Jonathan Roberts in Thirsk & Malton

It’s always interesting to see how my former assistants progress and I was particularly pleased to see Jonathan Roberts selected as Labour’s prospective parliamentary candidate for Thirsk and Malton.

Jonathan, who’s from Thirsk, worked in my constituency office for just over a year and is well versed in criss-crossing north Yorkshire, which is a good job because the Thirsk and Malton constituency goes right from Skipton-on-Swale to Filey on the east coast!

He has just launched his website which you can view at www.jonathanroberts.org.uk

On the subject of elections I suppose it would be remiss not to mention Crewe and Nantwich, though there is very little which hasn’t already been said. However, if Labour can go another 30 years without losing a by-election to the Conservatives we’ll be doing alright!

Local elections

Parts of Yorkshire bucked the national trend in last week's local elections. There were no Labour losses in Leeds, for instance. But there is no doubt that it was a bad result for Labour. Of course, local elections, like European elections, tend to be dominated by national issues, and in this case the abolition of the 10p tax band featured prominently.

Although there is some logic to abolishing this band (the lower rate applies to a proportion of the income of all income tax payers, meaning that 85% of its value accrues to taxpayers of higher bands - money which could be better used to allieviate poverty by targeting it directly at lower incomes through tax credits and benefits), the policy was not thought through enough in terms of how it would be perceived. Perception is political reality, and a highly visible reduction in take-home pay for lower band taxpayers does not match the sometimes less visible compensations - and not all losers were compensated anyway.

Of course, Labour can point to its record over eleven years which has boosted low incomes through steady economic growth, near full employment, the minimum wage, tax credits, fuel allowances and so on, which far outweigh the effect of the 10p rate. But the opposition were bound to make the most of the headline without looking at the wider context. This should have been spotted and rectified earlier, but at least the government has promised to do so now, refreshingly admitting that (like all governments) it made a mistake. Interestingly, none of the opposition parties are calling for a reintroduction of the 10p rate, but they have certainly managed to exploit the change to the full.

Labour's team for 2009

Delighted with the result of our ballot of all Labour party members in Yorkshire & Humber to choose Labour's team of candidates for the 2009 European elections. Linda McAvan and I are honoured to be the top two candidates again, as we were in 2004.

Several thousand members returned their ballots, which were counted yesterday, giving us, in a very close result, the following team, listed in ranking order:

1 Linda McAvan MEP
2 Richard Corbett MEP
3 Emma Hoddinott
4 David Bowe
5 Melanie Onn
6 Maroof Hussain MBE
Reserves: Chris Williams and Paul Blanchard

This gives us a good balance in terms of gender, different parts of the region, age, ethnicity, and experience. All are enthusiastic and raring to go.

Labour's team for Yorkshire & Humber

I spent the weekend at the Labour Party's Yorkshire & Humber regional conference, listening to a whole host of ministers, MPs, councillors and party members talk about a wide range of issues.

One of the debates was about the EU’s responsibilty to regulate the free market so it works for Europe’s citizens and protects the most vulnerable, in terms of consumer protection, social legislation, the environment, fair trade, health and safety rules, and so on. The discussion once again showed the importance of such European legislation and the need for Britain to take a central role in shaping it.

After our discussion, the four people who, following lengthy internal parocedures in the region, will join myself and my colleague MEP Linda McAvan to make up Yorkshire & Humber’s Labour team for the 2009 European elections were revealed. While the order has yet to be determined (it will be by a one-member-one-vote ballot, which should drop through Labour Party members’ letterboxes later this week), Emma Hoddinott, Mahroof Hussain, David Bowe and Melanie Onn will join me and Linda as part of Labour’s team of six candidates. It will be a good team.

The June 2009 European elections will be upon us soon (whether or not there is a General Election at or near that time). Yorkshire Labour party's European Regional Policy Forum focused on this on Saturday.

Linda McAvan and I reported back to around 100 Labour Party members on our work in the European Parliament over the past year.

In discussion many people were keen to build a positive campaign based on the benefits that joint action at European can provide and on Labour MEP successes in defining and adopting common rules for the common market that protect consumers, workers’ rights and the environment.

