Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The real worry for the Tories is if Carswell is able to tak

24

Comments

  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,950
    Mr. Jessop, pah. I've been talking about differential front end grip for years longer (incidentally, Rosberg suffered that after he lost some of his front wing at Spa).
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,875
    Also have to disagree with JosiasJessop On grammar schools, Germany has grammar schools as well as excellent technical schools and high schools, showing they can still allow an all-round excellent education suited to pupils' needs. Selection does not have to be at 11 either, Finland selects at 16, and many grammars allow sixth form entry
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,507
    edited August 2014
    dr_spyn said:

    Ultimately, why has Ed Miliband simply not demanded action? To show leadership, reassure core Labour voters, show he is in touch, or even just to defend Labour’s battered reputation?

    http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2014/08/28/why-has-labour-been-so-slow-to-react-to-rotherham/

    Ed I am their leader, I must follow them Miliband.

    What a shambles.

    Strangely quiet on this. Normally somebody dropping some litter is enough for Ed to call for independent public inquiry and that it starts its work within minutes. Maybe he is too busy reading the Sun.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 63,118
    There is an alternative for the Tories: don't stand.

    Carswell wins, but has not been seen to beat a Tory. I'm sure they can think of some weaselly words about what an outstanding parliamentarian Carswell is and how it wouldn't make sense for him to lose his seat etc etc. Desperate maybe, but shoots UKIP's fox.
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,300

    dr_spyn said:

    Ultimately, why has Ed Miliband simply not demanded action? To show leadership, reassure core Labour voters, show he is in touch, or even just to defend Labour’s battered reputation?

    http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2014/08/28/why-has-labour-been-so-slow-to-react-to-rotherham/

    Ed I am their leader, I must follow them Miliband.

    What a shambles.

    Strangely quiet on this. Normally somebody dropping some litter is enough for Ed to call for independent public inquiry. Maybe he is too busy reading the Sun.
    probably still locked in the lavatory.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,821
    Socrates said:

    In the coalition agreement there were proposals to encourage better government: recalls and primaries. Whatever happened to them?

    Primaries hit problems of costs, and recalls of defining exactly how they would work.

    However, the Conservative Party has been running open selection meetings (which they call 'open primaries', but don't go as far as that), very successfully. We held one in our local seat (ultra-safe Wealden) and the attendees selected the excellent Nus Ghani - who is not at all your stereotypical Conservative candidate.

    So some progress made.
  • rogerhrogerh Posts: 282
    The Lib Dems were, I'm sure hoping that UKIP would fade a bit so they could regain 3rd pace in the polls.This by election makes that less likely.However if win or lose it results in a significant drop in the polls for the Tories through to the GE then it might just help the lib Dems hold on to more of the seats vulnerable to the Tories.
  • JohnLilburneJohnLilburne Posts: 6,312
    edited August 2014

    Socrates said:

    This is the biggest scandal for years. I can't see anything less than an independent judge-led parliamentary inquiry being sufficient.

    I'm not certain that that is the right format. In part it needs police-style investigation, but the police are potentially tainted. Certainly Alexis Jay seems to have done a thorough job; perhaps something based on her approach would be appropriate.

    What I think we will all agree on is that the government needs to put some serious effort into finding out the extent of the scandal.
    a "judge-led inquiry" would kick it into the long grass - which is presumably why Labour suggested it - and would almost certainly mean the end of any chance of taking action against guilty individuals.

    Maybe we should commission a foreign police force to investigate, perhaps a Commonwealth force where the police officers are sworn constables (if such exists).

  • corporealcorporeal Posts: 2,549
    If Carswell wins, will it affect UKIP's chances of appearing in debates?
  • volcanopetevolcanopete Posts: 2,078
    HYUFD said:

    What earlier today looked like a UKIP triumph is now beginning to look like a UKIP farce as the party's official pre-selected 2015 candidate, Roger Lord, has refused to stand down for Carswell, now also adopted as UKIP candidate by the UKIP NEC, thus there will be 2 UKIP candidates on the by-election ballot paper. '
    '...he has "no intention" of stepping aside for the former Tory MP.

    "It's an enormous discourtesy to anybody really just to announce that," he told BBC Essex.

    He added: "Perhaps he's jumping ship to try and get in ahead of all the other Conservative MPs who are going to find themselves in the unemployment queue come next May."'


    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-28967904

    Carswell is still favourite, but the Tories could yet produce a shock and win back the seat. I suggest they pick a local candidate, preferably a telegenic female, perhaps a local teacher or nurse, mildly Eurosceptic, but centrist enough to win over Labour and LD voters, many of whom will want to keep UKIP out as they did in Newark. If Labour falls to 3rd in a seat they held in 1997 and 2001 that would also be a blow to Miliband

    Bring back Louise Mensch?

  • TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262

    dr_spyn said:

    Ultimately, why has Ed Miliband simply not demanded action? To show leadership, reassure core Labour voters, show he is in touch, or even just to defend Labour’s battered reputation?

    http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2014/08/28/why-has-labour-been-so-slow-to-react-to-rotherham/

    Ed I am their leader, I must follow them Miliband.

    What a shambles.

    Strangely quiet on this. Normally somebody dropping some litter is enough for Ed to call for independent public inquiry and that it starts its work within minutes. Maybe he is too busy reading the Sun.
    It's too close to home, hence the deafening silence.
  • perhaps douglas is going undercover and will return to the tories for the general election... after a big fall out with farage over something ...

    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/iainmartin1/100284328/ukip-is-in-love-with-douglas-carswell-for-now-but-how-long-will-it-last/

  • corporealcorporeal Posts: 2,549

    There is an alternative for the Tories: don't stand.

    Carswell wins, but has not been seen to beat a Tory. I'm sure they can think of some weaselly words about what an outstanding parliamentarian Carswell is and how it wouldn't make sense for him to lose his seat etc etc. Desperate maybe, but shoots UKIP's fox.

    Would look too much like a pact, there'd be internal riots.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 63,118
    corporeal said:

    If Carswell wins, will it affect UKIP's chances of appearing in debates?

    They'd have as many MPs as the Greens. So still can't justify a debate without Greens as well.
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,300
    Will Carswell be appearing on Question Time as often as Lucas?

    corporeal said:

    If Carswell wins, will it affect UKIP's chances of appearing in debates?

    They'd have as many MPs as the Greens. So still can't justify a debate without Greens as well.
  • SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976

    dr_spyn said:

    Ultimately, why has Ed Miliband simply not demanded action? To show leadership, reassure core Labour voters, show he is in touch, or even just to defend Labour’s battered reputation?

    http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2014/08/28/why-has-labour-been-so-slow-to-react-to-rotherham/

    Ed I am their leader, I must follow them Miliband.

    What a shambles.

    Strangely quiet on this. Normally somebody dropping some litter is enough for Ed to call for independent public inquiry and that it starts its work within minutes. Maybe he is too busy reading the Sun.
    It's too close to home, hence the deafening silence.
    In a nutshell - personally I don't give two hoots what Ed has to say on the matter - but I do want every single sodding person involved in the cover up of 1,400 sexually abused children to be brought to book.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395

    Jim Pickard‏@PickardJE·4 mins
    Ukip: "Roger Lord has never been the by-election candidate for Clacton." (He was only ever the general election candidate.)

    Dan Hodges‏@DPJHodges·5 mins
    Ukip's handling of Roger Lord is a becoming a cross between something out of Carry On script and something from Orwell.

    Jim Pickard‏@PickardJE·8 mins
    Roger Lord, ex Ukip Clacton candidate: "I had a call from the party secretary threatening to throw me out of the party if I don't shut up."

