LibDem leadership election

[Harry Hayfield]

namely the Social Democratic Party (who still exist in the south of Wales)

Don't they still have a couple of councillers somewhere down there? I know they do in Bridlington (ER, Yorks).

That's right. A threesome in Neath and Port Talbot

[Filuwaúrdjan]

20 is now 25; 19 of the 25 are on the frontbench. By the sound of it the names might become public (though we can guess a lot already methinks...)

[Peter]

The Social Democratic Party, a party that I would be a member of, a party that my aunt was a member of, is nothing like the perversion of it that is the Liberal Democratic Party.

I would remind you that Charles Kennedy betrayed the SDP when he and that other Scottish traitor tried to destroy it, and then when they harassed David Owen at his daughter's birthday party.

For the record, the Social Democratic Party of today has four Councillors on Bridlington Town Council in East Yorks, one of whom is actually Mayor. It also has three Councillors on the Neath Port Talbot Borough Council. It also has a sole Councillor on Richmondshire District Council in North Yorkshire.

In total the party presently has 54 members, of whom 47 are in East Yorkshire according to its accounts filed with the Electoral Commission.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

They also hold this ward (which has two councillers) on East Riding UA:



This is their ward on Neath Port Talbot CBC:



And this is their ward in Richmondshire DC:

[afleitch]

The SDP were always a treacherous lot. They couldn't stand the heat in the Labour kitchen so they jumped ship along with Brocklebank-Fowler. Interesting to think that they stood at 29 MP's before dissolution (their highest number was 30) I think I may make a map

[Peter]

Okay, I'm getting some idea of the signatories now:

Norman Baker, Tom Brake, Ed Davey, Andrew George, Sandra Gidley, Jeremy Browne, Lynne Featherstone, Jo Swinson, Evan Harris, Nick Harvey, Adrian Sanders, Sarah Teather, Jenny Willott, Vince Cable, David Laws, Chris Huhne, John Thurso, Norman Lamb and Michael Moore.

Thats 19. So I'm missing 6.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Okay, I'm getting some idea of the signatories now:

Norman Baker, Tom Brake, Ed Davey, Andrew George, Sandra Gidley, Jeremy Browne, Lynne Featherstone, Jo Swinson, Evan Harris, Nick Harvey, Adrian Sanders, Sarah Teather, Jenny Willott, Vince Cable, David Laws, Chris Huhne, John Thurso, Norman Lamb and Michael Moore.

Thats 19. So I'm missing 6.

Interesting list; some suprising names there actually. And you misspelled Featherbrain

[Filuwaúrdjan]

The full list hath been published... +=reps. a London constituency, *=reps. a SW constituency...

Edward Davey+
Sarah Teather +
Norman Baker
Tom Brake+
Andrew George*
Sandra Gidley
Norman Lamb
David Laws*
Jeremy Browne*
Alistair Carmichael
Nick Clegg
Tim Farron
Lynne Featherstone+
Julia Goldsworthy*
Chris Huhne
Evan Harris
John Pugh
Jo Swinson
Stephen Williams*
Nick Harvey*
Martin Horwood*
Dan Rogerson*
Adrian Sanders*
Matthew Taylor*
Jenny Willott

[afleitch]

Jo Swinson has a good future ahead of her, this is a big gamble for her.

[Joe Republic]

Just strolling on through the BBC website, and the top headline was, "Kennedy rejects 'denial' claims".  So he's in denial about being in denial, yes?

[Democratic Hawk]

And meanwhile, the rats leave the sinking ship. Is it wise to seek to dethrone the most successful Liberal leader in 80 years?

I have no love for Margaret Thatcher but the Tories', ultimately, paid the price for dumping the woman who was their most electorally successful of leader of the c.20th

Time for those Labour voters who went LibDem in 2005 to come home me thinks

While I'm on the subject, are these wretched souls set to quit the party if Kennedy stays or just their front bench posts?

Dave

[Peter]

And meanwhile, the rats leave the sinking ship. Is it wise to seek to dethrone the most successful Liberal leader in 80 years?

This is one of the great misnomers of this entire debate. He's not the most successful leader by any quantitative or qualitative standard.

In 1999 when he took over as Lib Dem leader, they had 46 MPs. At the 01 election they gained a further 6 and in 05 they gained a further 10, making a total of 16 MPs gaind in 6 years.

Now compare that to Paddy Ashdown: He took over in 1988 with 19 MPs. By the time he left in 1999 the party had 46 MPs, making for a gain of 27 MPs in 11 years. Ashdown also presided over their single most successful election in memory: In 1997 they gained 26 MPs in one election.

In terms of share of the vote Kennedy gained 22% in 2005, but that doesn't beat the Alliance's 25.4% in 1983 under Steel and Jenkins.

By any measurable standard, he has not been all that successful.

In more qualitative terms he's not either. Many considered the 2005 election to be the Lib Dems big chance - they could and should have been knocking on 90 to 100 seats if they were to have begun to become the Opposition. Seats like Oxford East, NUT Central, Guildford, Orpington, Hornsey and Wood Green, Durham, Edinburgh North, and so many more should have swung Lib Dem if they were to make the move. They had two protest votes - those disillusioned with Iraq, and those who were scared of Michael Howard - they will never have that chance again, and he squandered it.

