Lewisham East by-election

A by-election is due in the (very) safe Labour seat of Lewisham East. Current MP Heidi Alexander has resigned to take up a Deputy Mayoral role in City Hall.

The by-election is already being cited as an upcoming internal battle between Labour's centrists and Momentum, as the Lewisham CLPs are split between the two.

The result last time;


Image above is a screenshot of the 2017 General Election result in the Lewisham East constituency. The image above shows the 2017 result as :

Heidi ALEXANDER (Labour ) 32,072 (67.9%) (+12.3)
Peter FORTUNE (Conservative) 10,859 (23.0%) (+0.7)
Emily FRITH (Liberal Democrat) 2,086 (4.4%) (-1.3)
Störm POORUN (Green) 803 (1.7%) (-4.0)
Keith FORSTER (UKIP) 798 (1.6%) (-7.4)
Willow WINSTON (Independent) 355 (0.7%)
Maureen MARTIN (Christian Peoples) 228 (0.4%) ( -0.2)

No date has yet been fixed for voting.

The possibility of an upset, in my opinion, is somewhat reduced. However by-elections are curious beasts, each one has a story. I will try to keep this thread updated with candidate selections etc. and will be on the look out for any local gossip and what not. Any forum member a constituent here ?

I suspect a Clownentum candidate will be forced on the constituency.

A Labour member from London on a political forum I follow has pointed out that:

Let's note a few things.

1) The local party is firmly in the hands of moderates.
2) For a Parliamentary byelection, the NEC controls the shortlist.
3) The NEC is firmly in the hands of Momentum.

Click to expand...

Read more: http://vote-2012.proboards.com/thread/11222/lewisham-east?page=4#ixzz5EzkNInB6

It would be hilarious if the Lib Dems won it, howabout fielding Nick Clegg?

What should be noted is the seat only really became very safe since Heidi Alexander became MP. In 1992 there was less than 1000 votes between the first and second place candidates, while the 32,000 seats Alexander got in 2017 is almost 8,000 more votes than any other winning candidate has ever got since the seat was created. I think it has similarities to Crewe & Nantwich, when Gwyneth Dunwoody was Labour candidate no-one could even come close to beating her but when she died Labour initially lost the seat, despite Dunwoody getting 50% more votes than the Conservative candidate the last time she stood.

gordonthemoron said:

It would be hilarious if the Lib Dems won it, howabout fielding Nick Clegg?

Click to expand...

Probably too high profile for a seat they aren't expected to be challenging for.

PaulHarding150 said:

A Labour member from London on a political forum I follow has pointed out that:

Click to expand...

Then there will be a clash between the sensible constituency officers and the Corbyn Clown Army. I suspect the latter will win by imposing their will.

gordonthemoron said:

It would be hilarious if the Lib Dems won it, howabout fielding Nick Clegg?

Click to expand...

Although the figures suggest this is unlikely - it could split the Labour vote allowing a Tory in. We need an anti-hard Brexit Labour candidate, we probably won't get one.

DarloRich said:

Then there will be a clash between the sensible constituency officers and the Corbyn Clown Army. I suspect the latter will win by imposing their will.

Click to expand...

... by sensible I take it you mean the two faced lying Blairite Tory face of the Labour Party

Howardh said:

Although the figures suggest this is unlikely - it could split the Labour vote allowing a Tory in. We need an anti-hard Brexit Labour candidate, we probably won't get one.

Click to expand...

Would that not split the Labour vote given that many Labour voters also voted leave?

gordonthemoron said:

It would be hilarious if the Lib Dems won it, howabout fielding Nick Clegg?

Click to expand...

How about fielding Nick Clegg in a by-election in Sheffield Hallam?

There isn't a by-election in Sheffield Hallam, but that corner of Sheffield has been without an effective MP since Clegg stood down - Jared O'Mara has been worse than useless - he was suspended by the Labour party for various racist/homophobic comments but I don't think they'd dare demand a Momentum-backed MP stand down in the fairly marginal seat that he represents (however crude his historic comments or however lacklustre his subsequent performance as MP).

