« BORIS WINS | Main | Boris says thanks »

Comments

Malcolm Dunn

Well done to all our successful candidates particularly James Cleverly who is a great guy.
The GLA does need to assert itself however and show the public that it can be a force for good. To date, sadly, it has failed to do that. I hope William Hague was wrong about the assembly but I fear unless something happens farly shortly he will be proved to right.

Common Sense

Ten men and one woman? I hope that Boris has got some women lined up for senior appointments!

Not Boris

James Cleverly polled 8% less than Boris, more than the other Conservative constituency candidates. Are Conservative voters in Bromley closet racists? It certainly looks like it.

The Livingstone and Labour vote share actually increased. The Conservatives won because the UKIP vote collapsed and a substantial decline in the Lib Dem vote too. In addition to Brown, the other big losers are Clegg and Farage.

UKIP will struggle to raise funds for its European campaign. It is facing substantial losses, even a wipeout. Its only hope is that Cameron fails to offer a Eurosceptic policy of substance.

graeme archer

can I add two words of thanks for the unelected? I know two of the GLA candidates who didn't get in- Alexander Ellis in NE London, and Andy Jennings in Greenwich and Lewisham. Both of them ran brilliant campaigns in our harder areas, and their discipline and leadership helped give us a strong second in both (we came third in NE last time) as well as about 50000 votes each for boris. Don't believe the labour line that they had inner London sewn up- our talented teams there helped increase the Tory vote, and the Tory organisation, visibly and significantly. Congratulations to all of them, doughty conservatives and brave fighters all.

bluepatriot

I fear you may be right "Not Boris". The same happened in the MEP selection with Syed Kamall polling less votes than Charles Tannock and Nirj Deva also under-scoring Richard Ashworth. In every other contest the more sceptic candidate beat the more europhile candidate.

Yet Another Anon

UKIP will struggle to raise funds for its European campaign. It is facing substantial losses, even a wipeout.
Nationally they made a net gain of 5 councillors, now having 60 councillors - they already didn't have any GLA members because of the formation of the new One London Party which has since fizzled away, in the European Elections they are well established already - they have good prospects of holding and even increasing their number of seats.

IRJMilne

"The Conservatives won because the UKIP vote collapsed"

The number of Conservative votes went up by far more than the UKIP vote went down. We won chiefly because we got our vote out even more than Livingstone did.

For example - in Sutton and Croydon, we won over 85,000 votes, when the combined total of Norris' votes + Maloney's votes (still including those who stuck with UKIP) amounts to only 56,000 votes. Where did the other 30,000 votes come from? Not from the Liberals either - they went down by only 4000 votes. The truth is, in that one area we got at least 25,000 people who didn't vote in the last mayoral elections to turn out and vote for Boris Johnson - and from speaking to people on the doorstep, my impression was of enthusiasm for Boris and the current Tory message more than of a "get Livingstone" sentiment

UKIP's performance *was* dreadful - it should be remembered, though, that last time around UKIP had the benefit of the mayoral and European elections being on the same day, focussing minds on the issue of the EU, and bringing UKIP additional publicity in the run-up to the election.

support the strivers

Yes, absolutely delighted to see more of us in the Assembly.

Just sorry that Alexander Ellis - despite his doubling the vote!! - didn't get there too. He deserves a seat at Westminster and hopefully his efforts will have been noted.

Simon Newman

James Cleverley - 105,162 votes, 51.83% of all votes cast, a majority of 75,237 over Labour. I don't see how that indicates terrible racism in the hearts of Bexley & Bromley.

Congratulations to Dick Tracey - "Richard was the only member to receive more votes within his area than Boris" is pretty impressive.

GT

It seems to me that PR has a lot to answer for with UKIP last time, who plainly had no idea about London and the BNP this time. We also get Greens and just missed out on George Galloway and his assorted Trots.
The reasons for differences between local candidates and Boris Johnson's vote is most likely that Lib Dem voters did not understand the system and voted Livingstone or Johnson in the first round, instead of going with their normal party.
First past the post would have delivered the same result, but without the oddball hangers on.

Sally Roberts

Well done to them all!

Not Boris

Boris Johnson got 122,052 (60% share) first preference votes in Bromley and Bexley. nearly 17,000 (13.8%) of those voters did not vote for James Cleverly. Perhaps Simon Newman can explain why one in seven Boris voters did not back Cleverly.