In the afternoon Julian Scuola and Alexandra Pardal, from the Party of the European Socialists, spoke of the early work - which all party members are invited to contribute to - in preparing the PES election manifesto, which will eventually provide a common platform for all the Labour parties across the EU in the 2009 election.

Surprising as it may seem I barely mentioned the new treaty in my introductory speech, leaving it to my old friend and former Secretary General of the European Parliament, Sir Julian Priestley, one of the most articulate advocates of the case for Europe. He produced a very thorough explanation of what it contains, and why we should not have a referendum, managing as well to squeeze in an attack on the Eurosceptic lies and distortions.

Former Europe Minister Denis MacShane also made a cameo appearance, making the point that Europe was a wedge issue between Labour and the Tories and one that should be exploited.

A paper published by the European Commission a couple of weeks ago set out ideas that could make it easier for European political parties to increase their profile.

Despite the fact that, in the European Parliament, Labour members sit in the Party of European Socialists, the Tories (for the moment at least) in the European People's Party and the Liberal Democrats in the Alliance of Liberal Democrat and Reform Parties, when it comes to European election campaigns, their respective parties do little more than co-ordinate national campaigns. European elections tend to be fought as 27 different national campaigns dominated by the state of domestic politics.

This is slightly anomalous. Broadly speaking, the European Parliament gives the EU ideological/political pluralism, while national interests represented by national governments in the Council of Ministers. Most European issues are in fact political rather than national choices, such as whether you want higher environmental standards, but at greater costs, or not. There are people on both sides of the argument in every country. They are represented in the Parliament, but not reflected in the Council where each country is represented only by the government party.

The new rules would allow and indeed help Europe-wide parties to campaign and also to establish political foundations to encourage debates and political research.

One of the provisions of the proposed Reform Treaty is the election of the Commission president by the European Parliament. This has given rise to calls from some quarters that the European parties should nominate their own candidates for President. This would add to the profile of the elections and the European parties, as well as provide a more visible link between the election results and the choice of Europe's chief executive.

Many feel that this could be used as a tool to increase political participation and voter turn-out as well as generate a better understanding of the working of the EU.

The BBC website carries a fascinating article on the Spanish municipal elections, which reveals the extent local politics is now being influenced by Brits and other EU immigrants.

The European Union grants foreign nationals living in another member state the right to vote and stand in local and European elections and with over 300,000 EU citizens already registered to vote in Spain, mostly in the south of the country, plenty of Brits are putting themselves forward as candidates.

Many are standing for small independent parties in the municipality of San Fulgencio, with some parties’ lists of candidates dominated by non-Spaniards, most of them British.

I was amused to read that one party, who are fielding 11 migrants in their list of 16 candidates, claims it has the answer to “massive, uncontrolled immigration”.

Other parties representing EU migrants are campaigning for bilingual schools (English and Spanish) and more accountability around planning issues, which appears to be one of the main catalysts behind this rise in participation.

The article begs some interesting questions.

What exactly would Britain make of parties created to specifically represent the interests of migrants? I can’t imagine the Mail or Express being sympathetic to a Polish Independent campaigning for bilingual schools!

We are also repeatedly told how more and more people in the UK are feeling disfranchised from politics but the reverse appears to be happening out in Spain. Why are people apparently less willing to campaign for change in their home country than when they move abroad? Is it perhaps because their interest are in fact represented and defended in Britain?

It’s also worth noting that the article only ever refers to expats and never migrants or immigrants. This implies there is some sort of difference, when clearly there isn’t.

How well the non-Spanish candidates will do remains to be seen but it will be interesting to see if the participation of EU-migrants in another country’s politics is replicated in Britain in the future.

As expected, Labour took a mid-term hit in the local elections. However, they were not as bad as many expected, with Labour gaining a percentage point compared to last year, and again doing particularly well in West Yorkshire, gaining seats in Leeds, Bradford, Kirklees, Calderdale and taking North Lincolnshire Council.

Little press comment on how badly UKIP did. With a record number of candidates, this was supposed to be their breakthrough to be a national party, but they performed dismally....

Their Eurosceptic friends from the BNP were also disapppointed.

Well done to Calderdale's newest councillor, Judith Gannon, and everybody who helped Labour hold the Illingworth and Mixenden ward in Thursday's by-election.

With the two other seats in the ward held by the BNP it was imperative Labour held on to the seat which was long held by Tom McElroy, who
sadly died in December.

