Made In Preston – the blog

A swing of 5% nationally to the Conservatives. No Lib-Dem surge but a small swing towards them in many seats. Preston is now a red island in a sea of blue seats.

Preston had it’s own mini-surge of 2.5% to the Lib-Dems from Labour with a very low turn-out of 52% and Mark Hendrick, Labour winning with just over 48% of the vote. When you don’t live in a seat it isn’t easy to judge how effective candidates are being. It appeared that in column inches Mark Hendrick was a long way ahead of the other candidates. The Lib-Dem is a local councillor so you’d expect to hear more but from where I am it seemed quiet. The Conservative candidate similarly didn’t get a lot of inches. Whether that makes a lot of difference is hard to tell but a quiet candidate is unlikely to capture those key middle ground voters. The cost of publicity is often referred to but a strong candidate can make their own publicity.

In the seats next to Preston the results are;

The new seat of Wyre and Preston North remained strongly Conservative yet had a swing from Con to Lib-Dem of 3.9%. Ben Wallace getting 52% of the vote on a very respectable 72% turn out in a fairly large seat.

Ribble Valley which now includes Walton Le Dale remained strongly Conservative and the swing was 6.6% from Labour to Conservative. Nigel Evans gaining 50.3% of the vote on a tidy 67% turn out.

South Ribble is probably the most interesting seat in the area being the most marginal. An 8.1% swing from Labour to Conservative made it change hands to Conservative who had 45% of the vote on a 67% turn out.

Fylde remained strongly Conservative with 52% of the vote for Mark Menzies on a 66% turn out. A swing of 4.1% to the Lib-Dems from Conservative.

Another seat of interest in the area is Chorley which had previously changed hands with the election winner. This time Lindsey Hoyle kept his seat with 43% of the vote in a decent 73% turn out. A swing of 5.6% from Labour to Conservative. Lindsey Hoyle is an MP who makes himself heard locally. Same thing for Gordon Marsden in Blackpool South. Both MP’s could have fallen but perhaps their work in their locality helped.

Other seats changing hands to the Conservatives are Blackpool North, Rossendale and Darwen, Bury North, Pendle, Lancaster and Fleetwood, Morecambe and Lunesdale. With Burnley becoming Lib-Dem. A good day for the Conservatives in Lancashire but not quite good enough perhaps mirroring the national mood.

The message seems to be that we want change but not a big one. A move to the right is the only way we can go but we don’t want to go too far. Does that mean Conservative with Lib-Dem or Labour with Lib-Dem. Democratically it seems to mean the former yet the combination is less easy. It could be that a softer more progressive Conservative coupled with a Lib-Dem without its less safe policies is the best of both worlds.

Electoral Reform might be the point to watch but if National Interest is the key subject, how important is reform relative to the economy.

Years after the final episode of the Third Man can it be that next week Gordon Brown will still be in power from third position. After putting in a solid display in the third leaders debate it was widely said he was third after David Cameron and Nick Clegg. After the incident with Mrs Duffy and a car crash at his meeting we await the third incident. The stars seem to be giving a message that three is the number. But for who?

The Nick Clegg effect has made this election a lot more interesting and it would be good for the Lib Dems to get more seats and for there to be a change in the voting system. As far as policy goes though it isn’t so clear. Seems like they were selected based on being different from the other parties whether they were good ideas or not. Do we really want the jails emptying, an amnesty for illegal immigrants, join the Euro, defended less securely. Have we thought through the effect of having no nuclear power and no university fees. They slip off the tongue easily but all these things have uncertain outcomes and might cause a big and very expensive mess.

Labour have done a lot of good things particularly in new buildings for schools and hospitals, not at the RPH though. There has been a lot of social change and some of this is less comfortable for many. Their worse performance has been in spending too much so there were no reserves for the bad times and selling off gold at low prices to make it worse and whether you say banking regulation would have been different under any other leader. Also there seem to be a lot of processes creating red tape and an official excuse culture, excessive surveillance, a return of sleeze, and a form of denial about immigration as exemplified by Mrs Duffy.

The Conservatives seem to be offering to reduce the processes and blame culture and to stop red tape. Also David Cameron is a more mellow leader than previous ones in terms of social, education, health, environment and the EU. The downside is that the inheritance tax threshold increase is too generous and the school creation policy might be at the expense of other schools. Their message seems to be that they are a change from Labour.

No party offers you everything you want and they are always have policies you don’t like. Who-ever wins it’s going to be tough with the massive financial deficit. In conclusion if I had a say, on balance, Nick Clegg would be the third man. Who would be the first man – posted the vote last week.

Leaders Debate number 2 last night. Not riveting, these politicians can talk, but that’s what they do. Agree with Gordon that what they say is more important than how they look. Although you could add will they do what they say. Only Gordon has a history in office and many might say things never seem quite as advertised.

Then there is good old Dave standing as the person to bring change. There isn’t a massive message though, seems to be more a change from Gordon. Big Society was one but didn’t get much airing. Being in Europe but not a pawn of Europe seemed to be a theme although the European grouping that Dave has joined seems a bit unknown. Dave is looking a gentler leader than those of old and he needs to be as things have moved on a long way in the last 30 years in terms of care, sexuality, race and expectation.

Nick as new boy on the block, looks sincere and stands his ground. His policies seem a change but it set me thinking of the lyrics to Imagine by John Lennon. Imagine there’s no countries, it isn’t hard to do. Nick has no religion too. You may say that I’m a dreamer but I’m not the only one. Their policies are left of the Labour Party and Gordons call to ‘get real’ on nuclear power and defence seemed a good point. Nick also likes saying buying more Eurofighters is a waste of money and that’s before his defence review, although the other parties haven’t played their hand on this one.

