This is not a Newham I recognise

Seriously it's not. That image is of Whitechapel Road in Tower Hamlets - the old Royal London Hospital building is prominent on the left. If this Daily Mail article can't even get the right borough (and it's far from alone in using this image), what hope accurate reporting?

Tonight BBC1 is broadcasting Last Whites of the East End about the white residents of my home borough Newham. This is the borough with the lowest proportion of "White British" residents (although they're still the largest single demographic) and has experienced a lot of population movement in the last fifteen years, with many moving out settling in boroughs further east. This is a subject that should be handled sensitively but I fear will instead spawn many kneejerk ignorant articles and posts.

So I'll just say one thing up front. I live just off Green Street (where Upton Park tube station is) and I have never thought I am in Baghdad or any other hypersensational comparison. The only time I have ever been scared around Green Street has been when West Ham were playing Millwall.

In a way the old Newham lives on in another form. It contains Stratford, which gave the last half of its name to "Walford". You can even find a real life street called Albert Square here (sadly no Queen Vic pub). And the E20 post code is now a reality, covering the Olympic Park in Stratford. But EastEnders doesn't remotely reflect modern life. It's an extension of a glamorised past projected forward, not some hidden corner.

I will be watching the documentary with interest to see how accurate a portrayal it gives or whether it sensationally plays with fire. I know I am far from the only person in Newham who wants to make sure the wider world sees an accurate portrayal.

Comments on ballot papers don't deliver a message

At some point I'll post my more general reflections on the council and European elections last week but for now I want to focus on one aspect that doesn't get much discussion - spoilt ballot papers at the count.

For those who've never been to an election count, one of the important later stages is the adjudication. This is when all ballot papers identified by the counting as "Doubtful" - i.e. those that don't seemingly express a clear & correct number of intentions - are ruled on by either the Returning Officer or a formally designated deputy. Candidates and/or their agents are entitled to attend to witness the rulings though challenges must be submitted through the legal process. Crucially it's often the case that not every candidate/party is represented at this but that's their own decision.

Coming late in the count and usually straight after a long and intense campaign, all the candidates and agents are invariably tired and focusing their remaining energies on spotting valid votes for their own side. The ballot papers also go by fairly fast, especially in a borough such as Newham, which has many doubtful votes.

Some votes are ruled as valid and returned to the pile. Others are ruled out for one of the following reasons:

• Want of an official mark
• Being unmarked or wholly void for uncertainty
• Voting for more candidates than voter was entitled to
• Writing or mark by which voter could be identified

The first is rare nowadays due to changes in the way ballot papers are designed, printed and issued. The fourth should be self-explanatory though it includes polling numbers as well as names. The third is also known as "Overvoting" and is particularly common when there are multiple ballot papers given out at the same time - in my opinion the vast majority of these that I saw last week were either people who read the instructions on one ballot paper and followed them on the other two or people who put both their first and second preference for Mayor in the same column.

The second is something of a catch-all category, including blank ballot papers, ticks and crosses in so awkward a place they couldn't be determined, various attempts to vote for "None" and a variety of comments.

Why people cast spoilt ballot papers is ultimately known only to them, though I suspect a lot of the blanks come from people being given three papers and mistakenly assuming they can only vote on one of them. I'd be interested to hear people's experience from other multiple election counts but I'm not persuaded they're a sign of a mass deliberate "Vote Blank" campaign.

The comments are usually clearer, expressing dissatisfaction with some or all of the candidates or the absence of a particular party. But frankly they don't make any impact beyond comedy and irritation - it's a common opinion at counts that nobody who has seen how this process works would bother trying to send politicians a message by the ballot paper. The official returns bundle them in with the blanks and mistakes. The agents are primarily concerned to a) save good votes and b) work out where their supporters made mistakes & how to get them to get it right next time. Nobody is transcribing messages. If the agents report any of the messages back to party activists it will be for a laugh rather than anything else.

So all the essays and brief comments scribbled on ballot papers are ultimately ineffective. If you wish to not vote or to cast a blank then you're perfectly entitled to. But if you want to send a message to politicians in general or in particular, this is not the way to do it. Try email or Twitter or even, to show how serious you are, snail mail.

No more bendy 25

A year ago I posted Bye bye bendy 25 noting the announcement about the contract change that would bring with it the end of bendy buses on my local route, the Number 25.

