There is an argument that the presence of Ukip on the mayoral ballot paper in May helped secure a victory for Lutfur Rahman. Their candidate, Nick McQueen polled some 4,400 votes, a significant proportion of which might otherwise have gone to Labour’s John Biggs.
I don’t really buy that argument but I think even Lutfur’s camp are glad he ran.
What I do think is more likely is that Ukip’s presence in yesterday’s by-election cost the Tories two of their three seats in Blackwall & Cubitt Town.
Here are the results:
The turnout was low and some remarked there were more police and observers from the Electoral Commission than voters at the polling stations yesterday. The count at Anchorage House was, by all accounts, far more controlled than last time, which isn’t saying much.
And it finished at 3am, after two recounts. After a fair amount of confident boasting by some in Lutfur’s camp, his Tower Hamlets First candidates came nowhere close.
The recounts centred on two of Labour’s candidates and Chris Chapman from the Tories. As you can see, only five votes separated second from fourth. At various points, Labour’s Candida Ronald was ahead of party colleague Anisur Rahman, then fortunes switched and finally settled on Candida.
Congratulations to the three winners and particular commiserations to Gloria Thienel who was regarded well as a councillor in the last term. I’m fairly sure that the 200 odd votes picked up each by the Ukip slate cost her a seat.
But that’s democracy. Whether Ukip continue to challenge and engage in council meetings from the public gallery remains to be seen.
And this is how the chamber now looks: Labour 22 seats; Tower Hamlets First 18; Tories 5.
Labour needed 23 for a controlling majority in the chamber and that would have been significant. As things stand, unless Labour are able to persuade Tory boss Peter Golds to defect., we’re probably in for four more years of dysfunctional politics and council business.
I think it’s unlikely Lutfur will be able to entice five Labour councillors to defect. And I think it’s likely that the Tories will join Labour on various votes, but probably not as many as the last time.
Significant matters to resolve include what to do about the vacant chief executive’s position. That’s down to vote of the full council. Team Lutfur will not have their way on that.
And as I’ve said before, having a strong chief executive in place is going to be key in stabilising the council. I think Eric Pickles and co also believe this. And I wouldn’t be surprised if that’s what PwC recommend.
Trial by Jeory 
And if this had been a straightforward fight between Labour, the Tories and the Lib Dems, then quite clearly Labour would have romped home with all three seats. But this is Tower Hamlets in 2015, so it wasn’t, and they didn’t
Labour has seen off the Lib Dems and Respect in Tower Hamlets, and the people have given a two fingered salute to the Tories.
Tower Hamlets First. You’re next.
Not sure five councillors in a borough where they had none up to 2004 is much of a two fingered salute, especially with a Tory Government being in and losing seats all over London.
Seven councillors in ’06 (oh, but one defected to Respect!), six in ’10, and five in ’14: hardly going in the right direction.
Its amazing how important Mathematics can be at times like these 🙂 Was was a geometric progression or an arithmetic progression ….. and what are the next two items in the sequence ?
Engaging with the voting members of the public can be difficult especially if some are illiterate, semi-literate or sub-100 IQ – assuming, of course, the aspirant councillors genuinely have a desire, augmented with plans, to improve the borough for the real benefit of the voters.
Curious Cat.
We also cost the Tories a seat in Island Gardens.
It was encouraging to see us beat both Lib Dems and Greens in BCT.
I think it is tremendously sad that Gloria was not elected and that UKIP almost certainly cost her her seat. She was the last cockney on the council and with her going the distinctive cockney community in this borough – their ancestral home – have no representation.
There is of course absolutely no chance of Peter Golds “defecting” to Labour. Amoeba on Saturn will learn to recite the Koran before such a thing happens. I suspect the Tories will back Labour when necessary.
I was actually joking about Peter.
UKIP actually cost Gloria Thienel here seat twice. M Webber admits as much above. If anyone doubts that UKIP deliberately targeted the Conservatives in Tower Hamlets check out Mr Webbers blog post from February.
http://mwebberukip.wordpress.com/2014/02/26/how-vulnerable-are-the-tories-in-tower-hamlets/
UKIP wanted political power without a hint of social, or any, responsibility. Kill-off everyone so the UKIP morons can rule.
Never mind the public being well served by a dedicated councillor – why on earth should UKIP care about the needy of LBTH ?
Curious Cat.
Actually UKIP have never won anything in Tower Hamlets and probably never will.
Lutfur’s lot split the Labour vote for more than Ukip split the Tories. The problem with the Tories is they slag off Tower Hamlets even though the Tory voters seem to quite like it here. Why would people vote to agree that we live in a cesspool? They have the wrong strategy.