    Confirms what I said on the previous thread that he hadn't been selected as far as the national party was concerned.
  • corporealcorporeal Posts: 2,549

    corporeal said:

    If Carswell wins, will it affect UKIP's chances of appearing in debates?

    They'd have as many MPs as the Greens. So still can't justify a debate without Greens as well.
    There's a range of criteria used.
  • "Barnado's instructed their staff not to talk to him"

    Surely not...go take a look at the people in charge of the charity over the time period of this.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 63,118
    dr_spyn said:

    Will Carswell be appearing on Question Time as often as Lucas?

    corporeal said:

    If Carswell wins, will it affect UKIP's chances of appearing in debates?

    They'd have as many MPs as the Greens. So still can't justify a debate without Greens as well.
    She was the leader. Farage has had several QT appearances.
  • taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    It's too close to home, hence the deafening silence.

    Labour list admitted yesterday that labour craves the Pakistani vote. It's the perfect voter demographic for them (or any other party).

    They vote en bloc, they vote en masse and they all vote the same way. They also need little or no canvassing - the local 'community leader' sorts the vote for labour.

    And what the pakistani vote gets in return from labour is.....Well I'll leave the answer to that one up to you.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 63,118
    corporeal said:

    corporeal said:

    If Carswell wins, will it affect UKIP's chances of appearing in debates?

    They'd have as many MPs as the Greens. So still can't justify a debate without Greens as well.
    There's a range of criteria used.
    True. But all irrelevant as Cameron isn't going to agree to any of it if Crosby has any say in the matter.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,875
    volcanopete But you are assuming all Carswell's votes were personal ones or from rightwing voters. He clearly is popular there, but many Tory voters will still want a Tory MP and some Labour and LD voters may be prepared to tactically vote Tory to keep out UKIP, as they did when the Tories beat off Newark in the by-election a few months ago. As I said, the Tories should pick a local woman, with a strong record of public service who will be acceptable to some centre and centre-left voters, with Roger Lord also standing on the UKIP ticket splitting the UKIP vote the Tories could squeak home
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited August 2014
    SeanT said:

    And now the Rotherham scandal bleeds into neighbouring... Doncaster.

    http://www.southyorkshiretimes.co.uk/news/local/doncaster-council-boss-linked-to-rotherham-abuse-scandal-1-6810631#.U__G5tmu09w.twitter

    I'm trying to remember the name of the MP there. In Doncaster.

    IIRC Doncaster council was found to be a corrupt one party state a number of years ago, and serious child abuse was very much a part of it:

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7824400.stm

    http://www.theguardian.com/society/2009/jan/13/doncaster-child-protection
  • UK politics can be entertaining some days...

    Paul Waugh‏@paulwaugh·3 secs
    RT @adebradley Just waiting for the inevitable news that Diana claims to be standing for UKIP in Clacton pic.twitter.com/RL18MMwjji


    Louise Mensch‏@LouiseMensch·6 secs
    How soon before Douglas #Carswell deletes his entire blog? where he calls for discipline, warns of letting Labour in, opposes parachuting?
  • JohnLilburneJohnLilburne Posts: 6,312

    Socrates said:

    In the coalition agreement there were proposals to encourage better government: recalls and primaries. Whatever happened to them?

    Primaries hit problems of costs, and recalls of defining exactly how they would work.

    However, the Conservative Party has been running open selection meetings (which they call 'open primaries', but don't go as far as that), very successfully. We held one in our local seat (ultra-safe Wealden) and the attendees selected the excellent Nus Ghani - who is not at all your stereotypical Conservative candidate.

    So some progress made.
    Wouldn't the Americans call that a "caucus"? Sounds a bit smoke-filled-rooms and not open at all, though.

  • DM_AndyDM_Andy Posts: 1,127
    Speedy said:

    To answer the thread:
    Yes Carswell has, he keeps a separate record of his voters and supporters from the local tories.
    So he has full access to all the information that someone needs to get elected.

    Is he covered by the Data Protection Act? That information was gathered by and for the Conservative Party, you can't just take personal data and use it for another party. I vaguely remember a Lib Dem local organiser in the early/mid 90s defecting and trying to bring his database with him and that creating a huge stink.
  • MrJonesMrJones Posts: 3,523

    @Simon St Clare

    I suspect Mr Lord is playing the situation for what it's worth. Now that would make sense.

    Throwing toys out of the pram doesn't.

    Socrates said:

    Socrates said:

    When people realise that this has happened in a second place, the inevitable question "how many places did this happen in?" will be everywhere.

    To my mind that is the most urgent question. Alexis Jay said in her report that it is probable that similar things, and perhaps on a similar scale, have been going on elsewhere. We need a serious investigation of how much that has been the case. I'm not sure what the best format for such an investigation is, though.
    This is the biggest scandal for years. I can't see anything less than an independent judge-led parliamentary inquiry being sufficient.
    Butler-Sloss is free.

    Inquiry takes time - handy for kicking things into the long grass too.

    The Home Office need to go mob handed into South Yorks police and find out why they haven't been following up on these serious crimes, and what on earth the CPS have been up to.
    "Inquiry takes time"

    Shame one didn't start back when the Times first broke the media's wall of silence over this as it might have been done by now.


  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    SeanT said:

    Socrates said:

    Socrates said:

    When people realise that this has happened in a second place, the inevitable question "how many places did this happen in?" will be everywhere.

    To my mind that is the most urgent question. Alexis Jay said in her report that it is probable that similar things, and perhaps on a similar scale, have been going on elsewhere. We need a serious investigation of how much that has been the case. I'm not sure what the best format for such an investigation is, though.
    This is the biggest scandal for years. I can't see anything less than an independent judge-led parliamentary inquiry being sufficient.
    The lefty establishment will bitterly and fiercely oppose any further inquiries or major reports - for precisely the reasons you earlier stated.
    They might want to, but the difficulty comes when they are challenged publicly to do so. No-one would dare stand in the way of it if the public would find out about their opposition.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    rogerh said:

    The Lib Dems were, I'm sure hoping that UKIP would fade a bit so they could regain 3rd pace in the polls.This by election makes that less likely.However if win or lose it results in a significant drop in the polls for the Tories through to the GE then it might just help the lib Dems hold on to more of the seats vulnerable to the Tories.

    You win first prize in the clutching at straws contest.
  • manofkent2014manofkent2014 Posts: 1,543
    edited August 2014
    Sean_F said:

    Socrates said:

    It's telling even with this news that the reaction of conservatives isn't to discuss how they can keep UKIP-sympathisers in parliament and the party at large in the fold and accomodate their concerns. It's to spin every line they can against Carswell and call UKIP props for Labour.

    They just don't get it.

    For people who've switched from the Conservatives to UKIP, it simply rubs home to them why they were right to switch.

    Goodwin, co-author of the book Revolt On The Right, explained on his blog: "This is because the seat contains high concentrations of voters who are likely to be very receptive toward Nigel Farage: it has lots of pensioners, lots of voters without a degree, lots of voters with no educational qualifications and higher than average levels of economic disadvantage and unemployment.

    "UKIP tend to thrive in such communities --older, less well educated and insecure voters provide the ideal breeding ground for Farage's army.

    "Clacton is also very 'white', with high numbers of voters born in the country and few minorities, which again favours UKIP, who poll strongest in ethnically homogeneous areas."

    http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/08/28/douglas-carswell-ukip-tories-clacton_n_5728682.html

    Goodwin is a gift for UKIP. What better than a tame condescending urban liberal elitist academic pigeonholing UKIP voters as poor, white old and thick which is pounced on by moronic sneering Tory supporters to bolster their crumbling political egos. That Goodwin will peddle this drivel on every medium that will have him (he does love a good interview) is amongst the most certain ways of ensuring UKIP retain and perhaps inflate their current vote there is.
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322

    corporeal said:

    If Carswell wins, will it affect UKIP's chances of appearing in debates?

