Very good article, and I think essentially correct. One lession of recent years is that Scotland has a distinctive political culture - for instance, the "magic money tree" accusation doesn't stick - and attempting to sell Westminster attitudes doesn't work. Although separate parties would develop their own cultures in response to this, it wouldn't prevent governments forming, in the same way that the CSU in Bavaria is seen as well right of the CDU but sitll a natural coalition partner.
On ground games, one lesson of the election is that the "human wave" approach to winning seats doesn't work - most marginals had masses of Labour activists (although, amusingly, UNITE refused to send me any towards the end of the campaign because I was against Trident - too left-wing for Len McCluskey!) and we buried the voters in leaflets, but the Tory leaflets were better quality (physically, with better pictures and a nicer look) and as Marquee Mark says more effectively targeted. Richard Nabavi pointed out my problem early on (it seemed unwise to concede it at the time although I knew he was right, since I was trying to discourage a major Tory effort) - a third of the electorate had changed since 2010, and in my absence not much had been done to contact them, so the personal vote in 2010 was not only discounted but also diminishing. I got the result that both Ms Soubry and I expected in 2010 (a comfortable Tory majority), when an intense personal vote effort got us close: 5 years later with a partly different electorate, that was much weaker.
The party with the major problem in Scotland is Labour who really suffered under the SNP branch office taunts and the way that Johann Lamont was treated. They have to rebuild from scratch and try to find a reason to exist when a centre left SNP has already taken over nearly all of their territory both physical and political.
What does Scottish Labour believe in (other than stopping the tories which is no longer sufficient)? Is it different from what English Labour believes? I think as long as Labour was run by a north London intellectual it probably was but that is no longer the case. Would Scotland have such problems with an Andy Burnham led Labour party? I think not. A Chuka Umunna led party might be more difficult.
Under Salmond there was plenty of room to the left of the SNP for Labour. Under Sturgeon it is so much more difficult. The absurdity was demonstrated by Murphy's ridiculous "1000 extra nurses" pledge. Whatever the SNP promised he would deliver more.
We have a situation where our two largest parties in Scotland think public spending is the answer to all problems, that the job of the state is to regulate and control any private sector that remains into the ground and that those who are skilful and able enough to survive such hostility are simply a resource to be plucked to feed the voracious state. It seems inconsistent with such a mindset that there should be two parties like that.
For the tories I think having an independent party would be a waste of time. For the Lib Dems this election may well prove to be an extinction event. I really don't see them playing a major role in Scottish politics again for a very long time, if ever. To personalise again a Ruth Davidson led Tory party gives them very little room to operate in. The above mindset also surely creates some opportunities. The 2016 election will be interesting.
For me the big disappointment of the night was not getting Berwickshire, 2 seats and bigger than SLAB would have been tremendous.
Now you're being greedy......
A majority, Vince Cable, Ed Balls, three party leader out and Berwickshire?.....it was only 328 votes out....but I think the gods decided we were having enough fun for one evening......
Autonomy in areas of devolved power for Scottish parties may well make sense. But there are two sides to the border, and England needs equality, which demands an English Parliament.
Content analysis on our panelists’ unprompted “daily diaries”, sent in via their mobile apps, shows that the economy was mentioned four times as often as the next nearest policy area, the NHS. This turned out to be critical. Given the backdrop of uncertainty, our voters relied on a small number of touchstones. In Dewsbury, when asked what the Conservatives’ key policy was, they chorused “improving the economy” without skipping a beat. The same question about Labour was initially met with silence.
Another touchstones was the relative competency of the leaders. Here, while Miliband surprised with his feisty campaigning, Cameron’s consistency won through, despite panelists’ cynicism about politicians and politics.
Many of our panelists recorded their response to the result on Friday morning. One commented: “I didn’t want a Tory government but I suppose the last five years haven’t been that bad,” and another: “I voted Labour, so I’m a little bit disappointed but I’m also a little bit relieved.”
This is why the next Labour leader must NOT be any member of Gordo's cabinet (Sorry Andy), and their very first statement as leader must be "Yes, we spent way too much money"
Have Labour fixed the rules so the sensible choice for leader can't be undone by Len McLuskey?
This post sponsored by ToriesForBurnham™ and brought to you by NewsSense™ Inc.
Please let it be Burnham Burnham would be hillarious. Mr Stafford Hospital himself.
Yes it has to be a completely new face, someone who's lived in the real world and had a real job. Apart from Dan Jarvis, who else fits the bill from the 2010 intake?
I still can't believe how poorly Labour did especially considering the Lib Dem collapse. Use the excellent BBC website to search constituencies across the country, you will find many marginals where Labour have basically stood still and most of the movement is from the Lib Dems to Ukip and, to a lesser extent, to the Tories depending on the seat.
I am an Orange booker rather than a Fallonite, but even so I will be voting for Fallon as LD Leader.
Fallon was always arms length from the coalition so can win back a lot of those former LD voters gone to kippers and Tories. His northern roots and social conservatism make him ideal for this, and he is a good tub thumper to rouse the rather battered troops. Despite being a strong Christian he voted for repeal of blasphemy laws.
No way will the LDs merge with Labour; though I think there is some merit in a joint ticket in Scotland with the Conservatives in the style of the National Liberals for Westminster elections.
The LDs and Labour may not need to merge, but they certainly need to remember that bashing seven bells out of each other only work in the Tories favour. Unless something radical happens; the LDs have the power to reach the parts of the country Labour can't and vice versa.
Shame SLAB couldn't remember bashing the hell out of the Tories only helps the SNP.
Maybe it really started the re-launch of Scottish nationalism when Scots Labour, Scots Lib Dems joined with the SNP against the "Westminster Govt" of John Major. This anti-UK alliance led us to where we are today. Independence for Scotland is inevitable. Just a matter of time now, after all is said, the Scottish anthem is "to be a nation again". Bedding that into the minds of each generation as a goal, will ensure that the goal is met.
Federalism is inevitable Independence isn't.
Federalism could only work if Scotland and Wales are self funding. May be only supported out of the English overseas aid budget?
I still can't believe how poorly Labour did especially considering the Lib Dem collapse. Use the excellent BBC website to search constituencies across the country, you will find many marginals where Labour have basically stood still and most of the movement is from the Lib Dems to Ukip and, to a lesser extent, to the Tories depending on the seat.
Labour gained Red Libs but lost wwc votes to UKIP (or in Scotland to the SNP).
Labour's performance per constituency was therefore related to the relative proportions of the two demographics.
The difficulty we will have on PB for the next few months is that it is dominated by the victors Tories and Nats both of whom will re-write history as is their privilege. More interesting is when the losers drift back on and tell us how it looks from their side and what comes next.
Since you're in the odd position of being a winner\loser ( Tory but Scotland ) I'd be interested in how you see the position in Scotland develop for the blues. Is it hunker down and wait for the tide to turn against the Nats when the hubris wears off or is there something now the Tories should be doing ?
For me the big disappointment of the night was not getting Berwickshire, 2 seats and bigger than SLAB would have been tremendous.
I was gutted about Berwickshire and it was so close.
As I said in my initial ramble I think there are real opportunities for the Tories arising from having Scottish politics being dominated by 2 statist leftist parties. The Tories have also benefitted from being brave enough to select Ruth Davidson as leader. Even SNP supporters of my acquaintance like and respect her.
I think that unless Labour really find a reason for existing it is not impossible that the Tories will become the opposition in the next Scottish Parliament. In terms of debate that was already the case in this election. Rather than hunker down Scots desperately need a party that believes in a small state, in successful enterprise, in making money first and then using that money to pay for the public services. Ruth Davidson can be very articulate on these points and I think as Labour indulge in internal turmoil she has a real opportunity to do that.
Cameron and Osborne will have to use all their skill and guile in finding a constitutional settlement that makes sense for Scotland now. As David says asymmetric devolution has proved a disaster and needs to end. Fiscal autonomy is key to reminding the Scottish electorate that there is a price for additional public spending. English votes for English laws is surely inevitable but has to be done in a way that does not make it look like it is simply to shut the SNP out.
A majority, Vince Cable, Ed Balls, three party leader out and Berwickshire?.....it was only 328 votes out....but I think the gods decided we were having enough fun for one evening......
I still can't believe how poorly Labour did especially considering the Lib Dem collapse. Use the excellent BBC website to search constituencies across the country, you will find many marginals where Labour have basically stood still and most of the movement is from the Lib Dems to Ukip and, to a lesser extent, to the Tories depending on the seat.
I am an Orange booker rather than a Fallonite, but even so I will be voting for Fallon as LD Leader.
Fallon was always arms length from the coalition so can win back a lot of those former LD voters gone to kippers and Tories. His northern roots and social conservatism make him ideal for this, and he is a good tub thumper to rouse the rather battered troops. Despite being a strong Christian he voted for repeal of blasphemy laws.
No way will the LDs merge with Labour; though I think there is some merit in a joint ticket in Scotland with the Conservatives in the style of the National Liberals for Westminster elections.
The LDs and Labour may not need to merge, but they certainly need to remember that bashing seven bells out of each other only work in the Tories favour. Unless something radical happens; the LDs have the power to reach the parts of the country Labour can't and vice versa.
Shame SLAB couldn't remember bashing the hell out of the Tories only helps the SNP.
Maybe it really started the re-launch of Scottish nationalism when Scots Labour, Scots Lib Dems joined with the SNP against the "Westminster Govt" of John Major. This anti-UK alliance led us to where we are today. Independence for Scotland is inevitable. Just a matter of time now, after all is said, the Scottish anthem is "to be a nation again". Bedding that into the minds of each generation as a goal, will ensure that the goal is met.
Federalism is inevitable Independence isn't.
Federalism could only work if Scotland and Wales are self funding. May be only supported out of the English overseas aid budget?
Better tell that to the Germans they've been a running a federal state for nearly seventy years where only a handful of the states are self funding. Internal transfers do the rest.
