tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16547311613340893752024-03-13T10:03:42.435+00:00News to no oneAlastairhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11551605492626333385noreply@blogger.comBlogger91125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1654731161334089375.post-60875125839763819392015-07-16T15:06:00.001+01:002015-07-19T15:00:24.470+01:00Hanging tough – the Conservative intake of 2015<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Despite relatively few seats changing hands in May, more than a
fifth of Conservative MPs – 74 in total – were not in the last Parliament.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>They will have a big influence on the
dynamics of the Conservative party in government.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>What do they look like?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Well, here they are:</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bygi8eZw-4q1dnhQV3FVRkdHeWc/view?usp=sharing"><span style="color: blue; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span></a><span style="color: blue; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bygi8eZw-4q1dnhQV3FVRkdHeWc/view?usp=sharing">https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bygi8eZw-4q1dnhQV3FVRkdHeWc/view?usp=sharing</a></span><a href="https://www.blogger.com/null"></a><a href="https://www.blogger.com/null"></a><a href="https://www.blogger.com/null"></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">I've ploughed through MP websites, interviews and newspaper
articles to find out more about them.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In
the course of this, I've seen more Labradors than is healthy for any normal man
to look at.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Less than 30% of the new Conservatives are women, compared with
60% of the new Labour intake.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Assessing
racial and sexual diversity is more fraught (not least because not all
candidates' self-identification is explicit) so I have not performed a headcount,
but the Conservatives do seem to have proportionately more MPs from ethnic minorities
than previously.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">The biographies of many of the new MPs look familiar.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Much has been made of Scott Mann, the Cornish
postman, but he is an exception rather than the rule.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>At least 17 of the new Conservative MPs have
previously earned their corn as political professionals and I expect that is an
undercount owing to the reticence of some candidates to advertise the
fact.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I count 11 business owners (some CVs
are a little hazy) and 13 lawyers of various stripes.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Seven new MPs have backgrounds in PR,
communications and events management.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Four new MPs had military careers.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">The contrast with the background of new Labour MPs is
instructive.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Few of the new Conservative
MPs have a public sector background.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>There are two doctors and a nurse, a police officer and two government
lawyers, two teachers and the four ex-military men.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>No new Conservative MP advertises his or her previous
main job was as a charity worker or official, though many draw attention to
their charitable work (which in some cases is very impressive indeed).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>For the new Conservative MPs, charitable work
is something to be done when giving back to the community while for new Labour
MPs, working in the charitable sector is a normal career.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>We will no doubt see this difference in world
view on the floor of the House of Commons in the coming years.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">What of their opinions?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>For Conservative MPs the big topic for the next few years will be the
referendum on membership of the EU.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>David Cameron was extremely effective in getting these candidates to
rally around the policy of having a referendum, but will he be able to bring
him with them once the renegotiation is concluded?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The new MPs don't so much divide between
Europhile and Eurosceptic as between those who avoid talking about the subject,
those who give their views when prompted and those who won't shut up about
it.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"></span></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"></span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">For some of the new MPs, maybe eight to ten, it seems likely that
campaigning in the referendum for Out will outweigh party loyalties.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>They include a former leader of UKIP and the
campaign organiser for the Referendum party in 1997.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Several of the new intake have signed up for
Conservatives for Britain, a Eurosceptic campaign group.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>None of the new MPs rebelled on the vote
about public information during the purdah period during the referendum campaign
(one seriously considered doing so), so they're keeping their powder dry for
now.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">I have found only one new MP, Flick Drummond, who so far has identified
herself as pro-Europe. However, I suspect that those who have stayed quiet to
date will generally follow a party line when the time comes.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The broad mass of the new MPs are content
either to take the "negotiate then decide" line or to take the line
that they would vote Out now but are open to persuasion.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>But the awkward squad has received
reinforcements.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">What of the wider politics of the intake?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This was neatly summed up by Chris Green, the
new MP for Bolton West:<o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">
</span></div>
<div style="background: white; margin: 0cm 42.55pt 12pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; letter-spacing: 0.35pt; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman";">"As Paul Goodman has previously highlighted, the
Party has the Soho and the Easterhouse modernisation movements. Almost
invariably the Soho element costs us support in Bolton West and the Easterhouse
element wins us support."</span><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">
</span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Both groups are well-represented in the new intake (I think we
can take it that Chris Green sees himself as being in the second group), though
there appear to be more acolytes of George Osborne than Iain Duncan Smith and
Owen Paterson.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>But he might also have
mentioned the traditional small c conservative MPs, who are perhaps most
numerous of all.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>These MPs,
temperamentally similar to David Cameron and who would no doubt see their role
as MPs as part of the Big Society, would be readily recognisable to previous
generations of Conservative MPs.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The
Conservative party, as you would expect from the name, is not changing all that
fast.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">
</span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">The single strongest theme among the new MPs' campaign literature,
heavily encouraged by Conservative Central Office, is a focus on local
topics.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Nearly all the new MPs majored
on plans for their local constituencies.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Quite a few of the new MPs have commented almost exclusively on
these.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Craig Williams, MP for Cardiff
North, explains why:<o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">
</span></div>
<div class="Body" style="margin: 0cm 42.55pt 12pt; text-align: justify;">
<span lang="EN-US" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 13.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">"You get the occasional person who says, “Why on
earth are you banging on about potholes in your leaflet, that’s nothing to do
with Westminster?” Well, it’s because it matters to the resident of Cardiff
North."<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">
</span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">This has worked brilliantly for getting these MPs elected (the
Conservatives have learned much from the Lib Dems), but this may cause problems
in the future.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Far too many MPs have
prioritised superfast broadband in their constituency for the Government to
sideline this and many have named the improvement of local transport
infrastructure, which is laudable but expensive in these straitened times.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Amanda Solloway has already had to express
her disappointment at the postponement of the electrification of Midlands
Mainline.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Others will also be disappointed.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The government is going to need to draw up strategies
for implementing the new MPs' tactics for getting elected.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It is unclear whether it has realised that
yet.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">
</span></div>
<div class="Body" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 12pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">The challenges for David Cameron of getting any repeal of the
Hunting Act through are clear.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Several
of the new intake are explicitly opposing it.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">
</span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Who to look out for in the new intake?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Some names are already very familiar in
senior Conservative circles.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The Mayor
of London's team has swept into Westminster.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Boris Johnson's deputies, Kit Malthouse and Victoria Borwick will both
make an impression (I'm taking it as read that everyone is keeping an eye out
for Boris Johnson).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Oliver Dowden is one
of the few new MPs who arguably took a step down in government circles by
becoming a Conservative backbencher, having previously been David Cameron's
chief of staff.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>He is unlikely to stay
there for long.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>James Cartlidge has
already been added to David Cameron's team for preparing for Prime Minister's
Questions.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Given the importance of this,
he is presumably marked for early promotion.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">
</span></div>
<div class="Body" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 12pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Of those who are not already insiders, Johnny Mercer stands out
as a gifted natural communicator.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>His
maiden speech justly won acclaim and it was no one-off.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>He has the direct and incisive English of a
soldier and clear thoughts to communicate with it.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The Conservatives will be fools if they do
not make full use of him early on: he looks like a star in the making.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>On the right of the party, Chris Green can
express his views clearly and vividly, as shown above.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Andrea Jenkyns, who defeated Ed Balls, is
uncategorisable and doesn't look likely to be shy to voice her opinion.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">
</span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">As a general theme, there look to be a lot of forthright
characters in the new Conservative intake.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>And this new intake, like the 2010 intake, look unlikely to be
particularly biddable.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>With such a small
majority, the government is going to need to accept defeats from time to time
as a normal part of business.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It looks
set to be a lively Parliament.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Note</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br></span></div><div style="text-align: start;"><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">This post first appeared on politicalbetting yesterday afternoon:</span></div><div style="text-align: start;"><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);"><br></span></div><div style="text-align: start;">http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2015/07/18/antifrank-hanging-tough-the-conservative-intake-of-2015/</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">
</span></div>
Alastairhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11551605492626333385noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1654731161334089375.post-82254516134988653782015-07-10T17:52:00.001+01:002016-01-12T19:36:45.271+00:00Pleased to meet you: the Labour intake of 2015<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">The election in May was a huge disappointment for Labour, going
backwards rather than forwards.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Despite
losing seats, however, over one fifth of the Labour MPs elected in May were not
in the House of Commons in the last Parliament.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>That is a big chunk of the Parliamentary party and the new MPs will have
a big influence over the party's future direction.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Who are these new MPs, what do they believe
and who should we watch out for?</span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">I've had a trawl and compiled the following table:</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><o:p></o:p></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">
</span><a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bygi8eZw-4q1ektmbkRabm54Zjg/view?usp=sharing"><span style="color: #006699; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bygi8eZw-4q1ektmbkRabm54Zjg/view?usp=sharing</span></a><br />
<o:p></o:p> </div>
<div class="Body" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 12pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">This is harder to compile than you might expect.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Some of the new intake have not advertised
everything about their past (for example, Harry Harpham is happy to advertise
that he was a striking miner in the 1980s but it took more investigation to
find out that he has more recently worked as an assistant to David Blunkett).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Some have defeated me: all I have found out
about Ruth Cadbury's past career so far is that she was a local
councillor.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Some have so far betrayed
none of their detailed political thoughts, either being publicly on-message at
all times or simply not saying much at all.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>No doubt we will learn more in the coming months and years.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">
</span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">As you can see, the new intake includes some intriguing MPs.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>One, Keir Starmer, was lobbied to stand for
the Labour leadership even before he'd taken his seat.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>One, Nick <span style="mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Thomas-Symonds,</span> is a well-reviewed biographer.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Two are close relatives of foreign Prime
Ministers past and present.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>But what
themes can we identify?</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">
</span></div>
<div class="Body" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 12pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">First, there are a lot of new MPs with past experience of
national politics, either as special advisers or as parliamentary assistants to
MPs.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Even leaving aside the three MPs
who are returning to the Commons, at least 12 of the new MPs have held a role
of that type (I suspect the number is higher because quite a few of these MPs
are strangely reticent about such pasts and my digging may not have uncovered
them all). The public and third sector is well-represented: 11 are former union
officers, five worked in health or social care and ten have worked in charities
or NGOs.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>As usual, the lawyers are thick
on the ground: eight in total.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>(Of
course, some MPs have held more than one job so they may feature in more than
one of these totals.)<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">
</span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">By way of contrast, few have much private sector experience.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Even taking a broad view of what constitutes
"private sector", only four of the new MPs have substantial
experience in this area.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This looks like
a serious gap in experience on the Labour backbenches and is likely to prove an
indicator of the priorities of the new intake.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">
</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">What of their views?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>One
great advantage of a leadership election is that it forces the new MPs to nail
their colours to the mast at an early stage, even if they are naturally
taciturn or avoid internal party debate.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>And the first thing to note is that only three out of 53 new MPs chose
to back Liz Kendall.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>There aren't many
Blairites in the new crop.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Reinforcing
the point, 11 chose to nominate Jeremy Corbyn, and while at least four of them
apparently did so out of a wish to give party members a choice rather than
ideological sympathy, more have made enough public statements to put their firm
left credentials beyond dispute.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">
</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Since the election, new MPs have had three opportunities to show
off their leftwing credentials.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Immediately
after the election, ten new MPs called for a leader to set out an alternative
to austerity:</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span> </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: auto; text-align: justify;">
<a href="http://labourlist.org/2015/05/newly-elected-labour-mp-call-for-a-leader-who-wont-draw-back-to-new-labour/"><span style="color: #006699; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">http://labourlist.org/2015/05/newly-elected-labour-mp-call-for-a-leader-who-wont-draw-back-to-new-labour/</span></a><br />
<o:p></o:p> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">
</span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">At the end of May, many more Labour MPs wrote to defend the union link
with Labour:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">
</span><br />
<a href="http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/05/labour-must-defend-trade-union-link"><span style="color: #006699; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/05/labour-must-defend-trade-union-link</span></a><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">
<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">
</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">This was as much about internal Labour party politics as a wider defence:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">
</span></div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: auto; text-align: justify;">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">"Shamefully, there are many in our own party who see the aims of the unions as alien to their own and hurl around the lexicon of our enemies willy-nilly. The phrases trade union ‘barons’, union ‘bullying’ or ‘sabotage’ should have no place in the vocabulary of Labour politicians. Perhaps some of those from the nouveaux wing of the Party should read their history and understand that the unions created the Labour Party and not the other way around."<o:p></o:p></span></div>
</blockquote>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: auto; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">
</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">
</span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">At the end of last month,
an open letter was sent to the Observer calling for debt cancellation for
Greece and an end to the enforcing of austerity policies.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It included 25 MPs among the signatories:</span></div>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><o:p></o:p></span><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">
</span><a href="http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jun/28/greek-crisis-brings-eurozone-to-a-crossroads%20"><span style="color: #006699; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jun/28/greek-crisis-brings-eurozone-to-a-crossroads</span></a><span class="MsoHyperlink"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">
</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Any signatory of any of these letters (especially the first and
the last of these three) can be taken to be on the left of the Labour
party.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>16 of the new intake signed one
or more of these letters.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Seven signed
all three.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><o:p></o:p></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">
</span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Fewer of the new intake have come out decisively on the Blairite
side.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Wes Streeting has commented that <span style="mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">"</span>Never again can
the Labour party go into a general election with negative ratings on leadership
and economic credibility."<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Rob
Marris has said that <span style="mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Labour
overspent when in government.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Peter Kyle
has agreed with Tristram Hunt that </span>Labour needs a fundamental rethink
before putting a fresh offer to voters.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Jo Cox has said: " We must go out of our way to regain trust on the
economy; talking about how much we love the NHS isn’t enough".<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>But otherwise MPs have either taken a
mainstream line or kept their powder dry.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>If the new leader is going to move the party to a new economic position,
he or she will be leading the new intake rather than catching up with them.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><o:p></o:p></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">
</span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Which of these MPs are worth looking out for?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It's early days yet, of course.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Keir Starmer looks likely to be a
considerable asset for Labour straight away.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Angela Rayner is a rare example of an MP who started at the bottom as a
care worker and worked her way up: she looks capable. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Tulip Siddiq seems to have panache, managing
to discomfit Boris Johnson on the campaign trail.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Helen Hayes has an unusual background for an
MP as an architect and town planner and she seems to be very much her own
woman.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Peter Kyle's views will be much in
demand as the man who was able to take a Conservative seat in the south of
England.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Naz Shah's life experiences
will command respect.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">
</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Not all of the new MPs inspire immediate excitement: we have been
given a heavy sprinkling of council functionaries who so far seem to have more
skill at working party machines than to offer inspirational leadership.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>But they may yet surprise.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Some look likely to provide entertainment
value. Marie Rimmer is awaiting trial next month for assault following an
incident in the Scottish independence referendum.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><o:p></o:p></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">
</span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Taken as a whole, this looks like a talented intake and many of
them are already finding their voices.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>There is an undeniable leftward lean to the intake and a relatively
narrow set of backgrounds.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>With very few
exceptions these new MPs lack experience in the private sector and interest in
the getting rather than the spending aspects of politics.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The challenge they face is the same one that
the Labour party as a whole faces – addressing the concerns of a much wider
cross-section of society than the party as a whole managed in May.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: Arial;"><u></u></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><u></u></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><u>Note</u></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">This post first appeared on politicalbetting earlier this afternoon:</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2015/07/10/pleased-to-meet-you-the-labour-intake-of-2015/">http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2015/07/10/pleased-to-meet-you-the-labour-intake-of-2015/</a></span><br />
<o:p></o:p></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">
</span></div>
Alastairhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11551605492626333385noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1654731161334089375.post-57806444658779805392015-07-03T16:17:00.003+01:002015-08-11T13:15:59.230+01:00Reviewing the boundaries: the Boundary Commissions' role<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">In
my last two posts: <o:p></o:p></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span>
</span></span><div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">
<a href="http://newstonoone.blogspot.com/2015/06/the-boundaries-of-reason-possible-shape.html">http://newstonoone.blogspot.com/2015/06/the-boundaries-of-reason-possible-shape.html</a></span></span></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-family: Arial;"><div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">and<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><br />
<a href="http://newstonoone.blogspot.com/2015/06/the-art-of-changing-boundaries.html">http://newstonoone.blogspot.com/2015/06/the-art-of-changing-boundaries.html</a><br />
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Arial; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Arial; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: small;">I've looked at the likely impact of the boundary review and considered
how the parties might wish to see those boundaries fall. </span> </span> To date I haven't really looked at the role of the Boundary Commissions at all. This is a serious omission.</div>
</span><div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
</span><div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-family: Arial;">In fact, it will be the Boundary Commissions that determine the constituency boundaries. The parties can make representations but the Boundary Commissions will have the final say. </span></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial;">On my last post on the subject of the boundary changes, a poster called SirBenjamin commented as follows:</span></div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: x-small;"><span style="background-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.0470588); color: #333333; line-height: 22.1000003814697px; text-align: left;">"The parties do not have as much power and influence as the post implies.</span><br style="background-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.0470588); color: #333333; line-height: 22.1000003814697px; text-align: left;" /><br style="background-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.0470588); color: #333333; line-height: 22.1000003814697px; text-align: left;" /><span style="background-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.0470588); color: #333333; line-height: 22.1000003814697px; text-align: left;">During the last two reviews (including the aborted one) I've advised several associations on representations to the boundary commission during the review consultation period.</span><br style="background-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.0470588); color: #333333; line-height: 22.1000003814697px; text-align: left;" /><br style="background-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.0470588); color: #333333; line-height: 22.1000003814697px; text-align: left;" /><span style="background-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.0470588); color: #333333; line-height: 22.1000003814697px; text-align: left;">This has only a limited impact for several reasons:</span><br style="background-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.0470588); color: #333333; line-height: 22.1000003814697px; text-align: left;" /><br style="background-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.0470588); color: #333333; line-height: 22.1000003814697px; text-align: left;" /><span style="background-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.0470588); color: #333333; line-height: 22.1000003814697px; text-align: left;">1. The commission is (usually quite staunchly) predisposed towards their original recommendations - a compelling (and non partisan) reason for altering the proposals is required. </span><br style="background-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.0470588); color: #333333; line-height: 22.1000003814697px; text-align: left;" /><br style="background-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.0470588); color: #333333; line-height: 22.1000003814697px; text-align: left;" /><span style="background-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.0470588); color: #333333; line-height: 22.1000003814697px; text-align: left;">2. In a competitive seat there will be other parties making representations that will benefit them, so any proposals must not only be more compelling than the original proposal, but also better than any competing counter-proposals.</span><br style="background-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.0470588); color: #333333; line-height: 22.1000003814697px; text-align: left;" /><br style="background-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.0470588); color: #333333; line-height: 22.1000003814697px; text-align: left;" /><span style="background-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.0470588); color: #333333; line-height: 22.1000003814697px; text-align: left;">3. Even if beneficial proposals are adopted for one seat or in one area, it may have negative knock-on effects in others, so these must be considered when looking to make representations (e.g. you're not only competing with Labour, but possibly also with fellow Tories next door).</span><br style="background-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.0470588); color: #333333; line-height: 22.1000003814697px; text-align: left;" /><br style="background-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.0470588); color: #333333; line-height: 22.1000003814697px; text-align: left;" /><span style="background-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.0470588); color: #333333; line-height: 22.1000003814697px; text-align: left;">So, on balance, most counter-proposals will not be accepted and those that are will often be countered by an opposition counter-proposal adopted elsewhere that has a negative impact.</span><br style="background-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.0470588); color: #333333; line-height: 22.1000003814697px; text-align: left;" /><br style="background-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.0470588); color: #333333; line-height: 22.1000003814697px; text-align: left;" /><span style="background-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.0470588); color: #333333; line-height: 22.1000003814697px; text-align: left;">Finding compelling arguments that are prima face non-partisan can be difficult. As well as the interesting stuff like constituency shapes, electorate sizes and ward boundaries, It also involves a lot of rather dull work researching local commnity ties, access to resources, peoples shopping habits, how rivers, railways and big main roads can or can't be crossed, that sort of stuff. (And then quietly choosing to discard anything that isn't to our advantage...)"</span></span></blockquote>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">While the identity of the poster is unknown, this has the ring of authority to me and I happily accept the points made. It is certainly true that the Boundary Commissions are going to be looking exclusively at non-partisan reasons for taking on board suggestions. It should be noted that local party branches, local councils and individuals will also make their own recommendations and the Boundary Commissions will look at them all.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial;">There is no single right way of carving up boundaries. The relevant Boundary Commission will need to choose between competing possibilities. But the new strict rules mean that the Boundary Commissions will have much less freedom of manoeuvre. In fact, the task is likely to prove to be a real nightmare for the Boundary Commissions, made easier only by the fact that they have already had a trial run.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-family: Arial;"></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">They must do so in accordance with the legislation. </span><span style="font-family: Arial;">They are going to need to implement the proposed reduction in seat numbers to 600 and introduce new tight parameters on the number of registered voters in each seat. The Prime Minister reaffirmed his commitment to this in Prime Minister's Questions on 1 July 2015, noting that it was a manifesto pledge.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Historically, boundaries have so far as possible emphasised a sense of place. It is likely that we will see composite constituencies, simply because they will be needed to make the sums add up. But let's have a more detailed look at the considerations.</span></div>
<span style="font-family: Arial;">
</span>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-family: Arial;">The Boundary Commissions are permitted to take into account the following considerations:</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">• special geographical considerations,
including in particular the size, shape and
accessibility of a constituency; </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">• local government boundaries; </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">• boundaries of existing constituencies; and </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">•any local ties that would be broken by
changes in constituencies. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">I'm going to focus now on the Boundary Commission for England in the interests of keeping this piece of manageable length. Different boundary commissions may take different approaches on some of the points that follow (and some will not be relevant for other parts of the UK). Since England is by far the most populous part of the UK, I make no apology for doing so.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-family: Arial;">Last time around, the Boundary Commission for England stated that it did </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">not consider that it would be appropriate to start from a blank sheet of paper and that it intended to have regard generally to existing constituencies as far as possible. It would not try to make the constituencies as equal in numbers of registered voters as possible, merely to make sure that the constituencies fell within the permitted parameters. </span></span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">As far as possible, it would seek to create
constituencies from whole wards,</span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> from wards that are adjacent to each other and </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">that do not contain detached parts. </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">I expect that it will take the same approach this time.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Its revised proposals last time round, which were as far as it got before the process was brought to a halt, can be viewed here:</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20140404084345/http://consultation.boundarycommissionforengland.independent.gov.uk/">http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20140404084345/http://consultation.boundarycommissionforengland.independent.gov.uk/</a></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"> </span></div>
</div>
<span style="font-family: Arial;">The detailed proposals are found at the very end of each regional report. Given the allocation of seats between the component parts of the UK (and within England, between the different regions) at present look likely to be similar to what was envisaged for the abortive boundary review, you could do a lot worse at present than assume that the constituencies will look very like what was set to emerge from the review last time round. It won't get you all the way there because the English regions do vary a bit from last time round and the numbers of registered voters in the individual constituencies have also changed quite a bit, but it won't be a million miles away from what emerges.<br />