Can you tell me in which leaflet the Conservatives used the word “cesspool”. I think Labour are far too ready to put their own worst opinions in the mouths of others.
I gues with that logic you can say Tower Hamlets First cost Labour a Mayor and control of the Council. What a bright journalist…
At the last election in 2010, the Tories won all three BCT seats.
Get it?
But completely different ward boundaries, and they won by a small margin.
Congrats to all the elected Cllrs and I am glad we have finally concluded the local elections here in TH.
I think the ‘Bangladeshi’ candidates whether from THF or Labour were always going to struggle to attract the non-BME votes in a Tory stronghold. I also think the Bangladeshi candidates may have failed to get all BME votes out due to Ramadhan and selection of low key candidates who have little or no connection to the ward and they may even have split the Bangladeshi votes. Some lessons for THF in terms of candidate selection maybe?
Anyway its good to see all candidates and parties finally accepting the results and as Ted says ‘that’s democracy’ and it’s phrase that doesn’t get mentioned enough on this blog. Too many whingers and sore losers from the Anti-Lutfur Brigade just cry foul when defeated and love to cook up exaggerated claims of racial bias, voter intimidation and every other excuses under the sun as to why they / their party lost!!
It’s called election and democracy …so get used it and start to respect the result and mandate of residents in TH!!
Just like the Mayor who cries ‘racist’ and ‘Islamaphobia’ every time his administration is criticised. It’s a shame he always likes to portray himself as a victim.
If, as you speculate, UKIP cost the Tories two council seats, that’s as maybe. I would suggest however that the votes for UKIP were drawn from the disillusioned, across all parties.
Perhaps a more informed headline would be that support for UKIP surged in only 6 weeks to 7% against 3% in the May elections: no mean feat.
You are right on a probable PwC outcome to install a heavyweight CEO.with the gravitas essential to build respect and efficiency. That has to be a no brainer. He/she should be mandated to fire/hire key personnel as a stage one rebuild.
Obviously time for an urgently needed TH Party, devoid of national political baggage. Who else can disillusioned voters vote for ?
Is TH really the worse local authority in England or merely part of a widespread family of dysfunctional local government ?
Wonder if UKIP will try to take TH out of the EU sometime soon 🙂
Curious Cat.
It makes sense – but depends on how you prism out UKIP’s 2.5 average percent. If say you took the view that 20% of the vote came from Labour, 30% from the Tories and 50% from otherwise non-voters, there is just a story to back that up. But only just!
The interesting thing that together Labour and the Tories have enough seats on the Council to audit Rahman to death!
Ed, together they held a majority prior to this election – for the past 4 years. Will their combined efforts be any more effective during this 4 year term than the last? Same parties, same shortcomings..
UKIP are a bit mad** and no less than in Tower Hamlets. On the streets I heard a conversation between two types in purple rosettes: “We’re really going to start something here!” “Yes, I think now we must at least get Paul [must have been meant Mr Shea] in!” A bit deluded, especially if they’d read the results from 22 May.
The problem with these people is they’re all urban professionals with no interest in the council or its affairs. They won’t have the first clue what it means that Gloria Thienel isn’t on the council – they’ll say “Gloria Who? Just another Tory. Ted Heath was a Tory, and he took us into Europe. Blurgh!”
Actually, Gloria Thienel wasn’t just the last Cockney on Tower Hamlets Council, she was the hardest working councillor in the entire borough. Her work rate for residents was phenomenal. And your UKIP man up the thread brags about costing her a seat in Island Gardens, in addition to Ted’s argument they lost her the seat in this by election too. And now residents won’t have her able to fight for them.
Well done, UKIP, clap clap. Nice one.
** NB on the internet it is not allowed to call UKIP mad or racist or swivel-eyed. You immediately get the response from the Cyberkippers ‘We topped the poll in the Euros, there you are the Westminster elite, contemptuously labelling 6 million people racist! Up the People’s Army!’ Actually, Kippers, when we call UKIP racist or deluded, we’re referring to your members and activists and candidates, who keep coming up with such gems, but not the ordinary people who protest vote for you now the Lib Dems are no longer the party for protest voters.
Nicely written.
CC.
nicely written….!!!! its a deluded rant…..UKIP is taking votes from all sides, be it Tory, Lab, Lib AND Green believe it or not. I overheard one resident ALREADY complaining to a Tory polling agent who is a Cllrs elsewhere, that he had managed to secure 150 Tories votes at a neighbouring ward due to a nearby development that they the residents were against or concerned about that the said Tory had obvioulsy promised some re-dress etc and he had written to the Tory Cllr of the said adjacent ward 5 weeks ago and had heard nothing!!! The resident ended by saying if what was promised doesn’t happen I’ll remember next time.
