2024 Local, Mayoral and PCC Elections

[takno]

Interesting to note that the Tory council seat loss is broadly as bad as expected, but Labour’s gains are only around 40% of that number. That means it’s not a simple switch between the two, with Lib Dem’s, Greens, Galloway/workers and independents taking seats that Labour should/could have won. Even Sky are now saying that, based on yesterdays vote share, Labour would struggle to get a majority at a general election. Interesting times.

Labour's gains are around 60% of that number. The smaller size of a ward compared to a parliamentary constituency means that you always get a wider selection of parties in the running, so it's not especially surprising that other parties have picked up seats, and the reduced importance makes tactical voting less of a priority.

It's difficult to compare the vote share in local elections to generals. You can only really look at swings, since there weren't any council elections in a whole swathe of urban areas where Labour have a much larger vote share. Given that Sky tend to employ fairly low rate commentators to waffle non-stop, it's most likely that they've just taken the raw vote-share figures and not stopped to think about it at all.

 

[Bantamzen]

A quote which Labour have now distanced themselves from and condemned (it's the same BBC link - post at 13.01).


I think this is slightly disingenuous. In your quote, Starmer answered the question that was put to him: to answer a different question ("What is your reaction to the result?") would be rather ridiculous in those circumstances.

I seem to remember that another senior member of the Labour party had views on Jewish people not too long since that Labour managed to also sweep under the carpet. They seem to have form with people who can't keep their mouths shut.

I disagree with Starmer on this issue, but would personally far rather he was genuine on this and any other issue than he pretended to hold a different opinion in order to gain power and popularity. Or, to put it more succinctly, I'm sick of populism.

To put it bluntly I simply don't trust Labour under Starmer, and certainly don't Trust Starmer to be genuine. Labour seem to be a party destined to win by default rather than by policies, that is to say they'll get through because they are "Not The Tories" but won't be charging into Westminster on any great policies. Worse still they still seem to be determined to throw it entirely, meaning we could still end up with the calamity of a hung Parliament.

I think it's somewhat disturbing if there's a substantial number of people voting, or not voting, for a particular party because of its stance in relation to events taking place a long way outside this country. It can affect not only those voters themselves but many others if their decisions skew the results of elections. Local ones this time, but possibly the national one not many months from now.

A similar situation, but on a much more limited scale is the suggestion a few posts earlier that some voters in Harlow who regularly drive into London may have chosen not vote Labour in order to tell Sadiq Khan what they think of the ULEZ extension.

What is more worrying is that Labour have no other policies that actually stand out to counter people's opinions on Gaza. That is a lesson they ought to be learning very quickly, but seem more concerned in blaming on anyone or anything else they can. They've managed to take an almost no-lose situation and make a hash of it, goodness knows what they'll be like when they eventually take the top table.

Labour are a muddled mess right now, and seemingly too smug and arrogant to see it. If they are going to form a reasonable government they need to start to demonstrate that they have policies worth backing them instead of just coasting in as they seem to be doing.

 

[YorkRailFan]

Where’s Mr Galloway this evening?

Winning Councils:

Longsight (Manchester) council election result:

WP: 46.3% (+46.3)
LAB: 42.8% (-28.5)
GRN: 4.8% (-0.1)
CON: 3.1% (-14.2)
LDEM: 2.1% (-2.4)
IND: 0.9% (+0.9)

Workers Party of Britain GAIN from Labour.

https://twitter.com/BritainElects/status/1786502707949232431?t=aFMZIDddniBOHeFkWpyQrA&s=19

 

[dangie]

Sunak has to go. I would say he is less popular than Thatcher was to most ordinary folk.

Yes he has to go but in fairness to him, he has to go because basically he’s inept at the job. Thatcher was intensively disliked.