</span><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">If you have any interest in how the boundary reviews work in practice, I recommend dipping into these regional reports to get a flavour. Some practical examples will tell you more than any explanation can.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">The Boundary Commission in practice placed considerable weight on not disturbing constituencies if it could avoid doing so. For example in Suffolk one reason it gave for preferring its revised proposal over another that had been advocated was that it left five of the existing constituencies undisturbed.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial;">It seems likely (though it is not a legal requirement) that the Boundary Commission for England will respect regional boundaries - this is what they proposed last time around. So, for example, there may be cross-county seats between Nottinghamshire and Lincolnshire, both of which are in the East Midlands region, but there will not be cross-county seats between Cambridgeshire and Lincolnshire, since the former is in the Eastern region. .</span></div>
<span style="font-family: Arial;">
</span><span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span> <span style="font-family: Arial;">In accordance with the consideration of maintaining local ties, I expect that the Boundary Commissions will seek to keep sizeable towns in single constituencies wherever possible. </span><span style="font-family: Arial;">We may see a single constituency of Luton or we may see expanded versions of Luton North and Luton South (in the abortive boundary review, Luton North was to be linked with Dunstable, to the horror of the residents of the latter town). But we are unlikely to see Luton divided five ways with a mix of town and country in each one. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial;">This would place due respect to local ties if the revised rural constituencies have even a residual coherence. To give a hypothetical example from a county I know well, </span><span style="font-family: Arial;">if Ipswich or Bury St Edmunds were to be partitioned between different constituencies (as has already happened to Ipswich), this would cut across local ties. On the other hand, </span><span style="font-family: Arial;">South Suffolk is a large rural seat with two main towns, Sudbury and Hadleigh. Both towns are also in the same district council, Babergh, which covers almost the same area as the Parliamentary seat and the two towns have long been associated for political purposes. But if the seat were split up and the two towns were put in separate constituencies, this would not offend local sensibilities. Residents of both towns would look towards Bury St Edmunds, Ipswich and Colchester before they looked to each other. This would be a fairly usual state of affairs in rural constituencies. </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-family: Arial;"></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-family: Arial;">But it does mean, if </span></span><span style="font-family: Arial;">the Boundary Commissions decide to do this, that some of the remaining seats are going to be very different. </span><span style="font-family: Arial;">Some existing rural constituencies are likely to be subject to heavy reorganisation, as the effect of the reduction in seat count is concentrated in these areas. The Boundary Commission for England seems to prefer concentrating all the upheaval in odd constituencies rather than tinkering around the edges with quite a few.</span><span style="font-family: Arial;"><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-family: Arial;">It's also very likely that some rural constituencies will inevitably lack even a residual coherence. </span></span><span style="font-family: Arial;">Cornwall, for example, will have too many voters for only five constituencies and too few for six constituencies, so it will inevitably need to share a constituency with Devon. Local feeling in such a cross-border constituency will be outraged at such sacrilege. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">We have already had a taste of that from the abortive review in the last Parliament. In their revised proposals for the South West, the Assistant Commissioners drily commented:</span><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: x-small;">"We have been struck by the efforts
of many of those making representations to
reflect the history and unique cultural identity
of this region. Those issues are particularly
important to those who seek to ensure that a
particular county, historic area, city, or broader
urban area remains whole in the sense that it is
exclusively encompassed by one or more
constituencies. Cornwall, Wessex, Gloucester,
Plymouth, and the urban conurbation around
Bournemouth are obvious examples. We are
particularly grateful for the enormous amount
of work that has gone into the detailed
representations in relation to the unique
cultural identity of Cornwall.</span></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: x-small;">However, we are constrained by the
statutory requirement that each constituency
must have an electorate within 5% of the
electoral quota."</span></blockquote>
<span style="font-family: Arial;">And the same problem is going to arise in most of the counties in England which have fewer than eight or nine seats at present. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">All this is going to change the nature of some constituencies quite dramatically, both in terms of the current boundaries and in many cases in terms of the degree of internal coherence of the constituency.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">What would this mean in practice? If as I expect the Boundary Commissions prioritise keeping cities and towns within a single constituency wherever possible and dividing them between as few seats as possible where that is not possible, those constituencies are inevitably going to contain high concentrations of the urban voters who are much more likely to vote Labour than their country mouse cousins. In the south of England, that maximises Labour's chances of taking seats despite their weak levels of support there. The Conservatives do not benefit from the reverse in the north east of England and have not done so in Scotland for some time because their support in their weaker areas is so much more diffuse.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">This is good news for Labour, obviously. But it does not come close to counteracting the bad news that much of its support is piled up in inner city areas. Taking 75% of the vote in a constituency is a waste. You'd rather give at least 25% of that to another more marginal constituency. Right now this phenomenon is working more against Labour than the concentration of its weak support in the south in single constituencies is working for it. It is too weak in the rural south and too strong in the inner city north.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-family: Arial;">Still, if the Boundary Commissions adopt this approach on a seat count reduction to 600, this will prove disorientating for those incumbents in highly disrupted seats (almost all of whom will be Conservatives, given that they hold almost all the rural seats in England), even if the new seats created are also safe Conservative seats. The Conservative party establishment are going to need to hand out lots of tranquilisers and reassurance if they are going to get the seat reduction through.</span></span><br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><u>Note</u></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">This post first appeared on politicalbetting earlier this afternoon:</span><br />
<br />
<a href="http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2015/07/03/continuing-his-series-on-the-boundaries-antifrank-on-the-role-of-he-boundary-commissions/"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2015/07/03/continuing-his-series-on-the-boundaries-antifrank-on-the-role-of-he-boundary-commissions/</span></a></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
Alastairhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11551605492626333385noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1654731161334089375.post-36399459665107704312015-06-29T17:56:00.003+01:002015-06-30T00:10:34.884+01:00The art of changing boundaries<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">In my last post <span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;">(</span><a href="http://newstonoone.blogspot.com/2015/06/the-boundaries-of-reason-possible-shape.html">http://newstonoone.blogspot.com/2015/06/the-boundaries-of-reason-possible-shape.html</a>) I spent some time looking at the likely impact of the impending boundary changes on the numbers of seats in different regions and the potential impact on the seat numbers of different parties. In this post I shall look at how the detail of the boundary review might assist or hinder the different parties.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><strong>National party strategic considerations</strong></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><strong><br /></strong></span><span style="font-family: Arial;">What, however, would be better for the national parties? To answer this, we need to think about what the parties need. They will simultaneously wish to:</span></div>
<span style="font-family: Arial;">
</span><span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial;">1) Maximise their current notional seat count</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">2) Maximise their chances of taking new seats</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">3) Minimise their chances of losing seats</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">4) Keep incumbents happy</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">But these aims are inconsistent, so the parties will need to choose which are most important to them. This will vary for each party.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Right now the Conservatives are fairly content with how things stand. They have an overall majority on a lead of 6.5% of the national vote share. They will retain power, however, only if they have a substantial seat lead over Labour so they need to ensure first of all that the smallest possible poll lead will produce the most seats possible. If they go below that level they're expecting defeat anyway so the margin of defeat is less important than maximising the chances of success at or above that level.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Labour, by contrast, are already in a losing position. The current shares of votes are unacceptable to Labour and they need to plan on the basis that they are going to do better. They will want to ensure that small improvements in their vote share will result in as many extra seats as possible. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">From Labour's perspective a reduction in their notional seat count now following a boundary review may not necessarily be bad news if the result is to bring the possibility of winning more seats in play in 2020 should their vote share improve. They shouldn't be planning on the basis of their current vote share: that is a losing proposition, as we saw in May. </span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">For example, York Central and York Outer are respectively a safe Labour and safe Conservative seat. If they were combined and then divided on a homogeneous basis, the Conservatives would have two marginal seats that would both fall on a swing of just over 3% to Labour. Labour might conclude that such a reorganisation might suit them if they were working on the basis that a swing of 3% was the minimum that they were targeting.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial;">So each party needs to identify a seat share that they regard as the minimum acceptable and then take decisions on the boundary review with that in mind. There is no point in Labour giving up a seat in the manner described above if it is not going to be recouped on a smaller swing than that presently required for their target number of gains. And there is no point in the Conservatives seeking a redistricting that results in a notional gain on current vote shares if it makes retaining power on a slightly lower vote share harder.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Selling the strategy to incumbents may on occasion prove difficult and that cannot be overlooked. In particular, the Conservatives want to get the boundary changes through if they can since it will in general benefit them. So they don't want to upset incumbents unduly: they have a vote on the matter. It may be better to get an arrangement that isn't the very best for the national party if it is decent enough and keeps an incumbent happy.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial;">As for the best tactic for each party in a given area, much will depend on the detail of local voting patterns. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span>
<b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Developing strategy into tactics</span></b><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><br />But some general tactics are apparent.<br />
<br />
For now, let's work on the basis that the reduction in seats to 600 takes place. </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> Based on the national total of registered voters in the May 2015 of 46,425,476, that would produce a range of possible seat sizes of 73,508 to 81,244 registered voters with a par of 77,376 voters.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">
In the south of England, Labour's weakness actually simplifies its strategy. Some seats will look likely to drift out further of Labour's reach as a result of the reduction in seat numbers and these strict limits on seat sizes - larger seats will generally favour the party that is dominant in the area still further. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial;">The process will be uneven. </span><span style="font-family: Arial;">For example, on the general election registered voter numbers Cambridgeshire and Suffolk would be due an additional seat between them even with a seat reduction from 650 to 600. Meanwhile, Peterborough is below the minimum number of registered voters so it will need to take on more rural (and presumably Conservative-voting) voters from an adjoining constituency. Ipswich, another constituency where Labour has a keen interest, is likely to suffer the same fate, being </span><span style="font-family: Arial;">a constituency</span><span style="font-family: Arial;"> </span><span style="font-family: Arial;">only just above the minimum threshold for registered voters in a county which elsewhere has oversized constituencies.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">
<br />But some seats where Labour are interested will actually need to be reduced in size. In more populous seats in which Labour have some strength, like Watford and Waveney, Labour will be looking to shed outlying rural districts from the constituency which will be presumed to be more Conservative in the hope of creating a Labour seat.<br />
<br />
In less populous adjacent constituencies with Labour strength, Labour will seek to construct a new seat which takes the best of their support from both. The tactics here can be trickier. Both Luton seats are undersized. Do Labour seek to have the core made into a single seat, accepting the loss of a single seat but creating a single Labour stronghold, or do they accept the attachment of large rural areas to each in the hope of getting both but risking losing both? Given their current seat tally, they need to take the chance, I think. This gives the concept of political betting a whole new meaning.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><b>Minor problems</b><br />
<br />
So far I have had much to say about Labour/Conservative battles in the south. But the smaller parties need to watch out. For example, the Conservatives will be keen to disrupt UKIP so far as possible. It would be utterly unsurprising if the Conservatives proposed an arrangement in Essex which left the current Clacton constituency bisected, halving the effect of Douglas Carswell's formidable incumbency and swamping both new constituencies with Conservative voters. This constituency is going to need some adjustment, being underweight in registered voters, and the Conservatives will want to make it as difficult as possible for him. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial;">I expect that Labour will have similar thoughts about Brighton and may well seek to despatch Caroline Lucas by providing her with a new cohort of Labour voters to challenge her grip on her seat or partitioning the seat out of existence. And both main parties may well seek to partition isolated Lib Dem constituencies like Southport, Sheffield Hallam, North Norfolk and Leeds North West. Even as the electorate becomes less and less inclined to vote for one of the two main parties, the minor parties will find it harder to get or keep Parliamentary representation.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><b>Major problems</b></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><b><br /></b></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial;">By means such as those I described above, Labour managed in the mid-1990s to get a boundary review that actually worked against the Conservatives by bringing into play seats that would not previously have fallen on a landslide. Might such tactics work again? It would be much harder this time, as can be illustrated with four pictures:</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-AvdbmK47zNk/VZAaugPln9I/AAAAAAAAAKw/dfSLrN2UvoY/s1600/birminghamarea.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-AvdbmK47zNk/VZAaugPln9I/AAAAAAAAAKw/dfSLrN2UvoY/s320/birminghamarea.jpg" width="288" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-DS4_bOEaa9Q/VZAa3LOaMII/AAAAAAAAALA/HiKpRTaAjhs/s1600/northeast.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-DS4_bOEaa9Q/VZAa3LOaMII/AAAAAAAAALA/HiKpRTaAjhs/s320/northeast.jpg" width="288" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-5jKtQ8A1UGE/VZAa4opPzzI/AAAAAAAAALI/9oFSZ7sX7OQ/s1600/northwest.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-5jKtQ8A1UGE/VZAa4opPzzI/AAAAAAAAALI/9oFSZ7sX7OQ/s320/northwest.jpg" width="288" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-DpamFh_lxTw/VZAa6Se3V0I/AAAAAAAAALQ/_0N5nxhWJHk/s1600/southwales.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-DpamFh_lxTw/VZAa6Se3V0I/AAAAAAAAALQ/_0N5nxhWJHk/s320/southwales.jpg" width="288" /></a></div>
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><br />
</span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<strong><span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span></strong>
<strong><span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span></strong>
<strong><span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span></strong>
<strong><span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span></strong>
<strong><span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span></strong>
<strong><span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span></strong>
<strong><span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span></strong>
<strong><span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span></strong>
<strong><span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span></strong>
<strong><span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span></strong>
<strong><span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span></strong>
<strong><span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span></strong><strong><span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span></strong>
<strong><span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span></strong>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">In these four areas, Labour have over 100 seats in solid blocks. All four blocks will suffer substantial reductions in seats under the review. If the seat count is reduced to 600, three of the 18 Labour seats in Birmingham and the Black Country, one of the four Labour north east Welsh seats, two of the 18 English </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Labour</span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">seats in and around Merseyside, two of the 22 </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Labour</span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">seats in and around Manchester, three of the 26 Labour seats in the north east and four of the 19 Labour South Wales seats </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">look set to go. That's nearly a third of the seat count reduction accounted for already (and the seven seat reduction in Scotland and two seat reduction in Northern Ireland will do the Conservatives no harm either, taking us up to 24 seats lost from Parliament without the Conservatives having to leave the sofa). </span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">The chances of offloading any of these 15 seat losses in Labour heartlands onto other parties looks limited, given the solid nature of these Labour blocks, painstakingly built over a generation. Labour will be doing well if it avoids a dozen notional seat losses in its heartlands before it gets started. </span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><b>Conclusions</b></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><b><br /></b></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial;">A reduction in seat count to 600, if achieved, is likely to benefit the Conservatives nationally considerably. It would be bad for Labour and particularly bad for the Lib Dems, with serious challenges for both </span><span style="font-family: Arial;">the Greens</span><span style="font-family: Arial;"> and UKIP. Each party would need to think carefully about how best to protect its position, bearing in mind what they are trying to achieve in 2020 rather than focussing on what the reorganisation would mean in the context of the May 2015 result.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"> </span>
<span style="font-family: Arial;">But will it be achieved? Conservative incumbents are going to need a lot of reassurance before they are going to feel able to support it because their seats are likely to be chopped and changed a lot. That process of reassurance hasn't started yet. The Conservatives need to decide whether they want to try to get this through. If they do, they need to start laying the ground right away.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><u></u></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><u>Note</u></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">This post first appeared on politicalbetting earlier this afternoon:</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<a href="http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2015/06/29/guest-slot-the-art-of-changing-boundaries/"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2015/06/29/guest-slot-the-art-of-changing-boundaries/</span></a></div>
Alastairhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11551605492626333385noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1654731161334089375.post-11908583098870907052015-06-26T11:32:00.000+01:002015-06-26T11:32:19.286+01:00The boundaries of reason: the possible shape of the 2020 election<div align="justify">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">I previously looked back at the impact of demographic changes on party politics from 1992 to 2015. That's all well and good, but what changes can we expect for 2020? To determine that we first need to consider what the new boundaries are likely to look like.</span></div>
<div align="justify">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span> </div>
<div align="justify">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">It might be thought that the future musings of the Boundary Commissions are imponderable, but we have quite a lot of clues to go on. We should use them.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">The terms of any boundary review are closely delimited in legislation. The following will occur unless the law is changed or the proposed boundary changes are defeated in Parliament:</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">1) The election will be fought on 600 seats.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">2) There will be two Isle of Wight constituencies, a constituency for Orkney & Shetlands and a constituency for <span class="st">Na h-Eileanan an Iar.</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><span class="st">3) The 600 seats will be allocated between England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland according to a strict formula based on the number of registered voters as at the review date in each.</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><span class="st">4) Except for the exceptions already noted, the seats will have a population of 95% to 105% of the average constituency size (there are size requirements that are relevant only in Scotland and Northern Ireland has special rules).</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">These are pretty prescriptive rules. </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">T</span><span style="font-family: Arial;">here are already rumblings among Conservative MPs that the seat count should be kept at 650. As we shall see, this may be in the interests of individual Conservative MPs but it is unlikely to be in the interests of the Conservative party as a whole.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">The next thing to realise is that the Boundary Commissions have already started looking at this once (until their work was brought to a juddering halt by the Lib Dems ganging up on their coalition partners: as we shall see, this was absolutely correct from a narrow party interest). So we already can see the general direction of travel.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">For the moment I'm going to work on the basis of a 650 seat Parliament to explore what difference the boundary review might make. While this is not what the law currently requires, it makes it easier to see what difference the impact of movements in registered voters might have.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<strong><span style="font-family: Arial;">Allocation of seats around the component parts of the UK</span></strong><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">So, what should we expect? The first thing to do is to determine the number of registered voters in each part of the UK. This will be set at the end of this year, so we don't have the precise figures, but the numbers from the general election should provide a fairly decent guide. </span><span style="font-family: Arial;">We have the electoral commission's preliminary results: </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/__data/assets/excel_doc/0011/189623/2015-UK-General-election-data-collated-results-WEB.xlsx">http://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/__data/assets/excel_doc/0011/189623/2015-UK-General-election-data-collated-results-WEB.xlsx</a> </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">This gives a national total of registered voters of 46,425,476.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">I've separated these out into the component parts of the UK:</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><a href="https://www.dropbox.com/s/1k6q9vae8sn61xl/Registered%20voters%20and%20turnout.xlsx?dl=0">https://www.dropbox.com/s/1k6q9vae8sn61xl/Registered%20voters%20and%20turnout.xlsx?dl=0</a></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">From these we can derive the following totals of registered voters:</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Northern Ireland:</span><span style="font-family: Arial;">1,236,683</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Wales</span><span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-family: Arial;">: 2,282,297</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Scotland</span><span style="font-family: Arial;">: 4,094,784</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">England</span><span style="font-family: Arial;">: 38,811,712</span><br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">When the seat allocation is eventually determined, it is done by a broadly proportionate approach. Since we don't have the relevant registered voter numbers yet, it is pointless doing anything more than a pro rata approach. If the seat allocation stays at 650, we can expect Northern Ireland to get roughly 17 seats, Wales to get roughly 32 seats, Scotland to get roughly 57 seats and England to get roughly 543 seats (with one seat up for grabs). If the seat reduction to 600 seats takes effect, we can expect Northern Ireland to get roughly 16 seats, Wales to get roughly 30 seats, Scotland to get 52 or 53 seats and England to get 501 or 502 seats. This is almost exactly what the allocation would have been if the boundary review had gone ahead last time. So much for all the fuss about the voter registration changes.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Either way, English MPs will become still more dominant in Parliament. This can only be good news for the Conservatives, who dominate much of England and rely on it for almost all of their seats.</span></div>
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<strong><span style="font-family: Arial;">Allocation of seats within England</span></strong><br />
<strong><span style="font-family: Arial;"></span></strong><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Just as important as how the seats are distributed in the UK is how the seats will be distributed in England. The Boundary Commission for England is not legally obliged to follow the same approach when allocating seats between English regions, but in practice it intended to do so in the last Parliament and I expect it to do so again this time.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<a href="http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20131002112547/http://consultation.boundarycommissionforengland.independent.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/406678_Guide-to-the-2013-Review_acc.pdf"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20131002112547/http://consultation.boundarycommissionforengland.independent.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/406678_Guide-to-the-2013-Review_acc.pdf</span></a><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">The English regions had registered voter totals at the general election as follows:</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Eastern: 4,364,656</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">East Midlands: 3,350,769</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">London: 5,401,616</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-family: Arial;">North East: 1,941,841</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">North West: 5,240,724</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">South East: 6,419,548</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">South West:4,076,494</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-family: Arial;">West Midlands: 4,140,587</span><br />
Yorkshire & the Humber: 3,875,477</span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">This would result in the following seat allocations, based on England having 543 seats in a 650 seat Parliament (I have assumed a 650 seat Parliament for ease of comparability):</span><br />
<br />
<br />
<table border="1" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="MsoNormalTable" style="mso-cellspacing: 0cm; mso-padding-alt: 0cm 0cm 0cm 0cm; mso-table-layout-alt: fixed; mso-yfti-tbllook: 1184; width: 82%px;">
<tbody>
<tr style="mso-yfti-firstrow: yes; mso-yfti-irow: 0;">
<td style="background-color: transparent; border: rgb(0, 0, 0); padding: 0cm; width: 42.26%;" valign="top" width="42%"><div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: left;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><span style="font-family: Arial;">Region<o:p></o:p></span></span></b></div>
</td>
<td style="background-color: transparent; border: rgb(0, 0, 0); padding: 0cm; width: 18.04%;" valign="top" width="18%"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: right;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><span style="font-family: Arial;">Share
of registered voters<o:p></o:p></span></span></b></div>
</td>
<td style="background-color: transparent; border: rgb(0, 0, 0); padding: 0cm; width: 12%;" valign="top" width="12%"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: right;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><span style="font-family: Arial;">New
seat count<o:p></o:p></span></span></b></div>
</td>
<td style="background-color: transparent; border: rgb(0, 0, 0); padding: 0cm; width: 13.28%;" valign="top" width="13%"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: right;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><span style="font-family: Arial;">Old
seat count<o:p></o:p></span></span></b></div>
</td>
<td style="background-color: transparent; border: rgb(0, 0, 0); padding: 0cm; width: 14.4%;" valign="top" width="14%"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: right;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><span style="font-family: Arial;">Change
in seat count<o:p></o:p></span></span></b></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="mso-yfti-irow: 1;">
<td style="background-color: transparent; border: rgb(0, 0, 0); padding: 0cm; width: 42.26%;" valign="top" width="42%"><div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: left;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Eastern </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
</td>
<td style="background-color: transparent; border: rgb(0, 0, 0); padding: 0cm; width: 18.04%;" valign="top" width="18%"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: right;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">11.2%</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
</td>
<td style="background-color: transparent; border: rgb(0, 0, 0); padding: 0cm; width: 12%;" valign="top" width="12%"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: right;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">61 </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
</td>
<td style="background-color: transparent; border: rgb(0, 0, 0); padding: 0cm; width: 13.28%;" valign="top" width="13%"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: right;">
<span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><span style="font-family: Arial;">58<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
</td>
<td style="background-color: transparent; border: rgb(0, 0, 0); padding: 0cm; width: 14.4%;" valign="top" width="14%"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: right;">
<span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><span style="font-family: Arial;">3<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="mso-yfti-irow: 2;">
<td style="background-color: transparent; border: rgb(0, 0, 0); padding: 0cm; width: 42.26%;" width="42%"><div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: left;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">East Midlands </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
</td>
<td style="background-color: transparent; border: rgb(0, 0, 0); padding: 0cm; width: 18.04%;" valign="top" width="18%"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: right;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">8.6%</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
</td>
<td style="background-color: transparent; border: rgb(0, 0, 0); padding: 0cm; width: 12%;" width="12%"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: right;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">47 </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
</td>
<td style="background-color: transparent; border: rgb(0, 0, 0); padding: 0cm; width: 13.28%;" valign="top" width="13%"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: right;">
<span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><span style="font-family: Arial;">46<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
</td>
<td style="background-color: transparent; border: rgb(0, 0, 0); padding: 0cm; width: 14.4%;" valign="top" width="14%"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: right;">
<span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><span style="font-family: Arial;">1<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="mso-yfti-irow: 3;">
<td style="background-color: transparent; border: rgb(0, 0, 0); padding: 0cm; width: 42.26%;" width="42%"><div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: left;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">London </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
</td>
<td style="background-color: transparent; border: rgb(0, 0, 0); padding: 0cm; width: 18.04%;" valign="top" width="18%"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: right;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">13.9%</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
</td>
<td style="background-color: transparent; border: rgb(0, 0, 0); padding: 0cm; width: 12%;" width="12%"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: right;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">76 </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
</td>
<td style="background-color: transparent; border: rgb(0, 0, 0); padding: 0cm; width: 13.28%;" valign="top" width="13%"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: right;">
<span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><span style="font-family: Arial;">73<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
</td>
<td style="background-color: transparent; border: rgb(0, 0, 0); padding: 0cm; width: 14.4%;" valign="top" width="14%"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: right;">
<span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><span style="font-family: Arial;">3<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="mso-yfti-irow: 4;">
<td style="background-color: transparent; border: rgb(0, 0, 0); padding: 0cm; width: 42.26%;" width="42%"><div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: left;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">North East </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
</td>
<td style="background-color: transparent; border: rgb(0, 0, 0); padding: 0cm; width: 18.04%;" valign="top" width="18%"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: right;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">5.0%</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
</td>
<td style="background-color: transparent; border: rgb(0, 0, 0); padding: 0cm; width: 12%;" width="12%"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: right;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">27 </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
</td>
<td style="background-color: transparent; border: rgb(0, 0, 0); padding: 0cm; width: 13.28%;" valign="top" width="13%"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: right;">
<span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><span style="font-family: Arial;">29<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
</td>
<td style="background-color: transparent; border: rgb(0, 0, 0); padding: 0cm; width: 14.4%;" valign="top" width="14%"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: right;">
