Showing posts with label Greens. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Greens. Show all posts

Thursday, 28 May 2015

2020 and the Greens: renewing the energy

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.

Look a little deeper and the Greens have made some progress. Thanks to AndyJS, whose masterly work in processing election data is criminally overlooked all too often, we can look more closely at this progress.

Here are the Greens' results from 2010, ranked in order of vote share:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Y6K9EfRuZ4AVVHPyXu2rgfhOwd7I-f1xWmj7-YMxrRA/edit#gid=0

And here are the Greens' results from 2015, again ranked in order of vote share:


(Both of these tables are AndyJS's.)

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 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.  This is all positive for them.

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.

Green strengths

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.

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.

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 independent scored an impressive 24% of the vote.  With the Lib Dems having lost much of the progressive vote and Labour organisationally weak in this region, the Greens have opportunities to advance further here.

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 at the end the English constituencies with high student populations (using the 2011 census):

http://www.hepi.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/VERY-FINAL-CLEAN-PDF.pdf

It does so in a not particularly helpful way, so I have reorganised this into a more useful table:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bygi8eZw-4q1ajZQTlFLQ25reEE/view?usp=sharing

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.

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.

So the Greens have three possible strands to pursue in the coming years: inner city London, the south west and student-heavy constituencies.

Green targets

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:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bygi8eZw-4q1dG44RjgyaU4tQkE/view?usp=sharing

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.

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.

The south west

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.

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?

Inner city London

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.

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.

Student constituencies

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.

Summary

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.

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.

With its army of members, the Greens could step forward in 2020 - but only if they focus on the task at hand.

Monday, 20 April 2015

Other parties and independents: the battlegrounds in April 2015

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?

Here are the relevant tables of target seats for each of them.


Plaid Cymru:



Respect:



National Health Action:


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.

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.

I last looked at the outsider parties in November, and my post can be found here:

http://newstonoone.blogspot.co.uk/2014/11/other-parties-battlegrounds-in-november.html

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.  

We can look at these 12 seats in some detail.

The Greens

I'd backed a couple of longshots for the Greens, but all but one of these have failed to prosper.  




As I said yesterday, not all longshots can come off. 

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.

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.

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.

 
Plaid Cymru

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. 

This is the most recent Wales-only poll:

http://blogs.cardiff.ac.uk/electionsinwales/2015/04/15/the-latest-welsh-political-barometer-poll/

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.

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.

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:

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/labour-losing-votes-in-droves-8943801

This seems quite plausible.  Certainly, the Labour response in that article is not exactly carefully reasoned.

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.  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:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/plaid-cymru/11522401/Plaid-Cymru-candidate-compares-the-English-to-Nazis.html

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/chavs-sickening-england-flags-words-9018453

I'm still not betting on this seat, but the 4/7 on the Lib Dems is starting to look very tempting.

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:

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/maverick-independent-sian-caiach-contest-8386444

I have put something on Labour in this seat.

Respect

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).
 
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.
 
Out of the chaos, Labour have ended up with a candidate with a backstory that appears inspiring:
 
 
But this looks like the dirtiest constituency campaign in 2015:
 
 
It seems that the Respect machine is well-oiled, contrary to my previous impression.  Their favourite status is probably justified.


National Health Action

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 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.
 
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.

Independents

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.

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:

http://www.claire-wright.org/
https://8c78c03a-a-62cb3a1a-s-sites.googlegroups.com/site/realzorro1/CWrightJanFeb2015Leaflet.pdf?attachauth=ANoY7covzq0edyv-AzqBuWTJjpoVLjPAT3tV6J6ldRnIU0GMfKaDvMeM9_p4rT7GOQuO12NMjEo2jKf8kcmPqpxBmJO5L9BiGAMREs8qGYL4eqw9j9X_StCOCV6SWY1yebO0wyOK81jsxbLvYsCxX5VtdPtslIzHdqU7N4xVBHbkxto6OTxZjw1WQiE2eKEt2I8bJJAfX0ppIZLjclKqCf_he6hYLTRahAe0XNFaCu-KfpxUspE19Hk%3D&attredirects=1

Notably, no Green is standing against her.

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.

Wednesday, 5 November 2014

Other parties: the battlegrounds in November 2014

In the last few days, I have looked at the betting odds in each constituency from the perspective of, consecutively, Labour, the Conservatives, the Lib Dems, UKIP and the SNP.  The overwhelming majority of seats in mainland Great Britain will be won by one of these five parties.  But not all of them.  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.  What are their chances?