Whilst Clegg stood up in Parliament and in the Constituency, O'Mara has been silent - a waste of an MP - I think Clegg would win if Labour did dare have a by-election in Sheffield now.

Cable's quiet cautious leadership of the LibDems seems pretty timid compared to Clegg - at least Clegg put his head above the parapet and argued his case publically (rather than Cable's tactic, which seems to be sit back and wait for the trickle of dissatisfied Labour voters to come to his party).

jcollins said:

What should be noted is the seat only really became very safe since Heidi Alexander became MP. In 1992 there was less than 1000 votes between the first and second place candidates, while the 32,000 seats Alexander got in 2017 is almost 8,000 more votes than any other winning candidate has ever got since the seat was created

Click to expand...

Good points.

DarloRich said:

Then there will be a clash between the sensible constituency officers and the Corbyn Clown Army. I suspect the latter will win by imposing their will.

Click to expand...

I think you are (depressingly) on the money there.

furnessvale said:

Would that not split the Labour vote given that many Labour voters also voted leave?

Click to expand...

Two thirds of Labour voters voted to remain in the EU.

furnessvale said:

Would that not split the Labour vote given that many Labour voters also voted leave?

Click to expand...

Don't forget some of the pro-hard Brexit Tories represent areas which mainly voted remain, while some Lib Dem MPs represent areas which mainly voted leave.

Mutant Lemming said:

... by sensible I take it you mean the two faced lying Blairite Tory face of the Labour Party

Click to expand...

That's the one. You know the part of the Labour party that threw out all the clowns and ultimately won 3 elections. Terrible. What losers. Unlike the mighty Corbyn who led the Labour party to victory in 2017. Oh hang on................................

furnessvale said:

Would that not split the Labour vote given that many Labour voters also voted leave?

Click to expand...

Potentially, although as @jcollins points out, you have Tories representing remain voting constituencies and v.v, good examples being the Lib Dem MP for Sutton (which voted Leave by 53.7%), and then the other extreme of Kate Hoey - one of the few Hard Brexiteers in the Labour Party - whose Vauxhall constituency is estimated to have voted Remain 77.6%.

That said, seeing as Lewisham (whole borough rather than just constituency) voted remain by about 70%, I wouldn't think there would necessarily be too many Labour voting leavers anyway.

tbtc said:

There isn't a by-election in Sheffield Hallam, but that corner of Sheffield has been without an effective MP since Clegg stood down - Jared O'Mara has been worse than useless - he was suspended by the Labour party for various racist/homophobic comments but I don't think they'd dare demand a Momentum-backed MP stand down in the fairly marginal seat that he represents (however crude his historic comments or however lacklustre his subsequent performance as MP).

Whilst Clegg stood up in Parliament and in the Constituency, O'Mara has been silent - a waste of an MP - I think Clegg would win if Labour did dare have a by-election in Sheffield now.

Click to expand...

I thought O'Mara is now considered an independent meaning a request from Labour from him to resign as MP wouldn't have any more meaning than one from the Lib Dems or the Conservatives.

Clegg was probably one of the best qualified people to undertake Brexit negotiations with the EU. Being multilingual and someone who the EU actually like could have prevented both sides playing hardball. The coalition government demonstrated he can be reasonable with making compromises without giving up on achieving what he wants to achieve (he didn't just roll over and accept the Conservative's plan on tuition fees despite reports suggesting otherwise.)

Cable's quiet cautious leadership of the LibDems seems pretty timid compared to Clegg - at least Clegg put his head above the parapet and argued his case publically (rather than Cable's tactic, which seems to be sit back and wait for the trickle of dissatisfied Labour voters to come to his party).

Click to expand...

The Lib Dems were really put in a difficult place due to Tim Farron resigning as leader after Clegg had lost his seat. Jo Swinson was tipped as the favourite but thought she wasn't ready for the leader's job. Vince Cable was a much more respected MP prior to the coalition government. Those high up in the party all united to nominate Cable for leader - I wonder if that's because they wanted Swinson and thought he'd be a short term option while Swinson was gaining some more experience?

