It's complicated, but if I had to identify one single thing behind the Reform surge it would be asylum seekers in hotels. There's enough outrage about this to add quite a few percent to the Reform vote everywhere as, rightly or wrongly (probably the latter), people think they could solve it.
This ties in with the boats. Now, this election notwithstanding, where I think those who don't like foreigners are making their position known, the UK has consistently shown that it is happy to have immigrants, and plenty of them. What they don't like is being out of control, or freeloaders.
The boats represent a tangible example of the government not being able to control its own borders, and hence why successive governments are so keen to stop them, despite the tiny numbers arriving in this way.
Likewise, "asylum hotels" are seen as freeloading and jumping the queue. And every freeborn Englishman detests queue jumpers.
The people in hotels would love to have jobs. That’s what they’re hoping for, to get asylum and to be allowed to get a job. The rules don’t let them have jobs. The system forces them not to do anything and the Tories then produced these very long proceeding times.
Sure. Not the point. People (UK people) see them as freeloading and getting room service of coffee and pain au chocolat plus a spa treatment at the taxpayers' expense.
I think we might get a couple of CON-REF MP defections in the coming weeks.
What practical difference does it make if RefUK go to say 12 MPs, or 25MPs, from the current 5 (since this morning)?
Potentially huge. If there were more than one or two individual defections then Reform credibility increases and at the same time Tory credibility, already in tatters, decreases. The point comes when for more and more Tory MPs the only career future in politics is by defecting. Once started it is self reinforcing.
Such a point could be when you have been smashed in an election and you are starting to be below 20% in the polls, your leader isn't very effective and is failing to lead the counter offensive after a rout. That's today.
The Tories, unlike Labour, cannot position themselves as the binary opposition to Reform. Labour can, which is why Labour's problem, while real, has a possible solution. (Competence, luck, delivery, centre left). If the Tories have a solution, it is not clear what it can be.
Either Labour or Reform would be celebrating instead, if they had an alliance between them. And why not, Ref and Labour voters are as one on left wing economics, makes the two voter bases much closer to each other than Conservatism and Populist ideology can ever be.
This is an astounding performance by Reform. Seismic changes
Remember they are starting, essentially, from zero
It's like winning a 200m sprint where everyone else is already running but you have to crouch, wait, on your marks, Go
For now but these were provincial England elections only where Reform would be expected to do best, no doubt a very good day for Farage nonetheless with the Runcorn by election win on top.
However Farage haters of whichever of the main parties will now be looking to tactically vote for whichever party is best placed to beat Reform in their ward or constituency in elections to come up to and including the next GE
Am I right that Reform now look likely to exceed their highest expectation, in councils and councillors?
What were their highest expectations.
I'm genuinely not sure, hence the question!
But IIRC something around 600 councillors was seen as a great outcome for them? And with so many yet to count, they could go over that?
However I am, to put it mildly, not an expert on English local politics, hence my question to PBers who will know far better
On the other hand, Reform have slightly underperformed in mayoralties. But I don't think they will be worried by that
I don't think the number of votes cast nor the percentages for Reform bear that out. They did unexpectedly well in WOE and North Tyneside, for example. Happy to be contradicted if wrong.
Most Ref voters want left-wing economic policies, of the sort Callaghan was in favour of in the late 70s.
That's probably the dictionary definition of 'far right' these days...
In the USA, that's some way beyond far left !
Okay then, proper serious question. All the other G7 countries can supply us with this oh so important ”virgin steel” we can only supply ourselves by Nationalising. How do the other G7 countries manage it without nationalisation?
Bump. All those who said Nationalisation a great idea, need to answer this.
I think we might get a couple of CON-REF MP defections in the coming weeks.
What practical difference does it make if RefUK go to say 12 MPs, or 25MPs, from the current 5 (since this morning)?
Potentially huge. If there were more than one or two individual defections then Reform credibility increases and at the same time Tory credibility, already in tatters, decreases. The point comes when for more and more Tory MPs the only career future in politics is by defecting. Once started it is self reinforcing.
Such a point could be when you have been smashed in an election and you are starting to be below 20% in the polls, your leader isn't very effective and is failing to lead the counter offensive after a rout. That's today.
The Tories, unlike Labour, cannot position themselves as the binary opposition to Reform. Labour can, which is why Labour's problem, while real, has a possible solution. (Competence, luck, delivery, centre left). If the Tories have a solution, it is not clear what it can be.
It also puts the LibDems closer to official opposition status….
It's complicated, but if I had to identify one single thing behind the Reform surge it would be asylum seekers in hotels. There's enough outrage about this to add quite a few percent to the Reform vote everywhere as, rightly or wrongly (probably the latter), people think they could solve it.
This ties in with the boats. Now, this election notwithstanding, where I think those who don't like foreigners are making their position known, the UK has consistently shown that it is happy to have immigrants, and plenty of them. What they don't like is being out of control, or freeloaders.
The boats represent a tangible example of the government not being able to control its own borders, and hence why successive governments are so keen to stop them, despite the tiny numbers arriving in this way.
Likewise, "asylum hotels" are seen as freeloading and jumping the queue. And every freeborn Englishman detests queue jumpers.
The people in hotels would love to have jobs. That’s what they’re hoping for, to get asylum and to be allowed to get a job. The rules don’t let them have jobs. The system forces them not to do anything and the Tories then produced these very long proceeding times.
Am I right that Reform now look likely to exceed their highest expectation, in councils and councillors?
I thought Reform would come first: they're leading in the national polls, they had a favorable (i.e. Brexity) set of elections this year, and they stood in almost every ward.
However, the extent of their victory is really quite something. They have absolutely swept the board. They're not going to be running a few councils - they're going to be running lots.
Labour have been destroyed - they could end up trailing Independents and the Greens. The Conservatives have done little better: they've lost three quarters of seats, and could end up below the Liberal Democrats. The LibDems have done OK - they've markedly increased their representation, and might well be second in terms of number of Councillors. While the Greens have increased their number of Councillors, they're stuck well below the number of Independents.
So, yes, the story is Reform.
Which is great for Reform, but also brings with it a challenge. Running councils is a thankless job, because of the number of things you are legally required to spend money on. It's also highly likely that most of the elected representatives won't know much about how councils are run.
Am I right that Reform now look likely to exceed their highest expectation, in councils and councillors?
I thought Reform would come first: they're leading in the national polls, they had a favorable (i.e. Brexity) set of elections this year, and they stood in almost every ward.
However, the extent of their victory is really quite something. They have absolutely swept the board. They're not going to be running a few councils - they're going to be running lots.
Labour have been destroyed - they could end up trailing Independents and the Greens. The Conservatives have done little better: they've lost three quarters of seats, and could end up below the Liberal Democrats. The LibDems have done OK - they've markedly increased their representation, and might well be second in terms of number of Councillors. While the Greens have increased their number of Councillors, they're stuck well below the number of Independents.
So, yes, the story is Reform.
Which is great for Reform, but also brings with it a challenge. Running councils is a thankless job, because of the number of things you are legally required to spend money on. It's also highly likely that most of the elected representatives won't know much about how councils are run.
Let's see how they do.
They will do what Labour in Wales have done for the last 25 years. Blame central government for any failures. Remarkably successful tactic.
Wes Streeting coming in for criticism here. Tbh, I think he might be right to allocate the money but not ring-fence so local boards can make their own prioritization decisions. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cwynqx77dn5o
This is an astounding performance by Reform. Seismic changes
Remember they are starting, essentially, from zero
It's like winning a 200m sprint where everyone else is already running but you have to crouch, wait, on your marks, Go
For now but these were provincial England elections only where Reform would be expected to do best, no doubt a very good day for Farage nonetheless with the Runcorn by election win on top.
