They think it’s all over… And they’re right, it was, like, a week ago

Almost a week has passed since the results for Hampstead & Kilburn came through. It’s taken about this long for the adrenaline to drain from my body and my internal clock to tick tock its way back into shape after pulling an election all-nighter, but I’ve finally processed what has happened, and as the new coalition Cabinet concludes its first formal meeting, I feel ready to reflect on last week’s events.

One undeniable fact is that our part of North West London offered some of the most exciting battles of anywhere in the country. The new constituency of Brent Central was the only seat contested by two standing MPs: Sarah Teather of the Lib Dems and Labour’s Dawn Butler. It was a close run thing, but it was the former who eventually won on the night – or the following morning, to be precise.

In Hampstead & Kilburn, despite all three major parties telling us that it was a two horse race between one or the other of them, it turned out to be the most exciting three-way election extravaganza of them all. Chances are, of course, that you already know the result, but just in case you’ve been visiting relatives on the planet Zorg – and I hear it’s nice this time of year – it was as follows: After some drama involving errant ballot boxes and an excruciating re-count in the wee hours of Friday morning, the nail-bitingly close result was that Glenda Jackson held her seat, defeating Tory challenger Chris Philp by a mere 42 votes. Ed Fordham ended up coming third, less than 900 votes off the pace which, in general election terms, is pretty darned close. So in the end, the bookies, the pundits – even the bloggers! – got it wrong. Alas! How I wish that I’d put a cheeky fiver on Glenda to win; I’d now be sipping mojitos on a beach in Cancun…

The irony is that whilst Glenda pipped Ed and Chris to the post here in Hampstead & Kilburn, it is these two whose parties now govern our green and pleasant land. (Forgive me, by the way, if that doesn’t seem ironic to you, but I attended the Alanis Morissette school of irony, you see).

So congratulations are in order to Glenda Jackson MP, but I’d like to extend these to all the candidates who stood here – except that BNP woman – for leading such vigorous and passionate campaigns. I’m sure this won’t be the last we hear of such historic figures as Chris, Ed, Tamsin, Bea et al. In politics terms they’re all still young’uns (ish), and I for one look forward to seeing what larks they get up to in the future.

Out with the old, in with the new

Guest Blog: Why I’m voting for… (part 4)

The final word in this pre-election guest blog series goes to Nick Hudgell, 25, multi-national employee, sometime map-drawer, and Kilburn resident. Though a natural conservative (note the little ‘c’), Nick has been open minded about who to vote for on May 6th – until recently that is. Here he explains why he was won over by the Conservative Party.

Why I’m voting for… Chris Philp and the Conservatives.

There's something not quite right about this photo - can't quite put my finger on it...

I love The Wire. I have watched it from start to finish. Jimmy McNulty (Dominic West) is clearly the star of the show, with his American-Irish, system-hating, whiskey-downing rogueishness. I recently learnt that some years ago, Dominic West was once a love rival with David Cameron for the affection of one Samantha Sheffield (later to become ‘Sam Cam’). If Jimmy McNulty can be bested by the leader of the Tories, I’m voting Conservative.

Seriously though, it’s an important decision. So firstly, let’s look at the national scene, which is most important to me. In terms of big party politics, there is lots of manifesto spiel, but there are some distinctive stances which can separate the parties from each other. There isn’t time or space (or enough of your patience) to go through all of the policies and pick out the reasons why I think the Conservatives are better, but I do honestly think that it is time for change…

I agree with Conservative policy on immigration (the introduction of a Border Force), and crime (cutting paper work for police and increasing prison space). I also share their stance on ID cards: I don’t want to spend 80 odd quid on a piece of plastic, and probably neither do you.

They want to create a ‘big society’, increasing discipline in school, and trying to make sure that parents understand their responsibility at home. Tick from me. And something that I think is fairly radical is a pledge to debate a bill or motion in the Commons if 100,000 people vote for it. Definitely something I agree with and something that the Conservatives have in their manifesto.

