Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » William Hill make it odds-on that none of the original LAB and

24

Comments

  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,030

    slade said:

    Astonishing result in Cardiff - PC gain from Labour. This is despite Labour having a good candidate and Plaid having internal problems.

    Interesting with Newport in mind
    Plaid were 4th in Newport last time, I doubt it means much more than a good Plaid council by election campaign
  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    You'd think Gapes would get some credit for increasing the Labour majority in Ilford South from 402 in 1992 to 31,647 in 2017.
  • Options
    AndyJS said:

    You'd think Gapes would get some credit for increasing the Labour majority in Ilford South from 402 in 1992 to 31,647 in 2017.

    As mentioned up-thread - demographics!
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,030

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Mike Gapes I think will hold on, he has a strong personal vote, gaining Ilford South in 1992 when Labour lost nationally and seeing a 14% rise in the Labour vote in 2015 even as it rose by just 1% nationally and following that with an 11% rise in his vote in 2017

    Thanks for that and I know that you have strong local knowledge about constituency
    Yes, campaigned in Ilford last time, since winning it in 1992 Gapes has turned a Tory seat in 1987 to an ultra safe Labour seat now much of it on his personal vote
    Demographic changes.
    Not entirely, Gapes has the biggest majority in Redbridge, even bigger than John Cryer's in Leyton and Wanstead
    Due to demographic changes. Which have also converted Ilford North from a competitive seat to Safe Labour.
    Nowhere near as safe as Ilford South
    Yes, but that's because the demographics have only just kicked in in Ilford North. As recently as GE2010 Ilford North was won by the Tories.
    So what, the demographics are pretty similar across Redbridge, Gapes has had huge personal success in turning a Tory seat in 1987 into one with a 31,647 majority for Labour in 2017
  • Options
    dotsdots Posts: 615

    dots said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Forget TIG.

    May is still running down the clock.

    The clock is running down of its own accord. Nothing whatever to do with Theresa May. If MPs want something else to happen, they need to specify what.
    May in office, but not in power? She could stop the clock tomorrow.
    No she can't. Corbyn could, though.
    How?
    By whipping his MPs to back the EU's withdrawal deal, or even abstain. It wouldn't even require a change of policy: the 'jobs first' Brexit or whatever rebranding they want would still be available.
    How many MPs would such flip flop to something they’d never vote for would that whip deliver? 😂
  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    justin124 said:

    HYUFD said:

    justin124 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Mike Gapes I think will hold on, he has a strong personal vote, gaining Ilford South in 1992 when Labour lost nationally and seeing a 14% rise in the Labour vote in 2015 even as it rose by just 1% nationally and following that with an 11% rise in his vote in 2017

    No particular evidence it had much to do with him given the Labour surge in most of London. Wes Streeting in Ilford North saw an even mor dramatic increase in his majority. Nexxt time Labour might seek to label Gapes and Ryan - unsure about Leslie and Coffey - as being complicit in the War Crimes of the Blair Government.
    Streeting majority 2017 9,639, Gapes majority 2017 31,647
    Ilford South has always been the stronger seat for Labour but the swing in Ilford North was slightly higher.
    Factually incorrect. In the 70s Ilford South was better for the Tories than Ilford North.
  • Options

    The exchange between Chris Leslie and Andy McDonald over the Chakrabarti report won’t have done Labour any favours.

    A superb jibe. I expect Corbyn will threaten to sue him.
    What was a jibe?
    On QT:

    Chris Leslie: antisemitism in Labour is a disgrace
    Andy MacDonald: come on Chris, we have been taking it seriously, the Chakrabarti report...
    Chris Leslie: Baroness Chakrabarti?
    Nice!
    55 seconds in here
    https://twitter.com/bbcquestiontime/status/1098726075675430912
    And this is just the start
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,030
    dots said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Mike Gapes I think will hold on, he has a strong personal vote, gaining Ilford South in 1992 when Labour lost nationally and seeing a 14% rise in the Labour vote in 2015 even as it rose by just 1% nationally and following that with an 11% rise in his vote in 2017

    Thanks for that and I know that you have strong local knowledge about constituency
    Yes, campaigned in Ilford last time, since winning it in 1992 Gapes has turned a Tory seat in 1987 to an ultra safe Labour seat now much of it on his personal vote
    Is he not helped by Labour and remain votes migrating out of London?
    Not to the extent of getting a 31,000 majority in 2017, no
  • Options

    houndtang said:

    If the Question Time audience is anything to go by the TIGgers will not be holding their seats

    The Brexity man in the audience was a UKIP parliamentary candidate.
    Was he 'specially' invited?
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,125

    Most of Owen Jones's twitter feed is taken up with TIG.

    Not worried. Not worried one bit...

    Has he commented on that PC win?

    Hur hur hur.....
  • Options

    The exchange between Chris Leslie and Andy McDonald over the Chakrabarti report won’t have done Labour any favours.

    A superb jibe. I expect Corbyn will threaten to sue him.
    What was a jibe?
    On QT:

    Chris Leslie: antisemitism in Labour is a disgrace
    Andy MacDonald: come on Chris, we have been taking it seriously, the Chakrabarti report...
    Chris Leslie: Baroness Chakrabarti?
    Nice!
    55 seconds in here
    https://twitter.com/bbcquestiontime/status/1098726075675430912
    And this is just the start
    Removal of gloves.
  • Options
    TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633

    TGOHF said:
    Is there a local issue?

    Or is this a massive depth charge under Labour's direction?
    Scotland: SNP
    Wales: PC
    England: TIG
    North of Watford : Kipper 2.0
  • Options

    Most of Owen Jones's twitter feed is taken up with TIG.

    Not worried. Not worried one bit...

    Has he commented on that PC win?

    Hur hur hur.....
    Funnily enough no.

    But no doubt local media and big money are to blame as they are owned by Murdoch or lizards or something along those lines.
  • Options

    The exchange between Chris Leslie and Andy McDonald over the Chakrabarti report won’t have done Labour any favours.

    A superb jibe. I expect Corbyn will threaten to sue him.
    What was a jibe?
    On QT:

    Chris Leslie: antisemitism in Labour is a disgrace
    Andy MacDonald: come on Chris, we have been taking it seriously, the Chakrabarti report...
    Chris Leslie: Baroness Chakrabarti?
    Nice!
    55 seconds in here
    https://twitter.com/bbcquestiontime/status/1098726075675430912
    And this is just the start
    https://twitter.com/DPJHodges/status/1098728400712282112
  • Options
    HYUFD said:

    slade said:

    Astonishing result in Cardiff - PC gain from Labour. This is despite Labour having a good candidate and Plaid having internal problems.

    Interesting with Newport in mind
    Plaid were 4th in Newport last time, I doubt it means much more than a good Plaid council by election campaign
    In Wales this is a bad result for labour. Pin a red rosette on a donkey and it would get elected.

    Mind you, even that would be better than labour in Wales
  • Options
    ChrisChris Posts: 11,134
    The Guardian has a comment on the question of Shamima Begum's Bangladeshi citizenship:
    But Najrul Khasru, a British-Bangladeshi barrister and part-time tribunal judge who has reviewed Bangladesh’s citizenship laws, told the Guardian he believed Begum was not a Bangladeshi citizen unless, at the time of her birth, her parents had registered her at the High Commission, which he said was very uncommon within the British-Bangladeshi community.
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/feb/21/what-is-the-truth-about-shamima-begums-citizenship-status

    A link is provided to the Citizenship Act, 1951:
    http://bdlaws.minlaw.gov.bd/print_sections_all.php?id=242

    Although I am not a solicitor, his argument seems clearly incorrect to me.
  • Options
    dotsdots Posts: 615

    HYUFD said:

    Mike Gapes I think will hold on, he has a strong personal vote, gaining Ilford South in 1992 when Labour lost nationally and seeing a 14% rise in the Labour vote in 2015 even as it rose by just 1% nationally and following that with an 11% rise in his vote in 2017

    Thanks for that and I know that you have strong local knowledge about constituency
    Sarah Wollaston looks a possible IF the LibDems and Greens give her a free pass. Labour was the closest challenger in 2017. She raised her vote from 53.0% to 53.7% - but her majority dropped nearly 5k as Labour's vote more than doubled to 26.8%.

    LibDems used to be the close challenger - they were within 5k in 2010. Their same candidate has plugged away as they have gone from 35% to 10% to 13%. Totnes town itself is very Green and has had a Green councillor. But their vote dropped more than 60%, as it peeled off to Labour.

    Labour will be fired up, thinking the Tory vote will split drastically, between those who love her and those who very much do not, giving them a chance to come though the middle. That is probably simplistic - my two nearest neighbours are Labour members, but have told me they would vote for Wollaston if she was not a Tory. I doubt they are alone.

    Also worth noting that her personal vote probably helped move the constituency into Remain - an obvious standout result for Remain in the region. She is a significant figure in local politics.
    2017 a high water mark for Labour in many places. Won’t get anything like that again in many constituencies, rural or urban. Silly using them as basis for calculations really.
  • Options
    TGOHF said:

    TGOHF said:
    Is there a local issue?

    Or is this a massive depth charge under Labour's direction?
    Scotland: SNP
    Wales: PC
    England: TIG
    North of Watford : Kipper 2.0
    Except Flint, she might just hold on :smiley:
  • Options
    brokenwheelbrokenwheel Posts: 3,352

    TGOHF said:
    Is there a local issue?

    Or is this a massive depth charge under Labour's direction?
    Apparently the ward is a bit of a dive, I find it hard to believe this has much to do with what's going on in Westminster.
  • Options
    _Anazina__Anazina_ Posts: 1,810
    Just one seat at even money sounds great value to me. Will probably require tying up one’s money for some time.

    P.S. Heidi for leader.
  • Options
    justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    AndyJS said:

    justin124 said:

    HYUFD said:

    justin124 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Mike Gapes I think will hold on, he has a strong personal vote, gaining Ilford South in 1992 when Labour lost nationally and seeing a 14% rise in the Labour vote in 2015 even as it rose by just 1% nationally and following that with an 11% rise in his vote in 2017

    No particular evidence it had much to do with him given the Labour surge in most of London. Wes Streeting in Ilford North saw an even mor dramatic increase in his majority. Nexxt time Labour might seek to label Gapes and Ryan - unsure about Leslie and Coffey - as being complicit in the War Crimes of the Blair Government.
    Streeting majority 2017 9,639, Gapes majority 2017 31,647
    Ilford South has always been the stronger seat for Labour but the swing in Ilford North was slightly higher.
    Factually incorrect. In the 70s Ilford South was better for the Tories than Ilford North.
    I suggest you check again. Labour regained Ilford South in February 1974 - having previously held the seat 1966 - 1970. Labour very narrowly gained Ilford North in October 1974 for the first time since 1945 - only to lose it at the March 1978 by election when Tessa Jowell was the candidate.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,030

    HYUFD said:

    slade said:

    Astonishing result in Cardiff - PC gain from Labour. This is despite Labour having a good candidate and Plaid having internal problems.

    Interesting with Newport in mind
    Plaid were 4th in Newport last time, I doubt it means much more than a good Plaid council by election campaign
    In Wales this is a bad result for labour. Pin a red rosette on a donkey and it would get elected.

    Mind you, even that would be better than labour in Wales
    Not quite in Cardiff, the Tories won Cardiff West, where Ely lies, in 1983
  • Options

    The exchange between Chris Leslie and Andy McDonald over the Chakrabarti report won’t have done Labour any favours.

