As the dust begins to settle (and it is settling already) the parties all have to look at their next moves. Immediate concerns for the SNP will be getting John Mason working hard as an MP - difficult to do when the House has shut down for the summer. It will take at least until after recess before he has any help whatsoever in terms of money (after all he's not technically a Member of Parliament until he has been sworn in, so no allowances) but not hitting the ground running is not an option.
And there's the Baillieston by-election to think about too with John Mason having resigned already. Is there a candidate in place? Is there a suitable candidate in place? The SNP will need to select someone who can fill John's shoes as a first-rate councillor. And then get campaigning immediately. No rest for the winners here.
As I said in my post yesterday they also need to get a good answer to the question of what the policy is in the event of a failed referendum campaign.
As for Labour - well, they've got to select their Parliamentary candidate pretty sharpish. Theoretically they should take this seat back, even if they lose the General Election but they won't win it by just assuming it will come back to them. If the rumours about their lack of canvass data is true - and the fact they couldn't get their vote out would imply they were - they need to be spending the next couple of years knocking on every door in the constituency. Twice. And I'm sure MPs in other "safe seats" will be wanting to know if they need to do the same, the answer's yes.
They also need to treat the council by-election with a lot of respect. They could win it, although I'm not convinced. This is one election where I think that candidate selection will matter a lot. As will an early start.
As for the others, well the Lib Dems need to sort themselves out a leader and rethink their by-election strategy. This was a pretty shocking performance from them. The Tories - more of the same from them would be good. They were gutsy, spirited and put up a good show in the face of public antipathy and a major squeeze operation. Solidarity and the SSP need to ask if they still have a place in Scottish politics. Between them they were less popular than the Conservative candidate. In the East End of Glasgow. The writing's on the wall.
So an interesting night, but the story didn't end at 2am. There's still a lot more fights to be had in the East End over the next few weeks. Stay tuned.
Showing posts with label Labour. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Labour. Show all posts
Friday, July 25, 2008
Thursday, July 24, 2008
Election Day Campaign Review
So it's finally election day and early accounts indicate that its a slow one. Time for a totally unscientific campaign review and a bold, but probably flawed prediction. Living in Surrey I've not been on the ground in the campaign so am relying on blogs, news coverage, snatched bits of gossip and my own opinions to make these judgments.
SNP
Started brilliantly and captured the Big Mo early on. Picked a good, local, popular candidate - then did their level-best to stop him speaking in case he was a bit off-message. It was easy for Labour to attack the campaign as another Salmond ego-trip as he spoke more than the candidate. Ultimately though that won't make a huge difference as people like to hear from the party leaders and many people in the area know John Mason anyway.
The Party needs to get a better answer to the question about what they'll do if the referendum on independence goes against them.
A good, solid campaign. 8/10
Labour
Dear God - how bad was the start of this campaign? They failed to abide by the first rule of elections - if you don't have a candidate don't call an election. The crucial first weekend was a disaster which has tainted the rest of the campaign by allowing the SNP to grab the momentum then run with it. When they selected their fourth/fifth/nineteenth choice candidate it was a good one and that helped to steady the ship. There have been a few gaffes and bad news stories since but nothing that will matter to people outside politics.
Before Mags Curran 0/10
After Mags Curran 6.5/10
Lib Dems
Have been anonymous, bland and focussed only on the fire station, admittedly a damn good local issue. Don't rate their campaign or their chances of keeping third spot.
Dull dull dull 4/10
Conservatives
A good show in a seat they will never even have a sniff of winning. A good candidate and a well liked Scottish leader have given the Tories more airtime and control of the agenda than is really their right. Will still get a kicking, but a respectable one and could possibly overtake the Lib Dems into third.
Punching above their East End weight 7/10
The others
Well, not being in the constituency there's not much to see or say. Looks like the SSP and Solidarity may finally wipe each other out of any sort of relevance. Expect the Greens to come fifth.
Prediction
Low poll of about 31% with Labour just holding on by about 1000. Conservatives to come third and everyone below them to lose their deposit. I expect everyone to be back in Baillieston in about 8 months time as Margaret steps down and Steven Purcell goes for his place in Holyrood, lining up a leadership bid as the next hapless Labour leader falls by the wayside.
There has been no number-crunching, no inside information, nothing but gut feeling so expect this prediction to be utterly wrong. :-)
SNP
Started brilliantly and captured the Big Mo early on. Picked a good, local, popular candidate - then did their level-best to stop him speaking in case he was a bit off-message. It was easy for Labour to attack the campaign as another Salmond ego-trip as he spoke more than the candidate. Ultimately though that won't make a huge difference as people like to hear from the party leaders and many people in the area know John Mason anyway.
