tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-80049405868460995892024-03-05T23:15:21.412-08:00Graham Pointer's BlogThe thoughts of a fortysomething British Christian on religion, science (especially astronomy), politics, Doctor Who and many other things. Thanks for stopping by.Graham Pointerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03538991243769088600noreply@blogger.comBlogger282125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8004940586846099589.post-47992185901469928642016-06-25T07:31:00.000-07:002016-06-25T10:17:22.301-07:00Looking For The "No English" ShopOne thing I have seen on a Facebook discussion group is that there is a Polish shop in Shirley which has a "No English" sign up, and that English people have been ushered out.<P>
Cue, the whole <i>it's an f-ing outrage</i>, and the <i>we speak English here</i>.<P>
Further details on the discussion of this outrage is that it is "opposite the police station" and "next to the church".<P>
This is what the old Shirley police station looks like when it's tipping down:<P>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgSPTsbpslT41GgsIDVc9gGMtFufczmmSX84WHG-iWik7DVcHlHYRZZ9PTWUmJiSQA_YwT3nzCtvh1PzL5exh-_UC9tQr20Eyr-HDE9Bk-IGdPCsStoBqOEZ4uoqVdRSzLCUVP2TL9Ea8s/s1600/IMG_6846.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgSPTsbpslT41GgsIDVc9gGMtFufczmmSX84WHG-iWik7DVcHlHYRZZ9PTWUmJiSQA_YwT3nzCtvh1PzL5exh-_UC9tQr20Eyr-HDE9Bk-IGdPCsStoBqOEZ4uoqVdRSzLCUVP2TL9Ea8s/s400/IMG_6846.JPG" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgwBOz3HopbNNTgdr8l2G-K_CEx8Wd_oB_ceYVHE1umylaclHqYyHi068lzib1u-761qdkAl13siSOwNHlP18yq4rK-T07_15PUA_vv-sWCUM_LlMVR4-LJAIcKos9G1otqs4tbXl0BE6w/s1600/IMG_6849.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgwBOz3HopbNNTgdr8l2G-K_CEx8Wd_oB_ceYVHE1umylaclHqYyHi068lzib1u-761qdkAl13siSOwNHlP18yq4rK-T07_15PUA_vv-sWCUM_LlMVR4-LJAIcKos9G1otqs4tbXl0BE6w/s400/IMG_6849.JPG" /></a></div>
So, let's cross over Shirley High Street and see what the view is. What is there opposite the police station? Let's look up the road.<P>
There we have <i>Santo Lounge</i>, the old <i>Barclays'</i> and the old vaping centre. Just off <i>Santo</i> is Shirley Avenue, where my gran lived for the last 20 years of her life.<P>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhL41_h4pEE59dX4s3qMD_jU0B5bBO_j4HH0o1woVbjgzoG-X3UBIZQ6B-HE6DDD4T-EzZXullR9HtksIdOwMSrYZxXa4LRHh3h9ayMfTKDsDlCZOZzm2PW3dV5kE2-MOWxYDqZF-DuFFw/s1600/IMG_6848.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhL41_h4pEE59dX4s3qMD_jU0B5bBO_j4HH0o1woVbjgzoG-X3UBIZQ6B-HE6DDD4T-EzZXullR9HtksIdOwMSrYZxXa4LRHh3h9ayMfTKDsDlCZOZzm2PW3dV5kE2-MOWxYDqZF-DuFFw/s400/IMG_6848.JPG" /></a></div>
If we look down the road, we have:<P>
So, there we have it, the incident was at the Polish shop "opposite the police station" and "next to the church".<P>
Which is, er, cunningly disguised as laser hair removal salon. Those pesky Poles! Don't they have a wicked sense of humour. Go in to have your nose hair dealt with and before you know it, you've bought biała kiełbasa.<P>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj8VnPCYb4zVNDBjcC8oFO5A3UmtY1RHk6nk0BokWgk7cm4a0XRqx_V05YyBqucVgMFOQWty1Y05-df2mGYpwjf3VKvMQxmuSdPDUHNE4_G3SsbfkjeXqYX8RTL3VUdcNwlyw-6_imCohg/s1600/IMG_6850.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj8VnPCYb4zVNDBjcC8oFO5A3UmtY1RHk6nk0BokWgk7cm4a0XRqx_V05YyBqucVgMFOQWty1Y05-df2mGYpwjf3VKvMQxmuSdPDUHNE4_G3SsbfkjeXqYX8RTL3VUdcNwlyw-6_imCohg/s400/IMG_6850.JPG" /></a></div>
OK, I'll be charitable and assume that by "opposite the police station" the <strike>racist troublemonger</strike> friend of a friend of a.......a friend of those ushered out might have meant it happened in Villiers Road.<P>
Nope. Nothing remotely Polish there.<P>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiEOR7QlNxx2plo9x5-KZQHYsBgFOR73Sj4uXzObc1Lupk26LTjr_jnBgMe4mFa1oBwQp5Vt7KUwlh2jy7uh6DvhtxMzEmVMm19biAxCA3XZo9GsdL2g-CNxv43WMimybs8jhfx_NzAW48/s1600/IMG_6851.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiEOR7QlNxx2plo9x5-KZQHYsBgFOR73Sj4uXzObc1Lupk26LTjr_jnBgMe4mFa1oBwQp5Vt7KUwlh2jy7uh6DvhtxMzEmVMm19biAxCA3XZo9GsdL2g-CNxv43WMimybs8jhfx_NzAW48/s320/IMG_6851.JPG" /></a></div>
I was thinking about this, and on my way home passed by 2 Polish shops. Maybe "opposite the police station" meant "along from the police station".<P>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjqAOLMuNijZHQDUp-IiLBpA3mfB_WcTNbLmTQ78Wr-81B0lhieQwPCkIKCG4U1MJcJ5rtEkTnotrlnc5xroDbB2LI3xb50kPZGfkKXpbIfzgD_PPjML7VBkOHoM74Wk3ozOzaWzj4FbO0/s1600/IMG_6852.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjqAOLMuNijZHQDUp-IiLBpA3mfB_WcTNbLmTQ78Wr-81B0lhieQwPCkIKCG4U1MJcJ5rtEkTnotrlnc5xroDbB2LI3xb50kPZGfkKXpbIfzgD_PPjML7VBkOHoM74Wk3ozOzaWzj4FbO0/s320/IMG_6852.JPG" /></a></div>
<i>Malinka</i> has no such sign, and I popped in - no signs like that inside either.<P>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgA2FZpBZegXwioOWCYGBDf9t2yt0EHaxgY1hFq9zqM5X9Kp0_qu_XIsx6zbOQCkD8CX-KfVJlW4RdDByKowAiSutXO4TlRc_Q-3-idJjOIcz2fOyP4K-_8Vs9WuiqrRY_rra8kMkl_I4s/s1600/IMG_6853.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgA2FZpBZegXwioOWCYGBDf9t2yt0EHaxgY1hFq9zqM5X9Kp0_qu_XIsx6zbOQCkD8CX-KfVJlW4RdDByKowAiSutXO4TlRc_Q-3-idJjOIcz2fOyP4K-_8Vs9WuiqrRY_rra8kMkl_I4s/s400/IMG_6853.JPG" /></a></div>
So I went on and tried <i>Baltic Foods</i>. Again, no such signs.<P>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh3xejekjbLoQRd6jrPqafm9pCmTKqpqkpFH0-ipJPsBDwslbfZUF7TK-T3JPPz3VIWQus-_3h8inC_3NGqedxqWBEoachZs1bO0UXQK9wyO9tdd2fF2RN2yxesXLsbFTnKPa9TvmQBDMA/s1600/IMG_6854.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh3xejekjbLoQRd6jrPqafm9pCmTKqpqkpFH0-ipJPsBDwslbfZUF7TK-T3JPPz3VIWQus-_3h8inC_3NGqedxqWBEoachZs1bO0UXQK9wyO9tdd2fF2RN2yxesXLsbFTnKPa9TvmQBDMA/s400/IMG_6854.JPG" /></a></div>
All that research made me thirsty. So I went in and bought a can of coke - served in English, chatted with staff in English.
Graham Pointerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03538991243769088600noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8004940586846099589.post-22327645196039238602016-05-25T10:19:00.000-07:002016-05-25T10:19:16.337-07:00The 1994 European Election On Proportional Representation - And Its ConsequencesIn June 1994, there was an significant national election. It was the only national election Labour have ever contested with a female leader (Margaret Beckett, MP for <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14000663"><i>Derby South</i></a>), and Labour's 42.60% of the vote was their highest share since Harold Wilson lead them to defeat at the June 1970 general election on 43.07% of the vote, and was the highest national share of the vote for any party since the Conservatives' 48.40% at the inaugural European election of June 1979.<P>
I am, of course, referring to the 1994 election to the European Parliament, which was a time of change for both the United Kingdom and the European Union - indeed it was the first election to the Parliament of the European <i>Union</i> rather than to the Parliament of the European <i>Communities</i> (the term to collectively describe the European Economic Community - or "Common Market" as it was often called in the UK, - the European Coal & Steel Community and the European Atomic Energy Community). It was the last election where the EU was just 12 members, as it would expand to take in Austria, Finland and Sweden the following January.<P>
Not only was European politics on a cusp, but so too was British domestic politics. This was effectively the last election of the 20th century politics. Within weeks, Tony Blair would be Labour leader, transforming his party from the natural party of Opposition into the election-winning machine it became, leaving only the most optimistic Conservative and the most pessimistic socialist believing that the Conservatives stood a chance of winning a fifth term in office. It was the last time that the main parties were the Conservatives, Labour and the Liberal Democrats - a leaders' debate featuring the Greens, Scottish National Party and Plaid Cymru would not have crossed anyone's mind. Multi-party politics was just round the corner. Within 5 years there would be devolved legislatures in Belfast, Cardiff and Edinburgh. It was an era when a large proportion of the House of Lords were men who were simply there because they had inherited a title and seat from their dad.<P>
The <a href="http://grahampointer.blogspot.co.uk/2015/09/the-1989-european-election-results-on.html">notional result for June 1989</a> was:<P>
<UL><LI>Labour - 48
<LI>Conservative - 35
<LI>Scottish National Party - 1
<LI>Democratic Unionist Party - 1
<LI>Social Democratic & Labour Party - 1
<LI>Ulster Unionist Party - 1</li></ul><P>
The Conservatives lost 15 seats to Labour and 2 to the Liberal Democrats (one of which, <i>Somerset & North Devon</i>, had seen the Liberal Democrats in fourth place - behind Labour and the Greens - in 1989), while the only other seat to change hands was Labour's loss of <i>Scotland North East</i> to the Scottish National Party.<P>
In the UK, the use of First Past The Post (for the last time, it would transpire) in Great Britain, and Single Transferable Vote in Northern Ireland (as is still the current practice) gave the following result:<P>
<UL><LI>Labour - 62 (up 14)
<LI>Conservative - 18 (down 17)
<LI>Liberal Democrat - 2 (up 2)
<LI>Scottish National Party - 2 (up 1)
<LI>Democratic Unionist Party - 1 (unchanged)
<LI>Social Democratic & Labour Party - 1 (unchanged)
<LI>Ulster Unionist Party - 1 (unchanged)</li></ul><P>
In terms of Members of the European Parliament:<P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th rowspan="2">Party</th>
<th rowspan="2">MEPs after 1989 election</th>
<th rowspan="2">Retiring at or before 1994 election</th>
<th colspan="2">Standing for re-election at 1994 election</th>
<th rowspan="2">New MEPs</th>
<th rowspan="2">MEPs after 1994 election</th></tr>
<tr>
<th>Re-elected</th>
<th>Defeated</th></tr>
<tr>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>45</td>
<td>5</td>
<td>39</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>23</td>
<td>62</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>32</td>
<td>7</td>
<td>11</td>
<td>14</td>
<td>7</td>
<td>18</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Scottish National Party</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>2</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Democratic Unionist Party</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>1</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Social Democratic & Labour Party</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>1</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Ulster Unionist Party</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>1</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Liberal Democrat</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>2</td>
<td>2</td></tr>
<tr>
<td><b><i>Total</i></b></td>
<td><b><i>81</i></b></td>
<td><b><i>12</i></b></td>
<td><b><i>54</i></b></td>
<td><b><i>15</i></b></td>
<td><b><i>33</i></b></td>
<td><b><i>87</i></b></td></tr>
</table></center><P>
Obviously, the second column (MEPs after the 1989 election) is equal to the sum of third, fourth and fifth columns (the number retiring added to the number re-elected and then number defeated), and the final column (MEPs after the 1994 election) is equal to the fourth column (the number re-elected) added to the sixth column (the number of new MEPs).<P>
Note that the British representation in the European Parliament increased from 81 to 87 at the 1994 election.
In 1994, Labour became the largest party in the European Parliament, ahead of the German Social Democrats (who had 40 MEPs) and the German Christian Democratic Union (who had 39 - their sibling party, the Bavarian-based Christian Social Union, had 7).<P>
The Conservatives' 26.93% of the vote saw them descend below their previous low point (the December 1832/January 1833 general election).<P>
The Conservative result could easily have been worse, as a look at their majorities will show:<P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>Constituency</th>
<th>Majority</th>
<th>Runner-up</th></tr>
<tr>
<td>Buckinghamshire & East Oxfordshire</td>
<td>16.85%</td>
<td>Labour</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Surrey</td>
<td>14.01%</td>
<td>Liberal Democrat</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>South Downs West</td>
<td>10.97%</td>
<td>Liberal Democrat</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>London South & East Surrey</td>
<td>5.23%</td>
<td>Labour</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Hampshire North & Oxford</td>
<td>4.56%</td>
<td>Liberal Democrat</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Wiltshire North & Bath</td>
<td>4.27%</td>
<td>Liberal Democrat</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>North Yorkshire</td>
<td>3.84%</td>
<td>Labour</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Itchen, Test & Avon</td>
<td>3.00%</td>
<td>Liberal Democrat</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>East Sussex & South Kent</td>
<td>2.89%</td>
<td>Liberal Democrat</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Wight & South Hampshire</td>
<td>2.81%</td>
<td>Liberal Democrat</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Cambridgeshire</td>
<td>2.22%</td>
<td>Labour</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>The Cotswolds</td>
<td>2.18%</td>
<td>Labour</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Essex North & South Suffolk</td>
<td>1.77%</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<tr>
<td>Dorset & East Devon</td>
<td>1.01%</td>
<td>Liberal Democrat</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Sussex South & Crawley</td>
<td>0.94%</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<tr>
<td>Worcestershire & South Warwickshire</td>
<td>0.58%</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<tr>
<td>Thames Valley</td>
<td>0.40%</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<tr>
<td>Devon & East Plymouth</td>
<td>0.30%</td>
<td>Liberal Democrat</td></tr>
</table></center><P>
A swing of just 1.50% away from the Conservatives would have seen them lose 11 seats so tying with the Liberal Democrats for second place, with 7 MEPs each, and with Labour on 68.<P>
We can have a quick look at just who would have become MEPs if the Conservatives had lost their 11 most marginal seats.<P>
In <i>East Sussex & South Kent</i>, the Liberal Democrat candidate was David Bellotti, a former MP for <i>Eastbourne</i>.<P>
In <i>Wight & South Hampshire</i> the Liberal Democrat candidate was Mike Hancock, who at the time was a former Social Democrat MP for <i>Portsmouth South</i>, <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/vote2001/results_constituencies/constituencies/464.stm">recapturing his old seat at the May 1997 general election</a> and holding it until he <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14000884">came sixth and lost his deposit at the May 2015 general election</a> (the Labour candidate was Sarah McCarthy-Fry, who would go on to be MP for <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/vote2005/html/463.stm"><i>Portsmouth North</i></a> from the May 2005 general election until <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/election2010/results/constituency/d57.stm">losing her seat</a> at the May 2010 general election).<P>
In <i>Cambridgeshire</i> the Labour candidate was Melanie Johnson, who became Labour MP for <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/vote2001/results_constituencies/constituencies/621.stm"><i>Welwyn Hatfield</i></a> from the 1997 election until <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/vote2005/html/621.stm">losing the seat</a> at the 2005 election (the Liberal Democrat candidate was Andrew Duff, who would go on to be an MEP for Eastern England from the <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/euros_99/regional_html/702.stm">June 1999 European election</a> until being defeated at the <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/eu-regions/E15000006">May 2014 European election</a>).<P>
In <i>The Cotswolds</i> the Labour candidate was Tess Kingham, who would be Labour MP for <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/vote2001/results_constituencies/constituencies/275.stm"><i>Gloucester</i></a> from the 1997 election until retiring at the June 2001 general election.<P>
In <i>Worcestershire & South Warwickshire</i>, the Labour candidate was then known as Gisela Gschaider, and would go on to become MP for <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/vote2001/results_constituencies/constituencies/053.stm"><i>Birmingham Edgbaston</i></a> at the 1997 election - a seat she <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14000560">still holds 18 years later</a>.<P>
And in <i>Devon & East Plymouth</i>, the Liberal Democrat candidate was Adrian Sanders, who would go on to become MP for <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/vote2001/results_constituencies/constituencies/582.stm">Torbay</a> at the 1997 election, <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14000999">losing his seat in 2015</a> (the Labour candidate was Linda Gilroy, who would become MP for <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/vote2001/results_constituencies/constituencies/458.stm"><i>Plymouth Sutton</i></a> from the 1997 election until <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/election2010/results/constituency/d54.stm">being defeated at the 2010 election</a>).<P>
Such a small swing would have seen the political map turn yellow (which was then often used to signify the Liberal Democrats, rather than the SNP) along the whole south coast from Land's End to the River Hamble, along with Cornwall, Devon and southern Somerset being Liberal Democrat, and Labour holding the northern parts of Somerset and all of Gloucester (only a small part of Somerset, around Bath, would have remained Conservative).<P>
As it was, the 1994 election saw suburban and market town English Toryism becoming terminally ill - seats such as <i>Essex West & East Hertfordshire</i>, <i>Herefordshire & Shropshire</i> and <i>Kent West</i> - turned as red as <i>Greater Manchester Central</i>, and prefiguring the 1997 Labour landslide. Already wiped out at a European level in both Wales and Scotland in the 1989 election, here England was serving notice to quit on the Conservatives.<P>
With that out the way, we can project the European elections for 1994 onto the regions that have been used since 1999. Some of the European constituencies were split across 2 regions - in these cases we use the April 1992 general election result to determine, for each party, its relative strength in each part. For example, at the 1994 European election, the Conservatives won 44,060 votes in <i>Staffordshire West & Congleton</i>. Looking at the 1992 general election, they won 163,753 votes in that European constituency, of which 29,163 were in <i>Congleton</i>. Hence, we assume that at the 1994 election:<P>
<i>44,060</i> x <i>29,163</i> / <i>163,753</i> = <i>7,847</i><P>
votes were cast for the Conservatives in <i>Congleton</i>.<P>
With each region I will list 3 types of European constituency - ones contained wholly in the region, ones with the majority part in the region, and ones with the minority part in the region. The links are to the 1999 election, to provide for comparison.<P>
When I compare region-by-region the results under Single Member Plurality (often called First Past The Post) and list Proportional Representation, then for the SMP result I will consider the constituencies wholly contained in the region, or whose majority part lies in the region.<P>
The European constituencies were quite vast (in England, between 6 and 8 Westminster constituencies) and when it came to names, accuracy was often sacrificed on the altar of brevity - <i>e.g.</i> the June 1984 election saw the creation of <i>Bedfordshire</i>, which, despite its name, contained a sizeable chunk of Hertfordshire, including the New Town of Stevanage. One consequence of the vastness of these seats is that an area that politically leans in one direction can be electorally swamped. In June 1997, Hague - at the time the MP for <i>Richmond</i>, one of the safest Conservative seats - became Conservative party leader. And, at the time, his local MEP was Labour as this was the <i>Cleveland & Richmond</i> European constituency. This constituency would have included the fishing villages of the Redcar & Cleveland coast, the industrial areas of Teeside, the new middle-class commuter areas of Stockton and the farming communities of the North Yorkshire Moors. Hence an MEP could expect to have a wide range of constituents and to need to be an expert on an extensive range of issues.<P>
Another aspect was that major cities were divided across European constituencies - Liverpool (<i>Merseyside East & Wigan</i>/<i>Merseyside West</i>), Manchester (<i>Cheshire East</i>/<i>Greater Manchester Central</i>), Newcastle (<i>Northumbria</i>/<i>Tyne & Wear</i>) and Plymouth (<i>Cornwall & West Plymouth</i>/<i>Devon & East Plymouth</i>) are significant examples.<P>
<b><a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/euros_99/regional_html/701.stm">East Midlands (6 seats)</a></b><P>
<ul style="list-style-type:none">
<li>Contains whole of - <i>Leicester</i>; <i>Northamptonshire & Blaby</i>; <i>Nottingham & North West Leicestershire</i>; <i>Nottinghamshire North & Chesterfield</i>
<li>Contains majority part of - <i>Lincolnshire & South Humberside</i> (72%); <i>Peak District</i> (85%)
<li>Contains minority part of - <i>Staffordshire East & Derby</i> (43%)
</ul><P>
<ul><LI>Labour - 585,495 (50.12%)
<LI>Conservative - 353,150 (30.23%)
<LI>Liberal Democrat - 157,183 (13.46%)
<LI>Green - 43,434 (3.72%)
<LI>UK Independence Party - 8,877 (0.76%)
<LI>Natural Law Party - 8,274 (0.71%)
<LI>Independent (Ian Whitaker) - 4,397 (0.38%)
<LI>Independent (Peter Walton) - 2,710 (0.23%)
<LI>Liberal - 2,462 (0.21%)
<LI>Network Against The Child Support Agency - 2,132 (0.12%)</li></ul><P>
Comparing the results gives us:<P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th rowspan="2">Party</th>
<th colspan="2">1994</th>
<th rowspan="2">1999</th></tr>
<tr>
<th>SMP</th>
<th>PR</th></tr>
<tr>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>6</td>
<td>3</td>
<td>2</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>2</td>
<td>3</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Liberal Democrat</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>1</td></tr></table></center><P>
Under list PR, the order of the candidates would be chosen by the parties. To get some idea of who the successful MEPs could be, we can look at the sitting MEPs who were standing for re-election in the region:<P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>Candidate</th>
<th>Party</th>
<th>MEP for (1989 - 1994)</th>
<th>Contested (1994)</th>
<th>Successful?</th></tr>
<tr>
<td>Ken Coates</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Nottingham</td>
<td>Nottinghamshire North & Chesterfield</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Bill Newton-Dunn</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Lincolnshire</td>
<td>Lincolnshire & South Humberside</td>
<td>No</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Mel Read</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Leicester</td>
<td>Nottingham & North West Leicestershire</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Anthony Simpson</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Northamptonshire</td>
<td>Northamptonshire & Blaby</td>
<td>No</td></tr>
</table></center><P>
With 2 sitting MEPs re-elected, this meant the region had 4 new MEPs:<P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>Candidate</th>
<th>Party</th>
<th>Constituency</th></tr>
<tr>
<td>Angela Billingham</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Northamptonshire & Blaby</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Veronica Hardstaff</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Lincolnshire & South Humberside</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Arlene McCarthy</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Peak District</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Sue Waddington</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Leicester</td></tr>
</table></center><P>
It would not be unreasonable to assume that Newton-Dunn would have been high up enough on the Conservative list to be re-elected, as he would later be in 1999 (he lost the Conservative whip in September 2000, and joined the Liberal Democrats a couple of months later), and that Simpson would be the other Conservative MEP re-elected. Also note that - although she (unsuccessfully) stood in <i>Bedfordshire & Milton Keynes</i> - at the time of the 1994 election Edwina Currie was a Conservative MP for an East Midlands constituency (<i>Derbyshire South</i>). Under PR it is possible that she would have been third on the list here, rather than join the crowded lists for South East England or Eastern England.<P>
No doubt that Coates (who joined the European United Left-Nordic Green Left group in the European Parliament in January 1998 and stood for re-election in 1999 under the banner of Alternative Labour List) and Read would have been the 2 Labour MEPs re-elected on their list. I will speculate about the third later on, as there was another Labour MEP in the East Midlands who was standing for re-election in 1994.<P>
<b><a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/euros_99/regional_html/702.stm">Eastern England (8 seats)</a></b><P>
<ul style="list-style-type:none">
<li>Contains whole of - <i>Cambridgeshire</i>; <i>Essex North & South Suffolk</i>; <i>Essex South</i>; <i>Essex West & East Hertfordshire</i>; <i>Hertfordshire</i>; <i>Norfolk</i>; <i>Suffolk & South West Norfolk</i>
<li>Contains majority part of - <i>Bedfordshire & Milton Keynes</i> (75%)
</ul><P>
<ul><LI>Labour - 596,227 (39.61%)
<LI>Conservative - 506,211 (33.63%)
<LI>Liberal Democrat - 290,397 (19.29%)
<LI>Green - 51,311 (3.41%)
<LI>Independent (Somerset de Chair) - 12,409 (0.82%)
<LI>Liberal - 10,831 (0.72%)
<LI>Independent (Brian Smalley) - 10,277 (0.68%)
<LI>New Britain - 9,451 (0.63%)
<LI>Natural Law Party - 9,204 (0.61%)
<LI>UK Independence Party - 5,589 (0.37%)
<LI>National Front - 1,755 (0.12%)
<LI>Sportsman - 1,127 (0.07%)
<LI>21st Century Party - 369 (0.02%)</li></ul><P>
De Chair had been Conservative MP for <i>Norfolk South West</i> from the November 1935 general election until losing it to Labour at the July 1945 general election, and then MP for <i>Paddington South</i> from the February 1950 general election until retiring at the October 1951 one. He was 82 at the time of the European election, and would die 7 months later. His daughter, Helena, is now the wife of Jacob Rees-Mogg, Conservative MP for <i><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14000846">Somerset North East</a></i>.<P>
