Oxford by-election

[Fisher_Gate]

[edited] I never said the situation in Preston was "exactly the same" as Blackbird Leys. I said they were "broadly comparable", by which I meant that both are examples of how difficult it can be to follow up a success when Labour feels its nose has been put out of joint. I take no pleasure in pointing this out. It's a problem when the left's forces are small.

And the anti-Nazi vote certainly had little impact on Labour's vote holding up in Preston council elections - as the BNP fielded no candidates in the locals.

I think your reading of the council elections is heavily optimistic. OK you picked up a consistently respectable vote on average in Preston. But your overall representation on the council went down from 2 to 1 - where a high profile defector to Respect lost by a wide margin, and you failed to take a seat which you have already won previously. Against the backdrop of an unpopular Labour government and local council. Plus, you're likely to lose another ex-Labour defector when Cllr. Brooks comes up for re-election. And even Lavalette himself might struggle if Labour pulls its vote out and the war/occupation/terror etc. isn't so high up the agenda.

Lets get the facts about Preston straight -

1) Respect has never actually won a seat in Preston - it has defended one seat previously held by a Labour defector (Abbott) where it hadn't previously contested the seat and came a good second, beating both the tories and Lib Dems (who had previously held the seat in the last couple of years). Lavalette was elected as Socialist Alliance and will defend his seat in 2007. Brooks will also defend his seat in 2007. He was elected as Labour and scored a reasonable vote for Respect (nearly 10%) in a County seat, one third of which included his ward, on the same day as the general election when the Labour vote was maximised because of fear the tories might do well and the LibDems posed as an anti-war party. Unlike a by-election, Labour will be unable to focus their forces on one or two seats in 2007.

2) Respect's total vote in the local elections across the city has consistently risen and in May 2005 was over 2,700, making it a significant party in local politics. Only the electoral system prevents it holding a large number of the 60 or so seats on the City Council - proportionally it should have around 8-10 seats. The challenge in 2006 will be to maintain that broad base of support and turn it into winnable seats. This task will not be helped by socialists who agree with a large part of Respect's programme but snipe from the sidelines and fail to organise any activity of their own in a City where they once boasted of winning a councillor (though he was also a defector).

3) The BNP may not have contested the locals, but it scored 6.2% in the EU election in Preston City in 2004 (Respect got 6% by the way, though 4.7% also voted Green). I have recently had a BNP leaflet through my door indicating they are trying to get active. The threat is a constant one.

 

[BarryB]

[edited] I never said the situation in Preston was "exactly the same" as Blackbird Leys. I said they were "broadly comparable", by which I meant that both are examples of how difficult it can be to follow up a success when Labour feels its nose has been put out of joint. I take no pleasure in pointing this out. It's a problem when the left's forces are small.

And the anti-Nazi vote certainly had little impact on Labour's vote holding up in Preston council elections - as the BNP fielded no candidates in the locals.

I think your reading of the council elections is heavily optimistic. OK you picked up a consistently respectable vote on average in Preston. But your overall representation on the council went down from 2 to 1 - where a high profile defector to Respect lost by a wide margin, and you failed to take a seat which you have already won previously. Against the backdrop of an unpopular Labour government and local council. Plus, you're likely to lose another ex-Labour defector when Cllr. Brooks comes up for re-election. And even Lavalette himself might struggle if Labour pulls its vote out and the war/occupation/terror etc. isn't so high up the agenda.

Yes Paul Foot did get a reasonable vote in the 2002 Mayoral election in Hackney. But in two subsequent council bye elections in Hackney the SA % of the votes went down in comparison with the May 2002 elections.