The Party needs to get a better answer to the question about what they'll do if the referendum on independence goes against them.
A good, solid campaign. 8/10
Labour
Dear God - how bad was the start of this campaign? They failed to abide by the first rule of elections - if you don't have a candidate don't call an election. The crucial first weekend was a disaster which has tainted the rest of the campaign by allowing the SNP to grab the momentum then run with it. When they selected their fourth/fifth/nineteenth choice candidate it was a good one and that helped to steady the ship. There have been a few gaffes and bad news stories since but nothing that will matter to people outside politics.
Before Mags Curran 0/10
After Mags Curran 6.5/10
Lib Dems
Have been anonymous, bland and focussed only on the fire station, admittedly a damn good local issue. Don't rate their campaign or their chances of keeping third spot.
Dull dull dull 4/10
Conservatives
A good show in a seat they will never even have a sniff of winning. A good candidate and a well liked Scottish leader have given the Tories more airtime and control of the agenda than is really their right. Will still get a kicking, but a respectable one and could possibly overtake the Lib Dems into third.
Punching above their East End weight 7/10
The others
Well, not being in the constituency there's not much to see or say. Looks like the SSP and Solidarity may finally wipe each other out of any sort of relevance. Expect the Greens to come fifth.
Prediction
Low poll of about 31% with Labour just holding on by about 1000. Conservatives to come third and everyone below them to lose their deposit. I expect everyone to be back in Baillieston in about 8 months time as Margaret steps down and Steven Purcell goes for his place in Holyrood, lining up a leadership bid as the next hapless Labour leader falls by the wayside.
There has been no number-crunching, no inside information, nothing but gut feeling so expect this prediction to be utterly wrong. :-)
Monday, June 30, 2008
A Tricky By-Election
The news that there will soon be a by-election in Glasgow East has sent many of my political friends into a frenzy of excitement.
On the face of it this is a rock-solid Labour seat. The last majority was 13,507 and the SNP need a 22% swing to capture it. Normally a swing of that magnitude would be just that little bit impossible at a General Election - but by-elections are something different. The expectation, given Labour's woes, will surely be that the SNP will pull off a stunning victory.
But it won't be that easy - rumours are swirling that the candidate will be Elaine C. Smith. Where does that leave the already selected candidate Lachie MacNeill. And if Lachie MacNeill is the candidate - does he have the experience, knowledge and abilities for such a high-profile campaign? I don't know Lachie so wouldn't like to say but it tends to be that the best candidate to put up a good fight in an unwinnable seat is not always be the best person to take it on to win it in the spotlight of a media frenzy. Will Elaine C. Smith - a woman whose own "Chairities and Politics" page on her website doesn't mention independence go down well with the local members?
As for Labour - they really are in trouble. Anything except a win for them will be a disaster. Everyone knows that, but do they have the stomach for such a battle? Or will the campaign for a new Scottish leader overshadow everything else?
And the Conservatives? Well everyone knows they won't win Glasgow East. In 2005 their share of the vote was 6.9%. The campaign team from Crewe and Henley won't be troubling themselves on the doors of the East End. But the last story that David Cameron wants is the wheels coming off the election machine which is doing so well. A squeezed vote and lost deposit (likely outcome surely?) will mean that one story to come out of the by-election is that the Conservatives are still unwelcome in Scotland, that the Crewe vote wasn't a sign of making genuine and sustainable progress in Labour's heartlands - it was nothing more than a protest vote. If Labour lose they will want to deflect some of the pain, and this will be the easiest (and cheapest) way to do it. So the Conservatives will be looking to hold their share of the vote - or even increase it - and probably overtake the Lib Dems for third place. And the Lib Dems? Well they will want to stop the rot of Crewe and Henley so I imagine there will be an interesting - if irrelevant - scrap for third place.
If Labour win, even by the tiniest majority, it will be touted as a major success and defeat for the SNP. If the SNP win it will undoubtedly be a great victory but will it come at cost of upset members? The Conservatives could see a grinding halt to their relentless march to the next general election and the Lib Dems could just slide further into obscurity.
Its a tricky by-election for every party which of course should make for great viewing for those of us not involved.
