Why do the BBC and Eastenders get politics so wrong so consistently ?

Eastenders apparently prides itself on getting its facts right on issues. So what do they get it so wrong when it comes to politics ?

When it came to mark Fowler getting HIV, they spoke to people from the Terrence Higgins Trust, they spoke to people in the NHS, the spoke to real people who had HIV/AIDS.

When they dealt with Diana Butcher running away from home they spoke to groups who deal with the homeless like Shelter, they spoke to charities who help children with problems like Childline.

In fact, on every social issue the BBC and Eastenders make great efforts to be as correct on the issue as possible and avoid sensationalistand factual errors.

But for politics who do they speak to ?

When Iain Beale stood for the Walford East by-election back in 1998, there were a series of factual errors, not the least of which is the assumed belief that candidates do not know the result until it is publicly announced. So have the BBC spoken to anyone since then ? Obviously not.

There is in Eastenders at the moment a by-election in Walford East again. Peggy Mitchell is the candidate. The by-election is in three weeks time (2nd April). And that brings up the first error. Why is it on a Monday ? No explanation and a clearly odd day for an election, especially given that Thursday is an Eastenders day, but clearly the producers of the show decided that holding an election on a traditional day for elections was not important.

The second "gaffe" from a political hacks point of view was that Peggy handed in her nomination papers about a month ago. this would have been seven weeks before the election day. Any political hack or former election agent knows that you cannot hand in papers this early as the election timetable has a clear window for the handing in of nomination papers. You could argue that Peggy might have been pro-active in this case and got them in advance, but this is a by-election and things are very strictly controlled in such elections with less chance of being pro-active when it comes to nominations.

This second gaffe though was compounded by a third gaffe as Peggy Mitchell got her nomination papers handed in during the evening. She even made comment about the fact that she "handed them in". Oh that we could all live in Walford where council offices stay open so late.

Perhaps though the most common gaffe in TV is the belief that a public meeting is still the centrepiece and deciding factor in any election campaign.

Tonight's episode of Eastenders featured a public meeting of candidates which was attended by all of 20 people yet Peggy's performance was enough, in front of only a handful of people, to make people think that she was set to win ? Public meetings might have been decisive in the period up to the 1960's, but I have yet to go to one that has made any difference to a campaign.

And what of Walford East ? How big would the ward be ? 3000 houses ? More ? Yet no mention is made of canvassing or delivering leaflets. A leaflet was shown in one episode but it was like something from the 1950s and nothing like leaflets 90% of people get through there doors at election time. So it begs the question why one landlady in one pub would be so well known outside of Albert Square. Clearly the Eastenders producers think that local council wards are made up of 50 houses only.

In truth, none of this is important and for 99.9% of the viewing public, none of the machinations of politics is of any interest, but if Eastenders can go to the trouble of doing such great research in to serious issues which require lots of explaining, couldn't they speak to someone who knows something about politics to ensure that at least they get the very basics right when it comes to elections ?

Most useless attack in a political leaflet ever ?

Jonathan Wallace has highlighted what must be one of the poorest attacks ever in a political leaflet which highlights the problems the Labour Party face at the moment. In Jonathan's ward in Gateshead there is a by-election taking place, and the Labour Party have taken it upon themselves to attack the Tories for failing to support the NHS 60 years ago !

"Whilst I am a proponent of using an opponent's record against them, suggesting people should not vote for a political party for something that party did 60 years ago does seem to be scraping the bottom of the barrel."

I couldn't have put it better myself.

Read more about the leaflet's contents HERE.

For the Lib Dems a better night than expected and actually even better than that

All the pundits were expecting small Lib Dem losses last night, but it turned out not to be true and a small number of gains will give the party confidence to move forward under Nick Clegg's leadership. But whilst people might think it was a tale of two countries, with Lib Dems seemingly losing out to the Tories and gaining from Labour, the truth was that in the key Lib Dem seats in Tory areas that the Lib Dems have snatched at recent general elections, the Lib Dem performance was actually very good.

Take a look at some of the Lib Dem seat the Tories want to target. Southport, Cheltenham, Westmoreland and Lonsdale, Winchester, Colchester, Sheffield Hallam, and a host of others. IN all these area the Lib Dems did remarkably well, making gains from the Tories and taking the great majority of seats within those constituencies. In others too, such as Portsmouth South and Solihull for example, the Lib Dems didn't make gains, but they held the majority of seats in the constituency and halted any Tory surge.

