"Tony Blair and Gordon Brown face the hard truth that their Party’s organisation
is crumbling following the publication of new analysis showing that Labour has
failed to find town hall candidates for 40 per cent of all the council seats up
for election in May’s English local elections. This is the lowest number of
candidates fielded by any Party of government at this particular election cycle.
By contrast, Conservatives are fielding a record number of council
candidates.
Detailed number-crunching of all the 10,000+ council seats up for election, based on the lists of nominations published by each local authority, shows:
· Labour are only contesting 60.6 per cent (6,360) of all the seats up for election (5% down on last time). There is no nomination fee for local elections and just 10 local signatures are needed to sponsor a candidate.
· Conservatives are contesting 88 per cent of seats (9,264) – the best ever performance in these seats.
· Liberal Democrats are contesting just 64 per cent (6,667) – only marginally better than Labour (only a tiny improvement on last time)
· The BNP are running 717 candidates and UKIP 805 candidates (less than the 1,000+ they claimed earlier this week).
· Disappointingly the Labour Party and Liberal Democrats have not met the challenge posed by the BNP at these elections. Conservatives are contesting 96.7 per cent of town hall seats against the BNP, with Labour failing to run candidates against the BNP in 47 wards (6.6 per cent) and Liberal Democrats giving the BNP a free run in 129 wards(18 per cent).
Labour
Labour are fighting a lower proportion than four years ago. Labour candidates are contesting 6,360, or 60.6 per cent, of the seats. This is a significantly lower proportion than four years ago, when they contested 65.6 per cent of the seats. Labour are fighting a lower proportion of the seats up for election than Conservatives managed in the ‘low point’ of 1995.
Conservatives
Conservatives are fighting a higher proportion of the seats up for election than ever before. Conservative candidates are contesting 9,264, or 88.3 per cent, of the 10,491 seats up for election. This is our best ever performance in these seats. Four years ago, when most of these seats were last up for election, Conservatives contested 83.5 per cent of the seats.
The lack of Labour candidates potentially makes the local elections harder for Conservatives in CON-LIBDEM areas where Conservatives previously did not obtain more than half of the vote share.
Liberal Democrats
Liberal Democrat candidates are contesting 6,667, or 63.5 per cent, of the seats. This is only a slightly higher proportion than four years ago, when they contested 63.2 per cent of the seats.
BNP and UKIP
BNP are contesting 717, or 6.8 per cent of the seats and UKIP are contesting 805 seats, 7.7 per cent. UKIP’s nominations are below the “more than 1,000” they pledged to run earlier this week. Conservatives have sought to ensure we are running candidates against the BNP; there are just 24 seats with a BNP candidate but no Conservative candidate; this compared to 47 Labour and 129 Liberal Democrat seats.
Green Party
Green candidates are contesting 1,394, or 13.3 per cent of the seats, compared with 9.4 per cent four years ago
REGIONAL BREAKDOWNS
East of England
Conservative candidates are contesting 1,401, or 96.1 per cent, of the 1,458 seats up for election in the East. Four years ago, when these seats were last up for election, Conservatives contested 92.4 per cent of the seats.
Labour are contesting 906, or 62.1 per cent, and Liberal Democrats 993, or 68.1 per cent.
East Midlands
Conservative candidates are contesting 1,263, or 82.6 per cent, of the 1,529 seats up for election in the East Midlands. Four years ago, when these seats were last up for election, Conservatives contested 78.9 per cent of the seats. Labour are contesting 1,022, or 66.8 per cent, and Liberal Democrats 667, or 43.6 per cent.
North East
Conservative candidates are contesting 477, or 53.2 per cent, of the 897 seats up for election in the North East. Four years ago, when these seats were last up for election, Conservatives contested 45.2 per cent of the seats. Labour are contesting 745, or 83.1 per cent, and Liberal Democrats 484, or 54.0 per cent.
North West
Conservative candidates are contesting 1031, or 89.9 per cent, of the 1,147 seats up for election in the North West. Four years ago, when these seats were last up for election, Conservatives contested 81.1 per cent of the seats. Labour are contesting 920, or 80.2 per cent, and Liberal Democrats 645, or 56.2 per cent.
