Comments on: Plymouth Sutton and Devonport

By: Tim13

Tim13 — Tue, 03 Aug 2010 18:57:44 +0000

I fully agreed with the merger for the reasons suggested by David Steel at the time, Joe. At that point in time one party was needed, not two. It was up to David Owen what he personally wanted to do. Yes, his activities split the former members of the Alliance (as to a lesser extent did the continuing Meadowcroft Liberals). But Owen’s influence as a former Cabinet minister was much greater, and by fighting on to the (very) bitter end being beaten into fifth place at one of the Bootle byelections, he delayed the take off of the merged party.

I don’t believe that Labour would never have recovered, but the jury is very much out on whether it would have recovered sufficiently for a victory in 1997 (and certainly a near victory in 1992).

By: Joe James B

Joe James B — Tue, 03 Aug 2010 10:07:59 +0000

It might have swung back to a Labour/Con contest anyway.

Tim 13 clearly believes the destruction of the Lib/SDP Alliance was all Dr Owen’s fault and if he hadn’t opposed merger, the Labour Party would never have recovered.

I do not.

By: Tim13

Tim13 — Tue, 03 Aug 2010 08:07:00 +0000

In answer to the discussion about Plymouth on the Tiverton and Honiton thread, the (almost) entire reason for the swings between 1987 and 1992 was david Owen’s refusal to join the Liberal Democrats, continuing his rump SDP (which had considerable support in Plymouth, the city having taken Owen to its heart as one of its MPs). There had been hardly any Liberal support for years in the city, unlike the rest of Devon and Cornwall, and much SDP support actually reverted in 1992.

By: Kieran W

Kieran W — Mon, 28 Jun 2010 09:25:50 +0000

There was an interesting article in the Plymouth Herald last week on the subject of the election expenses of those standing in the city back in May. For me the big surprise is the vast amounts spent by UKIP (£30,000 here and £21,000 in Moor View) to little real effect. Of the £30k spent here apparently “UKIP paid about £28,000 for advertisements on Plymouth buses and the rent on a high-profile ’shop’ on Mutley Plain”. I reckon a sum of that size could have been better spent.

Of the candidates from the main parties “Mr Colvile spent less than £12,000 in a campaign that ran from early January this year, well short of Mrs Gilroy’s £20,000″. So much for poor diddums Labour candidates losing out to high spending Tories bankrolled by that nasty old Lord Ashcroft.

On the subject of Lord Ashcroft I thought for a long time that the party should have told him to get stuffed and keep his money, as his ambiguous tax status provided valuable ammunition for the opposition. It’s not even as if the party desperately needed his money.

By: Joe James B

Joe James B — Mon, 21 Jun 2010 14:12:38 +0000

yes,
I thought Stroud might be a bit closer 2 years or so ago, but not from April 2008 onwards,
perhaps David Drew was a good MP or they squeezed the LD vote,

By: Pete Whitehead

Pete Whitehead — Mon, 21 Jun 2010 14:07:34 +0000

Stroud actually had the highest Labour share of the vote of all the seats in the SW

By: Joe James B

Joe James B — Mon, 21 Jun 2010 13:53:03 +0000

They nearly held Stroud though which was a good result.

By: Andrea

Andrea — Mon, 21 Jun 2010 13:47:34 +0000

yes, just 4 in SW (Seaback, Bradshaw, Primarolo and McCarthy). And also just 4 in SE

By: TonyOtim

TonyOtim — Mon, 21 Jun 2010 11:32:35 +0000

I can only see 4. 1 in Plymouth, Exeter and 2 in Bristol.

By: Neil Turner

Neil Turner — Mon, 21 Jun 2010 11:22:44 +0000

Let’s play a game….spot the Labour MP in the South West of England!!! I think that they are down to 5.