Local election results


I have been asked to comment on the results. They show Labour in  top place, winning 1764 seats with 31% of the vote (controlling 76 Councils), and the Conservatives in second place with 1216 seats and 29% of the vote (controlling 30 Councils) . In third place come the Lib Dems with 399 seats, controlling just 6 Councils. Some here also want to know about the fourth placed party, UKIP. Their vote share  fell compared with the last local elections, to 17%, giving them just 155 seats and no Councils.

The biggest losers on the night were the Lib Dems. Labour made some good gains, but many pundits think they should have been winning much more to put them in a good position to win the General Election in 2015.


  1. Lifelogic
    May 23, 2014

    Well Labour suffers from poor & geeky leadership with his idiotic rent act disaster MkII, Also they are still putting their head in the sand over the EU issue. They will however offer a referendum on the EU (if they feel they have to) in order to win the election. Miliband is also (and quite rightly) far more likely to be trusted than serial ratter Cameron. Cameron’s referendum offer is as completely worthless as anything else this man utters to con the electorate.

    I see Boris clearly thinks that a UKIP deal is needed (refusing to rule it out). It is vital for Cameron to have any realistic chance, even then he will struggle.

    In the EURO elections UKIP will be way ahead of Cameron’s heart and soul serial ratters. Perhaps nearly double the Tory vote. Cameron clearly can not even debate Farage, so lacking in any sensible arguments or credibility is he.

    The only real positive is the drumming of the wrong on every issue Clegg, the Libdems and the evil greens.

    1. Lifelogic
      May 23, 2014

      I was listening to any questions just now, with the perfectly reasonable Patrick James O’Flynn, Director of Communications at UKIP being attacked with the usual unpleasant slurs by all the other panellists (and even the chairman ganging up). I am sure that this actually helps UKIP on balance. The British sense of fair play coming to the fore.

      The other parties merely sounded pathetic, dishonest, lacking valid arguments, vicious, desperate and rather vile. Angela Eagle has clearly best perfected this art, but the others were almost as bad. It is the existing coalition Cameron supported policy (what has he got against Indians, Chinese and Australians) that is clearly racist. Racist, against all from outside the EU, UKIP’s is just sensibly letting in those whom we need and can support themselves.


      1. Leslie Singleton
        May 24, 2014

        Lifelogic–The criticisms of UKIP make me laugh and I agree that they help UKIP enormously. A lot of people should get used to the idea that it would be best for their understanding if they were to learn to substitute “because of” rather than “despite” in what they say about UKIP. Personally I do not understand why so-called free movement is necessary to free trade in the first place. There is no free movement between America and Canada or Mexico for instance. It wouldn’t be so bad if the free movement were within the English speaking world rather than foreigners from Europe. Balls talking about how Labour are the answer to Immigration is preposterous–the sort of guff that gives politicians their low-life image.

        1. JA
          May 24, 2014

          The slurs might have helped the scales fall from some people’s eyes but don’t I doubt that UKIP lost a lot of support because of the LibLabCon BBC onslaught.

          One BBC political editor has been suspended for overt bias against UKIP.

          To be fair all those UKIP-a-like parties should be counted as UKIP votes too (for assessment purposes) the intention of these parties was to appropriate the UKIP vote – dishonestly some might say.

          1. JA
            May 24, 2014

            PS – I inferred from David Cameron’s ‘restrict immigration from without the EU’ that he thinks I’m a racist and will be satisfied with this.

            It is purely about the numbers.

        2. Hope
          May 24, 2014

          Cameron and the. Tories have nothing to offer the aspiration working class. Thatcher focused on them and those who took responsibility for their lives. Cameron has failed these categories, striving workers, savers, pensioners. He has focused on overseas aid and demands us to be proud, wasting money on Europe (to build infrastructure for countries) is good for us so be delighted, building on every piece of countryside to help mass immigration without the money to provide e necessary infrastructure, people on welfare being idolised while on foreign holidays at taxpayers’ expense. All jam tomorrow guff still being trotted out and Cameron demands us to trust him!

          JR you failed to note in your analysis that support for UKIP is growing fast and support for the Tory party under Cameron (despite his pompous demands) has reduced by over half! This will continue now momentum has taken grip despite the vile slurs and attack from your strategists, Osborne and Crosby? I also note none of the party speakers who made slurs about immigration have come back to apologise to say Farage was correct by ONS figures.

          Reply Conservative support is down a little. UKIP support fell by more compared with the previous local elections and is at 17%

          1. Hope
            May 24, 2014

            Oh I forgot, Cameron is now going to vindictively squeeze every penny of tax from hard working people and let HMRC take from their bank accounts, without legal safety or challenge, to carry on his wasteful spending because he does not have the courage or gumption to make spending cuts like he promised us four years go. Trust him? Not in this life time. The sooner he goes the better.

          2. Chris
            May 24, 2014

            Reply to Mr Redwood: support for UKIP, calculated on the areas where they actually put forward candidates, was apparently 28% on average.

            Reply That is no basis for comparison. That means a very unpopular small party which puts up in just a few places where it is popular has a higher rating than parties which draw support all across the country.