On the face of it this is a rock-solid Labour seat. The last majority was 13,507 and the SNP need a 22% swing to capture it. Normally a swing of that magnitude would be just that little bit impossible at a General Election - but by-elections are something different. The expectation, given Labour's woes, will surely be that the SNP will pull off a stunning victory.
But it won't be that easy - rumours are swirling that the candidate will be Elaine C. Smith. Where does that leave the already selected candidate Lachie MacNeill. And if Lachie MacNeill is the candidate - does he have the experience, knowledge and abilities for such a high-profile campaign? I don't know Lachie so wouldn't like to say but it tends to be that the best candidate to put up a good fight in an unwinnable seat is not always be the best person to take it on to win it in the spotlight of a media frenzy. Will Elaine C. Smith - a woman whose own "Chairities and Politics" page on her website doesn't mention independence go down well with the local members?
As for Labour - they really are in trouble. Anything except a win for them will be a disaster. Everyone knows that, but do they have the stomach for such a battle? Or will the campaign for a new Scottish leader overshadow everything else?
And the Conservatives? Well everyone knows they won't win Glasgow East. In 2005 their share of the vote was 6.9%. The campaign team from Crewe and Henley won't be troubling themselves on the doors of the East End. But the last story that David Cameron wants is the wheels coming off the election machine which is doing so well. A squeezed vote and lost deposit (likely outcome surely?) will mean that one story to come out of the by-election is that the Conservatives are still unwelcome in Scotland, that the Crewe vote wasn't a sign of making genuine and sustainable progress in Labour's heartlands - it was nothing more than a protest vote. If Labour lose they will want to deflect some of the pain, and this will be the easiest (and cheapest) way to do it. So the Conservatives will be looking to hold their share of the vote - or even increase it - and probably overtake the Lib Dems for third place. And the Lib Dems? Well they will want to stop the rot of Crewe and Henley so I imagine there will be an interesting - if irrelevant - scrap for third place.
If Labour win, even by the tiniest majority, it will be touted as a major success and defeat for the SNP. If the SNP win it will undoubtedly be a great victory but will it come at cost of upset members? The Conservatives could see a grinding halt to their relentless march to the next general election and the Lib Dems could just slide further into obscurity.
Its a tricky by-election for every party which of course should make for great viewing for those of us not involved.
Tuesday, November 27, 2007
A Pointless Rule - But Your Rule
I've never been a fan of PPERA (the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act). You know the one that made the simple process of elections and donations to political parties a whole lot more complicated. And doesn't know the correct word is actually referenda. And established that idiotically useless body The Electoral Commission.
I never saw a reason to have to report donations to parties. The vast majority of which have always been open, honest and done with no intention other than helping parties out. But the Labour Party in their infinite wisdom brought in PPERA and established the Electoral Commission. So despite me not really seeing a reason to it all I obeyed the law on reporting donations. And it was generally really simple to understand and comply with.
Which makes the Labour Party's knowing acceptance of donations via a third party from David Abrahams incomprehensible. There is no room for doubt in the law. No wiggle room.
The Act states that a donation is (among many other thing):
"any reference to anything being given or transferred to a party or any person is a reference to its being so given or transferred either directly or indirectly through any third person;"
OK - a bit wordy, but you get the gist.
When Peter Watt says he didn't know he couldn't take a donation through a third party he is either lying or so utterly incompetent he should never have been in his position. Either way he was quite right to resign.
The Labour Party has to realise that when it brings in these annoying and pointless laws they don't just apply to the evil Tories (who they were doubtless introduced to trip up) but to themselves too.
I never saw a reason to have to report donations to parties. The vast majority of which have always been open, honest and done with no intention other than helping parties out. But the Labour Party in their infinite wisdom brought in PPERA and established the Electoral Commission. So despite me not really seeing a reason to it all I obeyed the law on reporting donations. And it was generally really simple to understand and comply with.
Which makes the Labour Party's knowing acceptance of donations via a third party from David Abrahams incomprehensible. There is no room for doubt in the law. No wiggle room.
The Act states that a donation is (among many other thing):
"any reference to anything being given or transferred to a party or any person is a reference to its being so given or transferred either directly or indirectly through any third person;"
OK - a bit wordy, but you get the gist.
When Peter Watt says he didn't know he couldn't take a donation through a third party he is either lying or so utterly incompetent he should never have been in his position. Either way he was quite right to resign.
The Labour Party has to realise that when it brings in these annoying and pointless laws they don't just apply to the evil Tories (who they were doubtless introduced to trip up) but to themselves too.
