A by-election in the constituency of Oldham East and Saddleworth will take place in the new year, after Phil Woolas's appeal against his barring was rejected last week.

 

This will be the Coalition's first electoral test, and it seems both the Tories and the Lib Dems will be fielding candidates. In May's election, the seat was turned into a three-way marginal, with Labour's Woolas just edging out the Lib Dems, with both those parties on 32%, and the Tories on 27%. Meanwhile, Nick Griffin has said he will probably stand for the BNP in this seat.

 

Labour definitely go into this election as strong favourites - based on national swings since May's election in the opinion polls, the result in the re-run will be Labour on 41%, the Tories on 29% and the Lib Dems on 19% - although the polls do possibly indicate that the Lib Dems' swing to Labour has been even broader in the north than nationally. If Labour have any sense, they'll pitch this squarely as a referendum on the Coalition's tuition fees policy - despite this nonsense that ministers are putting forward about "working-class people not wanting to subsidise University-goers", working-class parents are more irate about this than anyone, as they see it as the government pulling up the ladder at the expense of their kids. Unfortunately, I think Nick Griffin might do quite well - what some people don't realise is that the a lot of people in these very poor, urban, northern constituencies have in the past voted Lib Dem as a "none of the above" protest vote, because they feel so ignored by the two main parties - clearly, they aren't going to feel the Lib Dems are an appropriate place to protest-vote anymore. Given that, and that this is a place where the BNP have had success in the past, I think there's a chance Griffin will push the Lib Dems into fourth place in this election.

Much will depend on how much of a fight the Tories put up. Obviously they will field a candidate but, if they fight a low-key campaign, they could be the ones battling to avoid coming fourth. The Lib Dmes have won a byelection in the predecessor seat (Littleborough and Saddleworth) so they can't be ruled out. However, no party in government has gained a seat in a byelection since 1982. That was in Mitcham and Morden where the Labour MP, Bruce Douglas-Mann, joined the SDP and resigned the seat to fight it again as an SDP candidate. It was held in the middle of the Falklands conflict which helped the Tories to win. I'm afraid I'm such an anorak that I didn't have to look that up :mellow:

That was in Mitcham and Morden where the Labour MP, Bruce Douglas-Mann, joined the SDP and resigned the seat to fight it again as an SDP candidate. It was held in the middle of the Falklands conflict which helped the Tories to win. I'm afraid I'm such an anorak that I didn't have to look that up :mellow:

 

I think that's known in the trade as a momumental c***-up.

 

Something similar happened in Northern Ireland in 1986 when the unionist MPs all resigned their posts to protest the Anglo-Irish Agreement. All but one of them, James Nicholson of the UUP, got their seat back, with Nicholson losing his seat to Seamus Mallon of the SDLP.

Edited December 11, 201014 yr by Brett-Butler

I think that's known in the trade as a momumental c***-up.

 

Something similar happened in Northern Ireland in 1986 when the unionist MPs all resigned their posts to protest the Anglo-Irish Agreement. All but one of them, James Nicholson of the UUP, got their seat back, with Nicholson losing his seat to Seamus Mallon of the SDLP.

If it hadn't been held in the middle of the Falklands conflict he might have won. As it was the ghastly Angela Rumbold held on before finally losing (to Labour) in the 1997 landslide.

Oh dear, what delusion. The Liberal Democrats have been close contenders in this seat over the past four elections and their candidate Elwyn Watkins (who is standing again) was cheated out a victory over Phil Woolas.

 

You seem to think that Labour voters will be happy that they were lied to by largely the same electoral team in May...moreso, people who have happily voted Lib Dem throughout their time in the constituency will suddenly flock to back a bunch of local liars based on the actions of a few disenfranchised students?

 

This isn't a traditional Conservative area either, so how you can expect them to overtake the Lib Dems is ludicrous. You cannot follow national polls at local level - there is no correlation whatsoever.

 

As for Griffin - well, I'd like to say you're wrong there too...but some people...

 

Personally I'll be massively disappointed if the people of Oldham East and Saddleworth are happy to re-elect Labour here after the actions of Phil Woolas.

You seem to think that Labour voters will be happy that they were lied to by largely the same electoral team in May...moreso, people who have happily voted Lib Dem throughout their time in the constituency will suddenly flock to back a bunch of local liars based on the actions of a few disenfranchised students?

