UK By-elections thread, 2021-

[afleitch]

Uxbridge is actually a helpful outlier because the Tories will now obsess over a niche issue which never usually works well for them.

[YL]

Some thoughts this morning:

My biggest concern is that the Uxbridge & South Ruislip result will embolden the increasingly noticeable anti-environmental tendency in the Tories, and furthermore that it'll make Labour (and even the Lib Dems to some extent) warier of doing anything which takes the car lobby on.

Reform UK's actual election results -- two lost deposits -- continue to fail to match their polling figures.  This could be seen as good news for the Tories, though the sizes of the Tory falls in Somerton & Frome and Selby & Ainsty with Reform UK doing nothing suggest that there's not much to that.

Tactical voting between Labour and the Lib Dems continues to look strong; both were squeezed almost out of existence in the other's target seats.  This doesn't, however, apply to the Greens, who did quite well.  There's some reason to think, especially in Selby & Ainsty with Andrew Teale's reports of Green posters everywhere in Ouseburn, that quite a bit of this Green vote came from the Tories.  Time is running out now for this to happen before the General Election, but could the Greens combine that vote with a Labour and Lib Dem tactical vote to win should a by-election come up in one of the rural areas where they've done really well locally?

Finally, I'll repeat that in spite of the U & SR disappointment Selby & Ainsty really is an outstandingly good result for Labour, up there with their most impressive by-election wins ever.  Dudley West 1994 had a bigger swing, but was a considerably more marginal seat on paper and Labour must have been expected to win it right from the start.

[afleitch]

There's a bigger 'cleavage' in tactical voting in recent by-elections than there was between 1992 and 1997 when in a number of Lib Dem gains, Labour also advanced (Eastleigh, Littleborough etc)

If this is carried through to the General Election that is likely to reduce Labour's seat tally, boost the Lib Dems and inflict deeper damage on the Tories. This is because the national polls don't line up with the results. Same was true at the locals.

[Blair]

The funny thing is the margin in Uxbridge is the same nearly as Batley and Spen when Labours victory saved Keir- equally I’m not sure if Labour won by say 100 votes whether the coverage would be that different today.

But yeah clear briefing already from labour re blaming it on ULEz and Sadiq…

[Pericles]

Uxbridge is a sign that UK voters are volatile-yes, Labour is up by 20+ points but this isn't some permanent realignment. This was already obvious, and the Tories are highly unlikely to be able to form a government after the next election regardless. It reminds us that just as the Tory landslide evaporated, whatever victory (landslide or narrow) Labour wins can disappear for any random reason if the electorate feel they are screwed over by the either party. So, not exactly encouraging for anyone-but the goal is just 'be great at your jobs' I guess.

[CityofSinners]

The biggest winners from the by-elections are clearly the lib dems. Still crushing it and the amount of tactical voting is encouraging for them.

The biggest losers are the labor environmentalist groups. ULEZs are a clear liability in outer London and Starmer will throw them under the bus if their policies are perceived as a electoral liability countrywide.

[JimJamUK]

What stands out to me is how volatile and unattached voters are. The Uxbridge result saw the minors parties squeezed into complete irrelevance while the Conservatives were able to narrowly hold on despite the national environment because of disciplined campaigning against an unpopular mayor/policy. In Selby by contrast there was an even better swing than the national polls would suggest. The minor party vote was weak (except for the Greens, who had a geographic base that presumably was less targeted by Labour). In Somerton and Frome the Lib Dems did their usual by-election thing and won the protest/anti-Conservative vote. The Labour vote went to pot despite national opinion polls, but the Greens actually put in a very strong performance which is very unusual for them in the circumstances (this will have been helped by their popularity in Frome, but localised strength didn’t help in North Shropshire).

