Local Authority Byelection Results, Thursday 14th March 2013

[rosen...@cix.compulink.co.uk]

Arun DC, Aldwick East
LD 383 (33.6%; +20.5)
Con 357 (31.3%; -22.3)
UKIP 339 (29.7%; +18.2)
Lab 61 (5.4%; -5.4)
[Ind (0.0; -11.0)]
Majority 26
Turnout 26.79%
LD gain from Con
Percentage change is since May 2011

Camden LBC, Gospel Oak
Lab 1272 (59.9; +20.8)
Con 419 (19.7; -7.9)
Green 134 (6.3; -5.4)
LD 132 (6.2; -15.3)
Trade Unionist and Socialist Coalition109 (5.1; +5.1)
BNP 57 (2.7; +2.7)
Majority 853
Turnout 27.16%
Lab hold
Percentage change is since May 2010.

Oldham MBC, Royton South
Lab 938 (63.7; -6.1)
Con 244 (16.6; -7.7)
LD 221 (15.0; +9.0)
Green 70 (4.8; +4.8)
Majority 694
Turnout not known
Lab hold
Percentage change is since May 2012.

Runnymede BC, Foxhills
UKIP 336 (40.2%; +17.4)
Con 318 (31.1%; -8.5)
Lab 181 (27%; -0.3)
[LD (0.0; -8.6)]
Majority 18
Turnout 19.41%
UKIP gain from Con
Percentage change is since May 2012

Barwell PC, Redhall
LD 109 (44.5)
Lab 75 (30.6)
Con 61 (24.9)
Majority 34
Turnout 21.96%
LD hold

Keynsham TC, Keynsham South
Lab 298 (39.5)
Con 243 (32.2)
LD 213 (28.2)
Majority 55
Turnout 19.16%
Lab gain from Con

Wells City Council, St Cuthbert's
Con 265 (36.6)
LD 199 (27.4)
Lab 144 (19.9)
Green 117 (16.1)
Majority 66
Turnout 21.64%
Con gain from Ind


Information courtesy of the Association of Liberal Democrat Councillors www:
http://www.aldc.org.
Also available at http://www.gwydir.demon.co.uk/byelections/
--
Cllr. Colin Rosenstiel
Cambridge

[Paul Hyett]

On Sat, 16 Mar 2013 at 07:23:03, rosen...@cix.compulink.co.uk wrote in
uk.politics.electoral :

>
>Runnymede BC, Foxhills
>UKIP 336 (40.2%; +17.4)
>Con 318 (31.1%; -8.5)
>Lab 181 (27%; -0.3)
>[LD (0.0; -8.6)]
>Majority 18
>Turnout 19.41%
>UKIP gain from Con
>Percentage change is since May 2012
>

They're on a roll ATM. :)
--
Paul Hyett, Cheltenham

[rosen...@cix.compulink.co.uk]

In article <f4Fiz5ty...@blueyonder.co.uk>, p...@invalid.invalid (Paul

Not everywhere:

> Arun DC, Aldwick East
> LD 383 (33.6%; +20.5)
> Con 357 (31.3%; -22.3)
> UKIP 339 (29.7%; +18.2)
> Lab 61 (5.4%; -5.4)
> [Ind (0.0; -11.0)]
> Majority 26
> Turnout 26.79%

> LD gain from Con
> Percentage change is since May 2011

Colin Rosenstiel

[JNugent]

On 16/03/2013 18:17, rosen...@cix.compulink.co.uk wrote:

> (Paul Hyett) wrote:
>> On Sat, 16 Mar 2013 at 07:23:03, rosen...@cix.compulink.co.uk wrote
>

>>> Runnymede BC, Foxhills
>>> UKIP 336 (40.2%; +17.4)
>>> Con 318 (31.1%; -8.5)
>>> Lab 181 (27%; -0.3)
>>> [LD (0.0; -8.6)]
>>> Majority 18
>>> Turnout 19.41%
>>> UKIP gain from Con
>>> Percentage change is since May 2012
>
>> They're on a roll ATM. :)
>
> Not everywhere:
>
>> Arun DC, Aldwick East
>> LD 383 (33.6%; +20.5)
>> Con 357 (31.3%; -22.3)
>> UKIP 339 (29.7%; +18.2)
>> Lab 61 (5.4%; -5.4)
>> [Ind (0.0; -11.0)]
>> Majority 26
>> Turnout 26.79%
>> LD gain from Con
>> Percentage change is since May 2011

UKIP must be very proud of having helped the LD to win there.

[Paul Hyett]

On Sat, 16 Mar 2013 at 13:17:39, rosen...@cix.compulink.co.uk wrote in
uk.politics.electoral :

If moving from over 40 points off the lead, to just 4 isn't 'a roll', I
don't know what is!
--
Paul Hyett, Cheltenham

[David North]

"JNugent" <jenni...@fastmail.fm> wrote in message
news:aqjrka...@mid.individual.net...

Just like the Conservatives must be proud of having helped the LD to win in
Eastleigh, eh?

Of course, it's all those who voted against AV who really helped the LD to
win.
--
David North

[JNugent]

In that case, the LibDims don't need PR after all.

[Guy Barry]

On Mar 18, 1:55 pm, "David North" <dno...@abbeymanor.fsbusiness.co.uk>
wrote:

> Of course, it's all those who voted against AV who really helped the LD to
> win.

Was it ever proposed for local government elections?

--
Guy Barry

[David North]

"Guy Barry" <guy....@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:6cc79d37-ca5b-44ee...@w3g2000vba.googlegroups.com...

I'm not sure about "ever". Obviously that was not the proposal in the
referendum, but if the vote had gone in favour of AV for the UK Parliament,
it seems likely that its use in other elections would have followed.
--
David North

[David North]

"JNugent" <jenni...@fastmail.fm> wrote in message

news:aqp20u...@mid.individual.net...

Obviously the LibDems don't need AV or PR to win seats they would win under
"FPTP", any more than the Cons need "FPTP" to win seats they would win under
AV.

It seems that the Cons need UKIP to stand aside to win seats like the above
using their preferred system, though.
--
David North

[JNugent]

What's with the "AV or PR"?

AV is a form of PR. You are perpetrating a category error.

But leaving that aside, it must be your position that the Libs are
entitled to seats they can't win.

> It seems that the Cons need UKIP to stand aside to win seats like
the above
> using their preferred system, though.

<shrug>

[David North]

"JNugent" <jenni...@fastmail.fm> wrote in message

news:aqu8rg...@mid.individual.net...

Repeating that blatant lie over and over again won't make it true.

> But leaving that aside, it must be your position that the Libs are
> entitled to seats they can't win.

No it isn't.
--
David North

[Guy Barry]

On Mar 20, 5:10 pm, JNugent <jennings...@fastmail.fm> wrote:

> AV is a form of PR. You are perpetrating a category error.

Please give a reference for this assertion. Preferably not one from
Monty Python's Life of Brian.

--
Guy Barry

[JNugent]

Are you hinting at Magritte?

[Guy Barry]

There is little point in trying to have any discussion with you about
this, as you're convinced that you're right and everyone else is
wrong. However, I would direct you to the following page from the
official "No2AV" campaign in the 2011 referendum, which you presumably
supported:

http://www.no2av.org/why-vote-no/what-about-pr/

"It is important to remember this referendum is about the Alternative
Vote system. NO to AV does not take an official position on
proportional representation.

Some of our supporters back PR – such as Labour MP Margaret Hodge and
Conservative MP Douglas Carswell– while others prefer the current
system.

There are strong principled arguments for and against PR, and it's a
debate worth having. The Alternative Vote, however, is a step backward
rather than a step forward.

AV combines the weaknesses of both systems; it isn't proportional –
three out of the last four elections would have been more
disproportional under AV – and leads to more hung parliaments and
political deals."

--
Guy Barry

[JNugent]

On 22/03/2013 07:59, Guy Barry wrote:

> On Mar 21, 7:56 pm, JNugent <jennings...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>> On 21/03/2013 17:08, Guy Barry wrote:
>>> On Mar 20, 5:10 pm, JNugent <jennings...@fastmail.fm> wrote:

>>>> AV is a form of PR. You are perpetrating a category error.

>>> Please give a reference for this assertion. Preferably not one from
>>> Monty Python's Life of Brian.

>> Are you hinting at Magritte?

> There is little point in trying to have any discussion with you about
> this, as you're convinced that you're right and everyone else is
> wrong.

You are, as so often, quite wrong. It says much about you that you let
your imagination run in that way, but I'm afraid to have to tell you
that not everyone else tries to insist that AV isn't one of the manifold
competing forms of PR.