Mutant Lemming said:

... by sensible I take it you mean the two faced lying Blairite Tory face of the Labour Party

Click to expand...

The one that won elections, yes. Nice pressure group you have there.

DarloRich said:

That's the one. You know the part of the Labour party that threw out all the clowns and ultimately won 3 elections. Terrible. What losers. Unlike the mighty Corbyn who led the Labour party to victory in 2017. Oh hang on................................

Click to expand...

I wonder why they stopped at 3 elections? Surely if they were that good they could have carried on?

Arglwydd Golau said:

I wonder why they stopped at 3 elections? Surely if they were that good they could have carried on?

Click to expand...

What happened to the economy in 2008? I'm not saying that was Labour's fault but after something like that a lot of people will vote for change. In the circumstances it was more surprising that the Conservatives couldn't get a majority at the next election than it was that Labour lost theirs.

jcollins said:

What should be noted is the seat only really became very safe since Heidi Alexander became MP. In 1992 there was less than 1000 votes between the first and second place candidates, while the 32,000 seats Alexander got in 2017 is almost 8,000 more votes than any other winning candidate has ever got since the seat was created. I think it has similarities to Crewe & Nantwich, when Gwyneth Dunwoody was Labour candidate no-one could even come close to beating her but when she died Labour initially lost the seat, despite Dunwoody getting 50% more votes than the Conservative candidate the last time she stood.

Click to expand...

Lewisham East was the constituency where I last lived in London, having lived and gone to school in the neighbouring West (previously South) constituency. The figures you quote are interesting, as is your Gwyneth Dunwoody comparison, because there was a decidedly personal element in the voting figures over several elections imo. The previous Labour incumbent never got those large majorities, being eventually deposed in 1987, because he was a useless constituency MP, not bothering with surgeries, and, on the one occasion I asked for his assistance on something, being utterly dismissive of it. It surprised many when Colin Moynihan, a 'colourful' character to say the least, took the seat for the Tories but it didn't surprise me: it was as much an anti- Roland Moyle vote as a pro-Moynihan one. I even voted Tory myself in 1983, the only time in about thirty or so elections over the decades I've done so, and likely to remain that way. Once Moynihan had finally seen Moyle off, a more natural order could assert itself. The short-lived independent SDP party had more support in this part of SE London (Lewisham/Greenwich) than anywhere else in Britain in the early 1980s, with Rosie Barnes grabbing Greenwich and Woolwich East also going SDP. A better candidate than Polly Toynbee would probably have secured a larger vote for the SDP in LE in 1983, as the seat was touted as a 3-way marginal. Instead, she chose to concentrate on dog poo in the most parochial way and got her comeuppance: a better candidate would almost certainly have secured my vote.

Polling day confirmed as 14 June.

tbtc said:

I don't think they'd dare demand a Momentum-backed MP stand down in the fairly marginal seat that he represents (however crude his historic comments or however lacklustre his subsequent performance as MP).

Click to expand...

The Labour Party can 'demand' a MP stands down all they want.

It's nothing to do with the Labour Party and everything to do with the individual MP.

And that lazy, misogynistic, homophobic waste of space isn't about to resign from a £75k pa job any time soon.

Arglwydd Golau said:

I wonder why they stopped at 3 elections? Surely if they were that good they could have carried on?

Click to expand...

it is nice to share If Brown hadn't wimped out of an early election it may well have been 4. For Labour 3 consecutive election victories is unprecedented.

“Tensions emerging” apparently. I suppose we shouldn’t be surprised the modern Labour party is more interested in picking an ethnic minority female to tick the right PC boxes, than it is in finding the best person for the job irrespective of race or sex. Never mind that this means overlooking experienced local councillors.