And BTW WHS, I would like to see if you have the balls or indeed any moral decency that you purport to portray above and to apologise to this Kipper and the rest of the branch for your racists slurs. Or can I be as prejudice towards your mental deficiency ? You go for the lowest common denominator because you have nothing else to append your twisted deranged low moral, mental ineptitude.
Could it be that the Tory voters are appalled at the incompetency of Cameron et al and are waking up.
Good evening,
In my legal personality as the creator of the aforementioned remark , I wish to state the commentator’s remarks were not deluded but real, in my experience of brain-dead UKIP supporters and UKIP local election candidates.
Not only is UKIP a political party that attracts women-haters, racists, benefit cheats, European Parliament expenses fiddlers, illiterates whom UKIP gleefully accepts as local election candidates, UKIP lacks any proper organisation to resolve its many internal problems.
Despite thinking both Labour and Conservatives are crap as national political parties, both possess efficient internal organisation to satisfactorily tackle unacceptable behaviour by their party members. UKIP does not as witnessed by me in many incidents this year – incidents that do not involve me !
Well what can the nutters do for local people in TH ? Split the anti-Labour vote, split the anti-Tory vote ?
Can local UKIP genuinely take-on hundreds of casework items ? No.
Clever and decent people are usually circumspect in their comments. They tend not to utter like oafs desperate to reassure the public that UKIP is the extreme and nasty right wing of the Conservative Party and a bunch of arrogant rude people who embarrass this country’s international reputation.
If UKIP nutters genuinely respect their country, they should never make their country a laughing-stock but UKIP are too thick to understand that foreigners may be just as clever as some of us, excluding UKIP people obviously, and even better than some of us. Residents of most of the 27 other EU countries speak more than their own local language unlike UKIP nutters and people all over the world, even those with non-white skins and whom live in abject poverty speak more languages that the average UKIP local election candidate.
Europe is this country’s best future.
Curious Cat
EU Citizen and English too.
My-my pussy cat, what a curious pussy you are. Come now, draw back your little talon claws, UKIP is really going to help you grow up into a big brave boy who won’t need European foster parents to take care of him.
So, shhhh, let’s not hear any more of your silly and naive Neville Chamberlain delusional rantings – you know, ‘Peace in Our Time’ etc, or ‘Europe is this country’s best future’.
Why not just purr, curl up, and say Good Night. When you wake up – if you wake up to reality – UKIP will be here for you; to help and guide you understand what being British is.
Oh dear. How dreadful. Grenville wants UKIP to educate me how to fiddle my public expenses. Then he wants UKIP to show me how to be obnoxiously rude to anyone who lives outside England, followed by lessons on how to be disruptive in public and how to make a mockery of England’s international reputation.
UKIP’s father and inspiration Neville Chamberlain was wrong. Even I know that. I’ve got the balls to fight – and I do. It must be caused by my genuine European bloodlines 🙂
I hear UKIP will kick-out the Queen and her son because they have far too much European blood in their veins and too much Euro-DNA too.
If I awake and find UKIP by my bedside, I would aggressively fight the bastards. They are true fifth columnists who want my country to become part of the USA.
I don’t hate foreigners. Some are incredibly nice, decent, friendly – clever too. That’s more than I can say about any current UKIP members.
I’ve got more brain cells in my little finger than my local UKIP local election candidate has in his whole body – UKIP’s standards are so low any ole rubbish will do – just as low as their polices and their public behaviour.
Perhaps after a good night’s sleep Neville you will come to your senses like all the other UKIP members who left the party this year 🙂
Curious Cat or should I write “Euro Cat” ?
“Euro Cat” is fine 🙂
Gee thanks Neville. That is sure kind of you, as UKIP’s American parent would write.
I prefer Europa Uni = One Europe United – obviously we would have to eject UKIP and send them home to their right-wing USA masters some 3,000 plus miles west of Europe.
Now, being a little intellectual, what precisely are UKIP’s strategic plans for the LBTH ? What local UKIP policies, if any, will help the ordinary citizens of the LBTH improve their daily existence ? Kindly avoid waffle as I am really allergic to it.
