Good morning all. Somewhat bemused by the enthusiasm being shown by newly elected councillors, especially Reform. You'd have thought they had won the lottery whereas a cursory investigation of a council's budget would show they're now responsible for potholes, bins and looking after people's grannies or special needs children.
Enjoy as they say
It's worse than that.
They have responsibility for those issues, but very little power, because so much of it is mandated by central government, which often uses those mandates as a way to cut spending without taking direct political responsibility.
So they have responsibility without much power, a terrible position to be in.
Unpaid.
So, when people complain about the low quality of councillors, given our current system, it's a miracle they are as good and dedicated as many of them are.
Councillors are mixed but on average i'd say they are actually high quality.
Certainly as good as modern day mps . At least many councillors have had actual non political jobs
Thrasher predicts 1864 losses for Labour, 599 losses for Tories. Far worse than what Curtice was talking about for Labour.
I'm not sure 1864 is even possible is it? Weren't Labour only defending 2100 odd, so that implies a nearly 90% loss of seats (and no sneaky compensating gains).
Especially as Labour have 200 seats already, implying -1900 is the upper bound.
You cannot lose more than the seats you are defending.
Are you questioning Prof Trashers working out?
I know. I wasn't convinced by some of the counts of seats defended, I think some sites may have quoted seat counts as of yesterday rather than those returned in 2022 (and 2023, 2024 in the case of all-ups for boundary changes).
So, I can only think Thrasher is counting a higher number of Labour defences, but he is operating very close to the upper bound of the possible.
In the table on here a couple of days ago, Rallings and Thrasher were saying 2557 Labour defences.
Using that table, Labour would be between “Disappointment” and “Disaster”, the Tories would be on “Relief”.
Labour holds both Ealing and Hammersmith with losses, but no calamity, with Reform failing to show. That prediction that Labour might only hold four councils in the capital looks way off; YouGov’s suggestion of 15-17 looks closer to the mark?
Labour holds both Ealing and Hammersmith with losses, but no calamity, with Reform failing to show. That prediction that Labour might only hold four councils in the capital looks way off; YouGov’s suggestion of 15-17 looks closer to the mark?
Just see SKS hang on by his fingertips to that lifeline
Thrasher predicts 1864 losses for Labour, 599 losses for Tories. Far worse than what Curtice was talking about for Labour.
I'm not sure 1864 is even possible is it? Weren't Labour only defending 2100 odd, so that implies a nearly 90% loss of seats (and no sneaky compensating gains).
Especially as Labour have 200 seats already, implying -1900 is the upper bound.
You cannot lose more than the seats you are defending.
Are you questioning Prof Trashers working out?
I know. I wasn't convinced by some of the counts of seats defended, I think some sites may have quoted seat counts as of yesterday rather than those returned in 2022 (and 2023, 2024 in the case of all-ups for boundary changes).
So, I can only think Thrasher is counting a higher number of Labour defences, but he is operating very close to the upper bound of the possible.
In the table on here a couple of days ago, Rallings and Thrasher were saying 2557 Labour defences.
1864 losses suggests much worse to come them. Currently 240 losses off 459, so down just over 50%.
So they'd need to lose 77% of remaining seats to reach the proposed losses from here. Which sounds a little stretched.
It looks like Labour may not face the wipeout in London that some predicted? That should help their overall seat total, with overall losses running currently at around half, not the three quarters sometimes predicted?
London may be the one place to be relatively innoculated against having an out of touch London lawyer as PM.
The problem is that Labour are becoming a regional, London party. Its the rest of the country that Labour are losing.
Labour holds both Ealing and Hammersmith with losses, but no calamity, with Reform failing to show. That prediction that Labour might only hold four councils in the capital looks way off; YouGov’s suggestion of 15-17 looks closer to the mark?
The South and London better for the legacy parties?
Not universally the case, but relatively speaking?
Labour holds both Ealing and Hammersmith with losses, but no calamity, with Reform failing to show. That prediction that Labour might only hold four councils in the capital looks way off; YouGov’s suggestion of 15-17 looks closer to the mark?
Maybe they can find a safe seat for Burnham - in London? That would be funny.
The Tories have won control of Westminster council from Labour
🔵 CON: 29 (+9) 🔴 LAB: 22 (-9)
Labour only had 16 seats in Westminster in 2018, before taking control in the Tory calamity of 2022. So 2026 isn’t that bad for Labour historically - London is going to save Labour from absolute humiliation, isn’t it?
Thrasher predicts 1864 losses for Labour, 599 losses for Tories. Far worse than what Curtice was talking about for Labour.
I'm not sure 1864 is even possible is it? Weren't Labour only defending 2100 odd, so that implies a nearly 90% loss of seats (and no sneaky compensating gains).
Especially as Labour have 200 seats already, implying -1900 is the upper bound.
You cannot lose more than the seats you are defending.
Are you questioning Prof Trashers working out?
I know. I wasn't convinced by some of the counts of seats defended, I think some sites may have quoted seat counts as of yesterday rather than those returned in 2022 (and 2023, 2024 in the case of all-ups for boundary changes).
So, I can only think Thrasher is counting a higher number of Labour defences, but he is operating very close to the upper bound of the possible.
In the table on here a couple of days ago, Rallings and Thrasher were saying 2557 Labour defences.
1864 losses suggests much worse to come them. Currently 240 losses off 459, so down just over 50%.
So they'd need to lose 77% of remaining seats to reach the proposed losses from here. Which sounds a little stretched.
It looks like Labour may not face the wipeout in London that some predicted? That should help their overall seat total, with overall losses running currently at around half, not the three quarters sometimes predicted?
London may be the one place to be relatively innoculated against having an out of touch London lawyer as PM.
The problem is that Labour are becoming a regional, London party. Its the rest of the country that Labour are losing.
Well, yes, and they've also lost two councils to the Tories in London as well.
Good morning all. Somewhat bemused by the enthusiasm being shown by newly elected councillors, especially Reform. You'd have thought they had won the lottery whereas a cursory investigation of a council's budget would show they're now responsible for potholes, bins and looking after people's grannies or special needs children.