Talking of Labour doing poorly.. I only just got around to looking at the actual figures for Broxtowe. I was pleased to have won some money for LUPUS UK but to see a majority of 500 or so turned into one of 4000 plus is truly a staggering result. I had to look twice...
Content analysis on our panelists’ unprompted “daily diaries”, sent in via their mobile apps, shows that the economy was mentioned four times as often as the next nearest policy area, the NHS. This turned out to be critical. Given the backdrop of uncertainty, our voters relied on a small number of touchstones. In Dewsbury, when asked what the Conservatives’ key policy was, they chorused “improving the economy” without skipping a beat. The same question about Labour was initially met with silence.
Another touchstones was the relative competency of the leaders. Here, while Miliband surprised with his feisty campaigning, Cameron’s consistency won through, despite panelists’ cynicism about politicians and politics.
Many of our panelists recorded their response to the result on Friday morning. One commented: “I didn’t want a Tory government but I suppose the last five years haven’t been that bad,” and another: “I voted Labour, so I’m a little bit disappointed but I’m also a little bit relieved.”
This is why the next Labour leader must NOT be any member of Gordo's cabinet (Sorry Andy), and their very first statement as leader must be "Yes, we spent way too much money"
Have Labour fixed the rules so the sensible choice for leader can't be undone by Len McLuskey?
This post sponsored by ToriesForBurnham™ and brought to you by NewsSense™ Inc.
Please let it be Burnham
Burnham would be hillarious. Mr Stafford Hospital himself.
Yes it has to be a completely new face, someone who's lived in the real world and had a real job. Apart from Dan Jarvis, who else fits the bill from the 2010 intake?
Andy Burnham Underwrites Grim Reaper - ABUGR to go with EIC
Content analysis on our panelists’ unprompted “daily diaries”, sent in via their mobile apps, shows that the economy was mentioned four times as often as the next nearest policy area, the NHS. This turned out to be critical. Given the backdrop of uncertainty, our voters relied on a small number of touchstones. In Dewsbury, when asked what the Conservatives’ key policy was, they chorused “improving the economy” without skipping a beat. The same question about Labour was initially met with silence.
Another touchstones was the relative competency of the leaders. Here, while Miliband surprised with his feisty campaigning, Cameron’s consistency won through, despite panelists’ cynicism about politicians and politics.
Many of our panelists recorded their response to the result on Friday morning. One commented: “I didn’t want a Tory government but I suppose the last five years haven’t been that bad,” and another: “I voted Labour, so I’m a little bit disappointed but I’m also a little bit relieved.”
This is why the next Labour leader must NOT be any member of Gordo's cabinet (Sorry Andy), and their very first statement as leader must be "Yes, we spent way too much money"
Have Labour fixed the rules so the sensible choice for leader can't be undone by Len McLuskey?
This post sponsored by ToriesForBurnham™ and brought to you by NewsSense™ Inc.
Please let it be Burnham
Burnham would be hillarious. Mr Stafford Hospital himself.
Yes it has to be a completely new face, someone who's lived in the real world and had a real job. Apart from Dan Jarvis, who else fits the bill from the 2010 intake?
What about a woman as leader?? There must be a few candidates.. R Reeves for one ?
Richard Nabavi pointed out my problem early on (it seemed unwise to concede it at the time although I knew he was right, since I was trying to discourage a major Tory effort) - a third of the electorate had changed since 2010, and in my absence not much had been done to contact them, so the personal vote in 2010 was not only discounted but also diminishing. I got the result that both Ms Soubry and I expected in 2010 (a comfortable Tory majority), when an intense personal vote effort got us close: 5 years later with a partly different electorate, that was much weaker.
Nick, good to see you here, magnanimous in defeat and already analysing the result, when inside you must be gutted after all the effort put in to regaining the seat.
A good point about voter churn, maybe this was also a factor in other areas of the country as people are more mobile than ever before.
Mr, Brooke, worth mentioning England's been a single land for over a thousand years, whereas Germany was pieced together from a patchwork of smaller lands, hence the strong local capitals (Frankfurt, Stuttgart, etc).
Edited extra bit: bah, sleepy, misread your post.
However, I maintain throwing money at Scotland when it has full fiscal autonomy will fly in England like a swallow with a coconut.
At a personal level, retiring from front-line politics (which I'm doing, unless something unexpected turns up) feels very, very odd. I'm used to a daily routine: Check out YouGov's entrails, post on PB, answer 50 emails, draft a leaflet, maybe write a local blog, juggle priorities. None of that is necessary now, and at 65 it actually makes sense to scale back to two jobs (animal welfare and translation) and have some free time to do...er...something.
There's a liberating effect - I no longer need to even try to be interested in local issues that engage maybe 100 potential voters (Should disused chapel X be refurbished partly or more expensively? Should former police station Y get a conservation order?): I can cheerfully think, or even say, that I don't give a toss. And I do have some other interests which it'll be nice to have more time for (board games, poker, big DVD series like Homeland) as well as things that I'm aware that "normal" people enjoy and I've never taken the time for - e.g. looking round all these foreign cities that my work takes me to.
But it feels odd, and slightly pointless. No doubt I'll get used to it.
Content analysis on our panelists’ unprompted “daily diaries”, sent in via their mobile apps, shows that the economy was mentioned four times as often as the next nearest policy area, the NHS. This turned out to be critical. Given the backdrop of uncertainty, our voters relied on a small number of touchstones. In Dewsbury, when asked what the Conservatives’ key policy was, they chorused “improving the economy” without skipping a beat. The same question about Labour was initially met with silence.
Another touchstones was the relative competency of the leaders. Here, while Miliband surprised with his feisty campaigning, Cameron’s consistency won through, despite panelists’ cynicism about politicians and politics.
Many of our panelists recorded their response to the result on Friday morning. One commented: “I didn’t want a Tory government but I suppose the last five years haven’t been that bad,” and another: “I voted Labour, so I’m a little bit disappointed but I’m also a little bit relieved.”
This is why the next Labour leader must NOT be any member of Gordo's cabinet (Sorry Andy), and their very first statement as leader must be "Yes, we spent way too much money"
Have Labour fixed the rules so the sensible choice for leader can't be undone by Len McLuskey?
This post sponsored by ToriesForBurnham™ and brought to you by NewsSense™ Inc.
Please let it be Burnham
Burnham would be hillarious. Mr Stafford Hospital himself.
Yes it has to be a completely new face, someone who's lived in the real world and had a real job. Apart from Dan Jarvis, who else fits the bill from the 2010 intake?
Liz Kendall! Fits most of your criteria and is an excellent communicator.
DavidL "For the Lib Dems this election may well prove to be an extinction event. I really don't see them playing a major role in Scottish politics again for a very long time, if ever." Agreed. There is no room for another left of centre party in Scotland.
There is room for a more centrist one though, and centrist in Scotland may look left wing from England.
It looks to me at first sight that the SLD vote held up better than SLAB but not as good as SCUP. The extinction event could be as much SLAB, or even more so, particularly if a tacit or even overt SLD SCUP ticket could emerge. It would also make both parties distinct from their English sibs.
Very good article, and I think essentially correct. One lession of recent years is that Scotland has a distinctive political culture - for instance, the "magic money tree" accusation doesn't stick - and attempting to sell Westminster attitudes doesn't work. Although separate parties would develop their own cultures in response to this, it wouldn't prevent governments forming, in the same way that the CSU in Bavaria is seen as well right of the CDU but sitll a natural coalition partner.
On ground games, one lesson of the election is that the "human wave" approach to winning seats doesn't work - most marginals had masses of Labour activists (although, amusingly, UNITE refused to send me any towards the end of the campaign because I was against Trident - too left-wing for Len McCluskey!) and we buried the voters in leaflets, but the Tory leaflets were better quality (physically, with better pictures and a nicer look) and as Marquee Mark says more effectively targeted. Richard Nabavi pointed out my problem early on (it seemed unwise to concede it at the time although I knew he was right, since I was trying to discourage a major Tory effort) - a third of the electorate had changed since 2010, and in my absence not much had been done to contact them, so the personal vote in 2010 was not only discounted but also diminishing. I got the result that both Ms Soubry and I expected in 2010 (a comfortable Tory majority), when an intense personal vote effort got us close: 5 years later with a partly different electorate, that was much weaker.
Can you tell us now whether Labour understood that the polling was so far off. There was the odd "mood music" that was talked about here so much at the time and largely discounted by me and others as Romney delusion. There was Ed going to Warwickshire which seemed odd but in fact they didn't take it either. And there was Cameron furiously campaigning in the south west going on about just needing 23 more seats and frankly sounding just a little mad.
In short there were clues that the Tories thought they were doing much better and Labour thought they were doing much worse than the polls indicated and they were both right.
Personal commiserations by the way. It must be a great disappointment.
SR..Rachel Robot Reeves...you have to be kidding..Burnham would be eviscerated very quickly but Reeves would be given slightly longer .. just.. cos she is a female and the Cons are polite. For a laugh it could be Lucy Powell..in which case I could see some Labour defections.
Mr, Brooke, worth mentioning England's been a single land for over a thousand years, whereas Germany was pieced together from a patchwork of smaller lands, hence the strong local capitals (Frankfurt, Stuttgart, etc).
Edited extra bit: bah, sleepy, misread your post.
However, I maintain throwing money at Scotland when it has full fiscal autonomy will fly in England like a swallow with a coconut.
"worth mentioning England's been a single land for over a thousand years"
Sod off Dancer, if you think us Mercians want to be associated with a bunch of itinerant Danes living in Yorkshire - a glorified swamp by the North Sea - you've got another thing coming.
At a personal level, retiring from front-line politics (which I'm doing, unless something unexpected turns up) feels very, very odd. I'm used to a daily routine: Check out YouGov's entrails, post on PB, answer 50 emails, draft a leaflet, maybe write a local blog, juggle priorities. None of that is necessary now, and at 65 it actually makes sense to scale back to two jobs (animal welfare and translation) and have some free time to do...er...something.