The results are:

Hackney Mayoral election 17 October 2002

Pipe Labour 13813 41.95%
Boff Con 4502 13.67%
Foot SA 4187 12.72%
Sharer LD 4185 12.71%
Truman Green 3002 9.12%
Spencer Hackney First 1543 4.61%
Edwards Ind 1253 3.81%
Carr Ind 441 1.34%

Leabridge bye election 12 December 2002

Labour 780 44.2% (+2.5%)
Green 366 20.7% (-3.8%)
Con 304 17.2% (+3.0%)
LD 189 10.7% (+10.7%)
SA 126 7.1% (- 6.00%)

Maj 414

Kings Park bye election 12 December 2002

Lab 905 59.5% (+16.6%)
Con 211 13.9% (+ 5.00%)
LD 144 9.5% (+9.5%)
Green 139 9.1% (-6.3%)
SA 121 8.00% (-1.2%)

Maj 694

 

[Calum McD]

Lets get the facts about Preston straight -

1) Respect has never actually won a seat in Preston - it has defended one seat previously held by a Labour defector (Abbott) where it hadn't previously contested the seat and came a good second, beating both the tories and Lib Dems (who had previously held the seat in the last couple of years).
Lavalette was elected as Socialist Alliance and will defend his seat in 2007.

The "SA against the war" banner was proto-Respect, it involved many of the forces who subsequqently became involved in that project. The fact you failed to take the same ward in 2004 shows you faced similiar problems to the IWCA, who you have been consistently deriding. And for someone who was a sitting councillor for the area, Abbott's derisory vote must have been pretty gutting - she came nowhere near challenging Labour in the ward she had represented for years.

Brooks will also defend his seat in 2007. He was elected as Labour and scored a reasonable vote for Respect (nearly 10%) in a County seat, one third of which included his ward, on the same day as the general election when the Labour vote was maximised because of fear the tories might do well and the LibDems posed as an anti-war party. Unlike a by-election, Labour will be unable to focus their forces on one or two seats in 2007.

Brooks will almost certainly lose his seat in 2007 - Tulketh has been a Labour/Tory marginal so any potential left vote faces getting squeezed. It has a relatively low muslim population - so no Imam to pull the rabbit out of the hat.

2) Respect's total vote in the local elections across the city has consistently risen and in May 2005 was over 2,700, making it a significant party in local politics. Only the electoral system prevents it holding a large number of the 60 or so seats on the City Council - proportionally it should have around 8-10 seats.

On that basis the "Idle Toad" party in South Ribble could be described as "a significant force in local politics". Only, they will probably outlive Respect.

The challenge in 2006 will be to maintain that broad base of support and turn it into winnable seats. This task will not be helped by socialists who agree with a large part of Respect's programme but snipe from the sidelines and fail to organise any activity of their own in a City where they once boasted of winning a councillor (though he was also a defector).

You started the sniping - at the IWCA. I was highlighting the fact that all left forces - given their size face a real problem in defending a seat and winning it again after an initial breakthrough, given Labour will almost certainly pull out the stops to make sure it doesn't happen again. Hence, the achievement of SP councillors in Coventry and Lewisham who have not just made one off breakthroughs but have largely their gains.

3) The BNP may not have contested the locals, but it scored 6.2% in the EU election in Preston City in 2004 (Respect got 6% by the way, though 4.7% also voted Green). I have recently had a BNP leaflet through my door indicating they are trying to get active. The threat is a constant one.

Well, there is a residual base of support - certainly. But I fail to see how exaggerating it helps the left. Insofar as it would have had any effect, UAF's telling everybody that it was imperative to vote to keep out Griffin would only have helped to shore up the Labour vote. I don't see this as a major factor behind Labour's improved performance in Town Cente though.

 

[Joe Reilly]

The 'exciting breakthrough just around the corner' is the very recipe that has dogged (and arguably detroyed the Left in this country) since the early 1970's. It renders any long term strategy void. It makes the left passive in the expectation that victory is just around the corner. Another principle attraction is that it leaves the 'leadership' off the hook for with no need for a strategy fundamental contradictions between micro and macro objectives lie unexplored. From the outset the IWCA has rejected the pie in the sky approach in the belief that radical social change has to be worked for.
Respect (and its forerunners like the SA and the SLP) do not.