Today is the final day that bendies run that route and I caught one this evening. As ever it was the same awful experience that make people hate them so much and I'm not sorry to see them go. It's good to see Boris delivering on his pledges!

"More money for electoral administration!" or "Fewer elections at the same time!"?

The Election Law Channel: It’s administrative blunders, not fraud, which should worry us most is right - no-one ever campaigns for the council on the first slogan above (well not successfully anyway). And I agree you have to have some sympathy with election officials at various levels who are asked to do a difficult job without adequate resources.

One of the big news stories about the election was the number of people who didn't get to vote despite queueing for a very long time, hours in some cases. Why this happened in some places and not others hasn't received so much attention but it seems clear to me this was a failing at the local level. Calling for the head of the chair of the Electoral Commission will achieve nothing here.

The basic problem seems to be rooted at the level of the polling stations, with failure to cope with higher than anticipated demand. But was it simply more voters than predicted or were the voters taking longer than expected?

Looking at the various lists of places where there were problems I wondered if it was connected to having local elections on the same day and whether or not this was the first time in a while. Taking The Election Law Channel's list of places, we find the following:

• Birmingham - Yes, first since 1979(?)
• Chester - No
• Hackney - Yes, first ever, also elected Mayor
• Islington - Yes, first ever
• Leeds - Yes, first since 1979(?)
• Lewisham - Yes, first ever, also elected Mayor
• Liverpool - Yes, first since 1979(?)
• Manchester - Yes, first since 1979
• Newcastle - Yes, first since 1979(?)
• Sheffield - Yes, first since 1979(?)
• Weybridge - Yes (local authority Elmbridge), first general/district since 1979(?)

Now okay Weybridge/Elmbridge had combined general and county elections in 1997, 2001 and 2005 whilst Chester is an anomaly. But in every other problem area it was the first time for at least thirty years that the general election took place on the same day as local elections. And I think this is what overwhelmed the stations.

A lot of voters will have arrived at the polling stations to be given two or even three ballot papers that included elections they’d heard very little about with voting instructions that can be different on each paper. In my home borough of Newham we have a directly elected Mayor and three members to elect in each council ward, the same set-up as in Hackney and Lewisham (both of which appear on the list above). A voter in any of these boroughs had to express a single choice on one paper, up to three simultaneous choices on a second, and two sequential preferences in different columns on a third.

Whilst Newham hasn’t appeared in reports it was clear from the counts that a huge number of voters got the voting systems muddled up with many people "over-voting" on the parliamentary election by using two or three crosses. Conversely in the council elections a lot of people used only one or two crosses (although these are still valid votes). It was also noticeable that voters were taking a good while at polling stations at times when there weren’t queues. Both of these point to a high level of voter confusion leading to many taking significantly longer than normal to cast their votes. To Newham's credit there was a campaign to emphasise the three different systems.

(As well as asking for help with understanding the ballot paper instructions, voters in some places might also have found themselves asking why they couldn’t vote for particular parties who didn’t have any candidates in some wards or boroughs. But I've not seen the indepth line-up in the areas effected.)

I suspect a lot of areas simply failed to take into account the increased requirements that stem from having multiple elections at once and this may go beyond returning officers to budgets. It’s not a case of simply shoving the usual general & local allocations together, subtracting one set of costs for polling station staff and facilities/equipment hire and adding a little to cover a) extra local ballot papers being printed to cope with the expected general turnout; and b) a bit more time for counting staff to cover separation. But I wouldn’t be surprised if some of that kind of back of beermat budgeting had been made.

The whole problem will need to be investigated in-depth and solutions found. Maybe more money and resources are needed for polling stations. Maybe there shouldn't be combined general and local elections, even if that would depress the latter's turnout. (Other countries do have them combined so the investigation should look at how they handle the problems this brings.) Maybe we shouldn't have so many different voting systems in operation at the same time (something that may get even worse if we change the system for the Commons). Or perhaps we should have a combined ballot paper and introduce a method that allows people to vote for all of a party's candidates at once if they wish. There are many possible ways to solve this but at least one is needed in time for the next elections.

Bye bye bendy 25

I have just seen the following posted on another forum I frequent:

I imagine some here may be interested to know that the new contract [for the number 25 bus] has been awarded to First London East with new double deckers. Vehicle requirements increases from 43 bendies to 59 deckers. The new contract starts on 25/6/11 so plenty of time for the construction of the buses and mobilisation of the depot space and new drivers. Interesting that the 25 swings between East London (and its predecessors) and First London East.

The Number 25 bus, which runs from Oxford Street to Ilford and links my home and workplace, is one of the most awful in London, with bendification having made it even more packed, not least because the official capacity of a bendy bus is about 50% more than can actually fit on-board (and drivers will do what they can to enforce the lower limit). There are few seats and passengers are repeatedly thrown all over the place. It is unsurprising to see many people opting instead for the double deckers that parallel part of the route, even where those double deckers stop short.

Bendy buses were originally designed for very short hop mass transit, such as at airports or fast inner city journeys like the trip from the main railway terminals to the City. It was simply ridiculous to put bendy buses on a route that runs from central London to the outer suburbs and their departure on this route cannot come soon enough so I'm glad to hear that they are going at the end of the contract:

I will not miss them. This was one of Boris Johnson's highest profile pledges in the last London Mayoral election and I am very glad to see implementation is finally reaching East London.

The election outcome

And so the election is over. I'll post my full thoughts soon. At the moment I'm still tired - the count here in Newham for both parliament and the council took a very long time and I didn't get home until late in the evening yesterday so I'm currently catching up on things including sleep.

I was one of the Conservative candidates for the Stratford & New Town ward on Newham council. We didn't win but instead came second. My thanks to my running mates, Peter Fox and Armyn Hennessy, both of whom are delightful gentlemen, as well as to all the other Conservative campaigners and candidates, particularly our agents Graham and Barbara Postles and Neil Pearce. Thanks also to our parliamentary candidates Virginia Morris (West Ham) and Paul Shea (East Ham) and our Mayoral candidate Maria Allen. I am sure we will hear more from all of them before long.

I'd also like to congratulate the victorious Labour candidates in Stratford & New Town, Richard Crawford, Charlene McClean and Terry Paul. Having met all three of them either during the campaign or the count I've found them to be good friendly people and I hope they give the ward good service for the next four years.

As for the overall national picture I'll post again soon. All I will say now is that the news from the markets is seriously scary.

"RESPECT - The Disunity Coalition"

I have just heard the news that Newham councillors Asif Karim and Hanif Abdulmuhit have both quit "RESPECT". (Newham Recorder: Councillors quit party) It is just the latest stage in the disintegration of "RESPECT" as a political force in Newham.

In the past few years they've lost Lindsey German, their West Ham parliamentary candidate in 2005, and now two thirds of their councillors. And that's before we even start searching for what's happened to all their other one time names. Furthermore in the European elections next month "RESPECT" will not be on the ballot paper.

The two councillors in question were deselected because they were "not delivering services", nor were they attending Town Hall meetings or surgeries. It is the same old story of "RESPECT" - they get elected with a load of fanfare and then proceed to wallow in the same old extreme left infighting.

At least Asif Karim and Hanif Abdulmuhit didn't follow their Tower Hamlets counterparts in trying to create a new group on the council that also claimed the "RESPECT" name. Over there "RESPECT" split with the new group called, with not a trace of irony, "RESPECT - The Unity Coalition"!

So what's the point of town twinning?

Today I saw the news that the Oxfordshire town of Wallingford is trying to break its twinning arrangement with the French town of Luxeuil-les-Bains because communications have long since ceased between the two. (BBC News: Town aims to disown French 'twin') This is in stark contrast to Wallingford's relations with its German twin, Bad Wurzach.

In the true spirit of local government international relations (surely a contradiction in term) it seems there is no mechanism for towns to break the twinning. I hope that anomaly gets rectified before a town finds its twin has become decidedly unacceptable.

But what exactly is the point of town twinning? How does it benefit the people of a town? There's some mention in the news of school exchange programmes but they're not especially noticeable. And what else is there? My home borough of Newham is apparently twinned with Kaiserslautern in Germany, but it hardly shouts about it beyond the occasional mention on the website (e.g. Mayor welcomes visitors from German twin town). How exactly has that brought benefit to the people?

Well I can think of some it has brought benefit to. Councillors who get to go on fraternal greetings trips. But councillor junkets are not a benefit to the wider community. The whole series of arrangements does not offer any obvious tangible benefits. If towns want to declare on their signs that they're twinned with some other town then let them, but at a time when the public finances are tight, and council tax is constantly rising, twinning junkets should be one of the first ports of call for councillors to cut waste to cut council tax.

