Ilkley Rocks

that Greg Mulholland won Leeds NW, which is a great result, and my old mate Martin Hemingway got 1,100 for the Green s without costing the LDs the seat. Nice all round.

Thanks to everyone who’s contributed over the past month or so–KC, ELv, Mrs EVil, Eggie, Nurseman, Jarda, GLowboat, Yorkiesoul, Nobby, Katherine and I’ve probably forgotten loads. Back to normal service now.

THere’s a great post-mortem over at Nosemonkey’s place.

Well, I was broadly right. Fekri didn’t do as well as I thought. The BNP got less than their local result, so are no real threat (and as for ‘Labour will come in fourth’???), and Poulsen was a damp squib. Turnout was on the big side, so Cryer won, though I didn’t expect the increased majority–and how bad Poulsen did!

Cryer                  20, 720                44.7%

Poulsen               15,868                 34.3

Fekri                    5,484                  11.8

Griffin                  4,240                   9.2

Turnout–67.9%

Maj==4852

I think everyone’s in bed…where are you all?

Counted four police vans in Ilkley tonight..more police than I’ve ever seen in town before.

At least we’ll be safe in our beds.

Well the results are in. A six or seven mile run round Ilkley, and the poster count is:

Dale Eddison: 35-ish

Dacres: 30-ish

William Brown: 10-ish

Anne Cryer: 8

Karl Poulsen: 5

BNP/LibDems/WalkerSmale: 0

As one would expect in Ilkley, then, a win for the estate agents.

Just got back from a jog round western Ilkley. Two Cryer posters and eight Poulsen posters in four and a bit miles.

It’s not enough for Poulsen.

Excellent article by Paul Keating in T’Grauniad, particularly his analysis of the assumed distinction between citizenship and humanity inherent in racism.

I got a couple of criticisms of my previous post on alleged poet Ian McMillan and his total crapness.

Well, here’s his output for the Today programme. I’m assuming they appointed him as ‘token comedy northerner’, it can’t be for anything else. Utter bilge. The man should be hog-tied and eviscerated. Slowly.

INcidentally, it seems when making permalinks, Typepad doesn’t like swear words. That previous post had its title changed in the link to ‘local meejah’-aren’t merkins amusing?

Interesting rumours flying around that the reason that Labour have spent so much time attacking the LibDems nationally over the last week is that they’ve seen how well the LDs have done on the postal vote. What this means for this constituency is, however, anyone’s guess.

Well, this is a lot harder than I thought it would be. This time last week, I was very confident Cryer would make it. A couple of things have shaken this opinion somewhat. Firstly, the terrible week for Labour, especially over the war. This will mean some voters who would have held their noses and voted Cryer (either because of the BNP or because, in spite of all, she opposed the war) will now not do so. The best chance for Cryer was a higher turnout than last time. I still think it might be up, but not by enough to make it easy. Secondly, and on the flipside, people have been reminded just how awful this government is, and however much Cryer has tried to distance herself from it, the publicity of the last week will simply swamp attempts at independence.

So, latest news and speculations:

1) The Tory groundwar finally got going last week. They’re attempting to shore up the Ilkley core vote. But no-one new seems to be voting for them. They’re not pulling anyone from Labour or the LibDems. As I suspected, Cryer’s team have barely been seen in Ilkley, which is a very bad mistake. Oxenhope might be the swing bit of the constituency.

2) The BNP have been seen outside of Keighley just once since the election started. They’ve basically stayed on the estates where they know they’re strong. Griffin’s work with the national party has also been distracting (the ground team is weak, to say the least). They’ve tried to spread some rumours to boost the result, but it’s not getting them very far. I still can’t see them improving on their total local government vote from the 2004 locals.

3) Cryer seems to have given up. There’s a lot of machinations going on with the BritAsian vote in Keighley, pressure from many quarters, which are frankly impossible for me to read. But the lady herself doesn’t seem to be giving the proverbial toss.

4) Again, contrary to initial predictions, postal votes will have a role to play. Rumours are that there are quite a few from Ilkley itself, as well as from Keighley, so we might be seeing them split between the parties.

5) The LibDems have had a good local campaign (and not only cos they’ve been the only party willing to talk to me), taking unexpected votes from Labour in Keighley, and votes from the Tories elsewhere. As I think I’ve tried to describe before, this effect might help rather than hinder Labour. If more votes leave the Tories than leave Labour (to BNP or LD). Labour keep the seat.

What can we say?

Well, a lot depends on turnout. If turnout is down, the Tory core vote does come out, and the BNP get anywhere near the number of votes they got in the last local elections, Cryer is toast, unless the LibDems really massacre the Tories, which I can’t see happening. However, I think the presence of the BNP, the hatred for Blair and hard final pushes from both main parties will see turnout hold up where it was last time (unlike nationally, where it will be down), which leaves a lot up in the air. Last time out Cryer got 48% of the vote, which is a lot more than many of her colleagues.