Of course, in qualitative terms, the most successful leader has to be Jo Grimond, who quite literally brought the party back from the dead

[Filuwaúrdjan]

This is one of the great misnomers of this entire debate. He's not the most successful leader by any quantitative or qualitative standard.

In 1999 when he took over as Lib Dem leader, they had 46 MPs. At the 01 election they gained a further 6 and in 05 they gained a further 10, making a total of 16 MPs gaind in 6 years.

Now compare that to Paddy Ashdown: He took over in 1988 with 19 MPs. By the time he left in 1999 the party had 46 MPs, making for a gain of 27 MPs in 11 years. Ashdown also presided over their single most successful election in memory: In 1997 they gained 26 MPs in one election.

In terms of share of the vote Kennedy gained 22% in 2005, but that doesn't beat the Alliance's 25.4% in 1983 under Steel and Jenkins.

By any measurable standard, he has not been all that successful.

True; the claim is based largely on the total number of seats won. Which forgets that there are currently quite a lot more M.P's in the Commons than there used to be. And the fact that in the past not all seats had candidates from all parties; in 1929 the Liberals won the same % of seats as the LibDems did in 2005... but the % of Liberal candidates that got elected was much higher.
O/c if you add together the official Liberals and the National Liberals in 1931 (and in that year that was sod all difference between the two; both were part of the National Government) the number of Liberals elected was higher in raw terms than 2005 and in % terms as well. Only four Liberals (all close to Lloyd George) had nothing to do with the National Government (to their eternal credit), so they've not been included.
Interestingly in % of vote terms, the LibDems were only a few % higher than Jeremy Thorpe in 1974F; and in that election the Liberals didn't run candidates in 118 seats.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

True. Pretty much the only major thing about the last election that actually *suprised* me, was the failure of the LibDems to get out of the 60's.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

True (although they actually won Hornsey; I think you mean Islington South & Finsbury) and in one of those they didn't even manage to turn into a technical marginal (NUT Central).

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Which is why all this current mess has started up. That and the bad local results recently.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

True

[afleitch]

You Gov survey of party membership has 65-27 against Kennedy. Importantly though that is based on the question of whom they want to lead them at the NEXT election, Kennedy or someone else, not necessarily that they want him to go right now.

As for potential leaders 49% want Campbell, 21 Huges and 14% Oaten

[afleitch]

Kennedy to step down at 3.00PM GMT

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4590688.stm

[Harry Hayfield]

It is being reported this afternoon across the two UK news networks (BBC News 24 and Sky News) that Charles Kennedy MP (Lib Dem, Ross, Skye and Lochaber) is to stand down as leader of the Lib Dems. I consider this action to be the result of the 25 or so MP's who suggested that he wasn't good enough to be Lib Dem leader following his admission of alcohol dependence on Thursday. I have only one thing to say to these MP's and that is:

Well, I hope that you are satisfied now!

What Charles Kennedy did on Thursday was the same as the Prime Minister speaking to the nation and announcing "I'm gay!" and what happens to Charles? He's gets picked on by half his party and is booted out. Well, I have to said that this is NOT the party I joined back in 1992 and if Mr. Kennedy's name is not on the leadership ballot (that he also announced on Thursday) then to be quite frank I want nothing to do with the Lib Dems again.

[Peter]

Charles Kennedy has announced his name will not go forward for the leadership election that is due to happen in the coming weeks.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

He's confirmed that he's resigned. Now what?

[Peter]

He's confirmed that he's resigned. Now what?

We bet on who will be candidates for the leadership. There's a distinct possibility that about there could be around 8 candidates if this thing gets out of hand.

[afleitch]

He sounded, quite understandably, angry.

[Peter]

According to Sky News, Menzies Campbell will be making an announcement "shortly".

[Filuwaúrdjan]

O.K... possible candidates...

Campbell, Hughes, Oaten, Laws, Opik, Cable... Clegg? Davey? And Pete bet 5 [non-existent] quid on Carmichael so we'll hold him to that...

[minionofmidas]

Damn.  What an unnecessary mess.

[Democratic Hawk]

And meanwhile, the rats leave the sinking ship. Is it wise to seek to dethrone the most successful Liberal leader in 80 years?

This is one of the great misnomers of this entire debate. He's not the most successful leader by any quantitative or qualitative standard.

Seats like Oxford East, NUT Central, Guildford, Orpington, Hornsey and Wood Green, Durham, Edinburgh North, and so many more should have swung Lib Dem if they were to make the move.

The party didn't exactly lose any net ground under Kennedy did it? Isn't the the party now at its strongest parliamentary strength in 80 years? Answers to both: Yes

As for Durham going Lib Dem? Not if the 'Hawk' had anything to do with it. Tuition fees and Iraq were big issues in the City but not in the District and it's the District rather than City that has defined Durham's politics. I always knew Labour would hold it but with a substantially reduced majority. The Conservative candidate, Ben Rogers, was a nice guy who really didn't deserve to see his vote squeezed

They will continue to be a relatively strong third party

Nevertheless, Peter thanks for enlightening me on the party's electoral history

Dave

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Cambell has confirmed that he'll be standing