The frontpage of The Bromley Times
couldn't have been much more unhelpful for Tory candidate Bob Neill (right). It will be a boost to the LibDem candidate whose dirty tactics have been exposed by Ed Vaizey and hilariously by Guido Fawkes.
Ahead of May 4th's local elections I sought your predictions on how many seats the Tories would gain. What are your predictions for tonight?
- What will be the size of the Tory majority (assuming that there will be one!)?
- What percentage share will Bob Neill win?
- Will UKIP beat Labour into fourth place?
- Will Labour retake Blaenau Gwent?
Eric Forth's 2005 result can be seen here.
FULL TEXT OF PATRICK CLIFT'S BROMLEY TIMES STORY
"VOTERS could face ANOTHER by-election if Conservative Bob Neill is elected today, following claims his candidacy is invalid. After weeks of campaigning by the 11 Bromley and Chislehurst by-election candidates, legal challenges may force the contest to be repeated in the autumn.
Problems arose after Mr Neill signed a by-election nomination form while he was a £5,000-a-year member of the North-East London Strategic Health Authority. The high-profile job barred him from becoming an MP. Yet by completing the form, the barrister claimed he was NOT prohibited from standing, leaving him open to possible legal action should he win the vote.
The Tory candidate told the Bromley Times that the issue was irrelevant as the quango is due to be abolished on July 1, and that he resigned from his post last Friday. He added: "It is a non-issue as far as we are concerned. I will not be a member of the strategic health authority at the time of polling day or when I take the seat. "Other parties can argue about it after the election, but I don't think they would want to waste the legal fees."
However UKIP candidate Nigel Farage, who confirmed he was taking legal advice on the issue, claimed: "His declaration to the returning officer was clearly incorrect. Mr Neill has far too many jobs and sits on too many committees already, and there is a strong legal argument for his disqualification as a candidate."
Liberal Democrat by-election agent Shaun Roberts said he hoped that situation would not arise. "People have been expressing their reluctance to elect a part-time MP who lives in London's east end," he said. "The idea of another by-election if he wins could be the final blow to Mr Neill's chances."
And Independent candidate John Hemming-Clark promised: "If the election goes ahead and by some outside chance Mr Neill wins, then I will be contacting the acting returning officer to have the result declared null and void."
As chief returning officer for the election, the candidates' nomination forms were submitted to Bromley council chief executive David Bartlett. However, a council spokesman said the authority had only to check the forms were completed fully, rather than accurately. She added: "It is the candidate's responsibility to make sure the information they give us is correct, and it is not down to us to challenge that information." Only the death of a monarch could halt a by-election once it had been called, a spokesman for the Electoral Commission said."
Looks like a free paper, so most people will have voted by the time they see it anyway...
Posted by: Cllr Iain Lindley | June 29, 2006 at 14:05
1. The Tory majority will be 5,009 (as against Eric Forth's 13,342)
2. 42.4% (Eric's 51.1)
3. Yes UKIP will come third.
4. Labour will win BG back.
Posted by: CCHQ Spy | June 29, 2006 at 14:13
Tory majority 2000
Share: 39%
UKIP: 3rd
Labour: lose deposit
Blanaeu Gwent: Independents win
Posted by: Inamicus | June 29, 2006 at 14:19
1. 6,897
2. 45.6%
3. UKIP will be 4th
4. For westminster yes, for Assembley yes (but only by a small margin)
Posted by: Andrew Hardie | June 29, 2006 at 14:21
1.Conservative majority 4,000.
2.39-40% of vote.
3.Yes
4.Sadly yes Labour will win.
Bob Neill should have resigned his assembly seat and from the Health Authority.It has taken the gloss off what could and should have been a fine campaign.The Conservative party must always strive for the moral high ground.
Posted by: malcolm | June 29, 2006 at 14:25
Not going to predict 1)-depends on turn out
2) 47.1%
3) No, but Lib Dems will take second from us
4) Yes, good chance of taking back BG (first case of a sitting govt making a by-election gain since the early 80's!) but the assembly seat may be closer due to 'sympathy factor'
Posted by: comstock | June 29, 2006 at 14:28
1. Tory majority 6,000
2. 49%
3. Yes
4. No, and No.
Posted by: Sean Fear | June 29, 2006 at 14:32
1. 1743
2. 39.6
3. Yes
4. Yes
The fiasco with Bob Neill's nomination paper was sloppy and incompetent. Bob Neill, no matter how he tries to get round it, made a false declaration on his nomination paper. He is lucky that the Quango is being abolished. It might just save the election from being voided. Also lucky that no-one appears to have notified "Votes Thrown Away" or he may even have seen the seat being awarded to the second place candidate - undoubtedly the Lib Dem.