          3. Chris
            May 24, 2014

            In a reply to John Redwood, I can only quote Denis Cooper in his excellent comment on the D Tel website with regard to drawing comparisons between the share of the vote from the local elections to this time:
            “Last year did not include a lot of the places where there have been local elections this year:
            “Elections not scheduled to be held in 2013 (other than by-elections)
            The 32 London borough councils (next election 2014)
            The 36 metropolitan district councils (next election 2014)
            The 201 district councils in two-tier authorities (next election 2014
            in the 67 councils where members are elected by thirds, and 2015 in the 127 councils where all members are elected together)
            48 unitary authorities of England (next election 2014 in the 19 councils where members are elected by thirds, excluding Bristol, and 2015 in the 30 councils where all members are elected together)”

            How reliable is any comparison made between the results of local elections held in 2013 in certain areas and local elections held in 2014 in mostly different areas?”

            Couldn’t have put it better myself, and something that should be borne in mind before making apparently simplistic claims about a fall in the share of the UKIP vote.

            Reply You still need to explain why UKIP won so few seats. Maybe they will do better in the EU elections where it was PR and Mr Farage said vote as a “free hit”!

  2. Once a Tory
    May 23, 2014

    I am surprised that you should casually write “Their [UKIP] vote share fell compared with the last local elections, to 17%…”.

    The figure to which you are presumably referring is the PNS (Projected National Share) which is, according to Stephen Fisher of Oxford University, “an ATTEMPT to ESTIMATE what the share of the vote would be if the whole of GB had local elections and if the three main Westminster parties had fielded candidates in all wards, as they do in general elections.” (My emphasis).

    In other words, that 17% is not UKIP’s share, but rather an estimate – with an inherent margin of error.


    In point of fact, UKIP managed to take 19.9% of the ACTUAL share in 2013:

    …and the figures from yesterday’s poll are obviously not available until all constituencies have declared and someone has extrapolated the REAL data.

    Please excuse my pedantry!

    1. JA
      May 24, 2014

      Add a couple of percent stolen by the dodgy UKIP-a-like parties.

      (Just where did they get their funding/network savvy ?)

    2. Denis Cooper
      May 24, 2014

      Firstly I question the reliability of any comparison made between the results of local elections held in 2013 in certain areas and local elections held in 2014 in mostly different areas.

      I would really like to check the exact degree of overlap between the areas where there were local elections in 2013 and the areas where there have just been local elections, but failing that I note in this Wikipedia article:


      “Elections not scheduled to be held in 2013 (other than by-elections)

      The 32 London borough councils (next election 2014)
      The 36 metropolitan district councils (next election 2014)
      The 201 district councils in two-tier authorities (next election 2014 in the 67 councils where members are elected by thirds, and 2015 in the 127 councils where all members are elected together)
      48 unitary authorities of England (next election 2014 in the 19 councils where members are elected by thirds, excluding Bristol, and 2015 in the 30 councils where all members are elected together)”

      Secondly I recollect from some years ago when I observed the count for certain local elections with multi-seat wards that in most cases the elector had split his votes between the solitary UKIP candidate and the candidates of other parties, rather than just casting a vote for the UKIP candidate and ignoring the rest; it then becomes a matter of conjecture how much higher the UKIP share of the total votes cast would have been if UKIP had fielded a full slate of candidates.

      Thirdly I don’t think that the results of either local elections or EU Parliament elections are a particularly reliable guide to how people would have voted in a general election if that had been on the same day, let alone when it won’t take place for another year.

      Reply Fine. However, the figures are as reported. UKIP came fourth in seats won, miles behind Labour and the Conservatives. You may wish it had been otherwise, but it wasn’t. If UKIP do well in the EU elections then I agree the fact that they were low turnout PR elections means you cannot draw too much inference from those about a FPTP General Election, especially when Mr Farage told people to vote for UKIP MEP candidates not to achieve anything in Brussels but as “free hit” against anything they did not like about the 3 main parties! I am not going to continue with these discussions about how well or badly UKIP has done. We each have our own views, and the figures are the reality. All I know is there is no evidence that UKIP are any closer to taking us out of the EU today than a year ago. All rests on getting a referendum and I can only see one way to do that which is why I will continue to work through the Conservative party.

      1. Kenneth R Moore
        May 25, 2014

        Professor Redwood – ‘All I know is there is no evidence that UKIP are any closer to taking us out of the EU today than a year ago’.

        Maybe but the CONSERVATIVE PARTY ARE a little closer to taking us out of the EU..thanks to the pressure exerted by UKIP!!.
        UKIP did fantastically well considering they don’t have the core tribal vote of the main well established parties.

        Nevertherless Mr Redwood much acknowledge that his party is now made up of too many nodding donkeys rather than the old style conviction politician. It is this that makes his position uncomfortable – not the strength of UKIP. UKIP are the enemies of the Europhiles and his ally.

        The list of shame which features too many ‘conservative’ names. :-


        In my view the only way to make progress is to use UKIP’s strength to demand concessions from the leadership ie. start listening about concerns over EU immigration and pressure on services, stop the Lib Dem tea boys blocking policies.
        Rather than play down UKIP’s success, Mr Redwood should be sending Mr Farage a letter of thanks for getting catching the deaf ear of the Conservative leadership.
        Atleast now his party has a (slim) chance of success in 2015 with the referendum pledge in place.

