Interesting. I'm tempted but a bit fed up of political bets at the moment.
No chance. Would do well in Richmond and Twickenham, but that'd be about it.
In the same way that there was no way Londoners would elect Boris?
Clearly Labour are favourites, but unless the Tories can get Seb or Karren to stand, Zac looks by far the best candidate, and I suspect his moderation and environmentalism etc. will go down well.
Yes, this is an election in which the personality of the candidate is as important as party affiliation. But Zac has strictly SW appeal. Heathrow expansion is not an issue in east London, nor indeed for great parts of west London.
To be fair to James Arbuthnot he had done some high profile work exposing the injustices of the Royal Mail's dealings with sub post masters ( criminal records given due to problems with the new IT system) towards the end of the last Parliament
I heard him on the radio a few weeks ago and, yes, it did sound an impressive piece of work. A good example of standing up for small businesses rather than non-doms and multinationals. To be honest I am fairly neutral about him and probably doing him a disservice, but in comparison Gerry Howarth in neighbouring Aldershot does seem more approachable and more likely to involve himself in local issues.
Interesting. I'm tempted but a bit fed up of political bets at the moment.
No chance. Would do well in Richmond and Twickenham, but that'd be about it.
In the same way that there was no way Londoners would elect Boris?
Clearly Labour are favourites, but unless the Tories can get Seb or Karren to stand, Zac looks by far the best candidate, and I suspect his moderation and environmentalism etc. will go down well.
Yes, this is an election in which the personality of the candidate is as important as party affiliation. But Zac has strictly SW appeal. Heathrow expansion is not an issue in east London, nor indeed for great parts of west London.
Somehow I don't think he'll make Heathrow the central plank of his manifesto. But keep underestimating Tories if you like...
"In Carlisle, Labour told voters that John didn’t care about opportunities for young people – just as John was organising his third Skills Fair in the town.
In Stockton South, Labour told people that James Wharton, the local Conservative MP, didn’t care about the NHS. Yet, it was James who was leading the campaign for £50 million to be invested in his local NHS hospital.
In my own patch, Labour put out a leaflet on polling day telling voters I was opposed to the Minimum Wage. Not only do I wholeheartedly support the Minimum Wage, but I have been a passionate advocate of the Living Wage for the past two years.
Nationally, Labour once again told voters there was just 24 hours to save the NHS from the Tories. It seems lost on them, if not on the country, that there have been eight Conservative Prime ministers since the NHS was founded in 1948 – and it remains rated as one of the best healthcare services in the world.
This wasn’t just a few cases of political mischief. Nationally, and in the marginals, Labour were shadow-boxing an enemy that only existed in their memories and the echo chamber of Twitter."
Yeah
"This wasn’t just a few cases of political mischief. Nationally, and in the marginals, Labour were shadow-boxing an enemy that only existed in their memories and the echo chamber of Twitter. As they did so, David Cameron and Conservative candidates were articulating our vision for an aspirational economy, which would secure our public services and help Britain fulfil its promise in the 21st Century. The Labour Party, like a poorly directed amateur dramatics society, continued re-enacting battles from the 1970s and 1980s, whilst the Conservative cavalry quietly conquered the marginals."
Don't forget this Cameron and beyond.
I think that Professor of Philosophy from Royal Holloway College, who's decided that Conservatives are too stupid and reprehensible to be worth debating with, encapsulates that attitude perfectly. If you don't even bother to find out why your political opponents believe what they do, and erect caricatures and straw men, you shouldn't be surprised if the public reject you.
Encouraging signs that the Tory Right might get it:
"Graham Stuart, former Education Committtee chair, has been at the 1992 committee of Conservative MPs - attended by the prime minister a little earlier. Mr Stuart says that what came out most strongly from the meeting was the need to put social justice at the centre of the party's work. Too often we've allowed our opponents to paint us as less interested in this, he adds.
What about Europe? He notes the "unity" of the party on Europe, saying the PM has got this one right. Regardless of the outcome of the renegotiation it's for the people to decide on our future membership of the EU. We promised a referendum - and that's what we'll deliver, he adds."
"'Goodwill bodes well'
BBC News Channel Posted at 12:57 Graham Brady
"Commenting on the 1992 committee meeting with the PM, chairman Graham Brady says he's never seen the room so full. "The sense of goodwill in the party towards the prime minister and the feeling of reciprocation bodes well for the coming years," he tells the BBC.