There's a liberating effect - I no longer need to even try to be interested in local issues that engage maybe 100 potential voters (Should disused chapel X be refurbished partly or more expensively? Should former police station Y get a conservation order?): I can cheerfully think, or even say, that I don't give a toss. And I do have some other interests which it'll be nice to have more time for (board games, poker, big DVD series like Homeland) as well as things that I'm aware that "normal" people enjoy and I've never taken the time for - e.g. looking round all these foreign cities that my work takes me to.
But it feels odd, and slightly pointless. No doubt I'll get used to it.
Five years til the next one is a long time. Wondering if you might get roped into the EU campaign, which will probably end up defining this parliament much in the same way as ScotRef dominated the last.
OGH and TSE. Worth doing a thread soon about the outcome from the Council elections. BBC report showing that from the data they have, (230+ of the 279), the Conservatives have gained control of 26 more councils and Labour lost control of 4. Lib Dems suffering significant loss with >1/3 of the seats they have been trying to retain are lost and LDs have lost control of 4 of the 7 councils they previously had.
The major difference between the SNP and SLab is that one is a nationalist party, the other is a social democratic party. One believes in drawing an international frontier between Scotland and the the UK, the other believes in solidarity with the rest of the UK. From those differences come very different priorities and policies. And because the SNP is a nationalist party it attracts people with very different political outlooks once you get beyond separation. That, too, is crucial.
That means there are three ways back for SLab:
1. The SNP's actual performance in government as a supposedly left of centre party becomes the main issue. If that happens very quickly the way it has favoured middle class over working class Scots will be put under the microscope.
2. Scotland becomes independent making the SNP hated, as the reality of the lies it has told and the deceptions it has practised hit home.
3. Independence is taken off the table as a UK constitutional settlement is found which most Scots can live with. Then the internal contradictions inherent in a nationalist grouping that encompasses a wide range of very divergent views will come to the fore and the party loses its ferocious focus and discipline as it struggles to work out what to do next.
Of course, points 2 and 3 also work as a way back for the Scottish Tories. And if it turns out to be 3 then David Cameron will have to play a big part, meaning he could create the conditions that will make SLab a force again.
As a Unionist Cameron will want that, but as a Tory he might be making life a lot tougher for his party.
That's why a proper constitutional convention before a settlement is so important, not just for the long term prospects of the UK but for a Tory party that believes in the Union. Back of the envelope stuff imposed on everyone via Parliamentary majority may look appealing, but will only ever be short term and will not close the independence issue down.
A settlement agreed by all and then endorsed by referendum does do that though. And if its federalism we end up with, the Tories interests in England are much better protected: solutions imposed by Parliamentary majority can be undone the same way. And would be as soon as the Tories no longer command the Commons.
The difficulty we will have on PB for the next few months is that it is dominated by the victors Tories and Nats both of whom will re-write history as is their privilege. More interesting is when the losers drift back on and tell us how it looks from their side and what comes next.
Since you're in the odd position of being a winner\loser ( Tory but Scotland ) I'd be interested in how you see the position in Scotland develop for the blues. Is it hunker down and wait for the tide to turn against the Nats when the hubris wears off or is there something now the Tories should be doing ?
For me the big disappointment of the night was not getting Berwickshire, 2 seats and bigger than SLAB would have been tremendous.
Cameron and Osborne will have to use all their skill and guile in finding a constitutional settlement that makes sense for Scotland now. As David says asymmetric devolution has proved a disaster and needs to end. Fiscal autonomy is key to reminding the Scottish electorate that there is a price for additional public spending. English votes for English laws is surely inevitable but has to be done in a way that does not make it look like it is simply to shut the SNP out.
Given the immediate danger of legislative problems arising from the devolution settlement is no longer an issue, would the sensible option be to set up a Royal Commission to explore the whole constitutional settlement - from national parliaments and their power over taxes and spending, to elected representatives being accountable to their electorate for the decisions they make in office, to the makeup of the House of Lords and the number of MPs. Such a Commission could report say in 18 months after input from all sides, so that the required legislation can be passed comfortably before the end of the Parliament wilst allowing debate on the issues and ensuring cross party support for the settlement.
You allude to the quality of the canvassers and Dr Fox does too. I've always thought that some fact-to-face conversations can be counter-productive. If an Owen Jones or a tim stride up and harangue the occupant, then return to say. "He had some silly and bigoted ideas but I soon put him straight." - you've just lost a don't know.
Jonathan .. Of course..how silly of me .. Lose a job worth over 200k and a whacking great pension and it will make me better off..I must adopt this lefty way of thinking..Perhaps if he gets a better paid job he might be better off..just like everyone else...is that what you meant to say.. I don't think the City would be too keen,he has not endeared himself there over the last few years... they work on a profit system.
It would be interesting if someone could make a constituency by constituency comparison between 1992 and 2015.
Its made complicated by two sets of boundary changes.
Conservative losses since 1992 At least a dozen in London, many on enormous swings eg Croydon North which has a Labour majority of over 20,000. Ten in Scotland Middle class areas in conurbations - Hallam, Leeds NW, Leeds NE, Edgbaston, Coventry S, Wolverhampton SW, Tynemouth, Bury S, Bristol W, Hove, Brighton Pavilion Middle class 'Greater Scouseland' - Wirral W, Wirral S, Chester, Sefton C, Southport Carshalton, Norfolk N and Westmoreland to strong LibDems
Conservative gains since 1992 Various from the LibDems - Bath, Cheltenham, Cornwall N, Truro, Devon N, Yeovil, Brecon, Montgomershire, Berwick Middle England industrial areas - Nuneaton, Warwickshire N, Cannock, Sherwood, Morley, Crewe, Pendle, Rossendale, Thurrock Three gains in SW Wales
The Conservatives would also have benefited from boundary reviews creating more rural constituencies.
Content analysis on our panelists’ unprompted “daily diaries”, sent in via their mobile apps, shows that the economy was mentioned four times as often as the next nearest policy area, the NHS. This turned out to be critical. Given the backdrop of uncertainty, our voters relied on a small number of touchstones. In Dewsbury, when asked what the Conservatives’ key policy was, they chorused “improving the economy” without skipping a beat. The same question about Labour was initially met with silence.
Another touchstones was the relative competency of the leaders. Here, while Miliband surprised with his feisty campaigning, Cameron’s consistency won through, despite panelists’ cynicism about politicians and politics.
Many of our panelists recorded their response to the result on Friday morning. One commented: “I didn’t want a Tory government but I suppose the last five years haven’t been that bad,” and another: “I voted Labour, so I’m a little bit disappointed but I’m also a little bit relieved.”
This is why the next Labour leader must NOT be any member of Gordo's cabinet (Sorry Andy), and their very first statement as leader must be "Yes, we spent way too much money"
Have Labour fixed the rules so the sensible choice for leader can't be undone by Len McLuskey?
This post sponsored by ToriesForBurnham™ and brought to you by NewsSense™ Inc.
Please let it be Burnham
Burnham would be hillarious. Mr Stafford Hospital himself.
Yes it has to be a completely new face, someone who's lived in the real world and had a real job. Apart from Dan Jarvis, who else fits the bill from the 2010 intake?
Liz Kendall! Fits most of your criteria and is an excellent communicator.
Liz Kendall could be a good one, will do a little more research on her before betting. Thanks.
Those suggesting Lucy Powell or Rachel Reeves are probably Tory members!
Jonathon Of course..how silly of me .. Lose a job worth over 200k and a whacking great pension and it will make me better off..I must adopt this lefty way of thinking..Perhaps if he gets a better paid job he might be better off..just like everyone else...is that what you meant to say..
It nothing to do with left or right, it's just a recognition that Ed Balls will earn more as an economist in the private sector than as an MP. Sorry to rain on your parade.
The difficulty we will have on PB for the next few months is that it is dominated by the victors Tories and Nats both of whom will re-write history as is their privilege. More interesting is when the losers drift back on and tell us how it looks from their side and what comes next.
Since you're in the odd position of being a winner\loser ( Tory but Scotland ) I'd be interested in how you see the position in Scotland develop for the blues. Is it hunker down and wait for the tide to turn against the Nats when the hubris wears off or is there something now the Tories should be doing ?
For me the big disappointment of the night was not getting Berwickshire, 2 seats and bigger than SLAB would have been tremendous.
Cameron and Osborne will have to use all their skill and guile in finding a constitutional settlement that makes sense for Scotland now. As David says asymmetric devolution has proved a disaster and needs to end. Fiscal autonomy is key to reminding the Scottish electorate that there is a price for additional public spending. English votes for English laws is surely inevitable but has to be done in a way that does not make it look like it is simply to shut the SNP out.
Given the immediate danger of legislative problems arising from the devolution settlement is no longer an issue, would the sensible option be to set up a Royal Commission to explore the whole constitutional settlement - from national parliaments and their power over taxes and spending, to elected representatives being accountable to their electorate for the decisions they make in office, to the makeup of the House of Lords and the number of MPs. Such a Commission could report say in 18 months after input from all sides, so that the required legislation can be passed comfortably before the end of the Parliament wilst allowing debate on the issues and ensuring cross party support for the settlement.
I don't think we have time for yet another commission tbh. We have the Smith Commission as a basis and Cameron would be well advised to implement that with a generous hand, having sensible discussions with the SNP about where they think there are good reasons to go further and making some concessions.
Cameron needs to respect the views of the Scottish people and the rights of their elected representatives to take a full role in the UK Parliament but he also needs, bluntly, to shaft Labour once and for all. This means reaching agreements bilaterally with the SNP and getting their consent for EVEL as the quid pro quo of a much enhanced devolution settlement. EVEL cannot be imposed unilaterally or Scotland will end up leaving but an agreement between the two main parties is surely possible.
The major difference between the SNP and SLab is that one is a nationalist party, the other is a social democratic party.
And Nicola Sturgeon's trick has been to represent the SNP as both - meanwhile fewer poor students getting into University because of "free tuition" goes unscrutinised, and lower spending on the NHS than Tory England barely remarked upon....
