Yorkshire First Results in Wakefield

There’s plenty to be digested on both a local and national level and I aim to do that gradually over the next few weeks. However, I thought readers might be interested in how Yorkshire First performed in Wakefield.

I stood in my home ward of Wakefield North which is a bit of a battleground for UKIP these days. The results over the years have shifted in favour of the UKIP candidate (who is a thoroughly nice chap), though obviously Wakefield is a Labour stronghold. 54 seats out of 63 are currently held by Labour with the Conservatives having 6, UKIP 2 and 1 Independent sitting on the council. The lack of opposition is something for a future post though. In the meantime, here are the results from my ward:

Green Party – 395 (6.3%)
Yorkshire First – 161 (2.6%)
Conservative Party – 1495 (23.9%)
Labour Party – 2666 (42.6%)
TUSC – 216 (3.5%)
UKIP – 1319 (21.1%)

For me, 2.6% is a great start. With it being something of a three-way battle, it’s heartening to know that over 150 people put a cross next to my name instead of the big three. It’s also a varied field with 12.4% of the vote going to the three smaller parties.

Next, my colleague Martin Roberts stood in parliamentary, district and parish elections. This is the result from his parliamentary seat, Hemsworth:

UKIP – 8565 (20.2%)
Liberal Democrats – 1357 (3.2%)
Conservative Party – 9694 (22.9%)
Yorkshire First – 1018 (2.4%)
Labour Party 21772 – (51.3%)

To get over 1000 votes is phenomenal and I’m really proud of Martin. He’s been a very active campaigner in the last few months and I think that dedication showed here. Labour were always going to win the seat but to take 2.4% of votes in a parliamentary election is brilliant. In the district council elections he stood for the ward of Ackworth, North Elmsall and Upton:

Labour Party – 3437 (45.7%)
Conservative Party – 2081 (27.7%)
Yorkshire First – 493 (6.6%)
UKIP – 1507 (20.0%)

Again, this is excellent and there are definitely lessons to be taken from that result. As for the parish ward of Ackworth – Moor Top, I won’t list the results of all 16 candidates (voters get up to eight choices per ballot paper) but here is Martin’s result:

Yorkshire First – 591 (5.2%)

There were 8 Labour candidates on the ballot paper, 6 of whom were elected and, indeed, many of the ballot papers I saw voted primarily for Labour candidates above all others. In parish council elections that’s certainly a consideration for the future. Nevertheless, that’s another good result for Martin.

Our final candidate in the Wakefield district was Arnie Craven who stood in the parliamentary seat of Morley and Outwood (this seat is half Leeds and half Wakefield). Now, if that seat wasn’t famous on Thursday morning it was by Friday afternoon. The incumbent Labour MP (and Shadow Chancellor) Ed Balls lost his seat and there’s something very interesting about this result:

Labour – 18354 (38.0%)
Yorkshire First – 479 (1.0%)
UKIP – 7951 (16.5%)
Green Party – 1264 (2.6%)
Conservative Party – 18776 (38.9%)
Liberal Democrats – 1426 (3.0%)

So Ed Balls lost by 422 votes and Arnie got 479. I’m not saying that people who voted for him may have otherwise voted for Labour but it’s a compelling figure nonetheless and it shows how smaller parties can chop into the vote share of the mainstream.

Those are the results for our district. Plenty to chew over and may I say a personal thank you to Martin and Arnie for standing alongside me as Yorkshire First candidates in this election.

Advertisements

The SNP’s Latest Command

I know I witter on a fair bit about democracy and accountability, call it a bug-bear. I don’t believe, for instance, that a coalition agreement should be implemented following the 2015 election without being put to the voters. You can sense, then, what my attitude on Nicola Sturgeon’s latest comments about the possibility of an SNP-Labour coalition might be.

Sturgeon has said that the SNP would be prepared to join forces with Labour, even if they didn’t have more MPs than the Tories following the election. It’s not a rule that the party with the highest number of MPs form the government, but it’s a standard that hasn’t been broken since the 1920s. Of course, this comes with a price – at the moment that’s a £180bn spending spree, though I expect that to increase the more desperate Labour look as the election nears. Whatever your view on austerity, it’s a pretty neat subversion of democracy on the part of the SNP.

The trouble with Labour at the moment is that they simply reek of desperation. That means the SNP can name their price (don’t be fooled, they’re aiming for independence either via another referendum or by the back door) and the Lib Dems too. The prospect of a Labour/SNP/Lib Dem coalition is terrifying, not least because it will have no legitimacy in the eyes of much of the country. We’ve had five years of back-room deals between the Tory-Lib Dem ‘quad’ and it’s left a sour taste. If anything, it’s served to distance the electorate further from their MPs – after all, does it matter who we all vote for if they decide what’s ‘best’ for us in the end? It stinks, and the stench is only going to get worse until May.

Politics Has a People Problem

The figure Harriet Harman draws attention to of 9.1 million women who didn’t vote in 2010 is alarming but not at all surprising. However, I don’t think political engagement has a ‘woman problem’ as much as a ‘people problem’. The public are disengaging – from the major parties at least – and, while I can understand the urge to drag them back kicking and screaming into the fold, I don’t think Labour’s ‘pink bus’ is going to do the trick on the women front.

The word being bandied about is ‘patronising’. I’d agree with that. I don’t think seeing a pink bus in my town centre would encourage me to vote Labour. In fact, I’d just be asking why they’re making so much effort to appear colourful when, really, the way to win votes is to create effective and economically literate policies. Those seem to be the things that women pay attention to. There was a lot written during the Scottish Referendum about how women were thinking with their heads while men were more focused on their emotional reaction to the prospect of independence. I don’t know how right that analysis is but, surely, the best way to achieve an election victory is to fight on both of those fronts?

For me, this pink bus is a gimmick, and one that’s been ridiculed pretty comprehensively already. This close to an election, is this really Labour’s strategy?

Musings on the Debates

The furore over the televised debates rolls on like the distraction technique it quite obviously is. So much time is being spent wittering about who should be included that politicians are avoiding many of those difficult questions they should be facing a hundred days before a general election. It’s ingenuous really – and rather pathetic.

David Cameron initially said he wouldn’t take part without the Greens present. Blatant selfishness as facing Nigel Farage with Ed Miliband and Nick Clegg sucking up to each other across the way would’ve been tricky for the PM. I can’t decide whether Cameron expected the broadcasters to roll over and include the Greens or cancel the debates altogether. In the event, they pulled a rabbit out of the hat and said, yes, they’d include the Greens along with the SNP and Plaid Cymru. After which, the DUP, quite rightly, become irritated that they, with eight MPs, are excluded. It’s all shaping up to be a right old mess but I have a few points.

1. On recent polls, if that’s what we’re using for this, the Lib Dems are trailing. Why should they be included?

2. Regional parties have a limited appeal. By all means, have separate debates for them to participate in but they’re a little surplus to requirements in a national debate.

3. However, if regional parties are included then the DUP should be too. It’s only fair.

4. The large, unruly debate that this is shaping up to be will be useful to nobody. Perhaps that’s how all major leaders would like it.