Ukip lost the Tory party 27 seats

B.A.Ware · 22-04-2006, 04:51 PM

Do people really believe Ukip lost the Tory party 27 seats?

As I actually thought people never believed this and were using it as a propaganda tool I was quite surprised in another posting that someone actually thinks it is a fact which lead me to do some research here are my conclusions.

The turnout in the majority these seats had increased.
Out of the 27 seats Labours vote had fallen (since 2001) by an average of 6.4% in 24 seats.
The 3 seats they increased their vote were at the cost of the Lib/Dems losses.

Quote:

Cornwall North-----Lab+2.1%-------Lib/Dems-9.4%
Romsey-------------- Lab+0.6%-------Lib/Dems-2.3%
Torbay--------------- Lab+5.3%-------Lib/Dems-9.6%

Out of the 27 seats the Tory vote had risen (since 2001) by an average of 2.4% in 21 seats.
The 6 seats their vote decreased were at the cost of lib/Dems gains.

Quote:

Burton---------------Tory-0.4%----------Lib/Dems +3.4%
Hove-----------------Tory-1.8%----------Lib/Dems +8.8%
Solihull--------------Tory-6%------------Lib/Dems +14%
Watford--------------Tory-3.7%---------Lib/Dems +13.8%
Westmorland--------Tory-3.7%---------Lib/Dems +5.1%
Thanet South--------Tory-2.3%---------Lib/Dems +3.8%

Ukip actually lost support in 3 of these seats.

Quote:

Harlow----------0.6%-
Hereford--------0.5%-
Solihull---------0.3%-

People assume that all of the people that voted Ukip would have voted Tory had Ukip not stood well the facts don’t seem to bear this out.
To summarise my point Labour had huge losses across these seats where did that vote go, the Tory vote had increased in the majority of these seats and where there were losses the Lib/Dems gained.

If we ignore the other small parties and the fact our vote decreased in three seats how can people believe that we cost the Tory party these seats or is this just more propaganda for the leadership to dupe the membership with.

Martin Harvey · 22-04-2006, 08:47 PM

Your view regarding Harlow is not so simple. Tony Bennett had stood in Harlow as a UKIP Local Council candidate in December with considerable financial and campaigning backing of my Branch committee, we came third beating the LDs, a very good Independent candidate and an ED candidate. Tony had a very good following in Harlow. He defected to Veritas and stood against UKIP in the general election in Harlow. Our UKIP candidate beat Tony Bennett, the combined vote was 4.84%.
It is very difficult to estimate what might have happened if the Veritas factor had not arisen, but what I do know for sure is that very many previously Labour supporters voted for UKIP, and they told me so, some even telephoning. This has lead me to conclude that if we had been able to concentrate solely on campaigning for UKIP, without the Veritas distraction in Harlow, we would have taken even more Labour votes, and we would have WON the seat for the CONS. Harlow was a Labour stronghold, but for obvious reasons has become vulnerable.
Martin Harvey.

B.A.Ware · 23-04-2006, 01:38 AM

I am saying nothing is simple I just want to be honest, I am tired of people saying we achieved something when with a little research it is blindingly obviously this is not true.

I aspire to be honest and truthful something the Lib/Lab/Con will never be, if this is what Ukip have become then thank you and goodbye.

Jonathan Arnott · 23-04-2006, 02:51 AM

I agree with your analysis B.A.Ware, the claim isn't true.

The Conservatives have believed it for a long time, and various Conservatives made that claim quite loudly. I don't think we should make the claim ourselves - after all, it's not true but if the Conservative Party want to delude themselves INTO phpbb_believing that we cost them 27 seats, that's their own business!

HarryUKIP · 23-04-2006, 07:14 AM

Shortly after the election last year on the UKIP main site this article was posted
http://www.ukip.org/ukip_news/gen12.php?t=1&id=1378

Quote:

