Well Done the Greens

[Kaka Tim]

I've edited the last three posts. Please consider uk libel law people!

Oh go on - give us a clue at least.

 

[claphamboy]

Ok, so by the final results: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/elections/euro/09/html/ukregion_999999.stm

TURNOUT: 15,136,932
ELECTORATE: 44,173,690 	Votes	MEPs
Party	Total	%	Total	+/-
Conservative	4,198,394	27.7
(+1.0)	25	+1
UK Independence Party	2,498,226	16.5
(+0.3)	13	+1
Labour	2,381,760	15.7
(-6.9)	13	-5
Liberal Democrats	2,080,613	13.7
(-1.2)	11	+1
Green Party	1,303,745	8.6
(+2.4)	2	0
British National Party	943,598	6.2
(+1.3)	2	+2
Scottish National Party	321,007	2.1
(+0.7)	2	0
Plaid Cymru	126,702	0.8
(-0.1)	1	0

If the system was directly proportional, the greens should have got 5.9 seats as brainaddict says.

For a direct vote, these are the numbers for all parties who got an MEP elected this time round. Figures rounded down from those in brackets.

Party - Election result - Proportional result
Cons - 25 - 19(19.11)
UKIP - 13 - 11(11.39)
Lab - 13 - 10(10.83)
Libd - 11 - 9(9.45)
Green - 2 - 5(5.93)
BNP - 2 - 4(4.28)
SNP 2 - 1(1.45)
Plaid - 1 - 0(0.55)

You seem to have lost 9 seats between the election result & the proportional result.

 

[Crispy]

I forgot to take account of the unelected votes Gimme a sec.

 

[belboid]

Oh go on - give us a clue at least.

I read the uneditted post last niht, but cant remember the name, dammit!

 

[Crispy]

Ok, here's what it should be

Party - Election result - Proportional result
Cons - 25 - 21(20.91)
UKIP - 13 - 12(12.44)
Lab - 13 - 12(11.86)
Libd - 11 - 10(10.36)
Green - 2 - 6(6.49)
BNP - 2 - 5(4.7)
SNP 2 - 2(1.6)
Plaid - 1 - 1(0.63)

 

[claphamboy]

That site I linked to in post 60 disagrees with you Crispy.

 

[_float_]

Here's a region-by-region comparison of the number of GP votes and percentage of the vote for 1999, 2004 and 2009 (plus where they beat Lab, BNP, UKIP):


Year:....................1999.....................2004.....................2009.....
SE.................110,571...7.4%...........173,351...7.9%...........271,506...11.6% (Lab, BNP)
Ldn.................87,545...7.7%...........158,986...8.4%...........190,589...10.9% (UKIP, BNP)
SW..................86,630...8.3%...........103,821...7.2%...........144,179....9.3% (Lab, BNP)
East................61,334...6.2%............84,068...5.6%...........141,016....8.8% (BNP)
E Mid...............38,954...5.4%............76,633...5.5%............83,939....6.8%
W Mid...............49,440...5.8%............73,991...5.2%............88,244....6.2%
Wales...............16,146...2.6%............32,761...3.6%............38,160....5.6% (BNP)
Y & H...............42,604...5.7%............90,337...5.7%...........104,456....8.5%
NE..................18,184...4.7%............37,247...4.8%............34,081....5.8%
NW..................56,828...5.6%...........117,393...5.6%...........127,133....7.7%
Scot................57,142...5.8%............79,695...6.8%............80,442....7.3% (UKIP, BNP)
NI.......................-.....-..............4,810...0.9%............15,764....3.2%
..
GB (UK excl.NI)....625,378...6.3%.........1,107,978...6.7%.........1,303,745....8.6% (BNP)
Total (turnout).13,132,789..31.6%........16,458,603..38.8%........15,136,932...34.3%


Looking at the numbers of people voting Green shows an upward trend in every region except the NE. People arguing that Green gains this year are 'inflated' due to lower turnout need equally to acknowledge that gains in 2004 were 'deflated' due to higher turnout: look at the increase from 42,604 to 90,337 in Yorkshire for example wih no change in percentage! If you want a fair view you need to look at the bigger picture/trend.

It's true that the NE and the Midlands are weaker, but everywhere else shows a healthy upward trend. If I have time I might have a go at confirming this trend by cross reference to local, assembly and general election results over the same time-frame.

 

[rover07]

Impessive vote count increases, in SE and London in particular.

Overall the Green vote as a percentage of those eligible to vote is...

1999 ... 1.5%
2004 ... 2.6%
2009 ... 2.9%

Figures rounded down

 

[rover07]

In fact not sure my figures are right... can anyone confirm them?