South East
Conservative candidates are contesting 2,082, or 98.4 per cent, of the 2,116 seats up for election in the South East. Four years ago, when these seats were last up for election, Conservatives contested 96.6 per cent of the seats. Labour are contesting 1,115, or 52.7 per cent, and Liberal Democrats 1,635, or 77.2 per cent.
South West
Conservative candidates are contesting 1,494, or 88.2 per cent, of the 1,693 seats up for election in the South West. Four years ago, when these seats were last up for election, Conservatives contested 82.0 per cent of the seats. Labour are contesting 587, or 34.7 per cent, and Liberal Democrats 1,304, or 77.0 per cent.
West Midlands
Conservative candidates are contesting 932, or 91.6 per cent, of the 1,017 seats up for election in the West Midlands. Four years ago, when these seats were last up for election, Conservatives contested 88.2 per cent of the seats. Labour are contesting 612, or 60.2 per cent, and Liberal Democrats 540, or 53.1 per cent.
Yorkshire & Humber
Conservative candidates are contesting 584, or 92.1 per cent, of the 634 seats up for election in Yorkshire & Humber. Four years ago, when these seats were last up for election, Conservatives contested 86.8 per cent of the seats. Labour are contesting 543, or 71.5 per cent, and Liberal Democrats 399, or 62.9 per cent."
42 comments:
Doesn't look like Labour is even bothering with the South West.
Not a suprise, them being even less welcome than foot and mouth disease around here.
Thats a pretty extensive post there Iain! Interesting stats as well - the most interesting of which has to be the free run of the BNP which the Lib Dems are allowing in some areas! Good increases in candidates across the board by Conservatives too.
Scotland, on the other hand, is an entirely different question.
Incredible that the local party can't even find a paper candidate for each seat!
I'm also shocked that the Conservatives can't find candidates for 100% of the seats.
What's happening to the parties? And does it have anything to do with big money politics?
Does 'free run' mean that there is no opposition to the BNP or mean that the LibDems are simply not contesting that seat?
In the latter surely it is a good thing to avoid splitting the anti-BNP vote and allowing them to win in our ridiculous electoral system.
I have commented before on the hollowing out of all political parties as the leaders & the media become all that parties are about. I must admit I had not realised how far it had gone - when parties cannot even provide one token canditate per ward democracy is in trouble.
Scarborough has fifty seats.
There are Labour candidates in eleven of them.
There are some extraordinary stats there. I particularly like the regional breakdown.
There is only one region in the country where the Conservatives are not competing in over 80% of seats - the North East. Obviously work needs to be done here, but the showing across the rest of the country is impressive.
Particularly when you compare this with Labour and the Lib Dems. Labour are only competing in two areas out of eight in more than 80% of seats, and have a showing of just 35% in the South West and 53% in the South East.
And the Lib Dems, are they a national party ready even for opposition, never mind government? You're joking! They are managing less than 80% in all areas of the country, and have less than 60% in four areas.
It is said that the Midlands is the key electoral battleground. Putting together the East and West Midlands, we have average fighting percentages of 87% for the Conservatives, 64% for Labour, and a pitiful 48% for the Lib Dems.
If two of the three main parties don't even bother in a third or even a half of all seats across the Midlands, what hope do they have in the long-run? I just hope the Conservatives can pick up a hefty load of seats as a result of this strong showing of candidates.
Here In sunny Dover we have plenty of liebour candidates.They are going to endeavor to "save" our playing fields & the planet of cause. If anybody wants some, I will willingly donate all or some FOC!
Some very interesting stats there. To an extent the reason for this disparity can be put down to tactics - the Lib Dems and Labour probably place more emphasis on only standing where they have a relative chance of making progress - but I agree it is bad news for both of them, and for party politics in general.
The spin about Labour and the Lib Dems 'failing' to stand up to the BNP is clearly false though. The BNP are opportunists par excellence who favour relatively uncontested seats. They're strategy is based on targeting wards which have relatively little activity.
