This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/may/05/local-election-results-all-parties-gain-political-deadlock
The article has changed 5 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 3 | Version 4 |
|---|---|
| Local elections: something for everyone, but politics deadlocked | Local elections: something for everyone, but politics deadlocked |
| (5 months later) | |
| In last year’s general election everything changed, but no one won. In this year’s local elections everyone won something but nothing changed. The Conservatives, Labour, the Liberal Democrats and the Greens all had vote and seat gains to cheer about, as all parties took a share of the electoral windfall from the dramatic collapse in Ukip. | In last year’s general election everything changed, but no one won. In this year’s local elections everyone won something but nothing changed. The Conservatives, Labour, the Liberal Democrats and the Greens all had vote and seat gains to cheer about, as all parties took a share of the electoral windfall from the dramatic collapse in Ukip. |
| The Conservatives went into Thursday night hoping to avoid the traditional anti-incumbent swing endured by most governments in midterm local elections, but instead came away with morale-boosting seat gains across England. Voters seemed more focused on Brexit than bin collection in this year’s local contest, with strong links between Brexit-voting and Conservative performance, just as were seen in last year’s general election. The Conservatives advanced by an average of 13 percentage points in authorities that recorded a 60%-plus vote for Leave in 2016 – and all of the four Tory council gains came in strong Leave areas. | The Conservatives went into Thursday night hoping to avoid the traditional anti-incumbent swing endured by most governments in midterm local elections, but instead came away with morale-boosting seat gains across England. Voters seemed more focused on Brexit than bin collection in this year’s local contest, with strong links between Brexit-voting and Conservative performance, just as were seen in last year’s general election. The Conservatives advanced by an average of 13 percentage points in authorities that recorded a 60%-plus vote for Leave in 2016 – and all of the four Tory council gains came in strong Leave areas. |
| The Conservatives also gained most from Ukip’s collapse, with larger advances in areas where Ukip did best in 2014. However, there was a lot of variation in how the purple cookie crumbled. Labour gained relatively more from the Ukip collapse in places where they were stronger prior to Ukip’s surge, resulting in the restoration of the status quo ante, taking Ukip seats in councils such as Basildon. | The Conservatives also gained most from Ukip’s collapse, with larger advances in areas where Ukip did best in 2014. However, there was a lot of variation in how the purple cookie crumbled. Labour gained relatively more from the Ukip collapse in places where they were stronger prior to Ukip’s surge, resulting in the restoration of the status quo ante, taking Ukip seats in councils such as Basildon. |
| While the collapse of Ukip and the Brexit realignment both benefited the Conservatives, it is the Liberal Democrats who will be happiest with these results overall. The party picked up more than 50 council seats, recovered control of its erstwhile London strongholds of Richmond and Kingston on large swings away from the Conservatives, and rebuilt a significant presence on many other local authorities. The party did best in areas that favoured both the Conservatives and Remain in past elections – epitomised by their dramatic takeover in South Cambridgeshire – but this was not a straightforward “Remainer revolt”. The party also enjoyed major surges in support in Leave-voting traditional Labour strongholds such as Hull and Sunderland. The Lib Dems may have recovered some of their chameleon-like capacity to mobilise local opposition regardless of the overall political climate. | While the collapse of Ukip and the Brexit realignment both benefited the Conservatives, it is the Liberal Democrats who will be happiest with these results overall. The party picked up more than 50 council seats, recovered control of its erstwhile London strongholds of Richmond and Kingston on large swings away from the Conservatives, and rebuilt a significant presence on many other local authorities. The party did best in areas that favoured both the Conservatives and Remain in past elections – epitomised by their dramatic takeover in South Cambridgeshire – but this was not a straightforward “Remainer revolt”. The party also enjoyed major surges in support in Leave-voting traditional Labour strongholds such as Hull and Sunderland. The Lib Dems may have recovered some of their chameleon-like capacity to mobilise local opposition regardless of the overall political climate. |