Here are the relevant tables of target seats for each of them.

The Greens:



Plaid Cymru:



Respect:



National Health Action:



Regrettably, I have yet to find any target seats for the Justice For Men And Boys Party worthy of inclusion.

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.

None of these parties is going to feature in many seats.  I have taken a very generous view of what constitutes a prospect for all four of these parties, as can be seen.  The very long combined list features 34 seats.  Of those where the minor party is rated at 10/1 or shorter, there are only ten: five Plaid Cymru seats and targets, three Green seats and targets, one Respect target (won at a by-election) and one National Health Action target.  For all the talk of a move to much more multi-party politics, the long tail isn't very long in practice.

On the plus side, that means that we can look at these ten seats in some detail.

The Greens

I've already looked at the Greens very recently here:


I don't have too much to add to what I said then.  One thing I didn't note in that piece was that Lord Ashcroft did not prompt for the Greens in his polls in Brighton Pavilion and Norwich South (he did prompt for Labour, the Conservatives, the Lib Dems and UKIP).  That wouldn't have made very much difference in Brighton Pavilion, given that Caroline Lucas is very high profile - though it might have been enough to reverse the 1% lead that Labour had over the Greens in his constituency poll in June.  However, it probably would have added a few extra points to the Greens' tally in Norwich South.  Perhaps that 5/1 remains good value after all.

Keep an eye on Edinburgh East.  Much depends on what the SNP decide to do in relation to the Greens.  That remains an open question right now.  If the SNP were to decide to enter into a pact with the Greens, this price would crash.  This is still entirely possible: Stewart Hosie, one of the candidates for the deputy leadership, is suggesting just such a pact on the Yes side.  Depending on how this is structured, however, such a pact could mess up bets on the Greens (and indeed the SNP) in Scottish constituencies.

Plaid Cymru

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 and an outside chance of taking Ynys Mon. 

According to this FT article from last week, Plaid Cymru hopes to double its seat tally to six:


It is hard to see where a sixth would come from.

Let's take a look at the Wales-only opinion polls:

 
  From these, we can see that Plaid Cymru appear to be polling at least as well in Wales as they did in 2010 (note that they flattered to deceive in the year before the 2010 election in the polls).  Given that Plaid Cymru are a force in so few seats, however, I don't regard even Wales-wide opinion polls as particularly informative.

In Arfon and Ynys Mon, Plaid Cymru's main opponent is Labour.  Welsh Labour are more traditional than the English flavour of that party, but nevertheless Plaid Cymru attack Labour from the left:


As in the more remote areas of Scotland, the north west corner of Wales's politics are very much personality-driven.  I'm not particularly familiar with the personalities, so I'm not betting.  To an outsider, the 3/1 on Plaid Cymru in Ynys Mon looks tempting, particularly bearing in mind that the rise of UKIP is likely to harm Labour more than Plaid Cymru, but without the necessary local knowledge my cash is staying in my pocket.

Similarly, Mark Williams appears to have built himself a profile in Ceredigion that is quite independent of the Lib Dems.  No doubt he will lose quite a lot of support in 2015, particularly among the substantial university population in Aberystwyth.  But he has a large majority and the area, which is predominantly a rural area, is not obviously the first place you'd look to build an election-winning coalition on the radical left.  A good summary of the candidates and the battle ahead can be found here:


Again, it's a constituency where I don't want to bet on either side of the fence.  If you forced me to, I'd probably back the Lib Dems.  But at 2/5 when Lib Dem support has crashed by two thirds since the last election, it's not a compelling proposition.
 

Respect
 

Despite a sensational by-election win in Bradford West, Respect have spent another parliament on political in-fighting.  It seems to have fissiparous instincts bred deep into its DNA.  George Galloway has fallen out with Respect's councillors on Bradford council over his plans to stand for the London Mayoralty in 2016, as a consequence of which they have left the party and now sit as independents. Respect have been unable to get any further councillors elected since.  3/1 looks considerably too short for George Galloway to retain this seat, given the loss of this part of his support base (note that Respect finished third in both Bethnal Green & Bow and Poplar & Limehouse in 2010 following Respect's schism in the last parliament, showing that the gold seam from the Galloway Midas touch can be exhausted).  This in turn makes the 1/3 on Labour with Ladbrokes look attractive.  I'm on.

National Health Action
 

This new party 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 initially attracted a lot of celebrity backing, but has since struggled to get any media traction.

