UK Labour routed at by-election

May 25th, 2008 at 1:49 pm by David Farrar

A couple of days old now, but have to mention the by-election for Crewe and Nantwich (don’t you love English place names).

In 2005 Labour won the seat by over 7,000 votes – 49% to 32%.

In the by-election, the won by almost 8,000 votes – 49.5% to 30.5%. So that is a 17% swing to the Conservatives. In 1997 Labour won it by 31% – 58% to 27%.

The highlight for me was the candidate for the Official Monster Raving Loony Party, a Mr “The Flying Brick” – and yes that is his legal name. He is their Shadow Minister for the Abolition of Gravity.

In nationwide polls, the Conservatives are 14% ahead of Labour, which would give them a 76 seat majority.

Tags: , ,

13 Responses to “UK Labour routed at by-election”

  1. Neil (589 comments) says:

    Crewe and Nantwich was 166 in the list of likely Tory gains, at 17% swing lots of Labour ministers are in the gun.
    Just shows that changing leaders is a dangerous act- look at Labour in NZ in 1990. Brown is no Tony Blair, Blair was a strong leader who lead from the front.
    Brown didn’t even campaign in Crewe during the by-election, something about “tradition” that PM’s never campaign in the by-election seat. What a laugh ! Brown sent the rest of the cabinet there. Perhaps he claims his ministers let him down.
    Labour are like Labour here, looking very tired and heading towards splitting between the Blairite-Browns and a swing back to old socialist Labour as advocated by the Compass group.
    Cameron is now showing that he is able to lead a movement thru the whole of the UK to the Tories.
    Shows how good a PM Tony Blair was.
    Oh for a by-election in a constituency seat in New Zealand, perhaps seats like Rotorua,New Plymouth and even Palmerston North.Maybe that is why Steve Maharey is warming a seat in parliament.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. Barnsley Bill (983 comments) says:

    It is telling the similarities between Labour UK and labour NZ.
    A couple of old friends of mine traveled up to campaign for the conservatives and the tactics used by Labour here are almost a carbon copy of over there. Here we have the term “rich prick” over there they were using “toffs” The stories they told me of young labour dickheads following the Tory candidate around wearing top hat and tails and the politics of envy flyers were fascinating.
    The irony of this was amazing when you consider Dunwoody Junior has an entry in Burkes peerage.
    The vile and nasty campaigning along with the fact that the English feel over run and down trodden has seen the unelected scottish PM of Britain suffer two massive defeats in a matter of weeks.
    Your English doppelganger Mr Dale’s blog has made fascinating reading over the last few weeks with the London campaign and now Crewe.
    Labour UK are fortunate in the fact that they have a couple of years to regroup before the election and will probably dump the clunking fist.
    Luckily for us no such event will happen before the end of the year here. Labour NZ have left it too late to shed Clark and Cullen.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. stuarts-burgers (97 comments) says:

    If we look we can see some interesting comparison’s Brown to Blair to a degree is Major to Thatcher. Both of the former leaders have a polarizing effect of the voters, the later leaders come across a very bland boring and their administrations look(ed) inept.

    Cameroon has the world at his feet in the same way Blair did two years out , if he can pick up more by election wins like this one, in the same way that Blair was able to do during the later days of the Major administration the swing to the Conservatives at a General Election will provide a greater than 76 seat majority that this by election indicates.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. Barnsley Bill (983 comments) says:

    Big difference between major and Brown. major actually won an election. Whereas Brooon bottled out of holding a vote.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. Sushi Goblin (419 comments) says:

    Ghostie: so everything’s ok with British Labour?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. Johnboy (17,018 comments) says:

    If gravity is the same seriousness then I am all for the abolition of it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. TomYum (23 comments) says:

    “…Labour Routed…” Works for me, however it is pronounced.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. Patrick Starr (3,674 comments) says:

    “Could there be a ’shy labour voter’ effect for the polling in NZ”

    yep, they’re about 480,000 votes shy of a win at the moment

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. OECD rank 22 kiwi (2,754 comments) says:

    Labour is going to be wiped out in both New Zealand in 2008 and the UK in 2010.

    Nice

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. Murray (8,847 comments) says:

    Maop readinh around the Puddle and Piddle rivers is tricky, its hard to give directions through the giggle from the hysterical place names.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. Ross Miller (1,706 comments) says:

    Bit like National wins Auckland Central.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. Sushi Goblin (419 comments) says:

    Ghostie does touch on a useful point, which may help explain the 2005 election result where some thought National would win by a point or two instead of losing by a point of two. Under MMP, the outright percentages reflect Parliament accurately, whereas the FPP Westminister system in the UK allows larger margins of victory due to local vagaries.

    In 2005, Labour’s marginal win was attributable to a couple of factors, one being Labour’s last week momentum, and secondly, Labour’s election day turnout of South Auckland.

    That 25,000 vote win by NZ Labour perhaps reflects the fact that Labour were able to successfully overcome a one or two point deficit.

    But there aren’t 400,000 plus “shy voters” in south Auckland. If Labour can’t close to within 10 points (where small parties could theoretically help Labour form a govt over National), then the reverse is likely to happen – haemorraging of support. That loss of support could go to National (to help them govern more efficiently) as well as centrist parties like NZ First or United, as it did in 2002 with National’s core vote.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote