Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
146 Councils across England elect over 4,350 Councillors - including all from the 32 Borough's of London and the 101 seats in Birmingham
7 Mayor's, including for the South Yorkshire Mayoral Combined Authority and 6 local authorities - including the first-ever poll in Croydon.
And 1,000 parish councils across the UK will be electing about 10,000 Councillors.
With Partygate, Ukraine, COVID, and Cost of Living all wrapping into one and the kind of seats up for grabs knowing how mixed the results were when these seats were last fought in 2018, it will be fascinating to see what the voters say and how many of them turn out on May 5th.
The results are likely to reflect how people feel about Boris Johnson, the "partygate" scandal, how Covid has been handled and the rising cost of living.
The Northern Ireland elections I think will be very interesting, as opinion polling suggests Sinn Fein could become the largest party ahead of the DUP. If this happens the DUP have threatened to refuse to form part of the executive, so another stand-off will ensue. Perhaps the sooner Northern Ireland learns to kick religion out of politics the better things will be there generally (I say that as someone who is religious).
I doubt it, if the level of campaigning I've seen round here is anything to go by. One generic leaflet for the Lib Dems (generic as in covering the whole borough, with no specific reference to the ward I live in), and similar for the Tories. A focused leaflet for an Independent who I've never heard of and whose main selling point seems to be that she's not a Tory. Nothing from Labour at all. I've not seen any posters or signs promoting particular parties.
I live in a relatively safe Tory area so I guess the other parties are probably focusing their efforts on more marginal wards, but even so, you'd hardly know there was an election at all.
On a number of local councils (particularly in shire counties) there are localist or independent groups of councillors who hold the balance of power, as in Tunbridge Wells and Thanet for example. Some of these councillors previously defected from the mainstream parties so it will be interesting to see if they are voted back in.
I am in a ward that has, for many years, had three Tory councillors due solely to the first-past-the-post system, as the support seems to be about 40% Tory with the remaining 60% split between the Lib Dems (mostly) and Labour. A very clear illustration of how first-past-the-post does not properly represent the ward's views; 40% Tory support should not equate to three Tory councillors!!! One of each party would be a more accurate representation of the ward's voting tendencies.
The local Lib Dem is campaigning hard and focuses on the issues of this specific ward, while the "banner/poster" count is 2 Lib Dem, 2 Tory (the latter have only just gone up). Just my luck - I am currently having one example of the latter pollute my view of outside on the days I work from home.
The "Vote Tory" banners are very ostentatious and "in your face", the Lib Dem ones are not.
This ward has been a fairly close call in recent years, with a bit of luck (IMO) the anti-Tory vote will rally behind the Lib Dem this time.
I doubt it, if the level of campaigning I've seen round here is anything to go by. One generic leaflet for the Lib Dems (generic as in covering the whole borough, with no specific reference to the ward I live in), and similar for the Tories. A focused leaflet for an Independent who I've never heard of and whose main selling point seems to be that she's not a Tory. Nothing from Labour at all. I've not seen any posters or signs promoting particular parties.
I live in a relatively safe Tory area so I guess the other parties are probably focusing their efforts on more marginal wards, but even so, you'd hardly know there was an election at all.
Agreed on the lower point; particularly as a candidate for Labour in Wolverhampton, where I am running in 1 of the 2 wards which we didn’t win in 2018 (we won 18 of the 20 wards 4 years ago) and that as a result of that and 5 Tory gains last year, leaves us a bit venerable.
Work has meant my campaigning being limited, but from a Get Out The Vote session on Tuesday with postal voters, I didn’t mark a single Tory so I suspect lots of people, are seriously considering alternatives in order to send a message to the Government.
On a number of local councils (particularly in shire counties) there are localist or independent groups of councillors who hold the balance of power, as in Tunbridge Wells and Thanet for example. Some of these councillors previously defected from the mainstream parties so it will be interesting to see if they are voted back in.
T. Wells featured on the local news earlier in the week so I had a look. It should be added that most are multi-member wards, where only one place is up for election each year. The Conservatives are defending over half the seats, many of these are in wards where other councillors are either Lib Dems or Alliance, so not 'rock solid'. Tunbridge Wells Alliance appear to appeal to traditional Conservative voters, pushing low spending, low council tax, they seem to have their heartlands in the nearby villages. It is the town, itself, the Lib Dems hold sway, with almost as many councillors as all the other parties put together.
The Conservatives may find they are squeezed from two fronts - by LibDems in the town and the Alliance in the villages. Part of their problem is that the national party may speak like traditional Tories, but they don't act like it, and some of their core vote may find they have other things to do in a week's time.
