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 6 7 8 9
  1. Paul

    What? The diabolical arsenal are 2 goals ahead!!

    Time to get drunk

  2. @AmbivalentSupporter

    “Maybe it was very clever of DC and the Tories to have the bi-elections at the same time as the elections for the elected police commissioners?”

    Surely not and I cannot believe that anyone can be so cynical as to think that The Tory Party machine saw an opportunity to bury some bad electoral news!

    What I thought was preposterous was Cameron’s post mortem on Thursday’s elections. I think his spin doctors had administered too strong a dose of double-speak, because he dismissed Corby as just a normal mid-term setback and claimed that the real political picture was painted by the PCC elections “where Labour failed to take mid Wales and Cumbria”. He then went on to say that this showed “there was no enthusiasm for the alternative”.

    I thought these Police and Crime Commissioners were essentially apolitical and non-party roles. I must have got it wrong then. According to Cameron, instead of going along to spoil my paper and give my verdict on the pointlessness of the role on Thursday, I should have voted Labour to give my verdict on the Coalition and send my message of support to Miliband.

    What an opportunity I missed, then.

  3. RiN

    No; its 4-1 now

  4. Colin

    Both parties have failed to see the problem of compound interest and debt inevitably leading to a debt overhang too large for the economy to support. You may believe that the issue is public debt but it is not!! All debt requires the payment of interest, it makes no difference if the debt is private or public. A classic example is tuition fees where instead of incurring public debt to pay for higher education we will now incur private debt of equal volume. Interest will still have to be paid on this debt indeed a higher rate of interest is due with private debt, so this money will be removed from the productive economy either way. This process was started in the 70s by your hero James calaghan and continued by Maggie, its easy to see debt has increased exponentially since then, doubling every 7 to 8 years, the labour years did see a larger increase in the numerical amount of debt than any others but it did not see a significant increase in the rate of change. In the same way that 2 doubled is 4 and 4 doubled is 8, the amount of increase in numerical terms is larger but the ratio stays the same. Thus I find it unrealistic to suggest that if the Tories had been in power rather than labour in those years that the debt would have been less, after all both parties are following the same general economic ideas with only a slight difference in emphasis

  5. Paulcroft

    I had hoped we could be friends, unfortunately I see that it is impossible unless you change your alligence(please feel free to correct my spelling here, I know how happy it makes you)

  6. Paul

    Not at all- I must say I hadn’t realised they were in power at the dawn of the Bronze Age.

    They always did have a thing for shiny metal :-)

  7. @CrossBat11,

    DC was always going to play the result down as mid-term blues. He is probably right to some extent as the incumbent government usually does take a pounding in mid-term bi-elections/local elections even if they later go on to win the subsequent general election….but it was a disappointing result for the Conservatives and a good one for Labour nonetheless. It showed that Labour has some momentum and it certainly takes a lot of the pressure off Ed Milliband and deflects it towards David Cameron. He now has to raise his game.

    All in all, a much better year for Labour than 2011.

  8. RiN

    @” A classic example is tuition fees where instead of incurring public debt to pay for higher education we will now incur private debt of equal volume. ”

    Well I shouldn’t say this-but -if only!

    The policy was intended to transfer more of the burden for a university education to the student beneficiary.

    But of course, as we know, students only repay their loans if they graduate. Further-graduates do not start repayments until their income reaches £21k pa, repayments at all levels are £540 pa less than the old system, and loan balances unpaid after 30 years are waived.

    So , I’m afraid some poor future CoE is going to find that it is indeed mainly public debt which is funding a university education.

  9. RiN:

    OK: in future I shall support the SNP.

  10. The problem the Tories have is they alienate their base, and fail to win over newer voters.

    Everyone initially applauded Cameron’s move to the centre, saying he couldn’t win without it, but actually all he has done, is cut off the right arm of the tory party those who are anti eu, anti immigration, and sent them off to Ukip, while also failing to win over many centre left voters.

    People on the centre left just won’t vote Tory, they see it as poison, and watering it down doesn’t make anyone more likely to go for it. They’re are people who have been brought up by their parents to never vote Tory. That’s why Murdo Fraser had a good idea of starting a new centre right party in Scotland. For example in one area, Durham, UKIP beat the Tories. Those who like left wing policies will vote for left wing parties, the Tories adopting them will still not be enough to win them around and the right wingers are waking up to the fact that the Tories aren’t all that right wing anymore, and are going slowly (but picking up pace) over to UKIP.

    If you take out the independents yesterday and recalculate, Tories got 36.7 and Ukip got 9.3 so for Cameron the UKIP split is getting worse. A few of those votes may have come from Anti Eu labour, but the vast majority are likely ex tory.