Looking at party performances overall:
Conservatives - Mostly poor of course but Uxbridge shows that voters are still willing to stick with them if attack Labour and make their policies unpopular enough.
Labour - Selby suggested the national polls are real, but Uxbridge suggests their vote is soft and Somerton and Frome that it is incredibly soft if the Lib Dem’s are seen as the tactical choice (how this works out in somewhere less clearly cut, we’ll see).
Lib Dems - Very good night in Somerton and Frome, otherwise pretty poor in the other 2 where they weren’t in contention. As mentioned in Labour, there’s still a big question of what happens in places where both major parties are competitive/people look to the national picture, as the tactical squeeze could damage both (and see the Conservatives win through the middle).
Greens - Good night I think. Somerton and Frome their best ever by-election I believe, Selby also decent. Uxbridge more standard.
Reform - Another weak performance, they have some supporters but it’s hard to reconcile the results with the national opinion polls.
Everyone else - Mostly poor, Yorkshire Party did good given they forgot to include a description in Selby.

[JimJamUK]

The biggest losers are the labor environmentalist groups. ULEZs are a clear liability in outer London and Starmer will throw them under the bus if their policies are perceived as a electoral liability countrywide.

The environmental justification for ULEZ is exaggerated, schemes like it are being implemented because local government is broke (especially London) and they want to justify raising tax (or the Conservative government is forcing them to implement one). Neither side wants to admit this of course.

[afleitch]

On a simple swing, and translated nationally, the Labour lead over the Tories would be a robust 15.9% with both parties shares lower than the national polls.

On current boundaries with UNS that's about Labour 383, Tories 137, Lib Dems 77.

A bigger Tory drop than in the the previous three by-elections (all under Sunak) which were in Labour seats and a more modest Labour rise due to Somerton more than Uxbridge.

In those three Labour defenses, the Lib Dem share hardly moved.

Also worth noting that in raw votes cast in comparison to the GE, Labour did well. Still less voters than in the GE overall but indicative of vote switching rather than a grossly disproportionate core vote coming out.

[Zinneke]

Uxbridge is actually a helpful outlier because the Tories will now obsess over a niche issue which never usually works well for them.

https://twitter.com/LukeTryl/status/1682205393106227200

It will not be a niche issue if you replace ULEZ with any environmental policy I can think of that is likely to piss off the general public. Selling green politics in a cost of living crisis is going to be difficult for any politician. Especially when even Z-list celebs are making front pages with their lavish jet setting lifestyle while a boring suit tells you you can't afford your Ryanair ticket anymore.

(And yes I know that the Western proletariat is privileged in this regard, I am just saying that the big mistake Labour and the Western Left in general could make.is making these issues.

Political ecology will be far more difficult than some of the Left realise.

[Benjamin Frank]

Uxbridge is actually a helpful outlier because the Tories will now obsess over a niche issue which never usually works well for them.

https://twitter.com/LukeTryl/status/1682205393106227200
It will not be a niche issue if you replace ULEZ with any environmental policy I can think of that is likely to piss off the general public. Selling green politics in a cost of living crisis is going to be difficult for any politician. Especially when even Z-list celebs are making front pages with their lavish jet setting lifestyle while a boring suit tells you you can't afford your Ryanair ticket anymore.

(And yes I know that the Western proletariat is privileged in this regard, I am just saying that the big mistake Labour and the Western Left in general could make.is making these issues.

Political ecology will be far more difficult than some of the Left realise.

This is nothing to do with the environemnt per se as changing the status quo is always difficult. The best that can be done is to point out that it's 'short term pain for long term gain' but the challenge is the voters have loss aversion.

[Blair]

I also think the swing in Uxbridge was iirc the same as that in Wakefield?

[oldtimer]

Uxbridge is actually a helpful outlier because the Tories will now obsess over a niche issue which never usually works well for them.

When unusual by-election results occur, it's usually a warning about a specific policy causing a lot of political pain.

George Galloway was a warning that Labour had specific trouble with foreign policy.

Conservatives lost in Richmond Park in 2016, and I saw it as a warning that Theresa May was going to have trouble with Brexit.

Labour losing Uxbridge is in my mind a similar warning that Labour will have trouble with green policies and would need to revise them.

At the very least Khan will have to ditch the ULEZ plans, because it clearly cost Labour the seat.

[afleitch]

Across the six by-elections under Sunak there could be a bit of caution for Labour across the overall votes cast.

While the Tories are down 16.3, the Lib Dems up 5 are up slightly more overall than Labour (up 4.9)

And this batch of six only includes one Ed Davey wall prop Lib Dem result.