Judith picked up 1104 votes with the BNP beating the Conservatives and Lib Dems into second, though thankfully the far-right party did concede a swing of fiver percent to Labour.

Hopefully we can keep this momentum going in Halifax and unseat the BNP Councillors come May.

I was greatly amused to see the results of last week's council by-election in Croydon.

The Conservatives' campaign slogan for the Bensham Manor ward was "Send a message to Mr Blair!", which the locals promptly did by voting in Labour candidate Alison Butler by over a thousand votes, a swing of 10% to Labour!

You can view all the results here which reveal a couple more interesting issues. The UKIP candidate stood as a UKIP candidate and not as an Independence Party candidate and registered 40 votes; that's just 25 more than the Monster Raving Loony Party. There was also no BNP candidate which will not help UKIP fight the allegations that the parties have a deal not to stand for the same seat.

On a lighter note, I couldn't help but feel sorry for the People's Choice candidate who was anything but after managing just nine votes.

In the aftermath of the May local elections, I wrote about the
interesting, if that is the correct word, relationship between UKIP and
the British National Party, and how it appeared that a deal had been
done between them to keep out of each other’s way.

Nationally, there were very few occasions of the two right wing parties
going against each other in a battle for council seats – in fact, UKIP
fielded very few candidates at all. This deal, it appears, was
reciprocated in the Bromley & Chislehurst, and Blaenau Gwent by-elections.

The facts are that UKIP stood, and the BNP did not – the BNP chose not
to field a candidate because it “did not want to split the anti-EU
vote”, choosing instead to actively encourage people to vote UKIP.

So watch out to see how explicit UKIP will be in encouraging people to
vote BNP in next year’s round of local elections.

I was interested to see that calling someone “pro-European” is seen as a spiteful act in the Bromley & Chislehurst by-election. UKIP’s Nigel Farage has called Tory hopeful Bob Neill “pro-European” on a recent campaign flyer, something which Neill has announced as being “defamatory”.

Surely the crime wasn’t calling Neill “pro-European”, but rather giving him undue credit for having some sense.

Much has been made in the media of the Conservative A-list of wannabe MPs, and in particular, how the list was compiled. Conservative members, the media and the public have been scratching their heads as to why experienced Councillors have been overlooked for the sake of young soap stars.

Perhaps we should be concentrating on the more serious A-listers – in particular the inclusion of the rabidly Eurosceptic Dan Hannan, Chris Heaton-Harris and Syed Kamall. As the debate regarding the EPP-ED (see here and here) drags on, it’s fascinating to see Cameron attempting to fill his UK Parliamentary party with those against European integration. I wonder, if he allows all of his Eurosceptic MEPs to become MPs, and sacks all of his pro-european MEPs (as he has threatened to do), who will he have left in the European Parliament? More soap stars?

I suppose it’s all irrelevant to a degree, his grassroot Conservative associations seem to be ignoring the A-list anyway.

Sometime ago I published a pamphlet entitled “25 things you didn’t know when you voted UKIP“ highlighting the extensive links between UKIP and the BNP, especially their interchangable membership (and, for that matter, leadership).

At the time of publication, the UKIP were up-in-arms. I suspect they will be distinctly quiet when I refer to my suspicions regarding their activities in the recent local elections.

Looking at the candidates list for each ward in each council in the region, I can only find one example of the BNP standing in the same ward as UKIP. Indeed, when I look at elections in other English regions, examples of BNP and UKIP going head-to-head are rare.

Indeed, it was particularly fascinating to see just how few candidates UKIP fielded. This undoubtedly allowed the BNP to pick up the far right vote without competition.

Could it possibly be that UKIP and the BNP shook hands over a deal? No matter how they package their policies, they are both on the far-right and it would clearly be in each other's interest not to split the far-right vote.

It makes me wonder what UKIP were getting in return for their {suspected} generosity. Could it possibly be a clear run in the European elections in 2009? Only time will tell…

It’s been a fascinating 24 hours.

The Labour Party has suffered losses across the country but I am delighted that Labour support across Yorkshire has remained strong.