Finally, health: the Conservatives have a great stance on cancer treatment. Having had a lot of family issues with cancer, this is close to my heart and I agree with their pledges. They would let your doctor decide what drug to prescribe you if you had cancer – including new cutting edge drugs that are available in Europe.

So why Conservative change, and not Lib Dem or an Independent change? Two reasons: 1) I agree with a lot of the Conservative policies and think they would form a stronger Government. 2) If I vote for Lib Dem, we will get a hung parliament, and I truly believe that a hung parliament would be bad for our economy. All parties have ideas on how to make our economy stronger, but the best way is to have a majority government. I do not want a run on GBP, and I do not want the country to lose it’s AAA credit rating (which would make our deficit harder to reduce). Therefore, change for me is Conservative.

Now back to the local scene. Gordon Brown once said this is not a popularity contest, and for once, I agree with Gordon. If it were, then Ed Fordham would get my vote. He seems like a truly nice guy, passionate about where he lives and willing to do everything he can to push action through. I think Chris is more like The Wire’s Mayor Carcetti, very much an ambitious young man, looking for a step up in national politics. But it’s not a contest based on looks and popularity, it’s based on substance and policies. And for me, the long-term national vote is much more important than the local view. So as much as I admire you Ed, I won’t be voting for you.

I can’t compete with some of the honest and heartfelt posts below; I just don’t love you that much Chris Philp. But I’m still voting for you.

Campaign takes the High Road

If you’re lucky enough to have taken a southward stroll down Kilburn High Road recently, or unlucky enough to have been sat in endless traffic heading the same way, then you may well have spotted the latest posters put up by the Conservative party. A few weeks ago, Tory candidate Chris Philp’s cheery face appeared temporarily on several billboards around the postcode, telling us about the various things he’d done for the local community. The latest Conservative posters on the High Road are part of a national campaign featuring a smug, demented-looking Gordon Brown, smiling away as he informs us of his “achievements”, like how he lost £6 billion selling off Britain’s Gold, or how he doubled the tax rate for the poor.

This is typical of the negative-style campaigning rife in the election build-up of all the major parties; a recent Conservative newsletter tells us to look out for tactical smearing by the Lib Dems, and supplies an “official” Lib Dem smear-watch email address for people to write in to. Within days, a leaflet from the Lib Dems themselves came through the letter box with ‘BEWARE!’ written on one side, and the reverse telling us that in fact it’s the Labour party who are conducting a desperate smear campaign. This all basically amounts to the playground classic of ‘I know you are, but what am I?’

In other news, quite a few people have been commenting on the fact that Labour haven’t shown much of a presence on the campaign trail yet. Well, that’s all changing now with the opening of the party’s constituency HQ on Kilburn High Road. The volunteers in the Labour office have been busy stuffing envelopes, which will no doubt be coming soon to a recycling bin near you. And either they’re clinging onto a glorious past, or they have been credit crunched good and proper, as they are currently operating underneath a large ‘Hampstead & Highgate Labour Party’ banner. So last season, darling.

But if all this election talk is getting you down, why not go for drink at one of Kilburn’s many fine pubs? If you do, you might bump into Tamsin Omond and her fellow Commoners, who tonight will be on a pub crawl sing-along, performing their latest To the Commons ditty. I think they may have misunderstood the concept of a political “party”…

A very Hampstead & Kilburn hustings: the low-down

My first hustings, and it was  everything I’d hoped it would be. Politicians taking shots at eachother, excitable audience members shouting and jeering, and an overwhelming sensation of ‘this sure beats sitting at home watching TV’. Little did I know, Inside the Perfect Predator was being broadcast on BBC1 – thank goodness for iPlayer.