As always with the hard left it appears some are more equal than others.

https://www.theguardian.com/politic...merge-in-race-to-pick-lewisham-east-candidate

Formally, the nomination process is an open one; anyone can apply. But informally, senior party figures say they are keen to appoint a woman of colour in an area that is economically and ethnically diverse.

That would exclude two local councillors, Joe Dromey, the son of the MPs Harriet Harman and Jack Dromey, and Kevin Bonavia.

Click to expand...

Bromley boy said:

“Tensions emerging” apparently. I suppose we shouldn’t be surprised the modern Labour party is more interested in picking an ethnic minority female to tick the right PC boxes, than it is in finding the best person for the job irrespective of race or sex. Never mind that this means overlooking experienced local councillors.

Click to expand...

I don't think that's totally fair. When you're picking an MP, you're not just picking an individual - you're also picking someone who needs to form part of a team. And if that team is to (hopefully) represent or even Govern the country, then that team really ought to have a good balance of perspectives and different life experiences that are at least vaguely representative of the population. So, given that it is mainly white males who choose to go into politics and to put themselves forward as MPs or councillors, if you didn't have some attempt to redress the balance, you'd end up with an overall very unbalanced team of MPs. Gender and ethnic origin do sadly can have a lot of impact on people's life experiences in the UK: It's clearly going to be easier for - for example - an Asian woman - to understand the particular problems faced by Asian women than it is for a caucasian man (and of course, vice versa). For that reason, I don't think there's anything wrong with a party actively trying to select people from minorities that are currently under-represented in politics. Bluntly, an person may well on paper look like the best qualified individual to be the Labour candidate. But if their background/gender/ethnic origin means they are likely to have the same perspective and experiences as most of the existing Labour MPs, then they are possibly not the best choice from the point of view of building a balanced team of MPs.

Having said that, there is certainly a counter-argument that it's far better if possible to have someone who is known in the local community, so I hope local councillors wouldn't be excluded from the Lewisham East shortlist. And I'd also be concerned if it turns out that prioritising BAME women gets used as an excuse to promote Corbyn loyalists, and not to shortlist more good candidates with more moderate views. I hope that won't happen - we'll see when the shortlist is published.

considering lewisham council is 54 Labour. 0 Green. 0 Tory, I dont think the other parties have any chance!

DynamicSpirit said:

I don't think that's totally fair. When you're picking an MP, you're not just picking an individual - you're also picking someone who needs to form part of a team. And if that team is to (hopefully) represent or even Govern the country, then that team really ought to have a good balance of perspectives and different life experiences that are at least vaguely representative of the population. So, given that it is mainly white males who choose to go into politics and to put themselves forward as MPs or councillors, if you didn't have some attempt to redress the balance, you'd end up with an overall very unbalanced team of MPs. Gender and ethnic origin do sadly can have a lot of impact on people's life experiences in the UK: It's clearly going to be easier for - for example - an Asian woman - to understand the particular problems faced by Asian women than it is for a caucasian man (and of course, vice versa). For that reason, I don't think there's anything wrong with a party actively trying to select people from minorities that are currently under-represented in politics. Bluntly, an person may well on paper look like the best qualified individual to be the Labour candidate. But if their background/gender/ethnic origin means they are likely to have the same perspective and experiences as most of the existing Labour MPs, then they are possibly not the best choice from the point of view of building a balanced team of MPs.

Having said that, there is certainly a counter-argument that it's far better if possible to have someone who is known in the local community, so I hope local councillors wouldn't be excluded from the Lewisham East shortlist. And I'd also be concerned if it turns out that prioritising BAME women gets used as an excuse to promote Corbyn loyalists, and not to shortlist more good candidates with more moderate views. I hope that won't happen - we'll see when the shortlist is published.

Click to expand...

I certainly agree that MPs should reflect the community they represent. However I believe any shortlisting process should *always* start by looking at peoples’ individual merits.

