Crewecified!

So now we have the results of the Crewe and Nantwich by-election. The Conservatives have gained the seat with a swing of 17.6% from Labour. The turnout was at 58.2% one of the highest by-election turnouts in many years. People wanted to vote in this election and did in huge numbers. This is a considerable victory for democracy, regardless of the result and shows that people do want to vote if there is a reason to do so and a clear choice on offer. I suspect that national General election turnout could climb up towards 70% again if this trend continues.

The result was the first Conservative by-election gain in 26 years and the first from Labour in 30. This is a significant result for David Cameron, and shows that the Conservatives are capable of winning elections of all types. Coming on top of the recent local elections, Mayoral elections and current opinion polls there is now considerable evidence pointing towards a Conservative victory at the next election. For Labour the result is dire, their vote share crashed by 18% from 48% to 30%. This is a disastrous haemorrhaging of support and bodes ill for Labour. The Lib Dem’s fared little better, their vote share wasn’t squeezed to nothing as third placed parties sometimes are but it still went down by 4% which is almost certainly not what they wanted to see. If a seat came up where the Lib Dems were second to Labour they might do better but it is clear that their is now a big tendency of a straight Labour to Conservative switch. That must be worrying for the Lib Dems.

Why did Labour perform so badly? I think there are a number of reasons, not the least of which is their generalised unpopularity. Recent opinion polls have given Labour defecits of anything between 17 and 26 points. I think however their campaign was a complete disaster. If their campaign had been merely inept it would have been one thing, however the campaign was also grossly insensitive in many different ways. Firstly despite agreement from the Dunwoody family the by-election should never have been called so early, it looked inappropriate when proper respects had not been paid to a much loved MP. This was compounded by the decision to adopt the former MP’s daughter as the candidate and try to trade on the respect the previous MP was held in. It looked what it was shabby and sordid. I shall deal with the Toff aspect later but I think that it was a significant feature of this by-election. Clearly the biggest factor was 10p tax which was a monumental government error, compounded by dithering and delay over how to mitigate the worst effects. The problem in the campaign was that Labour blundered by trying to gain credit for correcting their own mistake. The candidate even tried to claim some personal credit for the climbdown. I just don’t think it would have washed, it looked like what it was an expensive vote-buying excercise. We now know the price of every vote cast for Labour in Crewe and Nantwich £212,950.50! Finally there was the idiotic way in which the Labour campaign dogwhistled on certain issues particularly race. There was comment that the BNP didn’t put up a candidate in this by-election, at times it seemed as if the Labour party was performing that role quite adequately on its own.

The final issue which Labour comprehensively mishandled was their class war, Tory toffs, campaign message. This was always likely to be counter-productive but in the wake of 10p tax it was more than likely the suicide option. I will explain why. The toff part of the campaign may have echoed slightly in terms of people with greater advantage having an easier ride, however when your candidate could be accused of inheriting the seat that was likely to be blunted. The problem was that Labour fought a them and us campaign that was more based on wealth than advantage and that was a crucial mistake. Most people, even the poorest, would quite like to be rich, they want to be in a position of advantage. It is why the Lottery, bingo and the Football pools are all so popular. People want to better themselves. It is a human instinct. The problem was that Labour seemed to be saying in the Campaign, we bashed you whilst you were poor but if you become more wealthy we are going to bash you even more. It was an anti-aspiration campaign and no such campaign will ever work. People want to succeed, they just want the same chance of success as everyone else. Coming over as anti-success as Labour did through their campaign was always likely to be very bad idea, and they were mercilessly punished for it.

So what does the future hold after this result? Nobody can be certain however I would point out that in opinion polls the Conservatives have on some accounts a 20% advantage, in the local elections the Conservatives had a 20% advantage, and in Crewe and Nantwich the Conservatives had a near 20% advantage. That has to be more than co-incidence. If the swing in this by-election were repeated the Conservatives would have a majority of 334. I doubt the swing would be repeated but I suspect that the general reading of the runes is clear. The Conservatives will be more competitive in the next General election than at any time since 1992. Labour spokespeople are often heard saying of late that ‘the voters are sending us a message’, for many Labour MP’s in marginal seats the inescapable message for them is ’start looking for another job’.

