Vote

Thursday is by-election day - when 13 seats, and perhaps the future direction of the City - are decided. I know this election campaign hasn't exactly set the world on fire but it will make a difference here in the City.

Some parties are trying to convince you this is a referendum on the Coalition Government.

Some parties are trying to say its a county council election instead.

Some parties have some very choice figures to say only they can win here.

I say this - this is a City Council election, about City issues for City voters. Read the manifesto documents of the parties (the Conservatives one is here, for example) then make your decision.

But whatever you do - vote and vote for a positive reason.

I obviously hope that my record as a Councillor in the last 4 years will see me home in Bowthorpe but nothing can be taken for granted and we will fight every minute tomorrow for each and every vote.

Norwich Leaseholders Demand Connaught Inquiry

I don't usually reproduce comments from this blog but this one is well worth it, from Leaseholders Chairman Pauline Walton:

Leaseholders have been expressing concern about the management of this procurement project since it began in March last year.

We believe there Norwich Council has a case to answer for its failure to notice the state of Connaught's accounts in November last year, and adverse reporting by fund manager Tim Steer in mid-December. We believe that the Council was reckless in its appointment of Connaught on 10 February 2010, given the incredibly low bid price (30% lower than anyone else). We wonder whether its "due diligence exercise" really proved that this bid was affordable.

Morrison tried to warn this council immediately it knew it had lost the bid, but the Council pressed on.

Citizens of Norwich deserve better than this.

Now, with Connaught's social housing operation in administration, I presume we can look forward to another interim contract while the council has to go through a major expensive procurement process all over again.

Surely this warrants a public inquiry?

Pauline Walton
Chair, Norwich Leaseholders' Association

Personally I couldn't agree more - this has been a shambles and the point is that I don't know if the argument made by Mrs Walton is correct. An inquiry would sort that out. This all demonstrates the shambles of the way that Labour have run the City Council. There were warned ...

An inquiry is a good long term solution, but a vote to remove this Labour administration tomorrow is a better short term solution.

Connaught goes into Administration

The bad news for the staff and customers of Connaught was heavily trailed this morning and we now know that they have gone into administration (more here). This in, obviously, a very worrying time for both the 10,000 Connaught staff both here in Norwich and around the country and also for the tens of thousands who depend on their services.

There has been much concern expressed at Labour's handling of the Connaught contract, including from both City MPs Chloe Smith and Simon Wright, and also by the Conservative Group on the City Council. Questions were raised about the situation surrounding the Morrison bid, the "teething problems" at the beginning of the service and now the financial perils of the company. All along Labour have told us - don't worry, it'll be fine. There are, apparently, plans in place to ensure services do not suffer. I am not on the Council so I know no more than anybody else but Labour are going to have to make those plans public pretty soon.

This whole situation seems to have been handled very badly indeed. Was this contract ever robust enough? Labour have some big questions to ask - but residents on the doorstep tonight were rightly very concerned and many believed this incident was symptomatic of the way Labour have run City Hall.

No wonder Labour are desperate to turn a City by-election into a County election or General Election - because they are afraid of their own record in office.

Almost There

With polling day now just a few days away, I can report that I am absolutely shattered. Day-in-day-out campaigning - a mix of canvassing, leafleting and meeting residents groups is all coming to an end and on Thursday people will have their say.

I don't know if I'll have blogging time between then and now but this is just really say a big thank you to all those people in Bowthorpe and Earlham who have been so kind when we have called. Your support is greatly appreciated. Thanks also to those who have tramped the streets with me during these four weeks - plus those who have dished out the moral support!

This is an election nobody wanted but the result will shape our City for many years to come.

Local media & Local democracy

Archant goes through good times and bad times when it comes to reporting local democracy and elections. Currently, under the present Editor and team, they are having a good time. Shaun Lowthorpe and Dan Grimmer are like the Statler and Waldorf of the City (there goes my favourable coverage) but are doing an excellent job. At the moment they are previewing 2 wards per day in the lead u to the poll. It's even better to see them coming off the fence and having a punt at who they think is in the game at the moment. So far they think the Conservatives will hold Bowthorpe, LibDems hold Eaton (just) and Labour to hold University. Lakenham is too-close-to-call. It's good to see pieces from all the candidates (except UKIP who failed to provide any copy) with then an opinion-style piece from the paper. When the first article about the elections appeared on page 57 of the EDP I did fear a lack of coverage, but this really is a good service to democracy. Well done, Archant.