    They'd have as many MPs as the Greens. So still can't justify a debate without Greens as well.
    Except that one in seven UK voters supports UKIP, compared to one in a hundred for the Greens.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,507
    edited August 2014
    Doncaster another model council when it comes to protecting children,

    The brothers had been put in care by Doncaster Council, whose children's services department was recently described as 'chaotic and dangerous' following the death of seven vulnerable youngsters.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1167708/Brothers-charged-attempted-murder-young-playmates-slashed-head-toe-Stanley-knife.html

    And I don't want to keep hearing lessons are being learned and we have improved our rating since this incident, while all those whose job it is to be involved in "safe-guarding" merrily carry on as if nothing as happened.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited August 2014

    There is an alternative for the Tories: don't stand.

    Carswell wins, but has not been seen to beat a Tory. I'm sure they can think of some weaselly words about what an outstanding parliamentarian Carswell is and how it wouldn't make sense for him to lose his seat etc etc. Desperate maybe, but shoots UKIP's fox.

    Not standing in a seat where your party has a 12,000 majority? Impossible. Unthinkable.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    HYUFD said:

    What earlier today looked like a UKIP triumph is now beginning to look like a UKIP farce as the party's official pre-selected 2015 candidate, Roger Lord, has refused to stand down for Carswell, now also adopted as UKIP candidate by the UKIP NEC, thus there will be 2 UKIP candidates on the by-election ballot paper. '
    '...he has "no intention" of stepping aside for the former Tory MP.

    "It's an enormous discourtesy to anybody really just to announce that," he told BBC Essex.

    He added: "Perhaps he's jumping ship to try and get in ahead of all the other Conservative MPs who are going to find themselves in the unemployment queue come next May."'


    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-28967904

    Carswell is still favourite, but the Tories could yet produce a shock and win back the seat. I suggest they pick a local candidate, preferably a telegenic female, perhaps a local teacher or nurse, mildly Eurosceptic, but centrist enough to win over Labour and LD voters, many of whom will want to keep UKIP out as they did in Newark. If Labour falls to 3rd in a seat they held in 1997 and 2001 that would also be a blow to Miliband

    Interesting. I see that Carswell has a 12 000 majority at present, with Labour in second place. There were 5 000 or so LD voters, who will probably go to Labour in the main. BNP got a fair number of votes, and UKIP did not stand. There were two local independents in 2010 too.

    A Conservative candidate could retain a good percentage of the Tory vote, and there may be an AIFE type splitter candidate.

    I would have thought that Labour are in the best position to exploit the Tory/UKIP/splitter vote and tactical voting so are underpriced at 10/1.
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322

    Socrates said:

    In the coalition agreement there were proposals to encourage better government: recalls and primaries. Whatever happened to them?

    Primaries hit problems of costs, and recalls of defining exactly how they would work.

    However, the Conservative Party has been running open selection meetings (which they call 'open primaries', but don't go as far as that), very successfully. We held one in our local seat (ultra-safe Wealden) and the attendees selected the excellent Nus Ghani - who is not at all your stereotypical Conservative candidate.

    So some progress made.
    Even you must accept this is a weak defence for something defined in the Coalition agreement to be done nationally.
  • taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    No-one would dare stand in the way of it if the public would find out about their opposition.

    It's emerged that Rotherham council resorted to court injunctions to stop the truth coming out.

    Doesn;t seem to be battering labour's image, yet.
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    "Barnado's instructed their staff not to talk to him or The Times even off the record."

    Is that true? Do you have a source? Truly outrageous if so.
  • Ross Hawkins‏@rosschawkins·3 mins
    Roger Lord on 5 Live : if someone pushes me I'll push back

    Ross Hawkins‏@rosschawkins·3 mins
    Roger Lord: who's to say Carswell is better than I am? He was going to lose

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,875
    edited August 2014
    AndyJS Of course he was not the by-election candidate as the by-election only came in prospect today, but he was selected as the general election candidate and will stand splitting the UKIP vote.

    Rottenborough Ridiculous, with a good local candidate the Tories clearly have a chance in a seat they hold, many of their voters will still want a Tory MP even if they respect Carswell the man and some Labour and LDs will hold their nose and vote Tory to keep UKIP out as Newark showed
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    taffys said:

    No-one would dare stand in the way of it if the public would find out about their opposition.

    It's emerged that Rotherham council resorted to court injunctions to stop the truth coming out.

    Doesn;t seem to be battering labour's image, yet.

    Oh, I'm sure the local party is taking a battering.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited August 2014
    HYUFD said:

    AndyJS Of course he was not the by-election candidate as the by-election only came in prospect today, but he was selected as the general election candidate and will stand splitting the UKIP vote.

    Rottenborough Ridiculous, with a good local candidate the Tories clearly have a chance in a seat they hold, many of their voters will still want a Tory MP even if they respect Carswell the man and some Labour and LDs will hold their nose and vote Tory to keep UKIP out as Newark showed

    He wasn't on the official UKIP candidates list. The local party couldn't have informed HQ.

    I'm sure that's right because otherwise Farage would have sorted this out beforehand rather than have it being played out in public like this.

    Not surprising: the Tory candidates list is currently missing 53 locally selected candidates, for example. They say 75 non-incumbents have been selected, the correct figure is 128.
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    HYUFD said:

    AndyJS Of course he was not the by-election candidate as the by-election only came in prospect today, but he was selected as the general election candidate and will stand splitting the UKIP vote.

    Rottenborough Ridiculous, with a good local candidate the Tories clearly have a chance in a seat they hold, many of their voters will still want a Tory MP even if they respect Carswell the man and some Labour and LDs will hold their nose and vote Tory to keep UKIP out as Newark showed

    If UKIP win the seat in the byelection they wont have another candidate in the general, its over UKIP will win the seat, there is nothing to stop it.
  • DM_Andy said:

    Speedy said:

    To answer the thread:
    Yes Carswell has, he keeps a separate record of his voters and supporters from the local tories.
    So he has full access to all the information that someone needs to get elected.

    Is he covered by the Data Protection Act? That information was gathered by and for the Conservative Party, you can't just take personal data and use it for another party. I vaguely remember a Lib Dem local organiser in the early/mid 90s defecting and trying to bring his database with him and that creating a huge stink.
    Interesting. No idea of the law on this but given that voters legally vote for a candidate not a party it would be fascinating to see that one play out in court.
  • HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098

    HYUFD said:

    What earlier today looked like a UKIP triumph is now beginning to look like a UKIP farce as the party's official pre-selected 2015 candidate, Roger Lord, has refused to stand down for Carswell, now also adopted as UKIP candidate by the UKIP NEC, thus there will be 2 UKIP candidates on the by-election ballot paper. '
    '...he has "no intention" of stepping aside for the former Tory MP.

    "It's an enormous discourtesy to anybody really just to announce that," he told BBC Essex.

    He added: "Perhaps he's jumping ship to try and get in ahead of all the other Conservative MPs who are going to find themselves in the unemployment queue come next May."'


    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-28967904

    Carswell is still favourite, but the Tories could yet produce a shock and win back the seat. I suggest they pick a local candidate, preferably a telegenic female, perhaps a local teacher or nurse, mildly Eurosceptic, but centrist enough to win over Labour and LD voters, many of whom will want to keep UKIP out as they did in Newark. If Labour falls to 3rd in a seat they held in 1997 and 2001 that would also be a blow to Miliband

    Interesting. I see that Carswell has a 12 000 majority at present, with Labour in second place. There were 5 000 or so LD voters, who will probably go to Labour in the main. BNP got a fair number of votes, and UKIP did not stand. There were two local independents in 2010 too.

