Wythenshawe by-election result – for whom?

(55 Posts)
Isitmebut Fri 14-Feb-14 08:05:12

By-elections, known for protest voting against the incumbent government are still pawed over by political parties for voting intensions at the next major elections; so is there anything to be learned by this by-election?

The votes of 28.2% of those eligible to vote (versus 54.3% at the 2010 general election) went like this;
Labour 13,261
Ukip 4,301
Consevatives 3,479
Lib Dems 1.176
Monster Raving Looney Party 288

If Ukip was looking to gain ‘working class’ votes, the 11% increase in Labour’s share of a piddley turnout, would not bode too well, but that COULD have been down to Ukip’s dodgy candidate, his backer, and no national or local policies that mattered – in which case coming second was indeed a result.

The Lib Dems even as a party in government must be disappointed as they have been THE traditional by-election party, gathering the ‘protest vote’ parliamentary seats, unlike Ukip, now 6-times second and still don’t have one seat in parliament to keep the lucky candidate’s bum warm.

The Conservatives, the senior party in a coalition government, making tough, necessary and unpopular, in a Manchester constituency they have not held since 1959, it could have been worse. IMO.

claig Sat 15-Feb-14 16:00:35

But the 31p flat rate includes both income tax and national insurance. And anyway, it is not current policy. We have to wait for the manifesto to see what good policies are yet to come.

'And as for the Conservative bedroom tax, could you please explain to me how that optional “tax” works on many who have had their chances in life and those who’s children have left home - and how it doesn’t benefits those mainly starting out, overcrowded with 2 or more children to a bedroom?'

Because you don't rob Peter to pay Paul. You don't kick people out of homes and neighbourhoods that they have lived in for years and break all their ties to those neighbourhoods and to their friends and families just to save small beer while not bothering to dredge rivers for £4 million and ending up with a cost in damage of hundreds of millions where apparently now 'money is no object'.

It's about priorities and proper management and prevention.

Stop paying for the Ethiopian Spice Girls out of UK taxpayers' money and stop throwing the poorest people out of their council homes because they can't find the extra money to pay for their spare rooms.

Cut the salaries of the incompetent quangocrats and get off the backs of the poorest people in the country.

Put the people first like UKIP does.

BoulevardOfBrokenSleep Sat 15-Feb-14 16:18:00

With a turnout that low, it's a question of who stayed at home really, isn't it... Comparing the actual numbers of the 2010 result, Labour have lost 5,000 votes, the Cons lost 7,000, and LDs lost 8,000.

UKIP gained 3,000. So most of the voters for the serious 'traditional' parties stayed at home rather than converting, it looks like.

claig Sat 15-Feb-14 16:19:01

'on many who have had their chances'

So the politicians have decided that these people have had their chance, that their time is up, that they now have to move out? Is that it?

These politicians who claimed for bath plugs and moats and flipped homes from the public purse now sit in judgement of the poorest people and tell them "you've had your chance".

They have "had their chance" and the voters of Wythenshawe gave them a message. UKIP came second to Labour. Cameron has said he will "listen" to the UKIP voters now. They are no longer "fruitcakes" now that he needs them. But can he listen? Does he understand them or does it just go in one ear and out the other?

Is it too late? Is there a flood of people moving away? Has the wind changed? Have they had their chance? Did they blow it justy like they blew British taxpayer money on funding the Ethiopian Spice Girls while British citizens queue up at foodbanks and people's homes and businesses are flooded because someone thought that dredging should not be done?

HollyHB Sat 15-Feb-14 16:53:13

I think the extremely low turnout is more significant than any swing.

It means there is room for someone to emerge from out of the blue and be a serious contender. A big vote catching gimmick or something would be all that is needed. The youngsters would probably turn out in droves to vote for a young music celebrity who promised to wield a big stick.

Spinflight Sat 15-Feb-14 17:55:00

I live in a labour rotten borough, if there was a by election tomorrow most people wouldn't notice.

It is assumed that labour will get back in, hence the low turnouts.

Isitmebut Sun 16-Feb-14 01:16:48

Claig…the only record of what Ukip stand for is in that 2010 manifesto, where your party, in their Blue Ukip days, were trying to woo the wealthy with a Flat rate 31p income tax and NiCs, so while you are embarrassingly policy less and feel you have any right to lamely criticises other parties policies – your only historical document of what you stand for, shows its to support the filthy rich.

Did you have the Ukip policy on dredging to hand that no other party published, please provide the link.

In the real world this country did not build enough of any homes during the boom, so we are where we are. So it’s interesting Ukip would rather stick up for those with bedrooms they don’t use and are being asked to trade down (similar to the private sector decisions made every day, when children leave home), than the far more numerous people living in severely overcrowded, so unhealthy for mind and body, one and 2 bed roomed properties. I hope those people are taking note.

However while Labour tries to threaten property companies and therefore their shareholders to build.
www.theguardian.com/business/2013/dec/16/uk-housebuilders-ed-miliband-land-hoarding

The coalition has been encouraging them to build and getting results.
“Uk home building hits highest figure since 2007, figures show”.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-25982505

Come 2015 voters will have the following choices; the political party that got us into the mess, the coalition parties that increasing evidence shows is getting the country out of the mess, or the no policy party of three colours (of Red, Blue or Yellow), depending where they can opportunistically do best claiming they are ‘special’.

claig Sun 16-Feb-14 06:32:12

'Did you have the Ukip policy on dredging to hand that no other party published, please provide the link.'

You seem to be wedded to the old failed party policy wonks who have to have everything written down before they can act and who have to have policy written down on their pagers before they can speak on TV. But those are the old failed ways.

UKIP is different. it is the party of 'common sense'. They don't need everything written down in advance, they can take the correct action as and when necessary. Their policies are based on 'common sense'.

Under UKIP, rivers would be dredged, silt would be removed and rivers would not be able to flood so quickly and for so long.

Unlike the old failed parties, they will not accept the failed folly of littering the countryside with 40ft windmills and rooftop wind turbines in the vain King Canute style hope that this will stop flooding. Instead they will spend money on flood prevention and dredging rivers just like local farmers always said should be done. It's 'common sense', they don't need it written down on pagers.

UKIP have said that some of the 'ring-fenced foreign aid' should be spent in this country on flood prevention and in paying for the cleanup. There will be no more taxpayer funding of £4m for the Ethiopian Spice Girls when it would have only cost £4m to dredge the rivers in the Somerset Levels.

The Mad Hatters have run the country for too long, now it is time for common sense, time for One Nation UKIP (the ' party of three colours (of Red, Blue or Yellow').

Isitmebut Sun 16-Feb-14 13:30:02

Claig…in the real world, globally all governments have to ‘write things down’ in advance, in manifestos to show their priorities, and then in what is called a b-u-d-g-e-t; annual and hopefully for years forward as it both responsible government spending taxpayers money and allows departments to plan ahead.

It may have escaped your notice, but after a 250-year weather ‘event’, it is too late to get the dredgers out, as the ground is either too wet for the equipment, or under water.

So in conclusion, you are confirming dredging was not on Farage’s fridge list of things to do, never mind in your non existent manifesto, so once again, brainless Ukip opportunism. Marvellous.

Oh and telling different constituencies you have different policies is not ‘one nation’, its tricksy.

P.S. ring fenced aid, or as the only party to ring fence the NHS, does not mean compromises elsewhere, especially when a minute part of our overall economy.

claig Sun 16-Feb-14 14:04:37

'in what is called a b-u-d-g-e-t; annual and hopefully for years forward as it both responsible government spending taxpayers money and allows departments to plan ahead.'

And yet, we have now been told that "money is no object". Talk about making it up as you go along.

This is an article from the Spectator.

"Cameron betrayed public trust – and sounded like Arthur Scargill – when he said ‘money is no object’ "

blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2014/02/david-cameron-aligned-himself-with-arthur-scargill-when-he-said-that-money-is-no-object/

I don't think even Farage would have said "money is no object". He's no "fruitcake".

claig Sun 16-Feb-14 14:46:49

"Money is no object" seems to have been the formula used when determining the pay of quangocrats and the expenses of MPs.

I think Thatcher's approach would have been different. One of prioritising, spending wisely and scrapping windmills and taxpayer subsidies to aristocratic landed gentry for erecting them on their vast tracts of land.

Isitmebut Sun 16-Feb-14 16:44:17

Claig…I’m guessing that your not Ukip’s sharpest tack, but you are answering your own points: government annually budget, and then if there is a 250-year or other emergency/event, they have contingency plans to deal with THE PROBLEM. Money is no object here is to deal with the emergency. Once the emergency is over, the review to produce a far wider prevention policy reports and a policy, alien to UKIP, is formed.