| Labour will be more disappointed, as despite making over 60 seat gains, taking control of Plymouth and Kirklees and ending nearly 15 years of Conservative dominance in Trafford, the party finished the count in charge of fewer councils than before. Despite significant seat gains in the capital, predictions of big breakthroughs in traditionally Tory inner-London redoubts such as Wandsworth and Westminster proved wide of the mark. Outside the capital there was a small overall swing away from Labour, costing it control of Derby, Redditch and Nuneaton councils. There were signs that both parties have been hurt by scandals that have made headlines lately. The Conservatives did particularly poorly in areas where the last census recorded a large black community, which may hint at a Windrush backlash. They also fell back somewhat in Kensington and Chelsea, although the swing against them after last year’s Grenfell Tower fire was smaller than some anticipated, and the party suffered a net loss of just one seat. | Labour will be more disappointed, as despite making over 60 seat gains, taking control of Plymouth and Kirklees and ending nearly 15 years of Conservative dominance in Trafford, the party finished the count in charge of fewer councils than before. Despite significant seat gains in the capital, predictions of big breakthroughs in traditionally Tory inner-London redoubts such as Wandsworth and Westminster proved wide of the mark. Outside the capital there was a small overall swing away from Labour, costing it control of Derby, Redditch and Nuneaton councils. There were signs that both parties have been hurt by scandals that have made headlines lately. The Conservatives did particularly poorly in areas where the last census recorded a large black community, which may hint at a Windrush backlash. They also fell back somewhat in Kensington and Chelsea, although the swing against them after last year’s Grenfell Tower fire was smaller than some anticipated, and the party suffered a net loss of just one seat. |
| Meanwhile, Labour’s performance was noticeably poor in wards with large Jewish populations, which was particularly costly for the party in Barnet, a marginal London borough the party hoped to gain. Labour’s vote fell in the five Barnet wards with the largest Jewish populations, even as the party advanced strongly elsewhere.The recent antisemitism scandal thus looks to have hurt Labour at the polls this year, and to have played a significant role in the party’s failure to gain control of London’s most marginal council. | Meanwhile, Labour’s performance was noticeably poor in wards with large Jewish populations, which was particularly costly for the party in Barnet, a marginal London borough the party hoped to gain. Labour’s vote fell in the five Barnet wards with the largest Jewish populations, even as the party advanced strongly elsewhere.The recent antisemitism scandal thus looks to have hurt Labour at the polls this year, and to have played a significant role in the party’s failure to gain control of London’s most marginal council. |
| Two major public furores about antisemitism occurred in 2016, with Labour MP Naz Shah apologising for an antisemitic Facebook post, and former London mayor Ken Livingstone making remarks about “the Israel lobby” and Hitler supporting Zionism in broadcast interviews that eventually led to him quitting the party after a lengthy disciplinary process. A report that year by Shami Chakrabarti exonerated the party of widespread antisemitism but reported an 'occasionally toxic atmosphere'. | Two major public furores about antisemitism occurred in 2016, with Labour MP Naz Shah apologising for an antisemitic Facebook post, and former London mayor Ken Livingstone making remarks about “the Israel lobby” and Hitler supporting Zionism in broadcast interviews that eventually led to him quitting the party after a lengthy disciplinary process. A report that year by Shami Chakrabarti exonerated the party of widespread antisemitism but reported an 'occasionally toxic atmosphere'. |
| Matters escalated in 2018 when it became evident that the party was receiving more and more complaints, to the extent that there was a backlog of disciplinary cases. Jeremy Corbyn apologised that April for hurt caused to the Jewish community by problems in the process and pointed to only 0.1% of members being under investigation for alleged antisemitic comments. | Matters escalated in 2018 when it became evident that the party was receiving more and more complaints, to the extent that there was a backlog of disciplinary cases. Jeremy Corbyn apologised that April for hurt caused to the Jewish community by problems in the process and pointed to only 0.1% of members being under investigation for alleged antisemitic comments. |
| But the party was also mired in a row about whether to adopt the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism, which it ended up ultimately approving. Then accusations of political interference in the complaints process by aides close to Corbyn began to emerge earlier this year, which the party strongly denies. | But the party was also mired in a row about whether to adopt the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism, which it ended up ultimately approving. Then accusations of political interference in the complaints process by aides close to Corbyn began to emerge earlier this year, which the party strongly denies. |