If Labour lose the seat, it’s pretty obviously a bad result for them. The only blessing will be if there’s a big BNP turnout. THis will potentially mean an easily spun line in the next election to get out the anti-BNP vote (twisted, I know, but it’s something of a bright side).

If the Tories don’t win, it’s a disaster for them. They need to, they have the best conditions to do so in this constituency. If the LibDems double their vote, the Tories are really in trouble (and this might become a three-way next time).

The LibDems will be looking to double their share of the vote, to get back to where they were in the early 90s. Anything less than 15% of the vote’s not good news for them, as it suggests they’ve got little to build on.

And, finally, if the BNP get less than 3,000, it’s a terrible night. If they get around 4,500, they’ve done okay, but they’ve shown they can’t build their numbers, and that’s not good news. If they get more than 6,000 or around 15% on a 70% turnout, they’ve done really well, and they might be able to push on to more success next time.

So, okay, stop beating round the bush Bertie…Final predictions 2005: Turnout–60-65%. The Tories will lose a couple of %age points to the LibDems, but the rest of their support will remain steady at around 37%. The LibDems will increase to around 15%. The BNP will get about half that. Which means that Labour are left with around 39% of the final vote (losing 3% or so to the LibDems and 5% to the BNP). There’s a couple of points worth of error in there. Look for LibDems to hit 7,000, BNP 3,500, Cryer by 1,000 or so. If the turnout drops to 60% or below, she’ll lose. Incidentally, the bookies are rather more certain than I am.

Which will, I’m sure, be spectacularly wrong (and if I was a bit more of a wimp I’d have gone ‘too close to call’). Given that Cryer’s fate will be all about turnout, predicting a negative is very difficult. I tend to feel that few new people will be tempted to vote either Labour or Tory by this campaign.

Frankly, she doesn’t deserve to win. Vote Tory Boy. Vote LibDem. Just get her out.

Oh, and the result is due in around 1.30am, barring re-counts. I’ll be ready for your brickbats over my lack of insight afterwards, though I’m in London getting a new tattoo all day Friday, so mea culpa’s won’t come till Saturday at the earliest. And then it’ll be back to the usual rubbish on this site.

And go on, nationally, Blair by 80. Current rumours are he might lose the popular vote. Don’t see it happening, but he might only win by 1 or 2%.

There’s a good article on the constituency over at politics.co.uk.

It does appear that Mr. Poulsen has only a shaky grasp of the figures, however, judging by his assessment of the local elections towards the end of the piece. He manages to use total votes for three of the parties (remember local voters have three votes each), which leaves the BNP far behind. The BNP, however, only stood one candidate in each ward. SO, effectively, he’s trebling the outcomes for the other parties in order to downplay the BNP ‘threat’.

Norty, norty. 

Belated congrats to them over at Keighley Labour Party. They’ve finally removed the letter ‘MP’ from Ann Cryer’s name. Only some thirty or so days after they should have done.

Well done those computer illiterates in the red corner.

From one of my contacts, news of the only proper hustings in the constituency (well, I say proper, but it wasn’t exactly well adevrtised). Organized by the Muslim Association, all four parties were invited to attend. The BNP declined within an hour in a very polite e-mail, claiming a clash of dates. Ann Cryer’s team refused to take part in any meeting with Nick Griffin. Even after they knew he wouldn’t be there, they put pressure on the other candidates to withdraw so they didn’t share a platform with the BNP. Why? Well, my contact suggests that Labour wouldn’t face the Muslim Association, knowing the likely criticism they would get. Cryer didn’t show.

More interesting than Cryer’s complete disregard for the democratic process, however, were the mixed messages her team were giving out. Elsewhere in the country, Tories have released different leaflets in different parts of their constituencies (playing down immigration as an issue in high minority ethnic areas for instance). In Keighley, Labour are telling the Muslim population that if they don’t vote for Labour, the BNP will be elected.

Whilst in Ilkley and Oxenhope, and to whites generally, they’re pushing the general message that voting elsewise than Labour will result in the Tory getting in. Now, asks my correspondent, how racist is this? Why does a non-white voter’s vote elect the BNP, while a white voter’s vote elects the Tories? Are Labour assuming BritAsians are too stupid to know that the BNP can’t possibly win? Or do they think that white voters wouldn’t mind the BNP getting in?

Have the Labour party any ethics left? It’s no wonder we’re Backing Blair.

(UPDATE: Intead of being at the hustings, Mr Griffin was being guest of honour at the Front National celebration of May Day. Nothing like concentrating on the constituency, eh? Wonder how many of those citizens on the Braithwaite estate who’ll be voting for him share his taste for fine French w(h)ines?)