Curious Cat
I am gob smacked with C Cat!!! the cat has some serious mental issues going on there, I think the cat needs therapy. The cat is obviously blind, deaf, though not dumb, in the physical sense unfortunately but def in the psychological sense. We have many happy female and male members in our group from all walks of life, creeds, cultures and age group. illiterate we certainly are not. Benefit cheats…wow….would you like to come up with the proof of that? Non of your ranting remarks are based on any factual evidence…WHICH…as someone who instantly positioned in their statement as as someone one from the legal fraternity….I am agog that someone who should know better even publicly states such things, which leaves me to assume that you are fantasist on top of a very unemployable legal person.
UKIP does have the knowledge to take the helms as many of our executives and Cllrs are from the other 3 parties with whom they have totally lost faith in their parties incapacity unwillingness or total ineptitude and /or downright duplicity, even recently the Labour Press Officer joined UKIP, you should read his interview as to why….
As for the rest of your rant, UKIP is not against immigrants what we are appalled with is the immigration process as dictated to us by the EU. The cat obviously does not know the difference between the noun and adjective. UKIP has a lot of members who are immigrants, we have Italian immigrants in our local branch, a polish member moved to another part of London. In fact it is the EU that is racist. Immigrants from outside the EU do not have the same rights of access as people from the 27 EU nations. What UKIP is stating is a immigration policy akin to those of Canada, Australia and others, where every immigrant is judged on merit and needs not their nationality.
And as for UKIP making the U a laughing stock…well if our policies are so ludicrous…then how come both Labour, Cons and Lib are now repeating them. We have always stated the need for a managed immigration process, that benefits both parties and the community at large….and now Mr Milliband and his lackies are repeating it as if its their proposal..personally I don’t give a hoot as long as it gets done. Every member of UKIP believes strongly in the UK in reaching out and putting Britain at the forefront of global economics and not selling our country short to unelected twits from Europe…who as a European myself, I can tell you having spoken to many EU afficionados that they do not want Britain, but heck they do want our money. The EU is asking for £2.5Bil it is asking the UK to put up £500M….. 2.5B divided into 27 does not come to 500Mil….if we are all in it together, then someone in Brussels can’t do their maths. Cameron is delude and misleading the country to say that Europe will offer up negotiations…every senior exec from Brussels has already told you..NO renegotiations…why…because if we do….then other nations will want the same and they wont want to go down that line…its not rocker science it common sense, WHICH yu Cat are seriously missing.
Please go to you GP and get yourself some psycho therapy.
Can we please keep the discussion to local issues. If you want to talk about wider Ukip policies, use the Express site. Thanks.
Good Afternoon Mr AM,
I re-read your outburst several times but disappointingly failed to see any mention of the wonder London Borough of Tower Hamlets and UKIP’s policies how to improve the daily existence of those who live in TH.
If I may helpfully add for those with limited brain cells and similar comprehension disabilities, TH is in London, England and is not, well certainly the last time I looked, actually on the mainland of Europe. It is on an isolated island off the west coast of Europe. That island is on the European continental shelf and divided into 3 distinctive parts: England, Scotland and Wales.
So back to our beloved Tower Hamlets – what are UKIP’s specific policies on how the daily existence of the residents of TH may be beneficially improved ?????
Do you, personally, or UKIP, generally, really have the passion and desire to improve the daily existence of those who reside in TH ? If so, lets have it now – not just before the next election.
Thank you.
Curious Cat
!!!! astonishing, slander is OK but if a tad off local course then one gets the red card…OK then…Ted….Can we pleas ask Fascist Sexist arse-hole Cat to STOP calling me a racist please…Thank you.
Arsehole Cat, even though I was not elected I AM VERY MUCH involved with local issues….ALWAYS have been ALWAYS will be…I’m not into waving my personal flag but if that is the kind of egotistical demo you want I’ll gladly comply and happy to compare with your contributions… Check out the UKIP website after the summer where things will be updated. Now leave me alone you sad old fart I have a life to lead its Sat night
Good Evening Mr AM,
I did not call you, personally, “racist”. I have not called any UKIP member “racist” although I did assert UKIP does attract “racists” – obviously in the same way it attracts the gullible, the confused, and the pro-USA anti-Europe ring-wing (of the Tory Party) nutters.
Wishing you a pleasant evening and …….. hoping very optimistically …….. for your enlightening reply to my previous requests, including this one
Oodles of bad words is never an adequate substitute for informed debate or even an exchange of opinions.
Curious Cat.
Meow, meow and prrr, prrr…Mr Cat, you’ve come back with a vengeance. Please let AM off – let her enjoy the UKIP bubble until it bursts.
As for your own legal battles to change the voting systems, how are they progressing? And, what kind of a lawyer are you?
Hallo Clapham Trollybus,
I hear LT buses are now cashless.