However Farage haters of whichever of the main parties will now be looking to tactically vote for whichever party is best placed to beat Reform in their ward or constituency in elections to come up to and including the next GE
The potrntial number of tactical voters of any sort is much smaller than we well-informed denizens of internet fora often imagine. And the potential number of Con voters who will vote Lab to keep out Ref is tiny. And the potential number of Lab voters who will vote Con to keep out Ref is infinitessimal.
It's complicated, but if I had to identify one single thing behind the Reform surge it would be asylum seekers in hotels. There's enough outrage about this to add quite a few percent to the Reform vote everywhere as, rightly or wrongly (probably the latter), people think they could solve it.
This ties in with the boats. Now, this election notwithstanding, where I think those who don't like foreigners are making their position known, the UK has consistently shown that it is happy to have immigrants, and plenty of them. What they don't like is being out of control, or freeloaders.
The boats represent a tangible example of the government not being able to control its own borders, and hence why successive governments are so keen to stop them, despite the tiny numbers arriving in this way.
Likewise, "asylum hotels" are seen as freeloading and jumping the queue. And every freeborn Englishman detests queue jumpers.
The people in hotels would love to have jobs. That’s what they’re hoping for, to get asylum and to be allowed to get a job. The rules don’t let them have jobs. The system forces them not to do anything and the Tories then produced these very long proceeding times.
Do you not see how allowing asylum seekers to work would be abused? It would also undermine the visa system and is against the interests of local workers.
I'm not saying it's a good idea to allow asylum seekers to work. I'm saying that calling them freeloaders is inaccurate. What would be good is to process applications as quickly as possible, to deport those we should deport quickly and to admit those we want to admit quickly so they can stop freeloading and start contributing.
In the Cambs CC elections, the LDs now have the entire south of the county, outside the city itself. None of the city wards have yet declared, but hopefully Labour will get a drubbing
Am I right that Reform now look likely to exceed their highest expectation, in councils and councillors?
I thought Reform would come first: they're leading in the national polls, they had a favorable (i.e. Brexity) set of elections this year, and they stood in almost every ward.
However, the extent of their victory is really quite something. They have absolutely swept the board. They're not going to be running a few councils - they're going to be running lots.
Labour have been destroyed - they could end up trailing Independents and the Greens. The Conservatives have done little better: they've lost three quarters of seats, and could end up below the Liberal Democrats. The LibDems have done OK - they've markedly increased their representation, and might well be second in terms of number of Councillors. While the Greens have increased their number of Councillors, they're stuck well below the number of Independents.
So, yes, the story is Reform.
Which is great for Reform, but also brings with it a challenge. Running councils is a thankless job, because of the number of things you are legally required to spend money on. It's also highly likely that most of the elected representatives won't know much about how councils are run.
Let's see how they do.
Yes, "ruling" might be a challenge, especially at local level
However this did not stop Le Pen's RN from rising to the top. Indeed, this is exactly the path the RN followed: win locally, then get lots of MPs, then finally say: look, to do the overall job, we need to be the government; and until Le Pen got legally nobbled, it was all going right for them (and might still do)
Which is great for Reform, but also brings with it a challenge. Running councils is a thankless job, because of the number of things you are legally required to spend money on. It's also highly likely that most of the elected representatives won't know much about how councils are run.
Which is potentially a great position to be in for a party seeking national power to Reform the country. They will have endless examples to draw on of dysfunctional outcomes caused by statutory obligations imposed on local government.
It's complicated, but if I had to identify one single thing behind the Reform surge it would be asylum seekers in hotels. There's enough outrage about this to add quite a few percent to the Reform vote everywhere as, rightly or wrongly (probably the latter), people think they could solve it.
This ties in with the boats. Now, this election notwithstanding, where I think those who don't like foreigners are making their position known, the UK has consistently shown that it is happy to have immigrants, and plenty of them. What they don't like is being out of control, or freeloaders.
The boats represent a tangible example of the government not being able to control its own borders, and hence why successive governments are so keen to stop them, despite the tiny numbers arriving in this way.
Likewise, "asylum hotels" are seen as freeloading and jumping the queue. And every freeborn Englishman detests queue jumpers.
The people in hotels would love to have jobs. That’s what they’re hoping for, to get asylum and to be allowed to get a job. The rules don’t let them have jobs. The system forces them not to do anything and the Tories then produced these very long proceeding times.
Sure. Not the point. People (UK people) see them as freeloading and getting room service of coffee and pain au chocolat plus a spa treatment at the taxpayers' expense.
Wouldn't it be a good thing if UK people were better informed as to reality?
It will be easy to get the delta mixed up with the total including seats not in the election. They have iirc 100+ in seats not up today. There is also an overlap.
Either Labour or Reform would be celebrating instead, if they had an alliance between them. And why not, Ref and Labour voters are as one on left wing economics, makes the two voter bases much closer to each other than Conservatism and Populist ideology can ever be.
I don't know if you are teasing or not. If you are, you make a very good point parodying those who would happily add in another party's vote totals to their own and reach conclusions based on that. If you are not, you make an equally good point; @Stuartinromford (I think) posted some research this morning about what Ref voters appear to want; and what they appear to want is Dr. David Owen.
It's complicated, but if I had to identify one single thing behind the Reform surge it would be asylum seekers in hotels. There's enough outrage about this to add quite a few percent to the Reform vote everywhere as, rightly or wrongly (probably the latter), people think they could solve it.
This ties in with the boats. Now, this election notwithstanding, where I think those who don't like foreigners are making their position known, the UK has consistently shown that it is happy to have immigrants, and plenty of them. What they don't like is being out of control, or freeloaders.
The boats represent a tangible example of the government not being able to control its own borders, and hence why successive governments are so keen to stop them, despite the tiny numbers arriving in this way.
Likewise, "asylum hotels" are seen as freeloading and jumping the queue. And every freeborn Englishman detests queue jumpers.
The people in hotels would love to have jobs. That’s what they’re hoping for, to get asylum and to be allowed to get a job. The rules don’t let them have jobs. The system forces them not to do anything and the Tories then produced these very long proceeding times.
Do you not see how allowing asylum seekers to work would be abused? It would also undermine the visa system and is against the interests of local workers.
I'm not saying it's a good idea to allow asylum seekers to work. I'm saying that calling them freeloaders is inaccurate. What would be good is to process applications as quickly as possible, to deport those we should deport quickly and to admit those we want to admit quickly so they can stop freeloading and start contributing.
Contributing to holding down wages and competing for housing... Giving Deliveroo an even more plentiful supply of migrant workers might be in their interests but it's not in the national interest.
Which is great for Reform, but also brings with it a challenge. Running councils is a thankless job, because of the number of things you are legally required to spend money on. It's also highly likely that most of the elected representatives won't know much about how councils are run.
Which is potentially a great position to be in for a party seeking national power to Reform the country. They will have endless examples to draw on of dysfunctional outcomes caused by statutory obligations imposed on local government.
That’s certainly the angle they’ll be going for. A bit like the 2019 Tory gambit “we’re being stopped from doing what we want, so you need to give us power to let us do it.”
Most Ref voters want left-wing economic policies, of the sort Callaghan was in favour of in the late 70s.
That's probably the dictionary definition of 'far right' these days...
In the USA, that's some way beyond far left !
Okay then, proper serious question. All the other G7 countries can supply us with this oh so important ”virgin steel” we can only supply ourselves by Nationalising. How do the other G7 countries manage it without nationalisation?
Bump. All those who said Nationalisation a great idea, need to answer this.
They never let their steel industry deteriorate to the point that it was all foreign owned? I don't know if that's a true answer, but I'm sure somebody will contradict me if wrong.
It's complicated, but if I had to identify one single thing behind the Reform surge it would be asylum seekers in hotels. There's enough outrage about this to add quite a few percent to the Reform vote everywhere as, rightly or wrongly (probably the latter), people think they could solve it.