But if we look across the only three Labour challenging the Tories contests (two yesterday and Wakefield) the Tories are down 16.6, Labour up 12 and the Lib Dems down 4.1. And that's including Uxbridge.

Compared to the 2005 notionals, the Tories are down 2.3, Labour up 7.2 so again, a strong result.

----

The change in share between the 2005 notionals for the six by-elections under Sunak (which is just a measure against the last Labour government) is the Tories down 10.1, Labour up 7.7 and the Lib Dems down 6.4.

[oldtimer]

I don't understand how in the UK the liberal democrats can pull of astounding flips in by-elections then totaly choke and loose in general elections. Why can't they translate this success to something meaningful ?. Why can't they replicate their by-election machine in general elections ?

By-elections are an excellent opportunity to cast a protest vote.

Usually it's the LD, as they are in opposition and have no hope to be in government, that benefit as their least offensive to most voters (as long as they don't remember the Cameron-Clegg coalition).

[Blair]

I wonder with Uxbridge if they would have picked someone else for the by election; Labour is running a few councillors from London in seats outside of London (which Uxbridge for political purposes is!) and has always done so (see Lisa Nandy) but while DB was not a bad candidate he struggled to make a disintinct brand- the Tory leaflets called him a “councillor from Camden’ and I believe in that capacity he’d uttered warm words about ULEZ.

The issue ofc is that Labour doesn’t have many councillors in the seat iirc

[CumbrianLefty]

any guesses on the spin from the press?

The swing against the tories?

or the tories hanging on in Uxbridge?

Even the Sun correspondent on BBC was admitting it was a good night for Labour. I think the Uxbridge result will be played as less a national indication but more of a local issue for Sadiq Khan and the London mayoral election next year.

Though most of Greater London is not at all like Uxbridge.

(an obvious point perhaps, but some still seemed to be missing it this morning)

[Blair]

any guesses on the spin from the press?

The swing against the tories?

or the tories hanging on in Uxbridge?

Even the Sun correspondent on BBC was admitting it was a good night for Labour. I think the Uxbridge result will be played as less a national indication but more of a local issue for Sadiq Khan and the London mayoral election next year.

Though most of Greater London is not at all like Uxbridge.

(an obvious point perhaps, but some still seemed to be missing it this morning)

I do wonder though if this will see the bottom truly fallout in outer London for Sadiq- he ofc didn’t win Hillingdon in 2016, or 2020 but he’ll still need part of the labour vote there, in Harrow and Croydon- I worry that outer London has been written off to the extent that labour are expecting to get 0 zero votes.

[Oryxslayer]

Some thoughts this morning:

My biggest concern is that the Uxbridge & South Ruislip result will embolden the increasingly noticeable anti-environmental tendency in the Tories, and furthermore that it'll make Labour (and even the Lib Dems to some extent) warier of doing anything which takes the car lobby on.

The issue with ULEZ is that most local governments are running on shoestring budgets. I personally foresee many problems with this type of policy,  and know there are many better solutions for environmental urban transformation policy, most using the carrot rather than the stick. However,  for there to be expansions of public transport resources for example,  there needs to be a lot of money which there supposedly isn't. It's hopefully something Starmer recognizes and changes, especially with Nandy on board.

But until that point, local government has to realize that doing a transformational policy without providing any way to facilitateit, aka telling the voters to figure it out with the situation as is, is always going to make people very angry. Projects similar to ULEZ caused a Tory councilor to be elected in a by-election in Cambridge city of all places, and saw the Greens get entirely wiped out in Yorks 2023 elections. If you can't use the carrot,  maybe you shouldn't use so obvious of a stick.

[Conservatopia]

Uxbridge is actually a helpful outlier because the Tories will now obsess over a niche issue which never usually works well for them.

When unusual by-election results occur, it's usually a warning about a specific policy causing a lot of political pain.

George Galloway was a warning that Labour had specific trouble with foreign policy.

Conservatives lost in Richmond Park in 2016, and I saw it as a warning that Theresa May was going to have trouble with Brexit.

Labour losing Uxbridge is in my mind a similar warning that Labour will have trouble with green policies and would need to revise them.

At the very least Khan will have to ditch the ULEZ plans, because it clearly cost Labour the seat.

