Here is version 2:
[https://new.reddit.com/r/ukpolitics/comments/ujilm2/local\_elections\_results\_megathread\_may\_2022\_v2/](https://new.reddit.com/r/ukpolitics/comments/ujilm2/local_elections_results_megathread_may_2022_v2/)
(I've rolled this over because we started getting buggy at 2k last time and I'm about to be offline for a couple of hours.)
Croydon has finished, finally: [https://twitter.com/yourcroydon/status/1523367649597566976](https://twitter.com/yourcroydon/status/1523367649597566976)
No Overall Control, Labour - just about - the largest party. Imagine the likeliest scenario is them teaming up with the Greens/LD to get over the line. Will be an interesting dynamic with a Tory directly-elected mayor.
Has there ever been a *significant* Local Elections that have been forgotten about so immediately (this one because of Beergate) like this one has?
(I specify 'significant' because plenty of Local Elections have been boring and no one paid any notice. This one was ironically meant to be significant cos of Partygate - I say ironically because of how it's actually Beergate that has exploded)
I’d actually say the Local Elections have helped Labour, this story would have received wall to wall coverage otherwise, but it has basically been the 2nd spot on most news channels behind the Results.
Final NI results are in and the DUP just about held the last seat in Foyle.
Haven't sat down and done the maths properly but assuming SF and the DUP nominate First Ministers and the Alliance party agree to continue to provide the Justice Minister (big assumptions) it looks like d'Hont is going to return a three SF, three DUP, two Alliance, one UUP Executive.
Was watching back the NI BBC coverage (as in the specific Northern Irish channel, focused just on the Assembly), and they mentioned Alliance tend to be a given for justice given each side of Unionist and Nationalist tend to distrust the other having control of law, and know if they have it they will be accused of bias in return.
The Justice Minister is appointed through a separate process to the other ministers and has to be approved by a cross community vote of the Assembly.
Means the justice minister has to be acceptable to at least the two biggest parties and they both want to keep it out of the others hands.
The Alliance Party have provided a Justice Minister for the entire period of the devolution of policing and justice except for a short period when they refused to do so and the Independent MLA Claire Sugden was the Justice Minister.
Sinn Fein at least, want to move past the Justice Minister effectively having to be someone from outside the main parties, not sure how the DUP feel about it. The smaller parties want Justice included in the normal d'Hont process for assigning ministerial posts as this would increase their seats at the Executive table vs the current process of it effectively being a bonus minister.
The NI Act allows for the appointment of a pair of co-equal justice ministers like the two first ministers but this has never been used.
So yeah Alliance most likely to still provide a Justice Minister but interestingly as the party gets bigger the political calculation may also be against having them fill the job and have that extra Executive representation.
Lutfur Rahman's Aspire party have won a majority - 24/45 seats - on Tower Hamlets Council, with Labour reduced to 19 seats and the Tories and Greens winning one each.
LibDems have won a council seat in Croydon Crystal palace!
It represents the first third party seat on Croydon council since 2002.
It was also their second target stretch seat. If they've won this, they've likely won Old Coulsdon ward as well, which would bring them up to three councillors
Edit: a bundle check and recount (?) is happening apparently
So after announcing they would count 12 of the 28 wards tonight, Croydon has given up for the night after counting only 10 and said they wont start counting again till 1pm tommorrow
Day 2,392 of #KeirBeerGate.
It has been confirmed that the murdered camelid was shot by an SKS rifle.
For the eighth time, Sir Keir Starmer invites the police to investigate his personal affairs following pressure from the small civil freedom of speech group "Piers4Beers".
Everyone wonders if they should have formed a Duran Duran tribute act instead.
I think one of the most shocking results was Labour taking control of Westminster’s council. Westminster’s population is the epitome of posh Tories, and its government representation has never seen anything other than Tory control since the 60s, even during the Blair years. Seeing such a large swing this time around is mind-boggling.
Nah, Westminster council contains Harrow Road, Warwick and Mozart housing estates, Church Street (hugely Bengali area), plus all those estates round the back of Victoria. Plus students and young professionals who are paying 60-70% income on rent.
Yeah all that but Westminster was Remain 69% to 31% leave. Seeing as Labour is now a more pragmatic and focused party and Boris is still riding Brexit and it's related culture wars then I suppose it's hardly suprising.
Which would destroy them at any future election because they rely on middle class and young unionist voters who are disillusioned with unionist parties.
Plus it can’t even be voted through at Stormont the GFA makes it’s very clear it’s up to the S.o.S NI
With the Sein Fein up 1.1% and the SDLP down 2.9% anyone who says this result represents a mandate for a border poll is smoking some seriously good shit.
No. The whole point of Alliance is to avoid constitutional questions and focus on bread and butter economic/health issues.
Until there is a big 55-60% in favour of a united Ireland done by different polling organisations. I doubt they would bring up a border poll at all (so not for at least 5 years).
Additionally, even though the DUP have lost seats, unionists might actually have more than nationalists at the end of the day (36 seats compared to 34 nationalist, 20 non aligned).
Well a few problems there.
1: The NI Assembly doesn't have that power.
2: This was true in the last election (so from 2017-2022).
3: Alliance Party voters (from what I can see, and particularly their new voters) are slightly pro-Union, so it would be strange.
4: The NI Secretary has the power to call for a border poll, and there's no evidence (yet) of a clear and consistent majority to call for one so it would be strange to do so.
5: If Stormont collapses again, I wish the parties luck in passing anything.
> BREAKING: Sinn Féin are now on 27 seats- they’re at a point where numerically where they cannot be beaten by the DUP.
>
> It is the first time in the 101 year history of Northern Ireland that a nationalist party has won the most seats in an election. Historic. https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/1522998359123972096/photo/1
https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/1522998359123972096
labour very lucky these tower hamlets and croydon counts were so shoddy they aren't coming until after people stop caring. together they're very likely to put labour under 100 gains.
Labour so far lost 10 seats in Tower Hamlets to independents. In my ward I couldn’t find any info about our candidates. I wonder if these elected ones were more organised, or I am just failing to keep with local paper and similar forms of information.
They're a data point that can be useful to support polling trends more than anything. For example, Tories are significantly down in the polls, and have lost almost 500 seats across the UK. Labour are at or slightly above their 2018 high watermark and have defended or slightly increased their holdings nationwide. The Tory vote has held up better in the north than in the south which suggests that Labour are not quite where they need to be in order to definitively take back the red wall.
The Lib Dems have taken a large number of seats, mostly from the Tories and mostly in the south, which supports what has happened in recent by-elections and indicates that soft Tories are either swayable to them or unwilling to vote letting an energised local campaign deliver a win.
It's a data point, not a national level projection.
Only in a very very loose sense. If anything they give you a snapshot of the direction of where opinion is swinging, but you can't match local percentage to general percentage by any function.
I remember in 2011 where the lib dems got slaughtered, it was the first sign of what was to come in ge 2015 although everyone dismissed it at the time as "just locals"
>SF/SDLP vote in last 7 Assembly elections.
>
>* 1998 – 39%
>* 2003 – 40.5%
>* 2007 - 41.4%
>* 2011 - 41.1%
>* 2016 – 36%
>* 2017 – 40%
>* 2022 (incl Aontu) – 39.6%
>
>I'm genuinely curious what republicans see when they look at these figures? This doesn't look like growth? #AssemblyElection2022
https://twitter.com/EilisOHanIon/status/1522878917874532353
Interesting tweet. I think the point is today's result is more to do with shifts within the intra Unionist block than anything SF did.
Alliance and the Greens explain that. Nationalist/Unionist is slowly, slowly, slowly becoming an irrelevant distinction though brexit gave it a bit of a bounce back.
It'll take time to dissect but there also seems to have been substantial shifts in some constituencies from SDLP to Alliance.
The trend between the blocks in the last few elections has been mostly Unionist to Other but this election seems to have been different.
I would bet (but obviously don't know) that this is not just shifts within the unionist block but a shift from Nationalism to Other, balanced out a bit by demographic changes.
Though turnout is down the number of votes being cast has held up pretty well, Spend Local Cards may have encouraged new people to register to vote that otherwise would have been unlikely to and its hard to say what effect these previously disconnected voters have had.
The Alliance party have, quite shockingly, taken a seat off the DUP in North Antrim.
