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.
Cos whenever someone mentions Cardinal Ratzinger (as was) I get flashbacks to Murun Buchstansangur. Who would have made a rather more melancholic Pope, one suspects.
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.
An apology to Jarda who raised the question of postal votes. It appears that they will play rather a large part in our little local difficulty. Postal vote applications were up 149% in this constituency, to 9,845 for this election.
The impact of postal votes has led to the LibDem Leader in BIrmingham calling for separate counting of postal votes and a number of new safeguards. It’s believed (it said so on the World at One at least) that the Tories are backing this, but whether Labour will is another matter. And now the Police have been invited to get involved (I’m not sure kicking the votes downstairs and blaming it on an accident will help…)
Perhaps it explains why Labour are taking it so easy in Keighley. They already know the result? Surely not…
In a London bar while out celebrating the victory of the mighty Tykes.
"I’d vote for the BNP if they had any other policies"
So, uhhr, you’d vote for them whatever their other policies happended to be, but you won’t vote for them because of the one policy they’re known for. Hmm.
Well, now we know the way the election’s going to pan out on the doorsteps (not my doorstep you understand, neither hide nor hair has been seen of anyone nor of any leaflet). Labour’s building up the fear of the BNP and the Tories. They’re desperate to get out the vote. The LibDems are playing their usual long game. The Tories are relying on fear, and aiming at the elderly. The BNP are turning everything they can into a racist incident, and spreading rumour after rumour (well, it works better than a ground team I guess).
Some random observations from a lot of conversations over the last few days:
1) The Tories are having trouble with their ground-work. They can’t get enough good canvassers. Poulsen is bright and capable, but he hasn’t got good enough support. There are fears that the vote in Ilkley won’t be getting out.
2) Cryer’s team are really concentrating on fear of the Tories. They barely mention Blair or the government (which is sensible). They’re struggling to overcome a lot of resistance amongst the BritAsian community, particularly the young, who may not vote at all. Blair is universally disliked (I know, tell you something you don’t know).
3) However, fear of Tories and BNP will be getting the Labour vote out; they’ll be picking up a lot of unexpected votes in high Tory areas (contributory votes one might say) from Labour supporters who wouldn’t normally bother to go to the polls.
4) Immigration is not the main issue for anyone outside of the Keighley wards. However, it comes up on the radar as associated with other issues (usually crime).
5) But, the BNP is an issue. Voting patterns are altering because of people’s response to them
6) From lack of a proper ground team, the BNP message isn’t spreading. Outside of Keighley Central, East and West, they’re not gathering votes at all. They’re pretty well stuck. I’ve only spoken to a few people from Worth Valley ward, and they’re suggesting swings to Labour–can’t confirm that at all.
7) The LibDems are doing better than anyone thought. Quietly. Whether it will be enough to cost Labour the seat I’m not sure. I think Poulsen might start praying for that.
Week Two predictions–Ann Cryer by 1,000 votes. BNP to get <4,500. LibDems to increase votes. Turnout over 65% this time.
Just noticed that in an earlier crib note, I suggested the Tory candidate in the last election was Andrew Cooke. It was, of course, Simon. That’s what you get for c n p ing from the Beeb. Nobody noticed though. Maybe nobody cared!
From an ad. in the Gusset for a flat on Regent Road–’near to the restaurant quarter’. The whatty what? That would be Steps, T’Grove and Tubby’s I assume. Hardly a quarter is it? What do t’Box Tree and Farsyde feel about being left out?
What ever next? The pub quarter (opposite the station)? Little Pakistan (Church Street)? Chinatown (Wells Road outside Po Sang)?
And if you think the arguments on here are going in circles, you should try seeing the very same arguments (though there are one or two literate posters) on the C4 talkboards.
And so along comes the LibDems manifesto to round off the big three. At least it’s shorter than the other parties’. UNfortunately, Charlie doesn’t seem to know his own tax policy, but some of us might be re-assured by that (I’m sure Howard knows his, but given the evidence of recent days, is the one he’s sharing really the one he’s intending to pass on?).
It’s all fairly liberal, of course. But there are some points which could really work in our constituency. Anti-social ‘cracking down on licensees’ (easy to say when you’re not getting funding from the big brewers). Lots on the elderly not paying for care, and getting more on their pensions. Scrapping of Council Tax (though then some confusion over the bureaucratic costs of using money from well-off councils to support less well-off ones.
The big ones we’d support, of course, are on the scrapping of iD card proposals, a return to fundamental British standards of liberty, and a single equality act. Hmm, and only one paragraph (and that not very well high-lighted) on Europe–as in European Constitution anyway. And that’s attached to a binding referendum which is a retreat from their old policy.
Well, wonder if it’ll be enough for a breakthrough?
Stuff from the local news—the RC Church has stolen the Verbeia stones, as we thought, and are now demanding money for their return. I guess it’s how they pay for all the black smoke they’ll be using next week.
And IPC have given some money to the Standing Together Committee, who combat domestic violence. Or, rather, like most groups working in the domestic violence industry, they purport to combat violence against women, whilst playing fast and loose with statistics and with the definition of ‘violence’. Apparently, they’re now including ‘financial abuse’ in their definition of ‘domestic abuse’. So, if your partner asks to borrow a fiver, and you haven;t got it, you’re committing abuse (if you’re a man). Hmm. This is how the US domestic violence industry has got into such straits as suggesting over 100% of women are victims. See the work of Fekete, Farrell and many others.
Hobby-horse, I’ll just get off you here. I hear the pub calling. Dahling–can you lend me a fiver? What d’you mean, no?