    A superb jibe. I expect Corbyn will threaten to sue him.
    What was a jibe?
    On QT:

    Chris Leslie: antisemitism in Labour is a disgrace
    Andy MacDonald: come on Chris, we have been taking it seriously, the Chakrabarti report...
    Chris Leslie: Baroness Chakrabarti?
    Nice!
    55 seconds in here
    https://twitter.com/bbcquestiontime/status/1098726075675430912
    And this is just the start
    Well, he's got a point. And made it well.
  • Options
    HYUFD said:


    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Mike Gapes I think will hold on, he has a strong personal vote, gaining Ilford South in 1992 when Labour lost nationally and seeing a 14% rise in the Labour vote in 2015 even as it rose by just 1% nationally and following that with an 11% rise in his vote in 2017

    Thanks for that and I know that you have strong local knowledge about constituency
    Yes, campaigned in Ilford last time, since winning it in 1992 Gapes has turned a Tory seat in 1987 to an ultra safe Labour seat now much of it on his personal vote
    Demographic changes.
    Not entirely, Gapes has the biggest majority in Redbridge, even bigger than John Cryer's in Leyton and Wanstead
    Due to demographic changes. Which have also converted Ilford North from a competitive seat to Safe Labour.
    Nowhere near as safe as Ilford South
    Yes, but that's because the demographics have only just kicked in in Ilford North. As recently as GE2010 Ilford North was won by the Tories.
    So what, the demographics are pretty similar across Redbridge, Gapes has had huge personal success in turning a Tory seat in 1987 into one with a 31,647 majority for Labour in 2017
    Read Anthony Wells:

    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/2015guide/ilfordsouth/

    This is a densely packed residential seat without the Essex countryside of Ilford North, it is less affluent, the housing less desirable. In many ways it resembles its neighbour East Ham more than Ilford North. Most notably it now has a very large ethnic population, the second highest non-white population in the country and the second highest proportion of Asian voters. Ilford is perhaps still associated with the suburban Essex part of London, but demographic change has since made this seat part of ethnically diverse east London.
  • Options
    kjohnw said:

    houndtang said:

    If the Question Time audience is anything to go by the TIGgers will not be holding their seats

    The three amigos have effectively accused TM of being racist (“she has a problem with immigration”) and said they want to destroy the Tory party. I don’t think the public will have a lot of truck for that and the obvious remoamer bias of another manifestation of the people’s vote campaign , disguised as a new political movement , but really just a campaign to block brexit and scupper the 2016 vote .
    I don't know about racist but I agree with them that she is certainly a xenophobe. Everything she has done over the last 9 years has reinforced that impression.
  • Options
    _Anazina__Anazina_ Posts: 1,810
    Chris said:

    The Guardian has a comment on the question of Shamima Begum's Bangladeshi citizenship:
    But Najrul Khasru, a British-Bangladeshi barrister and part-time tribunal judge who has reviewed Bangladesh’s citizenship laws, told the Guardian he believed Begum was not a Bangladeshi citizen unless, at the time of her birth, her parents had registered her at the High Commission, which he said was very uncommon within the British-Bangladeshi community.
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/feb/21/what-is-the-truth-about-shamima-begums-citizenship-status

    A link is provided to the Citizenship Act, 1951:
    http://bdlaws.minlaw.gov.bd/print_sections_all.php?id=242

    Although I am not a solicitor, his argument seems clearly incorrect to me.

    The fact we - as a ostensibly civilised country - are even flirting with this sophistry is risible. This girl has never even set foot in Bangladesh. She was born, and made, in Britain. We should fucking deal with it.
  • Options
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    slade said:

    Astonishing result in Cardiff - PC gain from Labour. This is despite Labour having a good candidate and Plaid having internal problems.

    Interesting with Newport in mind
    Plaid were 4th in Newport last time, I doubt it means much more than a good Plaid council by election campaign
    In Wales this is a bad result for labour. Pin a red rosette on a donkey and it would get elected.

    Mind you, even that would be better than labour in Wales
    Not quite in Cardiff, the Tories won Cardiff West, where Ely lies, in 1983
    1983

    This is a bad result for labour and I expect it to continue and deepen for them here in Wales.

    We have had enough of their incompetence and they are now led by a Corbynista
  • Options
    _Anazina_ said:

    Chris said:

    The Guardian has a comment on the question of Shamima Begum's Bangladeshi citizenship:
    But Najrul Khasru, a British-Bangladeshi barrister and part-time tribunal judge who has reviewed Bangladesh’s citizenship laws, told the Guardian he believed Begum was not a Bangladeshi citizen unless, at the time of her birth, her parents had registered her at the High Commission, which he said was very uncommon within the British-Bangladeshi community.
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/feb/21/what-is-the-truth-about-shamima-begums-citizenship-status

    A link is provided to the Citizenship Act, 1951:
    http://bdlaws.minlaw.gov.bd/print_sections_all.php?id=242

    Although I am not a solicitor, his argument seems clearly incorrect to me.

    The fact we - as a ostensibly civilised country - are even flirting with this sophistry is risible. This girl has never even set foot in Bangladesh. She was born, and made, in Britain. We should fucking deal with it.
    Why should the taxpayer support her baby? Where's the daddy?
  • Options
    _Anazina__Anazina_ Posts: 1,810
    Thought Chris Leslie did well tonight, against a furious Labour MP, and the usual Brexit motormouths in the audience. John Barnes giving the Tiggers credit for standing up got a very good applause.
  • Options
    dotsdots Posts: 615

    HYUFD said:


    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Mike Gapes I think will hold on, he has a strong personal vote, gaining Ilford South in 1992 when Labour lost nationally and seeing a 14% rise in the Labour vote in 2015 even as it rose by just 1% nationally and following that with an 11% rise in his vote in 2017

    Thanks for that and I know that you have strong local knowledge about constituency
    Yes, campaigned in Ilford last time, since winning it in 1992 Gapes has turned a Tory seat in 1987 to an ultra safe Labour seat now much of it on his personal vote
    Demographic changes.
    Not entirely, Gapes has the biggest majority in Redbridge, even bigger than John Cryer's in Leyton and Wanstead
    Due to demographic changes. Which have also converted Ilford North from a competitive seat to Safe Labour.
    Nowhere near as safe as Ilford South
    Yes, but that's because the demographics have only just kicked in in Ilford North. As recently as GE2010 Ilford North was won by the Tories.
    So what, the demographics are pretty similar across Redbridge, Gapes has had huge personal success in turning a Tory seat in 1987 into one with a 31,647 majority for Labour in 2017
    Read Anthony Wells:

    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/2015guide/ilfordsouth/

    This is a densely packed residential seat without the Essex countryside of Ilford North, it is less affluent, the housing less desirable. In many ways it resembles its neighbour East Ham more than Ilford North. Most notably it now has a very large ethnic population, the second highest non-white population in the country and the second highest proportion of Asian voters. Ilford is perhaps still associated with the suburban Essex part of London, but demographic change has since made this seat part of ethnically diverse east London.
    I’m changing my mind and firmly with HY on this one. I know people move east out of London to better themselves and their property, but this doesn’t sound like the sort of place that will deliver that.
  • Options
    _Anazina_ said:

    Thought Chris Leslie did well tonight, against a furious Labour MP, and the usual Brexit motormouths in the audience. John Barnes giving the Tiggers credit for standing up got a very good applause.

    Based on random, vox pox conversations with people I bump into or work with when volunteering this week:

    ...we could all be in for a surprise on this one.
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    edited February 2019
    _Anazina_ said:

    Chris said:

    The Guardian has a comment on the question of Shamima Begum's Bangladeshi citizenship:
    But Najrul Khasru, a British-Bangladeshi barrister and part-time tribunal judge who has reviewed Bangladesh’s citizenship laws, told the Guardian he believed Begum was not a Bangladeshi citizen unless, at the time of her birth, her parents had registered her at the High Commission, which he said was very uncommon within the British-Bangladeshi community.
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/feb/21/what-is-the-truth-about-shamima-begums-citizenship-status

    A link is provided to the Citizenship Act, 1951:
    http://bdlaws.minlaw.gov.bd/print_sections_all.php?id=242

    Although I am not a solicitor, his argument seems clearly incorrect to me.

    The fact we - as a ostensibly civilised country - are even flirting with this sophistry is risible. This girl has never even set foot in Bangladesh. She was born, and made, in Britain. We should fucking deal with it.
    She betrayed this country. She took what we gave her and spat at us in the face. She f***ed off. She can live with her choices. We gave her education, healthcare, somewhere to live and she said that bombing the Manchester Arena was justified.

    We owe her nothing. She's made her choice.
  • Options
    dotsdots Posts: 615
    edited February 2019
    _Anazina_ said:

    Chris said:

    The Guardian has a comment on the question of Shamima Begum's Bangladeshi citizenship:
    But Najrul Khasru, a British-Bangladeshi barrister and part-time tribunal judge who has reviewed Bangladesh’s citizenship laws, told the Guardian he believed Begum was not a Bangladeshi citizen unless, at the time of her birth, her parents had registered her at the High Commission, which he said was very uncommon within the British-Bangladeshi community.
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/feb/21/what-is-the-truth-about-shamima-begums-citizenship-status

    A link is provided to the Citizenship Act, 1951:
    http://bdlaws.minlaw.gov.bd/print_sections_all.php?id=242

    Although I am not a solicitor, his argument seems clearly incorrect to me.

    The fact we - as a ostensibly civilised country - are even flirting with this sophistry is risible. This girl has never even set foot in Bangladesh. She was born, and made, in Britain. We should fucking deal with it.
    Trump and Javid had sensible, long term forward thinking policy’s to deal with surrendering IS members several weeks ago, but the politicians backbones couldn’t face down media and public disgust at the idea of returning them from where they came to be dealt with as criminals. The result of losing tabs and control of IS members is less security at home and around the world, whilst the policy of alienation and grievance actually plays into the hands of extremists.

    However, i am beginning to change my mind. there is another powerful angle on it. The strongest argument of all not to bring them home to face the music is Only one in 10 jihadists returning from Syria to the UK have been prosecuted by the British Government.

    It’s hard to make an argument, such as Corbyn is trying is trying to do, and you anazina to treat them as British criminals and British terrorists when the government is allowing 90% of the returning IS members to get off scot free.
  • Options
    dots said:

    HYUFD said:


    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Mike Gapes I think will hold on, he has a strong personal vote, gaining Ilford South in 1992 when Labour lost nationally and seeing a 14% rise in the Labour vote in 2015 even as it rose by just 1% nationally and following that with an 11% rise in his vote in 2017

    Thanks for that and I know that you have strong local knowledge about constituency
    Yes, campaigned in Ilford last time, since winning it in 1992 Gapes has turned a Tory seat in 1987 to an ultra safe Labour seat now much of it on his personal vote
    Demographic changes.
    Not entirely, Gapes has the biggest majority in Redbridge, even bigger than John Cryer's in Leyton and Wanstead
    Due to demographic changes. Which have also converted Ilford North from a competitive seat to Safe Labour.
    Nowhere near as safe as Ilford South
    Yes, but that's because the demographics have only just kicked in in Ilford North. As recently as GE2010 Ilford North was won by the Tories.
    So what, the demographics are pretty similar across Redbridge, Gapes has had huge personal success in turning a Tory seat in 1987 into one with a 31,647 majority for Labour in 2017
    Read Anthony Wells:

    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/2015guide/ilfordsouth/

    This is a densely packed residential seat without the Essex countryside of Ilford North, it is less affluent, the housing less desirable. In many ways it resembles its neighbour East Ham more than Ilford North. Most notably it now has a very large ethnic population, the second highest non-white population in the country and the second highest proportion of Asian voters. Ilford is perhaps still associated with the suburban Essex part of London, but demographic change has since made this seat part of ethnically diverse east London.
    I’m changing my mind and firmly with HY on this one. I know people move east out of London to better themselves and their property, but this doesn’t sound like the sort of place that will deliver that.
    Wells agrees with me about the demographics! BTW, Ilford has been part of Greater London since 1965. Also, to declare a personal interest in Ilford, I've lived here since 1978, aged three!
  • Options
    asjohnstoneasjohnstone Posts: 1,276

    You still win if they rejoin their party, right? If so, stonking value. Aside from their non-trivial chances of holding the seats as TIG, there had to be a reasonable chance that one of the ex-Tories rejoins Con post-Brexit, or one of the ex-Lab guys rejoins Lab post-Corbyn or post-Milne.

    I can't see any of them rejoining prior to next election, perhaps after if they hold
  • Options

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    slade said:

    Astonishing result in Cardiff - PC gain from Labour. This is despite Labour having a good candidate and Plaid having internal problems.