LibDem Negative Campaigning - New Low

The LibDems are very much predictable in the vicious and negative style of campaigning - the sort which led their former Leader Hereward Cooke, a decent man, to apologise to council for it (background here). Yet amazingly, despite poll after poll saying people don't like negative campaigning it seems to work. I wonder, however, if they can both be negative and mislead at the same time and still get away with it?

The following is taken from the latest "Simon Wright school of negative campaigning" - just a small section but from an A3 leaflet designed to knife Labour and suggest only the LibDems can beat them here (without a word about the Greens who actually do hold the ward).

Take a look ...
You would think from this that the LibDems has valiantly tried to stop the madness of Labour spending £1.5m of taxpayers cash on a "huge vain white-elephant of a project that was doomed to failure" (words taken from my first speech on the issue ...)

Yet, no. LibDem Councillors voted FOR this money to be spent and did so every time of asking.

Every time Labour wanted more cash to throw at this project, the LibDems said YES YES YES.

Check out the roll-call of those who voted for this money to be spent and you will soon find ...

"Councillors LUBBOCK, WATKINS ..."

and most embarrassingly ...

"... WRIGHT."

I wonder if Simon Wright knows his wife voted for this money to be spent? (For the record, the Conservative Group have voted against spending the money on every occasion we could have).

But wait - they have a chance to redeem themselves!! In 2008 and 2009 there were budget proposals on the table to reduce the unitary spend and use the money elsewhere. Surely if they were that concerned that would have voted FOR these measures?

Nope ... all LibDem Councillors, including Ros Wright, voted against Tory plans to scale back on unitary spending.

The the U-turn is sharp, the hypocrisy is breathtaking and no wonder people are losing faith in politics.

The LibDems vote, consistently, for unitary spending and then oppose it after the project fails.

This takes the LibDem negative campaigning to a new low - because it is designed to mislead.

Happy or Sad?

True story ...

A friend meets a LibDem deliverer ...

Friend: Thanks for calling round but it's too late, I've done my postal vote.

LibDem: Lovely, thank you, may I ask if you supported us?

Friend: No, sorry, I voted for Antony Little

LibDem: But Antony Little isn't a candidate here - he stood in the General Election.

Friend: Oh. I have no idea who I voted for then.

UPDATE: for clarification this wasn't in Bowthorpe and the LibDem was right - I wasn't on the ballot paper!!

Guest Post: Why Peter is wrong (and right) about Wensum

I suggest that before you read this you scroll through the comments on previous posts to find Peter's views on campaigning in his home ward of Wensum. Before I tell you why he is wrong, firstly we'll dwell on why he is right.

In an ideal world, every party would stand candidates everywhere and each community would have a full flourishing campaign where every vote is fought over and every argument challenged. That would be a real democracy. But sadly life is not like that.

Firstly politics requires people. Doors do not knock on themselves, and leaflets do not fly through your letter box by magic. Even if a party posts you material, as the LibDems did heavily last time, they first have to raise the money to do it. Even the Royal Mail doesn't run on IOUs. Sadly in modern politics the number of people given to do these activities is falling, driven on by a number of factors (like all the parties looking the same and lack of time in working practices). So with limited finances and limited workforces the parties have to be rational about what they do and where. I imagine the Tory and LibDem membership in Wensum is quite low and Labour's is quite inactive. Only the Greens, as supported by Peter's evidence on the ground, have what it takes to get around. In fact, it could be that the Tory / Libdem / Labour candidates are "paper" ones, where they stand only to give a choice on the ballot paper rather than seriously expect to win. That could explain the lack of effort. Whenever somebody complains to me about lack of communication from party X, I always ask them if they have volunteered to be the street leafleter recently. Usually the answer is "no"; QED.

So, in this election would we expect parties to be focusing on Wensum? Well, yes and no ...

I happen to believe that Mr Altman, the Green candidate, is a weak candidate and very open to attack. His record as Mancroft's councillor was poor, as was his decision to walk away after only a year. Hardly the commitment the people of Wensum want. In addition, a lot of people my end of the ward wonder if the Greens just want the council allowances (wages!) rather than to do the job for the right reasons. Llewellyn to Altman is like from the firepan into the fire! If the other candidates had decent local people who really wanted the job out of a sense of public duty, they'd do well. However ...