      2. Kenneth R Moore
        May 25, 2014

        JR ‘I will continue to work through the Conservative party.


        Professor Redwood,

        I would be interested to hear how you can do this when so many of your Conservative colleagues want to increase spending on the EU, take more power away from the Uk parliament, and don’t wish to affirm the sovereignty of the Uk parliament etc.
        These Europhile’s are also ‘working; through the Conservative Party to achieve their aims and their voices are louder than yours. They have taken control of the Party despite being less experienced and able parliamentarians because they have no convictions to trouble them – just a thirst for power.

        It beggars belief that a grown man or woman that can tie their own shoes or cross the road could wake up one morning and think ‘ah yes..sending more money to Brussels would be a better idea than reducing the national debt or building more schools.
        Mr Patrick Mcloughin seems to be one of these unfortunate creatures that loses all sense and judgement whenever he is near a voting lobby but there are manymany more.

        These are all quite black and white issues – either your colleaugues believe in an independent UK or they want a United States if Europe.

        The voting records highlighted by the Bruges group suggest a large body of opinion within your party wants the latter.This fact has been disguised by some clever public rhetoric but the voters are catching on and turning to UKIP or not voting.

        I don’t see how you ‘working’ within the party can change this unhappy fact . This is why UKIP have grown so strong – the foolishness of your colleagues in supporting so many unpopular pro EU positions. Rather than looking at UKIP it’s about time the Conservative party had a good look at itself. The lessons of the ERM have been lost or forgotten.

        Your supporters haven’t left you behind – the Conservative party turned it’s back on it’s own people.

  3. Freeborn John
    May 23, 2014

    The Conservative party have not won a majority since Maastricht and the decline is becoming precipitous because your party is selling pro-EU policy goods that no one wants to buy. Your party needs to learn what it has for so long preached, namely that the market is more powerful than once dominant brands selling obsolete product unsuited to the needs of a new era. If you cannot adapt then you will see at each successive election that the relationship between the Conservative party and UKIP is the same as that between the horse industry and the car industry.

    1. cosmic
      May 24, 2014

      “your party is selling pro-EU policy goods that no one wants to buy.”

      It’s not doing that. It’s dishonestly selling pro-EU policy goods. e.g. its “renegotiation and reform the EU at a fundamental level” nonsense, when it’s been made abundantly clear that the UK won’t be allowed to negotiate a special position, and reforming the EU into something it was never designed to be and doesn’t want to be, isn’t going to happen.

      Reply It’s selling an IN/Out referendum which you should want

      1. Denis Cooper
        May 24, 2014

        Cameron is trying to sell us something with no guarantee that it will even be delivered, let alone that it will be “of the nature or substance or quality demanded by the purchaser”, to use the phraseology of Section 14 of the Food Safety Act 1990:


        Maximum penalty, two years imprisonment.

        But here is a question: why should we have to wait for a politician to offer to sell us a referendum, when we should be able to petition for and get one as of our legal right, as in Switzerland?

        1. Aunty Estab
          May 24, 2014

          Good point Mr Cooper, there should be a right to a referendum as in Switzerland, if the people had more say a lot of the idiotic policies, i.e. Green taxes, foreign aid largesse etc. would never have been contemplated.

      2. cosmic
        May 24, 2014

        Firstly, I doubt they’ll have a working majority, and they do plenty of other things I absolutely don’t want.

        Secondly, I don’t trust them not to either do a Wilson, making out nothing is a lot, or renege on the commitment altogether should doing a Wilson seem like not coming off.

      3. Freeborn John
        May 25, 2014

        No eu-sceptic wants a rigged referendum designed to keep us in the EU. The referendum is a means to an end – EU exit – which Cameron clearly is against. Better that we get eject him in 2015 and you elect a real euro sceptic who would be prepared to lead an EU exit campaign or simply take the Uk out should he/she win a majority in 2020.

  4. Iain Gill
    May 23, 2014

    Yes well done in your area John.

    I’ve been in Eric Pickles area and its a shambles, biggest problem has been (now ex) Conservative councillors lying to the population about what they were doing on the planning front. If you are going to rubber stamp (indeed lead behind the scenes) a large new development in an area that doesn’t want it then at least be honest about it! Houses have got to be built somewhere but the way the political class is going about selecting those areas leaves a lot to be desired. And the way they are being two faced about it stinks. And Eric has nodded along with immigration concerns but done the square root of nothing about it.

    For what its worth I think that the Conservatives should not field candidates in places like Sunderland and let UKIP win, anything would be better than the dross labour candidates ending up in parliament again.

    I await your verdict on what should be done about UKIP’s main appeal:
    – low quality of the political class
    – immigration
    – EU

    I doubt your leaders are going to come up with what is needed without electoral pressure

    1. Hope
      May 24, 2014

      Boles has always forgotten to mention how he will provide the infrastructure to go with the builds. However he will threaten that the building will take place as developers wish if the councils fail to engage. The threats and vindictiveness radiate I to every policy the Tory led coalition make. Do as we say or else! I think is stems from the pompous arrogance at the top of both parties. They know best and do not question it.