As it happens, the approx 0.7% of our economy spent on Overseas Aid, doesn’t always go overseas, apparently £300k didn’t get passed Scotland, teaching in schools Global Citizenship
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10637364/Millions-of-overseas-aid-spent-in-UK.html

As for Ukip’s ‘policy’ of diverting from Overseas Aid to dredging or anything else, I HALF believe it to be true – as Ukip have only really stood as racist bigots, so hardly likely to send any money to Muslim or any other non-Christiam country – as Farage recently confirmed, when his hands reaching out to refugees from Syria, was specified as ‘Christian Only’. What would Ukip’s policy be to overseas citizens, Detention centres and the Ukip Youth Movement?

And don't worry yourself about Thatcher and silly class rhetoric to hide Ukip have nothing of substance, worry about your own inspirational figures think about Ukip

“Ukip Founder Alan Sked Says The Party Is 'Morally Dodgy' And 'Extraordinarily Right-Wing”
www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/11/26/ukip-founder-alan-sked-morally-dodgy_n_2190987.html
“David Cameron has been under fire for dismissing the UK Independence Party (Ukip) as a party of "fruitcakes, loonies and closet racists", in a now-notorious radio interview in 2006.

However, he may have won support from an unusual quarter - the founder and former leader of Ukip, Professor Alan Sked, says the party he launched in 1993 has become "extraordinarily right-wing" and is now devoted to "creating a fuss, via Islam and immigrants. They've got nothing to say on mainstream issues

"Its extraordinary," Sked told the HuffPost UK, "that at the last general election, with the country facing the greatest economic crisis since the Great Depression, [Ukip's] flagship policy was to ban the burqa."

claig Sun 16-Feb-14 17:04:13

'Claig…I’m guessing that your not Ukip’s sharpest tack'

Absolutely not. The UKIP team has far sharper tacks than me. But you are the Tories' one and only sharp tack, and I think that spells bad news for the Tories.

'there is a 250-year or other emergency/event, they have contingency plans to deal with THE PROBLEM'

But the farmers on the Somerset Levels have been telling them for ages that if they didn't dredge then the Somerset Levels would flood. Why didn't they treat the farmers' warnings as an emergency ? Didn't they believe them? Are they that incompetent?

Dredging had been going on for centuries and then the "experts" downgraded its importance. Why? Was it something to do with the EU?
Why spend £31 million of public money on a 'bird sanctuary' and not spend £4m on dredging?

Farage has asked for an inquiry into the whole matter. Will they grant an inquiry so that the public can find out why it happened and what decisions were involved and who took them and why? Failing that, will they let Pickles loose so that he can find out who made the decisions that led to a lack of dredging?

'Almost £12 million of the aid budget was spent on campaigns to increase UK support for overseas development, with around £300,000 also funding global citizenship lessons in schools in Scotland, the Guardian reported.'

And you don't think that is a waste of public funds? Are you one of these 'modernisers'? You are lucky Thatcher never met you. She would have said you was wet .

Alan Skid may have said that UKIP were "fruitcakes", but so did Cameron, but now Cameron has changed his tune and wants to listen to what were once called "fruitcakes" .

Isitmebut, get with the plan. Cameron has changed his tune. Now "money is no object" and UKIP are not "fruitcakes". You're still reading yesterday's pager, you're banging the wrong drum. Now they all think that not dredging was a "mistake" and insulting UKIP voters is also a "mistake".

They're sorry, you're sorry and they're in a sorry state.

Isitmebut Sun 16-Feb-14 18:00:08

Claig…having complimenting me (shucks, I blushed), I will try and be nice, but either you are so far unable, or just don’t want to, GET IT.

The cost of dredging the rivers involved was, I believe, relatively small e.g. under £500 million, so whether the EU was involved or not the COST was not the issue, so it matters not where other money in our annual £1.3 trillion (whatever) budget, was going.

Therefore it was an Environment Agency issue as that is who the farmers speak to on a day to day basis, but both the cost of the clean up and future climate change defences, is the government’s problem - and how they respond, people can then judge.

Farage clearly sees an opportunity for votes, doesn’t need to shout for an enquiry, Cameron has already said stop the bickering, we will sort out why this happened later, AFTER the emergency is over.

Read the papers or look at the news, see the repeat of PMQT or whatever, the ‘money is no object’ Cameron pledge is for sorting out this emergency, HE HAS MADE THAT CLEAR EVERY TIME. No responsible government would offer an open ended cheque for the likes of sea defences, living in a honking great island, and he hasn’t.

claig Sun 16-Feb-14 18:13:15

'so whether the EU was involved or not the COST was not the issue'

Of course it wasn't cost and now "money is no object". So what was it? Let's have an inquiry? Turn Pickles loose. Let people discover what was really behind it and why it happened.