But how long with that last? "We need to work at that but the most important thing is that we try to have disagreements quietly," Mr Brady adds. He says the big difference between the party and 20 years ago - when it was riven with internal divisions over Europe - is that this government is committed to having an EU referendum.
How will you ensure you make progress on the issue of the EU without allowing it to dominate the Tory agenda? "Because we all know it's in ours and the country's interest to take a balanced view on this," he says. There's still "a huge job" to build on the economic recovery and to address the constitutional future of the UK"
I see Mr Sugar has resigned from the Labour Party. Any inference to rats deserting proverbial ships is simply coincidental.
Lord Sugar has behaved with a huge amount of decency in deferring his resignation until after the GE.
Of course he has and he would have resigned if Ed stone had entered No 10. Mmmmmm.. No I don't think so sorry I just don't. Sugar has always been about sugar and will always be about Sugar.
Interesting. I'm tempted but a bit fed up of political bets at the moment.
No chance. Would do well in Richmond and Twickenham, but that'd be about it.
In the same way that there was no way Londoners would elect Boris?
Clearly Labour are favourites, but unless the Tories can get Seb or Karren to stand, Zac looks by far the best candidate, and I suspect his moderation and environmentalism etc. will go down well.
Yes, this is an election in which the personality of the candidate is as important as party affiliation. But Zac has strictly SW appeal. Heathrow expansion is not an issue in east London, nor indeed for great parts of west London.
Somehow I don't think he'll make Heathrow the central plank of his manifesto. But keep underestimating Tories if you like...
er... I don't think I'm guilty of underestimating tories - not after last Thursday! And I have said on here the Lab performance in London was actually very disappointing. It just looks good in comparison to everywhere else.
EDIT: Oh, a Thick Of It reference. Haven't seen that yet.
I urge you to watch it! Makes the last twenty years of UK politics much clearer. Although one of the script writers said the other day that the Ed stone wouldn't have made into the show as a piece of satire way to far.
Interesting. I'm tempted but a bit fed up of political bets at the moment.
No chance. Would do well in Richmond and Twickenham, but that'd be about it.
In the same way that there was no way Londoners would elect Boris?
Clearly Labour are favourites, but unless the Tories can get Seb or Karren to stand, Zac looks by far the best candidate, and I suspect his moderation and environmentalism etc. will go down well.
Yes, this is an election in which the personality of the candidate is as important as party affiliation. But Zac has strictly SW appeal. Heathrow expansion is not an issue in east London, nor indeed for great parts of west London.
Somehow I don't think he'll make Heathrow the central plank of his manifesto. But keep underestimating Tories if you like...
er... I don't think I'm guilty of underestimating tories - not after last Thursday! And I have said on here the Lab performance in London was actually very disappointing. It just looks good in comparison to everywhere else.
Writing Zac off as strictly SW appeal looks wrong to me. But then I haven't lived in London for some time...
Charles If anyone had said to a US political commentator in November 2004 just after George W Bush had beaten John Kerry that Chicago Community Organiser Barack Hussein Obama would have been the next US president they would have laughed in your face. The prospect of the first UK ethnic minority PM could well increase turnout amongst UK ethnic minorities, who knows, of course Chuka could lose, but he could win too, who knows what will happen in 5 years time
Writing Zac off as strictly SW appeal looks wrong to me. But then I haven't lived in London for some time...
It is wrong. Zac is very engaging, he's a surprisngly good campaigner, he's very independent-minded and he's not identified with the party leadership (good for mayoral contests), he's clearly someone who would be a champion for London, his environmental focus will appeal to many but he's also likely to be business-friendly. He'd be a strong candidate, if he wants to go for it.
On the subject of Oliver Dowden. I owe Richard N an apology. Having dismissed him as only getting the plum seat of Hertsmere because he was one of Dave's mates. He was actually canvassing in Potters Bar, and called on one of my mates from the pub. He was very impressed and more so as having lived in PB since the 60's had never been canvassed by anyone.
I did quite a bit of canvassing when I was councillor for Oakmere. Which is your ward?
I did meet you once Sean at PB Con club. I was in Oakmere ward then but have since crossed the border into Park field.
Encouraging signs that the Tory Right might get it:
"Graham Stuart, former Education Committtee chair, has been at the 1992 committee of Conservative MPs - attended by the prime minister a little earlier. Mr Stuart says that what came out most strongly from the meeting was the need to put social justice at the centre of the party's work. Too often we've allowed our opponents to paint us as less interested in this, he adds.