Comparing the results gives us:<P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th rowspan="2">Party</th>
<th colspan="2">1994</th>
<th rowspan="2">1999</th></tr>
<tr>
<th>SMP</th>
<th>PR</th></tr>
<tr>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>6</td>
<td>4</td>
<td>2</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>2</td>
<td>3</td>
<td>4</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Liberal Democrat</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>1</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>UK Independence Party</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>1</td></tr>
</table></center><P>
As before, we can look at the sitting MEPs who were standing for re-election in the region:<P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>Candidate</th>
<th>Party</th>
<th>MEP for (1989 - 1994)</th>
<th>Contested (1994)</th>
<th>Successful?</th></tr>
<tr>
<td>Paul Howell</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Norfolk</td>
<td>Norfolk</td>
<td>No</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Anne McIntosh</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Essex North East</td>
<td>Essex North & South Suffolk</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Patricia Rawlings</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Essex South West</td>
<td>Essex West & East Hertfordshire</td>
<td>No</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Amédée Turner</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Suffolk</td>
<td>Suffolk & South West Norfolk</td>
<td>No</td></tr>
</table></center><P>
With just McIntosh re-elected in this region, this meant there were 7 new MEPs:<P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>Candidate</th>
<th>Party</th>
<th>Constituency</th></tr>
<tr>
<td>Richard Howitt</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Essex South</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Hugh Kerr</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Essex West & East Hertfordshire</td>
<tr>
<td>Eryl McNally</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Bedfordshire & Milton Keynes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Clive Needle</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Norfolk</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Robert Sturdy</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Cambridgeshire</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>David Thomas</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Suffolk & South West Norfolk</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Paul Truscott</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Hertfordshire</td></tr>
</table></center><P>
On a list system, it would not be unreasonable to assume that the top 4 places on the Conservative list would go to those MEPs seeking re-election, and one of them would lose out.<P>
And on a list system, not all of the Labour MEPs that were elected would be able to be in the top 4. With hindsight, Labour would probably have hoped these didn't include Kerr - who joined the Green group in the European Parliament in January 1998, and contested Scotland at the 1999 European elections at the top of the Scottish Socialist Party list - and Truscott, who was <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/5357273/Lord-Truscott-and-Lord-Taylor-of-Blackburn-suspended-from-the-House-of-Lords.html">suspended from the House of Lords in May 2009</a>, and now sits as <a href="http://www.parliament.uk/biographies/lords/lord-truscott/3682">Independent Labour</a>.<P>
<b><a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/euros_99/regional_html/703.stm">London (10 seats)</a></b><P>
<ul style="list-style-type:none">
<li>Contains whole of - <i>London Central</i>; <i>London East</i>; <i>London North</i>; <i>London North East</i>; <i>London North West</i>; <i>London South East</i>; <i>London South Inner</i>; <i>London South West</i>; <i>London West</i>
<li>Contains majority part of - <i>London South & East Surrey</i> (75%)
</ul><P>
<ul><LI>Labour - 816,312 (51.01%)
<LI>Conservative - 472,852 (29.55%)
<LI>Liberal Democrat - 186,479 (11.65%)
<LI>Green - 59,987 (3.75%)
<LI>UK Independence Party - 26,740 (1.67%)
<LI>Natural Law Party - 9,856 (0.62%)
<LI>Liberal - 6,454 (0.40%)
<LI>National Front - 4,889 (0.31%)
<LI>Restoration of Capital Punishment - 4,063 (0.25%)
<LI>Third Way - 3,484 (0.22%)
<LI>Monster Raving Loony Party - 2,490 (0.16%)
<LI>Communist Party of Great Britain - 1,727 (0.11%)
<LI>Socialist Party of Great Britian - 1,593 (0.10%)
<LI>European People's Party Judaeo-Christian Alliance - 880 (0.05%)
<LI>21st Century Party - 740 (0.05%)
<LI>International Communist Party - 679 (0.04%)
<LI>Rainbow - 547 (0.03%)
<LI>Spirit of Europe - 377 (0.02%)</li></ul><P>
Comparing the results gives us:<P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th rowspan="2">Party</th>
<th colspan="2">1994</th>
<th rowspan="2">1999</th></tr>
<tr>
<th>SMP</th>
<th>PR</th></tr>
<tr>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>9</td>
<td>6</td>
<td>4</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>3</td>
<td>4</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Liberal Democrat</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>1</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Green</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>1</td></tr>
</table></center><P>
As before, we can look at the sitting MEPs who were standing for re-election in the region:<P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>Candidate</th>
<th>Party</th>
<th>MEP for (1989 - 1994)</th>
<th>Contested (1994)</th>
<th>Successful?</th></tr>
<tr>
<td>Richard Balfe</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>London South Inner</td>
<td>London South Inner</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Nicholas Bethell</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>London North West</td>
<td>London North West</td>
<td>No</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Michael Elliott</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>London West</td>
<td>London West</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Pauline Green</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>London North</td>
<td>London North</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Alf Lomas</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>London North East</td>
<td>London North East</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>James Moorhouse</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>London South & East Surrey</td>
<td>London South & East Surrey</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Stan Newens</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>London Central</td>
<td>London Central</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Anita Pollack</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>London South West</td>
<td>London South West</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Peter Price</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>London South East</td>
<td>London South East</td>
<td>No</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Carole Tongue</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>London East</td>
<td>London East</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
</table></center><P>
Note that none of London's MEPs were retiring. With 8 sitting MEPs re-elected, this meant there were 2 new MEPs for this region:<P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>Candidate</th>
<th>Party</th>
<th>Constituency</th></tr>
<tr>
<td>Robert Evans</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>London North West</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Shaun Spiers</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>London South East</td></tr>
</table></center><P>
For the Conservatives it would seem quite easy. Bethell (who later returned as an MEP at the 1999 election), Moorhouse and Price would surely be the top 3 on the list. With hindsight, this would not be a good idea, as Price <a href="http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-61118689.html">defected to the Liberal Democrats in December 1997</a>, followed by <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/188983.stm">Moorhouse in October 1998</a>.<P>
Moorhouse's defection is important, and I will return to this later.<P>
At least one of Labour's sitting MEPs would fail to make the top 6 on the party list. However, for the 1999 election, Pollack switched regions, standing (unsuccessfully) in South East England.<P>
With regards to the Liberal Democrats, the most obvious choice would be <a href="http://www.parliament.uk/biographies/lords/baroness-ludford/1867">Sarah Ludford</a>, who was elected at the 1999 election and <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/eu-regions/E15000007">lost her seat at the 2014 election</a>.<P>
<b><a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/euros_99/regional_html/704.stm">North East England (4 seats)</a></b><P>
<ul style="list-style-type:none">
<li>Contains whole of - <i>Durham</i>; <i>Northumbria</i>; <i>Tyne & Wear</i>
<li>Contains majority part of - <i>Cleveland & Richmond</i> (83%)
</ul><P>
<ul><LI>Labour - 446,124 (67.48%)
<LI>Conservative - 115,489 (17.47%)
<LI>Liberal Democrat - 65,204 (9.86%)
<LI>Green - 19,405 (2.94%)
<LI>UK Independence Party - 7,210 (1.09%)
<LI>Liberal - 4,174 (0.63%)
<LI>Natural Law Party - 3,478 (0.53%)</li></ul><P>
Comparing the results gives us:<P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th rowspan="2">Party</th>
<th colspan="2">1994</th>
<th rowspan="2">1999</th></tr>
<tr>
<th>SMP</th>
<th>PR</th></tr>
<tr>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>4</td>
<td>3</td>
<td>3</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>1</td></tr>
</table></center><P>
As before, we can look at the sitting MEPs who were standing for re-election in the region:<P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>Candidate</th>
<th>Party</th>
<th>MEP for (1989 - 1994)</th>
<th>Contested (1994)</th>
<th>Successful?</th></tr>
<tr>
<td>Gordon Adam</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Northumbria</td>
<td>Northumbria</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>David Bowe</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Cleveland & North Yorkshire</td>
<td>Cleveland & Richmond</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Alan Donnelly</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Tyne & Wear</td>
<td>Tyne & Wear</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Stephen Hughes</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Durham</td>
<td>Durham</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
</table></center><P>
As Labour would only win 3 seats on a list system, one of these would have to miss out.<P>
For the Conservatives, the most successful candidate was Robert Goodwill, who became an MEP for Yorkshire & Humberside at the 1999 election, before stepping down at the 2004 election, and then elected MP for <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/vote2005/html/504.stm"><i>Scarborough & Whitby</i></a> at the 2005 general election.<P>
<b><a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/euros_99/regional_html/705.stm">North West England (10 seats)</a></b><P>
<ul style="list-style-type:none">
<li>Contains whole of - <i>Cheshire East</i>; <i>Cheshire West & Wirral</i>; <i>Cumbria & North Lancashire</i>; <i>Greater Manchester Central</i>; <i>Greater Manchester East</i>; <i>Greater Manchester West</i>; <i>Lancashire Central</i>; <i>Lancashire South</i>; <i>Merseyside East & Wigan</i>; <i>Merseyside West</i>
<li>Contains minority part of - <i>Staffordshire West & Congleton</i> (14%)
</ul><P>
<ul><LI>Labour - 885,890 (54.86%)
<LI>Conservative - 441,366 (27.33%)
<LI>Liberal Democrat - 194,553 (12.05%)
<LI>Green - 45,908 (2.84%)
<LI>Liberal - 13,341 (0.83%)
<LI>British Home Rule - 12,918 (0.80%)
<LI>Natural Law Party - 12,211 (0.76%)
<LI>Make Criminals Concerned About Our Response To Hostility & Yobbishness - 3,693 (0.23%)
<LI>Independent (Eva Rokas) - 3,439 (0.21%)
<LI>Monster Raving Loony Party - 1,600 (0.10%)</li></ul><P>
Comparing the results gives us:<P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th rowspan="2">Party</th>
<th colspan="2">1994</th>
<th rowspan="2">1999</th></tr>
<tr>
<th>SMP</th>
<th>PR</th></tr>
<tr>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>10</td>
<td>6</td>
<td>4</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>3</td>
<td>5</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Liberal Democrat</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>1</td></tr>>
</table></center><P>
As before, we can look at the sitting MEPs who were standing for re-election in the region:<P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>Candidate</th>
<th>Party</th>
<th>MEP for (1989 - 1994)</th>
<th>Contested (1994)</th>
<th>Successful?</th></tr>
<tr>
<td>Richard Fletcher-Vane</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Cumbria & North Lancashire</td>
<td>Cumbria & North Lancashire*</td>
<td>No</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Glyn Ford</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Greater Manchester East</td>
<td>Greater Manchester East</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Lyndon Harrison</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Cheshire West</td>
<td>Cheshire West & Wirral</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Michael Hindley</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Lancashire East</td>
<td>Lancashire South</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Eddie Newman</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Greater Manchester Central</td>
<td>Greater Manchester Central</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Brian Simpson</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Cheshire East</td>
<td>Cheshire East</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Kenneth Stewart</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Merseyside West</td>
<td>Merseyside West</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Gary Titley</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Greater Manchester West</td>
<td>Greater Manchester West</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Michael Welsh</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Lancashire Central</td>
<td>Lancashire Central</td>
<td>No</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Terry Wynn</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Merseyside East</td>
<td>Merseyside East & Wigan</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
</table></center><P>
[* Due to boundary changes, <i>Cumbria & North Lancashire</i> was notionally a Labour seat]<P>
With 8 sitting MEPs re-elected, this meant the region had 2 new MEPs:<P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>Candidate</th>
<th>Party</th>
<th>Constituency</th></tr>
<tr>
<td>Tony Cunningham</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Cumbria & North Lancashire</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Mark Hendrick</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Lancashire Central</td></tr>
</table></center><P>
For the Conservatives, the logical choice would have been to give Fletcher-Vane and Welsh the top 2 places on the list to ensure they werre both re-elected.<P>
Labour would have had 8 sitting MEPs chasing 6 places. However, for the 1999 election, Ford switched regions, being elected in his native South West England.<P>
<b><a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/euros_99/regional_html/707.stm">Scotland (8 seats)</a></b><P>
<ul style="list-style-type:none">
<li>Contains whole of - <i>Fife & Mid Scotland</i>; <i>Glasgow</i>; <i>Highlands & Islands</i>; <i>Lothians</i>; <i>Scotland North East</i>; <i>Scotland South</i>; <i>Strathclyde East</i>; <i>Strathclyde West</i>
</ul><P>
<UL><LI>Labour - 635,955 (42.51%)
<LI>Scottish National Party - 487,239 (32.57%)
<LI>Conservative - 216,669 (14.48%)
<LI>Liberal Democrat - 107,811 (7.21%)
<LI>Green - 23,304 (1.56%)
<LI>Scottish Militant Labour - 12,113 (0.81%)
<LI>Natural Law Party - 5,037 (0.34%)
<LI>Liberal - 3,249 (0.22%)
<LI>Socialist Party of Great Britain - 1,832 (0.12%)
<LI>UK Independence Party - 1,096 (0.07%)
<LI>Communist Party of Great Britain - 689 (0.05%)
<LI>North East Ethnic Party - 584 (0.04%)
<LI>International Communist Party - 381 (0.03%)</li></ul><P>
Note this is the dim-and-distant long-forgotten era when Labour was a successful party in Scotland. It used to top the polls there!<P>
Comparing the results gives us:<P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th rowspan="2">Party</th>
<th colspan="2">1994</th>
<th rowspan="2">1999</th></tr>
<tr>
<th>SMP</th>
<th>PR</th></tr>
<tr>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>6</td>
<td>4</td>
<td>3</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Scottish National Party</td>
<td>2</td>
<td>3</td>
<td>2</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>2</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Liberal Democrat</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>1</td></tr>
</table></center><P>
As before, we can look at the sitting MEPs who were standing for re-election in the region:<P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>Candidate</th>
<th>Party</th>
<th>MEP for (1989 - 1994)</th>
<th>Contested (1994)</th>
<th>Successful?</th></tr>
<tr>
<td>Ken Collins</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Strathclyde East</td>
<td>Strathclyde East</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Winnie Ewing</td>
<td>Scottish National Party</td>
<td>Highlands & Islands</td>
<td>Highlands & Islands</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<td>Alex Falconer</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Fife & Mid Scotland</td>
<td>Fife & Mid Scotland</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Henry McCubbin</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Scotland North East</td>
<td>Scotland North East</td>
<td>No</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Hugh McMahon</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Strathclyde West</td>
<td>Strathclyde West</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>David Martin</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Lothians</td>
<td>Lothians</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Alex Smith</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Scotland South</td>
<td>Scotland South</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
</table></center><P>
With 6 sitting MEPs re-elected, this meant the region had 2 new MEPs:<P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>Candidate</th>
<th>Party</th>
<th>Constituency</th></tr>
<tr>
<td>Allan Macartney</td>
<td>Scottish National Party</td>
<td>Scotland North East</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Bill Miller</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Glasgow</td></tr>
</table></center><P>
None of the Conservative candidates went on to have any type of parliamentary career, or were ex-MPs, so none strike me as the obvious person to be top of the list. However, there was a former Conservative MEP for Scotland who returned to the European Parliament in 1994.....<P>
Labour would have 6 sitting MEPs - so at least 2 of them would have failed to be re-elected under PR.<P>
With the Scottish National Party, we could expect that Ewing and Macartney - who at the time was its depute leader - would take the top 2 places on the list. Among unsuccessful candidates there were some who would later go on and serve as Members of the Scottish Parliament - Keith Brown became MSP for <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/vote2007/scottish_parliment/html/442.stm"><i>Ochil</i></a> at the May 2007 Scottish election, being now the MSP for the successor constituency of <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/special/election2011/constituency/html/36079.stm"><i>Clackmannanshire & Dunblane</i></a> and the <a href="http://www.gov.scot/About/People/Ministers/Cabinet-Secretary-Economy">Scottish Secretary for the Economy, Jobs & Fair Work</a>; Colin Campbell became MSP for <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/vote_99/scotland_99/html/region/208.stm"><i>Scotland West</i></a> at the inaugural Scottish election in May 1999, retiring in May 2003; and Christine Creech became MSP for <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/vote_99/scotland_99/html/region/207.stm"><i>Scotland South</i></a> at the 1999 election and is now MSP for <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/special/election2011/constituency/html/36121.stm"><i>Midlothian South, Tweeddale & Lauderdale</i></a>.<P>
It is possible that - if PR had been used - Ewing would not be the only person having a dual mandate as an MEP and MSP for a few weeks in 1999.<P>
However, the most experienced of the SNP's unsuccessful candidates was <a href="http://www.scotsman.com/news/obituaries/obituary-richard-giles-dick-douglas-former-mp-dunfermline-west-1-3409840">Dick Douglas</a>, the former Labour MP for <i>Dunfermline West</i>.<P>
<b><a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/euros_99/regional_html/708.stm">South East England (11 seats)</a></b><P>
<ul style="list-style-type:none">
<li>Contains whole of - <i>Buckinghamshire & East Oxfordshire</i>; <i>East Sussex & South Kent</i>; <i>Hampshire North & Oxford</i>; <i>Kent East</i>; <i>Kent West</i>; <i>South Downs West</i>; <i>Surrey</i>; <i>Sussex South & Crawley</i>; <i>Thames Valley</i>; <i>Wight & South Hampshire</i>
<li>Contains majority part of - <i>Itchen, Test & Avon</i> (73%)
<li>Contains minority part of - <i>London South & East Surrey</i> (25%); <i>The Cotswolds</i> (16%)
</ul><P>
<UL><LI>Conservative - 826,353 (37.19%)
<LI>Labour - 599,361 (26.98%)
<LI>Liberal Democrat - 589,670 (26.54%)
<LI>Green - 83,300 (3.75%)
<LI>UK Independence Party - 55,258 (2.49%)
<LI>Liberal - 16,680 (0.75%)
<LI>Natural Law Party - 14,698 (0.66%)
<LI>Independent (John Browne) - 12,140 (0.55%)
<LI>Independent (David Horner) - 7,106 (0.32%)
<LI>Independent (John Walker) - 4,627 (0.21%)
<LI>New Britain - 4,498 (0.20%)
<LI>Monster Raving Loony Party - 3,708 (0.17%)
<LI>Independent (Nigel Furness) - 2,618 (0.12%)
<LI>Boston Tea Party - 1,018 (0.05%)
<LI>Restoration of Capital Punishment - 759 (0.03%)</li></ul><P>
Browne had been elected Conservative MP for <i>Winchester</i> at the May 1979 general election. In March 1990 he was suspended without pay from the House of Commons for 4 weeks and chose not to seek re-election, so the Conservatives chose Gerald Malone, the former MP for <i>Aberdeen South</i> as their candidate. Browne then decided he would stand after all, and had the Conservative whip withdrawn. In the 1992 general election he came last in <i>Winchester</i>, and <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/vote2001/results_constituencies/constituencies/633.stm">stood again at the 1997 general election</a>, where - despite coming joint last with the Monster Raving Loony Party - he won more votes than the Liberal Democrat majority. Also contesting in 1997 (and in the <a href="http://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/RP01-36/RP01-36.pdf">November 1997 by-election</a>) was the Li<i>t</i>eral Democrat, Richard Huggett - more about him when I look at South West England.<P>
Comparing the results gives us:<P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th rowspan="2">Party</th>
<th colspan="2">1994</th>
<th rowspan="2">1999</th></tr>
<tr>
<th>SMP</th>
<th>PR</th></tr>
<tr>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>9</td>
<td>5</td>
<td>5</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>2</td>
<td>3</td>
<td>2</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Liberal Democrat</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>3</td>
<td>2</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>UK Independence Party</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>1</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Green</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>1</td></tr>
</table></center><P>
As before, we can look at the sitting MEPs who were standing for re-election in the region:<P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>Candidate</th>
<th>Party</th>
<th>MEP for (1989 - 1994)</th>
<th>Contested (1994)</th>
<th>Successful?</th></tr>
<tr>
<td>James Elles</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Oxford & Buckinghamshire</td>
<td>Buckinghamshire & East Oxfordshire</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Christopher Jackson</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Kent East</td>
<td>Kent East</td>
<td>No</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Edward Kellett-Bowman</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Hampshire Central</td>
<td>Itchen, Test & Avon</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Ben Patterson</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Kent West</td>
<td>Kent West</td>
<td>No</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Tom Spencer</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Surrey West</td>
<td>Surrey</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Jack Stewart-Clark</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Sussex East</td>
<td>East Sussex & South Kent</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>John Stevens</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Thames Valley</td>
<td>Thames Valley</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
</table></center><P>
With just 5 sitting MEPs re-elected, this meant the region had 6 new MEPs:<P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>Candidate</th>
<th>Party</th>
<th>Constituency</th></tr>
<tr>
<td>Brendan Donnelly</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Sussex South & Crawley</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Graham Mather</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Hampshire North & Oxford</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Roy Perry</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Wight & South Hampshire</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>James Provan*</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>South Downs West</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Peter Skinner</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Kent East</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Mark Watts</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Kent East</td></tr>