    Interesting with Newport in mind
    Plaid were 4th in Newport last time, I doubt it means much more than a good Plaid council by election campaign
    In Wales this is a bad result for labour. Pin a red rosette on a donkey and it would get elected.

    Mind you, even that would be better than labour in Wales
    Not quite in Cardiff, the Tories won Cardiff West, where Ely lies, in 1983
    1983

    This is a bad result for labour and I expect it to continue and deepen for them here in Wales.

    We have had enough of their incompetence and they are now led by a Corbynista
    Strikes me from a distance, that the good folk who bred Neil Kinnock and Bevan, will hold little truck with this metro, middle class, youthy, marxist redux, anti-semite nonsense.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,030

    HYUFD said:


    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Mike Gapes I think will hold on, he has a strong personal vote, gaining Ilford South in 1992 when Labour lost nationally and seeing a 14% rise in the Labour vote in 2015 even as it rose by just 1% nationally and following that with an 11% rise in his vote in 2017

    Thanks for that and I know that you have strong local knowledge about constituency
    Yes, campaigned in Ilford last time, since winning it in 1992 Gapes has turned a Tory seat in 1987 to an ultra safe Labour seat now much of it on his personal vote
    Demographic changes.
    Not entirely, Gapes has the biggest majority in Redbridge, even bigger than John Cryer's in Leyton and Wanstead
    Due to demographic changes. Which have also converted Ilford North from a competitive seat to Safe Labour.
    Nowhere near as safe as Ilford South
    Yes, but that's because the demographics have only just kicked in in Ilford North. As recently as GE2010 Ilford North was won by the Tories.
    So what, the demographics are pretty similar across Redbridge, Gapes has had huge personal success in turning a Tory seat in 1987 into one with a 31,647 majority for Labour in 2017
    Read Anthony Wells:

    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/2015guide/ilfordsouth/

    This is a densely packed residential seat without the Essex countryside of Ilford North, it is less affluent, the housing less desirable. In many ways it resembles its neighbour East Ham more than Ilford North. Most notably it now has a very large ethnic population, the second highest non-white population in the country and the second highest proportion of Asian voters. Ilford is perhaps still associated with the suburban Essex part of London, but demographic change has since made this seat part of ethnically diverse east London.
    So what, Ilford South was still in the same relationship to Ilford North in 1987 and both have experienced demographic changes, that does not explain the 9,000 vote gap in the Ilford seats in 1992 expanding to a 22,000 vote gap by 2017
  • Options

    kjohnw said:

    houndtang said:

    If the Question Time audience is anything to go by the TIGgers will not be holding their seats

    The three amigos have effectively accused TM of being racist (“she has a problem with immigration”) and said they want to destroy the Tory party. I don’t think the public will have a lot of truck for that and the obvious remoamer bias of another manifestation of the people’s vote campaign , disguised as a new political movement , but really just a campaign to block brexit and scupper the 2016 vote .
    I don't know about racist but I agree with them that she is certainly a xenophobe. Everything she has done over the last 9 years has reinforced that impression.
    Agreed. The fact she got elected after the Go Home vans is a matter of shame.

    I didn't respect her before she became PM, nothing since has changed my mind.
  • Options

    HYUFD said:


    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Mike Gapes I think will hold on, he has a strong personal vote, gaining Ilford South in 1992 when Labour lost nationally and seeing a 14% rise in the Labour vote in 2015 even as it rose by just 1% nationally and following that with an 11% rise in his vote in 2017

    Thanks for that and I know that you have strong local knowledge about constituency
    Yes, campaigned in Ilford last time, since winning it in 1992 Gapes has turned a Tory seat in 1987 to an ultra safe Labour seat now much of it on his personal vote
    Demographic changes.
    Not entirely, Gapes has the biggest majority in Redbridge, even bigger than John Cryer's in Leyton and Wanstead
    Due to demographic changes. Which have also converted Ilford North from a competitive seat to Safe Labour.
    Nowhere near as safe as Ilford South
    Yes, but that's because the demographics have only just kicked in in Ilford North. As recently as GE2010 Ilford North was won by the Tories.
    So what, the demographics are pretty similar across Redbridge, Gapes has had huge personal success in turning a Tory seat in 1987 into one with a 31,647 majority for Labour in 2017
    Read Anthony Wells:

    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/2015guide/ilfordsouth/

    This is a densely packed residential seat without the Essex countryside of Ilford North, it is less affluent, the housing less desirable. In many ways it resembles its neighbour East Ham more than Ilford North. Most notably it now has a very large ethnic population, the second highest non-white population in the country and the second highest proportion of Asian voters. Ilford is perhaps still associated with the suburban Essex part of London, but demographic change has since made this seat part of ethnically diverse east London.
    and:

    "The massive demographic changes here and the Conservative party`s difficulties in appealing to ethnic minority voters though have transformed it into a safe Labour seat."
  • Options

    HYUFD said:


    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Mike Gapes I think will hold on, he has a strong personal vote, gaining Ilford South in 1992 when Labour lost nationally and seeing a 14% rise in the Labour vote in 2015 even as it rose by just 1% nationally and following that with an 11% rise in his vote in 2017

    Thanks for that and I know that you have strong local knowledge about constituency
    Yes, campaigned in Ilford last time, since winning it in 1992 Gapes has turned a Tory seat in 1987 to an ultra safe Labour seat now much of it on his personal vote
    Demographic changes.
    Not entirely, Gapes has the biggest majority in Redbridge, even bigger than John Cryer's in Leyton and Wanstead
    Due to demographic changes. Which have also converted Ilford North from a competitive seat to Safe Labour.
    Nowhere near as safe as Ilford South
    Yes, but that's because the demographics have only just kicked in in Ilford North. As recently as GE2010 Ilford North was won by the Tories.
    So what, the demographics are pretty similar across Redbridge, Gapes has had huge personal success in turning a Tory seat in 1987 into one with a 31,647 majority for Labour in 2017
    Read Anthony Wells:

    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/2015guide/ilfordsouth/

    This is a densely packed residential seat without the Essex countryside of Ilford North, it is less affluent, the housing less desirable. In many ways it resembles its neighbour East Ham more than Ilford North. Most notably it now has a very large ethnic population, the second highest non-white population in the country and the second highest proportion of Asian voters. Ilford is perhaps still associated with the suburban Essex part of London, but demographic change has since made this seat part of ethnically diverse east London.
    Indeed.

    How the Epping Forest based Hyufd doesn't know this is mystifying.

    Makes me wonder what century CCHQ is using for its data.
  • Options
    notme2notme2 Posts: 1,006

    You still win if they rejoin their party, right? If so, stonking value. Aside from their non-trivial chances of holding the seats as TIG, there had to be a reasonable chance that one of the ex-Tories rejoins Con post-Brexit, or one of the ex-Lab guys rejoins Lab post-Corbyn or post-Milne.

    I can't see any of them rejoining prior to next election, perhaps after if they hold
    The labour (ex) ones won’t rejoin if they hold. The amount of crap that would get thrown at them by those they once considered friends would be just too much.
  • Options
    _Anazina__Anazina_ Posts: 1,810

    _Anazina_ said:

    Chris said:

    The Guardian has a comment on the question of Shamima Begum's Bangladeshi citizenship:
    But Najrul Khasru, a British-Bangladeshi barrister and part-time tribunal judge who has reviewed Bangladesh’s citizenship laws, told the Guardian he believed Begum was not a Bangladeshi citizen unless, at the time of her birth, her parents had registered her at the High Commission, which he said was very uncommon within the British-Bangladeshi community.
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/feb/21/what-is-the-truth-about-shamima-begums-citizenship-status

    A link is provided to the Citizenship Act, 1951:
    http://bdlaws.minlaw.gov.bd/print_sections_all.php?id=242

    Although I am not a solicitor, his argument seems clearly incorrect to me.

    The fact we - as a ostensibly civilised country - are even flirting with this sophistry is risible. This girl has never even set foot in Bangladesh. She was born, and made, in Britain. We should fucking deal with it.
    She betrayed this country. She took what we gave her and spat at us in the face. She f***ed off. She can live with her choices. We gave her education, healthcare, somewhere to live and she said that bombing the Manchester Arena was justified.

    We owe her nothing. She's made her choice.
    She is an obnoxious, vile airhead. We made her. So why are we dumping her on Bangladesh?
  • Options
    ChrisChris Posts: 11,134
    _Anazina_ said:

    Chris said:

    The Guardian has a comment on the question of Shamima Begum's Bangladeshi citizenship:
    But Najrul Khasru, a British-Bangladeshi barrister and part-time tribunal judge who has reviewed Bangladesh’s citizenship laws, told the Guardian he believed Begum was not a Bangladeshi citizen unless, at the time of her birth, her parents had registered her at the High Commission, which he said was very uncommon within the British-Bangladeshi community.
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/feb/21/what-is-the-truth-about-shamima-begums-citizenship-status

    A link is provided to the Citizenship Act, 1951:
    http://bdlaws.minlaw.gov.bd/print_sections_all.php?id=242

    Although I am not a solicitor, his argument seems clearly incorrect to me.

    The fact we - as a ostensibly civilised country - are even flirting with this sophistry is risible. This girl has never even set foot in Bangladesh. She was born, and made, in Britain. We should fucking deal with it.
    As I said before, I'm purely talking about whether Javid has met the citizenship criterion stipulated by British law. As far as I can see, he has.

    That doesn't mean I think he's met the other legal requirements, or that I think he's made the right decision. In fact it seems clear he hasn't given written notice to Shamima Begun, as he is legally required to - or indeed any kind of notice to anyone.
  • Options

    _Anazina_ said:

    Chris said:

    The Guardian has a comment on the question of Shamima Begum's Bangladeshi citizenship:
    But Najrul Khasru, a British-Bangladeshi barrister and part-time tribunal judge who has reviewed Bangladesh’s citizenship laws, told the Guardian he believed Begum was not a Bangladeshi citizen unless, at the time of her birth, her parents had registered her at the High Commission, which he said was very uncommon within the British-Bangladeshi community.
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/feb/21/what-is-the-truth-about-shamima-begums-citizenship-status

    A link is provided to the Citizenship Act, 1951:
    http://bdlaws.minlaw.gov.bd/print_sections_all.php?id=242

    Although I am not a solicitor, his argument seems clearly incorrect to me.

    The fact we - as a ostensibly civilised country - are even flirting with this sophistry is risible. This girl has never even set foot in Bangladesh. She was born, and made, in Britain. We should fucking deal with it.
    Why should the taxpayer support her baby? Where's the daddy?
    Taxpayer support for the baby will cost a lot less than fighting a losing court case.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,030

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    slade said:

    Astonishing result in Cardiff - PC gain from Labour. This is despite Labour having a good candidate and Plaid having internal problems.

    Interesting with Newport in mind
    Plaid were 4th in Newport last time, I doubt it means much more than a good Plaid council by election campaign
    In Wales this is a bad result for labour. Pin a red rosette on a donkey and it would get elected.

    Mind you, even that would be better than labour in Wales
    Not quite in Cardiff, the Tories won Cardiff West, where Ely lies, in 1983
    1983

    This is a bad result for labour and I expect it to continue and deepen for them here in Wales.

    We have had enough of their incompetence and they are now led by a Corbynista
    I would still rather Labour than Plaid but probably some Tories voted Plaid as a protest tonight, the Tory vote was down 2% and the LD vote down 6% and Plaid won by 3% so they would not have beaten Labour without Tory and LD votes
  • Options
    asjohnstoneasjohnstone Posts: 1,276
    _Anazina_ said:

    _Anazina_ said:

    Chris said:

    The Guardian has a comment on the question of Shamima Begum's Bangladeshi citizenship:
    But Najrul Khasru, a British-Bangladeshi barrister and part-time tribunal judge who has reviewed Bangladesh’s citizenship laws, told the Guardian he believed Begum was not a Bangladeshi citizen unless, at the time of her birth, her parents had registered her at the High Commission, which he said was very uncommon within the British-Bangladeshi community.
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/feb/21/what-is-the-truth-about-shamima-begums-citizenship-status

    A link is provided to the Citizenship Act, 1951:
    http://bdlaws.minlaw.gov.bd/print_sections_all.php?id=242

    Although I am not a solicitor, his argument seems clearly incorrect to me.