Enjoy as they say
It's worse than that.
They have responsibility for those issues, but very little power, because so much of it is mandated by central government, which often uses those mandates as a way to cut spending without taking direct political responsibility.
So they have responsibility without much power, a terrible position to be in.
Unpaid.
So, when people complain about the low quality of councillors, given our current system, it's a miracle they are as good and dedicated as many of them are.
Councillors are mixed but on average i'd say they are actually high quality.
Certainly as good as modern day mps . At least many councillors have had actual non political jobs
I have one question.... How on earth have the Labour Westminster party or any future candidate to replace Keir Starmer got themselves into a position 22 months after an historic GE win to the point whereby one of the least liked Cabinet Ministers who is zealously persuing a deeply unpopular and disasterous Net Zero policy and who as a former Labour leader himself lost a GE now allowed him to get into a position whereby he is acting like a political Kingmaker when it comes to Keir Starmer's departure from No10?!
Seriously, if I wanted to replace Keir Starmer as Labour Leader and PM and reset Labour's political fortune in government before the next GE I would want to make sure that I ditched not only Ed Milliband's net zero policy direction but also I would want to ditch him from my Cabinet as well along with a few others to start a fresh. We are being briefed in the media that Ed Milliband now wants to replace Rachel Reeves as Chancellor, well that would be another politically huge mistake!
Take it from someone who lives in the North East of Scotland where Ed Milliband's stewardship of the Energy brief has had an absolutely devastating impact on the Oil & Gas Industry up here and the huge knock on effect it has had on the economy here whereby there are job losses being announced almost weekly. And this is under Labour's watch! I would not if I was a Labour politician up here mention that old political trope of Mrs Thatcher and the Miners! And I also think this became this Scottish Holyrood election which finally left politicians in Labour and the SNP who tried to bring up Thatcher in Scotland finding this usual old favourite finally falling on death ears and just totally out of touch with what is going on in politics today.
Just wait and see the bomb that goes off if voters in Fraserburgh etc vote fuker and then find out their new MSP’s party policy is “just switch the wind farms off and import more gas into England”
Thrasher predicts 1864 losses for Labour, 599 losses for Tories. Far worse than what Curtice was talking about for Labour.
I'm not sure 1864 is even possible is it? Weren't Labour only defending 2100 odd, so that implies a nearly 90% loss of seats (and no sneaky compensating gains).
Especially as Labour have 200 seats already, implying -1900 is the upper bound.
You cannot lose more than the seats you are defending.
Are you questioning Prof Trashers working out?
I know. I wasn't convinced by some of the counts of seats defended, I think some sites may have quoted seat counts as of yesterday rather than those returned in 2022 (and 2023, 2024 in the case of all-ups for boundary changes).
So, I can only think Thrasher is counting a higher number of Labour defences, but he is operating very close to the upper bound of the possible.
In the table on here a couple of days ago, Rallings and Thrasher were saying 2557 Labour defences.
1864 losses suggests much worse to come them. Currently 240 losses off 459, so down just over 50%.
So they'd need to lose 77% of remaining seats to reach the proposed losses from here. Which sounds a little stretched.
It looks like Labour may not face the wipeout in London that some predicted? That should help their overall seat total, with overall losses running currently at around half, not the three quarters sometimes predicted?
London may be the one place to be relatively innoculated against having an out of touch London lawyer as PM.
The problem is that Labour are becoming a regional, London party. Its the rest of the country that Labour are losing.
For sure. I’m simply saying that the early results are some way better for Labour than the worst of the polls and predictions.
The other side of that coin could be that the Greens aren’t going to get quite the headlines they might have hoped for. Perhaps a little of the shine has come off Zack over recent days?
Labour holds both Ealing and Hammersmith with losses, but no calamity, with Reform failing to show. That prediction that Labour might only hold four councils in the capital looks way off; YouGov’s suggestion of 15-17 looks closer to the mark?
The South and London better for the legacy parties?
Not universally the case, but relatively speaking?
It'd be interesting to see the demographics.
I suspect educated working professionals in the South and London probably aren't as into Reform or the Greens.
Thrasher predicts 1864 losses for Labour, 599 losses for Tories. Far worse than what Curtice was talking about for Labour.
I'm not sure 1864 is even possible is it? Weren't Labour only defending 2100 odd, so that implies a nearly 90% loss of seats (and no sneaky compensating gains).
Especially as Labour have 200 seats already, implying -1900 is the upper bound.
You cannot lose more than the seats you are defending.
Are you questioning Prof Trashers working out?
I know. I wasn't convinced by some of the counts of seats defended, I think some sites may have quoted seat counts as of yesterday rather than those returned in 2022 (and 2023, 2024 in the case of all-ups for boundary changes).
So, I can only think Thrasher is counting a higher number of Labour defences, but he is operating very close to the upper bound of the possible.
In the table on here a couple of days ago, Rallings and Thrasher were saying 2557 Labour defences.
1864 losses suggests much worse to come them. Currently 240 losses off 459, so down just over 50%.
So they'd need to lose 77% of remaining seats to reach the proposed losses from here. Which sounds a little stretched.
It looks like Labour may not face the wipeout in London that some predicted? That should help their overall seat total, with overall losses running currently at around half, not the three quarters sometimes predicted?
London may be the one place to be relatively innoculated against having an out of touch London lawyer as PM.
The problem is that Labour are becoming a regional, London party. Its the rest of the country that Labour are losing.
For sure. I’m simply saying that the early results are some way better for Labour than the worst of the polls and predictions.
The other side of that coin could be that the Greens aren’t going to get quite the headlines they might have hoped for. Perhaps a little of the shine has come off Zack over recent days?
Thankfully there are only so many seats were rampant antisemitism is a vote winner.
Thrasher predicts 1864 losses for Labour, 599 losses for Tories. Far worse than what Curtice was talking about for Labour.
I'm not sure 1864 is even possible is it? Weren't Labour only defending 2100 odd, so that implies a nearly 90% loss of seats (and no sneaky compensating gains).