While this new party is standing in 12 constituencies (all Conservative held except for Sheffield Hallam and Sutton & Cheam), 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 given the National Health Action's decision to stand against Nick Clegg, I don't expect them to do the same in 2015 (they stood against him in 2010, and the votes they took comfortably exceeded the Conservatives' margin of victory over him).  On the other hand, the Lib Dems are unlikely to do as well in 2015 and UKIP, who I've already backed at fairly long odds in this seat, will doubtless take votes from the Conservatives.  Dr Taylor remains well placed to pick up the left of centre vote, retains a high profile and this is better than a 5/1 shot.  I'm on.

Sunday, 26 October 2014

Environmentally unfriendly: who loses from an increase in the Green vote?

I last wrote about the Greens' prospects of taking more seats at the next election. My conclusion was  that  in general those prospects were ethereal. For more details, see here:


But the Greens are currently recording poll ratings well in excess of their vote share at the last election and just as importantly are standing in many more constituencies. At the Green Party conference, their leader Natalie Bennett committed to having Green candidates in at least 75% of constituencies (that's in the region of 500 seats), up from 310 at the last election.

At the last general election, the Greens took 0.9% of the national vote share but on that reduced number of seats fought.  Presumably they stood in what they considered to be their better seats, so we cannot simply scale that up to get a full notional national vote share.  On a wholly unscientific basis (psephologists, look away now), I'm going to work on a notional national vote share of 1.5% at the last election.

Right now, the Greens are polling rather better than that.  As of today's date, the UK Polling Report average is 4% and they have polled as high as 8% in one poll in recent days.  It's worth noting that most pollsters do not immediately prompt for the Greens.

Even at 4%, we can expect the Greens to have an increased impact on results, even where they come nowhere near taking the seat.  At 8%, their impact would be substantial.  So what are the seats where their influence will be felt most and who will it affect?

This is one of those occasions where I can be lazy (I always enjoy those), because the bulk of the work has already been done for me by Ian Warren of Election Data:


The key passage is as follows:

"My analysis has shown that the following demographic groups voted for the Greens in 2014:
  • Well educated singles living in purpose built flats
  • City dwellers owning houses in older neighbourhoods
  • Singles and sharers occupying converted Victorian houses
  • Young professional families settling in better quality older terraces
  • Diverse communities of well-educated singles living in smart, small flats
  • Owners in smart purpose built flats in prestige locations, many newly built
  • Students and other transient singles in multi-let houses
  • Young renters in flats with a cosmopolitan mix"
Wildly simplifying, I interpret that to mean in the main students and right-on urban dwelling professionals.  I hope Mr Warren will forgive that simplification.  

If the Greens aren't going to win many new seats, whose support are they eating into and whose chances are diminished as a result?  These are two different questions.

It is my assumption that the Greens pull their voters from the pool of voters who in the broadest terms could be labelled progressive, and who at various times in the past would have considered voting for the Lib Dems or Labour (or in Scotland the SNP).

Up to this point in the Parliament, these voters in England and Wales had looked like coalescing primarily around Labour, often having previously voted in 2005 and 2010 for the Lib Dems.  Labour may not be losing voters from 2010, but it may be failing to convert voters who it had previously banked on converting.  So in England and Wales, any increase in the Green vote is going to be bad news for Labour in any seat in which it is in contention.  The question is how bad.

Despite the name of the party, you generally find students and right-on urban dwelling professionals in large cities (obviously you'll also find students in smaller cities with big university populations).  In Britain's largest cities Labour hold the great bulk of the seats, often with large majorities.  At an election where a swing to Labour is currently anticipated, the impact in such seats of the Greens will be of footnote interest only.

There is, however, a set of seats where the battle is entirely between progressive parties.  Here are the Lib Dem held seats where Labour were second at the last election or are otherwise now seen in the betting markets as a main challenger:


There is a substantial overlap between these seats and those where the Greens are likely to do relatively well.  Up to the last election, the Lib Dems had made great inroads into the university seats.  Bristol West, Bath, Cambridge, Cardiff Central, Manchester Withington, Norwich South and Sheffield Hallam are all currently Lib Dem held seats with substantial university votes.  In all bar Bath, Labour are currently rated their closest challenger by the bookies.  The next election will be held in termtime, so we can expect most students to be voting in their university constituencies.

It's fair to say that the Lib Dems' USP in relation to university education has been tarnished.  The volte face on tuition fees has seriously damaged the Lib Dems' image.  Labour have been hoping to profit as a consequence.