    A Conservative candidate could retain a good percentage of the Tory vote, and there may be an AIFE type splitter candidate.

    I would have thought that Labour are in the best position to exploit the Tory/UKIP/splitter vote and tactical voting so are underpriced at 10/1.
    I agree, Dr Sox, which is doubtless a great relief to you. Much as I would like to see Carswell win (and will probably be out campaigning for him), I don't think it a forgone conclusion. I think I'll pop into the bookies when I go to town tomorrow and drop a tenner on Labour, especially if I can get 10/1.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,821

    Wouldn't the Americans call that a "caucus"? Sounds a bit smoke-filled-rooms and not open at all, though.

    It was a bit like a caucus, but it was certainly open - anyone registered to vote in the constituency (irrespective of which party if any they supported) could attend, ask questions of the candidates, and vote in the selection. That's why I call it an 'open selection meeting', which I think is the best shorthand description.
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Socrates said:

    "Barnado's instructed their staff not to talk to him or The Times even off the record."

    Is that true? Do you have a source? Truly outrageous if so.

    thetimes.co.uk/tto/life/article4188806.ece
    Initial approaches to police forces, local authority social services departments and even the Home Office met with a blank refusal to speak about the issue. Barnardo’s, the children charity that since the mid-1990s has run specialist projects to support the victims of child sexual exploitation, refused to allow any of its staff to talk to me, even off the record.
  • HYUFD said:

    AndyJS Of course he was not the by-election candidate as the by-election only came in prospect today, but he was selected as the general election candidate and will stand splitting the UKIP vote.

    Rottenborough Ridiculous, with a good local candidate the Tories clearly have a chance in a seat they hold, many of their voters will still want a Tory MP even if they respect Carswell the man and some Labour and LDs will hold their nose and vote Tory to keep UKIP out as Newark showed

    Newark showed nothing of the sort. No one knows where the Labour and Lib Dem votes went in Newark. Indeed most likely seems to be that they just stayed at home.
  • PeterCPeterC Posts: 1,275
    edited August 2014
    UKIP it seems are within their rights to nominate Carswell as their candidate for the by-election. But it is an extraordinary thing not to use an already selected GE candidate when an unexpected by-election occurs. The circumstances are very rare when an MP stands down and then re-contests his seat in a by-election under different colours, and so their is scant precedent. But Mr Lord is justified in feeling aggrieved by what has happened, the more so at the discourtesy of the manner in which it was done.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,821
    Socrates said:

    Even you must accept this is a weak defence for something defined in the Coalition agreement to be done nationally.

    Some things don't get done. That's life. Not the end of the world, they were amongst the most minor of the provisions of the coalition agreement.

    Personally I was never particularly enthusiastic about the power of recall. It's one of those ideas which sounds good until you try to pin down exactly how it should work.
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322

    DM_Andy said:

    Speedy said:

    To answer the thread:
    Yes Carswell has, he keeps a separate record of his voters and supporters from the local tories.
    So he has full access to all the information that someone needs to get elected.

    Is he covered by the Data Protection Act? That information was gathered by and for the Conservative Party, you can't just take personal data and use it for another party. I vaguely remember a Lib Dem local organiser in the early/mid 90s defecting and trying to bring his database with him and that creating a huge stink.
    Interesting. No idea of the law on this but given that voters legally vote for a candidate not a party it would be fascinating to see that one play out in court.
    If Douglas Carswell personally collected the information, I can't see how it can be said to be data owned by the Conservative party.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548

    DM_Andy said:

    Speedy said:

    To answer the thread:
    Yes Carswell has, he keeps a separate record of his voters and supporters from the local tories.
    So he has full access to all the information that someone needs to get elected.

    Is he covered by the Data Protection Act? That information was gathered by and for the Conservative Party, you can't just take personal data and use it for another party. I vaguely remember a Lib Dem local organiser in the early/mid 90s defecting and trying to bring his database with him and that creating a huge stink.
    Interesting. No idea of the law on this but given that voters legally vote for a candidate not a party it would be fascinating to see that one play out in court.
    Under the Data Protection Act, Information can only be used by the organisation that it was provided to and for the purpose that it was requested for, and must also be destroyed when the data is no longer required. To pass it on to a third party (such as a rival political party) requires the consent of all the individuals concerned.

    It could make for an interesting court case.
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322

    Socrates said:

    Even you must accept this is a weak defence for something defined in the Coalition agreement to be done nationally.

    Some things don't get done. That's life. Not the end of the world, they were amongst the most minor of the provisions of the coalition agreement.

    Personally I was never particularly enthusiastic about the power of recall. It's one of those ideas which sounds good until you try to pin down exactly how it should work.
    Except it has long been used in parts of the US.

    So those are "minor". What about the Great Freedom Bill that was promised?
  • SeanT said:

    Miliband's decision not to comment on Rotherham is surely an error. It just looks so bizarre, when he will happily demand an inquiry into Sam Cameron's hairdresser or whatever.

    And now his own deputy council chief is implicated? And still he says nothing?

    A mistake, I think.

    Depends if anybody picks him up on it, and I doubt they will....The media have for the moment moved onto dashing around breathlessly over the defection story (which in purely political terms is a big deal, for safe guarding of kids in some rotten run council areas less so).
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100

    HYUFD said:

    What earlier today looked like a UKIP triumph is now beginning to look like a UKIP farce as the party's official pre-selected 2015 candidate, Roger Lord, has refused to stand down for Carswell, now also adopted as UKIP candidate by the UKIP NEC, thus there will be 2 UKIP candidates on the by-election ballot paper. '
    '...he has "no intention" of stepping aside for the former Tory MP.

    "It's an enormous discourtesy to anybody really just to announce that," he told BBC Essex.

    He added: "Perhaps he's jumping ship to try and get in ahead of all the other Conservative MPs who are going to find themselves in the unemployment queue come next May."'


    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-28967904

    Carswell is still favourite, but the Tories could yet produce a shock and win back the seat. I suggest they pick a local candidate, preferably a telegenic female, perhaps a local teacher or nurse, mildly Eurosceptic, but centrist enough to win over Labour and LD voters, many of whom will want to keep UKIP out as they did in Newark. If Labour falls to 3rd in a seat they held in 1997 and 2001 that would also be a blow to Miliband

    Interesting. I see that Carswell has a 12 000 majority at present, with Labour in second place. There were 5 000 or so LD voters, who will probably go to Labour in the main. BNP got a fair number of votes, and UKIP did not stand. There were two local independents in 2010 too.

    A Conservative candidate could retain a good percentage of the Tory vote, and there may be an AIFE type splitter candidate.

    I would have thought that Labour are in the best position to exploit the Tory/UKIP/splitter vote and tactical voting so are underpriced at 10/1.
    I agree, Dr Sox, which is doubtless a great relief to you. Much as I would like to see Carswell win (and will probably be out campaigning for him), I don't think it a forgone conclusion. I think I'll pop into the bookies when I go to town tomorrow and drop a tenner on Labour, especially if I can get 10/1.
    Not a chance in hell.
    The hypothesis stands on some impossibilities.
    1. If the tories have a candidate that is more popular than Carswell.
    2.That LD will vote Labour to prevent a Carswell victory.