Especially as Labour have 200 seats already, implying -1900 is the upper bound.
You cannot lose more than the seats you are defending.
Are you questioning Prof Trashers working out?
I know. I wasn't convinced by some of the counts of seats defended, I think some sites may have quoted seat counts as of yesterday rather than those returned in 2022 (and 2023, 2024 in the case of all-ups for boundary changes).
So, I can only think Thrasher is counting a higher number of Labour defences, but he is operating very close to the upper bound of the possible.
In the table on here a couple of days ago, Rallings and Thrasher were saying 2557 Labour defences.
1864 losses suggests much worse to come them. Currently 240 losses off 459, so down just over 50%.
So they'd need to lose 77% of remaining seats to reach the proposed losses from here. Which sounds a little stretched.
It looks like Labour may not face the wipeout in London that some predicted? That should help their overall seat total, with overall losses running currently at around half, not the three quarters sometimes predicted?
London may be the one place to be relatively innoculated against having an out of touch London lawyer as PM.
The problem is that Labour are becoming a regional, London party. Its the rest of the country that Labour are losing.
For sure. I’m simply saying that the early results are some way better for Labour than the worst of the polls and predictions.
The other side of that coin could be that the Greens aren’t going to get quite the headlines they might have hoped for. Perhaps a little of the shine has come off Zack over recent days?
The headline they should be getting is vote Green outside of London and you won’t win many new councillors but will hand loads of seats to Reform .
According to the BBC, Starmer will be coming out fighting shortly with a pool statement.....
Thinks about that viral clip in boxing gloves.
We could write it for him. The problem is that he is going to claim that he has listened and the voters have expressed disappointment. Whilst in reality if he was listening he would know that the voters told him to F*** off.
According to the BBC, Starmer will be coming out fighting shortly with a pool statement.....
Thinks about that viral clip in boxing gloves.
We could write it for him. The problem is that he is going to claim that he has listened and the voters have expressed disappointment. Whilst in reality if he was listening he would know that the voters told him to F*** off.
"The voters have spoken and i have listened - whoever has let bad stuff cross their desk will be sacked when i find out who they are and why they kept it from me."
According to the BBC, Starmer will be coming out fighting shortly with a pool statement.....
Thinks about that viral clip in boxing gloves.
We could write it for him. The problem is that he is going to claim that he has listened and the voters have expressed disappointment. Whilst in reality if he was listening he would know that the voters told him to F*** off.
"The voters have spoken and i have listened - whoever has let bad stuff cross their desk will be sacked when i find out who they are and why they kept it from me."
Labour holds both Ealing and Hammersmith with losses, but no calamity, with Reform failing to show. That prediction that Labour might only hold four councils in the capital looks way off; YouGov’s suggestion of 15-17 looks closer to the mark?
The South and London better for the legacy parties?
Not universally the case, but relatively speaking?
It'd be interesting to see the demographics.
I suspect educated working professionals in the South and London probably aren't as into Reform or the Greens.
They will flick to the LDs at times, in pockets.
Green and Reform are roll the dice parties. Educated working professionals in the South and London want to see steady improvements, they don't want to roll the dice.
Labour holds both Ealing and Hammersmith with losses, but no calamity, with Reform failing to show. That prediction that Labour might only hold four councils in the capital looks way off; YouGov’s suggestion of 15-17 looks closer to the mark?
The South and London better for the legacy parties?
Not universally the case, but relatively speaking?
It'd be interesting to see the demographics.
I suspect educated working professionals in the South and London probably aren't as into Reform or the Greens.
They will flick to the LDs at times, in pockets.
The LibDem vote and seat count rising in Southampton , despite a surge in the Green vote, is hopefully an encouraging sign for the county
According to the BBC, Starmer will be coming out fighting shortly with a pool statement.....
Thinks about that viral clip in boxing gloves.
We could write it for him. The problem is that he is going to claim that he has listened and the voters have expressed disappointment. Whilst in reality if he was listening he would know that the voters told him to F*** off.
According to the BBC, Starmer will be coming out fighting shortly with a pool statement.....
Thinks about that viral clip in boxing gloves.
"It is unacceptable that a prime-ministerial warning about the threat posed by Reform has not been heeded by the public. I'm taking responsiblity for their mistake and will look carefully at how we can update the process to ensure that they cannot make it again."
From a glance at the map, Wigan staying red must be good news for Labour? With 42 out of 75 seats.
Hang on. Labour won 0 out the 25 seats up for election, losing 22 of the seats it held.
The other Labour results in met districts to declare: Dudley 1 held, 13 losses. Tameside 1 held, 16 losses. Oldham 3 held, 7 losses. Stockport 2 held, 5 losses. Salford 3 held, 13 losses. Still red. Bolton 2 held, 5 losses.
So don't let the results in London distract from the spectacular collapse that awaits today in the Met District heartlands. The fact that only 1/3rds of seats are up for election in many councils is irrelevant to the conclusions that MPs in those councils will be drawing about their own prospects were Starmer to stay.
Manchester is one of the first to declare for the day counting, so we will see more whether this is a city council / borough council divide or whether it is more purely a London / other Mets divide.
Labour holds both Ealing and Hammersmith with losses, but no calamity, with Reform failing to show. That prediction that Labour might only hold four councils in the capital looks way off; YouGov’s suggestion of 15-17 looks closer to the mark?
The South and London better for the legacy parties?
Not universally the case, but relatively speaking?
It'd be interesting to see the demographics.
I suspect educated working professionals in the South and London probably aren't as into Reform or the Greens.
They will flick to the LDs at times, in pockets.
Different ethnic groups will have different voting patterns.
There are a lot of Sikhs in Ealing and they are likely still pro Labour whereas Muslims are increasingly pro Ind or Green and Hindus increasingly pro Conservative.
Labour holds both Ealing and Hammersmith with losses, but no calamity, with Reform failing to show. That prediction that Labour might only hold four councils in the capital looks way off; YouGov’s suggestion of 15-17 looks closer to the mark?
The South and London better for the legacy parties?