Simon Newman

Apart from Dick Tracey in Merton & Wandsworth, all the Assembly candidates got fewer votes than Boris. Boris is a big name, they're not. Plus even non-Tories were desperate to get Ken out; I'm sure plenty of people all across London voted Boris for mayor and some other party or parties for the Assembly (you could eg vote Tory on the List and Green for the constituency candidate). The system encourages that kind of thing and there's nothing unusual, or racist, about it.

Not Boris

"Yet Another Anon" should note that in 2004 UKIP also benefited from the publlicity generated by Robert Kilroy-Silk's candidacy and Paul Syke's £2.5 million poster campaign. Kilroy-Silk stormed off when he failed to secure the leadership. Sykes no longer donates to the party. 60 councillors nationally is pathetic.

In 2009, UKIP needs to get over 10% of the national vote to hold onto most of its seats. If it drops below 7%, it will get about two or three seats at best.

Gerard Batten, UKIP's mayoral candidate, was predicting that UKIP would get 3 or 4 GLA seats. They got none and he got less than 1% of the vote and fewer than the Christian candidate. That is not the performance of a party that will retain its dozen MEPs.

sjm

Let's not forget Matthew Laban in Enfield&Haringey - worked so hard, and got within a whisker of winning it. Next time, Matt, next time!

Not Boris

Richard Barnbrook got 2.84% of first preferences and 5.23% of second preferences. The BNP got 5.33% of the London list votes for the GLA. A large proportion of BNP supporters (nearly 50% of them) voted Boris as their first preference.

Martin from MayorWatch

Guys

Just because it's the sort of thing which sets my OCD off like crazy can I just point out that 'GLA' refers to the Greater London Authority - the Assembly is just called the London Assembly.

Martin

Margaret on the Guillotine

Not Boris - you've just made that up, you have no idea how the BNP list voters went for Mayor. Certainly it is not true that all those BNP voters who did not vote for Barnbrook voted for Boris, especially in safe Labour Barking.

ade

It should be pointed out that the GLA is perhaps the least important elected body in the country.

It has no power, no resposibility, basically no function at all.

Let's not forget that Conservatives have traditionally believed in small government, and if anything needs to be abolished, it's this bloated, useless talking shop.

The only "scrutiny" an elected mayor needs, is the relentless scrutiny of the electorate, and the power to unseat him when the next election rolls round.

Not Boris

"Margaret", the BNP recommended that its voters support Boris as their second preference. It is reasonable to assume that a large proportion voted for Boris as their first, rather than second, preference.

Londoner

One minor scandal about how the list system works is that there was no way whatsoever, so far as I can see, of having found out in advance who was on the party lists. No lists of people in the official booklet, no lists at polling stations, never reported in any newspaper. You may have reported it here but I am fairly much a regular and never noticed it.

It was therefore a very pleasant surprise to find out afterwards that Andrew Boff and Victoria Borwick were top of the list - both of whom I hope will now play a significant role in the Boris/Assembly team. If I had known they were standing the friends and neighbours who asked me about the voting system etc would have got a much more personal and ringing recommendation on how to vote on the list. But it is a farce that even a political anorak like me had no idea who I was voting for - let alone any chance of finding out anything about the candidates of the other parties. For instance, I saw a party political broadcast from the UKIP Mayoral candidate and concluded that he was an idiot - but maybe his list colleagues were better (or was he top of the list?) OK I wasn't going to vote for them anyway, but you take my point.

I see from the agenda of the first LA meeting next week that there is an opportunity for Boris to appoint a Deputy Mayor - I presume it has to be from the LA members? Whilst I am tempted to say it should be Boff, it might be sensible for it to be someone who has been on the LA already. Who will/should it be?

On the question of abolishing the LA, I do think that a scrutiny body to which the Mayor is accountable should not be lightly thrown away, although whether it needs to meet in the day rather than the evening, and pretend to be a full time job (paying £50,000 a year) is another matter. Wouldn't it be a good inclusive move for Boris to say that he wants to use its people more, rather than talk about abolition? If we say the latter people will just say it's back to 1986 the moment we get any power in London. Surely the problem with the Mayoralty under Ken was that it had too much power, not too little.

Jon

The official guide which was sent to every household contained details of the party lists at the back of the booklet.

Jon

Rather amusingly the English Democrats managed to include twenty three individuals on the party list, even though only eleven seats were up for grabs.

IRJMilne

If "not boris"' main point is that Boris Johnson got some votes for the BNP, it could quite equally be pointed out that Livingstone probably got the communist/revolutionary trotskyist/islamic terrorist vote. In Bromley, if we presume that every National Front voter who did not vote Richard Barnbrook backed Boris Johnson for Mayor (highly unlikely), that amounts to only 2,300 votes.

