Paddick Speaks

Brian Paddick has published in the Mail on Sunday a selection of his diary entries over the period when he was running for mayor of London. (Hat-tip: Matthew Pearce for bringing it to my attention.) They make amusing and sometimes painful reading for Lib Dems, but it’s worth a look.

After the London election results were published, I said that I hoped the party was going to be looking at what went wrong. Well, it’s pretty clear from Brian’s piece that he feels it comes down to money:

I feel bruised and bewildered by the lack of support as a result of not being able to raise enough money – we were outspent 20:1 by the Ken and Boris machines.

He also makes it clear he doesn’t want to run for MP anywhere. But we should be cautious about thinking of this as the end of Brian’s political career. He has carefully worded this to leave open the possibility of being parachuted in to the House of Lords. I for one can’t think of a better place for him.

Posted in Uncategorized. Tags: , . 1 Comment »

Paddick Polls 9.8%

The London Mayor results are out, though the BBC are continuing their record in the reporting of these elections by only giving numbers for Ken and Boris. The Graun, at least, has given us the numbers.

And they’re not pretty. What happened here? Was this sheer Boris factor squeezing our vote, or has something more significant happened to our London support? The assembly numbers point towards the latter.

In the light of a by no means shabby night throughout the rest of the country, I hope the party works out what went wrong in London.

Posted in Uncategorized. Tags: , . 4 Comments »

We Need A Campaign to Explain the London Mayor Voting System

Watching from the sidelines up here in Cambridge, I, and I’m sure many other Lib Dems, and indeed supporters of anyone other than Ken or Boris, am asking myself one question whenever I see polls coming out of London: Why, in one of the few places in England where voters are not completely wedded to tactical voting, is the vote for parties other than the biggest two not larger?

I know it’s what Lib Dems would say in this situation, but in this case, I’m pretty sure it’s true: Londoners are tired of Ken, and they aren’t sure they want Boris in charge of the multimillion pound budget of the London mayor. So why can’t Brian, Sian, Gerard, Lindsey, Winston, Matt, Richard or Alan get more traction? In some of their cases (*cough* BNP *cough*), it is because they are awful, awful people. But that doesn’t get proponents of more proportional (and yes, I know, that’s questionable here, but never mind, if you don’t like the word proportional then try expressive – after all, voters are at the very least being given a greater opportunity to express an opinion) voting sytems off the hook. Why, under London’s voting system, do we see such a rush for the two biggest candidates?

It is tempting to answer that the reason is simply name recognition. This is undoubtedly a factor; in 2004 and 2000 there was not quite the same polarisation as we are seeing in polls now. But nonetheless, the assembly voting numbers for 2004 and 2000 do seem to show that Lib Dem support (and indeed other party support) is generally unrepresented in mayoral voting. So why is this? Is it the sheer weight of recognition value for the biggest candidates (almost invariably only achieving that status because the media have anointed them as such)? Maybe, but I doubt it.

Every mayoral election the results show that people are using their second choice votes to vote with their cosciences, and their first choice votes to vote tactically – which is, of course, the wrong way round. It is no use to UKIP, or the the Lib Dems, or to the Greens, to get a second choice vote, and you aren’t helping them one jot giving it to them. I’m fairly sure that many, many people aren’t quite grasping this, and I think it’s about time we, and the small parties, from the Greens on downwards, got together to ram home this point.

It’s tempting to say that Brian Paddick should be devoting his campainging and leafletting to explaining the voting system, since this is the one thing most likely to drive up his vote. But really, this isn’t a Lib Dem issue, it’s bigger than that. If London is to have an SV system for its mayoral elections, people need to know that that’s what they have, and they need to realise the implications of it. I’m not at all sure they do right now, and it would do everyone except the media, Ken and Boris, a huge favour for all the “outsider” parties (and Brian!) to make a big noise about it right about now.

Posted in Uncategorized. Tags: , . 3 Comments »