So was does this say to people interested in elections ? Well it tells us that the old Lib Dem adage, "Where we work, we win", is very true, and it also highlight the age old difficulty that the Tories (and Labour) have had over the years in unseating Lib Dem MP's when they get in, particularly if they get in and work their constituencies properly. What is shows, in laymans terms, is that uniform swings mean absolutely nothing in Lib Dem seats. A senior Tory and election night TV pundit once said to me "If the Lib Dems were on 5% in the opinion polls they would still win 40 seats and we could probably name the seats already".

So in general terms, the night said a lot about the Lib Dems chances of holding seats against a Tory surge in two years time.

But what of Labour.

Personally I thought it was about as bad as it gets for them and more worryingly the number of seats they lost in what are supposed to be solid Labour seats, particularly those gained since 1992, tell us that Labour's organisation is shot to pieces in some constituencies and they will lose some MP's next time who appear, on paper to be safe. Look at the losses in Southampton, Portsmouth North, Exeter and Birmingham for good examples of seats Labour won in order to take power but where they, unlike the Lib Dems, have never managed to truly build an organisation that can sustain them in thinner times.

In the cold light of day Labour must feel really distressed. It was a great night for the Tories, a decent one for the Lib Dems, but a sign of impending defeat for Labour.

Well if my experience is anything to go by, Labour could be hit by low turnouts

Part of my school grounds, in a ward that typically elects Labour councillors, has a polling station in it every year, so as someone with a more than passing interest in politics it is always interesting to see the activity that goes on.

In previous years we have seen tellers for the Lib Dems and Labour, but not this year. But the most surprising thing was that in the 45 minutes I was outside taking a PE lesson today, not one person came to vote. This is a polling station that covers about 400 or more houses, where more than a thousands registered voters live, and yet nobody was coming out to vote.

As I left school this evening at six o'clock, I spoke to one of the polling staff who was stretching his legs. I asked him if it was as quiet as it looked, and he said turnout was only one third of what it would typically be by 10pm and that it was looking likely that turnout would be significantly down. he also reported other Norwich polling stations were noticing less people voting.

Now I am fully aware that more people vote by post, but you have to wonder if there are a lot of Labour voters staying at home today.

The dreaded vote of confidence

In football there is a well known phrase "the dreaded vote of confidence. This relates to the board of a football club usually having a board meeting on a Monday where they give the manager the vote of confidence, only to sack him after they lose the next game.

The are strange parallels to this currently in the Labour Party where ministerial colleagues of Gordon Brown (as well as some sycophantic journalists if Mariella Frostrup's sad defence on the Andrew Marr programme this morning shows) rally round Gordon Brown assuring us there is no question mark hanging over his continued leadership and that everything is fine and dandy.

The fact is though that it isn't.

To return to the football analogy again, Gordon has got a big match ahead of him with the local election on May 1st, and whilst colleagues will want to be seen as loyal before Thursday, there must be real questions about how many of them will remain so happily supportive if Labour have as bad a night as many think they will have.

It is worth remembering that when this year's round of council seats was last up, labour had a terrible night scoring just 28% of the popular vote, so they are not having to defend a high point in their political fortunes yet already labour are saying that 200 losses would be manageable.

So what does 200 losses equate to in football terms ? Hardly a battling draw or even a gutsy narrow defeat. For me, a 200 council seat loss at this stage would be a good 4-0 thrashing and you'd hardly blame any board for keeping the manger on in such circumstances unless they were really dumb, and therein lies Gordon Brown's salvation ...

Apparently there are elections in a few days time

Is it just me or is there a severe case of election indifference in the air ?

Okay, so I don't live in an area where elections are being held this year but I do work in an area (Norwich) where there are elections, and being honest, nobody would know.

The usual display of signs by the political parties seems to be totally absent in some key wards whilst people I speak to who live in Norwich see oblivious to there being elections this year.

I know this is very subjective and based on just asking a few people and from what I see, but is there a degree of election apathy this year ?

BBC "Spinning" Pro Tory stories

The Tories love to lambast the BBC as being pro Labour, being institutionally biased against the Conservative Party and being a haven for socialists and liberals.

So can the Tories explain the blatant lies that the BBC was peddling on their behalf this morning on BBC Breakfast News and on BBC Radio ?

