Oldham East & Saddleworth by-election (Jan 13th)

[redcommander]

Wow the by-election poll was actually pretty decent to the actual result.

[Sibboleth]

So then. The result. Well, this is a higher Labour vote than 1997 and a bigger majority than 2005 (which, unusually, was the highest Woolas ever had). Tory vote worse even than 2001, when the BNP hacked deep into their support. LibDems... level, once again. Good result for UKIP.

[You kip if you want to...]

The Tories worst by-election swing since Wirral South, which they've still not won back.

[You kip if you want to...]

Oh god, Commons extrapolation. NOOO!!!!

[Sibboleth]

Lab/Con swing in the first by-election of each Parliament since 1979...

2010: Oldham East & Saddleworth - 11.9 to Labour
2005: Cheadle -  3.1 to the Tories.
2001: Ipswich - 2.9 to the Tories... I think. I am probably wrong.
1997: Uxbridge - 5.1 to the Tories.
1992: Newbury - 12.5 to Labour*
1987: Kensington - 5.4 to Labour
1983: Penrith & the Border - 3.5 to Labour**
1979: Manchester Central - 5.0 to Labour
1974: Woolwich West - 7.6 to the Tories
1974: Newham South - 2.2 to the Tories***
1970: St Marylebone - 1.0 to the Tories
1966: Carmarthen - 4.3 to the Tories
1964: Leyton - 8.7 to the Tories
1959: Brighouse & Spenborough - 0.8 to the Tories
1955: Gateshead West - 1.1 to Labour****
1951: Bournemouth East & Christchurch - 1.5 to the Tories*****
1950: Sheffield Neepsend - 0.8 to the Tories
1945: Smethwick - 3.0 to Labour

*But see Ipswich. Also, lol. Labour only polled 2%.
**But, again, see Ipswich.
***again...
****Actually the first was Mid Ulster. But it doesn't count for obvious reasons.
*****See Ipswich! But, also, note that Southport had a by-election on the same day. I don't know which declared first, but B comes before S.

[Sibboleth]

The percentage vote changes at the Littleborough & Saddleworth by-election sixteen years ago...

LDem +2.7, Labour +13.9, Con -20.7

Isn't that pattern strangely familiar? Obviously it's more extreme (for at least two reasons), but the curious symmetry is... I don't know. It doesn't mean a lot, but given that the seeds of this by-election were sown in that one...

[afleitch]

Meh.

Previously reserved for the Glenrothes by-election.

[Vasall des Midas]

Weaker Labour result than I would have guessed, actually.

[London Man]

Of course, it's only a by-election. Exceeding the 1997 total though is extremely encouraging.

[Sibboleth]

No interest in my pretty table of pretty?

Well, here's another one:

2010: Labour 42.1, LDem 31.9, Con 12.8, UKIP 5.8, BNP 4.5, Green 1.5, Others 1.3
2010: Labour 31.8, LDem 31.6, Con 26.4, BNP 5.7, UKIP 3.6, CP 0.5
2005: Labour 41.4, LDem 33.1, Con 18.2, BNP 4.8, UKIP 2.0, Ind 0.3
2001: Labour 38.6, LDem 32.6, Con 16.1, BNP 11.2, UKIP 1.5
1997: Labour 41.7, LDem 35.4, Con 19.7, RP 2.0, SLP 0.9, NLP 0.3

It's a real shame that ward results aren't published.

Anyway, I suppose the wider implications of this result deserve some attention. Watkins wasn't utterly smashed ala Malone, but it wasn't close either. Will the result discourage future attempts by wealthy candidates to take narrow defeats to the courts?

[Sibboleth]

Implications for protest parties interesting as well; UKIP passing the BNP in this constituency of all constituencies.

[Јas]

Will the result discourage future attempts by wealthy candidates to take narrow defeats to the courts?

I'd expect them to become relatively more common. Such actions to the elections court were viewed as futile up until this case, whereas now they can be seen as offering legitimate grains of hope to defeated candidates.

I'd imagine the major change from the whole episode is that parties consult their lawyers more about electoral literature that they produce and the literature that is produced by others about  them.

[Sibboleth]

I'd expect them to become relatively more common. Such actions to the elections court were viewed as futile up until this case, whereas now they can be seen as offering legitimate grains of hope to defeated candidates.

I agree with that, though that would be because of the decision of the court. I think (or hope?) that the by-election result might lead to some trepidation about actually going through with what is a fairly lengthy process. This wasn't another Winchester, but it's fairly clear that voters aren't particularly keen to reward candidates who go through the courts.

I'd imagine the major change from the whole episode is that parties consult their lawyers more about electoral literature that they produce and the literature that is produced by others about  them.

Almost certainly. Which, naturally, doesn't mean that leaflets will become 'cleaner' in anything other than a strict legal sense. Legislation is needed, though it's not going to happen.

Anyway. Another little thing to consider is the ending of the precedent that the party who used to hold a vacant seat moves the writ. Potential for mischief in the future there...

[Јas]

I'd expect them to become relatively more common. Such actions to the elections court were viewed as futile up until this case, whereas now they can be seen as offering legitimate grains of hope to defeated candidates.

I agree with that, though that would be because of the decision of the court. I think (or hope?) that the by-election result might lead to some trepidation about actually going through with what is a fairly lengthy process. This wasn't another Winchester, but it's fairly clear that voters aren't particularly keen to reward candidates who go through the courts.

Depends on the context of each particular circumstance, I'd imagine.

Hypothetically, would the result have been quite different if all circumstances were the same, but somehow Labour had retained a Government majority in the General Election? Or would a LibDem have made such a challenge had he narrowly lost out to a Tory candidate in similar circumstances? Or maybe the nature of whatever the allegations were in a particular case might resonate more strongly with a particular constituency.

Certainly, this result will be borne in mind, but it's just one piece of a larger picture to consider for those candidates mulling such decisions. I'd imagine those that can afford it would see it as worthy vengeance to remove the MP they see as an unfair winner, whether or not they themselves make it in their place.

Another little thing to consider is the ending of the precedent that the party who used to hold a vacant seat moves the writ. Potential for mischief in the future there...

Indeed. Not good IMO. And an area that might also benefit from legislative action.
I'll be interested to see if/how a writ is moved for West Belfast when Mr Adams resigns.

[Die-hard Clockworkfan]

The Flying Brick (Monster Raving Loony Party) - 145 0.42%
Stephen Morris (English Democrats) - 144 0.41%

Not looking good for the English Democrat mayor of Doncaster.

[Sibboleth]

Percentage change for the Government party/Senior Government party in the first by-election of a parliament, 1945 onwards...

2010: Oldham East & Saddleworth -13.6
2005: Cheadle -4.2
2001: Ipswich -7.9
1997: Uxbridge -2.5
1992: Newbury -29.0
1987: Kensington -5.9
1983: Penrith & the Border: -12.8
1979: Manchester Central -10.1
1974: Woolwich West -5.1
1974: Newham South -5.7
1970: St Marylebone +1.4
1966: Carmarthen -13.1
1964: Leyton -8.0
1959: Brighouse & Spenborough +0.9
1955: Gateshead West -1.2
1951: Bournemouth East & Christchurch -1.5
1950: Sheffield Neepsend -2.0
1945: Smethwick +2.9

...and on this measure it's the second worst as well. Though some comfort does exist for the Tories this time; two double-digit falls were in the 1979 and 1983 parliaments.

[London Man]

Baroness Warsi makes a classic fallacy in an argument