Friday 6 May 2016

2016 Local elections - everybody won

And for once, everyone did win. there was good news for all. The usual safe government kicking from annoyed voters didn't materialise for the Tories. They lose no councils in England. They finally have a breakthrough in Scotland. Or, more accurately, Labour have fallen below even Tory unpopularity.

In Wales, nothing much happened. Just one constituency changed hands. Labour losing one to Plaid.
So that must be a relief for labour. And good, limited, news for Plaid. On the assembley, Labour have lost majority, but are easily dominant still. 
UKIP picked up a comforting 7 seats. The Tories lost 3, down to 11.

The SNP continued to dominate almost the whole of Scotland. Labour's tactic of trying to out lefty them was a complete failure. No one was fooled.

The Liberals had a resurgence of sorts in Scotland. Encouraging signs, anyway. Very good hold in Shetlands that moved them from no influence to almost no influence in Scotland. And cheekily put them 1 constituency above labour on 4. Lib Dems lost their deposits in many many places. On councilors, UKIP and the Liberal Democrats picked up plenty.

Labour have won London. No big surprise. But by a bigger margin than predicted. And they have held onto almost all their councils, losing only 1 to NOC.  
The Greens remain the 3rd largest party in London, and even managed to achieve almost 6% of the weirdo voting system. good result for them.

So,everyone has some good news. Some real good news, not spin good news.

But some is just some. All have bad news too, except the SNP and Mr Khan. And Labour have the most.

The opposition party should be making gains. Standing still is no use. And this Labour opposition should have been making some  substantial gains with the advantages they have.

This is the sixth year of a ruling party. The government is currently fighting a civil war with a substantial number of its own, and the countries,  Brexit tendency. The government has been consumed by the referendum and has not focused on running the country. U-turn after U-turn followed the mini-omnishambles of the last budget. 
The junior doctors are out on strike. Just today the government has had to sneak a good day/bad news story that it was dropping its recently announced compulsory school academy program after much anger from teachers and parents. The new 'living wage', as predicted, is causing cut backs in other areas as  business struggles to find a way to pay for the largest ever increase in the minimum wage. The Prime Minister has had usually supportive newspapers against him over Europe. The worthless concessions the PM managed to achieve on Europe have had to buried and attempts to rig the referendum using government power and taxpayer's cash, have angered many Tory grassroots members, gifting UKIP supporters, when UKIP were largely out and finished after their own mis-steps post 2015.

The economic news is bad. The European news is bad. The migrant news is bad. The Syrian news is bad. The terrorist news is bad. The government forecasts are wrong and the government is totally unable to pursue any policy that runs into even the mildest of difficulties, due to its wafer thin majority and it lack of dominance in the House of Lords.

Any half decent labour leader would have made gains. A credible leader would have made large gains. Where is the Corbyn army that's supposed to be sweeping the new politics into power by virtue of them signing up millions of first-time and lapsed voters. If they didn't vote now, when will they?

The Corbyn party can take some comfort in London. But London has been a Labour city for a very long time.. Boris was the exception, not the rule. He won on the strength of his personality. No Boris, no win. Before Boris the most lefty of left wingers to ever take membership the Labour party was London Mayor. Ken Livingstone even had to defeat the Labour party to become mayor the first time. Which demonstrates both the argument for just how socialist London is and just how important having a 'personality ' is. It would have been a very big shock indeed if Mr Khan had not won. 

So. 2016 local elections.

Good news for everyone.
And equally, bad news for everyone.

{Even Nicola Sturgeon who might have wanted to make even more of a dent into the 20% of constituencies she has yet to overrun}


Nick Drew said...

Right on all counts, Mr Q

The Bremainers must be heartily relieved - no sign of the Let's Give Cameron A Good Kicking vote

Earlier I had surmised that Khan might be the price of Brexit. Well, maybe - butit doesn't feel quite like that now

what a tosser Corbyn is - and he gets to stay!

Antisthenes said...