 

[renegademaster]

Was there any mayoral contests where getting rid of preferential voting hurt the Tories and Conservative + Reform > 50%

 

[Thirteen]

Was there any mayoral contests where getting rid of preferential voting hurt the Tories and Conservative + Reform > 50%

Tees Valley didn't have a Reform candidate IIRC

 

[Howardh]

In Astley Bridge ward in Bolton, a Tory won the ward by one vote!

Local election results 2024 – Bolton Council

Results from the 2024 local elections.

www.bolton.gov.uk

Astley Bridge​

Candidate	Description	Votes
ARMSTRONG Mike	Reform UK & Bolton for Change	433
DEVEREUX Mark	Green Party	555
HEWITT Toby	The Conservative Party Candidate	1560
LAWSON Justin (withdrawn)	Reform UK & Bolton for Change
TAYLOR Kate Elizabeth	Labour and Co-Operative Party	1559

 

[YorkRailFan]

Was there any mayoral contests where getting rid of preferential voting hurt the Tories and Conservative + Reform > 50%

I think the main one where that could be the case is the West Midlands if loses as its so close between Labour and the Tories.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

In Astley Bridge ward in Bolton, a Tory won the ward by one vote!

Local election results 2024 – Bolton Council

Results from the 2024 local elections.

www.bolton.gov.uk

Astley Bridge​

Candidate	Description	Votes
ARMSTRONG Mike	Reform UK & Bolton for Change	433
DEVEREUX Mark	Green Party	555
HEWITT Toby	The Conservative Party Candidate	1560
LAWSON Justin (withdrawn)	Reform UK & Bolton for Change
TAYLOR Kate Elizabeth	Labour and Co-Operative Party	1559

Not at all unusual for that to happen somewhere in council elections. There are well over 2000 councillors being elected and as that result you've quoted illustrates, wards are small enough that the winning candidate often has something like just 1000 votes - which means winning margins are typically in the hundreds of votes. So hardly surprising if out of 2000+ elections a fair few of them result in someone winning by only one vote, or even a tie.


In other news, the BBC's tally of council seats won (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election/2024/england/results) is now showing the Tories in 3rd place: Labour 1026, LibDems 505, Tories 479. There are a couple of councils still to declare - as far as I can make out on the map, Stroud, Epping Forest and the London Assembly (not sure if I've missed any), so that could change once those results are in.

 

[nw1]

I certainly don't think it's a slam-dunk for Khan, especially without P.R. this time (no doubt this was arranged to make it more difficult for him.) I've been watching some of his TV appearances and he's certainly unlikely to have won many extra votes from them with his dour, humourless, slightly aloof performances. He could and should have made some concessions on ULEZ expansion (e.g. a discount on charges for a period for London residents) imo and fought for extra money for a scrappage scheme.

What disgusts me is the way in which the Government have fiddled changed the electoral system to FPTP in order for them to do better.

If Hall wins, then effectively she has, in my view, been installed there by the Government.

A similar thing apparently happened in Leicestershire where the police commissioner votes were very close:

The government recently changed the voting system for mayors and PCCs from the supplementary vote to FPTP. Under the supplementary vote, people get two choices, and if their first preference candidate does not make the final two, their second choice is taking into account. Under this system, Labour would almost certainly have won the Leicestershire PCC job.

Here are the results for the Leicestershire election.

Rupert Matthews (C) 62,280 (35.29%)
Rory Palmer (Lab) 61,420 (34.80%)
Aasiya Bora (Green) 23,649 (13.40%)
Ian Sharpe (LD) 22,041 (12.49%)
Fizza Askari (One Leics) 7,104 (4.03%)
C maj 860 (0.49%)
Electorate 806,812; Turnout 176,494 (21.88%)

(See https://www.theguardian.com/politic...821&filterKeyEvents=false#liveblog-navigation)

This really is disgusting and if Hall wins there need to be mass protests in London. What's the point of having a London mayor if the Government mess with the election system to put their person in?

Words cannot express how I despair at the post-2019 Government on every level. Never before in my lifetime has there been a government which is so arrogant, so conceited, so (IMV) corrupt, so full of hypocrisy and so lacking in principles. Far worse than Thatcher and infinitely worse than Cameron.

