Posted by JLW on Friday May 05, 01:53
Despite John Leech's efforts to increase the number of Lib Dem council seats, the Lib Dems had a bad night in the local elections in Manchester. In Manchester Withington, the Lib Dems failed to gain Chorlton where their main campaign took place with Val Stevens holding the ward with a majority over 100 votes. In Old Moat Brian Harrison increased his majority to over 750 votes.
The Liberal Democrats lost 4 seats in Manchester to the Labour Party including Fallowfield, Gorton North, Longsight and Whalley Range.
Liberal Democrat Leader Simon Ashley said, "A bad night, yeah". It wasn't really the ‘challenge for control of this great City’ that they had hoped to make.
The main Conservative target, Brooklands, was held by Labour with a massively increased majority.
+ tags coming soon
( 45 Comments )
Dave
Friday May 05, 10:11
Well I managed to vote this year (last year my wife was involved in a car crash with a hit and run twoker!!! so missed!). I voted Lib Dem, so it will be interesting to see the result. Lib Dems may not have done that great locally, but at least nationally New Labour got what they deserve. (PS when do New Labour stop using "new" in their name?)
Worryingly, the BNP doubled their votes!
Dave
Friday May 05, 10:20
According to the BBC, "The Lib Dems won a greater share of the vote than Labour but this did not translate into extra councillors." What a great democracy we live in, I bet the Iraqi's can't wait!
Dave
Friday May 05, 11:25
http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/elections/Manchester.htm
Here are the results for the whole of Manchester broken down into wards. Some interesting results.
Thomas
Friday May 05, 11:29
Be slightly wary of the results - there are some errors (for instance it thinks that Labour held Chorlton, but with 1000 votes less than the Lib Dems, and that three of the Labour gains didn't happen!)
Any views on why this melt-down occured for the Lib Dems?
Dave
Friday May 05, 13:30
I would hardly call it a "melt-down". However, I think the Lib Dems have not done as well as they could have, (in my area at least) due to not as big a presence as normal, and because they have lost some trust in recent months locally, and perhaps on a national level, not in the limelight as much as they were this time last year.
That said Labour's meltdown (and the figures show they came third nationally overall in votes counted) was due to ongoing problems and coverups nationally, and people are still protesting over Blair being in charge.
What do you think the reasons for Labour's meltdown were? Also, what do you think are the reasons the BNP managed to double the amount of councillors nationally?
Steve James
Friday May 05, 13:36
Great set of results in South Manchester for Labour. It's no secret the Lib Dems going all out for Chorlton and how good to see that Chorltonians favour a local candidate with a great track record of delivery over a Lib Dem chancer and his party's usual guff, scaremongering and distorted view of the world.
peter h
Friday May 05, 15:49
it was scarcely a great night in south manchester for labour? they didnt win in didsbury. their results were worse than they might expect given the shenanigans over simon wheale and john not giving up his council seat and yasmin whatsit. you should have done far better against lib dems in that case. You rather blew it , really.
and nationally you came 3rd (THIRD) behind tories and lib dems. clutching at straws , steve
Dave
Friday May 05, 16:00
And although Lib Dems didn't win Chorlton, they did win in my ward, Chorlton Park. All three of my local councillors are Lib Dems.
Adele
Friday May 05, 20:01
Fantastic night for Labour in Manchester. We're back with a vengeance and running this great city.
peter h
Friday May 05, 20:21
isnt reality boring when your a labour supporter..............back with a vengeance my ass
Adele
Saturday May 06, 18:07
Labour 61
Lib dem 34
Green 1
Assuming a coalition we have a 26 working majority
Labour have
peter h
Sunday May 07, 00:01
26 must be labour's lucky number.
they got 26% of the votes cast nationally on thursday.
Alan
Sunday May 07, 13:48
Adele, it's my job to argue with Peter!!
Peter, come on; the result is a kick in the teeth for the overconfident Mr Leech. With all his talk of taking control of Manchester he has actually lost seats. Hoepfully this is a reflection of what is to come in the next General Election!
Thomas
Sunday May 07, 14:14
I don't think anyone was suggesting that national results were great for the Labour Party. To answer your point Dave, there are several reasons including (but not limited to): Recent scandals (John Prescott/Charles Clarke etc.), Tony Blair, Third term government etc., but I think we all knew it was likely that the results wouldn't be great. My question was why were the results reversed here in Manchester?