The government is falling apart and Cameron caused it.

The government is falling apart, day in day out new revelations appear. The slew of memoirs released at the weekend would have been deeply irritating for the PM and the inner sanctum. Then Frank Field fires an exocet at the government this morning in an interview. All this is against the backdrop of a collapse in economic confidence and the governments opinion ratings in freefall. David Cameron would be forgiven for thanking his lucky stars, that is if he wasn’t partially responsible.

Why do I say that Cameron is responsible? Well firstly the strategy that Cameron during the final years of Tony Blair was to deliberately hug the modernisers or Blairites extremely close. This was a deliberate attempt to split the Labour party, it was designed to force the incoming Brownites to tack away from the centre-ground. This was accompanied by Cameron simultaneously moving the Conservatives towards the looming gap in the market. Now that strategy has come to fruition as Brown moved slightly away from the Blairite inheritance and Cameron moved in to the centre. As the Conservatives rebounded in the Autumn and moved ahead in the polls it caused the split in Labour to widen as each side in the Labour party try to pull it in different directions.

Cameron now has the space to move to a new stage of his strategy, to map out the Conservative alternative and to exploit Labours continuing difficulties. I expect that Cameron will now project more gravitas and unveil more ideas as he uses the disintegration of Labour to stake out more of the Centre ground for the Conservatives and also seeks to put the next election totally beyond doubt. Make no mistake whilst some of the governments woes are self inflicted a lot of that is down to Cameron driving the wedge in whilst Blair was still in office and playing the Labour factions off against each other.

Is Brown the new Major?

There are plenty of people looking at the current state of the government and the current political situation and drawing comparisons with the dog days of the last Conservative government. In these comparisons Brown is analogous to Major. I can see why the comparison is drawn but I think it is a false analogy. The situation Labour finds itself in is in many ways unique, and uniquely different to the Major government. Also I think that in a lot of ways the government’s predicament is being overplayed by the media.

John Major ascended to the premiership in 1990 having worked his way up in government from the whips office through junior ministerial rank up through Chief Secretary, Foreign Secretary and Chancellor. His ascent through the party did not however come with certain knowledge of his style, views or approach. This was an asset in the heady atmosphere of November 1990 and the leadership election but as things turned sour in the mid-1990s it became a massive hindrance. Conservatives felt that they had been sold a Thatcherite and received a Heathite. This was massively unfair and the circumstances of the 1992-97 Parliament would have forced leaders to be conciliatory and highly centrist in any case. John Major just happened to be most comfortable in that centrist conciliatory position. John Major was consequently derided as a weak PM buffeted by events, but in many ways this is unfair as the Parliamentary mathematics were not conducive to the kind of actions that would have been perceived as ’strong’. The Parliamentary situation post 1992 would have been a nightmare for any government a bare majority at the start of the Parliament was rapidly eaten away by death and defection. By the close of the Parliament the government was acting effectively as a minority administration.

Gordon Brown came into the premiership in entirely different circumstances, having been the second most powerful person in the government for a decade. Gordon Brown was extremely well known, all his strengths and weaknesses were on display. The leadership passed from Blair to Brown like an inheritance without a contest. So far so dissimilar to the Major experience. The Parliamentary situation is different, the government has a healthy majority which is unlikely to be much impacted by death or defection. Brown can therefore afford to take courses of action denied to Major who had no majority to speak of. However Brown is making mistakes that are souring the position that he is in, this is a factor of his character. Tony Blair likened him to a ‘clunking fist’, this was intended to compliment Brown’s heavyweight credentials. However it brings to mind a lumbering, lolloping creature unable to bend with the prevailing wind. This inflexibility and stubbornness was well known prior to his assumption of leadership. It is proving to be a huge problem for Labour now. Brown is a supertanker politician, he turns only slowly. Blair by contrast was a smaller faster more manoeuvrable vessel. Brown is also proving to be a very slow decision maker. This should have been no surprise, during his Chancellorship most of the difficult decisions were put off by reviews. Gershon, Barker, Adair Turner all conducted reviews by Brown. Brown is now reviewing like crazy as PM, this is no surprise as there are more difficult decisions to be taken. Labour are now in the position where they were sold a decisive leader and have received an indecisive one.