This ties in with the boats. Now, this election notwithstanding, where I think those who don't like foreigners are making their position known, the UK has consistently shown that it is happy to have immigrants, and plenty of them. What they don't like is being out of control, or freeloaders.
The boats represent a tangible example of the government not being able to control its own borders, and hence why successive governments are so keen to stop them, despite the tiny numbers arriving in this way.
Likewise, "asylum hotels" are seen as freeloading and jumping the queue. And every freeborn Englishman detests queue jumpers.
The people in hotels would love to have jobs. That’s what they’re hoping for, to get asylum and to be allowed to get a job. The rules don’t let them have jobs. The system forces them not to do anything and the Tories then produced these very long proceeding times.
Do you not see how allowing asylum seekers to work would be abused? It would also undermine the visa system and is against the interests of local workers.
I'm not saying it's a good idea to allow asylum seekers to work. I'm saying that calling them freeloaders is inaccurate. What would be good is to process applications as quickly as possible, to deport those we should deport quickly and to admit those we want to admit quickly so they can stop freeloading and start contributing.
Contributing to holding down wages and competing for housing... Giving Deliveroo an even more plentiful supply of migrant workers might be in their interests but it's not in the national interest.
On a related note, I've just come back from Sale town centre to find a small tent encampment has been set up by MEANA men who are apparently asylum seekers who have been granted leave to remain. I don't know whether the same things are features of other small provincial towns and suburbs, but I'd suggest it hasn't done Reform's chances any harm.
Striking result from Minchinghampton, south of Cheltenham:
Minchinhampton held by Greens
Bella Amory Conservative 444
Adam Giles Crispin Cain Liberal Democrats 131
David James Carter Labour 236
John Lee Marsden Reform UK 622
Chloe Isobel Turner Green Party 2199
If you have ever been there you may have noted the resemblance it bears to Middle Earth.
Looks like the Lib Dems will certainly have the administration, and if they take Bishops Cleeve and Winchcombe/Woodmancote as well as the two Tewkesbury seats, they may get a majority too.
In Devon, as I predicted, they will be short by one
So far it looks like Reform performing to par or just above, Lib Dems performing well, Green a few gains, Labour as expected and the Tories getting an absolute dicking.
Which is great for Reform, but also brings with it a challenge. Running councils is a thankless job, because of the number of things you are legally required to spend money on. It's also highly likely that most of the elected representatives won't know much about how councils are run.
Which is potentially a great position to be in for a party seeking national power to Reform the country. They will have endless examples to draw on of dysfunctional outcomes caused by statutory obligations imposed on local government.
Those statutory obligations are little things like education, social work, bins collection and social care. Also child safeguarding - is that something Reform are going to complain about?!
In fact, a lot of stuff that is "broken" about the UK is actually at the local level.
It's complicated, but if I had to identify one single thing behind the Reform surge it would be asylum seekers in hotels. There's enough outrage about this to add quite a few percent to the Reform vote everywhere as, rightly or wrongly (probably the latter), people think they could solve it.
This ties in with the boats. Now, this election notwithstanding, where I think those who don't like foreigners are making their position known, the UK has consistently shown that it is happy to have immigrants, and plenty of them. What they don't like is being out of control, or freeloaders.
The boats represent a tangible example of the government not being able to control its own borders, and hence why successive governments are so keen to stop them, despite the tiny numbers arriving in this way.
Likewise, "asylum hotels" are seen as freeloading and jumping the queue. And every freeborn Englishman detests queue jumpers.
The people in hotels would love to have jobs. That’s what they’re hoping for, to get asylum and to be allowed to get a job. The rules don’t let them have jobs. The system forces them not to do anything and the Tories then produced these very long proceeding times.
Do you not see how allowing asylum seekers to work would be abused? It would also undermine the visa system and is against the interests of local workers.
I'm not saying it's a good idea to allow asylum seekers to work. I'm saying that calling them freeloaders is inaccurate. What would be good is to process applications as quickly as possible, to deport those we should deport quickly and to admit those we want to admit quickly so they can stop freeloading and start contributing.
Contributing to holding down wages and competing for housing... Giving Deliveroo an even more plentiful supply of migrant workers might be in their interests but it's not in the national interest.
How is it more in the national interest to have someone you should be deporting sitting around in your country being paid for?
How is it more in the national interest to have someone you should be admitting sitting around in your country being paid for when they could be contributing, paying tax and integrating into their new community?
It's complicated, but if I had to identify one single thing behind the Reform surge it would be asylum seekers in hotels. There's enough outrage about this to add quite a few percent to the Reform vote everywhere as, rightly or wrongly (probably the latter), people think they could solve it.
This ties in with the boats. Now, this election notwithstanding, where I think those who don't like foreigners are making their position known, the UK has consistently shown that it is happy to have immigrants, and plenty of them. What they don't like is being out of control, or freeloaders.
The boats represent a tangible example of the government not being able to control its own borders, and hence why successive governments are so keen to stop them, despite the tiny numbers arriving in this way.
Likewise, "asylum hotels" are seen as freeloading and jumping the queue. And every freeborn Englishman detests queue jumpers.
The people in hotels would love to have jobs. That’s what they’re hoping for, to get asylum and to be allowed to get a job. The rules don’t let them have jobs. The system forces them not to do anything and the Tories then produced these very long proceeding times.
Do you not see how allowing asylum seekers to work would be abused? It would also undermine the visa system and is against the interests of local workers.
I'm not saying it's a good idea to allow asylum seekers to work. I'm saying that calling them freeloaders is inaccurate. What would be good is to process applications as quickly as possible, to deport those we should deport quickly and to admit those we want to admit quickly so they can stop freeloading and start contributing.
Contributing to holding down wages and competing for housing... Giving Deliveroo an even more plentiful supply of migrant workers might be in their interests but it's not in the national interest.
On a related note, I've just come back from Sale town centre to find a small tent encampment has been set up by MEANA men who are apparently asylum seekers who have been granted leave to remain. I don't know whether the same things are features of other small provincial towns and suburbs, but I'd suggest it hasn't done Reform's chances any harm.
If they have been granted leave to remain, they are not asylum seekers. They have been given asylum. They are asylum gainers.
It's complicated, but if I had to identify one single thing behind the Reform surge it would be asylum seekers in hotels. There's enough outrage about this to add quite a few percent to the Reform vote everywhere as, rightly or wrongly (probably the latter), people think they could solve it.
This ties in with the boats. Now, this election notwithstanding, where I think those who don't like foreigners are making their position known, the UK has consistently shown that it is happy to have immigrants, and plenty of them. What they don't like is being out of control, or freeloaders.
The boats represent a tangible example of the government not being able to control its own borders, and hence why successive governments are so keen to stop them, despite the tiny numbers arriving in this way.
Likewise, "asylum hotels" are seen as freeloading and jumping the queue. And every freeborn Englishman detests queue jumpers.
The people in hotels would love to have jobs. That’s what they’re hoping for, to get asylum and to be allowed to get a job. The rules don’t let them have jobs. The system forces them not to do anything and the Tories then produced these very long proceeding times.
Do you not see how allowing asylum seekers to work would be abused? It would also undermine the visa system and is against the interests of local workers.
I'm not saying it's a good idea to allow asylum seekers to work. I'm saying that calling them freeloaders is inaccurate. What would be good is to process applications as quickly as possible, to deport those we should deport quickly and to admit those we want to admit quickly so they can stop freeloading and start contributing.
Contributing to holding down wages and competing for housing... Giving Deliveroo an even more plentiful supply of migrant workers might be in their interests but it's not in the national interest.
On a related note, I've just come back from Sale town centre to find a small tent encampment has been set up by MEANA men who are apparently asylum seekers who have been granted leave to remain. I don't know whether the same things are features of other small provincial towns and suburbs, but I'd suggest it hasn't done Reform's chances any harm.