The Rosslyn Hill Unitarian Chapel, in association with the Ham & High, played host to the event. Around 150 people squeezed into the hall, sitting in neat rows facing the altar. At the top table were seated, from the audience’s left to right, Glenda Jackson MP (Labour), Chris Philp (Conservatives), the Chairman (that’s right, I never bothered finding out his name), Ed Fordham (Lib Dems), Magnus Nielsen (UKIP) and Bea Campbell (Green). Tamsin Omond was given a kind of ‘seat of honour’ in the front row of the audience, but was not involved in the BBC Question Time-style debate. The questions were selected in advance, and each candidate was given the opportunity to answer in turn, with the odd rambling, opinionated contribution from members of the audience.

Proceedings got off to a friendly enough start, the candidates milling about near the  top table, chatting freely amongst themselves. The gentlemen were all looking very smart, with a full complement of dark suits, buttoned-up shirts and ties. A more interesting range from the ladies, with Glenda sporting a smart black jacket over a little black dress, Tamsin mixing it up with a trouser suit, complete with zip-up hoody and t-shirt. Bea was wearing the evening’s red-carpet miss (actual carpet colour: blue), with a pink t-shirt over a long sleeved grey number, clashing nicely with her massive green rosette.

The candidates’ answers to the first question, which happened to be on Darling’s budget, set the tone exactly for the rest of the evening. In fact, I could have walked out after those first 15 minutes with the same impression I was left with at the end of what turned out to be over 2 hours worth of party-politicking debate. Bea Campbell’s main point was that instead of building warships, we should be building wind farms. And a fair point too perhaps, but if the Greens are really hoping to make waves in order to obtain power (little hydro-electric joke for you there), they’ll have to convince the wider public that there’s more to their policies than just glorified hand-holding and tree-hugging.

Magnus Nielsen and/or Christopher Lloyd

Magnus was definitely my favourite speaker, though by far the worst candidate. He spent most of his question-answering time explaining that he didn’t have enough time to answer the questions. As the UKIP candidate, everything was Europe’s fault, predictably, from sleaze and corruption to debt and recession. Want to improve the NHS? Get out of Europe. Or you could just read his new book, which he was keen to let us know is out soon. Magnus is like that great-uncle who sits in his chair in the corner, commanding attention, shouting a lot, and making boldly inappropriate comments. He also reminded me of Christopher Llyod’s character in Back to the Future. If his party’s policies weren’t so intolerant, unsubtle and weak, someone might even vote for him.

Glenda, Chris and Ed: the big three

As for the big three, they each did their parties proud. Glenda tended to talk around the questions a bit, eventually settling on overwhelming support for the party line. Everyone seemed to overlook the fact that she got MMR mixed up with MRSA at one point, but this was hopefully just a slip of the tongue, as opposed to a real lack of knowledge. She spoke fluently and authoritatively on most subjects, but owing more, I imagine, to her experience as a public speaker than to her depth of understanding. Highlight: when an audience member exclaimed that they had never seen Glenda shopping in Hampstead, the Labour MP was quick to come back with, “Well I’ve never seen you before, how do I know you live here?” Much to the audience’s amusement.

Ed Fordham is a man who has done his homework. On the matter of the transport disruptions that plague our constituency on the weekends, Ed produced a statement read out in parliament in 1999 supporting the PPP scheme, by the then transport minister, Glenda Jackson, with Ed saying to the incumbent, “the reality is, you stitched us up.” Queue applause. Nor did he shy away from taking digs at Tory candidate Chris Philp. When the latter proudly boasted that in his four years as councillor he had never claimed expenses, Ed pointed out that as a local councillor, he did not have the ability to do so anyway. Essentially, he hadn’t claimed expenses because he wasn’t able to do so. Some of his remarks could have been construed as being a little catty, and Chris certainly didn’t appreciate being accused of being disingenuous as to the origin of his campaign funds. Having said that, Ed comes across as a mature candidate who understands the matters at hand and the concerns of his (potential) constituents.

I was equally impressed by Chris Philp. If I had to sum-up his performance last night in a single word: smooth. He looked the part, he sounded the part, he acted the part. If you were voting based on a candidate’s individual merits, as opposed to the party they represented, you could do much worse than to vote for Chris. He spoke with confidence in a matter-of-fact tone, coming across as prepared, but not rehearsed. The only candidate in his introductory speech to thank the Chapel for hosting the event, he was charming at times and, when he needed to be, impassioned too. In a heated moment, on campaign funding, Chris brought up a dodgy unreturned donation to the Lib Dems’s coffers of £2m, saying, “maybe you’ll find it down the back of your sofa, Ed.”