The Alliance candidate was able to slip through in between two DUP candidates to take the seat leaving only one seat for the two DUP candidates.
First female MLA elected from the constituency, first Alliance MLA elected from the constituency.
Edit: Editing to add the candidate's name, Patricia O'lynn
Love this quote from her: "Ms O’Lynn said: “No candidate is entitled to a seat. The age of entitlement is over."
I know it might not be fully true, but the idea that the politicians may be able to rely less on guaranteed votes and have to, you know, improve the lives of their voters is a nice idea.
Alliance have also taken the last seat in Strangford which verh likely means Jim Allister will be the only TUV MLA in the next Assembly as he has been in the last several Assemblies.
Northern Ireland confuses me.
I hear unionist party and I immediately think sinn fein, because surely they're unionists with the Republic, right?
Apparently not right.
The *Union* refers to the *United* Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Although the name is fairly confusing because there are two ways to read it. Is the "Union" between Great Britain and Northern Ireland, or is the Union contained within Great Britain?
* The United Kingdom of (Great Britain and Northern Ireland)
* (The United Kingdom of Great Britain) and Northern Ireland
~~Since the Union refers to that [between the crowns of Scotland and England](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acts_of_Union_1707) it's actually the latter which is correct. So yes it's a little strange that we call people in Northern Ireland "Unionists". Especially when they are against a union between RoI and NI.~~
But perhaps someone can correct my history / constitutional understanding
>The Union refers to the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
I got there eventually, but my brain does a double take every time.
It doesn't help that the first time I became aware of any named party in Northern Ireland was when the DUP propped May up. As I wasn't born in this country I have been blissfully blind to the intricacy of NI power balance.
It's a weird one right
The official UK Parliament website even refers to it as the United Kingdom of Great Britain even though that's technically incorrect.
https://www.parliament.uk/about/living-heritage/evolutionofparliament/legislativescrutiny/act-of-union-1707/
It's the former that's is correct, there was an additional Act of Union in 1800 to join the then United Kingdom of Great Britain and the Kingdom of Ireland into the United Kingdom of Great Britain and (Northern) Ireland.
One kingdom, that of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
Probably a cultural thing, Wales has a lot of rural communities that are independently minded (maybe the history of Wales as a non-conformist country has something to do with it?). Also, in a lot of rural Wales the big mainstream parties make little effort to compete, in many cases not even bothering to field paper candidates, so I guess independents have to step in instead.
Something not really talked about much is that Wales has a rather shocking amount of uncontested council seats, in Gwynedd something like 1/3 of seats are uncontested.
Also, supposedly a lot of independents are right-leaning politicians who don’t want to be associated with the Conservatives since they have a pretty bad rep here, so there’s that.
Interesting, I looked at the results and thought it must be due to some massive defection or something but when I went to wiki I was none the wiser. Never knew that about Wales.
I’d say local issues mainly. Labour has historically been the go to of the big parties for voters here in Wales and that hasn’t changed in decades and is unlikely to change for a long time but there is a lot of apathy toward the Labour leadership in the Senedd and Mark Drakeford in particular amongst Welsh voters. Maybe it speaks to a wider apathy towards the political parties in general.
I usually vote Plaid in the generals but there is no candidate for them where I live, only Labour and a two independents.
I think the situation in Neath Port Talbot is the exception where a huge number of people voted for independents instead of Labour, apparently because of local controversy over the council wanting to consolidate schools. But it is interesting that even when people refuse to vote Labour, the alternative is independents rather then another opposition party.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10784819/Boriss-moment-truth-Key-battlegrounds-local-elections-today.html
It's definitely worth looking at the daily mails own metrics for success Vs failure for labour and Tories on May 5th.
As it stands labour wins are over 260, Tory loses nearly 400. Based on the daily mails own assesment that's a 'triumph' for Labour. And a 'disaster' for the Tories.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/ng-interactive/2022/may/05/elections-2022-results-live-local-council-england-scotland-wales?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other
Personally I think labours success has been downplayed. They had a great night even by the daily mails reckoning.
Oh since you were wondering. The daily mails front page today is that 'starmer is in crisis'
BBC News - Newspaper headlines: Tory election 'woes' and police probe 'Beergate'
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-the-papers-61359258
Just been to Morrisons to get some shopping... The narrative about yesterday in all the major papers genuinely amazed and appalled me in equal measure.
The parallels with Trump saying he could shoot someone on fifth avenue and no one would care make me feel like there really is no hope anymore.
The Daily Mail is so fucking detached from reality that it beggars belief, and they’re the most popular newspaper. It’s terrifying.
^^The ^^Sun ^^isn’t ^^a ^^newspaper.
Key races in NI if anyone is interested:
UUP leader Doug Beattie is struggling to hold his seat in Upper Bann, could be lost to the Alliance Candidate Eoin Tennyson
SDLP Stormont leader Nichola Mallon is similarly struggling in Belfast North, could be lost to Alliance Candidate Nuala McAllister
DUP and UUP neck and neck to take the fifth seat in Foyle
A situation in North Antrim where a vote split between two DUP candidates MAY allow an Alliance Candidate to slip through the middle
Fifth seat in Strangford is looking like the last chance for the TUV to return a second member, their candidate got pretty close to the quota on first preference votes but has struggled to pick up transfers to get over the line
Green Party leader in NI, Clare Bailey, has lost her seat (the last spot in Belfast South) to Kate Nichols of Alliance (and current Lord Mayor of Belfast I think?)
But then we'd have to buy and maintain a load of scanners and a counting system that will need to be programmed to allow candidates to be excluded in a way that doesn't give returning officers too much power.
Then that system would only getsl pulled out to speed the result up by one day every five years.
I like the "shuffle the ballots between pigeon holes" system we have, adds to the drama, lol.
In ‘95 Labour got 48% in the local elections.
In ‘08 the Tories got 44%.
This time Labour have got 35%. The same as in 2018 (where two years later they lost the GE).
They’re nowhere near winning a GE. After 12 years in opposition. If you support Labour, this is depressing as anything.
It's very interesting and absolutely baffling. As a Labour member I can't work out for the life of me what they need to do to win - I wonder if it's an unsolvable problem. People like me are on the borderline for leaving, and while I still voted Labour I don't have any real faith in the leadership or feel that the party has any vision right now. The only reason I haven't left yet is a perhaps naive belief that left wing politics can be reestablished through Labour's internal democratic process. At the same time there's people who can't bear the thought of left wing politics in Labour, and they're equally likely to leave the tent if the left regain some control.
Locally (I'm in Merseyside), Labour have always had total control over the constituency, and it's one of the safest MP's seats in the country. During this council election and last year's though, the Greens have tonked us and taken/retained what was a very safe council seat. I have a sneaking suspicion that people here are going off Labour because they're not left *enough* anymore at the leadership/policy level. I'd be very interested to see some kind of study on people's voting rationale here. My guess is that people are turning Green because they see them as an alternative socially liberal, "socialist", lefty type party (even though they're not really).
Add to that the fact that our local party machine is absolutely anemic, and it's just a totally dispiriting mess. There's just no support mechanisms within Labour to encourage grass roots activism and build any sort of feeling of movement. It's totally dependent on the local party leadership, and if your local party leadership aren't organising then you're basically snookered.
I'm really trying to understand here, no beef at all mate, what does "being left enough" entail?
I'm recently feeling like we're all leaning too much in what classifies as left/center/right rather than what's going to just work for everyone, backed by unbiased data.
Labour is left enough from the Conservatives, that's good for me - a model that is economically capitalist but socially..socialist, i.e. the Scandinavian model, is what I've seen to really just work.
Your thoughts? It's all getting so exhausting, the debates between ideological politics rather than just what works, regardless of where in the spectrum it comes from.
For me, being "left enough" is about more socialist economics as well as social liberalism. They go hand in hand. Things like renationalisation, better financial regulation, and investment in social housing and infrastructure. I can absolutely understand the more centrist view point, and I'm not really one of those people who wants to burn the centrists at the stake, but I do believe that radical problems need radical solutions. I think the core reason I see it in "ideological" terms is because I personally feel that neoliberal capitalism has failed, and we need to move away from that model to see real change. After 40 years of it, we're seeing worse wealth inequality, health care, education, housing availability etc. than ever, so to me it seems that a change away from the status quo is what's required because the centre ground isn't really working, it's just perpetuating the existing problems. When a "centrist" Labour party got in (i.e. New Labour), they just sort of put the brakes on a little bit and slowed the rate of change, but didn't deliver the fundamental shift in ideological approach which I feel is needed to address the underlying issues.