Well, only the Tories seemed to take advantage of the carnival yesterday. Beaker was out and about (he’s very tall isn’t he?), with various minders. Saqw WIlliam Hague and Ken Clarke. Didn’t get the chance to ask the latter ‘as a notoriously liberal Tory, how do you feel about the most despicable Tory campaign since 1964′? Or, indeed, the chance to ask him about jazz.

But we did think the handing out of balloons to youngsters was a bit dodgy. Surely they should be taught young that you don’t get summat for nothing in this world. Under a Tory government, helium would be privatised.

And just to balance up the coverage, here’s a BNP leaflet. Who are these people? Mark looks very familiar–did he appear on the infamous documentary? The old dears seem to have missed the point of the second world war, but that’s comprehensive education for you.

It all goes to show the delicate tightrope Griffin is walking. Can he turn his party into a proper political organization (a manifesto launch in front of three journalists says no) without losing the activists that have kept the movement going for the past half-decade (who are leaving in droves)? 2005 will probably see the high point of the BNP before the splits start (and, yes, this would have been a longer essay if I could have been bothered). Or, rather, start again. When deciding whether to vote for Mr. Griffin, just remember, this is a man who thought throwing bullets into a campfire was a good idea. Wonder what he’d do with nukes?

After police advice, the count will take place in Ilkley Town Hall this time. So we get a visit from Mr Griffin after all–probably the only time we’ll see him in Ilkley. One wonders whether he’ll scurry away as fast as he did after the Oldham count?

And the Yorkshire Post has finally covered the little local affair. Nothing new, except he obviously spent his time in the Worth Valley. Keighley itself was probably a little too bracing for him.

Apparently, the BNP have produced some CDs with six songs around the subject of their message for distribution across the constituency. That should make up for the lack of a ground-team.

Anyone gets one, please forward it. Can’t wait to hear their version of ‘White Christmas’

And the local rag features this ad (thanks to KC for spotting). WHich features some, uhhr, questionable assertions. £600,000 over seven years? That’s £85,700 a year. On a budget this year of £616 million. Some 0.014% of the total budget then. Good to see the Tories concentrating on the really major issues. Off the top of my head, I can’t remember the precise number of council tax payers in the city, but it’s around 140,000. So, if everyone (and Band D is used as an average) was paying £390.72 extra because of asylum seekers, that would be an extra £54,700,800 in the pot for them. DOn’t you love statistics?

Real chutzpah though is the attack on Bradford Council. Bradford, throughout this time, has, of course, been mostly ruled by a Tory Or Tory-+ n other coalition. SO this is the Tories attacking the Tories in order to make political points.

Another piece on Keighley n Ilkley by the Blair-apologist David Aaronovitch in T’Grauniad. USual stuff, though note the last paragraph–where are all the canvassers? What is going on?

Well, if Tory Boy’s desperate, goodness knows what’s going on with Cryer’s team. Look at this farrago of an election leaflet. Something from central office (which she claimed she wasn’t going to do), some dubious statistics and then an attack on the Tories for allowing the rise of the BNP–which is very rich. And the claim that the Tories favour Bradford over the outlying villages. I suppose it was a bit tough to say ‘sorry Keighley, you don’t get any money cos of Ilkley, oops, sorry Ilkley, didn’t mean to offend you…’. Perfect example of why she’s as bad as the rest of them.

And look at the sort of people willing to be photographed in a Labour leaflet. What is that woman wearing? And why’s she elbowing her ‘daughter’ in the head? A secret BNP supporter perhaps?

Well, I promised at the beginning of the campaign that there would be questions and answers from the candidates (well, questions from me, but you know what I mean). Don’t think I forgot. I was chasing much of last week, and I can let you know that for e-mails bouncing, phone messages not being passed on and messages going astray three of the candidates do very well.

AT this point, the only candidate that’s actualy agreed is Nader Fekri. I don’t think there’s much point going ahead with only one, however, so thanks Mr Fekri (and agent), at least you’re interested in a little local website which only gets, oooh, 1,000 visits a day at the moment. The other three of you obvisouly cound’t organise the proverbial in a brewery (or, indeed, are so arrogant you think you shouldn’t be questioned).

Unless it was seomthing I said that offended them?

It feels like the Tories have completely given up. From the people I’ve been talking to, they can’t get their groundwar (luuurvve that phrase) together, so getting the vote out is a real problem. Driving round Ilkley yesterday, we spotted three Tory posters. This is in one of the most true blue areas of the country under the least popular Labour PM since MacDonald (and he wasn’t unpopular with the Tories). Three posters. I wouldn’t even bother going for the count Mr Poulsen.

Meanwhile, his latest leaflets smack of desperation (or at least late night work with the scalpel and glue). Thanks again to Elvis for scanning. Warning: don’t click on the one on the top. His face, large, is not a pretty sight.