    On both occations it cannot occur because there is only one popular MP Douglas Carswell in Clacton and he is much closer to some core LD issues than Labour is.
  • DM_AndyDM_Andy Posts: 1,127
    Given that there wasn't the slightest whisper about the defection before hand, I assume very few UKIP people were informed. Mr Lord does seem a bit "loose lips sink ships" so the decision not to tell him first looks sensible. He can stand in the by-election if he wants but he'll have to come up with the deposit and he won't be able to call himself the UKIP candidate.
  • FlightpathFlightpath Posts: 4,012

    HYUFD said:

    What earlier today looked like a UKIP triumph is now beginning to look like a UKIP farce as the party's official pre-selected 2015 candidate, Roger Lord, has refused to stand down for Carswell, now also adopted as UKIP candidate by the UKIP NEC, thus there will be 2 UKIP candidates on the by-election ballot paper. '
    '...he has "no intention" of stepping aside for the former Tory MP.

    "It's an enormous discourtesy to anybody really just to announce that," he told BBC Essex.

    He added: "Perhaps he's jumping ship to try and get in ahead of all the other Conservative MPs who are going to find themselves in the unemployment queue come next May."'


    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-28967904

    Carswell is still favourite, but the Tories could yet produce a shock and win back the seat. I suggest they pick a local candidate, preferably a telegenic female, perhaps a local teacher or nurse, mildly Eurosceptic, but centrist enough to win over Labour and LD voters, many of whom will want to keep UKIP out as they did in Newark. If Labour falls to 3rd in a seat they held in 1997 and 2001 that would also be a blow to Miliband

    Interesting. I see that Carswell has a 12 000 majority at present, with Labour in second place. There were 5 000 or so LD voters, who will probably go to Labour in the main. BNP got a fair number of votes, and UKIP did not stand. There were two local independents in 2010 too.

    A Conservative candidate could retain a good percentage of the Tory vote, and there may be an AIFE type splitter candidate.

    I would have thought that Labour are in the best position to exploit the Tory/UKIP/splitter vote and tactical voting so are underpriced at 10/1.
    Will the BNP step aside to as not split the extreme right wing vote?
    Given the insidious way UKIP cost the tories 20-odd seats in 2010, the fact that they did not stand in Clacton rather undercuts the extra swing Carswell got. and so possibly means he has not got this especial personal following. But unless the tories pick a really good/clever candidate then I can see either the LD vote giving Labour the seat or Carswell sneaking in.
  • GrandioseGrandiose Posts: 2,323
    Socrates said:

    DM_Andy said:

    Speedy said:

    To answer the thread:
    Yes Carswell has, he keeps a separate record of his voters and supporters from the local tories.
    So he has full access to all the information that someone needs to get elected.

    Is he covered by the Data Protection Act? That information was gathered by and for the Conservative Party, you can't just take personal data and use it for another party. I vaguely remember a Lib Dem local organiser in the early/mid 90s defecting and trying to bring his database with him and that creating a huge stink.
    Interesting. No idea of the law on this but given that voters legally vote for a candidate not a party it would be fascinating to see that one play out in court.
    If Douglas Carswell personally collected the information, I can't see how it can be said to be data owned by the Conservative party.
    What does it mean for him to have "personally collected" it? Did he not collect it in the capacity of Conservative candidate or MP?
  • GrandioseGrandiose Posts: 2,323
    SeanT said:

    Miliband's decision not to comment on Rotherham is surely an error. It just looks so bizarre, when he will happily demand an inquiry into Sam Cameron's hairdresser or whatever.

    And now his own deputy council chief is implicated? And still he says nothing?

    A mistake, I think.

    Miliband should sieze the initiative. Come down like a tonne of bricks and take a somewhat anti-establishment line (as much as possible). The government cannot of course do the same, even if it's Labour councils or councillors involved.
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    I was in favour of recall, but then the complexities of making it work/not manipulated by opponents or jealous rivals just made it a non-starter.

    We'd just got rid of the hideous law that allowed anyone to willy-nilly get another elected official suspended for nebulous reasons. My mind has gone blank as to its official name - but I certainly saw it used against rivals on more than one occasion.

    Socrates said:

    Even you must accept this is a weak defence for something defined in the Coalition agreement to be done nationally.

    Some things don't get done. That's life. Not the end of the world, they were amongst the most minor of the provisions of the coalition agreement.

    Personally I was never particularly enthusiastic about the power of recall. It's one of those ideas which sounds good until you try to pin down exactly how it should work.
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100

    DM_Andy said:

    Speedy said:

    To answer the thread:
    Yes Carswell has, he keeps a separate record of his voters and supporters from the local tories.
    So he has full access to all the information that someone needs to get elected.

    Is he covered by the Data Protection Act? That information was gathered by and for the Conservative Party, you can't just take personal data and use it for another party. I vaguely remember a Lib Dem local organiser in the early/mid 90s defecting and trying to bring his database with him and that creating a huge stink.
    Interesting. No idea of the law on this but given that voters legally vote for a candidate not a party it would be fascinating to see that one play out in court.
    Under the Data Protection Act, Information can only be used by the organisation that it was provided to and for the purpose that it was requested for, and must also be destroyed when the data is no longer required. To pass it on to a third party (such as a rival political party) requires the consent of all the individuals concerned.

    It could make for an interesting court case.
    He kept his activities and organisation separate from the local tory party.
  • HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098

    DM_Andy said:

    Speedy said:

    To answer the thread:
    Yes Carswell has, he keeps a separate record of his voters and supporters from the local tories.
    So he has full access to all the information that someone needs to get elected.

    Is he covered by the Data Protection Act? That information was gathered by and for the Conservative Party, you can't just take personal data and use it for another party. I vaguely remember a Lib Dem local organiser in the early/mid 90s defecting and trying to bring his database with him and that creating a huge stink.
    Interesting. No idea of the law on this but given that voters legally vote for a candidate not a party it would be fascinating to see that one play out in court.
    Under the Data Protection Act, Information can only be used by the organisation that it was provided to and for the purpose that it was requested for, and must also be destroyed when the data is no longer required. To pass it on to a third party (such as a rival political party) requires the consent of all the individuals concerned.

    It could make for an interesting court case.
    Almost right, it depends on the terms of the registration as to which third parties can be given the information. I doubt the registration will say, UKIP, but there might be some get out clause in there. It depends how clever the person was who did the registration. It should be easy enough to find out because all registrations are public documents, or at least the used to be the last time I had anything to do with the subject.
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100

    Socrates said:

    Even you must accept this is a weak defence for something defined in the Coalition agreement to be done nationally.

    Some things don't get done. That's life. Not the end of the world, they were amongst the most minor of the provisions of the coalition agreement.

    Personally I was never particularly enthusiastic about the power of recall. It's one of those ideas which sounds good until you try to pin down exactly how it should work.
    What about when nothing gets done?
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,821
    edited August 2014
    Socrates said:

    So those are "minor". What about the Great Freedom Bill that was promised?

    Yes, that and the whole deregulation agenda has been a disappointment. Much more needs to be done, but I guess it won't now.

    That reminds me - I have a perfect, 100% free of charge suggestion for deregulation, which will have absolutely zero downside. Currently, for some totally inexplicable reason, if you use an estate agent to buy or sell a house or flat you have to provide ID under the completely loony Money Laundering Regulations. That is despite the fact that the estate agent doesn't handle the transaction, the solicitors do. Since the solicitors also verify ID, why on earth does the estate agent have to as well?
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    Grandiose said:

    Socrates said:

    DM_Andy said:

    Speedy said:

    To answer the thread:
    Yes Carswell has, he keeps a separate record of his voters and supporters from the local tories.
    So he has full access to all the information that someone needs to get elected.