      Cameron has still failed to recognise that the expense scandal and taking no significant actionable four years has damaged not only politics but his own credibility. The same is true with the economy, EU, immigration or any of the key policy issues he asked us to judge him by. Osborne has not delivered on any measurement he asked us to judge him by and should have walked 2 years ago. Each time he demands that we move on, he might like to reflect how it damages his party.

  5. Leslie Singleton
    May 23, 2014

    Given that, apart from the “Metropolitan” and a very few other exceptions, only a third of seats were being contested how come (especially by the BBC) the continual references to no councils controlled by UKIP? Cannot see much surprise in that myself.

    Reply IT is surprising as this is the second set of local elections where some say UKIP has done well, with the vote this time lower than last time.

    1. Leslie Singleton
      May 24, 2014

      Eh?–Isn’t there a 4-year cycle? Two lots of one third surely has no chance, but time will change that. Like a lot of others I cannot wait for tomorrow. The only pity is that the much-needed and soon-to-happen by-election happens to be in a seat with a 16,000 majority. Even so there is hope, even there. How sure are you now that UKIP will not win seats in 2015? Share of votes and more especially the estimated Projected National Share, though of course vastly important, is not the only game in town: as discussed a week or two ago, Variability, which seems to me to be large, also very important. Everything gets thrown at UKIP but I think we have the wrong kind of MP’s. Unlike you-know-whom, they do not talk like normal people or believe what normal people believe. And the BBC is just as bad: how dare they talk about UKIP causing “disruption”? How else is an up and coming new party to progress? God and the Devil protect us from the idea that the present (or former) three main parties should have a permanent lock.

      Reply On current polls for the GE UKIP will not win any seats in 2015, and there is nothing in the local election results to suggest these polls are wrong. Things can change of course – either way. The winning parties from Thursday’s local election expect more people than current polls imply to want to influence the Conservative/Labour struggle in 2015, implying a squeeze on third fourth and fifth placed parties in each seat where the outcome between the 2 main parties is a close call.

      1. JA
        May 24, 2014

        Reply to reply: It is not about how many seats UKIP win but how many your party loses.

        Conservative voters are more intelligent. Therefore they are first to realise the Lib/Lab/Con con. Therefore your party is losing most to UKIP. Your lot would rather stand against a UKIP win in some areas and let Labour in.

        Where UKIP will fail is its lack of experience and professionalism. When it finally gets councilors, perhaps even MPs too and their incompetence shows.

        Reply A depressingly negative approach to an issue that matters so much.

        1. JoeSoap
          May 24, 2014

          Reply to reply:
          If it matters so much, why carry on with a leader who doesn’t share your views?
          Straight question to which a straight answer is required – would Cameron rather the UK had all the trade agreements and arrangements which Switzerland has outside the EU, or be part of an ever-closer union, because that is the choice?

          Reply Mr Cameron has made clear his opposition to ever closer union. He thinks he can negotiate a relationship for the UK with the EU which is better than Switzerland’s. If he can’t we can vote Out, assuming a Conservative victory in 2015.

          1. Hope
            May 24, 2014

            You know that is not true when he spent £18 million pounds of taxpayers’ money to promote closer union to the EU and you were present at the debate. This is also meant to be renegotiation point of his. Trust him? Your reply is not befitting of your intelligence.

          2. Leslie Singleton
            May 24, 2014

            Eh? again. Your Reply is the first mention I’ve seen of Cameron’s thinking he can come up with a better relationship than Switzerland’s. His comments on Switzerland have invited derision as you know. Are the Swiss and Norwegians fools? Slightly unlikely given that they are the richest in the World. The elephant in the room question is why are Switzerland and Norway not applying to join the EU. There are few certainties but one is that Brussels would bite their arms off to get them in because the present situation makes a joke out of how supposedly necessary it is to be In. And we (still) have advantages that Norway and Switzerland can only dream about in terms of friends and contacts, and language and culture and Law, around the world.

          3. Kenneth R Moore
            May 25, 2014

            Mr Cameron cannot have it both ways.

            ‘During the debate on the Government’s EU Bill a motion was moved to reaffirm the sovereignty of the United Kingdom Parliament in relation to EU law. This motion was opposed by the Government which has kept the supremacy of EU law over those laws made by our own democratic institutions.’ Bruges Group)

            He voted to allow support the supremacy of EU law over Uk law. So where it matters (in the voting lobby) ‘Mr Cameron has NOT made clear his opposition to ever closer union’.

        2. JA
          May 24, 2014

          Reply to reply:

          The fact is that your party would rather let Labour win that give its natural supporters what they want.

          There is nothing in me which matches that sort of negativity – on an issue which matters so much.

          (I wouldn’t be typing this if it didn’t matter to me)

          Reply With some other colleagues I have persuaded Mr Cameron to give us an In/Out referendum if he wins next year. That is exactly what our natural supporters want.

          1. Hope
            May 24, 2014

            Presumably his word will be similar to his cast iron guarantee for a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty and all the dire warning he gave us about it. Look it up on Youtube to remind yourself and balance this against his action over four years. For example, he had the opportunity to make changes to the Lisbon treaty and Chose not to do so. He did not have to implement the EU arrest warrant, he chose to.

