Seagulls Party Official Result

[Tooting Gull]

Excellent effort, well done to all. A serious force, must have done a lot right to get that many votes.

Labour 41

 

[Dennis and Lois]

onwards and upwards!!!!

 

[eastlondonseagull]

Top stuff, Ed, you've got them running.

Long live the Seagulls Party

 

[Rich Suvner]

He tried. He even went out canvassing wearing a BHAFC tie.

So, if you like, the vote went:-

Pro-Albion 921
Anti-Albion 715

Lord B - are we not missing a trick with this then?

Whilst your efforts can obviously be commended as directly flying the flag for the Albion and Falmer would the option of supporting the Conservative candidate have been more sensible?

If this is not so much a case of party politics but a Lib Dem backlash then why did the campaign seek to take votes off a Pro Albion Conservative councillor?

As your figures suggest, mobilising support for the Tories may have helped thwart the Lib Dem challenge.

I know it's all with the benefit of hindsight but having admitted that you didnt want to be
a) running in this seat
b) running this soon
c) didnt see a genuine challenge to the Lib Dems from the Seagulls party on this occassion

haven't the Seagulls Party missed an opportunity here?

 

[ROSM]

Lord B - are we not missing a trick with this then?

Whilst your efforts can obviously be commended as directly flying the flag for the Albion and Falmer would the option of supporting the Conservative candidate have been more sensible?

If this is not so much a case of party politics but a Lib Dem backlash then why did the campaign seek to take votes off a Pro Albion Conservative councillor?

As your figures suggest, mobilising support for the Tories may have helped thwart the Lib Dem challenge.

I know it's all with the benefit of hindsight but having admitted that you didnt want to be
a) running in this seat
b) running this soon
c) didnt see a genuine challenge to the Lib Dems from the Seagulls party on this occassion

haven't the Seagulls Party missed an opportunity here?

Thos are really good questions - however i think this needs to be looked at in the context of this ward.

When you enter a candidate for an election, you dont know who else or on what grounds others will be standing. Also, you have to recall that the Lib Dems and Conservatives combined last December to pursue the court action against us.

What nobody knew was that the conservative candidiate would be pro albion. And, lets whisper this quietly because he certainly did, would tell people verbally but not in writing, that he was pro stadium.

so when we started this campaign we were up against two parties who were publicly opposed to us. What would have happened if we hadn't have stood? You may well have got a two horse race, both of whom were publicly anti us. We also said that we would be willing and committed to fight for seats - you cant then pick and choose your battles.


When we were formed, many people like Anne De Vecchi said we were a single issue and irrelevant. Some on here said that normal people in Lewes wouldn't be interested in that single issue.
I would say that 22% in a predominantly rural seat shows that we aren't just a single issue party and that people are interested in us. Just imagine how this would translate in big town areas like Lewes, newhaven, seaford and peacehaven?

Also the campaign fought by Ed was anything buit a single issue. From our initial findings, in some areas of the ward we are clearly the number 1 party and in others we are second to the conservatives.

make no mistake here that the Lib Dems won because of their share of votes in the incinerator area where they have marketed themselves for at least the last 24 months as the only realistic hope of blocking it. If just half of the votes they got on that issue had gone to the conservatives or us then the Lib dems would have lost an election in the ward for the first time in over 25 years.

I can tell you that the big two parties in lewes are at this very moment doing their maths on this and this result will change the way they fight next may. You may see that the conservatives no position themselves publicly as pro stadium and challenge the lib dems at every turn through their existing cabinet and council seats. That can only be good for the Albion as a whole. Why else would they do this unless they think that their are votes in it? And how else would they have known this without our 22% of proof? And as has already been pointed out, that is the same percentage that the Lib Dems got nationally at the last election - so they would hardly think that this is an irrelevant figure now!

Finally, this has enabled us at very close hand to see just how the other parties view us and will try and beat us. This has been an exceedingly positive exercise and will leave us even better prepared to fight in our key battlegrounds next May.

 

[Rich Suvner]

cheers for the answers. all good points. events last night certainly seem to be very positive for the future

 

[Lord Bracknell]

Apologies for the slightly pessimistic post last night, Ed. The fact that you, and everyone else involved at the coal-face (so to speak), seem pleased is very reassuring.

Thanks for all your efforts so far.

Andrew...

ditto

No worries.

I've cancelled the open-top bus tour of Nottingham tomorrow.

 

[Publius Ovidius]

ROSM/ED

In the hustings, did ed meet the two candidates that were fighting the seat with us?

If not, have you any idea, anecdotal or otherwise that when canvassing, they rubbished our cause or dismissed us as an irrelevance.

What i find strange about all of this is that Perry/Knight/The seagulls party have been saying that the Liberal Democrats have been lying all along, their case is based on ignorance of the law/ vindictiveness and sheer bloody minded ness. they have been wasting LDC council tax payers money on this and LDC council tax payers will be hammered when they lose and we are all awarded costs they cannot afford.

YET, the Liberal chap still got in by around 200 votes in a 1600ish constituency.

Does that say that the residents do not believe us, do not care or are prepared to back their man whatever the outcome?

 

[The Clown of Pevensey Bay]

What ROSM said.

Don't forget that there are Tories, as well as Lib Dems, on the Lewes DC cabinet -- even though the leader and lead member for planning are both Lib Dems. At a local council level, the Conservatives have been pretty anti-stadium.