Monday, February 05, 2007
Why I Hope Tony Blair is Innocent
First of all just let me say - I can't stand Tony Blair. I think he's arrogant, smug, is destroying civil liberties in this country and is the most appalling whore around "celebrities" (see the dreadful Cool Britannia phenomenom for proof).
I would also be lying if I didn't feel a little bit of Schadenfreude at Labour's current problems. I remember the hell it was to be a member of the Conservative Party in the mid 90s. I saw people that I knew and cared about having their lives pulled apart in the tabloids. I saw the impact this had on their families, extended families and friends. It was a horrendous time. I also saw members of the Labour Party gloat quite hideously over people's personal misfortunes. It showed the horrible side of politics and the Labour Party and there is a part of me that feels a certain justifiable vindictiveness. And sympathy for those good, hard working members of the Labour Party who are working hard in their communities and are despairing at the antics of their party leaders. I've been there. It's tough.
Having said all that, I hope Tony Blair and his advisors are innocent in the Cash for Honours debacle. Not because I like Blair or because I want to see the Labour Party have an easy ride. I just don't want politics in Britain to have sunk to this level.
I think all parties (with the possible exception of the SNP) have been guilty in the past of nominating their donors for awards. Now this was always wrong, but the Labour Party would appear to have taken this principle (or lack thereof) and walked to extremes with it. To reward a donor with a K is one thing, but to blatantly sell honours is quite another. If true this undermines democracy as a whole in this country in a number of ways.
It makes people much less inclined to become involved in politics - either through donating cash or their time. If the public don't donate to their favoured party we have to start looking at the dreadful possibility of state funding for political parties.
It makes people less inclined to even trust politicians. Virtually every MP or councillor I have met or dealt with has been in politics for absolutely the right reasons. Most would never do anything which could be seen as corrupt, yet all are being tarred with the same brush. If the public aren't inspired to even vote then democracy suffers.
It undermines the achievements/capabilities of people who are in the Lords due to their experiences and expertise.
And perhaps in a stunning show of how naive I am - I just don't want to believe that a Prime Minister could be so corrupt and crooked. Arrogant, slimy, wrong, conceited are all fine, but a criminal, nope. Don't want to see that.
I think my hopes are misguided, I think Blair and his gang are as guilty as hell. If they are they should go to jail - perverting the democratic process is one of the worst crimes in our society as it destroys the very basics of our society. I hope I'm wrong.
I would also be lying if I didn't feel a little bit of Schadenfreude at Labour's current problems. I remember the hell it was to be a member of the Conservative Party in the mid 90s. I saw people that I knew and cared about having their lives pulled apart in the tabloids. I saw the impact this had on their families, extended families and friends. It was a horrendous time. I also saw members of the Labour Party gloat quite hideously over people's personal misfortunes. It showed the horrible side of politics and the Labour Party and there is a part of me that feels a certain justifiable vindictiveness. And sympathy for those good, hard working members of the Labour Party who are working hard in their communities and are despairing at the antics of their party leaders. I've been there. It's tough.
Having said all that, I hope Tony Blair and his advisors are innocent in the Cash for Honours debacle. Not because I like Blair or because I want to see the Labour Party have an easy ride. I just don't want politics in Britain to have sunk to this level.
I think all parties (with the possible exception of the SNP) have been guilty in the past of nominating their donors for awards. Now this was always wrong, but the Labour Party would appear to have taken this principle (or lack thereof) and walked to extremes with it. To reward a donor with a K is one thing, but to blatantly sell honours is quite another. If true this undermines democracy as a whole in this country in a number of ways.
It makes people much less inclined to become involved in politics - either through donating cash or their time. If the public don't donate to their favoured party we have to start looking at the dreadful possibility of state funding for political parties.
It makes people less inclined to even trust politicians. Virtually every MP or councillor I have met or dealt with has been in politics for absolutely the right reasons. Most would never do anything which could be seen as corrupt, yet all are being tarred with the same brush. If the public aren't inspired to even vote then democracy suffers.
It undermines the achievements/capabilities of people who are in the Lords due to their experiences and expertise.
And perhaps in a stunning show of how naive I am - I just don't want to believe that a Prime Minister could be so corrupt and crooked. Arrogant, slimy, wrong, conceited are all fine, but a criminal, nope. Don't want to see that.
I think my hopes are misguided, I think Blair and his gang are as guilty as hell. If they are they should go to jail - perverting the democratic process is one of the worst crimes in our society as it destroys the very basics of our society. I hope I'm wrong.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)