In the most recent ICM poll, Labour tally 35% and the Lib Dems are at 11%.  That represents a 9% swing from the Lib Dems to Labour (other pollsters are recording slightly bigger swings).  As can be seen, a uniform swing of this size would enable Labour to take 12 seats, with hopes of taking two or three more if they slightly outperform the swing required.

If some of the votes in these seats that might otherwise have been heading from the Lib Dems to Labour head to the Greens instead, this makes Labour's task harder (a Lib Dem vote lost to the Greens is worth half as much to Labour as a Lib Dem vote that comes directly to them).  But the movement would be quite substantial before it made much of a difference.  Labour look unlikely in practice to take either Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch & Strathspey or Caithness, Sutherland & Easter Ross in any case, given the disruptive effect of the SNP on Scottish politics.  Bristol West might well be put out of reach, as might Bermondsey & Old SouthwarkSheffield Hallam always looked a big stretch, as did Leeds North West, and the impact of the Greens might be to make the odds on the Lib Dems still more promising. 

In all of the bolded seats named above, the Lib Dems now look like the value bet, taking the rise of the Greens into account.

Any rise in the Green vote in Cambridge is similarly likely to be helpful for Julian Huppert, the Lib Dem incumbent.  I do not place too much weight on the ICM constituency poll in Cambridge in April 2014 showing him well behind, which was based on a small sample and did not name the candidates.  He is a very active local MP and is likely to have a strong personal vote which such a form of polling will not capture (indeed, the ICM poll asked questions about his performance later and he was given a firm thumbs-up).  Lord Ashcroft's poll in September 2014, on a larger sample, found that when the constituency was named and respondents were prompted to think about the candidates standing, Labour polled 33%, the Lib Dems 32% (and the Greens 8%, which is pretty impressive considering that they were not prompted for).  However, this poll is also problematic, because it was taken from 3-12 September, before the university term began.  Students make up almost 20% of the town's population.  It is far from clear how this telephone poll was conducted to capture those students in the results, given the unusual nature of this constituency.  We have the competing forces of the polling possibly not yet fully reflecting the make-up of the constituency and the MP's personal profile not yet being fully drawn out through the polling questions asked.  We have much more information about this seat than most, but no more clarity.

The effect of the Greens should not be overstated.  Lord Ashcroft undertook a constituency poll in Cardiff Central in September of this year, showing that the Lib Dems remain well adrift there, even though he found a 5% poll share for the Greens:


The effect is going to be at the margins only.  You will note that Ian Warren found Cardiff Central to be the constituency with the most fertile ground in the country for Green vote-hunting.

In Scotland, the dynamics are quite different.  Here the party who has most to lose from a rise of the Greens is the SNP.  The Greens and the SNP fought shoulder to shoulder on the Yes side of the referendum debate.  The SNP will be hoping so far as possible to convert the Yes votes into SNP votes.  Any that take a detour into verdant fields will reduce the SNP's prospects of getting the huge swings that they need to take substantial numbers of new seats.

Let's look at the SNP's target list ranked by odds:


The SNP's sharp moves upwards in the polls now look very fully priced in.  Any possible impact from the Greens does not.  There are no obvious bargains on the SNP side of the fence (Dundee West aside) and some of the Labour prices now look worth considering.

There is the suggestion that the Greens and the SNP might come to an arrangement:


"There has been serious speculation about the SNP standing down in the seat [Edinburgh East] in exchange for the Greens giving them a free run at a few of their key targets. From their perspective, they are never going to win every MP in Scotland. If they can do something to make it more likely that one of the other seats is someone else who supported independence, if they can ensure Scotland sends to Westminster a delegation of MPs which represents the diversity of the Yes campaign, then this will be helpful to the thing they care about most – securing more powers for Holyrood."

This would be a smart thing for the SNP to consider.  They can't afford to lose even a couple of percentage points to the Greens elsewhere, given the swings that they require.

Finally, the Greens may yet have a part to play in straight Conservative/Labour battles and in particular straight Conservative/Lib Dem battles.  The effect of the Greens' intervention is unlikely to be anything like as significant as the effect of UKIP's intervention in most such constituencies. But it needs to be factored in.

In such seats, the advantage will be entirely for the Conservatives, because the progressive vote will be split.  In straight fights between the Conservatives and Labour, any increase in the Green vote will concern Labour.  If the Greens do well in seats like Stroud and Brighton Kemptown, they will be depleting the stock of progressive voters available to Labour.  Another way of looking at this is to consider whether this is a way that the cohort of 2010 Lib Dem voters who have defected to Labour will be diminished.  It may be.