</table></center><P>
[* Provan had been MEP for <i>Scotland North East</i> from 1979 to 1989]<P>
It is interesting to note that this is the region where the UK Independence Party had its biggest successes. Nigel Farage - who would go on to become their leader - won 5.40% of the vote in <i>Itchen, Test & Avon</i> (he also contested the <i>Eastleigh</i> by-election, which was <a href="http://www.election.demon.co.uk/by1992.html">one of 5 by-elections held the same day as the European election</a>, and Craig Mackinlay (now the Conservative MP for <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14000948"><i>Thanet South</i></a>, where he defeated Farage) won 5.16% of the vote in <i>Kent West</i>.<P>
The Conservatives would have had 7 MEPs seeking re-election, with 2 of them having to miss out on the top 5 places that would secure re-election.<P>
For the Conservatives this was not a good region for keeping MEPs. As I noted earlier, Moorhouse in <i>London South & East Surrey</i> defected to the Liberal Democrats. We also had Spencer <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/269329.stm">losing the whip in January 1999</a> after customs found drugs and pornography, as well as Stevens and Donnelly <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/events/euros_99/parties_and_issues/349285.stm">forming the Pro-Euro Conservative Party</a> in February 1999.<P>
For the Conservatives, this election saw Provan become a re-tread. If PR had been used, then I expect he would have chosen to remain in Scotland and top the Conservative list there.<P>
Labour had no sitting MEPs here, but in 1999 Pollack contested South East England, so I expect that if PR had been used in 1994 she would have done the regional switch 5 years before she did in reality.<P>
Like Labour, there were no sitting Liberal Democrat MEPs. I guess that, as former MPs, Bellotti and Hancock would have been the top 2 on the list. But who would have been the third?<P>
In 1999, the Liberal Democrats elected here were <a href="http://www.parliament.uk/biographies/lords/baroness-nicholson-of-winterbourne/1164">Emma Nicholson</a> - now a member of the House of Lords - and Chris Huhne, who became MP for <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/vote2005/html/223.stm"><i>Eastleigh</i></a> at the 2005 general election, joined the Cabinet as Energy & Climate Change Secretary when the Conservative/Liberal Democrat coalition Government was formed after the 2010 general election, and then had a <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-21737627">spectacular fall from grace</a>.<P>
However, at the time of the 1994 European election, Nicholson was Conservative MP for <i>Devon West & Torridge</i>, not defecting to the Liberal Democrats until December 1995, retiring at the 1997 general election and joining the House of Lords later that year.<P>
At the time, dual mandates (such as Nicholson being an MEP and a member of the House of Lords) were acceptable - it was not until the <a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2008/1647/contents/made"><i>European Parliament (House of Lords Disqualification) Regulations 2008</i></a> took effect at the June 2009 European elections that MEPs were disqualified from sitting in the House of Lords during their term of office. The <a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2004/304/contents/made"><i>European Communities (Definition of Treaties) (Common Electoral Principles) Order 2004</i></a>, implemented the <a href="http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32002D0772&from=en">2002 Decision of the European Council</a> which stated:<P>
<i>From the European Parliament elections in 2004, the office of member of the European Parliament shall be incompatible with that of member of a national parliament.</i><P>
with the derogation:<P>
<i>Members of the United Kingdom Parliament who are also members of the European Parliament during the five-year term preceding election to the European Parliament in 2004 may have a dual mandate until the 2009 European Parliament elections, when the first subparagraph of this paragraph shall apply.</i><P>
While Huhne had contested a couple of constituencies in South East England for the Social Democrats (<i>Reading East</i> at the June 1983 general election, and <i>Oxford West & Abingdon</i> at the June 1987 general election), he did not stand anywhere at the 1994 European election - nor the general elections either side, so we can assume he was not actively seeking to become a parliamentarian at the time.<P>
So, we can rule Nicholson and Huhne out. Third on the Liberal Democrat list for 1999 was <a href="http://www.parliament.uk/biographies/lords/baroness-bowles-of-berkhamsted/4562">Sharon Bowles</a>, who had come third in <i>Buckinghamshire & East Oxfordshire</i> in 1994 (which included <i>Aylesbury</i>, where she had come second to the Conservatives at the 1992 and 1997 general elections). She became an MEP when Huhne had to resign upon his election as an MP, and retired at the 2014 European election.<P>
Fourth on the list was Bellotti, and fifth was Jo Hawkins, at the time leader of <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/town-where-prosperity-was-a-way-of-life-tories-could-suffer-by-election-backlash-as-chill-wind-of-1494876.html">Newbury District Council</a>. and who was the runner-up in <i>Hampshire North & Oxford</i> (which included western parts of Berkshire centred on Newbury) at the 1994 election.<P>
My guess is that the Liberal Democrats MEPs who would have been elected are Bellotti, Bowles (beginning her European career 11 years early) and Hancock.<P>
<b><a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/euros_99/regional_html/709.stm">South West England (7 seats)</a></b><P>
<ul style="list-style-type:none">
<li>Contains whole of - <i>Bristol</i>; <i>Cornwall & West Plymouth</i>; <i>Devon & East Plymouth</i>; <i>Dorset & East Devon</i>; <i>Somerset & North Devon</i>; <i>Wiltshire North & Bath</i>
<li>Contains majority part of - <i>The Cotswolds</i> (84%)
<li>Contains minority part of - <i>Itchen, Test & Avon</i> (27%)
</ul><P>
<ul><li>Liberal Democrat - 517,293 (33.29%)
<LI>Conservative - 513,588 (33.05%)
<LI>Labour - 367,227 (23.63%)
<LI>Green - 57,691 (3.71%)
<LI>UK Independence Party - 32,032 (2.06%)
<LI>Liberal - 21,381 (1.38%)
<LI>New Britain - 16,439 (1.06%)
<LI>Literal Democrat - 10,203 (0.66%)
<LI>Natural Law Party - 7,440 (0.48%)
<LI>Mebyon Kernow - 3,315 (0.21%)
<LI>Independent (Ian Mortimer) - 3,229 (0.21%)
<LI>Independent (John Everard) - 2,629 (0.17%)
<LI>Christian People's Party - 725 (0.05%)
<LI>Subsidarity Party - 606 (0.04%)
</li></ul><P>
Comparing the results gives us:<P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th rowspan="2">Party</th>
<th colspan="2">1994</th>
<th rowspan="2">1999</th></tr>
<tr>
<th>SMP</th>
<th>PR</th></tr>
<tr>
<td>Liberal Democrat</td>
<td>2</td>
<td>3</td>
<td>1</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>4</td>
<td>2</td>
<td>4</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>2</td>
<td>1</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>UK Independence Party</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>1</td></tr>
</table></center><P>
As before, we can look at the sitting MEPs who were standing for re-election in the region:<P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>Candidate</th>
<th>Party</th>
<th>MEP for (1989 - 1994)</th>
<th>Contested (1994)</th>
<th>Successful?</th></tr>
<tr>
<td>Christopher Beazley</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Cornwall & Plymouth</td>
<td>Cornwall & West Plymouth</td>
<td>No</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Bryan Cassidy</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Dorset East & West Hampshire</td>
<td>Dorset & East Devon</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Margaret Daly</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Somerset & West Dorset</td>
<td>Somerset & North Devon</td>
<td>No</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Caroline Jackson</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Wiltshire</td>
<td>Wiltshire North & Bath</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Henry Plumb</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>The Cotswolds</td>
<td>The Cotswolds</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Ian White</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Bristol</td>
<td>Bristol</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
</table></center><P>
With 4 sitting MEPs re-elected, this meant the region had 3 new MEPs:<P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>Candidate</th>
<th>Party</th>
<th>Constituency</th></tr>
<tr>
<td>Giles Chichester</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Devon & East Plymouth</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Robin Teverson</td>
<td>Liberal Democrat</td>
<td>Cornwall & West Plymouth</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Graham Watson</td>
<td>Liberal Democrat</td>
<td>Somerset & North Devon</td></tr>
</table></center><P>
Plumb had been President of the European Parliament from January 1987 to July 1989 and was given a life peerage in April 1987. Immediately after the election, he returned to his pre-Presidency role as leader of the Conservative MEPs.<P>
The Conservatives had 5 sitting MEPs seeking re-election, so at least 3 of them would have been defeated.<P>
Labour had 1 sitting MEP (White) seeking re-election, and it is feasible that Ford would have abandoned North West England to seek election in South West England.<P>
This region saw one of the most controversial results in <i>Devon & East Plymouth</i>, where Huggett, standing as a Li<i>t</i>eral Democrat, obtained 10,203 votes - more than Chichester's 700 vote majority over Sanders - which led to concerns that there were people who voted for Huggett who had misread his designation and assumed he was the Liberal Democrat candidate. The <a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/48/contents/enacted"><i>Registration of Political Parties Act 1998</i></a> tidied up the rules on how candidates described themselves on the ballot paper. Note than this constituency also saw the sole Liberal candidate in the region.<P>
One interesting test we can do is to consider what would have happened if the election had been under PR and Huggett could therefore have a "party list" (with just his name on). It is obvious that you can only vote for a person (or party) who is standing where you are voting, and so in the real world, under SMP, only voters in <i>Devon & East Plymouth</i> could vote for him. In that constituency, the combined Liberal Democrat/Literal Democrat vote is 84,456 - higher than Chichester's 74,953.<P>
In South West England outside of <i>Devon & East Plymouth</i>, the Liberal Democrats got 443,040 votes. Now suppose that these got confused between the Liberal Democrats and the Literal Democrats in the same ratio as the voters of <i>Devon & East Plymouth</i>.<P>
This gives us:<P>
10,203 <i>x</i> 443,040 <i>/</i> 84,456 <i>=</i> 53,523<P>
confused voters.<P>
This would bring the Liberal Democrats down to 463,770 - behind the Conservatives, and hence the Conservatives would have 3 MEPs and the Liberal Democrats 2. So, even under a list system of PR, Huggett's intervention could have cost the Liberal Democrats a seat.<P>
<b><a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/euros_99/regional_html/710.stm">Wales (5 seats)</a></b><P>
<ul style="list-style-type:none">
<li>Contains whole of - <i>Wales Mid & West</i>; <i>Wales North</i>; <i>Wales South Central</i>; <i>Wales South East</i>; <i>Wales South Central</i>; <i>Wales South West</i>
</ul><P>
<UL><LI>Labour - 530,749 (55.86%)
<LI>Plaid Cymru - 162,478 (17.10%)
<LI>Conservative - 138,349 (14.56%)
<LI>Liberal Democrat - 82,480 (8.68%)
<LI>Green - 19,413 (2.04%)
<LI>Natural Law Party - 6,081 (0.64%)
<LI>UK Independence Party - 5,536 (0.58%)
<LI>Independent (Maxwell Cooksey) - 1,623 (0.17%)
<LI>Welsh Socialist - 1,270 (0.13%)
<LI>European Candidate from Planet Beanus - 1,106 (0.12%)
<LI>Communist Party of Britain - 1,073 (0.11%)</li></ul><P>
Comparing the results gives us:<P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th rowspan="2">Party</th>
<th colspan="2">1994</th>
<th rowspan="2">1999</th></tr>
<tr>
<th>SMP</th>
<th>PR</th></tr>
<tr>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>5</td>
<td>3</td>
<td>2</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Plaid Cymru</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>2</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>1</td></tr>
</table></center><P>
One thing to note is that Labour would have won the first 3 seats to be allocated, with Plaid Cymru the penultimate one and the Conservatives just beating Labour to the fifth one.<P>
As before, we can look at the sitting MEPs who were standing for re-election:<P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>Candidate</th>
<th>Party</th>
<th>MEP for (1989 - 1994)</th>
<th>Contested (1994)</th>
<th>Successful?</th></tr>
<tr>
<td>Wayne David</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Wales South</td>
<td>Wales South Central</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<td>David Morris</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Wales Mid & West</td>
<td>Wales South West</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Joe Wilson</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Wales North</td>
<td>Wales North</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
</table></center><P>
With 3 sitting MEPs re-elected, this meant there were 2 new MEPs:<P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>Candidate</th>
<th>Party</th>
<th>Constituency</th></tr>
<tr>
<td>Glenys Kinnock</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Wales South East</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Eluned Morgan</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Wales Mid & West</td></tr>
</table></center><P>
Labour would have had 3 sitting MEPs seeking re-election, with 3 places that would be filled. One question is whether Kinnock - who was more well-known among the public than the siting MEPs - would have simply been placed fourth on the list, or whether she would have been placed ahead of some of the sitting MEPs.<P>
There is one way Welsh Labour could have managed this, though. After the 1994 election, David became the leader of the Labour MEPs, but in May 1999 <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/vote_99/wales_99/html/constituency/36.stm">he contested <i>Rhondda</i></a> at the first <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/vote_99/wales_99/html/azindex.stm">election to the National Assembly of Wales</a>, losing to Plaid Cymru's Geraint Davies. At the 2001 election, he <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/vote2001/results_constituencies/constituencies/112.stm">became MP for <i>Caerphilly</i></a> - and <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/W07000076">he still is</a> the big cheese of Caerphilly politics.<P>
In January 1995, Kinnock's husband, Neil - the former Leader of the Opposition - resigned as MP for <i>Islwyn</i> in order to become a member of the European Commission, triggering a by-election the following month. Would it not be possible that - if proportional representation had been used - then he could have resigned much earlier, knowing that he was going to be nominated for the Commission, and David chosen as the candidate for the <i>Islwyn</i> by-election, leaving Labour with just 2 sitting MEPs seeking re-election?<P>
For the Conservatives, the most succeesful candidate was Peter Bone, now the MP for <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14001025"><i>Wellingborough</i></a>. However, at the time the only Conservative to have ever been a Welsh MEP was Beata Brookes, who had represented <i>Wales North</i> from 1979 to 1989 and was Chairwoman of the Welsh Conservatives at the time of the 1994 election.<P>
The most successful Plaid Cymru candidate was Dafydd Wigley, at the time its leader and MP for <i>Caernarfon</i> - if successful, then there would have been a trio of party leaders being MEPs (with the Democratic Unionist Party's Ian Paisley and the Social Democratic & Labour Party's John Hume).<P>
In the summer of 1995 myself and some friends were staying in the <i>Ceredigion & North Pembrokeshire</i> constituency, and one of them asked whether we knew that the constituency had a Green MP. Actually, it didn't, but when Plaid Cymru's Cynog Dafis won the seat from the Liberals (from fourth place) in 1992, it was with support from the local Greens.<P>
Since 1999, the Greens and Plaid Cymru have sat together in the European Parliament in the <a href="http://www.greens-efa.eu">Greens/European Free Alliance</a> grouping (along with the Scottish National Party). I had a look at what the effect would be if Plaid Cymru and the Greens were to run a joint list - there would be no difference in the number of seats, but the winning MEP would take the third seat, rather than the fourth.<P>
<b><a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/euros_99/regional_html/711.stm">West Midlands (8 seats)</a></b><P>
<ul style="list-style-type:none">
<li>Contains whole of - <i>Birmingham East</i>; <i>Birmingham West</i>; <i>Coventry & North Warwickshire</i>; <i>Hereford & Shropshire</i>; <i>Midlands West</i>; <i>Worcestershire & South Warwickshire</i>
<li>Contains majority part of - <i>Staffordshire East & Derby</i> (57%); <i>Staffordshire West & Congleton</i> (86%)
<li>Contains minority part of - <i>Peak District</i> (15%)
</ul><P>
<ul><LI>Labour - 654,893 (49.45%)
<LI>Conservative - 386,169 (29.16%)
<LI>Liberal Democrat - 184,864 (13.96%)
<LI>Green - 47,402 (3.58%)
<LI>Natural Law Party - 10,286 (0.78%)
<LI>For British Independence & Free Trade - 9,432 (0.71%)
<LI>UK Independence Party - 9,202 (0.69%)
<LI>National Independence Party - 8,447 (0.64%)
<LI>Liberal - 7,932 (0.60%)
<LI>National Front - 3.727 (0.28%)
<LI>Socialist Party of Great Britain - 1,969 (0.15%)</li></ul><P>
Comparing the results gives us:<P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th rowspan="2">Party</th>
<th colspan="2">1994</th>
<th rowspan="2">1999</th></tr>
<tr>
<th>SMP</th>
<th>PR</th></tr>
<tr>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>7</td>
<td>5</td>
<td>3</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>2</td>
<td>4</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Liberal Democrat</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>1</td></tr>
</table></center><P>
As before, we can look at the sitting MEPs who were standing for re-election in the region:<P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>Candidate</th>
<th>Party</th>
<th>MEP for (1989 - 1994)</th>
<th>Contested (1994)</th>
<th>Successful?</th></tr>
<tr>
<td>Christine Crawley</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Birmingham East</td>
<td>Birmingham East</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Christine Oddy</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Midlands Central</td>
<td>Coventry & North Warwickshire</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Christopher Prout</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Shropshire & Stafford</td>
<td>Hereford & Shropshire</td>
<td>No</td></tr>
<tr>
<tr>
<td>John Tomlinson</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Birmingham West</td>
<td>Birmingham West</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
</table></center><P>
With 3 sitting MEPs re-elected, this meant there were 5 new MEPs:<P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>Candidate</th>
<th>Party</th>
<th>Constituency</th></tr>
<tr>
<td>John Corrie</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Worcestershire & South Warwickshire</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>David Hallam</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Hereford & Shropshire</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Simon Murphy</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Midlands West</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Michael Tappin</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Staffordshire West & Congleton</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Phillip Whitehead</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Staffordshire East & Derby</td></tr>
</table></center><P>
Note that this region produced quite a few peerages - on the Labour side, life peerages were awarded in July 1998 to <a href="https://www.thegazette.co.uk/London/issue/55205/page/8087">Tomlinson</a>, followed by <a href="https://www.thegazette.co.uk/London/issue/55210/page/8287">Crawley</a>. On the Conservative side, Prout <a href="https://www.thegazette.co.uk/London/issue/53817/page/14259">was ennobled in October 1994</a> and <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/obituaries/politics-obituaries/5828223/Lord-Kingsland.html">became Shadow Lord Chancellor in June 1997</a>. At the time of the election he had been leader of the Conservative MEPs since April 1987.<P>
As noted above, as the law stood at the time, it was possible for someone to serve as a peer and an MEP simultaneously.<P>
With the large number of sitting MEPs retiring in this region, both the Conservatives and Labour would have been able to put their MEPs seeking re-election high enough on the list to ensure re-election, with 1 space spare on the Conservative list and 2 on the Labour list.<P>
<b><a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/euros_99/regional_html/712.stm">Yorkshire & Humberside (7 seats)</a></b><P>
<ul style="list-style-type:none">
<li>Contains whole of - <i>Humberside</i>; <i>Leeds</i>; <i>North Yorkshire</i>; <i>Sheffield</i>; <i>Yorkshire South</i>; <i>Yorkshire South West</i>; <i>Yorkshire West</i>
<li>Contains minority part of - <i>Cleveland & Richmond</i> (17%); <i>Lincolnshire & South Humberside</i> (18%)
</ul><P>
<ul><LI>Labour - 641,170 (53.78%)
<LI>Conservative - 298,731 (25.05%)
<LI>Liberal Democrat - 180,780 (15.16%)
<LI>Green - 43,058 (3.61%)
<LI>New Britain - 8,027 (0.67%)
<LI>Liberal - 7,589 (0.64%)
<LI>Natural Law Party - 7,332 (0.61%)
<LI>UK Independence Party - 3,948 (0.33%)
<LI>Network Against The Child Support Agency - 841 (0.07%)
<LI>International Communist Party - 834 (0.07%)</li></ul><P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th rowspan="2">Party</th>
<th colspan="2">1994</th>
<th rowspan="2">1999</th></tr>
<tr>
<th>SMP</th>
<th>PR</th></tr>
<tr>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>6</td>
<td>4</td>
<td>3</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>2</td>
<td>3</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Liberal Democrat</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>1</td></tr>
</table></center><P>
As before, we can look at the sitting MEPs who were standing for re-election in the region:<P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>Candidate</th>
<th>Party</th>
<th>MEP for (1989 - 1994)</th>
<th>Contested (1994)</th>
<th>Successful?</th></tr>
<tr>
<td>Roger Barton</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Sheffield</td>
<td>Sheffield</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Peter Crampton</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Humberside</td>
<td>Humberside</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Michael McGowan</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Leeds</td>
<td>Leeds</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Edward McMillan-Scott</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>York</td>
<td>North Yorkshire</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Tom Megahy</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Yorkshire South West</td>
<td>Yorkshire South West</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Barry Seal</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Yorkshire West</td>
<td>Yorkshire West</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Norman West</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Yorkshire South</td>
<td>Yorkshire South</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
</table></center><P>
Uniquely, all sitting MEPs in this region were re-elected.<P>
It would be likely that McMillan-Scott would top the Conservative list. Among the Liberal Democrats, Diana Wallis - <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/euros_99/regional_html/712.stm">who would be elected in this region at the top of her party list in 1999</a> and <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-16636573">retired in January 2012, not being replaced by her husband</a> - contested <i>Humberside</i>.<P>
Labour would have had a bit of a problem - only 4 MEPs out of its 6 would be re-elected. However, in 1989 Barton and Crampton were elected for cross-region seats. At the 1994 election <i>Humberside</i> lost its East Midlands part (the constituencies of <i>Brigg & Cleethorpes</i> and <i>Great Grimsby</i>) to <i>Lincolnshire & South Humberside</i>), while <i>Sheffield</i> lost its East Midlands part (the constituencies of <i>Chesterfield</i> and <i>Derbyshire North East</i>) to <i>Nottinghamshire North & Chesterfield</i>. Hence, if the 1994 election had been on list proportional representation, then it would have been sensible for either Barton or Crampton to join Coates and Read on Labour's East Midlands list of candidates.<P>
The overall result would have been:<P>
<ul><LI><b>Labour - 43 (down 5)</b>
<LI><b>Conservative - 25 (down 10)</b>
<LI><b>Liberal Democrat - 12 (up 12)</b>
<LI><b>Scottish National Party - 3 (up 2)</b>
<LI><b>Plaid Cymru - 1 (up 1)</b>
<LI><b>Democratic Unionist Party - 1 (unchanged)</b>
<LI><b>Social Democratic & Labour Party - 1 (unchanged)</b>
<LI><b>Ulster Unionist Party - 1 (unchanged)</b></li></ul><P>
A bad result for the Conservatives, of course, but not as bad as it was under SMP. At the 1989 election, Labour had gained 13 seats and the Conservatives lost 13. The Conservative spin operation would note that the Conservatives suffered a worse loss in 1989 but went on to win the subsequent general election, and draw attention to Labour's modest advance.<P>
Of course, the election of the United Kingdom's MEPs was just a small part of the European election, and the <a href="http://grahampointer.blogspot.co.uk/2016/02/the-composition-of-1994-1999-european.html">overall result</a> was, in reality:<P>
<ul><LI>Party of European Socialists (PES) - 198 (including 62 Labour and 1 Social Democratic & Labour Party)
<LI>European People's Party (EPP) - 158 (including 18 Conservative and 1 Ulster Unionist Party)
<LI>European Liberal Democrat & Reform Party (ELDR) - 42 (including 2 Liberal Democrat)