Peter - yes the results were great in Manchester Withington/South Manchester for the Labour party. The stats are a bit difficult since there were three candidates from most parties at the local elections in 2004, but taking the best result (i.e. highest number of votes) for a candidate from each party against the results this time the results for wards in Manchester Withington were:
Burnage: Labour +12.73%, Lib Dem -10.46%
Chorlton: Labour + 5.29%, Lib Dem +2.98%
Chorlton Park: Labour +0.77%, Lib Dem +6.42%
Didsbury East: Labour +2.85%, Lib Dem -2.46%
Didsbury West: Labour +4.61%, Lib Dem + 0.13%
Old Moat: Labour +5.07%, Lib Dem -0.44%
Withington: Labour +8.93%, Lib Dem -10.54%
Overall in 2004, the Lib Dems had 45.79% of the vote and Labour had 29.49%. In 2006, Labour has 35.81% and the Lib Dems have 43.37%. I reckon that means Labour increased it's share of the vote by 6.31% and the Lib Dem share dropped by 2.42%.
While there is more to do, these election results are very positive with every single ward except Chorlton Park (Mr Leech's ward) reducing the Lib Dem majority (or increasing the Labour majority in the case of Old Moat and Chorlton).
peter h
Sunday May 07, 18:21
it was a bad night in manchester for lib dems.
But it wasnt a brilliant night for labour either.
I think labour got good local candidates with strong local following in the seats they gained, because thet got big swings in those wards.
One ,for instance, was the mayor's daughter and she no doubt benefitted (quite properly) from that.
And of course, with such low turnouts a candidate who can call on such support is likely to win. 500 extra followers can turn things on their head.
That matters. I've always argued that john leech won so well because he has developed a strong personal local following.
so good for labour in those 4 wards. But nationally it was a disaster for them. Theyre in a mess. The parliamentary party is imploding in a mixtures of arrogance, corrupt practice and cat-fights.
And now that you have John Reid acting as blair's de facto spokesman you're going to see bare knuckle bouts. He was at it in radio today calling anybody wanting a change of leadership "from another planet". Does that clown not realise just how bad a picture that paints of labour?
Putting any political bias to one side, the last thing we need is a governing party at war with itself. All moral authority disappears.
2 JOBS
Sunday May 07, 19:33
No it was a really good night for Labour in Manchester because Labour in Manchester are running the city well.
peter h
Sunday May 07, 22:16
they do some things well. but they also do a lot of things badly.
Dave
Monday May 08, 12:24
I was slightly influenced by Clarks cock up, but what John "two shags" Prescott gets up to is his and the tabloids buisness! Like I said, the Labour candidate failed to engage at all with me, and she had an excellent opportunity to do so. I never heard anything from our Green party candidate nor did I hear from the local Tory candidate. As for Norman Lewis, well his leaflet was a little disappointing (just taking a swing at Labour and not much else) but at least I see him regularly in the community, and his party nationally has a lot to offer me currently, whereas the other main parties do not have much to offer me. Locally, I never know who to trust, they all seem to take credit for when things go right, and all seem to slag one another off when things go wrong!
Dave
Monday May 08, 12:40
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4983780.stm
Why is Labour so worried about this one man?
peter h
Monday May 08, 17:42
why do they worry about one man indeed, especially when they ignored a million people when they march against iraq?
and about the green candidate - we noticed that this mr candleland only ever seems to turn up on ballot papers. we never see or hear from them from one year to the next. completely bloody useless. we've thought about voting green , but if he can't be arsed to go out and spread his message then we can't be arsed to vote for him.
Alan
Monday May 08, 21:03
Should we not all get a sense of national and local. Hypothetically, if you have a great Labour councillor, (or as in Geoff Bridsons case a potentially great councillor)and a terrible Lib Dem/ Tory who is running for council surely you would vote Labour regardless of whether you disagree with some of their national policies??
peter h
Monday May 08, 22:11
true but nationally too. I'd vote for boris johnson, or tony benn, or denis skinner because parliament needs people like that, irrespective of their party.
Dave
Tuesday May 09, 08:24
I do agree Alan on the local and national issue. But my choice was some what limited. I do still agree with many of Labours principles, but when their local candidate doesn't take an interest in me, why should I vote for her?
peter h
Tuesday May 09, 17:35
dave if your candidate takes no interest in you then your candidate has missed the point of the job.