    The fact we - as a ostensibly civilised country - are even flirting with this sophistry is risible. This girl has never even set foot in Bangladesh. She was born, and made, in Britain. We should fucking deal with it.
    She betrayed this country. She took what we gave her and spat at us in the face. She f***ed off. She can live with her choices. We gave her education, healthcare, somewhere to live and she said that bombing the Manchester Arena was justified.

    We owe her nothing. She's made her choice.
    She is an obnoxious, vile airhead. We made her. So why are we dumping her on Bangladesh?
    Islam made her
  • Options
    I thought we'd been told on PB that the Allen and Soubry were certain of being re-elected ?
  • Options
    notme2notme2 Posts: 1,006

    _Anazina_ said:

    Chris said:

    The Guardian has a comment on the question of Shamima Begum's Bangladeshi citizenship:
    But Najrul Khasru, a British-Bangladeshi barrister and part-time tribunal judge who has reviewed Bangladesh’s citizenship laws, told the Guardian he believed Begum was not a Bangladeshi citizen unless, at the time of her birth, her parents had registered her at the High Commission, which he said was very uncommon within the British-Bangladeshi community.
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/feb/21/what-is-the-truth-about-shamima-begums-citizenship-status

    A link is provided to the Citizenship Act, 1951:
    http://bdlaws.minlaw.gov.bd/print_sections_all.php?id=242

    Although I am not a solicitor, his argument seems clearly incorrect to me.

    The fact we - as a ostensibly civilised country - are even flirting with this sophistry is risible. This girl has never even set foot in Bangladesh. She was born, and made, in Britain. We should fucking deal with it.
    She betrayed this country. She took what we gave her and spat at us in the face. She f***ed off. She can live with her choices. We gave her education, healthcare, somewhere to live and she said that bombing the Manchester Arena was justified.

    We owe her nothing. She's made her choice.
    Yes. But let’s step back for a moment. She’s not a dual national. She was British born. Stripping her of her citizenship makes her stateless. Things like this can have ripples around the world.
  • Options
    _Anazina__Anazina_ Posts: 1,810

    _Anazina_ said:

    Chris said:

    The Guardian has a comment on the question of Shamima Begum's Bangladeshi citizenship:
    But Najrul Khasru, a British-Bangladeshi barrister and part-time tribunal judge who has reviewed Bangladesh’s citizenship laws, told the Guardian he believed Begum was not a Bangladeshi citizen unless, at the time of her birth, her parents had registered her at the High Commission, which he said was very uncommon within the British-Bangladeshi community.
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/feb/21/what-is-the-truth-about-shamima-begums-citizenship-status

    A link is provided to the Citizenship Act, 1951:
    http://bdlaws.minlaw.gov.bd/print_sections_all.php?id=242

    Although I am not a solicitor, his argument seems clearly incorrect to me.

    The fact we - as a ostensibly civilised country - are even flirting with this sophistry is risible. This girl has never even set foot in Bangladesh. She was born, and made, in Britain. We should fucking deal with it.
    She betrayed this country. She took what we gave her and spat at us in the face. She f***ed off. She can live with her choices. We gave her education, healthcare, somewhere to live and she said that bombing the Manchester Arena was justified.

    We owe her nothing. She's made her choice.

    Thank you for that level-headed, intelligently argued and nuanced response.
  • Options
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:


    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Mike Gapes I think will hold on, he has a strong personal vote, gaining Ilford South in 1992 when Labour lost nationally and seeing a 14% rise in the Labour vote in 2015 even as it rose by just 1% nationally and following that with an 11% rise in his vote in 2017

    Thanks for that and I know that you have strong local knowledge about constituency
    Yes, campaigned in Ilford last time, since winning it in 1992 Gapes has turned a Tory seat in 1987 to an ultra safe Labour seat now much of it on his personal vote
    Demographic changes.
    Not entirely, Gapes has the biggest majority in Redbridge, even bigger than John Cryer's in Leyton and Wanstead
    Due to demographic changes. Which have also converted Ilford North from a competitive seat to Safe Labour.
    Nowhere near as safe as Ilford South
    Yes, but that's because the demographics have only just kicked in in Ilford North. As recently as GE2010 Ilford North was won by the Tories.
    So what, the demographics are pretty similar across Redbridge, Gapes has had huge personal success in turning a Tory seat in 1987 into one with a 31,647 majority for Labour in 2017
    Read Anthony Wells:

    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/2015guide/ilfordsouth/

    This is a densely packed residential seat without the Essex countryside of Ilford North, it is less affluent, the housing less desirable. In many ways it resembles its neighbour East Ham more than Ilford North. Most notably it now has a very large ethnic population, the second highest non-white population in the country and the second highest proportion of Asian voters. Ilford is perhaps still associated with the suburban Essex part of London, but demographic change has since made this seat part of ethnically diverse east London.
    So what, Ilford South was still in the same relationship to Ilford North in 1987 and both have experienced demographic changes, that does not explain the 9,000 vote gap in the Ilford seats in 1992 expanding to a 22,000 vote gap by 2017
    What do you mean "so what"? You disagree with Anthony Wells? Read what he said. He said it's the demographic changes that make it, presumably more favourable to Labour ("it resembles East Ham more than Ilford North"). And I've lived in Ilford since 1978, aged three, you don't think I know my own home town?
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,030

    HYUFD said:


    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Mike Gapes I think will hold on, he has a strong personal vote, gaining Ilford South in 1992 when Labour lost nationally and seeing a 14% rise in the Labour vote in 2015 even as it rose by just 1% nationally and following that with an 11% rise in his vote in 2017

    Thanks for that and I know that you have strong local knowledge about constituency
    Yes, campaigned in Ilford last time, since winning it in 1992 Gapes has turned a Tory seat in 1987 to an ultra safe Labour seat now much of it on his personal vote
    Demographic changes.
    Not entirely, Gapes has the biggest majority in Redbridge, even bigger than John Cryer's in Leyton and Wanstead
    Due to demographic changes. Which have also converted Ilford North from a competitive seat to Safe Labour.
    Nowhere near as safe as Ilford South
    Yes, but that's because the demographics have only just kicked in in Ilford North. As recently as GE2010 Ilford North was won by the Tories.
    So what, the demographics are pretty similar across Redbridge, Gapes has had huge personal success in turning a Tory seat in 1987 into one with a 31,647 majority for Labour in 2017
    Read Anthony Wells:

    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/2015guide/ilfordsouth/

    This is a densely packed residential seat without the Essex countryside of Ilford North, it is less affluent, the housing less desirable. In many ways it resembles its neighbour East Ham more than Ilford North. Most notably it now has a very large ethnic population, the second highest non-white population in the country and the second highest proportion of Asian voters. Ilford is perhaps still associated with the suburban Essex part of London, but demographic change has since made this seat part of ethnically diverse east London.
    Indeed.

    How the Epping Forest based Hyufd doesn't know this is mystifying.

    Makes me wonder what century CCHQ is using for its data.
    Excuse me?

    What on earth has the fact Ilford South being slightly less desirable than Ilford North got to do with the fact Gapes has turned a 9,000 vote gap in Labour's favour between the Ilford seats in 1992 into a 22,000 vote gap in Labour's favour in 2017? Plus a rising ethnic population has affected both seats
  • Options
    _Anazina__Anazina_ Posts: 1,810

    HYUFD said:


    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Mike Gapes I think will hold on, he has a strong personal vote, gaining Ilford South in 1992 when Labour lost nationally and seeing a 14% rise in the Labour vote in 2015 even as it rose by just 1% nationally and following that with an 11% rise in his vote in 2017

    Thanks for that and I know that you have strong local knowledge about constituency
    Yes, campaigned in Ilford last time, since winning it in 1992 Gapes has turned a Tory seat in 1987 to an ultra safe Labour seat now much of it on his personal vote
    Demographic changes.
    Not entirely, Gapes has the biggest majority in Redbridge, even bigger than John Cryer's in Leyton and Wanstead
    Due to demographic changes. Which have also converted Ilford North from a competitive seat to Safe Labour.
    Nowhere near as safe as Ilford South
    Yes, but that's because the demographics have only just kicked in in Ilford North. As recently as GE2010 Ilford North was won by the Tories.
    So what, the demographics are pretty similar across Redbridge, Gapes has had huge personal success in turning a Tory seat in 1987 into one with a 31,647 majority for Labour in 2017
    Read Anthony Wells:

    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/2015guide/ilfordsouth/

    This is a densely packed residential seat without the Essex countryside of Ilford North, it is less affluent, the housing less desirable. In many ways it resembles its neighbour East Ham more than Ilford North. Most notably it now has a very large ethnic population, the second highest non-white population in the country and the second highest proportion of Asian voters. Ilford is perhaps still associated with the suburban Essex part of London, but demographic change has since made this seat part of ethnically diverse east London.
    Indeed.

    How the Epping Forest based Hyufd doesn't know this is mystifying.

    Makes me wonder what century CCHQ is using for its data.
    It is very easy to get lost in Epping Forest. It is 6,000 acres!!
  • Options
    _Anazina_ said:

    _Anazina_ said:

    Chris said:

    The Guardian has a comment on the question of Shamima Begum's Bangladeshi citizenship:
    But Najrul Khasru, a British-Bangladeshi barrister and part-time tribunal judge who has reviewed Bangladesh’s citizenship laws, told the Guardian he believed Begum was not a Bangladeshi citizen unless, at the time of her birth, her parents had registered her at the High Commission, which he said was very uncommon within the British-Bangladeshi community.
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/feb/21/what-is-the-truth-about-shamima-begums-citizenship-status

    A link is provided to the Citizenship Act, 1951:
    http://bdlaws.minlaw.gov.bd/print_sections_all.php?id=242

    Although I am not a solicitor, his argument seems clearly incorrect to me.

    The fact we - as a ostensibly civilised country - are even flirting with this sophistry is risible. This girl has never even set foot in Bangladesh. She was born, and made, in Britain. We should fucking deal with it.
    She betrayed this country. She took what we gave her and spat at us in the face. She f***ed off. She can live with her choices. We gave her education, healthcare, somewhere to live and she said that bombing the Manchester Arena was justified.

    We owe her nothing. She's made her choice.

    Thank you for that level-headed, intelligently argued and nuanced response.
    Do you agree with her Islamist ideology, _Anazina_?
  • Options
    ' I think Heidi Allen in Cambridgeshire South might be in with a good chance given that her main opponents when she was a CON candidate was the LibDem. '

    WRONG

    2015
    Con 51%
    Lab 18%
    LibD 15%

    2017
    Con 52%
    Lab 27%
    LibD 19%

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Cambridgeshire_(UK_Parliament_constituency)
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,082

    I thought we'd been told on PB that the Allen and Soubry were certain of being re-elected ?

    This all seems a bit premature given that we don't know what the party political context will be when the next election happens.
  • Options
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:


    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Mike Gapes I think will hold on, he has a strong personal vote, gaining Ilford South in 1992 when Labour lost nationally and seeing a 14% rise in the Labour vote in 2015 even as it rose by just 1% nationally and following that with an 11% rise in his vote in 2017

    Thanks for that and I know that you have strong local knowledge about constituency
    Yes, campaigned in Ilford last time, since winning it in 1992 Gapes has turned a Tory seat in 1987 to an ultra safe Labour seat now much of it on his personal vote
    Demographic changes.
    Not entirely, Gapes has the biggest majority in Redbridge, even bigger than John Cryer's in Leyton and Wanstead
    Due to demographic changes. Which have also converted Ilford North from a competitive seat to Safe Labour.
    Nowhere near as safe as Ilford South
    Yes, but that's because the demographics have only just kicked in in Ilford North. As recently as GE2010 Ilford North was won by the Tories.
    So what, the demographics are pretty similar across Redbridge, Gapes has had huge personal success in turning a Tory seat in 1987 into one with a 31,647 majority for Labour in 2017
    Read Anthony Wells:

    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/2015guide/ilfordsouth/

    This is a densely packed residential seat without the Essex countryside of Ilford North, it is less affluent, the housing less desirable. In many ways it resembles its neighbour East Ham more than Ilford North. Most notably it now has a very large ethnic population, the second highest non-white population in the country and the second highest proportion of Asian voters. Ilford is perhaps still associated with the suburban Essex part of London, but demographic change has since made this seat part of ethnically diverse east London.
    Indeed.