<LI>European United Left (EUL) - 28
<LI>Non-attached (NA) - 28 (including 1 Democratic Unionist Party)
<LI>Forza Europa (FE) - 26
<LI>European Democratic Alliance (EDA) - 26
<LI>Greens (Grn) - 23
<LI>European Radical Alliance (ERA) - 19 (including 2 Scottish National Party)
<LI>Europe of Nations (EN) - 19</li></ul><P>
We can consider the impact at an EU-level if Great Britain had used Proportional Representation, and it gives a different result:<P>
<ul><LI>Party of European Socialists - 179 (including 43 Labour and 1 Social Democratic & Labour Party)
<LI>European People's Party - 165 (including 25 Conservative and 1 Ulster Unionist Party)
<LI>European Liberal Democrat & Reform Party - 52 (including 12 Liberal Democrat)
<LI>European United Left - 28
<LI>Non-attached (NA) - 28 (including 1 Democratic Unionist Party)
<LI>Forza Europa - 26
<LI>European Democratic Alliance - 26
<LI>Greens - 23
<LI>European Radical Alliance - 21 (including 3 Scottish National Party and 1 Plaid Cymru)
<LI>Europe of Nations - 19</li></ul><P>
While the Party of European Socialists would have remained the largest grouping, its initial lead over the European People's Party would be reduced from 40 MEPs to 14. And the Liberal Democrats would be the largest delegation in the European Liberal Democrat & Reform Party group.<P>
The merger of Forza Europa and the European Democratic Alliance in July 1995 would not - as it did in reality - have put the new Union for Europe in third place; instead it would be in fourth place, 6 seats behind the ELDR. The decision in November 1996 by 8 of Portugal's Social Democrats to leave the ELDR and join their party colleague, Francisco Lucas Pires, in the EPP is the event that would have pushed the ELDR into fourth place.<P>
June and July 1998 saw a stream of Forza Italia MEPs leaving the UFE and joining the EPP. Antonio Tajani's defection in the June of that year would have seen the ELDR end up joint third in size, and would also have put the PES just 2 seats ahead of the EPP.<P>
If Great Britain had used proportional representation, then the defection of a group of 14 Forza Italia MEPs from the UFE to the EPP in July 1998 would have seen the EPP end up the largest group (something it never managed in the 1994-1999 Parliament).<P>
We can look at the <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/euros_99/regional_html/full_sop.stm">results of the 1999 one</a>, and we get:<P>
<ul><LI>Conservative - 36 (up 18)
<LI>Labour - 29 (down 33)
<LI>Liberal Democrat - 10 (up 8)
<LI>UK Independence Party - 3 (up 3)
<LI>Green - 2 (up 2)
<LI>Scottish National Party - 2 (unchanged)
<LI>Plaid Cymru - 2 (up 2)
<LI>Democratic Unionist Party - 1 (unchanged)
<LI>Social Democratic & Labour Party - 1 (unchanged)
<LI>Ulster Unionist Party - 1 (unchanged)</li></ul><P>
This looks quite dramatic - Labour losing over half their seats and the Conservative number of seats doubling. It is easy to see why this was such a fillip for the Conservatives.<P>
If, however, the 1994 election had been on the same system as subsequent elections, the 1999 result would be:<P>
<ul><LI>Conservative - 36 (up 11)
<LI>Labour - 29 (down 14)
<LI>Liberal Democrat - 10 (down 2)
<LI>UK Independence Party - 3 (up 3)
<LI>Green - 2 (up 2)
<LI>Scottish National Party - 2 (down 1)
<LI>Plaid Cymru - 2 (up 1)
<LI>Democratic Unionist Party - 1 (unchanged)
<LI>Social Democratic & Labour Party - 1 (unchanged)
<LI>Ulster Unionist Party - 1 (unchanged)</li></ul><P>
While a Conservative success, the changes in seats would have been less. and cooler heads would reflect that the change in seats is similar to 1989 and note that Labour's advance that year didn't see it win the general election three years later. It would be more normal-mid-term-election-result stuff rather than Labour-is-going-to-lose-the-next-election.<P>
And, a look region-by-region would show the changes as being:<P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th rowspan="2">Region or Nation</th>
<th colspan="7">Party</th></tr>
<tr>
<th>C</th>
<th>Lab</th>
<th>LD</th>
<th>UKIP</th>
<th>Grn</th>
<th>SNP</th>
<th>PC</th></tr>
<tr>
<td>East Midlands</td>
<td>Up 1</td>
<td>Down 1</td>
<td>Unchanged</td>
<td>n/a</td>
<td>n/a</td>
<td>n/a</td>
<td>n/a</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Eastern England</td>
<td>Up 1</td>
<td>Down 2</td>
<td>Unchanged</td>
<td>Up 1</td>
<td>n/a</td>
<td>n/a</td>
<td>n/a</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>London</td>
<td>Up 1</td>
<td>Down 2</td>
<td>Unchanged</td>
<td>n/a</td>
<td>Up 1</td>
<td>n/a</td>
<td>n/a</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>North East England</td>
<td>Unchanged</td>
<td>Unchanged</td>
<td>n/a</td>
<td>n/a</td>
<td>n/a</td>
<td>n/a</td>
<td>n/a</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>North West England</td>
<td>Up 2</td>
<td>Down 2</td>
<td>Unchanged</td>
<td>n/a</td>
<td>n/a</td>
<td>n/a</td>
<td>n/a</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Scotland</td>
<td>Up 1</td>
<td>Down 1</td>
<td>Up 1</td>
<td>n/a</td>
<td>n/a</td>
<td>Down 1</td>
<td>n/a</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>South East England</td>
<td>Unchanged</td>
<td>Down 1</td>
<td>Down 1</td>
<td>Up 1</td>
<td>Up 1</td>
<td>n/a</td>
<td>n/a</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>South West England</td>
<td>Up 2</td>
<td>Down 1</td>
<td>Down 2</td>
<td>Up 1</td>
<td>n/a</td>
<td>n/a</td>
<td>n/a</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Wales</td>
<td>Unchanged</td>
<td>Down 1</td>
<td>n/a</td>
<td>n/a</td>
<td>n/a</td>
<td>n/a</td>
<td>Up 1</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>West Midlands</td>
<td>Up 2</td>
<td>Down 2</td>
<td>Unchanged</td>
<td>n/a</td>
<td>n/a</td>
<td>n/a</td>
<td>n/a</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Yorkshire & Humberside</td>
<td>Up 1</td>
<td>Down 1</td>
<td>Unchanged</td>
<td>n/a</td>
<td>n/a</td>
<td>n/a</td>
<td>n/a</td></tr>
</table></center><P>
To clarify what this is - this table shows, region-by-region, the changes in MEPs for each party at the 1999 election compared to a 1994 election on list Proportional Representation.<P>
So, it's pretty much an increase for the Conservatives and decrease for Labour across the board - just what you'd expect for a mid-term election. But for the Liberal Democrats it's different. Yes, there is that breakthrough in Scotland (hot on the heels of them becoming part of the Scottish Executive), while in the south there is a decline.<P>
If we assume that Sanders, Teverson and Watson were the Liberal Democrat MEPs elected in South West England in 1994, then it is reasonable to assume that Sanders - as an MP - would have chosen not to contest the 1999 election, meaning that either Teverson or Watson lost their seat. And, in South East England, if we assume that Bellotti, Bowles and Hancock were the Liberal Democrat MEPs elected in 1994, then - for similar reasons - it is likely that Hancock would not have stood in 1999, meaning that Bellotti and Bowles are re-elected (and Huhne never becomes an MEP, so the whole points issue never happens).<P>
For the Liberal Democrats, it also means that <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/259260.stm">Paddy Ashdown's leadership</a> ends on a bit of a downer.<P>
So, these are the <i>British</i> consequences of the 1994 European election being held on list Proportional Representation. But what about the <i>European</i> ones? I have already mentioned that in the European Parliament, the Party of European Socialists' initial lead over the European People's Party would have been narrower - and would eventually disappear. Ironically, just a few months after William Hague - at the time the Conservative party leader - had <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/115223.stm">ruled out joining the single European currency until 2007 at the earliest</a> - then the federalist group which Conservative MEPs belonged to would have become the largest group.<P>
European Union negotiations are a bit of give-and-take, and we have to ask whether there was anything that the other members of the European Council could have offered the then-Prime Minister, John Major, in return for Great Britain electing our MEPs using the same method as the rest of the EU (apart from Ireland and Northern Ireland)?<P>
Well, there was a battle that Major fought and lost, which has had repercussions, and it goes back to his predecessor, Margaret Thatcher, signing away the national veto with the introduction of Qualified Majority Voting in the Council.<P>
At the time of the 1994 election, the voting weights in the Council were:<P>
<ul>
<LI>France - 10
<LI>Germany - 10
<LI>Italy - 10
<LI>United Kingdom - 10
<LI>Spain - 8
<LI>Belgium - 5
<LI>Greece - 5
<LI>Netherlands - 5
<LI>Portugal - 5
<LI>Denmark - 3
<LI>Ireland - 3
<LI>Luxembourg - 2</li></ul><P>
That was a total of 76 votes. In order for legislation to pass the Council, 54 votes were needed.<P>
However, it was normal to express this the other way round, <i>i.e.</i> how many votes does it take to block? This would be 23, or 30.3% of the total.<P>
Hence, if the British Government wanted to block something, it just needed 13 more votes - which isn't too difficult to manage.<P>
As noted above, Austria, Finland and Sweden were about to join, and the voting weights allocated to them were to be:<P>
<ul>
<LI>Austria - 4
<LI>Sweden - 4
<LI>Finland - 3
</li></ul><P>
So, the total number of votes was to increase to 87. And the number of votes needed to pass legislation in the Council was increased to 62. Hence, the number of votes to block rose to 26 - or 29.9% of the total.<P>
This was the big area of disagreement. Major wanted the blocking minority to remain at 23 (which was 26.4% of the total), whilst the rest of the European Council wanted the blocking minority to remain around 30%.<P>
To be honest, it wouldn't have made much difference, but we were already in the era where "Europe" was seen as a zero-sum game.<P>
Interestingly, Major <i>did</i> eventually win on this issue - or to be more precise, Blair achieved the victory that Major had wanted. In preparation for the major expansion of the EU in May 2004, the Treaty of Nice re-weighted the votes from February 2003:<P>
<ul>
<LI>France - 29
<LI>Germany - 29
<LI>Italy - 29
<LI>United Kingdom - 29
<LI>Spain - 27
<LI>Netherlands - 13
<LI>Belgium - 12
<LI>Greece - 12
<LI>Portugal - 12
<LI>Austria - 10
<LI>Sweden - 10
<LI>Finland - 7
<LI>Denmark - 7
<LI>Ireland - 7
<LI>Luxembourg - 4</li></ul><P>
In the period between the Treaty of Nice coming into force and the 2004 enlargement, there was a total of 237 available votes in the Council. 176 votes were needed to pass anything - hence the blocking minority was 62, which was 26.2% of the total, so just slightly less than what Major had aimed for.<P>
We can sum up what the probably consequences would have been of Great Britain using list Proportional Representation for the 1994 European election:<P>
<ul><LI>The Conservative defeat in 1994 wouldn't have been so dramatic - and neither would the Conservative revival in 1999
<LI>By the summer of 1998, Conservative MEPs would be in the largest grouping in the European Parliament
<LI>The Liberal Democrats would have debuted in the 1994-1999 European Parliament as the largest party in the third largest grouping
<LI>The Conservatives would have had MEPs in Scotland, North West England and North East England - rather than their northernmost MEP being in Yorkshire & Humberside</li></ul><P>Graham Pointerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03538991243769088600noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8004940586846099589.post-25226750465900915762016-04-15T15:17:00.000-07:002016-04-15T15:17:27.566-07:00The Euro In Your PocketI notice that it's been several years since I have been outside the United Kingdom - the last year I was abroad was in 2012, when I visited Brussels for a long weekend in the April (including trips to Germany), and then visited the USA in the May and June.<P>
With a short holiday in the Netherlands coming up, there is one of those tasks that has to be done - getting the foreign currency.<P>
And it is this which reinforces the idea that I am going abroad. If I visit Scotland or Northern Ireland, I have no need to change currency, although I will, of course, end up with non-Bank of England sterling banknotes.<P>
It <i>could</i> have been different. We could have gone down the road of using the euro as our currency.<P>
I was never persuaded by the pseudo-romantic "Queen's head" argument - the appearance of the Queen's head on Bank of England banknotes dates back to the 1960s, and moreover, at the time of the debate of whether we should adopt the euro I was living in Scotland, so used to carrying around Bank of Scotland, Royal Bank of Scotland and Clydesdale Bank banknotes without the Queen's head on. And, if we had adopted the euro, then the Queen's head would still appear on the coins that would have been produced by the Royal Mint for the European Central Bank.<P>
As I gather together my euro notes, and try and find where I put the coins from my trip to Brussels, I can't help feeling that "Europe" is something "other". That using sterling rather than the euro reminds us that we are different, and that - at least while we remain - the European Union will lack one of the things that makes a nation a nation, namely a single currency.
Graham Pointerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03538991243769088600noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8004940586846099589.post-86226015271906665022016-02-11T15:20:00.001-08:002016-02-13T09:41:58.456-08:00The Nuclear Option - Why Moderate Labour MPs Should Vote For An Early ElectionToby Perkins, the Labour MP for <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14000632"><i>Chesterfield</i></a>, has <a href="http://labourlist.org/2016/02/tories-turmoil-should-ring-snap-election-alarm-bells">raised the prospect of an early general election</a>, noting:<P>
<i>In June, decades of Tory infighting are set to reach a crescendo with the referendum on membership of the European Union. The prospect of the Prime Minister standing down in the event of a vote to leave has been often mooted. However, I believe that the forces unleashed within the Conservative party are so great that, whether Cameron wins or loses, many of their MPs and activists will feel it is time for a change at the top. Cameron fired the starting gun on the race to succeed him when he announced that he will not fight another general election and, as Tony Blair can testify, once the lid is off the bottle it can be very difficult to re-seal it.<P>
In the event that Cameron goes, I expect his successor to look very keenly at whether the Labour party is capable of fighting a snap general election. The new Conservative leader would, of course, insist this was nothing to do with naked political calculation. You can already imagine the argument, a new Tory leader arguing that “unlike Gordon Brown, I am not going to be an unelected Prime Minister”.<P>
Many people assume that the Fixed Term Parliament Act would prevent the Tories from cutting and running but they are wrong. The Act, designed to hold the coalition together, does allow an early general election to be called if agreed by two thirds of the House of Commons. If a new Conservative leader demanded a general election it is impossible to imagine how Labour could refuse to go to the country.</i><P>
Under the <a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2011/14/contents/enacted"><i>Fixed Term Parliaments Act 2011</i></a>, the dates of the next general election is 7 May 2020, followed by 1 May 2025 - <i>as long as there is nothing that triggers an early election</i>. As Perkins notes, <a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2011/14/section/2/enacted">one method is the two-thirds vote</a>:<P>
<i><b>2 Early parliamentary general elections</b><P>
(1) An early parliamentary general election is to take place if—<P>
(a) the House of Commons passes a motion in the form set out in subsection (2), and<P>
(b) if the motion is passed on a division, the number of members who vote in favour of the motion is a number equal to or greater than two thirds of the number of seats in the House (including vacant seats).<P>
(2) The form of motion for the purposes of subsection (1)(a) is—<P>
“That there shall be an early parliamentary general election.”</i><P>
With there being 650 MPs (including the Speaker and 3 Deputy Speakers who only cast a vote in a tie, and 4 Sinn Féin ones who don't take their seats), 434 MPs need to vote for such a motion. Even in the Labour <a href="http://www.election.demon.co.uk/ge1997.html">landslide of May 1997</a>, it was 22 seats short of two-thirds. Apart from wartime coalitions, we have to go back to November 1935 to find an elected Government with over two-thirds the seats in the Commons (and, ironically, that was a Parliament that postponed the subsequent election).<P>
Note that such a motion doesn't actually set the date for the early election:<P>
<i>(7) If a parliamentary general election is to take place as provided for by subsection (1) or (3), the polling day for the election is to be the day appointed by Her Majesty by proclamation on the recommendation of the Prime Minister (and, accordingly, the appointed day replaces the day which would otherwise have been the polling day for the next election determined under section 1).</i><P>
Hence, it simply returns to the Prime Minister the power to set the election day - and interestingly, there is no time limit specified. Theoretically, there is nothing to stop the House of Commons voting today for an early election, and 3<sup>1</sup><sub>2</sub> years down the line using that vote to hold an election a few months early.<P>
The Conservatives currently have 329 MPs - hence need the support of a further 105 MPs to trigger an early election. Where could this support come from?<P>
The third largest group in the Commons is the Scottish National Party, with 54 MPs (2 of the SNP MPs elected in May 2015 sit as Independents). They have only 3 target seats:<P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>Seat</th>
<th>Swing needed</th>
<th>Held by</th></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/S14000014">Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale & Tweeddale</a></td>
<td>0.77%</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/S14000051">Orkney & Shetland</a></td>
<td>1.80%</td>
<td>Liberal Democrat</td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/S14000024">Edinburgh South</a></td>
<td>2.68%</td>
<td>Labour</td></tr>
</table></center><P>
While it would be tempting for the SNP to go for an early election to try and get a clean sweep of Scottish constituencies - especially if the May election to the Scottish Parliament shows them still having momentum - there are risks of losing seats if the Conservatives and/or Liberal Democrats pick up support. Labour isn't really much of a threat to the SNP - the only seats where the SNP majority over Labour is less than 10% are <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/S14000021"><i>Renfrewshire East</i></a> (6.55%) and <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/S14000023"><i>Edinburgh North & Leith</i></a> (9.65%).<P>
The next group to look at is the Unionist contingent from Northern Ireland (8 Democratic Unionist Party, 2 Ulster Unionist Party and 1 Independent Unionist). May 2015 was a good election for Unionism, with 2 seats being picked up from non-Unionists - the DUP gained <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/N06000001"><i>Belfast East</i></a> from the Alliance Party of Northern Ireland and the UUP gained <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/N06000007"><i>Fermanagh & South Tyrone</i></a> from Sinn Féin. However, these were both due to Unionist pacts, which may or may not be present at the next election, and in <i>Fermanagh & South Tyrone</i> there is the possibility of some of the remaining Social Democratic & Labour Party vote going to Sinn Féin to give them back a seat with a Nationalist/Republican majority.<P>
The only targetable Nationalist/Republican seat is the interesting 4-way marginal of <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/N06000003"><i>Belfast South</i></a>, which a Unionist pact <i>could</i> win from the SDLP (which could backfire if - as at the <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/election2010/results/constituency/703.stm">May 2010 general election</a> - Sinn Féin chooses to step down to help the SDLP, or UUP supporters prefer to vote for the APNI rather than the DUP).<P>
And in the DUP seat of <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/N06000017"><i>Upper Bann</i></a>, the Unionist vote could split in such a way that - along with tactical voting by SDLP supporters - this seat falls to Sinn Féin.<P>
At the moment, you can go from Northern Ireland's westernmost point to its northernmost or its easternmost with the entire journey in Unionist seats. For Unionism, the current position is as good as it gets.<P>
Next are the Liberal Democrats, who are down to 8 seats:<P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>Seat</th>
<th>Majority</th>
<th>Over</th></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14001037"><i>Westmorland & Lonsdale</i></a></td>
<td>18.29%</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/W07000064"><i>Ceredigion</i></a></td>
<td>8.20%</td>
<td>Plaid Cymru</td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14000848"><i>Norfolk North</i></a></td>
<td>8.18%</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14000780"><i>Leeds North West</i></a></td>
<td>6.70%</td>
<td>Labour</td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14000922"><i>Sheffield Hallam</i></a></td>
<td>4.24%</td>
<td>Labour</td></tr>
<tr>
<td><i>Orkney & Shetland</i></td>
<td>3.59%</td>
<td>Scottish National Party</td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14000621"><i>Carshalton & Wallington</i></a></td>
<td>3.17%</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14000958"><i>Southport</i></a></td>
<td>3.00%</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
</table></center><P>
The Liberal Democrats stand on a precipice. Only their leader, Tim Farron, in <i>Westmorland & Lonsdale</i>, is safe. In 2015, there was clearly tactical voting in <i>Sheffield Hallam</i>, with Conservatives protecting Nick Clegg - at the time the Liberal Democrat leader and Lord President of the Council - from a Labour onslaught, but any reason to protect him has now gone. To be blunt, if an early election were held in the near future, then Clegg is out, with Labour winning all of Sheffield.<P>
But, for the Liberal Democrats, there is a prize that could be won if they gamble on an early election. Just look at the seats they would win on a 5% swing:<P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>Seat</th>
<th>Swing needed</th>
<th>Held by</th></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14000617"><i>Cambridge</i></a></td>
<td>0.58%</td>
<td>Labour</td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14000684"><i>Eastbourne</i></a></td>
<td>0.69%</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14000786"><i>Lewes</i></a></td>
<td>1.07%</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14000994"><i>Thornbury & Yate</i></a></td>
<td>1.54%</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14001005"><i>Twickenham</i></a></td>
<td>1.63%</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/S14000018"><i>Dunbartonshire East</i></a></td>
<td>1.97%</td>
<td>Scottish National Party</td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14000770"><i>Kingston & Surbiton</i></a></td>
<td>2.39%</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14000964"><i>St Ives</i></a></td>
<td>2.56%</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/S14000026"><i>Edinburgh West</i></a></td>
<td>2.93%</td>
<td>Scottish National Party*</td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14000999"><i>Torbay</i></a></td>
<td>3.42%</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14000984"><i>Sutton & Cheam</i></a></td>
<td>3.93%</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14000547"><i>Bath</i></a></td>
<td>4.06%</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14000609"><i>Burnley</i></a></td>
<td>4.08%</td>
<td>Labour</td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14000553"><i>Bermondsey & Old Southwark</i></a></td>
<td>4.36%</td>
<td>Labour</td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14001060"><i>Yeovil</i></a></td>
<td>4.67%</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/S14000049"><i>Fife North East</i></a></td>
<td>4.80%</td>
<td>Scottish National Party</td></tr>
</table></center><P>
[* Michelle Thomson, the MP for <i>Edinburgh West</i>, <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-34499652">no longer sits for the SNP</a>]<P>
These are all seats which the Liberal Democrats lost in 2015. Although they will be fighting against first term incumbents in most of these, the party would be able to argue that it has moved on from the days of the Conservative/Liberal Democrat coalition, and is under new management, and one that Labour supporters can vote tactically for. While it would not stand a chance of overtaking the SNP to become the third largest party, a credible fourth place is possible.<P>
It will be the circumstances in other parties will determine what the Liberal Democrats will be in the next Parliament - in my lifetime they have gone from being a home for those on the left who felt Labour was too left-wing (the Liberal/Social Democrat Alliance era), to being a home for those on the right who felt the Conservatives were too right-wing (the Ashdown era), to being a home for those on the left who felt Labour was too right-wing (the Kennedy era) and then being part of a centre-right Government (the Clegg era).<P>
Next is Plaid Cymru, with only 3 seats:<P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>Seat</th>
<th>Majority</th>
<th>Over</th></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/W07000061"><i>Dwyfor Meirionnydd</i></a></td>
<td>18.20%</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/W07000067"><i>Carmarthen East & Dinefwr</i></a></td>
<td>14.21%</td>
<td>Labour</td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/W07000057"><i>Arfon</i></a></td>
<td>13.67%</td>
<td>Labour</td></tr>
</table></center><P>
These are all quite safe seats, and there's only 2 seats which would fall to Plaid Cymru on a swing of less than 5%:<P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>Seat</th>
<th>Swing needed</th>
<th>Held by</th></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/W07000041"><i>Ynys Môn</i></a></td>
<td>0.33%</td>
<td>Labour</td></tr>
<tr>
<td><i>Ceredigion</i></td>
<td>4.10%</td>
