Latest By-Election Results

At last, there seems to be some moderately good news for the Tories - a 3.7% swing in our favour in the Washington East council seat, and a 5.5% swing in Dover Town.

However, as we all know, local election results very rarely give much of a clue to the general election result. Michael Howard achieved pretty much 40% in 2004, but stil only polled 32% in the 2005 GE.

Furthermore, let's examine the Westminster seats for these two towns (including projections after boundary revisions):

Washington and Sunderland West:

Labour 21507 59.98%
Lib. Dem. 6564 18.30%
Conservative 5787 16.14%
BNP 892 2.48%
Neil Herron, Ind 608 1.69%
Jim Batty, UKInd 479 1.33%
Mad Cow Girl Warner, Lny 18 0.05%
Total 35855 52.55%

Lab Majority 14943 41.68%

Dover:

Labour 21821 45.21%
Conservative 16891 35.00%
Lib. Dem. 7651 15.85%
UK Independence Party 1276 2.64%
Independent 607 1.25%
Howard Green, Grn 12 0.02%
Total 48258 67.52%

Lab Majority 4930 10.22%

So there we are. Dover certainly is winnable - indeed, it's probably one of the seats that would clinch a working Tory majority.

The Polls

Police Community Support Officers

ConservativeHome, 'Cameron Watt: Scrap Police Community Support Officers'

I would like nothing better than to see PCSOs scrapped and replaced with proper police. I'm living in Salford at the moment, and most recently, when I had my car broken into and the stereo taken outside my front door, a couple of local PCSOs rang the doorbell and asked, 'Have you let the police know?'

Hang on, I thought. Aren't you the...?

No, they're not.

I then rang the police, was put through to an officer at a desk, who seemed completely disinterested and told me in no uncertain terms that they wouldn't be able to do anything. There is a CCTV camera on our stretch of the road, but all the neighbours tell me it is switched off. Where is all the money going?

BorisforPM is absolutely right - relegate PCSOs to the office and remove their puny titles, and bring out the trained officers on to the streets. Confidence has to be reinvested in neighbourhood policing, and the current stewardship of PCSOs renders this aim unachievable.

As for Blackpool, it apparently contains some of the most deprived wards in the country, many plagued by drug addiction; which makes it all the more important that some (or all) of it is returned to Conservative hands at the next election. I should know - I was born there.

What if Brown goes to the country this autumn?

...well it's quite simple. We'd lose. Badly.

Or is it that simple? With the Lib Dems only polling, on average, 17% at the moment, we have to consider where they would lose. UK Elect 6.2 shows that with the most recent polling averages (Lab 38.3%, Con 34%, LD 17%) that the Lib Dems would lose in the following constituencies:

Carshalton and Wallington
Cheltenham
Eastleigh
Hereford and South Herefordshire
Somerton and Frome
Taunton Deane
Torbay
Westmorland and Lonsdale (Tim Collins' old seat)

However, being further behind labour than we were in 2005 means that the Tories would lose the following seats to Labour:

Croydon Central
Gravesham
Hammersmith
Harlow
Hemel Hempstead
Lancaster and Fleetwood (new seat)
Mid Derbyshire
Milton Keynes North
Preseli Pembrokeshire
Reading East
Rugby
Shipley
Sittingbourne and Sheppey
South Basildon and East Thurrock
South Thanet
The Wrekin
Wellingborough

As a result, according to this forecast, the Conservatives would be left with 204 seats - that's a net loss of 9 after the latest boundary revisions. This would be an unacceptable result for the Party, particularly after such consistently good results through 2006 and earlier in 2007.

Again, I feel it necessary to highlight quite how difficult it is for the Party to win. Let's suppose the exit poll on election night was Lab 32 Con 40 LD 19. These are the results:

Con 307 (+94) (40%)
Lab 271 (-76) (32%)
LibD 40 (-20) (19%)

(Con short by 17)

Even with an 8-point lead, we cannot form an overall majority. This is because the swing is only 5.2% from Lab to Con. With a 7% swing, the results are as follows:

Con 327 (+114) (39.2%)
Lab 236 (-111) (28.4%)
LibD 56 (-4) (22.6%) (because this was a uniform two-party swing forecast, the Lib Dems remain largely static)

Con maj 6

In this highly optimistic scenario, I have collated the seats where the Conservative incumbents enjoy the most slender majorities; i.e., these are the 'biggest wins':

Stockton South
Sutton and Cheam (from the Lib Dems)
Barrow in Furness
Dudley North
Dagenham and Rainham
Blackpool North and Cleveleys
Elmet and Rothwell
Eltham
North Cornwall (from the Lib Dems)
Tooting
Leeds North East
Carlisle

All these seats have projected majorities of under 600. Stockton South currently has a projected Labour majority of 5912. THESE ARE THE SEATS WE HAVE TO WIN.

