Piara Khabra dies

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Parliament's oldest MP dies at 82

A pity but not really a surprise. RIP.

[Silent Hunter]

RIP.

[Harry Hayfield]

Ealing, Southall Result 2005:
Piara Khabra Labour 22,937 (48.75%),
Nigel Bakhai Lib Dem 11,497 (24.43%)
Mark Nicholson Conservative 10,147 (21.56%)
Sarah Edwards Green 2,175 (4.62%)
Malkiat Bilku Worker's Revolutionary Party 289 (0.61%)
Labour hold with a majority of 11,440 (24.32%)
Swing required for Lib Dem gain: 12.16%

[merseysider]

Obviously the LibDems will be targeting this - it has the kind of multi cultural demographic of other places where they have done well in byelections, such as Leicester South and Brent East. I believe however that the majority of the Asian population is Hindu or Sikh rather than Muslim, so droning on endlessly about the War in Iraq and plastering their leaflets with photos of George W Bush may not work as well as in some other places.

The LibDems will inevitably squeeze the Tory vote - then Tories came third but with 10,000 votes.

This is a constituency which can produce some strange results - in 2001 almost 24% of the vote went to a range of independent and minor party candidates. Much of this seemed to go to the LibDems in 2005 who increased their share of the vote from 10% to 24%.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Southall has a bit of an odd electoral history and any guesses about a possible by-election result are (mostly), just that; guesses.

As far as demographic go, the constituency is 52.67% Non-white (and only 36.44% are "White, British") and about 40% Asian (mostly Indian). Religious-wise, it's 10% Hindu, 11% Muslim and 18% Sikh.

Politics in Ealing is dominated by racial/ethnic voting and so on (not just this end of the borough either; it's hard not to notice that the one Acton ward in which Labour's vote didn't slump badly in in 2006 has a large, and in parts quite established now, Polish community) and nothing like an accurate prediction can be made until we find out who the candidates are. I'm assuming that Labour will run a Sikh and that the Tory candidate will be White, but other than that?

[Rural Radical]

It will be a Labour hold IMO.

The first test of the Brown era.

RIP.

[Verily]

Politics in Ealing is dominated by racial/ethnic voting and so on (not just this end of the borough either; it's hard not to notice that the one Acton ward in which Labour's vote didn't slump badly in in 2006 has a large, and in parts quite established now, Polish community) and nothing like an accurate prediction can be made until we find out who the candidates are. I'm assuming that Labour will run a Sikh and that the Tory candidate will be White, but other than that?

As the article says, Labour will be choosing from an all-woman shortlist. I don't know how much that might affect voting among more conservative Sikhs, Hindus and Muslims, but it could.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

As the article says, Labour will be choosing from an all-woman shortlist. I don't know how much that might affect voting among more conservative Sikhs, Hindus and Muslims, but it could.

Doubt it; so long as the candidate has a surname that sounds "right" that sort of thing doesn't matter in areas with racially polarised politics (and just in case anyone gets me wrong on that, that applies to white voters as much as Asians). The only way in which an AWS could cause trouble in itself is if a white woman from a professional background somehow gets picked as candidate.
But, bearing in mind local politics, I'd be surprised if the Labour candidate isn't a Sikh.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Some ward maps to give a general impression of the area:



First row is from 2006.

[Silent Hunter]

Haven't you guys heard of a decent interval?

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Haven't you guys heard of a decent interval?

Understood o/c.

Anything that goes beyond electoral geekery/curiosity (or paying respects and so on) will be deleted if it's posted (until a proper by-election thread is posted when the writ is moved).

(Actually I was going to do that anyway, but I might as well say so now. It's a case of trying to draw a line between legitimate (this is an elections site after all) and inappropriate discussion, basically).

[afleitch]

He was well respected across party lines. Yes it's an old line but it's true.

R.I.P

[minionofmidas]

You can see from the maps that the seat's in West London... the inner parts are the posher parts.

[merseysider]

Haven't you guys heard of a decent interval?

If you think that this thread is bad, read this! I remember hearing a story about Ernie Ross, the former MP for Dundee West. In 1981 he was very ill and went into hospital. The Liberals and the SDP started putting leaflets out in his constituency and making high profile visits from the likes of David Owen.

Mr Ross ended up making a full recovery and held the seat for another 24 years before retiring at the 2005 general election!

[Filuwaúrdjan]

He was well respected across party lines. Yes it's an old line but it's true.

R.I.P

Wasn't he the last M.P to have served in the War?

[Harry Hayfield]

He was indeed. Taken from Wikipedia:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Ben.]

Cant say that I knew much about the guy beyond his reputation as a fairly decent old boy with the emphasis being on old (quite a transformation from his earlier persona as a pretty ruthless political operator) ... as Al says a shame but not a surprise.

First off this should be a Labour hold, a largely Asian seat which is predominantly Sikh and Hindu rather than Muslim, a strong party machine in place and a decent base in local government (it’ll be interesting to see if the All-Women short list that was in place is still retained for the selection of the candidate for the by-election ).