 

I think it would be a BIT of a faux-pas if the Lib Dems base their campaign on Labour's lies in light of the NUS pledges, don't you? On that note... the Lib Dems' problem goes much wider than the simple issues of tuition fees (although the Coalition's policy on that is wildly unpopular)... it's the fact the issue has, rightly or wrongly, given the whole party the image that they're a bunch of liars who've sold their principles for power. Take a look at the barracking a Lib Dem minister received on Question Time last week from various members of the audience (not just students) - in the words of a Guardian columnist, it was the most hostile the audience has been to a panellist since the expenses scandal first broke.

 

 

This isn't a traditional Conservative area either, so how you can expect them to overtake the Lib Dems is ludicrous. You cannot follow national polls at local level - there is no correlation whatsoever.

The seat was held by the Tories from 1979 to 1995.

 

 

Personally I'll be massively disappointed if the people of Oldham East and Saddleworth are happy to re-elect Labour here after the actions of Phil Woolas.

 

How are the actions of Woolas relevant to Labour in this election when there's a new candidate due to Woolas (rightly) being barred?

I think it would be a BIT of a faux-pas if the Lib Dems base their campaign on Labour's lies in light of the NUS pledges, don't you? On that note... the Lib Dems' problem goes much wider than the simple issues of tuition fees (although the Coalition's policy on that is wildly unpopular)... it's the fact the issue has, rightly or wrongly, given the whole party the image that they're a bunch of liars who've sold their principles for power. Take a look at the barracking a Lib Dem minister received on Question Time last week from various members of the audience (not just students) - in the words of a Guardian columnist, it was the most hostile the audience has been to a panellist since the expenses scandal first broke.

The seat was held by the Tories from 1979 to 1995.

How are the actions of Woolas relevant to Labour in this election when there's a new candidate due to Woolas (rightly) being barred?

There's a difference between knowingly telling lies about your opponent and - unwisely - signing a pledge you couldn't keep. Whether Elwyn Watkins would have joined the majority of backbenchers in voting against the government, I do not know. If he's got any sense, he will say that he would have done and will do so in any future vote.

 

The seat held by the Tories was Littleborough and Saddleworth. There have been significant boundary changes since then.

 

I haven't seen last week's Question Time but there do seem to be a lot of Lib Dem ministers appearing while the Tories have gone to ground. It's time Clegg told Cameron to get some of his ministers to take some of the flack. After all, aren't we all in this together?

There's a difference between knowingly telling lies about your opponent and - unwisely - signing a pledge you couldn't keep. Whether Elwyn Watkins would have joined the majority of backbenchers in voting against the government, I do not know. If he's got any sense, he will say that he would have done and will do so in any future vote.

 

The seat held by the Tories was Littleborough and Saddleworth. There have been significant boundary changes since then.

 

I haven't seen last week's Question Time but there do seem to be a lot of Lib Dem ministers appearing while the Tories have gone to ground. It's time Clegg told Cameron to get some of his ministers to take some of the flack. After all, aren't we all in this together?

 

 

That's because the Tories are using the Lib Dems as their whipping boys... And, well, they've really no one to blame but themselves...

 

 

That's because the Tories are using the Lib Dems as their whipping boys... And, well, they've really no one to blame but themselves...

Unfortunately Clegg seems to be about the only person who hasn't noticed.

I think it would be a BIT of a faux-pas if the Lib Dems base their campaign on Labour's lies in light of the NUS pledges, don't you?

 

I don't know how many times I have to say that those pledges were made based on the Lib Dems governing OUTRIGHT. How the f*** is a party making up the minority of the government supposed to keep all or any of their pledges? If students voted for Lib Dems purely on one single issue, which was not the Lib Dems main campaigning issue, then they should think a bit more before casting their votes...especially since they all seem to be flocking to Labour now that Ed Miliband is in and they have the ability to sit back and decry the Government's policies.

 

How are the actions of Woolas relevant to Labour in this election when there's a new candidate due to Woolas (rightly) being barred?

 

I'd assume the same names will be running the election campaign for Labour etc. It's not Woolas per se, but the same group of Oldham Labour members.

 

I totally agree that the Tories have been sitting out of the public eye and letting the Lib Dems take a hammering on Question Time. That said, Jeremy Browne deserved every bit of abuse he was given: I've never seen such an un-Liberal Liberal.

 

I don't know how many times I have to say that those pledges were made based on the Lib Dems governing OUTRIGHT.