Apologies for the absence of the usual fevered opinionating, but I’ve been suffering with a heavy cold, sinusitis, oh, and some essays to finish as well. Service is being resumed.

Bugger all’s changed in the meantime though, eh?

It isn’t just our candidates who seem bored with the whole process. Trying to follow what’s happening through the T&A is pointless. Their coverage amounts to a page a day, and the versions that appear on the web site are a) late and b) eviscerated.

Have a look at their news page. That’s one election story (on the 21st–I expect you’ll check it and see thousands). Notice the link on the sidebar to the 2004 council elections, but nothing to the current General Election. Then compare to another newspaper from the same stable, the South Wales Argus. A massive section on the election.

Why are we being so badly served? Why is the T&A so crap? WHy are its sister papers (the Gusset and Craven Herald) even worse? Answers on a postcard please…

SO, finding that their concentration on immigration is heading them straight for their worst election result in, oooh, four years, the Tories are desperate to move on. Well, when I say ‘the Tories’, I mean the Tories except for Howard and Lynton Crosby/-ie. So they throw in a new policy on stopping council tax revaluations.

Presumably intended to put out any challenge from the LibDems, this policy might play well in Ilkley, given the impact revaluation’s going to have on what we pay. However, that assumes that no-one asks the simple question, ‘how the hell are you going to fund local government then?’. Not to mention asking that nice (but soon to be without a job) Mr Letwin why he’d included polans for revaluation when he drew up the original proposals.

Tory strategy is following that of Oz and of the US. Appealing to core voters and core values, making sure they get out their core so they can handle anything Labour might get. This is, however, a strategy doomed to failure in the UK. Unlike the US there simply aren’t enough core Tory voters to go around. And every reminder of core Tory values will mean thousands more wavering Labour voters holding their noses and endorsing Blair.

Which is not to say it might not work in an area like Ilkley, were there is a solid Tory core. If only the Tories got out and told anyone about it.

Michael Howard’s apparently in Yorkshire tomorrow. Will we see him in Ilkley? If not, what does that say about Tory ambitions?

Lord save me from professional Yorkshiremen. Harry Gration is bad enough on the local news, but when local coverage extends to that feckwit Ian McMillan doing a regular ‘peom’ about the election, I despair.

Listen, Ian, just because something rhymes, that don’t make it poetry. Just because it rhymes, that don’t make it funny. Just becaue you gurn when speaking, that don’t make you funny either. It’s like Pam Ayres without the social realism.

I’m proud of my county, but I don’t see why so many of us want to take pride in being crap. See also ‘Marching on Together’, the worst ever footie song.

The local battles seem to be being fought in the same ways as the national ones. The candidates are barely to be seen, any visits by Ministers and other great and the good are not only not advertised, they’re held in secret (and this is not only the BNP I’m talking about). There’s a fear of the people, a fear, above all, that they might not give a toss what any of these putative representatives might have to say.

I mean, where is Ann Cryer? Has anyone seen her? Out on the stump perhaps? I’ve seen (and talked to) her teams, but of the lady herself there’s been not a sign. She surfaced on the local news yesterday to hold Charles Clarke’s hand, but that must have taken all of ten minutes.

And what of these flying visits? There’s a stop to look at a poster, a brief saunter down a main street for the benefit of whatever cameras are around, a pep talk to the local team and then, if we’re very lucky, a prepared ‘meet’ with a carefully selected group that reflects that day’s campaign priorities.

It’s so terribly patronising. I appreciate that ministers and puffed-up panjandrums have a limited attention span when it comes to ordinary punters, but we are their fucking employers, for Kali’s sake.

It’s not only Labour, of course. No-one’s seen Griffin either. He also surfaced on the local news to blame the government for spending more on ‘asian’ council estates than on ‘white’ ones (one would have thought the responsibility lay with our Tory council, who would hardly follow such a policy, preferring to spend the money on Ilkley in Bloom instead), but out on the stump—not a sign. Perhaps he’s staying in his ‘own’ areas, but it’s hardly likely to force a breakthrough as a tactic, is it?

Perhaps they’re all following the same tactic, talking to their own people. Cryer’s team are too wrapped up in saving votes in Keighley to notice that there might be some up for grabs in Worth Valley and even in Ilkley. Griffin won’t venture out of his estates (when he deigns to visit this constituency at all—he hasn’t said whether he’d move here if he wins).

Poulsen won’t go into Keighley at all, and his office doesn’t take messages and bounces e-mails from gmail ("hi, we’re the tories and we understand techn8crageee…..damn thing’s turned off again Tim–shall we send it back and get another?").

There’s not even that many posters about. How do any of them hope to win?

There’s a feeling that Cryer’s already given this one up. Given the amount of work she’s put in over the last eight years, particularly her presence at every local event going, one can hardly blame her. Time to put her feet up perhaps. If you do know where she is, let me know. I’ve got some questions to ask her.