Many people on the “mainstream” right lost sight of the fact that it’s in their interests to have a large bourgoisie, in favour of making quick bucks, by driving down wages, and driving up property prices.
So far it looks like Reform performing to par or just above, Lib Dems performing well, Green a few gains, Labour as expected and the Tories getting an absolute dicking.
Labour are currently an abysmal 5th on seats, Reform have won control of over half the councils declared which is birdie or even hole in one level for Farage not 'to par' and the LDs making a few gains in Remain areas like the Greens.
Yes the Tories are doing dreadfully in terms of councils and seats lost but are still second behind Reform
It's complicated, but if I had to identify one single thing behind the Reform surge it would be asylum seekers in hotels. There's enough outrage about this to add quite a few percent to the Reform vote everywhere as, rightly or wrongly (probably the latter), people think they could solve it.
This ties in with the boats. Now, this election notwithstanding, where I think those who don't like foreigners are making their position known, the UK has consistently shown that it is happy to have immigrants, and plenty of them. What they don't like is being out of control, or freeloaders.
The boats represent a tangible example of the government not being able to control its own borders, and hence why successive governments are so keen to stop them, despite the tiny numbers arriving in this way.
Likewise, "asylum hotels" are seen as freeloading and jumping the queue. And every freeborn Englishman detests queue jumpers.
The people in hotels would love to have jobs. That’s what they’re hoping for, to get asylum and to be allowed to get a job. The rules don’t let them have jobs. The system forces them not to do anything and the Tories then produced these very long proceeding times.
Do you not see how allowing asylum seekers to work would be abused? It would also undermine the visa system and is against the interests of local workers.
I'm not saying it's a good idea to allow asylum seekers to work. I'm saying that calling them freeloaders is inaccurate. What would be good is to process applications as quickly as possible, to deport those we should deport quickly and to admit those we want to admit quickly so they can stop freeloading and start contributing.
Contributing to holding down wages and competing for housing... Giving Deliveroo an even more plentiful supply of migrant workers might be in their interests but it's not in the national interest.
On a related note, I've just come back from Sale town centre to find a small tent encampment has been set up by MEANA men who are apparently asylum seekers who have been granted leave to remain. I don't know whether the same things are features of other small provincial towns and suburbs, but I'd suggest it hasn't done Reform's chances any harm.
They are everywhere
I met a friend yesterday for drinks, Tramadol and Gascake, and he told me of a recent visit to Bournemouth - a town he knows well, as he's from Dorset
Bournemouth has always had a grungey side but he said it is now positively menacing for a mile or more, in the town centre. With asylum seekers - exactly as you describe - loitering eveywhere, apparently doing nothing
They all have to go. Send them all home. Withdraw from the EHRC and cancel the general right to asylum, except for unique cases like Ukraine and HK. Enough
We've got them in Camden too, but to be fair they probably make Camden Town, by the Tube, a bit nicer
Most Ref voters want left-wing economic policies, of the sort Callaghan was in favour of in the late 70s.
That's probably the dictionary definition of 'far right' these days...
In the USA, that's some way beyond far left !
Okay then, proper serious question. All the other G7 countries can supply us with this oh so important ”virgin steel” we can only supply ourselves by Nationalising. How do the other G7 countries manage it without nationalisation?
UK producers face energy costs approximately 80-90% higher than Germany, the highest of these examples
So far it looks like Reform performing to par or just above, Lib Dems performing well, Green a few gains, Labour as expected and the Tories getting an absolute dicking.
Labour have lost a higher proportion of their councillors than the Conservatives have. They're getting an absolute dicking too.
It's complicated, but if I had to identify one single thing behind the Reform surge it would be asylum seekers in hotels. There's enough outrage about this to add quite a few percent to the Reform vote everywhere as, rightly or wrongly (probably the latter), people think they could solve it.
This ties in with the boats. Now, this election notwithstanding, where I think those who don't like foreigners are making their position known, the UK has consistently shown that it is happy to have immigrants, and plenty of them. What they don't like is being out of control, or freeloaders.
The boats represent a tangible example of the government not being able to control its own borders, and hence why successive governments are so keen to stop them, despite the tiny numbers arriving in this way.
Likewise, "asylum hotels" are seen as freeloading and jumping the queue. And every freeborn Englishman detests queue jumpers.
The people in hotels would love to have jobs. That’s what they’re hoping for, to get asylum and to be allowed to get a job. The rules don’t let them have jobs. The system forces them not to do anything and the Tories then produced these very long proceeding times.
Do you not see how allowing asylum seekers to work would be abused? It would also undermine the visa system and is against the interests of local workers.
I'm not saying it's a good idea to allow asylum seekers to work. I'm saying that calling them freeloaders is inaccurate. What would be good is to process applications as quickly as possible, to deport those we should deport quickly and to admit those we want to admit quickly so they can stop freeloading and start contributing.
I think you and I probably have slightly differing views of immigration - but I cannot see anything in that post to disagree with.
So far it looks like Reform performing to par or just above, Lib Dems performing well, Green a few gains, Labour as expected and the Tories getting an absolute dicking.
I would say Reform is doing extremely well, the LibDems quite well, Greens are falling slightly short, and both Labour and Conservatives are being hammered.
Striking result from Minchinghampton, south of Cheltenham:
Minchinhampton held by Greens
Bella Amory Conservative 444
Adam Giles Crispin Cain Liberal Democrats 131
David James Carter Labour 236
John Lee Marsden Reform UK 622
Chloe Isobel Turner Green Party 2199
If you have ever been there you may have noted the resemblance it bears to Middle Earth.
Looks like the Lib Dems will certainly have the administration, and if they take Bishops Cleeve and Winchcombe/Woodmancote as well as the two Tewkesbury seats, they may get a majority too.
In Devon, as I predicted, they will be short by one
Well if they don't win Bishops Cleeve, Cicero, I will eat my yellow socks. They should also take Winchcombe, where I voted for them personally.
Still think it's pushing it to win an 'overall' but with Green and sundry other support they shouldn't have difficulty governing (to the extent any Council is allowed to govern.)
All the county divisions in South Cambs district are now declared; the LDs have won the lot, a few narrowly (gains from both Tory and Labour) but most with around half the vote.
In East Cambs, one Tory has held on, and there’s one Reform gain. The rest are all LibDem.
It's complicated, but if I had to identify one single thing behind the Reform surge it would be asylum seekers in hotels. There's enough outrage about this to add quite a few percent to the Reform vote everywhere as, rightly or wrongly (probably the latter), people think they could solve it.
This ties in with the boats. Now, this election notwithstanding, where I think those who don't like foreigners are making their position known, the UK has consistently shown that it is happy to have immigrants, and plenty of them. What they don't like is being out of control, or freeloaders.
The boats represent a tangible example of the government not being able to control its own borders, and hence why successive governments are so keen to stop them, despite the tiny numbers arriving in this way.
Likewise, "asylum hotels" are seen as freeloading and jumping the queue. And every freeborn Englishman detests queue jumpers.
The people in hotels would love to have jobs. That’s what they’re hoping for, to get asylum and to be allowed to get a job. The rules don’t let them have jobs. The system forces them not to do anything and the Tories then produced these very long proceeding times.
Do you not see how allowing asylum seekers to work would be abused? It would also undermine the visa system and is against the interests of local workers.
I'm not saying it's a good idea to allow asylum seekers to work. I'm saying that calling them freeloaders is inaccurate. What would be good is to process applications as quickly as possible, to deport those we should deport quickly and to admit those we want to admit quickly so they can stop freeloading and start contributing.
Contributing to holding down wages and competing for housing... Giving Deliveroo an even more plentiful supply of migrant workers might be in their interests but it's not in the national interest.