 

No, they weren't. Their MANIFESTO policy to scrap tuition fees was based on them governing outright. The pledge to the NUS pledging to vote against any rise in fees was completely separate, and had no caveats about what they would do if they were in a coalition. In any case, the Scottish Lib Dems managed to win with their tuition fees policy when they went into coalition with Labour in Scotland 10 years ago - Clegg had the option to do likewise but he chose not to. He should count himself lucky that the Scottish example (proof that he could have chosen not to betray students) hasn't gained much media coverage; otherwise, the vitriol directed at him would've been even greater.

Paddy Power reckons there's a better chance of Manchester United finishing bottom of this year's Premier League than there is of a Lib Dem win in this by-election.

Paddy Power reckons there's a better chance of Manchester United finishing bottom of this year's Premier League than there is of a Lib Dem win in this by-election.

Even if Man U lost all their remaining games they would be highly unlikely to finish bottom. Therefore, Paddy Power seem to be saying that the chances of a Lib Dem win are less than zero.

Therefore, Paddy Power seem to be saying that the chances of a Lib Dem win are less than zero.

Well, we already knew this, didn't we? :lol:

Paddy Power reckons there's a better chance of Manchester United finishing bottom of this year's Premier League than there is of a Lib Dem win in this by-election.

No it doesn't. They are quoting odds of 7/2 for the Lib Dem candidate with Labour clear favourites on 1/6. They aren't quoting odds on Man U finishing bottom of the league but the longest odds they do quote are 40/1 (for Stoke and Newcastle) so they would obviously offer longer odds than that.

No it doesn't. They are quoting odds of 7/2 for the Lib Dem candidate with Labour clear favourites on 1/6. They aren't quoting odds on Man U finishing bottom of the league but the longest odds they do quote are 40/1 (for Stoke and Newcastle) so they would obviously offer longer odds than that.

 

Well, I was just going off what a spokesman for them told the Guardian. :P

 

12.15pm: I'm normally reluctant to quote bookies, because their press releases are cheap bids for free publicity which normally don't tell us anything very new, but I'm going to make an exception because it's a quiet news day and this quote is quite a lively one. It's from Ken Robertson at Paddy Power, which has Labour on 1/6 to hold Oldham East and Saddleworth. Robertson says betting patterns suggest the Lib Dems have practically no chance.

 

"What Nick Clegg believes about his party's chance of winning Oldham East contradicts all recent betting patterns. Victory for the Lib Dems in Oldham is now as unlikely as Manchester United finishing at the bottom of this year's Premier League with Roy Keane in charge!"

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2011/ja...itics-live-blog

Well, I was just going off what a spokesman for them told the Guardian. :P

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2011/ja...itics-live-blog

A spokesman who was obviously looking for a headline and some free publicity <_>

A spokesman who was obviously looking for a headline and some free publicity <_<

 

Oh Simon, when did you become so cynical?

 

To be honest, I think that a Liberal Democrat win would not be as strange an outcome as people would expect. Elwyn Watkins is standing again in the area, and given that he's probably built up an aura of support there (you don't win 14,000 odd votes purely on party politics, I would suspect), he could ust clinch it. The Torries are a no-no, and I'd like to think that people in Oldham have long enough memories to remember why the by-election is happening in the first place (Labour MP distorts truth in campaign materials).

 

There's really no-one outside those three main parties standing that have a chance of coming close. The other candidates are:

 

BNP Derek Adams

Green Peter Allen

Bus-Pass Elvis David Bishop

Monster Raving Loony Nick "The Flying Brick" Delves

Pirate Loz Kaye

English Democrats Stephen Morris

UKIP Paul Nuttall

 

and I can't see the Bus-Pass Elvis Party getting a majority.

 

Obvious joke time - I thought the Monster Raving Loony Party and UKIP were the same thing?

Oh Simon, when did you become so cynical?

:lol:

Two polls out today show Labour are on track for a very comfortable win. ICM has Labour on 44% with the Lib Dems on 27% and the Tories on 18%. Populus (which had a bigger sample size) puts Labour on 46% with the Lib Dems on 29% and the Tories on 15%.

 

Nowhere near as disastrous for the Lib Dems as might've been expected... if these polls are reliable, they're only down 3-5% from the election. Surprisingly (and at odds with national opinion polls), most of Labour's increased support in Oldham since May seems to be coming from the Tories, whose vote in these polls is down more than 10% - although it should be noted that it's widely thought the Tories are holding back money from their candidate in a deliberate attempt to boost the Lib Dem candidate's chances. Still, it's worth pointing out that, in the Populus poll, Labour even manage to outpoll the combined Coalition vote! I think Ed Miliband will be very pleased with anything like this scale of victory next week.