Malcolm is quite right, the gloss will have been taken from the victory completely.
As for the idiot independent - he can moan to the Action Returning Officer all he likes. The only way to have a declaration declared null is through an election petition. The RO has no legal ability to do this.
Posted by: Louise | June 29, 2006 at 14:46
1. 13,000
2. 47%
3. Yes
4. Yes
Posted by: EdR | June 29, 2006 at 14:48
1 7,000
2 50.5%
3 Yes
4 No Westminster, No assembly
4 Yes Westminster is more a hope than prediction - think some Lab supporters might still want to give Blair a bloody nose and in privacy of booth might just do so.
If B&C had chosen one of final two A lister's my personal view is majority would have been bigger (though perhaps a few more discontented might have voted UKIP so share much the same)
Posted by: Ted | June 29, 2006 at 14:59
So does this campaign prove that picking a 'local' over an a-lister was a good or bad thing?
Posted by: ANONY | June 29, 2006 at 15:03
The sub-editor on the Bromley Times appears to be a bit sloppy if their front-page spelling of pageant is anything to go by...
Posted by: inamicus | June 29, 2006 at 15:04
Too close to call on low turnout.
Liberals 3rd, Labour 4th!
Posted by: Chris Gillibrand | June 29, 2006 at 15:10
stab in the dark time...
1. 3,500
2. 38%
3. No
4. Yes for Westminster, no for Cardiff Bay
Posted by: Daniel Vince-Archer | June 29, 2006 at 15:17
1. 250,000
2. 86%
(because: I'm sure Bromleyites are too sensible to be fussed about either the shenanigans of another LibDem loser or a local paper desperately seeking publicity (well done them i say!)
3. What was the 3rd question? With their fellow traveller Chad, surely UKIP will be aiming for 2nd let alone 3rd place.
4. DVA, All the Way, yaa-ay. (ie Cardiff Bay no).
Posted by: Graeme Archer | June 29, 2006 at 15:31
1)10,000
2)51%
3)No
4)Yes Westminster, No Cardiff
The Ben Abbotts story is awful, shame it broke so late. Anyone know if we are using this against him outside polling stations or whether we are playing nice? one thinsg for certain is that if a re-run is needed Ben Abbotts will get slaughtered if we use this...
Posted by: Chris | June 29, 2006 at 15:33
6500
46%
No
Yes & Yes
Posted by: Paul Kennedy | June 29, 2006 at 15:55
I'll have some of what you've been having this afternoon Mr Archer!
Posted by: Chad | June 29, 2006 at 15:55
@Chris: what is Ben Abbott's story?
Posted by: Graeme Archer | June 29, 2006 at 16:08
Just might though Chad - wondered if perhaps he'd rushed down to Bromley to finish the job Mr Abbott so signally failed to do and inhaled a few too many fumes....
Posted by: Ted | June 29, 2006 at 16:10
Just might though? maybe it's something catching?
Just my thought too Chad... that's better.
Posted by: Ted | June 29, 2006 at 16:13
Looked again at the Bromley Times frontpage -- "Voters may face second election", according to the layout, because "the Motor Pagent [sic] Revs Up". Is this another Iron Triangle thing that I can't understand, except more of an iron line?
Greetings from an old iron in Hackney.
Posted by: Graeme Archer | June 29, 2006 at 16:13
Graeme, A blogger in Bromley by the name of Jaj has discovered something interesting about the images used in ben Abbotts literature. You can read about it Here. This comes after Iain Dale had uncovered the truth about ben helping the orphans...
Posted by: Chris | June 29, 2006 at 16:14
Graeme - see Guido & link.
Posted by: Ted | June 29, 2006 at 16:15
1. Conservative Majority 11,500
2. 48.8%
3. UKIP 4th (just)
4. No
Posted by: Chris Palmer | June 29, 2006 at 16:31
1) 2250
2) 40.5%
3) No
4) Yes
Posted by: R Market | June 29, 2006 at 17:28
1. 1200 max - it will be very very close.