Without a doubt on a national level Labour will see a large increase in seats and the Tories a large decrease. With any luck this'll be enough to finish off Boris's time in Downing Street.
I do however think Labour are at risk of losing some seats in areas where they've held the councils for a long time, and said councils are currently unpopular - Newcastle, Gateshead and Sunderland all stand out as places where I'd expect to see the Lib Dems, and in the case of Sunderland even the Tories, making gains at Labour's expense. Many people in Tyne & Wear are sick to the back teeth of the poorly ran Labour councils.
If I had to give a prediction of the results in Gateshead it'd be this:
Labour: 50 (-2)
Conservative: 0 (-)
Lib Dem: 16 (+3)
Independent: 0 (-1)
Both the Tories and the Lib Dems make considerably more of an effort to keep in touch with voters year round in my area than Labour - 95% of the local Labour group will vanish off the face of the earth the day after the election and not appear again until about a month before the next local elections.
Sunderland will be one to watch as if the Tories and Lib Dems make the gains they're hoping for (and I predict that they both will), the council would go into no overall control, a huge blow to Labour.
Poster/board count from my ward currently, after yesterday (I've walked round it quite a bit) is 4 Tory, 3 Lib Dem.
Slightly worrying IMO - in no previous elections has the Tory been ahead on poster count. Furthermore the Tory is a new guy rather than an established councillor who might get votes on recognition value.
I hope this is more a sign of the Tory being very active in terms of distributing posters, rather than a Tory swing in my ward. (I would expect an anti-Tory swing if anything, because the ward profile from what I can make out is affluent but socially-liberal, with quite a large immigrant population - not especially the demographic that would be swinging towards the Tories right now).
The prevailing theme on this site seems to be anti Conservative and either pro Labour or pro left wing. Given that Boris and the Conservatives are mired in sleaze, what would be the positive reasons to vote Labour other than giving the Conservatives a metaphorical bloody nose ?
I am always an ABC voter: Anyone But Conservative. This has nothing to do with the present shenanigans, it has been my attitude for all the time that I have been able to vote. If a Conservative is the sitting representative, I will vote for whoever to their left is most likely to get them out. If they are embedded, I will probably vote Green, as they are the only ones who really take the most important problem facing the planet seriously, even if I don’t agree with quite a few of their policies. Reasons for voting Labour could well include the fact that they are likely to make some attempt to provide a fairer society which will at least try to help the worst off, rather than the Conservatives’ policy of filling their boots and those of their pals with no thought for the rest of us or the future.
Without a doubt on a national level Labour will see a large increase in seats and the Tories a large decrease. With any luck this'll be enough to finish off Boris's time in Downing Street.
I do however think Labour are at risk of losing some seats in areas where they've held the councils for a long time, and said councils are currently unpopular - Newcastle, Gateshead and Sunderland all stand out as places where I'd expect to see the Lib Dems, and in the case of Sunderland even the Tories, making gains at Labour's expense. Many people in Tyne & Wear are sick to the back teeth of the poorly ran Labour councils.
If I had to give a prediction of the results in Gateshead it'd be this:
Labour: 50 (-2)
Conservative: 0 (-)
Lib Dem: 16 (+3)
Independent: 0 (-1)
Both the Tories and the Lib Dems make considerably more of an effort to keep in touch with voters year round in my area than Labour - 95% of the local Labour group will vanish off the face of the earth the day after the election and not appear again until about a month before the next local elections.
Sunderland will be one to watch as if the Tories and Lib Dems make the gains they're hoping for (and I predict that they both will), the council would go into no overall control, a huge blow to Labour.
Part of the reason areas like Sunderland and Hartlepool have headed in that direction is demographic changes: most of the younger working demographics you'd expect to vote Labour have moved out to city areas where the jobs are, and aforementioned areas are left with voters who are typically retired and/or more likely to vote Conservative. This is also in part why Labour have increased popularity in cities generally, which is partially offsetting losses in some perceived heartland areas. It's not the only reason, and having a poor leader in 2019 certainly had an impact, but there is more than meets the eye.
I hope my local councillor stays Green, I hate the green party, but my councillor seems switched on to local issues. My ward is a 2 horse race between them and Labour, I'm hoping labour loose control because they are incompetent and woke compared to conservative councils in neighbouring areas.
In my last local election in Sheffield, despite my fury at national Labour’s dreadful lockdown policy, the local candidate did actually bother to deliver a leaflet (the other parties didn’t), and it said some sensible things, so I voted for her. However, I think those who bother to vote - or not - in local elections may be more influenced by national events.