@DavidL This election was pretty good long term for the Scot Cons - places like WAK are now clearly SNP-Con contests, and I expect the Labour vote in places like Murphy's seat will float away next GE to leave it as an SNP hold, but Con target in say 2025
Content analysis on our panelists’ unprompted “daily diaries”, sent in via their mobile apps, shows that the economy was mentioned four times as often as the next nearest policy area, the NHS. This turned out to be critical. Given the backdrop of uncertainty, our voters relied on a small number of touchstones. In Dewsbury, when asked what the Conservatives’ key policy was, they chorused “improving the economy” without skipping a beat. The same question about Labour was initially met with silence.
Another touchstones was the relative competency of the leaders. Here, while Miliband surprised with his feisty campaigning, Cameron’s consistency won through, despite panelists’ cynicism about politicians and politics.
Many of our panelists recorded their response to the result on Friday morning. One commented: “I didn’t want a Tory government but I suppose the last five years haven’t been that bad,” and another: “I voted Labour, so I’m a little bit disappointed but I’m also a little bit relieved.”
This is why the next Labour leader must NOT be any member of Gordo's cabinet (Sorry Andy), and their very first statement as leader must be "Yes, we spent way too much money"
Have Labour fixed the rules so the sensible choice for leader can't be undone by Len McLuskey?
This post sponsored by ToriesForBurnham™ and brought to you by NewsSense™ Inc.
Please let it be Burnham
Burnham would be hillarious. Mr Stafford Hospital himself.
Yes it has to be a completely new face, someone who's lived in the real world and had a real job. Apart from Dan Jarvis, who else fits the bill from the 2010 intake?
Liz Kendall! Fits most of your criteria and is an excellent communicator.
Liz Kendall could be a good one, will do a little more research on her before betting. Thanks.
Those suggesting Lucy Powell or Rachel Reeves are probably Tory members!
She is ambitious and fairly ruthless too. Was quite an active campaigner, trade union links but pretty dry on spending. Would give Dave a very hard time at PMQs. One of the best TV performers on the Labour front bench.
Very good article, and I think essentially correct. One lession of recent years is that Scotland has a distinctive political culture - for instance, the "magic money tree" accusation doesn't stick - and attempting to sell Westminster attitudes doesn't work. Although separate parties would develop their own cultures in response to this, it wouldn't prevent governments forming, in the same way that the CSU in Bavaria is seen as well right of the CDU but sitll a natural coalition partner.
On ground games, one lesson of the election is that the "human wave" approach to winning seats doesn't work - most marginals had masses of Labour activists (although, amusingly, UNITE refused to send me any towards the end of the campaign because I was against Trident - too left-wing for Len McCluskey!) and we buried the voters in leaflets, but the Tory leaflets were better quality (physically, with better pictures and a nicer look) and as Marquee Mark says more effectively targeted. Richard Nabavi pointed out my problem early on (it seemed unwise to concede it at the time although I knew he was right, since I was trying to discourage a major Tory effort) - a third of the electorate had changed since 2010, and in my absence not much had been done to contact them, so the personal vote in 2010 was not only discounted but also diminishing. I got the result that both Ms Soubry and I expected in 2010 (a comfortable Tory majority), when an intense personal vote effort got us close: 5 years later with a partly different electorate, that was much weaker.
Probably contrary to prevailing opinion, but I think this whole situation could go very sour for the SNP very quickly. First of all, the obvious point to make is that their main slogan in the election was "vote for us and lock the Tories out". Well there's no doubt Scotland voted for them and,...er, didn't really work, did it? Some explaining to do. And the fact is that they don't have a monopoly on Scottish opinion, but they have a near monopoly on expressing what they think Scottish opinion is.
More practically, I think after the initial euphoria, I think the 56 MPs are not going to find it at all easy. There are no ready made induction/support networks for SNP MPs at Westminster which are going to have to be put in place very quickly. The sensible ones might try and form personal links with MPs from other parties, but for many I imagine that will require a different mindset from the default. Especially from a party who's mandate is to oppose/change the way Westminster operates - "slotting in" will, for many, not be an option.
Then there is the issue of what they are all going to do. There will obviously be resistance to putting them on "English" committees, and anyway there will only be so many posts to go round. The media will quickly focus on a few key individuals for quotes/reaction (Salmond, basically), resentment among the rest could quickly build up. And then there is the human reality that many of these people simply won't like each other on a personal level. 56 is a good number for factions to build up pretty rapidly. Salmond talks about how much trouble the SNP were allegedly able to cause Thatcher in the 80s, but it is easier to do that sort of thing when just a close knit small group of MPs. Corelling 56 MPs to cause trouble on a consistent basis is I imagine not such a simple matter.
Will they do pairing? How will the whipping work? How will day to day party management work and who will be in charge? I'm quite certain we will find all the controversial/close votes, especially ones on arguably "English" matters will be scheduled for Thursday evenings. The enthusiasm for sticking around in Westminster for those may quickly die away.
Add to that that Scotland is the remotest area from Westminster. Maintaining constituent contact is harder than anywhere else. There may be turf wars with MSPs on the same patch.
Holyrood election may be interesting and unexpected.
And finally, do they all want to be there? Many will have chosen to stand to give them experience of campaigning with an eye to moving through the party in Holyrood (and hopefully, later, an independent Scotland). Being in Westminster was not part of the plan. But they now need a plan for Westminster.
"A new day has dawned has it not .... Enough of talk it is time to do ...."
Titter ....
Yesterday I had hoped to post some further analysis of the campaign but got sidetracked, however the delay may have been fortuitous as it'll give me a little more time to speak to a few contacts, one of whom I'll meeting briefly at lunchtime.
On canvassing I agree that the quality of the canvassers is an issue but I also frankly wonder if the belief in the merits of the "ground war" are substantially overstated. For me delivering that 3rd of 4th leaflet of the campaign might make some of the activists feel good but is almost certainly otherwise counterproductive. People just get annoyed.
The Tories invested huge amounts into the virtual war in this campaign. I understand that they were spending over £100K a month on Facebook alone. Was that more effective?
I only saw the Tory e-mails and (other the SamCam one which I continue to believe was deeply personal) they were fairly generic and rather obsessed with looking for money. Each and every one encouraged me to spread the message on social media. It would be interesting to see how much that actually happened.
My guess is that this election was something of a watershed between the emphasis being on actual and virtual campaigning but it is only that.
@DavidL This election was pretty good long term for the Scot Cons - places like WAK are now clearly SNP-Con contests, and I expect the Labour vote in places like Murphy's seat will float away next GE to leave it as an SNP hold, but Con target in say 2025
They are well places in the borders and NE highlands and Perth. They are nowhere in Edinburgh now though. They need to work those areas hard from now
Content analysis on our panelists’ unprompted “daily diaries”, sent in via their mobile apps, shows that the economy was mentioned four times as often as the next nearest policy area, the NHS. This turned out to be critical. Given the backdrop of uncertainty, our voters relied on a small number of touchstones. In Dewsbury, when asked what the Conservatives’ key policy was, they chorused “improving the economy” without skipping a beat. The same question about Labour was initially met with silence.
Another touchstones was the relative competency of the leaders. Here, while Miliband surprised with his feisty campaigning, Cameron’s consistency won through, despite panelists’ cynicism about politicians and politics.
Many of our panelists recorded their response to the result on Friday morning. One commented: “I didn’t want a Tory government but I suppose the last five years haven’t been that bad,” and another: “I voted Labour, so I’m a little bit disappointed but I’m also a little bit relieved.”
This is why the next Labour leader must NOT be any member of Gordo's cabinet (Sorry Andy), and their very first statement as leader must be "Yes, we spent way too much money"
Have Labour fixed the rules so the sensible choice for leader can't be undone by Len McLuskey?
This post sponsored by ToriesForBurnham™ and brought to you by NewsSense™ Inc.
Please let it be Burnham
Burnham would be hillarious. Mr Stafford Hospital himself.
Yes it has to be a completely new face, someone who's lived in the real world and had a real job. Apart from Dan Jarvis, who else fits the bill from the 2010 intake?
Liz Kendall! Fits most of your criteria and is an excellent communicator.
Liz Kendall could be a good one, will do a little more research on her before betting. Thanks.
Those suggesting Lucy Powell or Rachel Reeves are probably Tory members!
She is ambitious and fairly ruthless too. Was quite an active campaigner, trade union links but pretty dry on spending. Would give Dave a very hard time at PMQs. One of the best TV performers on the Labour front bench. Thanks for that quick summary. Getting on at 16/1, along with Jarvis who's getting much shorter.
My concern is that I don't know enough about the internal workings of the party and they'll choose someone seemingly baffling from the outside - just as they did with Ed.
Better tell that to the Germans they've been a running a federal state for nearly seventy years where only a handful of the states are self funding. Internal transfers do the rest.
Jonathon Of course..how silly of me .. Lose a job worth over 200k and a whacking great pension and it will make me better off..I must adopt this lefty way of thinking..Perhaps if he gets a better paid job he might be better off..just like everyone else...is that what you meant to say..
It nothing to do with left or right, it's just a recognition that Ed Balls will earn more as an economist in the private sector than as an MP. Sorry to rain on your parade.
Why anyone in the private sector would employ Ed Balls as an economist is beyond me, but you are right, they will.
@DavidL This election was pretty good long term for the Scot Cons - places like WAK are now clearly SNP-Con contests, and I expect the Labour vote in places like Murphy's seat will float away next GE to leave it as an SNP hold, but Con target in say 2025
They are well places in the borders and NE highlands and Perth. They are nowhere in Edinburgh now though. They need to work those areas hard from now
The Tory vote in Edinburgh went tactical in a big way. No way Labour would have held Edinburgh South without it. I think they will do much, much better there in 2016.
Better tell that to the Germans they've been a running a federal state for nearly seventy years where only a handful of the states are self funding. Internal transfers do the rest.