| The resignations of some MPs and peers over antisemitism in February 2019 alarmed many Labour colleagues. Then Chris Williamson, a Labour MP and ally of Corbyn, caused an outcry for saying that the party had been 'too apologetic' about antisemitism complaints. However, many of his supporters in the party backed a campaign saying he had been vilified and badly treated. Then came the announcement that the Equalities and Human Rights Commission was placing the party under formal investigation over antisemitism. | The resignations of some MPs and peers over antisemitism in February 2019 alarmed many Labour colleagues. Then Chris Williamson, a Labour MP and ally of Corbyn, caused an outcry for saying that the party had been 'too apologetic' about antisemitism complaints. However, many of his supporters in the party backed a campaign saying he had been vilified and badly treated. Then came the announcement that the Equalities and Human Rights Commission was placing the party under formal investigation over antisemitism. |
| In November 2019 the chief rabbi, Ephraim Mirvis, said Jews are justifiably anxious about the idea of Jeremy Corbyn becoming prime minister, saying a “poison sanctioned from the top” has taken root in Labour. | |
| In a July 2019 programme, eight whistleblowers spoke to a BBC Panorama documentary, with some saying they felt there was political meddling from Corbyn’s office in the process for handling antisemitism complaints. Seumas Milne, one of Corbyn’s closest aides, told officials the party was 'muddling up political disputes with racism' and must review processes. Jennie Formby, the general secretary, was accused of attempting to interfere in who sat on a panel examining the case of Jackie Walker, a high-profile activist who was eventually expelled from the party. | In a July 2019 programme, eight whistleblowers spoke to a BBC Panorama documentary, with some saying they felt there was political meddling from Corbyn’s office in the process for handling antisemitism complaints. Seumas Milne, one of Corbyn’s closest aides, told officials the party was 'muddling up political disputes with racism' and must review processes. Jennie Formby, the general secretary, was accused of attempting to interfere in who sat on a panel examining the case of Jackie Walker, a high-profile activist who was eventually expelled from the party. |
| Labour strongly denied the allegations of political interference, and came out on the offensive, accusing the BBC of bias and calling for the documentary to be pulled. A Labour spokesman said the party had fully answered “a number of questions” put to it by the programme, and had also sent 50 pages of documents in response. The complaints to the BBC had been made “at various levels, including the director general”. | Labour strongly denied the allegations of political interference, and came out on the offensive, accusing the BBC of bias and calling for the documentary to be pulled. A Labour spokesman said the party had fully answered “a number of questions” put to it by the programme, and had also sent 50 pages of documents in response. The complaints to the BBC had been made “at various levels, including the director general”. |
| Yes, particularly his record when he was a backbencher. For example, Corbyn has said he regrets calling members of Hamas and Hezbollah “friends” at a meeting in parliament in 2009. He accepted he had made a mistake by supporting a graffiti artist after his work, featuring several known antisemitic tropes, was removed from a wall in east London after complaints. The UK’s three most prominent Jewish newspapers published a joint editorial saying a government led by Corbyn would pose an existential threat to Jewish life in the UK. | |
| Labour insists the a figure of 130 outstanding cases of antisemitism is inaccurate, and says it is “taking robust action”, including quick suspensions, a process for rapid expulsions and an education programme. However, it has not yet provided its own up-to-date figure. | |
| Some prospective candidates have been accused of antisemitism during the campaign. Gideon Bull stepped down in Clacton after denying he used the term “Shylock” in front of a Jewish councillor, while Kate Ramsden, who had been standing for Gordon, in Aberdeenshire, withdrew after it emerged she was being re-interviewed by Labour over posts comparing Israel to “an abused child who becomes an abusive adult”. However, other candidates criticised for antisemitism have remained in place, including Apsana Begum, who shared a post referring to “Zionist masters”. She later distanced herself from the post saying she did not share those views. | |
| Peter Walker and Rowena Mason | |
| The results also suggest that neither the government nor the opposition has yet found a way to bridge the deep demographic and geographical divisions revealed in the EU referendum and last year’s general election. Labour registered its strongest gains in areas with many migrants and ethnic minorities, in areas with many students and young people and in the big cities – trends which have been evident since Ed Miliband’s tenure as leader. Nearly all Labour’s seat gains came from advances in London. Yet the party already controls most local and Westminster seats in such areas, limiting the capacity for further gains. Labour cannot hope to achieve a majority if it continues to underperform in areas with key marginal constituencies such as Bolton, Derby and Southampton. | The results also suggest that neither the government nor the opposition has yet found a way to bridge the deep demographic and geographical divisions revealed in the EU referendum and last year’s general election. Labour registered its strongest gains in areas with many migrants and ethnic minorities, in areas with many students and young people and in the big cities – trends which have been evident since Ed Miliband’s tenure as leader. Nearly all Labour’s seat gains came from advances in London. Yet the party already controls most local and Westminster seats in such areas, limiting the capacity for further gains. Labour cannot hope to achieve a majority if it continues to underperform in areas with key marginal constituencies such as Bolton, Derby and Southampton. |