Part of the reason areas like Sunderland and Hartlepool have headed in that direction is demographic changes: most of the younger working demographics you'd expect to vote Labour have moved out to city areas where the jobs are, and aforementioned areas are left with voters who are typically retired and/or more likely to vote Conservative. This is also in part why Labour have increased popularity in cities generally, which is partially offsetting losses in some perceived heartland areas. It's not the only reason, and having a poor leader in 2019 certainly had an impact, but there is more than meets the eye.
In a general election most definitely, especially in Hartlepool. In local elections not so much. The two most commonly raised issues I’ve heard on doorsteps over the last few weeks have been Boris and the incompetence of the local Labour councils. A lot of people here seem to be Labour voters in general elections, but Lib Dem/Green voters in local elections as they’ve had enough of how the councils are run. In Tyne & Wear if people vote the way they say they’re going to vote, Labour are in for a right kicking at the ballot box, whilst Thursday night could be a very good night for the Lib Dems and the Greens
The prevailing theme on this site seems to be anti Conservative and either pro Labour or pro left wing. Given that Boris and the Conservatives are mired in sleaze, what would be the positive reasons to vote Labour other than giving the Conservatives a metaphorical bloody nose ?
I will only have a choice of two candidates in the local elections, Labour and Conservative, and I am going to vote Conservative.
My local council is Sandwell, in the West Midlands, and has been controlled (allegedly) by Labour ever since it was created.
But the ruling Labour group are only interested in fighting amongst themselves, to the extent that the council has had six leaders in the past six years.
The council regularly features in the "Rotten Boroughs" column in Private Eye, and recently the government had to appoint commissioners to oversee the running of the council after and external review revealed “...deeply troubling picture of mismanagement and of ineffective scrutiny and accountability arrangements...”
Until last year, there were no Conservatives on the council, but at present there are nine.
In all likelihood, Labour will retain control of the council, but I think that there needs to be an effective opposition at all levels of government, as I don't think it is right that one party can have a virtual monopoly of power at any council.
Local council elections can produce strange results, but where I used to live my last local council (where ward had 3 votes) produced 2 conservatives and a Lib Dem. Nearby had a mix of Labour and conservative in one ward.
The count took much longer than normal as split (between parties) votes were quite common and they had to move those counting around to deal with significant number of combination votes, so don’t assume people will just vote for a party.
There are no elections where I live this week, but if I had 3 votes this time, would probably be given to best independent who cares about local issues, a green, and anyone but the partygate party.
Part of the reason areas like Sunderland and Hartlepool have headed in that direction is demographic changes: most of the younger working demographics you'd expect to vote Labour have moved out to city areas where the jobs are, and aforementioned areas are left with voters who are typically retired and/or more likely to vote Conservative. This is also in part why Labour have increased popularity in cities generally, which is partially offsetting losses in some perceived heartland areas. It's not the only reason, and having a poor leader in 2019 certainly had an impact, but there is more than meets the eye.
The converse of course is the recent tendency for cities which had frequent Tory MPs in the past voting for a non-Tory MP in 2019. For example Brighton and Hove has not a single Tory MP, yet from 1979 to 1992 all three constituencies returned solid Tories every time.
It's interesting also that some places swung initially towards the Tories in 2010, before moving away from 2015 or 2017 onwards. Generally socially-liberal city areas with student populations, who might have been attracted to Cameron's relatively modern social outlook but who have been put off by Brexit and the hard-right policies of people like Patel. Good examples would be Portsmouth South, Reading East, Hove and Brighton Kemptown - all southern cities with a large student population.
I have heard some stories that some other places like Milton Keynes and Swindon, perhaps even Worthing, are starting to see a shift in this direction too - due to jobs or the proximity of nearby employment centres attracting socially-liberal voters, perhaps - so maybe Labour need to be targeting these places rather than locations which now see a large socially-conservative demographic.
Likewise, by examining their recent gains (St Albans, Richmond Park, Twickenham - though this was only lost to the Tories for two years) the best pickings for the Lib Dems are likely to be affluent but socially liberal locations in the south, where they could pick up quite a few votes. Places like Winchester, Guildford, and the like.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
While sadly Labour and the Lib Dems have been less than perfect on multiple occasions, I would say that the base ethic of both is a good deal more appealing than the Tories. To me, the Tories have always been about looking after the interests of the wealthy, and promoting socially-conservative policies of various sorts, whether that be Section 28 in 1987 or strident anti-immigration policies under Johnson. Neither appeals to me, though I do acknowledge that there are a (relatively small) number of Conservatives that believe in moderate fiscal conservatism but not any of the right wing stuff (most prominent under Major, also Cameron to some extent but IMO his government too much saw austerity as the solution to all our problems).