Lib Dems - NOT winning here

ConservativeHome, 20th September, 'Blog Reactions to Ming's Big Speech'.

We desperately need Ming to stay. Most election predictions would suggest that with the Lib Dems at 15-18%, they could lose around half of their seats. This would allow us to make significant headway across the south of England. However, Lib Dems continue to make progress in metropolitan boroughs in the North where we need to win. My concern is that the Conservative message is not being effectively communicated in the north, where the Lib Dems are capable of pulling off astonishing results - see Manchester Withington. We are in danger of being unable to break through in the north unless we can deliver a coherent and positive message which feels relevant to the electorate.

With awful policies such as granting illegal immigrants amnesty, and redistributive taxes, Lib Dems should not be winning anywhere. As Tories, we must be able to dismiss the Silly Party's policies and provide a viable alternative.

Asking the unaskable...

I have recently purchased two volumes of Arthur Seldon's collected articles. Those wishing to daydream about the full potential of the market economy should look no further. This extract from his 1988 article 'Political Bar to Economic Progress' is a perfect illustration of the problems of government ownership and centralization:

'In the commercial market we 'represent' ourselves directly. We spend our money on food, clothing, furnishing, motoring. We use our money - 'votes' - to buy what we want as individuals, families. If we don't like one supplier we can change to another.

The political 'market' is very different. Politicians spend other people's money. We the people are 'represented' indirectly in a tortuous chain of public meetings, conferences, motions, references back, elections, private conclaves, lobbies, compromises, hard bargains.

We submit to majority decisions on intimate personal services like education, medical care, housing and transport. And if we, as individuals or minorities, don't like what this Tower of Babel produces, we cannot escape.

In spending our own money, we make every penny count. In the political 'market' our cross on the ballot-paper makes not a scrap of difference. The cost of voting [...] can be high; the benefit is doubtful, immeasurable or absent.'

The 'Broken Society': Part 1 - Education

Living in Salford, I feel I can pass fairly accurate judgement on the state of Britain's 'society'. Social breakdown which is prevalent across the country is more likely to be exaggerated in less affluent areas, where crime and unemployment are high.

At present, Salford is undergoing a dramatic transformation. Most of Lower Broughton is being rebuilt. The Irwell Riverside will be transformed. Unemployment is comparatively low. So, apparently, is crime.

These days, though, politicians are speaking a different language. The problem has stopped being jobs and the economy and is now a sociological phenomenon centred around such things as deprivation, ignorance, lack of respect for law/family/govt. institutions, and selfishness.

I don't think a Labour government can solve these problems. They have tried to bury meritocracy, and replace it with some peculiar notion of universal equality. Where is the carrot and the stick for young people now? School-leaving teens are treated as clones: GCSEs, A Levels, University undergraduate; and yet, universities are struggling with the number of students having difficulties with basic English grammar, spelling and punctuation. Schools are being polluted by notions that teachers should be responsible for 'citizenship' and other meaningless notions of glib do-goodery. It is not the responsibility of a school to mould a pupil into a decent citizen, least of all a state school. It is for parents to teach children the basics of citizenship. Questions such as 'What does it mean to be British?' are not worth asking, because everyone has a different answer, and it is constantly changing. Being British is what the British do best. We do not need to be TAUGHT how to do it. This sort of nonsense going on in education means kids have less time to learn about important things.

I left university because I didn't believe I would gain enough from it to justify being there. There are few attending university at 18-20 years old who have much (detested phraseology) life experience. Second year students usually move into rented accommodation, at which point, some have to adopt a degree of financial nouse. Many, however, are completely covered by their parents' generous donations, and are left to spend their student loan WHICH THEY WILL HAVE TO PAY BACK.

All Conservatives should believe that only the brightest students should be at university. Universities should be centres of excellence. Britain's much-discussed 'skills shortage' could be replenished by limiting university places and encouraging less academic students to take up apprenticeships and job placements.

We are faced with a huge increase of graduates, whose courses cannot provide them with employment in their respective field. Meanwhile, we are short of plumbers, electricians, plasterers, and all manner of skilled tradesmen.

There is no shame in not attending university, indeed, I believe my prospects are better poised having thrown the towel in on the damn thing.