The best question of the night was posed by Tamsin Omond, who asked the candidates to name their own party’s faults, and how they hoped to remedy these. This struck me as a fantastic opportunity for the candidates to give off an impression of openness and honesty, and to demonstrate their individuality. Unfortunately, none of them made the most of it. Chris gave it a shot by saying that in ’97 he’d voted Lib Dem, but his party had moved on since then. Glenda probably came closest, bemoaning the lack of female candidates being presented by Labour in the party’s safe seats. Tamsin told me that she had found the overall experience quite depressing, with the candidates’ focus seeming to be on the negative elements of their rivals’ campaigns, as opposed to the really positive aspects of their own.

Hampstead & Kilburn is one of the most marginal seats in the country, a fact recognised by all the candidates. Interestingly, the audience – excluding pockets of supporters for each candidate – was representative of this fact. I didn’t get the impression that any particular candidate had more support than any other and, encouragingly, well-argued points received equally generous and vehement rounds of applause, regardless of who had put them forward.

The bookies still have Ed down as favourite, with Ladbrokes offering the best odds of 5/4. At Paddypower, you can now get 2/1 on Chris, and 5/2 on Glenda winning. Ladbrokes are now also offering 25/1 on Tamsin and her Commons party, with Magnus and Bea joint-outsiders at 100/1.

There’s everything still to play for, and the candidates will all be upping their games in the run up to May 6th, with Glenda (ominously) announcing that we’ll be seeing a lot more of her in the coming weeks. More events like last night’s hustings are due to take place in the run up to the election, and I’d urge you to come along to one for yourself, especially if you’re a floating/undecided voter. They offer a great chance to see the candidates for yourself, up-close and personal.

But I’m afraid I couldn’t pick you a winner – not based on last night’s performances anyway – not from all the way up here, on this fence that I’m sitting on…

The results show

The lines are closed and the votes have been counted. Please don’t phone in now – you may still be charged.

NW6: the poll was a rip-roaring success, with record numbers of voters turning out to exercise their democratic right. Everyone, I’m sure, has been awaiting the results of this most important of polls with bated breath. The results may prove to be entirely inconsequential, and have literally no effect on anything – ever – but it’s been jolly good fun, hasn’t it?

The results are presented as a percentage of the total number of voters (236, over a 24hour period):

NW6: the poll

I’ll be honest, I was rather surprised to see these results. I believe it’s what you might call a landslide. So, what does this tell us about the upcoming election? The answer: absolutely nothing. Obviously. I can tell you that at about 10pm last night, the results were looking a lot more like you might have expected them to: Tories on 39%, Labour on 38% and Lib Dems on 19%. Still, neither yesterday’s interim nor these final results reflect either what I’ve been saying, what the bookies have been suggesting, or what the parties themselves have been proclaiming. With the notable exception, of course, of Chris Philp’s Conservatives.

Some important details to bear in mind about these results: Although I’m quite pleased with 236 people having voted, this doesn’t even come close to the tens of thousands of voters who will turn out come election day. Needless to say, most of the people who voted are likely based in NW6, though the constituency is made up of several postcodes. It’s also worth pointing out that even though, theoretically, people shouldn’t have been able to vote more than once from the same computer, in reality, it wouldn’t have been particularly complicated to do so. But I’m sure nobody would suggest that the Tories cheated their way to victory…

Chris Philp MP - an artist's impression

Then there is the role of Twitter; I half-expected the candidate with the most followers (Ed Fordham, 751) to win, as all the PPCs (except Beatrix and Magnus) retweeted or linked through to the poll. Chris Philp only informed his 425 Twitter followers this morning, but was by that stage already well in the lead. Mike Katz, of the local Labour party (91 followers), was the first to retweet the message, and this may have helped Labour to take their (very) early lead, but ultimately they didn’t have enough backing. If this poll is anything to go by – which it isn’t – then it looks like Tamsin has some way to go in getting the new media-consuming youth to back her campaign.