You can bet your bottom dollar that had Ed not been standing, the Tory candidate in Rigmer would have left his Albion tie at home....

 

[The Clown of Pevensey Bay]

Does that say that the residents do not believe us, do not care or are prepared to back their man whatever the outcome?

I think it says that they care more about other matters -- like the incinerator -- than they do about Falmer stadium...

 

[Dandyman]

What ROSM said.

Don't forget that there are Tories, as well as Lib Dems, on the Lewes DC cabinet -- even though the leader and lead member for planning are both Lib Dems. At a local council level, the Conservatives have been pretty anti-stadium.

You can bet your bottom dollar that had Ed not been standing, the Tory candidate in Rigmer would have left his Albion tie at home....

Spot on. The LDC members that are forcing the court case are Tories as well as LibDems. They should both be fought.

 

[Lady Bracknell]

ROSM/ED

In the hustings, did ed meet the two candidates that were fighting the seat with us?

If not, have you any idea, anecdotal or otherwise that when canvassing, they rubbished our cause or dismissed us as an irrelevance.

We did indeed meet the Tory and Lib Dem candidates - the Tory turning up on our doorstep in an Albion tie about 30 seconds before Revell scored his goal at Rotherham!!!

The evidence we have of the Lib Dem doorstep tactics "a vote for the Seagulls Party is a vote for the incinerator" is irrefutable and not just anecdotal. Unfortunately I think they made the mistake of assuming we are all simple countryfolk out here and hadn't reckoned on us having reliable sources of intelligence.

The importance of the incinerator issue can't be overstressed in this ward and I'd say that regardless of whether Ed had stood in this by-election. Certainly, in South Heighton, where the proposed incinerator is literally on their doorstep, I can easily understand it being far more important than whether a stadium gets built at Falmer.

 

[El Dude Brother]

Has there been any coverage of this result in the local media?

I cannot find any mention of it in today's on-line Argus, which I have to say I'm disappointed with.

 

[Lord Bracknell]

Blimey! The national media are taking note.

From The Guardian website:-

http://politics.guardian.co.uk/byelections/story/0,,1853282,00.html

Midday

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lib Dems gain seat despite stadium campaign

Press Association
Friday August 18, 2006
Guardian Unlimited


The Liberal Democrats gained in the only council by-election reported this week - at the height of the political holiday season - although a group supporting controversial football stadium plans took more than a fifth of the votes.

Peter Gardiner, the Lib Dem candidate, won a formerly-independent seat at Ouse Valley and Ringmer, Lewes district, East Sussex.

The ward's other two seats are represented by another Liberal Democrat and a Tory.

The Seagulls party, campaigning in favour of Brighton and Hove Albion football club's plans for a Sussex community stadium, won nearly 22% of the vote.

John Prescott, the deputy prime minister, gave the go-ahead for a new stadium at Falmer, to the north of Brighton, in 2005, but there was a mistake concerning the description of the site in his approval letter.

A legal challenge against Mr Prescott's decision had already been launched by Lewes district council.

Results

Lewes District - Ouse Valley and Ringmer: Lib Dem 715, Con 521, Seagulls 359, Lab 41. (May 2003 - three seats Ind 1123, Con 877, Lib Dem 766, 678, 647, Con 491, Lab 456, Green 241). Lib Dem gain from Ind. Swing 5.7% Con to Lib Dem.

 

[Lord Bracknell]

Has there been any coverage of this result in the local media?

I cannot find any mention of it in today's on-line Argus, which I have to say I'm disappointed with.

Today's Argus was put to bed too early to cover last night's result. But expect something tomorrow, since I've already spoken with their reporter.

 

[British Bulldog]

Brilliant effort from Ed & the Seagulls Party. A great stepping stone for next May's elections.

 

[Statto]

well done Mr Bassford. To get just under 22% and beat the labour party in your first election is a great achievement. Ive allways been a labour voter myself, but even I am gald that we pushed them into 4th place. Lets hope the lib dems are ousted in May. (I'd even be happy to se the tories win that ward).

Another thing, I wonder how many people voted for us as a protest vote against the Lib dems? I know a few non-football people who live in the lewis district and they are pissed off with the Lib dems over other issues. All good for us, though.

 

[seagullsovergrimsby]

Well done Lord B , 22% of the vote from a fledgling party will have them quaking in their boots. How can the LibDems say that the Seagulls Party is a one issue outfit when they have campaigned themselves as champions of the anti incinerator lobby as South Heighton is literally on the doorstep. From reading between the lines, the two main parties will be bricking it next May.

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

I get the feeling that the cumulative effect of yesterday's result and next month's rally at the Lib Dem conference may be that LDC start to soften their stance on Falmer. Certainly, one or two of the ruling junta in LDC may start to realise that the behind-closed-doors game is up, and may bail out 'for personal reasons'. Others may then take flight before the High Court hearing.

Now, how about one or other of the official pro-Falmer bodies starting an online petition to press home the point? Given a month, it should be perfectly possible to present Ming with a printed-out petition with a six-figure number of names on it deploring the local Lib-Dems anti-Falmer stance. And the positive aspect is that this time it doesn't need to be restricted to the constituents of LDC. It can be bounced around tinternet as only NSC knows how. Keep the pressure on.

Well?

 

[Publius Ovidius]

I am not really convinced abouit that. they are comitted to the court case and all the posturing aside, they are going to have to go ahead with that.