    Is he covered by the Data Protection Act? That information was gathered by and for the Conservative Party, you can't just take personal data and use it for another party. I vaguely remember a Lib Dem local organiser in the early/mid 90s defecting and trying to bring his database with him and that creating a huge stink.
    Interesting. No idea of the law on this but given that voters legally vote for a candidate not a party it would be fascinating to see that one play out in court.
    If Douglas Carswell personally collected the information, I can't see how it can be said to be data owned by the Conservative party.
    What does it mean for him to have "personally collected" it? Did he not collect it in the capacity of Conservative candidate or MP?
    He collected it as an MP outside of the Tory party apparatus (i.e. the local association). Being a "Conservative MP" merely means that the Conservative Party has identified him as their preferred candidate.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,875
    Fox Indeed, Labour will also have a chance, but are probably too far behind now, especially after boundary changes, as they were in Newark, and the story will be Tory v UKIP with the UKIP vote split
  • TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262
    SeanT said:

    Miliband's decision not to comment on Rotherham is surely an error. It just looks so bizarre, when he will happily demand an inquiry into Sam Cameron's hairdresser or whatever.

    And now his own deputy council chief is implicated? And still he says nothing?

    A mistake, I think.

    Shhhh.

    He doesn't want to rock the boat, and lose votes.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,046
    Socrates said:

    TOPPING said:

    Socrates said:

    It's telling even with this news that the reaction of conservatives isn't to discuss how they can keep UKIP-sympathisers in parliament and the party at large in the fold and accomodate their concerns. It's to spin every line they can against Carswell and call UKIP props for Labour.

    They just don't get it.

    The problem within the Cons has long been the so called "rebels". They are a ridiculous, anti-democratic, solipsistic bunch of fools (to be kind).

    They are failing to realise that the totality of the Conservative effort is a broad church but they previously (and Carswell today) have singled out one particular issue because they have a bee in their bonnet about it. They don't rebel on so many other things but Europe (on which of course the entire country is divided) when their own party has one of the most coherent policies on it.

    Of course it is a leap of faith that any negotiations will be meaningful but if they aren't or if voters perceive they aren't then they can just vote "Out" in 2017.

    It really beggars belief.
    Please keep insulting your own party members. It just encourages more of them to defect.
    Good riddance to them. They either get it or they don't. In my small (ie 1 vote) way I am also trying to create the best possible party and government.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548

    HYUFD said:

    What earlier today looked like a UKIP triumph is now beginning to look like a UKIP farce as the party's official pre-selected 2015 candidate, Roger Lord, has refused to stand down for Carswell, now also adopted as UKIP candidate by the UKIP NEC, thus there will be 2 UKIP candidates on the by-election ballot paper. '
    '...he has "no intention" of stepping aside for the former Tory MP.

    "It's an enormous discourtesy to anybody really just to announce that," he told BBC Essex.

    He added: "Perhaps he's jumping ship to try and get in ahead of all the other Conservative MPs who are going to find themselves in the unemployment queue come next May."'


    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-28967904

    Carswell is still favourite, but the Tories could yet produce a shock and win back the seat. I suggest they pick a local candidate, preferably a telegenic female, perhaps a local teacher or nurse, mildly Eurosceptic, but centrist enough to win over Labour and LD voters, many of whom will want to keep UKIP out as they did in Newark. If Labour falls to 3rd in a seat they held in 1997 and 2001 that would also be a blow to Miliband

    Interesting. I see that Carswell has a 12 000 majority at present, with Labour in second place. There were 5 000 or so LD voters, who will probably go to Labour in the main. BNP got a fair number of votes, and UKIP did not stand. There were two local independents in 2010 too.

    A Conservative candidate could retain a good percentage of the Tory vote, and there may be an AIFE type splitter candidate.

    I would have thought that Labour are in the best position to exploit the Tory/UKIP/splitter vote and tactical voting so are underpriced at 10/1.
    I agree, Dr Sox, which is doubtless a great relief to you. Much as I would like to see Carswell win (and will probably be out campaigning for him), I don't think it a forgone conclusion. I think I'll pop into the bookies when I go to town tomorrow and drop a tenner on Labour, especially if I can get 10/1.
    I am just going to enjoy the popcorn on this one. If Carswell wins then it is a blow to the Tories, but gets rid of a blue europhobe, and puts him on the same benches as Miliband and Balls. He will take prominence away from Farage as the face of UKIP, and may provoke another round of splitters in UKIP with his loose cannon behaviour. If he loses to the Tories then UKIP look a busted flush, If he loses to Labour then "vote silly, get Milli" will be the meme.

    There are risks here for Tories, kippers and Labour, but little for my party.
  • SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    BBC - Inspections of children's services at the centre of the child abuse scandal in Rotherham are to be carried out early, the government has said.

    In a series of developments, the police watchdog the IPCC is writing to South Yorkshire Police warning "evidence of failures" must be passed on to it.

    Deputy police and crime commissioner (PCC) for South Yorkshire Tracey Cheetham has also resigned.

    She has joined David Cameron in calling for her boss, PCC Shaun Wright, to go.


    (to give then their due, BBC are still highlighting this story) no quote from Ed though...

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-28973589
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,046
    JamesM said:

    What I don't understand is the consistent focus on Carswell saying that the PM only wants minimal change, and that he not serious about reform. Whether this is true or not, surely the point of a referendum on IN/OUT is that if you are not happy about the deal you vote OUT? Moreover in Carswell case, he would probably vote OUT in any scenario anyway. It does seem a little counter-productive in terms of EU membership.

    nutshell.
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    HYUFD said:

    Fox Indeed, Labour will also have a chance, but are probably too far behind now, especially after boundary changes, as they were in Newark, and the story will be Tory v UKIP with the UKIP vote split

    I seriously doubt that UKIP would be split.
    Only one UKIP candidate was selected, Douglas Carswell.
    He is immensely popular in his own seat, he will have no problem of being re-elected.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,875
    Speedy Yes, but the key point is he will split the UKIP vote. Carswell will be favourite, but UKIP did not win Newark either in ideal conditions after the Euros, where they came first in the seat and nationally, so I do not see why they should be a shoo-in for a seat with a 12,000 Tory majority with the Tories still leading UKIP in the national polls. If the Tories pick a good local candidate they have a chance
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322

    HYUFD said:

    What earlier today looked like a UKIP triumph is now beginning to look like a UKIP farce as the party's official pre-selected 2015 candidate, Roger Lord, has refused to stand down for Carswell, now also adopted as UKIP candidate by the UKIP NEC, thus there will be 2 UKIP candidates on the by-election ballot paper. '
    '...he has "no intention" of stepping aside for the former Tory MP.

    "It's an enormous discourtesy to anybody really just to announce that," he told BBC Essex.

    He added: "Perhaps he's jumping ship to try and get in ahead of all the other Conservative MPs who are going to find themselves in the unemployment queue come next May."'


    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-28967904

    Carswell is still favourite, but the Tories could yet produce a shock and win back the seat. I suggest they pick a local candidate, preferably a telegenic female, perhaps a local teacher or nurse, mildly Eurosceptic, but centrist enough to win over Labour and LD voters, many of whom will want to keep UKIP out as they did in Newark. If Labour falls to 3rd in a seat they held in 1997 and 2001 that would also be a blow to Miliband

    Interesting. I see that Carswell has a 12 000 majority at present, with Labour in second place. There were 5 000 or so LD voters, who will probably go to Labour in the main. BNP got a fair number of votes, and UKIP did not stand. There were two local independents in 2010 too.

    A Conservative candidate could retain a good percentage of the Tory vote, and there may be an AIFE type splitter candidate.