You can all look forward to more such polls as the election approaches, hopefully with an equally surprising and meaningless set of results. Do you feel that NW6: the poll is an accurate reflection of public opinion? Or is it just that everyone who reads this blog is a Conservative-supporting tweet-obsessive? Answers on a postcard. Or in the comment box below.

Interview: Chris Philp

Social networking sites are strange and wonderful things. But whereas for you and I they’re a way of keeping in touch with friends, or promoting our truly excellent blogs, for the modern politician, they’re a key campaign feature. They provide a quick and easy way to engage with (potential) constituents, addressing their concerns in an instant, and allow the dissemination of campaign messages around the clock. Facebook it was that helped me set up an interview with Ed Fordham. Then Twitter, somewhat unexpectedly, brought me tidings from one Chris Philp, Conservative PPC for Hampstead & Kilburn. Chris had read the interview with his Lib Dem rival and felt a little aggrieved by some of Ed’s comments.  For balance, he asked, would I like to interview him? For balance, I agreed.

The Wet Fish Cafe on West End Lane played host to our meeting. Chris had called to warn that he would be late. He arrived before I did. Throughout the interview, he sat comfortably on the other side of our small table by the wall, legs crossed and top two buttons undone on his tie-less shirt. We drank tea.

Chris Philp

Chris is a man prepared. All my questions, be they on policy, background, campaigning or anything else, were answered quickly, eloquently and with confidence. He has an impressive grip on facts and figures, which he can pull out to back up any of his points. I often felt, however, that he was drawing on a mental database of stock answers for anticipated questions. I don’t hold this against Chris – if you’re asked similar questions everyday, you’ll give similar answers – but it did give proceedings a more ostensibly on-the-record feel than I would have liked.

Still, Chris spoke openly about his motivations for entering the political sphere; a few years a go now, his father was taken to hospital, and whilst there contracted the MRSA ‘super-virus’. This was his first insight into what he saw as being the Labour government’s (flawed) centralised approach to running public services, and it led to his becoming involved in campaigning, eventually joining the Conservative party and being elected as a councillor for Camden. He was forthwith in revealing that he did not vote Conservative in 1997, as the previous Tory government had not properly funded public services. He now believes, however, that although these  services are better funded than they once were, they are poorly run, and it will take a Conservative government to fix this.

Let’s not forget the reason for the interview: the accusations made against him during my prior interview with his election rival, Ed Fordham. Chris seemed genuinely shocked by Ed’s comments, saying, “I thought [his remarks] were just totally inaccurate, intemperate and uncalled for, and not the kind of thing you would expect from someone who is putting themselves forward for serious office.”

On the electoral figures used by the Lib Dems that put them 474 votes away from victory, Chris said, “the figures that [Ed Fordham] likes quoting are five years old, which he probably forgot to mention, and are based on a sort of theoretical projection. The figures that we look at are recent and are based on real votes. It annoys me, frankly, when the Lib Dems use these very old notional figures, because I don’t think it gives an accurate reflection of the mathematics of the seat.”

During the 'save the Royal Free's stroke unit' campaign

As for the accusation that the Tories campaigned to save a stroke unit at the Royal Free that was never actually under threat, Chris obviously disagrees. He tells me that the Royal Free was recognised as having one of the best emergency stroke units in the country, and that the ‘door-to-needle’ time at both the old facility in Hampstead and the new acute unit at UCLH is exactly the same, at 35 minutes, and thus for most people the journey time to the hospital will now be greater, but for no added benefit. He adds, “the Lib Dems were wrong to fail to support the Royal Free’s emergency stroke unit, and I think the reason that Ed used such intemperate and frankly immature language was he knows that he’s on the wrong side of the issue.”