What about Europe? He notes the "unity" of the party on Europe, saying the PM has got this one right. Regardless of the outcome of the renegotiation it's for the people to decide on our future membership of the EU. We promised a referendum - and that's what we'll deliver, he adds."
"'Goodwill bodes well'
BBC News Channel Posted at 12:57 Graham Brady
"Commenting on the 1992 committee meeting with the PM, chairman Graham Brady says he's never seen the room so full. "The sense of goodwill in the party towards the prime minister and the feeling of reciprocation bodes well for the coming years," he tells the BBC.
But how long with that last? "We need to work at that but the most important thing is that we try to have disagreements quietly," Mr Brady adds. He says the big difference between the party and 20 years ago - when it was riven with internal divisions over Europe - is that this government is committed to having an EU referendum.
How will you ensure you make progress on the issue of the EU without allowing it to dominate the Tory agenda? "Because we all know it's in ours and the country's interest to take a balanced view on this," he says. There's still "a huge job" to build on the economic recovery and to address the constitutional future of the UK"
Exactly. The party has honest internal disagreements about the EU. As long as both the pro-EU and anti-EU camps are honest and open about their arguments then there's no need for a falling out. The public will get their say, and that will settle it one way or another for a decade or so.
If the Conservatives want to put the boot into the BBC, I make it over a hundred seat majority for this particular move...
Indeed - the country will applaud the Tories for it as well. The UK hates the way that the BBC does not report events in the way the Conservative party would like and would believe it to be utterly reasonable for the Tories to do something about it.
Interesting. I'm tempted but a bit fed up of political bets at the moment.
No chance. Would do well in Richmond and Twickenham, but that'd be about it.
In the same way that there was no way Londoners would elect Boris?
Clearly Labour are favourites, but unless the Tories can get Seb or Karren to stand, Zac looks by far the best candidate, and I suspect his moderation and environmentalism etc. will go down well.
Yes, this is an election in which the personality of the candidate is as important as party affiliation. But Zac has strictly SW appeal. Heathrow expansion is not an issue in east London, nor indeed for great parts of west London.
Somehow I don't think he'll make Heathrow the central plank of his manifesto. But keep underestimating Tories if you like...
er... I don't think I'm guilty of underestimating tories - not after last Thursday! And I have said on here the Lab performance in London was actually very disappointing. It just looks good in comparison to everywhere else.
Writing Zac off as strictly SW appeal looks wrong to me. But then I haven't lived in London for some time...
I think what most people round here know about him is he's a posho environmentalist who's dead against Heathrow expansion (even in west London views about whatever that's a good thing or not are mixed). My view is that he'd need to be priced at 50-1 or better for it to be considered a good bet. On the other hand a Tory candidate who had some workable policies for housing could definitely be in with a shout.
Writing Zac off as strictly SW appeal looks wrong to me. But then I haven't lived in London for some time...
It is wrong. Zac is very engaging, he's a surprisngly good campaigner, he's very independent-minded and he's not identified with the party leadership (good for mayoral contests), he's clearly someone who would be a champion for London, his environmental focus will appeal to many but he's also likely to be business-friendly. He'd be a strong candidate, if he wants to go for it.
Encouraging signs that the Tory Right might get it:
"Graham Stuart, former Education Committtee chair, has been at the 1992 committee of Conservative MPs - attended by the prime minister a little earlier. Mr Stuart says that what came out most strongly from the meeting was the need to put social justice at the centre of the party's work. Too often we've allowed our opponents to paint us as less interested in this, he adds.
What about Europe? He notes the "unity" of the party on Europe, saying the PM has got this one right. Regardless of the outcome of the renegotiation it's for the people to decide on our future membership of the EU. We promised a referendum - and that's what we'll deliver, he adds."
"'Goodwill bodes well'
BBC News Channel Posted at 12:57 Graham Brady
"Commenting on the 1992 committee meeting with the PM, chairman Graham Brady says he's never seen the room so full. "The sense of goodwill in the party towards the prime minister and the feeling of reciprocation bodes well for the coming years," he tells the BBC.
But how long with that last? "We need to work at that but the most important thing is that we try to have disagreements quietly," Mr Brady adds. He says the big difference between the party and 20 years ago - when it was riven with internal divisions over Europe - is that this government is committed to having an EU referendum.