I feel uncomfortable with the lazy assumption that an MP will better represent their constituents, simply by virtue of the colour of their skin or gender. Starting a shortlisting process from this premise seems to contain an embedded prejudice, by stereotyping the roles particular races perform in society. This approach goes down a dangerous road of lumping all ethnic minorities together, assuming they all share a similar outlook and can only relate to a representative who is themselves from an ethnic minority.

I know a number of privately educated, middle class, doctors lawyers and investment bankers who happen to be black or Asian (admittedly they almost universally vote Tory so are unlikely to feature on any Labour parliamentary candidate shortlists ) . A white working class male who had grown up on an estate in Lewisham would probably have far more in common with many Lewisham Labour voters then they would, yet wouldn’t make the shortlist based on his race/gender. That seems wrong to me.

I reckon the ability to provide effective representation as an MP has far less to do with someone’s race than their background, outlook, local experience etc.

I completely agree with your second point although I gather the candidates are due to be interviewed by the odious “momentum”, so it’s pretty obvious which way it will go.

AlterEgo said:

The one that won elections, yes. Nice pressure group you have there.

Click to expand...

So you sell your soul and turn in to your opponents ? Blair blurred the distinction between Labour and Tory so much that they were virtually the same. Do you really want a one style politic with no real alternative ?

Mutant Lemming said:

So you sell your soul and turn in to your opponents ? Blair blurred the distinction between Labour and Tory so much that they were virtually the same. Do you really want a one style politic with no real alternative ?

Click to expand...

A “one style politic with no real alternative” is precisely what we have now, in the absence of a functional opposition.

Before the Corbynistas took over the Labour Party at least we had the choice of two mainstream, centrist, vaguely sensible, political parties.

Bromley boy said:

A “one style politic with no real alternative” is precisely what we have now, in the absence of a functional opposition.

Before the Corbynistas took over the Labour Party at least we had the choice of two mainstream, centrist, vaguely sensible, political parties.

Click to expand...

Really ? we had a Labour Party that abandoned it's principles to take on a Tory Party that didn't have any in the first place. All that has been happening is the Labour Party is returning to it's real purpose - in supporting the ordinary people against the self centred interests of business.

Mutant Lemming said:

So you sell your soul and turn in to your opponents ? Blair blurred the distinction between Labour and Tory so much that they were virtually the same. Do you really want a one style politic with no real alternative ?

Click to expand...

What utter nonsense (which sadly seems to be oft-repeated by many on the left.

Under Blair, Labour pushed for devolution while the Tories were opposed to it. Under Blair, Labour improved gay rights and pushed towards equality for gays at a time when that was not popular, and the Tories were opposed. Under Blair, the Government took an active role in promoting investment at a time when the Tories were still locked in an laissez faire ideology of letting the private sector do everything. Under Blair, much unhumane treatment of animals was banned at a time when the Tories largely just weren't interested in the issue and supported fox-hunting. Under Blair spending on healthcare and education went up and waiting times for hospital appointments went down. Under Blair the Government promoted an internationalist foreign policy that accepted our role in Europe - this produced things like campaigning for the ban on landmines and for more aid for developing nations. Under Blair, the Government actively promoted support for the environment and sustainable development, at a time when the Tories, on the whole, regarded the environment as something to be discarded in favour of economic growth.

The thing that changed under Blair is that - unlike, it seems, many on the left of the Labour Party today - he understood that a fair society and prosperity for as many people as possible depended on using and supporting the market economy and private enterprise to generate the wealth and opportunities we need. But his aims remained traditional Labour aims: A fair society. That is a World away from the Thatcherite, laissez-faire view that the Tories had 20 years ago.

(Of course, since those days, the Tories have changed and have accepted more inclusive attitudes towards sexuality, as well as the need for more progressive attitudes towards things like Government investment, the environment, and so on. I suspect that makes it harder for people not aware of the state of politics 20 years ago to appreciate the changes that Tony Blair's Government brought about and how different he was from what the Tories were offering at that time. I'd add that I suspect it's in large part because of Tony Blair's success that the Conservatives were forced to change, but whatever the reason I'd say we can all be thankful that they have).