          2. Leslie Singleton
            May 24, 2014

            Eh? yet again–Says you–Rather, a good few of your “natural supporters” have translated themselves elsewhere rather than embarrass themselves by listening to this guff. Cameron IMHO has next to no chance of an outright majority.

          3. J A
            May 24, 2014

            Reply to reply

            A good start would be an apology for calling us fruitcakes, loons and closet racists. Closely followed by praise for our forbearance, tolerance, civility and proper use of the appropriate democratic means rather than violence (violence being the first choice of some influential groups in Britain)

            Secondly a moratorium on immigration and new EU laws. Now.

            Otherwise we shan’t be convinced by Mr Cameron’s promises.

            It’s going to take a lot to prevent me relishing voting UKIP in 2015. A heck of a lot. I’ll never forgive myself if I find myself duped again.

          4. Kenneth R Moore
            May 25, 2014

            The fact that it took Professor Redwood and ‘some other colleagues arm twisting ‘ to make Mr Cameron concede an EU referendum shows how out of touch and unsuitable for high office Mr Cameron is.
            It’s blindingly obvious to anyone outside the Westminister bubble that the Conservatives have no chance whatsoever of victory in 2015 without the pledge.
            It was given reluctantly by Cameron and is now his trump card in the election. Professor Redwood you must be mortified you have to serve under such a visionary(less) leader.

        3. ian wragg
          May 24, 2014

          Last night BBC local news interviewed the Tory leader of Amber Valley and he was wittering on about it not being a level playing field as UKIP had stolen tory votes and given Labour control of the council.
          He sounded pathetic and his entitlement to rule attitude will sway many more towards UKIP.

      2. Chris
        May 24, 2014

        Reply to Mr Redwood: John Curtice yesterday said that on the basis of the results UKIP would be expected to win parliamentary seats.

        Reply Difficult to see where.

        1. Leslie Singleton
          May 24, 2014

          Dear John–You seem wilfully to continue to miss the point about Variability. It is indeed difficult to predict specific seats but that is not what Professor Curtice is saying, nor even close. Hark back to that Observer article that Denis put before us. From memory, at 20% Support and a Variability of 5% that Poll predicted 7.2 seats. No idea “where” but “where” is not what is being predicted, only that SOME “where” in the country UKIP (at least as predicted using the Model in question) will win 7.2 seats if 20%/5% applies. Admittedly it was only 17% not 20% but on the other hand the 5% seems very low which is a huge compensation. It cannot be stated often enough that the LibDems only have seats because of Variability. If their support were spread evenly they would have no seats.

          Reply I understand targeting which UKIP says it intends to use. Mr Farage tried that himself, standing for Thanet South and then Buckingham in 2010, but failed on both occasions.

          1. Leslie Singleton
            May 25, 2014

            Comment on Reply–Your Reply once again is about specific seats which is not what this little bit of the discussion is about. I don’t care where UKIP gets its first seats only that it does so. Ben Nevis?, Isle of Wight??, Windermere??? I repeat: who cares as long as a few come good. It is not JUST targeting (though that is very important), it is Variability as well and there was a lot of it about on Thursday. Of course I realise the vote has to hold up as well but as the other Parties destroy themselves, as they will be even more inclined to do if tonight and especially Newark go well, I believe it will. You will be aware that the Conservatives were blown away in Canada.

          2. Leslie Singleton
            May 25, 2014

            Back specifically on this “No Seats” point, anybody know how many Councils there were, if any, which UKIP had any chance of gaining control of even if they had won all the third up for grabs? I don’t know, but suspect few. Not seen anything on this but seems very relevant to me. I realise it is very easy to seek to be dismissive by saying “They have no Councils” but the position before Thursday is IMHO close to irrelevant, at least to the current discussion. Surely the current comment should be on the current results (unless otherwise made clear).

        2. Longinus
          May 24, 2014

          Ed Balls’ seat would be a good start for UKIP. Farage vs Balls in key marginal oop North.

  6. uanime5
    May 23, 2014

    Of the 18 wards being voted on in Wokingham the Conservatives won 15 seats, the Liberal Democrats won 2, and Labour won 1. The Council remained Conservative.


    Reply Yes, true.Not all the seats are in the Wokingham constituency, where there are no Labour Councilllors.

  7. John E
    May 23, 2014

    I’ve been surprised to see the number of voters that UKIP seem to be taking from Labour. The man of the people act from Farage seems to be working.
    Voters are increasingly unable to identify with the professional political class that exists in its own closed world following a career path from University to SPAD to candidate to MP to Minister without having to come into contact with the real world.

    Where all this leaves the arithmetic come General Election time I can’t begin to guess. Just looking at national averages will not work. The analysis will have to be done constituency by constituency. Interesting times.

  8. Chris S
    May 23, 2014

    Looking at the results, they are far more likely to give a pointer towards the GE than Sunday’s Euro result will.

    I am a traditional Conservative supporter in the Redwood mould and my MP is Christopher Chope.

    Naturally I also have a lot of sympathy with Nigel Farage and UKIP because I can’t believe Brussels will give DC anything like enough to make me want to vote to stay in.