Virginia Morris for West Ham

Two days ago I attended a parliamentary selection meeting for the first time ever. (In the past a combination of moving between home and university, sitting MPs and various timings has meant that the opportunity has not previously arisen.) But on Sunday the West Ham Conservative Association held its meeting to select its prospective parliamentary candidate and the full meeting heard from three impressive candidates before selecting. And I believe we have made an excellent choice.

The Association has selected Virginia Morris as its candidate. I can do no better to introduce her than repeat the words of ConservativeHome: Virginia Morris adopted for West Ham:

Virginia is married with a daughter and has been a Councillor for Richmond upon Thames since 2002, holding the portfolio of Shadow Cabinet Member for Civic Pride and Planning. Previously she stood for parliament for Oxford East in 2005. She holds a PhD in engineering becoming a partner and later a director of one of the leading consultancies specialising in environmental engineering, building design and consultancy services, winning the Queens Award for Enterprise in 2004. She changed careers after spending two years living in Lao PDR, the first working for the United Nations Development Programme and the second walking hundreds of miles in remote areas undertaking research. From this work she has written two books on the Vietnam War.

She said on her selection:

"I am proud to have been selected as the Conservative Parliamentary Candidate for West Ham. The constituency and Newham Council have been run for too long by Labour and I am looking forward to working with the Conservatives here to oust them."

The next general election, whenever it comes, is going to heat up here in West Ham.

So where's our copy of the Newham Mag?

Every fortnight Newham Council publishes The Newham Mag about what is going on in the borough and what the councillors are up to. According to the website it is "delivered to every home in the borough." It has been running for over six years now.

Now as well as having often delivered political leaflets, when I was younger I worked to deliver copies of the Yellow Pages and the telephone directory. Both have involved delivering to difficult to reach addresses. Now I'm not going to pretend that I or others have always reached every single address (there are times when canvassing that I've been completely unable to find a particular address no matter how many times I've looked) but we certainly tried our hardest. And for a not impossible to find address (which the presence of the Yellow Pages and directories here confirms mine certainly is) they would almost certainly get delivered to over 90% of the time. And I live just behind the library and local service centre where my local councillors hold their surgery so it's not as if it's hard to find.

By my calculations there have been approximately 124 copies of The Newham Mag published since I moved into my current address. So why in all the time I have been living here has it never once come through our letterbox?

Is producing a propaganda sheet so dominated by communications from incumbent councillors really the best use of council taxpayers' money? Especially if it's not being sent to all households in the borough?

How to get to Westminster from West Ham

The West Ham parliamentary constituency, like pretty much all of Newham, is in the London Travelcard Zone 3 and has good transport connections with much of London. To get to, say, Westminster one can take either the District Line (with three stations in the constituency - West Ham, Plaistow and Upton Park, though the latter is on the current constituency boundary) or the Jubilee Line (two stations - Stratford and West Ham), both with plenty of direct services. And that's to say nothing about the numerous interchange options involving tubes, trains, buses, the DLR and more. With the current row about MPs' expenses it should be the ideal constituency for someone to live in and commute to Parliament.

So why is Lyn Brown MP claiming £15,889 a year for a second home? (The Daily London News: What does your London MP earn and claim?) According to former councillor Mike Law she was living in Plaistow until at least recently. Tellingly her website is silent on this one.

So why does she need a second home? Where is she claiming from? What does she need it for?

Battle Royal (Docks)

Today I went for the umpteenth time to the other end of the borough to campaign in the Royal Docks council by-election. Whilst canvassing voters I was surprised to bump into Steve Phillpott, a fellow History student in my days at the University of Kent. (I won't reveal how he's voting though.)

For those unfamiliar with this part of London, the Royal Docks ward is the southernmost part of Newham, below the Royal Docks themselves and consisting of Silvertown and North Woolwich (or for those who use the tube map for geography it's served by the Woolwich Arsenal branch of the Docklands Light Railway between West Silvertown and King George V stations). Here's the best map I can find electronically (although the ward boundaries are not precise), click for a larger version:

The response has been good so far and I have also been amazed by the number of people we've had out. (See also ConservativeHome: Could Newham be poised for a Tory councillor?) Our candidate, Neil Pearce, has been campaigning not just since the by-election began but over the years for improvements to the ward, including a successful campaign to retain the North Woolwich police station, and against the expansion of flights at London City Airport to a level far beyond originally agreed for the airport, because of the air and noise pollution they bring.

