In a major concession over its controversial academy plans, the government has announced good or outstanding schools will no longer be forced to become academies.
Michael Dugher (Labour MP) on BBC Two still criticising Corbyn's leadership, saying that Labour should have been electorally "storming ahead" of what he deems "the worst Conservative government that I can remember since Major in the mid-90s".
Seeing as it's the first Conservative government (technically) since Major in the mid-90s... :-)
Getting 47 per cent of the vote but no majority compared to Cameron's 37 per cent with a majority. Which would you have?
On governing Sturgeon will have no problem. Limit legislation, maximise intitiatives and put the other parties on the spot. Salmond did it with 47 for four years between 2007-2011. Sturgeon will do it with 63 for five.
On independence she still has an indy majority in the Parliament and Greens have just confirmed it in the same language of popular demand that Sturgeon uses.
Ironically the Greens are running on SNP petrol rather than their own wind power in the second vote. If they start to go cool on independence then they will be back in their two seat box in the next parliament.
The good news for the SNP is that with the Tories in second place they'll have no trouble in getting their tax cutting agenda through the Parliament. Unlike other parts of the UK, Scotland has voted unequivocally for parties that believe the best way to grow the economy is to cut taxes for the better off, rather than raising them, and to squeeze the public services used by the poorest. It is now clearly the most right wing of the home nations. Whoever would have thought it?
The SNP's most impressive trick is to convince people it is progressive or even left wing.
A trick that SLab, despite its essentially Blairite tendencies, seems entirely incapable of performing on its own behalf.
Dismore now comfortably ahead for Labour in Brent and Harrow. Merton and Wandsworth still looking like a Labour gain on a slim margin (about a 3,5-4% swing to Labour there), and Redbridge like a Tory hold on an even slimmer one. Basically the core of the doughnut turned out and the outer ring is not as Tory as it was. There seems to be neither a big Khan personal vote or a big anti-Khan personal vote (except maybe in Brent and Harrow, but I think the difference there is Dismore's personal vote), as the Khan/Labour votes move in step. People have seemingly just shrugged off all the "you once met an Islamist" stuff and voted on a party basis.
Anecdotally I did meet a few Labour voters on the doorstep yesterday in inner London who said they weren't voting for Khan.
However I also met a large number of very enthusiastic Khan supporters who hadn't always voted in the past and some who were splitting their vote - including one who said she has voted for Khan as Mayor and UKIP in the party list! In the event the two trends seem to have balanced each other, leaving Khan on roughly the same vote share as the Party.
Universal view was that Goldsmith had fought a poor campaign, completely failed to play to his strengths on the environment etc and recipients of the "family jewelry" letters felt insulted and angry.
It may also be the case that the Goldsmith vote energised dormant anti-Tory voters who were reminded of why they do not like the party. It sort of happened in Oldham East too to an extent: the UKIP campaign actually got Labour voters to come out and vote.
Agreed.
Coming out for Leave was another Goldsmith blunder - London leans heavily to Remain and going for Leave lost him any chance of vocal support from business or the City.
UKIP back in 4th place in 2016 projected national vote share from BBC. Con 30 Lab 31 LD 15 UKIP 12 UKIP failed in goal of being 3rd
Local election vote share is influenced by how many seats the Lib Dems and UKIP stand in. It does not necessarily reflect general election vote share when UKIP and Lib Dem stand in nearly all the seats.
In a major concession over its controversial academy plans, the government has announced good or outstanding schools will no longer be forced to become academies.
Dismore now comfortably ahead for Labour in Brent and Harrow. Merton and Wandsworth still looking like a Labour gain on a slim margin (about a 3,5-4% swing to Labour there), and Redbridge like a Tory hold on an even slimmer one. Basically the core of the doughnut turned out and the outer ring is not as Tory as it was. There seems to be neither a big Khan personal vote or a big anti-Khan personal vote (except maybe in Brent and Harrow, but I think the difference there is Dismore's personal vote), as the Khan/Labour votes move in step. People have seemingly just shrugged off all the "you once met an Islamist" stuff and voted on a party basis.
Anecdotally I did meet a few Labour voters on the doorstep yesterday in inner London who said they weren't voting for Khan.
However I also met a large number of very enthusiastic Khan supporters who hadn't always voted in the past and some who were splitting their vote - including one who said she has voted for Khan as Mayor and UKIP in the party list! In the event the two trends seem to have balanced each other, leaving Khan on roughly the same vote share as the Party.
Universal view was that Goldsmith had fought a poor campaign, completely failed to play to his strengths on the environment etc and recipients of the "family jewelry" letters felt insulted and angry.