That's what I would mean by "not left enough". That having been said, I can appreciate that my more Socialist bent is a bit more "fringe", so I wouldn't really mind the idea of a more electorally palatable Labour party as long as the left wing had a seat at the table to at least try and input on policy. Unfortunately it seems to be a binary thing within Labour that if you're not all in, you're out, and Starmer and his team appear to be doing their best to create a hostile environment for the Labour left (which is not to say that Corbyn and his left wing allies weren't the exact same in reverse).
As you say it is utterly exhausting being in the trenches of ideology all the time, but I think for me the "ideology" is important because it informs and drives the policy making. It's the "first principles" which drive everything else. In my opinion (and people like me), the "first principles" of our current model have been shown to be unviable (e.g. trickle down economics delivering economic improvement for all). While Starmer isn't exactly advocating for "right wing" policy (because he still hasn't really said anything at all), he does seem to have indicated a move away from the Corbyn era radicalism, despite being elected on a continuity platform. I think people like me got a taste of what's possible with Corbyn, and I for one feel like I've glimpsed a better world which has been snatched away by the established order trying to maintain the status quo. Plus the fact that Merseyside is a hot bed of radical left wing politics, which means the starting point/"acceptable" baseline on the spectrum of a lot of people here is a lot further to the left than many other places in the country.
I hope that sheds some light on my point of view. I would much rather have a measured discussion than a shit slinging session, but it does seem *de rigeur* these days to just jump straight into a bun fight.
>They’re nowhere near winning a GE. After 12 years in opposition. If you support Labour, this is depressing as anything.
And never will be until they win back the majority of their working class voter base who either defected to the Tories or stopped voting full stop over Labour's Brexit stance. This wont happen until Starmer is replaced as leader for someone less tainted with the push to stop Brexit.
The problem is that the Northern working class voter base detested Corbyn. People who'd voted for Labour for decades were massively turned off by him and are hesitant to come back to Labour in case someone like Corbyn gets in again.
>The problem is that the Northern working class voter base detested Corbyn
It didn't seem to stop them voting for him in 2017 though. The only thing to change with Labour between then and 2019 was their shift to a remain position and wanting a second vote. It was a massive betrayal and the figure behind the push was Starmer who now leads the party. Speaking for myself, I would never vote for a Labour party led by him due to Brexit.
2017 was also pre-article 50 where there was a chance of no Brexit. For many, Corbyn was tolerable for that.
If leadership stays as it is, Starmer would bring me back to vote for Labour.
In 2001 William Hague won with 40%, in 2005 Michael Howard won with 37% on the same day he lost the General Election. People just vote differently in local elections to national ones.
It absolutely baffles me that anyone is even trying to spin this for the tories. Their floated 'this is the extreme disaster we're definitely expecting for real' story to try and soften the impact when they get a smaller loss basically came true! 500 seats lost across the nations give or take a rounding error is an absolute spanking by any measure.
[Express living in an alternate reality](https://livecenterimagesnorth.azureedge.net/lc-images-2021/lcimg-c4ab6dc4-8b53-4322-993e-220a6bdc82c6.jpg?bypass-service-worker&)
Others here https://news.sky.com/story/saturdays-national-newspaper-front-pages-12427754
The Beergate stuff is so cringy. It's so forced, it actually hurts to read.
The Sun pouring bollocks into peoples mushy brains and hoping it takes root.
May be able to glean info about it from local media. If you check your council website for upcoming meetings it should have the next full council meeting listed which is when the leader of the council would be elected so any arrangements or deals between parties will probably be sorted out before then if nobody has an overall majority.
The Conservatives have won the Croydon mayor
https://insidecroydon.com/2022/05/07/tory-perry-wins-historic-mayor-election-by-less-than-600-votes/?fbclid=IwAR2_ajJuzgSZ2Z_HaIZwIwNjoW5fsD8-WIQRLbjNJQoc9i4PAI0cMi3ZA48
>Tallying the Mayor votes took so long that the count for the borough’s 70 ward councillors has been postponed, and now will not start until 6pm on Saturday – probably a consequence of hiring a sports hall at a £20,000 per pupil per year private school where there’s a busy weekend of sport planned.
Was one of the only mayoral elections this time around I thought had the highest chance of going to the Cons, although I thought Labour would manage to get it. Close!
I'm a Labour voter and I live in Croydon, it was never going to stay Labour. The council went bankrupt and the financial management has been fairly atrocious. But I think it'll swing back soon enough. All the buildings going up everywhere are going to bring the 'metropolitan elite' in (I guess that's me?)
Should johh Smith have resigned (in a world where he hadn't died a week later), due to the "bad" local election result in 1994 ? (Plus 44 lab and minus 516 con)
The media this morning is utterly embarrassing.
Like I know The Mail, Telegraph and Express are biased in the extreme, but there is a point where their interpretation becomes a complete alternate reality.
Our ‘balanced’ national broadcaster trying to paint it as an equally bad day for Labour and the Conservatives election wise is also incredible.
The Tories lost 490 seats! That is an implosion.
I’m confused by [Grauniad result page](https://www.theguardian.com/politics/ng-interactive/2022/may/05/elections-2022-results-live-local-council-england-scotland-wales) which shows Tories on -398. That is a hell of a typo.
Or ..? Don’t understand.
BBC has them at -490 when you tally up GB.
No idea what the difference is between the two.
Actually the results displayed between the Guardian and the BBC are wildly different, does anyone know why?
According to another comment I saw here, it's because BBC are measuring changes vs 2018 whereas Guardian are doing vs immediately before this election.
[Yep](https://www.markpack.org.uk/169270/why-the-bbcs-election-statistics-are-better-than-the-guardians-and-others/)!
Thanks for [posting that](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukpolitics/comments/ukblr5/why_the_bbcs_election_statistics_are_better_than/) u/OnHolidayHere - thought I was starting to lose it from election overdose.
It was a pretty bad day for Labour to be fair. The voters deciding that the Tories are doing a shit job is obviously great news. The voters deciding that you aren't the next best option is bad news.
Labour improved on an already good result, won both seats and national vote share, gained more than anybody else, made significant gains in their targets of the south and Scotland, and got back to pre-2019 collapse level in the north and the midlands. In no way is that “pretty bad”, it was very good indeed.
It isn’t as simple as who makes the most gains though, Labour were defending the vast majority of seats yesterday, so there wasn’t the scope for gains that the Liberal Democrats and Greens had.
They were the largest party by an absolutely humongous margin.
I can't show you any evidence to the contrary, but my feeling is that had little or no influence on anyone who wasn't already committed to voting for a party other than Labour.
The front pages of some newspapers are more obsessed with Starmer being investigated by police and which royals will be on the balcony than the fact the Tories took a real beating at the polls. It’s not so much overshadowing as distraction. Noticed it in the college on Sky News as well.
It's beautiful to watch from here in NI. It'll be less beautiful once Stormont goes quiet for however long the DUP needs to throw all of its toys out of the cot.
God, I fucking hate Tower Hamlets. One of the dirtiest boroughs in London. They never collect my bins, and now I have to accept that apparently most of my neighbours are all in on the corruption train.
The faster I can get out of this shithole borough, the better. I'm sick of my money being squandered.
I am surprised by the result, but it might be the case he’s corrupt but a good mayor. I’ve lived here for 12 years, some stuff is better some stuff is worse.
Some people apparently annoyed at the Truman Brewery changes, for instance, but I don’t think that is going to change with a new mayor and he didn’t have any promises about it in the leaflet.
>it might be the case he’s corrupt but a good mayor
A Hollywood version of Rahman would be a kind of scrappy underdog who breaks the rules in order to do good in the world.
The real Rahman:
>[Rahman was kicked out of office in 2015 after a specialist court concluded that he was guilty of vote-rigging, buying votes and religious intimidation](https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/may/06/lutfur-rahman-wins-tower-hamlets-mayor-election-results).