The BBC quite categorically stated that in yesterday's local council by-elections "the results had been poor for Gordon's Brown's Labour Party with the Conservative Vote up in 8 of the 9 seats with the Tories gaining a seat of Labour"

The funny thing is though that when you analyse the results clearly, Labour's vote was up in nearly half of the contests (four). This is exactly the same for the Tories, with their vote up in only four contests, not the five the BBC falsely reported.

The fact the BBC failed to acknowledge that Labour actually made a gain in Mansfield was also not acknowledged.

In fact last night's results have got to be seen as good for Labour. They defended a three way marginal in Portsmouth with an increase in their vote and their majority whilst even in the seat they lost in Sunderland, their vote was up by more than 2%.

So next time the Tories send a press release to the BBC perhaps the Beeb could actually bother to check the results for themselves. And for that matter, the next time the Tories complain of bias, perhaps they should remember the fact that the BBC ran this story without seemingly checking it's credibility at all.

The bigger question though is why are the Tories trying to spin poor results as being enough to put Gordon Brown off calling an election ? I thought the Tories were desperate for the election as soon as possible. Surely this sort of spin is designed to stop an election. isn't this a sign of panic in the Tory Party ?

Hardly a ringing endorsement of North Norfolk Conservatives

In his fortnightly column in the Eastern Daily Press, Iain Dale, perhaps with some justification, gets very excited about the local election results, but with one notable exception. His old stomping ground of North Norfolk gets mentioned, but it is hardly a ringing endorsement of the Conservatives there or indeed an expectation of them having any chance of victory in the near future. Iain writes ;

"North Norfolk Tories now need to grasp a nettle they know in their heads they should have grasped several years ago. They lost the parliamentary seat to the Lib Dems in 2001, they lost the Council to the Lib Dems, they haven’t won a single council by election in a decade and they (and I ) were trounced in the 2005 General Election. They now need to ask themselves why that is. They’ve got to learn the campaigning techniques which South Norfolk Tories - and indeed, North Norfolk Lib Dems - seem to take for granted. They have got to embrace the sort of community politics which the Lib Dems thrive on but also learn the art of opposition."

.

Actually, Iain is wrong about their by-elections. According to our records we have no evidence of a Conservative District Council by-election victory since local government re-organisation in 1974, but I am happy to be corrected on this, but at the very least, the Tories have won no council by-elections since Norman Lamb first became involved in North Norfolk back in 1990.

.

As for community politics, it will be difficult for the Tories to do this because in great swathes of North Norfolk they never see a Conservative until three weeks before an election and the Tories failure to find candidates who lived anywhere near the wards they were standing in on May 3rd spoke volumes about the state of their local party organisation.

Iain Dale went on to add ;

.

"Tory councillors sometimes tend to act as if they are in some sort of power sharing arrangement with the Lib Dems. The LibD ems exploit this weakness and reap the benefits. "

.

Again, the problem with this is that the Tories lack judgement. They opposed the wheelie bin system, which has proved to be both popular and successful. However, this was after they had already supported it. This duplicity shows a distinct lack of judgement.

.

On issues like coastal erosion, Tory Councillors were asking the council to deliver leaflets explaining what the councils position was because local people were worried about things that had been said in leaflets. It turns out the leaflets were Tory leaflets that had been scaremongering, but then the Tories want council tax payers to explain the truth to rectify the damage done by their own leaflets !

.

Then we have council tax where the Tories put out leaflets in by-election campaigns claiming they would proposed a 0% budget, only for the budget to come round and they have no such budget and they back the Lib Dem budget.

.

Finally, the most recent issue where the Tories show their duplicity is the issue of travellers sites. The Lib Dems went to a second round of consultations in order to ensure the public had as much chance as possible to contribute to the debate. The Tories actually opposed going to a second round of consultation, then argued in leaflets during the local elections that the Lib Dems had failed to consult. In my own former ward of Fakenham, the Tories failed to lodge a single complaint or letter of opposition to the proposed traveller site on the very edge of town. They even had one Tory councillor propose that two sites should be put in Fakenham instead of one, then they had the nerve to claim during the election campaign that only the Tories were fighting against the travellers site.

.

The problem is for the Tories is that you need to be a bit smarter to be an effective opposition, but you also have to rely on having a ruling council group that loses touch with what people want. The Lib Dem's in North Norfolk have their ears too close to the ground to lose touch with people's concerns whilst the Tories obsession with opposing what is popular makes them look like fools.