On a related note, I've just come back from Sale town centre to find a small tent encampment has been set up by MEANA men who are apparently asylum seekers who have been granted leave to remain. I don't know whether the same things are features of other small provincial towns and suburbs, but I'd suggest it hasn't done Reform's chances any harm.
If they have been granted leave to remain, they are not asylum seekers. They have been given asylum. They are asylum gainers.
So far it looks like Reform performing to par or just above, Lib Dems performing well, Green a few gains, Labour as expected and the Tories getting an absolute dicking.
I would say Reform is doing extremely well, the LibDems quite well, Greens are falling slightly short, and both Labour and Conservatives are being hammered.
Yes, your analysis is right and Taz is uncharacteristically wrong. This is an outstanding performance by Reform, and both Labour and the Tories are being marmalised, arguably Labour is doing even WORSE
So Reform haven’t got a clue and have duped the gullible. Apparently they’ll start with cutting traffic calming measures so more people can end up as roadkill .
This is an astounding performance by Reform. Seismic changes
Remember they are starting, essentially, from zero
It's like winning a 200m sprint where everyone else is already running but you have to crouch, wait, on your marks, Go
For now but these were provincial England elections only where Reform would be expected to do best, no doubt a very good day for Farage nonetheless with the Runcorn by election win on top.
However Farage haters of whichever of the main parties will now be looking to tactically vote for whichever party is best placed to beat Reform in their ward or constituency in elections to come up to and including the next GE
The potrntial number of tactical voters of any sort is much smaller than we well-informed denizens of internet fora often imagine. And the potential number of Con voters who will vote Lab to keep out Ref is tiny. And the potential number of Lab voters who will vote Con to keep out Ref is infinitessimal.
No but the potential number of LD and Green voters who will vote Labour to keep out Ref is high and in the few seats where Reform and the Tories were the top 2 last time you may well get some Labour and LD voters holding their nose and voting Tory
Which is great for Reform, but also brings with it a challenge. Running councils is a thankless job, because of the number of things you are legally required to spend money on. It's also highly likely that most of the elected representatives won't know much about how councils are run.
Which is potentially a great position to be in for a party seeking national power to Reform the country. They will have endless examples to draw on of dysfunctional outcomes caused by statutory obligations imposed on local government.
Those statutory obligations are little things like education, social work, bins collection and social care. Also child safeguarding - is that something Reform are going to complain about?!
In fact, a lot of stuff that is "broken" about the UK is actually governed at the local level.
At a guess, we're going to end up with quite a lot of town hall mini-Trumps trying to slash services so that they can cut council tax. That may be popular with ex-Tory Refukkers, but perhaps not so much with ex-Labour ones.
East Devon (11/11) Axminister: Ind gain from Con Broadcylst (2): 1 Grn hold, 1 Ref gain from Con Exmouth (2): 1 Con hold, 1 Ref gain from Con Exmouth and Budleigh Salterton Coastal: LD gain from Con Feniton & Honiton: LD gain from Con Otter Valley: Ind hold Seaton & Colyton: LD gain from Con Sidmouth: LD gain from Con Whimple and Blackdown: LD gain from Con
Exeter (9/9) Alphington & Cowick: Ref gain from Lab Duryard & Pennsylvania: LD gain from Con Exwick & St Thomas: Ref gain from Lab Heavitree & Whipton Barton: Grn gain from Lab Pinhoe & Mincinglake: Ref gain from Lab St Sidwells & St James: Grn gain from Lab St Davids & Haven Banks: Grn gain from Lab Wearside & Topsham: Con hold Wonford & St Loyes: Ref gain from Lab
Mid Devon (6/6) Crediton: LD hold Creedy Taw & Mid Exe: LD gain from Con Cullompton & Bradninch: LD gain from Con Willand & Uffculme: LD gain from Con Tiverton East: Ref gain from Con Tiverton West: LD gain from Con
North Devon (8/8) Barnstaple North: LD hold Barnstaple South: LD hold Braunton Rural: LD gain from Con Chulmleigh & Landkey: LD gain from Con Combe Martin Rural: Con hold Fremington Rural: LD gain from Ind Ilfracombe: Grn gain from Con South Molton: Ref gain from Con
South Hams (7/7) Bickley & Wembury: Con hold Dartmouth & Marldon: LD gain from Con Ivybridge: LD gain from Con Kingsbridge: LD hold Salcombe: LD gain from Con South Brent & Yealmpton: LD hold Totnes & Dartington: Grn hold
Teignbridge (10/10) Ashburton & Buckfastleigh: Con hold Bovey Rural: LD gain from Con Chudleigh & Teign Valley: LD gain from Con Dawlish: LD hold Exminster & Haldon: LD hold Ipplepen & The Kerswells: Ref gain from LD Kingsteignton & Teign Estuary: Ref gain from Con Newton Abbot North: Ref gain from Con Newton Abbot South: Ref gain from Ind Teignmouth: LD hold
Torridge (5/5) Bideford East: Ref gain from Con Bideford West & Hartland: Ref gain from Con Holsworthy Rural: Ref gain from Con Northam: Con hold Torrington Rural: LD gain from Con
West Devon (4/4) Hatherleigh & Chagford: Ref gain from Con Okehampton Rural: Ref gain from Con Tavistock: Con hold Yelverton Rural: Ref gain from Con
After 60/60 seats declared Reform: 18 (+18) (12 gains from Con, 4 from Lab, 1 from LD, 1 from Ind) Liberal Democrats: 27 (+18) (18 gains from Con, 1 from Ind, 1 loss to Ref) Conservatives: 7 (-32) (18 losses to LD, 12 to Ref, 1 to Grn, 1 to Ind) Green: 6 (+4) (3 gains from Lab, 1 from Con) Labour: 0 (-7) (4 losses to Ref, 3 to Grn) Independent: 2 (-1) (1 gain from Con, 1 loss to LD, 1 loss to Ref)
So far it looks like Reform performing to par or just above, Lib Dems performing well, Green a few gains, Labour as expected and the Tories getting an absolute dicking.
Reform - very well indeed LDs - well Greens - par/quite well Labour - disaster Tory - disaster +1
Which is great for Reform, but also brings with it a challenge. Running councils is a thankless job, because of the number of things you are legally required to spend money on. It's also highly likely that most of the elected representatives won't know much about how councils are run.
Which is potentially a great position to be in for a party seeking national power to Reform the country. They will have endless examples to draw on of dysfunctional outcomes caused by statutory obligations imposed on local government.
Those statutory obligations are little things like education, social work, bins collection and social care. Also child safeguarding - is that something Reform are going to complain about?!
In fact, a lot of stuff that is "broken" about the UK is actually governed at the local level.
At a guess, we're going to end up with quite a lot of town hall mini-Trumps trying to slash services so that they can cut council tax. That may be popular with ex-Tory Refukkers, but perhaps not so much with ex-Labour ones.
Would be very difficult, Chris, without breaching statutory obligations. This is where I think we will find the Refukkers are well and truly cattle trucked.
This is an astounding performance by Reform. Seismic changes
Remember they are starting, essentially, from zero
It's like winning a 200m sprint where everyone else is already running but you have to crouch, wait, on your marks, Go
For now but these were provincial England elections only where Reform would be expected to do best, no doubt a very good day for Farage nonetheless with the Runcorn by election win on top.
However Farage haters of whichever of the main parties will now be looking to tactically vote for whichever party is best placed to beat Reform in their ward or constituency in elections to come up to and including the next GE
The potrntial number of tactical voters of any sort is much smaller than we well-informed denizens of internet fora often imagine. And the potential number of Con voters who will vote Lab to keep out Ref is tiny. And the potential number of Lab voters who will vote Con to keep out Ref is infinitessimal.