Jonathan...He wont be able to get a job unless he has the right credentials and economics don't seem to be his strong point..
Doesn't seem to have stopped Gordon Brown from finding plenty of gainful employment in the past 5 years. Balls doesn't even have to pretend to be an MP either.
@DavidL This election was pretty good long term for the Scot Cons - places like WAK are now clearly SNP-Con contests, and I expect the Labour vote in places like Murphy's seat will float away next GE to leave it as an SNP hold, but Con target in say 2025
So are the borders, Perthshire, Angus and a chunk of the NE. As the Lib Dems fade into oblivion they will become the opposition in rural Scotland.
If UKIP is seriously aiming to take on Labour it needs to shift its centre of gravity well to the left. That means a philosophical journey, not just a few lefty sounding policies like getting rid of the bedroom tax. Whether a party led by Thatcherites can do that is open to question.
What many right wing posters on here fail to grasp is that white working class people do not all drive white vans and fly England flags at every opportunity. In fact, the vast majority don't. They have a range of views and outlooks, many of which are anathema to the right. The WWC Labour is said to have abandoned - with some justification - was and is patriotic, but was also very strongly grounded in trade unionism, nationalisation, belief in a strong, cradle to grave welfare state, and very high marginal top rate tax rates.
Put it this way, the two most prominent working class figures in English politics over recent years have been Bob Crow and Len McCluskey.
If UKIP is seriously aiming to take on Labour it needs to shift its centre of gravity well to the left. That means a philosophical journey, not just a few lefty sounding policies like getting rid of the bedroom tax. Whether a party led by Thatcherites can do that is open to question.
Not sure you are correct. Thatcher did quite well.
Instead of doing so reactively, might parties not split up to get ahead of a coming problem? For example, Labour would do well to let a separate southern English party form their own answers to the problems that the current leadership are insufficiently engaged with and the Conservatives would be equally well-advised to do the same in northern England. Those answers could then have an explicit power base when coalitions were being formed.
Of course, that would require party leaders giving up power rather than hoarding it.
OGH and TSE. Worth doing a thread soon about the outcome from the Council elections. BBC report showing that from the data they have, (230+ of the 279), the Conservatives have gained control of 26 more councils and Labour lost control of 4. Lib Dems suffering significant loss with >1/3 of the seats they have been trying to retain are lost and LDs have lost control of 4 of the 7 councils they previously had.
With counting completed in more than two thirds of the 279 authorities involved, Conservatives had made 423 net seat gains, Ukip 47 and Greens 6.
The Liberal Democrats had 282 losses, Labour 153 and independents/others 260.
I still can't believe how poorly Labour did especially considering the Lib Dem collapse. Use the excellent BBC website to search constituencies across the country, you will find many marginals where Labour have basically stood still and most of the movement is from the Lib Dems to Ukip and, to a lesser extent, to the Tories depending on the seat.
I am an Orange booker rather than a Fallonite, but even so I will be voting for Fallon as LD Leader.
Fallon was always arms length from the coalition so can win back a lot of those former LD voters gone to kippers and Tories. His northern roots and social conservatism make him ideal for this, and he is a good tub thumper to rouse the rather battered troops. Despite being a strong Christian he voted for repeal of blasphemy laws.
No way will the LDs merge with Labour; though I think there is some merit in a joint ticket in Scotland with the Conservatives in the style of the National Liberals for Westminster elections.
The LDs and Labour may not need to merge, but they certainly need to remember that bashing seven bells out of each other only work in the Tories favour. Unless something radical happens; the LDs have the power to reach the parts of the country Labour can't and vice versa.
Shame SLAB couldn't remember bashing the hell out of the Tories only helps the SNP.
Maybe it really started the re-launch of Scottish nationalism when Scots Labour, Scots Lib Dems joined with the SNP against the "Westminster Govt" of John Major. This anti-UK alliance led us to where we are today. Independence for Scotland is inevitable. Just a matter of time now, after all is said, the Scottish anthem is "to be a nation again". Bedding that into the minds of each generation as a goal, will ensure that the goal is met.
Federalism is inevitable Independence isn't.
Federalism could only work if Scotland and Wales are self funding. May be only supported out of the English overseas aid budget?
Better tell that to the Germans they've been a running a federal state for nearly seventy years where only a handful of the states are self funding. Internal transfers do the rest.
Peerages Hague, Cable anyone else who has retired/ lost and not blotted their copybook?
One that immediately springs to mind for a job somewhere in government if not a peerage was the one personal disappointment of an ecstatic night - Esther McVey in Wirral.
She was subjected to a quite horrible and personal campaign against her from some quite horrible people. Cameron himself could really do with a Northern woman in his office, would offer him a usefully different perspective on life.
On canvassing I agree that the quality of the canvassers is an issue but I also frankly wonder if the belief in the merits of the "ground war" are substantially overstated. For me delivering that 3rd of 4th leaflet of the campaign might make some of the activists feel good but is almost certainly otherwise counterproductive. People just get annoyed.
The Tories invested huge amounts into the virtual war in this campaign. I understand that they were spending over £100K a month on Facebook alone. Was that more effective?
I only saw the Tory e-mails and (other the SamCam one which I continue to believe was deeply personal) they were fairly generic and rather obsessed with looking for money. Each and every one encouraged me to spread the message on social media. It would be interesting to see how much that actually happened.
My guess is that this election was something of a watershed between the emphasis being on actual and virtual campaigning but it is only that.
I was vaguely surprised in the number of people I know on facebook would were shown clicking "LIKE CONSERVATIVE" posters (along with the mandatory "+x thousand" others). On a widespread scale I can see how this would seriously give confidence to Tory leaners to row in behind with their votes.
I still can't believe how poorly Labour did especially considering the Lib Dem collapse. Use the excellent BBC website to search constituencies across the country, you will find many marginals where Labour have basically stood still and most of the movement is from the Lib Dems to Ukip and, to a lesser extent, to the Tories depending on the seat.
I am an Orange booker rather than a Fallonite, but even so I will be voting for Fallon as LD Leader.
Fallon was always arms length from the coalition so can win back a lot of those former LD voters gone to kippers and Tories. His northern roots and social conservatism make him ideal for this, and he is a good tub thumper to rouse the rather battered troops. Despite being a strong Christian he voted for repeal of blasphemy laws.
No way will the LDs merge with Labour; though I think there is some merit in a joint ticket in Scotland with the Conservatives in the style of the National Liberals for Westminster elections.
The LDs and Labour may not need to merge, but they certainly need to remember that bashing seven bells out of each other only work in the Tories favour. Unless something radical happens; the LDs have the power to reach the parts of the country Labour can't and vice versa.
Shame SLAB couldn't remember bashing the hell out of the Tories only helps the SNP.
Maybe it really started the re-launch of Scottish nationalism when Scots Labour, Scots Lib Dems joined with the SNP against the "Westminster Govt" of John Major. This anti-UK alliance led us to where we are today. Independence for Scotland is inevitable. Just a matter of time now, after all is said, the Scottish anthem is "to be a nation again". Bedding that into the minds of each generation as a goal, will ensure that the goal is met.
Federalism is inevitable Independence isn't.
Federalism could only work if Scotland and Wales are self funding. May be only supported out of the English overseas aid budget?
Better tell that to the Germans they've been a running a federal state for nearly seventy years where only a handful of the states are self funding. Internal transfers do the rest.
Same in the US.
Quite so, we are just horrendously overcentralised.
Better tell that to the Germans they've been a running a federal state for nearly seventy years where only a handful of the states are self funding. Internal transfers do the rest.
On canvassing I agree that the quality of the canvassers is an issue but I also frankly wonder if the belief in the merits of the "ground war" are substantially overstated. For me delivering that 3rd of 4th leaflet of the campaign might make some of the activists feel good but is almost certainly otherwise counterproductive. People just get annoyed.
The Tories invested huge amounts into the virtual war in this campaign. I understand that they were spending over £100K a month on Facebook alone. Was that more effective?
I only saw the Tory e-mails and (other the SamCam one which I continue to believe was deeply personal) they were fairly generic and rather obsessed with looking for money. Each and every one encouraged me to spread the message on social media. It would be interesting to see how much that actually happened.
My guess is that this election was something of a watershed between the emphasis being on actual and virtual campaigning but it is only that.
The numbers of views for each of the main parties' Youtube channels shows the Conservatives were better at sharing them, presumably with established and more importantly potential supporters, and via email, Facebook and other social media.
To keep the length of this post down, here are those over 10,000 in the past four weeks. The figures on the end show the length of each video.
For Labour: 22,170 views A decent society looks after its people 2:46 23,467 views Ed's Mystery Guest 1:36 27,137 views Look at what David Cameron has done in five years... 0:27 94,887 views Steve Coogan on the choice in this election 2:46 104,631 views Ed Miliband: A Portrait 4:39
For Conservatives 11,690 views David Cameron: Let's finish what we've begun 16:05 14,856 views Salmond Alert 0:25 53,402 views Alex Salmond: "I'm writing the Labour Party budget" 0:29 61,966 views David Cameron: Vote Conservative on Thursday 1:58 67,014 views David Cameron: Vote Conservative today 0:49 84,380 views Our note to you: let's keep going 1:45 88,876 views Don't risk it with Ed Miliband and the SNP 0:14 89,097 views The SNP propping up Ed Miliband: you'll pay for it 0:19 174,548 views What type of country do we want to be? 2:41 420,080 views It's working - don't let them wreck it. Vote Conservative on Thursday. 2:46
As an aside, notice how many are what the Americans call "attack ads" that would not be allowed on television.
All of the things you mention - the pay and rations stuff - will already have been dealt with.
This is the most ruthlessly professional political force in history - far more organised than Labour or even the Tories. It will take a lot more than that to stop the March of the NATS!