2. 44%
3. Yes
4. Yes
Posted by: Hmmmm | June 29, 2006 at 17:32
1. 11,000
2. 55%
3. Yes
4. Labour shut out of both seats
Posted by: A H Matlock | June 29, 2006 at 17:40
1. 7000
2. 54%
3. UKIP 4th
4. No
Posted by: eugene | June 29, 2006 at 17:45
i. Will be much closer than 2005.
ii. Postal votes apparently OK but turnout is lower than at Borough Elections.
iii. Some Tories swayed by Lib Dem tricks.
iv.Bromley Times is always anti-Tory and Duncan Borrowman seems to write some of the stories.
v. UKIP - 3rd
Lab or Green 4th
NF - 6th
Hemming-Clark (Ind) - 7th
English Democrats - 8th
Monster Raving Loonies - 9th
Nick whatshisgreekname - 10th
Money Reform - 11th
Posted by: Bromley voter | June 29, 2006 at 18:07
Conservative 13,000 (34.2%); UKIP 12,000 (31.5%); Liberal Democrat 9,000 (23.7%); Green 2,000 (5.3%); Labour 1,000 (2.6%) (as their supporters vote with their asses and stay away); other parties - various none more than 500. So a 1,000 majority but even possibly a UKIP win.
Trish Law will win very narrowly in the Assembly Election in Blanaeu Gwent but Labour will beat Dai Davies narrowly in the Westminster vote, Labour will have a major recovery in their vote but the Liberal Democrats will pick up a lot of the Independent votes and potentially be a future challenger to Labour there. Next Welsh Assembly Elections - Labour will regain the seat.
Posted by: Yet Another Anon | June 29, 2006 at 18:22
Cons lose - end of story
Posted by: me | June 29, 2006 at 18:46
Me at 18:46
If you believe that suggest you quickly visit Betfair or go to Guido Fawkes site where he'll offer you odds of 3:1. Money for nothing if you really believe it.
Posted by: Ted | June 29, 2006 at 19:03
Bromley Times is always anti-Tory and Duncan Borrowman seems to write some of the stories.
You flatter me :-)
Though occassionally I give them some good material (but not in this election).
Posted by: Duncan Borrowman | June 29, 2006 at 19:11
I have just returned from Bromley having spent the day knocking up.
Apathy from the core Conservative vote who feel disenfranchised with a poor campaign and the confusion over "3 Jobs Bob" and the validity of his nomination. LibDems active.
I posted my predictions yesterday:
http://andrew-kennedy.blogspot.com/2006/06/somethings-not-quite-right-in-town-of.html
Conservative majority of below 10%. I will stick by it.
Posted by: Andrew Kennedy | June 29, 2006 at 19:12
Andrew,
I hope you are wrong and I know you have reservations over Cameron's Conservatives but if majority falls isn't this a judgement on what I think of (probably unfairly) as the Home Counties Golf Club Constituency Party?
We should achieve a rise in our vote share since last year in view of Labours failings and the LibDems recent poor showing - and I still hope we do and that my reservations are proved pessimistic - but this selection has been dogged from the start by the local party trying to prove its independence from the CamCons & from what I've read using the same old tactics and messages.
I must admit that having looked at Bromley Councils record on things like civil partnerships perhaps the electors are happier with a traditional Tory. So hopefully Bob will win and win handsomely.
Posted by: Ted | June 29, 2006 at 19:27
1. 12,000.
2. 50%.
3. Yes.
4. No.
I'm hoping the votes for all the other minor candidates will reduce the Labour and Lib Dem share.
Posted by: EML | June 29, 2006 at 19:29
"Conservative 13,000 (34.2%); UKIP 12,000 (31.5%); Liberal Democrat 9,000 (23.7%); Green 2,000 (5.3%); Labour 1,000 (2.6%) (as their supporters vote with their asses and stay away); other parties - various none more than 500. So a 1,000 majority but even possibly a UKIP win."
Too low for Labour, but too high for the LibDems (they weren't raising anyones pulse, on the doorstep at least). The top too close to call. A truly terrible Tory candidate. Seems neo-trad but in reality post-modern.