    I think 2015 may be an election that mirrors the 80’s, but this time the left is united “around Labour” but the right is divided between Conservative/UKIP and the remaining Libs who lean more right than left (hence why they are still happy to be a lib and many 2nd prefs went from Lib to Tory.

  11. CB11

    I share your view of DC’s remarks about the PCC election outcomes.

  12. MinM:

    Good, analytical post. Basically they are snookered and can’t make it in either direction in my view.

    May well be that Cameron was their last, best hope. Goodness knows who would follow him………………..

  13. RiN

    Actually after Theo made it 5-2 I’ve given up on the SDP and gone back to the lads at Arsenal.

    I never visit Norway anyway: isn’t it just snow and ice?

  14. The problem for the Tories is not ideology, but tribalism. Rightly or wrongly, they lose a lot of potential voters because of how they are perceived by voters. In theory, many of their policies are/could be popular (i.e. cutting the welfare state, anti-EU message, stronger punishment/justice etc. etc ) are all very popular amongst the general public. But they are seen as out-of-touch and a party for the rich. Whether they can overcome and re-create a new party image that will/can attract new potential voters is something that is open to question, but one which will probably prove very difficult.

  15. @AMBIVALENTSUPPORTER

    Right-wing policy sops doesn`t a coherent policy make.
    Can you tell me in ten words what David Cameron stands for?I bet you it`s going to take a while.

  16. Colin

    2012 PCCs ? 15% to 20%

    Not even that I’m afraid. If you play about with the Guardian’s useful spreadsheet:

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2012/nov/16/pcc-election-results-police-crime-commissioners

    you’ll see it varied between 11.63% (Staffordshire) to 19.5% (Northants – presumably boosted by the Corby by-election). The overall turnout was 14.94%.[1]

    I’m slightly disappointed because I was hoping for at least one single figure result, possibly in a safe Labour area such as Merseyside. But what is noticeable is that the apathy was so evenly spread. The sort of Conservative-dominated areas that reliably produce high turnouts were not much more likely to vote than Labour ones.

    I’m not sure I agree with your automatic assumption that voting = democratic = good. After all if that was true we should be voting for every street-sweeper and postman – and indeed for the people running private companies too. More to the point I don’t think that most people in the country think it would be a good idea either and for many staying away from the polls or voting independent (22.4% of votes cast) or spoiling their paper was their way of protesting. As NickP said some polling would be interesting – and the lack of it is interesting too.

    There’s also the specific problem with policing (and perhaps other areas) that even if people want it to be “democratic”, they don’t want it to be “political”. Of course you can’t have one without the other. Remember how both Labour and Conservative parties toyed with the idea of not putting up candidates to “depoliticise” it. That went well didn’t it? And of course a lot of the “Independents” standing had some form of Party allegiance – some were even rejected candidates.

    [1] The by-election on the same day for Port Erin Village Commissioners had a turnout of 24.7%. Just sayin’.

  17. Colin
    I would suggest expanding your reading of left-wing thought in to the more libertarian/anarchist leaning areas. More Bakunin, less Marx.
    We have been having these sorts of arguments internally on the left since before the first international[1].

    And it’s easy to mock electing as many of society’s positions as possible but, structurally, the alternatives, usually suggested, are via employment contract or by appointment [2].
    So structurally capitalist or authoritarian.
    Both hardly what I would call left-wing. ;)

    You’d actually be surprised at the ideological overlap between the mutualist/libertarian left and charitable libertarian capitalist types.
    Only a few minor disagreements on the nature of property and the validity of the contract stand between them, really. You know, tiny stuff. ;)

    [1] Reading about the first international’s internal struggles is key to understanding divisions on the left between the statist and the mutualist ideologies. In fact it’s key to understanding history – why we had more Lenins and less Kropotkins.
    [2] Well, there’s also voluntary/consensus, but a little impractical to choose a police commissioner that way..

  18. Will there be any study’s of the spoilt ballots? I’m sure I’ve asked about spoilt ballots before but can’t remember what happens to them

  19. Good Afternoon All.

    Nice to hear Anthony Wells on Radio 4 this morning.

    Interesting comparison with the Fulham by election when Raynsford won, but lost it in 1987.

  20. Colin,

    You are of course correct about student loans, indeed I pointed out that this would happen when the details were released. But the intention was to turn public debt into private debt and was based on a philosophy which sees private debt as good and public debt as bad, when in fact there is in most cases very little difference between them

  21. @Smukesh,

    “Right-wing policy sops doesn`t a coherent policy make.
    Can you tell me in ten words what David Cameron stands for?I bet you it`s going to take a while.”

    I couldn’t tell you. Then again, I couldn’t really tell you what any of the main parties or leaders stand for. Modern politics is all about soundbites and appealing to voters. It’s less about policy.