Given the national coverage of the local election results, allow me to contrast the quite different regional results in Yorkshire:

Seats (gains & losses)
•Lab net gain of 10 seats across region.
•Lib Dem net loss of seven (underline loss)
•Cons net loss of five (underline loss)
•BNP net gain of only one
•Greens net gain of one


Share of Vote
•Increase in Labour share of vote across region (2004 30% /2006 31.1%)
•Lib Dem share of vote has declined (2004 26.2% /2006 24.6%)
•Con share of vote up by 8% overall (mainly in Craven and Harrogate)
•Lab net gains in Bradford, Kirklees, Calderdale, Doncaster, Barnsley
and Rotherham

BNP
•Stood 106 candidates in the region (82 in West Yorkshire)
•Gained 4, lost 3 (held 1)
•Won none in South, East or North Yorkshire, nor in Wakefield
•Their gains were from us (Dewsbury East), the Lib Dems (Heckmondwike),the Independents (Morley South) and the Tories (Queensbury in Bradford)
•Their losses were to us (Town in Calderdale and Wibsey in Bradford) and the Tories (Worth Valley in Bradford)
•They increased their overall share of vote from 6.6% to 7.3%

So at least in Yorkshire, the picture is quite good for Labour. I’d like to pay tribute to all the candidates and activists across the region who have worked so hard for their local communities. It is of real credit to Labour activists that, despite some turbulent times, we had a net gain of 10 seats as well as increasing our share of the vote across the region.

In this age of high media it is only to be expected that national issues should affect the local vote. I have no doubt that some extremely competent, hard-working Labour Councillors have lost their positions due to the national issues.

Concerning the cabinet re-shuffle, I’d like to specifically welcome Geoff Hoon’s appointment to the position of Minister of State for Europe. As a former MEP, Geoff is very well placed to work on developing the UK’s role in the European Union.

I believe that appointment is a step towards having a Europe Minister separate from the Foreign Office. EU matters are much more concerned with domestic policy than with foreign policy, and it is not always sensible for them to be co-ordinated by the foreign office.

What a result! I’d like to offer my warmest congratulations to Angela Sinfield of Bradford District Council for winning yesterdays by-election in Keighley West.
Angela not only overturned a BNP majority, but she now has her own majority of 603, gaining 1819 votes to their 1216.

This is a fantastic achievement. The BNP have concentrated their efforts in Keighley for some time, using aggressive, intimidatory tactics to frighten people into voting for them.

I visited Keighley twice during the campaign and was struck by how determined the community was to drive the BNP out. There was a sense of real anger from the electors that the BNP had damaged the reputation of Keighley. As Angela said last night, “The BNP need to get the message and realise that they are not welcome in Keighley”.

Lets hope those sentiments are shared across the country in May’s Local Government Elections.

You can find BBC coverage here -

The by-election phenomena is a curious thing (as some of you will know, the resignation of a BNP Councillor in Keighley West has triggered a by-election for Thursday 23rd March). When you’re out campaigning it can seem like nothing exists beyond the ward boundary. When it’s a BNP-held seat, however, it becomes a different story. Their beliefs are so extreme that the whole country should pay attention. If we don’t stamp out the far right’s presence in our region, then we become vulnerable to widespread preaching of hate.

I spent much of today talking to local residents in Keighley West (on one of the coldest days of the winter I might add!), and was delighted to see how many people were making a stand against the BNP. Undoubtedly there is a media backlash against the Labour Party at the moment, but it is imperative that those people who believe in equality, diversity and community all vote for Labour in this two-horse race and reject the far right, non-sensical policies of the BNP.

There have been many reports of the BNP using intimidatory tactics on the doorstep: you don’t have to put up with it, as one constituent quickly learnt. When I asked him if he had had such a visit, he pointed to his fully grown Doberman and laughed. I think he’ll be just fine.

The German election results are most interesting.

Far from being the predicted landslide for the Conservatives (CDU) and meltdown for Chancellor Schröder’s Social Democrats (SPD), the campaign allowed the latter to steadily regain ground and come to within about three seats of the former. It might yet be even tighter, as the poll in one seat (Dresden) was postponed due to the death of a candidate (just as in South Staffordshire in Britain!) and this seat is likely to be won by the Social Democrats, with a corresponding effect on the top-up proportional seats. In other words, it's a virtual dead-heat!