The problem is deciding whether Labour’s issues are worse than the problems for the Conservative government under Major. A lot of the Conservative problems were to do with circumstance and a lot of the Labour problems are to do with the guy at the helm. That is not to say that changing the helmsman as some suggest would make things better, the public would probably look unkindly on a party that elected unopposed a leader one year and deposed him the next. The Labour party are staring a bad defeat in the face under Brown however they have nowhere to go, changing leader would in all likelihood not make much of a difference and the brooding presence of Brown would be left on the backbenches. Labour needs to find a means of compensating for Brown’s weaknesses until the next election. It may claw back some votes and minimise the scale of the defeat. The comparison with Major is overdone, John Major was basically a decent politician in dire circumstances, Brown looks increasingly like a dire politician in basically decent circumstances. The consequences for Labour could be worse than the consequences were for the Conservatives.

Tipping Point?

The history of the current Parliament when it comes to be written will probably be divided into three sections. It now looks increasingly likely that the Parliament will go pretty much to term and that the next election will be in May 2010. If that is the case then the three sections of the Parliament will be, I believe divided thus. The first part will be May 2005-Jun 2007, and will be the final Blair hurrah with the undercurrent of the ascent of Cameron. The second part will be shorter and from Jun 2007- Jun 2008 and will probably be labelled the tipping period. The final part of the Parliament from Jun 2008- May 2010 will be the part probably labelled the increasingly inevitable.

The first part of this Parliament is absolutely crucial in the story that now seems to be unfolding. The continuing presence of Blair, and the knowledge of his impending departure created the space for the Conservative Party to finally decontaminate and then rebuild. The media narrative was concentrated on when Blair would finally go and it is credit to David Cameron and his team that he recognised the space this gave him and used it. Cameron’s policy during this period was to cling to the Blairite faction in many ways and to neutralize the Lib Dems. The first half of this strategy had two aims, firstly it forced the Brownites to become more anti-Blair and to retreat into the rhetoric of Old Labour, secondly it was to convince the electorate that Cameron represented continuity and reassurance. The second part of the strategy was designed simply to maximise the chances of being able to gain a majority, and if that didn’t happen to pave the way for an agreement with the Lib Dems to acquiesce in a minority Conservative administration. I happen to believe that the Conservatives were not looking at formal coalition, they simply wanted to make sure that a minority Conservative government had enough shelf life to get a few things done before seeking a full mandate.

The results of this twin strategy were solid if not spectacular the polls began to shift towards the Conservatives, the Lib Dems began to drift downwards in polling. The sideline effect was that the Labour party started to balkanise more and more into Blairite and Brownite. The Brown camp in the lead up to the transition clearly was whispering around that he was the traditionalist and that when he got his hands on the levers of power that his government would be more left-wing. It was clear though that Brown would be left with little room for manoeuvre and would end up either disappointing those who thought he was their salvation or the electorate which was showing signs of shifting in a Blairite or right-ward direction. Thus phase one of the Parliament came to a climax.

