UK By-elections thread, 2021-

[Vosem]

At least per Wikipedia it seems like polling before the February 1974 election was called usually had a slight Labour advantage, and during the campaign itself a slight Tory advantage, but for whatever reason the narrative was that the Tories were certain to win a landslide. This seems strange given that the economy was actually very bad -- again, per Wikipedia, it was the first British election held in the midst of an economic contraction since 1931 -- but it is what it is.

It seems like it is relatively often the case in many countries that election results have an element of "pre-backlash" to whatever the polls are showing; if the narrative is that one party will have a landslide then those who are on the fence feel some pressure to vote for the other team so that the first party will not have too much of a mandate. Sometimes this causes the other team to actually win, if the polls were wrong enough. I wonder if it eventually produces a "boy who cried wolf" effect, where part of the reason 1979 was such a comfortable Tory victory (...and part of the reason 1997 was such a comfortable Labour victory) was that people didn't really believe the polls showing the out-party winning, as they had been so wrong before within recent memory.

But this is basically speculation -- as me citing Wikipedia shows I perhaps don't know as much as I should about the intricacies of the 1970s campaigns in Britain, or the extent to which 1979 was something that was a long time coming and had been delayed as long as it could be delayed. (Or why the public thought that February 1974 was so likely to be a Tory landslide, even though they were the incumbents in a bad economy.)

[Filuwaúrdjan]

The issue in 1974 was the specific circumstances - unusually extreme and dramatic - that led to the snap election. The economic crisis caused by Anthony Barber's disastrous 1972 Budget had led to a wave of industrial militancy and a subsequent surge in Liberal support at the expense of the two main parties (i.e. the government was blamed for inflation, and Labour was seen as being too close to the unions, who had come to adopt different tactics and media strategies from those that which people were used to). The Oil Shock as a result of the Yom Kippur War then added extra issues and contributed to tensions between the National Union of Mineworkers and the government (via the National Coal Board). The mining industry by this point was a shadow of its former self, but it still mattered as far as power generation was concerned, as nearly all British power stations were coal-fueled. The NUM was also associated with the Labour Party to an unusual extent: it was always seen as being the Labour affiliated union. At the end of 1973 the NUM's membership rejected a national strike* and instead an overtime ban was agreed on: Joe Gormley, the NUM's moderate leader, hoped that the government would then negotiate seriously, but instead Heath took a very hard line and announced the infamous Three Day Week (in order to conserve fuel supplies through the Winter) which took effect at the start of 1974. The NUM finally voted for national strike action in the middle of January, and Heath responded to this by calling a snap election, hoping that the surging Liberal vote would collapse in the Conservatives favour and that there would be extra defections from Labour out of anger at the NUM for causing such inconvenience. He decided to campaign on the slogan 'Who Runs Britain?' and tried to present the election as a choice between Order and industrial militancy. At first the plan seemed to work very well: there was indeed substantial movement from the Liberals to the Conservatives in the polls and the government soon built up a solid polling lead, but then things started to go awry in the last few weeks as the Liberals started to surge again and as the Labour vote, after some wobbling mid campaign, solidified. An increased majority seemed very unlikely by polling day (unlike at the start of the campaign), but the general expectation was that the government would at least be returned by a small one.

_{*Mining unions in Britain were traditionally governed by a stricter adherence to democratic norms than was typical of the wider Trade Union movement, and this would remain the case until the 1980s, but that's another story.}

[Vosem]

Thank you, that makes a great deal of sense.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Incidentally, Gormley was very much a figure from a previous era in British Trade Unionism - masculine in an old fashioned sense rather than a man prone to posturing machismo, quite unlike Mick McGahey (the principal media villain at the time) or Arthur Scargill - and it is plausible that things might have worked out a little differently had he not been:

[OSR stands with Israel]

Here is coverage from the same exact by election from 1996:

[Torrain]

Here is coverage from the same exact by election from 1996:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ItLTm5RhvmM

Great channel - some real gems on there. Basically the only place you can find the overnight coverage from several notable elections (including the initial elections to the devolved parliaments of Scotland and Wales in 1999), and most 21st century by-elections.

There are also some Blair-era documentaries, which are a nice insight into a very different time, psychologically. Always struck by the sheer inevitability New Labour appeared to carry for basically that first full term.