    I would have thought that Labour are in the best position to exploit the Tory/UKIP/splitter vote and tactical voting so are underpriced at 10/1.
    I agree, Dr Sox, which is doubtless a great relief to you. Much as I would like to see Carswell win (and will probably be out campaigning for him), I don't think it a forgone conclusion. I think I'll pop into the bookies when I go to town tomorrow and drop a tenner on Labour, especially if I can get 10/1.
    I am just going to enjoy the popcorn on this one. If Carswell wins then it is a blow to the Tories, but gets rid of a blue europhobe, and puts him on the same benches as Miliband and Balls. He will take prominence away from Farage as the face of UKIP, and may provoke another round of splitters in UKIP with his loose cannon behaviour. If he loses to the Tories then UKIP look a busted flush, If he loses to Labour then "vote silly, get Milli" will be the meme.

    There are risks here for Tories, kippers and Labour, but little for my party.
    Because your party is too marginal to be relevant to anything these days?
  • DM_AndyDM_Andy Posts: 1,127


    Almost right, it depends on the terms of the registration as to which third parties can be given the information. I doubt the registration will say, UKIP, but there might be some get out clause in there. It depends how clever the person was who did the registration. It should be easy enough to find out because all registrations are public documents, or at least the used to be the last time I had anything to do with the subject.

    Good point, so I checked, Carswell's just got the normal MP's registration and in the guide to members, MPs can't use information gathered for casework for any political campaigning.

  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    HYUFD said:

    Speedy Yes, but the key point is he will split the UKIP vote. Carswell will be favourite, but UKIP did not win Newark either in ideal conditions after the Euros, where they came first in the seat and nationally, so I do not see why they should be a shoo-in for a seat with a 12,000 Tory majority with the Tories still leading UKIP in the national polls. If the Tories pick a good local candidate they have a chance

    In Newark they had 2 problems that completely separates it from Clacton.
    1. They only got 32% in the euro's, in Clacton they got 48% almost their highest in the country.
    2. The candidate was Roger Helmer, not Douglas Carswell.
  • FlightpathFlightpath Posts: 4,012

    Socrates said:

    In the coalition agreement there were proposals to encourage better government: recalls and primaries. Whatever happened to them?

    Primaries hit problems of costs, and recalls of defining exactly how they would work.

    However, the Conservative Party has been running open selection meetings (which they call 'open primaries', but don't go as far as that), very successfully. We held one in our local seat (ultra-safe Wealden) and the attendees selected the excellent Nus Ghani - who is not at all your stereotypical Conservative candidate.

    So some progress made.
    Wouldn't the Americans call that a "caucus"? Sounds a bit smoke-filled-rooms and not open at all, though.

    Well why don't you do 10 seconds investigation on your own before spreading speculations?
    http://www.kentonline.co.uk/maidstone/news/public-to-vote-on-mps-6577/

    ''Conservative party officials are to hold an American-style "open primary" to select the person they want to be the next MP for Tonbridge and Malling.
    The decision means anyone who lives in the constituency and is over 18 will have the chance to vote on the candidates shortlisted by the association - even if they do not belong to the party.''
    Read somebody's lips 'open primary'
    I imagine its happening eleswhere.
    http://www.conservativehome.com/parliament/2013/11/meet-the-candidates-picked-to-compete-in-the-north-east-hampshire-and-mid-worcestershire-open-primaries.html
    ''I gather that after the success of the Tonbridge and Malling experience, a lot more Associations are clamouring to go down the Open Primary route, so we can expect to see a lot more over the next few months.''

    When I read things like this I realise what a pompous idiot Carswell is. He has just joined a party and elbowed its duly selected candidate out. And he talks of reforming politics! He has his work cut out with UKIP.
    Seems to me the best publicity the Tories can get is indeed to run an open primary in Clacton. UKIP won't be having one.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,875
    edited August 2014
    Richard Tyndall Wrong, There was a high turnout in the Newark by-election of over 50% and yet the Labour vote fell by almost 5% against the national trend and the LD vote fell by 17%. The UKIP vote rose by 22%, but the Tory vote only fell by 8%, so clearly some Labour and LD voters voted Tory offsetting some of the Tory voters who voted UKIP .
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newark_by-election,_2014
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    Plato said:

    Socrates said:

    "Barnado's instructed their staff not to talk to him or The Times even off the record."

    Is that true? Do you have a source? Truly outrageous if so.

    thetimes.co.uk/tto/life/article4188806.ece
    Initial approaches to police forces, local authority social services departments and even the Home Office met with a blank refusal to speak about the issue. Barnardo’s, the children charity that since the mid-1990s has run specialist projects to support the victims of child sexual exploitation, refused to allow any of its staff to talk to me, even off the record.
    Thanks. That's unbelievably disgusting. What sort of children's charity tries to stymie a big newspaper article raising awareness of child abuse?
  • TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262
    edited August 2014
    SeanT said:
    'Safeguarding services'. What did they do, hand out condoms?
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,046

    Hugh said:

    btw, isn't louise mensch a potty mouth...

    She's thick as two short planks.
    No she isn't.

    She used to post regularly here on PB, under a pseudonym. I wouldn't say she was one of the Site's best posters, but she wasn't thick.

    She wasn't a very good constituency MP although I appreciate that that might not have been an issue for her.

    Everyone and I mean every Tory loathed her.
  • MrJonesMrJones Posts: 3,523

    Doncaster another model council when it comes to protecting children,

    The brothers had been put in care by Doncaster Council, whose children's services department was recently described as 'chaotic and dangerous' following the death of seven vulnerable youngsters.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1167708/Brothers-charged-attempted-murder-young-playmates-slashed-head-toe-Stanley-knife.html

    And I don't want to keep hearing lessons are being learned and we have improved our rating since this incident, while all those whose job it is to be involved in "safe-guarding" merrily carry on as if nothing as happened.

    People getting promoted and moved to a different local authority when they screw up instead of being sacked is a bit like evolution in reverse - you get an ever growing collection of bad genes at the top.

  • manofkent2014manofkent2014 Posts: 1,543
    HYUFD said:

    Speedy Yes, but the key point is he will split the UKIP vote. Carswell will be favourite, but UKIP did not win Newark either in ideal conditions after the Euros, where they came first in the seat and nationally, so I do not see why they should be a shoo-in for a seat with a 12,000 Tory majority with the Tories still leading UKIP in the national polls. If the Tories pick a good local candidate they have a chance

    UKIP 'won' Newark in the 2014 Euros by 1%. They won Tendring by 23% outpolling the other significant parties collectively. Any comparison with Newark is unrealistic. The idea that UKIP could take Newark was always a long shot to say the least, winning Clacton with the incumbent MP and all that brings with it is a far more plausible possibility.
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    HYUFD said:

    Richard Tyndall Wrong, There was a high turnout in the Newark by-election of over 50% and yet the Labour vote fell by almost 5% against the national trend and the LD vote fell by 17%. The UKIP vote rose by 22%, but the Tory vote only fell by 8%, so clearly some Labour and LD voters voted Tory offsetting some of the Tory voters who voted UKIP

    The answer to that is Roger Helmer.
    I said from the moment he was selected that he throws UKIP back at least a decade in political development and he would push everyone else to vote against him.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    HYUFD said:

    Fox Indeed, Labour will also have a chance, but are probably too far behind now, especially after boundary changes, as they were in Newark, and the story will be Tory v UKIP with the UKIP vote split

    What effect are the boundary changes in notional terms?

    My interest in this is mostly in the betting.

    Past experiences of defecting MPs is that their personal following is seldom as big as they like to think, and Tories are particularly hard on disloyalty.
  • tpfkartpfkar Posts: 1,565
    If Roger 'comedy legend' Lord is the GE candidate but not te by-election candidate, he should bide his time. If Carswell wins, he will become the first person ever to inherit a UKIP-held parliamentary seat a the GE.