<span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><span style="font-family: Arial;">(2)<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="mso-yfti-irow: 5;">
<td style="background-color: transparent; border: rgb(0, 0, 0); padding: 0cm; width: 42.26%;" width="42%"><div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: left;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">North West </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
</td>
<td style="background-color: transparent; border: rgb(0, 0, 0); padding: 0cm; width: 18.04%;" valign="top" width="18%"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: right;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">13.5%</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
</td>
<td style="background-color: transparent; border: rgb(0, 0, 0); padding: 0cm; width: 12%;" width="12%"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: right;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">73 </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
</td>
<td style="background-color: transparent; border: rgb(0, 0, 0); padding: 0cm; width: 13.28%;" valign="top" width="13%"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: right;">
<span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><span style="font-family: Arial;">75<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
</td>
<td style="background-color: transparent; border: rgb(0, 0, 0); padding: 0cm; width: 14.4%;" valign="top" width="14%"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: right;">
<span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><span style="font-family: Arial;">(2)<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="mso-yfti-irow: 6;">
<td style="background-color: transparent; border: rgb(0, 0, 0); padding: 0cm; width: 42.26%;" width="42%"><div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: left;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">South East </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
</td>
<td style="background-color: transparent; border: rgb(0, 0, 0); padding: 0cm; width: 18.04%;" valign="top" width="18%"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: right;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">16.5%</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
</td>
<td style="background-color: transparent; border: rgb(0, 0, 0); padding: 0cm; width: 12%;" width="12%"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: right;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">88* </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
</td>
<td style="background-color: transparent; border: rgb(0, 0, 0); padding: 0cm; width: 13.28%;" valign="top" width="13%"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: right;">
<span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><span style="font-family: Arial;">84<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
</td>
<td style="background-color: transparent; border: rgb(0, 0, 0); padding: 0cm; width: 14.4%;" valign="top" width="14%"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: right;">
<span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><span style="font-family: Arial;">6<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="mso-yfti-irow: 7;">
<td style="background-color: transparent; border: rgb(0, 0, 0); padding: 0cm; width: 42.26%;" width="42%"><div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: left;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">South West </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
</td>
<td style="background-color: transparent; border: rgb(0, 0, 0); padding: 0cm; width: 18.04%;" valign="top" width="18%"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: right;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">10.5%</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
</td>
<td style="background-color: transparent; border: rgb(0, 0, 0); padding: 0cm; width: 12%;" width="12%"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: right;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">57 </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
</td>
<td style="background-color: transparent; border: rgb(0, 0, 0); padding: 0cm; width: 13.28%;" valign="top" width="13%"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: right;">
<span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><span style="font-family: Arial;">55<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
</td>
<td style="background-color: transparent; border: rgb(0, 0, 0); padding: 0cm; width: 14.4%;" valign="top" width="14%"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: right;">
<span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><span style="font-family: Arial;">2<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="mso-yfti-irow: 8;">
<td style="background-color: transparent; border: rgb(0, 0, 0); padding: 0cm; width: 42.26%;" width="42%"><div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: left;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">West Midlands </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
</td>
<td style="background-color: transparent; border: rgb(0, 0, 0); padding: 0cm; width: 18.04%;" valign="top" width="18%"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: right;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">10.7%</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
</td>
<td style="background-color: transparent; border: rgb(0, 0, 0); padding: 0cm; width: 12%;" width="12%"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: right;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">58 </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
</td>
<td style="background-color: transparent; border: rgb(0, 0, 0); padding: 0cm; width: 13.28%;" valign="top" width="13%"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: right;">
<span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><span style="font-family: Arial;">59<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
</td>
<td style="background-color: transparent; border: rgb(0, 0, 0); padding: 0cm; width: 14.4%;" valign="top" width="14%"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: right;">
<span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><span style="font-family: Arial;">(1)<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="mso-yfti-irow: 9; mso-yfti-lastrow: yes;">
<td style="background-color: transparent; border: rgb(0, 0, 0); padding: 0cm; width: 42.26%;" valign="bottom" width="42%"><div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: left;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Yorkshire and the Humber </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
</td>
<td style="background-color: transparent; border: rgb(0, 0, 0); padding: 0cm; width: 18.04%;" valign="top" width="18%"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: right;">
<span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><span style="font-family: Arial;">10</span></span><span style="font-family: "Georgia","serif"; font-size: 12pt; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">%</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
</td>
<td style="background-color: transparent; border: rgb(0, 0, 0); padding: 0cm; width: 12%;" valign="bottom" width="12%"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: right;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">54 </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
</td>
<td style="background-color: transparent; border: rgb(0, 0, 0); padding: 0cm; width: 13.28%;" valign="top" width="13%"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: right;">
<span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><span style="font-family: Arial;">54<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
</td>
<td style="background-color: transparent; border: rgb(0, 0, 0); padding: 0cm; width: 14.4%;" valign="top" width="14%"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: right;">
<span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><span style="font-family: Arial;">-<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<br />
<div class="Body" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 12pt;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><o:p><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: x-small;"> </span></o:p><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">*Plus two Isle of Wight constituencies</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Again, this seems to benefit the Tories. More seats are being added in their strongest areas while the seat count in the North West and the North East, two of their weaker areas, continues to decline.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><strong>Putting numbers on these changes</strong></span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">So, what would these movements mean in real seat numbers? Unfortunately, we cannot simply apply a formula because much depends on how the boundaries are actually set. Thinking about the detail of boundary commission reviews will need to be the subject for another post, but some general principles can be laid down now.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">1) Boundary reviews are bad for incumbents. The more extensive the boundary alterations, the less of an advantage incumbency gives.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">2) <u>Within an area</u>, a seat reduction will increase the advantage of the party with the most support. To give an extreme example, if Wales were reduced to one constituency, Labour would expect to take 100% of seats in the area. Considered on a wider scale, it would obviously be to Labour's detriment to have only one seat within Wales, but within Wales itself it would accentuate its political dominance.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">3) With a seat reduction in an area, regional strength of trailing parties will outweigh general strength in the area. For example, if Wales were reduced to four constituencies, Labour might reasonably hope to take all four constituencies. But it would probably be most worried about losing a seat to Plaid Cymru because of its regional strength in north west Wales. The fact that the Conservatives poll twice Plaid Cymru's vote share across Wales as a whole would not affect this calculation.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">4) An increase of seats in an area will naturally tend to produce more seats for the dominant party in the area, but the increased granularity may help another party gain an odd seat where a pocket of support has previously been swamped by the dominant party's support in previously-attached areas (this is the inverse of the last two points). For example, Peterborough is a Conservative-held marginal seat comprising a city with outlying areas attached. Making the reasonable assumption that the city is more Labour-leaning than the outlying areas, I infer that if the seat count in the area were increased and the boundaries were confined more tightly around the town, Labour might hope to pick up a new seat in an area of Conservative dominance. Incidentally, this will tend to work better for Labour than for the Conservatives, given the way in which Labour support tends to cluster in towns.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">With these principles in mind, and without going through the detail of my thought process (which is more art than science in any case), my guess is that if the votes cast in May were cast on the boundaries of a new 650 seat Parliament that I have outlined above, the seat count would be something like:</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Conservative: 335</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Labour: 229</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">SNP: 55</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Lib Dem: 8</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Plaid Cymru: 3</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">UKIP: 1</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Green: 1</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Speaker: 1</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Northern Irish parties: 17</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">So I imagine a hypothetical increase in the Conservative majority by ten or so, but it wouldn't fundamentally alter the dynamics of the next election. I feel that I have made midpoint assumptions in coming to these numbers.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><strong></strong></span><br />
<strong><span style="font-family: Arial;">The impact of switching to a 600 seat Parliament</span></strong><br />
<strong><span style="font-family: Arial;"></span></strong><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">But as the law stands, the boundary review will be conducted on the basis that we will get a 600 seat Parliament, and that will intensify some of the effects that I have just noted. The new 600 seat Parliament would be comprised roughly as follows:</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Scotland: 52</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Wales: 30</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Northern Ireland: 16</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">England: 502</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> - Eastern 56</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> - East Midlands 43</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> - London 70</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> - North East 25</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> - North West 68</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> - South East 83 (including two Isle of Wight constituencies)</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> - South West 53</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> - West Midlands 54</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> - Yorkshire & The Humber 50</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">The seat reorganisation would be relatively minor in the Eastern, South East and South West regions, given the minor adjustments in seat counts, and these are as it happens all overwhelmingly Conservative areas. They would, however, be very extensive in Wales, the North West and the North East: all Labour areas (Scotland also would be seriously affected). Of the Conservative-leaning areas, only the West Midlands would see heavy reorganisation.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">The consequence might well be that the bulk of Conservative incumbents could see their incumbency damaged in only minor ways, while Labour incumbents would be much more likely to see their incumbency seriously affected.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">It gets worse for Labour. Many of the constituencies with the lowest number of registered voters are in contiguous Labour-held areas. On a shrinking seat count determined by numbers of registered voters, that is the worst permutation for a party, because there is much less scope to recoup lost seats in the area by taking seats of a rival party. Leeds, Bradford, Hull and Liverpool are all stuffed full of constituencies with very low numbers of registered voters, all with large Labour majorities. If the seat count in those areas is reduced, that will probably come straight off the top of the Labour seat total.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Meanwhile, the smaller parties all get hit still harder because of the consequences of reducing the seat count noted above.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">My artist's impression of how the results of the last election might have translated onto reasonably normal boundaries on the new basis is something like the following:</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Conservatives: 316</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Labour: 209</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">SNP: 50</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Lib Dems: 5</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Plaid Cymru: 2</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">UKIP: 1 (maybe)</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Greens: 0</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Speaker: 1</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Northern Ireland: 16 </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">By this stage, the Conservative majority, now hypothetically 32, is starting to look very solid given the smaller size of the House. Again, I don't feel that I have particularly stepped out in one direction or another.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">So if you want to see why the Opposition (and the Lib Dems in particular) might seek to block the boundary review, this is why. Their task is hard enough, without the Conservatives being given a still greater head start.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><u></u></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><u></u></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><u>Note</u></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">This post first appeared on politicalbetting yesterday:</span><br />
<br />
<a href="http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2015/06/25/guest-slot-the-boundaries-of-reason/"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2015/06/25/guest-slot-the-boundaries-of-reason/</span></a></div>
</div>
Alastairhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11551605492626333385noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1654731161334089375.post-28420644634601515332015-06-22T09:23:00.003+01:002015-06-22T09:48:15.683+01:00The long view: comparing the 1992 and the 2015 election results<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">We spend much time looking at the most recent developments. But every now and then it is profitable to stand back and look at longer term trends. That is most easily done by comparing elections which produced quite similar overall results and then looking at the detail. The 1992 and the 2015 election results are sufficiently similar overall to make that a valuable exercise. Except in Scotland. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">The overall result in 2015 was as follows:</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Con 330 </span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Lab 232 </span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">SNP 56 </span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Lib Dem 8 </span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Plaid Cymru 3 </span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">UKIP 1 </span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Green 1 </span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Speaker 1</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Northern Irish parties 18</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/CBP-7186#fullreport">http://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/CBP-7186#fullreport</a></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">The result in 1992 was as follows:</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Con 336</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Lab 271</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Lib Dem 20</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Plaid Cymru 4</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">SNP 3</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Northern Irish parties 17</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">(The outgoing Speaker had retired).</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.parliament.uk/documents/commons-information-office/m13.pdf">http://www.parliament.uk/documents/commons-information-office/m13.pdf</a></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">As you can see, the Conservatives tallied much the same seat count in both elections, Labour did considerably better in 1992, as did the Lib Dems, while the SNP went from nowhere to third place. </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">For Lib Dems surveying these two election results, it must feel like clogs to clogs in five elections. They have fewer seats now than they had then. The only seat held in both elections is Orkney & Shetland.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Let's start with the big point of difference, Scotland. In 1992, the SNP were nowhere. They had fewer seats than Plaid Cymru. It is easy to forget, but the Conservatives as well as Labour and the Lib Dems had substantial seat numbers in Scotland. A generation on and the landscape is unrecognisable. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Scotland's seat count has declined by 13, reducing its numerical significance in Parliament even as demands for independence and further devolution have catapulted up the political agenda. And the SNP have effectively wiped the other three parties off the map. In the same period, Plaid Cymru have gone nowhere.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">This is, of course, a disaster for Labour who at a stroke have lost a large block of MPs. They will either need to be recovered or replaced elsewhere. Right now, the latter looks much more achievable.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">If we look at just England and Wales, the results converge:</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><u>1992</u></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><u><br /></u></span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Con 325</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Lab 222 </span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Lib Dem 11 </span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Plaid Cymru 4 </span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><u>2015</u></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><u><br /></u></span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Con 329 </span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Lab 231 </span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Lib Dem 7 </span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Plaid Cymru 3 </span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">UKIP 1 </span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Green 1 </span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Speaker 1</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><u></u></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">These results are as close as you will ever get any two election results. So substantial differences in the detail will have real meaning. </span></div>
<div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">There were 11 more seats in England and Wales in 2015 than in 1992. But the distribution of the seats has been uneven. Despite the rapid population growth of London, there are 11 fewer seats in greater London now than in 1992 (the newcomers must in large part be non-voting immigrants). There are five fewer seats in the north west and the north east combined than in 1992 (regional boundaries were a little different then). Meanwhile, there are seven extra seats in the south west, four extra seats in the east midlands, an extra seat in the west midlands, two extra seats in Wales and 13 extra seats in the south east and east. The seats have been accumulating in more Tory-friendly areas over the last 24 years. </span></div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span> </div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">And this is the real story. Labour are <u>not</u> taking fewer seats now than in 1992 in the south. They took ten seats in the south west, the south east outside London and the east in 1992 and 12 seats in the same areas in 2015. But the Conservatives, benefiting from this southwards drift of population, are taking 20 more seats in these areas. Labour's failure to find a message for southern England is becoming ever more damaging to their chances. </span></div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span> </div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">We see the same picture in the east midlands, where Labour have the same seat tally as in 1992 but the Conservatives have gained ground, pocketing all the increase in seat count in the area. Only the west midlands have decisively swung away from Labour. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">In Wales, Labour have lost a quarter of its vote share in under 25 years (and 40% of its vote share since 1966). So far it has not significantly affected its seat count, though it is drifting down, because the rest of the vote is still more fragmented with the rise of UKIP. But Labour looks vulnerable in Wales in the longterm if this trend continues. The example of Scotland should be fresh in their minds.</span></div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">If Labour have underperformed in these areas relative to 1992, there are areas of outperformance too. They have increased their stranglehold on the north east and the north west, getting four more seats in these regions even with a reduced seat count to aim at. Most strikingly, they have conquered London, holding 60% of the seats now as opposed to the 40% of seats that they held in 1992. But again, there are fewer seats in London than there once was.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">It is anachronism to refer to the Core Cities in 1992, since this grouping of the largest cities outside London was only set up in 1995. Labour always found strength in the larger English cities, but Labour have strengthened their position in the English areas now covered by that grouping still further. In 1992, the seats in what is now covered by the Core Cities in England divided as follows:</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Labour: 82</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Con: 31</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Lib Dem: 2</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Now, the split is:</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Labour: 83</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Con: 16</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Lib Dem: 3</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">The seat count in the Core Cities in England has declined, but Labour are getting ever closer to a whitewash. 55% of all Labour seats are now found in an English Core City or in London. The perspective of the average Labour MP may be unhealthily influenced by concerns of constituencies that are not particularly representative.</span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Wherever they have strengthened over the last 23 years, Labour are getting a larger slice of a smaller cake. Meanwhile, the Conservative-dominated areas of England have gained seats, benefiting the Conservatives by default. Labour risk being on the wrong side of longterm demographic trends. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">There is another way of looking at this. Twice at low ebbs Labour have been reduced to nominal seat counts in the rural south, but in better times in the interim they have picked up a lot more seats in those areas. They simply need to rediscover that art.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Even in good times, however, the Conservatives have found themselves progressively squeezed further out of their weaker areas and are losing London. Labour have an immediate demographic problem but the Conservatives have a much more enduring demographic problem. Their room for further progress is limited unless they can unlock more seats in areas that have been turning their backs on them for a generation. Meanwhile, the distance that they could fall is much greater. George Osborne is developing policies such as the Northern Powerhouse to appeal to the Core Cities. Will they be enough? We shall see, but I doubt it. Both main parties are facing longterm trends that should trouble them deeply.</span></div>
</div>
Alastairhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11551605492626333385noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1654731161334089375.post-2643023900811218112015-05-29T13:36:00.004+01:002015-06-16T15:14:56.571+01:002020: Plaid Cymru, waiting for the great leap forward<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Plaid Cymru had an election to forget on 7 May 2015. They marginally improved their vote share across Wales, but found themselves overtaken by UKIP on that measure, with the Lib Dem collapse largely bypassing them. Their seat tally was unchanged, missing out on Ynys Mon by a whisker and failing by a larger margin to wrest Ceredigion out of Lib Dem hands. Indeed, in their top ten targets, they lost vote share in all bar three constituencies: Ynys Mon, Rhondda and Cardiff West. </span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Considering that Plaid Cymru had more election coverage than ever before and featured in the national televised debates, this failure to make any significant advance must be seen as a serious disappointment. The contrast with the triumph of their fellow nationalists in Scotland in the same election could not be starker.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><strong>Plaid Cymru's prospects</strong></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">What are Plaid Cymru's prospects for 2020? Well, first of all it must be noted that there are likely to be boundary changes, so these lists should not be taken as precise seat targets but as a general indication of where Plaid Cymru may prosper or flounder. This is particularly important in Wales where any boundary changes are likely to be particularly far-reaching, given the current over-representation in Parliament that Wales enjoys. A reduction in seat counts is usually more harmful for smaller parties but in the case of Plaid Cymru that may not in fact be the case because its vote is concentrated geographically, being particularly strong in north west Wales. (It would, however, make UKIP's chances of taking a seat in Wales harder - their support is very evenly spread, not exceeding 20% in any existing constituency.)</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Here are the Welsh constituencies organised by diminishing Plaid Cymru vote share:</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<a href="https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/14JKN65Dy5C3N1vqEEkX_0BSk73v0xExcIFRRiapByzo/edit?usp=sharing"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/14JKN65Dy5C3N1vqEEkX_0BSk73v0xExcIFRRiapByzo/edit?usp=sharing</span></a><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">This table was prepared by AndyJS.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Alternatively, here are the Welsh constituencies organised by the swings that Plaid Cymru would require to take each seat:</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bygi8eZw-4q1by0wMmNnUVVCZFU/view?usp=sharing"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bygi8eZw-4q1by0wMmNnUVVCZFU/view?usp=sharing</span></a><br />
<br />
As you can see, Plaid Cymru's prospects differ considerably between the two lists given above. Which is more useful? </span><span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">To determine the answer, we first need to look at a different election in a different part of the UK.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><strong>The Scottish great leap forward</strong></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">In 2010, the SNP made only modest progress in vote share and won no new Westminster seats. This was their target list in the run-up to this year's election, arranged by swing:</span><br />
<br />
<a href="https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WBE7ZiFBcNn8pKRZwwImmfi6eqm3jMKI3Jo_k2m-nEQ/edit?usp=sharing"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WBE7ZiFBcNn8pKRZwwImmfi6eqm3jMKI3Jo_k2m-nEQ/edit?usp=sharing</span></a><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">The SNP required some pretty heroic swings, and by and large it got them. There does not seem to have been a particularly strong relationship between the seats which it did not win and the swings required to take them. Edinburgh South and Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale & Tweeddale would require relatively small swings to the SNP while Orkney & Shetland would have required the second largest swing.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">However, there is a strong correlation between SNP performance in 2015 and its absolute vote share in 2010, at least at the bottom end of that table. The ten lowest SNP vote shares in 2010 were (from the bottom up):</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Edinburgh South</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">East Renfrewshire</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Berwickshire, Roxburgh & Selkirk</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Edinburgh North & Leith</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">East Dunbartonshire</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Dunfermline & West Fife</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Orkney & Shetland</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale & Tweeddale</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Aberdeen South</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Glasgow North</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">This list includes all three of the seats that the SNP did not take in 2015 and four of the five most marginal SNP seats for 2020. It seems that if the mould is broken by a party that soars in the polls, prior vote share is a more reliable guide than swing required as to where the mould will break least.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<strong><span style="font-family: Arial;">Revenons a nos moutons</span></strong><br />
<strong><span style="font-family: Arial;"></span></strong><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">That is all well and good, but Plaid Cymru in 2015 are far behind where the SNP were in 2010. Their vote share in 2015 across Wales is only just over half what the SNP had across Scotland in 2010. The SNP was second in vote share in Scotland in 2010 while Plaid Cymru remains fourth in vote share in Wales in 2015. The SNP was in power in Holyrood and was able to engineer a lengthy and all-consuming debate about national identity between 2010 and 2015. Plaid Cymru is in opposition in the Welsh Assembly and there is no particular reason to expect that to change next year. Mould-breaking (and Mold-taking) looks like a distant prospect.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">I would pretty much completely discount the chances of Plaid Cymru in any seat where they had not already got at least 15%, even allowing for the fact that the four or five party nature of Welsh politics means that seats can be taken on relatively low vote shares. On current boundaries, that means that they have a vague interest in just nine seats. A uniform 5% swing to Plaid Cymru would deliver them just two extra seats on these boundaries. A uniform 10% swing to Plaid Cymru would deliver them just one more.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">But if Plaid Cymru are to make any progress at all, they need to start gaining vote share. They can't profit by being bystanders while other parties rise and fall. They need to look at what the SNP has achieved in Scotland, consider how that may be applied to their circumstances in Wales and act accordingly. Otherwise, they could be waiting for the great leap forward for a very long time indeed.</span></div>
Alastairhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11551605492626333385noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1654731161334089375.post-89758864207676602772015-05-28T07:56:00.001+01:002015-08-11T12:37:27.146+01:002020 and the Greens: renewing the energy<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">
<span style="mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">What
to make of the Greens' performance on 7 May? Despite far more publicity than in previous election campaigns, they took no new seats. They strengthened their hold on Brighton Pavilion and came a clear second in Bristol West, but went backwards in Norwich South. On the surface, they did not do much better than standing still - a disappointing result for a party that had attracted so much coverage in the election campaign.</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Look a little deeper and the Greens have made some progress. </span><span style="font-family: Arial;">Thanks to AndyJS, whose masterly work in processing election data is criminally overlooked all too often, we can look more closely at this progress.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Here are the Greens' results from 2010, ranked in order of vote share: </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<a href="https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Y6K9EfRuZ4AVVHPyXu2rgfhOwd7I-f1xWmj7-YMxrRA/edit#gid=0"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Y6K9EfRuZ4AVVHPyXu2rgfhOwd7I-f1xWmj7-YMxrRA/edit#gid=0</span></a><br />
<br /></div>
<span style="font-family: Arial;">And here are the Greens' results from 2015, again ranked in order of vote share:</span><br />
<br />
<div>
<a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bygi8eZw-4q1LTA5VThnXzF1MWs/view?usp=sharing"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bygi8eZw-4q1LTA5VThnXzF1MWs/view?usp=sharing</span></a></div>
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">(Both of these tables are AndyJS's.</span><span style="font-family: Arial;">)</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">In 2010 they contested 335 seats and won an average of 1.81% of the vote in those seats. In 2015 they contested 573 seats and won 3.77% of the vote (even including the constituencies they did not stand in). They saved their deposits in 131 seats, up from seven seats in 2010. The Greens exceeded 10% in only two seats in 2010, but 18 in 2015. They </span><span style="font-family: Arial;">now have an estimated membership of 66,500. This is a very substantial number and gives the Greens the ability to undertake a proper ground game. </span><span style="font-family: Arial;">This is all positive for them.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial;">But let's not get carried away. UKIP also took only one seat. But they got more than 10% in 451 seats. As yet the Greens have nothing like the breadth of support that even UKIP have.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><b>Green strengths</b></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Where are the Greens taking votes? They are largely an English phenomenon. They buddied up before the election with the SNP and Plaid Cymru, and the price of doing so seems to have been to ruin their chances in Scotland and Wales. They saved their deposits in just three seats in each of Scotland and Wales.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial;">If you look at the seats that the Greens did best in, three trends stand out. First, the Greens did well in London. Ten of their 30 best vote shares are in the capital. All ten of these are rock solid Labour seats in inner city London.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Next, the Greens have built up significant regional strength in the south west. Seven of their top 30 vote shares are found in this region. You should also note that the Greens did not contest Devon East, where a Green-friendly </span><span style="font-family: Arial;">independent</span><span style="font-family: Arial;"> scored an impressive 24% of the vote. With the Lib Dems having lost much of the progressive vote and Labour organisationally weak </span><span style="font-family: Arial;">in this region, the Greens have opportunities to advance further here.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial;">The third trend, which overlaps with the other two, is for the Greens to have done well in areas with high student populations. This report lists </span><span style="font-family: Arial;">at the end </span><span style="font-family: Arial;">the English constituencies with high student populations (using the 2011 census):</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span>