It may also be the case that the Goldsmith vote energised dormant anti-Tory voters who were reminded of why they do not like the party. It sort of happened in Oldham East too to an extent: the UKIP campaign actually got Labour voters to come out and vote.
Agreed.
Coming out for Leave was another Goldsmith blunder - London leans heavily to Remain and going for Leave lost him any chance of vocal support from business or the City.
Anti-Eu, anti-heathrow, less than pro uber, wrong side of all those arguments for London.
UKIP back in 4th place in 2016 projected national vote share from BBC. Con 30 Lab 31 LD 15 UKIP 12 UKIP failed in goal of being 3rd
Local election vote share is influenced by how many seats the Lib Dems and UKIP stand in. It does not necessarily reflect general election vote share when UKIP and Lib Dem stand in nearly all the seats.
UKIP stood in more councils. LDs didn't have any candidates in 10% of councils at all.
Getting 47 per cent of the vote but no majority compared to Cameron's 37 per cent with a majority. Which would you have?
On governing Sturgeon will have no problem. Limit legislation, maximise intitiatives and put the other parties on the spot. Salmond did it with 47 for four years between 2007-2011. Sturgeon will do it with 63 for five.
On independence she still has an indy majority in the Parliament and Greens have just confirmed it in the same language of popular demand that Sturgeon uses.
Ironically the Greens are running on SNP petrol rather than their own wind power in the second vote. If they start to go cool on independence then they will be back in their two seat box in the next parliament.
The good news for the SNP is that with the Tories in second place they'll have no trouble in getting their tax cutting agenda through the Parliament. Unlike other parts of the UK, Scotland has voted unequivocally for parties that believe the best way to grow the economy is to cut taxes for the better off, rather than raising them, and to squeeze the public services used by the poorest. It is now clearly the most right wing of the home nations. Whoever would have thought it?
The SNP's most impressive trick is to convince people it is progressive or even left wing. This ought to provide an opening for SLAB to attack SNP as the party of the rich and big business.
If you tell people what they want to hear they will often ignore what you actually do. But Scotland is a right of centre country today. There is absolutely no doubt about it.
UKIP back in 4th place in 2016 projected national vote share from BBC. Con 30 Lab 31 LD 15 UKIP 12 UKIP failed in goal of being 3rd
Local election vote share is influenced by how many seats the Lib Dems and UKIP stand in. It does not necessarily reflect general election vote share when UKIP and Lib Dem stand in nearly all the seats.
UKIP stood in more councils. LDs didn't have any candidates in 10% of councils at all.
Is it still an unfair extrapolation because of full votes in areas where UKIP typically do worse, such as Scotland and London?
UKIP back in 4th place in 2016 projected national vote share from BBC. Con 30 Lab 31 LD 15 UKIP 12 UKIP failed in goal of being 3rd
Local election vote share is influenced by how many seats the Lib Dems and UKIP stand in. It does not necessarily reflect general election vote share when UKIP and Lib Dem stand in nearly all the seats.
In a major concession over its controversial academy plans, the government has announced good or outstanding schools will no longer be forced to become academies.
Osborne told to get back in his box.
If only Nicky Morgan had the balls to tell him where to go when he suggested it. Osborne's toadys are completely inept. Rudd, Morgan and Javid are completely incapable of being Secretaries of State.
In a major concession over its controversial academy plans, the government has announced good or outstanding schools will no longer be forced to become academies.
Osborne told to get back in his box.
But local authority schools are never good or outstanding in Osborne-land.
Am I right in thinking that outside Scotland this is a pretty meh performance by the Tories too?
Yes, but for a split party Labour have let them off the hook. A better Labour leader would have put them to the sword and Dave would be in serious shit right now trying to explain that 300 losses aren't so bad.
I think Khan fought an excellent campaign. One that Labour nationally would do well to emulate - plenty of outreach to potentially difficult and doubtful parts of the electorate.
Boris's legacy to London is a Labour mayor and a Labour assembly.
Yes, I agree - there were plenty of pitfalls and he avoided them all with a careful, positive and disciplined effort. I thought his comment of regret that Goldsmith, who he knew as a liberal cosmopolitan, had allowed his campaign to slip into anti-Muslim stereotyping was far better than if he'd denounced Goldsmith personally. It pretty much defused the issue.
It's a lesson for Crosby and his mates - you can't win an election *only* by shouting "Islamist!" "friends with extremists!" and the like.
UKIP back in 4th place in 2016 projected national vote share from BBC. Con 30 Lab 31 LD 15 UKIP 12 UKIP failed in goal of being 3rd
Local election vote share is influenced by how many seats the Lib Dems and UKIP stand in. It does not necessarily reflect general election vote share when UKIP and Lib Dem stand in nearly all the seats.