Of course it was the Environment Agency. but they don't operate in a vacuum. There is supposed to be oversight of what these quangos are spending our money on and what their policies are. Ultimately, the government is in charge.

'Cameron has already said stop the bickering, we will sort out why this happened later, AFTER the emergency is over.'

There is such a thing as multi-tasking. Let's hope we do "sort out why this happened". Let's hope Pickles is part of the process of finding out what happened.

Isitmebut Sun 16-Feb-14 18:33:41

God save us, 'the lights are on, but there's no one at home', and its not flooded.

Do try to read facts presented to you before answering, and Pickles (as we have discussed before) has already apologized as the government is ultimately responsible. I'm guessing 'no policy Ukip' sees milage in other people misery, so not overly bothered about the facts. Lame politics.

claig Sun 16-Feb-14 18:46:58

Pickles was right to apologise, but afterwards we haven't heard much from him. Has he been muzzled?

Farage wants an inquiry so that the people who have had their homes and businesses flooded and all the rest of the public can find out what went wrong and why dredging was not done in certain areas, which worsened the flooding.

Heads should roll over this and it shouldn't be months down the line either. Anything else is an insult to the thousands of people who have had their homes, businesses and cars flooded.

claig Sun 16-Feb-14 19:40:36

Just googled "heads should roll" over the flooding and what comes up? UKIP's Godfrey Bloom talking sense.

A poll in the Observer says "David Cameron has fumbled the flooding crisis – voters' verdict".

My guess is it is because he has not sacked anyone. People are grateful for lots of money and the army etc, but the real thing is why was it allowed to happen and for that Cameron must show leadership and sack anyone responsible. Pickles should be allowed to run wild and find out why it happened.

Here is Godfrey Bloom

"LORD CHRIS Smith is merely the last of a long line of Secretaries of State and/or heads of the Environment Agency responsible for the current flood defence shambles.

I suggest the names of Margaret Becket, Elliott Morley, Hilary Benn, Huw Irranca Davies, Ian Pearson and whoever else with whom I have been in correspondence in the last nine years, have without exception pursued a green agenda to the detriment of the taxpayers who have paid their salaries

Why on earth did these so-called experts think landowners have spent time and money on dredging for the last 800 years? Out of the goodness of their hearts?

Lord Smith should be sacked rather than allowed to retire in June; if only to appease the wrath of the victims of unnecessary floods over the last 20 years.

He should be replaced as head of the Environment Agency by a suitably qualified Dutch expert

......

"Billions wasted on wind turbines, solar power and suicidal policy based on apocryphal global warming which clearly is not happening.

A tiny percentage of all that cash could have alleviated flood problems in the countryside."

www.grimsbytelegraph.co.uk/Heads-roll-true-environmental-disaster/story-20610848-detail/story.html

No wonder UKIP is on the rise and the Tories are in decline.

claig Sun 16-Feb-14 21:42:46

A Tory MP wants an inquiry now too.

Interesting article in the Mail.
No wonder lots of people want to say it is this thing they call "global warming".

"The MP for Wraysbury last night demanded an inquiry into claims that the £110 million flood relief scheme by the Environment Agency has made flooding worse in the village.

Conservative MP Adam Afriyie said he believes the Jubilee River, a giant man-made channel that runs parallel to the Thames, unleashes a ‘fierce mini-wave’ that reduces flooding upstream but makes it worse downstream."

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2560311/The-wrath-Wraysbury-We-drowned-Gin-Jag-set-Windsor-Eton-dry.html

soul2000 Sun 16-Feb-14 21:54:42

Claig Isit. For Christ sake , stop doing what Militant Tendency did in the 1980 s and tearing apart the Centre Right , instead of fighting Ed Balls And
RED EDWARD, RALPH , HOBSBAWN , MILIBAND.

The Country will be finished in 5 Years , there are no resources or slack left to survive 5 years of Labour, all the slack was burnt out in the previous 13 years.
The stupid thing is I bet Isit agrees with 70% of what UKIP and their supporters believe . This in fighting of the Centre Right is the same as Labour and Eric Heffer and Kinnock in the 80s.....

claig Sun 16-Feb-14 22:13:24

soul2000, it's not down to the voters, it's up to the parties to offer hope.