The major losers of course were the British people but then they deserve to be it is they who vote for these incompetent people to govern us. A few of the right sort do get elected they have the ability and they actually do understand economics and what is needed to make a society function properly. However as they are so few and as the bureaucrats and public opinion is always against them doing anything in the countries best interest is rarely possible. Even when it is their successors come along and undo all their good work.

One day we will grow up and vote for people based on their ability and not on their ideology.

andrew said...

It looks like in the US, UK, Germany - 3 of the 5 largest world economies, the main political parties are at best fraying at the edges and at worst about to become irrelevant.
(oh, and talking of irrelevant, France too :)

andrew said...

How do you measure ability?

Antisthenes said...

Andrew. Good question. Not easily and simply answered but measured it can be. We are for ever measuring peoples ability that we do not have a problem with it is how good we are at it is the problem. As we all set different standards and goals that we want met and base them on our own knowledge and understanding or lack of it. When we are all in agreement with what those standards and goals are then measuring those with the ability to achieve them will be easy.

Electro-Kevin said...

It could have been worse. Thank goodness Goldsmith didn't share platforms with racists, sexists or homophobes.

We'd never have heard the last of it. But it's OK if Khan does it, or if he belongs to a party riven with racism (so long as it's the right racism.)

The British version of modern socialism isn't about being nice, nor is it about doing what's right. It's about standing for anything - so long as it's not British.

I despair.

It appears to me that London was won and lost on arguments over middle eastern ideology. The Asian Persuasion in the UK is presently 5% (so they tell us.) Imagine what the influence is going to be like at 15%.

The Tories are never getting London back.

(I feel for the homosexuals, feminists and the racially oppressed)

Bill Quango MP said...

I disagree,EK. On London.
I expect that if Alan Sugar had run for mayor as a Tory or Labour, he would have won.

London is a cosmopolitan city. Party politics at the Mayoral level, can be beaten by someone with charisma and media presence.

Roderick said...

This is the first commentary I have read which states that the glass is half full and at the same time it is half empty.

Thanks for this valuable insight. I was rather hoping for more.

andrew said...

One way of measuring is to let all the people who will be affected by the candidates decisions use their own criteria to choose and then pick the one most of them agree on.

Having said that, a pox on all the leading pols

andrew said...

One way of measuring is to let all the people who will be affected by the candidates decisions use their own criteria to choose and then pick the one most of them agree on.

Having said that, a pox on all the leading pols

Antisthenes said...

Andrew is that not what we already doing but then we are measuring only the ability to bribe not the ability to govern. Self interest of course is paramount it is hard wired into our genes. We are driven by only two prerogatives; survival and procreation. So to survive we have to look out for ourselves as the number one priority. However we found that living as a society enhances our chances of survival so we also have a vested interest in ensuring that society functions well.

So when it comes to governance of that society self interest has to be subsumed to the best interests of the collective. So we should pick those whose abilities best achieve that. The problem is that there are too many sub-societies within one society so finding consensus as to what is best for all is highly problematic. Devolution appears to be the modern method of making consensus easier to achieve. I tend to agree that it is a good step in the right direction. So big government bad, EU very very bad.

Electro-Kevin said...

BQ - Understood. Sadiq Khan will be a successful mayor and was (obviously) a darn good candidate. I'm wrong on what I said at 9.42.

I visit London a lot and like it very much. It is a beacon to the world. I am sad I ever left her.

But had the Tories been embroyled in anything like the Labour anti-Semetic scandal they would have been finished with no stone left unturned.

Antisthenes said...

EK. It will not be long before London is declared a Caliphate along with Bradford as if you noticed all those politicians who have been identified as anti-semetic have been re-elected with increased majorities.

mike fowle said...

The policy on academies was quite radical. It should have been very very carefully evaluated before being announced and if sure it was the right policy should have been maintained regardless. (I don't know whether it was or not), but to suddenly announce it out of the blue with virtually no consultation and then withdrew it (trying to do so under cover of other news) seems to me just about as incompetent as you can get.