The fact of the matter is that the Greens hold the ward with a big majority, with Labour in second. The Tories have improved in the last 3-4 years but have only just managed to leapfrog the poor old fourth placed LibDems (although no doubt only they can win here!!).

And do the parties need Wensum for where they are going? The Greens do because they need it in their column for the great council take-over. But I guarantee you neither Tory nor LibDems have in in the front, middle or even back of their minds. And that leaves Labour - with the party struggling to hold onto 6 (yes, six) marginal wards I doubt they have room for a seventh target no matter how tempting.

I am sorry Peter - Wensum is not going to be a great political fight this year; maybe next. You can expect a few leaflets, probably from Greens and Labour, and a knock from maybe the Greens. The rest you'll have to discover from the internet.

I know it's sad and not how elections ought to be, but until one of the other parties need Wensum or the results show they may be able to win it, don't expect that to change.

But have heart - the Tories are making a good show in Thorpe Hamlet, a seat that I know well and where most people thought they were out of the running. My partner has a leaflet and a letter from the party in a clear third place, so maybe there is hope for Wensum yet.

The author is a regular here and lives in Wensum Ward.

Guest Post: Is a new Green dawn "unstoppable"?

I suppose this post came out of a brief chat with Antony during the week, in which he re-iterated the point that turnout at these elections was likely to be low and that would damage the Greens chances. I'll go on to why I think the Greens are un-stoppable in a moment, but first the turnout point.

I disagree - the canvassing that I have done does show an increased level of apathy, partly because of the time of year and also because you rarely meet anybody who wants these elections. However I would argue that we all share in the apathy - it doesn't just impact on the young, student, green-voters. I have met middle-aged Tories and working class Labour who just aren't going to vote. And think on this - this will be an election where the most motivated set of supporters win. And I would say that the Greens have amongst the most determined, motivated and political (with a big P) supporters in the City. It's why I think the Tories will edge it in Eaton and why the Greens will do better than you all think across the City. In fact (here I go) I think the Greens will take Thorpe Hamlet and University in Norwich South and also Sewell in Norwich North.

Even so, we come to the wider point of the arithmetic. The Greens are essentially a single seat short of becoming the largest party; they have 9 seats and you need to add in holds in Town Close, Nelson, Wensum and Mancroft. Labour have 9 but I wouldn't bet on any of them being an automatic hold at this point (although clearly Mile Cross will end up in the Labour column come election night). Even if Labour do stage a massive recovery, the Green gain in Thorpe Hamlet will leave the parties 15-14; all it would take is a Tory gain in Catton Grove or Crome to put them as equals at 14-14. Can Morphew hold on then? I wouldn't bet on it. You see the Greens are unstoppable; because the other parties will do our work for us. A Tory gain here or a LibDem gain there (Lakenham?) and they've slipped behind. The Greens can take control without taking a single Labour seat.

For what it's worth, I think the result will be:
Green 16 (gains Thorpe Hamlet, University & Sewell)
Labour 10 (holds Mile Cross)
Tories 8 (holds Bowthorpe, gains Eaton, Catton & Crome)
LibDems 5 (loses Thorpe Hamlet & Eaton but gains Lakenham)

And in those circumstance not even a Condem coalition can stop Claire Stephenson being Leader of the Council.

LibDem Bar Chart Comeback - but it's still inacurrate - Shock.

Judging from my email inbox there is more hubbub about the LibDems using the whole Norwich South result to prove "it's a two horse race" between them and Labour and no point in voting Conservative or Green - sadly, though, they used this argument in places like Eaton (where the Tories and LibDems are around 200 votes apart with Labour fourth) and Town Close (where the Greens have a 20% lead over the LibDems with Labour in fourth).

After all we hear about "new politics" and "I understand why politicians are not trusted", surely this kind of campaigning is partly to blame? Luckily (for us) confused electors don't believe the party that mis-lead them.

Guest Post: What happened to LibDem localism?

One of the issues which really stood out for me amongst the "Statement of Persons Nominated" in how few of the candidates live in the areas they seek to represent. Back in the days, the LibDem campaigning rule-book clearly stated that you stood a much, much better chance of winning with a local candidate and that you should always select a local above anybody else. In fact, when you have done that and the other parties have not simply hammer them the whole way through the parachuting in an unpopular outsider!!