.

Iain's analysis is quite fair, but like nature, politics abhors a vacuum. In South Norfolk the Tories were able to fill the vacuum the Lib Dems had left. In North Norfolk I cannot see this happening, and if you take the example of other areas of the country where they have strong Lib Dem council groups and Lib Dem MP's (Eastleigh springs to mind), there is no reason to suggest that it is certain that the Lib Dems will implode as they have in South Norfolk.

Iain finshes by saying;

.

"North Norfolk Tories have an excellent new parliamentary candidate who deserves top class support. North Norfolk Conservatives know now what they need to do to give it to him."

.

It sounds to me as if Iain is of the opinion that none of the things the Tories need to do in North Norfolk are being done at all. Perhaps with his knowledge of North Norfolk Conservative's, as their candidate in 2005 , he feels that they have not moved on or learnt any lessons at all from their 10,606 vote defeat.

.

Overall, and perhaps I am reading between the lines, Iain Dale's commentary on North Norfolk Conservatives prospects and organisation is far from a ringing endorsement.

What about a review of the vote count fiasco in Breckland ?

The Electoral Commission has said that it will appoint a panel of independent experts to review what went wrong in the Scottish Parliamentary elections for so many people's votes not to count.

What I want to know is why isn't this independent panel's remit widened to look at the count in Breckland and to make recommendations on whether some of the results should stand and ascertain what went wrong . Is it a case of Scotland being more important that English Districts ?

Iain Dale's Rules - Number 94 : Never criticise a Banana Republic when it is your own Banana Republic

Interesting to see today that Iain Dale is hailing the results in Breckland for the Tories on the same day as the Conservatives are asking for an enquiry in to the counting debacle in Scotland. What utter hypocrisy ?

In Breckland they have, according to the Eastern Daily Press, sonly just finished the count (18:05 hrs) . The Returning Officer has refused to use the e-counting machines, but was also refusing to recount votes declared last week which were done using the e-counting machines which Breckland no longer wished to use for the remainder of the count. There were in the first batch of counts last Friday some suspiciously low turnouts and some odd results for Labour. There is also a strong suspicion that the results last Friday do not accurately reflect the votes cast and it has caused all sorts of problems at the count, as the EDP reports HERE.

So in this case, in a Tory run council, we have a debacle using counting machines. Why aren't the Tories asking for an enquiry in to this ?

What surprised me about Iain Dale is that I e-mailed him details of the Breckland fiasco last week because it is such an awful mess and with his Norfolk links, I assumed (wrongly) that he would be interested. As it is, I was wrong.

So the rules is that you can hail the results from a Banana Republic if they are the results you want and you never criticise a Banana Republic so long as it is your Banana Republic. It's a shame Iain. I like your blog and whilst I don't expect political balance, I would expect some reporting of the problems in Breckland given that you are so keen to publicise the results of the count.

Update - Iain, polite as ever, has emailed me this response.

"I have no idea who is to blame either in Scotland or in Breckland. I am tempted to put it at the door of the Electoral Commission. Next week I am interviewing Sam Younger for an hour and will be questioning him hard on this. If Breckland Council are to blame in any way then I am very happy to criticize them. From what I remember of your email (which I appear to have deleted) it looked like a complete balls up (in Breckland)."

Broadland Tories and their stories

Just a couple of gems from the elections, two stories of mass deception in separate wards from Tories.

Firstly, in Sprowston, the Conservative Party were canvassing with the message that the local Lib Dems had supported Norwich's bid for unitary status, which is a blatant lie. I have also been told their was a Tory leaflet stating the same untruth, but sadly, you cannot libel an organisation or a political party, so the Tories can get away with blatant lies. Oh Dave must be so proud.

The other story is a tale of two independents who, I am told, are actually Tory party members, but stand as independents, sit as independents and then get given vice-chairmanships of committees reserved for opposition councillors, in order to allow the ruling Tory group to have another Tory in place of an a Lib Dem.

If this is the sort "clean" political climate David Cameron urges us all to believe in then god help the country.

It is because of these sorts of things that I have lost a lot of faith in politics and why I have withdrawn from front line political activism.

Unfortunately in politics, like fluid, the scum usually rises to the top !

P.S. And yes, I am sure there are tales of all political parties telling porkies. I wouldn't justify the telling of lies in any circumstance. If you've had it happen to you, don't use it as a justification to do it back or justify what Broadland Tories do. Only by people taking a proper stand against lies and misleading campaigns will politics be genuinely cleaned up.