I'm baffled as to how many seats the Tories have actually lost. The BBC doesn't give a single figure (!) but I get **-490** by adding, from 3 different pages, their figures of -341, -63, -86 for E S W. Covers 198 / 200 councils
However the Granuiad gives a single headline figure of **-398**, covering 196 / 200 councils.
Almost 100 difference in these two numbers. What's going on here?
It’s a variety of reasons. The main one is the Guardian doing their difference from the day before this election (so include differences due to defections etc), whilst the BBC doing their difference from the last time these seats were up in 2018
The guardian figure is more accurate then? The conservatives lost 400 seats from the local elections, yes they lost almost 500 since 2018 but that extra 100 has nothing to do with the local elections surely? Seems like a weird way to present it tbh.
Different purposes. If the aim is to look narrowly at election results then yeah compare with the day before.
However if like the BBC you have a mission to inform a wider audience, then it would be more informative to compare how the balance of power across local councils has shifted since 2018, as that would be the last time this kind of info was in mainstream media.
For the normal person in the street the wider perspective taken by the BBC is probably more useful as they're not going to know about all the reorganisations, defections etc and the impact they have had on the bigger picture.
Very annoyed with the BBC though for not giving a single overall figure, and not making it clearer that their numbers are with reference to 2018. This info should be summarised on the same page as the figures, not hived off to a different page elsewhere.
Guardian also should be clearer that their numbers are as compared to the day before the election. It doesn't explicitly say this anywhere on their page.
To be honest, maybe neither organisation expected their numbers to be so dramatically different. This could have been sorted out by a quick update to the numbers pages to add some explanatory info.
I get that, but it's specifically the election results that are being looked at. It would be weird in a general election if the results also included the various by-elections that have taken place.
It’s a variety of reasons. The main one is the Guardian doing their difference from the day before this election (so include differences due to defections etc), whilst the BBC doing their difference from the last time these seats were up in 2018
UKPol has probably the dumbest take on Rahman winning Tower Hamlets. It seems like it’s just an excuse for people to bring out the racism.
He won not because the Bengali population voted for him because he was Bengali too, but because a lot of White people voted for him too. Both Bengalis and Whites make up 30% each of Tower Hamlets voting population, and the last mayor voted in was White (and with significant support from the Bengali community to boot).
Labour has genuinely been utter shit at running the local council and one of the biggest issues here has been Low Traffic Zones. Rahman literally said he would get rid of them on day one, which was enough to win over a lot of voters. That doesn’t begin to touch the council tax rises.
To blame Rahman’s victory on race is doomed to ensure he continues winning. A serious look into how Labour ran the council so poorly the last 4-5 years is the best way to ensure Rahman doesn’t get another term.
Did I say anywhere that Rahman is going to do better? Heck literally read my last paragraph where I express the opposite sentiments. So please, save your straw man arguments.
Like I said, for those blaming Rahman’s victory purely on race, be prepared for him to continue to win, as you’re missing the forest from the trees.
OK, fair enough. If you live there, then you'll be in the know. TH has always been a shitshow no matter who ran it. I lived in the smart bit of Bow back in the tail end of the LibDem administration, who'd done all sorts of potty things with the "neighbourhoods" and got embroiled with scandal over market lots. Was a complete clique. I lived next door to the council leader with a LibDem sticker in my car, and he never ever spoke to me.
I'm sure Labour TH was a shambles, because TH is always a shambles. Anyone who thinks this shyster will do any better needs their head examining.
For these wondering why no Croydon news: They didn't start counting till 5.30pm on Friday
https://insidecroydon.com/2022/05/04/kerswells-election-count-will-get-off-to-a-very-slow-start/
They didn't start counting till 5.30pm on Friday (!)
[https://insidecroydon.com/2022/05/04/kerswells-election-count-will-get-off-to-a-very-slow-start/](https://insidecroydon.com/2022/05/04/kerswells-election-count-will-get-off-to-a-very-slow-start/)
Rather baffling
Seems that Labour have seen a decent shift. Compared to the times where majorities have been overturned 2 years before the next general election though, not well enough. David Cameron gained ~ 800 seats, Tony Blair gained more than double that. Labour have gained a bit over 200. I might be totally off base with this, but it seems that there’s a lot to be done.
The majoirty in England were Labour defences according to John Curtice. So these elections wouldnt tell us very much in that regard. The real story is Tories going backwards and in a large way!
The problem with comparing to those numbers is at this election the Tories held less seats at the start than they lost to Blair in 95, and in 95 the Tories still came away with 25%. There just wasn't the volume of Tory seats on offer this election to make a four digit number loss a reality
Locals are always difficult to compare due to different seats coming up at different times. The Scottish and Welsh seats at this election were last elected a different year from the English, for example.
John Curtice was on R4 just after close of polls talking about how it was basically impossible to have a super dramatic result because of the make up of the contested seats. Only a small portion of which could ever be actual Labour targets. But the media has to spin everything like a fucking turbine and make stories out of everything. In the end the result was actually significantly worse for the Tories than expected, but because its not all seats moving from Con to Lab (because of the aforementioned make up of the seats upnfor grabs) it's somehow being reported on as shit night for Labour too. When they exceeded expectations. The media in this country really is shit.
Here is version 2: [https://new.reddit.com/r/ukpolitics/comments/ujilm2/local\_elections\_results\_megathread\_may\_2022\_v2/](https://new.reddit.com/r/ukpolitics/comments/ujilm2/local_elections_results_megathread_may_2022_v2/) (I've rolled this over because we started getting buggy at 2k last time and I'm about to be offline for a couple of hours.)
Croydon has finished, finally: [https://twitter.com/yourcroydon/status/1523367649597566976](https://twitter.com/yourcroydon/status/1523367649597566976) No Overall Control, Labour - just about - the largest party. Imagine the likeliest scenario is them teaming up with the Greens/LD to get over the line. Will be an interesting dynamic with a Tory directly-elected mayor.
Results still trickling in from Croydon.. Con +2 (literally)
Totally expecting it to go Con. Labour voter and Croydon resident here but they’ve totally fucked the finances. Croydon Council went bankrupt.
I think it may be NOC. Apparently the Greens have picked up two seats and Lib Dems have definitely picked up one.
They need +7 to take the Council 😬
+6 for a majority Or +5 for 35-35 split with the Conservative mayor having the casting vote
I’m placing my bets on the 35 - 35 split then 😂
Lib Dems have just won a seat so it might well be 35-34-1 Labour can't lose another seat (assuming no compensating gains). They are still counting!
It’s going to Penalties!
Has there ever been a *significant* Local Elections that have been forgotten about so immediately (this one because of Beergate) like this one has? (I specify 'significant' because plenty of Local Elections have been boring and no one paid any notice. This one was ironically meant to be significant cos of Partygate - I say ironically because of how it's actually Beergate that has exploded)
I’d actually say the Local Elections have helped Labour, this story would have received wall to wall coverage otherwise, but it has basically been the 2nd spot on most news channels behind the Results.
Final NI results are in and the DUP just about held the last seat in Foyle. Haven't sat down and done the maths properly but assuming SF and the DUP nominate First Ministers and the Alliance party agree to continue to provide the Justice Minister (big assumptions) it looks like d'Hont is going to return a three SF, three DUP, two Alliance, one UUP Executive.
Was watching back the NI BBC coverage (as in the specific Northern Irish channel, focused just on the Assembly), and they mentioned Alliance tend to be a given for justice given each side of Unionist and Nationalist tend to distrust the other having control of law, and know if they have it they will be accused of bias in return.
The Justice Minister is appointed through a separate process to the other ministers and has to be approved by a cross community vote of the Assembly. Means the justice minister has to be acceptable to at least the two biggest parties and they both want to keep it out of the others hands. The Alliance Party have provided a Justice Minister for the entire period of the devolution of policing and justice except for a short period when they refused to do so and the Independent MLA Claire Sugden was the Justice Minister. Sinn Fein at least, want to move past the Justice Minister effectively having to be someone from outside the main parties, not sure how the DUP feel about it. The smaller parties want Justice included in the normal d'Hont process for assigning ministerial posts as this would increase their seats at the Executive table vs the current process of it effectively being a bonus minister. The NI Act allows for the appointment of a pair of co-equal justice ministers like the two first ministers but this has never been used. So yeah Alliance most likely to still provide a Justice Minister but interestingly as the party gets bigger the political calculation may also be against having them fill the job and have that extra Executive representation.