    How the Epping Forest based Hyufd doesn't know this is mystifying.

    Makes me wonder what century CCHQ is using for its data.
    Excuse me?

    What on earth has the fact Ilford South being slightly less desirable than Ilford North got to do with the fact Gapes has turned a 9,000 vote gap in Labour's favour between the Ilford seats in 1992 into a 22,000 vote gap in Labour's favour in 2017? Plus a rising ethnic population has affected both seats
    As Sunil has explained Gapes hasn't done it but changing demographics have.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,030

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:


    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Mike Gapes I think will hold on, he has a strong personal vote, gaining Ilford South in 1992 when Labour lost nationally and seeing a 14% rise in the Labour vote in 2015 even as it rose by just 1% nationally and following that with an 11% rise in his vote in 2017

    Thanks for that and I know that you have strong local knowledge about constituency
    Yes, campaigned in Ilford last time, since winning it in 1992 Gapes has turned a Tory seat in 1987 to an ultra safe Labour seat now much of it on his personal vote
    Demographic changes.
    Not entirely, Gapes has the biggest majority in Redbridge, even bigger than John Cryer's in Leyton and Wanstead
    Due to demographic changes. Which have also converted Ilford North from a competitive seat to Safe Labour.
    Nowhere near as safe as Ilford South
    Yes, but that's because the demographics have only just kicked in in Ilford North. As recently as GE2010 Ilford North was won by the Tories.
    So what, the demographics are pretty similar across Redbridge, Gapes has had huge personal success in turning a Tory seat in 1987 into one with a 31,647 majority for Labour in 2017
    Read Anthony Wells:

    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/2015guide/ilfordsouth/

    This is a densely packed residene this seat part of ethnically diverse east London.
    So what, Ilford South was still in the same relationship to Ilford North in 1987 and both have experienced demographic changes, that does not explain the 9,000 vote gap in the Ilford seats in 1992 expanding to a 22,000 vote gap by 2017
    What do you mean "so what"? You disagree with Anthony Wells? Read what he said. He said it's the demographic changes that make it, presumably more favourable to Labour ("it resembles East Ham more than Ilford North"). And I've lived in Ilford since 1978, aged three, you don't think I know my own home town?
    I mean 'so what?' You have told me nothing, zilch, nada that in any way disputes Gapes achievement in Ilford South and turning a narrow Labour advantage in the seat in the 1992 over North into a huge advantage by 2017.



  • Options
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:


    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Mike Gapes I think will hold on, he has a strong personal vote, gaining Ilford South in 1992 when Labour lost nationally and seeing a 14% rise in the Labour vote in 2015 even as it rose by just 1% nationally and following that with an 11% rise in his vote in 2017

    Thanks for that and I know that you have strong local knowledge about constituency
    Demographic changes.
    Not entirely, Gapes h
    Due to demographic changes. Which have also converted Ilford North from a competitive seat to Safe Labour.
    Nowhere near as safe as Ilford South
    Yes, but that's because the demographics have only just kicked in in Ilford North. As recently as GE2010 Ilford North was won by the Tories.
    So what, the demographics are pretty similar across Redbridge, Gapes has had huge personal success in turning a Tory seat in 1987 into one with a 31,647 majority for Labour in 2017
    Read Anthony Wells:

    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/2015guide/ilfordsouth/

    This is a densely packed residential seat without the Essex countryside of Ilford North, it is less affluent, the housing less desirable. In many ways it resembles its neighbour East Ham more than Ilford North. Most notably it now has a very large ethnic population, the second highest non-white population in the country and the second highest proportion of Asian voters. Ilford is perhaps still associated with the suburban Essex part of London, but demographic change has since made this seat part of ethnically diverse east London.
    Indeed.

    How the Epping Forest based Hyufd doesn't know this is mystifying.

    Makes me wonder what century CCHQ is using for its data.
    Excuse me?

    What on earth has the fact Ilford South being slightly less desirable than Ilford North got to do with the fact Gapes has turned a 9,000 vote gap in Labour's favour between the Ilford seats in 1992 into a 22,000 vote gap in Labour's favour in 2017? Plus a rising ethnic population has affected both seats
    You disagree with Anthony Wells? Read what he said. He said it's the demographic changes that make it, presumably more favourable to Labour ("it resembles East Ham more than Ilford North"). And I've lived in Ilford since 1978, aged three, you don't think I know my own home town?
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    edited February 2019
    notme2 said:

    _Anazina_ said:

    Chris said:

    The Guardian has a comment on the question of Shamima Begum's Bangladeshi citizenship:
    But Najrul Khasru, a British-Bangladeshi barrister and part-time tribunal judge who has reviewed Bangladesh’s citizenship laws, told the Guardian he believed Begum was not a Bangladeshi citizen unless, at the time of her birth, her parents had registered her at the High Commission, which he said was very uncommon within the British-Bangladeshi community.
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/feb/21/what-is-the-truth-about-shamima-begums-citizenship-status

    A link is provided to the Citizenship Act, 1951:
    http://bdlaws.minlaw.gov.bd/print_sections_all.php?id=242

    Although I am not a solicitor, his argument seems clearly incorrect to me.

    The fact we - as a ostensibly civilised country - are even flirting with this sophistry is risible. This girl has never even set foot in Bangladesh. She was born, and made, in Britain. We should fucking deal with it.
    She betrayed this country. She took what we gave her and spat at us in the face. She f***ed off. She can live with her choices. We gave her education, healthcare, somewhere to live and she said that bombing the Manchester Arena was justified.

    We owe her nothing. She's made her choice.
    Yes. But let’s step back for a moment. She’s not a dual national. She was British born. Stripping her of her citizenship makes her stateless. Things like this can have ripples around the world.
    The legal advice of the government say that she is a dual-national, in which case we can do this.

    If she's not a dual-national then our courts should rectify that. She should be told that she is still a citizen and is welcome to return to the UK at any point and be charged with treason and face potential life in prison.

    But if she is a dual-citizen I see no legal or ethical reason we shouldn't put our own country over this vile woman. Anyone who defends the Manchester Arena bombing and calls it justified is not welcome in this country as far as I'm concerned. I don't give a shit about her race, religion or politics - I do think that goes too far.
  • Options
    justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    notme2 said:

    You still win if they rejoin their party, right? If so, stonking value. Aside from their non-trivial chances of holding the seats as TIG, there had to be a reasonable chance that one of the ex-Tories rejoins Con post-Brexit, or one of the ex-Lab guys rejoins Lab post-Corbyn or post-Milne.

    I can't see any of them rejoining prior to next election, perhaps after if they hold
    The labour (ex) ones won’t rejoin if they hold. The amount of crap that would get thrown at them by those they once considered friends would be just too much.
    They have indicated they will not contest their existing seats.
  • Options
    _Anazina__Anazina_ Posts: 1,810
    Chris

    Yes, I accept that. I merely point out that his trying to thread the eye of needle in order to dump her on an allied country she had never even visited is a shameful act.
  • Options
    notme2notme2 Posts: 1,006
    edited February 2019
    Shami Shami Shami (as rod Liddle called her ) was once a ubiquitous figure on tv. As head of Liberty carved out a media profile as a fair minded and trustworthy arbitrator of that which is good and bad. And she traded this reputation by giving the Labour Party a clean bill of health on anti Semitism and rewarded by a seat in the lords.

    It was so grubby and transactional. It was Kidscape level of fall from grace.
  • Options
    TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633

    _Anazina_ said:

    _Anazina_ said:

    Chris said:

    The Guardian has a comment on the question of Shamima Begum's Bangladeshi citizenship:
    But Najrul Khasru, a British-Bangladeshi barrister and part-time tribunal judge who has reviewed Bangladesh’s citizenship laws, told the Guardian he believed Begum was not a Bangladeshi citizen unless, at the time of her birth, her parents had registered her at the High Commission, which he said was very uncommon within the British-Bangladeshi community.
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/feb/21/what-is-the-truth-about-shamima-begums-citizenship-status

    A link is provided to the Citizenship Act, 1951:
    http://bdlaws.minlaw.gov.bd/print_sections_all.php?id=242

    Although I am not a solicitor, his argument seems clearly incorrect to me.

    The fact we - as a ostensibly civilised country - are even flirting with this sophistry is risible. This girl has never even set foot in Bangladesh. She was born, and made, in Britain. We should fucking deal with it.
    She betrayed this country. She took what we gave her and spat at us in the face. She f***ed off. She can live with her choices. We gave her education, healthcare, somewhere to live and she said that bombing the Manchester Arena was justified.

    We owe her nothing. She's made her choice.

    Thank you for that level-headed, intelligently argued and nuanced response.
    Do you agree with her Islamist ideology, _Anazina_?
    The Isis bride hates Britain . Hence Anzina supports her no matter anything else.

    Lefty sectioning in action.
  • Options
    _Anazina__Anazina_ Posts: 1,810

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:


    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Mike Gapes I think will hold on, he has a strong personal vote, gaining Ilford South in 1992 when Labour lost nationally and seeing a 14% rise in the Labour vote in 2015 even as it rose by just 1% nationally and following that with an 11% rise in his vote in 2017

    Thanks for that and I know that you have strong local knowledge about constituency
    Yes, campaigned in Ilford last time, since winning it in 1992 Gapes has turned a Tory seat in 1987 to an ultra safe Labour seat now much of it on his personal vote
    Demographic changes.
    Not entirely, Gapes has the biggest majority in Redbridge, even bigger than John Cryer's in Leyton and Wanstead
    Due to demographic changes. Which have also converted Ilford North from a competitive seat to Safe Labour.
    Nowhere near as safe as Ilford South
    Yes, but that's because the demographics have only just kicked in in Ilford North. As recently as GE2010 Ilford North was won by the Tories.
    So what, the demographics are pretty similar across Redbridge, Gapes has had huge personal success in turning a Tory seat in 1987 into one with a 31,647 majority for Labour in 2017
    Read Anthony Wells:

    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/2015guide/ilfordsouth/

    ...
    So what, Ilford South was still in the same relationship to Ilford North in 1987 and both have experienced demographic changes, that does not explain the 9,000 vote gap in the Ilford seats in 1992 expanding to a 22,000 vote gap by 2017
    What do you mean "so what"? You disagree with Anthony Wells? Read what he said. He said it's the demographic changes that make it, presumably more favourable to Labour ("it resembles East Ham more than Ilford North"). And I've lived in Ilford since 1978, aged three, you don't think I know my own home town?
    More sharp debating posts like this from you and fewer facsimiles of ancient graphs would be welcome.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,030
    edited February 2019

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:


    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Mike Gapes I think will hold on, he has a strong personal vote, gaining Ilford South in 1992 when Labour lost nationally and seeing a 14% rise in the Labour vote in 2015 even as it rose by just 1% nationally and following that with an 11% rise in his vote in 2017

    Thanks for that and I know that you have strong local knowledge about constituency
    Yes, campaigned in Ilford last time, since winning it in 1992 Gapes has turned a Tory seat in 1987 to an ultra safe Labour seat now much of it on his personal vote
    Demographic changes.
    Not entirely, Gapes has the biggest majority in Redbridge, even bigger than John Cryer's in Leyton and Wanstead
    Due to demographic changes. Which have also converted Ilford North from a competitive seat to Safe Labour.
    Nowhere near as safe as Ilford South
    Yes, but that's because the demographics have only just kicked in in Ilford North. As recently as GE2010 Ilford North was won by the Tories.
    So what, the demographics are pretty similar across Redbridge, Gapes has had huge personal success in turning a Tory seat in 1987 into one with a 31,647 majority for Labour in 2017
    Read Anthony Wells:

    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/2015guide/ilfordsouth/

    This is a densely packed residential seaat part of ethnically diverse east London.
    Indeed.

    How the Epping Forest based Hyufd doesn't know this is mystifying.

    Makes me wonder what century CCHQ is using for its data.
    Excuse me?