A more accurate analysis, which in many ways is just as damaging, is that by not focusing as much on maximising their candidates, the Lib Dems and Labour have effectively given the BNP a boost. Nick Griffin is rushing into the vacuum.
interesting stuff, but you should also look at the figures from the elections held in other years for all the other council seats.
The Tories are contesting more seats than Labour in *Yorkshire*?! Incredible...
The interesting question is whether the seats that Labour are not competing in are the same as the ones the LibDems are not competing in - or are we seeing a sort of non-compete clause?
anon @ 12.06 - large parts of Yorkshire are wealthy, rural areas. Labour dominates in the towns and cities, but there are large parts of Yorkshire where it's between the Tories and Lib Dems.
A rather weak attempt at spin about the Liberal Democrat figures. It's the first time outside of a general election that the Lib Dems have come second in number of candidates stood in an election - which is a major achievement.
The role of local councillor has recently become deeply unappealing and onerous. Not only are councillors unable to speak on issues that affect their ward (and on which issues many weere elected), the Standards Board dogs their every step with groundless accusations being endlessly investigated, their personal finances and circumstances are subjected to disclosure more intrusive than any national-level politician, and unless the councillor is a member of the grandiosly entitled 'cabinet', he or she is devoid of influence as well.
Maybe it is time to re-evaluate the role of councillor and to reduce their number(why, oh why does Scarborough need fifty?) and restore their influence, ability to speak freely and increase their status in local democracy. Being local is the essence of a councillor - that's why people elect them. they must be able to speak on local issues.
Hi Iain, I'm doing my bit in Norfolk (Breckland) and standing as a candidate (for the Labour Party! haha). As your article says, there are unfortunately less Labour candidates across Norfolk then I would certainly of hoped for, but considering the amount of work that is needed for nomination papers it is not suprising - the Tories have a full time paid election agent and part-time assistant - I dont think any other parties have anyone in a paid capacity so that is certainly an advantage for them. To get 10 signatures for a District nomination paper actually takes a lot of time in most Norfolk seats as they are so rural you can clock up a lot of miles driving to collect signatures. Best wishes, Terry
Councilors should live locally and be accessible to all of the people within the community that they serve.
I was recently involved in the selection of the GLA candidate for Haringay and Enfield. The calibre of Conservative candidates was exceptionally high and as a result of this I found the process very difficult. However, it provided me with a valuable insight into the way the selection process works.
Interesting stats.
The BNP sin though is disgraceful.
Lib Dems are standing in 64% of ards nationally but 82% of wards where there are BNP. SO it look as if they are going out of their way to oppose the BNP. I believe Labour have done the same.
It is a shame Conservative Central Office have ruined a good press release by playing a sordid game with stats about the BNP.
Interestig post, shameful BNP spin!
Ed and Neil Craig express surprise that the main parties cannot find token paper cadidates for certain wards. I know of many cases where people have allowed their names to be put forward for "unwinnable" council seats and then without any campaigning found themselves elected.
Tristan said...
...avoid splitting the anti-BNP vote and allowing them to win in our ridiculous electoral system.
--
Er, it is our system that keeps the BNP out, PR would open the door to them.
Charlotte, are you saying that people are scared of getting onto the council?!
I nearly won my paper candidacy in May but I would have loved to have got onto the council!
Fair point Charlotte - as an ex-Lib Dem in Labour swamped glasgow I never encountered that problem.
Quoting numbers of council seats gives a misleading impression about the actual spread of support. I suspect many of the seats uncontested by Labour are relatively small rural district seats, and that if you looked at share of electorate the coverage figures would be much closer between Labour and Tory.
In Calderdale MBC, it's the Tories who do not have a full slate, although that appears to be due to the problems with submitting nominations (for the second year running) and, to balance out Iain's concern about Labour's actions helping the Lib Dems, this will probably help the Lib Dems in one Labour-Lib Dem marginal.