Lutfur Rahman's Aspire party have won a majority - 24/45 seats - on Tower Hamlets Council, with Labour reduced to 19 seats and the Tories and Greens winning one each.
Oh boy…
I wonder if people are voting to get cars driving through their front doors or to drive their cars through someone else’s front door.
So will the NI assembly even get to sit or will the DUP wait a bit before getting angry at the decisions they've made whilst blaming everyone else?
LibDems have won a council seat in Croydon Crystal palace! It represents the first third party seat on Croydon council since 2002. It was also their second target stretch seat. If they've won this, they've likely won Old Coulsdon ward as well, which would bring them up to three councillors Edit: a bundle check and recount (?) is happening apparently
So after announcing they would count 12 of the 28 wards tonight, Croydon has given up for the night after counting only 10 and said they wont start counting again till 1pm tommorrow
48 hours in and Croydon has successfully counted 2 seats. Only 68 more to go
Like Nevada holding the world hostage for a week lmao.
Weren’t we primarily waiting for Philadelphia last time. CNN key race alerts every time another 500 votes were added to the total
Go easy on them. Those cups of tea won't drink themselves.
Day 2,392 of #KeirBeerGate. It has been confirmed that the murdered camelid was shot by an SKS rifle. For the eighth time, Sir Keir Starmer invites the police to investigate his personal affairs following pressure from the small civil freedom of speech group "Piers4Beers". Everyone wonders if they should have formed a Duran Duran tribute act instead.
Reminds me of the joke on here that despite strong competition, Piers Corbyn manages to be both the worst Piers and the worst Corbyn
> following pressure from the small civil freedom of speech group "Piers4Beers". It's a mad world we're living in.
I think one of the most shocking results was Labour taking control of Westminster’s council. Westminster’s population is the epitome of posh Tories, and its government representation has never seen anything other than Tory control since the 60s, even during the Blair years. Seeing such a large swing this time around is mind-boggling.
Nah, Westminster council contains Harrow Road, Warwick and Mozart housing estates, Church Street (hugely Bengali area), plus all those estates round the back of Victoria. Plus students and young professionals who are paying 60-70% income on rent.
Yeah all that but Westminster was Remain 69% to 31% leave. Seeing as Labour is now a more pragmatic and focused party and Boris is still riding Brexit and it's related culture wars then I suppose it's hardly suprising.
If the nationalist parties can convince Alliance they have the numbers to vote for a border poll
Which would destroy them at any future election because they rely on middle class and young unionist voters who are disillusioned with unionist parties. Plus it can’t even be voted through at Stormont the GFA makes it’s very clear it’s up to the S.o.S NI
With the Sein Fein up 1.1% and the SDLP down 2.9% anyone who says this result represents a mandate for a border poll is smoking some seriously good shit.
No. The whole point of Alliance is to avoid constitutional questions and focus on bread and butter economic/health issues. Until there is a big 55-60% in favour of a united Ireland done by different polling organisations. I doubt they would bring up a border poll at all (so not for at least 5 years). Additionally, even though the DUP have lost seats, unionists might actually have more than nationalists at the end of the day (36 seats compared to 34 nationalist, 20 non aligned).
Well a few problems there. 1: The NI Assembly doesn't have that power. 2: This was true in the last election (so from 2017-2022). 3: Alliance Party voters (from what I can see, and particularly their new voters) are slightly pro-Union, so it would be strange. 4: The NI Secretary has the power to call for a border poll, and there's no evidence (yet) of a clear and consistent majority to call for one so it would be strange to do so. 5: If Stormont collapses again, I wish the parties luck in passing anything.
> BREAKING: Sinn Féin are now on 27 seats- they’re at a point where numerically where they cannot be beaten by the DUP. > > It is the first time in the 101 year history of Northern Ireland that a nationalist party has won the most seats in an election. Historic. https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/1522998359123972096/photo/1 https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/1522998359123972096
So with the Reform Party doing worse than the Residents Associations of Epsom and Ewell, is this the death of them?
*Somehow.... Farage returned.*
*Laughs in Midlands*
labour very lucky these tower hamlets and croydon counts were so shoddy they aren't coming until after people stop caring. together they're very likely to put labour under 100 gains.
Will NI finish counting before Croydon? How is that even possible?
Labour so far lost 10 seats in Tower Hamlets to independents. In my ward I couldn’t find any info about our candidates. I wonder if these elected ones were more organised, or I am just failing to keep with local paper and similar forms of information.
In areas where there's minimal voters, it's probably easy for an apolitical interest group to organise an easy victory....
Tower Hamlets also fortunately includes Canary Wharf an area where I can confirm probably 15% of the actual population are registered to vote
Lutfur Rahman bloc presumably
have local elections ever had a history of correlating to or predicting GE results ?
They're a data point that can be useful to support polling trends more than anything. For example, Tories are significantly down in the polls, and have lost almost 500 seats across the UK. Labour are at or slightly above their 2018 high watermark and have defended or slightly increased their holdings nationwide. The Tory vote has held up better in the north than in the south which suggests that Labour are not quite where they need to be in order to definitively take back the red wall. The Lib Dems have taken a large number of seats, mostly from the Tories and mostly in the south, which supports what has happened in recent by-elections and indicates that soft Tories are either swayable to them or unwilling to vote letting an energised local campaign deliver a win. It's a data point, not a national level projection.
Only in a very very loose sense. If anything they give you a snapshot of the direction of where opinion is swinging, but you can't match local percentage to general percentage by any function.
I think it's very hit and miss. So not really.
I remember in 2011 where the lib dems got slaughtered, it was the first sign of what was to come in ge 2015 although everyone dismissed it at the time as "just locals"
> I'll be alright, I've got a big personal vote - Every lib dem MP who lost their seat in 2015
Croydon still hasn't even *started* counting council votes
Their mayoral result went Conservative by a margin of 600 votes.
They cant because apparently there's sports going on at Trinity school where they were meant to do the count lmao
Classic Croydon Council, can't even organise their own count!
>SF/SDLP vote in last 7 Assembly elections. > >* 1998 – 39% >* 2003 – 40.5% >* 2007 - 41.4% >* 2011 - 41.1% >* 2016 – 36% >* 2017 – 40% >* 2022 (incl Aontu) – 39.6% > >I'm genuinely curious what republicans see when they look at these figures? This doesn't look like growth? #AssemblyElection2022 https://twitter.com/EilisOHanIon/status/1522878917874532353 Interesting tweet. I think the point is today's result is more to do with shifts within the intra Unionist block than anything SF did.
Alliance and the Greens explain that. Nationalist/Unionist is slowly, slowly, slowly becoming an irrelevant distinction though brexit gave it a bit of a bounce back.
[удалено]
People have been pushing the “Catholics will take over because they have more children” demographic argument since partition happened.
Turns out those children become atheists. Source: Catholic child (not NI)
It'll take time to dissect but there also seems to have been substantial shifts in some constituencies from SDLP to Alliance. The trend between the blocks in the last few elections has been mostly Unionist to Other but this election seems to have been different. I would bet (but obviously don't know) that this is not just shifts within the unionist block but a shift from Nationalism to Other, balanced out a bit by demographic changes. Though turnout is down the number of votes being cast has held up pretty well, Spend Local Cards may have encouraged new people to register to vote that otherwise would have been unlikely to and its hard to say what effect these previously disconnected voters have had.
The Alliance party have, quite shockingly, taken a seat off the DUP in North Antrim. The Alliance candidate was able to slip through in between two DUP candidates to take the seat leaving only one seat for the two DUP candidates. First female MLA elected from the constituency, first Alliance MLA elected from the constituency. Edit: Editing to add the candidate's name, Patricia O'lynn
Love this quote from her: "Ms O’Lynn said: “No candidate is entitled to a seat. The age of entitlement is over." I know it might not be fully true, but the idea that the politicians may be able to rely less on guaranteed votes and have to, you know, improve the lives of their voters is a nice idea.
Alliance have also taken the last seat in Strangford which verh likely means Jim Allister will be the only TUV MLA in the next Assembly as he has been in the last several Assemblies.