 

[Joe Reilly]

You started the sniping - at the IWCA. I was highlighting the fact that all left forces - given their size face a real problem in defending a seat and winning it again after an initial breakthrough, given Labour will almost certainly pull out the stops to make sure it doesn't happen again. Hence, the achievement of SP councillors in Coventry and Lewisham who have not just made one off breakthroughs but have largely their gains.
UOTE]

Just to clarify here. The first iWCA councillor was elected in 2002. In 2004 in spite of a concerted campaign by Labour he was re-elected - almost doubling his vote in the process.

What Labour have managed to do in sucessive by-elections is prevent the IWCA adding to the 3 existing seats held by the IWCA.

 

[Fisher_Gate]

... And for someone who was a sitting councillor for the area, Abbott's derisory vote must have been pretty gutting - she came nowhere near challenging Labour in the ward she had represented for years.

Now you are just getting silly and abusive - are you saying Dave Nellist's 5% (just!) in the last general election, in a city he represented as an MP for 9 years, was 'derisory' too?

Winning 24% of the vote and coming second behind the official Labour candidate, beating off the LibDems who won the seat 2 years earlier, was a significant result that does not deserve the opprobrium you obviously have for Respect.

Let's get it clear - any vote above around 5% for left of labour forces is significant in the current circumstances. I wasn't 'sniping' at the IWCA for their good vote, only criticising the absence of any analysis or acknowledgment of the result. We now have some analysis and comment, and can have a good debate about what it represents and where all the left go from here.

 

[flimsier]

Now you are just getting silly and abusive - are you saying Dave Nellist's 5% (just!) in the last general election, in a city he represented as an MP for 9 years, was 'derisory' too?

Either he is, or he's a hypocrite.

 

[Calum McD]

a significant result that does not deserve the opprobrium you obviously have for Respect.

No, my "oppropbrium" for Respect is based on its (lack of) politics, not on its electoral performance.

But since Levien was using Preston of his example of Respect's being poised for electoral gains in the near future, I was drawing atention to the mixed picture of the 2005 peformance. Preston Respect were claiming on their website that Riversway would be a tightly fought contest - the reality was the sitting councillor from the ward didn't even get close - losing by close on 200 votes. No significant muslim population and the results look less than spectacular. And the same thing will be faced by Brooks in 2007, and even possibly (though less likely) by Lavalette.

Obviously, I take no pleasure in Labour candidates getting elected at the present time. I just think we need to appreciate that "breakthroughs" need to be consolidated by the hard graft of campaigning if Labour isn't to overturn them again. Premature announcements that "we-are-now-a-major-force-in-British-Politics" of the kind Rees, German and certain U75 posters trot out won't help build a lasting alternative.

[edit - If Nellist has got 5 per cent as a sitting MP immediately following his departure from Labour it would indeed have been derisory. But as it was in 1992 he got over 10, 000 votes and missed re-election by a whisker]

 

[Nigel Irritable]

Now you are just getting silly and abusive - are you saying Dave Nellist's 5% (just!) in the last general election, in a city he represented as an MP for 9 years, was 'derisory' too?

Surely the correct comparison is with Nellist's attempt to defend his Westminster seat outside the Labour Party - and any analysis of that election will show that he did extremely well. Having been an MP fifteen or twenty years ago isn't quite the same thing. Abbot was defending her council seat, a seat she had held for years, and she didn't even come close. And that's glossing over the fact that it is a lot easier to win a council election than a Westminister one.

That said the central point made by Calum is an important one. It isn't easy to consolidate an initial breakthrough in an area.

 

[Fisher_Gate]

Surely the correct comparison is with Nellist's attempt to defend his Westminster seat outside the Labour Party - and any analysis of that election will show that he did extremely well. Having been an MP fifteen or twenty years ago isn't quite the same thing. Abbot was defending her council seat, a seat she had held for years, and she didn't even come close. And that's glossing over the fact that it is a lot easier to win a council election than a Westminister one.

That said the central point made by Calum is an important one. It isn't easy to consolidate an initial breakthrough in an area.

