Looking at local newspaper feeds, twitter feeds of reporters on the ground and so on here is what I can make out so far…

WILTSHIRE and DYFED-POWYS have both declared and were both won by the Conservatives.

BEDFORDSHIRE has gone to a second round between the Conservatives and Labour, pretty much neck and neck and the moment. Ind, Lib Dem and British Freedom second preferences to be reallocated.

CLEVELAND has gone to a second round between the Conservatives and Labour. Green and Independent 2nd preferences to be reallocated.

DORSET is reported to have an independent in first place so far.

ESSEX has gone to a second round between the Conservatives and an Independent. The Conservatives have a lead of 10,000 or so votes, but there are lots to be redistributed, including Labour, a second independent and UKIP.

GWENT’s first round was won by an Independent, Ian Johnston, and has gone to a second round

KENT is still counting, but the former Independent chair of the police authority Ann Barnes is ahead on the first round and looks set to win

MERSEYSIDE should be ready to declare shortly, Labour have won easily on first preferences.

NORTH WALES has gone to a second round between Labour and an Independent

NORTHUMBRIA hasn’t quite declared yet, but has been easily won by Labour. They have declared now and Vera Baird has indeed won comfortably on the first round.

SOUTH YORKSHIRE has apparently been won by Labour on the first round, but no figures yet

SUFFOLK has gone to a second round with Labour and the Conservatives absolutely neck and neck, there are votes from UKIP and an Independent to be redistributed.

WEST MIDLANDS has gone to a second round, but Labour’s first round lead looks unassailable.

UPDATE: Labour have won Corby with a 22% lead, so the Populus(?) poll by Lord Ashcroft got the lead correct. It is a swing of around about 12.7%, so significantly better than the national polling position, which is currently showing a swing of around about 8.5%.


412 Responses to “PCC Update – the situation so far”

1 7 8 9
  1. PaulCroft,

    But it’s too ambiguous/wishy-washy to have any real meaning. That’s why even most political anoraks don’t really know what it means/what it hopes to achieve/how it hopes to achieve it.

  2. The Internet is fun.

    I go to the BBC site and get told the scores, then visit a technical site and get told the football scores, so I go to a political site and get told the football scores…it’s not as if I can sleep all day to avoid the scores.

    Etiquette:

    *** Football Spoliers ***

    etc.

  3. Good Evening All.
    On a different topic. Vince Cable led a campaign to the High Court to stop Richmond Council setting up two voluntary aided schools in the borough.

    Perhaps his leader will explain to Vincent the benefits of such schools, although the Party is pledged to abolish them.

  4. Smukesh

    Re your ten words I can tell you the difference between Cameron and Milliband in two words.” Very little” and the difference between modern Tory and modern Labour in five words “none that makes any difference”.

  5. @CL1945

    I thought it was Coalition policy to take councils out of schooling altogether.

  6. When a man who is meant to determine policing policy in a locality – takes office with around 8-9% of the votes of the electorate the coalition may find it difficult to claim union ballots provide little in the way of a mandate for them to act in industrial disputes.

    If these elections were meant to engage the wider public they didn’t and the government has wasted a large lump of tax payers money on a vanity project they didn’t even think was worth campaigning for.

    Set aside party politics this is the sort of government that gives all politicians a bad name – Prescott’s Referenda on Regional govt and his Housing Packs come to mind.

    Politicians deserve their poor public reputation when they engage in this sort of behaviour. But sadly if you cheapen the value attached to the active of participation in democracy by exercising the vote by creating meaningless elections in the long run it is democracy itself that is undermined.

    DC’s comment that it was obvious these elections would have a low turnout because they were new was specious to the point of being disingenuous. In 1975 it seems the novelty of a referendum over membership of Common Market – a novel idea in its time – didn’t
    get a derisive response from the voters.

    And the timing of these elections and the fact they were poorly funded demonstrates and the lack of proper information show that the government’s intentions were as uncertain as the policy is poorly thought out.

  7. Turk
    Precisely – and hence low turnouts in general. and disillusionment by many voters. It’s all caused by the relentless marketing-led approach of trying to appeal to what they both seem to believe is the centre ground.

    I foresee a future of very small GE majorities or many coalitions, and the rise of smaller parties such as Green, UKIP, possibly Respect and even some as yet unknown populist party, as well as SNP and PC in their respective parts of Britain. Perhaps we might even get English regional parties becoming more successful.

  8. @TURK
    Seven years in the public eye and am I right in thinking you are finding it difficult to define Cameron.I rest my case.

  9. As we breathlessly await the benefits of post code policing, does anyone agree with me that politics just took another dive in the eyes of the public? I almost wrote ‘voters’ but of course the two are now entirely different concepts (and reality).

    Thus I am not sure that my statement applies to the people who ‘could’ vote but do not vote., They are in the same frame of mind as Rhett Butler.

    Meanwhile Mensch-like aspirants will believe it is all down to their amazing personal appeal as to whether they are chosen for office. I have seen many comments to that effect already.

  10. New thread comrespoll

  11. So what was the share of the vote for the respective political parties in the PCC vote?

1 7 8 9