to show their support, all party workers who put in many hours campaigning over the past few weeks, and candidate Adam Holden who also
worked tirelessly. Adam does not work directly for Blackburn with Darwen Borough Council but he is an employee of a publicly funded organisation of which Blackburn with Darwen is the accountable body. The Council have been advised that under electoral law this disqualifies Adam from being a candidate. This is a complex matter and raises new issues about the eligibility of potential candidates working in a variety of fields. We accept that on this occasion the selection of Adam as candidate was a mistake and would like to take this opportunity to apologise to voters. This will be a learning exercise for future selections"
|
|
|
|
Post by finsobruce on Mar 24, 2017 10:30:05 GMT
Do we have the actual voting figures from Higher Croft? colin - yes, they are upthread.... |
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Mar 24, 2017 10:53:14 GMT
BLACKBURN WITH DARWEN Higher Croft
Adam HOLDEN (Labour Party) 446
Ian GRIMSHAW (UK Independence Party (UKIP)) 169
Maureen McGARVEY (The Conservative Party Candidate) 133
Labour hold
(Successful candidate disqualified)
|
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,952
|
Post by The Bishop on Mar 24, 2017 10:58:32 GMT
Actually a small pro-Labour swing since the previous by-election late last year, which makes subsequent developments that bit more embarrassing.
|
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Mar 24, 2017 11:03:21 GMT
Here's Blackburn Labour's facebook post: |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 24, 2017 11:03:43 GMT
BLACKBURN WITH DARWEN Higher Croft Adam HOLDEN (Labour Party) 446 Ian GRIMSHAW (UK Independence Party (UKIP)) 169 Maureen McGARVEY (The Conservative Party Candidate) 133 Labour hold (Successful candidate disqualified) Just put this here to copy and paste later...  2017by (void): Lab 446, UKIP 169, Con 133 2016by: Lab 435, UKIP 187, Con 125 2016: Lab 874, Con 309 2015: Lab 1,283, UKIP 927, Con 570 2014: Lab 908/877, Con 389 2012: Lab 1,037, Con 275 2011: Lab 980, Con 417, BNP 179 2010: Lab 1,361, Con 885, BNP 551 |
|
|
|
Post by yellowperil on Mar 24, 2017 11:21:50 GMT
The thing I find remarkable is how poorly the Cons are doing once again - really in all 3 of these very different by-elections, its the one consistent theme (certainly I got their performance very wrong in the prediction competition). In both West Somerset and Herefordshire they faced a divided anti-Tory vote and could not capitalise on it. And in Blackburn surely they should have been able to take second place and push UKIP back into last. They are riding high in the national polls but there seems little sign of it on the ground.
|
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,952
|
Post by The Bishop on Mar 24, 2017 11:26:40 GMT
The thing I find remarkable is how poorly the Cons are doing once again - really in all 3 of these very different by-elections, its the one consistent theme (certainly I got their performance very wrong in the prediction competition). In both West Somerset and Herefordshire they faced a divided anti-Tory vote and could not capitalise on it. And in Blackburn surely they should have been able to take second place and push UKIP back into last. They are riding high in the national polls but there seems little sign of it on the ground.As I mentioned the other day, the principal exception to this seems to be Con/Lab marginals - where recent by-elections have shown them holding up well. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 24, 2017 11:43:36 GMT
The thing I find remarkable is how poorly the Cons are doing once again - really in all 3 of these very different by-elections, its the one consistent theme (certainly I got their performance very wrong in the prediction competition). In both West Somerset and Herefordshire they faced a divided anti-Tory vote and could not capitalise on it. And in Blackburn surely they should have been able to take second place and push UKIP back into last. They are riding high in the national polls but there seems little sign of it on the ground. One reason is that the Conservatives don't enjoy as much positive popularity as their good poll ratings might suggest - they are buoyed by the weakness of their opponents to a great extent. Also, Theresa May is still on probation as far as many people are concerned. An additional factor is that the Conservative organisation across much of the country is surprisingly weak - many constituencies simply do not have the capacity to maintain proper canvass records or fight anything beyond a basic campaign. EDIT: The Bishop's observation that Conservatives are performing better when Labour is their only viable opponent is an interesting one, though I've made no independent attempt to verify it. |
|
|
|
Post by gwynthegriff on Mar 24, 2017 11:47:15 GMT
Greens really do struggle with byelections don't they? Just think how much we'd have won in Leominster by if we were any good 😉. There's probably enough evidence to back up the theory. Not sure either of these two elections do really. Great result for your guys though. Fair points. As a great fan of the film Airplane all I can say is: "Seems like I picked the wrong week to poke fun at the Greens"  |
|
|
|
Post by yellowperil on Mar 24, 2017 12:01:42 GMT
interesting to find the reasons for the different Green performance in West Somerset and in Herefordshire. Was it a different level of organistion? Was it simply the residential factor in Dunster & Timberscombe?