UKIP stood in more councils. LDs didn't have any candidates in 10% of councils at all.
Is it still an unfair extrapolation because of full votes in areas where UKIP typically do worse, such as Scotland and London?
UKIP, though, will probably finish slightly ahead of the Lib Dems in London.
Am I right in thinking that outside Scotland this is a pretty meh performance by the Tories too?
Yes, but for a split party Labour have let them off the hook. A better Labour leader would have put them to the sword and Dave would be in serious shit right now trying to explain that 300 losses aren't so bad.
"This is the worst conservative government since Major in the 90s"
errrrr
Under Major as PM the economy recovered from the recession of the early 1990s and a new monetary policy was put into effect after Black Wednesday. The basic rate of income tax was reduced from 25% to 23%, UK Government spending reduced as a percentage of GDP, and the budget deficit reduced from £50.8 billion in 1993 to £15.5 billion in 1997.
I think Khan fought an excellent campaign. One that Labour nationally would do well to emulate - plenty of outreach to potentially difficult and doubtful parts of the electorate.
Boris's legacy to London is a Labour mayor and a Labour assembly.
Yes, I agree - there were plenty of pitfalls and he avoided them all with a careful, positive and disciplined effort. I thought his comment of regret that Goldsmith, who he knew as a liberal cosmopolitan, had allowed his campaign to slip into anti-Muslim stereotyping was far better than if he'd denounced Goldsmith personally. It pretty much defused the issue.
It's a lesson for Crosby and his mates - you can't win an election *only* by shouting "Islamist!" "friends with extremists!" and the like.
A swing of 3.5% since the General Election is equivalent to a 2% Conservative lead in England. It's an artificial exercise though, as so much of England didn't have local elections. The PCC elections may give some pointer as to how the parties were faring elsewhere.
Always used to be able to see gains or losses by council, now all you get is a link to the relevant council's homepage! Most of these don;t have "gain" or "loss" just who won.
I think Khan fought an excellent campaign. One that Labour nationally would do well to emulate - plenty of outreach to potentially difficult and doubtful parts of the electorate.
Boris's legacy to London is a Labour mayor and a Labour assembly.
Yes, I agree - there were plenty of pitfalls and he avoided them all with a careful, positive and disciplined effort. I thought his comment of regret that Goldsmith, who he knew as a liberal cosmopolitan, had allowed his campaign to slip into anti-Muslim stereotyping was far better than if he'd denounced Goldsmith personally. It pretty much defused the issue.
It's a lesson for Crosby and his mates - you can't win an election *only* by shouting "Islamist!" "friends with extremists!" and the like.
We don't know the counterfactual. It might easily have been worse for Zac Goldsmith.
Dismore now comfortably ahead for Labour in Brent and Harrow. Merton and Wandsworth still looking like a Labour gain on a slim margin (about a 3,5-4% swing to Labour there), and Redbridge like a Tory hold on an even slimmer one. Basically the core of the doughnut turned out and the outer ring is not as Tory as it was. There seems to be neither a big Khan personal vote or a big anti-Khan personal vote (except maybe in Brent and Harrow, but I think the difference there is Dismore's personal vote), as the Khan/Labour votes move in step. People have seemingly just shrugged off all the "you once met an Islamist" stuff and voted on a party basis.
Anecdotally I did meet a few Labour voters on the doorstep yesterday in inner London who said they weren't voting for Khan.
However I also met a large number of very enthusiastic Khan supporters who hadn't always voted in the past and some who were splitting their vote - including one who said she has voted for Khan as Mayor and UKIP in the party list! In the event the two trends seem to have balanced each other, leaving Khan on roughly the same vote share as the Party.
Universal view was that Goldsmith had fought a poor campaign, completely failed to play to his strengths on the environment etc and recipients of the "family jewelry" letters felt insulted and angry.
It may also be the case that the Goldsmith vote energised dormant anti-Tory voters who were reminded of why they do not like the party. It sort of happened in Oldham East too to an extent: the UKIP campaign actually got Labour voters to come out and vote.
Agreed.
Coming out for Leave was another Goldsmith blunder - London leans heavily to Remain and going for Leave lost him any chance of vocal support from business or the City.
Anti-Eu, anti-heathrow, less than pro uber, wrong side of all those arguments for London.