As I noted in my previous post, an increase in Green support is likely to prove fatal for the Lib Dems in Solihull.  It may make the Lib Dems' large majority in Bath that bit more within reach for the Conservatives (though as a 5/1 shot, it's hardly a bargain).  In a whole slew of seats in the south west, the Greens didn't stand in 2010.  Any votes that they pick up in 2015 in such constituencies are unlikely to be to the Lib Dems' benefit.

Another area where the Lib Dems will be shifting uneasily is south west London.  The Greens did stand in the Lib Dem constituencies in this area in 2010, but did not poll well.  They will hope to do considerably better in 2015, given the Lib Dems' decision to enter a coalition with the Conservatives - though interestingly there was no sign of this in Lord Ashcroft's constituency polls in this area.  A shift of Lib Dem votes to Greens in these seats could be worth in effect something like a 2% swing to the Conservatives without the blue team picking up a single additional vote.  This effect may also be under-recorded by pollsters who do not prompt for the Greens (though in practice I expect that many voters who are surprised and delighted to find a Green option in the polling booth would have said previously that they were voting for Labour when asked).  I don't see this as a decisive consideration such as to alter my betting positions, but it is one more negative when deciding whether to back the Lib Dems in the constituency markets.

Thursday, 23 October 2014

A short story: the Greens' target list for 2015

The Greens have been rising in the polls in the last few months and in one recent poll had pushed the Lib Dems into fifth place in the national share of the vote.  UKIP have been making waves as insurgents on the right.  Will the Greens be able to do so on the left in time for 2015?

This is one of those political questions that at present can be answered briefly: no.  At least, not without some remarkable shifts in public opinion, of which there are no signs at present.

The Greens do not start from a strong platform.  They currently hold one seat at Westminster (Brighton Pavilion) and in 2010 they saved their deposits in only six other seats: Norwich South, Cambridge, Lewisham Deptford, Brighton Kemptown, Hove and Edinburgh East (in descending order of vote share). 

A full list of the Greens' performance in 2010 is given here (prepared by AndyJS of politicalbetting, and I am very grateful for his hard work):


It is generally a grim story for the Greens, and emphasises how far they need to travel for further electoral success.

They do only slightly better at the local level, with 162 councillors on 56 councils in England & Wales:


Note the number of councils on which they have councillors.  This is not a good thing for getting Parliamentary seats on a first past the post basis.  Nuclei of councilors are much more promising for that.  The Greens proudly boast of being the official opposition in (among others) Islington and Lewisham, but in both they have only one councillor against a monolithic bloc of Labour councillors.  These are not obvious bases for a path to power.

That said, the Greens now have substantial blocs of councillors on the following councils: Brighton (21 - the largest grouping, and leading the council), Norwich (16), Solihull (ten), Bristol (six, where they participate in the council leadership), Edinburgh (six), Oxford (six), Glasgow (five) and Kirklees (five).  They also have two London Assembly members, both of whom have substantial London-wide profiles.

The Greens also have a reasonably large activist base.  They now have 20,000 members in England and Wales and over 7,000 in Scotland, boosted in the latter case dramatically by converts in the wake of the independence referendum.  By way of comparison, UKIP are approaching 40,000 members across the UK while the Lib Dems are just above that mark.  In Scotland, the Greens certainly have more members than the Lib Dems and may even be approaching the tally of Scottish Labour (though they are far behind the SNP's 80,000 members).

The Greens lack cash and lack the ready access to media coverage that the Conservatives, Labour, the Lib Dems and even UKIP have.  They are set to be excluded from all three TV debates (though the Conservatives chivalrously for their own reasons are advocating their inclusion and there may yet be a legal challenge to this).

These are the seats that the Greens are saying that they're targeting in England and Wales:


So, with that preamble, let's have a look at the Green battleground:


Yes, I've included every best price where the Greens are at 50/1 or shorter.  Yes, it's a really short list.  They're shorter than 25/1 in only three seats.

There are related markets.  Ladbrokes, William Hill and Paddy Power all allow you to bet on the number of Green seats.  Your best price at present on no Green seats is evens with Ladbrokes, your best price on exactly one seat is 7/5 with William Hill, and your best price on two or more seats is 5/1 with William Hill, though you might like the look of the 6/1 on 2-5 seats with Ladbrokes better.  The 1/7 with Paddy Power on under 1.5 seats represents better value than combining Ladbrokes' evens on no seats and William Hills' 7/5 on one seat.

