Dulwich & West Norwood Results

[theboycj]

Echo thoughts as above, James Barber seems like a good chap and is very response to meeting the public's needs. I hope the next Labour MEP puts in the same effort.

[Green Goose]

northdulmum Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Just Google Simon hughess and Peter tatchell 1983

Made worse by the fact that Hughes, himself, was outed in 2006.

Further evidence that it is the LibDems that's the nasty party. Like Danny Alexander presenting his own "budget" to parliament on the day after budget day.

[geh]

whist I disagreed with some of the initiatives (CPZ) I think in the main James has been a very good local councillor, and I suspect would have been the same as an MP. I hope this doesn't discourage him.

g

[Zebedee Tring]

This is wrong. Labour increased the top rate from 40% to 50% in their last months in office (far too late IMHO) and Osborne then cut the rate to 45%, since they were so concerned about the tax "burden" on multi-millionaires. If it had not been for the Lib Dems, they would have probably cut it back to 40%.

This is not to defend the Lib Dems' role in the coalition since they allowed many bad things to happen, in particular the so-called "reform" of the NHS.

[maxxi]

I confess to being delighted Simon Hughes lost his seat. He was a venomous snake who deserved to be dumped a long time ago. I lived in SE1 for 8 years and had some contact with him in various roles re housing and tenants associations - he was a self serving egotist and a snide.

I have always thought JB to be a decent cove though and hope he sticks at it.

[Pugwash]

I think the Lib Dems put a brake on the more extreme policies and cutbacks that the Torys wanted to make, this time round David C and his cronies will have a free hand in privatising various sections of NHS etc and also more draconian cuts in welfare spending and monies to local authorities.

For those who voted tactically - you may have made a wrong choice

[ali2007]

just wanted to echo what a few other people have said here - I voted Lib Dem solely for James Barber who definitely deserved to win!

[dc]

Penguin68 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Two - these constituencies are often small(er) than rural ones

> (population, not area) so there are more of them.

> So a smaller electorate can elect more MPs (per

> 100,000 head of population)

This is not correct. The average electorate across England is 72,400 and there is no difference in the 'target size' or Electoral Quota, to give the official term, of urban and rural constituencies set out by the Boundary Commission at the commencement of each boundary review process. There is usually, on average, a lower turnout of electors in urban constituencies so it may appear that it takes fewer voters to elect a Labour MP but that is a statistical issue not one of any structural bias in favour of urban areas.

[Green Goose]

ali2007 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> just wanted to echo what a few other people have

> said here - I voted Lib Dem solely for James

> Barber who definitely deserved to win!

One might vote for a particular candidate because he/she appeals to you ona personal level but, in the end, you are going to get his/her party.

I also think JB is a decent bloke but his party lives in an ivory tower of idealism far detached from the real world.

[dc]

HappyFamily Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Im afraid James and others in "Dulwich & West

> Norwood" will have been disadvantaged by the

> previous Gerrymandering by the labour party (key

> being that the East Dulwich Tory/libdem district

> is merely swamped by the lumping in of West

> Norwood which gives the easy Labour vote).

This is not correct. The change from Dulwich to Dulwich and West Norwood when, for the first time in a boundary review process borough boundaries were crossed, was in the review that reported in 1995. That was under a Tory government. So even if gerrymandering of the process was possible (which it really isn't given the independence of the Boundary Commissions) it could not have been done by Labour. That review took out wards to the north of Dulwich (ie Peckham and strongly Labour) and added wards from Lambeth. Two of those at the time were Tory, one LibDem and one Labour. The 'notional' Labour majority of the new seat compared to the old one went down from 2056 to 1800 odd. Labour actually fought the proposals tooth and nail (to no effect) as they reduced Labour seats across Lambeth and Southwark from five to four.

Later changes merely reflected a relative increase in the population of Lambeth compared to Southwark and changes to the local 'ward' boundaries in both boroughs (wards are not allowed to be split between parliamentary seats).

[Otta]

SteveUK1978 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I was 5 so not aware of any early 80's naughtiness

> on his part. He just looked a bit sad on the TV

> tonight, like a bloke in his early 60's who had

> just lost his job.

>

> (ps...what did he do?)