 

[elbows]

People arguing that Green gains this year are 'inflated' due to lower turnout need equally to acknowledge that gains in 2004 were 'deflated' due to higher turnout: look at the increase from 42,604 to 90,337 in Yorkshire for example wih no change in percentage! If you want a fair view you need to look at the bigger picture/trend.

True. But one aspect of this wider picture is that, certainly in my area the West Midlands, the Greens slogan on the ballot, the exact wording I forget, was painting themselves as the anti-BNP vote. Did they do that in previous EU elections?

We also have no idea how much disenchantment with the big parties over the expenses scandal helped the greens.

It's true that the NE and the Midlands are weaker, but everywhere else shows a healthy upward trend.

Im in the Midlands, lurking in whats left of car & coal country. It will be hard to get the environment higher up the list of people's priorities here. There is a vocal green in my town who gets some press and was associated strongly with a successful campaign to stop a processing plant for contaminated soil being built here, and he did quite well in his own ward, which is next to the proposed soil-decon site, in the council elections. But it hasnt translated into a wider green movement here from what I can tell so far.

 

[rover07]

Strangely the Tory vote went up in the West Midlands too, not by much but their vote has fallen across most of the country... whats going on up there?

 

[elbows]

Strangely the Tory vote went up in the West Midlands too, not by much but their vote has fallen across most of the country... whats going on up there?

I dont exactly know. My town was traditionally Labour (only having a Tory MP in 1983 and 1987, not 1979 or 1992) but they lost control of the council to the Tories the other year, and whilst its not the easiest seat to win in a general election, the Tories seem in a pretty good mood round here. In the wider region I can only speculate:

Still a fair amount of manufacturing round these parts which has been hit badly for many years now, with the recent economic woe just feeling like more of the same than a shocking new turn of events.

There are a huge amount of warehouse/distribution related jobs round these parts now, and these have not yet been hit as badly as could be expected because retail has not totally collapsed.

Lots of immigration here of all kinds for many decades, its been accepted fairly well ahtough there is the usual underlying resentment and certain areas that have not recovered from the deindustrialisation of the 80's have got quite high levels of support for the BNP.

My own personal experience is not broad enough to make predictions but in my conversations with people I hardly ever hear about parties other than Labour, Tory, and now the BNP. So its possible some people were slightly more inclined to vote Tory for change rather than not vote or pick another party. UKIP did ok here especially compared to the east midlands where Kilroys 'popularity last time skewed the figures, but maybe the Tories support here was holding up better in the face of expenses scandal than elsewhere, though Ive no idea why that would be.

David cameron may have been paying special attention to the Midlands and visiting it a lot, motivating the troops, he has certainly been to my town multiple times but Ive got no comparison. I think the Tories see success in the midlands as quite important.

 

[_float_]

...the Greens slogan on the ballot, the exact wording I forget, was painting themselves as the anti-BNP vote. Did they do that in previous EU elections?

I don't know. I can't recall seeing this on my ballot paper (SE Region).

My advice specifically re. West Midlands on the "tactical voting" thread before the election, when someone asked who to vote for to stop the BNP being elected was:

Generally I'd say that a tactical vote should be any of the top four parties (Con, Lab, LibDem, UKIP) and not No2EU or Green as they are a long way off getting a seat.

I am arguing that the figures suggest that Green Party support has been growing steadily over the last ten years and doesn't look like a knee-jerk reaction to expenses or even to be purely about environmental issues.

The area-by-area figures for the euros in 2004 show that some areas have stronger support (cf. average for W Mid was 5.1%):

Highest:

10.7 Herefordshire*
8.5 Malvern Hills*
8.3 South Shropshire*
7.5 Warwick
7.2 Worcester

Lowest:

3.1 Walsall **
3.6 Sandwell **
3.9 Wolverhampton
4.0 South Staffordshire
4.0 Dudley **
4.0 Cannock Chase

Two other large areas:

4.6 Birmingham
5.8 Coventry

* Three of the four local GP councillors in the region are in these areas with the other one in Solihull.

** These are three of the four areas where the BNP got over 10% in the 2004 euros, the other place being Stoke-on-Trent.

I really don't know the region so maybe you can draw some conclusions from these figures - ie the type of areas where Green support is highest and lowest?

source: http://www.parliament.uk/commons/lib/research/rp2004/rp04-050.pdf

 

[elbows]

Thats pretty much an industrial v rural split, with big cities in the middle.

 

[Malawi]

I think the BNP's 2 seats wer new thus "news", and the Green Party's 2 wer ones that they had already, thus old news.

 

[Malawi]

Great Britain as a single European Parliament consituency could never happen. It would hav to be England as a single European Parliament constsiuency, (Wales, Scotland and N Ireland are already).

 

[butchersapron]

Noticed little Danny Cohn-Bendit talking up a possible Green Coalition with the conservative CDU - i wonder would his french lot do the same with Sarkozy's lot?