<a href="http://www.hepi.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/VERY-FINAL-CLEAN-PDF.pdf" style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="color: blue; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial;">http://www.hepi.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/VERY-FINAL-CLEAN-PDF.pdf</span></a><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial;">It does so in a not particularly helpful way, so I have reorganised this into a more useful table:</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bygi8eZw-4q1ajZQTlFLQ25reEE/view?usp=sharing">https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bygi8eZw-4q1ajZQTlFLQ25reEE/view?usp=sharing</a></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Ten of the Greens' top 30 seats by vote share had a student population of 20% or more. Many of the others also had a substantial student population. The Greens lost their deposit in only three of the constituencies with a student population of 20% or more: Coventry South, Birmingham Ladywood and Loughborough.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial;">One drawback about being popular with students is that they don't usually hang around the same constituency for two elections running. But if the Greens can embed themselves more firmly in student politics, the meme of students voting Green could transmit itself from student generation to generation.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial;">So the Greens have three possible strands to pursue in the coming years: inner city London, the south west and student-heavy constituencies.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><b>Green targets</b></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Given the Greens' low vote shares, it does not make sense to prepare a list of targets created exclusively by swing required - as we have already seen with the Lib Dems and UKIP, such lists will be dominated by constituencies where the winner had a low share of the vote, regardless of whether there is any base level of support for the minority party. Having seen that effect with both the Lib Dems and UKIP, I have decided to create a 30 seat target list based on the 30 seats where the Greens had the highest share of the vote. (There is no right way of drawing up such lists. By confining myself in this way, Green prospects in seats like Cambridge, Plymouth Sutton & Devonport and Portsmouth South are excluded, though the swings that they require are considerably lower than the swings in most of the seats on this list.) Anyway, here's the table:</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bygi8eZw-4q1dG44RjgyaU4tQkE/view?usp=sharing"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bygi8eZw-4q1dG44RjgyaU4tQkE/view?usp=sharing</span></a><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">This is a daunting prospect for the Greens. A uniform 15% swing would bring them just five seats from this target list. A uniform 5% swing (which in itself is a fairly chunky swing) would get them just one seat.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Once again, it needs to be noted that we may well get boundary changes in this Parliament, so this list should not be taken too seriously. We should be looking at this list as a general indication of where and how the Greens should be focussing in 2020, not as a precise list of named target constituencies.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><u>The south west</u></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">The list is illuminating, however. Three of the top four are Bristol West, Bristol South and Bath. Bristol East, while having a lower Green vote share than the top 30 targets (it's the constituency with the 32nd highest Green vote share), also requires more a modest swing than most on the top 30 list. A Green focus on this area is automatic.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">While most of these seats are currently Labour-held, organising them by reference to swing rather than Green vote share results in the six Conservative-held seats all rising to the top half of the table. This reflects the fact that these seats have more parties contesting them; for example, the Greens are in fifth in Truro & Falmouth but it is their seventh most promising seat in their top 30 vote shares as measured by swing required. The south west is shaping up for a big battle on the progressive side to see who can establish themselves as the primary challenger to the Conservatives. The Greens are reasonably well placed for this battle if they focus on it. Will they?</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><u>Inner city London</u></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">The bottom end of the table is dominated by those inner city London seats. If the Greens are to make progress here, they need to pull off the same trick that the SNP managed in Scotland - persuading the traditional Labour vote to defect en masse. Right now that doesn't look remotely likely. But those London activists will want something to do, so it's more likely than not that the Greens will pour their energies into what looks like a futile endeavour because it's more popular with a large part of its membership.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">If the Greens are to try hard to break through in inner city London, they need to consider carefully what their pitch is to the typical Labour supporter in such seats. It will not be enough to win over right-on urban professionals: the Greens will need a persuasive pitch to the urban poor as well. They haven't managed that so far, but if the Greens can take the mantle of the anti-austerity party, they may have opportunities. Much may depend on the Labour party leadership election and the fall-out from that.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><u>Student constituencies</u></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><u><br /></u></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">The decisions for the Greens in student constituencies are more straightforward. They need to embed themselves into student life and make themselves the default progressive choice. With the implosion of the Lib Dems and the vagueness of Labour's anti-austerity credentials to date, the Greens have made headway. Labour look set to head further rightwards following their leadership election, so the opportunities for the Greens may well improve further this Parliament.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><b>Summary</b></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><b><br /></b></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">It would be surprising if the Greens were able to make a big breakthrough in 2020. They have too much ground to cover and they can hope to make sizeable gains only if Labour donates them its left wing. That is unlikely.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">But the Greens do have opportunities to progress further. In the south west they should be fighting hard to become the single biggest progressive party and right now that battle looks well worth fighting. More widely, they can appeal to the anti-austerity left to pick up support on university campuses.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">With its army of members, the Greens could step forward in 2020 - but only if they focus on the task at hand.</span></div>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">
</span>Alastairhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11551605492626333385noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1654731161334089375.post-56580275678962205822015-05-26T07:49:00.001+01:002015-05-26T16:02:53.460+01:002020: the geography of Labour's next campaign<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">I've looked at the broad sweep of the next election from the viewpoint of each party in turn. What of the geography of the next election? In particular, how does the geography affect Labour's chances of electoral success?</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">A boundary review is due and it is likely that many constituencies will change considerably, so there is no point in looking at the 2020 marginals yet - we don't know where they are yet. But we can look in broad terms at how the election is likely to be fought.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">The starting point has to be the current map of the constituencies.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/3e/2015UKElectionMap.svg/1049px-2015UKElectionMap.svg.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/3e/2015UKElectionMap.svg/1049px-2015UKElectionMap.svg.png" height="312" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Every picture tells a story and the story this picture tells is on the surface fairly clear. </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Northern Ireland is its own special patchwork. </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Scotland is an SNP fiefdom. England and Wales are dominated by the Conservatives except in some very specific areas. </span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span> </div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">The effect is exacerbated by the different sizes of the constituencies. I give below the same constituency map but this time presented with each constituency represented by an equal-sized hexagon:</span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/cd/2015_UK_general_election_constituency_map.svg/460px-2015_UK_general_election_constituency_map.svg.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/cd/2015_UK_general_election_constituency_map.svg/460px-2015_UK_general_election_constituency_map.svg.png" height="320" width="245" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Scotland has shrivelled. </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> Meanwhile, t</span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">he Conservative dominance in England and Wales is now not quite so overwhelming as the Labour-held areas have dramatically expanded in size.</span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Both of these maps have important things to tell us. The second map shows that the Conservatives are not so far out of sight of Labour as some of the commentary since the election would have you believe. And the first map shows that Labour are nevertheless barricaded in a few heartlands that take them nowhere near a majority. Labour need to break down those barricades.</span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span> </div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Where do Labour retain strength? A glance at the first map will tell you the answer: London, the English Core Cities, Hull, Leicester, Coventry, Stoke, </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">south Wales, </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">the north east</span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> as a whole </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">and the wider north west surrounding Liverpool, including north east Wales. Or, to put it more briefly, by and large, big cities. With worryingly few exceptions, Labour have become an almost exclusively metropolitan party. They have lost Scotland and they have lost smaller town England.</span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">(For those that haven't come across the term before, the Core Cities are a grouping of the largest cities outside London. I wrote about Labour's deep support in these last year:</span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span> </div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">
<a href="http://newstonoone.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/core-cities-labours-reservoir.html"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">http://newstonoone.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/core-cities-labours-reservoir.html</span></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span> </div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">At that time the grouping was only of English cities. Since then, it has been expanded to include Cardiff and Glasgow, but not, oddly, Edinburgh.)</span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span> </div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Labour made ten gains from the Conservatives. Only two of these seats fell clearly outside the Labour fiefdoms listed above: Hove and Lancaster & Fleetwood. Meanwhile, the Conservatives took Plymouth Moor View, Telford, Southampton Itchen, Derby North, Vale of Clwyd and Gower. Labour are getting close to maxing out in the metropolitan areas, but all the time are being edged out of smaller towns and cities - and Southampton, Derby and Plymouth are not really that small.</span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span> </div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Many of the exceptions to the general picture - Norwich South, Cambridge, Oxford East, Exeter, Lancaster & Fleetwood - are constituencies with a large university presence. They may be smaller places, but they have much in common with the metropolitan areas. They are places where the words "urban professional" would not produce a curl of the lip.</span></div>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">The Labour leadership campaign has spent much of the time so far discussing "aspiration" at great length. But the language is very misleading. Labour have no problems talking to the residents of the places with the highest aspirations. Their problem is rather how to talk with those who live in places where the average resident has ambitions that are real but more limited, the strivers and battlers.</span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span> </div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">This is not a new idea. Here's a New Statesman article on the subject from 2011:</span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span> </div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/the-staggers/2011/09/aspirational-voters-election">http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/the-staggers/2011/09/aspirational-voters-election</a></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">As the article acknowledges, it wasn't a new idea then either.</span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span> </div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">This seems to be why Labour have been more harmed by the rise of UKIP than the Conservatives. It seems that the Conservatives eventually found a message that addressed the hopes and fears of a fair-sized section of the strivers and battlers. Labour did not. </span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">If Labour want to win - by any definition of "win" - next time, they will need to reverse this trend. They need to find a way to reach the unglamorous medium sized towns and cities of England. </span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span> </div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Let's look again at the Labour target list on existing boundaries:</span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bygi8eZw-4q1SDZTLUl2NVd4aTQ/view?usp=sharing">https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bygi8eZw-4q1SDZTLUl2NVd4aTQ/view?usp=sharing</a></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">It is stuffed full of such constituencies: Thurrock, Bedford, Lincoln, Corby and Carlisle are very different places, but none of them are world centres of anything and all of them have lots of people who quietly want a slightly better life for themselves - or at least, for life not to get any worse. However the constituency boundaries are drawn up for 2020, there will be similar such constituencies that Labour will need to win over.</span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span> </div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Indeed, Labour are not secure in all of the seats that they currently hold:</span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span> </div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bygi8eZw-4q1Tm54TU02a3E3R0U/view?usp=sharing">https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bygi8eZw-4q1Tm54TU02a3E3R0U/view?usp=sharing</a></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">If the Conservatives can broaden their appeal, they will be circling around seats like Barrow & Furness, Newcastle-under-Lyme, Derbyshire North East and Wrexham. In all of these seats the Conservatives closed the gap on Labour from 2010. There are others on the Labour defence list that are becoming increasingly marginal. However the boundaries are drawn for 2020, there will be constituencies like these that are trending away from Labour. Unless Labour changes course significantly.</span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span> </div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">More generally, if Labour does not start to broaden its appeal, it may even find that other apparent heartlands that are outside its current metropolitan focus are vulnerable to attack if other parties get their acts together. South Wales and the north east, for example, don't fit particularly well with the rest of Labour's current heartlands. </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Fortunately for Labour, its opponents in those areas are UKIP and Plaid Cymru, and neither has so far demonstrated much seat-winning prowess. But things can change. Labour needs to recognise the danger fast.</span></div>
Alastairhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11551605492626333385noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1654731161334089375.post-3909122138455279262015-05-22T08:30:00.000+01:002015-05-29T16:53:12.928+01:002020: UKIP's choices<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">I come now to the most interesting of my surveys for 2020. </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Labour and the Conservatives will be locked in their usual battle with each other. The SNP sit at the top of a mountain of votes and if Scotland is still in the UK in 2020, their job will be to hoard them. The Lib Dems need to pick themselves off the canvas, if they can. But UKIP have important choices ahead of them, choices that will determine not just their own future but have a big impact on the future of the other parties as well.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Taking only one seat, UKIP underperformed their expectations. Indeed, even in Clacton, their 7.8% majority over the Conservatives does not look completely secure for 2020. If UKIP's support subsides, the Conservatives might wipe even Douglas Carswell off the electoral map. UKIP's place in the peloton of British politics is insecure and that is not helped by the factional fighting that UKIP have descended into since the election. The first choice that UKIP have to take is to remain focussed on the electorate. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Let us assume that UKIP manage to overcome their current round of blood-letting. Where should they aim for next? Here are their targets for 2020:</span><br />
<br />
<a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bygi8eZw-4q1X3MzejJOTmQtQ00/view?usp=sharing"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bygi8eZw-4q1X3MzejJOTmQtQ00/view?usp=sharing</span></a><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-family: Arial;">I hope that this table is largely self-explanatory. I have highlighted the seat and the majority in the colour of the party of the incumbent. I have also asterisked the majority if UKIP are in third, with an additional asterisk for each position that UKIP dropped below third. Note that the boundaries may well change in this Parliament, so this list should not be taken too seriously and should be seen more as indicative than anything final.<br />
<br />
Two things are immediately apparent. First, UKIP has a long way to go if it is going to get significant numbers of seats in 2020. And secondly, the bulk of its most tempting targets are in Labour-held seats.<br />
<br />
<strong>A long long way to run</strong><br />
<br />
Yesterday I looked at the position of the Lib Dems and noted that a uniform 5% swing to them would yield the Lib Dems just 16 seats. A uniform 5% swing to UKIP would yield them just four seats. UKIP don't have the disadvantage that the Lib Dems have that they are losing an incumbency bonus in many of their target seats, which will make future gains for the Lib Dems harder. But a 5% swing is still a chunky swing. This would be nearly a 50% increase in UKIP's vote on 2015. UKIP should not underestimate the task that they have ahead. <br />
<br />
If UKIP got a uniform 5% swing towards them in 2020, they would be on just under 18% of the vote and would win just five seats. On a smaller vote share in 1997, the Lib Dems managed 46 seats. UKIP need to make sure that any increase in their vote is concentrated, not uniform. So they are going to have to choose where to focus their efforts. If they are to pick up more than a handful of seats, they are going to need to focus on a subset of seats relentlessly. <br />
<br />
Worse than that, UKIP will need to make progress in a congested field. Note the number of asterisks on the table (yes, UKIP really are in seventh place in their 23rd target seat). They're in third place even in their top target. They are in fourth place as early as their eighth target seat. They're going to have to muscle past other parties in most of their target seats if they are to increase their parliamentary representation. <br />
<br />
But what of all their second places? There has been much mention of UKIP coming second in 120 constituencies. And so they did: I lost a private bet as a result. Here they are (the map was prepared by Kieran Healy of Crooked Timber and first featured here <a href="http://crookedtimber.org/2015/05/09/who-came-second-in-the-uk-election/">http://crookedtimber.org/2015/05/09/who-came-second-in-the-uk-election/</a>):</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span></span>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-J2kUMeh9NiY/VV49tAkqDeI/AAAAAAAAAJc/uz437ZwbiAQ/s1600/uk-2015-runners-up.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-J2kUMeh9NiY/VV49tAkqDeI/AAAAAAAAAJc/uz437ZwbiAQ/s320/uk-2015-runners-up.png" width="213" /></a></div>
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Click on the map to enlarge it. </span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-family: Arial;">But UKIP got their swathe of second places largely in very safe Conservative and Labour seats, where their vote wasn't squeezed and where the other main party was very weak. It might conceivably be easier to get bigger swings in such seats than in seats where UKIP are third. But they're hardly going to be particularly easy to win.<br />
<br />
So UKIP is going to have to choose whether to prioritise getting the smallest swings or winning the most promising two horse races - or by some other means, perhaps by a geographical focus. Its decision will lead to very different seats being targeted.<br />
<br />
<strong>Who to go after next?</strong><br />
<br />
Look again at that list of targets by swing. Five of the top ten targets are Labour-held, as are 13 of the top 20 targets and 25 of the top 40 targets. (But three of the four seats vulnerable to a uniform 5% swing are currently Conservative-held).</span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">This is not what was expected before the election. Here is my last post before the election looking at UKIP's prospects:</span></div>
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><a href="http://newstonoone.blogspot.co.uk/2015/04/the-ukip-battleground-in-april-2015.html">http://newstonoone.blogspot.co.uk/2015/04/the-ukip-battleground-in-april-2015.html</a></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Look at the list of UKIP targets organised by odds. 15 of what the bookies rated to be the top 20 UKIP targets were Conservative-held seats and only four were Labour-held seats. Contrary to all expectations, UKIP did relatively far better in Labour seats than in Conservative-held seats.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">This gives UKIP a dilemma. They started life as a Thatcherite offshoot of the Conservative party, predominantly in southern England and their sole MP has characterised himself as a Gladstonian liberal. Their initial boost in support came from the type of southern working class Conservative voters who voted for Margaret Thatcher's Conservative party and who were alienated by the smoother posher men who followed her. But the type of policies that would appeal most in Labour-held seats would be much more economically leftwing in political outlook and much more northern. Are UKIP's leadership prepared or even able to go in that direction to build up their newfound voter base? Electoral logic pushes them in that direction. But will they be guided by a different principle?</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Eleanor Roosevelt famously said: <span class="st">"Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people." UKIP have spent all the time since the election discussing people when they should really be discussing ideas. This is not just unedifying, it is a dangerous missed opportunity for UKIP.</span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><span class="st">UKIP have some big choices ahead of them. They need to start thinking about them soon. They will get nowhere without focus.</span></span></div>
Alastairhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11551605492626333385noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1654731161334089375.post-10607202835406897782015-05-21T08:30:00.000+01:002015-06-16T15:05:23.151+01:002020: the Lib Dems, sifting through the wreckage<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">7 May 2015 was a disastrous day for the Lib Dems. Overnight, they lost 49 of their 57 MPs. This result was worse than their worst nightmares. Will they be able to recover in 2020?</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">This is what remains of the Lib Dems' representation in the House of Commons:</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bygi8eZw-4q1ZGtkZVpVRGJXSHc/view?usp=sharing">https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bygi8eZw-4q1ZGtkZVpVRGJXSHc/view?usp=sharing</a></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">It's a short list.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">What should they be targeting next? Here are the list of their best target seats on the current boundaries:</span></div>
<br />
<a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bygi8eZw-4q1cGpNSENPOWx2aXc/view?usp=sharing"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bygi8eZw-4q1cGpNSENPOWx2aXc/view?usp=sharing</span></a><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Note that the boundaries may well change in this Parliament, so this list should not be taken too seriously and should be seen more as indicative than anything final. However, there are some points relating to a boundary review that are particularly relevant to the Lib Dems, as I shall note later.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">I hope that both of these tables are largely self-explanatory. On the first list I have highlighted the majority in the colour of the party of the nearest challenger (I have used grey for the SNP simply on the ground of legibility). On the second list I have highlighted the seat and the majority in the colour of the party of the incumbent. On the second list I have also asterisked the majority if the Lib Dems are in third, with an additional asterisk for each position the Lib Dems dropped below third. As you go down the table, the asterisks thicken on the ground.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">So where to start? The Lib Dems will want to think about possible gains. </span><span style="font-family: Arial;">But the second table does not give them much to give them great hopes of a quick revival</span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">. Beyond the top 50 targets, thei<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">r vote has turned to dust. The Lib Dems held Chesterfield ("target" 82) until 2010 and are now fourth. Meanwhile, target 81 is Hartlepool, in which they finished seventh. I encourage you to take a look at the epic swings that the Lib Dems need from third, fourth or lower in the second half of this table so that you can appreciate just how few opportunities for outside gains the Lib Dems will have next time.</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">So the Lib Dems are going to have very few constituencies to focus on. Just how few in practice?</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">A uniform 5% swing to them gets them just 16 seats. And their chances of getting
such a swing in those seats are dramatically reduced because in most cases (Bath and Fife North East being the exceptions) these are seats
where the Lib Dems were incumbents with large incumbency votes. Most or all of
these former incumbents will not be standing in 2020, meaning that any new candidate will be starting from a much lower base. Of the top five Lib Dem targets, former incumbents Vince Cable, Norman Baker and Stephen Lloyd have already said that they are retiring from politics. They are typical of the ousted Lib Dem MPs, and their successors as candidates will not have a residue of loyalty to draw on. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">It gets worse for the Lib Dems. As I have noted, the Lib Dems trade heavily on local loyalties and incumbency. If the boundary changes go through, that remaining loyalty and incumbency will be weakened further. </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Meanwhile, each of the 49 seats that the Lib Dems have just lost now have 49 incumbents, all of whom will be seeking to entrench themselves using the type of tactics that the Lib Dems pioneered so successfully. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">We can probably add at least 10% to the size of the majority that the Lib Dems would need to overcome in most cases (that assessment of 10% may be being charitable to them). If so, the Lib Dems are going to struggle to make any gains at all without a dramatic revival in their fortunes. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Meanwhile, the Lib Dems cannot be confident of holding all of their current seats next time. As the first table shows, they don't have large majorities anywhere other than Westminster & Lonsdale. The value of their incumbency in many seats looks set to be weakened by boundary changes (though I expect the boundaries of Orkney & Shetland to remain unaltered). And some of their current MPs will probably retire in 2020. W</span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">hat are the chances that Nick Clegg will be standing again? Or John Pugh (who by then will be 72)?</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">7 May 2015 was a disastrous day for the Lib Dems. But it seems to me that the extent of the disaster has yet to be fully understood. It is entirely possible that it was the day that ended the Lib Dems as a significant force in British politics.</span></div>
Alastairhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11551605492626333385noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1654731161334089375.post-4175886537144577392015-05-20T08:53:00.000+01:002015-05-26T16:01:56.716+01:002020: where next for the SNP, Britain's third party?<div align="justify">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">The SNP lost the war in September on the referendum but won the battle in May at the general election. In the end, it was a crushing victory for the SNP in Scotland on 7 May, exceeding all bar the most optimistic predictions. </span></div>
<div align="justify">
</div>
<div align="justify">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">It is possible that Scotland will be independent by 2020, which would render speculation about how they would do in a general election in that year redundant. But for the moment I want to think about how the 2020 election will shape up if Scotland hasn't thrown off the English yoke by that date.</span></div>
<div align="justify">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span> </div>
<div align="justify">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-family: Arial;">As was noted in the comments yesterday and as I have flagged previously, we are due a boundary change, perhaps with fewer seats, so comments based on existing boundaries should not be taken too seriously. But they should give us a general idea of the lay of the land in general terms. Fewer larger constituencies favour parties with greater proportionate support in general, so if the number of constituencies is reduced we can expect the SNP's position to be entrenched still further (though I would expect Orkney & Shetland to remain on its present boundaries for reasons of geography).</span></span></div>
<div align="justify">
</div>
<div align="justify">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">For once, I only need to attach a link to one table. Here are the seats that the SNP currently hold:</span></div>
<div align="justify">
</div>
<div align="justify">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bygi8eZw-4q1ck45N3pXTG4xVmM/view?usp=sharing">https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bygi8eZw-4q1ck45N3pXTG4xVmM/view?usp=sharing</a></span></div>
<div align="justify">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial;">With 56 out of the 59 Scottish seats, the SNP lion is rampant.</span></div>
<div align="justify">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://thumbs.dreamstime.com/x/scottish-lion-rampant-8443168.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://thumbs.dreamstime.com/x/scottish-lion-rampant-8443168.jpg" height="190" width="320" /></a></div>
<div align="justify">
</div>
<div align="justify">
</div>
<div align="justify">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Could they complete a whitewash next time? It's certainly conceivable. The three remaining seats are:</span></div>
<div align="justify">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">1. Dumfriesshire Clydesdale & Tweeddale (Conservative majority 1.5%)<br />2. Orkney & Shetland (Lib Dem majority 3.6%)<br />3. Edinburgh South (Labour majority of 5.3%)</span></div>
<div align="justify">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial;">A uniform swing to the SNP of under 3% would see them clear the board. Bearing in mind that they managed swings to them of <em>on average </em>just under 24% from Labour on 7 May, such a swing will seem like a small step to them. If the SNP are performing well in the polls in five years' time, they will fancy their chances of completing the set.</span></div>
<div align="justify">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial;">If we now turn to the seats that the SNP now hold, we can see that the SNP are in a commanding position not just in seat count but in terms of their resilience against adverse swing. If the SNP suffered a uniform adverse swing against them of 5%, they would lose just six seats. A uniform 10% adverse swing would cost them exactly half their seats. But a 10% swing is of the order achieved by Labour across the UK as a whole in 1945 and 1997 and so would represent a landslide.</span></div>
<div align="justify">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial;">It gets better for the SNP. There was apparently quite a bit of tactical voting among unionists on 7 May, and the Lib Dems appear to have benefited particularly from this. Many of the smallest majorities were former Lib Dem-held seats (including three of those six seats vulnerable to a 5% swing against the SNP). With the unionist incumbents having been turfed out, the tactical voting against the SNP is likely to dissipate to some extent at least. This will make even small swings that bit harder for the SNP's challengers to obtain.</span></div>
<div align="justify">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Who are the SNP's chief enemy? Two weeks ago the answer was obviously Labour. But look at this table and now it's not so clear. Such is the scale of the SNP's obliteration of Scottish Labour, they don't even rank as the main challenger in the majority of the most marginal Scottish constituencies. </span><span style="font-family: Arial;">Labour are second in only nine of the 20 most marginal Scottish constituencies, as compared with the Lib Dems' seven and the Conservatives' four.</span><span style="font-family: Arial;"> </span><span style="font-family: Arial;">Even if Labour can get the landslide 10% swing against the SNP referred to above, they would still only take 15 seats back - the other 13 would fall to the Lib Dems (eight) and the Conservatives (five).</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Moreover, in at least four or five of what are now the most marginal Scottish seats, Labour's support seems to have been sustained in significant part by tactical unionist votes. It must be questionable whether these tactical votes can be kept. Labour seem to have done best - or rather, least badly - in pro-unionist areas which had sitting MPs who were able to reach out across party boundaries. With those sitting MPs presumably unlikely to stand again in 2020, any personal vote will be lost. And with Scottish Labour currently looking likely to turn leftwards, they don't look particularly likely to be replaced by candidates who will even try to reach out across party boundaries.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial;">The Conservatives will be hoping to make some progress in 2020, with an unwinding of tactical voting for other unionist parties following the loss of incumbency. But Scottish Conservatives' idea of progress would be to take a handful of seats and to come second in a handful more.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial;">So all in all, the SNP look set very fair to dominate in 2020 just as they do in 2015, assuming always that Scotland is still in the union. For that domination to be put under threat, Scottish politics would need as much of an upheaval as it got in the last Parliament. Is that possible? Sure, it has already happened once and very recently. Is it particularly likely? No. We look to be living in a new electoral landscape in Scotland. We all need to get used to it.</span></div>
Alastairhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11551605492626333385noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1654731161334089375.post-46296128236618966122015-05-19T09:14:00.000+01:002015-05-26T16:01:46.145+01:002020: where might the Conservatives go from here?<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Yesterday I looked at Labour's position following the last election. Today I look at the Conservatives' opportunities and challenges.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">The Conservatives have been understandably euphoric about their unexpected overall majority. This euphoria has strayed close to hubris at times. Is it justified?</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Here are the seats that they currently hold (ranked from most marginal to safest):</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bygi8eZw-4q1bFRCZUdFNWZRU00/view?usp=sharing">https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bygi8eZw-4q1bFRCZUdFNWZRU00/view?usp=sharing</a></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">And here are their target seats, ranked in order of swing that the Conservatives require to take them:</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bygi8eZw-4q1OXNnMm53SDdsVTA/view?usp=sharing">https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bygi8eZw-4q1OXNnMm53SDdsVTA/view?usp=sharing</a></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">I hope that these lists are fairly self-explanatory. On the first list I have highlighted the majority in the colour of the party of the nearest challenger (I have used grey for the SNP because bright yellow is hard to read). On the second list I have highlighted the seat and the majority in the colour of the party of the incumbent. On the second list I have also asterisked the majority if the Conservatives are in third.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">But remember, there may well be boundary changes which may or may not result in a reduction in the number of seats in the House of Commons. In general these are likely, but not certain, to be to the benefit of the Conservatives. These lists should therefore not be taken too seriously but do show how the next election will shape up in the broadest terms.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Let's look at the second list first. The Conservatives' chances of substantial further gains look limited. It is unusual enough for a party of government to get a swing to it after serving in power, and the swings required start to get quite large quite quickly. The first 17 targets would fall to a relatively modest swing of 1.6% (that would give them a majority of 46) but double this swing would be required to take even 29 seats (and a majority of 70) on a uniform basis. A historically unprecedented 5% swing to an incumbent government would yield 48 seats (and a majority of 108) on a uniform swing. Even if the Conservatives stay in power after 2020, a landslide looks unlikely.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">If the Conservatives are aiming to make further progress, they will need to improve their performance in London in particular, the location of seven of their top 20 targets. And they would need to train their fire on Labour: only five of their top 50 targets are not held by Labour.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">But it is much more likely that we will be spending the current years thinking about how vulnerable the Conservative-held seats are. And there too, the main battle is with Labour, who are the main challengers in exactly three quarters of the top 100 seats.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">With a majority of only 12, the Conservatives could lose their majority very easily. A uniform swing of just 0.5% would wipe it out. That's a hair's breadth. They should be able to remember that they are mortal without anyone whispering in their ears. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Beyond that point, however, the Conservatives have built up decent majorities in their seats. A 3% uniform swing against them would deliver only 29 seats to their opponents (and only 21 would transfer directly to Labour). It would take a 4.7% uniform swing against them for the Conservatives to lose 50 seats, of which only 38 would fall to Labour. The experience in 2015 was that t</span><span style="font-family: Arial;">he Lib Dems did not come close to retaking any seats where the Conservatives had broken their incumbency. Ten of the Conservatives' 50 most vulnerable seats are Lib Dem held. The Lib Dems may find it harder than Labour to get the swings required against the Conservatives to take target seats, given their particular past emphasis on incumbency. Whether the Conservatives can keep these former Lib Dem seats may determine whether the Conservatives have most seats and whether the Conservatives remain in power in 2020.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">But what is likely to be the critical seat count? With the Lib Dems so diminished in numbers and in any case likely to be less well-disposed towards the Conservatives in future, the Conservatives have few potential supportive partners after the 2020 election. If they get 305 seats or more, they will probably scramble home with support from the DUP, UKIP and/or the Lib Dems. Fewer than that and the progressive parties are likely to be just too strong.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">So the Conservatives probably need to restrict any swing to Labour to roughly 3% or less, and to hold onto their gains this time round from the Lib Dems. Far from being invincible, Conservatives should have no particular expectations of retaining power in 2020. It's going to be a hard fought battle.</span></div>
Alastairhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11551605492626333385noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1654731161334089375.post-77101154684559819182015-05-18T11:17:00.001+01:002015-05-26T16:01:35.695+01:002020: Labour's challenge<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Since the election we have been treated to a lot of angst from senior Labour politicians. Liz Kendall claimed: "One more parliament like the last means we might be unable to form a majority government again." </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Jon Cruddas, going further, said: "this could be the greatest crisis the Labour party has faced since it was created. It is epic in its scale.” </span><span style="font-family: Arial;">Are they right?</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">I do not propose looking directly at the direction that Labour should go in. But I have taken a look at the electoral landscape that they now face. Here are the seats that they currently hold (ranked from most marginal to safest):</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bygi8eZw-4q1Tm54TU02a3E3R0U/view?usp=sharing">https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bygi8eZw-4q1Tm54TU02a3E3R0U/view?usp=sharing</a></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">And here are their target seats, ranked in order of swing that Labour require to take them:</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bygi8eZw-4q1SDZTLUl2NVd4aTQ/view?usp=sharing">https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bygi8eZw-4q1SDZTLUl2NVd4aTQ/view?usp=sharing</a></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">I hope that these lists are fairly self-explanatory. On the first list I have highlighted the majority in the colour of the party of the nearest challenger (I have used grey for the SNP simply on the ground of legibility). On the second list I have highlighted the seat and the majority in the colour of the party of the incumbent. On the second list I have also asterisked the majority if Labour is in third, with an additional asterisk for each position Labour has dropped below third.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Now it must be noted at once that we will probably have boundary changes before the next election (these may well make Labour's position weaker, though this is not certain). So these lists should not be used unthinkingly. The sands are expected to shift.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">From these lists, however, quite a few conclusions can be drawn.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<strong><span style="font-family: Arial;">Know your enemy</span></strong></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<strong><span style="font-family: Arial;"></span></strong> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">One thing stands out from both of these lists: Labour should be focussed pretty much exclusively on the Conservatives. Of their top 100 targets, all bar 14 are Conservative-held seats. Of their top 100 most vulnerable seats, all bar 16 have a Conservative as nearest challenger. The lesson is simple: Labour has to turn all its efforts towards its traditional battle with the Conservatives.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">The point should not need making, but apparently it does. Already Labour supporters are considering how to get back "their" Scottish seats from the SNP. But only seven SNP-held seats feature in the top 100 targets. When it comes to forming a majority in Westminster, Scotland is a sideshow. Nothing that has happened since the election suggests that the tribulations of Scottish Labour have ended or even that it has yet reached its nadir.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Similarly, there has been much talk about how UKIP are now second-placed in a plethora of Labour-held seats. And so they are. But chiefly this is a feature of very safe Labour seats. UKIP are second in only five of Labour's 100 most vulnerable seats. If UKIP start getting swings the size that the SNP achieved in Scotland this time, then they will take lots of Labour seats. But if that happens, Labour will have many other problems than just the challenge of UKIP. And it's not as though the post-election period has been particularly happy for UKIP either.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Labour should not be distracted. Everything it does needs to be geared towards undermining the Conservatives. Everything else is of secondary importance.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<strong><span style="font-family: Arial;">The scale of the challenge</span></strong></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<strong><span style="font-family: Arial;"></span></strong> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">It has been noticed quite widely that Labour will need a very large swing if they are to win an overall majority: just under 10% on a uniform basis. This is true. Indeed, Labour need something like a 5% swing if they are even to get most seats. To put this in context, a swing of the level required for an overall majority has been achieved since the Second World War only in the 1945 and the 1997 elections. A 5% swing has been achieved in only three more elections in that period. Clearly Labour have a major challenge ahead of them.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">But Labour is demonstrating a goldfish-like ability to forget all the discussions before the election about what happens in the case of a hung Parliament. Because most of the other Parliamentary parties dress to the left, Labour does not even need most seats to be best-placed to form a government. It just has to gain something approaching 40 seats from the Conservatives and to be ready to play nicely with others. This is rather less of a challenge.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Going back to my earlier point, Labour taking seats off the SNP in 2020 doesn't do all that much to improve Labour's prospects of leading a government: the SNP's supporters expect it to back a Labour government, so the seat count for a hypothetical coalition or minority government is left unaltered by transferring a seat from the SNP column to the Labour column. If Labour plus SNP totalled 326, all the huffing and puffing in the world from the Conservatives won't stop a Labour-led government from being formed.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Labour taking SNP seats would help, of course, in addressing scare stories put forward by the Conservatives about the malign influence of the SNP over policy and it would help in giving Labour legitimacy for forming a government if it got it closer to being the largest party. But these are secondary rather than primary benefits.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><strong>Implications for the Labour leadership election</strong></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<strong><span style="font-family: Arial;"></span></strong> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">When selecting their new leader, Labour members need to be aware that they do not have very good prospects for an outright majority in 2020 in the absence of something big happening and that even getting most seats looks quite tough from where they start now. There is much that is uncertain in the coming five years, but Labour would do well to plan on the basis that these uncertainties won't necessarily work in its favour. </span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">So if Labour prioritises power over ideological purity and if it wants to aim for an overall majority or most seats, it should avoid "no change" candidates. It should look for the candidate that would most undermine the Conservatives' prospectus to the country. And it should consider the quite likely possibility that its leader will need to work in concert with other progressive parties, so it should look for a good negotiator and someone comfortable with the idea of working on a cross-party basis.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">The last time that Labour had such a leader, he managed to achieve a sufficiently large national swing to make the idea of a coalition entirely unnecessary. By contemplating a broad coalition in 1997, Tony Blair was able to create one under the banner of his own party. Are Labour party members ready to select a leader that offers a similar approach? And do any of the current candidates actually do so?</span></div>
Alastairhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11551605492626333385noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1654731161334089375.post-81605871998915377952015-05-14T08:35:00.001+01:002015-05-26T16:04:46.777+01:00I'd rather be happy than right: 2015 personal election review<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Well that didn't go as expected. With the luminous exception of Scotland, I was completely wrongfooted by how the election result turned out. I could argue that so was everyone else but that would be a bit of a cop out. It's my turn to eat some humble pie.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/03298/election-01_3298073b.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/03298/election-01_3298073b.jpg" height="248" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">So what did I get right and what did I royally mess up? The best place to start must be my end of year predictions:</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://newstonoone.blogspot.co.uk/2014/12/2015-may-and-everything-after.html">http://newstonoone.blogspot.co.uk/2014/12/2015-may-and-everything-after.html</a></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">These were, in order:</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">1. There would be a hung Parliament</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">2. It will be neck and neck between the Lib Dems and the SNP which would be the third party.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">3. UKIP would get a good poll rating and few seats to show for it.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">4. The Greens would take precisely one seat: Brighton Pavilion.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">5. The debates would take place, basically in the format put forward by David Cameron.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">6. The election campaign wouldn't change very much.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">7. There would be a Labour minority government.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">8. All of the leaders (except Nicola Sturgeon) would be in peril of losing their jobs.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Not good, are they? I was right about UKIP and the Greens, half right about the debates (the format changed considerably) and right about the pressure on the leaders apart from David Cameron - though Nigel Farage's bouncing resignation was an innovation in British politics that I hadn't expected. But for the rest, I was hopelessly wrong. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">There's no point sugaring the pill, this was a terrible set of predictions. What went wrong?</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Despite being very aware that polling was an unreliable friend and likely to be particularly unreliable this time with the rise of UKIP and the SNP and the crash of the Lib Dems, I still relied heavily on the opinion polls. I think I acted correctly when I put together these predictions - you have to make use of the evidence that you have got in the absence of concrete reasons to doubt that evidence. At the turn of the year, I had no such concrete reasons.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">In fact, my year-end predictions were largely what I expected right up to 10pm on 7 May 2015 (but by that stage I expected the SNP to far outstrip the Lib Dems, though even then not by as much as in fact happened). The polls had remained static, even though the mood music from both main parties and the campaign itineraries of the two main party leaders suggested something different from the polls. That failure to revise my expectations was less forgivable. Ed Miliband would not have been campaigning in North Warwickshire and David Cameron would not have been campaigning in Twickenham and Bath if they didn't believe that the election was far adrift of where the polls suggested. One of them might have been wrong. Both of them were most unlikely to be. I should have taken more notice.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">So I wasn't right. But I am still happy. Why? Because my betting produced the returns I was looking for from them. How did I turn a profit when I had been such a poor prophet? I need to break this down into asset allocation, stock selection and timing.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">As of 10pm on Thursday night, my portfolio of fixed price bets was comprised in the following categories:</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">1. Scottish constituency bets, almost all on the SNP</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">2. </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">English constituency bets, the great majority on the Conservatives, but not exclusively if I saw bets that I thought offered disproportionate value on other parties</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">3. </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Hung parliament (I'll come back to this)</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">4. Labour most seats</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">5. Labour minority government</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">6. Laying David Cameron as Prime Minister after the election and backing Ed Miliband as Prime Minister after the next election</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">7. Miscellaneous others</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">I had placed some spread bets, but this time I didn't put huge sums at stake that way. My focus was elsewhere.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">You can see from the bets that I placed that these were partly indirectly hedging. Relative longshot Conservative constituency bets were inconsistent with bets in categories 4, 5 and 6 in particular. By selecting constituency bets that I felt were likely to outperform each party's run-of-the-mill seats for the same odds, I hoped to maximise returns.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">I did so well on my Scottish constituency bets that everything else pales into insignificance. They comprised roughly 80% of my winnings. This was a triumph of asset allocation - all those hours I spent poring over the likeliest SNP wins proved entirely superfluous in the end (indeed, at an early stage I had managed to back the SNP to win Edinburgh South, the one seat that they did not take, though having obtained odds of 25/1 on that possibility I can scarcely be too upset).</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">But I did OK elsewhere also. On Thursday morning, I thought that most of my English constituency bets on the Conservatives were heading for the virtual ashtray. But on Friday morning, they largely came up trumps. My strategy of seeking out value on both sides of the fence left me ahead. </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Here, stock selection was more important. And I did OK, particularly as regards the battle between Labour and the Conservatives. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Labour took ten seats from the Conservatives. Of these, I had placed losing bets on the Conservatives holding City of Chester, Hove and Ilford North. But conversely I did bet on Labour taking Brentford & Isleworth and Ealing Central & Acton. I avoided betting on the other five either way. Meanwhile, I successfully backed the Conservatives (at fairly long odds) to keep many of their other most marginal seats, and while I'd backed Labour to take some other seats, I am not embarrassed by my choices there either. Taken as a whole, I think I did a pretty fair job of identifying which Conservative seats might underperform and where Labour might outperform against the Conservatives.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">In other battlefields, the story was much closer to neutral overall (I did conspicuously badly with UKIP). But I did best where I'd bet most. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">I made one other critical decision early on Friday morning which was worth a four figure sum to me. After seeing the exit poll, I was aware that it was in doubt whether the Conservatives would merely be the largest party or whether they might get an overall majority. Following the results in Nuneaton and Swindon North, where the Conservatives had outperformed the exit poll in each case, I reversed my previous position on no overall majority and backed </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">the Conservatives getting an overall majority </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">at fairly long odds. Timing was everything on this. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">If this all sounds too smug, please return to the top and reread my serving of humble pie. I will. </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Overall, I made a complete hash of my predictions. Fortunately, I got away with it. This time.</span></div>
Alastairhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11551605492626333385noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1654731161334089375.post-14609852461852938342015-04-21T17:21:00.002+01:002015-04-21T17:21:14.806+01:00When April turns to May: what the seat markets imply for the election result<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">It's time to put the pieces together. Over the last few days, I've been looking at the constituency markets on a party by party basis, sorting the seats by the implied probability that the bookies have given to each party in turn and looking at what that means for them both in general terms and in specific seats. I attach links to each of them below (some of the prices are already slightly out of date, particularly following the gyrations in the prices in the Scottish constituencies over the weekend):</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><b style="background-color: white; color: #333333; line-height: 22.1px;">Labour</b></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<a href="http://newstonoone.blogspot.co.uk/2015/04/the-labour-battleground-in-april-2015.html"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">http://newstonoone.blogspot.co.uk/2015/04/the-labour-battleground-in-april-2015.html</span></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><b style="background-color: white; color: #333333; line-height: 22.1px;"></b></span><br />
<strong><span style="color: #333333; font-family: Arial;"></span></strong><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><b style="background-color: white; color: #333333; line-height: 22.1px;">Conservatives </b></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br />
<a href="http://newstonoone.blogspot.co.uk/2015/04/the-conservative-battleground-in-april.html"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">http://newstonoone.blogspot.co.uk/2015/04/the-conservative-battleground-in-april.html</span></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><b style="background-color: white; color: #333333; line-height: 22.1px;"></b></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><b style="background-color: white; color: #333333; line-height: 22.1px;"></b></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><b style="background-color: white; color: #333333; line-height: 22.1px;">Lib Dem </b></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://newstonoone.blogspot.co.uk/2015/04/the-lib-dem-battleground-in-april-2015.html">http://newstonoone.blogspot.co.uk/2015/04/the-lib-dem-battleground-in-april-2015.html</a></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><strong></strong></span></span> <span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><strong>SNP </strong></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">
</span><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #333333; line-height: 22.1px;"><a href="http://newstonoone.blogspot.co.uk/2015/04/the-snp-battleground-in-april-2015.html">http://newstonoone.blogspot.co.uk/2015/04/the-snp-battleground-in-april-2015.html</a></span></span></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><strong></strong></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><strong>UKIP </strong></span><br />
<strong><span style="font-family: Arial;"></span></strong> </div>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">
</span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://newstonoone.blogspot.co.uk/2015/04/the-ukip-battleground-in-april-2015.html">http://newstonoone.blogspot.co.uk/2015/04/the-ukip-battleground-in-april-2015.html</a></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><b style="background-color: white; color: #333333; line-height: 22.1px;">Greens, Plaid Cymru, Respect, NHA and Independents</b></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br />
<a href="http://newstonoone.blogspot.co.uk/2015/04/other-parties-and-independents.html"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">http://newstonoone.blogspot.co.uk/2015/04/other-parties-and-independents.html</span></a><br />
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">And new for April, I've prepared tables for the Northern Ireland seats:</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bygi8eZw-4q1SXBsTVFWVVRJRmM/view?usp=sharing"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bygi8eZw-4q1SXBsTVFWVVRJRmM/view?usp=sharing</span></a></span><span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">I don't propose to give any commentary on the Northern Irish seats, partly because I have no great insight and partly because there aren't that many interesting seats. Some of the DUP and Sinn Fein 1/100 bets are as sound 1/100 bets as you will find anywhere, mind.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Now it's time to put together the overall picture as it stands.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<strong><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Projected seat tallies</span></strong></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">What are the implied seat counts? Allocating the seats to the favourites (halving them when there are joint favourites) gives the following seat counts:</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Conservative: 273</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Labour:265 1/2*</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">SNP: 54</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Lib Dems: 30 1/2</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">DUP 9</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Sinn Fein 5</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">SDLP 3</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Plaid Cymru: 3 </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">UKIP: 3</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Speaker: 1</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Lady Sylvia Hermon: 1</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Greens: 1</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Respect: 1</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">*This figure has been adjusted to take account of the intervening seat movements in Scotland since the Labour seat odds table was compiled.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">What kind of government would that produce? Labour plus SNP would be just shy of the magic 326 figure. Adding in the support of the SDLP, Plaid Cymru, the Greens and Lady Sylvia Hermon and the passive support of Respect would get a Labour-led government control of Parliament.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">That would work for UK-wide matters, but the SNP would not be reliable partners for English-only matters. In those circumstances, Labour would probably need Lib Dem support also.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Nevertheless, the par numbers suggest a rickety Labour minority government. If it panned out like that, it would be fun. You can still get that at 7/4 and I've been tipping it since it was 7/1. </span></div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<strong><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">What might yet change?</span></strong></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">That's all well and good, but we need to think about what are the likely bounds of possibilities. With less than three weeks to go we can largely confine ourselves to the 1/2 to 2/1 bands. There will be seats won at longer odds, but we should now expect that to happen relatively rarely.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">So what's the likely minimum and maximum for any party? Here are the totals that each party would tally if they took all the seats in which they are priced at 1/2 or shorter (but no more) and the totals that each party would tally if they took all the seats in which they are priced at 2/1 or shorter (but no more):</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Labour: </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">241* - 301*</span></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Conservative: </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">239 - 305</span></span><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">SNP: </span><span style="font-family: Arial;">43 - 57</span><br />
Lib Dems: 17 - 37 </span></span></div>
<span style="font-family: Arial;">
</span><span style="font-family: Arial;">DUP: 9</span><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Sinn Fein: 5</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Plaid Cymru: <span style="font-family: Arial;">2-5</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-family: Arial;">SDLP 2 - 3</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">UKIP: <span style="font-family: Arial;">1 - 7</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Speaker: 1</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Lady Sylvia Hermon: 1</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-family: Arial;">Greens: 1</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Respect: 0 - 1</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">UUP: 0 - 2</span></div>
<span style="font-family: Arial;">
</span><div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<span style="font-family: Arial;">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br />
*This figure has been adjusted to take account of the intervening seat movements in Scotland since the Labour seat odds table was compiled.</div>
</span><span style="font-family: Arial;"><div style="text-align: justify;">
<br />
What can we sensibly note? Well, first, it is now most unlikely that we will see an overall majority. You can back No Overall Majority at 1/8 on Betfair and that looks like value even at that price to me. Note that before the latest SNP surge, Labour were priced at 2/1 or less in 322 seats, meaning that their outer bound was within a whisker of the overall majority threshold. That has receded into the distance. 1/8 on No Overall Majority is some way too long.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Secondly, it is going to be very hard for the Conservatives to get to form the next government. If they don't get an overall majority (or very close), they're going to need the connivance of the Lib Dems. The Conservatives will need at least 295 seats and that is close to the top end of the range for them. Laying David Cameron as Prime Minister after the next election looks value right the way to 2/1 at the least.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
</span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Oh, and the 7/4 on Labour minority government continues to look like very good value, particularly given that the SNP would be an essential component of any majority and there is no prospect of any coalition between those two parties.</span><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">But I've plugged all these bets before. Do I have any new ones?</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">These ranges are surprisingly tight. You could take the view that the seat prices are too bunched (I have some sympathy with that view) or you could work on the basis that the variations from the norm will cancel each other out.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">If you take the latter view, you might back 21-30 Lib Dem seats at 5/4 and 31-40 seats at 5/2, both bets with Bet365. By placing appropriate stakes, you can get effective odds of slightly better than 1/3 that the Lib Dems will get between 21 and 40 seats. Given the very local appeal of each Lib Dem candidate, it seems unlikely to me in practice that the Lib Dems will get fewer than 21 seats because their chances in different seats are much more loosely correlated than, for example, the major parties. </span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Similarly, you can back the Conservatives to get 251-275 seats at 7/2 with Ladbrokes and 276-300 seats at 13/8 with William Hill, giving effective odds of slightly worse than 4/6 that the Conservatives will get between 251 and 300 seats - place the bet with William Hill first because it's more likely to be limited. Conservative chances are much more correlated than the Lib Dem's chances, but this still looks like a good combination bet to me. I've put some money on both of these combinations.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">The same combination is available for Labour (251-275 seats at 7/4 with William Hill and 276-300 seats at 2/1 with Ladbrokes) for effective odds of slightly worse than 4/9. The reward doesn't look quite good enough for me, but it's not far off either.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">For a quirky bet, Coral offer a UKIP vs Plaid Cymru match-up. The 7/2 on the tie looks like fair value, given that both are favourites in three seats. I'm on.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span> </div>
</div>
Alastairhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11551605492626333385noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1654731161334089375.post-90028183712730780422015-04-20T10:08:00.000+01:002015-04-20T10:08:31.673+01:00Other parties and independents: the battlegrounds in April 2015<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">In the last few days, I have looked at the betting odds in each constituency from the perspective of Labour, the Conservatives, the Lib Dems, the SNP and UKIP. But they aren't the only ones fighting the general election and they aren't the only ones who have decent hopes of winning seats. At present three more parties hold seats in Parliament (currently holding five seats between them) and a fourth is led by someone who did so until 2010. All four of these parties will be contesting some seats at the next election where the bookies deem that they are in the mix, and a couple of independents have made their presence felt at the bookies. What are their chances?</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Here are the relevant tables of target seats for each of them.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">The Greens:</span></b><br />
<b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></b>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bygi8eZw-4q1OVFKTG4zZVJnajA/view?usp=sharing">https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bygi8eZw-4q1OVFKTG4zZVJnajA/view?usp=sharing</a></span><br />
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Plaid Cymru:</span></b></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bygi8eZw-4q1R1VmRkhuXzRyVU0/view?usp=sharing"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bygi8eZw-4q1R1VmRkhuXzRyVU0/view?usp=sharing</span></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Respect:</span></b></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bygi8eZw-4q1NURoTFBOeFZ1NVE/view?usp=sharing"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bygi8eZw-4q1NURoTFBOeFZ1NVE/view?usp=sharing</span></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">National Health Action:</span></b></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bygi8eZw-4q1eXo5SFBXLWxlUEE/view?usp=sharing">https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bygi8eZw-4q1eXo5SFBXLWxlUEE/view?usp=sharing</a></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br />
<b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Independents</span></b><br />
<b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></b>
<a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bygi8eZw-4q1UUExd1hBdDRxN0k/view?usp=sharing"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bygi8eZw-4q1UUExd1hBdDRxN0k/view?usp=sharing</span></a><br />
<br />
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">We have not yet exhausted the list of parties contesting the election. Candidates for the Ubuntu Party, the War Veteran's Pro-Tradition Through Family Party, the Wessex Regionalists Party, the Cannabis Is Safer Than Alcohol Party or the World Peace Through Song Party (to name a few) have yet to set the constituency markets alight, and time is running out.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">To recap, these tables are compiled on the basis that in aggregate the constituency odds are our best estimate of what's going on, while noting that there may be individual anomalies (otherwise known as betting opportunities). The constituency odds factor those matters in to the best judgement of bookies and punters. By arranging constituencies by order of odds rather than majority, we can see how many seats gamblers expect the parties to take - or what the odds are that each party will take a given number of seats.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">I last looked at the outsider parties in November, and my post can be found here:</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://newstonoone.blogspot.co.uk/2014/11/other-parties-battlegrounds-in-november.html">http://newstonoone.blogspot.co.uk/2014/11/other-parties-battlegrounds-in-november.html</a></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">There are still only 12 seats where the minor party or independent is rated at 10/1 or shorter: six Plaid Cymru seats and targets, three Green seats and targets, one Respect target (won at a by-election), one National Health Action target and one independent. </span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">We can look at these 12 seats in some detail.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">The Greens</span></b></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">I'd backed a couple of longshots for the Greens, but all but one of these have failed to prosper. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://www.reactiongifs.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/chicken_regret_nothing.gif" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://www.reactiongifs.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/chicken_regret_nothing.gif" height="179" width="320" /></a></div>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">As I said yesterday, not all longshots can come off. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">The Greens now have three serious prospects: Brighton Pavilion, Bristol West and Norwich South. Last time round, I observed that in Lord Ashcroft's first opinion poll in Brighton Pavilion, he had not prompted for the Greens. He rectified this in his subsequent poll in December, resulting in a 1% Labour lead being converted into a 10% Green lead. The 4/9 on the Greens here looks great value and is well worth topping up. I'm not expecting Caroline Lucas to be defeated now.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br />