No but the potential number of LD and Green voters who will vote Labour to keep out Ref is high and in the few seats where Reform and the Tories were the top 2 last time you may well get some Labour and LD voters holding their nose and voting Tory
Labour will need to convince potential LD and Grn voters that they are, in fact, best placed to stop Reform. They might also want to consider sounding a bit more socially liberal if they want tactical votes from social liberals.
It's complicated, but if I had to identify one single thing behind the Reform surge it would be asylum seekers in hotels. There's enough outrage about this to add quite a few percent to the Reform vote everywhere as, rightly or wrongly (probably the latter), people think they could solve it.
This ties in with the boats. Now, this election notwithstanding, where I think those who don't like foreigners are making their position known, the UK has consistently shown that it is happy to have immigrants, and plenty of them. What they don't like is being out of control, or freeloaders.
The boats represent a tangible example of the government not being able to control its own borders, and hence why successive governments are so keen to stop them, despite the tiny numbers arriving in this way.
Likewise, "asylum hotels" are seen as freeloading and jumping the queue. And every freeborn Englishman detests queue jumpers.
The people in hotels would love to have jobs. That’s what they’re hoping for, to get asylum and to be allowed to get a job. The rules don’t let them have jobs. The system forces them not to do anything and the Tories then produced these very long proceeding times.
Do you not see how allowing asylum seekers to work would be abused? It would also undermine the visa system and is against the interests of local workers.
I'm not saying it's a good idea to allow asylum seekers to work. I'm saying that calling them freeloaders is inaccurate. What would be good is to process applications as quickly as possible, to deport those we should deport quickly and to admit those we want to admit quickly so they can stop freeloading and start contributing.
Contributing to holding down wages and competing for housing... Giving Deliveroo an even more plentiful supply of migrant workers might be in their interests but it's not in the national interest.
On a related note, I've just come back from Sale town centre to find a small tent encampment has been set up by MEANA men who are apparently asylum seekers who have been granted leave to remain. I don't know whether the same things are features of other small provincial towns and suburbs, but I'd suggest it hasn't done Reform's chances any harm.
They are everywhere
I met a friend yesterday for drinks, Tramadol and Gascake, and he told me of a recent visit to Bournemouth - a town he knows well, as he's from Dorset
Bournemouth has always had a grungey side but he said it is now positively menacing for a mile or more, in the town centre. With asylum seekers - exactly as you describe - loitering eveywhere, apparently doing nothing
They all have to go. Send them all home. Withdraw from the EHRC and cancel the general right to asylum, except for unique cases like Ukraine and HK. Enough
We've got them in Camden too, but to be fair they probably make Camden Town, by the Tube, a bit nicer
I visit Bournemouth and surrounding areas a lot. I was there last week and can tell you that the towncentre does indeed have a homeless problem, but the vast majority appear to be British.
It's complicated, but if I had to identify one single thing behind the Reform surge it would be asylum seekers in hotels. There's enough outrage about this to add quite a few percent to the Reform vote everywhere as, rightly or wrongly (probably the latter), people think they could solve it.
This ties in with the boats. Now, this election notwithstanding, where I think those who don't like foreigners are making their position known, the UK has consistently shown that it is happy to have immigrants, and plenty of them. What they don't like is being out of control, or freeloaders.
The boats represent a tangible example of the government not being able to control its own borders, and hence why successive governments are so keen to stop them, despite the tiny numbers arriving in this way.
Likewise, "asylum hotels" are seen as freeloading and jumping the queue. And every freeborn Englishman detests queue jumpers.
The people in hotels would love to have jobs. That’s what they’re hoping for, to get asylum and to be allowed to get a job. The rules don’t let them have jobs. The system forces them not to do anything and the Tories then produced these very long proceeding times.
Sure. Not the point. People (UK people) see them as freeloading and getting room service of coffee and pain au chocolat plus a spa treatment at the taxpayers' expense.
Wouldn't it be a good thing if UK people were better informed as to reality?
Another Tory source contacts me with this upbeat assessment: "Don’t forget to pay attention to the West Country and South West. Yes Reform exist here, but it’s the Lib Dems we’re getting a f*****g pounding from".
Tory source warms to their Lib Dem theme: "The Lib Dems are like Japanese knot weed. Once they're in it takes a flamethrower and a crucifix to get rid of them".
From the Twitter feed of Dan Hodges.
I'm not sure what I'd advise the Tories to do, however, they already lost a load of seats to the Lib Dems last time. What seats they do have are more at risk from Reform than the Lib Dems.
The Tories are buggered either way.
Come up with a strategy that wins back seats like Witney and Esher & Walton and also wins back the Stoke seats.
Two basic problems: 1) What are the Conservatives for? What do you stand for? Whats the big picture? 2) Proven to be utterly crap in office. Not just ineffectual, but catastrophically poor at governing
This can be fixed. But it means dropping "tactics" like going after Labour over woke issues and going back to "rebuild Britain through Business". And you'll only get away with that by accepting how catastrophic a job was done in government and changing direction.
Reform are out there saying Britain is Broken. At a fundamental level. And have some new ideas to go after. Tories seem to be claiming it isn't broken actually because you did a brilliant job actually but all the stuff that is broken actually is Labour's fault because actually that Keir Starmer was in charge from opposition.
What should the Tories be for?
Sound money, low inflation, no QE nonsense, a balanced budget, an improved trading situation; equality of opportunity, reward for effort and hard work (implying lower taxes), care with the public purse ensuring tax payers money is spent carefully and wisely; support and care for those that need it but with a priority, where appropriate, of encouraging people to provide for themselves and for their families; a strong defence; immigration that benefits UK plc by bringing in people with talents, investment and entrepreneurial drive; the rule of law and respect for institutions, home ownership, self sufficiency and self reliance; and a strong sense of the national interest over sectorial interests.
The problem is that if you mark the government from 2019 to 2024 out of 10 on that list you struggle to get a pass mark. And I really don't know if this matches Kemi's aspirations or not. I will not be voting Tory with any enthusiasm until I have had assurances about a lot of this.
I disagree with many of the policies, but go back to the two landslide Tory administrations of the 80s. A clear brand image and policy platform, aspiration at the heart both of the politics and the economy, a significant program of economic and social reform, and the part Labour never wanted to credit - significant investment into skills and training and regeneration.
In summary, what the Tories need to rediscover is capitalism. They binned it off firstly in favour of bankism and then oligarchism. Money needs to circulate. Jobs need to pay more than bills, so that people have cash to spend on stuff which creates jobs which drives growth and so on.
Too much cash has been taken away by a small number of individuals and companies, with the Tories promoting their needs. Which is why "fuck business" was so damaging - it wasn't just a whoops moment, it was active policy.
But a lot of what the Tories did under Thatcher in the 1980s could only be done once. You can't sell off millions of council houses on the cheap more than once. You can't privatise the profitable bits of the public sector more than once. You can't steal Scotland's oil revenues more than once.
And the legacy of all three poisons our politics still
Would you deny that Labour inherited a golden legacy in 1997?
When I was doing my journalism degree in 1997 I wrote a number of stories on my course. One that stuck with me was the terrible nature of so many of the city schools - literally falling down. One with a steel endoskeleton which had been installed in classrooms because the roof was falling down.
And remember the NHS? Similarly crumbling hospitals, endless waits for treatment.
Governments delivering a golden legacy don't get demolished by landslides.
Isn't an endoskeleton just a skeleton?
Um...? Yes, but the existence of "exoskeleton" demanded the existence of "endoskeleton".