[Torrain]

While I'm here -  the new MPs were sworn in today. The Commons photographer caught some decent shots. As per usual, the MPs were flanked by members of their party - including key figures from the by-election campaign.
https://twitter.com/HouseofCommons/status/1716488154159419404
For those keeping track of such things, both affirmed, in contrast to the last two Labour by-election winners, Keir Mather and Michael Shanks, who both swore in on the KJV.

[Torrain]

Peter Bone suspension to be voted on tomorrow:
https://twitter.com/breeallegretti/status/1716860564083745194
No word on when we’ll get a final decision on Scott Benton, but I believe that’s also expected to be done and dusted before Parliament rises in December.

[oldtimer]

Thank you, that makes a great deal of sense.

The 3 day week and the Winter of Discontent where the cherries on the top.

In the early 1970's the Conservatives where split in fierce internal fighting over Eurore (as usual), Labour took advantage of that to promise a Referendum (sounds familiar?) :

https://www.nytimes.com/1974/02/24/archives/enoch-powell-a-key-tory-suggests-foes-of-market-should-vote-for.html

"In a move that angered Conservative party leaders in this decisive week of the election campaign, Enoch Powell, the party's controversial maverick, suggested today that Britons opposed to the Common Market should vote for the Labor party on Thursday."

The 1979 GE was determined here:

It was a national humiliation, and a confession by the Labour Government then that they couldn't Govern.
The IMF Austerity made a mess, and led to fierce Labour internal fighting and to the Winter of Discontent.

[DK_Mo82]

I don't know much about U.K. Politics. My question I have . if Tories are losing Mid Bedfordshire district how many safe seats can they have? 100?

[Torrain]

I don't know much about U.K. Politics. My question I have . if Tories are losing Mid Bedfordshire district how many safe seats can they have? 100?

If the Conservatives lost Mid-Beds in a general election, on a nation-wide swing towards Labour, we'd be talking about an exctinction level event. Attempting to model those sorts of results produces *insane* maps, like this, from ElectionMapsUK:


Labour: 480 (+284)
Lib Dem: 104 (+96)
Conservative: 20 (-356)
SNP: 23 (-25)
Plaid Cymru: 3 (+1)
Green: 1 (=)

In the event, things *almost certainly* won't be that bad for the Tories - going below 200 is hard, 150 is harder, and dipping below 100 is - well... unlikely.

[JimJamUK]

I don't know much about U.K. Politics. My question I have . if Tories are losing Mid Bedfordshire district how many safe seats can they have? 100?

In a by-election held today, probably less than 100. In a general election, there’s probably ~125 seats* they could realistically expect to hold in a landslide of say 15% Labour lead nationally.

*Not all 125 would be ‘safe’ ahead of time, but there would be some combination of differential swing, split opposition vote etc that would save them (some surprising holds, some surprising losses).

[Coldstream]

I don't know much about U.K. Politics. My question I have . if Tories are losing Mid Bedfordshire district how many safe seats can they have? 100?

If the Conservatives lost Mid-Beds in a general election, on a nation-wide swing towards Labour, we'd be talking about an exctinction level event. Attempting to model those sorts of results produces *insane* maps, like this, from ElectionMapsUK:


Labour: 480 (+284)
Lib Dem: 104 (+96)
Conservative: 20 (-356)
SNP: 23 (-25)
Plaid Cymru: 3 (+1)
Green: 1 (=)

In the event, things *almost certainly* won't be that bad for the Tories - going below 200 is hard, 150 is harder, and dipping below 100 is - well... unlikely.

In practise what would prevent them going as low as 20 is the Labour/Lib Dem vote split - which even after Mid Beds is still likely to save them in dozens of seats without concentrated campaigns from either Labour or Lib Dem’s. Though personally I no longer think below 150 is all that unlikely given the scale of their vote’s disintegration.

[Torrain]

In practise what would prevent them going as low as 20 is the Labour/Lib Dem vote split - which even after Mid Beds is still likely to save them in dozens of seats without concentrated campaigns from either Labour or Lib Dem’s. Though personally I no longer think below 150 is all that unlikely given the scale of their vote’s disintegration.

Fair point - in a wipeout scenario the lack of a clear option (where one has never been needed) is probably the saving grace for a number of government MPs.