@GerriPeev: Handing Ken Livingstone a mic is like giving an alcoholic a bottle of Jack Daniel's.They can't help themselves & it's not good for the kids
Yes, I agree - there were plenty of pitfalls and he avoided them all with a careful, positive and disciplined effort. I thought his comment of regret that Goldsmith, who he knew as a liberal cosmopolitan, had allowed his campaign to slip into anti-Muslim stereotyping was far better than if he'd denounced Goldsmith personally. It pretty much defused the issue.
It's a lesson for Crosby and his mates - you can't win an election *only* by shouting "Islamist!" "friends with extremists!" and the like.
Khan ran a very good campaign and was a good choice for Labour, albeit a bit dull. But Zac was even more dull, so that didn't matter.
The 'friends with extremists' line never really caught on. Personally I was never convinced by it, the well-argued posts by Ms Cyclefree notwithstanding. I'm much more concerned about Sadiq's daft policies on housing and transport fares, but if Londoners want to vote for less housing and worse transport, who am I to complain?
As @anothernick and @FrancisUrquhart pointed out, Zac managed to be on the wrong side of some crucial issues. I'm surprised his campaign wasn't better; he never really made the leap from what works in Richmond to what would work in London as a whole.
Am I right in thinking that outside Scotland this is a pretty meh performance by the Tories too?
I think meh sums up results for everybody.
Good result for Khan though, as the numbers currently stand.
This does lead to one question. If Labour is doing just as well / just as badly as in 2012, why is Khan winning so easily when Livingstone lost ?
London has improved for Labour since 2012. The results in 2015 show that.
London won the GLA vote in 2012, having lost it in 2008. The mayoral vote was Boris v Ken and having seen Ken in action over recent weeks perhaps a few more people will begin to understand why a lot of Labour voters could not put their X's next to Ken's name.
@GerriPeev: Handing Ken Livingstone a mic is like giving an alcoholic a bottle of Jack Daniel's.They can't help themselves & it's not good for the kids
@GerriPeev: Handing Ken Livingstone a mic is like giving an alcoholic a bottle of Jack Daniel's.They can't help themselves & it's not good for the kids
Yes, I agree - there were plenty of pitfalls and he avoided them all with a careful, positive and disciplined effort. I thought his comment of regret that Goldsmith, who he knew as a liberal cosmopolitan, had allowed his campaign to slip into anti-Muslim stereotyping was far better than if he'd denounced Goldsmith personally. It pretty much defused the issue.
It's a lesson for Crosby and his mates - you can't win an election *only* by shouting "Islamist!" "friends with extremists!" and the like.
Khan ran a very good campaign and was a good choice for Labour, albeit a bit dull. But Zac was even more dull, so that didn't matter.
The 'friends with extremists' line never really caught on. Personally I was never convinced by it, the well-argued posts by Ms Cyclefree notwithstanding. I'm much more concerned about Sadiq's daft policies on housing and transport fares, but if Londoners want to vote for less housing and worse transport, who am I to complain?
As @anothernick and @FrancisUrquhart pointed out, Zac managed to be on the wrong side of some crucial issues. I'm surprised his campaign wasn't better; he never really made the leap from what works in Richmond to what would work in London as a whole.
Reason he couldn't make the leap out of Richmond...he got confused by the tube ;-)
Am I right in thinking that outside Scotland this is a pretty meh performance by the Tories too?
I think meh sums up results for everybody.
Good result for Khan though, as the numbers currently stand.
This does lead to one question. If Labour is doing just as well / just as badly as in 2012, why is Khan winning so easily when Livingstone lost ?
London has improved for Labour since 2012. The results in 2015 show that.
London won the GLA vote in 2012, having lost it in 2008. The mayoral vote was Boris v Ken and having seen Ken in action over recent weeks perhaps a few more people will begin to understand why a lot of Labour voters could not put their X's next to Ken's name.
I voted for Ken in 2000, voted against him in 2004 and 2008 and 2012.
@GerriPeev: Handing Ken Livingstone a mic is like giving an alcoholic a bottle of Jack Daniel's.They can't help themselves & it's not good for the kids
Just noticed that the Election Night 2015 coverage on iPlayer is no longer available.
Shame. I have enjoyed flicking through it a few times over the past 12 months, particularly the "OMFG" moment at the stroke of 10pm when Dimbleby revealed the exit poll and nobody could quite believe what they were seeing. And then Paddy promising to eat his hat, literally, if the LDs finished with as few as 10 MPs...
In a major concession over its controversial academy plans, the government has announced good or outstanding schools will no longer be forced to become academies.
Osborne told to get back in his box.
But local authority schools are never good or outstanding in Osborne-land.
As usual with Osborne this was purely political.
It was about him finding a policy basis to cement an alliance with Gove post Brexit referendum.