The one thing that surprised me over the course of the interview was Chris’ assertion that the election in Hampstead & Kilburn would be a two horse race between the Tories and Labour, writing the Lib Dems off entirely – bearing in mind that the new mystery candidate had not yet put up posters in Hampstead. This is despite the Lib Dems being the bookies’ favourites, and despite the re-drawn constituency boundaries potentially favouring them. This is a key marginal seat, of great importance to all the major parties, hence the newsletters, billboards and flyering from all comers. But for Chris there is only one choice: “If you want to get rid of Gordon Brown, then voting Conservative is the only way to do that, both here and nationally.”

The new Hampstead & Kilburn constituency

Chris insists that his campaign is not personal, but some of his comments show a clear understanding that this is a contest, and there’s no use in playing nice: “One thing that Ed probably didn’t find time to mention is that he’s targeting different communities with different messages.” Chris tells me that he is referring to the fact that Lib Dems in Kings Cross have sent out leaflets iterating Nick Clegg’s calls for the disarmament of Israel, a ‘rogue state’, whereas Ed Fordham has distributed leaflets in Hampstead, printed partially in Hebrew, saying that he’s a friend of Israel. Chris appears to challenge Ed, saying, “he hasn’t stood up and said Nick Clegg is wrong on the issue, which if he was serious is what he would do.”

Chris generally comes across as relaxed, but reticent. He doesn’t give as much away as I’d like him to. I’m not saying that (only) because I want more juicy blog-fuel, but because it’s refreshing to hear what someone really feels. Still, he seems to be smart, keen and competent. Also, he’ll be pleased to hear, he comes across as a nice guy. But this is a campaign that neither he nor Ed Fordham can afford to run on personality alone, with Glenda Jackson still in it for Labour, and a yet to be revealed mystery contender joining the race on February 25th.

One thing is certain: things are spicing up on the Hampstead & Kilburn election trail – stay tuned!

Ask yourself, ‘what would John McCririck do?’

There’s been a fair bit of chatter on this blog recently from Lib Dem and Tory supporters (interestingly, not much Labour presence) as to whose election result-predicting figures are most accurate, who’s most likely to become Hampstead & Kilburn’s next MP, and who can throw a tennis ball the furthest. I may have made up that last one, but it would be fun to find out nevertheless…

Democracy... In action!

At the end of the day, it’ll come down to what box all you lovely voters draw your smiley faces in.* But seeing as everyone likes a good bit of speculation, I thought I’d check out the latest predictions made by the real experts: the bookies. The odds quoted below are specific for the Hampstead & Kilburn constituency.

PaddyPower has the Lib Dems as even money favourites, with the Tories at 2/1, and Labour the outsiders at 5/2.

Ladbrokes ranks the three parties in the same order, but offers better odds on the Lib Dems at 11/10. It matches PaddyPower by offering 2/1 on the Tories, and again has Labour as 9/4 outsiders.

William Hill has the best all-round odds, though not dissimilar to Ladbrokes and PaddyPower. It currently has Lib Dems as 11/10 favourites, with shorter odds on the Tories at 7/4, and Labour 5/2.

Finally, online bookmakers Bet365 have the Lib Dems at 11/10, Tories at 15/8, and Labour 5/2.

So in summary it seems that, for now at least, the Liberal Democrats are the bookies’ favourites, with the Conservatives cantering along in second, and Labour bringing up the rear, trotting into third. If you do fancy a cheeky punt, but are unsure of the most favourable odds, your best bet would be Ladbrokes for the Lib Dems, and PaddyPower for the other parties.

Every now and then I’ll keep you posted on the latest odds, especially if there are any notable changes, but if you want to check for yourself, The Guardian has an online odds-checker. Betting is a sure fire way to lose money you don’t have, but it can make Peter Snow’s Swingometrical ramblings considerably more exciting!

Lib Dems vs Tories: who wins? You decide...

*Just in case you didn’t know, if you do put a smiley face in the little box then your vote won’t be counted, so think carefully before taking this drastically cute course of action!