Not universally the case, but relatively speaking?
It'd be interesting to see the demographics.
I suspect educated working professionals in the South and London probably aren't as into Reform or the Greens.
They will flick to the LDs at times, in pockets.
Different ethnic groups will have different voting patterns.
There are a lot of Sikhs in Ealing and they are likely still pro Labour whereas Muslims are increasingly pro Ind or Green and Hindus increasingly pro Conservative.
How depressing that sectarianism is a voting metric in 21st century England.
According to the BBC, Starmer will be coming out fighting shortly with a pool statement.....
Thinks about that viral clip in boxing gloves.
We could write it for him. The problem is that he is going to claim that he has listened and the voters have expressed disappointment. Whilst in reality if he was listening he would know that the voters told him to F*** off.
"The voters have spoken and i have listened - whoever has let bad stuff cross their desk will be sacked when i find out who they are and why they kept it from me."
Very good, thought you forgot to say that he has taken full responsibility ... so will sack whoever ...
Labour holds both Ealing and Hammersmith with losses, but no calamity, with Reform failing to show. That prediction that Labour might only hold four councils in the capital looks way off; YouGov’s suggestion of 15-17 looks closer to the mark?
The South and London better for the legacy parties?
Not universally the case, but relatively speaking?
It'd be interesting to see the demographics.
I suspect educated working professionals in the South and London probably aren't as into Reform or the Greens.
They will flick to the LDs at times, in pockets.
Different ethnic groups will have different voting patterns.
There are a lot of Sikhs in Ealing and they are likely still pro Labour whereas Muslims are increasingly pro Ind or Green and Hindus increasingly pro Conservative.
How depressing that sectarianism is a voting metric in 21st century England.
London is like a different world . If Burnham wants to win a by-election the only place where he can be guaranteed a win is in London ! Although not sure any London MP is willing to make way for him .
Labour holds both Ealing and Hammersmith with losses, but no calamity, with Reform failing to show. That prediction that Labour might only hold four councils in the capital looks way off; YouGov’s suggestion of 15-17 looks closer to the mark?
The South and London better for the legacy parties?
Not universally the case, but relatively speaking?
It'd be interesting to see the demographics.
I suspect educated working professionals in the South and London probably aren't as into Reform or the Greens.
They will flick to the LDs at times, in pockets.
Green and Reform are roll the dice parties. Educated working professionals in the South and London want to see steady improvements, they don't want to roll the dice.
Two kinds of people tend to roll the dice:
The truly desperate, with not much to lose.
The comfortable but bored thrill seeker, for whom losses don't really matter.
In theory, it's a winning coalition, but heaven knows how you please them both in power.
Meanwhile, it's beginning to look like a tealwash in Havering. Some of the Reform gains are in very plush bits of the borough, and both the former administration and main opposition may be squeezed to virtually nothing.
Labour holds both Ealing and Hammersmith with losses, but no calamity, with Reform failing to show. That prediction that Labour might only hold four councils in the capital looks way off; YouGov’s suggestion of 15-17 looks closer to the mark?
The South and London better for the legacy parties?
Not universally the case, but relatively speaking?
It'd be interesting to see the demographics.
I suspect educated working professionals in the South and London probably aren't as into Reform or the Greens.
They will flick to the LDs at times, in pockets.
Different ethnic groups will have different voting patterns.
There are a lot of Sikhs in Ealing and they are likely still pro Labour whereas Muslims are increasingly pro Ind or Green and Hindus increasingly pro Conservative.
How depressing that sectarianism is a voting metric in 21st century England.
You allow a group to settle here, carve out special privileges for the “community”, celebrate our multicultural identity… and then we’re all supposed to adopt faux outrage that the group’s representative doesn’t adopt your expected politics?
London is like a different world . If Burnham wants to win a by-election the only place where he can be guaranteed a win is in London ! Although not sure any London MP is willing to make way for him .
Burnham wins the by-election by effectively running against his own party. The biggest obstacle he faces isn’t the election, but the selection, since Labour HQ won’t fancy a by-election where their own candidate is essentially calling for change.
Labour holds both Ealing and Hammersmith with losses, but no calamity, with Reform failing to show. That prediction that Labour might only hold four councils in the capital looks way off; YouGov’s suggestion of 15-17 looks closer to the mark?
The South and London better for the legacy parties?
Not universally the case, but relatively speaking?
It'd be interesting to see the demographics.
I suspect educated working professionals in the South and London probably aren't as into Reform or the Greens.
They will flick to the LDs at times, in pockets.
Different ethnic groups will have different voting patterns.
There are a lot of Sikhs in Ealing and they are likely still pro Labour whereas Muslims are increasingly pro Ind or Green and Hindus increasingly pro Conservative.
How depressing that sectarianism is a voting metric in 21st century England.
Labour holds both Ealing and Hammersmith with losses, but no calamity, with Reform failing to show. That prediction that Labour might only hold four councils in the capital looks way off; YouGov’s suggestion of 15-17 looks closer to the mark?
The South and London better for the legacy parties?
Not universally the case, but relatively speaking?
It'd be interesting to see the demographics.
I suspect educated working professionals in the South and London probably aren't as into Reform or the Greens.
They will flick to the LDs at times, in pockets.
Different ethnic groups will have different voting patterns.
There are a lot of Sikhs in Ealing and they are likely still pro Labour whereas Muslims are increasingly pro Ind or Green and Hindus increasingly pro Conservative.
How depressing that sectarianism is a voting metric in 21st century England.
An inevitable consequence of multiculturalism.
What is the cure for multiculturalism if the future, according to the ONS, is a declining domestic population propped up by immigration?
Labour holds both Ealing and Hammersmith with losses, but no calamity, with Reform failing to show. That prediction that Labour might only hold four councils in the capital looks way off; YouGov’s suggestion of 15-17 looks closer to the mark?
The South and London better for the legacy parties?
Not universally the case, but relatively speaking?
It'd be interesting to see the demographics.
I suspect educated working professionals in the South and London probably aren't as into Reform or the Greens.
They will flick to the LDs at times, in pockets.