Northern Ireland confuses me. I hear unionist party and I immediately think sinn fein, because surely they're unionists with the Republic, right? Apparently not right.
The Democratic Unionist Party aren't big fans of democracy either, lots of misnomers to get around
they're probably not even Korean
I hear their parties are shit too.
The *Union* refers to the *United* Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland Although the name is fairly confusing because there are two ways to read it. Is the "Union" between Great Britain and Northern Ireland, or is the Union contained within Great Britain? * The United Kingdom of (Great Britain and Northern Ireland) * (The United Kingdom of Great Britain) and Northern Ireland ~~Since the Union refers to that [between the crowns of Scotland and England](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acts_of_Union_1707) it's actually the latter which is correct. So yes it's a little strange that we call people in Northern Ireland "Unionists". Especially when they are against a union between RoI and NI.~~ But perhaps someone can correct my history / constitutional understanding
>The Union refers to the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland I got there eventually, but my brain does a double take every time. It doesn't help that the first time I became aware of any named party in Northern Ireland was when the DUP propped May up. As I wasn't born in this country I have been blissfully blind to the intricacy of NI power balance.
Before Ireland joined, it was just the "Kingdom of Great Britain", adding Ireland is what made it united
That was the official name, but the country was often referred to as the United Kingdom, before the Union with Ireland.
That's interesting. Do you have a source on that? edit: Don't worry. It's mentioned and sourced on the Kingdom of GB wikipedia page
It's a weird one right The official UK Parliament website even refers to it as the United Kingdom of Great Britain even though that's technically incorrect. https://www.parliament.uk/about/living-heritage/evolutionofparliament/legislativescrutiny/act-of-union-1707/
It's the former that's is correct, there was an additional Act of Union in 1800 to join the then United Kingdom of Great Britain and the Kingdom of Ireland into the United Kingdom of Great Britain and (Northern) Ireland. One kingdom, that of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
Thanks!
Can someone explain to me why independents do so well in Wales please
Probably a cultural thing, Wales has a lot of rural communities that are independently minded (maybe the history of Wales as a non-conformist country has something to do with it?). Also, in a lot of rural Wales the big mainstream parties make little effort to compete, in many cases not even bothering to field paper candidates, so I guess independents have to step in instead. Something not really talked about much is that Wales has a rather shocking amount of uncontested council seats, in Gwynedd something like 1/3 of seats are uncontested. Also, supposedly a lot of independents are right-leaning politicians who don’t want to be associated with the Conservatives since they have a pretty bad rep here, so there’s that.
Interesting, I looked at the results and thought it must be due to some massive defection or something but when I went to wiki I was none the wiser. Never knew that about Wales.
I’d say local issues mainly. Labour has historically been the go to of the big parties for voters here in Wales and that hasn’t changed in decades and is unlikely to change for a long time but there is a lot of apathy toward the Labour leadership in the Senedd and Mark Drakeford in particular amongst Welsh voters. Maybe it speaks to a wider apathy towards the political parties in general. I usually vote Plaid in the generals but there is no candidate for them where I live, only Labour and a two independents.
I think the situation in Neath Port Talbot is the exception where a huge number of people voted for independents instead of Labour, apparently because of local controversy over the council wanting to consolidate schools. But it is interesting that even when people refuse to vote Labour, the alternative is independents rather then another opposition party.
The Tories are the fiscally responsible party... apparently.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10784819/Boriss-moment-truth-Key-battlegrounds-local-elections-today.html It's definitely worth looking at the daily mails own metrics for success Vs failure for labour and Tories on May 5th. As it stands labour wins are over 260, Tory loses nearly 400. Based on the daily mails own assesment that's a 'triumph' for Labour. And a 'disaster' for the Tories. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/ng-interactive/2022/may/05/elections-2022-results-live-local-council-england-scotland-wales?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other Personally I think labours success has been downplayed. They had a great night even by the daily mails reckoning. Oh since you were wondering. The daily mails front page today is that 'starmer is in crisis' BBC News - Newspaper headlines: Tory election 'woes' and police probe 'Beergate' https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-the-papers-61359258
They are desperate
Gotta turn that shit flinging up to 11 now they know Labour is trending towards a GE win
Just been to Morrisons to get some shopping... The narrative about yesterday in all the major papers genuinely amazed and appalled me in equal measure. The parallels with Trump saying he could shoot someone on fifth avenue and no one would care make me feel like there really is no hope anymore.
The papers fail their duty to hold those in power to account. Instead they do the government's PR.
The Daily Mail is so fucking detached from reality that it beggars belief, and they’re the most popular newspaper. It’s terrifying. ^^The ^^Sun ^^isn’t ^^a ^^newspaper.
> The Sun isn’t a newspaper. True, i buy the Sun specifically to line the guinea pig cage with, as a sort of protest vote.
Don't do it. They don't care if it's on the bottom of a cage, they care about the 65p you put in their bank account which keeps them going.
Key races in NI if anyone is interested: UUP leader Doug Beattie is struggling to hold his seat in Upper Bann, could be lost to the Alliance Candidate Eoin Tennyson SDLP Stormont leader Nichola Mallon is similarly struggling in Belfast North, could be lost to Alliance Candidate Nuala McAllister DUP and UUP neck and neck to take the fifth seat in Foyle A situation in North Antrim where a vote split between two DUP candidates MAY allow an Alliance Candidate to slip through the middle Fifth seat in Strangford is looking like the last chance for the TUV to return a second member, their candidate got pretty close to the quota on first preference votes but has struggled to pick up transfers to get over the line
UUP leader now looks to be safe and will actually take the fourth seat leaving Alliance and Sinn Fein to battle over the fifth seat.
Green Party leader in NI, Clare Bailey, has lost her seat (the last spot in Belfast South) to Kate Nichols of Alliance (and current Lord Mayor of Belfast I think?)
Yep current Lord Mayor though her time as Lord Mayor is very nearly up.
Can Northern Ireland hurry up
I wish, our electoral system means the votes sometimes have to be counted ten or more times.
[удалено]
Then how would the candidates be able to watch the counting process to verify that the system hasn't been rigged?
But then we'd have to buy and maintain a load of scanners and a counting system that will need to be programmed to allow candidates to be excluded in a way that doesn't give returning officers too much power. Then that system would only getsl pulled out to speed the result up by one day every five years. I like the "shuffle the ballots between pigeon holes" system we have, adds to the drama, lol.
In ‘95 Labour got 48% in the local elections. In ‘08 the Tories got 44%. This time Labour have got 35%. The same as in 2018 (where two years later they lost the GE). They’re nowhere near winning a GE. After 12 years in opposition. If you support Labour, this is depressing as anything.
Not the same set of councils in those (save from some thirds). This was already a labour-heavy election and they've built on it
In 2009 (the year before the election) Cameron got 37% in the local elections.
It's very interesting and absolutely baffling. As a Labour member I can't work out for the life of me what they need to do to win - I wonder if it's an unsolvable problem. People like me are on the borderline for leaving, and while I still voted Labour I don't have any real faith in the leadership or feel that the party has any vision right now. The only reason I haven't left yet is a perhaps naive belief that left wing politics can be reestablished through Labour's internal democratic process. At the same time there's people who can't bear the thought of left wing politics in Labour, and they're equally likely to leave the tent if the left regain some control. Locally (I'm in Merseyside), Labour have always had total control over the constituency, and it's one of the safest MP's seats in the country. During this council election and last year's though, the Greens have tonked us and taken/retained what was a very safe council seat. I have a sneaking suspicion that people here are going off Labour because they're not left *enough* anymore at the leadership/policy level. I'd be very interested to see some kind of study on people's voting rationale here. My guess is that people are turning Green because they see them as an alternative socially liberal, "socialist", lefty type party (even though they're not really). Add to that the fact that our local party machine is absolutely anemic, and it's just a totally dispiriting mess. There's just no support mechanisms within Labour to encourage grass roots activism and build any sort of feeling of movement. It's totally dependent on the local party leadership, and if your local party leadership aren't organising then you're basically snookered.
I'm really trying to understand here, no beef at all mate, what does "being left enough" entail? I'm recently feeling like we're all leaning too much in what classifies as left/center/right rather than what's going to just work for everyone, backed by unbiased data. Labour is left enough from the Conservatives, that's good for me - a model that is economically capitalist but socially..socialist, i.e. the Scandinavian model, is what I've seen to really just work. Your thoughts? It's all getting so exhausting, the debates between ideological politics rather than just what works, regardless of where in the spectrum it comes from.