    Where I part company with you, John, is that I see a need for an accommodation with UKIP for the General Election. UKIP is not going to go away and is likely to gain enough votes to deprive the Conservatives of a working majority next year. It’s clear that there are many UKIP supporters who will not switch back to the Conservatives, whatever the party says.

    We are where we are : there is a clear majority of the electorate in favour of leaving the EU or wanting a referendum on the issue after renegotiation. It would be a tragedy if Miliband creeps in via the back door because both right of centre parties are fighting each other.

    All the Party needs to do is to allow UKIP a clear run in a number of seats where the Conservatives can’t win but UKIP has a chance. In return, Eurosceptic Conservative MPs.
    will not be opposed by UKIP.

    This makes perfect sense but I don’t believe DC will countenance any kind of deal.
    If only he had been tougher on the LibDems over the boundary issue he would have a chance of an extra 20 seats. I think he will live to regret that disastrous error.

    Reply I do not believe Mr Farage would offer or be able to enforce such a deal on his side, and the Conservative leadership is not prepared to tell some Conservative candidates to stand down either.

    1. Chris S
      May 24, 2014

      Sadly, if there is not some kind of deal, I suspect we will end up with a Miliband-led coalition.

      How can these two parties possibly allow this to happen when there is a clear majority in favour of a referendum ?

      Reply Both leaders of the 2 parties would need to be sincerely want a deal, and they would have to be able to force individual candidates to stand down in favour of the other party. Neither of these two conditions is currently met by Conservatives/UKIP. Mr Cameron does not want a deal, and Mr Farage keeps calling for the replacement of Mr Cameron as leader of the Conservatives, a move not designed to woo Mr Cameron to a deal! I doubt Mr Farage could get many of his candidates to stand down.

      1. Alan Wheatley
        May 24, 2014

        For UKIP, by far and away the most important policy is for the UK to leave the EU. As Conservative Party policy is for the UK to stay in the EU I do not see how there could possibly be a deal between the two parties: of course there is always the theoretical possibility that a deal could be done, but it could well herald the political end of the deal makers as their supporters abandoned them.

        1. Denis Cooper
          May 24, 2014

          The UKIP policy of leaving the EU is enshrined in its constitution as the primary objective of the party, its raison d’etre:


          There is no way that the members would agree to change that.

        2. Chris S
          May 25, 2014

          The only way UKIP will achieve its objective of leaving the EU is either :

          1. Winning a General Election outright with leaving the EU as the main policy in the election manifesto.

          2. Win a referendum on the issue

          As option 1 is almost an impossibility, there has to be a referendum and only the Conservatives will deliver one, If they remain in power.

          We can only hope that Cameron gets the largest number of seats and, against the likely odds, UKIP get just enough MPs to hold the balance of power.

          Cameron will then be forced to do a deal with Farage. That has to be an easier task than putting together a coalition with Clegg and his ragbag group of MPs !

    2. Kenneth R Moore
      May 25, 2014

      The Conservative Leadership were quite happy to tell a few Conservatives to stand down to make way for the Liberal Democrats when the Coalition was formed. What is the difference with UKIP ?

  9. Wokingham Mums
    May 23, 2014

    Oh dear UKIP did well, despite the media bashing. Time to stop that don’t you think?, you only dig dirt on your opponent when you’re run out of constructive debate. Address the issues UKIP raise, MP’s are elected by the people to reflex the people views, not to influence the people views, listen.
    Labour are weak, but gaining strength, an extra seat in W!. If they change leader?
    Lib Dems are probably a spent force but don’t under estimate Nick if he falls and he has. he won’t fall alone. And their supporters are, disenchanted , lost, adventurous, non-traditional, ripe for Labour and UKIP
    and could be the deciding factor in the next election.

    Reply There has been no UKIP bashing on this site. I have offered the same protection against personal attacks to UKIP as to all other parties and people. IT is just a pity a few UKIP supporters have tried to abuse my fair mindedness by seeking to attack others whilst decrying all attacks on their party.

    1. JA
      May 24, 2014

      Reply to reply: Thank you for running this site.

      It was not fair of you to comment on UKIP performance without you mentioning the negative campaigning by all parties and virtually all of the media against UKIP. Nor did you mention the fake UKIP parties either.

      Reply There was plenty of negative campaigning against other parties as well. I could give you a detailed run down of the tricks rival parties played in their leaflets and campaigns against Conservatives in the local elections, but I do not, as I accept there is a certain amount of noise, stolen ideas and banter in all elections.

      1. JA
        May 24, 2014

        During the campaign there were accusations of racism against the UKIP leader too.

        This is about the worst accusation which can be made against someone these days. This is the only attack I will defend UKIP against and your PM was part of that attack.

        In the interests of proper debate on this site I’ve defended UKIP against charges of racism.

  10. Ken Wokingham
    May 24, 2014

    Employment and Benefit migration have been the deciding factors in this Election. So, UKIP pulled large number of votes from others, distorting the results. Local issues like flooding played their part too.
    Sadly, peaceful nation of ours is gradually filling up with thugs and racketeers. Immigrant (low wage work ed) from EU is returning to forecourts and construction industry, wiping away local opportunities. Our graduates have little prospect with our Industrial base being taken over by other nations i.e. Pharmaceuticals – USA and Fareast, consumer electronics – Fareast, Motor industry – Europe and Fareast and so on. All we have is our financial institutions. All in all this election result witness a true cry by the nation that want to retain some dignity without being striped naked in the name of EU.
    For me, I can not align with labour policy, don’t trust LD after their last mess, I don’t fall in to UKIP clans, so voting conservatives was the only choice.