My comment about corbyn 2020 GE campaign only talking to the BBC (if they promise to be nice) & press tv the other day looking like it will be spot on. He already doesn't do sky news, telegraph, Daily mail
Just noticed that the Election Night 2015 coverage on iPlayer is no longer available.
Shame. I have enjoyed flicking through it a few times over the past 12 months, particularly the "OMFG" moment at the stroke of 10pm when Dimbleby revealed the exit poll and nobody could quite believe what they were seeing. And then Paddy promising to eat his hat, literally, if the LDs finished with as few as 10 MPs...
Is it available on DVD? :-)
It is on youtube... preserved for the nation etc....
Livingstone from BBC News "Former London Mayor Ken Livingstone comments on the anti-Semitism row that engulfed Labour. He claims others in Labour made an issue of it and tells these critics: "You've cost us seats all over the country."
They wouldn't have had the chance to fan the flames unless Livingstone had poured a great big can of petrol over an ember that seemed set to go out. He now accepts that the row cost Labour seats, yes is oblivious to his own role. The man is an utter liability to the party he purports to support.
Comments
KingFirst Minister!"In a major concession over its controversial academy plans, the government has announced good or outstanding schools will no longer be forced to become academies.
Osborne told to get back in his box.
Seeing as it's the first Conservative government (technically) since Major in the mid-90s... :-)
The government has abandoned its plans to force all schools to become academies.
Good day to bury some bad news.
Coming out for Leave was another Goldsmith blunder - London leans heavily to Remain and going for Leave lost him any chance of vocal support from business or the City.
So far
Labour held PCC for Durham, Cleveland and Northumbria
Con held Northamptonshire, Wiltshire, Suffolk
Indy held Dorset
Con gained Lincolnshire from Ind
http://www.bbc.com/news/election/2016/police
'Boris's legacy to London is a Labour mayor and a Labour assembly.'
As the assembly needs a two-thirds majority to block any of the Mayor's policies, it's in realty just a talking shop and jobs for the boys.
Con and Lab go to round 2. Incumbent Indy eliminated.
Con will win easily
It's a lesson for Crosby and his mates - you can't win an election *only* by shouting "Islamist!" "friends with extremists!" and the like.
A better record than under Cameron.
https://www.periscope.tv/SussexPCC/1djGXDoqNPyGZ
First Round Declaration coming up.
A swing of 3.5% since the General Election is equivalent to a 2% Conservative lead in England. It's an artificial exercise though, as so much of England didn't have local elections. The PCC elections may give some pointer as to how the parties were faring elsewhere.
Rock'n'roll.
Always used to be able to see gains or losses by council, now all you get is a link to the relevant council's homepage! Most of these don;t have "gain" or "loss" just who won.
How pathetic.
several seats swopped both ways between UKIP and Lab but net change appears to be
Con -1 UKIP plus 1
RDFNCPLAPM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election/2016/police
The 'friends with extremists' line never really caught on. Personally I was never convinced by it, the well-argued posts by Ms Cyclefree notwithstanding. I'm much more concerned about Sadiq's daft policies on housing and transport fares, but if Londoners want to vote for less housing and worse transport, who am I to complain?
As @anothernick and @FrancisUrquhart pointed out, Zac managed to be on the wrong side of some crucial issues. I'm surprised his campaign wasn't better; he never really made the leap from what works in Richmond to what would work in London as a whole.
'This does lead to one question. If Labour is doing just as well / just as badly as in 2012, why is Khan winning so easily when Livingstone lost ?'
8 years of Livingstone and his assorted nutters.
According to Prof Curtice Labour results excluding London are worse than in 2011 & 2012.
Shame. I have enjoyed flicking through it a few times over the past 12 months, particularly the "OMFG" moment at the stroke of 10pm when Dimbleby revealed the exit poll and nobody could quite believe what they were seeing. And then Paddy promising to eat his hat, literally, if the LDs finished with as few as 10 MPs...
Is it available on DVD? :-)
It was about him finding a policy basis to cement an alliance with Gove post Brexit referendum.
CON -6.5%
LAB -0.1%
UKIP +9.7%
GRE +1.2%
LD -0.4%
"Former London Mayor Ken Livingstone comments on the anti-Semitism row that engulfed Labour. He claims others in Labour made an issue of it and tells these critics: "You've cost us seats all over the country."
They wouldn't have had the chance to fan the flames unless Livingstone had poured a great big can of petrol over an ember that seemed set to go out. He now accepts that the row cost Labour seats, yes is oblivious to his own role. The man is an utter liability to the party he purports to support.