Phase two was always going to be the point between when Brown succeeded to the Premiership and the point at which the shape of future Politics became obvious. It represented the tipping point of Politics and as with any fulcrum it can tip either way. This tipping point period started in June with a significant bounce in the polls for Labour and a serious wobble on the part of the Conservatives. Indeed at times during those first three months it appeared as if the Conservatives would be faced with an early election and demolished. I think though that the Cameron strategy rested on this one big gamble, that Gordon wouldn’t throw his innate caution to the wind. It was a high stakes game of political Russian roulette, I doubt though that even David Cameron would have foreseen that Gordon Brown would seemingly put the bullet straight through his chances at the next election. This phase of the Cameron strategy was to ride out the Brown bounce and then ruthlessly prey on his own insecurities. Cameron has followed this strategy ever since Gordon arrived and has had the PM visibly quivering with rage, hands shaking. David Cameron has used PMQ’s to eviscerate the Prime Minister’s character in a merciless way. The PM has made several mistakes that have given Cameron the space to achieve this, notably when he visibly blinked in October over the election that never was. It wasn’t so much what it said about the political situation as what it said about the PM, for all the double-digit poll leads Gordon was scared of the Conservatives. Cameron used the period afterwards to compound misery on Gordon Brown and to bare his political teeth. As the undoubted Big Beast shrunk the plucky little fighter was bulking up.

The immediate space after the cancelled election also gave space to the Lib Dems who had found themselves viciously squeezed in the vice of the two-party titans. At one stage plumbing the depths of just 11% in the polls. Ming was eased out and eventually replaced with Nick Clegg, this has resulted in a slight improvement in the Lib Dem polling figures but they are still well off their 2005 tally. Also the new Lib Dem leader hasn’t had an auspicious start, firstly his election was by the thinnest of margins. Then he concocted a row over a key policy which looked unseemly. He then courted ridicule with laddish braggings in a magazine interview. The media appear to regard him with faint disdain and he hasn’t even got to his six month mark yet, and for a party that is third placed they rely on a favourable media for even a slightly fair wind.

The tipping point period seems to be coming to an end now, as the shape of politics in the last section of the Parliament the final run-in to the next election begins to become clearer. The Local elections last week were a shattering rebuff to Labour, commentators were left scouring the record books to draw comparisons. Some even suggested that this was as bad as it has been for Labour since the First World War, I think that is stretching things. The common benchmark is that this is certainly as bad as it has been since 1968. The Conservatives scored 44% of the vote and were 20% in front of Labour, confirming the most dire opinion polls. In London Labour lost the mayoralty and were probably only saved from a bigger humiliation by the personality of the incumbent Mayor seeking re-election. In London terms the Lib Dems were severely squeezed and despite net gains and good headlines the picture in the locals is probably patchy and falsely comforting for the Lib Dems. The Conservatives were the clear winners in the Local elections making progress in all parts, even in the North and in some of Labour’s heartland areas. The Conservatives also now have a two-year period of running London to showcase how a Conservative government would be and despite the hopes of many left-wing columnists, Boris Johnson will not embarass the Conservative cause but will aid it.

The final chapter in this part of the Parliament is being written now in Crewe & Nantwich. The by-election caused by the sad death of Gwynneth Dunwoody will be the most important in years. The Conservatives have a realistic chance of taking the seat, the Lib Dems are miles behind and although they are the past masters at by-elections the Conservatives have learnt lessons from recent contests and are showing serious intent. If the Conservatives win Crewe & Nantwich it will be the clearest possible indication of which way politics has tipped. If they don’t win then whilst I think that the indicators will be slightly less clear the direction will still be the same but less emphatically. The final section of this Parliament looks increasingly as if it will be about the increasing inevitablitiy of a change of government.

 

Broxbourne Borough: Ward by Ward - Rye Park Ward

Finally we come to the last ward with elections in this cycle for Broxbourne Borough, Rye Park ward. The results from 2004 are as follows:-

Conservative   1016      Labour             713           

For comparison the result at last years round of elections was as follows:-

Conservative   873      Labour             439           Lib Dem   105     BNP      186

This ward is probably considered by most people to be part of Hoddesdon; however in many respects it exhibits its own characteristics. The demographics would convince you that this was a Labour ward at first glance; however a closer look would show you a highly mixed ward with pockets of good support for each. This is in reality a marginal ward and if Labour were doing better nationally then it would probably be Labour held. It is a credit to the local Conservatives that they have made hay while the sun has shone. The Lib Dems fielded a candidate last year and showed that they were largely irrelevant coming 4^th in a field of 4 with just 7% of the vote. The BNP achieved 12% from a standing start in 2007 and Labour plumbed a new support low. In 2003 Labour polled 47% and in 2007 just 27%.