Added to that Brexit, which is something I will never forgive the Tories for, so if there was any chance of me voting Tory, that chance has gone now, for good. I'm a Gen-Xer so if I was to swing to the Tories, it would probably have happened by now.
On the other hand, the base message of Labour and the Lib Dems more aligns to what I believe in - even if, when in power, they can partially abandon that message. So I will always vote for one of these two, generally on a tactical "anti-Tory" basis.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
In my last local election in Sheffield, despite my fury at national Labour’s dreadful lockdown policy, the local candidate did actually bother to deliver a leaflet (the other parties didn’t), and it said some sensible things, so I voted for her. However, I think those who bother to vote - or not - in local elections may be more influenced by national events.
I will admit that their pro-restriction policy has been uncomfortable for me personally, something I have disagreed with - and I do think it was a big political mistake as it likely lost more potential votes than it gained. However compared with the (IMO) lengthy list of wrongdoings executed by the Tories since 2010, I would always vote for Labour over the Tories given such a binary choice. More so in the coming years, in which questions of lockdown and restrictions are unlikely to be to the fore.
That may have been a good reason in the early 80s when you had Labour under Michael Foot vs Conservatives under Thatcher but it is less convincing now when there is little difference in policy.
This may seem like a silly question, but is it normal for councils to get funding from national government as well as from their own taxes? If councils do get funding from government, I wouldn't be surprised if pork-barrel politics exists where any council that is not run by the same party as government gets less than those that are the same, so that opposition councils either can't do as much and/or have to have higher council taxes. The way to get around this if a problem is to make sure that any government funding is set at a fixed rate based on the local population total, and/or some other suitable means-tested calculations.
While I wouldn't expect turnout of 75% or similar, some people do use local and by-elections to voice dissatisfaction with the government. That's one reason why the Lib Dems can look like a strong force in some elections but never look like becoming the 2nd biggest party at a general election.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Yes it is. Councils are responsible for roads but the taxes you pay on fuel and motor vehicles are collected by central government, while council tax is also supposed to fund some of the highway costs. Over the past 12 years it's been a common compliant that central government are withholding funds that should be going to local councils for pot hole repairs and road improvement schemes.
Of course if you have a Conservative MP and a Labour run council, you'll find the Conservative MP becomes very vocal about the local council not doing their job in fixing the roads.
For social care a levy was added on to council tax so that councils could self-fund services. But now the government has increased NI to pay for it as well. So again we pay different taxes for the same thing and some goes in to a local pot and some goes in to a central pot.
to make sure that any government funding is set at a fixed rate based on the local population total
That wouldn't be a good idea. The number of school children, pensioners and working age people vary between council areas. While in more rural areas the costs of getting children to school and pensioners to medical facilities can be much higher.
This may seem like a silly question, but is it normal for councils to get funding from national government as well as from their own taxes? If councils do get funding from government, I wouldn't be surprised if pork-barrel politics exists where any council that is not run by the same party as government gets less than those that are the same, so that opposition councils either can't do as much and/or have to have higher council taxes. The way to get around this if a problem is to make sure that any government funding is set at a fixed rate based on the local population total, and/or some other suitable means-tested calculations.
Many councils are heavily dependent on central government funding which is based on various factors. Some of that funding has been lost due to policy changes such as the creation of school academies where funding goes directly from central government to the school rather than via the local authority. Pork barrel funding mainly relates to discretionary grants such as Town Funds and the like which have been shown to more likely go to Tory voting areas than block grants which are based on demographics and are less likely to be manipulated.
Local council elections can produce strange results, but where I used to live my last local council (where ward had 3 votes) produced 2 conservatives and a Lib Dem. Nearby had a mix of Labour and conservative in one ward.
The count took much longer than normal as split (between parties) votes were quite common and they had to move those counting around to deal with significant number of combination votes, so don’t assume people will just vote for a party.
I think the difference between local and national elections is that you are much more likely to know (or know of) the candidates. I have voted for a UKIP candidate because he actually bothered to turn up to local residents'meetings and sorted out an issue that sometimes led to flooding in local premises, for a Conservative candidate because he spearheaded a campaign to improve disabled access to a local station, an independent because they (can't remember the gender) were promoting something innovative instead of the same old, and a Green because he was campaigning in sleet, so I thought he might actually make an effort if I needed help. When we had a two member ward, one of the sitting councillors came canvassing, I told him I vote for him but not his colleague as the latter did not always attend consultation meetings, when he did he was usually late, I don't think he ever contributed and sat with his legs outstretched staring at the ceiling, obviously bored.