One of the more interesting moments of the day was when I saw a Labour leaflet claiming that we are in favour of a second runway at the airport! Now even leaving aside that this is totally contrary to our candidate's record, it's also not physically possible. Take a look again at the map above. The airport's only runway is at the bit that says "LONDON CITY AIRPORT" between the Royal Albert and King George V docks. Exactly where on earth could a second runway go? The only way I could imagine one is if it's on Royal Albert Dock and used by seaplanes! And these are hardly the most compatible planes for the destination airports.

Polling day is on March 26th and all help is much appreciated. To get details please either join the Facebook group: Neil Pearce for Royal Docks or ring his agent Billy on 07717 752657.

Updated: Many thanks to the commenter below who has provided links to images from the Labour leaflets showing the lies here and here.

The end for elected Mayors?

I've just seen the news that voters in Stoke-on-Trent have voted to end having a directly elected Mayor. (BBC News: City's mayor to go following vote)

Now I don't know much about the politics of Stoke-on-Trent and it seems that they have a unique set-up for running the authority, so this may just be a local matter. But the actual question is interesting:

Are you in favour of the proposal for Stoke-on-Trent City Council to be run in a new way, which includes a councillor, who will be elected by the councillors of Stoke-on-Trent to lead the Council and the community which it serves?

Whatever the details this question is effectively describing a standard councillor led system. I wonder what the results would be if Newham held a fresh referendum on whether or not to keep its elected Mayor?

Of other note the turnout was just 19.23%. One has to wonder if there shouldn't be a threshold for referendums that carry major changes.

A Tale Of Two Councils - or Why I Wish I Had Hammersmith & Fulham Council

Today I heard from two separate London Borough Councils, performing very differently.

This morning my five bedroom flat received four envelopes from Newham Council seeking to confirm the electoral register. Three were for "the occupier" of empty rooms seeking confirmation that no-one is there! What a waste - a single envelope for the entire flat would have sufficed. If such waste is taking place on this micro scale, what else are they squandering money on? Mayor Sir Robin Wales, SHAME ON YOU!

Then I heard the news that Hammersmith & Fulham Council has achieved a 3% cut in council tax through efficiency savings. (The Bristow Blog: Council Tax Cut in H&F) At a time when many councils are holding up their hands and claiming that council tax cannot be cut, Hammersmith & Fulham have shown that it is possible.

But there is a sore point still. Whilst Hammersmith & Fulham Council have managed to cut their tax, the GLA tax is up by 5%. If Mr Livingston ever decides to visit the borough (Ken chooses Cuba over Hammersmith) he could learn how to deliver services efficiently and waste less money. Instead he choose to carry on his self-publicity drives and his pathetic crusade against Trevor Phillips. (Livingstone vs Phillips round infinity) Mayor Livingston, SHAME ON YOU!

Tony Banks, Baron Stratford?

Former West Ham MP Tony Banks is going to become a member of the House of Lords, becoming just the latest left-wing extremist to end up as a member of that bastion of privilege. He's also generating some interest over his choice of title.

Traditionally most peerage titles are named after places, but in recent years there has been a trend towards using surnames. There have been the bizarre combination of first and surnames such as "Lord Alanbrooke" and "Lord George-Brown" - one has to wonder if the latter was referred to casually as "George George-Brown". Indeed some actually changed their surname to overcome the opposition to this. (There are also those peers who insist on calling themselves Lord/Lady Firstname Surname - Baroness Kennedy of the Shaws, not Baroness Helena Kennedy, is one of the most prominent.)

Tony Banks has decided to go for a place name in his title instead. The obvious place would be his constituency, but "Lord West Ham" might be rather awkward for a Chelsea supporter. "Lord Newham" would have been appropriate since there is a distinct Newham identity. But he's chosen to be "Lord Stratford". I'm surprised he wants to be reminded of where his constituency office was - on announcing his retirement from the Commons he said he found constituency work "intellectually numbing, and tedious in the extreme". Given Banks' ability to draw attention to his latest rubbish outburts, no doubt the people of Stratford will too. I feel lucky that I live in Forest Gate (next door).