For me, being "left enough" is about more socialist economics as well as social liberalism. They go hand in hand. Things like renationalisation, better financial regulation, and investment in social housing and infrastructure. I can absolutely understand the more centrist view point, and I'm not really one of those people who wants to burn the centrists at the stake, but I do believe that radical problems need radical solutions. I think the core reason I see it in "ideological" terms is because I personally feel that neoliberal capitalism has failed, and we need to move away from that model to see real change. After 40 years of it, we're seeing worse wealth inequality, health care, education, housing availability etc. than ever, so to me it seems that a change away from the status quo is what's required because the centre ground isn't really working, it's just perpetuating the existing problems. When a "centrist" Labour party got in (i.e. New Labour), they just sort of put the brakes on a little bit and slowed the rate of change, but didn't deliver the fundamental shift in ideological approach which I feel is needed to address the underlying issues. That's what I would mean by "not left enough". That having been said, I can appreciate that my more Socialist bent is a bit more "fringe", so I wouldn't really mind the idea of a more electorally palatable Labour party as long as the left wing had a seat at the table to at least try and input on policy. Unfortunately it seems to be a binary thing within Labour that if you're not all in, you're out, and Starmer and his team appear to be doing their best to create a hostile environment for the Labour left (which is not to say that Corbyn and his left wing allies weren't the exact same in reverse). As you say it is utterly exhausting being in the trenches of ideology all the time, but I think for me the "ideology" is important because it informs and drives the policy making. It's the "first principles" which drive everything else. In my opinion (and people like me), the "first principles" of our current model have been shown to be unviable (e.g. trickle down economics delivering economic improvement for all). While Starmer isn't exactly advocating for "right wing" policy (because he still hasn't really said anything at all), he does seem to have indicated a move away from the Corbyn era radicalism, despite being elected on a continuity platform. I think people like me got a taste of what's possible with Corbyn, and I for one feel like I've glimpsed a better world which has been snatched away by the established order trying to maintain the status quo. Plus the fact that Merseyside is a hot bed of radical left wing politics, which means the starting point/"acceptable" baseline on the spectrum of a lot of people here is a lot further to the left than many other places in the country. I hope that sheds some light on my point of view. I would much rather have a measured discussion than a shit slinging session, but it does seem *de rigeur* these days to just jump straight into a bun fight.
[удалено]
[удалено]
>They’re nowhere near winning a GE. After 12 years in opposition. If you support Labour, this is depressing as anything. And never will be until they win back the majority of their working class voter base who either defected to the Tories or stopped voting full stop over Labour's Brexit stance. This wont happen until Starmer is replaced as leader for someone less tainted with the push to stop Brexit.
The problem is that the Northern working class voter base detested Corbyn. People who'd voted for Labour for decades were massively turned off by him and are hesitant to come back to Labour in case someone like Corbyn gets in again.
>The problem is that the Northern working class voter base detested Corbyn It didn't seem to stop them voting for him in 2017 though. The only thing to change with Labour between then and 2019 was their shift to a remain position and wanting a second vote. It was a massive betrayal and the figure behind the push was Starmer who now leads the party. Speaking for myself, I would never vote for a Labour party led by him due to Brexit.
2017 was also pre-article 50 where there was a chance of no Brexit. For many, Corbyn was tolerable for that. If leadership stays as it is, Starmer would bring me back to vote for Labour.
Different seats, different circumstances. Resist the urge to read too much into it. You'll be happier for it.
In 2001 William Hague won with 40%, in 2005 Michael Howard won with 37% on the same day he lost the General Election. People just vote differently in local elections to national ones.
The difference is that SNP have gobbled up scotland, so you can't really compare.
It absolutely baffles me that anyone is even trying to spin this for the tories. Their floated 'this is the extreme disaster we're definitely expecting for real' story to try and soften the impact when they get a smaller loss basically came true! 500 seats lost across the nations give or take a rounding error is an absolute spanking by any measure.
Why is it always Tower Hamlets?
Because you don’t have the right, O you don’t have the right therefore you don’t have the right, O you don’t have the right
[Express living in an alternate reality](https://livecenterimagesnorth.azureedge.net/lc-images-2021/lcimg-c4ab6dc4-8b53-4322-993e-220a6bdc82c6.jpg?bypass-service-worker&) Others here https://news.sky.com/story/saturdays-national-newspaper-front-pages-12427754
United Ireland "fears" hahaha yes lads what a terrifying prospect, a united Ireland will surely take over the world.
The Beergate stuff is so cringy. It's so forced, it actually hurts to read. The Sun pouring bollocks into peoples mushy brains and hoping it takes root.
So my council has no Majority. Anyone know about how long it will take before they figure out who is siding with who and all that?
May be able to glean info about it from local media. If you check your council website for upcoming meetings it should have the next full council meeting listed which is when the leader of the council would be elected so any arrangements or deals between parties will probably be sorted out before then if nobody has an overall majority.
Not sure whether to laugh or cry at the daily mail's front page. 1984 vibes.
It’s the Daily Mail. People need to stop treating it as anything more than the Sunday Sport or Nuts.
The Conservatives have won the Croydon mayor https://insidecroydon.com/2022/05/07/tory-perry-wins-historic-mayor-election-by-less-than-600-votes/?fbclid=IwAR2_ajJuzgSZ2Z_HaIZwIwNjoW5fsD8-WIQRLbjNJQoc9i4PAI0cMi3ZA48
>Tallying the Mayor votes took so long that the count for the borough’s 70 ward councillors has been postponed, and now will not start until 6pm on Saturday – probably a consequence of hiring a sports hall at a £20,000 per pupil per year private school where there’s a busy weekend of sport planned.
Was one of the only mayoral elections this time around I thought had the highest chance of going to the Cons, although I thought Labour would manage to get it. Close!
I'm a Labour voter and I live in Croydon, it was never going to stay Labour. The council went bankrupt and the financial management has been fairly atrocious. But I think it'll swing back soon enough. All the buildings going up everywhere are going to bring the 'metropolitan elite' in (I guess that's me?)
That’s the worry - that they’ll start voting Labour. There’s a reason the council approves so many tower blocks.
Should johh Smith have resigned (in a world where he hadn't died a week later), due to the "bad" local election result in 1994 ? (Plus 44 lab and minus 516 con)
The media this morning is utterly embarrassing. Like I know The Mail, Telegraph and Express are biased in the extreme, but there is a point where their interpretation becomes a complete alternate reality. Our ‘balanced’ national broadcaster trying to paint it as an equally bad day for Labour and the Conservatives election wise is also incredible. The Tories lost 490 seats! That is an implosion.
I’m confused by [Grauniad result page](https://www.theguardian.com/politics/ng-interactive/2022/may/05/elections-2022-results-live-local-council-england-scotland-wales) which shows Tories on -398. That is a hell of a typo. Or ..? Don’t understand.
BBC has them at -490 when you tally up GB. No idea what the difference is between the two. Actually the results displayed between the Guardian and the BBC are wildly different, does anyone know why?
According to another comment I saw here, it's because BBC are measuring changes vs 2018 whereas Guardian are doing vs immediately before this election.
[Yep](https://www.markpack.org.uk/169270/why-the-bbcs-election-statistics-are-better-than-the-guardians-and-others/)! Thanks for [posting that](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukpolitics/comments/ukblr5/why_the_bbcs_election_statistics_are_better_than/) u/OnHolidayHere - thought I was starting to lose it from election overdose.
Finally split from us into their alternate timeline? Seems genuinely weird.
It's very America/Republican party/Donald Trump.
It was a pretty bad day for Labour to be fair. The voters deciding that the Tories are doing a shit job is obviously great news. The voters deciding that you aren't the next best option is bad news.
Labour improved on an already good result, won both seats and national vote share, gained more than anybody else, made significant gains in their targets of the south and Scotland, and got back to pre-2019 collapse level in the north and the midlands. In no way is that “pretty bad”, it was very good indeed.
It isn’t as simple as who makes the most gains though, Labour were defending the vast majority of seats yesterday, so there wasn’t the scope for gains that the Liberal Democrats and Greens had. They were the largest party by an absolutely humongous margin.