    1. JA
      May 24, 2014

      Ken – The Tories have been up to their armpits in everything bad you claim here. They signed Maastricht opening up our borders. It was their party which created the Britain-for-sale culture to which the City has become addicted.

      I voted for them.

      The population level has increased under them (unselectively and against the will of the public), we have a new housing bubble and clearly Britain is still for sale.

      1. JA
        May 24, 2014

        I should clarify that I USED to vote for them. On Thursday I voted UKIP.

  11. The PrangWizard
    May 24, 2014

    I have to say that this is not much of a ‘comment’. I would have hoped for more; the words seem to be reluctantly given.

    UKIP is getting a lot of coverage because they have seen a dramatic rise in their popularity and I don’t think it is significant that they didn’t gain any councils; I’m surprised there isn’t more on the disastrous fall in the LibDem vote, and how this leaves them as a credible party. Lots of valid criticism has been levied at Miliband, but Clegg deserves more than he’s getting. They seem to have a surprising number of influential friends. It continues to confound me why they have so much power and are allowed so much influence over and in government.

    Whilst the local elections have a certain importance it’s the EU results which I’m looking forward to, the results from these will set the tone for the next few years, and especially the next one, with the General Election so close. This will be an anxious weekend for many.

    I would have thought that for anyone wishing OUT of the EU, a major victory for UKIP should be wished for and welcomed, as it will send a strong message about how the people of Britain feel. It need not be seen in UK party political terms. It will put still more frighteners on the pro-EU Establishment and media. I wonder how they will react.

    Reply The local election results do not show “a dramatic rise” in UKIP popularity, but a modest fall compared to last time, as measured by the national vote share. The results show that people do not see UKIP as the party they want to run their local Councils – they think the choice is mainly between Conservative and Labour.I just describe the results as they are, based on the figures. Had UKIP scored around 30% of the vote in the local elections like Labour and the Conservatives and won hundreds of seats I would have written a very different analysis, but they didn’t. The polls for the EU election point to a better UKIP performance, which if confirmed on Sunday will clearly be a sign that more people want to leave the EU. The one way to let people decide on our membership of the EU is to support Conservatives in 2015 to get the IN/Out referendum that would be needed to do that.

    1. zorro
      May 24, 2014

      Conversely John, surely it would be better for UKIP to get lots of votes at the election and win a fair number of seats from Labour. Perhaps then, if the Conservatives and UKIP had enough seats, you could form a coalition giving DC the authority to negotiate a deal with Europe….. Of course, if he couldn’t or wouldn’t you could vote to leave and perhaps even within the same Parliament have a majority to overturn the 1972 Act……what with UKIP and that solid mass of Eurosceptic Tories…… A sure fire bet? 😉


      1. David Price
        May 25, 2014

        If UKIP want to see their core goal realised then eusceptic votes need to be increased in Parliament. This means displacing euphiles of any stripe but if the referendum is to happen at all requires replacing Labour and LibDem.

        The recent local elections seem the first step on that way but the new UKIP councillors will have to deliver meaningful results quickly if significant impact on Westminster elections are to happen.

        Even if sufficient eusceptic MPs were established for a majority there’d still need to be compromise and cooperation. To my mind this would reequire Farage or Cameron to stand down for the good of the country.

        As it is neither party has offered a credible plan for exiting the EU.

  12. formula57
    May 24, 2014

    The huge difference arising from this local election surely is that the voters now know voting UKIP means getting UKIP.

    reply On the contrary, in most places they did not get a single UKIP Councillor, and nowhere did they get anything approaching a UKIP Council.

    1. Leslie Singleton
      May 24, 2014

      I continue to find it astonishing that you would keep saying that UKIP haven’t won a Council–how could they possibly do so with only a third (essentially) being counted? UKIP did splendidly despite what you say, and will do much better yet.

      Reply I just describe the position. UKIP have been contesting elections for many years now, so they have had several chances to win enough to take a Council. Winning just 155 seats on Thursday, less than 4% of those on offer, is hardly an earthquake! Labour gains were far larger than total UKIP seats.

      1. Leslie Singleton
        May 24, 2014

        Reply to Reply–You love to talk about the history, which is largely irrelevant. Think back to differential calculus at school. It is the slope of the tangent at today’s point on the graph that is important. And you have ignored the crucial Variability aspect. If you don’t like talking in terms of (the patently large) Variability, just consider that UKIP won 30% in some of Labour’s heartlands, which is very significant in terms of winning a few seats in Parliament. I doubt if Sunday’s results are going to do much to change that other than for the better. Even if I am wrong and UKIP fails to win seats in Parliament it is a stone cold certainty now that UKIP are going to destroy Cameron’s already small (because of Boundaries and the fact that Labour are already ahead before Boundaries) chances which means his bluster is irrelevant and, acting rationally, he has no choice but to come to an accommodation with UKIP. Nobody said it would be easy getting people to stand aside but TINA.