In Astley Bridge ward in Bolton, a Tory won the ward by one vote!

Local election results 2024 – Bolton Council

Results from the 2024 local elections.

www.bolton.gov.uk

Astley Bridge​

Candidate	Description	Votes
ARMSTRONG Mike	Reform UK & Bolton for Change	433
DEVEREUX Mark	Green Party	555
HEWITT Toby	The Conservative Party Candidate	1560
LAWSON Justin (withdrawn)	Reform UK & Bolton for Change
TAYLOR Kate Elizabeth	Labour and Co-Operative Party	1559

Another way of looking at it, Progressives 2114, conservatives* 1993. Prog maj 121.

It may only be a tiny village, but it's a microcosm of all that is wrong with the pseudo-democratic system that is FPTP.

(* small-c)

Yes he has to go but in fairness to him, he has to go because basically he’s inept at the job. Thatcher was intensively disliked.

I think Sunak is intensely disliked by some of us too - it's not just ineptitude.

He is actively reactionary-right-wing, IMV.

 

[Gloster]

Not at all unusual for that to happen somewhere in council elections. There are well over 2000 councillors being elected and as that result you've quoted illustrates, wards are small enough that the winning candidate often has something like just 1000 votes - which means winning margins are typically in the hundreds of votes. So hardly surprising if out of 2000+ elections a fair few of them result in someone winning by only one vote, or even a tie.


In other news, the BBC's tally of council seats won (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election/2024/england/results) is now showing the Tories in 3rd place: Labour 1026, LibDems 505, Tories 479. There are a couple of councils still to declare - as far as I can make out on the map, Stroud, Epping Forest and the London Assembly (not sure if I've missed any), so that could change once those results are in.

Plus (at time of typing) North Tyneside and Warrington, neither of which may be good for Labour.

 

[nw1]

To put it bluntly I simply don't trust Labour under Starmer, and certainly don't Trust Starmer to be genuine. Labour seem to be a party destined to win by default rather than by policies, that is to say they'll get through because they are "Not The Tories" but won't be charging into Westminster on any great policies. Worse still they still seem to be determined to throw it entirely, meaning we could still end up with the calamity of a hung Parliament.

What is more worrying is that Labour have no other policies that actually stand out to counter people's opinions on Gaza. That is a lesson they ought to be learning very quickly, but seem more concerned in blaming on anyone or anything else they can. They've managed to take an almost no-lose situation and make a hash of it, goodness knows what they'll be like when they eventually take the top table.

As I've said before, not taking a more strongly anti-bombing, sympathetic-to-Gazans line was perhaps, on one level, a mistake for Labour, as we're now seeing. But cynically, I guess they're counting on the fact that in the GE, inner-city London, Manchester and Birmingham are still going to go to them anyway as they are no way going to be won by the Tories.

Plus (at time of typing) North Tyneside and Warrington, neither of which may be good for Labour.

Warrington might be good? Not a million miles from Blackpool and perhaps some similarities to Hartlepool (red-wall, generally Labour historically, socially-conservative tendency for a significant part of the electorate)

Same goes for north Tyneside, I guess.

Labour do seem to be doing well in small-town red-wall places, it's the big cities where they have a real problem this time.

 

[Thirteen]

Protesting because someone didn't win seems pointless IMO plus I suspect if Hall wins, she will have to be able to work with a Labour Government to get necessary funds plus she has to prove herself to Londoners she's not a one trick pony otherwise she'll be booted out in 2028.

 

[cactustwirly]

What disgusts me is the way in which the Government have fiddled changed the electoral system to FPTP in order for them to do better.

If Hall wins, then effectively she has, in my view, been installed there by the Government.

A similar thing apparently happened in Leicestershire where the police commissioner votes were very close:



(See https://www.theguardian.com/politic...821&filterKeyEvents=false#liveblog-navigation)

This really is disgusting and if Hall wins there need to be mass protests in London. What's the point of having a London mayor if the Government mess with the election system to put their person in?