The thing that I think is most interesting about the wipeout scenario, is whether those last seats go to Labour or the Lib Dems. A 500 Lab, 40 Lib Dem, 20 Tory parliament probably produces a country that's much different from the 400 Lab, 110 Lib Dem, 20 Tory scenario, given the latter has a clear opposition party, and the former has to wait either for a clear challenger to (re)emerge and claim the opposition mantle, or a formal Labour split.

[Coldstream]

In practise what would prevent them going as low as 20 is the Labour/Lib Dem vote split - which even after Mid Beds is still likely to save them in dozens of seats without concentrated campaigns from either Labour or Lib Dem’s. Though personally I no longer think below 150 is all that unlikely given the scale of their vote’s disintegration.

Fair point - in a wipeout scenario the lack of a clear option (where one has never been needed) is probably the saving grace for a number of government MPs.

The thing that I think is most interesting about the wipeout scenario, is whether those last seats go to Labour or the Lib Dems. A 500 Lab, 40 Lib Dem, 20 Tory parliament probably produces a country that's much different from the 400 Lab, 110 Lib Dem, 20 Tory scenario, given the latter has a clear opposition party, and the former has to wait either for a clear challenger to (re)emerge and claim the opposition mantle, or a formal Labour split.

Yeah I expect them to hold on to more than a few seats with splits something like 35-30-25, similar to what happened in 1997. There will be fewer cases of that happening nowadays with tactical voting being more common & understood, but probably enough to survive at the very least as the opposition.

[CumbrianLefty]

Thank you, that makes a great deal of sense.

The 3 day week and the Winter of Discontent where the cherries on the top.

In the early 1970's the Conservatives where split in fierce internal fighting over Eurore (as usual), Labour took advantage of that to promise a Referendum (sounds familiar?) :

https://www.nytimes.com/1974/02/24/archives/enoch-powell-a-key-tory-suggests-foes-of-market-should-vote-for.html

"In a move that angered Conservative party leaders in this decisive week of the election campaign, Enoch Powell, the party's controversial maverick, suggested today that Britons opposed to the Common Market should vote for the Labor party on Thursday."

The 1979 GE was determined here:

It was a national humiliation, and a confession by the Labour Government then that they couldn't Govern.
The IMF Austerity made a mess, and led to fierce Labour internal fighting and to the Winter of Discontent.

Labour were actually more divided than the Tories regarding Europe in the early 1970s (both in terms of their MPs - as shown in the votes to enter - and the wider membership) That is maybe the principal reason why Wilson swung behind a referendum - it papered over that division quite well. And carrying off the 1975 effort successfully was arguably his last significant achievement as PM.

Yes the 1976 IMF episode was a national humiliation, and Labour suffered for it electorally for quite a while - but two years later they seemed to have recovered fairly well. Yes, they might have lost had Callaghan stuck to his initial instincts and called a late 1978 GE - but it could have been less emphatic and with no WoD the longer term fallout for the party is likely nowhere near as toxic.

(whereas in our timeline, the events of 1978-79 were still used successfully by the Tories as late as the 1992 GE - when images of rubbish piling up and undug graves continued to feature in their PPBs, and people on the doorstep still cited it as a reason for not voting Labour)

[Torrain]

Commons has voted (without a division) to suspend Peter Bone for six weeks.

Bone won up to as much as 62% of the vote in 2019, with Labour less than half that. So a long way to come back from.

However, the seat has an 18k Tory majority - smaller than Tamworth (19.6k), Mid Beds (24.6k), Somerton (19.2k), Selby (20.1k). Clear two-way Labour-Conservative race - the Lib Dems rarely even keep their deposit there these days.

[Boobs]

Commons has voted (without a division) to suspend Peter Bone for six weeks.

Bone won up to as much as 62% of the vote in 2019, with Labour less than half that. So a long way to come back from.

However, the seat has an 18k Tory majority - smaller than Tamworth (19.6k), Mid Beds (24.6k), Somerton (19.2k), Selby (20.1k). Clear two-way Labour-Conservative race - the Lib Dems rarely even keep their deposit there these days.

Between here and the likely Labour romp in Blackpool, are the Lib Dems really going to sit out a set of by-elections?

[Tintrlvr]

Commons has voted (without a division) to suspend Peter Bone for six weeks.

Bone won up to as much as 62% of the vote in 2019, with Labour less than half that. So a long way to come back from.