East Devon (11/11) Axminister: Ind gain from Con Broadcylst (2): 1 Grn hold, 1 Ref gain from Con Exmouth (2): 1 Con hold, 1 Ref gain from Con Exmouth and Budleigh Salterton Coastal: LD gain from Con Feniton & Honiton: LD gain from Con Otter Valley: Ind hold Seaton & Colyton: LD gain from Con Sidmouth: LD gain from Con Whimple and Blackdown: LD gain from Con
Exeter (9/9) Alphington & Cowick: Ref gain from Lab Duryard & Pennsylvania: LD gain from Con Exwick & St Thomas: Ref gain from Lab Heavitree & Whipton Barton: Grn gain from Lab Pinhoe & Mincinglake: Ref gain from Lab St Sidwells & St James: Grn gain from Lab St Davids & Haven Banks: Grn gain from Lab Wearside & Topsham: Con hold Wonford & St Loyes: Ref gain from Lab
Mid Devon (6/6) Crediton: LD hold Creedy Taw & Mid Exe: LD gain from Con Cullompton & Bradninch: LD gain from Con Willand & Uffculme: LD gain from Con Tiverton East: Ref gain from Con Tiverton West: LD gain from Con
North Devon (8/8) Barnstaple North: LD hold Barnstaple South: LD hold Braunton Rural: LD gain from Con Chulmleigh & Landkey: LD gain from Con Combe Martin Rural: Con hold Fremington Rural: LD gain from Ind Ilfracombe: Grn gain from Con South Molton: Ref gain from Con
South Hams (7/7) Bickley & Wembury: Con hold Dartmouth & Marldon: LD gain from Con Ivybridge: LD gain from Con Kingsbridge: LD hold Salcombe: LD gain from Con South Brent & Yealmpton: LD hold Totnes & Dartington: Grn hold
Teignbridge (10/10) Ashburton & Buckfastleigh: Con hold Bovey Rural: LD gain from Con Chudleigh & Teign Valley: LD gain from Con Dawlish: LD hold Exminster & Haldon: LD hold Ipplepen & The Kerswells: Ref gain from LD Kingsteignton & Teign Estuary: Ref gain from Con Newton Abbot North: Ref gain from Con Newton Abbot South: Ref gain from Ind Teignmouth: LD hold
Torridge (5/5) Bideford East: Ref gain from Con Bideford West & Hartland: Ref gain from Con Holsworthy Rural: Ref gain from Con Northam: Con hold Torrington Rural: LD gain from Con
West Devon (4/4) Hatherleigh & Chagford: Ref gain from Con Okehampton Rural: Ref gain from Con Tavistock: Con hold Yelverton Rural: Ref gain from Con
After 60/60 seats declared Reform: 18 (+18) (12 gains from Con, 4 from Lab, 1 from LD, 1 from Ind) Liberal Democrats: 27 (+18) (18 gains from Con, 1 from Ind, 1 loss to Ref) Conservatives: 7 (-32) (18 losses to LD, 12 to Ref, 1 to Grn, 1 to Ind) Green: 6 (+4) (3 gains from Lab, 1 from Con) Labour: 0 (-7) (4 losses to Ref, 3 to Grn) Independent: 2 (-1) (1 gain from Con, 1 loss to LD, 1 loss to Ref)
Which is great for Reform, but also brings with it a challenge. Running councils is a thankless job, because of the number of things you are legally required to spend money on. It's also highly likely that most of the elected representatives won't know much about how councils are run.
Which is potentially a great position to be in for a party seeking national power to Reform the country. They will have endless examples to draw on of dysfunctional outcomes caused by statutory obligations imposed on local government.
Those statutory obligations are little things like education, social work, bins collection and social care. Also child safeguarding - is that something Reform are going to complain about?!
In fact, a lot of stuff that is "broken" about the UK is actually governed at the local level.
At a guess, we're going to end up with quite a lot of town hall mini-Trumps trying to slash services so that they can cut council tax. That may be popular with ex-Tory Refukkers, but perhaps not so much with ex-Labour ones.
Would be very difficult, Chris, without breaching statutory obligations. This is where I think we will find the Refukkers are well and truly cattle trucked.
Doesn't that just mean they'll have to slash services without such protection, and even so will be able to deliver only modest tax cuts? Which could be the worst of both worlds.
So far it looks like Reform performing to par or just above, Lib Dems performing well, Green a few gains, Labour as expected and the Tories getting an absolute dicking.
I would say Reform is doing extremely well, the LibDems quite well, Greens are falling slightly short, and both Labour and Conservatives are being hammered.
Yes, your analysis is right and Taz is uncharacteristically wrong. This is an outstanding performance by Reform, and both Labour and the Tories are being marmalised, arguably Labour is doing even WORSE
No, Labour is doing better than the Tories (and Reform, while having an excellent round, isn't quite outstanding for the same reason).
And that reason is three mayoralities that tipped red on a knife-edge: Doncaster, North Tyne and West of England. They could easily have all been Reform gains.
For practical purposes, it doesn't matter hugely in the big picture (though three extra mayors would have given Reform a wider set of media heads to use) but the bottom line is results and while Reform's councillor results are indeed outstanding, the night could easily have been better still for them in the higher-profile races.
Comments
Badenoch will be en route to Peterborough, I expect…
Roger Gough said he was not sure he would hang on to his own seat at Sevenoaks and Darent Valley North.
It comes as the results have started to be declared in Kent with the Conservatives losing 13 of the first 15 seats, 12 of which were won by Reform UK.
All 72 electoral divisions across the county are up for election - equating to 81 councillors in total"
- BBC Live
Just sit back and bask in that. Hahahahahah
Such a point could be when you have been smashed in an election and you are starting to be below 20% in the polls, your leader isn't very effective and is failing to lead the counter offensive after a rout. That's today.
The Tories, unlike Labour, cannot position themselves as the binary opposition to Reform. Labour can, which is why Labour's problem, while real, has a possible solution. (Competence, luck, delivery, centre left). If the Tories have a solution, it is not clear what it can be.
But IIRC something around 600 councillors was seen as a great outcome for them? And with so many yet to count, they could go over that?
However I am, to put it mildly, not an expert on English local politics, hence my question to PBers who will know far better
On the other hand, Reform have slightly underperformed in mayoralties. But I don't think they will be worried by that
The Lib Dem won the local, and the Conservative the mayoral!
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/05/01/children-rescued-from-four-year-covid-lockdown-horror-house/ (£££)
Now look what you've done.
However Farage haters of whichever of the main parties will now be looking to tactically vote for whichever party is best placed to beat Reform in their ward or constituency in elections to come up to and including the next GE
The Tories haven’t won a single seat in Kent, yet
Gravesham Rural: RefUK
Maidstone SE: RefUK
Cheriton: LD
Maidstone S: RefUK
Folkeston E: RefUK
Gravesend E: RefUK
Hythe W: RefUK
Folkestone W: RefUK
Eltham Valley: RefUK
Maidstone Rural S: RefUK
Canterbury City N: Lab
Romney Marsh: RefUK
Margate: RefUK
Canterbury N: LD
Maidstone NE: LD
Sittingbourne N: RefUK
Tunbridge Wells N: LD
Tunbridge Wells E: LD
Swale E: Green
Canterbury City S: Lab
Tunbridge Wells S: LD
Maidstone Rural N: RefUK
Dartford E: RefUK
Dover W: RefUK
Dartford NE: RefUK
Dartford Rural: RefUK
Maidstone Rural W: RefUK
Dartford W: RefUK
Dartford Rural: RefUK
Dartford W: RefUK
Canterbury S: LD
Sittingbourne S: RefUK
Swanscombe: RefUK
Dover N: RefUK
Tunbridge Wells Rural: LD
Cliftonville: RefUK
Wilmington: RefUK
Swale W: RefUK
Sandwich: RefUK
https://x.com/Kent_cc
28 out of 39 RefUK.
However, the extent of their victory is really quite something. They have absolutely swept the board. They're not going to be running a few councils - they're going to be running lots.