Electro-Kevin said...

Antisthenes - Demographics.

BQ - I can't think of any charismatic Tory that would win the London Mayoral election now that BoJo has been and gone. Lord Alan is a Labourite - I doubt the drug-legalising Sir Richard Branson would stand and if he did it would be for Labour.

Who else then ?

After a rethink I stand by my claim that there will never again be a Tory Mayor of London and add that (after this) no non-Muslim candidate will ever scrutinise a fellow candidate - who is a Muslim - this way again.

UKIP was trashed on suspected racism without a shred of proof, yet Labour survives (and its Mayor is elected) after the party's confirmed racism, only in recent weeks. One side of our political field can wage a negative campaign against an opponent based on their alleged racism - the other can't.

The population of London either didn't care about the anti-Semetism scandal - and Corbyn's support of organisations whose sole purpose is the elimination of the Jewish State - or some of that population actually enjoyed it.

I have yet to hear from anyone, or any organisation, who it is that is actually accused for the rise of anti-Semitism in our capital. With the absence of such information one presumes it's white, booted skinheads of the far right.

Goldsmith tried to make the link between Corbyn/Khan/shared-platforms and it didn't work. I won't say it backfired - it just wasn't wanted. It isn't just Goldsmith that is not wanted by London, but the whole of the Tory party too; unless they offer a colourful character or one that is cosmopolitan and unConservative enough.

London is socialist. That is clear from the Daily papers and letter pages I read whenever I am there.

Electro-Kevin said...

Had Goldsmith have shared a platform with Marine Le Pen or been implicated in the Expenses Scandal would Labour not have 'negatively' campaigned ? (And got away with it !)

The Tories have lost London because they DESERVE to have lost London.

rwendland said...

> The opposition party should be making gains. Standing still is no use.

I'm rather mystified by the view, common in the media as well, that Labour not improving on the 2012 results is a problem for Labour.

Basically Labour did much the same as in 2012, and in 2012 Labour had 43.1% of the vote share in the local elections compared to 27.5% for the Tories. If Labour could reproduce this at the next general election (with a fuller turn-out admittedly), where is the problem for them? Basically 2012 was a very good result for Labour, and just near-reproducing it is very good again.

Here is the Electoral Commission table from 2012:

Table 2: Vote and Seat share local elections 2012

Party / Vote (%) / Seats (%)

Labour / 43.1 / 49.4
Conservative / 27.5 / 32.5
Lib Dem / 14.0 / 11.9
Green / 4.2 / 1.1
Independent / 3.2 / 2.8
Other / 8.0 / 2.3

rwendland said...

... forgot to say just looking at England and Wales above.

Obviously Scotland is a disaster for Labour, which may well be a problem for any future Labour general election victory, especially if Tories can build on their 2nd place there.

Thud said...

When I read about or visit London it always feels that it has as much to do with me and the North as N.Y. or Paris, multi culti and loathsome,moreso now.

andrew said...

Zac G was probably at a bit of a disadvantage being the son of a billionaire expat with many homes at a time when a key concern of many Londoners oscillates between paying the rent and wondering how they will ever be able to buy a flat inside the m25

Electro-Kevin said...

Andrew - Sure. As I've been saying for YEARS, Conservatives need home-ownerist ***** people to vote for them.

If ***** people aren't allowed to own homes then they won't vote Tory, as Margaret Thatcher well understood.

That I can't even mention ***** people rather proves my point.

Khan DID insult moderate Muslims as 'Uncle Toms'.

In the Britain that I once knew there was never a problem with billionaires, nor expats ... so long as ***** people could put stone cladding and Georgian glazing on their OWN HOMES !

Electro-Kevin said...

This election will lead to yet more censorship (the self enforcing type) because of religious dogma.

I'm all for breaking down sexual and racial barriers. I hate religion - the most divisive mindset of all.