Green and Reform are roll the dice parties. Educated working professionals in the South and London want to see steady improvements, they don't want to roll the dice.
I think this is true among voters who are settled and own their own home etc... but not so for younger voters. If this were a GE I think Reform and Green would be doing a lot better as younger voters would turn up. What we're really seeing is differential turnout with the youth not giving a fuck about bin collections and potholes in their local area because they rent.
I have one question.... How on earth have the Labour Westminster party or any future candidate to replace Keir Starmer got themselves into a position 22 months after an historic GE win to the point whereby one of the least liked Cabinet Ministers who is zealously persuing a deeply unpopular and disasterous Net Zero policy and who as a former Labour leader himself lost a GE now allowed him to get into a position whereby he is acting like a political Kingmaker when it comes to Keir Starmer's departure from No10?!
Seriously, if I wanted to replace Keir Starmer as Labour Leader and PM and reset Labour's political fortune in government before the next GE I would want to make sure that I ditched not only Ed Milliband's net zero policy direction but also I would want to ditch him from my Cabinet as well along with a few others to start a fresh. We are being briefed in the media that Ed Milliband now wants to replace Rachel Reeves as Chancellor, well that would be another politically huge mistake!
Take it from someone who lives in the North East of Scotland where Ed Milliband's stewardship of the Energy brief has had an absolutely devastating impact on the Oil & Gas Industry up here and the huge knock on effect it has had on the economy here whereby there are job losses being announced almost weekly. And this is under Labour's watch! I would not if I was a Labour politician up here mention that old political trope of Mrs Thatcher and the Miners! And I also think this became this Scottish Holyrood election which finally left politicians in Labour and the SNP who tried to bring up Thatcher in Scotland finding this usual old favourite finally falling on death ears and just totally out of touch with what is going on in politics today.
The decline of North Sea O&G as a large employer has been obvious for 2 decades, the old fields are being decommissioned, new installations are mainly unmanned platforms or subsea, and they're now cabled back onshore and controlled from there. No company is going to put another large LQ offshore and chopper 100s back and forth every 2 weeks. That decline is entirely independent of net zero and Milliband. Offshore workers who still want those sort of jobs should be retraining in cable lay and maintenance or turbine maintenance and blade repair.
Labour holds both Ealing and Hammersmith with losses, but no calamity, with Reform failing to show. That prediction that Labour might only hold four councils in the capital looks way off; YouGov’s suggestion of 15-17 looks closer to the mark?
The South and London better for the legacy parties?
Not universally the case, but relatively speaking?
It'd be interesting to see the demographics.
I suspect educated working professionals in the South and London probably aren't as into Reform or the Greens.
They will flick to the LDs at times, in pockets.
Different ethnic groups will have different voting patterns.
There are a lot of Sikhs in Ealing and they are likely still pro Labour whereas Muslims are increasingly pro Ind or Green and Hindus increasingly pro Conservative.
How depressing that sectarianism is a voting metric in 21st century England.
It’s not new. Sikhs, Muslims and Hindus showed different voting patterns previously too: they were all much more pro-Labour. Meanwhile, geographical splits during the English Civil War still show up in today’s voting patterns, e.g. the Brexit vote. Old Anglican vs non-conformist splits, again, still show differences in party preference. That’s psephology for you.
From a glance at the map, Wigan staying red must be good news for Labour? With 42 out of 75 seats.
Hang on. Labour won 0 out the 25 seats up for election, losing 22 of the seats it held.
The other Labour results in met districts to declare: Dudley 1 held, 13 losses. Tameside 1 held, 16 losses. Oldham 3 held, 7 losses. Stockport 2 held, 5 losses. Salford 3 held, 13 losses. Still red. Bolton 2 held, 5 losses.
So don't let the results in London distract from the spectacular collapse that awaits today in the Met District heartlands. The fact that only 1/3rds of seats are up for election in many councils is irrelevant to the conclusions that MPs in those councils will be drawing about their own prospects were Starmer to stay.
Manchester is one of the first to declare for the day counting, so we will see more whether this is a city council / borough council divide or whether it is more purely a London / other Mets divide.
Given that Greater Manchester is viewed as one of Labour's (current) strongest areas, I wonder whether the results for Labour in the rest of the Met Districts will be even worse. The results in the northern Unitaries that have declared also look shockingly bad for Labour.
But, heh, we are told that London is the only place that counts.......
Thrasher now predicting 1,200 losses for Labour. I think Curtice is also saying Reform is only on about 30% on estimated national vote share.
Sounds like what I said yesterday messy picture as London wouldn't be as bad for Labour. Are Labour going to bottle it and stick with Brittas?
A friend’s ward in Hammersmith, safe Labour, Labour has dropped from about 1,150 to 850 votes, the Tory vote is unchanged at around 450, and about 300 votes have gone off to add to the previously low Green, LibDems or Reform piles. If north and east London follows a similar pattern, the Greens are going to come away with lots of second places and Labour will hold its councils there.
I hope that the Harlow and Westminster results are extended to Barnet (and maybe even Enfield). Well done to @HYUFD who I'm sure was out campaigning in Harlow!
The Tories have won control of Westminster council from Labour
🔵 CON: 29 (+9) 🔴 LAB: 22 (-9)
Labour only had 16 seats in Westminster in 2018, before taking control in the Tory calamity of 2022. So 2026 isn’t that bad for Labour historically - London is going to save Labour from absolute humiliation, isn’t it?
London propping up Labour isn't going to play well in all those places outside London where they have been hollowed out.
Labour holds both Ealing and Hammersmith with losses, but no calamity, with Reform failing to show. That prediction that Labour might only hold four councils in the capital looks way off; YouGov’s suggestion of 15-17 looks closer to the mark?
The South and London better for the legacy parties?
Not universally the case, but relatively speaking?
It'd be interesting to see the demographics.
I suspect educated working professionals in the South and London probably aren't as into Reform or the Greens.
They will flick to the LDs at times, in pockets.
Different ethnic groups will have different voting patterns.