Antony's note: True, and in the Tories we used to say that you were only as local as your LibDem candidate. If the LibDem didn't live in the ward, it didn't matter - but if the Tory didn't then it was a high crime!

So going down the list it is interesting to see who lives where.

In Catton Grove the LibDem lives in Mile Cross. in Crome they live in Nelson. In Bowthorpe the LibDem is from Eaton, but in Eaton he's from Nelson. The Lakenham LibDem is from Mancroft. The Nelson candidate is from Unviersity whilst the Thorpe Hamlet guy is from Sewell. Town Close LibDems have a candidate from Wensum and in Wensum he's from Mancroft

But Bingo - we have genuine locals in Mile Cross (I rate Carl Mayhew and whilst I don't think he'll win this time, I think it will be a good match for May 2011). Mancroft LibDems also have a local - Simon Nobbs.

University have a local candidate (just - he lives on the borderline with Nelson!) as too do Sewell LibDems.

2 locals out of 13? 4 at a push? Come on, what are the Norwich LibDems playing at? Especially given that their target seats - Eaton, Town Close, Thorpe Hamlet and Lakenham are all missing out on locals. Are the LibDems really stuck for candidates like this?

Is it better to live in a set geographical area or to work hard at campaigning? I wonder if people care where the candidates come from anymore? Have the LibDems missed a trick with this?

Antony's Update: I know this guest post focuses on the LibDems so out of fairness I have evaluated the Tory local candidate count. We have 6 candidates who live in their wards and 2 more with existing elected links.

Guest Post: Is there life after UEA?

The biggest interest in this election, for election nerds like us, is not if the Greens can take control or even if a bizarre ConDem pact can seize control of City Hall - but just what will the City election results be without the UEA student voting?

Don't for a moment believe this is limited to just University Ward itself - these days students impact greatly in Bowthorpe, Nelson, Town Close, Wensum and to a lesser extent in Sewell, Thorpe Hamlet and Eaton too. I know that turnout isn't great (where is at local election time) but when the student vote is so Green-Lib leaning, could their absence leave the Tories smiling and Labour frustrated?

You see, UEA automatically registers all first year student on campus - but now they've gone. So the politically motivated learners have to get postal votes or tramp back to their common rooms to vote at a time when the university isn't even open for the new term. Similarly those who have moved off site seem unlikely to have registered yet. Third years who were registered may have buggered off, never to return (let alone to vote). Basically there is a UEA student shaped hole in canvass sheets across the City.

So what of the impact then? Well, it should make Bowthorpe safe for the Tories (a cheer from OGH there?) and also University safe for Labour, where Bert Bremner's opposition tends to come from campus. It will dent the Green majorities in Wensum and Nelson but not so far as the wards could be lost (although the Green candidate in Wensum - who served one year as Mancroft Councillor then quit doesn't inspire confidence). The most interested impact may be in Town Close, where the Greens had 42% to the LibDems 24% and Tory 20% last time. Without the student vote in the Golden Triangle, that may just be closer than it seems.

So, as I said, a game for political nerds that we leave us pouring over the exact stats on 10th September, but for what its worth I don't think the lack of student votes will actually tip any wards whatsoever. It'll make some safer, some less so but I don't see any of the big student area seats changing hands ... yet.

The author is a volunteer who responded to my previous request for articles. He is not a member of any political party (at the moment) but wishes to remain, in the spirit of these posts, anonymous.

View from the Camps

I've now had offers from people in all political parties to write reviews ahead of the by-elections on 9th September. I am very grateful but still interested to hear from anyone who isn't connected to a party - get in touch if you can do this for us. I will post the predictions / analysis when I get them!

Night Off

I'm having a night off from campaigning (the first since the election began) to go to a wedding reception. I have to say that the campaign so far has had a sort of unreal feel to it. Large numbers of people are away at the moment and an even larger number don't know or care about this poll. We're getting lots of good support in our target wards, including Bowthorpe, but somehow I'm not sure this one has caught fire yet! Maybe the protests from council tenants (see here) will enliven the campaign and remind people about Labour's record in office.