<td>Liberal Democrat</td></tr></table></center><P>
Even if a motion for an early general election received the support of all the non-Labour voting MPs, this still would not be enough for the two-thirds needed. Hence, there would need to be some Labour MPs willing to press the button and send their party into an election which not only would it not win, but would see it do worse than in 2015.<P>
Turkeys need a very strong motivation to vote for Christmas. So, why would a Labour MP do this?<P>
Firstly, <b>it could stop Momentum's momentum</b>. As the <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-3436583/CHRIS-DEERIN-Labour-lost-general-election-gives-time-away-think.html"><i>Daily Mail</i> notes</a>:<P>
<i>Labour is done for a generation. If the Corbynites are successful in their efforts to seize control of every aspect of the internal machinery, to deselect non-hard-Left MPs, and to turn a potential party of government into a puritanical protest movement, Labour is done for good.</i><P>
A snap election would be before this scenario has played to completion. Constituency Labour Parties would have to find candidates as short notice. Any Corbynite group wanting to deselect their MP would suddenly find they had a much shorter timescale in which to get their plans together, and would be wrong-footed. A generation ago, Labour MPs knowing the hard Left would deselect them had nothing to lose by defecting to the Social Democrats. In this generation, Labour MPs knowing that Momentum will get them deselected in time for 2020 have nothing to lose by forcing an election in 2016.<P>
Secondly, and associated with this, <b>Corbynism will have faced its test at the ballot box</b> - and have been rejected. Just as the June 1983 election result made Labour realise it had to move back towards the centre to win, losing the next election would tell Labour the same.<P>
And, connected with that is the third reason - <b>it brings the next Labour-led Government forward</b>. At the moment, Labour clearly will not win in 2020, and will be back in office at the 2025 election at the earliest. But the 2011 Act <a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2011/14/section/1/enacted">has timetabling rules</a>:<P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>Date of next election</th>
<th>Scheduled date of following election</th></tr>
<tr>
<td>Up to 28 April 2016</td>
<td>7 May 2020</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>5 May 2016 to 27 April 2017</td>
<td>6 May 2021</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>4 May 2017 to 26 April 2018</td>
<td>5 May 2022</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>3 May 2018 to 25 April 2019</td>
<td>4 May 2023</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>2 May 2019 to 30 April 2020</td>
<td>2 May 2024</td></tr></table></center><P>
Naturally, there is not going to be an early election before May this year, but if a snap one were held post-referendum, this would bring the subsequent one forward to May 2021. Labour has to experience defeat before it comes to its senses.<P>
But I have to say that - despite seeing Labour's opinion poll rating going south since he became Leader of the Opposition - Jeremy Corbyn <i>is</i> an asset to Labour. He has played a significant role in uniting the Left, and bringing politically passionate people into Labour who were disillusioned during the Blair/Brown Government. The challenge for his successor will be to win back the types of voters who gave Labour its landslides around the turn of the century without alienating those Corbyn has brought back. If he or she does that, Labour's biggest electoral successes lie in the future. One of the first acts of the next Labour leader should be to make Corbyn the Labour Party Chairman.<P>
The fourth reason is that due to <a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2013/6/section/6/enacted">a clause</a> in the <a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2013/6/contents/enacted"><i>Electoral Registration & Administration Act 2013</i></a>, <b>the Boundary Commissions will present their reports to Parliament in September 2018</b>, and these will be the new constituencies used at the 2020 election - or at any early election after late 2018.<P>
And these are likely to <a href="http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/elections/2015/10/why-are-boundary-changes-bad-labour">be bad new for Labour</a>. There should be provisional boundaries produced soon, giving parties a more specific idea of how the changes will impact them. It would be in Labour's interests to get the next general conducted on the current boundaries - and hence, out of the way before the new constituencies are formally approved.<P>
The fifth one might sound - at first - to be an odd reason. Namely, <b>it will reinforce the Anglicisation of the Labour party</b>.<P>
During the Blair era - and especially the Brown era - there were the predictable <i>Daily Mail</i> stories that we had a Government dominated by Scots. For example, take the sextet of senior members of the Government that took office in 1997:<P>
<ul>
<Li>Prime Minister - Tony Blair (born in Scotland)
<LI>Environment, Transport & Regional Affairs Secretary - John Prescott (born in Wales)
<LI>Lord Chancellor - Derry Irvine (Scottish)
<LI>Chancellor of the Exchequer - Gordon Brown (Scottish)
<LI>Foreign & Commonwealth Secretary - Robin Cook (Scottish)
<LI>Home Secretary - Jack Straw</li></ul><P>
Out of the six, only Straw would be English enough for the <i>Daily Mail</i>.<P>
Although it has to be said that it was North East England - rather than Scotland - dominating that Government. In addition to Blair (representing <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/vote2001/results_constituencies/constituencies/506.stm"><i>Sedgefield</i></a>), there was <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/vote2001/results_constituencies/constituencies/526.stm"><i>South Shields</i></a>'s David Clark as Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/vote2001/results_constituencies/constituencies/472.stm"><i>Redcar</i></a>'s Mo Mowlam as Northern Ireland Secretary.<P>
Although Clark was dismissed in the July 1998 reshuffle, out of the four new members of the Cabinet, only Margaret Jay - as Lord Privy Seal, Leader of the House of Lords and Minister for Women - was not an MP for North East England (actually, she wasn't an MP for anywhere), with <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/vote2001/results_constituencies/constituencies/422.stm"><i>Newcastle-upon-Tyne East & Wallsend</i></a>'s Nick Brown becoming Agriculture Minister, <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/vote2001/results_constituencies/constituencies/592.stm"><i>Tyneside North</i></a>'s Stephen Byers as Chief Secretary to the Treasury and <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/vote2001/results_constituencies/constituencies/304.stm"><i>Hartlepool</i></a>'s Peter Mandelson as Trade & Industry Secretary.<P>
Even Mandelson's resignation in December 1998 didn't reduce the North East contingent, as Byers replaced him and was, in turn, replaced by <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/vote2001/results_constituencies/constituencies/177.stm"><i>Darlington</i></a>'s Alan Milburn.<P>
Mowlam being moved to Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster in October 1999 and replaced by a returning Mandelson brought the number of Cabinet members sitting for North East constituencies up to 6 - which was over one-quarter of the Cabinet from Great Britain's smallest region.<P>
However, the perception remained of the Government being dominated by Scots - and, when we look at elections, we can see why Scotland would punch above its weight in Labour Governments:<P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th rowspan="2">Election</th>
<th colspan="2">Labour MPs</th>
<th colspan="2">% from Scotland</th></tr>
<tr>
<th>UK</th>
<th>Scotland</th>
<th>Labour MPs</th>
<th>All MPs</th></tr>
<tr>
<td>July 1945</td>
<td>393</td>
<td>37</td>
<td>9.41%</td>
<td>11.09%</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>February 1950</td>
<td>315</td>
<td>37</td>
<td><b>11.75%</b></td>
<td>11.36%</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>October 1951</td>
<td>295</td>
<td>35</td>
<td><b>11.86%</b></td>
<td>11.36%</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>May 1955</td>
<td>277</td>
<td>34</td>
<td><b>12.27%</b></td>
<td>11.36%</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>October 1959</td>
<td>258</td>
<td>38</td>
<td><b>14.73%</b></td>
<td>11.27%</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>October 1964</td>
<td>317</td>
<td>43</td>
<td>13.56%</td>
<td>11.27%</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>March 1966</td>
<td>363</td>
<td>46</td>
<td>12.67%</td>
<td>11.27%</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>June 1970</td>
<td>287</td>
<td>44</td>
<td><b>15.33%</b></td>
<td>11.18%</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>February 1974</td>
<td>301</td>
<td>40</td>
<td>13.29%</td>
<td>11.18%</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>October 1974</td>
<td>319</td>
<td>41</td>
<td>12.85%</td>
<td>11.18%</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>May 1979</td>
<td>268</td>
<td>44</td>
<td><b>16.42%</b></td>
<td>11.18%</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>June 1983</td>
<td>209</td>
<td>41</td>
<td><b>19.62%</b></td>
<td>11.08%</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>June 1987</td>
<td>229</td>
<td>50</td>
<td><b>21.83%</b></td>
<td>11.08%</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>April 1992</td>
<td>271</td>
<td>49</td>
<td>18.08%</td>
<td>11.06%</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>May 1997</td>
<td>418</td>
<td>56</td>
<td>13.40%</td>
<td>10.93%</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>June 2001</td>
<td>412</td>
<td>55</td>
<td>13.35%</td>
<td>10.93%</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>May 2005</td>
<td>355</td>
<td>40</td>
<td>11.27%</td>
<td>9.13%</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>May 2010</td>
<td>258</td>
<td>41</td>
<td><b>15.89%</b></td>
<td>9.08%</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>May 2015</td>
<td>232</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>0.43%</td>
<td>9.08%</td></tr>
</table></center><P>
I should clarify what the percentages are. The first one is the percentage of Labour MPs that were elected for Scottish constituencies, and the second the percentage of all MPs that were elected for Scottish constituencies.<P>
If the first percentage is in bold, then it is an increase from the previous election's. And what we see is that, as Labour support falls, normally this leads to the Scottish section of the Parliamentary Labour Party increasing its numerical influence in the PLP - with a peak at the 1987 election when the Conservatives losing around half their Scottish seats to Labour meant that 21.83% of Labour MPs were representing Scottish constituencies.<P>
For most of the post-war period Scotland (and, indeed, Wales and North East England) have been areas where Labour is entrenched. However tough it gets elsewhere, these are places where Labour keeps on winning. Hence, during the low points for Labour, these areas carry the load and hit above their weight.<P>
But now Labour has lost Scotland. In the polling for the Scottish Parliament election <a href="http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/scottish-election-2016-poll-labour-and-conservatives-level-1-4022057">it is tying with the Conservatives</a>, which would lead to a close battle for second place, when you <a href="http://www.scotlandvotes.com/holyrood">run the results through the Scotland Votes website</a>:<P>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg04fArHumJnCsMoT0jgsi9J8lYW4OwYbdgi1x-qlV75TWFS_gFgemal2n4GLMCJlZqR6ASAO182HQKe5VAFm_qaz_5feWRLfESLZ8DpIfA-4quDxw8p7qW_quDbzdDIBe-7_d3b0AGeiA/s1600/scotlandvotes.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg04fArHumJnCsMoT0jgsi9J8lYW4OwYbdgi1x-qlV75TWFS_gFgemal2n4GLMCJlZqR6ASAO182HQKe5VAFm_qaz_5feWRLfESLZ8DpIfA-4quDxw8p7qW_quDbzdDIBe-7_d3b0AGeiA/s640/scotlandvotes.png" /></a></div><P>
When we looked at the Liberal Democrat target seats, we saw that <i>Dunbartonshire East</i> and <i>Edinburgh West</i> would fall back on less than a 3% swing. Third on the Conservative target list is <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/S14000008"><i>Berwickshire, Roxburgh & Selkirk</i></a>, which needs just a 0.30% swing. However, as I noted earlier, Labour needs a swing of 3.28% to have a second Scottish seat - and is at risk of losing the one it has.<P>
Picture then, a general election which sees Labour - if it has any Scottish MPs - reduced to being Scotland's fourth party in terms of Westminster seats. Gone would be the days of the Blair/Brown Government, where there was the perception that Labour was favouring Scotland above England. Instead, it would enable voters in England to see Labour as a quintessentially English party.<P>
In addition, <a href="http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/labour-in-wales-perhaps-the-biggest-polling-movement-in-recent-uk-history-that-almost-no-one-has-heard-of">Labour support in Wales is falling</a>, and the boundary changes will hit Wales more than anywhere else in the United Kingdom, as it would lose around one-quarter of its seats.<P>
For Labour, things will just get worse as this Parliament continues. The best thing for their long-term future is an early election - however damaging that will be in the short-term.Graham Pointerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03538991243769088600noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8004940586846099589.post-54900959413317129752016-02-08T15:23:00.000-08:002016-02-08T15:23:34.784-08:00The Composition Of The 1994-1999 European ParliamentThe overall result for the European Parliament elected in 1994 as supplied to me by the Historical Archives Unit of the European Union's Directorate-General for Parliamentary Research Services was:<P>
<ul><LI>Party of European Socialists (PES) - 198 (including 62 Labour and 1 Social Democratic & Labour Party)
<LI>European People's Party (EPP) - 158 (including 18 Conservative and 1 Ulster Unionist Party)
<LI>European Liberal Democrat & Reform Party (ELDR) - 42 (including 2 Liberal Democrat)
<LI>European United Left (EUL) - 28
<LI>Non-attached (NA) - 28 (including 1 Democratic Unionist Party)
<LI>Forza Europa (FE) - 26
<LI>European Democratic Alliance (EDA) - 26
<LI>Greens (Grn) - 23
<LI>European Radical Alliance (ERA) - 19 (including 2 Scottish National Party)
<LI>Europe of Nations (EN) - 19</li></ul><P>
Note that no single group could achieve the 284 MEPs needed for an overall majority - and the only pairing that could would be a Party of European Socialists/European People's Party one.<P>
The earliest Member of the European Parliament was <a href="http://www.europarl.europa.eu/meps/en/1186/ASTRID_LULLING_home.html">Astrid Lulling</a> (EPP) from Luxembourg's Christian Social People's Party (the party which Jean-Claude Juncker, the current President of the European Commission, is from) who was appointed in October 1965 - however, she had left the Parliament in July 1974, and had not returned until being elected in June 1989.<P>
Next was <a href="http://www.europarl.europa.eu/meps/en/877/DOEKE_EISMA_home.html">Doeke Eisma</a> (ELDR) from the Netherlands' Democrats 66, who was appointed in March 1973, and left the Parliament in October 1974, not returning until filling a vacancy in June 1981.<P>
Third was <a href="http://www.europarl.europa.eu/meps/en/357/John-alexander_CORRIE_home.html">John Corrie</a> (EPP) from the Conservatives, who had a couple of appointed terms (March to December 1975 and March 1977 to July 1979), and wouldn't return until elected MEP for <i>Worcestershire & South Warwickshire</i> in 1994 (the constituency I was living in at the time).<P>
Joint fourth were <a href="http://www.europarl.europa.eu/meps/en/1369/WINIFRED+M._EWING_home.html">Winnie Ewing</a> (ERA) from the Scottish National Party, who was the longest continually-serving MEP, having been appointed in July 1975 and elected as MEP for <i>Highlands & Islands</i> at every election since then; and <a href="http://www.europarl.europa.eu/meps/en/1145/NIELS+ANKER_KOFOED_home.html">Niels Kofoed</a> (ELDR) from Denmark's Left party, who had stepped down in September 1978 and returned at the 1989 election.<P>
We can now look at the day-by-day changes:<P>
19 July 1994: 4<sup>th</sup> European Parliament commences [PES 198, EPP 158, ELDR 42, EUL 28, NA 28, FE 26, EDA 26, Grn 23, ERA 19, EN 19]<P>
26 September 1994: Resignation of Luis Sá (EUL, Portugal) [PES 198, EPP 158, ELDR 42, NA 28, EUL 27, FE 26, EDA 26, Grn 23, ERA 19, EN 19, <i>vacant 1</i>]<P>
28 September 1994: Appointment of Honório Novo (EUL, Portugal) [PES 198, EPP 158, ELDR 42, EUL 28, NA 28, FE 26, EDA 26, Grn 23, ERA 19, EN 19]<P>
16 October 1994: Resignation of Lydie Wurth-Polfer (ELDR, Luxembourg) [PES 198, EPP 158, ELDR 41, EUL 28, NA 28, FE 26, EDA 26, Grn 23, ERA 19, EN 19, <i>vacant 1</i>]<P>
25 October 1994: Appointment of Charles Goerens (ELDR, Luxembourg) [PES 198, EPP 158, ELDR 42, EUL 28, NA 28, FE 26, EDA 26, Grn 23, ERA 19, EN 19]<P>
15 December 1994: Enrico Ferri (NA, Italy) and Marilena Marin (ELDR, Italy) join Forza Europa [PES 198, EPP 158, ELDR 41, EUL 28, FE 28, NA 27, EDA 26, Grn 23, ERA 19, EN 19]<P>
21 December 1994: Lilli Gyldenkilde (Grn, Denmark) joins European United Left [PES 198, EPP 158, ELDR 41, EUL 29, FE 28, NA 27, EDA 26, Grn 22, ERA 19, EN 19]<P>
1 January 1995: Austria, Finland and Sweden join the European Union and interim MEPs appointed by their national Parliaments (Austria - PES 8, EPP 6, NA 5, ELDR 1, Grn 1; Finland - ELDR 6, PES 4, EPP 4, Grn 1, NA 1; Sweden - PES 11, EPP 6, EDLR 3, Grn 1, NA 1) take their seats [PES 221, EPP 174, ELDR 51, NA 34, EUL 29, FE 28, EDA 26, Grn 25, ERA 19, EN 19]<P>
5 January 1995: Bengt Hurtig (NA, Sweden) and Marjatta Stenus-Kaukonen (NA, Finland) join European United Left, which is renamed European United Left-Nordic Green Left [PES 221, EPP 174, ELDR 51, NA 32, EUL-NGL 31, FE 28, EDA 26, Grn 25, ERA 19, EN 19]<P>
23 January 1995: Resignation of Christos Papoutsis (PES, Greece) [PES 220, EPP 174, ELDR 51, NA 32, EUL-NGL 31, FE 28, EDA 26, Grn 25, ERA 19, EN 19, <i>vacant 1</i>]<P>
24 January 1995: Appointment of Yiannos Kranidiotis (PES, Greece) [PES 221, EPP 174, ELDR 51, NA 32, EUL-NGL 31, FE 28, EDA 26, Grn 25, ERA 19, EN 19]<P>
18 May 1995: Resignations of Yves Galland (ELDR, France) and Jean-Pierre Raffarin (EPP, France) [PES 221, EPP 173, ELDR 50, NA 32, EUL-NGL 31, FE 28, EDA 26, Grn 25, ERA 19, EN 19. <i>vacant 2</i>]<P>
19 May 1995: Appointments of Jean-Antoine Giansily (EDA<sup>1</sup>, France) and Jean-Thomas Nordmann (ELDR, France) [PES 221, EPP 173, ELDR 51, NA 32, EUL-NGL 31, FE 28, EDA 27, Grn 25, ERA 19, EN 19]<P>
30 June 1995: Resignation of Walter Posch (PES, Austria) [PES 220, EPP 173, ELDR 51, NA 32, EUL-NGL 31, FE 28, EDA 27, Grn 25, ERA 19, EN 19, <i>vacant 1</i>]<P>
3 July 1995: Death of Alexander Langer (Grn, Italy) [PES 220, EPP 173, ELDR 51, NA 32, EUL-NGL 31, FE 28, EDA 27, Grn 24, ERA 19, EN 19, <i>vacant 2</i>]<P>
5 July 1995: Forza Europa and European Democratic Alliance merge to form Union for Europe [PES 220, EPP 173, UFE 55, ELDR 51, NA 32, EUL-NGL 31, Grn 24, ERA 19, EN 19, <i>vacant 2</i>]<P>
11 July 1995: Appointments of Albrecht Konecny (PES, Austria) and Gianni Tamino (Grn, Italy) [PES 221, EPP 173, UFE 55, ELDR 51, NA 32, EUL-NGL 31, Grn 25, ERA 19, EN 19]<P>
15 September 1995: Resignation of Maritto Segni (EPP, Italy) [PES 221, EPP 172, UFE 55, ELDR 51, NA 32, EUL-NGL 31, Grn 25, ERA 19, EN 19, <i>vacant 1</i>]<P>
18 September 1995: Appointment of Vincenzo Viola (EPP, Italy); death of Jean Gol (ELDR, Belgium) [PES 221, EPP 173, UFE 55, ELDR 50, NA 32, EUL-NGL 31, Grn 25, ERA 19, EN 19, <i>vacant 1</i>]<P>
20 September 1995: Pier Casini (UFE, Italy) and Enrico Ferri (UFE, Italy) join European People's Party [PES 221, EPP 175, UFE 53, ELDR 50, NA 32, EUL-NGL 31, Grn 25, ERA 19, EN 19, <i>vacant 1</i>]<P>
30 September 1995: Resignation of Celia Villalobos Talero (EPP, Spain) [PES 221, EPP 174, UFE 53, ELDR 50, NA 32, EUL-NGL 31, Grn 25, ERA 19, EN 19, <i>vacant 2</i>]<P>
2 October 1995: Appointment of Jorge Hernández Mollar (EPP, Spain) [PES 221, EPP 175, UFE 53, ELDR 50, NA 32, EUL-NGL 31, Grn 25, ERA 19, EN 19, <i>vacant 1</i>]<P>
8 October 1995: Swedish interim MEPs (PES 11, EPP 6, EDLR 3, Grn 1, EUL-NGL 1) leave the Parliament [PES 210, EPP 169, UFE 53, ELDR 47, NA 32, EUL-NGL 30, Grn 24, ERA 19, EN 19, <i>vacant 23</i>]<P>
9 October 1995: Elected Swedish MEPs (PES 7, EPP 5, Grn 4, ELDR 3, EUL-NGL 3) take their seats [PES 217, EPP 174, UFE 53, ELDR 50, EUL-NGL 33, NA 32, Grn 28, ERA 19, EN 19, <i>vacant 1</i>]<P>
11 October 1995: Jup Weber (Grn, Luxembourg) joins European Radical Alliance [PES 217, EPP 174, UFE 53, ELDR 50, EUL-NGL 33, NA 32, Grn 27, ERA 20, EN 19, <i>vacant 1</i>]<P>
15 October 1995: Resignation of João Soares (PES, Portugal) [PES 216, EPP 174, UFE 53, ELDR 50, EUL-NGL 33, NA 32, Grn 27, ERA 20, EN 19, <i>vacant 2</i>]<P>
17 October 1995: Appointment of Carlos Candal (PES, Portugal) [PES 217, EPP 174, UFE 53, ELDR 50, EUL-NGL 33, NA 32, Grn 27, ERA 20, EN 19, <i>vacant 1</i>]<P>
19 October 1995: Resignation of Manuel Monteiro (UFE, Portugal) [PES 217, EPP 174, UFE 52, ELDR 50, EUL-NGL 33, NA 32, Grn 27, ERA 20, EN 19, <i>vacant 2</i>]<P>
25 October 1995: Appointment of Philippe Monfils (ELDR, Belgium) [PES 217, EPP 174, UFE 52, ELDR 51, EUL-NGL 33, NA 32, Grn 27, ERA 20, EN 19, <i>vacant 1</i>]<P>
28 October 1995: Resignation of António Vitorino (PES, Portugal) [PES 216, EPP 174, UFE 52, ELDR 51, EUL-NGL 33, NA 32, Grn 27, ERA 20, EN 19, <i>vacant 2</i>]<P>
30 October 1995: Appointment of Quinídio Correia (PES, Portugal) [PES 217, EPP 174, UFE 52, ELDR 51, EUL-NGL 33, NA 32, Grn 27, ERA 20, EN 19, <i>vacant 1</i>]<P>
31 October 1995: Appointment of Rui Vieira (UFE, Portugal) [PES 217, EPP 174, UFE 53, ELDR 51, EUL-NGL 33, NA 32, Grn 27, ERA 20, EN 19]<P>
6 December 1995: Resignation of Mercedes de la Merced Monge (EPP, Spain) [PES 217, EPP 173, UFE 53, ELDR 51, EUL-NGL 33, NA 32, Grn 27, ERA 20, EN 19, <i>vacant 1</i>]<P>
12 December 1995: Appointment of Felipe Camisón Asensio (EPP, Spain) [PES 217, EPP 174, UFE 53, ELDR 51, EUL-NGL 33, NA 32, Grn 27, ERA 20, EN 19]<P>
14 January 1996: Resignations of Lilli Gyldenkilde (EUL-NGL, Denmark) and Mathias Reichhold (NA, Austria) [PES 217, EPP 174, UFE 53, ELDR 51, EUL-NGL 32, NA 31, Grn 27, ERA 20, EN 19, <i>vacant 2</i>]<P>
15 January 1996: Appointment of John Iversen (EUL-NGL, Denmark) [PES 217, EPP 174, UFE 53, ELDR 51, EUL-NGL 33, NA 31, Grn 27, ERA 20, EN 19, <i>vacant 1</i>]<P>
17 January 1996: Appointment of Klaus Lukas (NA, Austria) [PES 217, EPP 174, UFE 53, ELDR 51, EUL-NGL 33, NA 32, Grn 27, ERA 20, EN 19]<P>
24 January 1996: Resignation of Gerfrid Gaigg (EPP, Austria) [PES 217, EPP 173, UFE 53, ELDR 51, EUL-NGL 33, NA 32, Grn 27, ERA 20, EN 19, <i>vacant 1</i>]<P>
25 January 1996: Appointment of Paul Rübig (EPP, Austria) [PES 217, EPP 174, UFE 53, ELDR 51, EUL-NGL 33, NA 32, Grn 27, ERA 20, EN 19]<P>
1 February 1996: Resignation of Heinke Salisch (PES, Germany) [PES 216, EPP 174, UFE 53, ELDR 51, EUL-NGL 33, NA 32, Grn 27, ERA 20, EN 19, <i>vacant 1</i>]<P>
6 February 1996: Appointment of Dietrich Elchlepp (PES, Germany) [PES 217, EPP 174, UFE 53, ELDR 51, EUL-NGL 33, NA 32, Grn 27, ERA 20, EN 19]<P>
26 March 1996: Resignation of María Aramburu del Río (EUL-NGL, Spain) [PES 217, EPP 174, UFE 53, ELDR 51, EUL-NGL 32, NA 32, Grn 27, ERA 20, EN 19, <i>vacant 1</i>]<P>
28 March 1996: Appointment of Abdelkader Mohamed Ali (EUL-NGL, Spain); resignation of Marco Pannella (ERA, Italy) [PES 217, EPP 174, UFE 53, ELDR 51, EUL-NGL 33, NA 32, Grn 27, ERA 19, EN 19, <i>vacant 1</i>]<P>
31 March 1996: Appointment of Olivier Dupuis (ERA, Italy) [PES 217, EPP 174, UFE 53, ELDR 51, EUL-NGL 33, NA 32, Grn 27, ERA 20, EN 19]<P>
15 April 1996: Philippe-Armand Martin (EN, France) joins Union for Europe [PES 217, EPP 174, UFE 54, ELDR 51, EUL-NGL 33, NA 32, Grn 27, ERA 20, EN 18]<P>
21 April 1996: Death of Robert Hersant (EPP, France) [PES 217, EPP 173, UFE 54, ELDR 51, EUL-NGL 33, NA 32, Grn 27, ERA 20, EN 18, <i>vacant 1</i>]<P>
22 April 1996: Appointment of André Fourçans (EPP, France) [PES 217, EPP 174, UFE 54, ELDR 51, EUL-NGL 33, NA 32, Grn 27, ERA 20, EN 18]<P>
25 April 1996: Resignations of Susanne Riess-Passer (NA, Austria) and Karl Schweitzer (NA, Austria) [PES 217, EPP 174, UFE 54, ELDR 51, EUL-NGL 33, NA 30, Grn 27, ERA 20, EN 18, <i>vacant 2</i>]<P>
26 April 1996: Appointments of Wolfgang Jung (NA, Austria) and Franz Linser (NA, Austria) [PES 217, EPP 174, UFE 54, ELDR 51, EUL-NGL 33, NA 32, Grn 27, ERA 20, EN 18]<P>
6 May 1996: Resignation of Abel Matutes Juan (EPP, Spain) [PES 217, EPP 173, UFE 54, ELDR 51, EUL-NGL 33, NA 32, Grn 27, ERA 20, EN 18, <i>vacant 1</i>]<P>
10 May 1996: Appointment of José Pomés Ruiz (EPP, Spain) [PES 217, EPP 174, UFE 54, ELDR 51, EUL-NGL 33, NA 32, Grn 27, ERA 20, EN 18]<P>
10 July 1996: Antonio González Triviño (Spain) leaves Party of European Socialists [PES 216, EPP 174, UFE 54, ELDR 51, EUL-NGL 33, NA 33, Grn 27, ERA 20, EN 18]<P>
17 July 1996: Antoinette Fouque (ERA, France) joins Party of European Socialists [PES 217, EPP 174, UFE 54, ELDR 51, EUL-NGL 33, NA 33, Grn 27, ERA 19, EN 18]<P>
19 July 1996: Resignation of Frédérique Bredin (PES, France) [PES 216, EPP 174, UFE 54, ELDR 51, EUL-NGL 33, NA 33, Grn 27, ERA 19, EN 18, <i>vacant 1</i>]<P>
20 July 1996: Appointment of Marie-Arlette Carlotti (PES, France) [PES 217, EPP 174, UFE 54, ELDR 51, EUL-NGL 33, NA 33, Grn 27, ERA 19, EN 18]<P>
2 September 1996: Death of Kenneth Stewart (PES, United Kingdom) [PES 216, EPP 174, UFE 54, ELDR 51, EUL-NGL 33, NA 33, Grn 27, ERA 19, EN 18, <i>vacant 1</i>]<P>
17 September 1996: Resignation of Isidoro Sanchez Garcia (ERA, Spain) [PES 216, EPP 174, UFE 54, ELDR 51, EUL-NGL 33, NA 33, Grn 27, ERA 18, EN 18, <i>vacant 2</i>]<P>
18 September 1996: Appointment of Alfonso Novo Belenguer (ERA, Spain); Antonio González Triviño (NA, Spain) joins European Radical Alliance [PES 216, EPP 174, UFE 54, ELDR 51, EUL-NGL 33, NA 32, Grn 27, ERA 20, EN 18, <i>vacant 1</i>]<P>
19 September 1996: Leonie van Bladel (PES, Netherlands) joins Union for Europe [PES 215, EPP 174, UFE 55, ELDR 51, EUL-NGL 33, NA 32, Grn 27, ERA 20, EN 18, <i>vacant 1</i>]<P>
1 October 1996: John Iversen (EUL-NGL, Denmark) joins Party of European Socialists [PES 216, EPP 174, UFE 55, ELDR 51, EUL-NGL 32, NA 32, Grn 27, ERA 20, EN 18, <i>vacant 1</i>]<P>