There are a lot of Sikhs in Ealing and they are likely still pro Labour whereas Muslims are increasingly pro Ind or Green and Hindus increasingly pro Conservative.
How depressing that sectarianism is a voting metric in 21st century England.
Very sad.
I am however still looking forward to the Green Party schism between the LGBTQIA++ and Islamic Hamas supporters, with a large bucket of popcorn. They agree on nothing except a hatred of Israel, which is just about holding them together for now.
Some of us are old enough to remember when the Greens were hippies and environmentalists.
Sadly the sectarianism showed itself in the last GE, with half a dozen ‘independents’ elected.
Thrasher now predicting 1,200 losses for Labour. I think Curtice is also saying Reform is only on about 30% on estimated national vote share.
Sounds like what I said yesterday messy picture as London wouldn't be as bad for Labour. Are Labour going to bottle it and stick with Brittas?
If they stay in second place it's bad, but not absolutely horrendous. Not a reason to keep Starmer, but not the smoking gun that says he clearly has to go.
I suspect that's where we're ending up. Labour isn't ruthless enough in these circumstances, they'll faff about trying to work out how to get Burnham into Parliament for the next 12 months.
Labour holds both Ealing and Hammersmith with losses, but no calamity, with Reform failing to show. That prediction that Labour might only hold four councils in the capital looks way off; YouGov’s suggestion of 15-17 looks closer to the mark?
Maybe they can find a safe seat for Burnham - in London? That would be funny.
According to the BBC, Starmer will be coming out fighting shortly with a pool statement.....
Thinks about that viral clip in boxing gloves.
Is he a fighter not a quitter?
Talking of which, I see that Reform has gained every seat in Hartlepool.
Labour must be so grateful that many of the councils are only electing a third this year, so we hold on to the seatsxthat aren't up to make the headline numbers on the council look better than the reality.
Looking forward to the all-out results in Yorkshire...
Labour holds both Ealing and Hammersmith with losses, but no calamity, with Reform failing to show. That prediction that Labour might only hold four councils in the capital looks way off; YouGov’s suggestion of 15-17 looks closer to the mark?
The South and London better for the legacy parties?
Not universally the case, but relatively speaking?
It'd be interesting to see the demographics.
I suspect educated working professionals in the South and London probably aren't as into Reform or the Greens.
They will flick to the LDs at times, in pockets.
Different ethnic groups will have different voting patterns.
There are a lot of Sikhs in Ealing and they are likely still pro Labour whereas Muslims are increasingly pro Ind or Green and Hindus increasingly pro Conservative.
A few in Southall, yes. But Ealing covers a wide area (Acton, Greenford, Perivale are all parts of the borough).
Labour holds both Ealing and Hammersmith with losses, but no calamity, with Reform failing to show. That prediction that Labour might only hold four councils in the capital looks way off; YouGov’s suggestion of 15-17 looks closer to the mark?
The South and London better for the legacy parties?
Not universally the case, but relatively speaking?
It'd be interesting to see the demographics.
I suspect educated working professionals in the South and London probably aren't as into Reform or the Greens.
They will flick to the LDs at times, in pockets.
Green and Reform are roll the dice parties. Educated working professionals in the South and London want to see steady improvements, they don't want to roll the dice.
I think this is true among voters who are settled and own their own home etc... but not so for younger voters. If this were a GE I think Reform and Green would be doing a lot better as younger voters would turn up. What we're really seeing is differential turnout with the youth not giving a fuck about bin collections and potholes in their local area because they rent.
A lot of young people want to roll the dice. They're frustrated with the housing market, the jobs market, the international picture, some of them with Brexit. They feel like they've little to lose.
The Tories have won control of Westminster council from Labour
🔵 CON: 29 (+9) 🔴 LAB: 22 (-9)
Labour only had 16 seats in Westminster in 2018, before taking control in the Tory calamity of 2022. So 2026 isn’t that bad for Labour historically - London is going to save Labour from absolute humiliation, isn’t it?
London propping up Labour isn't going to play well in all those places outside London where they have been hollowed out.
Some very high proportion of Labour members and activists live in London, not to mention all the peers and party officials. They’re likely to be insulated from the worst of Labour’s rout and not feel it as acutely as those MPs in areas where all their councillors are gone. That may well play into the narrative over coming weeks. I reckon Starmer hanging on now looks odd on.
Britain Elects guy has gone live on the twatter and Youtube. Normally worth listening to his takes as he managed to rise above his personal political bias.
Nevertheless both Greens and LibDems will be disappointed not to have pushed Labour in Ealing to anywhere near losing control, with Labour holding 46 out of 59 seats it defended. This afternoon will likely see a string of Labour council holds across inner North, East and South London.
Labour holds both Ealing and Hammersmith with losses, but no calamity, with Reform failing to show. That prediction that Labour might only hold four councils in the capital looks way off; YouGov’s suggestion of 15-17 looks closer to the mark?
The South and London better for the legacy parties?
Not universally the case, but relatively speaking?
It'd be interesting to see the demographics.
I suspect educated working professionals in the South and London probably aren't as into Reform or the Greens.
They will flick to the LDs at times, in pockets.
Green and Reform are roll the dice parties. Educated working professionals in the South and London want to see steady improvements, they don't want to roll the dice.
I think this is true among voters who are settled and own their own home etc... but not so for younger voters. If this were a GE I think Reform and Green would be doing a lot better as younger voters would turn up. What we're really seeing is differential turnout with the youth not giving a fuck about bin collections and potholes in their local area because they rent.
A lot of young people want to roll the dice. They're frustrated with the housing market, the jobs market, the international picture, some of them with Brexit. They feel like they've little to lose.
Yes I agree with you, I just don't think they care enough about bin collections and potholes to turn up for local elections. If this current climate persists through to 2029 I expect both Green and Reform will do a lot better as younger voters will turnout for the GE to roll the dice.
From a glance at the map, Wigan staying red must be good news for Labour? With 42 out of 75 seats.
Hang on. Labour won 0 out the 25 seats up for election, losing 22 of the seats it held.