'UKIP effect' - the political sensation of the election
09-05-2005 By Stuart Gulleford
The incredible, untold story of the general election is the effect that UKIP (and to a lesser extent Veritas) has had on the outcome. Overall, the combined votes of these two parties affected the outcome of 27 seats which might have otherwise gone to the Conservatives.
Of these 18 are held by Labour and if the Conservatives had won them the government would have had an overall majority of 30 instead of the 66 they actually have. Also the Conservatives would have 224 seats instead of 197. Liberal Democrat gains would have been reduced to a mere two.
The seats are as follows:
- Battersea (Lab hold) Majority: 163 - UKIP: 333
- Burton (Lab hold) Majority: 1,421 ¬ UKIP plus Veritas: 1,825
- Carshalton & Wallington (LD hold) Majority: 1,068 - UKIP: 1,111
- Cornwall North (LD hold) Majority: 3,076 - UKIP plus Veritas: 3,387
- Crawley (Lab Hold) Majority 37 - UKIP 935
- Dartford (Lab hold) Majority 706 - UKIP: 1,407
- Eastleigh (LD Hold) Chris Huhne Majority: 568 - UKIP: 1,669
- Gillingham (Lab hold) Majority 254 - UKIP 1,191
- Harlow (Lab hold) Majority 97 - UKIP plus Veritas 1922
- Hereford (Lab hold) Majority: 962 - UKIP: 1,030
- High Peak (Lab hold) Majority: 735 ¬ UKIP 1,106
- Hove (Lab hold) Majority 420 - UKIP 575
- Medway (Lab hold) Majority: 213 - UKIP 1,488
- Portsmouth North (Lab hold) Majority: 1,139 - UKIP 1,348
- Romsey (LD hold) Majority 125 ¬ UKIP: 1,076
- Sittingbourne & Sheppey (Lab hold) Majority: 79 - UKIP plus Veritas: 1,118
- Solihull (LD Gain) Majority: 279 - UKIP: 990
- Somerton & Frome (LD hold) Majority: 812 - UKIP plus Veritas: 1,531
- Staffordshire Moorlands (Lab hold) Majority: 2,438 -¬ UKIP: 3,512
- Stroud (Lab hold) Majority: 350 - UKIP: 1,089
- Stourbridge (Lab hold) Majority: 407 - UKIP: 1,087
- Taunton (LD gain) Majority: 573 ¬ UKIP: 1,441
- Thanet South (Lab hold) Majority: 664 - UKIP (Nigel Farage) 2,079
- Torbay (LD hold) Majority: 2,029 - UKIP 3,726
- Warwick & Leamington (Lab hold) Majority: 306 - UKIP: 921
- Watford (Lab hold) Majority: 1,148 - UKIP: 1,292
- Westmorland & Lonsdale (LD gain) Majority: 267 - UKIP: 660
From this, it is clear that potentially, UKIP had a far more significant effect on the election than their vote would imply. Given how different today would look if Blair has a majority of 30 and Kennedy had only taken two seats, it could be said that the "UKIP effect" is the political sensation of the election - and one that the mainstream media missed completely.
Furthermore, from provisional data, it is evident that UKIP is – almost under the radar – making steady gains in a hostile electoral environment. Seats fought over the last three elections have increased from 194 and 434 to 497, while the national share of vote has increased from 0.34% and 1.47% to 2.38%, with deposits saved increasing from one in 1997 to six in 2001 and 45 in this current election.
Total votes stood at 106,001 in 1997, at 390,910 in 2001 and at roughly 610,000 this time round. Given the tenacity of the Party, even where funding had dried up, fielding 497 candidates was a considerable achievement and there is no reason to expect that the Party will be any less tenacious in the next general election.
On the basis that the UKIP vote increases the same amount in the next election, having gone through the current results and worked out, provisionally, that some 15 extra Conservative seats could be lost to the "UKIP effect" in the next election.
These include Devon West, Eastbourne, Guildford, Totnes and the Wrekin, these would be in addition to the current 27 potentials, which would bring Conservative losses to 42.
All this, of course, is theoretical but there is good reason to believe that – all things being equal – UKIP could maintain its rate of growth or even improve its performance. For instance, with a prolonged EU referendum battle, it could improve its profile and attract greater support.
Crucially, the most probable year for the next general election is 2009 which, this time, coincides with the Euro-elections, which might even be held on the same date. That would put “Europe” firmly on the agenda and could significantly benefit UKIP.
The failure to develop a fully Eurosceptic policy and the missed opportunity of making "Europe", in just a small way, a part of the Conservatives Party's election campaign handicapped them and allowed Labour to retain a sizeable majority. Clearly, the Conservatives cannot afford to ignore neither "Europe" nor UKIP at the next election, if they are to stand a chance of winning and forming a government.

This was on the main site and has been quoted from by leading UKIP people.

B.A.Ware · 23-04-2006, 01:05 PM

I agree with Jonathan Arnott it is one thing letting the opposition think we had a huge effect on these seats and another seeking comfort and telling members we did.

22-04-2006, 08:47 PM	#2 (permalink)
Martin Harvey Member Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: West Essex Posts: 167	UKIP lost the Tory Party 27 seats Your view regarding Harlow is not so simple. Tony Bennett had stood in Harlow as a UKIP Local Council candidate in December with considerable financial and campaigning backing of my Branch committee, we came third beating the LDs, a very good Independent candidate and an ED candidate. Tony had a very good following in Harlow. He defected to Veritas and stood against UKIP in the general election in Harlow. Our UKIP candidate beat Tony Bennett, the combined vote was 4.84%. It is very difficult to estimate what might have happened if the Veritas factor had not arisen, but what I do know for sure is that very many previously Labour supporters voted for UKIP, and they told me so, some even telephoning. This has lead me to conclude that if we had been able to concentrate solely on campaigning for UKIP, without the Veritas distraction in Harlow, we would have taken even more Labour votes, and we would have WON the seat for the CONS. Harlow was a Labour stronghold, but for obvious reasons has become vulnerable. Martin Harvey.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

23-04-2006, 01:38 AM	#3 (permalink)
B.A.Ware Moderator Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Birmingham Posts: 4,773 Party: UKIP	I am saying nothing is simple I just want to be honest, I am tired of people saying we achieved something when with a little research it is blindingly obviously this is not true. I aspire to be honest and truthful something the Lib/Lab/Con will never be, if this is what Ukip have become then thank you and goodbye.

23-04-2006, 02:51 AM	#4 (permalink)
Jonathan Arnott Junior Member Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 93	I agree with your analysis B.A.Ware, the claim isn't true. The Conservatives have believed it for a long time, and various Conservatives made that claim quite loudly. I don't think we should make the claim ourselves - after all, it's not true but if the Conservative Party want to delude themselves INTO phpbb_believing that we cost them 27 seats, that's their own business!

23-04-2006, 01:05 PM	#6 (permalink)
B.A.Ware Moderator Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Birmingham Posts: 4,773 Party: UKIP	I agree with Jonathan Arnott it is one thing letting the opposition think we had a huge effect on these seats and another seeking comfort and telling members we did.