|
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 14,784
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Mar 24, 2017 13:05:11 GMT
The result was published on Blackburn Labour's Facebook page about 20 minutes ago as: Lab 446, UKIP 169, Con 133 as was this. "Sadly late on the afternoon of election day we and the Council were notified of a challenge to the eligibility of our candidate, Adam Holden. The outcome of which is that the election result has been declared null and void. .... He has my sympathy. Sometimes outsourced organsations go to long lengths to tell their employees "you don't work for the council, you work for Fred Blogs Ltd" and it is repeatedly so often it it taken as truth, and an employee stands for election, only for them to turn around and effectively say, "sorry, we were lying, you *do* work for the council". In the early 1990s Sheffield schools outsourced their catering. The school dinner ladies/etc.were repeatedly told "you do not work for the council, you work for Fred Blogs Catering". In 1992 one of the dinner ladies stood for election. She won, but the election was challenged claiming she worked for the council. "I don't work for the council, I've been repeatedly told I don't work for the council, I've been repeatedly told I work for Fred Bloggs Catering." She resigned her seat, resigned as a dinner lady, stood in the re-run election and increased her majority. Things like this is a lapse of local council to be clear what organisations they control in such a manner to make their employees ineleigble candidates, while at the same time vigoursly claiming they are arms-length outsourced organsations that are fully independent. |
|
|
|
Post by justin124 on Mar 24, 2017 13:22:16 GMT
The thing I find remarkable is how poorly the Cons are doing once again - really in all 3 of these very different by-elections, its the one consistent theme (certainly I got their performance very wrong in the prediction competition). In both West Somerset and Herefordshire they faced a divided anti-Tory vote and could not capitalise on it. And in Blackburn surely they should have been able to take second place and push UKIP back into last. They are riding high in the national polls but there seems little sign of it on the ground.As I mentioned the other day, the principal exception to this seems to be Con/Lab marginals - where recent by-elections have shown them holding up well. On the other hand, the Tories have been competitive in Blackburn in the past. In 1970 Barbara Castle's majority was only just above 2500 - and the Tories had hopes of defeating her in February 1974. That said, perhaps there have been boundary changes in more recent years. |
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,952
|
Post by The Bishop on Mar 24, 2017 13:32:51 GMT
I recall reports from the 1983 GE suggesting Jack Straw could lose there - he later admitted to having been a bit nervous himself.
(in the event he held on by a relatively comfortable 3k)
|
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Mar 24, 2017 13:50:00 GMT
I recall reports from the 1983 GE suggesting Jack Straw could lose there - he later admitted to having been a bit nervous himself. (in the event he held on by a relatively comfortable 3k) On the notional 1979 figures, Blackburn was the easiest to win of the Conservative targets from Labour which did not in the event fall. That would partly have been down to the loss of Barbara Castle's incumbency vote in 1979, which Straw quickly built back up. |
|
|
|
Post by froome on Mar 24, 2017 14:14:28 GMT
interesting to find the reasons for the different Green performance in West Somerset and in Herefordshire. Was it a different level of organistion? Was it simply the residential factor in Dunster & Timberscombe? The simple answer to your questions is yes and yes. The 2015 result in West Somerset was simply due to there being no other non Conservative candidates, and in an area where we have little organisation. Whereas we have been well organised in Leominster for a very long time, and now hold 3 of the 4 seats in the unitary authority. |
|
|
|
Post by froome on Mar 24, 2017 14:17:04 GMT
Just think how much we'd have won in Leominster by if we were any good 😉. There's probably enough evidence to back up the theory. Not sure either of these two elections do really. Great result for your guys though. Fair points. As a great fan of the film Airplane all I can say is: "Seems like I picked the wrong week to poke fun at the Greens" You certainly did. And your initial comment couldn't have been more wrong. What has happened now is that we have learnt how to win by-elections, and target our resources more carefully for this. |
|
|
|
Post by justin124 on Mar 24, 2017 14:58:34 GMT
I recall reports from the 1983 GE suggesting Jack Straw could lose there - he later admitted to having been a bit nervous himself. (in the event he held on by a relatively comfortable 3k) On the notional 1979 figures, Blackburn was the easiest to win of the Conservative targets from Labour which did not in the event fall. That would partly have been down to the loss of Barbara Castle's incumbency vote in 1979, which Straw quickly built back up. I find it surprising that Jack Straw's 1979 majority was double Barbara Castle's majority in 1970 despite being a new candidate! |
|