However, it wont be a completely straightforward contest… Labour got a hammering in Ealing in last year’s local elections with the Tories making significant gains, Al’s wrong to assume any Tory candidate will automatically be the white male archetype (wouldn’t be be surprised to see Syed Kamall MEP look into it), not that I’d be surprised to see a white Tory candidate (potentially a sensible electoral ploy) but I think its far from a “sure-thing” as unlike Bromley this is likely to be a contest that the Conservative leadership could have considerable influence over (no entrenched and established local party with a tradition of returning MPs). 

Despite the Tories strong showing in the last round of local elections it’s the LibDems who were second in the seat in 2005 and they are of course the ‘past-masters’ when it comes to by-elections so to a certain extent the local results don’t necessarily provide a good indicator when it comes to a parliamentary by-election (the same was true in Bromley) .

Beyond the three main parties, the seat has the potential to produce a strong independent showing (something that might become more likely should the AWSL still be in place for the by-election). Of the minor parties only Respect could run a candidate with a chance of retaining their deposit , though the relatively small Muslim community probably limits their scope for securing a respectable (lol! – I’ll get my coat) result… though their participation could provide Labour and perhaps the LibDems with an extra headache.

So overall it’s a contest that Labour should start with a pronounced advantage in (and that’s before you consider the possible effect of any “Brown honey moon”), the LibDems (as always) seem the likely challengers, but the Tories should treat the seat seriously and look for a credible showing (but it’s a by-election so it’ll be very tough for the Tories to say the least).   

[Filuwaúrdjan]

(quite a transformation from his earlier persona as a pretty ruthless political operator)

During those "early days" he was in his '60's! O/c there's nothing to say that you can't be both a canny operator and a fundamentally decent person. Khabra was both IMO.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

They tend to be dropped for by-elections, though the front-runner (the leader of the Labour group on Ealing LBC) is a women.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Did badly in Ealing as a whole, yes, but did well in Southall proper (over 50% in all five wards). The results in the West Ealing part of the seat were more typical of the borough as a whole o/c, but it's not as though those wards were voting Labour by 2005 anyway.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Parachuting in some token Asian Tory (for that is what it would look like, even if it would be unfair to think so) wouldn't really make much sense for the Tories electorally. The last thing they want is for their white vote to collapse and head LibDemward (for the LibDems will presumably run their last counciller in the constituency; white and from the far east of the seat), what with the boundary changes coming next election (the best Tory, and best LibDem, parts of the seat are returing to Tory-target Acton...).

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Acton returned a Tory from 1974 until 1997.

[Harry Hayfield]

Ealing, Southall Electoral History (1979 Notional - 2005 General)

1979 Notional Election:
Labour 28,498 (54.37%)
Conservatives 17,220 (32.86%)
Liberals 3,920 (7.48%)
Others 2,774 (5.29%)
Labour win with a majority of 11,278 (21.51%)

General Election 1983:
Labour 26,664 (52.31% -2.06%)
Conservatives 15,548 (30.50% -2.36%)
Alliance 8,059 (15.81% +8.33%)
National Front 555 (1.09%)
Independent 150 (0.29%)
Labour HOLD with a majority of 11,116 (21.81%)
Swing from Con to Lab of 0.15%
Turnout: 71.35%

General Election 1987:
Labour 26,480 (50.74% -1.57%)
Conservatives 18,503 (35.46% +4.96%)
Alliance 6,947 (13.31% -2.50%)
Worker's Revolutionary 256 (0.49%)
Labour HOLD with a majority of 7,977 (15.28%)
Swing from Lab to Con of 3.27%
Turnout: 69.73% (-1.62%)

General Election 1992:
Labour 23,476 (47.44% -3.30%)
Conservatives 16,610 (33.57% -1.89%)
Independent Labour 4,665 (9.43%)
Liberal Democrats 3,790 (7.66% -5.65%)
Green 944 (1.91%)
Labour HOLD with a majority of 6,866 (13.87%)
Swing from Lab to Con of 0.71%
Turnout: 75.46% (+5.73%)

General Election 1997 (Change on Notional 1992)
Labour 32,791 (60.01% +14.73%)
Conservatives 11,368 (20.80% -15.50%)
Liberal Democrats 5,687 (10.40% +2.25%)
Socialist Labour Party 2,107 (3.85%)
Green 934 (1.70% -0.21%)
Referendum Party 854 (1.56%)
Pro Life Alliance 473 (0.86%)
United Kingdom Independence Party 428 (0.78%)
Labour HOLD with a majority of 21,423 (39.21%)
Swing from Con to Lab of 15.11%
Turnout: 66.87% (-7.39%)