2 October 1996: Resignation of Friedrich König (EPP, Austria) [PES 216, EPP 173, UFE 55, ELDR 51, EUL-NGL 32, NA 32, Grn 27, ERA 20, EN 18, <i>vacant 2</i>]<P>
29 October 1996: Resignation of Michael Spindelegger (EPP, Austria) [PES 216, EPP 172, UFE 55, ELDR 51, EUL-NGL 32, NA 32, Grn 27, ERA 20, EN 18, <i>vacant 3</i>]<P>
1 November 1996: Anne Poisson (EN, France) joins Union for Europe [PES 216, EPP 172, UFE 56, ELDR 51, EUL-NGL 32, NA 32, Grn 27, ERA 20, EN 17, <i>vacant 3</i>]<P>
6 November 1996: António Capucho (ELDR, Portugal), Carlos Costa Neves (ELDR, Portugal), Arlindo Cunha (ELDR, Portugal), Eurico de Melo (ELDR, Portugal), Nélio Mendonça (ELDR, Portugal), Carlos Pimenta (ELDR, Portugal), Manuel Porto (ELDR, Portugal) and Helena Vaz da Silva (ELDR, Portugal) join European People's Party [PES 216, EPP 180, UFE 56, ELDR 43, EUL-NGL 32, NA 32, Grn 27, ERA 20, EN 17, <i>vacant 3</i>]<P>
10 November 1996: Austrian (PES 8, EPP 4, NA 5, ELDR 1, Grn 1) and Finnish (ELDR 6, PES 4, EPP 4, EUL-NGL 1, Grn 1) interim MEPs leave the Parliament; resignation of Enrico Montesano (PES, Italy) [PES 203, EPP 172, UFE 56, ELDR 36, EUL-NGL 31, NA 27, Grn 25, ERA 20, EN 17, <i>vacant 39</I>]<P>
11 November 1996: Elected Austrian (EPP 7, PES 6, NA 6, ELDR 1, Grn 1) and Finnish (ELDR 5, PES 4, EPP 4, EUL-NGL 2, Grn 1) MEPs take their seats; Georges Berthu (France), Johannes Blokland (Netherlands), Jens-Peter Bonde (Denmark), Charles de Gaulle (France), Philippe de Villiers (France), Edouard des Places (France), Hervé Fabre-Aubrespy (France), James Golsmith (France), Thierry Jean-Pierre (France), Lis Jensen (Denmark), Ole Krarup (Denmark), Ulla Sandbæk (Denmark), Françoise Seillier (France), Dominique Souchet (France), Frédéric Striby (France) and Leen van der Waal (Netherlands) leave Europe of Nations; appointment of Pasqualina Napoletano (PES, Italy) [PES 214, EPP 183, UFE 56, NA 49, ELDR 42, EUL-NGL 33, Grn 27, ERA 20, EN 1, <i>vacant 1</i>]<P>
12 December 1996: Election of Richard Corbett (PES, United Kingdom) [PES 215, EPP 183, UFE 56, NA 49, ELDR 42, EUL-NGL 33, Grn 27, ERA 20, EN 1]<P>
13 December 1996: Alessandro Fontana (UFE, Italy) joins European People's Party [PES 215, EPP 184, UFE 55, NA 49, ELDR 42, EUL-NGL 33, Grn 27, ERA 20, EN 1]<P>
31 December 1996: Noël Mamère (ERA, France) joins Greens [PES 215, EPP 184, UFE 55, NA 49, ELDR 42, EUL-NGL 33, Grn 28, ERA 19, EN 1]<P>
1 January 1997: James Janssen van Raay (EPP, Netherlands) joines Union for Europe and Bernard Kouchner (PES, France) joins European Radical Alliance [PES 214, EPP 183, UFE 56, NA 49, ELDR 42, EUL-NGL 33, Grn 28, ERA 20, EN 1]<P>
13 January 1997: Georges Berthu (NA, France), Johannes Blokland (NA, Netherlands), Jens-Peter Bonde (NA, Denmark), Charles de Gaulle (NA, France), Philippe de Villiers (NA, France), Edouard des Places (NA, France), Hervé Fabre-Aubrespy (NA, France), James Golsmith (NA, France), Thierry Jean-Pierre (NA, France), Lis Jensen (NA, Denmark), Ole Krarup (NA, Denmark), Jim Nicholson (EPP, United Kingdom), Ulla Sandbæk (NA, Denmark), Françoise Seillier (NA, France), Dominique Souchet (NA, France), Frédéric Striby (NA, France) and Leen van der Waal (NA, Netherlands) form Independents for a Europe of Nations [PES 214, EPP 182, UFE 56, ELDR 42, EUL-NGL 33, NA 33, Grn 28, ERA 20, IEN 17, EN 1]<P>
17 January 1997: Resignation of Rui Vieira (UFE, Portugal) [PES 214, EPP 182, UFE 55, ELDR 42, EUL-NGL 33, NA 33, Grn 28, ERA 20, IEN 17, EN 1, <i>vacant 1</i>]<P>
18 January 1997: Appointment of Maria Cardona (UFE, Portugal) [PES 214, EPP 182, UFE 56, ELDR 42, EUL-NGL 33, NA 33, Grn 28, ERA 20, IEN 17, EN 1]<P>
1 February 1997: Luigi Caligaris (Italy) leaves Union for Europe [PES 214, EPP 182, UFE 55, ELDR 42, NA 34, EUL-NGL 33, Grn 28, ERA 20, IEN 17, EN 1]<P>
3 February 1997: Resignation of Yiannos Kranidiotis (PES, Greece) [PES 213, EPP 182, UFE 55, ELDR 42, NA 34, EUL-NGL 33, Grn 28, ERA 20, IEN 17, EN 1, <i>vacant 1</i>]<P>
4 February 1997: Resignation of Bernard Tapie (ERA, France) [PES 213, EPP 182, UFE 55, ELDR 42, NA 34, EUL-NGL 33, Grn 28, ERA 19, IEN 17, EN 1, <i>vacant 2</i>]<P>
5 February 1997: Appointment of Michel Scarbonchi (ERA, France) [PES 213, EPP 182, UFE 55, ELDR 42, NA 34, EUL-NGL 33, Grn 28, ERA 20, IEN 17, EN 1, <i>vacant 1</i>]<P>
6 February 1997: Appointment of Anna Karamanou (PES, Greece) [PES 214, EPP 182, UFE 55, ELDR 42, NA 34, EUL-NGL 33, Grn 28, ERA 20, IEN 17, EN 1]<P>
19 February 1997: Luigi Caligaris (NA, Italy) and Stefano de Luca (UFE, Italy) join European Liberal Democrat & Reform Party; Umberto Bossi (Italy), Gipo Farassino (Italy), Marco Formentini (Italy) and Luigi Moretti (Italy) leave European Liberal Democrat & Reform Party [PES 214, EPP 182, UFE 54, ELDR 40, NA 37, EUL-NGL 33, Grn 28, ERA 20, IEN 17, EN 1]<P>
30 April 1997: Resignation of René-Emile Piquet (EUL-NGL, France) [PES 214, EPP 182, UFE 54, ELDR 40, NA 37, EUL-NGL 32, Grn 28, ERA 20, IEN 17, EN 1, <i>vacant 1</i>]<P>
1 May 1997: Appointment of Jean Querbes (EUL-NGL, France) [PES 214, EPP 182, UFE 54, ELDR 40, NA 37, EUL-NGL 33, Grn 28, ERA 20, IEN 17, EN 1]<P>
5 June 1997: Resignations of Elisabeth Guigou (PES, France), Bernard Kouchner (ERA, France), Pierre Moscovici (PES, France) and Catherine Trautmann (PES, France) [PES 211, EPP 182, UFE 54, ELDR 40, NA 37, EUL-NGL 33, Grn 28, ERA 19, IEN 17, EN 1, <i>vacant 4</i>]<P>
6 June 1997: Appointments of Jean Cottigney (PES, France), Olivier Duhamel (PES, France), Georges Garot (PES, France) and Marie-Noëlle Lienemann (PES, France) [PES 215, EPP 182, UFE 54, ELDR 40, NA 37, EUL-NGL 33, Grn 28, ERA 19, IEN 17, EN 1]<P>
15 June 1997: Resignation of Philippe de Villiers (IEN, France) [PES 215, EPP 182, UFE 54, ELDR 40, NA 37, EUL-NGL 33, Grn 28, ERA 19, IEN 16, EN 1, <i>vacant 1</i>]<P>
17 June 1997: Appointment of Eric Pinel (NA, France) [PES 215, EPP 182, UFE 54, ELDR 40, NA 38, EUL-NGL 33, Grn 28, ERA 19, IEN 16, EN 1]<P>
15 July 1997: Resignation of Nicole Pery (PES, France) [PES 214, EPP 182, UFE 54, ELDR 40, NA 38, EUL-NGL 33, Grn 28, ERA 19, IEN 16, EN 1, <i>vacant 1</i>]<P>
17 July 1997: Appointment of Marie-José Denys (PES, France) [PES 215, EPP 182, UFE 54, ELDR 40, NA 38, EUL-NGL 33, Grn 28, ERA 19, IEN 16, EN 1]<P>
19 July 1997: Death of James Goldsmith (IEN, France) [PES 215, EPP 182, UFE 54, ELDR 40, NA 38, EUL-NGL 33, Grn 28, ERA 19, IEN 15, EN 1, <i>vacant 1</i>]<P>
20 July 1997: Appointment of Stéphane Buffetaut (IEN, France) [PES 215, EPP 182, UFE 54, ELDR 40, NA 38, EUL-NGL 33, Grn 28, ERA 19, IEN 16, EN 1]<P>
31 July 1997: Resignation of Jack Lang (PES, France) [PES 214, EPP 182, UFE 54, ELDR 40, NA 38, EUL-NGL 33, Grn 28, ERA 19, IEN 16, EN 1, <i>vacant 1</i>]<P>
2 August 1997: Appointment of Henri Weber (PES, France) [PES 215, EPP 182, UFE 54, ELDR 40, NA 38, EUL-NGL 33, Grn 28, ERA 19, IEN 16, EN 1]<P>
11 August 1997: Resignation of Noël Mamère (Grn, France) [PES 215, EPP 182, UFE 54, ELDR 40, NA 38, EUL-NGL 33, Grn 27, ERA 19, IEN 16, EN 1, <i>vacant 1</i>]<P>
13 August 1997: Appointment of Henri de Lassus Saint Genies (ERA, France) [PES 215, EPP 182, UFE 54, ELDR 40, NA 38, EUL-NGL 33, Grn 27, ERA 20, IEN 16, EN 1]<P>
31 August 1997: Resignation of Christian Jacob (UFE, France) [PES 215, EPP 182, UFE 53, ELDR 40, NA 38, EUL-NGL 33, Grn 27, ERA 20, IEN 16, EN 1, <i>vacant 1</i>]<P>
1 September 1997: Resignation of Leen van der Waal (IEN, Netherlands) [PES 215, EPP 182, UFE 53, ELDR 40, NA 38, EUL-NGL 33, Grn 27, ERA 20, IEN 15, EN 1, <i>vacant 2</i>]<P>
2 September 1997: Appointments of Pierre Lataillade (UFE, France) and Rijk van Dam (IEN, Netherlands) [PES 215, EPP 182, UFE 54, ELDR 40, NA 38, EUL-NGL 33, Grn 27, ERA 20, IEN 16, EN 1]<P>
17 September 1997: Resignation of Henri Weber (PES, France) [PES 214, EPP 182, UFE 54, ELDR 40, NA 38, EUL-NGL 33, Grn 27, ERA 20, IEN 16, EN 1, <i>vacant 1</i>]<P>
18 September 1997: Appointment of Marie-Thérèse Mutin (PES, France) [PES 215, EPP 182, UFE 54, ELDR 40, NA 38, EUL-NGL 33, Grn 27, ERA 20, IEN 16, EN 1]<P>
2 October 1997: Resignation of Dominique Baudis (EPP, France) [PES 215, EPP 181, UFE 54, ELDR 40, NA 38, EUL-NGL 33, Grn 27, ERA 20, IEN 16, EN 1, <i>vacant 1</i>]<P>
3 October 1997: Appointment of Roger Karoutchi (UFE<sup>2</sup>, France) [PES 215, EPP 181, UFE 55, ELDR 40, NA 38, EUL-NGL 33, Grn 27, ERA 20, IEN 16, EN 1]<P>
6 October 1997: Resignation of Siegbert Alber (EPP, Germany) [PES 215, EPP 180, UFE 55, ELDR 40, NA 38, EUL-NGL 33, Grn 27, ERA 20, IEN 16, EN 1, <i>vacant 1</i>]<P>
10 October 1997: Appointment of Rainer Wieland (EPP, Germany) [PES 215, EPP 181, UFE 55, ELDR 40, NA 38, EUL-NGL 33, Grn 27, ERA 20, IEN 16, EN 1]<P>
1 January 1998: Hugh Kerr (PES, United Kingdom) joins Greens [PES 214, EPP 181, UFE 55, ELDR 40, NA 38, EUL-NGL 33, Grn 28, ERA 20, IEN 16, EN 1]<P>
12 January 1998: Ken Coates (PES, United Kingdom) joins European United Left-Nordic Green Left [PES 213, EPP 181, UFE 55, ELDR 40, NA 38, EUL-NGL 34, Grn 28, ERA 20, IEN 16, EN 1]<P>
31 March 1998: Resignation of Norman West (PES, United Kingdom) [PES 212, EPP 181, UFE 55, ELDR 40, NA 38, EUL-NGL 34, Grn 28, ERA 20, IEN 16, EN 1, <i>vacant 1</i>]<P>
21 April 1998: Death of Spalato Bellerè (NA, Italy) [PES 212, EPP 181, UFE 55, ELDR 40, NA 37, EUL-NGL 34, Grn 28, ERA 20, IEN 16, EN 1, <i>vacant 2</i>]<P>
24 April 1998: Resignation of Bernard Stasi (EPP, France) [PES 212, EPP 180, UFE 55, ELDR 40, NA 37, EUL-NGL 34, Grn 28, ERA 20, IEN 16, EN 1, <i>vacant 3</i>]<P>
25 April 1998: Appointment of Bernard Lehideux (EPP, France) [PES 212, EPP 181, UFE 55, ELDR 40, NA 37, EUL-NGL 34, Grn 28, ERA 20, IEN 16, EN 1, <i>vacant 2</i>]<P>
30 April 1998: Resignation of Raymonde Dury (PES, Belgium) [PES 211, EPP 181, UFE 55, ELDR 40, NA 37, EUL-NGL 34, Grn 28, ERA 20, IEN 16, EN 1, <i>vacant 3</i>]<P>
1 May 1998: Appointment of Claude Delcroix (PES, Belgium) [PES 212, EPP 181, UFE 55, ELDR 40, NA 37, EUL-NGL 34, Grn 28, ERA 20, IEN 16, EN 1, <i>vacant 2</i>]<P>
6 May 1998: Appointment of Luciano Schifone (NA, Italy) [PES 212, EPP 181, UFE 55, ELDR 40, NA 38, EUL-NGL 34, Grn 28, ERA 20, IEN 16, EN 1, <i>vacant 1</i>]<P>
7 May 1998: Election of Linda McAvan (PES, United Kingdom) [PES 213, EPP 181, UFE 55, ELDR 40, NA 38, EUL-NGL 34, Grn 28, ERA 20, IEN 16, EN 1]<P>
22 May 1998: Death of Francisco Lucas Pires (EPP, Portugal) [PES 213, EPP 180, UFE 55, ELDR 40, NA 38, EUL-NGL 34, Grn 28, ERA 20, IEN 16, EN 1, <i>vacant 1</i>]<P>
25 May 1998: Luciano Pettinari (EUL-NGL, Italy) joins Party of European Socialists [PES 214, EPP 180, UFE 55, ELDR 40, NA 38, EUL-NGL 33, Grn 28, ERA 20, IEN 16, EN 1, <i>vacant 1</i>]<P>
8 June 1998: Appointment of José Mendes Bota (EPP, Portugal) [PES 214, EPP 181, UFE 55, ELDR 40, NA 38, EUL-NGL 33, Grn 28, ERA 20, IEN 16, EN 1]<P>
15 June 1998: Guido Podestá (UFE, Italy), Giacomo Santini (UFE, Italy), Umberto Scapagnini (UFE, Italy) and Guido Viceconte (UFE, Italy) join European People's Party [PES 214, EPP 185, UFE 51, ELDR 40, NA 38, EUL-NGL 33, Grn 28, ERA 20, IEN 16, EN 1]<P>
16 June 1998: Antonio Tajani (UFE, Italy) joins European People's Party [PES 214, EPP 186, UFE 50, ELDR 40, NA 38, EUL-NGL 33, Grn 28, ERA 20, IEN 16, EN 1]<P>
6 July 1998: Aldo Arroni (UFE, Italy), Claudio Azzolini (UFE, Italy), Monica Baldi (UFE, Italy), Gian Boniperti (UFE, Italy), Ombretta Colli Comelli (UFE, Italy), Alessandro Danesin (UFE, Italy), Pietro di Prima (UFE, Italy), Luigi Florio (UFE, Italy), Riccardo Garosci (UFE, Italy), Giacomo Leopardi (UFE, Italy), Giancarlo Ligabue (UFE, Italy), Franco Malerba (UFE, Italy), Eolo Parodi (UFE, Italy) and Luisa Todini (UFE, Italy) join European People's Party [PES 214, EPP 200, ELDR 40, NA 38, UFE 36, EUL-NGL 33, Grn 28, ERA 20, IEN 16, EN 1]<P>
13 July 1998: Carlo Ripa di Meana (Grn, Italy) joins European United Left-Nordic Green Left [PES 214, EPP 200, ELDR 40, NA 38, UFE 36, EUL-NGL 34, Grn 27, ERA 20, IEN 16, EN 1]<P>
2 August 1998: Resignation of Gijs de Vries (ELDR, Netherlands) [PES 214, EPP 200, ELDR 39, NA 38, UFE 36, EUL-NGL 34, Grn 27, ERA 20, IEN 16, EN 1, <i>vacant 1</i>]<P>
25 August 1998: Death of Allan Macartney (ERA, United Kingdom) [PES 214, EPP 200, ELDR 39, NA 38, UFE 36, EUL-NGL 34, Grn 27, ERA 19, IEN 16, EN 1, <i>vacant 2</i>]<P>
31 August 1998: Resignation of Nel van Dijk (Grn, Netherlands) [PES 214, EPP 200, ELDR 39, NA 38, UFE 36, EUL-NGL 34, Grn 26, ERA 19, IEN 16, EN 1, <i>vacant 3</i>]<P>
1 September 1998: Appointments of Robert Goedbloed (ELDR, Netherlands) and Joost Lagendijk (Grn, Netherlands) [PES 214, EPP 200, ELDR 40, NA 38, UFE 36, EUL-NGL 34, Grn 27, ERA 19, IEN 16, EN 1, <i>vacant 1</i>]<P>
14 September 1998: Resignation of António Capucho (EPP, Portugal) [PES 214, EPP 199, ELDR 40, NA 38, UFE 36, EUL-NGL 34, Grn 27, ERA 19, IEN 16, EN 1, <i>vacant 2</i>]<P>
15 September 1998: Appointment of Carlos Coelho (EPP, Portugal) [PES 214, EPP 200, ELDR 40, NA 38, UFE 36, EUL-NGL 34, Grn 27, ERA 19, IEN 16, EN 1, <i>vacant 1</i>]<P>
2 October 1998: Resignation of José Apolinário (PES, Portugal) [PES 213, EPP 200, ELDR 40, NA 38, UFE 36, EUL-NGL 34, Grn 27, ERA 19, IEN 16, EN 1, <i>vacant 2</i>]<P>
3 October 1998: Appointment of Elisa Damião (PES, Portugal) [PES 214, EPP 200, ELDR 40, NA 38, UFE 36, EUL-NGL 34, Grn 27, ERA 19, IEN 16, EN 1, <i>vacant 1</i>]<P>
4 October 1998: Resignations of Birgitta Ahlqvist (PES, Sweden) and Tommy Waidelich (PES, Sweden) [PES 212, EPP 200, ELDR 40, NA 38, UFE 36, EUL-NGL 34, Grn 27, ERA 19, IEN 16, EN 1, <i>vacant 3</i>]<P>
6 October 1998: Appointments of Veronica Palm (PES, Sweden) and Yvonne Sandberg-Fries (PES, Sweden) [PES 214, EPP 200, ELDR 40, NA 38, UFE 36, EUL-NGL 34, Grn 27, ERA 19, IEN 16, EN 1, <i>vacant 1</i>]<P>
7 October 1998: Resignation of Alfonso Novo Belenguer (ERA, Spain) [PES 214, EPP 200, ELDR 40, NA 38, UFE 36, EUL-NGL 34, Grn 27, ERA 18, IEN 16, EN 1, <i>vacant 2</i>]<P>
8 October 1998: Appointment of Manuel Escola Hernando (ERA, Spain) [PES 214, EPP 200, ELDR 40, NA 38, UFE 36, EUL-NGL 34, Grn 27, ERA 19, IEN 16, EN 1, <i>vacant 1</i>]<P>
11 October 1998: Resignation of Achille Occhetto (PES, Italy) [PES 213, EPP 200, ELDR 40, NA 38, UFE 36, EUL-NGL 34, Grn 27, ERA 19, IEN 16, EN 1, <i>vacant 2</i>]<P>
14 October 1998: Resignation of Jaak Vandemeulebroucke (ERA, Belgium) [PES 213, EPP 200, ELDR 40, NA 38, UFE 36, EUL-NGL 34, Grn 27, ERA 18, IEN 16, EN 1, <i>vacant 3</i>]<P>
16 October 1998: Appointment of Nelly Maes (ERA, Belgium) [PES 213, EPP 200, ELDR 40, NA 38, UFE 36, EUL-NGL 34, Grn 27, ERA 19, IEN 16, EN 1, <i>vacant 2</i>]<P>
19 October 1998: James Moorhouse (EPP, United Kingdom) joins European Liberal Democrat & Reform Party [PES 213, EPP 199, ELDR 41, NA 38, UFE 36, EUL-NGL 34, Grn 27, ERA 19, IEN 16, EN 1, <i>vacant 2</i>]<P>
26 October 1998: Resignation of Giampaolo d'Andrea (EPP, Italy) [PES 213, EPP 198, ELDR 41, NA 38, UFE 36, EUL-NGL 34, Grn 27, ERA 19, IEN 16, EN 1, <i>vacant 3</i>]<P>
11 November 1998: Appointments of Gaetano Carrozzo (PES, Italy) and Giuseppe Mottola (EPP, Italy) [PES 214, EPP 199, ELDR 41, NA 38, UFE 36, EUL-NGL 34, Grn 27, ERA 19, IEN 16, EN 1, <i>vacant 1</i>]<P>
18 November 1998: Resignation of Claudia Roth (Grn, Germany) [PES 214, EPP 199, ELDR 41, NA 38, UFE 36, EUL-NGL 34, Grn 26, ERA 19, IEN 16, EN 1, <i>vacant 2</i>]<P>
19 November 1998: Thierry Jean-Pierre (IEN, France) joins European People's Party [PES 214, EPP 200, ELDR 41, NA 38, UFE 36, EUL-NGL 34, Grn 26, ERA 19, IEN 15, EN 1, <i>vacant 2</i>]<P>
23 November 1998: Appointment of Ozan Ceyhun (Grn, Germany) [PES 214, EPP 200, ELDR 41, NA 38, UFE 36, EUL-NGL 34, Grn 27, ERA 19, IEN 15, EN 1, <i>vacant 1</i>]<P>
26 November 1998: Election of Ian Hudghton (ERA, United Kingdom) [PES 214, EPP 200, ELDR 41, NA 38, UFE 36, EUL-NGL 34, Grn 27, ERA 20, IEN 15, EN 1]<P>
2 December 1998: Marie-France de Rose (EN, France) joins European People's Party [PES 214, EPP 201, ELDR 41, NA 38, UFE 36, EUL-NGL 34, Grn 27, ERA 20, IEN 15]<P>
16 December 1998: Roberto Mezzaroma (UFE, Italy) joins European People's Party [PES 214, EPP 202, ELDR 41, NA 38, UFE 35, EUL-NGL 34, Grn 27, ERA 20, IEN 15]<P>
29 December 1998: Raymond Chesa (UFE, France) joins Independents for a Europe of Nations [PES 214, EPP 202, ELDR 41, NA 38, UFE 34, EUL-NGL 34, Grn 27, ERA 20, IEN 16]<P>
5 January 1999: Resignation of Josu Imaz San Miguel (EPP, Spain) [PES 214, EPP 201, ELDR 41, NA 38, UFE 34, EUL-NGL 34, Grn 27, ERA 20, IEN 16, <i>vacant 1</i>]<P>
21 January 1999: Appointment of José Posada González (ERA<sup>3</sup>, Spain) [PES 214, EPP 201, ELDR 41, NA 38, UFE 34, EUL-NGL 34, Grn 27, ERA 21, IEN 16]<P>
31 January 1999: Resignation of Carmen Díez de Rivera Icaza (PES, Spain) [PES 213, EPP 201, ELDR 41, NA 38, UFE 34, EUL-NGL 34, Grn 27, ERA 21, IEN 16, <i>vacant 1</i>]<P>
4 February 1999: Appointment of Carlos Bru Purón (PES, Spain) [PES 214, EPP 201, ELDR 41, NA 38, UFE 34, EUL-NGL 34, Grn 27, ERA 21, IEN 16]<P>
28 March 1999: Resignation of Outi Ojala (EUL-NGL, Finland) [PES 214, EPP 201, ELDR 41, NA 38, UFE 34, EUL-NGL 33, Grn 27, ERA 21, IEN 16, <i>vacant 1</i>]<P>
29 March 1999: Resignation of Kirsi Piha (EPP, Finland) [PES 214, EPP 200, ELDR 41, NA 38, UFE 34, EUL-NGL 33, Grn 27, ERA 21, IEN 16, <i>vacant 2</i>]<P>
30 March 1999: Resignations of Sirkka-Liisa Anttila (ELDR, Finland) and Fernando Morán López (PES, Spain) [PES 213, EPP 200, ELDR 40, NA 38, UFE 34, EUL-NGL 33, Grn 27, ERA 21, IEN 16, <i>vacant 4</i>]<P>
9 April 1999: Appointment of Juan de Dios Ramírez Heredia (PES, Spain) [PES 214, EPP 200, ELDR 40, NA 38, UFE 34, EUL-NGL 33, Grn 27, ERA 21, IEN 16, <i>vacant 3</i>]<P>
13 April 1999: Appointments of Inna Ilivitzky (EUL-NGL, Finland), Ritva Laurila (EPP, Finland) and Samuli Pohjamo (ELDR, Finland) [PES 214, EPP 201, ELDR 41, NA 38, UFE 34, EUL-NGL 34, Grn 27, ERA 21, IEN 16]<P>
19 April 1999: Charles de Gaulle (France) leaves Independents for a Europe of Nations [PES 214, EPP 201, ELDR 41, NA 39, UFE 34, EUL-NGL 34, Grn 27, ERA 21, IEN 15]<P>
22 April 1999: Resignation of Marlies Mosiek-Urbahn (EPP, Germany) [PES 214, EPP 200, ELDR 41, NA 39, UFE 34, EUL-NGL 34, Grn 27, ERA 21, IEN 15, <i>vacant 1</i>]<P>
23 April 1999: Appointment of Michael Gahler (EPP, Germany) [PES 214, EPP 201, ELDR 41, NA 39, UFE 34, EUL-NGL 34, Grn 27, ERA 21, IEN 15]<P>
<i>10 June 1999: Election for 5<sup>th</sup> European Parliament held in Denmark, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom.<P>
11 June 1999: Election for 5<sup>th</sup> European Parliament held in Ireland.<P>
13 June 1999: Election for 5<sup>th</sup> European Parliament held in Austria, Belgium, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Luxembourg, Portugal, Spain and Sweden.</i><P>
14 June 1999: Resignation of Laurens Brinkhorst (ELDR, Netherlands) [PES 214, EPP 201, ELDR 40, NA 39, UFE 34, EUL-NGL 34, Grn 27, ERA 21, IEN 15, <i>vacant 1</i>]<P>
20 June 1999: Resignation of Jesús Cabezón Alonso (PES, Spain) [PES 213, EPP 201, ELDR 40, NA 39, UFE 34, EUL-NGL 34, Grn 27, ERA 21, IEN 15, <i>vacant 2</i>]<P>
28 June 1999: Resignation of Anne-Marie Neyts-Uyttebroeck (ELDR, Belgium) [PES 213, EPP 201, ELDR 39, NA 39, UFE 34, EUL-NGL 34, Grn 27, ERA 21, IEN 15, <i>vacant 3</i>]<P>
30 June 1999: Resignation of Georges de Brémond d'Ars (EPP, France) [PES 213, EPP 200, ELDR 39, NA 39, UFE 34, EUL-NGL 34, Grn 27, ERA 21, IEN 15, <i>vacant 4</i>]<P>
1 July 1999: Resignation of Nélio Mendonça (EPP, Portugal) [PES 213, EPP 199, ELDR 39, NA 39, UFE 34, EUL-NGL 34, Grn 27, ERA 21, IEN 15, <i>vacant 5</i>]<P>
12 July 1999: Resignation of Laura de Esteban Martin (EPP, Spain) [PES 213, EPP 198, ELDR 39, NA 39, UFE 34, EUL-NGL 34, Grn 27, ERA 21, IEN 15, <i>vacant 6</i>]<P>
<i>19 July 1999: Term of 4<sup>th</sup> European Parliament expires.</i><P>
<i>Notes:</i><P>
<sup>1</sup> Giansily was replacing Raffarin - at a national level, Giansily was from the National Centre of Independents & Peasants, a small party which was allied with Raffarin's Union for French Democracy.<P>
<sup>2</sup> Baudis was from Union for French Democracy (which was part of the EPP group), while Karoutchi was from Rally for the Republic (which was part of the UFE group). These parties had fought the 1994 election on a combined list.<P>
<sup>3</sup> Imaz San Miguel was from the Basque Nationalist Party, which contested the European election as part of the National Coalition - Posada González was from another regionalist party in the National Coalition, <i>viz. the Galician Coalition.</i><P>
We can look at the initial breakdown of seats country-by-country:<P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th rowspan="2">Country</th>
<th colspan="10">Group</th></tr>
<tr>
<th>PES</th>
<th>EPP</th>
<th>ELDR</th>
<TH>EUL</th>
<th>NA</th>
<th>FE</th>
<TH>EDA</th>
<th>Grn</th>
<th>ERA</th>
<TH>EN</th></tr>
<tr>
<td>Belgium</td>
<td>6</td>
<td>7</td>
<td>6</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>3</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>2</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>0</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Denmark</td>
<td>3</td>
<td>3</td>
<td>5</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>4</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>France</td>
<td>15</td>
<td>13</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>7</td>
<td>11</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>14</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>13</td>
<td>13</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Germany</td>
<td>40</td>
<td>47</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>12</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Greece</td>
<td>10</td>
<td>9</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>4</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>2</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Ireland</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>4</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>7</td>
<td>2</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Italy</td>
<td>18</td>
<td>13</td>
<td>6</td>
<td>5</td>
<td>13</td>
<td>26</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>4</td>
<td>2</td>
<td>0</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Luxembourg</td>
<td>2</td>
<td>2</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Netherlands</td>
<td>8</td>
<td>10</td>
<td>10</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>2</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Portugal</td>
<td>10</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>8</td>
<td>3</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>3</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Spain</td>
<td>22</td>
<td>30</td>
<td>2</td>
<td>9</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>0</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>United Kingdom</td>
<td>63</td>
<td>19</td>
<td>2</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>2</td>
<td>0</td></tr>
</table></center><P>
The rules on group forming in the Parliament were a lot more relaxed - the <a href="http://www.europarl.europa.eu/aboutparliament/en/20150201PVL00010/Organisation">current rules require 25 MEPs from at least one-quarter of member nations (<i>i.e.</i> 7</a>).<P>
If such rules had been in place after the 1994 election, then Forza Europa would fail to meet the criteria (its MEPs were from only one country) and the Greens, European Radical Alliance and Europe of Nations would not have enough MEPs. In those circumstances, it is reasonable to assume that the merger of Forza Europa and the European Democratic Alliance would have occurred when the Parliament first met, and the merger of the Greens and the European Radical Alliance to form a single group (which happened in July 1999) would have happened 5 years earlier.<P>Graham Pointerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03538991243769088600noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8004940586846099589.post-27858879220656874782016-02-08T15:18:00.000-08:002016-02-08T15:18:57.612-08:00The 1989 European Election Results On The 1994 BoundariesAt 4 elections - June 1979, June 1984, June 1989 and June 1984 - Great Britain elected our Members of the European Parliament using Single Member Plurality (often called First Past The Post). The way that the Parliament has changed in size can be seen in the table below:<P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th rowspan="2">Election</th>
<th colspan="2">MEPs</th>
<th rowspan="2">Nations</th></tr>
<tr>
<th>United Kingdom</th>
<th>In total</th>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>June 1979</td>
<td>81</td>
<td>410</td>
<td>9</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>June 1984</td>
<td>81</td>
<td>434</td>
<td>10</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>June 1989</td>
<td>81</td>
<td>518</td>
<td>12</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>June 1994</td>
<td>87</td>
<td>567</td>
<td>12</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>June 1999</td>
<td>87</td>
<td>626</td>
<td>15</td></tr>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>June 2004</td>
<td>78</td>
<td>732</td>
<td>25</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>June 2009</td>
<td>72</td>
<td>736</td>
<td>27</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>May 2014</td>
<td>73</td>
<td>751</td>
<td>28</td></tr>
</table></center><P>
Until 1994, the number of MEPs that "The Nine" (Belgium, Denmark, France, Federal Republic of Germany, Republic of Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, United Kingdom) had remained constant, and the four largest nations (France, Germany, Italy, UK) each had 81 MEPs. The expansion in the Parliament's size was Greece being given 24 MEPs when it joined in January 1981, and Portugal and Spain being given 24 and 60 MEPs respectively when they joined in January 1986.<P>
By 1994 there had been two major changes. Firstly, the old German Democratic Republic had been absorbed into the Federal Republic in October 1990, and as a consequence, the parity in seats for the four largest nations ended. Germany received an additional 18 seats (bringing it up to 99), while France, Italy, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom each received an extra 6 seats, Span received an extra 4, with Belgium, Greece and Portugal (all of whom had had 24 MEPs) received an extra seat each - creating an extra 49 seats. The second big change was the Treaty of Maastricht coming into force in November 1993, replacing the European Communities with the European Union, and giving the Parliament more powers.<P>
January 1995 saw Austria (21 MEPs), Finland (16 MEPs) and Sweden (22 MEPs) join, pushing the Parliament up to 626 seats.<P>
The Treaty of Nice came into force in February 2003, setting an upper limit of 732 MEPs (which could be breached, temporarily, if new countries joined between elections).<P>