The irony is that this campaign may just change the face of City politics for the next decade; control of City Hall is uncertain and we have some big issues to address particularly with regards to the budget. I'd love people to get a bit more into this campaign because this really is a crucial time for the City.

For what its worth I don't think we've picked up much changed voting behaviour since the General Election, most people are sticking with their choice from May - of course the lack of students may really impact - so it may come down to turnout, or lack of.

p.s. I usually carry an independent assessment of candidates, predictions etc but my usual source has gone off on holiday! If there is anybody who would like to write a review let me know and I am happy to publish!

Labour blames Tories for by-elections; so not the High Court or, oh, themselves then...

According to the Labour Party Website:
As a result of expensive legal action by the Tory-controlled County Council (paid for out of your council tax), costly and unnecessary by-elections (paid for again out of your council tax!) have been forced on the citizens of Norwich.
Norwich Labour Party believes this money would have been better spent keeping day-care centres for the elderly open and keeping our street lights on after midnight

It might have been more accurate to say:

As a result of THE GENERAL ELECTION by A COUNTRY ANNOYED WITH GORDON BROWN (paid for out of your council tax), costly and unnecessary by-elections (paid for again out of your council tax!) have been forced on the citizens of Norwich BY THE HIGH COURT AS A DIRECT RESULT OF LABOUR'S UNITARY BID.
Norwich CONSERVATIVE Party believes this money would have been better spent IMPROVING OUR ZERO STAR HOUSING SERVICE and ACTUALLY PROVIDING BASIC SERVICES SUCH AS CUTTING THE GRASS VERGES.

;-)

What happened to the class of '06?

There can be few entry year of councillors who have had a more uncertain or difficult time than that of 2006. Looking at the fate of each of them makes for interesting reading considering 7 out of the 13 has led their party or served on the Executive;

Bowthorpe - Antony Little, Conservative Leader - restanding
Catton Grove - Brian Morrey, Labour Deputy Leader of the Council - de-selected / standing down
Crome - Jenny Lay, Labour - restanding
Eaton - Brian Watkins, LibDem Leader - no news yet
Lakenham - Mary Cannell, Labour - standing down
Mancroft - Howard Jago, Green - standing down
Mile Cross - Linda Blakeway, Labour Executive Member - standing down
Nelson - Claire Stephenson, Green Leader - restanding
Sewell - Sue Sands, Labour Executive Member - restanding
Thorpe Hamlet - Joyce Divers, LibDem - standing down
Town Close - Janet Bearman, Green - standing down
University - Bert Bremner, Labour Executive Member - restanding
Wensum - Tom Llewelyn, Green - standing down

Having only 5 of the original cohort re-standing is incredible and most of those going were only first elected in 2006.

Notice of Poll

Well, it's started again with the issuing of the "Notice of Poll" and the beginning of the most bizarre set of by-election perhaps in electoral history. For those of you who missed this one ... in March the government canceled the Norwich elections because it wouldn't be worth the money to elect for one year if we were all going to be abolished pending unitary elections in May 2011. Now, the decision to cancel the elections were tied up with the unitary law, so when that law failed ... you guessed it, the election were back on!

So today has been a flurry of nomination papers, leaflets and canvass cards - like the good old days of, erm, 10 weeks ago ...

And now we're getting ready to hit the streets again tonight, in Bowthorpe, Eaton, Thorpe Hamlet and Town Close ... I deeply suspect we are more excited than the public but these are important elections and its our job to engage and get that turnout up.

As always, predictions welcome!

Working Hard for Bowthorpe - All Year Around!

And that's not just an election slogan! I must admit that I took the weekend after the by-election off, mainly to see my kids again, but this week has been straight back into it. The bizarre twilight world of the by-election meant that a number of other issues took a back seat, but they are all back on the agenda now.

On Tuesday night I attended the Lord Mayor's Business Reception at Norwich Castle which was an excellent event; not only well attended but the quality of the debate - particularly on the round table - was impressive. It became very clear that business wants a low tax, low intereferance attitude from the City Hall; faciliate business, they urged. There was good support for a number of the cultural functions of the council (elephants, ice trail etc) and an interesting split over transport (some for more road closures, others for opening up more routes).