General Election 2001:
Labour 22,239 (47.49% -12.52%)
Conservatives 8,556 (18.27% 2.53%)
Sunrise 5,764 (12.30%)
Liberal Democrats 4,680 (9.99% -0.41%)
Green 2,119 (4.52% +2.87%)
Communities Now 1,214 (2.59%)
Independent 1,166 (2.48%)
Socialist Labour Party 921 (1.96% -1.89%)
Qari Islamic Party 169 (0.36%)
Labour HOLD with a majority of 13.683 (29.22%)
Swing from Lab to Con of 4.99%
Turnout: 56.84% (-10.03%)

General Election 2005:
Labour 22,937 (48.75% +1.26%)
Liberal Democrats 11,497 (24.43% +14.44%)
Conservatives 10,147 (21.56% +3.29%)
Green 2,175 (4.62% +0.10%)
Worker's Revolutionary 289 (0.61%)
Labour HOLD with a majority of 11,440 (24.32%)
Swing from Lab to Lib Dem of 6.59%
Turnout: 56.18% (-0.66%)

[Filuwaúrdjan]

There was a major boundary change to the seat in 1997 following the abolition of Ealing Acton (which added those white, middle class wards to the seat).
According to the notionals it didn't have much of a political impact, but I learned a while ago not to trust the '97 notionals (or perhaps any?) very much.

And there will be another major boundary change before the next election, essentially reversing those changes and making the seat pretty much unwinnable (in just about any circumstances I'd have thought) for any party other than Labour.

[Ben.]

Parachuting in some token Asian Tory (for that is what it would look like, even if it would be unfair to think so) wouldn't really make much sense for the Tories electorally. The last thing they want is for their white vote to collapse and head LibDemward (for the LibDems will presumably run their last counciller in the constituency; white and from the far east of the seat), what with the boundary changes coming next election (the best Tory, and best LibDem, parts of the seat are returing to Tory-target Acton...).

To a certain extent i think its as long as its broad, in all likelihood this will be another by-election where the strength of the LibDem by-election machine  will over come their local weakness and mount a competitive challenge...

But if the Tories want to mount a serious challenge (and based on the local elections they really should be able to... but i wont hold my breath) I'd probably agree they should resist the temptation to select an Asian candidate, don't necessarily agree that it has to be a local candidate (I mean Teather was a Cllr in Islington when she ran in Brent East) though... a candidate from North West London, yes but doesn't have to be a local cllr IMHO.

I'd also not be surprised if the LibDems looked to select an Asian candidate, which would mean a candidate from outside of the area, certainly the leadership could find themselves under pressure to select that sort of candidate... especially with so few genuinely "local" candidates (though I'm sure they'll be "local" by the time Reynard has drafted his first "focus" newsletter ).   

[Verily]

Is a new ealing seat being created at the east end of the constituency where most of the white voters are? If that's the case, a non-Labour MP elected in the by-election (LD or Tory) would probably choose to run there.

As for winners, I could see the LDs squeezing the Tory vote down and winning the seat with a strong candidate and campaign, but I can't see the reverse happening. The Tories just aren't very good at by-elections, and at least as many LD voters prefer Labour as prefer the Tories. I would say the odds are probably about 70% Labour hold, 28% LD gain, 2% Conservative gain.

[minionofmidas]

Is a new ealing seat being created at the east end of the constituency where most of the white voters are?

Ealing moves back up from 2.6 to 3 constituencies, meaning that the (eastern) Acton seat moves somewhat westward.

[Verily]

Is a new ealing seat being created at the east end of the constituency where most of the white voters are?

Ealing moves back up from 2.6 to 3 constituencies, meaning that the (eastern) Acton seat moves somewhat westward.

Interesting. Ealing, Acton and Shepherd's Bush (which will be dropping Shepherd's Bush and adding the east end of Ealing Southall to become Ealing Central and Acton) is another seat that had a large Labour-to-LD swing in 2005 with the LDs and Tories nearly even (the Tories lead the LDs marginally in that seat, though). The new seat would actually probably be quite LD-friendly. Anyone have ward-by-ward results for both constituencies in 2005?

[Harry Hayfield]

Is a new ealing seat being created at the east end of the constituency where most of the white voters are? If that's the case, a non-Labour MP elected in the by-election (LD or Tory) would probably choose to run there.

You are quite right. The notionals in 2005 for the Ealing seats are:

Ealing Central and Acton:
Labour 12,944 (33.35%)
Conservative 12,105 (31.19%)
Liberal Democrat 11,883 (30.62%)
Green 1,869 (4.81%)
Labour win with a majority of 839 (2.16%)

Ealing North
Labour 20,483 (46.91%)
Conservative 12,357 (28.30%)
Liberal Democrat 8,390 (19.21%)
Green 1,242 (2.84%)
UK Independence Party 692 (1.58%)
Others 495 (1.13%)
Labour win with a majority of 8,126 (18.61%)

Ealing, Southall
Labour 19,634 (57.27%)
Conservative 6,494 (18.94%)
Liberal Democrat 6,254 (18.24%)
Green 1,612 (4.70%)
Others 289 (0.84%)
Labour win with a majority of 13,140 (38.33%)