Scots Lib Dems make the right decision - Now for Wales

After my plea yesterday to the Lib Dems in Scotland to sit in opposition and give up any chance of sharing power with the SNP and the Greens, I was delighted to read THIS this morning.

I am still concerned about Wales where it is clear Lembit Opik seems very keen on a deal with Labour . Oh dear !

Now I hope a number of Lib Dem council groups will take similar advice and avoid propping up council administrations. Because we take up the middle ground, Lib Dems often feel it is our moral duty to work with one or other of the main politics parties to share power. It isn't and we should learn this. the electorate neither thanks us or reward us for doing so, which has been shown so clearly in the results last Thursday,

So "Return to your wards and prepare for opposition !"

Amongst the poor results at least Lib Dem results bode well for sitting Lib Dem MP's

Although the local elections were in no way a triumph for the Liberal Democrats, the results do show some interesting trends, particularly when looking at councils which have sitting Lib Dem MP's.

The Conservatives like to talk up the possibility of winning Lib Dem seats at the next general election and I am sure there will be one or two that go that way. However, the very best results from last Thursday tended to be in Liberal Democrat MP's seats or in long term target seats which have a strong Liberal Democrat tradition built up over a long time.

For example, North Norfolk, Lewes, South Somerset, South Lakeland, Caradon and Vale of White Horse, all saw excellent Lib Dem results and are part of MP's seats held by Tories up to 1997 in most cases, or in the case of North Norfolk and South Lakeland, even later than that.

Yes, there were some poor results too. Torbay did its usual of swinging back and forth between the Lib Dems and Tories whilst the Bournemouth general election results were a good indicator of what was to come there.

So as to the future, what do the results show ? Well there are some clear targets for the Lib Dems. Northampton North looks good whilst Watford is a must win seat and what about Eastbourne ? Will it buck the national trend ?

So overall, disappointing, but not a disaster. My old seat in Fakenham (North Norfolk) was comfortably held and my father was re-elected too in Broadland so I am happy.

I can now retire from front line politics until the general election and I do so knowing that the life does go on for the Lib Dems even when I am not doing the legwork.

Update : It has also been brought to my attention that the Lib Dems did well in marginal Solihul, gaining seats and new votes. It appears that some people who send me comments cannot read, so again I point out that the results on thursday are not indicative of Lib Dems losing MP's as quite cleary, the Lib Dem performed well in most seats held by MP's. Indeed, in North Norfolk the Lib Dem vote was up by more than 6%. This was the basic premise of my report and I am yet to read anything that disagrees with this.

Breckland Election Votes Fiasco

I have been sent this information about the fiaso which is the counting of votes using electronic means in Breckland. To describe it as catastrophically bad is an understatement. This needs as wide a coverage as possible.

"You may be aware of the fiasco in Breckland regarding the counting of votes, the whole process has now been abandoned until Tuesday when it is hoped all votes will be counted manually, not electronically.

Some seats have been declared, e.g. Dereham Central and Dereham Humbletoft, I think the results speak for themselves -

Dereham - Humbletoft - DISTRICT - Turnout was 13.9% yet for the Town it was 31% ! The result was declared that Labour lost the Dereham Humbletoft seat, however after raising this turnout issue for the varying turnout for the same seat with the town and district, it was discovered that a large number of votes for the District seat HAD NOT been counted!!!!

It was then admitted that an error had been made but the result still stood after the other votes had been counted.

Also look at Dereham Central - DISTRICT - Turnout 32%Dereham Central - TOWN - Turnout 15%These are DECLARED results but there is clearly something wrong with them.

The whole process today has been a complete shambles, candidates arrived at 9am to await the results and they waited all day, and then at 8.30pm the returning offer - after consulting with agents, agreed that a manual recount was the best option but staff were too tired and it wasnt fair to keep them for many more hours and also accuracy of the counting would become an issue.

At this time, around 20 of the 54 seats had been declared, but even some of the delcared ones are contentious.This has not been a good day for democracy in Thetford!

The count will continue on Tuesday, hopefully with a recount of the results declared so far - this decision is up to the returning office."

I think that says it all.

Tories worried in Taverham

It was noticeable today that the Tories, particularly in Taverham North have decided that street litter is the new way to win voters. Presumably the illegal fly posting they are doing by fixing poster boards to street signs and on other land owned by County highways is a sign of their desperation.