However, the seat has an 18k Tory majority - smaller than Tamworth (19.6k), Mid Beds (24.6k), Somerton (19.2k), Selby (20.1k). Clear two-way Labour-Conservative race - the Lib Dems rarely even keep their deposit there these days.

Between here and the likely Labour romp in Blackpool, are the Lib Dems really going to sit out a set of by-elections?

I don't see what purpose it would serve for them to try really hard in two no-hope seats to only get maybe at maximum 12-15% of the vote. Better to write both seats off. They've never tried hard in every single by-election that comes up. Mid Bedfordshire was an obviously different circumstance where they were always in with a shout and probably would have won easily if Labour had not seriously contested the seat as well.

[Torrain]

Between here and the likely Labour romp in Blackpool, are the Lib Dems really going to sit out a set of by-elections?

They'll just put up paper candidates, and provide the bare-minimum funding. Enough to print some leaflets, and rent one minivan so they can bus in enough activists for a wee photo-op near the end of the camapign.

Tbh - they'll probably spend at least as much time in Solihull (in the off-chance that one actually gets triggered there) as they will in either/both of these seats.

[JimJamUK]

Rightly or wrongly, the Lib Dem’s tend to have a consistent but narrow approach to which by-elections they target. These are seats they are already the challenger in, and seats where Labour are perceived as unable to win. The latter can vary, as shown by Labour campaigning properly in Mid Bedfordshire but not Chesham/Tiverton/North Shropshire.

[YL]

Commons has voted (without a division) to suspend Peter Bone for six weeks.

Bone won up to as much as 62% of the vote in 2019, with Labour less than half that. So a long way to come back from.

However, the seat has an 18k Tory majority - smaller than Tamworth (19.6k), Mid Beds (24.6k), Somerton (19.2k), Selby (20.1k). Clear two-way Labour-Conservative race - the Lib Dems rarely even keep their deposit there these days.

It was Labour in 1997 and 2001 and Bone only narrowly won in 2005.  A small area, basically the town of Earls Barton and its immediate surroundings, was transferred to Daventry in 2010; this might have helped Labour a little, but only a little, given that the seat was still notionally Tory.

We won't know the outcome of the petition until just before Christmas (the petition doesn't open until 10 working days after the Speaker notifies North Northamptonshire Council, and is then open for six weeks, which I think means it should open on Thursday 9 November and close on Wednesday 20 December) which means that any by-election won't be until February, unless Bone follows Pincher by taking the Chiltern Hundreds.

[Torrain]

Bone has been reselected for his seat, and Labour don't have a candidate yet. So there could be some expedited selections on the cards - on both sides of the aisle.

In contrast, while Conservatives haven't made a final decision in Blackpool South (that would require expelling or embracing Benton), Labour have had a candidate in place (Chris Webb) for six months.

[Tintrlvr]

Between here and the likely Labour romp in Blackpool, are the Lib Dems really going to sit out a set of by-elections?

They'll just put up paper candidates, and provide the bare-minimum funding. Enough to print some leaflets, and rent one minivan so they can bus in enough activists for a wee photo-op near the end of the camapign.

Tbh - they'll probably spend at least as much time in Solihull (in the off-chance that one actually gets triggered there) as they will in either/both of these seats.

Solihull would definitely be an interesting by-election because the Lib Dems really are much weaker locally now than when they were winning the seat. (I think they actually have no councillors within the boundaries of the parliamentary seat; the Lib Dem seats on Solihull council are all in Meriden.) I wonder if the Greens would seriously contest.

[icc]

Between here and the likely Labour romp in Blackpool, are the Lib Dems really going to sit out a set of by-elections?

They'll just put up paper candidates, and provide the bare-minimum funding. Enough to print some leaflets, and rent one minivan so they can bus in enough activists for a wee photo-op near the end of the camapign.

Tbh - they'll probably spend at least as much time in Solihull (in the off-chance that one actually gets triggered there) as they will in either/both of these seats.

Solihull would definitely be an interesting by-election because the Lib Dems really are much weaker locally now than when they were winning the seat. (I think they actually have no councillors within the boundaries of the parliamentary seat; the Lib Dem seats on Solihull council are all in Meriden.) I wonder if the Greens would seriously contest.

The Lib Dem seats on Solihull council are all in the Solihull parliamentary constituency. They don't have any councillors in Meriden.