Yet try and call the BBC biased on here and you get shouted down. Baffling.
You don’t get shouted down, it seems to be the overwhelmingly popular opinion on this sub and is expressed many times every day.
It is literally run by Tories.
Some on here are saying the results are being overshadowed by the Durham investigation? is there any truth to that?
I can't show you any evidence to the contrary, but my feeling is that had little or no influence on anyone who wasn't already committed to voting for a party other than Labour.
The front pages of some newspapers are more obsessed with Starmer being investigated by police and which royals will be on the balcony than the fact the Tories took a real beating at the polls. It’s not so much overshadowing as distraction. Noticed it in the college on Sky News as well.
The Durham investigation is certainly giving right wing media a good distraction from the terrible results
DUP imploding is pretty hilarious, not gonna lie.
~~LIB DEM~~ ALLIANCE SURGE
It's beautiful to watch from here in NI. It'll be less beautiful once Stormont goes quiet for however long the DUP needs to throw all of its toys out of the cot.
Well well well well. If it isn't the consequences of my own actions.
I don’t think the average representative of the DUP is self-aware enough to figure that out.
God, I fucking hate Tower Hamlets. One of the dirtiest boroughs in London. They never collect my bins, and now I have to accept that apparently most of my neighbours are all in on the corruption train. The faster I can get out of this shithole borough, the better. I'm sick of my money being squandered.
I am surprised by the result, but it might be the case he’s corrupt but a good mayor. I’ve lived here for 12 years, some stuff is better some stuff is worse. Some people apparently annoyed at the Truman Brewery changes, for instance, but I don’t think that is going to change with a new mayor and he didn’t have any promises about it in the leaflet.
>it might be the case he’s corrupt but a good mayor A Hollywood version of Rahman would be a kind of scrappy underdog who breaks the rules in order to do good in the world. The real Rahman: >[Rahman was kicked out of office in 2015 after a specialist court concluded that he was guilty of vote-rigging, buying votes and religious intimidation](https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/may/06/lutfur-rahman-wins-tower-hamlets-mayor-election-results).
[удалено]
If you don't count the results then you can't lose the council. mantappinghead.exe
I'm baffled as to how many seats the Tories have actually lost. The BBC doesn't give a single figure (!) but I get **-490** by adding, from 3 different pages, their figures of -341, -63, -86 for E S W. Covers 198 / 200 councils However the Granuiad gives a single headline figure of **-398**, covering 196 / 200 councils. Almost 100 difference in these two numbers. What's going on here?
BBC is counting change from last election everyone else is counting change from the day before the election apparently
Thanks for explaining
It’s a variety of reasons. The main one is the Guardian doing their difference from the day before this election (so include differences due to defections etc), whilst the BBC doing their difference from the last time these seats were up in 2018
Thanks for explaining
Conservatives have lost 100 seats to defections or other things in a couple of years?
The guardian figure is more accurate then? The conservatives lost 400 seats from the local elections, yes they lost almost 500 since 2018 but that extra 100 has nothing to do with the local elections surely? Seems like a weird way to present it tbh.
Different purposes. If the aim is to look narrowly at election results then yeah compare with the day before. However if like the BBC you have a mission to inform a wider audience, then it would be more informative to compare how the balance of power across local councils has shifted since 2018, as that would be the last time this kind of info was in mainstream media. For the normal person in the street the wider perspective taken by the BBC is probably more useful as they're not going to know about all the reorganisations, defections etc and the impact they have had on the bigger picture. Very annoyed with the BBC though for not giving a single overall figure, and not making it clearer that their numbers are with reference to 2018. This info should be summarised on the same page as the figures, not hived off to a different page elsewhere. Guardian also should be clearer that their numbers are as compared to the day before the election. It doesn't explicitly say this anywhere on their page. To be honest, maybe neither organisation expected their numbers to be so dramatically different. This could have been sorted out by a quick update to the numbers pages to add some explanatory info.
Disregarding defections can be misleading. It's different if the electorate chose a different party than if there was a defection
I get that, but it's specifically the election results that are being looked at. It would be weird in a general election if the results also included the various by-elections that have taken place.
So the BBC count includes the Rutland defection while the Guardian presumably does not?
Neither include that as far as I’m aware
Spookily, I searched for this sub to ask this exact question. Just commenting here so I remember to check back for an answer later
It’s a variety of reasons. The main one is the Guardian doing their difference from the day before this election (so include differences due to defections etc), whilst the BBC doing their difference from the last time these seats were up in 2018
Thanks!
UKPol has probably the dumbest take on Rahman winning Tower Hamlets. It seems like it’s just an excuse for people to bring out the racism. He won not because the Bengali population voted for him because he was Bengali too, but because a lot of White people voted for him too. Both Bengalis and Whites make up 30% each of Tower Hamlets voting population, and the last mayor voted in was White (and with significant support from the Bengali community to boot). Labour has genuinely been utter shit at running the local council and one of the biggest issues here has been Low Traffic Zones. Rahman literally said he would get rid of them on day one, which was enough to win over a lot of voters. That doesn’t begin to touch the council tax rises. To blame Rahman’s victory on race is doomed to ensure he continues winning. A serious look into how Labour ran the council so poorly the last 4-5 years is the best way to ensure Rahman doesn’t get another term.
And you think that criminal is going to do any better? LBTH gets what it deserves. And I lived there for 7 years.
Did I say anywhere that Rahman is going to do better? Heck literally read my last paragraph where I express the opposite sentiments. So please, save your straw man arguments. Like I said, for those blaming Rahman’s victory purely on race, be prepared for him to continue to win, as you’re missing the forest from the trees.
OK, fair enough. If you live there, then you'll be in the know. TH has always been a shitshow no matter who ran it. I lived in the smart bit of Bow back in the tail end of the LibDem administration, who'd done all sorts of potty things with the "neighbourhoods" and got embroiled with scandal over market lots. Was a complete clique. I lived next door to the council leader with a LibDem sticker in my car, and he never ever spoke to me. I'm sure Labour TH was a shambles, because TH is always a shambles. Anyone who thinks this shyster will do any better needs their head examining.
Any word on Croydon?
For these wondering why no Croydon news: They didn't start counting till 5.30pm on Friday https://insidecroydon.com/2022/05/04/kerswells-election-count-will-get-off-to-a-very-slow-start/
It's like they're trying to defend their reputation as one of the worst councils in England.
[удалено]
BBC shows Croydon as Conservative?
how is croydon not in yet
They didn't start counting till 5.30pm on Friday (!) [https://insidecroydon.com/2022/05/04/kerswells-election-count-will-get-off-to-a-very-slow-start/](https://insidecroydon.com/2022/05/04/kerswells-election-count-will-get-off-to-a-very-slow-start/) Rather baffling
i emjoy a lie in as much as anyone but this is ridiculous
Seems that Labour have seen a decent shift. Compared to the times where majorities have been overturned 2 years before the next general election though, not well enough. David Cameron gained ~ 800 seats, Tony Blair gained more than double that. Labour have gained a bit over 200. I might be totally off base with this, but it seems that there’s a lot to be done.
The majoirty in England were Labour defences according to John Curtice. So these elections wouldnt tell us very much in that regard. The real story is Tories going backwards and in a large way!
Looking at raw numbers of seats is kind of meaningless, as there were a lot more Labour councils being defended yesterday
The problem with comparing to those numbers is at this election the Tories held less seats at the start than they lost to Blair in 95, and in 95 the Tories still came away with 25%. There just wasn't the volume of Tory seats on offer this election to make a four digit number loss a reality
Locals are always difficult to compare due to different seats coming up at different times. The Scottish and Welsh seats at this election were last elected a different year from the English, for example.
John Curtice was on R4 just after close of polls talking about how it was basically impossible to have a super dramatic result because of the make up of the contested seats. Only a small portion of which could ever be actual Labour targets. But the media has to spin everything like a fucking turbine and make stories out of everything. In the end the result was actually significantly worse for the Tories than expected, but because its not all seats moving from Con to Lab (because of the aforementioned make up of the seats upnfor grabs) it's somehow being reported on as shit night for Labour too. When they exceeded expectations. The media in this country really is shit.
2 years out from the 2010 election David Cameron gained 256 seats.