Posted by: Chris Gillibrand | June 29, 2006 at 19:33
I'm hoping the votes for all the other minor candidates will reduce the Labour and Lib Dem share.
Labour can't win Bromley & Chislehurst this parliament anyway, or in a General Election, the only situation they could possibly take such a seat is one in which there is a Conservative Government in a state of collapse and them at a high point and even then it would be a tough seat to take, 1995 maybe they would have taken it.
Posted by: Yet Another Anon | June 29, 2006 at 19:35
Blaenau Gwent - am told that at the opening of postal votes it looked as if Trish Law was ahead of Labour. Labour strongly tipped to win the Westminster seat. The Assembly seat is more immediately important - if Labour win it, they regain their absolute majority in the Assembly.
Bromley - Bob by 4000
Posted by: Robert Buckland | June 29, 2006 at 20:53
1. 23,000
2. 73%
3. No, the fruitcakes will lose their deposit.
4. Dave's appeal across the length and breadth of the land, coupled with a below the radar telephone canvassing campaign will lead to surprise Conservative victories in both Westminster and Assembly seats, defeating New Labour and Old Labour in one go.
Posted by: Boy George | June 29, 2006 at 21:29
if Labour win it, they regain their absolute majority in the Assembly.
It will make some difference in terms of debates and composition of committees, but then again they have the advantage of being so close to a majority as to make no odds and yet that they don't quite have a majority probably rather releases them from being perceived as being totally in control and there are some advantages of that for them, probably keeps Labour voters in Wales on their toes a bit without causing complacency and people expect less of a Minority Administration. Fixed Term Assemblies lets them out from any sense of constantly having to scrabble to achieve a majority because everyone knows that really on a Labour administration in Wales is practical with the current Assembly makeup.
Posted by: Yet Another Anon | June 29, 2006 at 22:11
Good luck to Bob! Whatever the result he has been supported by a fantastic team who should be proud. My hunch is a 4,000 majority and the headline to be Labour recieving a kicking in Wales.
Posted by: Henry Edward-Bancroft | June 29, 2006 at 22:19
Unless turnout is low, a 4,000 majority would IMO be a poor result, not only in light of the opinion polls, but the local election results in Bromley as well. We haven't yet had the result, however if we get anywhere near to losing the seat then CCHQ has got to re-organise/get a grip on its by-election campaigning. I am getting fed up of seeing a succession of poor by-election results due to poor/inept campaiging.
Posted by: Voice from the South West | June 29, 2006 at 22:27
Would it really be CCHQ's fault though, Andrew? My understanding is that this campaign has largely been left to the local association per their wishes.
Posted by: A H Matlock | June 29, 2006 at 22:36
Best of luck to Bob, though the distinct lack of support to the Association is to be noted. As to whether they wanted the help or not, I doubt Cameron would have been bending over backwards to even offer it since his beloved A-Listers missed out on the shot. Oh, dont we love a private hissy fit!
Posted by: James Maskell | June 29, 2006 at 22:49
That's preposterous, James. I'm sure David Cameron would have made available whatever help the local association wanted. He, unlike others, would need no reminders that we are all supposed to be pulling on the same rope.
Posted by: A H Matlock | June 29, 2006 at 22:53
Alastair - I wouldn't (for once!) say it was CCHQ's fault. However I think something does need to be done about our by-election campaiging in general - our results in Moray, Cheadle and maybe even Dunfermline were worse than what they should have been.
Cue Bob Neill to romp home :)
Posted by: Voice from the South West | June 29, 2006 at 22:53
I noticed that Electoral Calculus has a problem handling Independent held seats - no matter what figures you enter for the 3 main parties it shows Blanaeu Gwent as being held by an Independent by the same percentage vote, so if Labour wins it back or appears to have moved to a position where they will win it back at the next election that all your figures you are tapping in will still show it as being Independent.
Posted by: Yet Another Anon | June 29, 2006 at 22:55
Andrew, on that we certainly agree. We could learn a few lessons from the Lib Dems in this regard though I hope we would make more of an effort to keep our noses clean.
Posted by: A H Matlock | June 29, 2006 at 22:57
CCHQ can blame the local Association for a bad result in Bromley if they wish.
But is to blame for Moray ? £92,000 spent for 6,000 votes polled. I expect that is the fault of Mary Scanlon.