  22. Actually the Private and Public question is very interesting if you consider pension liabilites.

    We are witnessing an attack on Public Sector pensions on the grounds that they are unaffordable, and much of the justification is around the idea that the public sector already gave up final salary pensions for the same reason.

    So basically the individual will be expected to fund their retirement through savings and investments of his or her own. All fine and dandy, but look.

    What happens to an individual or the vast mass of individuals who haven’t saved enough at retirement? Will they or will they not get a state funded pension in one form or another? If yes, then how come it is affordable? If no, are we really saying these people will have to starve and/or freeze to death?

    I suspect not. Especially since the voters might not like it.

    So the attempt to privatise future liabilities for pensions won’t work. Or put it another way, those private liabilites are really public liabilities.

    In the end bank debt, individual debt and public debt are all intertwined. If all the individuals default then the banks are insolvent, if the banks are insolvent where does that leave the Government? If states are bankrupt what is the point of individual debt anyway as there is nobody to enforce collection.

    It’s all a meaningless ideological argument. There is no more advantage in prvatising everything than there is nationalising everytthing becasue when it come down to it, we can’t allow banks, transport, health, pensions etc to fail.

    It’s a fruitless quest by zealots on both sides of the argument.

  23. John Rentoul says they’ll be a Comres/Independent on Sunday/Sunday Mirror poll on Sanday (released this evening). Field dates Weds-Fri.
    http://blogs.independent.co.uk/2012/11/17/poll-alert-25/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

  24. @AMBIVALENT SUPPORTER

    If I asked you what Margaret Thatcher or Blair stood for,I think it might be easier.I think I know what Miliband stands for and I hope he doesn`t do exactly the opposite if he gets into power.

  25. @Smukesh,

    “If I asked you what Margaret Thatcher or Blair stood for,I think it might be easier.I think I know what Miliband stands for and I hope he doesn`t do exactly the opposite if he gets into power.”

    Thatcher was the last of a dying breed, even though I dislike most of her policies. Miliband isn’t detailing any actual policies for a reason – he knows that if he becomes PM he will have to keep tuition fees, public sector cuts etc. He will just become one of the many i.e. someone who promises the earth in opposition, but fails to deliver in power.

  26. As for what Cameron and Miliband really stand for, I haven’t got a clue beyond the soundbites!!!

    They both seem to want to appeal to everyone.

  27. What does Cameron stand for?

    I think he’d like to be an economic conservative and a liberal on social policy. Simple as that. He’s pragmatic on Europe.

    But he suffers from Blair’s problem in that the pragmatism overrides nearly all fundamental beliefs.

    Maybe all politicians who get actual power compromise so much that they don’t stand for much.

  28. Economic conservative vs cheapest tariff for all customers.
    How is that even pragmatic or even possible unless in leftie heaven.

  29. Strip away the party labels and I don’t think there’s much daylight between Cammy and Ed. Same Oxford background and never having a real job, coming straight from Uni, then to being an advisor, MP, party leader etc. Both want to be all things to all men, with very little substance in their policy.

    They agree on almost all the issues, the only difference I can find, is that Miliband wants to cut the public sector and get the budget, just doing it a tad slower.

  30. One assumes that Ed would tax the rich more and cut welfare less a la Obama.

    Might be a dodgy assumption!

  31. On the subject of gas and electricity and water.

    My water had been privatised but I can’t shop around. It’s all the same water and the same supplier in one area.

    But I am expected to shop around for the best deal for gas or electricity. Why the hell should I do that? It’s all the same gas. I don’t believe there is any consumer advantage whatsoever from privatising utilities.How often do I do it? How can I do it anyway? Should I trust a price comparison site? And how long will the deal remain the best deal?

    It’s like savings rates from banks. You get a good deal and then they change it into a bad deal and only give you a better deal if you keep track and challenge them and even then it won’t stay the best deal.

    Competition is a nonsense in these cases.

  32. @NICKP

    You got a point.

  33. I agree Nick

    Similar with trains. The railways have been privatised/franchised off, but there is no competition, if I want to go into London I have to use South Eastern Rail, there is no option for me to go to a cheaper provider. There is no competition they have a monopoly.

  34. ROGER MEXICO

    Yes- I see the figure is around 14% to 15%

    I don’t think we should for everything & everyone.

    This is the extrapolation ad absurdam which OLD NAT used.

    I think elected PCCs is a good idea. There may be others. There may not be.

  35. “One assumes that Ed would tax the rich more and cut welfare less a la Obama.”

    I don’t think he would tax the rich more. He probably would have kept the 50% income tax rate for the richest unlike the Tories (a massive Tory mistake IMO), but apart from that bankers/CEOs, rich people and tax avoiders would still be given a free reign. He probably wouldn’t protect the elderly/disabled IMO, just mainly those Labour voters who receive child tax credits/have children.