Words cannot express how I despair at the post-2019 Government on every level. Never before in my lifetime has there been a government which is so arrogant, so conceited, so (IMV) corrupt, so full of hypocrisy and so lacking in principles. Far worse than Thatcher and infinitely worse than Cameron.


Another way of looking at it, Progressives 2114, conservatives* 1993. Prog maj 121.

It may only be a tiny village, but it's a microcosm of all that is wrong with the pseudo-democratic system that is FPTP.

(* small-c)


I think Sunak is intensely disliked by some of us too - it's not just ineptitude.

He is actively reactionary-right-wing, IMV.

How have the government "planted" Hall if she gets the most amount of votes? That's a crazy suggestion to make.

FPTP is a fair system and is used in every other election in the UK.

 

[Gloster]

As I've said before, not taking a more strongly anti-bombing line with Gaza was perhaps, on one level, a mistake for Labour, as we're now seeing. But cynically, I guess they're counting on the fact that in the GE, inner-city London, Manchester and Birmingham are still going to go to them anyway as they are no way going to return to the Tories.

I am afraid that - stating the obvious - we are still seeing the legacy of Corbyn. (*) Starmer et al. are absolutely s**t cared that the slightest criticism of Israel, however well-reasoned and considered, will unleash a deluge of bad press from the Mail, Telegraph, Times, etc.: accusations of siding with the terrorists, anti-semitism, hatred of (subs fill in anything here), and so on. Starmer has soft-pedalled and virtually mirrored the weak and insipid tut-tutting of Sunak, rather than taking a more robust line, which I personally believe is both morally wrong and lacking in political nous.

* - Why does spellcheck always change it to Corbun? And what is a Corbun?

 

[nw1]

How have the government "planted" Hall if she gets the most amount of votes? That's a crazy suggestion to make.

No it isn't, because a more sophisticated voting system involving second-preference votes was formerly used. I suspect most Lib Dem and Green voters would have gone for Khan as their second preference.

So Khan is losing out. The Government have, IMV, effectively "fiddled" the system to make it bad for Khan and good for their person.

FPTP is a fair system and is used in every other election in the UK.

FPTP is absolutely not a fair system. It disenfranches many voters. How is it fair that one party has been in power for 32 of the past 45 years (25 of those with a majority government) when it's never got more than between 43 and 44% of the vote?

FPTP, in England at least, implicitly favours the Tories because the main divide here is between conservatives and progressives. There are multiple progressive parties each with a different take on progressive politics, but basically only one conservative party (though I will admit Reform is now playing a more significant role, but that's a recent thing).

Protesting because someone didn't win seems pointless IMO plus I suspect if Hall wins, she will have to be able to work with a Labour Government to get necessary funds plus she has to prove herself to Londoners she's not a one trick pony otherwise she'll be booted out in 2028.

The protest would be due to the way in which they didn't win. If the Tory government hadn't changed the system to make it better for them, then Khan would have been assured of victory.

If Brexiters are allowed to complain about excessive EU influence, I think London progressive voters should be allowed to complain about the way that Central Government has played with the system to make it more favourable for the Government party.

 

[cactustwirly]

No it isn't, because a more sophisticated voting system involving second-preference votes was formerly used. I suspect most Lib Dem and Green voters would have gone for Khan as their second preference.

So Khan is losing out. The Government have, IMV, effectively "fiddled" the system to make it bad for Khan and good for their person.


FPTP is absolutely not a fair system. It disenfranches many voters. How is it fair that one party has been in power for 25 of the past 45 years (18 of those with a majority government) when it's never got more than between 43 and 44% of the vote?

FPTP, in England at least, implicitly favours the Tories because the main divide here is between conservatives and progressives. There are multiple progressive parties each with a different take on progressive politics, but basically only one conservative party (though I will admit Reform is now playing a more significant role, but that's a recent thing).