How will you ensure you make progress on the issue of the EU without allowing it to dominate the Tory agenda? "Because we all know it's in ours and the country's interest to take a balanced view on this," he says. There's still "a huge job" to build on the economic recovery and to address the constitutional future of the UK"
Exactly. The party has honest internal disagreements about the EU. As long as both the pro-EU and anti-EU camps are honest and open about their arguments then there's no need for a falling out. The public will get their say, and that will settle it one way or another for a decade or so.
We have heard this before, but the Tories can't help themselves they will continue "banging on about Europe".
Labour requires a swing in England & Wales of 9.4% to win an overall majority at the next election under the current boundaries using UNS. If you include targets from the SNP the figure is 8.7%.
Encouraging signs that the Tory Right might get it:
"Graham Stuart, former Education Committtee chair, has been at the 1992 committee of Conservative MPs - attended by the prime minister a little earlier. Mr Stuart says that what came out most strongly from the meeting was the need to put social justice at the centre of the party's work. Too often we've allowed our opponents to paint us as less interested in this, he adds.
What about Europe? He notes the "unity" of the party on Europe, saying the PM has got this one right. Regardless of the outcome of the renegotiation it's for the people to decide on our future membership of the EU. We promised a referendum - and that's what we'll deliver, he adds."
"'Goodwill bodes well'
BBC News Channel Posted at 12:57 Graham Brady
"Commenting on the 1992 committee meeting with the PM, chairman Graham Brady says he's never seen the room so full. "The sense of goodwill in the party towards the prime minister and the feeling of reciprocation bodes well for the coming years," he tells the BBC.
But how long with that last? "We need to work at that but the most important thing is that we try to have disagreements quietly," Mr Brady adds. He says the big difference between the party and 20 years ago - when it was riven with internal divisions over Europe - is that this government is committed to having an EU referendum.
How will you ensure you make progress on the issue of the EU without allowing it to dominate the Tory agenda? "Because we all know it's in ours and the country's interest to take a balanced view on this," he says. There's still "a huge job" to build on the economic recovery and to address the constitutional future of the UK"
Exactly. The party has honest internal disagreements about the EU. As long as both the pro-EU and anti-EU camps are honest and open about their arguments then there's no need for a falling out. The public will get their say, and that will settle it one way or another for a decade or so.
We have heard this before, but the Tories can't help themselves they will continue "banging on about Europe".
I would expect a great deal less banging as most of the pro-European 'big beasts' totter into the sunset and the party's view becomes one of settled euroscepticism.
Sooooo......Labour have now announced their new front bench shadow team.
The political equivalent of rearranging the deck chairs when the Ship has already sunk and is resting at the bottom of the sea.
More accurately, the interim leader has announced an interim shadow cabinet, with most of its members doing the jobs they did in the last Parliament - in particular, all those likely to be standing in the leadership contest.
It'd be really interesting to see a seat list that Labour has to win back. I think doing it in a single parliament is fanciful unless something stunning happens
Labour requires a swing in England & Wales of 9.4% to win an overall majority at the next election under the current boundaries using UNS. If you include targets from the SNP the figure is 8.7%.
If the Conservatives want to put the boot into the BBC, I make it over a hundred seat majority for this particular move...
Indeed - the country will applaud the Tories for it as well. The UK hates the way that the BBC does not report events in the way the Conservative party would like and would believe it to be utterly reasonable for the Tories to do something about it.
Yesterday morning between 9.45am and 10am I was on my way home and turned on R4 and they were looking at papers. This was quite simply a 15 minute leftie fest so they still don't get it. The question was asked about the bias in the papers towards the Tories by the interviewer and the guest said well let's start with the BbC bias to the left. The interviewer jumped in and said no we can talk about that tomorrow but what about the Daily Mail?
Liam Brynes message about no money being left was described as " a silly bit of paper that meant nothing really"
Cameron has the perfect opportunity to finally put this at an end and return the BBC to his charter but will he? He should do it would be seriously popular.
If the Conservatives want to put the boot into the BBC, I make it over a hundred seat majority for this particular move...
Indeed - the country will applaud the Tories for it as well. The UK hates the way that the BBC does not report events in the way the Conservative party would like and would believe it to be utterly reasonable for the Tories to do something about it.