    What on earth has the faoth seats
    As Sunil has explained Gapes hasn't done it but changing demographics have.
    Rubbish, Ilford North has experienced demographic change as much as Ilford South, certainly on a relative basis, I should know I canvassed Ilford North in 2017 and half the houses I knocked had Asian voters (plus being Asian of course does not guarantee a Labour voter, plenty of Asian Tory voters, they are the best ethnic group for the Tories outside the Jewish community).


    Wells on Ilford North 'In recent years it has become increasingly ethnically diverse, with a large Asian population as well as significant Black and Jewish communities. Overall just over half the seats population was white in the 2011 census'
  • Options
    dotsdots Posts: 615

    dots said:

    HYUFD said:


    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Mike Gapes I think will hold on, he has a strong personal vote, gaining Ilford South in 1992 when Labour lost nationally and seeing a 14% rise in the Labour vote in 2015 even as it rose by just 1% nationally and following that with an 11% rise in his vote in 2017

    Thanks for that and I know that you have strong local knowledge about constituency
    Yes, campaigned in Ilford last time, since winning it in 1992 Gapes has turned a Tory seat in 1987 to an ultra safe Labour seat now much of it on his personal vote
    Demographic changes.
    Not entirely, Gapes has the biggest majority in Redbridge, even bigger than John Cryer's in Leyton and Wanstead
    Due to demographic changes. Which have also converted Ilford North from a competitive seat to Safe Labour.
    Nowhere near as safe as Ilford South
    As recently as GE2010 Ilford North was won by the Tories.
    So what, the demographics are pretty similar across Redbridge
    Read Anthony Wells:

    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/2015guide/ilfordsouth/

    This is a densely packed residential seat without the Essex countryside of Ilford North, it is less affluent, the housing less desirable. In many ways it resembles its neighbour East Ham more than Ilford North. Most notably it now has a very large ethnic population, the second highest non-white population in the country and the second highest proportion of Asian voters. Ilford is perhaps still associated with the suburban Essex part of London, but demographic change has since made this seat part of ethnically diverse east London.
    I’m changing my mind and firmly with HY on this one. I know people move east out of London to better themselves and their property, but this doesn’t sound like the sort of place that will deliver that.
    Wells agrees with me about the demographics! BTW, Ilford has been part of Greater London since 1965. Also, to declare a personal interest in Ilford, I've lived here since 1978, aged three!
    I am changing my mind. I now agree with Sunil.

    What is it we agree on? It is every bit the piss ant swamp at the back end of universe you neither choose to go to or can escape from Mr Wells described?
  • Options

    You still win if they rejoin their party, right? If so, stonking value. Aside from their non-trivial chances of holding the seats as TIG, there had to be a reasonable chance that one of the ex-Tories rejoins Con post-Brexit, or one of the ex-Lab guys rejoins Lab post-Corbyn or post-Milne.

    I can't see any of them rejoining prior to next election, perhaps after if they hold
    If TIG fizzles then some of them will want to rejoin, and there's a lot of incentive for their party to let them back in and prove that it's [ reoccupied the centre-ground | reunited after brexit | addressed its anti-semitism issue ].

    If TIG is doing well then you get to win the bet that way instead.
  • Options
    justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:


    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Mike Gapes I think will hold on, he has a strong personal vote, gaining Ilford South in 1992 when Labour lost nationally and seeing a 14% rise in the Labour vote in 2015 even as it rose by just 1% nationally and following that with an 11% rise in his vote in 2017

    Thanks for that and I know that you have strong local knowledge about constituency
    Yes, campaigned in Ilford last time, since winning it in 1992 Gapes has turned a Tory seat in 1987 to an ultra safe Labour seat now much of it on his personal vote
    Demographic changes.
    Not entirely, Gapes has the biggest majority in Redbridge, even bigger than John Cryer's in Leyton and Wanstead
    Due to demographic changes. Which have also converted Ilford North from a competitive seat to Safe Labour.
    Nowhere near as safe as Ilford South
    Yes, but that's because the demographics have only just kicked in in Ilford North. As recently as GE2010 Ilford North was won by the Tories.
    So what, the demographics are pretty similar across Redbridge, Gapes has had huge personal success in turning a Tory seat in 1987 into one with a 31,647 majority for Labour in 2017
    Read Anthony Wells:

    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/2015guide/ilfordsouth/

    This is a densely packed residential seat without the Essex countryside of Ilford North, it is less affluent, the housing less desirable. In many ways it resembles its neighbour East Ham more than Ilford North. Most notably it now has a very large ethnic population, the second highest non-white population in the country and the second highest proportion of Asian voters. Ilford is perhaps still associated with the suburban Essex part of London, but demographic change has since made this seat part of ethnically diverse east London.
    Indeed.

    How the Epping Forest based Hyufd doesn't know this is mystifying.

    Makes me wonder what century CCHQ is using for its data.
    Excuse me?

    What on earth has the fact Ilford South being slightly less desirable than Ilford North got to do with the fact Gapes has turned a 9,000 vote gap in Labour's favour between the Ilford seats in 1992 into a 22,000 vote gap in Labour's favour in 2017? Plus a rising ethnic population has affected both seats
    There were boundary changes in 1997 which added Chadwell and Seven Kings to the Ilford South seat.
  • Options
    _Anazina_ said:

    _Anazina_ said:

    Chris said:

    The Guardian has a comment on the question of Shamima Begum's Bangladeshi citizenship:
    But Najrul Khasru, a British-Bangladeshi barrister and part-time tribunal judge who has reviewed Bangladesh’s citizenship laws, told the Guardian he believed Begum was not a Bangladeshi citizen unless, at the time of her birth, her parents had registered her at the High Commission, which he said was very uncommon within the British-Bangladeshi community.
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/feb/21/what-is-the-truth-about-shamima-begums-citizenship-status

    A link is provided to the Citizenship Act, 1951:
    http://bdlaws.minlaw.gov.bd/print_sections_all.php?id=242

    Although I am not a solicitor, his argument seems clearly incorrect to me.

    The fact we - as a ostensibly civilised country - are even flirting with this sophistry is risible. This girl has never even set foot in Bangladesh. She was born, and made, in Britain. We should fucking deal with it.
    She betrayed this country. She took what we gave her and spat at us in the face. She f***ed off. She can live with her choices. We gave her education, healthcare, somewhere to live and she said that bombing the Manchester Arena was justified.

    We owe her nothing. She's made her choice.
    She is an obnoxious, vile airhead. We made her. So why are we dumping her on Bangladesh?
    We're not. We're leaving her stranded in Syria, which is where she voluntarily chose to go.

    If she wants to make her way to Bangladesh and try her luck with them, then that's up to them to deal with. Not our issue.
  • Options
    _Anazina__Anazina_ Posts: 1,810
    Sunil

    Er, no. I think it’s hateful and vile.

    Hence why we shouldn’t dump her on another (allied) country that she has never even set foot in. We should do our own dirty work.
  • Options
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:


    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Thanks for that and I know that you have strong local knowledge about constituency
    Demographic changes.
    Not entirely, Gapes has the biggest majority in Redbridge, even bigger than John Cryer's in Leyton and Wanstead
    Due to demographic changes. Which have also converted Ilford North from a competitive seat to Safe Labour.
    Nowhere near as safe as Ilford South
    Yes, but that's because the demographics have only just kicked in in Ilford North. As recently as GE2010 Ilford North was won by the Tories.
    So what, the demographics are pretty similar across Redbridge, Gapes has had huge personal success in turning a Tory seat in 1987 into one with a 31,647 majority for Labour in 2017
    Read Anthony Wells:

    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/2015guide/ilfordsouth/

    This is a densely packed residene this seat part of ethnically diverse east London.
    So what, Ilford South was still in the same relationship to Ilford North in 1987 and both have experienced demographic changes, that does not explain the 9,000 vote gap in the Ilford seats in 1992 expanding to a 22,000 vote gap by 2017
    What do you mean "so what"? You disagree with Anthony Wells? Read what he said. He said it's the demographic changes that make it, presumably more favourable to Labour ("it resembles East Ham more than Ilford North"). And I've lived in Ilford since 1978, aged three, you don't think I know my own home town?
    I mean 'so what?' You have told me nothing, zilch, nada that in any way disputes Gapes achievement in Ilford South and turning a narrow Labour advantage in the seat in the 1992 over North into a huge advantage by 2017.

    The demographics have gifted him those whopping majorities!

    Most notably it now has a very large ethnic population, the second highest non-white population in the country and the second highest proportion of Asian voters. Ilford is perhaps still associated with the suburban Essex part of London, but demographic change has since made this seat part of ethnically diverse east London.
  • Options

    _Anazina_ said:

    Chris said:

    The Guardian has a comment on the question of Shamima Begum's Bangladeshi citizenship:
    But Najrul Khasru, a British-Bangladeshi barrister and part-time tribunal judge who has reviewed Bangladesh’s citizenship laws, told the Guardian he believed Begum was not a Bangladeshi citizen unless, at the time of her birth, her parents had registered her at the High Commission, which he said was very uncommon within the British-Bangladeshi community.
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/feb/21/what-is-the-truth-about-shamima-begums-citizenship-status

    A link is provided to the Citizenship Act, 1951:
    http://bdlaws.minlaw.gov.bd/print_sections_all.php?id=242

    Although I am not a solicitor, his argument seems clearly incorrect to me.

    The fact we - as a ostensibly civilised country - are even flirting with this sophistry is risible. This girl has never even set foot in Bangladesh. She was born, and made, in Britain. We should fucking deal with it.
    Why should the taxpayer support her baby? Where's the daddy?
    Taxpayer support for the baby will cost a lot less than fighting a losing court case.
    Hopefully she will bill you personally??
  • Options
    notme2 said:

    Shami Shami Shami (as rod Liddle called her ) was once a ubiquitous figure on tv. As head of Liberty carved out a media profile as a fair minded and trustworthy arbitrator of that which is good and bad. And she traded this reputation by giving the Labour Party a clean bill of health on anti Semitism and rewarded by a seat in the lords.

    It was so grubby and transactional. It was Kidscape level of fall from grace.
    Definitely the opinion down my local.

    Whether this is universal or indeed whether 98% of voters give a flying f is another matter.

  • Options
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:


    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:



    Thanks for that and I know that you have strong local knowledge about constituency

    Yes, campaigned in Ilford last time, since winning it in 1992 Gapes has turned a Tory seat in 1987 to an ultra safe Labour seat now much of it on his personal vote
    Demographic changes.
    Not entirely, Gapes has the biggest majority in Redbridge, even bigger than John Cryer's in Leyton and Wanstead
    Due to demographic changes. Which have also converted Ilford North from a competitive seat to Safe Labour.
    Nowhere near as safe as Ilford South
    Yes, but that's because the demographics have only just kicked in in Ilford North. As recently as GE2010 Ilford North was won by the Tories.
    So what, the demographics are pretty similar across Redbridge, Gapes has had huge personal success in turning a Tory seat in 1987 into one with a 31,647 majority for Labour in 2017
    Read Anthony Wells:

    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/2015guide/ilfordsouth/

    This is a densely packed residential seaat part of ethnically diverse east London.
    Indeed.

    How the Epping Forest based Hyufd doesn't know this is mystifying.

    Makes me wonder what century CCHQ is using for its data.
    Excuse me?

    What on earth has the fact Ilford South being slightly less desirable than Ilford North got to do with the fact Gapes has turned a 9,000 vote gap in Labour's favour between the Ilford seats in 1992 into a 22,000 vote gap in Labour's favour in 2017? Plus a rising ethnic population has affected both seats
    As Sunil has explained Gapes hasn't done it but changing demographics have.
    Rubbish, Ilford North has experienced demographic change as much as Ilford South, certainly on a relative basis, I should know I canvassed Ilford North in 2017 and half the houses I knocked had Asian voters
    Okay lets put some actual vote numbers to your claims.

    What personal vote do you think Gapes has ?