There will be others who will cast a vote because a candidate is, say an organiser of a food bank, drop in centre or neighbourhood watch say; has served the community as a doctor, teacher police officer and retired; or is a long term, respected candidate for a party which is in retreat, but still has a personal vote. There are reasons why a voter will not cast their vote for a particular candidate, many can be imagined, but, for instance, I would not vote for a candidate who was not fairly local; at one time we had a candidate for the local council who lived about 10 miles away as the crow flies (much longer by road), consequently was pretty invisible until the elections. Others will give different reasons.
I don't think it is particularly strange, but the difference in the votes cast for a particular party's candidates can be telling.
That may have been a good reason in the early 80s when you had Labour under Michael Foot vs Conservatives under Thatcher but it is less convincing now when there is little difference in policy.
Perhaps there was relatively little difference in policy between say Major and Blair, but I think there is a clear line between the Tories and the other main parties (Labour, Lib Dem) now nationally on matters such as immigration and whether Brexit was a good or bad thing (and, therefore, what we should do with our relationship with Continental Europe going forward). Plus, the tendency for some Tory supporters to use "woke" as a slightly derogatory term is rather different to Labour or the Lib Dems; there does appear to exist something of a culture clash between social conservatives and socially liberal people right now, as well as (and independently of that) between libertarians and authoritarians though this latter one spans the Tory-Labour divide, i.e. you get Tory and non-Tory libertarians as well as Tory and non-Tory authoritarians.
However I will admit these policies are not really of concern in local elections and will only come into play at the next general election. I suspect in the local elections people will use them to voice dissatisfaction at, or acceptance of, the national government, except in those cases where a local council or councillor is either notably good or notably bad.
I would not vote for a candidate who was not fairly local; at one time we had a candidate for the local council who lived about 10 miles away as the crow flies (much longer by road), consequently was pretty invisible until the elections.
We've had a couple of Conservatives who've stood for election as a resident of the ward they will be representing, then within a year of being elected they've moved out to another area. In one case it was to a neighbouring village, which isn't too bad but in the other case it was over 10 miles down the road to Macclesfield. Generally I've found the independents are the ones who will resign mid-term if they move or if increased work commitments prevent them attending too many meetings. Those representing parties tend to see out the term, even if they are missing for most of the meetings.
One thing to be cautious of is if you expect a councillor to have 100% attendance at all meetings and to always be available to answer the phone during normal office hours, then you'll only likely favour the retired candidates. If you get too many retired people acting as councillors then the council can appear out-of-touch with working age voters and families.
We've had a couple of Conservatives who've stood for election as a resident of the ward they will be representing, then within a year of being elected they've moved out to another area. In one case it was to a neighbouring village, which isn't too bad but in the other case it was over 10 miles down the road to Macclesfield. Generally I've found the independents are the ones who will resign mid-term if they move or if increased work commitments prevent them attending too many meetings. Those representing parties tend to see out the term, even if they are missing for most of the meetings.
One thing to be cautious of is if you expect a councillor to have 100% attendance at all meetings and to always be available to answer the phone during normal office hours, then you'll only likely favour the retired candidates. If you get too many retired people acting as councillors then the council can appear out-of-touch with working age voters and families.
The chap I mentioned would have been at least semi retired (he owned a business, which would have required very little of his time). I take your point but councillors do have to attend meetings or otherwise talk to residents otherwise they end up just towing the party line. I am quite happy to use written or e-mail communication (particularly the latter), I certainly don't expect to be able to phone a councillor.
I would suggest that party candidates are encouraged not to resign for fear of losing the seat. There have been stupid situations of councillors hanging on even though they have moved miles away and attend one or two meetings a year.
I would suggest that party candidates are encouraged not to resign for fear of losing the seat. There have been stupid situations of councillors hanging on even though they have moved miles away and attend one or two meetings a year.
As any reader of Private Eye’s Rotten Boroughs know, councillors must not go more than six months without attending a meeting. If they fail, except in some limited exceptions, they lose their seat and allowances. This does provide a loophole: there have been instances of members moving abroad, but keeping their seat because it is worthwhile to fly back twice a year. Ruling parties seem to go along with this because it keeps them in power.
We are aware of an issue with emails from the Forum to Microsoft-based email accounts (hotmail/outlook/live.com email addresses). This is being looked into currently, thanks for your patience meanwhile.