OGH and TSE. Worth doing a thread soon about the outcome from the Council elections. BBC report showing that from the data they have, (230+ of the 279), the Conservatives have gained control of 26 more councils and Labour lost control of 4. Lib Dems suffering significant loss with >1/3 of the seats they have been trying to retain are lost and LDs have lost control of 4 of the 7 councils they previously had.
With counting completed in more than two thirds of the 279 authorities involved, Conservatives had made 423 net seat gains, Ukip 47 and Greens 6.
The Liberal Democrats had 282 losses, Labour 153 and independents/others 260.
Yet more hollowing out of the Lib Dems making it so much more difficult for them to come back at Westminster level. They have survived on small numbers of seats before but that was in a different world with far less national media etc. Unless you believe in something fairly nutty like the Greens it is hard to get enough enthusiasm in one place to build momentum. I think they are in serious trouble. The reduction in short money alone means a massive reduction in staff, offices, media contracts, agents and the ability to be heard.
@Aidan_Kerr1: Despite tactical voting the Scottish Conservatives are up 20,000 votes and finish 3rd for the 1st time since 1992.
It doesn't seem to me there is any need for a major rebranding just yet.
There are also many more acts to this play.
The separatists thought they had won last year, and it didn't work out like that.
They thought they would be writing Ed Miliband's first budget, and it didn't work out like that.
Now Cameron is apparently offering FFA giving the Nats Hobson's choice of saying "no, we didn't really want it" or accepting a financial black hole they then have to explain to the Scots. Neither of those options seems on the surface likely to endear them
LOL, only a turnip like you could say that with a straight face , they scrape 1 MP again out of 59 and you think all is well.
This election was Nicola Sturgeon's honeymoon and the referendum hangover. As such it was not a normal election. Before we make any predictions about the future of Scotland we need to wait to see the results of the election next year.
The Scottish Conservatives are based around their MSPs and not their MP and have benefited from this. Ruth Davidson knows the SNP weaknesses and is always on TV up here. Labour will go the same way and may even benefit from not having MPs to get in the way of policy.
The fiscal battle between Cameron and Sturgeon will be brutal. I see this as more of a risk to the union than the European referendum.
Sandpit..There are always fools willing to part with their money..Just look at Blairs income . Balls is not a good economist .. he is wonderful at hand jiving across the Despatch Table but that wont get him a job in the City where most of the companies there seem to work on a profit making basis. ..and in recent years he has not gone out of his way to endear himself to them.
"What many right wing posters on here fail to grasp is that white working class people do not all drive white vans and fly England flags at every opportunity. In fact, the vast majority don't. They have a range of views and outlooks, many of which are anathema to the right. The WWC Labour is said to have abandoned - with some justification - was and is patriotic, but was also very strongly grounded in trade unionism, nationalisation, belief in a strong, cradle to grave welfare state, and very high marginal top rate tax rates."
Spot on. They may be left-ish economically, but socially they tend to be old-fashioned.
NickP,
Commiserations. No matter how carefully constructed your sand castles, you can't stop the strong tide of public opinion washing up the beach..
I still can't believe how poorly Labour did especially considering the Lib Dem collapse. Use the excellent BBC website to search constituencies across the country, you will find many marginals where Labour have basically stood still and most of the movement is from the Lib Dems to Ukip and, to a lesser extent, to the Tories depending on the seat.
I am an Orange booker rather than a Fallonite, but even so I will be voting for Fallon as LD Leader.
Fallon was always arms length from the coalition so can win back a lot of those former LD voters gone to kippers and Tories. His northern roots and social conservatism make him ideal for this, and he is a good tub thumper to rouse the rather battered troops. Despite being a strong Christian he voted for repeal of blasphemy laws.
No way will the LDs merge with Labour; though I think there is some merit in a joint ticket in Scotland with the Conservatives in the style of the National Liberals for Westminster elections.
The LDs and Labour may not need to merge, but they certainly need to remember that bashing seven bells out of each other only work in the Tories favour. Unless something radical happens; the LDs have the power to reach the parts of the country Labour can't and vice versa.
Shame SLAB couldn't remember bashing the hell out of the Tories only helps the SNP.
Maybe it really started the re-launch of Scottish nationalism when Scots Labour, Scots Lib Dems joined with the SNP against the "Westminster Govt" of John Major. This anti-UK alliance led us to where we are today. Independence for Scotland is inevitable. Just a matter of time now, after all is said, the Scottish anthem is "to be a nation again". Bedding that into the minds of each generation as a goal, will ensure that the goal is met.
Federalism is inevitable Independence isn't.
Federalism could only work if Scotland and Wales are self funding. May be only supported out of the English overseas aid budget?
Better tell that to the Germans they've been a running a federal state for nearly seventy years where only a handful of the states are self funding. Internal transfers do the rest.
Same in the US.
US politics for all its faults is very local. We could learn a lot from devolving power down closer to the people, where cities and states can compete with each other on tax rates and spending priorities.
Better tell that to the Germans they've been a running a federal state for nearly seventy years where only a handful of the states are self funding. Internal transfers do the rest.
It would be weird for the Scottish Conservatives to have two separate parties considering they are the most unionist bunch.
It would be interesting for Scotland to have FFA so they actually have responsibility for raising taxes rather than just spend spend spend
But...what is FFA? To the Nats, it requires them to have all the oil taxation revenues.... Until they get that, they will say they don't have true Scottish FFA. And giving them oil taxation revenues only happens when they get full independence, not fiscal autonomy.
FFA means all our revenues, not the kid on pocket money ones that Westminster allocate to us. It is every penny that is raised in Scotland for all taxes , oil , etc , etc. Given we have subsidised England for 30 years it is time we got our own money to spend as we wish.
At a personal level, retiring from front-line politics (which I'm doing, unless something unexpected turns up) feels very, very odd. I'm used to a daily routine: Check out YouGov's entrails, post on PB, answer 50 emails, draft a leaflet, maybe write a local blog, juggle priorities. None of that is necessary now, and at 65 it actually makes sense to scale back to two jobs (animal welfare and translation) and have some free time to do...er...something.
There's a liberating effect - I no longer need to even try to be interested in local issues that engage maybe 100 potential voters (Should disused chapel X be refurbished partly or more expensively? Should former police station Y get a conservation order?): I can cheerfully think, or even say, that I don't give a toss. And I do have some other interests which it'll be nice to have more time for (board games, poker, big DVD series like Homeland) as well as things that I'm aware that "normal" people enjoy and I've never taken the time for - e.g. looking round all these foreign cities that my work takes me to.
But it feels odd, and slightly pointless. No doubt I'll get used to it.
Enjoy it!! You have had the guts to pit yourself above the parapet to be shot at (making you far braver than most of us on here) and you have sacrificed plenty, you deserve some quiet, contented time. And there is definitely a big world out there to see.
As a Labour voter, albeit a reluctant one, I'd also like to say thank-you for all that you've done. I wish it could have ended better, that it didn't is no reflection on you at all. You were caught up in something far bigger.
OGH and TSE. Worth doing a thread soon about the outcome from the Council elections. BBC report showing that from the data they have, (230+ of the 279), the Conservatives have gained control of 26 more councils and Labour lost control of 4. Lib Dems suffering significant loss with >1/3 of the seats they have been trying to retain are lost and LDs have lost control of 4 of the 7 councils they previously had.
With counting completed in more than two thirds of the 279 authorities involved, Conservatives had made 423 net seat gains, Ukip 47 and Greens 6.
The Liberal Democrats had 282 losses, Labour 153 and independents/others 260.
Yet more hollowing out of the Lib Dems making it so much more difficult for them to come back at Westminster level. They have survived on small numbers of seats before but that was in a different world with far less national media etc. Unless you believe in something fairly nutty like the Greens it is hard to get enough enthusiasm in one place to build momentum. I think they are in serious trouble. The reduction in short money alone means a massive reduction in staff, offices, media contracts, agents and the ability to be heard.
Burnham was a researcher to Tessa Jowell from 1994 until the 1997 election, and joined the Transport and General Workers' Union in 1995. After the 1997 election, he was briefly a Parliamentary Officer for the NHS Confederation from August to December 1997, before taking up the post as an administrator with the Football Task Force for a year.
In 1998, he became a Special Adviser to the then Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, Chris Smith, a position he remained in until his election to Parliament in 2001.
Jarvis attended the Royal Military Academy Sandhurst as an officer cadet. On 9 August 1997, he was given a short service commission into the Parachute Regiment as a subaltern (second lieutenant) with seniority from 9 July 1994.......
During his time in the Parachute Regiment, Jarvis was a platoon commander with 3 Para in Kosovo in 1999, and was with General Sir Mike Jackson during the Pristina Airport incident when Jackson refused the suggestion of his American NATO superior to confront Russian forces..... In 2000 he was deployed to Sierra Leone in the aftermath of Operation Barras to help the Army learn the lessons of the kidnap of a group of troops by an armed rebel group.
Jarvis served in Iraq during Operation Telic and in Afghanistan during Operation Herrick. He was deployed to Afghanistan twice... The second deployment was a six-month tour as a company commander with the Special Forces Support Group, leading a company of 100 troops. He was also deployed to Northern Ireland.
It would be weird for the Scottish Conservatives to have two separate parties considering they are the most unionist bunch.
It would be interesting for Scotland to have FFA so they actually have responsibility for raising taxes rather than just spend spend spend
But...what is FFA? To the Nats, it requires them to have all the oil taxation revenues.... Until they get that, they will say they don't have true Scottish FFA. And giving them oil taxation revenues only happens when they get full independence, not fiscal autonomy.
FFA means all our revenues, not the kid on pocket money ones that Westminster allocate to us. It is every penny that is raised in Scotland for all taxes , oil , etc , etc. Given we have subsidised England for 30 years it is time we got our own money to spend as we wish.
Oil is in British waters, there's no such thing as Scottish waters in international law. If you want that, go independent. But you don't.
All revenues and expenditures in Scotland, that's fair enough.
All of the things you mention - the pay and rations stuff - will already have been dealt with.