    And for comparison purposes please give what personal vote you think nearby MPs have.
  • Options
    _Anazina__Anazina_ Posts: 1,810
    TGOHF said:

    _Anazina_ said:

    _Anazina_ said:

    Chris said:

    The Guardian has a comment on the question of Shamima Begum's Bangladeshi citizenship:
    But Najrul Khasru, a British-Bangladeshi barrister and part-time tribunal judge who has reviewed Bangladesh’s citizenship laws, told the Guardian he believed Begum was not a Bangladeshi citizen unless, at the time of her birth, her parents had registered her at the High Commission, which he said was very uncommon within the British-Bangladeshi community.
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/feb/21/what-is-the-truth-about-shamima-begums-citizenship-status

    A link is provided to the Citizenship Act, 1951:
    http://bdlaws.minlaw.gov.bd/print_sections_all.php?id=242

    Although I am not a solicitor, his argument seems clearly incorrect to me.

    The fact we - as a ostensibly civilised country - are even flirting with this sophistry is risible. This girl has never even set foot in Bangladesh. She was born, and made, in Britain. We should fucking deal with it.
    She betrayed this country. She took what we gave her and spat at us in the face. She f***ed off. She can live with her choices. We gave her education, healthcare, somewhere to live and she said that bombing the Manchester Arena was justified.

    We owe her nothing. She's made her choice.

    Thank you for that level-headed, intelligently argued and nuanced response.
    Do you agree with her Islamist ideology, _Anazina_?
    The Isis bride hates Britain . Hence Anzina supports her no matter anything else.

    Lefty sectioning in action.
    I’ll leave others to unpack that post.
  • Options

    _Anazina_ said:

    _Anazina_ said:

    Chris said:

    The Guardian has a comment on the question of Shamima Begum's Bangladeshi citizenship:
    But Najrul Khasru, a British-Bangladeshi barrister and part-time tribunal judge who has reviewed Bangladesh’s citizenship laws, told the Guardian he believed Begum was not a Bangladeshi citizen unless, at the time of her birth, her parents had registered her at the High Commission, which he said was very uncommon within the British-Bangladeshi community.
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/feb/21/what-is-the-truth-about-shamima-begums-citizenship-status

    A link is provided to the Citizenship Act, 1951:
    http://bdlaws.minlaw.gov.bd/print_sections_all.php?id=242

    Although I am not a solicitor, his argument seems clearly incorrect to me.

    The fact we - as a ostensibly civilised country - are even flirting with this sophistry is risible. This girl has never even set foot in Bangladesh. She was born, and made, in Britain. We should fucking deal with it.
    She betrayed this country. She took what we gave her and spat at us in the face. She f***ed off. She can live with her choices. We gave her education, healthcare, somewhere to live and she said that bombing the Manchester Arena was justified.

    We owe her nothing. She's made her choice.
    She is an obnoxious, vile airhead. We made her. So why are we dumping her on Bangladesh?
    We're not. We're leaving her stranded in Syria, which is where she voluntarily chose to go.

    If she wants to make her way to Bangladesh and try her luck with them, then that's up to them to deal with. Not our issue.
    I may be mistaken, but BBC seemed to be saying the Kurds were having to deal with her.

    And many more from non-middle east countries.
  • Options

    _Anazina_ said:

    _Anazina_ said:

    Chris said:

    The Guardian has a comment on the question of Shamima Begum's Bangladeshi citizenship:
    But Najrul Khasru, a British-Bangladeshi barrister and part-time tribunal judge who has reviewed Bangladesh’s citizenship laws, told the Guardian he believed Begum was not a Bangladeshi citizen unless, at the time of her birth, her parents had registered her at the High Commission, which he said was very uncommon within the British-Bangladeshi community.
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/feb/21/what-is-the-truth-about-shamima-begums-citizenship-status

    A link is provided to the Citizenship Act, 1951:
    http://bdlaws.minlaw.gov.bd/print_sections_all.php?id=242

    Although I am not a solicitor, his argument seems clearly incorrect to me.

    The fact we - as a ostensibly civilised country - are even flirting with this sophistry is risible. This girl has never even set foot in Bangladesh. She was born, and made, in Britain. We should fucking deal with it.
    She betrayed this country. She took what we gave her and spat at us in the face. She f***ed off. She can live with her choices. We gave her education, healthcare, somewhere to live and she said that bombing the Manchester Arena was justified.

    We owe her nothing. She's made her choice.
    She is an obnoxious, vile airhead. We made her. So why are we dumping her on Bangladesh?
    We're not. We're leaving her stranded in Syria, which is where she voluntarily chose to go.

    If she wants to make her way to Bangladesh and try her luck with them, then that's up to them to deal with. Not our issue.
    I may be mistaken, but BBC seemed to be saying the Kurds were having to deal with her.

    And many more from non-middle east countries.
    I'm OK with that.
  • Options
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:


    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Mike Gapes I think will hold on, he has a strong personal vote, gaining Ilford South in 1992 when Labour lost nationally and seeing a 14% rise in the Labour vote in 2015 even as it rose by just 1% nationally and following that with an 11% rise in his vote in 2017

    Thanks for that and I know that you have strong local knowledge about constituency
    Yes, campaigned in Ilford last time, since winning it in 1992 Gapes has turned a Tory seat in 1987 to an ultra safe Labour seat now much of it on his personal vote
    Demographic changes.
    Not entirely, Gapes has the biggest majority in Redbridge, even bigger than John Cryer's in Leyton and Wanstead
    Due to demographic changes. Which have also converted Ilford North from a competitive seat to Safe Labour.
    Nowhere near as safe as Ilford South
    Yes, but that's because the demographics have only just kicked in in Ilford North. As recently as GE2010 Ilford North was won by the Tories.
    Read Anthony Wells:

    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/2015guide/ilfordsouth/

    This is a densely packed residential seaat part of ethnically diverse east London.
    Indeed.

    How the Epping Forest based Hyufd doesn't know this is mystifying.

    Makes me wonder what century CCHQ is using for its data.
    Excuse me?

    What on earth has the faoth seats
    As Sunil has explained Gapes hasn't done it but changing demographics have.
    Rubbish, Ilford North has experienced demographic change as much as Ilford South, certainly on a relative basis, I should know I canvassed Ilford North in 2017 and half the houses I knocked had Asian voters (plus being Asian of course does not guarantee a Labour voter, plenty of Asian Tory voters, they are the best ethnic group for the Tories outside the Jewish community).

    Wells on Ilford North 'In recent years it has become increasingly ethnically diverse, with a large Asian population as well as significant Black and Jewish communities. Overall just over half the seats population was white in the 2011 census'
    The percentage of non-whites in South is much higher than in North.
  • Options
    _Anazina_ said:

    Sunil

    Er, no. I think it’s hateful and vile.

    Hence why we shouldn’t dump her on another (allied) country that she has never even set foot in. We should do our own dirty work.

    Thanks for fighting this corner so well Anazina. I think you are absolutely right in everything you say on this. I find it shameful that we should abandon our responsibilities and leave it to others to sort out the mess we have helped create.
  • Options
    dotsdots Posts: 615
    TGOHF said:

    _Anazina_ said:

    _Anazina_ said:

    Chris said:

    The Guardian has a comment on the question of Shamima Begum's Bangladeshi citizenship:
    But Najrul Khasru, a British-Bangladeshi barrister and part-time tribunal judge who has reviewed Bangladesh’s citizenship laws, told the Guardian he believed Begum was not a Bangladeshi citizen unless, at the time of her birth, her parents had registered her at the High Commission, which he said was very uncommon within the British-Bangladeshi community.
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/feb/21/what-is-the-truth-about-shamima-begums-citizenship-status

    A link is provided to the Citizenship Act, 1951:
    http://bdlaws.minlaw.gov.bd/print_sections_all.php?id=242

    Although I am not a solicitor, his argument seems clearly incorrect to me.

    The fact we - as a ostensibly civilised country - are even flirting with this sophistry is risible. This girl has never even set foot in Bangladesh. She was born, and made, in Britain. We should fucking deal with it.
    She betrayed this country. She took what we gave her and spat at us in the face. She f***ed off. She can live with her choices. We gave her education, healthcare, somewhere to live and she said that bombing the Manchester Arena was justified.

    We owe her nothing. She's made her choice.

    Thank you for that level-headed, intelligently argued and nuanced response.
    Do you agree with her Islamist ideology, _Anazina_?
    The Isis bride hates Britain . Hence Anzina supports her no matter anything else.

    Lefty sectioning in action.
    It’s got nothing to do with the girls ethics or morality, but ours.

    Javid policy is right wing reactionary nonsense at its most embarrassing.
  • Options
    FloaterFloater Posts: 14,195
    Ha ha ha

    Please do Shameless

  • Options
    _Anazina_ said:

    Sunil

    Er, no. I think it’s hateful and vile.

    Hence why we shouldn’t dump her on another (allied) country that she has never even set foot in. We should do our own dirty work.

    She's in Syria
    ISIS did a lot of bad stuff in Syria
    Let her face Syrian justice
  • Options
    notme2notme2 Posts: 1,006

    notme2 said:

    _Anazina_ said:

    Chris said:

    The Guardian has a comment on the question of Shamima Begum's Bangladeshi citizenship:
    But Najrul Khasru, a British-Bangladeshi barrister and part-time tribunal judge who has reviewed Bangladesh’s citizenship laws, told the Guardian he believed Begum was not a Bangladeshi citizen unless, at the time of her birth, her parents had registered her at the High Commission, which he said was very uncommon within the British-Bangladeshi community.
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/feb/21/what-is-the-truth-about-shamima-begums-citizenship-status

    A link is provided to the Citizenship Act, 1951:
    http://bdlaws.minlaw.gov.bd/print_sections_all.php?id=242

    Although I am not a solicitor, his argument seems clearly incorrect to me.

    The fact we - as a ostensibly civilised country - are even flirting with this sophistry is risible. This girl has never even set foot in Bangladesh. She was born, and made, in Britain. We should fucking deal with it.
    She betrayed this country. She took what we gave her and spat at us in the face. She f***ed off. She can live with her choices. We gave her education, healthcare, somewhere to live and she said that bombing the Manchester Arena was justified.

    We owe her nothing. She's made her choice.
    Yes. But let’s step back for a moment. She’s not a dual national. She was British born. Stripping her of her citizenship makes her stateless. Things like this can have ripples around the world.
    The legal advice of the government say that she is a dual-national, in which case we can do this.

    If she's not a dual-national then our courts should rectify that. She should be told that she is still a citizen and is welcome to return to the UK at any point and be charged with treason and face potential life in prison.

    But if she is a dual-citizen I see no legal or ethical reason we shouldn't put our own country over this vile woman. Anyone who defends the Manchester Arena bombing and calls it justified is not welcome in this country as far as I'm concerned. I don't give a shit about her race, religion or politics - I do think that goes too far.
    Is there an opinion that one holds that means your citizenship should be nullified? Bangladesh have already said she isn’t a national of theirs. Don’t get me wrong. Taken out and shot is too good for her, but this is pretty poor form.

    It means anyone who could somehow be entitled to (but not have) citizenship elsewhere could have their British citizenship revoked. Jews might feel a bit sensitive about this...
  • Options
    Floater said:

    Ha ha ha

    Please do Shameless

    What a court case that would be.
  • Options
    _Anazina__Anazina_ Posts: 1,810

    _Anazina_ said:

    Sunil

    Er, no. I think it’s hateful and vile.

    Hence why we shouldn’t dump her on another (allied) country that she has never even set foot in. We should do our own dirty work.

    Thanks for fighting this corner so well Anazina. I think you are absolutely right in everything you say on this. I find it shameful that we should abandon our responsibilities and leave it to others to sort out the mess we have helped create.
    Cheers Richard. Hope all is well with you and yours.
  • Options

    _Anazina_ said:

    Sunil

    Er, no. I think it’s hateful and vile.

    Hence why we shouldn’t dump her on another (allied) country that she has never even set foot in. We should do our own dirty work.

    She's in Syria
    ISIS did a lot of bad stuff in Syria
    Let her face Syrian justice
    Indeed. We shouldn't provide a get out of jail free card for her. She can lay in the bed she made.