I guess we could blame the sympathy factor for our poor showing in Livingston.
Not quite sure who is responsible for Dunfermline & West Fife.
Posted by: Andrew Kennedy | June 29, 2006 at 22:57
So VFSW, would you support CCHQ & the centre treating by-elections outside of normal procedure and for the next deciding who the shortlist is, assuming no selected candidate, and forming a specialist by election team (as our opponents do)?
Posted by: Ted | June 29, 2006 at 22:58
Andrew Kennedy - fair points. What do you suggest to remedy this situation?
Posted by: A H Matlock | June 29, 2006 at 23:04
Betfair is indicating that Labour will fail to win back either of the Blaenau Gwent seats.
Follow the money, always follow the money.
Posted by: Daniel Vince-Archer | June 29, 2006 at 23:09
Just returned home from campaigning, looks to me that Bob will win by 2-3,500 votes. Labour still 3rd (just!).
Posted by: Justin Hinchcliffe | June 29, 2006 at 23:09
Not quite sure who is responsible for Dunfermline & West Fife.
mainly that the Liberal Democrats or SNP were the only parties that could take the seat off Labour and that the more votes the Conservatives gained then the more likely that Labour would hold it and if they didn't then that the SNP would take it off them, indeed the Labour Party will have great reason to hope to regain it in 2009 and the Conservatives taking votes off the Liberal Democrats would help them in this, the Liberal Democrats hold it by a very small margin.
Posted by: Yet Another Anon | June 29, 2006 at 23:13
Not quite sure who is responsible for Dunfermline & West Fife.
Should have been in italics.
Posted by: Yet Another Anon | June 29, 2006 at 23:14
Labour still 3rd
Labour was actually 2nd narrowly ahead of the Liberal Democrats in 2005.
Posted by: Yet Another Anon | June 29, 2006 at 23:15
Andrew Neil has just reported on This Week that the word from BG is that Labour have failed to win back both Assembly & HoC seats.
Posted by: mattsimpson | June 30, 2006 at 00:05
Failure to win back the HOC seat in BG would be a big disappointment, but we shall see. I still say Labour by a nose
Posted by: comstock | June 30, 2006 at 00:08
Surprised there's not more live blogging on here. PB.com appears to be the place to be...
Posted by: Cllr Iain Lindley | June 30, 2006 at 00:16
Iain - I wonder if you would be good enough to email me on the address linked to my name? Many thanks.
Posted by: A H Matlock | June 30, 2006 at 00:25
Idiotic that the media keep referring to the by elections as 2 by-elections when in fact it's 3.
Posted by: Yet Another Anon | June 30, 2006 at 00:39
Done!
Posted by: Cllr Iain Lindley | June 30, 2006 at 00:43
Early indications from Bromley and Chislehurst suggest Conservative 48%, Liberal Democrats 38%, Labour lost deposit.
Posted by: Daniel Vince-Archer | June 30, 2006 at 01:08
"Early indications from Bromley and Chislehurst suggest Conservative 48%, Liberal Democrats 38%, Labour lost deposit"
Oh dear.Result never in doubt but from 2nd to lost deposit in a year. I shall have to put this one down to tactical voting.
Posted by: comstock | June 30, 2006 at 01:11
If Labour can't get 5% to save a deposit it might be a bumpy ride in BG too.
Posted by: comstock | June 30, 2006 at 01:13
Labour have conceded defeat in both by-elections in Blaenau Gwent.
Posted by: Daniel Vince-Archer | June 30, 2006 at 01:20
I have just heard a report of a 600 (six hundred) Conservative majority in B&C. Not confirmed.
Posted by: Andrew Kennedy | June 30, 2006 at 02:08
Looking like a massively reduced majority for B Neill: either the core vote took the result for granted or the more traditional constituents of E Forth wanted to send a message to CCHQ??!!
Posted by: Neil C | June 30, 2006 at 02:09
The Lib's have called a recount as the the margin between them and the Tories is in the hundreds!!
Very surprising, perhaps the local newspaper headlines and the opposition parties negative coverage of B Neill may have hit home with the voters??!!
Posted by: Neil C | June 30, 2006 at 02:11
Not suprising at all Neil. I predicted a 16% swing to the LibDems on this site yesterday.
Posted by: Andrew Kennedy | June 30, 2006 at 02:13
What did you base this on Andrew?? Did either of the two factors I mentioned above come into it??