It's not just the Conservatives that'd appreciate this move
It'd be really interesting to see a seat list that Labour has to win back. I think doing it in a single parliament is fanciful unless something stunning happens
Labour requires a swing in England & Wales of 9.4% to win an overall majority at the next election under the current boundaries using UNS. If you include targets from the SNP the figure is 8.7%.
The question is what happens if the Tories drop 45 seats at 2020GE. They'd probably be on around 290-300 under the new boundaries.
A majority in England and a veto on EVEL, but not in the wider UK and no obvious coalition partners.
Sugar just told the Labour Party "Your fired" - Sky news
So the next series of The Apprentice will be dominated by Tory peers. I trust pb will be straining under the weight of complaints of political bias.
I think they should have a special series where all the high profile Labour MPs that lost their jobs have to do the show.....with Sugar ripping into them for being f##king useless.
Encouraging signs that the Tory Right might get it:
"Graham Stuart, former Education Committtee chair, has been at the 1992 committee of Conservative MPs - attended by the prime minister a little earlier. Mr Stuart says that what came out most strongly from the meeting was the need to put social justice at the centre of the party's work. Too often we've allowed our opponents to paint us as less interested in this, he adds.
What about Europe? He notes the "unity" of the party on Europe, saying the PM has got this one right. Regardless of the outcome of the renegotiation it's for the people to decide on our future membership of the EU. We promised a referendum - and that's what we'll deliver, he adds."
"'Goodwill bodes well'
BBC News Channel Posted at 12:57 Graham Brady
"Commenting on the 1992 committee meeting with the PM, chairman Graham Brady says he's never seen the room so full. "The sense of goodwill in the party towards the prime minister and the feeling of reciprocation bodes well for the coming years," he tells the BBC.
But how long with that last? "We need to work at that but the most important thing is that we try to have disagreements quietly," Mr Brady adds. He says the big difference between the party and 20 years ago - when it was riven with internal divisions over Europe - is that this government is committed to having an EU referendum.
How will you ensure you make progress on the issue of the EU without allowing it to dominate the Tory agenda? "Because we all know it's in ours and the country's interest to take a balanced view on this," he says. There's still "a huge job" to build on the economic recovery and to address the constitutional future of the UK"
Exactly. The party has honest internal disagreements about the EU. As long as both the pro-EU and anti-EU camps are honest and open about their arguments then there's no need for a falling out. The public will get their say, and that will settle it one way or another for a decade or so.
We have heard this before, but the Tories can't help themselves they will continue "banging on about Europe".
I would expect a great deal less banging as most of the pro-European 'big beasts' totter into the sunset and the party's view becomes one of settled euroscepticism.
It'd be really interesting to see a seat list that Labour has to win back. I think doing it in a single parliament is fanciful unless something stunning happens
Labour requires a swing in England & Wales of 9.4% to win an overall majority at the next election under the current boundaries using UNS. If you include targets from the SNP the figure is 8.7%.
It'd be really interesting to see a seat list that Labour has to win back. I think doing it in a single parliament is fanciful unless something stunning happens
Labour requires a swing in England & Wales of 9.4% to win an overall majority at the next election under the current boundaries using UNS. If you include targets from the SNP the figure is 8.7%.
"since their SNP replacements seem to be of similar low quality"
If that is the case (which it is not) they disguise it well, given their considerable success in life as evidenced e.g. university qualifications, successful careers etc. etc.
Were you analysis (of course, you have not actually done one, merely expressed an unjustified prejudice) correct, the MSM etc would have succeeded in taking more than the single scalp they managed (allowed the one SLABBER to survive)
Dismissing the SNP at this point in time is the position adopted only by a determined fool :-)
It'd be really interesting to see a seat list that Labour has to win back. I think doing it in a single parliament is fanciful unless something stunning happens
Labour requires a swing in England & Wales of 9.4% to win an overall majority at the next election under the current boundaries using UNS. If you include targets from the SNP the figure is 8.7%.
May need to be re-worked. From the Conservative manifesto:
In the next Parliament, we will address the unfairness of the current Parliamentary boundaries, reduce the number of MPs to 600 to cut the cost of politics and make votes of more equal value. We will implement the boundary reforms that Parliament has already approved and make them apply automatically once the Boundary Commission reports in 2018.
It'd be really interesting to see a seat list that Labour has to win back. I think doing it in a single parliament is fanciful unless something stunning happens
Labour requires a swing in England & Wales of 9.4% to win an overall majority at the next election under the current boundaries using UNS. If you include targets from the SNP the figure is 8.7%.