    And let us be clear to future potential jihadi's that is the fate they face if they betray us and go fight for a future ISIS. They don't get to go fight for terrorists then return back to Blighty like they'd never left.
  • Options
    justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    Chris Leslie has always struck me as someone who was seriously overpromoted and very lucky to have even found himself an MP. Very lightweight and is still finding it difficult to come to terms with Labour having elected a Leader such as Corbyn with the consequent collapse of his former hopes of advancement.
  • Options
    TGOHF said:

    _Anazina_ said:

    _Anazina_ said:

    Chris said:

    The Guardian has a comment on the question of Shamima Begum's Bangladeshi citizenship:
    But Najrul Khasru, a British-Bangladeshi barrister and part-time tribunal judge who has reviewed Bangladesh’s citizenship laws, told the Guardian he believed Begum was not a Bangladeshi citizen unless, at the time of her birth, her parents had registered her at the High Commission, which he said was very uncommon within the British-Bangladeshi community.
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/feb/21/what-is-the-truth-about-shamima-begums-citizenship-status

    A link is provided to the Citizenship Act, 1951:
    http://bdlaws.minlaw.gov.bd/print_sections_all.php?id=242

    Although I am not a solicitor, his argument seems clearly incorrect to me.

    The fact we - as a ostensibly civilised country - are even flirting with this sophistry is risible. This girl has never even set foot in Bangladesh. She was born, and made, in Britain. We should fucking deal with it.
    She betrayed this country. She took what we gave her and spat at us in the face. She f***ed off. She can live with her choices. We gave her education, healthcare, somewhere to live and she said that bombing the Manchester Arena was justified.

    We owe her nothing. She's made her choice.

    Thank you for that level-headed, intelligently argued and nuanced response.
    Do you agree with her Islamist ideology, _Anazina_?
    The Isis bride hates Britain . Hence Anzina supports her no matter anything else.

    Lefty sectioning in action.
    Except it is by no means just 'Lefties' who think this way. This is not about rights but about both personal and national responsibility.
  • Options
    blueblueblueblue Posts: 875

    _Anazina_ said:

    _Anazina_ said:

    Chris said:

    The Guardian has a comment on the question of Shamima Begum's Bangladeshi citizenship:
    But Najrul Khasru, a British-Bangladeshi barrister and part-time tribunal judge who has reviewed Bangladesh’s citizenship laws, told the Guardian he believed Begum was not a Bangladeshi citizen unless, at the time of her birth, her parents had registered her at the High Commission, which he said was very uncommon within the British-Bangladeshi community.
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/feb/21/what-is-the-truth-about-shamima-begums-citizenship-status

    A link is provided to the Citizenship Act, 1951:
    http://bdlaws.minlaw.gov.bd/print_sections_all.php?id=242

    Although I am not a solicitor, his argument seems clearly incorrect to me.

    The fact we - as a ostensibly civilised country - are even flirting with this sophistry is risible. This girl has never even set foot in Bangladesh. She was born, and made, in Britain. We should fucking deal with it.
    She betrayed this country. She took what we gave her and spat at us in the face. She f***ed off. She can live with her choices. We gave her education, healthcare, somewhere to live and she said that bombing the Manchester Arena was justified.

    We owe her nothing. She's made her choice.
    She is an obnoxious, vile airhead. We made her. So why are we dumping her on Bangladesh?
    We're not. We're leaving her stranded in Syria, which is where she voluntarily chose to go.

    If she wants to make her way to Bangladesh and try her luck with them, then that's up to them to deal with. Not our issue.
    I may be mistaken, but BBC seemed to be saying the Kurds were having to deal with her.

    And many more from non-middle east countries.
    I'm OK with that.
    I'm sure the Kurds will look very favourably upon the hand-wring nonsense being posted by British lefties when meting out their justice. Or not, as the case may be.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,030
    justin124 said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:


    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Mike Gapes I think will hold on, he has a strong personal vote, gaining Ilford South in 1992 when Labour lost nationally and seeing a 14% rise in the Labour vote in 2015 even as it rose by just 1% nationally and following that with an 11% rise in his vote in 2017

    Thanks for that and I know that you have strong local knowledge about constituency
    Yes, campaigned in Ilford last time, since winning it in 1992 Gapes has turned a Tory seat in 1987 to an ultra safe Labour seat now much of it on his personal vote
    Demographic changes.
    Not entirely, Gapes has the biggest majority in Redbridge, even bigger than John Cryer's in Leyton and Wanstead
    Due to demographic changes. Which have also converted Ilford North from a competitive seat to Safe Labour.
    Nowhere near as safe as Ilford South
    Yes, but that's because the demographics have only just kicked in in Ilford North. As recently as GE2010 Ilford North was won by the Tories.
    So what, the demographics are pretty similar across Redbridge, Gapes has had huge personal success in turning a Tory seat in 1987 into one with a 31,647 majority for Labour in 2017
    Read Anthony Wells:

    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/2015guide/ilfordsouth/

    This is a densely packed residential seat without of ethnically diverse east London.
    Indeed.

    How the Epping Forest based Hyufd doesn't know this is mystifying.

    Makes me wonder what century CCHQ is using for its data.
    Excuse me?

    What on earth has the fact Ilford South being slightly less desirable than Ilford North got to do with the fact Gapes has turned a 9,000 vote gap in Labour's favour between the Ilford seats in 1992 into a 22,000 vote gap in Labour's favour in 2017? Plus a rising ethnic population has affected both seats
    There were boundary changes in 1997 which added Chadwell and Seven Kings to the Ilford South seat.
    So? In 2015 Gapes increased the Labour vote by 14.6% in the seat, in 1997 by 13.5%
  • Options

    TGOHF said:

    _Anazina_ said:

    _Anazina_ said:

    Chris said:

    The Guardian has a comment on the question of Shamima Begum's Bangladeshi citizenship:
    But Najrul Khasru, a British-Bangladeshi barrister and part-time tribunal judge who has reviewed Bangladesh’s citizenship laws, told the Guardian he believed Begum was not a Bangladeshi citizen unless, at the time of her birth, her parents had registered her at the High Commission, which he said was very uncommon within the British-Bangladeshi community.
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/feb/21/what-is-the-truth-about-shamima-begums-citizenship-status

    A link is provided to the Citizenship Act, 1951:
    http://bdlaws.minlaw.gov.bd/print_sections_all.php?id=242

    Although I am not a solicitor, his argument seems clearly incorrect to me.

    The fact we - as a ostensibly civilised country - are even flirting with this sophistry is risible. This girl has never even set foot in Bangladesh. She was born, and made, in Britain. We should fucking deal with it.
    She betrayed this country. She took what we gave her and spat at us in the face. She f***ed off. She can live with her choices. We gave her education, healthcare, somewhere to live and she said that bombing the Manchester Arena was justified.

    We owe her nothing. She's made her choice.

    Thank you for that level-headed, intelligently argued and nuanced response.
    Do you agree with her Islamist ideology, _Anazina_?
    The Isis bride hates Britain . Hence Anzina supports her no matter anything else.

    Lefty sectioning in action.
    Except it is by no means just 'Lefties' who think this way. This is not about rights but about both personal and national responsibility.
    Our national responsibility is to our nation. Letting back in to the nation people we have no legal obligation to let back in, who think the Manchester Arena bombing was justified, is not helping our nation.
  • Options

    TGOHF said:

    _Anazina_ said:

    _Anazina_ said:

    Chris said:

    The Guardian has a comment on the question of Shamima Begum's Bangladeshi citizenship:
    But Najrul Khasru, a British-Bangladeshi barrister and part-time tribunal judge who has reviewed Bangladesh’s citizenship laws, told the Guardian he believed Begum was not a Bangladeshi citizen unless, at the time of her birth, her parents had registered her at the High Commission, which he said was very uncommon within the British-Bangladeshi community.
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/feb/21/what-is-the-truth-about-shamima-begums-citizenship-status

    A link is provided to the Citizenship Act, 1951:
    http://bdlaws.minlaw.gov.bd/print_sections_all.php?id=242

    Although I am not a solicitor, his argument seems clearly incorrect to me.

    The fact we - as a ostensibly civilised country - are even flirting with this sophistry is risible. This girl has never even set foot in Bangladesh. She was born, and made, in Britain. We should fucking deal with it.
    She betrayed this country. She took what we gave her and spat at us in the face. She f***ed off. She can live with her choices. We gave her education, healthcare, somewhere to live and she said that bombing the Manchester Arena was justified.

    We owe her nothing. She's made her choice.

    Thank you for that level-headed, intelligently argued and nuanced response.
    Do you agree with her Islamist ideology, _Anazina_?
    The Isis bride hates Britain . Hence Anzina supports her no matter anything else.

    Lefty sectioning in action.
    Except it is by no means just 'Lefties' who think this way. This is not about rights but about both personal and national responsibility.
    Our national responsibility is to our nation. Letting back in to the nation people we have no legal obligation to let back in, who think the Manchester Arena bombing was justified, is not helping our nation.
    Well the security services apparently disagree with you on that.
  • Options
    justin124 said:

    Chris Leslie has always struck me as someone who was seriously overpromoted and very lucky to have even found himself an MP. Very lightweight and is still finding it difficult to come to terms with Labour having elected a Leader such as Corbyn with the consequent collapse of his former hopes of advancement.

    You are having a laugh right?

    "seriously overpromoted."

    With Jezza's Shad Cabinet as the role models?

    Jeez, give me a break.

  • Options
    notme2notme2 Posts: 1,006

    _Anazina_ said:

    Chris said:

    The Guardian has a comment on the question of Shamima Begum's Bangladeshi citizenship:
    But Najrul Khasru, a British-Bangladeshi barrister and part-time tribunal judge who has reviewed Bangladesh’s citizenship laws, told the Guardian he believed Begum was not a Bangladeshi citizen unless, at the time of her birth, her parents had registered her at the High Commission, which he said was very uncommon within the British-Bangladeshi community.
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/feb/21/what-is-the-truth-about-shamima-begums-citizenship-status

    A link is provided to the Citizenship Act, 1951:
    http://bdlaws.minlaw.gov.bd/print_sections_all.php?id=242

    Although I am not a solicitor, his argument seems clearly incorrect to me.

    The fact we - as a ostensibly civilised country - are even flirting with this sophistry is risible. This girl has never even set foot in Bangladesh. She was born, and made, in Britain. We should fucking deal with it.
    Why should the taxpayer support her baby? Where's the daddy?
    Taxpayer support for the baby will cost a lot less than fighting a losing court case.
    If the baby is put in care and the baby’s needs are standard and not complex in anyway it will cost about £50k a year minimum. Any kind of complications or behavioural issues you can double it and triple it.

    There’s a kid in care I’m my area that’s costing about £200k a year. One kid.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,030

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:


    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Thanks for that and I know that you have strong local knowledge about constituency
    Demographic changes.
    Not entirely, Gapes has the biggest majority in Redbridge, even bigger than John Cryer's in Leyton and Wanstead
    Due to demographic changes. Which have also converted Ilford North from a competitive seat to Safe Labour.
    Nowhere near as safe as Ilford South
    Yes, but that's because the demographics have only just kicked in in Ilford North. As recently as GE2010 Ilford North was won by the Tories.
    So what, the demographics are pretty similar across Redbridge, Gapes has had huge personal success in turning a Tory seat in 1987 into one with a 31,647 majority for Labour in 2017
    Read Anthony Wells:

    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/2015guide/ilfordsouth/

    This is a densely packed residene this seat part of ethnically diverse east London.
    So what, Ilford South was still in thote gap by 2017
    What do you mean "so wy own home town?
    I mean 'so what?' You have told me nothing, zilch, nada that in any way disputes Gapes achievement in Ilford South and turning a narrow Labour advantage in the seat in the 1992 over North into a huge advantage by 2017.

    The demographics have gifted him those whopping majorities!

    Most notably it now has a very large ethnic population, the second highest non-white population in the country and the second highest proportion of Asian voters. Ilford is perhaps still associated with the suburban Essex part of London, but demographic change has since made this seat part of ethnically diverse east London.
    Wells on Ilford North 'In recent years it has become increasingly ethnically diverse, with a large Asian population as well as significant Black and Jewish communities.
This discussion has been closed.