I guess I will have to contact the council to ask if the Conservatives actually have permission to hang their poster boards from street signs and street lamps that were put in by the District Council, county and Parish Councils.

Of course, it could be a sign that they are a little bit worried in Taverham North about their chances ?


It would have been so much nicer if they Tories had actually bothered to do more than one awful leaflet rather than flyposting. And yet, they might, and should hold the seats in Taverham North despite their inept campaign. Obviously I wish the Lib Dems well here as a the wok they have put in has put the Tories to shame and probably explains their street littering last night.

The irony of tomorrow's elections for some Labour councillors

It is perhaps fitting that Blair's last electoral test as Labour leader will be the same part of the electoral cycle that launched Blair's rise to power.

In 1995, Labour candidates, many of who had never expected to win, saw themselves elected in great numbers to councils across the country on the back of a simple message. "We're different and not Tory", Labour claimed in leaflets carrying Tony Blair's broad smile, and aside from that, very little else. Yet, on the back of Blair's grin and a number of national attacks on the Tories, Labour made new breakthroughs at a local level which lead in many cases to even greater success two years later in 1997.

So what's the irony ? Well most of the 1995 crop of Labour councillors held on in 1999. By 2003, things were not so good with many of the 1995 crop of Labour councillors disappearing. however, a few held on. So the irony of tomorrow is, with Labour more unpopular than ever, and with Tony' Blair's smile being the very last thing a Labour councillor would put on a leaflet, the last of the 1995 new crop of Labour councillors those that broke through in to virgin territory, should also lose their seats and depart with Mr Blair.

Still, if they need cheering up after defeat, a look at one of their old 1995 leaflets and Mr Blair's smile ought to lift their mood.

Oh the sheer hypocrisy

Earlier today I posted a story about Labour using electoral fraud as the means of justifying ID cards. This story was in yesterday's Times.

Today, in the Sunday Times, they report that Labour are driving a coach and horses through regulations intended to stop voter fraud and they make clear that Labour could be breaking the law.

So there you have it. Labour's slogan is

Vote Labour so they can introduce ID cards in order to stop Labour activists committing electoral fraud.

The hypocrisy of Labour is absolutely stunning.

P.S. Thanks to Lib Dem Voice for alerting me to the Sunday Times story.

Apathy about local elections isn't helped by apathetic or even pathetic reporting

I am grateful to a poster to my site called Peter or pointing me in the direction of the BBC Politics Show's Eastern Region report which highlights apathy towards local elections.

However, the big question for me is would apathy be less if the BBC actually chose not to be so apathetic in its reporting of local elections ?

For starters, the site I was referred too has a list of councils holding elections in the East but a quick look through the list highlights three councils alone in Norfolk that are holding elections but are not on the list. What would a voter in Broadland, North Norfolk or South Norfolk think as they have elections but are not on the list ?

The other question for the BBC ought to be about the overall reporting of local government, Apart from scandals, reporting of things that local councils are doing is scant and barely ever makes even the regional news.

Shouldn't the BBC's local news centres be making more of an effort to find out what is going on inside council chambers ? Why are local elections only important to the BBC for two days each year ?

In the meantime, I am pleased the BBC are paying at least some interest this year, but they shouldn't try and explain apathy to us when their reporting about local elections is at best apathetic and at worst, truly pathetic.

Iain Dale makes a good point about silly a Lib Dem candidate's comments

I agree with what Iain is saying here 100%. To denigrate a candidate because of their age is ludicrous. of course, it does not stop Iain and other from denigrating Ming Campbell because he is older than "Call me Dave" Cameron, but that is not what this story is about.

Four years ago my running mate in Fakenham North, Simon Wright, who is now Lib Dem PPC for Norwich South, was rubbished on the door by the opposition simply for being too young. It didn't stop him winning by 350 votes, but if that is what can happen to a 22 year old then it is wrong.

The silly Lib Dem Iain refers to should withdraw their comments and should be told by their local executive to act with more restraint in the future.

How Labour Campaign - Number Two

Yesterday this blogger felt it necessary to bring to readers attention just how Labour likes to fake photographs for leaflets.

Today, it is this blog's job to point you in the direction of Chris & Glynis Abbot's blog, highlighting how Labour don't understand how to add up and how the misrepresent facts in their leaflets.