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/the-homophobic-campaign-that-helped-win-bermondsey-524703.html

[Belle]

In fairness, there's no evidence he did anything himself, and he did apologise unreservedly. I'm not sure it's fair to judge 30+ years of service to a constituency (and despite comments here, he is generally seen a good constituency MP) based on some dodgy/dirty tricks in the original election campaign, some of which are hearsay. I know people who have worked for him, and who live in the constituency, and I used to work in it - and he came across as extremely hard working.

[SteveUK1978]

northdulmum Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> ... er feel sorry for SH?

> You live by the sword you die by the sword. What

> he did back then was unforgivable.

Turns out it is forgivable...

"Peter Tatchell has forgiven Simon Hughes for the "homophobic" campaign run against him by the Liberal Party at the 1983 Bermondsey by-election."

[northdulmum]

?

He won a campaign by gay bashing despite being gay himself. Of all the extreme acts by politicians to gain power that takes the biscuit IMO so to me, unforgivable.

[James Barber]

Perhaps worth reading the Wiki version of those events in 1983 rather than incomplete rumours:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bermondsey_by-election,_1983

[SteveUK1978]

Clearly a very unsavoury incident and hopefully one that is consigned to a different era.

[????]

Yup , hopefully. Now just who were telling Orthodox Jews in Finchley that the Tory Candidate was gay a few days ago?

[Otta]

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/tory-candidate-mike-freer-labour-canvassers-are-telling-orthodox-jews-im-gay-10228322.html

Hadn't heard about that, and if true totally disgusting.

But only his word for it and no.suggestion the Labour candidate had any knowledge.

[Otta]

James Barber Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Perhaps worth reading the Wiki version of those

> events in 1983 rather than incomplete rumours:

> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bermondsey_by-electio

> n,_1983

Because wiki is always so reliable and unbiased.

[Bic Basher]

Returning to the election result. Labour campaigned hard here, including a visit from our new MP two weeks ago.

While I voted Labour for the first time in a General Election as I didn't like our ex North London based MP who I felt was disconnected with our area, I have a lot of respect for James Barber and the work he's done and continues to do as a Ward Cllr in ED ward. He, Simon Hughes and Vince Cable were the victims of being associated with a party who propped up the Tory Coalition.

[Otta]

Have lib dems ever held Dulwich? As far as I remember it's been Labour my whole life.

[Otta]

Just checked, Had 9 years of Tory between 83 - 92. That was when it was just Dulwich constituency. Before that it had been Labour since 64.

[uncleglen]

Does it matter how hard they campaign? I personally go by the manifesto and previous record. I also think that people vote out of self interest. The well-off in Dulwich Village are untouched by Labour policies and doctors etc. will vote Labour for the sake of the NHS and then send their kids to private schools. Poorer people on estates around Dulwich and West Norwood will vote Labour to preserve their levels of benefits. As a middle-englander I suffer under Labour and therefore do not vote Labour- I voted for James to try to keep Labour out. (Also I firmly believe that all the extreme lefties are now firmly secreted away in the Labour Party after the Militant 'scandal' in the '80s)

[Otta]

Nice flaming.

[Blah Blah]

You assume all labour voters are on benefits now Uncle? That'll be why London is overwhelmingly Labour then of course!

Of course most people vote out of self interest and that's why all parties set policies to 'reward' groups of people for voting for them. But there are also a group of people who are not self interested uncleglen, people who believe in trying to be as fair as possible to everyone. I would choose a cohesive society over a devisive one anyday. Some things are very important in levelling opportunity and the playing field. Education is one of them, and in that, good education for everyone. Not underfunded overcrowded schools in poor areas whilst the luckier people in life can send theirs to smaller better funded schools. The ideal party would be one that can deliver improved opportunity, jobs, education, upward social mobility etc FOR ALL, not just 33% of the population (which is around the share of the vote the Tories received - and only around 2% moire than in 2010 btw).

The same is true of MPs. Some are less interested in party politics and more interested in delivering for the needs of constituents they represent (and that will differ from borough to borough). Many people voted for the MP they wanted because of their record in delivering/ fighting for the area they represent. Party politics had little to do with it.

Labours success in London is not down to people on benefits, it's down to a whole mix of people, from Judges and the well educated, to the small business owner. They will all have their own reasons for choosing Labour just as those who vote Tory/ Lid Dem etc will have theirs. Let's not be so arrogant as to assume we know why anyone votes the way they do shall we?