Labour have been destroyed - they could end up trailing Independents and the Greens. The Conservatives have done little better: they've lost three quarters of seats, and could end up below the Liberal Democrats. The LibDems have done OK - they've markedly increased their representation, and might well be second in terms of number of Councillors. While the Greens have increased their number of Councillors, they're stuck well below the number of Independents.
So, yes, the story is Reform.
Which is great for Reform, but also brings with it a challenge. Running councils is a thankless job, because of the number of things you are legally required to spend money on. It's also highly likely that most of the elected representatives won't know much about how councils are run.
Let's see how they do.
Minchinhampton held by Greens
Bella Amory Conservative 444
Adam Giles Crispin Cain Liberal Democrats 131
David James Carter Labour 236
John Lee Marsden Reform UK 622
Chloe Isobel Turner Green Party 2199
If you have ever been there you may have noted the resemblance it bears to Middle Earth.
FPTP is punishing the Tories bigly in these elections, as ultimate karma
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cwynqx77dn5o
And the potential number of Con voters who will vote Lab to keep out Ref is tiny.
And the potential number of Lab voters who will vote Con to keep out Ref is infinitessimal.
However this did not stop Le Pen's RN from rising to the top. Indeed, this is exactly the path the RN followed: win locally, then get lots of MPs, then finally say: look, to do the overall job, we need to be the government; and until Le Pen got legally nobbled, it was all going right for them (and might still do)
https://democracy.kent.gov.uk/mgElectionAreaResults.aspx?XXR=0&ID=712&RPID=278405173
https://www.markpack.org.uk/174615/local-election-predictions/
It will be easy to get the delta mixed up with the total including seats not in the election. They have iirc 100+ in seats not up today. There is also an overlap.
For example, is the proportion of ex-Tory seats won by Reform different from the proportion of ex-Labour seats.
Does anyone know whether that kind of data is available?
Mebyon Kernow, the "Sons of Cornwall", have lost a councillor
In Devon, as I predicted, they will be short by one
In fact, a lot of stuff that is "broken" about the UK is actually at the local level.
How is it more in the national interest to have someone you should be admitting sitting around in your country being paid for when they could be contributing, paying tax and integrating into their new community?
Nay is about thirteen miles from where I stayed last night in Gan
Gan is about five miles from Pau
They all have proper rugby clubs
I bet there aren't three other rugby clubs with three letter town or city names within twenty miles of each other
I bet nobody will ever bother to check this, or ever bother to point it out again
Yes the Tories are doing dreadfully in terms of councils and seats lost but are still second behind Reform
I met a friend yesterday for drinks, Tramadol and Gascake, and he told me of a recent visit to Bournemouth - a town he knows well, as he's from Dorset
Bournemouth has always had a grungey side but he said it is now positively menacing for a mile or more, in the town centre. With asylum seekers - exactly as you describe - loitering eveywhere, apparently doing nothing
They all have to go. Send them all home. Withdraw from the EHRC and cancel the general right to asylum, except for unique cases like Ukraine and HK. Enough
We've got them in Camden too, but to be fair they probably make Camden Town, by the Tube, a bit nicer
Ref +72
Con -50
Lab -14
LD -1
Oth -5
https://www.theguardian.com/uk
Still think it's pushing it to win an 'overall' but with Green and sundry other support they shouldn't have difficulty governing (to the extent any Council is allowed to govern.)
In East Cambs, one Tory has held on, and there’s one Reform gain. The rest are all LibDem.
"Jacob Rees-Mogg says 'conservatism having fantastic 24 hours', as he urges Tories and Reform UK to work together"
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2025/may/02/local-elections-polls-labour-tories-reform-council-mayor-uk-politics-live-news
East Devon (11/11)
Axminister: Ind gain from Con
Broadcylst (2): 1 Grn hold, 1 Ref gain from Con
Exmouth (2): 1 Con hold, 1 Ref gain from Con
Exmouth and Budleigh Salterton Coastal: LD gain from Con
Feniton & Honiton: LD gain from Con
Otter Valley: Ind hold
Seaton & Colyton: LD gain from Con
Sidmouth: LD gain from Con
Whimple and Blackdown: LD gain from Con
Exeter (9/9)
Alphington & Cowick: Ref gain from Lab
Duryard & Pennsylvania: LD gain from Con
Exwick & St Thomas: Ref gain from Lab
Heavitree & Whipton Barton: Grn gain from Lab
Pinhoe & Mincinglake: Ref gain from Lab
St Sidwells & St James: Grn gain from Lab
St Davids & Haven Banks: Grn gain from Lab
Wearside & Topsham: Con hold
Wonford & St Loyes: Ref gain from Lab
Mid Devon (6/6)
Crediton: LD hold
Creedy Taw & Mid Exe: LD gain from Con
Cullompton & Bradninch: LD gain from Con
Willand & Uffculme: LD gain from Con
Tiverton East: Ref gain from Con
Tiverton West: LD gain from Con
North Devon (8/8)
Barnstaple North: LD hold
Barnstaple South: LD hold
Braunton Rural: LD gain from Con
Chulmleigh & Landkey: LD gain from Con
Combe Martin Rural: Con hold
Fremington Rural: LD gain from Ind
Ilfracombe: Grn gain from Con
South Molton: Ref gain from Con
South Hams (7/7)
Bickley & Wembury: Con hold
Dartmouth & Marldon: LD gain from Con
Ivybridge: LD gain from Con
Kingsbridge: LD hold
Salcombe: LD gain from Con
South Brent & Yealmpton: LD hold
Totnes & Dartington: Grn hold
Teignbridge (10/10)
Ashburton & Buckfastleigh: Con hold
Bovey Rural: LD gain from Con
Chudleigh & Teign Valley: LD gain from Con
Dawlish: LD hold
Exminster & Haldon: LD hold
Ipplepen & The Kerswells: Ref gain from LD
Kingsteignton & Teign Estuary: Ref gain from Con
Newton Abbot North: Ref gain from Con
Newton Abbot South: Ref gain from Ind
Teignmouth: LD hold
Torridge (5/5)
Bideford East: Ref gain from Con
Bideford West & Hartland: Ref gain from Con
Holsworthy Rural: Ref gain from Con
Northam: Con hold
Torrington Rural: LD gain from Con
West Devon (4/4)
Hatherleigh & Chagford: Ref gain from Con
Okehampton Rural: Ref gain from Con
Tavistock: Con hold
Yelverton Rural: Ref gain from Con
After 60/60 seats declared
Reform: 18 (+18) (12 gains from Con, 4 from Lab, 1 from LD, 1 from Ind)
Liberal Democrats: 27 (+18) (18 gains from Con, 1 from Ind, 1 loss to Ref)
Conservatives: 7 (-32) (18 losses to LD, 12 to Ref, 1 to Grn, 1 to Ind)
Green: 6 (+4) (3 gains from Lab, 1 from Con)
Labour: 0 (-7) (4 losses to Ref, 3 to Grn)
Independent: 2 (-1) (1 gain from Con, 1 loss to LD, 1 loss to Ref)
LDs - well
Greens - par/quite well
Labour - disaster
Tory - disaster +1
Is pretty much how I see things.
Like Trump’s America you have to hit them in their wallets.
https://x.com/keir_starmer/status/1918276396566143014
National security is the bedrock of our Plan for Change.
I am determined to keep this country safe and invest in defence spending that will bring jobs and growth.
We’re going further and faster to deliver the security you deserve.
And that reason is three mayoralities that tipped red on a knife-edge: Doncaster, North Tyne and West of England. They could easily have all been Reform gains.
For practical purposes, it doesn't matter hugely in the big picture (though three extra mayors would have given Reform a wider set of media heads to use) but the bottom line is results and while Reform's councillor results are indeed outstanding, the night could easily have been better still for them in the higher-profile races.