If you think about it, that it why Tony Blair is in such trouble.
He's forgotten that he is the people's representative and thinks he's their leader.
Alan
Tuesday May 09, 17:55
Boris Johnson!!!! I see where you're coming from with Tony Benn, I've got a lot of respect for him but irrespective of party politics Boris Johnson is an idiot!!
peter h
Tuesday May 09, 22:07
listen alan, boris johnson wants to introduce sharia law for bike thieves. that gets my vote.
and you should look up the proper definition of idiot. I'm happy to be an idiot by its proper meaning.
Dave
Wednesday May 10, 09:19
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/manchester/4755537.stm
John's in the news again!
Steve James
Wednesday May 10, 13:42
Yep, fair play to John. he's doing well in terms of press coverage/speaking up but, as ever, the soundbites are good, the solution is missing.
Dave - the MEN last night reported the Centre was for 'perverts.' The BBC report says the Centre doesn't involve sex offenders! An episode of Brasseye beckons.
Sensitivities aside, it's easy to be a NIMBY whether it's an offenders centre, phone mast, social housing etc etc...but these sorts of Centres HAVE to exist somewhere.
Can our MP suggest where?
Dave
Wednesday May 10, 14:16
Don't get me wrong, I agree with you Steve that they need to be placed somewhere. Perhaps a light industrial estate? (I am quickly thinking off the top of my head, please feel free to point out the problems with my suggestion!) At least it wouldn't be in a residential area, nor would it be right next to a school/nursery etc.
The MEN is a load of tosh... I like to read it from time to time, but it is about as news worthy as the Sun/Mirror/Express etc
Thomas
Wednesday May 10, 14:37
Dave - do you want to post that as a new "blog" entry. Otherwise the story just gets lost amounst the comments. To do it just click the "Add to the blog" link at the top of this page or visit http://www.johnleechwatch.com/home/add
Alan
Wednesday May 10, 19:23
LOL Peter, I used the word idiot because the word I wanted to use was not suitable to post on this site!
Alan
Wednesday May 10, 19:25
Dave / Steve I've got the perfect solution to the problem. They shouldn't get housed anywhere they should be shot!
peter h
Wednesday May 10, 22:11
what really needs to be done is effective rehabilitation.
this country is really stupid. it more or less guarantees that most offenders will re-offend by not spending the time and money to breaking the cycle and helping them to go straight.
if youre some twentysomething black kid with crap education, a couple of convictions for robbery or drugs, what chance have you got? Youre written off before you start, so you do crime because that's the only way you can get anywhere.
Alan
Wednesday May 10, 23:12
I agree, in relation to crime I believe that society as a whole is at fault but at the same time if someone commits a crime then they should be punished.
I think you can draw a line between certain offences. e.g. there is a definate difference between paedophiles, rapists murders and some poor bastard who causes trouble because he lives on a shit estate, has had a terrible upbringing, a bad education and no chances. The paedophiles, rapists and murderers should be strung up but liek you say Peter the kid who has a couple of convictions should get help. But we have to look at the way in which society works ( and this Peter, is why I'm not a Tory). Society needs to reform to make sure that everyone has a chance at a good education, a good upbringing and has evry chance in life to succeed. If this happens then we will have a society where people don't have to turn to crime..... we have a very long way to go before we get there though!!
Dave
Thursday May 11, 08:43
I guess Alan, will you be the one to shoot my brother? He is a schedule one offender. If you are not the one to shoot him, who will do the job?
Steve James
Thursday May 11, 09:11
Peter - (seriously). If everything is so bad in Blighty, why aren't you living abroad?
peter h
Thursday May 11, 17:33
because I'm emglish and this is home.
but if I was 21 again, I'd be off to NZ, or Canada, or Ireland. Somewhere with a bit of space. This bloody country has 60 million inhabitants in an area suited to maybe 30 million, and we expect that to rise 10% soon from inward migration , which is lunatic.
we have the same population as france, for instance, in a land mass may 25% of the size of France (guesstimate...).
That is not a swipe at immigrants. It's about numbers, irrepsective of who they are.