We have had one poll in Norwich South without prompting for the Greens, which resulted in them being second but some way adrift. I still wonder what difference prompting would make. 5/1 is probably a value loser bet. I'm on this at 25/1 and don't feel the urge to top up, but it's not a stupid bet.<br />
<br />
I've been sceptical about the Greens' chances in Bristol West from the outset. At one stage you could have backed them at 100/1. I wish that was one of the longshots that I was on, but it isn't. They're now in to 4/1 and though there has been no polling in this seat, they're clearly in contention. The three parties in contention are all progressive, which means that the two left of centre opponents of the Lib Dems are likely to knock each other out. I'm on the Lib Dems in this seat at 8/13 and I still like this bet at evens. I'm not topping up further though.</span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Plaid Cymru</span></b></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Plaid Cymru, unlike any other parties in this list, are sure to retain at least one seat and in all probability at least two. Their third seat, Arfon, looks like a cliffhanger, while the bookies assess them as having a decent chance of taking Ceredigion, an outside chance of taking Ynys Mon and a faint hope of taking Llanelli. </span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">This is the most recent Wales-only poll:</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://blogs.cardiff.ac.uk/electionsinwales/2015/04/15/the-latest-welsh-political-barometer-poll/">http://blogs.cardiff.ac.uk/electionsinwales/2015/04/15/the-latest-welsh-political-barometer-poll/</a></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Plaid Cymru appear to be polling at least as well in Wales as they did in 2010, but even so there is a relative swing away from Plaid Cymru to Labour, its main rivals in most of its target seats, because Labour has improved more. Incidentally, no one is talking about any possible UKIP gains in Wales, but they're polling as well in Wales as in the UK as a whole and I'd guess that their appeal in the areas where Plaid Cymru is strong is as weak as their appeal is in Scotland. If I were looking for an under-the-radar success for UKIP, Wales is one of the areas I'd be looking at.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Plaid Cymru are only competing seriously in a handful of seats, so I don't regard even Wales-wide opinion polls as particularly informative. We have to dig deeper.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">The politics of Arfon and Ynys Mon are very much personality-driven. I'm not particularly familiar with the personalities, so I'm not betting. Plaid Cymru have suggested that the rise of UKIP has been helpful to them in Ynys Mon and Llanelli:</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/labour-losing-votes-in-droves-8943801">http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/labour-losing-votes-in-droves-8943801</a></span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">This seems quite plausible. Certainly, the Labour response in that article is not exactly carefully reasoned.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Ceredigion is a fascinating seat. Mark Williams has very much followed the Lib Dem tradition of building up a personal brand rather than rely on the party to secure him votes. He has a large majority</span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">. Will it be enough to survive a collapse in national Lib Dem support? He has probably been helped by his main rival having got bogged down in a slanging match with the no-hoper Labour candidate. This has been very entertaining, but can only benefit the incumbent:</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/plaid-cymru/11522401/Plaid-Cymru-candidate-compares-the-English-to-Nazis.html">http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/plaid-cymru/11522401/Plaid-Cymru-candidate-compares-the-English-to-Nazis.html</a></span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/chavs-sickening-england-flags-words-9018453">http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/chavs-sickening-england-flags-words-9018453</a></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">I'm still not betting on this seat, but the 4/7 on the Lib Dems is starting to look very tempting.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Llanelli, on the other hand, does look straightforward to me. The 1/8 on Labour has to be value, even if UKIP might be drawing support from Labour. On the other side of the fence, an independent is standing who has a proven record of drawing support away from Plaid Cymru:</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/maverick-independent-sian-caiach-contest-8386444">http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/maverick-independent-sian-caiach-contest-8386444</a></span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">I have put something on Labour in this seat.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><b>Respect</b></span></div>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Respect have only one short-priced chance: Bradford West. Their three longer shots are also all brought to you by the letter B, but I'm not tempted by any of them (in two of them, Bethnal Green & Bow and Bradford East, they aren't even standing, which makes the odds on them look a little uninviting).</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Last time around, I thought that Labour were value at 1/3 in Bradford West. Out of spite to a gambler, they promptly imploded in an orgy of in-fighting. Unsurprisingly, Respect are now favourites in this seat.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Out of the chaos, Labour have ended up with a candidate with a backstory that appears inspiring:</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<a href="http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2015/mar/09/bradford-west-labour-candidate-naz-shah-childhood"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2015/mar/09/bradford-west-labour-candidate-naz-shah-childhood</span></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">But this looks like the dirtiest constituency campaign in 2015:</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-32233892"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-32233892</span></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">It seems that the Respect machine is well-oiled, contrary to my previous impression. Their favourite status is probably justified.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span></b><br />
<b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">National Health Action</span></b></div>
<b></b><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">As I noted last time, this is a new party which was founded by Dr Richard Taylor, the former MP for Wyre Forest who had sat as an independent campaigning on health for two parliaments. It </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">is standing in 12 constituencies but the only seat in which it is considered to have more than an outside chance is Wyre Forest, where Dr Taylor is again standing. He would need a 2.6% swing to retake the seat. In 2001 and 2005, the Lib Dems stood aside for Dr Taylor, but there will be a full complement of parties this time around. We have had one poll from Lord Ashcroft in this constituency, but unsatisfactorily he did not prompt for National Health Action, which must be an error given the history of this seat.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">I had previously backed UKIP at 25/1 and NHA at 5/1, and have now closed out by backing the Conservatives for a near-guaranteed profit. If I were starting from scratch I'd find the 6/1 on NHA very tempting.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><b>Independents</b></span><br />
<strong><span style="font-family: Arial;"></span></strong><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">As in every general election, there are independents standing up and down the country. Most will vanish without trace. But sometimes they challenge hard and sometimes they win. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">In East Devon, Claire Wright is apparently putting together a decent show. She's a local councillor who apparently has a good local support base. Her national politics, so far as one can discern them from her website and manifesto, are green-tinged:</span><br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.claire-wright.org/"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">http://www.claire-wright.org/</span></a><br />
<a href="https://8c78c03a-a-62cb3a1a-s-sites.googlegroups.com/site/realzorro1/CWrightJanFeb2015Leaflet.pdf?attachauth=ANoY7covzq0edyv-AzqBuWTJjpoVLjPAT3tV6J6ldRnIU0GMfKaDvMeM9_p4rT7GOQuO12NMjEo2jKf8kcmPqpxBmJO5L9BiGAMREs8qGYL4eqw9j9X_StCOCV6SWY1yebO0wyOK81jsxbLvYsCxX5VtdPtslIzHdqU7N4xVBHbkxto6OTxZjw1WQiE2eKEt2I8bJJAfX0ppIZLjclKqCf_he6hYLTRahAe0XNFaCu-KfpxUspE19Hk%3D&attredirects=1"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">https://8c78c03a-a-62cb3a1a-s-sites.googlegroups.com/site/realzorro1/CWrightJanFeb2015Leaflet.pdf?attachauth=ANoY7covzq0edyv-AzqBuWTJjpoVLjPAT3tV6J6ldRnIU0GMfKaDvMeM9_p4rT7GOQuO12NMjEo2jKf8kcmPqpxBmJO5L9BiGAMREs8qGYL4eqw9j9X_StCOCV6SWY1yebO0wyOK81jsxbLvYsCxX5VtdPtslIzHdqU7N4xVBHbkxto6OTxZjw1WQiE2eKEt2I8bJJAfX0ppIZLjclKqCf_he6hYLTRahAe0XNFaCu-KfpxUspE19Hk%3D&attredirects=1</span></a><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Notably, no Green is standing against her.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">The $64,000 question is whether she has the organisation to back up a constituency-wide campaign and whether the Lib Dems' past strength here can be built upon by a different party. I anticipate that the 1/6 on the Conservatives is good value. But this is one bet I'll pass in the absence of more local knowledge.</span></div>
Alastairhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11551605492626333385noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1654731161334089375.post-69464140961998818282015-04-19T13:50:00.001+01:002015-04-19T13:50:40.220+01:00The UKIP battleground in April 2015<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">It's time to look at the constituency betting markets as they currently stand from UKIP's perspective. </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">So as at 13 April 2015, </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">here's the table of all the seats where UKIP's chances are ranked by the bookies as 16/1 or better, ranked in ascending order of implied probability:</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bygi8eZw-4q1MVM0UjBkLXprZVk/view?usp=sharing"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bygi8eZw-4q1MVM0UjBkLXprZVk/view?usp=sharing</span></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">To recap for first timers, this table is compiled on the basis that in aggregate the constituency odds are our best estimate of what's going on, while noting that there may be individual anomalies (otherwise known as betting opportunities). The constituency odds factor those matters in to the best judgement of bookies and punters. By arranging constituencies by order of odds rather than majority, we can see how many seats gamblers expect the parties to take - or what the odds are that each party will take a given number of seats.</span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> </span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">This is how things stood at the beginning of November 2014.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://newstonoone.blogspot.co.uk/2014/11/the-ukip-battleground-in-november-2014.html">http://newstonoone.blogspot.co.uk/2014/11/the-ukip-battleground-in-november-2014.html</a></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">At that time, UKIP were soaring. Since then, their prices have plateaued or even waned. UKIP are favourites now in just three seats (down from five in November) and priced at under 2/1 in just seven seats, (down from nine in November). UKIP were priced at under 10/1 in 42 constituencies in November, and that has now reduced to just 34 constituencies. Some of this is explicable by prices in general becoming more competitive, but not all of it by a long way. Whether or not UKIP have peaked in the polls, they have peaked at the bookies. I shall consider later whether that is a correct reaction.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">The decline in UKIP's fortunes has been exclusively as against the Conservatives. In November, UKIP were priced at under 10/1 in 13 non-Conservative constituencies, exactly the same number as today. UKIP have actually shortened their price in the one Labour constituency, Great Grimsby, priced at under 2/1 over this period.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">UKIP do seem to have slightly come off their very highest points in the national polls and even the most ardent kipper would have to concede that they are not advancing further. Some of the previous prices had been predicated on the possibility of UKIP continuing to improve. That has not happened and their election campaign has not caught light. The dreams of the most excitable kippers look set to be crushed.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">That means in turn that UKIP look most unlikely to take anything more than a handful of seats. Recent constituency polling seems to confirm that (click to enlarge):</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://lordashcroftpolls.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Marginals-VI-150414.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://lordashcroftpolls.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Marginals-VI-150414.jpg" height="152" width="320" /></a></div>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">UKIP will be particularly disappointed in the polling in Dover, a seat where they had entertained outside hopes but where they seem to be coming a distant third. They might well have hoped to be polling better in Cleethorpes and Dudley South too.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">This means that UKIP's chances for the election are probably all gathered in those few seats where they are short-priced and the rest can probably now be forgotten about. There is still the chance of an odd shock under the radar somewhere, but if it happens, it will be an odd shock not part of a clutch of victories.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">As someone with a collection of UKIP longshot bets, this is disappointing, but I can hardly be simultaneously thrilled with the strong hope of success of longshot bets on the SNP and glum about UKIP longshots looking likely to be heading for the ashtray. That is in the nature of longshot bets: they don't all come off.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">I have called UKIP wrong at every point, discounting them before they surged, then thinking the surge would continue when in fact Rochester & Strood marked the end of that period of progress. So I hesitate to give any advice at all, and you should discount my thoughts heavily given my track record. But here goes.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Where UKIP are still short enough to affect the price of the others in the market without having a real chance of success themselves, there may be opportunities worth backing elsewhere. So I am looking at those seats where UKIP are priced between 4/1 and 10/1 with that in mind. I've backed the Conservatives in Folkestone & Hythe at 1/4 and Wyre Forest at 8/15 (closing out a three-way bet for a guaranteed profit). I backed the Lib Dems in Eastleigh at 4/7 the other day, as I mentioned when I looked at the Lib Dem seat markets. And I've backed Labour in Walsall North at 1/3 and in Newcastle-under-Lyme at 2/7 (as I mentioned when I looked at the Labour seat markets).</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">What of those seats where UKIP remain in with a shout? My view of those is that they are seriously murky and that no one really understands how they are going to play out. I am therefore proceeding with extreme caution in this final phase. The 1/9 on UKIP in Clacton is a decent 1/9 shot though, as 1/9 shots go.</span></div>
Alastairhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11551605492626333385noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1654731161334089375.post-30137939008497573722015-04-18T13:55:00.000+01:002015-04-18T13:55:00.536+01:00The SNP battleground in April 2015<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">So far I've looked in turn at Labour, the Conservatives and the Lib Dems. And now it's time for my look at the constituency betting markets as they currently stand from the SNP's perspective. But as in October, my original plans have had to be slightly modified. I had planned yesterday to show all the parties as they stood as at 13 April 2015, to have a nice neat record of fully interlocking constituency odds tables. But the prices in Scotland have changed so much in the last two days (thanks, Lord Ashcroft) that to base a post on the prices then in place would be pointless and misleading. So I've had to wait for the prices to settle a little then update the table to take account of these, and this has been reworked several times today. Still, I can for the first time confirm the truth of Camus' observation that Sisyphus was happy. The prices used in this post are correct as of today's date.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Anyway, here is the table of all the Scottish seats, ranked in descending order of implied probability of the SNP taking them, as determined by the best odds available at the bookies:</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bygi8eZw-4q1bi1Pak9zdGFGZ1k/view?usp=sharing">https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bygi8eZw-4q1bi1Pak9zdGFGZ1k/view?usp=sharing</a></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">To recap for first timers, this table is compiled on the basis that in aggregate the constituency odds are our best estimate of what's going on, while noting that there may be individual anomalies (otherwise known as betting opportunities). The constituency odds factor those matters in to the best judgement of bookies and punters. By arranging constituencies by order of odds rather than majority, we can see how many seats gamblers expect the parties to take - or what the odds are that each party will take a given number of seats.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">These prices are still in a state of ferment. It is quite likely that the best prices in many of these seats will be dramatically out of date in a few hours (the bookies have had their prices pushed all over the place in the last two days). But I had to draw the line somewhere.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">It is worth comparing with the position on 13 April so that you can see just how quickly things have changed:</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bygi8eZw-4q1TGkwMmRGbHNNSTQ/view?usp=sharing">https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bygi8eZw-4q1TGkwMmRGbHNNSTQ/view?usp=sharing</a></span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">What has caused this turmoil? This:</span><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://lordashcroftpolls.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Scottish-VI-150417-1024x480.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://lordashcroftpolls.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Scottish-VI-150417-1024x480.jpg" height="300" width="640" /></a></div>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Out of the blue, Lord Ashcroft released another batch of Scottish constituency polling. It showed the SNP doing extremely well everywhere (other than the very special case of Berwickshire Roxburgh & Selkirk) and apparently even better than it had been doing in January and February when Lord Ashcroft last looked at the Scottish constituencies.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">As a result, the bookies appear to have concluded that it is game over. The SNP are now 5/6 (the bookies' evens) or better in 50 seats, favourites in a further four seats and joint favourites in a further two seats. The SNP are priced at 1/2 or shorter in 43 seats. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Are the bookies right? Essentially I think that they are. </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">I expect that there was an element of book-balancing in the face of money backing the SNP and there are arbs all over the place. </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">There may be a late swing, and as a matter of caution you might want to knock a few points off the SNP's constituency polling which is relatively untested and bearing in mind that the pollsters overstated the Yes vote in the referendum by about 3% in the end. B</span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">ut there is nothing in these polls to suggest that the SNP's appeal is waning and with only three weeks to go, time is running out for Labour to pull it back.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">This leaves me with the emotional problem of whether to start hedging my bets. I've done a little of this to cover my stakes in East Dunbartonshire and Edinburgh North & Leith at what I considered favourable odds, but I've decided not to in general. I only gamble what I can afford to lose, so I don't need to insure the losses. Indeed, most of my bets in the last two days have been on the SNP - this latest batch of constituency polling is seriously good news for the SNP.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Are there any bargains? On the SNP side, all the 1/2 bets look good to me (Ayr Carrick & Cumnock, West Dunbartonshire, Paisley & Renfrewshire North and Paisley & Renfrewshire South), as does the evens in East Renfrewshire - 9% is a healthy lead in a constituency poll and nothing in the detail suggested that tactical voting was going to save Jim Murphy. The 11/10 in Rutherglen & Hamilton West looks good - the swing of 22.4% required would be comfortably exceeded by the average swings in the constituency polling in nearby seats.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">On the Labour side, I'd want local knowledge before backing them anywhere. I suspect that the scope for tactical voting would be greater in the Edinburgh area, but the swings that the SNP requires there are smaller too. So until I get more information, I'm not really betting on Labour anywhere.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">These latest polls are grim for the Lib Dems. So I'm not making any more bets on them either.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Next up, UKIP.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span></div>
Alastairhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11551605492626333385noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1654731161334089375.post-35533838729865283332015-04-17T10:24:00.000+01:002015-04-17T10:24:00.033+01:00The Lib Dem battleground in April 2015<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">This week is my pre-election round-up of the seat markets, and I'm ploughing through the parties one by one (metaphorically speaking). On Wednesday I looked at the constituency betting markets as they currently stand from a Labour perspective. Yesterday I looked at the Conservatives. Today it's the Lib Dems' turn.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">So here's the table of all the seats where the Lib Dems' chances are ranked by the bookies as 16/1 or better, ranked in ascending order of implied probability:</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bygi8eZw-4q1NUNleG1ldmdOMkk/view?usp=sharing">https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bygi8eZw-4q1NUNleG1ldmdOMkk/view?usp=sharing</a></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">These figures are up to date as at 13 April 2015.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">To recap, this table is compiled on the basis that in aggregate the constituency odds are our best estimate of what's going on, while noting that there may be individual anomalies (otherwise known as betting opportunities). The constituency odds factor those matters in to the best judgement of bookies and punters. By arranging constituencies by order of odds rather than majority, we can see how many seats gamblers expect the parties to take - or what the odds are that each party will take a given number of seats.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">The overarching picture for the Lib Dems has deteriorated decisively since November, the last time I took a comprehensive look at the seat markets. </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">They are longer than 5/6 in 31 constituencies that they currently hold (up from 24 in November), 5/6 being the price that the bookies use for a 50:50 shot (they have their margins to make). </span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">In June, the Lib Dems were priced at odds of greater than 2/1 in ten of the constituencies that they hold. By November, that had risen to 14. Now, there are 21 such seats.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Despite the Lib Dems facing many more Conservative challengers than Labour challengers, the favourites in these 21 seats is exactly evenly divided between Labour, the Conservatives and the SNP. This represents a strengthening in both the SNP's and (to a lesser extent) the Conservatives' position since November, while Labour have stood still. </span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">The position is getting worse for the Lib Dems at the other end of the spectrum too. In June, the Lib Dems are rated at shorter odds than 1/2 in 22 seats. By November, this had fallen to 19. Now, there are only 14 seats where the Lib Dems are thought to be a better than 1/2 shot.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">So why are the Lib Dems doing so much worse on the seat markets now? In part, as with Labour, it's a consequence of the SNP's surge in Scotland. But in the main, it reflects the failure of the Lib Dems to recover in the polls in the run-up to the election. A recovery had been priced in and it hasn't happened.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial;">For those that want to look at my previous outings on the Lib Dems, here's my review in October:</span><br />
<br />
<a href="http://newstonoone.blogspot.co.uk/2014/11/the-lib-dem-battleground-in-november.html"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">http://newstonoone.blogspot.co.uk/2014/11/the-lib-dem-battleground-in-november.html</span></a><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">And here's my June review:</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><a href="http://newstonoone.blogspot.co.uk/2014/06/the-lib-dem-battleground-in-june-2014.html">http://newstonoone.blogspot.co.uk/2014/06/the-lib-dem-battleground-in-june-2014.html</a></span><br />
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">One of the central questions of the next election is: how far will the Lib Dems fall from the 23% they recorded in 2010 and where will those losses be felt most? </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">The Lib Dems seem to be doing particularly poorly in Scotland, if the Scottish only polls are to be believed. They also seem to be set to be obliterated in seats where they are not in contention.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">What of seats where the Lib Dems are in contention? We have conflicting polling. The constituency polls for Lord Ashcroft tell a reasonably hopeful story for the Lib Dems, showing their local effort potentially leading to them to hang on in many redoubts. But a recent ComRes poll of the Lib Dem-held seats in the south west with Conservative challengers tells a very different story, showing a swing of 13%, which would lead to them losing every single seat in the region on a uniform swing. At the other extreme, we have details of some Lib Dem private polling showing many of their incumbents doing phenomenally well. They cannot all be right (though they can all be wrong). Which should we believe?</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Lord Ashcroft derives his headline constituency poll numbers from the second of a two part question, where voters have been guided to concentrate on who is standing in their constituency. His standard questions are as follows:</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial;">"1. If there were a general election tomorrow, which party would you vote for? Would it be Conservative, Labour, Liberal Democrat, UKIP or another party. <i>If 'another party': </i>Would that be, the Green Party, the British National Party (BNP) or some other party - or do you not know how you would vote?</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial;">2. And thinking specifically about your own constituency and the candidates who are likely to stand there, which party's candidate do you think you will vote for in your own constituency at the next general election? <i>[Prompts as at Q1]</i>"</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial;">ComRes's quest</span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">ion did seek to elicit a local response. It read: "Please now think specifically about your own constituency, the issues it faces, the local MP and the different candidates. At the General Election coming up in May, would you vote Conservative, Labour, Liberal Democrat, UKIP or for some other party?" It did not, however, explicitly lead voters through the same process as Lord Ashcroft.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Lord Ashcroft's approach relies on voters going through the same two stage process that he prompts them to. If the Lib Dems' electoral machine is running smoothly, that may be a safe assumption. In seats where the Lib Dems are not so fluent, perhaps it isn't.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">So my expectation is that the Lib Dems may overperform in seats where they have the organisation to get out the vote and underperform elsewhere. Past performance is not always a guide to the future, but it is at least a guide to where the Lib Dems have the organisational skills.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">The methodology behind the Lib Dems' private polling is here:</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<a href="http://www.markpack.org.uk/files/2015/04/East-Dunbartonshire-constituency-poll.pdf"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">http://www.markpack.org.uk/files/2015/04/East-Dunbartonshire-constituency-poll.pdf</span></a><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">As you can see, it asks the respondents to consider the merits or otherwise of the Lib Dem incumbent and her chief opponent before asking the voting question. <span style="font-family: Arial;">I shall be charitable about the Lib Dems' private polling and say that it may provide a useful guide to them as to how to frame the election to maximise their vote, and releasing such polling may well be useful to them for obtaining tactical votes. It may also be a hint to the seats where the Lib Dems are well organised: we have seen leaked polls from some constituencies but not from others. I draw a fairly good inference in the most threatened constituencies where we haven't seen leaked polls that the Lib Dems may well be up against it.</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">So, what individual seats do I recommend? Generally, I'm cautious where the Lib Dems are heavily involved because of the general murk about how their local performance. I don't believe that there are many home bankers unless you have very firm views about which constituency polling methodology is correct. I don't.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">That said, I pay closer attention to individual constituency polls from Lord Ashcroft than usual, because they should pick up the performance of the local MP, which is going to be exceptionally important in Lib Dem held seats.</span></div>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Given the Lib Dem decline in vote share, any bets on short priced Lib Dem seats is a bet on the quality of that constituency's party machine. I've put some money on the Lib Dems in Thornbury & Yate at 2/7 because I reckon that Steve Webb's personal vote will see him through comfortably, but I don't regard this bet as being as safe as some of the short priced bets on Labour and the Conservatives yesterday.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">It may be better to identify misfiring challenges. The Conservatives in Southport seem to have been no better organised than in 2010, so the 1/2 on the Lib Dems is worth a bet.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Alternatively, the murk may mean that you get better value in the 1/2 to 2/1 band than in supposedly safer bets. I've put bets on the Lib Dems in Cheadle at 4/5 and Eastleigh at 4/7. The latter price in particular looks too long, with the Conservatives failing at the by-election and UKIP apparently fading outside their top targets at present.</span></div>
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">All bets on the Lib Dems are very much AYOR. These are inherently riskier bets than bets in straight Conservative/Labour fights, because local considerations may (or may not) weigh much more heavily than in other contests and much is not visible from the outside.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> </span><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">What of the seats where the Lib Dems are the challengers? For quite some time, I have regarded many of these prices as way too short. If voters in these seats weren't going to vote Lib Dem at the height of enthusiasm for Nick Clegg, you need an exceptional reason to think that they're a worthwhile bet to make a gain. The value for me is almost always all on the other side of the bet. In the last two posts, I've already mentioned Ashfield and Maidstone & The Weald as seats where the incumbents are good value. You might well form the same view of Oxford West & Abingdon, Truro & Falmouth and Newton Abbot.</span></div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Tomorrow I'll turn to the SNP.</span></div>
Alastairhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11551605492626333385noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1654731161334089375.post-65215690607324108812015-04-16T10:58:00.005+01:002015-04-16T10:58:38.268+01:00The Conservative battleground in April 2015<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Yesterday I looked at the constituency betting markets as they currently stand from a Labour perspective. Today I'm looking at the Conservatives. So here's the table of all the seats (as at 14 April) where the Conservatives' chances are ranked by the bookies between 1/16 and 16/1, ranked in ascending order of implied probability:</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bygi8eZw-4q1bVpaZjkycGo3d3M/view?usp=sharing">https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bygi8eZw-4q1bVpaZjkycGo3d3M/view?usp=sharing</a></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">As I explained yesterday, such a table assumes that in aggregate the constituency odds are our best estimate of what's going on, while noting that there may be individual anomalies (otherwise known as betting opportunities). The constituency odds factor those matters in to the best judgement of bookies and punters. By arranging constituencies by order of odds rather than majority, we can see how many seats gamblers expect the parties to take - or what the odds are that each party will take a given number of seats. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Here are the milestone seats with the seat counts implied if the Conservatives take every seat in order of probability up that point:</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">350 Clacton (7/1)</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">340 Birmingham Edgbaston (5/1)</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">330 Thornbury & Yate (7/2)</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">326 Plymouth Sutton & Devonport (7/2)</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">320 North Warwickshire (3/1)</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">310 Weaver Vale (5/2)</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">300 Hastings & Rye (2/1)</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">290 Morecambe & Lunesdale (6/4)</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">280 Cheadle (6/5)</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">270 Great Yarmouth (5/6)</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">260 Rossendale & Darwen (4/6)</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">250 Elmet & Rothwell (4/7)</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">240 South Basildon & East Thurrock (8/15)</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">230 North Thanet (2/5)</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">220 Folkestone & Hythe (3/10)</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">210 Maidstone & The Weald (1/4)</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">200 Burton (1/6)</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">5/6, the price on the Conservatives for Great Yarmouth, is sometimes referred to as the bookies' evens (reflecting their need to build in a margin to make a profit), so it seems that the current central implied expected point for the Conservatives is around 270 seats. </span><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">For an overall majority, the Conservatives would need 326 seats. The 326th seat is Plymouth Sutton & Devonport, for which the Conservatives are priced at 7/2. </span> <span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">As of this morning, you can get just under 9/1 with Betfair on the proposition that the Conservatives will get an overall majority, with good liquidity above 8/1. The seat markets are by and large for the birds in this vicinity. I would not consider backing the Conservatives in any seat at these odds without the most outstanding intelligence that the Conservatives were doing far better in the seat than was widely understood. If you think that the Conservatives stand an earthly chance of an overall majority, back that proposition directly on Betfair.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">As I noted yesterday in relation to Labour, it's less clear how many seats would be required for either main party to have most seats. Both parties are priced in the constituency markets at 5/6 to get their 270th seat. Yet Labour are 15/8 on Betfair to get most seats while the Conservatives are 8/15. These two markets are completely detached from each other.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">It follows that there is an indirect hedging strategy, which is to back Labour on the most seats market and to back the Conservatives in the seats which they would need to take from Labour if they were to get around 270 seats. Such seats would include Worcester, Blackpool North & Cleveleys, Pudsey and Ipswich, for example. If you back a suitable selection according to taste, you would be unlucky to come out behind and if you were lucky (or skilful in choosing your Conservative bets) you might win on both sides of some of the bets.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span> </div>
