Ealing Southall and Sedgefield by-elections thread

[Democratic Hawk]

More defections likely as Labour by-election campaign fractures

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article2056549.ece

Dave

 

[Ben.]

More defections likely as Labour by-election campaign fractures

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article2056549.ece

Dave

 

Part of me wonders if there will be any more defections... one thing the Labour Party know how to do (and its no bad thing!) is hold the proverbial fort, backs are against the wall in Ealing it seems, "squeaky bum time" now... it'd be a big blow if they cant hold their cllrs together at this point in an important campaign.

That said if i was sitting on another trench of potential defectors... I'd try and pull if off closer to polling day and time it some distance from the last trench, to maximize any potential discomfort for my opponents... then again its very rarely the case that a campiagn has that kind of control over something like a defection (unless their Labour and its Quentin Davies of course).             

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Put bluntly, whether more defections happen or not depends on what possible defectors are being offered by various people.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

This is, if you pardon my Francais, bollocks. It's well known that Khabra and Gurcharan Singh hated each other (hell I knew that before I knew anything else, beyond very basic details, about a certain former Mayor of Ealing...) and even better known that Khabra actually supported an AWS for Ealing Southall.

[Democratic Hawk]

Thoughts on Ealing Southall

1) Firstly, I'd fancy Labour's chances were the seat being fought on new boundaries rather than old since it loses two Conservative wards (Ealing Common and Walpole), as welll as 20.8% of another, Ealing Broadway, which seems strongly Conservative

In the 2006 Borough Elections, the aggregate vote total in these three wards were as follows:

Ealing Common: Con 40.5%; LD 37.5%; Green 11.9%; Lab 10.1%
Walpole: Con 37.0%; LD 28.5%; Lab 23.7%; Green 10.8%
Ealing Broadway: Con 54.1%; LD 17.2%; Lab 14.5%; Green 11.6%

2) Secondly, the 2006 Borough elections in Southall, although they favored Labour, they were by no means comfortably ahead of the Conservatives, which I have estimated as follows:

Labour 12,658 (37.89%)
Conservative 10,886 (32.59%)
Lib Dem 6,439 (19.28%)
Green 2,657 (7.95%)
Respect 763 (2.28%)

Since only 20.8% of Ealing Broadway is in the constituency, I've taken each party's total aggregate vote and multiplied by 0.208 to give an adjusted total

However, on new boundaries, the results point to a more significant Labour lead:

Labour 11,114 (45.94%)
Conservative 7,158 (29.58%)
Lib Dem 3,585 (14.82%)
Green 1,575 (6.51%)
Respect 763 (3.15%)

3) Given the possibility that the five Labour to Conservative defecting councillors might erode Labour support in the safe Labour wards of Lady Margaret (Jarnai Singh Jandu, Maininder Kaur Keith, Gurchuran Singh) and Southall Broadway (Jagdish Chander Gupta, Manjit Singh, the portents do not bode well for Virendra Kumar Sharma

In 2006, in Lady Margaret, Labour polled 57.1%to the Conservatives' 29.1%; and, in Southall Broadway, Labour polled 57.4% to the Conservatives' 34.6%

Depending, on the local strength of these defecting councillors, it is highly possible that Tony Lit shall gain votes at the expense of Sharma. Then again, it may not, depending on the extent to which Sikh voters identify with the Labour Party, rather than their local councillors. I suspect, however, given the evidence of communal feuding that party identification might come second to many Sikh voters

My prediction: Anything can happen in the by-election, though, were Labour to lose it, it should, in theory, given the new boundaries, revert to being a safe Labour seat at the next general election

4) Having earlier bemoaned that lack of a white candidate from either of the major parties considering Ealing Southall is 47.32% white and 38.53% Asian, things are now starting to make sense when you consider that the new constituency results in a demographic ''flip'', with Asians comprising 47.76% of the new constituency (this is total population) and whites, 37.60%

BTW, any one know whether the swing to the Conservatives in the 2006 borough elections was more against the government or, the then Labour controlled, Ealing Borough Council ?. Because if it was the latter, the by-election might not as bad for Labour

Finally, a quip from yours truly, what is it with this new-found love on the part of Gurcharan Singh and his acolytes? It's not like Tony Lit wears a turban

Dave

[Filuwaúrdjan]

BTW, any one know whether the swing to the Conservatives in the 2006 borough elections was more against the government or, the then Labour controlled, Ealing Borough Council ?. Because if it was the latter, the by-election might not as bad for Labour

Mainly against Ealing BC; some tram scheme was extremely unpopular there for whatever reason. IIRC some of the Southall results were quite odd when compared with the GLA figures, though I canst remember quite how...