> However, I would direct you to the following page from the
> official "No2AV" campaign in the 2011 referendum, which you presumably
> supported:

> http://www.no2av.org/why-vote-no/what-about-pr/
>
> "It is important to remember this referendum is about the Alternative
> Vote system. NO to AV does not take an official position on
> proportional representation.

I hold no brief for this campaign or that campaign.

If what you quote is accurate (I haven't checked it), that simply means
that (some of) those running the campaign - who were against AV - would
not necessarily be against all other forms of PR.

> Some of our supporters back PR � such as Labour MP Margaret Hodge and
> Conservative MP Douglas Carswell� while others prefer the current
> system.

Again (same provisos), all it means is that there may be some other
form(s) of PR which one or more the opponents of AV might support. But
they don't support the form of PR known as AV. It's all Judean Peoples'
Front stuff.

Just parse your citations in ordinary English and you'll understand.

It's a bit like saying "We're not against home ownership but we bitterly
oppose the RTB". And depending upon the credibility of the person saying
it, your interpretation of it is about as believable.

[Guy Barry]

[To JNugent]

I wrote:

> >>> Please give a reference for this assertion.  Preferably not one from
> >>> Monty Python's Life of Brian.

and you wrote:

> It's all Judean Peoples' Front stuff.

Waste of time, isn't it?

--
Guy Barry

[JNugent]

You can't expect me not to reference the most telling analogy there is
for the splits (whether genuine or not) between supporters of the
various forms of PR.

In the meantime, though, you could certainly consider not wasting your
time trying to insist that a particular form of PR isn't a form of PR.
In fact, it's a course I would recommend.

[Guy Barry]

On Mar 22, 9:39 am, JNugent <jennings...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> On 22/03/2013 09:29, Guy Barry wrote:
>
> > [To JNugent]
> > I wrote:
> >>>>> Please give a reference for this assertion.  Preferably not one from
> >>>>> Monty Python's Life of Brian.
> > and you wrote:
> >> It's all Judean Peoples' Front stuff.
> > Waste of time, isn't it?
>
> You can't expect me not to reference the most telling analogy there is
> for the splits (whether genuine or not) between supporters of the
> various forms of PR.

I specifically asked you not to mention the Life of Brian and you
did. That shows how seriously you take this topic.

It is nonsense to talk about "splits", because no one except you
appears to believe that AV is a form of PR. They're two different
things and it's possible to support one or the other, both, or
neither.

Please give an independent reference supporting your view that the
Alternative Vote is a proportional system. Otherwise your comments
are simply vacuous nonsense.

--
Guy Barry

[JNugent]

On 22/03/2013 09:55, Guy Barry wrote:

> On Mar 22, 9:39 am, JNugent <jennings...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>> On 22/03/2013 09:29, Guy Barry wrote:

>>> [To JNugent]
>>> I wrote:
>>>>>>> Please give a reference for this assertion. Preferably not one from
>>>>>>> Monty Python's Life of Brian.
>>> and you wrote:

>>>> It's all Judean Peoples' Front stuff.

>>> Waste of time, isn't it?
>
>> You can't expect me not to reference the most telling analogy there is
>> for the splits (whether genuine or not) between supporters of the
>> various forms of PR.
>
> I specifically asked you not to mention the Life of Brian and you
> did. That shows how seriously you take this topic.

It actually shows you how seriously I take you.

Who do you think you are, barking out your orders?

> It is nonsense to talk about "splits", because no one except you
> appears to believe that AV is a form of PR. They're two different
> things and it's possible to support one or the other, both, or
> neither.

> Please give an independent reference supporting your view that the
> Alternative Vote is a proportional system. Otherwise your comments
> are simply vacuous nonsense.

You lost.

Get over it.

[Guy Barry]

On Mar 22, 11:24 pm, JNugent <jennings...@fastmail.fm> wrote:

> Who do you think you are, barking out your orders?

And who do you think you are, somehow more knowledgeable about this
topic than everyone else who's ever commented on it? Both sides in
the AV referendum campaigned on the basis that AV was not a form of
PR. The independent leaflet from the Electoral Commission said that
AV was not a form of PR. The BBC and the various newspapers explained
that AV was not a form of PR. The Parliamentary website states that
AV is not a form of PR. I can give you dozens of references saying
the same thing, and you can't come up with a single one. Why not?

> You lost.
>
> Get over it.

Which side won or lost the referendum is irrelevant to this point.
The point is that it wasn't a referendum about PR. Both the winners
and the losers agreed on that. The only person who doesn't is you.

--
Guy Barry