Tonight I did a street meeting with residents about pavement issues in Clover Hill, cyclists on pavements and repairing roads. I met with one of the City engineers to talk to residents abot an action plan and I think everyone left happy; nice to have a bright evening to stand outside and chat! Then I had a Bowthorpe Ward Councillors meeting and onto the Bowthorpe Community Partnership where, amongst other things, we heard a report of the opening of the new Youth & Community Centre and concerns about the state of Bowthorpe Hall Road.

And the rest of the evening has been catching up on correspondance and the like. A busy life ...

I wonder if anonymous will comment again?

This gem of a comment appeared on a previous thread; I wonder if the secretive owner will now post a response? I doubt it, but I can live in hope.

Great real Little - the Dims are going to win Bowthorpe and you know it.They were storming around Bowthorpe delivering egg blue handwritten letters while you guys were pushing out the same crappy black and white rubbish with terrible photos.What will you feel like when Simon Wright's machine gets to work in your little nest egg in Bowthorpe? Looking forward to your election against the type of campaign you've seen in the last 5 weeks? Enjoy your council allowance while you can.

Apparently, anon, people liked the "crappy black and white rubbish" because it featured local issues with real solutions to problems rather than "mass printed to look like handwritten letters" which were strings of meaningless nonsense. I know this because the Conservatives got more votes than the LibDems. The thing is that day after the poll, the LibDem campaigners have all gone home, only here because it was a by-election, whereas everyone involved in our campaign is still here because we were all local. The Norwich Tory campaign team that took on and beat the Norfolk LibDem juggernault is very much ready to go. Quite frankly, if this is the best that Wright and his team can do then I say of the next election - BRING IT ON.

The LibDems can take no comfort from Bowthorpe

I am going to make some early remarks about the by-election; and I stress early because I have been so tired I haven’t really thought through all the angles. I also hope this to be an honest account of what happened.

For those who do not know the circumstances or the campaign on the ground or the local factors this could be a confusing result; on sites like Vote-2007 a lot of people simply applied the polls or the national situation to the result. Many people thought that could lead to a Labour win. I have to say, the one result that – until the day – I thought utterly unlikely was the Labour win. On the day it was clear that Labour was moving its core block-vote and a lower turnout could have meant them squeaking back in. That is why the utterly efficient Tory get-out-the-vote was so important.

It is also important to remember the history of the ward; a factor which is largely ignored in the analysis of the result. Bowthorpe had, for a very long time indeed, been Labour’s safest City berth. The challengers in the ward were the LibDems, and after a narrower result in 2000 – if I recall correctly Labour held on by a couple of hundred – the war settled down into a familiar pattern of results. When I took over as candidate, Labour were polling around 1100, LibDems 750 and Tories 350. In 2003, the year I first stood, it was Labour 1100, LibDems 614, Tories 609. So, remember, this ward has a longer LibDem history and has a big LibDem vote within it; much larger than the natural Tory bloc. The reason that the LibDem advance looked so impressive is that the Conservatives had squeezed their vote so effectively in the 04-08 period and they were starting from an ultra-low base of around 195 votes. So when I see LibDems claiming a hell-of-a-result, I really want to point out that this was exactly the same sort of result they have always got in this ward.

Then there was the campaign itself. The LibDem bandwagon hit Bowthorpe hard; they produced at least 9 A3 leaflets during the campaign, on top of god knows how many more plus direct mail. The LibDems pounced on this ward the day after John died and relentlessly pursued it in the next 7 weeks. The sheer weight of campaign support they received was phenomenal; I have never seen anything like it – something the Tory Party ought to take note of. Nobody could deny the effort that went in; they imported campaign organisers and their Eastern Region Director was here for the whole of the campaign. Labour had, similarly, support from amongst others their London Campaign Director. We had no such support in any way, shape or form.

Given the money, the campaign support, the backing from local MPs it is remarkable that anything stopped the LibDem bandwagon. But when it came down to it, local issues and local candidates matter more than the weight of leaflets you could deliver. I am very proud that local people turned their backs on negative politics and voted for a candidate who offered a positive vision based upon years of getting results. The LibDems will no doubt point to an increase in votes; they should be looking at why their vote share ever fell that low in the first place; their campaign bought them back up to where they were. They should then look to see if their own campaign is what killed their candidate in the end; more of this later.

Sometimes, the thing is not what you have but what you do with it. And I would like to comment on the campaign that each party ran – but that’s for another day (after sleep).