[Kevinstat]

Most of the Green vote in that seat from 2001 voted BNP in 2005.

Has the BNP ever run a non-Anglo-Saxon candidate (that anyone's aware of)?  Based on their name and what I know about them, I could seem them not objecting to native Scots, Welshmen and Ulstermen ("they can't help that they were born here," or rather "we can't help that they [and their ancestors] were born here" - I'm trying to sound like a English racist).  I'd be pretty surprised if they'd ever run a non-white candidate, although if the person was like a 5th Generation or more Briton and could argue that the party was not rasist, just nativist (positive spin on xenophobic), I could see them being nominated somewhere.

On a slightly related note, how much control does a party like the BNP have over who can run on their label, like when the party fails to nominate a candidate?  I imagine people could get around it by running on the label "British Nationalist Party" instead of their (legally) correct name "British National Party."

[Verily]

Most of the Green vote in that seat from 2001 voted BNP in 2005.

Has the BNP ever run a non-Anglo-Saxon candidate (that anyone's aware of)?  Based on their name and what I know about them, I could seem them not objecting to native Scots, Welshmen and Ulstermen ("they can't help that they were born here," or rather "we can't help that they [and their ancestors] were born here" - I'm trying to sound like a English racist).  I'd be pretty surprised if they'd ever run a non-white candidate, although if the person was like a 5th Generation or more Briton and could argue that the party was not rasist, just nativist (positive spin on xenophobic), I could see them being nominated somewhere.

There was a BNP councillor (something Ebanks) who was kicked out of the party last year when it was revealed she had an African grandparent. That pretty answers that question, I think.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The Registration of Political Parties Act prevents candidates or parties from using names that are likely to cause confusion with registered political parties. The law was passed after a bunch of candidates ran as "Literal Democrats" and "The Conversative Party" in 1997 to intentionally cause confusion. "British Nationalist Party" would certainly be deemed too similar to "British National Party".

[minionofmidas]

"British Natural Party"?

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Just when you thought the Ealing Southall by-election couldn't get any wierder...

It's just emerged that Lit donated Labour £4,800 last month.

[Verily]

Just when you thought the Ealing Southall by-election couldn't get any wierder...

It's just emerged that Lit donated Labour £4,800 last month.

And there's a nice picture of him smiling with Tony Blair, too. I think the Tories can kiss this by-election good-bye.

[Ben.]

And the LibDems say "thankyou very much"...

...as it is though I'm really not sure it'll have a devastating impact, it's a photo of the Tory candidate with Blair and at this stage in the election i'm not sure most voters will see it as more than that, talk of donations is less likely to permeate to the broader electorate - unless Labour and the LibDems are very effective and people actually read the literature.     

[Democratic Hawk]

Just when you thought the Ealing Southall by-election couldn't get any wierder...

It's just emerged that Lit donated Labour £4,800 last month.

And there's a nice picture of him smiling with Tony Blair, too. I think the Tories can kiss this by-election good-bye.

I'd like to think so

This by-election for me has two dream outcomes:

1) Labour hold the seat with the Conservatives coming a very distant second

2) Tony Lit, elected by the most narrow of margins over Labour, realises that come the next general election, on new boundaries, realises that he stands a cat in hell's chance of being re-elected and defects to Labour

Either scenario would be one big smack in the mush for Cameron, which would be nice

Dave

[Democratic Hawk]

I'm not sure whether this Ealing Southall by-election is a Greek tragedy, from a Labour perspective, or a Roman farce, from a Tory one?

Dave

[Harry Hayfield]

Just when you thought the Ealing Southall by-election couldn't get any wierder...