In May 2004 there was a major expansion of the EU, with Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Slovakia and Slovenia joining, bringing the EU to 25 member nations. The Parliament elected the following month saw many countries have a reduction in MEPs in order to keep the Nice cap.<P>
In January 2007 Bulgaria (18 MEPs) and Romania (35 MEPs) joined the EU, brinng the Parliament up to 785 MEPs. As this was mid-term, breaching the Nice cap was not an issue, but the size of the Parliament was reduced by 49 members for the 2009 election. Croatia - with 12 MEPs - joined in July 2013, bringing the Parliament up to 748.<P>
The Treaty of Lisbon came into force in December 2009, which set the size of the Parliament at 750 members from the 2014 election, with each nation being entitled to a minimum of 6 and a maximum of 96 seats. Historically, France, Italy and the United Kingdom had the same number of seats, but this Treaty put France on 74, the United Kingdom on 73 and Italy on 72. To ensure Italy was treated equally as the United Kingdom, the size was increased to 751 members.<P>
The June 1989 European election had given the result:<P>
<UL><LI>Labour - 45
<LI>Conservative - 32
<LI>Scottish National Party - 1
<LI>Democratic Unionist Party - 1
<LI>Social Democratic & Labour Party - 1
<LI>Ulster Unionist Party - 1</li></ul><P>
The 1989 election was controversial as the Greens obtained their best ever result - 14.42% of the vote - but won no seats. This was the first election I was really aware of, as - although I was too young to vote - most of the students at my sixth-form college were able to. Our European constituency - <i>Dorset East & West Hampshire</i> - was one where the Greens came second.<P>
Labour's 38.72% was their best result in a national election since the October 1974 general election, and ended up being their highest share of the vote under Neil Kinnock's leadership (the April 1992 general election saw their share of the vote fall from 1989). The Conservatives' 33.54% was their worst result in a national election since the April/May 1859 general election.<P>
The 1989 election was also the last national election with Margaret Thatcher as Prime Minister.<P>
The following 26 seats were unchanged:<P>
<ul><LI><i>Birmingham East</i>
<LI><i>Birmingham West</i>
<li><i>Durham</i>
<LI><i>Fife & Mid Scotland</i>
<LI><i>Glasgow</i>
<LI><i>Highlands & Islands</i>
<LI><i>Leeds</i>
<LI><i>London Central</i>
<LI><i>London East</i>
<LI><i>London North</i>
<LI><i>London North East</i>
<LI><i>London North West</i>
<LI><i>London West</i>
<LI><i>Lothians</i>
<LI><i>Merseyside East</i> (renamed <i>Merseyside East & Wigan</i>)
<LI><i>Merseyside West</i>
<LI><i>Midlands West</i>
<LI><i>Northern Ireland</i> (3-member constituency)
<LI><i>Northumbria</i>
<LI><i>Scotland North East</i>
<LI><i>Scotland South</i>
<LI><i>Strathclyde East</i>
<LI><i>Strathclyde West</i>
<LI><i>Thames Valley</i>
<LI><i>Tyne & Wear</i>
<LI><i>Yorkshire South</i>
</li></ul>
<P>
Next we can look at how the 1984/1989 constituencies were split up for 1994:<P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>Constituency</th>
<th>Percentage</th>
<th>New constituency</th></tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="3" bgcolor="#00BFFF">Bedfordshire South</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">56.81%</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Bedfordshire & Milton Keynes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">29.94%</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Hertfordshire</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">13.25%</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Essex West & East Hertfordshire</td></tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2" bgcolor="#FF0000">Bristol</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">75.11%</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Bristol</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">24.89%</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Wiltshire North & Bath</td></tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2" bgcolor="#00BFFF">Cambridge & North Bedfordshire</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">72.66%</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Cambridgeshire</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">27.34%</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Bedfordshire & Milton Keynes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="4" bgcolor="#FF0000">Cheshire East</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">57.96%</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Cheshire East</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">14.31%</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Peak District</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">14.30%</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Cheshire West & Wirral</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">13.44%</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Staffordshire West & Congleton</td></tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2" bgcolor="#FF0000">Cheshire West</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">86.05%</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Cheshire West & Wirral</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">13.95%</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Cheshire East</td></tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2" bgcolor="#FF0000">Cleveland & North Yorkshire</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">86.80%</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Cleveland & Richmond</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">13.20%</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">North Yorkshire</td></tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2" bgcolor="#00BFFF">Cornwall & Plymouth</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">87.77%</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Cornwall & West Plymouth</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">12.23%</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Devon & East Plymouth</td></tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="3" bgcolor="#00BFFF">Cotswolds</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">72.61%</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Cotswolds</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">14.67%</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Worcestershire & South Warwickshire</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">12.73%</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Buckinghamshire & East Oxfordshire</td></tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2" bgcolor="#00BFFF">Cumbria & North Lancashire</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">89.27%</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Cumbria & North Lancashire</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">10.73%</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Lancashire Central</td></tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="3" bgcolor="#FF0000">Derbyshire</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">63.62%</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Peak District</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">24.63%</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Staffordshire East & Derby</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">11.75%</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Nottinghamshire North & Chesterfield</td></tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="3" bgcolor="#00BFFF">Devon</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">75.43%</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Devon & East Plymouth</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">13.14%</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Dorset & East Devon</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">11.44%</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Somerset & North Devon</td></tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2" bgcolor="#00BFFF">Dorset East & West Hampshire</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">62.44%</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Dorset & East Devon</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">37.56%</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Itchen, Test & Avon</td></tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2" bgcolor="#00BFFF">Essex North East</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">67.30%</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Essex North & South Suffolk</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">32.70%</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Essex South</td></tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2" bgcolor="#00BFFF">Essex South West</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">50.28%</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Essex West & East Hertfordshire</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">49.72%</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Essex South</td></tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="3" bgcolor="#FF0000">Greater Manchester Central</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">61.58%</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Greater Manchester Central</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">25.23%</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Cheshire East</td>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">13.20%</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Greater Manchester West</td></tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2" bgcolor="#FF0000">Greater Manchester East</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">62.24%</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Greater Manchester East</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">37.76%</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Greater Manchester Central</td></tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2" bgcolor="#FF0000">Greater Manchester West</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">86.65%</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Greater Manchester West</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">13.35%</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Lancashire South</td></tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="3" bgcolor="#00BFFF">Hampshire Central</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">42.92%</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Hampshire North & Oxford</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">42.74%</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Itchen, Test & Avon</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">14.34%</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Wight & South Hampshire</td></tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="3" bgcolor="#00BFFF">Hereford & Worcester</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">51.27%</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Worcestershire & South Warwickshire</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">35.48%</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Hereford & Shropshire</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">13.25%</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Cotswolds</td></tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2" bgcolor="#00BFFF">Hertfordshire</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">70.73%</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Hertfordshire</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">29.27%</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Essex West & East Hertfordshire</td></tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2" bgcolor="#FF0000">Humberside</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">70.61%</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Humberside</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">29.39%</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Lincolnshire & South Humberside</td></tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2" bgcolor="#00BFFF">Kent East</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">87.22%</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Kent East</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">12.78%</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Kent West</td></tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2" bgcolor="#00BFFF">Kent West</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">74.34%</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Kent West</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">25.66%</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">East Sussex & South Kent</td></tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2" bgcolor="#00BFFF">Lancashire Central</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">56.83%</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Lancashire Central</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">43.17%</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Lancashire South</td></tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="3" bgcolor="#FF0000">Lancashire East</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">39.08%</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Lancashire South</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">35.99%</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Greater Manchester East</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">24.93%</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Lancashire Central</td></tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="3" bgcolor="#FF0000">Leicester</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">61.56%</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Leicester</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">24.59%</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Coventry & North Warwickshire</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">13.86%</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Nottingham & North West Leicestershire</td></tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="3" bgcolor="#00BFFF">Lincolnshire</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">64.28%</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Lincolnshire & South Humberside</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">23.09%</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Nottinghamshire North & Chesterfield</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">12.63%</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Leicester</td></tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2" bgcolor="#00BFFF">London South & East Surrey</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">85.61%</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">London South & East Surrey</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">14.39%</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Surrey</td></tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2" bgcolor="#00BFFF">London South East </td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">91.31%</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">London South East </td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">8.69%</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">London South Inner</td></tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2" bgcolor="#FF0000">London South Inner</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">89.01%</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">London South Inner</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">10.99%</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">London South West</td></tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2" bgcolor="#FF0000">London South West</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">85.97%</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">London South West</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">14.03%</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">London South & East Surrey</td></tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2" bgcolor="#FF0000">Midlands Central</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">71.94%</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Coventry & North Warwickshire</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">28.06%</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Worcestershire & South Warwickshire</td></tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2" bgcolor="#00BFFF">Norfolk</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">86.75%</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Norfolk</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">13.25%</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Suffolk & South West Norfolk</td></tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2" bgcolor="#00BFFF">Northamptonshire</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">87.09%</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Northamptonshire & Blaby</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">12.91%</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Leicester</td></tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="3" bgcolor="#FF0000">Nottingham</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">62.48%</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Nottingham & North West Leicestershire</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">24.66%</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Nottinghamshire North & Chesterfield</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">12.85%</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Peak District</td></tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2" bgcolor="#00BFFF">Oxford & Buckinghamshire</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">75.14%</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Buckinghamshire & East Oxfordshire</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">24.86%</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Hampshire North & Oxford</td></tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2" bgcolor="#FF0000">Sheffield</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">74.20%</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Sheffield</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">25.80%</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Nottinghamshire North & Chesterfield</td></tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="3" bgcolor="#00BFFF">Shropshire & Stafford</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">51.36%</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Hereford & Shropshire</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">36.74%</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Staffordshire West & Congleton</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">11.89%</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Staffordshire East & Derby</td></tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="3" bgcolor="#00BFFF">Somerset & West Dorset</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">75.35%</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Somerset & North Devon</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">13.20%</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Bristol</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">11.45%</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Dorset & East Devon</td></tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="3" bgcolor="#FF0000">Staffordshire East</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">51.68%</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Staffordshire East & Derby</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">35.93%</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Staffordshire West & Congleton</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">12.39%</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Nottingham & North West Leicestershire</td></tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="3" bgcolor="#00BFFF">Suffolk</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">70.63%</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Suffolk & South West Norfolk</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">15.25%</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Essex North & South Suffolk</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">14.13%</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Cambridgeshire</td></tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2" bgcolor="#00BFFF">Surrey West</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">85.83%</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Surrey</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">14.17%</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">South Downs West</td></tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2" bgcolor="#00BFFF">Sussex East</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">66.46%</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">East Sussex & South Kent</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">33.54%</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Sussex South & Crawley</td></tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2" bgcolor="#00BFFF">Sussex West</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">55.63%</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Sussex South & Crawley</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">44.37%</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">South Downs West</td></tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2" bgcolor="#FF0000">Wales Mid & West</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">58.28%</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Wales Mid & West</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">41.72%</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Wales South West</td></tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2" bgcolor="#FF0000">Wales North</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">86.46%</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Wales North</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">13.54%</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Wales Mid & West</td></tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2" bgcolor="#FF0000">Wales South</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">69.11%</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Wales South Central</td>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">30.89%</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Wales South West</td></tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2" bgcolor="#FF0000">Wales South East</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">80.63%</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Wales South East</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">19.37%</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Wales South Central</td>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2" bgcolor="#00BFFF">Wight & East Hampshire</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">70.88%</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Wight & South Hampshire</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">29.12%</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">South Downs West</td></tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="3" bgcolor="#00BFFF">Wiltshire</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">61.14%</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Wiltshire North & Bath</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">25.72%</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Hampshire North & Oxford</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">13.14%</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Itchen, Test & Avon</td></tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2" bgcolor="#00BFFF">York</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">71.87%</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">North Yorkshire</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">28.13%</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Humberside</td></tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2" bgcolor="#FF0000">Yorkshire South West</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">88.08%</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Yorkshire South West</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">11.92%</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Sheffield</td></tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2" bgcolor="#FF0000">Yorkshire West</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">86.51%</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Yorkshire West</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">13.49%
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Yorkshire South West</td></tr></table></center><P>
We can now identify the 1984-1994 constituencies with their successors (if any) and will also look at which MEPs were seeking re-election in 1994:<P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>Constituency</th>
<th>MEP</th>
<th>Standing for re-election?</th>