Got diverted by the discovery of voters denied a vote in the local election because local election voting was reserved for British and Irish citizens only – that is the claim made by the Polling Station staff all day long.
The quantity of denied voters is sufficient to have altered the election result.
Both the Returning Officer and the local authority who appointed the RO, and thus are liable in law for the fitness of the person they appointed as RO, are doing a silent cover-up, earnestly hoping I will forget about it 🙂 The LA has recognised the seriousness of the matter and appointed a central London lawyer. The RO is apparently doing nothing.
I’m not a lawyer and never ever have been. I’m just an ordinary member of the public. I think I can win this one if I keep matters simple, use logic and reasoning and ask the court for something simple like a declaration or even several and ask the court to determine whether the CoE Treaty from about 1951, the EU Treaty (van uit Maastricht) and Tony Blair’s HRA from 1998? on the matter of free and fair elections have been breached.
At present there is nothing in English law about such situations. In the country that lacks a proper constitution it is no wonder major parts of the election system are unfit for purpose. Lots of people are paid lots of dosh and all they can do is to ignore the conspicuous imperfections that continue to exist. After some years they get gongs such as KBEs, CBEs and the lower-class OBEs. Meanwhile the public get the crumbs of MBEs.
I hope to finish gathering witness statements in the next week, then draft my pleading and ask for Orders that the RO and LA admit facts and supply the requested information.
I want to publish the story exclusively when I’m ready – after all, I’m doing all the work and we all know how newspapers can lie, distort and even invent facts just to sell newspaper copies. Naturally I’ll give a copy to Private Eye.
The more substantive election matters are slightly delayed by the Cabinet Office’s inability to send-out emails using a properly configured email server – think they use incompetent Message Labs (messagelabs.com) now owned by Symantec.. Wonder why the national government can’t send-out its own emails and are obsessed with spending public funds on expensive USA companies when the government could do the same work better and a lot, lot cheaper.. Backhanders or personal favours or simple incompetence perhaps ?
Might re-disappear from here to concentrate on the legal work.
Curious Cat.
Curios Cat… You really talk a lot of shite!! Get a life !!
Ajay,
Just because you don’t understand something there is no need to embarrass yourself in public by illustrating your inadequacies.
Night classes start in September. What subjects are you going to study? Comprehension ?
Good Luck.
Curious Cat.
Curious Cat, with all due respective, Ajay has a point – you weren’t making a lot of sense. You were just rambling.
Always keep it simple, concise and to the point.
Hi Clapham,
I was asked “As for your own legal battles to change the voting systems, how are they progressing? And, what kind of a lawyer are you?”
Answers:
1. I was diverted by a voting denial matter which I am submitting to the High Court.
2. The substantive issues are slowly progressing, not helped by the Cabinet Office’s inability to send their outgoing Internet emails using properly configured mail servers.
3. I’m not a lawyer.
Being entertaining I added details including
A. some background to 1.
B. a moan about the Cabinet Office’s problem.
C. a moan about the dire state of election laws in England.
Hope that helps.
CC.
Curious Cat, if you moan a lot, there is a risk that you might end up becoming like Cllr Peter Car Crash Golds.
Here’s a suggestion. Make your points in brief and then outline your ‘moans’ like a footnote. Readers can elect to ignore that part if they wish to.
I hope you are not ‘moaning’ too much in your pleadings that you are drafting.
Hi Clapham.
Without blatantly taking sides, and dishing-out justified criticisms to some in TH, may I humbly suggest I have a lot to moan about and I am, restricted by my limited resources, actually doing something to improve the matters I moan about ?
My pleadings are usually good. Given the time, and access to university law libraries, they can become razor-sharp, in tort at least. They are always concise and comprehensible.
Thinking about enrolling for a distant law course, part time.
I may publish my current pleading on the Internet- unsure whether I can publish my opponents.
Curious Cat
God I am bored of this now!!!
Sorry just heard this joke, and thought I would try it out on strangers I don’t know.
What is a cats way of keeping law and order? Claw Enforcement
Hoho hoho
Woah. I didnt know that santa was on trial by jeory. Xmas has come early for you this year hasnt it. Or have you been listening to too much gangster rap.
I like it 🙂
Seriously best method is prevention by steering the kids and youths away from a life of crime and social failure. Primary target is dysfunctional families.
CC.
Indeed. Nicely written. You should work for the councils communications department.
Laughter is the best medicine, Max. Xmas or not, I personally like Santa’s iconic laughter. Hoho hoho….
Since Santa has not trademarked his laughter, we can all use it. Even in Ramadan.
Hi Max,
I can’t accept your invitation. I don’t want to be a spin doctor distorting the truth to suit politicians or council bosses or fiddling public “consultations”.