| The Conservatives have solidified their grip on Leave-voting rural and small-town parts of England with large numbers of older white voters with low education levels. Class politics was again turned upside down: the Tory vote share increased by over 10 points in the wards with the highest share of people doing routine manual work, or who left school with no qualifications, but flatlined in places with the most middle-class professionals and fell in the places with the most graduates. | The Conservatives have solidified their grip on Leave-voting rural and small-town parts of England with large numbers of older white voters with low education levels. Class politics was again turned upside down: the Tory vote share increased by over 10 points in the wards with the highest share of people doing routine manual work, or who left school with no qualifications, but flatlined in places with the most middle-class professionals and fell in the places with the most graduates. |
| The steep age gradient in party support that emerged in last year’s general election was once again in evidence last week – the Conservatives advanced by up to 10 points in areas with the most pensioners, but there was a substantial swing to Labour in areas with the most voters under 35. The Conservatives remain on the wrong side of demographic trends – doing best with shrinking groups and worst with growing ones. They will struggle to achieve a parliamentary majority unless they can find a way to appeal to graduates, younger voters and ethnic minorities. | The steep age gradient in party support that emerged in last year’s general election was once again in evidence last week – the Conservatives advanced by up to 10 points in areas with the most pensioners, but there was a substantial swing to Labour in areas with the most voters under 35. The Conservatives remain on the wrong side of demographic trends – doing best with shrinking groups and worst with growing ones. They will struggle to achieve a parliamentary majority unless they can find a way to appeal to graduates, younger voters and ethnic minorities. |
| As the final votes were tallied on Friday afternoon the BBC’s projected national share showed a dead heat, with both Conservatives and Labour on 35 points. Both parties improved on the showing in 2014 by recruiting Ukip voters and advancing in their areas of strength, but both trod water outside their strongholds. These local elections have thus entrenched the polarised, evenly divided status quo. Both the Conservatives and Labour now dominate large parts of England, yet neither party can hope to win a general election majority with support from “home territory” alone. Ukip’s collapse has not fundamentally changed the even balance of power between the two, and the Liberal Democrats, though they showed signs of life, remain too weak and marginal to challenge two party dominance. A resolution to Brexit Britain’s political deadlock remains elusive. | As the final votes were tallied on Friday afternoon the BBC’s projected national share showed a dead heat, with both Conservatives and Labour on 35 points. Both parties improved on the showing in 2014 by recruiting Ukip voters and advancing in their areas of strength, but both trod water outside their strongholds. These local elections have thus entrenched the polarised, evenly divided status quo. Both the Conservatives and Labour now dominate large parts of England, yet neither party can hope to win a general election majority with support from “home territory” alone. Ukip’s collapse has not fundamentally changed the even balance of power between the two, and the Liberal Democrats, though they showed signs of life, remain too weak and marginal to challenge two party dominance. A resolution to Brexit Britain’s political deadlock remains elusive. |
| Dr Robert Ford is a professor of politics at the University of Manchester. He is the co-author, with Matthew Goodwin, of Revolt on the Right: Explaining Public Support for the Radical Right in Britain. He tweets @robfordmancs | Dr Robert Ford is a professor of politics at the University of Manchester. He is the co-author, with Matthew Goodwin, of Revolt on the Right: Explaining Public Support for the Radical Right in Britain. He tweets @robfordmancs |
| Politics | Politics |
| The Observer | The Observer |
| Labour | Labour |
| Conservatives | Conservatives |
| Liberal Democrats | Liberal Democrats |
| UK Independence party (Ukip) | UK Independence party (Ukip) |
| Local elections | Local elections |
| analysis | analysis |
| Share on Facebook | Share on Facebook |
| Share on Twitter | Share on Twitter |
| Share via Email | Share via Email |
| Share on LinkedIn | Share on LinkedIn |
| Share on Pinterest | Share on Pinterest |
| Share on WhatsApp | Share on WhatsApp |
| Share on Messenger | Share on Messenger |
| Reuse this content | Reuse this content |