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Another important milestone seat is Eastbourne (7/4), which is the 295th seat. This probably represents the practical minimum for the formation of a Conservative government, with David Cameron as Prime Minister. Yet you can still lay David Cameron on Betfair at odds on to be Prime Minister after the next election. Another indirect hedging strategy is to do just that and to back the Conservatives in seats like Stroud, Eastbourne, Cannock Chase and Carlisle. Get the right seats and you might again come out ahead on both sides of the bet.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Obviously for both of these strategies there is the risk of losing on both sides of the bets. But that would be seriously unlucky (or you would have chosen poorly when you picked the seats in which you had backed the Conservatives).</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">If you want to play things more simply, just lay David Cameron for next Prime Minister, which is what I have done. He should be at least 7/4 for that proposition if the constituency markets are to be believed. To be able to lay him at odds against is incredible value.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Or, if you disagree and think that the Conservatives are going to get most seats, look in the 270 to 310 band of seats. If you are right, this is where you will find the best value on the constituency markets. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">I already have a book of Conservative relative longshot bets from the last year, and now I'm looking at the value at the other end of the scale. Redditch at 2/7, Sittingbourne & Sheppey at 3/10 and Crawley at 3/10 all look safe enough to me, and I've backed the Conservatives in all of these. I'm not expecting the Lib Dems to come close in places like Maidstone & The Weald either, despite rumours of private Lib Dem polling showing them doing well: 1/4 looks like a good price here too.</span></div>
Alastairhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11551605492626333385noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1654731161334089375.post-69984138043263690102015-04-15T09:31:00.000+01:002015-04-15T15:58:01.025+01:00The Labour battleground in April 2015<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Over the months I have looked a few times at the individual constituency betting odds on party lines, ranking the seats in order of the odds on a given party taking that seat. I last did this in a comprehensive manner in October/November last year. Over the next week or so, I shall be giving my final pre-election look at the seat markets.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">The idea behind this is not immediately obvious to everyone, so new readers may want to start here:</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<a href="http://newstonoone.blogspot.co.uk/2014/04/end-of-part-one.html"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">http://newstonoone.blogspot.co.uk/2014/04/end-of-part-one.html</span></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">The central point from that post is that such a table assumes that in aggregate the constituency odds are our best estimate of what's going on, while noting that there may be individual anomalies (more commonly known as betting opportunities). It also makes the heroic assumption that the individual constituency odds - for Labour and the Conservatives at least - are perfectly correlated contingencies (which of course they are not) to establish a handy tool for judging the chances of success for each of the main parties overall. The general idea is that looking exclusively at marginality takes insufficient account of the different nature of the seats (who's second, is there a relevant third player, where is the seat). The constituency odds factor those matters in to the best judgement of bookies and punters. By arranging constituencies by order of odds rather than majority, we can see how many seats gamblers expect the parties to take - or what the odds are that each party will take a given number of seats.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">So, here's the table as of this morning:</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bygi8eZw-4q1aXVQM1lPXzNockk/view?usp=sharing"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bygi8eZw-4q1aXVQM1lPXzNockk/view?usp=sharing</span></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">I've included every seat where Labour are priced between 1/16 and 16/1. These prices are up to date so far as possible (subject to the inevitable transcription errors etc) as of first thing this morning. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Here are the seat tallies that would be implied by taking these milestone seats:</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">210 Cardiff North (2/9)</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">220 Enfield North (2/7)</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">230 Plymouth Sutton & Devonport (4/11)</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">240 Hove (4/9)</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">250 Bury North (4/7)</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">260 Ayrshire Central (8/11)</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">270 Harrow East (5/6)</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">280 Lanark & Hamilton East (6/5)</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">290 Stevenage (5/4)</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">300 Glasgow Central (13/8)</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">310 Blackpool North & Cleveleys (7/4)</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">320 Rossendale & Darwen (2/1)</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">326 Aberconwy (9/4)</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">I last looked at the Labour position in October here:</span><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="color: #0000ee; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><u><a href="http://newstonoone.blogspot.co.uk/2014/10/the-labour-battleground-in-october-2014.html">http://newstonoone.blogspot.co.uk/2014/10/the-labour-battleground-in-october-2014.html</a></u></span></div>
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">What has changed? In the intervening months, the markets have become much more competitive. We have many new entrants to the seats markets, with at least 14 different firms quoting on some or all of the different constituencies. Prices have generally improved in aggregate and there are numerous seats where there is a practical underround (those who wish to seek out low risk double bets may wish to study these lists carefully). A slight deterioration in the best price for a party may signify nothing more than a new entrant to the market.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">But the glacier of safe Scottish Labour seats has melted. All 41 Scottish Labour seats are far less safe than they were in October. Some seats that were so safe in October that they were not even listed then are now odds against for Labour. This has made Labour's task much harder.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Otherwise, the seat markets have moved predominantly in response to constituency polls (and then often not by as much as one might have expected).</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Anyway, back to the present day. </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">5/6, the price on Labour for Harrow East, is sometimes referred to as the bookies' evens (reflecting their need to build in a margin to make a profit), so it seems that the current central expected point for Labour is between 265 and 270. </span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">For an overall majority, Labour would need 326 seats. The 326th seat is Aberconwy, for which Labour are priced at 9/4. </span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">As of this morning, you can get 41/1 with Betfair (with good volumes of money at 33/1) on the proposition that Labour will get an overall majority. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">That means one of two things. Either the bookies' prices on the constituencies are ridiculously mean or the impact of how Labour will perform in individual constituencies has not been properly factored into the overall markets. The two are not mutually exclusive, of course.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">It's less clear how many seats would be required for Labour to have most seats. You can get 7/4 with Bet365 on Labour getting most seats and do slightly better even than that on Betfair. You don't start getting prices in the individual constituency markets until you approach the 310 seat mark. 310 would definitely be enough for Labour to have most seats - indeed, 280 might well be enough. </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">So once again, the most seats market offers far better value than the individual constituency markets if you are looking to back Labour.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">So if you want to back Labour, the simplest strategy by far must be to ignore the constituency markets and instead to back Labour in the most seats market (and, if you so wish, the overall majority market). I've been following this strategy for some time.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">However, it is now worth considering whether to place some short term low risk bets on Labour in their safer seats. 2/7 in Newcastle-under-Lyme and 1/5 in Ashfield (where the previous dynamic Lib Dem candidate had to stand down in the worst circumstances) both look good, with UKIP apparently fading in their more distant prospects if other polling is to be believed. I'm on both. I haven't detected a Plaid Cymru surge, so I'm backing Labour at 1/8 in Llanelli also. The rates of return seem well worth the increased risk over bank rates to me.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Tomorrow I shall look at the markets from the Conservatives' perspective. </span></div>
Alastairhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11551605492626333385noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1654731161334089375.post-47857168896763928182015-03-30T10:39:00.001+01:002015-04-15T16:00:54.819+01:00The range of possibilities: how the constituency markets look in aggregate in March<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">In late November I had a look at how the constituency markets were assessing the parties' chances in aggregate - not just by looking at how the favourites stacked up in aggregate but also at how many seats in aggregate were in practice in play:</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<a href="http://newstonoone.blogspot.co.uk/2014/11/conventional-wisdom-on-next-election.html"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">http://newstonoone.blogspot.co.uk/2014/11/conventional-wisdom-on-next-election.html</span></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">I thought it was about time, on the eve of the campaign, to look at this again. Here are the aggregates of the best prices favourites on the seat markets:</span></div>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Conservatives 275</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Labour 278</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Lib Dems 31</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">SNP 40</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">UKIP 3</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Plaid Cymru 3</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Greens 1</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Respect 1</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">DUP 9</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">SDLP 3</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Sinn Fein 5</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Lady Sylvia Hermon 1</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">We now have Northern Irish seats, so we have a full house. I have treated the Speaker's seat as being in the Conservative column, though different "most seats" markets treat his seat differently, so check this.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Since the end of November, the SNP have risen dramatically in the best-guess seat tally. Correspondingly, Labour have dropped substantially. </span><span style="font-family: Arial;">Interestingly, the polls haven't actually changed much since December. Sentiment has changed. It seems to be a dawning realisation that the Scottish polls reflect an underlying reality.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Otherwise, the aggregate of the favourites has stayed very stable. That is also interesting, because the constituency markets assume a level of recovery by the Conservatives and the Lib Dems which doesn't so far seem to be happening.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">As you can see, both main parties are thought to be quite a long way from an overall majority. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Just as importantly, Labour are thought to be slightly ahead of the Conservatives in the battle for most seats. Even if you take the view, as I do, that the seat markets still underestimate the SNP's chances in Scotland, the two main parties are neck and neck. You'd never guess that from the "Most Seats" market, where Labour can be backed on Betfair as of this morning at 2/1. This price is crazy and backing Labour heavily on the Most Seats market should be an essential part of any portfolio of political bets.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">How stable is that projected outcome?</span></b></div>
<b></b><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">As before, I've looked at how strongly fancied the favourite is. And as before, I've worked on the basis that i</span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">f there is a second favourite at or below 2/1, this is a true marginal. I've presented the results in a tabular format, with the parties' range shown below:</span></div>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">
</span><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">
<a href="https://docs.google.com/document/d/1o_021oOlU0YpvApb62zBI0MGVNXdaH3G3YppG8JYFMM/edit?usp=sharing">https://docs.google.com/document/d/1o_021oOlU0YpvApb62zBI0MGVNXdaH3G3YppG8JYFMM/edit?usp=sharing</a></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span> </div>
<div class="Body" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 12pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">And again we see a substantial change from late November in both the Labour and the SNP columns. The Conservative band has edged up slightly, but the Labour band has shifted down roughly 20 seats. Meanwhile, the SNP band has moved forward by roughly 15 seats.</span></div>
<div class="Body" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 12pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">The consequence is that even at the outer edges of this measure of the parties' safe seats and marginals, neither party will get to an overall majority. Neither party looks very likely to get to 300 seats - everything within this bound of probability would have to come right for the Conservatives for that to happen for them and most things within this bound of probability would have to come right for Labour for that to happen for them.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">For those that are interested, here are the Northern Irish seats presented on this basis:</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><table border="1" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="MsoTableGrid" style="border-collapse: collapse; border: currentColor; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-padding-alt: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-yfti-tbllook: 1184;"><tbody>
<tr style="mso-yfti-firstrow: yes; mso-yfti-irow: 0;"><td style="background-color: transparent; border: 1pt solid windowtext; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt; width: 76.3pt;" valign="top" width="102"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><br />
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; text-align: center;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;"><o:p> </o:p></span></b></div>
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span></td><td style="background-color: transparent; border-color: windowtext windowtext windowtext rgb(0, 0, 0); border-style: solid solid solid none; border-width: 1pt 1pt 1pt 0px; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt; width: 77.95pt;" valign="top" width="104"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><br />
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; text-align: center;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;">DUP <o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span></td><td style="background-color: transparent; border-color: windowtext windowtext windowtext rgb(0, 0, 0); border-style: solid solid solid none; border-width: 1pt 1pt 1pt 0px; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt; width: 70.9pt;" valign="top" width="95"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><br />
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; text-align: center;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;">SDLP<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span></td><td style="background-color: transparent; border-color: windowtext windowtext windowtext rgb(0, 0, 0); border-style: solid solid solid none; border-width: 1pt 1pt 1pt 0px; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt; width: 3cm;" valign="top" width="113"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><br />
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; text-align: center;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;">Sinn Fein<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span></td><td style="background-color: transparent; border-color: windowtext windowtext windowtext rgb(0, 0, 0); border-style: solid solid solid none; border-width: 1pt 1pt 1pt 0px; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt; width: 3cm;" valign="top" width="113"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><br />
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; text-align: center;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;">UUP<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span></td><td style="background-color: transparent; border-color: windowtext windowtext windowtext rgb(0, 0, 0); border-style: solid solid solid none; border-width: 1pt 1pt 1pt 0px; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt; width: 77.95pt;" valign="top" width="104"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><br />
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; text-align: center;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;">Independent<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span></td></tr>
<tr style="mso-yfti-irow: 1;"><td style="background-color: transparent; border-color: rgb(0, 0, 0) windowtext windowtext; border-style: none solid solid; border-width: 0px 1pt 1pt; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt; width: 76.3pt;" valign="top" width="102"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><br />
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; text-align: center;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;">DUP<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span></td><td style="background-color: transparent; border-color: rgb(0, 0, 0) windowtext windowtext rgb(0, 0, 0); border-style: none solid solid none; border-width: 0px 1pt 1pt 0px; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt; width: 77.95pt;" valign="top" width="104"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><br />
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;">8<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span></td><td style="background-color: transparent; border-color: rgb(0, 0, 0) windowtext windowtext rgb(0, 0, 0); border-style: none solid solid none; border-width: 0px 1pt 1pt 0px; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt; width: 70.9pt;" valign="top" width="95"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><br />
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;">1<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span></td><td style="background-color: transparent; border-color: rgb(0, 0, 0) windowtext windowtext rgb(0, 0, 0); border-style: none solid solid none; border-width: 0px 1pt 1pt 0px; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt; width: 3cm;" valign="top" width="113"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><br />
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;">0<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span></td><td style="background-color: transparent; border-color: rgb(0, 0, 0) windowtext windowtext rgb(0, 0, 0); border-style: none solid solid none; border-width: 0px 1pt 1pt 0px; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt; width: 3cm;" valign="top" width="113"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><br />
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;">1<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span></td><td style="background-color: transparent; border-color: rgb(0, 0, 0) windowtext windowtext rgb(0, 0, 0); border-style: none solid solid none; border-width: 0px 1pt 1pt 0px; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt; width: 77.95pt;" valign="top" width="104"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><br />
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;">0<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span></td></tr>
<tr style="mso-yfti-irow: 2;"><td style="background-color: transparent; border-color: rgb(0, 0, 0) windowtext windowtext; border-style: none solid solid; border-width: 0px 1pt 1pt; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt; width: 76.3pt;" valign="top" width="102"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><br />
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; text-align: center;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;">SDLP<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span></td><td style="background-color: transparent; border-color: rgb(0, 0, 0) windowtext windowtext rgb(0, 0, 0); border-style: none solid solid none; border-width: 0px 1pt 1pt 0px; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt; width: 77.95pt;" valign="top" width="104"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><br />
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;">1<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span></td><td style="background-color: transparent; border-color: rgb(0, 0, 0) windowtext windowtext rgb(0, 0, 0); border-style: none solid solid none; border-width: 0px 1pt 1pt 0px; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt; width: 70.9pt;" valign="top" width="95"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><br />
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;">2<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span></td><td style="background-color: transparent; border-color: rgb(0, 0, 0) windowtext windowtext rgb(0, 0, 0); border-style: none solid solid none; border-width: 0px 1pt 1pt 0px; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt; width: 3cm;" valign="top" width="113"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><br />
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;">0<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span></td><td style="background-color: transparent; border-color: rgb(0, 0, 0) windowtext windowtext rgb(0, 0, 0); border-style: none solid solid none; border-width: 0px 1pt 1pt 0px; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt; width: 3cm;" valign="top" width="113"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><br />
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;">0<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span></td><td style="background-color: transparent; border-color: rgb(0, 0, 0) windowtext windowtext rgb(0, 0, 0); border-style: none solid solid none; border-width: 0px 1pt 1pt 0px; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt; width: 77.95pt;" valign="top" width="104"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><br />
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;">0<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span></td></tr>
<tr style="mso-yfti-irow: 3;"><td style="background-color: transparent; border-color: rgb(0, 0, 0) windowtext windowtext; border-style: none solid solid; border-width: 0px 1pt 1pt; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt; width: 76.3pt;" valign="top" width="102"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><br />
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; text-align: center;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;">Sinn Fein<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span></td><td style="background-color: transparent; border-color: rgb(0, 0, 0) windowtext windowtext rgb(0, 0, 0); border-style: none solid solid none; border-width: 0px 1pt 1pt 0px; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt; width: 77.95pt;" valign="top" width="104"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><br />
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;">0<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span></td><td style="background-color: transparent; border-color: rgb(0, 0, 0) windowtext windowtext rgb(0, 0, 0); border-style: none solid solid none; border-width: 0px 1pt 1pt 0px; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt; width: 70.9pt;" valign="top" width="95"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><br />
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;">0<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span></td><td style="background-color: transparent; border-color: rgb(0, 0, 0) windowtext windowtext rgb(0, 0, 0); border-style: none solid solid none; border-width: 0px 1pt 1pt 0px; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt; width: 3cm;" valign="top" width="113"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><br />
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;">4<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span></td><td style="background-color: transparent; border-color: rgb(0, 0, 0) windowtext windowtext rgb(0, 0, 0); border-style: none solid solid none; border-width: 0px 1pt 1pt 0px; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt; width: 3cm;" valign="top" width="113"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><br />
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;">1<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span></td><td style="background-color: transparent; border-color: rgb(0, 0, 0) windowtext windowtext rgb(0, 0, 0); border-style: none solid solid none; border-width: 0px 1pt 1pt 0px; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt; width: 77.95pt;" valign="top" width="104"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><br />
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;">0<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span></td></tr>
<tr style="mso-yfti-irow: 4;"><td style="background-color: transparent; border-color: rgb(0, 0, 0) windowtext windowtext; border-style: none solid solid; border-width: 0px 1pt 1pt; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt; width: 76.3pt;" valign="top" width="102"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><br />
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; text-align: center;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;">Independent<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span></td><td style="background-color: transparent; border-color: rgb(0, 0, 0) windowtext windowtext rgb(0, 0, 0); border-style: none solid solid none; border-width: 0px 1pt 1pt 0px; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt; width: 77.95pt;" valign="top" width="104"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><br />
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;">0<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span></td><td style="background-color: transparent; border-color: rgb(0, 0, 0) windowtext windowtext rgb(0, 0, 0); border-style: none solid solid none; border-width: 0px 1pt 1pt 0px; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt; width: 70.9pt;" valign="top" width="95"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><br />
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;">0<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span></td><td style="background-color: transparent; border-color: rgb(0, 0, 0) windowtext windowtext rgb(0, 0, 0); border-style: none solid solid none; border-width: 0px 1pt 1pt 0px; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt; width: 3cm;" valign="top" width="113"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><br />
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;">0<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span></td><td style="background-color: transparent; border-color: rgb(0, 0, 0) windowtext windowtext rgb(0, 0, 0); border-style: none solid solid none; border-width: 0px 1pt 1pt 0px; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt; width: 3cm;" valign="top" width="113"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><br />
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;">0<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span></td><td style="background-color: transparent; border-color: rgb(0, 0, 0) windowtext windowtext rgb(0, 0, 0); border-style: none solid solid none; border-width: 0px 1pt 1pt 0px; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt; width: 77.95pt;" valign="top" width="104"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><br />
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;">1<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span></td></tr>
<tr style="mso-yfti-irow: 5;"><td style="background-color: transparent; border-color: rgb(0, 0, 0) windowtext windowtext; border-style: none solid solid; border-width: 0px 1pt 1pt; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt; width: 76.3pt;" valign="top" width="102"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><br />
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; text-align: center;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;">UUP<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span></td><td style="background-color: transparent; border-color: rgb(0, 0, 0) windowtext windowtext rgb(0, 0, 0); border-style: none solid solid none; border-width: 0px 1pt 1pt 0px; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt; width: 77.95pt;" valign="top" width="104"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><br />
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;">1<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span></td><td style="background-color: transparent; border-color: rgb(0, 0, 0) windowtext windowtext rgb(0, 0, 0); border-style: none solid solid none; border-width: 0px 1pt 1pt 0px; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt; width: 70.9pt;" valign="top" width="95"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><br />
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;">0<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span></td><td style="background-color: transparent; border-color: rgb(0, 0, 0) windowtext windowtext rgb(0, 0, 0); border-style: none solid solid none; border-width: 0px 1pt 1pt 0px; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt; width: 3cm;" valign="top" width="113"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><br />
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;">1<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span></td><td style="background-color: transparent; border-color: rgb(0, 0, 0) windowtext windowtext rgb(0, 0, 0); border-style: none solid solid none; border-width: 0px 1pt 1pt 0px; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt; width: 3cm;" valign="top" width="113"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><br />
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;">0<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span></td><td style="background-color: transparent; border-color: rgb(0, 0, 0) windowtext windowtext rgb(0, 0, 0); border-style: none solid solid none; border-width: 0px 1pt 1pt 0px; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt; width: 77.95pt;" valign="top" width="104"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><br />
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;">0<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span></td></tr>
<tr style="mso-yfti-irow: 6; mso-yfti-lastrow: yes;"><td style="background-color: transparent; border-color: rgb(0, 0, 0) windowtext windowtext; border-style: none solid solid; border-width: 0px 1pt 1pt; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt; width: 76.3pt;" valign="top" width="102"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><br />
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; text-align: center;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;">Total<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span></td><td style="background-color: transparent; border-color: rgb(0, 0, 0) windowtext windowtext rgb(0, 0, 0); border-style: none solid solid none; border-width: 0px 1pt 1pt 0px; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt; width: 77.95pt;" valign="top" width="104"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><br />
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; text-align: center;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;">8-10<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span></td><td style="background-color: transparent; border-color: rgb(0, 0, 0) windowtext windowtext rgb(0, 0, 0); border-style: none solid solid none; border-width: 0px 1pt 1pt 0px; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt; width: 70.9pt;" valign="top" width="95"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><br />
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; text-align: center;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;">2-3<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span></td><td style="background-color: transparent; border-color: rgb(0, 0, 0) windowtext windowtext rgb(0, 0, 0); border-style: none solid solid none; border-width: 0px 1pt 1pt 0px; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt; width: 3cm;" valign="top" width="113"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><br />
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; text-align: center;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;">4-5<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span></td><td style="background-color: transparent; border-color: rgb(0, 0, 0) windowtext windowtext rgb(0, 0, 0); border-style: none solid solid none; border-width: 0px 1pt 1pt 0px; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt; width: 3cm;" valign="top" width="113"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><br />
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; text-align: center;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;">0-2<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span></td><td style="background-color: transparent; border-color: rgb(0, 0, 0) windowtext windowtext rgb(0, 0, 0); border-style: none solid solid none; border-width: 0px 1pt 1pt 0px; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt; width: 77.95pt;" valign="top" width="104"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><br />
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; text-align: center;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;">1<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<br />
</span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">These will not affect the outcome of the main battle, of course.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<strong><span style="font-family: Arial;">Taking a broader view of what makes a marginal</span></strong><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Let's push the boundaries further.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">As previously, I've also had a look at the position if we use the test of marginality as a seat having a second favourite that is priced at 5/1 or less. This table is complicated by the presence of 13 three way marginals (hence the extra row).</span></div>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><o:p><span style="font-size: x-small;"> </span></o:p></b></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><o:p><a href="https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GVCbP7pn701XM-uOhJH7HL3QMYBFpDjr5RDP2BNTaMQ/edit?usp=sharing">https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GVCbP7pn701XM-uOhJH7HL3QMYBFpDjr5RDP2BNTaMQ/edit?usp=sharing</a></o:p></span><br />
<div class="Body" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 12pt;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: 17px; font-weight: normal; text-align: justify;"></span></span></b></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: 17px; font-weight: normal; text-align: justify;">(The independent is Claire Wright in East Devon, who is a localist environmental type, who has apparently been quite fancied at the bookies.)</span></span></b></span></div>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">
</span></b></span><div class="Body" style="display: inline !important; margin: 0cm 0cm 12pt;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><b style="font-size: 17px;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: 17px; font-weight: normal; text-align: justify;">The ranges of outcomes are now much wider than when I used a 2/1 cut-off for assessing marginals, but these wider ranges barely differ from late November. The betting public aren't </span><em style="font-size: 17px; font-weight: normal; text-align: justify;">that </em><span style="font-size: 17px; font-weight: normal; text-align: justify;">sure of the SNP's chances. </span></span></b></span></b></span></div>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">
</span></b></span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: Arial;"><div class="Body" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 12pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">This
stability of range is itself noteworthy. These markets aren't shifting
very much.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I haven't changed my views on
the question of how correlated the results in different constituencies will
be. In my opinion, the answer is different for different parties.