Interesting to see Chingford & Woodford Green at the bottom of that list, not far in swing required from Kingswood.
You could see it getting a lot of attention from Labour types as being (1) the seat held by IDS and (2) roughly speaking the seat they need to win a majority.
I also note that while Labour would take 12 seats from the Tories on a 1% swing, they would only win another 3 seats on a 2% swing, and then a further 6 seats on a 3% swing.
It'd be really interesting to see a seat list that Labour has to win back. I think doing it in a single parliament is fanciful unless something stunning happens
Labour requires a swing in England & Wales of 9.4% to win an overall majority at the next election under the current boundaries using UNS. If you include targets from the SNP the figure is 8.7%.
Interesting to see Chingford & Woodford Green at the bottom of that list, not far in swing required from Kingswood.
You could see it getting a lot of attention from Labour types as being (1) the seat held by IDS and (2) roughly speaking the seat they need to win a majority.
I also note that while Labour would take 12 seats from the Tories on a 1% swing, they would only win another 3 seats on a 2% swing, and then a further 6 seats on a 3% swing.
Perhaps something from the targeting strategy. I noticed on the night that a lot of Labour targets seemed to go away from them rather than towards them. Possibly the 5 million voter interactions had the opposite than the desired effect.
Comments
"Graham Stuart, former Education Committtee chair, has been at the 1992 committee of Conservative MPs - attended by the prime minister a little earlier. Mr Stuart says that what came out most strongly from the meeting was the need to put social justice at the centre of the party's work. Too often we've allowed our opponents to paint us as less interested in this, he adds.
What about Europe? He notes the "unity" of the party on Europe, saying the PM has got this one right. Regardless of the outcome of the renegotiation it's for the people to decide on our future membership of the EU. We promised a referendum - and that's what we'll deliver, he adds."
"'Goodwill bodes well'
BBC News Channel
Posted at 12:57
Graham Brady
"Commenting on the 1992 committee meeting with the PM, chairman Graham Brady says he's never seen the room so full. "The sense of goodwill in the party towards the prime minister and the feeling of reciprocation bodes well for the coming years," he tells the BBC.
But how long with that last? "We need to work at that but the most important thing is that we try to have disagreements quietly," Mr Brady adds. He says the big difference between the party and 20 years ago - when it was riven with internal divisions over Europe - is that this government is committed to having an EU referendum.
How will you ensure you make progress on the issue of the EU without allowing it to dominate the Tory agenda? "Because we all know it's in ours and the country's interest to take a balanced view on this," he says. There's still "a huge job" to build on the economic recovery and to address the constitutional future of the UK"
.
Sugar just told the Labour Party "Your fired" - Sky news
The political equivalent of rearranging the deck chairs when the Ship has already sunk and is resting at the bottom of the sea.
Labour requires a swing in England & Wales of 9.4% to win an overall majority at the next election under the current boundaries using UNS. If you include targets from the SNP the figure is 8.7%.
There are going to be tears before bedtime
Liam Brynes message about no money being left was described as " a silly bit of paper that meant nothing really"
Cameron has the perfect opportunity to finally put this at an end and return the BBC to his charter but will he? He should do it would be seriously popular.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/video/2015/may/06/nuneaton-election-2015-scottish-get-in-with-labour-were-done-for
A majority in England and a veto on EVEL, but not in the wider UK and no obvious coalition partners.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0At91c3wX1Wu5dGZQUmFIb0xPaURkeGdubVBCRHJkbmc#gid=0
CON Gain I reckon.
In the next Parliament, we will address the unfairness of the current Parliamentary boundaries, reduce the number of MPs to 600 to cut the cost of politics and make votes of more equal value. We will implement the boundary reforms that Parliament has already approved and make them apply automatically once the Boundary Commission reports in 2018.
You could see it getting a lot of attention from Labour types as being (1) the seat held by IDS and (2) roughly speaking the seat they need to win a majority.
I also note that while Labour would take 12 seats from the Tories on a 1% swing, they would only win another 3 seats on a 2% swing, and then a further 6 seats on a 3% swing.
'The question is what happens if the Tories drop 45 seats at 2020GE. They'd probably be on around 290-300 under the new boundaries.
A majority in England and a veto on EVEL, but not in the wider UK and no obvious coalition partners.'
But under the new boundaries and seat reduction to 600 they would only need 301 for a majority + the possibilty of support from DUP / UUP.