If you really think that the Greens will get six or more seats, first have your temperature taken and second ignore Ladbrokes' not particularly generous 25/1 offering and play the constituency markets instead where there is better value.

What of the seats themselves?  The punters reckon that there are three serious-ish prospects: Brighton Pavilion, Norwich South and Bristol West. 

In Brighton Pavilion, the July 2014 constituency poll for Lord Ashcroft found Labour 1% ahead of the Greens (33%: 32%).  The controversies of the Green-led council do not seem to have particularly harmed Caroline Lucas' chances of re-election.  It looks like a complete toss-up.  I'm steering clear of betting on this seat this time, having no particular inside information. The current prices look fair to me as an outsider.

You also can't assume that if the Greens win, say, Norwich South that they will also retain Brighton Pavilion.  While they are related contingencies, the relationship is fairly weak - kissing cousins at least.

Moving on to Norwich South, the Greens tallied a healthy 15% of the vote in 2010 and have a longstanding presence on the council.  Lord Ashcroft found that they are now in second place in July, some way adrift of Labour though (33%: 20%).  There would still need to be a substantial swing from Labour for the Greens to take this seat, so I caution punters not to get over-excited.  With the poll also showing the Conservatives, UKIP and the Lib Dems all polling in double figures, this could be a five way marginal.  That means that the total vote share required to take the seat could once again be in the 20s, making it easier for a niche party like the Greens to win.

The tactical voting could be interesting - Conservatives backing the Lib Dem incumbent to keep out Labour, Conservatives voting Labour to keep out the Greens, Lib Dems voting Green to keep out Labour, Kippers voting Conservative to try to thwart progressives of many stripes.  And so on. 

Anyway, I tipped the Greens in Norwich South at 25/1 earlier in the year here:


The best price now is 5/1.  That's short enough, I'd say.

I have to say I don't really understand the 10/1 in Bristol West.  The push on this price is evidently based on local knowledge of what's happening there, but I'd want very good information before backing the Greens at that price there.  They contested this seat in 2010 and lost their deposit.  Since then the Greens have built up a seat base on Bristol council, but it's nothing amazing. 

What of the longer shots?  Well, there are actually a couple that are worth thinking about.  The Greens didn't stand in Solihull in 2010, but they've had a few good years in this area.  The Greens are the main opposition on Solihull council to the Conservatives (note, Solihull Council covers two constituencies, Solihull and Meriden) and one of their long-standing councillors is standing for them in the Solihull constituency.  The candidate has an interesting history, having defected from the Lib Dems in protest at the formation of the Westminster coalition with the Conservatives in 2010, so he's perfectly placed to pick up on the anti-coalition votes in the constituency.  Labour took over a quarter of the vote share in 2001 (albeit on slightly different boundaries), so there must be a substantial anti-coalition vote in the seat.  It's a knife edge marginal between the Lib Dems and the Conservatives, and UKIP may well take a bite out of the Conservative vote.  It's unlikely that the Greens will take the seat, but with a well-placed candidate in a marginal seat (again lowering the vote share that the Greens would need to take the seat), it doesn't look inconceivably unlikely to me.  I'm on at 33/1.  It's now 25/1 and that may still be worth considering.

It's more likely that a good Green performance will hand this seat to the Conservatives.  But I'll come back to the secondary effects of an improved Green performance in a separate post.

The Greens, off the back of their recent Scottish surge, are making Edinburgh East their one Scottish target seat (see halfway down this admittedly boosterish piece):


They saved their deposit here in 2010 (as they did in 2005) and will be hopeful of a much better performance next year.  The Green candidate is the rector of Edinburgh University and there is a large student vote in the constituency (note that if the election is in May next year, that will be in university term time).  The incumbent is a pretty anonymous Labour MP, and neither the SNP who finished second last time out nor the Lib Dems who finished third have yet selected candidates.

I got on this at 33/1 and it's probably still worth it at 25/1, given the footsoldiers that Scottish Greens now have at their disposal.  The SNP might conceivably quietly give their fellow Yessers a free run at this one seat, soft-pedalling their own efforts in return for the Greens not queering their pitch in other seats.  Will the Greens win?  Probably not - but it's a bit less improbable than 25/1.

Otherwise, I'm keeping my money in my pocket.  Of more general interest is what an increased Green vote might do to the battlegrounds in seats where they stand no real chance.  But that needs to be the subject of another post.