The SNP will see very correlated results, since the election in Scotland is
either going to be all about their turf (as seems likely right now) or Labour will
have reframed it to some extent on UK-wide terms. At the other extreme,
Labour and the Conservatives are fighting multiple different battles and so the
correlation will be much less. To get a fuller version of my views on
this subject, I went into this in much more detail last time, so have a look at the link at the top of the page if you want.</span><br />
<div class="body" style="margin: 1em 0cm; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">Again,
for those that are interested, here are the Northern Irish seats presented on
this basis:</span></div>
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";"><a href="https://docs.google.com/document/d/1EVhvEvf3wZDQmJbF55wNavDpAHUMRn0n6Jf5GGyPSwA/edit?usp=sharing"><span style="color: blue;">https://docs.google.com/document/d/1EVhvEvf3wZDQmJbF55wNavDpAHUMRn0n6Jf5GGyPSwA/edit?usp=sharing</span></a><o:p></o:p></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">It is a more stable position than the rest of the UK, even at this level of marginality.</span></div>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><strong>Conclusions</strong></span><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
If the seat markets are to be believed, there is only a slim chance of either main party achieving an overall majority. Even on the most generous interpretation of what makes a marginal, each main party is going to have to get close to taking everything thought to be in play to get there. <br />
<br />
Incidentally, it would be nice to be able to produce a neat graph which shows the exact implied probabilities of a hung Parliament, but the degree to which the results in individual constituencies will be correlated is uncertain, so it will be a matter of guesswork rather than science.<br />
<br />
Are the seat markets to be believed? Good question. Two considerations push me in opposite directions. <br />
<br />
On the one hand, the two main parties have been regularly polling in the low 30s in the national polls. On those national vote shares the winners in many seats will do so on relatively low local vote shares, meaning that the winners may be considerably less predictable at an individual level than the constituency markets suggest. (The corollary to that is that some of the odds against shots may well offer good value.) Set against that, the unpredictability is quite likely to cancel out to a considerable extent at an aggregate level.<br />
<br />
So on balance I probably do believe the overall story of the seat markets. That leads me to three conclusions:<br />
<br />
1) Don't bet against a hung Parliament unless you get long odds.<br />
2) Labour most seats is a terrific value bet at 2/1.<br />
3) Since the Conservatives look unlikely to get above 300 seats (I'd guess at least 3/1), the next Government is very likely to be a Labour-led government. Lay David Cameron as Prime Minister after the next election at anything close to, or even not very close to, current prices. He's odds on at present to keep his job. This is a crazy price. Enjoy.</div>
</span><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><o:p><span style="font-size: x-small;">
</span><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
</o:p><div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
</b><div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="Body" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 12pt; text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div class="Body" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 12pt; text-align: justify;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><o:p><span style="font-size: x-small;"></span></o:p></b> </div>
<div class="Body" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 12pt; text-align: justify;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><o:p><span style="font-size: x-small;"></span></o:p></b> </div>
<div class="Body" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 12pt; text-align: justify;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><o:p><span style="font-size: x-small;"></span></o:p></b> </div>
</span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">
</span><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span></div>
Alastairhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11551605492626333385noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1654731161334089375.post-56697418479794817512015-03-23T18:55:00.001+00:002015-04-15T16:00:23.466+01:00Laugh about it, shout about it, when you've got to choose: who is going to win the candidates' debate?<div align="justify">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">So we are going to get some debates after all. After what seems like endless faffing about, we are getting the following format:</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-32001383"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-32001383</span></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<ul>
<li><div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><strong>26 <span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">March:</span></strong></span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> Live question and answer programme on Channel 4
and Sky News featuring David Cameron and Ed Miliband, presented by Jeremy Paxman
and Kay Burley</span></div>
</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li><div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><strong>2 April:</strong> Debate with seven party leaders on ITV, moderated
by Julie Etchingham</span></div>
</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li><div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><strong>16 April: </strong>Debate between five opposition party leaders on
the BBC, moderated by David Dimbleby</span></div>
</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li><div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><strong>30 April:</strong> BBC Question Time programme with David Cameron,
Ed Miliband and Nick Clegg, presented by David Dimbleby</span></div>
</li>
</ul>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">You don't have to be particularly keen-eyed to realise that there are in fact only two debates in this, and David Cameron features in only one, on 2 April. I can think of better ways of spending the evening of Maundy Thursday than watching a debate (I'll be on a plane when it takes place, as it happens). But that doesn't stop me considering the betting implications, and Ladbrokes do have a market on this:</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<a href="http://sportsbeta.ladbrokes.com/TV-Debates/7-Way-Live-TV-Debate/Politics-N-1z124w7Z1z0ql15Z1z141ng/"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">http://sportsbeta.ladbrokes.com/TV-Debates/7-Way-Live-TV-Debate/Politics-N-1z124w7Z1z0ql15Z1z141ng/</span></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">So, who is going to win? </span></div>
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><strong><span style="font-family: Arial;">Constraints of the system</span></strong></span></div>
<span style="font-family: Arial;">
</span><span style="font-family: Arial;"> </span><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-family: Arial;">In a seven-way debate, participants have a limited number of messages that they can major on, bearing in mind the time that they have available and the time that others will spend trying to counteract their messages. So each leader will need to consider carefully what they are going to try to achieve in that limited time. How are they going to decide what to say and do? For this we need to get mathematical.</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<strong><span style="font-family: Arial;">Game theory</span></strong><br />
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Among Janos von Neumann's many achievements (including helping to inspire the film Dr Strangelove) was the foundation of game theory. In that area of mathematics, we regularly encounter the truel - a three-way duel of the type seen in The Good, The Bad And The Ugly. Apparently weaker gunslingers are disproportionately likely to win because the stronger gunslingers need to focus their fire on each other.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">This time we have a seven-way duel (a heptuel?). Perhaps disappointingly, they will all be standing physically at the end of the process and every participant will get multiple shots. How is that going to pan out? We need to consider in turn the strength of the various shootists and their objectives. Because the party leaders aren't all aiming for the same thing and they have different starting positions.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">As with the truel, this heptuel features gunslingers of differing strengths. I see them falling into three categories: the main contenders (David Cameron and Ed Miliband); the outsiders (Nigel Farage, Leanne Wood, Natalie Bennett and Nicola Sturgeon); and Nick Clegg. In many ways, Nick Clegg throws up by far the most interesting problems, as we shall see.</span></div>
<span style="font-family: Arial;">
</span>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Better brains than me will be crunching the mathematics, but we can make do with a debased version. As we shall see, this is a most peculiar heptuel.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><strong>The party leaders' aims and capabilities</strong></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><strong></strong></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">First, let us consider what each party leader is going to aim for and how capable they are of achieving that aim. The order will seem a little strange, and there is an element of iteration, but bear with me.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><u>Ed Miliband</u></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><u></u></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Ed Miliband needs the public to take a fresh look at him. He is the single greatest impediment to his party's chances. He therefore needs to come across as fluent and thoughtful, and to hold his own with David Cameron.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">In the absence of intervening factors, I would expect him to have a very decent chance of achieving this. He is intelligent and when not being tormented by the press reasonably likeable. Set against that, he is undeniably nerdy and can get bogged down in detail. He can also be slow to realise when he needs to change tack once things have turned in an unexpected direction.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">As I shall explain below, however, he has a major problem in this format that hasn't been fully appreciated yet.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><u></u></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><u>David Cameron</u></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><u></u></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Conversely, David Cameron's chief opponent is Ed Miliband. He needs to be seen to have decisively beaten him so that the public don't take a second look at him. The Conservatives' one clear advantage over Labour is in their leaders, so they cannot afford to have that advantage eroded.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">In the absence of intervening factors, this would be a fairly stiff challenge for David Cameron, given that Ed Miliband can be more capable and personable than the public appreciates. That said, David Cameron looks and sounds the part of a leader, is an experienced debater and in a crowded field that is unlikely to be eroded unless he makes a serious blunder.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">What David Cameron does not have time to do is challenge properly Nigel Farage's assertions about him. Eagles don't have the time to strain at gnats. This means that he is very vulnerable to an attack on the anti-immigrant flank.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><u>Nigel Farage</u></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><u></u></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Nigel Farage has a very simple task: to go after the votes of David Cameron's grumpy right wing. He will do so by labelling all the other parties as the same and having no real answer to the problem of immigration. He will be positioning himself as bluff and plain-speaking.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">He has excellent chances in the absence of intervening factors of achieving this. He was perceived to have done well in the debates with Nick Clegg before the Euro-elections and neither Ed Miliband nor David Cameron have the time to be attacking him with any great zeal. He may well have the coast clear to make his points (though perhaps not, as I shall explain below).</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><u>Natalie Bennett, Leanne Wood and Nicola Sturgeon</u></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><u></u></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Why have I grouped these three together? Because they group themselves together:</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><a href="http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/mar/06/green-party-talks-alliance-snp-plaid-cymru-caroline-lucas-labour-coalition">http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/mar/06/green-party-talks-alliance-snp-plaid-cymru-caroline-lucas-labour-coalition</a></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><a href="http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/dec/16/snp-plaid-cymru-greens-join-forces-austerity-election">http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/dec/16/snp-plaid-cymru-greens-join-forces-austerity-election</a></span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Effectively they are respectively the English, Welsh and Scottish wings of anti-austerity parties (the Greens operate in all three countries but de facto are going to be competitive only in England). They have at the debates the identical purpose of taking a big anti-austerity bite out of Ed Miliband's left flank.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">And, critically, together they have three times as much firepower as everyone else in the debate. Natalie Bennett has not exactly impressed as a political figure, but Nicola Sturgeon in particular is formidable. Between the three of them, they are going to attract a lot of attention. They will have the wind behind them from the start.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">From Ed Miliband's viewpoint, this is a disaster. Half of all the voices against him are going to be virulently anti-austerity. Either he is going to have to spend some of his time rebutting them, time that he would otherwise be spending attacking David Cameron, or he is going to have to let this attack go unchallenged. He's really going to struggle to avoid being spread way too thinly.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Labour might not have been able to avoid it, but this is a really poor format for them.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span> </div>
<span style="font-family: Arial;">
</span>
<u><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Nick Clegg</span></u><br />
<u><span style="font-family: Arial;"></span></u><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Nick Clegg is in a unique position. His best source of votes is from those potentially opposed to the Conservatives. So he will need to find ways to pile into David Cameron.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">He is likely to be disregarded by almost everyone else because of his remarkable unpopularity - you don't kick a dead dog. But he is the leader of a party of government. He needs the public to take a second look at him - to that extent the format is really bad for him, because he risks getting lost in the mix.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">That means that he needs to do something unexpected that will attract attention. The Lib Dems have already shown that they appreciate the need for this with the much-derided Yellow Box stunt after the budget:</span></div>
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/81796000/jpg/_81796245_yesllowbox_reuters.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/81796000/jpg/_81796245_yesllowbox_reuters.jpg" height="179" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">That didn't work, and the Lib Dems are going to need to do something more. What could Nick Clegg do in the debates to attract (positive) attention?</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">The odds are stacked against Nick Clegg from the start, so he needs to find someone in the room to attack aggressively that people that he would hope might be "his" people would enjoy seeing attacked. David Cameron registers for that purpose, but that is already priced in. </span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Nick Clegg needs to shake things up more than that, to be a wildcard. Otherwise, he is going down quietly to crushing defeat. He may well be defeated anyway, but he should at least go down fighting.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">He might think about really laying into Nigel Farage. </span><span style="font-family: Arial;">The advantage of doing so in this format is that Nigel Farage will really not want to waste much time on Nick Clegg (who is already roadkill) when he could be using his valuable time on David Cameron. Progressives would love to see Nigel Farage on the back foot, and the warmth from that might help Nick Clegg. He was judged by the public to have lost the debates against Nigel Farage last year, but that was one on one. You don't have to be the biggest bruiser to get a vicious jab in when you're in a confused melée.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Or he might try something entirely different. </span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">I don't expect Nick Clegg to win the debate. Too much water has flowed under the bridge since his debating triumph in 2010. But he's an experienced debater and will make a dramatic contribution: he needs to. I just don't know what that contribution will be.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<strong><span style="font-family: Arial;">Judging the heptuel</span></strong></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<strong><span style="font-family: Arial;"></span></strong><br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">If the contest was to be judged by the commentariat, Nigel Farage wouldn't stand a chance. But the contest will be judged by pollsters, and their respondents have a habit of seeing things quite differently.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">It is human nature to regard the leader of your preferred party. This gives David Cameron and Ed Miliband a headstart. Equally, it is human nature to have one's expectations confirmed. This gives David Cameron and Nigel Farage a headstart.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">The fourth serious contender must be Nicola Sturgeon, as leader of the anti-austerity trio. She is unlikely to come under sustained attack from anyone and in any case is a very capable and personable presenter of arguments.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">In a seven-way contest, the winner doesn't need to get that high a share of the vote. It's more likely than not that the winner will get no more than 30% of the vote and possibly less.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Given the strategic pressures that Ed Miliband will come under in the debate, I'm not expecting him to break through. Battling both the anti-austerity trio and David Cameron from opposite positions is just too tough. At 3/1 he looks way too short to me. </span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Nicola Sturgeon is worth considering at 8/1 since she is a confident speaker who will not come under much fire, but I'm doubtful whether non-Scots will be receptive to the SNP badge. 8/1 is fair value but no more for me.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Nigel Farage has to stand an excellent chance. He is hated by many but adored by many too. There will be no tactical voting in this contest, so the Faragistas will ensure that he is in serious contention. Only if he slips up seriously will he fall out of contention. But at 2/1 he's just a bit too short to be fanciable for me.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">The format, however, favours familiarity. David Cameron is well-known and well-liked, and so long as he doesn't say anything absurd, offensive or patronising, his own loyal cadre of supporters will ensure that he is there or thereabouts. 4/1 looks like a very good price for the most familiar and experienced candidate. I'm on.</span></div>
Alastairhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11551605492626333385noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1654731161334089375.post-17824439367597780852015-03-17T13:00:00.000+00:002015-04-15T16:00:15.366+01:00Party games: constructing the next government<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Everyone has their own pet theories about what the next government
will look like.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I've already had one
look at this in early December:</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">
</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://newstonoone.blogspot.co.uk/2014/12/the-next-government-picking-through.html">http://newstonoone.blogspot.co.uk/2014/12/the-next-government-picking-through.html</a></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span> </div>
<div class="Body" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 12pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">I am still following the same general approach, but the numbers
need quite a bit of updating, which in turn changes the dynamics. We've had a few more statements of intent from the various political parties, which need decoding. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>So my thinking
has moved on a bit.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<strong><span style="font-family: Arial;">A game of consequences</span></strong><br />
<strong><span style="font-family: Arial;"></span></strong><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">In my previous post on the subject, I looked at the various parties' positions. Not much has changed here and the underlying dynamics remain the same. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Labour yesterday explicitly ruled out a coalition with the SNP (though not a supply and confidence arrangement). UKIP has become firmer about not entering a coalition with the Conservatives:</span><br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/nigel-farage/11467020/This-is-my-deal-Mr-Cameron-an-immediate-EU-referendum-where-my-German-wife-is-banned-from-voting.html"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/nigel-farage/11467020/This-is-my-deal-Mr-Cameron-an-immediate-EU-referendum-where-my-German-wife-is-banned-from-voting.html</span></a><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">"First, would UKIP wish to form a formal coalition with the Tories? The answer is no. We are radicals; we want real change to help Britain get back self-governance and self-confidence. There are many other areas where we can make a contribution. But I have no desire to swap the short-term privilege of a ministerial car for everything that we have fought for. I would look to do a deal where we would back key votes for them – such as the Budget – but in return for very specific criteria on an EU referendum."</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">This logic would seem to apply equally to deals with Labour, though Nigel Farage avoided commenting on this.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<strong><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">What does that leave us with?</span></strong><br />
<strong><span style="font-family: Arial;"></span></strong><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">When you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth. Donning my deerstalker (though without the aid of cocaine), I can identify the following possible outcomes:</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">1) Labour majority government</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">2) Conservative majority government</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">3) Labour-Lib Dem coalition - not necessarily a majority coalition</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">4) Conservative-Lib Dem coalition - not necessarily a majority coalition</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">5) Labour minority government (with or without explicit confidence and supply from other parties)</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">6) Conservative minority government (with or without explicit confidence and supply from other parties)</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">7) Grand coalition</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">That, or we're being lied to by one or more of the ensemble. But I'm a trusting soul and I put my trust in them all. </span><span style="font-family: Arial;">If you back all of these options at best prices in appropriate proportions, you can get a return in two months of 10%. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">There are three risks in this. First, one or more politicians may indeed eat their words, or may be replaced by others with different approaches. Secondly, you may have arguments with bookies about some of these bets - do the coalition options include minority coalitions? They should, but it's worth checking in advance. Thirdly, I have treated as "impossible" coalitions that involve parties such as the DUP, the Greens and Plaid Cymru. You could find your bets losing on this basis (though that really would be bad luck).</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">So on balance, I don't particularly recommend backing all of the above possibilities indiscriminately, but choosing a bit more carefully. So let's go further and look at how the numbers are currently adding up.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<strong><span style="font-family: Arial;">The current par result<o:p></o:p></span></strong><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<strong><span style="font-family: Arial;"></span></strong><br /></div>
<div class="Body" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 12pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Since early December, the Conservatives have strengthened a bit in the markets, Labour has weakened a bit more and the SNP have strengthened a lot.</span></div>
<div class="Body" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 12pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">This morning, Sporting Index had the following midpoint prices: </span></div>
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="markets"><span class="markets">Conservative <span class="markets">Seats 284</span></span></span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="markets"><span class="markets"><span class="markets">Labour Seats 269</span></span></span></span></span><br />
<div class="show" key="MM4.uk.174118758" meetingkey="mm4.uk.meeting.4888412" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="markets"><span class="markets"><span class="markets">SNP Seats 42</span></span></span></span></span></div>
<div class="show" key="MM4.uk.174118758" meetingkey="mm4.uk.meeting.4888412" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="markets"><span class="markets">Liberal Democrats Seats 26</span></span></span></span></div>
<div class="show" key="MM4.uk.174118758" meetingkey="mm4.uk.meeting.4888412" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="markets"><span class="markets"></span>UKIP Seats 8</span></span></span></div>
<div class="show" key="MM4.uk.174118759" meetingkey="mm4.uk.meeting.4888412" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="markets">Green Party Seats 1.5</span></span></span></div>
<div class="show" key="MM4.uk.174118760" meetingkey="mm4.uk.meeting.4888412" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="markets">Plaid Cymru Seats 3.3</span></span></span></div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Compiling the current favourites in the individual constituency markets would not get you to a very different point (though it should be noted that this totals nearly three more than the 631 seats in Parliament for constituencies outside northern Ireland).</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">The models based on the polls are coming in thick and fast, and in general they are broadly in line with the markets, though the SNP are generally forecast by pundits to do better than the markets currently envisage. </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">As of 13 March, May2015 predicted the following result:</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br /></div>
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B__pNFBWoAAM-qV.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="342" src="https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B__pNFBWoAAM-qV.png" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
<div>
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Polling Observatory, unusually, forecast that Labour will get most seats:</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /><a href="http://may2015.com/featured/election-2015-academics-predict-labour-will-win-20-more-seats-than-tories-and-form-next-government/">http://may2015.com/featured/election-2015-academics-predict-labour-will-win-20-more-seats-than-tories-and-form-next-government/</a><br /><br />Their forecast yesterday was:<br /><br />Labour — 285 (260-313)<br />Tories — 265 (235-293)<br />SNP — 49 (34-56)<br />Lib Dem — 24 (17-33)<br />Ukip — 3 (1-5)</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Others — 6 (4-9)</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">The May2015 forecast is more in line with the predictions of most other forecasters at present. Mind you, Polling Observatory may be right - just because they're out of line with the consensus doesn't mean they're wrong.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><strong>What would these figures mean?</strong></span><br />
<strong><span style="font-family: Arial;"></span></strong><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">For the moment, I'll work off the May2015 numbers. These, in common with most of the pundits' projections, show that not only should we expect a hung Parliament but the only combinations of two parties to command a majority in Parliament are (1) Conservatives plus SNP and (2) Conservatives plus Labour. The SNP have explicitly and repeatedly ruled out the first of these, as noted above. The second also looks like a remote prospect, the entreaties of the likes of Lord Baker notwithstanding: neither party looks anywhere near ready for the idea just yet.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">So if we get the par result we look set for a government that is going to be dependent on the support, passive or otherwise, of three or more parties. That sounds like fun. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">In fact on these numbers, the only arrangements of parties that come close to stacking up given the politics involved both require Labour and the SNP to work together, and then either patch up a ragtag army of Plaid Cymru, Respect, Greens and friendly (or bribed) northern Irish politicians or work with the Lib Dems. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Will the SNP vote on English-only matters? This is important. If the SNP are going to abstain on English matters, the practical level of an overall majority reduces to 295, but 55 potentially helpful votes also disappear. Even if Labour can get Plaid Cymru, the Greens, Respect, the SDLP, Lady Sylvia Hermon and the DUP onside, the government still would not have a majority on the May2015 numbers on English-only votes. This remains true even if the SNP take 20 fewer seats from Labour, because the practical level of an overall majority increases at half the rate that Labour rises in the seat count. </span><span style="font-family: Arial;">The Conservatives and the Lib Dems would have a blocking majority in England. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Labour need something like 290 seats as a minimum to be able to disregard the Lib Dems if the SNP are abstaining on English-only matters (more, if they want to avoid being blackmailed by the DUP). </span><span style="font-family: Arial;">So if the SNP aren't going to help on English votes, Labour would need to deal with the Lib Dems.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial;">So that means that there remain two critical questions. First, would the SNP help on English votes? And secondly, if they wouldn't, what would the Lib Dems do?</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><b>The SNP strategy</b></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><b><br /></b></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial;">The SNP's long term aim is no big secret: it wants independence for Scotland. Nicola Sturgeon has named three preconditions for Labour to get its support: no renewal of Trident; more powers for Scotland; and an end to austerity. The first and last of these are practically unacceptable to Labour, as she well knows. So what is she doing?</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Given that the SNP has just suffered a clear referendum defeat, it cannot make that a precondition. But it can use its clout in a hung Parliament to advance that cause. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Nicola Sturgeon has already indicated that the SNP might vote on English matters where they can claim a Scottish interest:</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><a href="http://www.channel4.com/news/nicola-sturgeon-nhs-election-devolution-referendum">http://www.channel4.com/news/nicola-sturgeon-nhs-election-devolution-referendum</a></span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Her pretext:<br /><br />"The current Westminster agenda of austerity, privatisation and patient charging in the NHS in England threatens to harm Scotland's budget, on which our NHS depends.<br /><br />"Therefore, SNP MPs elected in May are prepared to vote for a bill which would restore the national health service in England to the accountable public service it was always meant to be."</span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">This is a fairly screeching handbrake turn from the SNP's previous stance, but makes complete sense from a strategic view. It winds up the English and maximises the destabilisation of the UK-wide government. Note, the SNP are not committed to voting on all English-only laws. But they reserve the right. </span><span style="font-family: Arial;">Nicola Sturgeon is setting up the opportunity to make the SNP as unpredictable as possible and to destabilise the union as much as possible. </span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span> </div>
<div>
<span style="font-family: Arial;">That means that if Labour is to be able to govern reliably on English-only matters, it will need Lib Dem assistance. Will it get it?</span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span> </div>
<div>
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><b>The Lib Dems' next steps</b></span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><b><br /></b></span><span style="font-family: Arial;">The good news for Labour is that the Lib Dems look as though they are likely to be moving leftwards after May, if I am right in my previous deductions:</span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><a href="http://newstonoone.blogspot.co.uk/2015/02/blessed-are-kingmakers-who-will-lib.html">http://newstonoone.blogspot.co.uk/2015/02/blessed-are-kingmakers-who-will-lib.html</a></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial;">But the Lib Dems seem to be getting steadily wobblier about the idea of being in coalition with anyone at all. </span><span style="font-family: Arial;">Vince Cable has pretty much ruled out the possibility of the Lib Dems playing ball with either the SNP or UKIP:</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<a href="http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/mar/13/vince-cable-lib-dem-snp-deal-after-election-inconceivable"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/mar/13/vince-cable-lib-dem-snp-deal-after-election-inconceivable</span></a><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">"He said: “I think it’s inconceivable that we would be getting into tie-ups with the SNP and I would be very surprised if Labour did that but certainly not the Tories.”</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">The business secretary likened a deal with the SNP to working with the UK Independence party. He said: “The same is true of the attitude towards Ukip; they want to take Britain out of the EU which is just as fundamental a constitutional change as – well, almost as fundamental as – membership of the UK, so we take a comparable approach to that.” "</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial;">And the rank and file are potentially unreliable even to their own leadership:</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<a href="http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/mar/15/liberal-democrat-leaders-asked-about-coalition-without-party-approval"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/mar/15/liberal-democrat-leaders-asked-about-coalition-without-party-approval</span></a><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">"Despite the Liberal Democrat campaign focusing on the idea that the party as a moderating force in coalition with either Labour or the Conservative party, sources in the party say they are increasingly worried that a deal with either of the main parties would not achieve the two-thirds of support needed by the membership.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">While there is a lot of anger about the coalition with the Conservative party, “Labour hates us and we hate Labour”, said one source.</span><br />
<br />
<div class="js-ad-slot ad-slot ad-slot--dfp ad-slot--inline1 ad-slot--inline" data-link-name="ad slot inline1" data-mobile-landscape="1,1|300,50|320,50|300,250" data-mobile="1,1|300,50|300,250" data-name="inline1" data-node-uid="16" data-tablet="1,1|300,250" data-test-id="ad-slot-inline1" id="dfp-ad--inline1">
<div class="ad-slot__label" data-test-id="ad-slot-label">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">“[A coalition with either of the main parties] might get through the parliamentary party and the federal executive might have their arms twisted to support it, but the party as a whole would probably reject it.” "</span></div>
</div>
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">But we don't need to get into the Lib Dems' hive mind to work out their preferences. Ultimately, if the Lib Dems are reduced to anything like the 24 seats that May2015 predicts, they will not have enough bodies to form a credible coalition partner. Whether they offer confidence and supply or, more likely, simply deal with Labour on a case-by-case basis, they will probably not form part of the government. They don't look like getting the 35+ MPs they would need to start demanding seats at the table. They will secure what terms they can from Labour to ensure that the nation has a viable government, then find a corner to lick their wounds. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Interestingly, all this logic is still broadly applicable if the Polling Observatory prediction comes true rather than the May2015 prediction: Labour would still need the SNP to commit to vote on English-only laws and it is not in the SNP's interests to be a reliable partner. So Labour will need Lib Dem support, which will probably be given in some tenuous form.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial;">The sum total of all this is that anything reasonably close to what is currently widely seen as the par result will probably result in a Labour minority government.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><b>When do the dynamics change?</b></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><b><br /></b></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Given what the various parties have said and my reading of what's going on, I expect a different dynamic to the ultimate form of government only if:</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial;">1) </span><span style="font-family: Arial;">Labour is greater than 290; or</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">2) Conservatives are greater than 295</span><span style="font-family: Arial;">.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Other possibilities also open up if the Lib Dems get 35 seats or more, UKIP get 20 seats or more or if the SNP fall far short at the last minute. But all of these outcomes now look unlikely, so I'm not factoring them into my thinking. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial;">The first case is not too complicated. If Labour can form a government without needing the unreliable SNP as partners for the difficult English-only votes, they will. They can expect SNP support when it's not needed too. Labour will rely on the Lib Dems or the Parliamentary shrapnel to get their majority in these cases. That support may be tenuous, but it will be sufficient to get them into office in a minority government - unless they surpass all expectations and get an overall majority. But that looks like a very outside chance right now.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial;">When do the Conservatives get the chance to stay in power? Given that the SNP is avowedly left-wing and anti-austerity and the Lib Dems would describe themselves as progressive, the Conservatives need to secure a seat count for themselves that makes an effective majority impractical without them. For that they need a seat count that either is sufficient with the Lib Dems to reach an overall majority or to have a seat count at or above the effective level for passing English-only laws if the SNP abstains. In those circumstances, particularly if Labour is unable to put together a coalition or formal supply-and-confidence arrangement, the Conservatives would fancy their chances of staying in power. For the reasons given in the previous posts linked to above, I assess that level at 295 seats.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial;">If they get the chance, the Conservatives will form a minority government unless the Lib Dems scramble to 35 or more seats or unless the Conservatives get their overall majority. Neither outcome looks to be in prospect.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial;"><b>How likely are these other possibilities?</b></span><br />
<strong><span style="font-family: Arial;"></span></strong><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">This is the critical question. Most importantly, how likely is it that the Conservatives will get to 295 seats?</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br /></div>
<div>
<span style="font-family: Arial;">
I have not repeated my analysis from late last year as to the implications from the betting market on this:</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<a href="http://newstonoone.blogspot.co.uk/2014/11/conventional-wisdom-on-next-election.html"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">http://newstonoone.blogspot.co.uk/2014/11/conventional-wisdom-on-next-election.html</span></a><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">(I'm hoping that I'll get time to do a full round-up of all the seat markets on the eve of the election.)</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">My lick-of-the-finger guess is that the Conservatives would have roughly a 1 in 3 chance of getting to 295 seats at present, bearing in mind current polling. Feel free to disagree with me though.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">On that basis, I make the current probabilities something like the following:</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Labour minority: evens</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Conservative minority: 3/1</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Anything else: 3/1</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">So I see some value in backing a Conservative minority government, but loads and loads of value in backing a Labour minority government. If anything, I feel that I'm being cautious about my assessment of the chance of a Labour minority government. You can still back this at 7/2 with SkyBet and 3/1 is widely available. I've backed this heavily and so far I've ignored the option of backing Conservative minority government (I backed it at 7/1 in November and December and it has improved as a bet since then). If you are more bullish than me about the Conservatives' prospects, you will want to cover Conservative minority government too. But for myself, I wouldn't bother with anything else.</span></div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">The other bet that still looks good is laying David Cameron on Betfair as Prime Minister after the general election. To me this looks firmly odds against now, and by quite some way.</span></div>
Alastairhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11551605492626333385noreply@blogger.com0