As for "racist Tories", 1 in 9 Boris Johnson voters in Sutton and Croydon didn't vote for Steve O'Connell, and *more* than 1 in 7 Boris Johnson voters in the South West didn't vote for Tony Arbour.

Serf

Are Conservative voters in Bromley closet racists? It certainly looks like it.

Not being familiar with the voters of Bromley, I cannot answer that with 100% certainty. (though I am sure that James Cleverly could do).

However, this just looks like a smear to me. why?
Many Non Tories voted for Boris, so there are many possible reasons other than bigotry for the result.
The vast majority of Bromley's Conservatives were happy to vote Cleverly, even if a tiny minority weren't.

We all know that our party (as is true of big tent parties) include people whose views are different, and sometimes even offensive. We can hardly hold an inquisition every time there is an election can we.

Londoner

Thanks Jon. I searched but somehow missed page 29 - no biog details though.

On the Cleverley issue, one should compare the constituency vote with the party list vote in the constituency, not with the Mayoralty vote - and also compare that discrepancy with other constituencies. Might his predecessor having gone off to be an MP have been a slight negative also (4 jobs Bob or whatever they quite infairly called him)? It's clearly just a smear. People didn't believe us when we said Boris was a racist so let's smear his suburban voters instead.

Meanwhile Boris's first engagement as Mayor was yesterday to go to Sikh new year celebrations - with his half-Sikh wife. Oh dear, doesn't quite fit the left's script does it?

David Gold

huge congratulations to the successful GLA candidates who now have a real opportunity to make a difference in London. But special thanks to those who fought so hard and helped drive the Conservative vote up but did not find themselves elected to the GLA. In particular I would like to thank Andy Jennings who fought a strong and energetic campaighn in Greenwich & Lewisham, motivating many who may not have believed victory was possible until recently. I hope he will continue to seek public office, he has a strong connection with the grassroots, understands the public's concerns and has a good brain. Just the type of person who should be in office.

Justin Hinchcliffe

I am truly sorry that we could not get the 'right' result of our local GLA candidate, Matthew Laban (Enfield-Haringey). This was Matthew's first attempt to enter City Hall. His strength came out during the campaign and you could not have asked for a more dedicated, energetic and reliable candidate than Matthew. I hope he gives it another shot.

ADE

"huge congratulations to the successful GLA candidates who now have a real opportunity to make a difference in London."

How?

Joe  James Broughton

I don't know what "Not Boris"'s problem is.
(Bexley and Bromley).
The Tory and Labour votes were higher on the Mayoral vote than the GLA vote, as one might expect, because it was the former where the two way Con/Lab contest was most intense.
Even so, the GLA results were very good - although Labour also increased their GLA vote over 2004.

tory guy

COMMENT OVERWRITTEN

William

I do not understand why UKIP had candidates in the local authority/mayoral elections at all. As most traditional conservatives realised the presence of UKIP would only serve to split the vote, most UKIP supporters (at Euro elections at least) voted Conservative this time. The danger for the party is what will happen at the next euro elections when I fear an increasing number will vote UKIP and not Tory. The Euro issue has not gone away; it is just a matter of voters realising there are horses for courses.

Graham D'Amiral

James Cleverly polled over 105,000 votes which accounts for almost 52% the highest share of the vote won by any GLA candidate and when you consider that Bob Neill polled 64,000 (39%) in 2004 I think the evidence is clear that Bexley & Bromley voters supported James in unprecedented numbers.

Boris Johnson as has been said in all but one constituency outpolled the Party's GLA candidates evidence surely that he had an appeal beyond traditional Conservative conservative voters. In Bexley & Bromley the 60% Boris polled was a massive improvement on the 37% Steve Norris won in 2004.

James Marsh

Is it odd that Boris Johnson got almost the same number of second preference votes as Steve Norris in 2004?

Bexie

I suspect UKIP is dying. I see very little of them down Thanet way and several of their core folk seem to have come back to the Conservatives.

What used to be their headquarters is no longer plastered with UKIP posters and has not been for a couple of years.

Anon

Dick Tracey didn't get more votes than Boris. The BBC website incorrectly gave Boris 72,236 when the actual figure was 77,236. (Source London Elects) Dick only got 75,103. Wonderful man though he is it defies belief that Dick would get more than Boris.

The comments to this entry are closed.

London Mayor videos

  • Receive our daily email
    Enter your details below:
    Name:
    Email:
    Subscribe    
    Unsubscribe 

  • Tracker 2
  • Extreme Tracker