    What a day - can only conclude the Tories aren't serious about winning the GE sadly. No space for indiscipline, bit it's been coming with Cameron's appeasement of the Europhobes.
  • DM_AndyDM_Andy Posts: 1,127
    Just thinking, can the Tories get away without moving the writ for Clacton at all. They won't want a early poll considering the lack of a Tory candidate, soon enough it'll be the run up to Christmas and then the general election will be mere weeks away.
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322

    SeanT said:
    'Safeguarding services'. What did they do, hand out condoms?
    It's the Labour approach to local government. A rapid expansion of staff and do-goody titles, but without any of them actually doing anything for the community.
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    Speedy said:

    HYUFD said:

    Richard Tyndall Wrong, There was a high turnout in the Newark by-election of over 50% and yet the Labour vote fell by almost 5% against the national trend and the LD vote fell by 17%. The UKIP vote rose by 22%, but the Tory vote only fell by 8%, so clearly some Labour and LD voters voted Tory offsetting some of the Tory voters who voted UKIP

    The answer to that is Roger Helmer.
    I said from the moment he was selected that he throws UKIP back at least a decade in political development and he would push everyone else to vote against him.
    UKIP should have won that seat and Helmer was undoubtedly the wrong choice. He was the left-wing's stereotype of what a UKIP member was. We need more types like Diane James and Paul Nuttall instead.
  • taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    What sort of children's charity tries to stymie a big newspaper article raising awareness of child abuse?

    remember the NSPCC's ''cruelty to children has to stop - full stop" campaign?

    As minors were being gang raped in Rotherham??
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Socrates said:

    HYUFD said:

    What earlier today looked like a UKIP triumph is now beginning to look like a UKIP farce as the party's official pre-selected 2015 candidate, Roger Lord, has refused to stand down for Carswell, now also adopted as UKIP candidate by the UKIP NEC, thus there will be 2 UKIP candidates on the by-election ballot paper. '
    '...he has "no intention" of stepping aside for the former Tory MP.

    "It's an enormous discourtesy to anybody really just to announce that," he told BBC Essex.

    He added: "Perhaps he's jumping ship to try and get in ahead of all the other Conservative MPs who are going to find themselves in the unemployment queue come next May."'


    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-28967904

    Interesting. I see that Carswell has a 12 000 majority at present, with Labour in second place. There were 5 000 or so LD voters, who will probably go to Labour in the main. BNP got a fair number of votes, and UKIP did not stand. There were two local independents in 2010 too.

    A Conservative candidate could retain a good percentage of the Tory vote, and there may be an AIFE type splitter candidate.

    I would have thought that Labour are in the best position to exploit the Tory/UKIP/splitter vote and tactical voting so are underpriced at 10/1.
    I agree, Dr Sox, which is doubtless a great relief to you. Much as I would like to see Carswell win (and will probably be out campaigning for him), I don't think it a forgone conclusion. I think I'll pop into the bookies when I go to town tomorrow and drop a tenner on Labour, especially if I can get 10/1.
    I am just going to enjoy the popcorn on this one. If Carswell wins then it is a blow to the Tories, but gets rid of a blue europhobe, and puts him on the same benches as Miliband and Balls. He will take prominence away from Farage as the face of UKIP, and may provoke another round of splitters in UKIP with his loose cannon behaviour. If he loses to the Tories then UKIP look a busted flush, If he loses to Labour then "vote silly, get Milli" will be the meme.

    There are risks here for Tories, kippers and Labour, but little for my party.
    Because your party is too marginal to be relevant to anything these days?
    My party has fared badly in the polls before. In 1989 they were unrecordable in the polls, in 97 they doubled their seats. After 2015 there will be a need for a sensible centrist party between the Europhobic xenophobes on the one side and the spendthrifts on the other. In the long run there will always be a place for the LibDems.
  • HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098

    Socrates said:

    So those are "minor". What about the Great Freedom Bill that was promised?

    Yes, that and the whole deregulation agenda has been a disappointment. Much more needs to be done, but I guess it won't now.

    That reminds me - I have a perfect, 100% free of charge suggestion for deregulation, which will have absolutely zero downside. Currently, for some totally inexplicable reason, if you use an estate agent to buy or sell a house or flat you have to provide ID under the completely loony Money Laundering Regulations. That is despite the fact that the estate agent doesn't handle the transaction, the solicitors do. Since the solicitors also verify ID, why on earth does the estate agent have to as well?
    Glad you raised that one Mr. Navabi as it was similarly raised by two of my "parishioners". Man and wife they have lived in the same house for forty years and now want to sell it and move into a bungalow. Neither have passports, neither drive, all their utilities are dealt with on line so they have no recent bills. They can't sell their house because they can't find a solicitor that will take them on because they can't provide the proofs of ID set down in the code of practice or whatever it is. This insanity is still going on after four years of Cameron's bonfire of the quangos and war on unnecessary red tape.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,875
    Speedy, The Tories had an 8,000 majority in Newark even after losing the Euros and UKIP did not win more than 50% even at its euro high watermark in Clacton.
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Wonderful pithy summary of the situation.
    MrJones said:

    Doncaster another model council when it comes to protecting children,

    The brothers had been put in care by Doncaster Council, whose children's services department was recently described as 'chaotic and dangerous' following the death of seven vulnerable youngsters.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1167708/Brothers-charged-attempted-murder-young-playmates-slashed-head-toe-Stanley-knife.html

    And I don't want to keep hearing lessons are being learned and we have improved our rating since this incident, while all those whose job it is to be involved in "safe-guarding" merrily carry on as if nothing as happened.

    People getting promoted and moved to a different local authority when they screw up instead of being sacked is a bit like evolution in reverse - you get an ever growing collection of bad genes at the top.

  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,046
    tpfkar said:

    What a day - can only conclude the Tories aren't serious about winning the GE sadly. No space for indiscipline, bit it's been coming with Cameron's appeasement of the Europhobes.

    Yes. That is the source of my bile towards Carswell and the other "rebels".

    Indiscipline (oh the irony) and a lack of I don't know, worldliness, pragmatism, insight into how politics works.

    First they are furious at being in a Coalition and then they don't work hard to get an OM. Just shows that the Tories were out of power for too long so have forgotten the art of politics (which is not the same as spinning/PR).

    God we really do get the politics we deserve.
  • mattmatt Posts: 3,789
    Speedy said:

    HYUFD said:

    Fox Indeed, Labour will also have a chance, but are probably too far behind now, especially after boundary changes, as they were in Newark, and the story will be Tory v UKIP with the UKIP vote split

    I seriously doubt that UKIP would be split.
    Only one UKIP candidate was selected, Douglas Carswell.
    He is immensely popular in his own seat, he will have no problem of being re-elected.
    Interesting, because his writing make across as a man wholly in touch with his own ego. Is he by chance a friend of that noted leader, David Davis?
  • taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    I have a feeling that 'safeguarding' will become one of those anti-words, which is ironically taken to mean the opposite of what it says, after Rotherham.

    A a huge loss of confidence in council officialdom the real upshot of all this??? Not that there ever was much confidence.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,950
    Mr. Tpfkar, whom the gods wish to destroy, they first make mad.

    I wonder if the EU are the Turks, the Conservatives Byzantium, and UKIP the Latins.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,875
    Flightpath Indeed, the Tories should run a primary, pick a local nurse, GP or teacher and ram Carswell's hypocrisy down his throat after he elbowed out the already selected UKIP candidate
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    HYUFD said:

    Speedy, The Tories had an 8,000 majority in Newark even after losing the Euros and UKIP did not win more than 50% even at its euro high watermark in Clacton.

    1.Roger Helmer
    2. 23% majority over CON, not 1% like in Newark.
    3. Douglas Carswell.

    Case closed.
This discussion has been closed.