The Conservative candidate is the sitting Councillor, Bren Perryman. The Labour candidate is again Annette Marples, who should be given points for persistence in the face of an increasingly bigger margin against her. The BNP are fielding a candidate again this year in Ramon Johns, who sat as the lone BNP Councillor for Rosedale between 2003 and 2007.

The Conservatives should be a little concerned in this ward this year. As the ruling group on the Council they piloted a new refuse collection scheme in this ward and Goff’s Oak ward. If the local people take against this then the Conservatives could suffer. However where that vote goes is difficult to surmise. One suspects that Labour is too unpopular nationally to profit too much although they may get a lift from their 27% last year. The BNP may be the receptacle of the protest vote here, but one suspects that they are too far behind to really have too much hope here. I would suspect that this will probably therefore be a Conservative hold, with an outside chance of a Labour gain. It really depends how badly the bin change has gone down.

Broxbourne Borough: Ward by Ward - Hoddesdon North Ward

Moving north we come to Hoddesdon North ward, which is the northernmost ward in the Borough. The results from 2004 are as follows:-

Conservative   1478      Labour             354           

For comparison the result at last years round of elections was as follows:-

Conservative   1193      Labour             256           BNP   213

This ward is the northern extreme of Hoddesdon and is centred around the bulk of the Hundred Acre estate. Demographically speaking this should be a closer ward than it is. The estates are not particularly upmarket and it is tribute to the Conservatives locally that they have such a lock on this ward. The Labour vote has been remorselessly squeezed in Hoddesdon North and is now down to about 15%. I doubt it can go much lower. The BNP stood last year and scored only 12% which is unsurprising as there are a few things to play on but not a lot and the Conservatives are ridiculously strong in the ward.

The Conservative candidate is the veteran sitting Councillor, Lyn White. The Labour candidate is Ed Hopwood, who has stood for Labour previously. The BNP are fielding a candidate again this year in Colin Whittaker, I know nothing about this candidate.

The Conservatives will have little to be worried about in this ward; they managed a touch under 70% in a three way contest last year. The national trend will make life very difficult for Labour and one wouldn’t expect them to exceed their share last year, having said that it is difficult to see it dropping much further. The BNP may improve on their 12% and may nudge in front of Labour but it is difficult to see them gaining more than 15%. This looks like a quite comfortable hold for the Conservatives.

Broxbourne Borough: Ward by Ward - Hoddesdon Town Ward

Moving north we come to Hoddesdon Town ward, which is the ward I live in. The results from 2004 are as follows:-

Conservative   968      Labour             267            Lib Dem   356

For comparison the result at last years round of elections was as follows:-

Conservative   930      Labour             224            Lib Dem   259

The ward is quite a mixed bag in some respects, the extreme south of the ward is quite affluent and is probably where the bulk of the Conservative support comes from, moving north through the ward one encounters areas that are more likely to have a larger showing for Labour. The significant showing for the Lib Dems is unsurprising as in many ways most of the borough would probably be quite a good area but the party locally is pretty moribund. This year the BNP are also standing and in parts of the ward they could probably have somewhat of an impact.

The Conservative candidate is the sitting Councillor, Bob Bick. The Labour candidate is Neil Harvey, who used to be a Councillor for Labour in Rye Park. The Liberal Democrats are putting up Kirstie De Rivaz as their perennial candidate in this ward. The BNP are fielding a candidate for the first time this year in Garry Crowhurst, I know nothing about this candidate.