And within that limited landmass we have the most restricted access to countryside in europe.
in most countries - including scotland - you are free to walk or ride your bike bascially anywhere except other peoples' gardens. Here we allow fat bastard landlords to hog the best bits for themselves.
peter h
Thursday May 11, 17:41
dave - Presumably your brother's ill then? needs help, not shooting ?
peter h
Thursday May 11, 23:43
ana alan, the most effective long term way of dealing with paedophiles, rapists and murderers is to reform - or cure - them. very few people are beyond help.
Steve James
Friday May 12, 09:17
Yes but Peter, everything you seem to post about the state of Britain is so negative. If you're on such a perpetual downer, move away.
Dave
Friday May 12, 14:10
Peter, depends on your definition of "ill". No matter the crime, I don't think shooting/killing the criminal is the answer. The death penality is not a deterrent, nor does it set a good example to the youth of today. However, I am unsure if some people can ever be rehabilitated. I don't have a real answer, we can't keep filling up prisons/secure hospitals, yet community probation orders etc are not the answer either.
peter h
Friday May 12, 17:02
thanks for the thought steve.
my comments actually are usually negative about aspects of the current labour government's policies.
So New Labour's attitude is "if you don't like what we do, leave the country".
I can't say I'm surprised.
peter h
Friday May 12, 17:22
dave you say we can't keep filling up prisons and secure hospitals?
well, as for prisons, a significant percentage of prisoners ought either to be doing non-custodial sentences or be in psychiatric care.
prisons are used as dustbins too often. as soon as somebody gets sent to prison it gets far more difficult to rehabilitate them because they have the black mark of prison on their record.
How many ex-cons go back to crime because they can't find straight jobs afterwards?
really, community service, and remedial educational classes, should sort out a lot of them. In Norway, minor prison sentences are served over a series of weekends, which means they get punished, but don't have to lose jobs or family.
then with those who are mentally ill, banging them up in prison is going to make their condition far worse.
Do you know for instance that Styal prison, soon to be europe's biggest women's prison, does not have a single resident psychiatrist? Not one! And they are notorious for suicides. Surprise surprise.
Obviously a percentage of criminals need locking up and possibly locking up for life, and a percentage of mental patients cannot be either cured or at least stabilized sufficiently to be allowed to be free, but we as a country do nothing like enough to tackle the majority who can be salvaged.
That is why we have the biggest prison population in Europe , and it is a huge waste of people, and adds to society's insecurity simply so that people like alan can think they've been "punished".
Alan
Saturday May 13, 12:15
Peter, if you think that a convicted paedophile should be allowed to re enter into society then you need your head testing. I once watched a programme on tv about paedophiles and one specific interview has stayed in my head. A 50 or so year old man was justifying having sexual relations with a 5 year old on the basis that they can speak so they can consent!! I mean for God's sake!!! How can you suggest that people like this can be helped or indeed that they should be helped!! People like that want remmoving from society and I for one would sooner see my taxes go to locking them up in maximum security prisons than 'rehabilitating' them and placing them back in society! You can't use your black kid on drugs committing crime argument (which incidentally I do agree with) in this case Peter, they are both very far removed from one another!
Doing The South Manchester Reporters Job For Them
Sunday Jun 18, 19:52
Just catching up with the election analysis. Was particularly interested in the comments about Chorlton Park - Norman's leaflet being crap, but at least Dave sees him around. I'm told by sources close to the ground on the estates that they encountered what amounts to gangsterism in this ward. People intimidated into displaying LD posters or not displaying Labour ones, dogs being set loose on campaigners, a constant threat bubbling under the surface, under age kids delivering leaflets for beer (I don't have a clue whether that is true, but it is true that I've been told it) and to be frank the things we do hear on the grapevine abour dear old Norman are very off putting indeed. With organ grinder John Leech out of town to all intents and purposes and with no prospect of relief for two years Norman and Tony are Chorlton Park monkeys and to be blunt us residents who are unlucky enough to live in that ward have no representation in the Town Hall. A friend of mine who is from Yorkshire reckons he can tell which party has the council seats from taking a quick look around. On Mersey Bank he guessed in 10 seconds flat. In Levenshulme it took more like a minute even though the councillors there are a whole lot better than Norman and Tony.
These comments are owned by the person that posted them. They are not necessarily indicative of public opinion and their content has not been checked for accuracy. If you find a comment you think violates our Terms of Use please report it.
Sorry, posting on this entry is disabled to prevent comment spam.