To me that is an unfair system. Khan is getting extra votes from people that didn't vote for him.

If people are voting for Green or Lib Dems they clearly aren't voting Labour. If they wanted Labour they would have voted for them

 

[Gloster]

As I've said before, not taking a more strongly anti-bombing, sympathetic-to-Gazans line was perhaps, on one le

Warrington might be good? Not a million miles from Blackpool and perhaps some similarities to Hartlepool (red-wall, generally Labour historically, socially-conservative tendency for a significant part of the electorate)

Same goes for north Tyneside, I guess.

Warrington is a financial shambles (see Private Eyes passim) and North Shields is in the area where Labour have had loads of internal ructions over the mayoral contest.

 

[Thirteen]

The Tories didn't really want Susan Hall in the first place so her being planted is not true.

 

[nw1]

To me that is an unfair system. Khan is getting extra votes from people that didn't vote for him.

If people are voting for Green or Lib Dems they clearly aren't voting Labour. If they wanted Labour they would have voted for them

A very simplistic view.

A Green or Lib Dem voter might, in an ideal world, prefer the Greens or Lib Dems to win.

However, it's likely, as progressives, that they would still strongly consider Khan as very much better than Hall.
Why should their second-preference not be taken into account?

With my own politics it's similar. I'd much prefer a hypothetical pro-EU, pro-Gazans party to win the election than Labour. But Starmer would be very much better than Sunak.
Under a non-FPTP system, I'd be allowed to voted for said hypothetical party initially then Starmer as some kind of second-preference. Perhaps under true PR (admittedly not what London had), said hypothetical party might even get a good number of seats and influence Labour in a coalition.

Perhaps if the Conservatives are bitten by Reform UK this year, thus splitting the right-wing vote, they will suddenly realise how FPTP is a bit of a silly system after all.

Imagine the fictional constituency of Redwall-on-Trent, for example, gets:

Lab 35%
Con 30%
Ref UK 25%
Others 10%

Clearly a small-c conservative majority, but the conservative vote will be split and Labour will get in.

 

[simonw]

How have the government "planted" Hall if she gets the most amount of votes? That's a crazy suggestion to make.

FPTP is a fair system and is used in every other election in the UK.

FPTP isn't "used in every other election in the UK".

 

[YorkRailFan]

FPTP is a fair system and is used in every other election in the UK.

I wouldn't call a system that allows a candidate to win an election simply because they got the most votes, even if that vote share was below 50% meaning that the majority of voters voted against the candidate.

 

[Howardh]

To me that is an unfair system. Khan is getting extra votes from people that didn't vote for him.

If people are voting for Green or Lib Dems they clearly aren't voting Labour. If they wanted Labour they would have voted for them

I voted Libdem, my favoured choice in both local and national elections. But come the general later this year, I'll be lending my vote to Labour as there's little chance of the LD candidate winning here. That will be more of a "hold my nose to get shut of the Tory" rather than a glowing endorsement of Labour.

However, the big win for me would be a hung parliament and , hopefully, to get the LD's on board Starmer will be forced to either hold a referendum of the EU/single market or be prepared to work much closer with the EU than he so far has indicated. The fly in all the ointment though is how well the SNP do (or don't do) and they could also be king makers.

 

[75A]

How have the government "planted" Hall if she gets the most amount of votes? That's a crazy suggestion to make.

FPTP is a fair system and is used in every other election in the UK.

Here in N.Ireland our 90 MLA's (Members of the Legislative Asembley) are elected by the Single Transferable Vote system, you put 1 against your favourite 2 against your 2nd etc.The Legislative Assembley is composed of 18 Constituency each of which elects 5 MLS's.
Does this system work?
Of course not.