Local government can do a lot to improve everyone’s lives but only when the bosses have the brain power, the drive and energy, the inspiration, the VISION and they genuinely like the public. Haven’t noticed that sort of commitment in TH.
Not one person at LBTH paid more than the prime minister (2 salaries = £142,000 p.a.) is worth it. Expensive and delicate bums on seats are not a good substitute for real public service.
UKIP lacks any vision, ditto Tories and ditto Labour. That’s why TH is in a mess. Oh, sorry, neither does Son of Labour either.
Curious Cat.
No, no, no. Elections don’t work like that. See below. But first, let’s examine the proposition that “X party standing me cost me the election”.
Well you know what? That’s kind of the way that democracy works. You are a combination of party support + message + personal vote + organisation + where you are on the ballot paper absolutely and in relation to the other 2 candidates of your party (there’s nearly always a drop off for candidates 2 and 3) and you hope that’s going to add up more than what the other parties standing bring to the election campaign. You might as well say that Green Party cost Labour one seat. Its nonsense of course.
There is a lot of evidence nationally where UKIP votes come from and that suggests it lots of it comes from the Tories, but it’s not overwhelmingly the case. http://yougov.co.uk/news/2014/02/24/where-ukip-gets-its-support/
However, LBTH is unique. My informed guess is that UKIP was draws on the white elderly working class vote in LBTH – which splits pretty evenly between Tories, Labour, LibDems, the far right and previous non-voters.
Now to the analysis.
You can’t look at an election in isolation. Yes, boundaries change and voters move in and out: comparison is limited but its the best tool we have.
Scroll down for the quite cool bar charts in the links below
2010 results
http://moderngov.towerhamlets.gov.uk/mgElectionAreaResults.aspx?XXR=0&ID=3&RPID=4995997
2014 results
http://moderngov.towerhamlets.gov.uk/mgElectionAreaResults.aspx?ID=86&RPID=4961923
On a turnout of 31% compared to the local elections in 2010 of 54%, there were an awful lot of Conservative voters who didn’t feel strong strongly enough about either the Conservative offer in BCT, or the threat of THF, or the threat of the Labour Party to bother to vote. If there was one single thing that cost the Tories, it was their own failure of the Conservatives to inspire over 1000 of their voters to go vote that cost them. UKIP my a**e.
OK, let’s for a second assume that all parties are hit equally by a lower turnout. We now look at share of the vote to see the difference. The big difference in 4 years is the collapse of the LibDems, who let’s face it weren’t trying that hard in 2010 in BCT. The results are kind of explicable for most of the parties, if we assume that Respect voters now vote THF, some of Labour goes to THF, and that Labour benefited from LibDem switchers (which goes against the grain of national research, but LBTH is different). What stands out is the lack of a personal vote for Gloria Thienel.
Gloria was elected in 2010 on 10.95% as the third placed Tory candidate – Archer had a significant person vote as parliamentary candidate, and Golds had a bit of one through hard work and his inimitable charisma . After 4 years of what I am sure was diligent attention to casework, door knocking, appearing in leaflets and turning up to TRAs, Gloria in this election received 9.62% of the vote as second placed Tory candidate on the ballot paper. The incumbency factor means that you are supposed increase your personal vote over time not reduce it.
I’m sure she’s a lovely person and everything, but her particular result tells you something, and it’s not that UKIP took Tory votes.
Very astute post. I’ve never understood why people wax lyrical about Thienel – she never made much of an impact on council life. People keep saying she’s done more casework than anyone else but that’s not true – see the figures:
Click to access SFOI%209707%20Members%20enquiry%20numbers%20for%20all%20councillors%20since%202010.pdf
She didn’t do badly, but you’ll note that Labour’s Marc Francis and THF’s Rabina Khan are miles ahead.
I also think that she is racially prejudiced – this was her take on Ted pointing out the number of councillors elected by ethnicity this time around:
And yes I think you’re right, Judoker, that Tim Archer (who did make a brilliant contribution to local politics, and it’s a shame we’ve seen the back of him, despite my being at odds with him politically) topped that ward on account of being the parliamentary candidate. But Cllr Golds is on the record as saying that the disparity is explained by people voting against him because he was gay.
Which is probably about as true as his claim in the following interview with the BBC’s Dotun Adebayo that Lutfur’s councillors had ‘shouted’ at him in a council meeting, ‘Zionist scum’ and ‘sit down you effing old queer’.
If that had happened, it would be a hate crime and we’d have seen a by-election immediately. I’d love to know who the accused councillors are.