The Conservatives will have little to be worried about in this ward; this is currently a quite Conservative ward. The number of candidates might mean that the ward is won by less than 50%, I would expect though that the Conservatives would be the largest vote in this ward though. Labour are weak in Hoddesdon Town and have been weakening in recent years, I cannot see that altering as national trends will bear down. The BNP will have pockets of support but will not be able to gain sufficient support to overtake the Conservatives. This looks like a Conservative hold to me.

Broxbourne Borough: Ward by Ward - Broxbourne Ward

The next ward on my list is Broxbourne ward, which to my mind is probably the largest ward by area. The results from 2004 are as follows:-

Conservative   1338      Labour             225            Lib Dem   384

For comparison the result at last years round of elections was as follows:-

Conservative   1355      Labour             164            Lib Dem   223

The ward is one of the most affluent in the Borough with lots of larger houses and more wealthy estates. The Baas Hill/Park Lane area has some of the grandest houses in the Borough. There are the odd pockets of more modest accommodation around the ward but these are few and far between. The Conservatives are unsurprisingly extremely strong in this ward. What is more surprising is that the Liberal Democrats who put up a candidate regularly in this ward do not perform better and that probably reflects on the state of that party locally. Labour regularly come third in this ward and in the last 2 years have polled less than 10%.

The Conservative candidate is the sitting Councillor, Paul Mason, who has been on the Council a number of years and yet is one of the more youthful Councillors. The Labour candidate is Raymond Cook, of whom again I know nothing. The Liberal Democrats are putting up Michael Winrow as their candidate. The BNP are fielding a candidate for the first time this year in Joanne Warren, again I know nothing about this candidate.

The Conservatives will have few concerns in this ward; this is currently an extremely Conservative ward. The number of candidates will probably mitigate against the near 80% of the vote they have achieved in recent contests. The Lib Dems are pretty weak here too, in the last 5 years never getting above 20% of the votes,  Labour are have never scored above 15% and as noted above have now dropped below 10%. Looking at the nature of the ward the BNP will struggle to make much as the ward presents few grievances for them to exploit. All in all this looks like nothing other than a solid Conservative hold.

Broxbourne Borough: Ward by Ward - Wormley Turnford Ward

The next ward on my list is Wormley Turnford, which contains the two villages of Wormley and Turnford. The results from 2004 are as follows:-

Conservative   1248      Labour             475           

For comparison the result at last years round of elections was as follows:-

Conservative   1068       Labour             245        BNP     305   

The ward is one that has many differences, some areas of the ward have very large up market houses, other parts are more modest. This is one of those areas that Labour should be doing better in if one looked purely at the demographics. In recent years the Conservatives have been running away with this ward by extremely big margins, comfortably gaining at least two thirds of the vote. The entry of the BNP last year did little to dent the Conservatives commanding advantage. Indeed their vote share seemed to come as much from Labour.

The Conservative candidate is new this year, James Metcalf, I know nothing about this candidate. The Labour candidate is Christopher Francis, of whom again I know nothing. The BNP are fielding a candidate again this year in Ian Hunter, yet again I know nothing about this candidate.

The Conservatives will have few concerns in this ward; this is currently a heavily Conservative ward. Labour are pretty weak in this ward and the BNP are unlikely to be able to overhaul the Conservatives two-thirds of the vote. This should be a comfortable Conservative hold.

A good weekend to be a Conservative

Fresh from the YouGov poll lead of 18% for the Conservatives, this weekend brings fresh good news for the party. An ICM poll gives a lead of 10% and a News of the World poll in the marginals suggests that Labour are losing out heavily in the marginals. The poll suggests that the Conservatives would make net gains of over 100 seats, enough to give a majority of 64. This is devastating news for Labour as it shows that they are being comprehensively outperformed where it matters most.

The Conservatives cannot sit back on their laurels though and will need to work daily until the next election to ensure that what is only a theoretical result becomes an actual result. The more polls like the last couple and we can be fairly sure that that election won’t be occurring until it has to!