 

[renegademaster]

I think those giving conspirital motives to the change to FPTP need to remeber it works both ways, it also allows Farage to peel off a lot of votes to the right. And also remeber when the change was legislated their wasn't the Gaza conflict and no major splits on the left happening. FPTP is cheaper and less time consuming, and the government are misers

 

[nw1]

I think those giving conspirital motives to the change to FPTP need to remeber it works both ways, it also allows Farage to peel off a lot of votes to the right. And also remeber when the change was legislated their wasn't the Gaza conflict and no major splits on the left happening. FPTP is cheaper and less time consuming, and the government are misers

Generally though the split on the progressive side is more pronounced, and has persisted longer, than the split on the conservative side.

It's only now that we're seeing Reform UK as a real significant force on the right. For a time also there was UKIP as you say but again it was only for a fairly short period.

As I said, I'd like, ironically, to see the Tory vote really hurt by Reform this year. It might force the Tories to wake up and realise that their beloved FPTP, which has helped keep them in power for more than 70% of the period since 1979, isn't so good after all.

Here in N.Ireland our 90 MLA's (Members of the Legislative Asembley) are elected by the Single Transferable Vote system, you put 1 against your favourite 2 against your 2nd etc.The Legislative Assembley is composed of 18 Constituency each of which elects 5 MLS's.
Does this system work?
Of course not.

Northern Ireland is, perhaps, a special case though where you have two very polarised sides who will find it hard to get on with one another.

In general, most other European (note: European, not EU) countries and provinces appear to use a non-FPTP system of one sort or another. That alone must speak volumes. UK Central Government appears to be the outlier here.

 

[renegademaster]

It's only now that we're seeing Reform UK as a real significant force on the right. For a time also there was UKIP as you say but again it was only for a fairly short period.

Brexit party almost done it until Boris was forced to cut a deal with Farage, and UKIP would have if Cameron hadn't called the referendum

 

[JamesT]

In other news, the BBC's tally of council seats won (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election/2024/england/results) is now showing the Tories in 3rd place: Labour 1026, LibDems 505, Tories 479. There are a couple of councils still to declare - as far as I can make out on the map, Stroud, Epping Forest and the London Assembly (not sure if I've missed any), so that could change once those results are in.

Though that’s third place of the posts that were up for election. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_make-up_of_local_councils_in_the_United_Kingdom has the standings after last year’s elections of
Labour: 6,361
Conservative: 5,534
LibDem: 2,987
The Tories losing ~450 and LibDems gaining ~100 doesn’t really change the overall standings.

 

[telstarbox]

You can see the detailed figures at https://www.londonelects.org.uk/im-voter/election-progress/verification-and-turnout-data. Eyeballing those figures, I get a definite sense of inner London being a little lower than outer London, but only by a few %. However there are a couple of outliers that I imagine would be causing some panic: Bexley and Bromley - one of the most solidly Tory area - is showing 48%, while City and East - which would normally be solidly Labour - is coming in at just 31%. I would imagine you are looking at ULEZ anger pushing turnout at Bexley/Bromley and Gaza depressing it in muslim areas of east London.

Some outer places like Bromley and Chingford are becoming more 'progressive' as inner Londoners move further out - both will probably go Labour at the GE. I do agree that ULEZ will be a factor in this election though.

 

[brad465]

I think those giving conspirital motives to the change to FPTP need to remeber it works both ways, it also allows Farage to peel off a lot of votes to the right. And also remeber when the change was legislated their wasn't the Gaza conflict and no major splits on the left happening. FPTP is cheaper and less time consuming, and the government are misers

There are several things to say here:

-Firstly, there was a major split in the left in 2015, in Scotland specifically, where the SNP wiped out a lot of Labour seats that more than offset the seat gains Labour made in England.
-Second, UKIP might have got very little for their vote share, but the Tories have essentially moved into their alignment ever since and abandoned their traditional positions. They got away with in up to 2019 because Labour moved from the centre also, but now the latter has returned to the centre, suddenly the Tories have plummeted. In other words, FPTP doesn't prevent extreme views/positions being enacted.
-Third, just because something is cheap and easy, doesn't mean it's right.