  13. oldtimer
    May 24, 2014

    I watched some of the broadcast results and gained the following impressions:

    1 Labour did not poll as well as they must have hoped, underestimated the impact that UKIP would have on them and paid the price in several councils. FWIW various pundits thought they should have done better to be confident of a majority in the 2015 GE.
    2 The Conservative vote was damaged by UKIP, but managed to hold up in a few important councils such as Trafford.
    3 The LibDems suffered big losses and total wipe out on important councils such as Liverpool which they had previously controlled.
    4 UKIP demonstrated their capacity to take votes from the three main parties and, according to electoral pundit Curtice, and to poll well enough to be able to win a few seats in the 2015 GE. The lower overall vote share was said to be influenced by very poor results in London (c7% share) compared with elsewhere, especially outside the large metropolitan areas.

    I think the MEP results will provide a better picture of the relative state of the parties. But these local government elections have made the political outlook much more uncertain for all the political parties. Attempts to brand UKIP as “racist” are and will continue to be counter productive. It seems to be the default argument of the pro-EU camp. Is it too much to hope that we will now get a better and more informed political debate in the UK as a result of UKIP`s arrival on the scene?

    Reply I do not think the Euro results will be as good an indicator as the locals to the 2015 election. The Euro election was a PR election, not a first past the post one, and many people do treat it as a “free hit” as Mr Farage rather unfortunately called it. I personally think the EU election matters in its own right, but others see it as an opportunity to criticise and complain about the imperfections of the major parties as Mr Farage invited them to do.

    1. Iain Gill
      May 24, 2014

      Reply to Johns reply:
      The results show for me that places like Sunderland which have always been dismissed as a no hope proposition for anyone but labour are actually winnable. A right wing party which is prepared to tackle properly the immigration question could very well win. I have been telling the Conservative party this for a long time but the powers that be just don’t want to listen.

  14. Chris
    May 24, 2014

    I feel that you are very dismissive of UKIP achievement, and to put it in context, it is worth bearing in mind the following posting I saw in the comments section in the D Tel today:
    “We know one third of the country voted, including London, Wales and Northern Ireland – all areas which are known to be difficult territory for UKIP.
    They started with 2 councillors – they ended the day with 160 or so councillors. That is an 80-fold increase on what they had. They are now the main opposition in two councils and hold the balance of power in several others.”

    This is not an achievement to be dismissed or sneered at. UKIP has had enough of that sort of treatment, treatment which has proved to be highly counterproductive.

    Reply I have never sneered at UKIP or been unpleasant about them. However, to qualify for an earthquake surely they would have to win 1000 plus seats on a night when more than 4000 seats were available to win, and when both Labour and the Conservatives won well over 1000 each. I just describe what happens.

  15. theyenguy
    May 24, 2014

    Nature economist Elaine Meinel Supkis writes The Rising Tribe Of The Working Stiff. The rise of UKIP unsettles Labour, Tories and Liberal Democrats in England elections. Increasingly, British politics now is a three way battle. And if they let in even more Eastern Europeans, it will be eventually won by UKIP out of sheer desperation. In the US, the displacement of citizens is cruelly celebrated. The rulers who want no unions and low wages love this flood of aliens. Ditto with the rulers in England. Little worry about these people also causing local street crimes is due to the rich living in basically what are castles surrounded by armed guards.

    So long as their bank accounts continue to bulge bigger and bigger, they don’t give a damn. The US doesn’t have a UKIP party to appeal to the working stiffs. Instead, we have the dreary left/right game that has the leaders of both wings constantly betraying their followers and playing mind xxxx games galore.

  16. Chris
    May 24, 2014

    There is necessarily a tremendous amount of soul searching and analysis going on amongst the Conservatives as to how to deal with the UKIP threat, a threat which is perceived to be very real by many in the Conservative Party. Lord Ashcroft’s contribution to the Conservative Home Conference today gives yet another example. However, can I suggest that sometimes the best answer to a problem is the common sense one. This posting which I have just seen in the D Tel comments section says it all. I suggest the Conservative leadership would be wise to take heed:

    “Reader comment I saw over at The Indie today:
    ‘Perhaps the reason that more and more people are turning away from the main parties is that they have abandoned serious politics and have become marketing organisations.
    Look at the hard-hitters from the world of marketing that they are hiring for the election.

    There is an old story about marketing which might be apt in understanding why more people are turning to UKIP.

    It is a story about a US dog food manufacturer who decided to launch a new product.

    So they spent $10m on a marketing campaign. But the food wasn’t selling. so they spent another $10m – and still it didn’t sell.

    So the CEO called a crisis meeting and the marketing and promotions people presented all kinds of stats and they were trying to figure out why it was going wrong. They had run poster campaigns, TV ads and done all the social media stuff and had got approval for the slogans and sales messages from focus groups.
    Then suddenly, the secretary taking the notes of the meeting put her hand up and started waving at the CEO shouting “I know why it isn’t selling.”

    Intrigued the boss asked her why.

    She replied: “It’s because the dogs don’t like it.” ‘

Comments are closed.