Henley: How low can Labour go?
As I write, the polls in Henley have just closed. The winner of the by-election, triggered by Boris Johnson's resignation from parliament following his election as London mayor, is a foregone conclusion: Henley is one of those lovely, rich, semi-rural constituencies where the Tories could put up Ian Huntley as a candidate and still romp home. In 2005 Johnson had a majority of nearly 13,000, and that was when the Tories weren't 20% ahead in the polls. Since their candidate, John Howell, is not Britain's most notorious child killer, but an accountant, it seems fairly inevitable that he will be the next MP for Henley.
No, far more interesting (and possibly rather enjoyable, for those of us who despise everything the present government stands for) will be the result further down the table. Specifically, around 3rd, 4th, 5th, or possibly 6th place. For it is conceivable, I think, that Labour could finish in any of those positions, behind any or all of the BNP, UKIP, and the Greens. A little while ago politicalbetting.com speculated that the BNP, which has been putting quite a bit of effort into the Henley campaign, could be headed for third place, after the Tories and the Lib Dems. They have previously suggested that Labour's share of the vote could fall as low as 2 or 3%, down from 14.7% three years ago. Last time round UKIP took a 2.5% share, and the Greens 3.3%, so if Labour's vote really does collapse, both parties could beat them simply by keeping their own support steady. Can anyone recall an occasion when one of the big parties has finished lower than fourth in an English parliamentary election?
Admittedly, I may be allowing my excitement at the thought of Labour receiving yet another humiliating electoral drubbing to get the better of me. Perhaps they will cling on to third place. But the bookies' expectation is that they will fail to secure the 5% share needed to save their deposit. The question then becomes, how far below the 5% mark will they fall? And what does yet another bad result mean for Gordon Brown?
The Fulham Reactionary
6 Comments
View Printer Friendly Version
Reader Comments (6)
A by-election in Henley? Who says? There's been not a peep about this on the news, only the one where John Simpson has been mournfully wailing on about, somewhere in the dark continent.
Bernard,
True - It's Zimbabwe above all other things. Funny thing is when Mugabe was butchering white farmers - and their black workers - not a cheep. Sickening.
David
There was widespread coverage on the BBC at the time of the white farm pogrom unleashed by Mugabe. It was as a result of reporting that pogrom that the BBC was expelled from Zimbabwe, as it is to this day.
A symbolic 1066 votes for Labour
Labour's Richard McKenzie could only poll 1,066 votes, behind the Green Party's Mark Stevenson on 1,321 and the BNP's Timothy Rait on 1,243.
Blimey, you're an early riser Henry!
Henley is wealthy and pretty much un-enriched.
For the BNP to come 4th speaks volumes about the fear and detestation of the socialised experiment by Labour that has been perpetrated on the country as a whole.
Labour & Brown are gone. It remains as to what further damage they can inflict in the year or so remaining. That's the terror.
Well spotted, Henry. Although I should point out that since Gordon Brown is monoptic, an arrow in the eye might not necessarily prove fatal.
Also mildly interesting is yet another bad result for UKIP, who got just 843 votes. Their pet issue, Europe is high on the agenda at the moment, and Henley is the kind of seat where they ought to do well. Instead their share of the vote fell, albeit only very slightly.