Posted by: Neil C | June 30, 2006 at 02:18
Yes - both of them !
I posted my thoughts on B&C on my blog when I returned from Knocking-up earlier tonight. Please feel free to read:
http://www.andrew-kennedy.blogspot.com/
Posted by: Andrew Kennedy | June 30, 2006 at 02:21
Good insight there Andrew Thank you!!
I fancy the jobs issue certainly took it's tole, and the Euro views will certainly not have helped!!
Posted by: Neil C | June 30, 2006 at 02:27
Just watching BBC News 24 live and it seems the apology in Wales did not have the desired effect!! The independant winners speech was a real throwback to the days of the British disease!!
Posted by: Neil C | June 30, 2006 at 02:32
11,629: B Neill scrapes in!!
Now the inquest begins!!
Posted by: Neil C | June 30, 2006 at 02:46
11,629: B Neill scrapes in!!
Now the inquest begins!!
Posted by: Neil C | June 30, 2006 at 02:47
Fantastic barrage against the Lib Dems by Bob Neill. Well done for having the guts!!
Posted by: Neil C | June 30, 2006 at 02:48
Fantastic barrage against the Lib Dems by Bob Neill. Well done for having the guts!!
Posted by: Neil C | June 30, 2006 at 02:49
I agree. Glad Bob got that off his chest. I certainly don't dispute any of it.
Posted by: A H Matlock | June 30, 2006 at 02:57
His barrage made him look very small in my eyes.
Posted by: Christina | June 30, 2006 at 03:00
I think Bob Neill needed to expose the personal onslaught against him by the arrogant lib dem candidate!!
His reaction I think was completely spontaneous and refreshing to see in this era of stage managed politics!!
As a replacement for Eric Forth, an independent minded M.P. we Tories should be proud!! The raw emotion of the speech was evident and great to see.
Congratulations Bob Neill M.P.
Posted by: Neil C | June 30, 2006 at 03:06
There is nothing to be proud about reducing a massive majority to 633! If we're pround of that we'll keep losing.
Kamall was a suitable replacement to replace Forth, having the same beliefs.
The Lib Dems only gained another 1000 or so votes, we lost over 10, 000! Conservative voters stayed at home.
Posted by: Christina | June 30, 2006 at 03:18
PS It is great to see raw emotion when it expressed on behalf of the people the winning candidate is representing. Having a hissy fit about Bob Neill being insulted is not great.
Posted by: Christina | June 30, 2006 at 03:22
I think Bob hit the nail on the head in his post match interview when he said many core voters took the result for granted.
Having experienced the Lib Dem campaigning in the North of England I am very proud of the way Bob voiced what all of us Tory activists know to be the truth, concerning their lack of integrity and honesty in campaigning!!
Posted by: Neil C | June 30, 2006 at 03:23
P.S. The hissy fit concerns the integrity of the Conservative Candidate, who was voted in on behalf of a majority of the people to represent their views in Parliament, so it could be argued that he was expressing raw emotion on behalf of them!!
Yes, the majority is very disapointing, but by elections have a habit of throwing up sporadic results!!
Posted by: Neil C | June 30, 2006 at 03:29
Yes Neil, Neill's hissy fit could be argued that he was arguing on behalf of his new constituents. That is known as spin.
Posted by: Christina | June 30, 2006 at 03:41
And what did you make of the losing Lib Dem's speech, Christina? I suppose it was a model of grace and virtue?
Posted by: A H Matlock | June 30, 2006 at 03:52
Lets hope that this is just a feak by-election result. A majority of this size, in a seat that we should waltz through, against the limp dems is pretty poor.
Hardly a ringing endorsement of DC is it?
Tory voters stayed at home? Lets hope thats true, but we need them to get out and vote.
Posted by: Jon White | June 30, 2006 at 04:11
"And what did you make of the losing Lib Dem's speech, Christina? I suppose it was a model of grace and virtue?"
It was an appropriate and rather funny response to Bob's Alan Partridge cringeworthy speech. If he can't stand the heat he should get out of the kitchen.
Posted by: Christina | June 30, 2006 at 04:25
voted in on behalf of a majority of the people
Really ? So turnout was 100% then ?
Posted by: TomTom | June 30, 2006 at 05:21