It has got to the stage where half of the Tory Party's members have left and now UKIP has emerged as a real force in politics. We don't know how long it will last, but unless the Tories change drastically, they will have lost lots of voters. People vote on principle and for values, they can't kid themselves and vote for a party that stands for so many things they don't believe in. there is a "tipping point" and I fear it has now been passed. Who do you think the people of Wraysbury will vote for now?

There has to be an inquiry and people need to be accountable and heads need to roll. But it won't happen because there is a lack of courage and a rush to blame "global warming" instead of who is really to blame. Pickles is nowhere to be seen anymore. Most probably muzzled.

Change is coming and it's going to sweep the old away. Labour may benefit for a while, but they won't last long. The Environment Agency was led by some of their Baronesses and Lords.

Galloway used to play one of his favourite songs on one of his old radio shows. It was Sam Cooke's "A Change is Gonna Come". Well now it's coming, come what may.

"It's been a long
A long time coming
But I know change gonna come
Oh yes it will"

While waiting for it to come, you can't do worse than listen to that prophetic song

www.youtube.com/watch?v=j-X9JkM9Bgo

chocoshopoholic Mon 17-Feb-14 09:56:44

I just wanted to add that the green party also stood. I am surprised by the low turn out-following the pestering we've had by the parties over the last few weeks. Ukip had a mini bus and offered free lifts to the polling station.

Isitmebut Mon 17-Feb-14 11:58:37

Chocoshopoholic….interesting points from the Wythenshawe ‘front line’, I’ll apologise for not adding the Green’sto my opening post.

Fyi I am making a Monster Raving as an alternative ‘protest vote’ view elsewhere and I have too much respect for the Greens and their manifesto to suggest that the Ukip fan-atics use them, as an irrelevant (to British politics) protest vote. But feel free to make the pitch if you want. lol

Isitmebut Mon 17-Feb-14 12:03:03

soul2000….you are of course 100% correct, looking at Ukip’s 2010 manifesto, it was Conservatism on steroids, washed down with several pints - there should not be such bickering.

But thanks to the Lib Dems putting party politics aside to form a coalition in 2010, this country has so far dodged a huge bullet and for now at least, put us back on a SUSTAINABLE footing.

But sitting back and let no policy Ukip do the more political damage in 2015 as they did in 2010, is not an option, just read Claig (and others) content, do you really think that they are open to reason when many (like Claig) have said they don’t care about Ukip policies in order to vote for them? So comparing 2010 manifestos and seeing a similarity in OBJECTIVES, just won’t happen

Could you and I, day after day, have the conviction (and front) to go on and on about how ‘’different” our party was, when we had absolutely NOTHING to offer the electorate, other than another guaranteed Labour government – having to make up lies about other parties record in the process?

So I see Ukipism as a dangerous British disease, a far right wing disease that far too often resurfaces in European history during economic hardship, and how many of their supports said afterwards, ‘I totally believed in what the leader said, and I was doing what I was told’?

Standing by while Ukip talks about Ukip would not be a problem to most people as it is quite funny, but the drip,drip.drip, of untruths on other parties, is an effective way to get voters to believe Ukip has promise, when they are an empty shell of both policies and real hope, than can seriously damage this country. Confronting those lies, arguably opens up a political debate, Ukip’s propaganda doesn’t.

Conservative MP’s too often play by the Marquis of Queensberry rules, they cannot get down in to the political trenches with the likes of Prescott , or Farage for that matter, who will freely shout mistruths that can resonate with voters.

Now I am definitely not saying Conservatives should offer mistruths, far from it - but at least be totally aware of their record during their administrations, be proud of it, and shout (and debate) that record louder than the mistruths. Too many Conservative stereotypes exist because THEY DON’T -in my opinion as just a voter, looking in.

Spinflight Sat 22-Feb-14 02:58:47

And the Wythenshawe result has had it's first effect...

Cleggie has reached into his pantyhose and discovered a pair - he will now debate against our Nigel live on LBC radio.

Fair play, about time the debate was heard, but why aren't Ed and his Lordship joining in to help the deputy PM out?

Well instead of joining in they are.... threatening Clegg with omission from any televised debates before the next election!

Hence not just running scared, but trying to stop it from happening in the first place.

Marvellous, democracy and reasoned debate in action.

Isitmebut Sat 22-Feb-14 18:24:38

When democracy has no policies, democracy is an ass, as it has NOTHING TO DEBATE with the grown up parties that have proof of what they actually stand for, not what is an opportunistic soundbite for the week.

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now