However, even with their preferred coalition partners (the Greens for the Social Democrats and the Liberals for the Conservatives), neither side has a majority. The balance is held by the Left party – largely the former East German Communists.

What seems to be happening at present is that everyone is ruling out the various alternative coalition options:

• No-one wants to make a deal with the Left Party.


• A “grand coalition” has been ruled out by Schröder (rightly so in my view: a coalition of opposites is bound to run into trouble, and if people later want to vote against the government, they have only extremist parties to vote for).


• A Socialist-Green-Liberal coalition has been ruled out by the Liberals.


• Neither the Liberals nor the Greens are very keen on a Conservative-Liberal-Green coalition (perhaps they have observed what has happened to Leeds City Council!).

So what will happen? The Chancellor (their equivalent of Prime Minister) is elected by the Bundestag (equivalent to our House of Commons) by a majority of all elected members (as opposed to a mere majority of those voting – a requirement that has in the past occasionally forced ill or pregnant members to attend when votes are likely to be close). This takes place in a secret ballot on a proposal of the Federal President. If the person proposed by the President is not elected, the Bundestag has 14 days to elect another candidate, also by a majority of its members. If no-one reaches this majority after 14 days, then a new ballot takes place in which the person obtaining the largest number of votes is elected. If the person elected obtained the votes of the majority of the members of the Bundestag, the President must appoint him as Chancellor, but if the person elected does not receive this majority, the President may either appoint him or her, or dissolve the Bundestag and call a new general election.

This means that it is possible to have a minority government, if the President appoints a Chancellor without the necessary majority. Not many people know this, however, as it's never happened since the restoration of democracy after the war. (Today, I even had to point it out to a German MEP spokesman on constitutional affairs!)

A minority Conservative-Liberal coalition could therefore elect their candidate (presumably Frau Merkel) for Chancellor 14 days after the Bundestag re-assembles. It could govern, but it would have to bargain with one or another opposition parties whenever it wanted to get legislation through the Bundestag - just as the previous government had to bargain to get its legislation through the upper house.

A Social Democrat-Green coalition, however, would require the support of some others to elect their candidate for Chancellor (presumably Herr Schröder). For instance, the Left Party could say that, while not joining the government, they would be willing to vote for Schröder rather than see Merkel form a government. He too would have to bargain to see its legislation get through, but perhaps with more options.

Schröder sees that his economic reforms, which were initially unpopular among traditional Social Democrat voters, are beginning to bear fruit. Germany has just become the world’s largest exporter and unemployment is beginning to fall. That's why voters returned to backing him in unexpectedly high numbers.

He sees that he occupies the middle ground between the consrevative-liberal alliance who wanted faster, harsher reforms and the Left Party who opposed any reforms. Neither the right nor the left alternative to Schröder gained a majority. Politically, he feels vindicated. Legally, the constitution allows him a way to get back. And if the President prefers to call a new election rather than have a minority government, he is equally well placed to build on the momentum of his comeback. We will watch the situation unfold with interest!

The Green party has a lot to answer for - including the backdoor Tory victory in my home constituency of Shipley. The previous Labour MP, Chris Leslie, was defeated by only 400 votes - while the Greens managed to garner 1800, almost entirely from Labour voters.

The result? We've ended up with an MP from a party that's far less environmentally minded than Labour, having consistently opposed environmental legislation in both Westminster and the European Parliament. Green voters in Shipley must be kicking themselves.

Ah, the joys of campaigning in nice weather. There were some 50 people out helping in my local key seat of Shipley today.

As ever, there's no shortage of stories from the doorstep. There was the householder with the worst garden in the street, full of rubbish and rusting metal, who protested that the government isn't doing enough about the environment. And there was the telesalesman complaining that the UK's near-full employment meant nobody was ever at home any more when he rang around.

It's also interesting to hear people's reaction to the various election slogans. One constituent turned "Are you thinking what I'm thinking?" into "Are you remembering what I'm remembering?".

So the election has been called! The European Parliament doesn't stop for elections in member states (with 25 countries to take into account, we'd never actually meet if we did!). So British MEPs don't get any time off for the general election, though of course I and many others will be devoting any spare time to helping with the campaign.

On another note, the Tories' policy on Europe is getting madder and madder. These days, even their own colleagues in Parliament's conservative and Christian Democrat group tell me they hope the Conservatives don't win!