The other Labour results in met districts to declare: Dudley 1 held, 13 losses. Tameside 1 held, 16 losses. Oldham 3 held, 7 losses. Stockport 2 held, 5 losses. Salford 3 held, 13 losses. Still red. Bolton 2 held, 5 losses.
So don't let the results in London distract from the spectacular collapse that awaits today in the Met District heartlands. The fact that only 1/3rds of seats are up for election in many councils is irrelevant to the conclusions that MPs in those councils will be drawing about their own prospects were Starmer to stay.
Manchester is one of the first to declare for the day counting, so we will see more whether this is a city council / borough council divide or whether it is more purely a London / other Mets divide.
Given that Greater Manchester is viewed as one of Labour's (current) strongest areas, I wonder whether the results for Labour in the rest of the Met Districts will be even worse. The results in the northern Unitaries that have declared also look shockingly bad for Labour.
But, heh, we are told that London is the only place that counts.......
Also, seat change numbers are always relative to what you are defending.
2022 was the first of the modestly good rounds for Labour, though London was felt underwhelming.
It wasn't so good for the Tories though worse was to come.
So Labour losses possibly lower in percentage terms than in 2025, when they were defending against an already very poor 2021 set. They can actually take a small silver lining from that. Whether that would be wise.....
I actually wonder if Labour's NEV will sneak into the 20s.
From a glance at the map, Wigan staying red must be good news for Labour? With 42 out of 75 seats.
Hang on. Labour won 0 out the 25 seats up for election, losing 22 of the seats it held.
The other Labour results in met districts to declare: Dudley 1 held, 13 losses. Tameside 1 held, 16 losses. Oldham 3 held, 7 losses. Stockport 2 held, 5 losses. Salford 3 held, 13 losses. Still red. Bolton 2 held, 5 losses.
So don't let the results in London distract from the spectacular collapse that awaits today in the Met District heartlands. The fact that only 1/3rds of seats are up for election in many councils is irrelevant to the conclusions that MPs in those councils will be drawing about their own prospects were Starmer to stay.
Manchester is one of the first to declare for the day counting, so we will see more whether this is a city council / borough council divide or whether it is more purely a London / other Mets divide.
Given that Greater Manchester is viewed as one of Labour's (current) strongest areas, I wonder whether the results for Labour in the rest of the Met Districts will be even worse. The results in the northern Unitaries that have declared also look shockingly bad for Labour.
But, heh, we are told that London is the only place that counts.......
Also, seat change numbers are always relative to what you are defending.
2022 was the first of the modestly good rounds for Labour, though London was felt underwhelming.
It wasn't so good for the Tories though worse was to come.
So Labour losses possibly lower in percentage terms than in 2025, when they were defending against an already very poor 2021 set. They can actually take a small silver lining from that. Whether that would be wise.....
I actually wonder if Labour's NEV will sneak into the 20s.
Whats a winning score at the next GE? Guessing if either Labour or Conservatives reach 27/28ish they would be the largest party and would need 31/32 for a majority. Either getting into the 20s now isn't good but it is not terrible either.
Labour holds both Ealing and Hammersmith with losses, but no calamity, with Reform failing to show. That prediction that Labour might only hold four councils in the capital looks way off; YouGov’s suggestion of 15-17 looks closer to the mark?
The South and London better for the legacy parties?
Not universally the case, but relatively speaking?
It'd be interesting to see the demographics.
I suspect educated working professionals in the South and London probably aren't as into Reform or the Greens.
They will flick to the LDs at times, in pockets.
Green and Reform are roll the dice parties. Educated working professionals in the South and London want to see steady improvements, they don't want to roll the dice.
I think this is true among voters who are settled and own their own home etc... but not so for younger voters. If this were a GE I think Reform and Green would be doing a lot better as younger voters would turn up. What we're really seeing is differential turnout with the youth not giving a fuck about bin collections and potholes in their local area because they rent.
A lot of young people want to roll the dice. They're frustrated with the housing market, the jobs market, the international picture, some of them with Brexit. They feel like they've little to lose.
Yes I agree with you, I just don't think they care enough about bin collections and potholes to turn up for local elections. If this current climate persists through to 2029 I expect both Green and Reform will do a lot better as younger voters will turnout for the GE to roll the dice.
Have you got a link to the polling that shows strong support for Reform in younger demographics? All the polling I've seen suggests that it's older, white men angry at getting old, unfit, fat and flaccid. Perhaps PB has an eloquent Reform fan from this younger demographic who can speak up for them?
I have one question.... How on earth have the Labour Westminster party or any future candidate to replace Keir Starmer got themselves into a position 22 months after an historic GE win to the point whereby one of the least liked Cabinet Ministers who is zealously persuing a deeply unpopular and disasterous Net Zero policy and who as a former Labour leader himself lost a GE now allowed him to get into a position whereby he is acting like a political Kingmaker when it comes to Keir Starmer's departure from No10?!
Seriously, if I wanted to replace Keir Starmer as Labour Leader and PM and reset Labour's political fortune in government before the next GE I would want to make sure that I ditched not only Ed Milliband's net zero policy direction but also I would want to ditch him from my Cabinet as well along with a few others to start a fresh. We are being briefed in the media that Ed Milliband now wants to replace Rachel Reeves as Chancellor, well that would be another politically huge mistake!
Take it from someone who lives in the North East of Scotland where Ed Milliband's stewardship of the Energy brief has had an absolutely devastating impact on the Oil & Gas Industry up here and the huge knock on effect it has had on the economy here whereby there are job losses being announced almost weekly. And this is under Labour's watch! I would not if I was a Labour politician up here mention that old political trope of Mrs Thatcher and the Miners! And I also think this became this Scottish Holyrood election which finally left politicians in Labour and the SNP who tried to bring up Thatcher in Scotland finding this usual old favourite finally falling on death ears and just totally out of touch with what is going on in politics today.
The decline of North Sea O&G as a large employer has been obvious for 2 decades, the old fields are being decommissioned, new installations are mainly unmanned platforms or subsea, and they're now cabled back onshore and controlled from there. No company is going to put another large LQ offshore and chopper 100s back and forth every 2 weeks. That decline is entirely independent of net zero and Milliband. Offshore workers who still want those sort of jobs should be retraining in cable lay and maintenance or turbine maintenance and blade repair.