Ian,
Lumping the BNP and UKIP together is a not so transparent ploy that we're all getting a bit weary of. Let's be honest here. If you ever bothered to read manifestos you must know that UKIP are a centre right Libertarian Party and the BNP like all socialists are a far left authoritarian party. It would have been more plausible putting the Lib/Lab/Con together with their consensus ideology.
I agree with Maltheus that the BNP stats are most interesting. However this isn't all that helpfully or fairly expressed really:
Disappointingly the Labour Party and Liberal Democrats have not met the challenge posed by the BNP at these elections. Conservatives are contesting 96.7 per cent of town hall seats against the BNP, with Labour failing to run candidates against the BNP in 47 wards (6.6 per cent) and Liberal Democrats giving the BNP a free run in 129 wards(18 per cent).
The switch from candidates fielded 96.7% to candidates not fielded 6.6% etc is statistical manipulation at its worst. 93.4% would be so much fairer and more useful.
There are instances where local knowledge suggests NOT standing all candidates against the BNP and driving votes to the most likely to beat them. Not something we'd do in Mcr but it is not uncommon in the NW to have a paper only or even a tacit "don't vote for me" line from a second or third party.
The LIb Dem figure of 82% could be more sinister I suppose as there have been documented instances of them working with the BNP or behaving just like them as communalists. Though mad Lib Dem blogger Tristan is part right - except sometimes his party and it must be said the Socialist alliance have helped BNP get in by not standing their forces down or going low key.
Well done to the Tories anyway. If the only Cameron effect is allowing local activists to be not embarrassed to stand as Tories any more then that's OK by me. Tory collapse gives us the Lib Dem poll rats infestation we are currently trying to eradicate.
Why did you lump UKIP and the BNP together Iain?
Four years ago, when these seats were last up for election,
You are joking I take it ! There were Local Elections in 2006. They operate on a cycle of Thirds with an Election in 3 years out of 4.
I do think you should become more acquainted with English local government
"you must know that UKIP are a centre right Libertarian Party"
Libertarian eh? Where are their promises to abolish the welfare state and legalise all class A drugs?
Agree though that comparing them to the BNP is silly. Their ideology is not based on racial nationalism and and they are not anticapitalist.
Justin, I didn't. If you had read the post properly you would see that these figures are from a CCO press release. They did it, not me.
Observer Said
Not all local authorities operate on a cycle of Thirds. Some are all out including many unitary and district authorities.
Thanks for that Iain.
Why did you repeat the CCO press release's lumping together of UKIP and the BNP? Isn't the connotation obvious?
It's a conspiracy you see. It gives you something to beat me over the head with.
Nigel Farage deserves to be awarded the UKIP@ HOME award for telling Pork Pies.
UKIP can't even be trusted in telling the truth over a simple thing like candidate numbers!
What I find interesting is how it's so interesting how uninteresting this is or isn't.
Mind you I've spent the day at Lords being very interested in what is very uninteresting to the uninterested and at the same time pretty interesting (even though it was damnably cold in London) to those who weren't there, or not.
And also,I've had just the oen.
QED
This must be the only self induced infrastructural collapse nulab don't blame on the Conservatives.
Auntie Flo'
Proud to say 100% for the Conservatives in Newcastle upon Tyne this time
and how many do the tries expect to win in newcastle then/ not many more than they will do in Easington 9where they are not standing at all)
I am not sure your interpretation is quite right. Labour has a habit of standing one paper candidate in no-hope multi-member wards. So although they are only contesting about 60% of vacancies, they will be on the ballot paper in many more wards.
Interesting analysis nevertheless.
Iain
Your article in the EDP today on this issue mentions the Raynhams where there is a straight choice between UKIP and Lib Dems.
Conservative supporters may lean towards voting UKIP but giving UKIP a council foothold and profile could work against Tories in next general election...
What do you think?
In the words of Francis Urquhart, you might say that, I couldn't possible comment...
Vote for who you want. All the clever tactical voting is as likely as not to cancel out. Maybe letting in the UKIPist will make it marginally tougher for the Tories, maybe it will marginally move the Tories away from political correctness. Equally maybe the LDs will dump Ming & become electable in which case they will give the Tories a harder fight.
Post a Comment