I think you're reading too much into a by election result. Yes ULEZ cost Labour a seat when the election was fought on ULEZ but the general election won't be fought on ULEZ.

A lot of by election gains are then lost at the following election because the niche circumstances that lead to the by election result no longer exist.

Also, turnout matters. 15-25pp extra turnout will make a huge difference in the general election.

It's completely plausible that Labour comfortably win Uxbridge next year even if the polls narrow.

[Duke of York]

Uxbridge is actually a helpful outlier because the Tories will now obsess over a niche issue which never usually works well for them.

When unusual by-election results occur, it's usually a warning about a specific policy causing a lot of political pain.

George Galloway was a warning that Labour had specific trouble with foreign policy.

Conservatives lost in Richmond Park in 2016, and I saw it as a warning that Theresa May was going to have trouble with Brexit.

Labour losing Uxbridge is in my mind a similar warning that Labour will have trouble with green policies and would need to revise them.

At the very least Khan will have to ditch the ULEZ plans, because it clearly cost Labour the seat.

I think you're reading too much into a by election result. Yes ULEZ cost Labour a seat when the election was fought on ULEZ but the general election won't be fought on ULEZ.

A lot of by election gains are then lost at the following election because the niche circumstances that lead to the by election result no longer exist.

Also, turnout matters. 15-25pp extra turnout will make a huge difference in the general election.

It's completely plausible that Labour comfortably win Uxbridge next year even if the polls narrow.

So both winners in these elections are guaranteed to lose the next general election?

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Compared to the 2005 notionals, the Tories are down 2.3, Labour up 7.2 so again, a strong result.

It would also be slightly higher in practice (even if this can't be measured) as the notionals for Selby & Ainsty were (as discussed the other day) flawed due to an error made about how the area transferred from the old Selby constituency to the new York Outer constituency voted...

[JimJamUK]

The issue with ULEZ is that most local governments are running on shoestring budgets. I personally foresee many problems with this type of policy,  and know there are many better solutions for environmental urban transformation policy, most using the carrot rather than the stick. However,  for there to be expansions of public transport resources for example,  there needs to be a lot of money which there supposedly isn't. It's hopefully something Starmer recognizes and changes, especially with Nandy on board.

But until that point, local government has to realize that doing a transformational policy without providing any way to facilitateit, aka telling the voters to figure it out with the situation as is, is always going to make people very angry. Projects similar to ULEZ caused a Tory councilor to be elected in a by-election in Cambridge city of all places, and saw the Greens get entirely wiped out in Yorks 2023 elections. If you can't use the carrot,  maybe you shouldn't use so obvious of a stick.

The problem is that local governments think they can/should attempt to solve a wide array of problems despite only the national government presently having the ability to do so. Unless/until local government is much better funded and has greater freedom, they need to learn their place and understand that implementing half solutions that mainly involve the sticks is not going to end well or achieve the improvements they desire.

[YL]

Uxbridge is actually a helpful outlier because the Tories will now obsess over a niche issue which never usually works well for them.

When unusual by-election results occur, it's usually a warning about a specific policy causing a lot of political pain.

George Galloway was a warning that Labour had specific trouble with foreign policy.

Conservatives lost in Richmond Park in 2016, and I saw it as a warning that Theresa May was going to have trouble with Brexit.

Labour losing Uxbridge is in my mind a similar warning that Labour will have trouble with green policies and would need to revise them.

At the very least Khan will have to ditch the ULEZ plans, because it clearly cost Labour the seat.

I think you're reading too much into a by election result. Yes ULEZ cost Labour a seat when the election was fought on ULEZ but the general election won't be fought on ULEZ.

A lot of by election gains are then lost at the following election because the niche circumstances that lead to the by election result no longer exist.

Also, turnout matters. 15-25pp extra turnout will make a huge difference in the general election.

It's completely plausible that Labour comfortably win Uxbridge next year even if the polls narrow.

So both winners in these elections are guaranteed to lose the next general election?

Not at all, especially as the boundary changes in Selby (no Ainsty any more) are helpful to Labour.  And by-election winners often get a bit of a boost: I doubt the Tories would have won Copeland in 2017 without the by-election, for example.

[Storr]

https://twitter.com/CountBinface/status/1682218248035549192?s=20