This is the most ruthlessly professional political force in history - far more organised than Labour or even the Tories. It will take a lot more than that to stop the March of the NATS!
On canvassing I agree that the quality of the canvassers is an issue but I also frankly wonder if the belief in the merits of the "ground war" are substantially overstated. For me delivering that 3rd of 4th leaflet of the campaign might make some of the activists feel good but is almost certainly otherwise counterproductive. People just get annoyed.
The Tories invested huge amounts into the virtual war in this campaign. I understand that they were spending over £100K a month on Facebook alone. Was that more effective?
I only saw the Tory e-mails and (other the SamCam one which I continue to believe was deeply personal) they were fairly generic and rather obsessed with looking for money. Each and every one encouraged me to spread the message on social media. It would be interesting to see how much that actually happened.
My guess is that this election was something of a watershed between the emphasis being on actual and virtual campaigning but it is only that.
The numbers of views for each of the main parties' Youtube channels shows the Conservatives were better at sharing them, presumably with established and more importantly potential supporters, and via email, Facebook and other social media.
To keep the length of this post down, here are those over 10,000 in the past four weeks. The figures on the end show the length of each video.
For Labour: 22,170 views A decent society looks after its people 2:46 23,467 views Ed's Mystery Guest 1:36 27,137 views Look at what David Cameron has done in five years... 0:27 94,887 views Steve Coogan on the choice in this election 2:46 104,631 views Ed Miliband: A Portrait 4:39
For Conservatives 11,690 views David Cameron: Let's finish what we've begun 16:05 14,856 views Salmond Alert 0:25 53,402 views Alex Salmond: "I'm writing the Labour Party budget" 0:29 61,966 views David Cameron: Vote Conservative on Thursday 1:58 67,014 views David Cameron: Vote Conservative today 0:49 84,380 views Our note to you: let's keep going 1:45 88,876 views Don't risk it with Ed Miliband and the SNP 0:14 89,097 views The SNP propping up Ed Miliband: you'll pay for it 0:19 174,548 views What type of country do we want to be? 2:41 420,080 views It's working - don't let them wreck it. Vote Conservative on Thursday. 2:46
As an aside, notice how many are what the Americans call "attack ads" that would not be allowed on television.
I may just be old but unless they were embedded in an e-mail to me or linked to on here I didn't even see any of these. I do think that politics is changing though and this is where the effort will be in the future.
All of the things you mention - the pay and rations stuff - will already have been dealt with.
This is the most ruthlessly professional political force in history - far more organised than Labour or even the Tories. It will take a lot more than that to stop the March of the NATS!
"This is the most ruthlessly professional political force in history"
Comments
On ground games, one lesson of the election is that the "human wave" approach to winning seats doesn't work - most marginals had masses of Labour activists (although, amusingly, UNITE refused to send me any towards the end of the campaign because I was against Trident - too left-wing for Len McCluskey!) and we buried the voters in leaflets, but the Tory leaflets were better quality (physically, with better pictures and a nicer look) and as Marquee Mark says more effectively targeted. Richard Nabavi pointed out my problem early on (it seemed unwise to concede it at the time although I knew he was right, since I was trying to discourage a major Tory effort) - a third of the electorate had changed since 2010, and in my absence not much had been done to contact them, so the personal vote in 2010 was not only discounted but also diminishing. I got the result that both Ms Soubry and I expected in 2010 (a comfortable Tory majority), when an intense personal vote effort got us close: 5 years later with a partly different electorate, that was much weaker.
@TheSunNewspaper: ‘I’m smug and I’m staying in Britain’ - @KTHopkins is gloating in the glory of a Tory victory http://t.co/0VLGqk5oit http://t.co/kNU4P8nebb
Autonomy in areas of devolved power for Scottish parties may well make sense. But there are two sides to the border, and England needs equality, which demands an English Parliament.
Burnham would be hillarious. Mr Stafford Hospital himself.
Yes it has to be a completely new face, someone who's lived in the real world and had a real job. Apart from Dan Jarvis, who else fits the bill from the 2010 intake?
Labour's performance per constituency was therefore related to the relative proportions of the two demographics.
As I said in my initial ramble I think there are real opportunities for the Tories arising from having Scottish politics being dominated by 2 statist leftist parties. The Tories have also benefitted from being brave enough to select Ruth Davidson as leader. Even SNP supporters of my acquaintance like and respect her.
I think that unless Labour really find a reason for existing it is not impossible that the Tories will become the opposition in the next Scottish Parliament. In terms of debate that was already the case in this election. Rather than hunker down Scots desperately need a party that believes in a small state, in successful enterprise, in making money first and then using that money to pay for the public services. Ruth Davidson can be very articulate on these points and I think as Labour indulge in internal turmoil she has a real opportunity to do that.
Cameron and Osborne will have to use all their skill and guile in finding a constitutional settlement that makes sense for Scotland now. As David says asymmetric devolution has proved a disaster and needs to end. Fiscal autonomy is key to reminding the Scottish electorate that there is a price for additional public spending. English votes for English laws is surely inevitable but has to be done in a way that does not make it look like it is simply to shut the SNP out.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-32627158
That irony aside, it's otherwise a fairly good summary of what's gone on recently.
Bercow would be the cherry on the top of the icing on the cake.
Yes it has to be a completely new face, someone who's lived in the real world and had a real job. Apart from Dan Jarvis, who else fits the bill from the 2010 intake?
Andy Burnham Underwrites Grim Reaper - ABUGR to go with EIC
should be fun.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/general-election-2015/11591600/Katie-Hopkins-is-staying-in-Britain-and-the-status-of-other-celebrity-election-promises.html
Yes it has to be a completely new face, someone who's lived in the real world and had a real job. Apart from Dan Jarvis, who else fits the bill from the 2010 intake?
What about a woman as leader?? There must be a few candidates.. R Reeves for one ?
A good point about voter churn, maybe this was also a factor in other areas of the country as people are more mobile than ever before.
Edited extra bit: bah, sleepy, misread your post.
However, I maintain throwing money at Scotland when it has full fiscal autonomy will fly in England like a swallow with a coconut.
There's a liberating effect - I no longer need to even try to be interested in local issues that engage maybe 100 potential voters (Should disused chapel X be refurbished partly or more expensively? Should former police station Y get a conservation order?): I can cheerfully think, or even say, that I don't give a toss. And I do have some other interests which it'll be nice to have more time for (board games, poker, big DVD series like Homeland) as well as things that I'm aware that "normal" people enjoy and I've never taken the time for - e.g. looking round all these foreign cities that my work takes me to.
But it feels odd, and slightly pointless. No doubt I'll get used to it.
Yes it has to be a completely new face, someone who's lived in the real world and had a real job. Apart from Dan Jarvis, who else fits the bill from the 2010 intake?
Liz Kendall! Fits most of your criteria and is an excellent communicator. There is room for a more centrist one though, and centrist in Scotland may look left wing from England.
It looks to me at first sight that the SLD vote held up better than SLAB but not as good as SCUP. The extinction event could be as much SLAB, or even more so, particularly if a tacit or even overt SLD SCUP ticket could emerge. It would also make both parties distinct from their English sibs.
In short there were clues that the Tories thought they were doing much better and Labour thought they were doing much worse than the polls indicated and they were both right.
Personal commiserations by the way. It must be a great disappointment.
For a laugh it could be Lucy Powell..in which case I could see some Labour defections.
Sod off Dancer, if you think us Mercians want to be associated with a bunch of itinerant Danes living in Yorkshire - a glorified swamp by the North Sea - you've got another thing coming.
Still, with the 1 Lib Dem and 1 Labour MP they can stick Together to outnumber the pandas.
Mr. Brooke, you're just jealous because none of your kings ever had cool names like Erik Bloodaxe.
That means there are three ways back for SLab:
1. The SNP's actual performance in government as a supposedly left of centre party becomes the main issue. If that happens very quickly the way it has favoured middle class over working class Scots will be put under the microscope.
2. Scotland becomes independent making the SNP hated, as the reality of the lies it has told and the deceptions it has practised hit home.
3. Independence is taken off the table as a UK constitutional settlement is found which most Scots can live with. Then the internal contradictions inherent in a nationalist grouping that encompasses a wide range of very divergent views will come to the fore and the party loses its ferocious focus and discipline as it struggles to work out what to do next.
Of course, points 2 and 3 also work as a way back for the Scottish Tories. And if it turns out to be 3 then David Cameron will have to play a big part, meaning he could create the conditions that will make SLab a force again.
As a Unionist Cameron will want that, but as a Tory he might be making life a lot tougher for his party.
That's why a proper constitutional convention before a settlement is so important, not just for the long term prospects of the UK but for a Tory party that believes in the Union. Back of the envelope stuff imposed on everyone via Parliamentary majority may look appealing, but will only ever be short term and will not close the independence issue down.
A settlement agreed by all and then endorsed by referendum does do that though. And if its federalism we end up with, the Tories interests in England are much better protected: solutions imposed by Parliamentary majority can be undone the same way. And would be as soon as the Tories no longer command the Commons.
You allude to the quality of the canvassers and Dr Fox does too. I've always thought that some fact-to-face conversations can be counter-productive. If an Owen Jones or a tim stride up and harangue the occupant, then return to say. "He had some silly and bigoted ideas but I soon put him straight." - you've just lost a don't know.
How many of Ed's conversations were like that?
Can you filter out the fanatics?
I don't think the City would be too keen,he has not endeared himself there over the last few years... they work on a profit system.
Its made complicated by two sets of boundary changes.
Conservative losses since 1992
At least a dozen in London, many on enormous swings eg Croydon North which has a Labour majority of over 20,000.