When it comes to putting an X in the box what actually happens might be a surprise. Protesting is one thing, but many might think 5 years of a similar government isn’t what was really wanted. There is a big question that a vote for Nick Clegg is a vote for Gordon Brown to continue as PM. Although the LibDems could say no partnership while Mr Brown is the leader, no-one has said that. He could continue as a minority leader and the SNP / PC and others might help it. Then again SNP v Labour could cost Labour a lot in Scotland, or maybe not. The Conservatives seem to be buffeted on conflicting currents relating to other parties and need to come forward with a big message to get back above it. Interesting couple of weeks ahead, so surprise or no surprise won’t be that surprising.

Since the leaders debate Nick Clegg has grown into a giant. A clever and catchy campaign slogan, unofficial perhaps and penned by Gordon Brown, of ‘I agree with Nick’ has become a mantra. The debate has brought the Lib Dems into the spotlight and seems to have brought a lot of younger people to take an interest as they have been enrolling to vote in high numbers. Both of these are good as it reduces the lack of choice argument and involves more people into the voting process. In countries like Australia it’s illegal not to vote, that might be a bit too far for most, but more involvement is needed.

The spotlight has also brought debate onto policies in the LibDem manifesto. There are what appear very good ones like raising the income tax threshold. Nick Clegg is against the police holding the DNA records of people not convicted and reform of parliament comes high. Some appear a bit over-enthusiastic: no prison sentences less than 6 months, quiet enthusiasm for the Euro, illegal immigrant amnesty, no Trident. Although listening to an explanation of these on the radio the spokesman appeared to water them down. Perhaps they’re not as clearcut, or they could be just a beginning of more to come. For example he said the amnesty is only for a select few, Trident could be extended and the alternative isn’t clear.

Trident is a key issue. Many would say it’s more than defence. It’s about a national position. To be able to promote UK interests and resist pressure to accept policies we don’t like. Either by being at the top table in international forums or bi-laterally with emerging nuclear states. Some people put a financial cost on this but it’s real value might be a way of life or more acceptance of other peoples preferences.

The third of our political comments looking at what is being offered at the General Election. What will the LibDems do in the Preston region and what are their policies. 

 The Liberal Democrats got quite a good percentage of the vote overall at the last election but in our voting system the number of seats is no-where near representative. Although you can say that for the Conservatives as well who polled almost as many votes as Labour.   The LibDems will support change to the system, it’s in their interest, and the election after this one should be the target, unless it’s in 4 months.

Reading the LD policies on their website there are some good ideas. Although I don’t find any mention of the opinions frequently expressed by senior party members that seem to effect the biggest wealth generators in our area.  For example Sir Menzies Campbell, Norman Lamb and Vince Cable frequently express strong distate about the defence and nuclear industry and conflicts in general. Although don’t we all, but to different degrees.  It isn’t known what exactly they would do if they had any mandate as their website isn’t very precise on defence. It says:

‘Move away from a Cold War-style posture towards a more relevant armed forces structure. If we are to continue to have the capability to be a force for good in the world we need far greater cooperation with our NATO and EU partners. Liberal Democrats do not believe that the UK can afford the billions of pounds the Government wants to spend on a like-for-like replacement of the Trident nuclear weapons system We believe that less expensive alternatives should be considered.’

Noting the word ‘considered’ which isn’t ruling anything out including keeping Trident, although that seems unlikely.  I’d be surprised if the RAF and Trident survived without big cuts.  To be fair George Osborne also hinted at RAF cuts on Typhoon.  The case for Trident includes that other countries are moving towards nuclear options, international security has a tendency to sudden change faster than our defences can change, the nuclear option provides an ultimate deterrent and greater influence in the world not only in defence but well into the ‘food’ and status chain, a joint European force with France and reducing dependance are interesting options.

The LibDem defence policy makes me immediately quite hostile but the rest of their policies have some interest.  From their website:

‘Raise the threshold at which people start paying income tax from current levels to £10,000, cutting the average working age person’s income tax bill by £700 and cutting pensioner’s income tax bills by £100. These plans will mean that almost 4 million people on low incomes will no longer have to pay any income tax at all.’

  It seems ridiculous to pay tax when you’re on the minimum wage and I’ve long thought this LibDem policy their best and I’d expect them to do it without caveat unlike the other parties.

‘Liberal Democrats are the only party which believes university education should be free and everyone who has the ability should be able to go to university and not be put off by the cost.’

Doesn’t actually say they’ll make it free though and the term ‘who has the ability’ is adaptable. That the UK should have universities that equal the best in the world is required as well and this needs a lot of money.

‘Drive a massive programme of investment in renewable energy sources such as wind, wave and solar. We will also transform the National Grid into a smart decentralised grid which will respond dynamically to the changing patterns of energy demand.’

 No nuclear station at Heysham perhaps, will the hills be alive with the sound of windmills.  This could be a very expensive policy.

‘Unlike the Conservatives we oppose all airport expansion serving London and the South East and so would block expansion at Stansted and Gatwick as well.’

Not really relevant to round here except it isn’t clear how this will effect the UK’s prosperity if decision makers for example find it easier to go to Paris and Amsterdam to do international business. The thought-to-be over-paid people are the ones who place 1,000’s of jobs so we need them here.

‘We will scrap central targets and guarantee that you get your treatment on time. We will give people the power to stop hospital closures in their area through elected local health boards.’

 Laudable, although I had a course of serious treatment and the doctor assured me that the target setting would ensure I got the speedy treatment I was asking for, so I’ve never been sure about people making statements against targets.

In conclusion a selection of policies for a kindly Britain making fair and decent decisions in a world that in general doesn’t regard fairness or decency too high a requirement.  This doesn’t sound like it will work for me.  I have a fear of being part of something  that is too decent to know they’ve been had.