I think if you talk to people who actually did the doorknocking on the island (of all parties) you’ll get the impression that very many Tory voters switched to Ukip. They think this swing to Ukip was a significant factor in costing the Tories two seats.
I must say, it was also my experience when I spent an afternoon trailing the Tories on the doorstep. I was surprised by how many Tory voters said they were going to Ukip.
Anyone else with direct informed experience want to comment?
With the greatest respect, Ted, you’re showing the difference between a journalist and a political hack.
You have in fact answered your own question when you say “you’ll get the impression that very many Tory voters switched to Ukip”. If they voted UKIP then they WEREN’T TORY VOTERS IN THE FIRST PLACE.
It works like this. Between 10% and about a third of your canvass data is rubbish. It’s carried out by willing but not terrible able volunteers, you catch people as they’re watching the world cup, or having their tea or bathing the baby – and they’ll tell you their vote for your party to get rid of you. There are ways of differentiating between those voters and the real supporters but I shalln’t post it (I know, I’m such a tease). So the upshot is on the day unless it’s a very good campaign, you’ll be knocking up all sorts – your supporters, their supporters, people who will split their vote, people who vote down the list alphabetically & people who couldn’t give a monkeys. This is universal and affects all parties equally.
Now, the statement “you’ll get the impression that very many Tory voters switched to Ukip. They think this swing to Ukip was a significant factor in costing the Tories two seats” Err, wrong for the reason given above, but also wrong because (1) post-election justification means that parties like to find an excuse rather than their own failings for not winning and (2) UKIP vote is so small that is *almost* within the margin of error.
To reiterate. There are 3 unusual things with the result and its not a tiny number of UKIP voters. Number 1 is the 1,000 Tory voters who went awol between 2010 and 2014. Number 2 is the 1,000 or so missing LibDems (who nationally head towards the Tories when squeezed, again this is a bit different in LBTH). Number 3 is the failure of Gloria (sorry, it’s not personal, sure she’s lovely, never met her) to get a personal vote.
In most places, you have a core party vote which is larger than you would expect which will vote for you no matter what….if you get them out to vote. This is a function of organisation, message, weather, candidate appeak, what’s going on nationally and locally. Within that, you’ll have bad data which misidentifies people. And within that you have a tiny number of people who genuinely float between parties. The latter are basically irrelevant in electoral terms because they are massively outnumbered by the core vote and they effect each party similarly – Labour bleeds votes to the Greens and to THF for example. I repeat: you get a bit of movement on the day. This is normal. It happens.
Now, there’s one exception to this. And that’s the person who switches between the top two parties in a race. These people are important because they count twice – not only are you losing one of your votes, the opposition is gaining a vote too. Say you have 30 people who switch between Tory and Labour – you’re never going to pick that up on the day in terms of doorstep feedback, and yet that’s a 60 vote difference. Makes a massive difference in a tight local election, and far more important than a few people choosing to vote for an alsoran party.
Now, only the agents and the guys and gals with the spreadsheets will really know, and then only till there able to examine the data looking at past elections and who voted this time round.
.
Generally at local elections:-
(1) Adult semi-illiteracy or complete illiteracy
(2) Total disinterest
(3) Low IQ
(4) Voting Tory because they hate Labour.
(5) Then alone comes “drink several pints of beer a day” and “smoke yourself to death” anti-women, anti-Europe, anti-non whites UKIP. UKIP are bollshie and very few of the voters have ever analysed what UKIP stand for except fiddling EP expenses, continually being obnoxious in public and wanting UK to become an American state. BINGO UKIP are radically different, so they get the vote.
QED.
Curious Cat
Those who said they voted Tory in 2010 when there were no Ukip candidates but who switched to Ukip in May weren’t Tory voters?
Explain this Dr Whoery.
If a tree falls in a wood when there’s no-one around, does it make a sound?
Excuse the riddle.
What you are saying (I think) is that there were a bunch of people who were canvassed before the *last set* of local elections who said that they were going to vote Conservative, and this time didn’t.
Now, I don’t know the ins and out of the Tory campaign, but you go with the last set of canvass returns you have. You shouldn’t be in a situation where you are knocking on doors on election day getting your vote out and coming across people who have changed their mind in any significant numbers: that’s one of the purposes of canvassing. You weed out the flaky support.
There are 3 circumstances where you face the situation you’re suggesting happened. The first is that you’ve got dud data (see posts above) – this happens a bit for everyone equally. The second – most common reason – is that you haven’t done a recent canvass – you are relying on old, old data. This is inexcusably bad campaigning. The third is you that get what’s called “late swing” – people who have changed their mind in the course of the last week of the campaign. The problem for the enthusiasts of “late swing” is that it’s very rare – it only happens under very particular circumstances (candidate gets arrested for something really bad, or you’re faced with a large well orchestrated campaign with a strong emotional plea) neither of which happened in BCT.