Everyone else is quoting this excellent article, and so will I. Given the recent record of our beloved government in manufacturing security scares (anyone remember the ‘plot’ against Old Trafford and the ‘scare’ around Heathrow?), we should be ready for more of this on, oooh, May 1st or so.
It appears that the immigration debate is starting to backfire. The Tory (and, by implication, BNP) concentration on the subject and nothing but the subject is motivating Labour supporters, and ensuring they’ll actually go to the polls. Meanwhile, those most likely to passively support the BNP are traditionally those least likely to vote (particularly if this weather holds up).
Funnily enough, it doesn’t look like our borders WILL be that secure under the Tories.
Meanwhile, Labour launches its manifesto, and it’s possibly the most boring document I’ve ever seen (and that’s including the full text of the FoIA legislation). Hidden away in Chapter Three is the stuff I’ve been looking forward to–a points system for immigration, language tests, financial bonds, fingerprinting of all entrants, and ‘electronic borders system’, national register (course, none of this is about immigration, but about control of the populace already here), new control orders for detention without trial.
And then there’s this (which will please KC)–
We will use our presidency of the EU to look at how to ensure content creators can protect their innovations in a digital age. Piracy is a growing threat and we will work with industry to protect against it
GIven the massive evidence that illegal downloading of choons doesn’t affect sales of music at all, you’d think they’d take a leetle more care over that one. But, no, in thrall to big business as always, and willing to destroy the European software industry (and e-business culture) to help their American big business friends. Luvverly.
Ho hum. How ghastly. For a look at when Labour manifestoes had something to do with Labour values, check out this site.
One of those weirdly inconsequential ‘isn’t it funny up north’ articles on the Keighley constituency from The Times. The writer had the same attitude when he was at Leeds Uni. 1500 words that manage to say sod all.
The Indie also covers the Keighley story. A much better article, though the author does manage to put Ilkley in the wrong valley (the Worth?). And makes that cardinal error when criticising someone’s spelling–doing the same himself. It’s Haworth, not Howarth.
Anyone noticed any of the people from vote for peace out on the streets? They’re campaigning for our Ann. Which is a bit hard on Nader Fekri, who was also against the war in Iraq.
(edit after I realised I’d got the order wrong)
It took a while for the Tories to select a candidate. First twe thought there was Simon Cooke, Deputy leader of the local council. He lost out in the selection and then made the unfortunate mistake of making a seig heil gesture at an opponent–if only he’d done it a year earlier, he’d have been selected for sure. Not necessarily for the Tories though.
Selected instead was Robert Collinson, who’d previously lost rather badly in Crosby in 2001. Nothing like backing a winner. So he starts the usual business of writing bland letters to the local press full of fairly meaningless statistics. And then he withdraws from the contest. No-one knows why, though it was rumoured to have something to do with not being able to win the site.
Then they tried to get Cllr Anne Hawkesworth involved. Now our Anne, known affectionately here as no pasaran for her oppostion to almost everything in Ilkley, is very well respected and would have put up a fierce fight. But she didn’t want to get involved (possibly the confusion over Ann vs Anne would have been a bit much for some Ilkley-ites).
And then came Karl Poulsen, the ultimate Tory Boy. Youngest Tory regional chairman, blah-de-blah. He’s very young. He has few opinions of his own. He sends letters to the local press basically run off from Tory Central Office.
Now, the people of Ilkley would vote for a monkey if he represented the Tories (just ask funky Gibbons). But will they vote for owr Karl? Hawkesworth would have been a shoe-in, she’s late middle-age, rather tough, a Thatcher manque (did you see what I did there?). Poulsen, well, isn’t. Some of the locals might think, ‘ah, what a sweet boy’ and vote for him.
But he’s up against Ann Cryer, who’s been twice widowed, is silver haired, is late middle aged, is outspoken, and who actually has a lot in common with many of the local bluerinses as a result. There’s just a bit of me that feels that Cryer could do better in Ilkley itself than anyone expects, if she campaigns here.
Otherwise, we’ve got a muppet taking all the votes (thanks to KC and Elvis for this):
Here it is then. The Tory manifesto and summary speech from the newly nasty Mr. Howard. Initial fact-check on it can be found at the brilliant C4 site.
They long for hospitals that are clean. I mean, how hard is it to keep a hospital clean?
Well, it’s a lot easier if you haven’t out-sourced the cleaning contracts because of PFI agreements supported by Labour but originally introduced by the Tories.
People long for more police on the streets, to enforce respect, discipline and the law. People long for their children to be taught in disciplined schools…
Discipline, respect. The age of Miss Whiplash is back.
The choice at the election is simple–it comes down to whether you want simply to be grabbed, dominated and butt-fucked, or whether you’d prefer someone to grin mindlessly at you and drop some Rohypnol in your drink first? It’s a tough old choice.
Mr Blair’s been in charge of our immigration system for eight years. And it’s been eight years of chaos. Surely it’s not that hard for an island nation to control its borders? People are longing for controlled immigration, a fair system that stops the abuse of our country’s generosity.
Are people longing for it? Has their been a sensible debate on the subject? The racism isn’t even subliminal. It’s just out there. Dominant metaphors–battling, fighting, war, discipline (hmm, Karl Rove has a lot to answer for).
Control of our borders?
Jeez, this is 2005. I wrote an essay once comparing the development of Star Wars in the US (the missile defense, not the film) with the psychological trauma of AIDS–ie defending our ‘real’ space because we couldn’t defend our internal space from invasion (and, no, it wasn’t an original thought). We’re back there again. Fear of contagion, need for order, discipline.
Mein Kampf anyone?
I feel dirty. I need a drink. The only thing we know is that Labour’s will be worse.