Ten in Scotland
Middle class areas in conurbations - Hallam, Leeds NW, Leeds NE, Edgbaston, Coventry S, Wolverhampton SW, Tynemouth, Bury S, Bristol W, Hove, Brighton Pavilion
Middle class 'Greater Scouseland' - Wirral W, Wirral S, Chester, Sefton C, Southport
Carshalton, Norfolk N and Westmoreland to strong LibDems
Conservative gains since 1992
Various from the LibDems - Bath, Cheltenham, Cornwall N, Truro, Devon N, Yeovil, Brecon, Montgomershire, Berwick
Middle England industrial areas - Nuneaton, Warwickshire N, Cannock, Sherwood, Morley, Crewe, Pendle, Rossendale, Thurrock
Three gains in SW Wales
The Conservatives would also have benefited from boundary reviews creating more rural constituencies.
Liz Kendall could be a good one, will do a little more research on her before betting. Thanks.
Those suggesting Lucy Powell or Rachel Reeves are probably Tory members!
here in Mercia we have our own madmen Ozzy Osborne and his earth scorcher brother George
Cameron needs to respect the views of the Scottish people and the rights of their elected representatives to take a full role in the UK Parliament but he also needs, bluntly, to shaft Labour once and for all. This means reaching agreements bilaterally with the SNP and getting their consent for EVEL as the quid pro quo of a much enhanced devolution settlement. EVEL cannot be imposed unilaterally or Scotland will end up leaving but an agreement between the two main parties is surely possible.
Those suggesting Lucy Powell or Rachel Reeves are probably Tory members!
She is ambitious and fairly ruthless too. Was quite an active campaigner, trade union links but pretty dry on spending. Would give Dave a very hard time at PMQs. One of the best TV performers on the Labour front bench.
PMQs might be the week after that, 4th June.
If I take our Nats at face value the only ones they mention giving them a run for their money have been Annabel Goldie and Ruth Davidson.
I knew you had an honest post within you...!
More practically, I think after the initial euphoria, I think the 56 MPs are not going to find it at all easy. There are no ready made induction/support networks for SNP MPs at Westminster which are going to have to be put in place very quickly. The sensible ones might try and form personal links with MPs from other parties, but for many I imagine that will require a different mindset from the default. Especially from a party who's mandate is to oppose/change the way Westminster operates - "slotting in" will, for many, not be an option.
Then there is the issue of what they are all going to do. There will obviously be resistance to putting them on "English" committees, and anyway there will only be so many posts to go round. The media will quickly focus on a few key individuals for quotes/reaction (Salmond, basically), resentment among the rest could quickly build up. And then there is the human reality that many of these people simply won't like each other on a personal level. 56 is a good number for factions to build up pretty rapidly. Salmond talks about how much trouble the SNP were allegedly able to cause Thatcher in the 80s, but it is easier to do that sort of thing when just a close knit small group of MPs. Corelling 56 MPs to cause trouble on a consistent basis is I imagine not such a simple matter.
Will they do pairing? How will the whipping work? How will day to day party management work and who will be in charge? I'm quite certain we will find all the controversial/close votes, especially ones on arguably "English" matters will be scheduled for Thursday evenings. The enthusiasm for sticking around in Westminster for those may quickly die away.
Add to that that Scotland is the remotest area from Westminster. Maintaining constituent contact is harder than anywhere else. There may be turf wars with MSPs on the same patch.
Holyrood election may be interesting and unexpected.
And finally, do they all want to be there? Many will have chosen to stand to give them experience of campaigning with an eye to moving through the party in Holyrood (and hopefully, later, an independent Scotland). Being in Westminster was not part of the plan. But they now need a plan for Westminster.
And in those famous words of Tony Blair ...
"A new day has dawned has it not .... Enough of talk it is time to do ...."
Titter ....
Yesterday I had hoped to post some further analysis of the campaign but got sidetracked, however the delay may have been fortuitous as it'll give me a little more time to speak to a few contacts, one of whom I'll meeting briefly at lunchtime.
The Tories invested huge amounts into the virtual war in this campaign. I understand that they were spending over £100K a month on Facebook alone. Was that more effective?
I only saw the Tory e-mails and (other the SamCam one which I continue to believe was deeply personal) they were fairly generic and rather obsessed with looking for money. Each and every one encouraged me to spread the message on social media. It would be interesting to see how much that actually happened.
My guess is that this election was something of a watershed between the emphasis being on actual and virtual campaigning but it is only that.
Some decent start points for the Tories in a few constituencies in Scotland now.
Imagine imposed FFA.
Thanks for that quick summary. Getting on at 16/1, along with Jarvis who's getting much shorter.
My concern is that I don't know enough about the internal workings of the party and they'll choose someone seemingly baffling from the outside - just as they did with Ed.
THEY.
HAVE.
NOT.
Have you ever read a history book...?
A Tory + SNP parliament is probably one that has the best chance for a better constitutional settlement for the English and the Scots.
Cameron can deliver EVEL and keep the English happy, whilst giving enough to the Scots to prevent breakup.
Both the SNP and Conservatives will be good with this, and Labour (thankfully) can be ignored.
What many right wing posters on here fail to grasp is that white working class people do not all drive white vans and fly England flags at every opportunity. In fact, the vast majority don't. They have a range of views and outlooks, many of which are anathema to the right. The WWC Labour is said to have abandoned - with some justification - was and is patriotic, but was also very strongly grounded in trade unionism, nationalisation, belief in a strong, cradle to grave welfare state, and very high marginal top rate tax rates.
Put it this way, the two most prominent working class figures in English politics over recent years have been Bob Crow and Len McCluskey.
Of course, that would require party leaders giving up power rather than hoarding it.
The Liberal Democrats had 282 losses, Labour 153 and independents/others 260.
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/may/09/tories-make-large-gains-in-council-contests-after-general-election-win
Small swing from Lab to Con (which was implied by Comres/Opinium/Survation), and UKIP on the rise.
Will Welsh Labour be tempted in any way to play because Labour have been neutered in England and panda-ised in Scotland?
I've inboxed you about our bets.
She was subjected to a quite horrible and personal campaign against her from some quite horrible people. Cameron himself could really do with a Northern woman in his office, would offer him a usefully different perspective on life.
So this will be of no surprise:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Germany
Maybe George Osborne needs to sit you down for a remedial maths lesson...?
To keep the length of this post down, here are those over 10,000 in the past four weeks. The figures on the end show the length of each video.
For Labour:
22,170 views A decent society looks after its people 2:46
23,467 views Ed's Mystery Guest 1:36
27,137 views Look at what David Cameron has done in five years... 0:27
94,887 views Steve Coogan on the choice in this election 2:46
104,631 views Ed Miliband: A Portrait 4:39
For Conservatives
11,690 views David Cameron: Let's finish what we've begun 16:05
14,856 views Salmond Alert 0:25
53,402 views Alex Salmond: "I'm writing the Labour Party budget" 0:29
61,966 views David Cameron: Vote Conservative on Thursday 1:58
67,014 views David Cameron: Vote Conservative today 0:49
84,380 views Our note to you: let's keep going 1:45
88,876 views Don't risk it with Ed Miliband and the SNP 0:14
89,097 views The SNP propping up Ed Miliband: you'll pay for it 0:19
174,548 views What type of country do we want to be? 2:41
420,080 views It's working - don't let them wreck it. Vote Conservative on Thursday. 2:46
As an aside, notice how many are what the Americans call "attack ads" that would not be allowed on television.
You really don't get it do you?
All of the things you mention - the pay and rations stuff - will already have been dealt with.
This is the most ruthlessly professional political force in history - far more organised than Labour or even the Tories. It will take a lot more than that to stop the March of the NATS!
The Scottish Conservatives are based around their MSPs and not their MP and have benefited from this. Ruth Davidson knows the SNP weaknesses and is always on TV up here. Labour will go the same way and may even benefit from not having MPs to get in the way of policy.
The fiscal battle between Cameron and Sturgeon will be brutal. I see this as more of a risk to the union than the European referendum.
"What many right wing posters on here fail to grasp is that white working class people do not all drive white vans and fly England flags at every opportunity. In fact, the vast majority don't. They have a range of views and outlooks, many of which are anathema to the right. The WWC Labour is said to have abandoned - with some justification - was and is patriotic, but was also very strongly grounded in trade unionism, nationalisation, belief in a strong, cradle to grave welfare state, and very high marginal top rate tax rates."
Spot on. They may be left-ish economically, but socially they tend to be old-fashioned.
NickP,
Commiserations. No matter how carefully constructed your sand castles, you can't stop the strong tide of public opinion washing up the beach..
or add the word almost to the earlier post :-)
As a Labour voter, albeit a reluctant one, I'd also like to say thank-you for all that you've done. I wish it could have ended better, that it didn't is no reflection on you at all. You were caught up in something far bigger.
Burnham was a researcher to Tessa Jowell from 1994 until the 1997 election, and joined the Transport and General Workers' Union in 1995. After the 1997 election, he was briefly a Parliamentary Officer for the NHS Confederation from August to December 1997, before taking up the post as an administrator with the Football Task Force for a year.
In 1998, he became a Special Adviser to the then Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, Chris Smith, a position he remained in until his election to Parliament in 2001.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andy_Burnham
Jarvis:
Jarvis attended the Royal Military Academy Sandhurst as an officer cadet. On 9 August 1997, he was given a short service commission into the Parachute Regiment as a subaltern (second lieutenant) with seniority from 9 July 1994.......
During his time in the Parachute Regiment, Jarvis was a platoon commander with 3 Para in Kosovo in 1999, and was with General Sir Mike Jackson during the Pristina Airport incident when Jackson refused the suggestion of his American NATO superior to confront Russian forces..... In 2000 he was deployed to Sierra Leone in the aftermath of Operation Barras to help the Army learn the lessons of the kidnap of a group of troops by an armed rebel group.
Jarvis served in Iraq during Operation Telic and in Afghanistan during Operation Herrick. He was deployed to Afghanistan twice... The second deployment was a six-month tour as a company commander with the Special Forces Support Group, leading a company of 100 troops. He was also deployed to Northern Ireland.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_Jarvis
All revenues and expenditures in Scotland, that's fair enough.
"This is the most ruthlessly professional political force in history"
So better than Stalin or Mao ?
I'm still laughing.