    Said like a true cynic, I know. :)

  36. I think Cammo stands for being PM.

  37. tingedfringe

    Also does anybody know if we’re going to get full second-preference results from these elections?
    I.e when people voted Lab1st-Ind2nd, Ind1-Con2nd, etc?

    Unless they’re up somewhere and I’ve missed them.

    I’m not sure that they will be available. For example here are the results for D&C from the Cornwall Council site:

    http://www.cornwall.gov.uk/default.aspx?page=32666

    it doesn’t show a breakdown of the second vote, by first vote. You do get it in the London Mayoral elections, but those are counted electronically so the figures would be easy to extract. I presume all that happened here was that the ballot papers for the other candidates were gathered up together and the second votes counted and no further analysis done or published (though count agents tallying might have an idea).

    A few other points from the D&C results (which I suspect may be more widely representative):

    First preference spoilt votes[1] were 3.32% (as opposed to less than 0.3% in the 2010 General) however the supplementary vote system does cause more to be rejected (maybe 1-2%), so deliberate spoiling was perhaps only 2% of those who voted. I suspect most of those who spoilt did so by scoring through the ballot paper[2] or leaving it blank – only 97 wrote something identifiable (which is a pity as it cheers the counting staff up).

    Postal votes consisted of 43.7% of those cast – much more than the 18.8% in 2010. This helps explain the tumbleweed blowing around the polling stations – only 8.5% of the people on the register tuned up. Oddly enough people in urban areas are more likely to vote postally – Plymouth had the highest percentage 52.9%.

    The relative evenness of turnout we saw across police authority areas is replicated at the LA level. True there is some of usual pattern where smaller communities have higher turnouts[3], but the variation in D&C is surprisingly small: 13.03% to 17.43%.

    [1] Some higher figures quoted are those for “total rejected ballot papers at second count” – 17,897 in this case. But that is mainly people such as Colin who did not use their second vote – the first is still counted.

    [2] Some these will be genuine mistakes where it isn’t clear what the voter meant. However 2108 people also voted “for more than one candidate”, which suggests making the same AV-style mistake that daodao nearly did – though they could also have voted with several Xs.

    [3] Because voting is more of a social thing and you can say things like “I thought you’d retired Mike” to the Presiding Officer. Or at least I would have done if the woman in front of me hadn’t already.

  38. I find in politics, like life in general, there is often a very thin line between cynicism and realism.

  39. Oh – and a big society, though I’m not sure how big and compared to what other sizes.

  40. Oh….. and not being not-in-europe but not being not….um………no, I’ve lost my way with that one.

  41. @Paul Croft,

    The big society idea is probably the biggest flop in modern political history. Does anyone even understand what it means? :)

  42. TINGED

    Right- Bakunin it is then ( gulp) ………..after Sandbrooke’s history of UK 1970-1974; and Edward O Wilson’s The Social Conquest of Earth………and I may have Christmas books too……….but soon anyway :-)

    More seriously-thanks- particularly for your interesting third para.

  43. I think postal votes will get more and more common, i think they are the future of voting, the polling station is on its way out.

    Relatively few people don’t know who they will vote for in the preceding weeks of an election.

    Voting by post allows you to cast you’re vote early if you already know who you will vote for.

  44. By the way all 2010 GE stats in that post came from the Electoral Commission document “The 2010 General Election: aspects of participation and administration”

    http://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0011/105896/Plymouth-GE2010-report-web.pdf

    by our old friends Rallings and Thrasher.

  45. I bet I’m one of very few people, who voted in both the London Mayoral election and the PCC elections. (Moved house in June)

    I voted by post in London and voted in person for PCC on thursday. Wish I had kept the postal vote to be honest, post box is a lot closer than the polling station and you get to vote early.

  46. Ambi

    Actually yes: it means one nation and everyone taking mutual responsibility.

    I heartily prove but the sad thing is that it takes no account of – for example – people who allow their dogs to defecate in children’s play areas. Its utterly unrealistic utopianism and can neither be enforced or encouraged.

  47. Meanwhile on the subject of Corby, Ken’s attempt to put the loss of Corby down to a Mensch effect was, as usual, skillful, full of brio and ostentatiously insincere. It did, admittedly, echo the lady’s own performance of re-emerging on polling day yelling[1] “ME! ME!! IT’S ALL ABOUT ME!!!”. Like she ever said anything else.

    All of which was the most amusing display of chutzpah since… well since Ms M wrote an article for the Guardian last week denouncing Mad Nad for being an attention-seeker who had gone off and left her constituents. :D

    [1] well tweeting I assume which is the electronic equivalent.

  48. ChrisL

    Did AW mention me in his interview?

  49. 400 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! and my best post ever !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

1 6 7 8 9