No not really. The big driver for job losses was not un manned platforms. We have had those for many decades. But they are mostly smaller satellites. The big job losses have been driven by the loss of new drilling and platforms being shut down because of the lack of new investment.
Every time a drilling rig leaves the North Sea we lose around 500 jobs. Go back 15 years or so and there were 40 odd drilling rigs operating in the North Sea. Now there are 3 or 4. And none of them are currently drilling. That is 15 to 20 thousand jobs there straight away.
Someone said Starmer could become Foreign Secretary on the basis he likes meeting foreign leaders and travel.........
I think I'd sooner have Leon....
It's thanks to his forays into the job of foreign secretary that he's managed to get the worst election results on record. His decision making has been woeful. He's managed to persuade even loyalists like me that enough is enough.
According to the BBC, Starmer will be coming out fighting shortly with a pool statement.....
Thinks about that viral clip in boxing gloves.
Probably means Starmer with a fancy cocktail, sat by the pool.
"Crisis? What crisis?"
My car share, a prof in his early sixties, was adamant that Callaghan actually said that live on TV after getting off the plane. He wouldn’t have it that this was a paper headline after a load of waffle from the PM. The mindvplays tricks on us.
Comments
🔵 CON: 29 (+9)
🔴 LAB: 22 (-9)
The problem is that Labour are becoming a regional, London party. Its the rest of the country that Labour are losing.
Not universally the case, but relatively speaking?
➡️ RFM: 27 (+27)
🔵 CON: 15 (-10)
🔴 LAB: 2 (-17)
They aren't really safe anywhere right now.
The other side of that coin could be that the Greens aren’t going to get quite the headlines they might have hoped for. Perhaps a little of the shine has come off Zack over recent days?
I suspect educated working professionals in the South and London probably aren't as into Reform or the Greens.
They will flick to the LDs at times, in pockets.
Thinks about that viral clip in boxing gloves.
Too many though.
*Other papers are available
There are a lot of Sikhs in Ealing and they are likely still pro Labour whereas Muslims are increasingly pro Ind or Green and Hindus increasingly pro Conservative.
The truly desperate, with not much to lose.
The comfortable but bored thrill seeker, for whom losses don't really matter.
In theory, it's a winning coalition, but heaven knows how you please them both in power.
Meanwhile, it's beginning to look like a tealwash in Havering. Some of the Reform gains are in very plush bits of the borough, and both the former administration and main opposition may be squeezed to virtually nothing.
You allow a group to settle here, carve out special privileges for the “community”, celebrate our multicultural identity… and then we’re all supposed to adopt faux outrage that the group’s representative doesn’t adopt your expected politics?
Sounds like what I said yesterday messy picture as London wouldn't be as bad for Labour. Are Labour going to bottle it and stick with Brittas?
That decline is entirely independent of net zero and Milliband.
Offshore workers who still want those sort of jobs should be retraining in cable lay and maintenance or turbine maintenance and blade repair.
But, heh, we are told that London is the only place that counts.......
"Crisis? What crisis?"
I am however still looking forward to the Green Party schism between the LGBTQIA++ and Islamic Hamas supporters, with a large bucket of popcorn. They agree on nothing except a hatred of Israel, which is just about holding them together for now.
Some of us are old enough to remember when the Greens were hippies and environmentalists.
Sadly the sectarianism showed itself in the last GE, with half a dozen ‘independents’ elected.
CON: 35.2% (+11.5)
LAB: 27.2% (-26.1)
GRN: 20.2% (+8.1)
REF: 10.2% (+10.2)
LDEM: 7.1% (-3.7)
Conservative GAIN from Labour.
I suspect that's where we're ending up. Labour isn't ruthless enough in these circumstances, they'll faff about trying to work out how to get Burnham into Parliament for the next 12 months.
I decided I couldn't be bothered with a lost night of sleep given it seemed certain what would happen.
Just catching up.
Step forward the next leader of the Tory Party
..............Sir James Cleverly.
Labour must be so grateful that many of the councils are only electing a third this year, so we hold on to the seatsxthat aren't up to make the headline numbers on the council look better than the reality.
Looking forward to the all-out results in Yorkshire...
Might hinge on quite how horrific Scotland/Wales end up.
2022 was the first of the modestly good rounds for Labour, though London was felt underwhelming.
It wasn't so good for the Tories though worse was to come.
So Labour losses possibly lower in percentage terms than in 2025, when they were defending against an already very poor 2021 set. They can actually take a small silver lining from that. Whether that would be wise.....
I actually wonder if Labour's NEV will sneak into the 20s.
RFM: 64.9% (+57.1)
LAB: 13.0% (-41.7)
CON: 11.0% (-23.8)
GRN: 8.2% (+8.2)
LDM: 2.9% (+0.2)
Reform GAIN from Labour
Changes w/ 2024.
NEW THREAD
But it's a quibble ...
All the polling I've seen suggests that it's older, white men angry at getting old, unfit, fat and flaccid. Perhaps PB has an eloquent Reform fan from this younger demographic who can speak up for them?
Every time a drilling rig leaves the North Sea we lose around 500 jobs. Go back 15 years or so and there were 40 odd drilling rigs operating in the North Sea. Now there are 3 or 4. And none of them are currently drilling. That is 15 to 20 thousand jobs there straight away.
I think I'd sooner have Leon....
It's thanks to his forays into the job of foreign secretary that he's managed to get the worst election results on record. His decision making has been woeful. He's managed to persuade even loyalists like me that enough is enough.
Go back to the Bar Keir....
NE Lincs (Grimsby) win 0 from 15 seats, lose 4
Hull win 1 from 19, lose 4
Hartlepool win 0 from 12, lose 7
Halton won 2 from 19, lose 15
So win 3 out of 65 seats being contested. Absolutely dire.
Starmer must go. Why would any Labour MP for these areas disagree?