Depends how you look at it - Nellist came third, Abbott second . Nellist was an MP - that's a lot higher profile than being only one of four councillors for a ward (remember we have two-tier multi-member local government here, and the County is actually the big player, not the City). Despite all the hype about local democracy, most people still vote for parties not personalities in the locals, and that's why the LibDems can get pillocks like Alan Valentine elected for the same ward (you won't know him, but I can assure you he's a stain on the councillor system - even Liam P and I could agree on that).

Ask most people to name all their councillors and they couldn't - ask them to name their MP and a lot more would know, especially the high profile ones like Nellist (Backbencher of the Year no less).

Anyway I don't want to downplay Nellist's achievements - as you know I was a fan of his from when he was first selected, back in about 1981 I first met him.

And yes it is difficult to maintain the momentum - after Lavellette's victory with 38%, the first Respect vote in the same ward 12 months later was 34%, so I suppose that was a small slide, albeit one against much much stronger Labour opposition. We got 20% in the County Division that includes the ward, but that was on the same day as the General Election when people wanted to keep the Tories out. So the vote has definitely been consolidated and consistently high over three elections now. We'll see in 2006 whether we can keep the vote up at that level in the seat, but anything above about 20% will still be an excellent showing. The one thing I will guarantee is that the results will be on the local Respect website within 24 hours!

I think most people locally agree that if there were an election for his seat tomorrow, Lavalette would romp home with at least 40% vote, because of his exceptionally high profile. Brooks will obviously face more of an uphill struggle but to say 2 years before the election that he will definitely lose, is rather premature for a Marxist who believes it is possible to convince the majority of people of the need for a revolution! He's been very active on the economic and social issues in his ward, like opposing the closure of a local factory and the council downgrading local play areas, and he has a good profile locally - anything could still happen.

 

[Fisher_Gate]

...



On that basis the "Idle Toad" party in South Ribble could be described as "a significant force in local politics". Only, they will probably outlive Respect.

...

I don't understand the point - the Idle Toad Party are a signficant force in a local politics in a small (rural) part of South Ribble. The difference is that they are not going to get anywhere in any other place, even Preston 5 miles away, let alone Oxford or London. As to whether they will outlive Respect, I thought you predicted it wouldn't even last this long, yet now you are making predictions about how it will fare in 2007? Some consistency please - I think you know now that Respect is going to be around for some time to come.

 

[Calum McD]

As to whether they will outlive Respect, I thought you predicted it wouldn't even last this long, yet now you are making predictions about how it will fare in 2007? Some consistency please - I think you know now that Respect is going to be around for some time to come

You thought wrong. Where did I say it wouldn't survive the general election? Unfortunately, Respect seems set to die a slow and lingering death (punctuated by the odd success for the SWP to get excited about), until a new class-oriented left force can emerges.

Brooks will obviously face more of an uphill struggle but to say 2 years before the election that he will definitely lose, is rather premature for a Marxist who believes it is possible to convince the majority of people of the need for a revolution!

IMO some "Marxists" are far too willing to make exaggeratedly over-optimistic predictions, and far too reticent to see difficulties ahead. Who knows? Maybe you're right - 2007 will see the outbreak of global revolution, Respect will be seen as harbingers of a new future for humanity, and Brooks will be held aloft through the streets of Tulketh by the grateful proletarian masses. I rather doubt it.

Obviously, I'm not saying that left should despair and throw in the towel. Just asking for a reality check.

 

[Fisher_Gate]

...


IMO some "Marxists" are far too willing to make exaggeratedly over-optimistic predictions, and far too reticent to see difficulties ahead. .

Statements like:

"If one takes the likely stormy economic scenario, together with the determination of New Labour to pursue its neo-liberal agenda ... the relative tranquillity of the two New Labour governments can be shattered in the coming period.
.. the underlying processes in Britain are leading to a big collision between the classes"

certainly might be interpreted as having that difficulty, yes.

 

[Calum McD]

Sorry F_G - have no problem with that - "stormy economic scenario", neo-liberal agenda" can (ie.conditional) lead to conflict between classes. Where does that statement speak of the left making inevitable, or exceedingly likely, gains?