Now, going back to the “2010 Tory voters who voted for UKIP in 2014”. The most likely explanation for this happening is second reason. They were relying on data from the 2010 local election. Several problems with this:
1. None of us really know how these people voted last time. We only know what canvassers recorded they said they were going to do (with all the caveats in the posts above).
2. The data probably isnt 4 years old, it’ll be more like 5 years ago – a lot can happen in that time. If you’re relying on 5 year old data you deserve to get a kicking in the ballot box. You might as well be doing a blind knockup (that it knocking on everyone’s door on election day in the hope of getting lucky and finding someone who is going to vote for you).
3. In the spirit of Dr Whoery, let’s get in the Tardis and go back to the 2010 local election, which of course coincided with the General Election. A further point in how rubbish canvass data can be – it’s hard to distinguish between local and general election voting intention. You could argue quite strongly that the other Tory candidates were boosted by Tim Archer’s parliamentary vote in 2010 – and that actually they did remarkably well in his absence to get even one candidate elected, rather than claim its a Tory ward and UKIP did for us.
So, in short. Let’s assume that there were a group of voters who voted Tory in 2010 at the same time as the General Election which booted out an unpopular Labour Government (and now we have a reasonably unpopular Tory/LibDem government) who decided to vote UKIP this time. The only plausible circumstances that can be called “Conservative voters” by the Tories and knocked up on election day in 2014 is if they hadn’t been spoken to since by a canvasser. It all comes back to poor campaigning – Tories have themselves to blame, not UKIP.
Let it go, Ted. You’re wrong on this one.
Hmm. People in May told me on the doorstep they voted Tory in 2010 but they intended to vote Ukip in 2014.
Not some theoretical canvassing lala land; actual horses and mouths.
“Hmm. People in May told me on the doorstep they voted Tory in 2010 but they intended to vote Ukip in 2014. Not some theoretical canvassing lala land; actual horses and mouths.”
I love it when journalists get all huffy.
Like I said at the beginning, the difference is between someone who reports it and someone who knows what they’re on about.
My point is not that (some) people who said that they voted Tory in 2010 said that they were going to vote UKIP in 2014 (though I note, this is not what you said earlier).
[Though the evidence is that people generally cant accurately remember not only who they voted for but whether they voted at all]
My point is that these aren’t “Tory voters”, they are people who may have voted Tory at some point in the past.
The distinction is an absolutely critical one, if a fine one.
But in any event, the Tories failed to get out 1,000+ people who voted Tory in 2010 and didn’t in 2014, and because they didn’t make any inroads into the 1,000 or so people who voted LibDem in 2010 and didn’t in 2014.
Against a backdrop of 2k or so Tory inclined voters who didn’t bother to vote, worrying about a few votes slipping away from Tory to UKIP is like worrying about the deckchairs slipping off the side of the Titanic.
Sometimes you can know too much and hear the trees falling when they’re not.
I have work to do.
=> Judoker
That’s a load of nonsense in local elections campaigns. A Tory voter is a voter who votes Tory, Once a Tory voter always a Tory voter unless the Tories foul-up or something better comes along – like UKIP for instance ?
Now I’m not stating UKIP are better than Tories but that is what some Tory voters in TH clearly perceived.
How do YOU quantify “few” ? I’m sure that is not Central Office’s Spin Doctors’ philosophy. They badly want to retain every Tory vote.
Is the Tory Party today the Titanic to which you refer ? I note both names begin with a “t” and both names are associated with disasters.
Surely one of the aims is to convert “flaky” into “firm” ?
Are you an election advisor to the Tories for their 2015 campaign ?
Curious Cat.
There are two further elements which I believe affected the voting in Blackwall & Cubitt Town:
1) Ethnicity – there is a proportion of white voters who refuse to vote for BME candidates of the party they normally support. Both Labour and Conservative Asian candidates received fewer votes than their white colleagues. It is particularly difficult for the Tories to get non-white candidates elected in Tower Hamlets. The position is reversed for THF – some of their voters will support Bangladeshi candidates only, and hence none of their candidates from other ethnic groups were elected.
2) Labour can now portray themselves as the only party able to effectively challenge Lutfur. This may be the case in Tower Hamlets as a whole, but not in Blackwall & Cubitt Town. However, many voters will not be aware of that, and the Tories are subject to the “third party squeeze”.