It's just emerged that Lit donated Labour £4,800 last month.

And there's a nice picture of him smiling with Tony Blair, too. I think the Tories can kiss this by-election good-bye.

I'd like to think so

This by-election for me has two dream outcomes:

1) Labour hold the seat with the Conservatives coming a very distant second

2) Tony Lit, elected by the most narrow of margins over Labour, realises that come the next general election, on new boundaries, realises that he stands a cat in hell's chance of being re-elected and defects to Labour

Either scenario would be one big smack in the mush for Cameron, which would be nice

Dave

What about the following? Lab hold Ealing Southall but challenged by the Lib Dems by less than 2%, with the Conservatives beaten into fourth by Respect?

[Filuwaúrdjan]

What about the following? Lab hold Ealing Southall but challenged by the Lib Dems by less than 2%, with the Conservatives beaten into fourth by Respect?

Would be very funny, but won't happen.

One prediction that I will make, is that the LibDems will probably throw everything they have (and from just about everywhere) at Ealing Southall over the next few days.

[minionofmidas]

It's safe to say that, as least as far as Southall politics go, Labour and the Tories are really one party, not two. Which is throwing away what should be a safe seat by running two candidates.

[Democratic Hawk]

It's safe to say that, as least as far as Southall politics go, Labour and the Tories are really one party, not two. Which is throwing away what should be a safe seat by running two candidates.

Hey, don't akin my party in with them lot .

Dave

[afleitch]

It's safe to say that, as least as far as Southall politics go, Labour and the Tories are really one party, not two. Which is throwing away what should be a safe seat by running two candidates.

Hey, don't akin my party in with them lot .

Dave

^^^^^^

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Some early predictions (these will change as the week goes on, obviously)...

Labour to hold Sedgefield easily with the LibDems second. Not sure how well the other parties will do. Turnout will be low. Basically it would take freak turnout patterns for Labour to lose and, from what I've heard, that's not very likely (turnout will probably be down everywhere).

I think that Labour will also hold Ealing Southall, by about 2,000 votes or so (last week I'd have said a thousand). But I'm much less sure of that than my Sedgefield prediction... and I've no idea which party will come second. Most things about this by-election seem to be uncertain.

[Democratic Hawk]

Vera backs Labour in Sedgefield

http://www.sedgefield-labour.com/images/uploads/166580/272f29f2-fbf2-a5f4-5d49-2b8d89774531.pdf

Dave

[Filuwaúrdjan]

The following post appeared on Tom Watson's blog earlier today:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Democratic Hawk]

The following post appeared on Tom Watson's blog earlier today:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I wonder what it could be?

Dave

[Serenity Now]

Vera backs Labour in Sedgefield

http://www.sedgefield-labour.com/images/uploads/166580/272f29f2-fbf2-a5f4-5d49-2b8d89774531.pdf

Dave

Haha I like the face that baby's pulling..

[Verily]

The following post appeared on Tom Watson's blog earlier today:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I wonder what it could be?

Dave

Tony Lit defects to... well, anyone. That would be both surprising and completely expected.

[Harry Hayfield]

Here's something that someone I know might want to get his teeth into

Ealing, Southall (All figures accurate to the year 2000)
Core Poor (people who are income poor, materially deprived and subjectively poor) 12.6%
Bradline Poor (people living below a relative poverty line, and as such excluded from participating in the norms of society) 31.0%
Neither Wealthy nor Poor: 39.2%
Asset Wealthy: (estimated using the relationship between housing wealth and the contemporary Inheritance Tax threshold) 29.8%
Exclusive Wealthy: (people with sufficient wealth to exclude themselves from the norms of society) 8.2%

Sedgefield
Core Poor (people who are income poor, materially deprived and subjectively poor) 12.6%
Bradline Poor (people living below a relative poverty line, and as such excluded from participating in the norms of society) 29.9%
Neither Wealthy nor Poor: 63.7%
Asset Wealthy: (estimated using the relationship between housing wealth and the contemporary Inheritance Tax threshold) 6.4%
Exclusive Wealthy: (people with sufficient wealth to exclude themselves from the norms of society) 0.0%

Interesting, wouldn't you say?