<th>Successor constituency</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Bedfordshire South</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Peter Beazley</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">No</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Bedfordshire & Milton Keynes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Birmingham East</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Christine Crawley</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Yes</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Birmingham East</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Birmingham West</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">John Tomlinson</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Yes</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Birmingham West</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Bristol</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Ian White</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Yes</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Bristol</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Cambridge & North Bedfordshire</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Fred Catherwood</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">No</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Cambridgeshire</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Cheshire East</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Brian Simpson</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Yes</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Cheshire East</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Cheshire West</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Lyndon Harrison</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Yes</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Cheshire West & Wirral</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Cleveland & North Yorkshire</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">David Bowe</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Yes</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Cleveland & Richmond</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Cornwall & Plymouth</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Christopher Beazley</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Yes</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Cornwall & West Plymouth</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Cotswolds</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Henry Plumb</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Yes</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Cotswolds</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Cumbria & North Lancashire</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Richard Fletcher-Vane <sup>[a]</sup></td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Yes</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Cumbria & North Lancashire</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Derbyshire</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Geoff Hoon <sup>[b]</sup></td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">No</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Peak District</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Devon</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Charles Strachey <sup>[c]</sup></td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF"><a href="http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/12697993.Why_the_Euro_Tories_wanted_Lord_O_apos_Hagan__apos_disappeared_apos_">Resigned seat May 1994</a></td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Devon & East Plymouth</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Dorset East & West Hampshire</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Bryan Cassidy</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Yes</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Dorset & East Devon</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Durham</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Stephen Hughes</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Yes</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Durham</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Essex North East</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Anne McIntosh</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Yes</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Essex North & South Suffolk</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Essex South West</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Patricia Rawlings</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Yes</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Essex West & East Hertfordshire</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Fife & Mid Scotland</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Alex Falconer</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Yes</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Fife & Mid Scotland</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Glasgow</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Janey Buchan</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">No</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Glasgow</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Greater Manchester Central</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Eddie Newman</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Yes</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Greater Manchester Central</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Greater Manchester East</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Glyn Ford</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Yes</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Greater Manchester East</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Greater Manchester West</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Gary Titley</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Yes</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Greater Manchester West</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Hampshire Central</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Edward Kellett-Bowman</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Yes</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Hampshire North & Oxford</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Hereford & Worcester</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">James Scott-Hopkins</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">No</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Worcestershire & South Warwickshire</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Hertfordshire</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Derek Prag</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">No</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Hertfordshire</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FFFF00">Highlands & Islands</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFF00">Winnie Ewing</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFF00">Yes</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFF00">Highlands & Islands</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Humberside</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Peter Crampton</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Yes</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Humberside</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Kent East</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Christopher Jackson</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Yes</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Kent East</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Kent West</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Ben Patterson</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Yes</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Kent East</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Lancashire Central</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Michael Welsh</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Yes</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Lancashire Central</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Lancashire East</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Michael Hindley</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Yes</td>
<td><i>None</i> <sup>[d]</sup></td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Leeds</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Michael McGowan</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Yes</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Leeds</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Leicester</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Mel Read</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Yes</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Leicester</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Lincolnshire</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Bill Newton-Dunn</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Yes</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Lincolnshire & South Humberside</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">London Central</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Stan Newens</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Yes</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">London Central</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">London East</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Carole Tongue</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Yes</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">London East</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">London North</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Pauline Green</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Yes</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">London North</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">London North East</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Alf Lomas</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Yes</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">London North East</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">London North West</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Nicholas Bethell <sup>[e]</sup></td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Yes</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">London North West</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">London South & East Surrey</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">James Moorhouse</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Yes</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">London South & East Surrey</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">London South East</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Peter Price</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Yes</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">London South East</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">London South Inner</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Richard Balfe</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Yes</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">London South Inner</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">London South West</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Anita Pollack</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Yes</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">London South West</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">London West</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Michael Elliott</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Yes</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">London West</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Lothians</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">David Martin</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Yes</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Lothians</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Merseyside East</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Terry Wynn</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Yes</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Merseyside East & Wigan</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Merseyside West</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Kenneth Stewart</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Yes</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Merseyside West</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Midlands Central</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Christine Oddy</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Yes</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Coventry & North Warwickshire</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Midlands West</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">John Bird</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">No</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Midlands West</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Norfolk</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Paul Howell</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Yes</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Norfolk</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Northamptonshire</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Anthony Simpson</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Yes</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Northamptonshire & Blaby</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Northumbria</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Gordon Adam</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Yes</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Northumbria</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Nottingham</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Ken Coates</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Yes</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Nottingham & North West Leicestershire</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Oxford & Buckinghamshire</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">James Elles</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Yes</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Buckinghamshire & East Oxfordshire</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Scotland North East</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Henry McCubbin</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Yes</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Scotland North East</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Scotland South</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Alex Smith</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Yes</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Scotland South</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Sheffield</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Roger Barton</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Yes</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Sheffield</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Shropshire & Stafford</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Christopher Prout</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Yes</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Hereford & Shropshire</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Somerset & West Dorset</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Margaret Daly</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Yes</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Somerset & North Devon</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Staffordshire East</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">George Stevenson <sup>[f]</sup></td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">No</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Staffordshire East & Derby</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Strathclyde East</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Ken Collins</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Yes</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Strathclyde East</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Strathclyde West</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Hugh McMahon</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Yes</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Strathclyde West</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Suffolk</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Amédée Turner</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Yes</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Suffolk & South West Norfolk</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Surrey West</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Tom Spencer</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Yes</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Surrey</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Sussex East</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Jack Stewart-Clark</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Yes</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">East Sussex & South Kent</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Sussex West</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Madron Seligman</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">No</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Sussex South & Crawley</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Thames Valley</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">John Stevens</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Yes</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Thames Valley</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Tyne & Wear</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Alan Donnelly</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Yes</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Tyne & Wear</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Wales Mid & West</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">David Morris</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Yes</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Wales Mid & West</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Wales North</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Joe Wilson</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Yes</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Wales North</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Wales South</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Wayne David</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Yes</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Wales South Central</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Wales South East</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Llew Smith <sup>[g]</sup></td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">No</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Wales South East</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Wight & East Hampshire</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Richard Simmonds</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">No</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Wight & South Hampshire</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Wiltshire</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Caroline Jackson</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Yes</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Wiltshire North & Bath</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">York</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Edward McMillan-Scott</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Yes</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">North Yorkshire</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Yorkshire South</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Norman West</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Yes</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Yorkshire South</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Yorkshire South West</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Tom Megahy</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Yes</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Yorkshire South West</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Yorkshire West</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Barry Seal</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Yes</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Yorkshire West</td></tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="3"><i>None</i></td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Essex South</td></tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="3"><i>None</i></td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Itchen, Test & Avon</td></tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="3"><i>None</i></td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Lancashire South</td></tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="3"><i>None</i></td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Nottinghamshire North & Chesterfield</td></tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="3"><i>None</i></td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">South Downs West</td></tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="3"><i>None</i></td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Staffordshire West & Congleton</td></tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="3"><i>None</i></td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Wales South West</td></tr>
</table></center><P>
<sup>[a]</sup> Fletcher-Vane became the <a href="http://www.parliament.uk/biographies/lords/lord-inglewood/1980">2<sup>nd</sup> Lord Inglewood</a> a week after the 1989 election.<P>
<sup>[b]</sup> Hoon was elected Labour MP for <i>Ashfield</i> (which lay within his European constituency) at the 1992 general election.<P>
<sup>[c]</sup> Strachey was a member of the House of Lords as the 4<sup>th</sup> Lord O'Hagan.<P>
<sup>[d]</sup> While it might appear that <i>Lancashire South</i> is the natural successor to <i>Lancashire East</i>, it picked up more voters from <i>Lancashire Central</i> than from <i>Lancashire East</i>.<P>
<sup>[e]</sup> Bethell was also a member of the House of Lords as the 4<sup>th</sup> Lord Bethell.<P>
<sup>[f]</sup> Stevenson was elected Labour MP for <i>Stoke-on-Trent South</i> (which lay within his European constituency) at the 1992 general election.<P>
<sup>[g]</sup> Smith was elected Labour MP for <i>Blaenau Gwent</i> (which lay within his European constituency) at the 1992 general election.<P>
Note that not every MEP seeking re-election stood in their successor seat:<P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>MEP</th>
<th>Successor seat</th>
<th>Stood in</th></tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Ken Coates</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Nottingham & North West Leicestershire</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Nottinghamshire North & Chesterfield</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Michael Hindley</td>
<td><i>None</i></td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Lancashire South</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Edward Kellett-Bowman</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Hampshire North & Oxford</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Itchen, Test & Avon</td></tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">David Morris</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Wales Mid & West</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Wales South West</td>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Mel Read</td>
<td bgcolor="#00BFFF">Leicester</td>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">Nottingham & North West Leicestershire</td></tr>
</table></center><P>
We can now look at the partisan effects of the new constituencies:<P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th rowspan="2">Party</th>
<th rowspan="2">Seats</th>
<th colspan="2">Changing hands due to boundary changes</th>
<th rowspan="2">Abolished seats</th>
<th rowspan="2">Created seats</th>
<th rowspan="2">Notional seats</th></tr>
<tr>
<th>Gained</th>
<th>Lost</th></tr>
<tr>
<td>Labour</td>
<td><b>45</b></td>
<td>1</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>4</td>
<td><b>48</b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td><b>32</b></td>
<td>1</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>3</td>
<td><b>35</b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Scottish National Party</td>
<td><b>1</b></td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td><b>1</b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Democratic Unionist Party</td>
<td><b>1</b></td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td><b>1</b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Social Democratic & Labour Party</td>
<td><b>1</b></td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td><b>1</b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Ulster Unionist Party</td>
<td><b>1</b></td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td><b>1</b></td></tr>
</table></center><P>
The notional results are:<P>
<b>Labour (48 seats)</b><P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>Constituency</th>
<th>Majority</th>
<th>Runner-up</th>
<th>Held in 1994?</th></tr>
<tr>
<td>Tyne & Wear</td>
<td>95,780</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Yorkshire South</td>
<td>91,784</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Durham</td>
<td>86,848</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Wales South East</td>
<td>79,195</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Merseyside East & Wigan</td>
<td>76,867</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Wales South West</td>
<td>69,762</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Sheffield</td>
<td>65,558</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Yorkshire South West</td>
<td>61,293</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Strathclyde East</td>
<td>60,317</td>
<td>Scottish National Party</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Northumbria</td>
<td>60,040</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Glasgow</td>
<td>59,232</td>
<td>Scottish National Party</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Greater Manchester East</td>
<td>58,959</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Wales South Central</td>
<td>57,554</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Fife & Mid Scotland</td>
<td>52,157</td>
<td>Scottish National Party</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Merseyside West</td>
<td>49,817</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Greater Manchester West</td>
<td>49,400</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>London North East</td>
<td>47,767</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Birmingham East</td>
<td>46,948</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Nottinghamshire North & Chesterfield</td>
<td>46,772</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Leeds</td>
<td>42,518</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Midlands West</td>
<td>42,364</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>London South Inner</td>
<td>42,186</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Strathclyde West</td>
<td>39,591</td>
<td>Scottish National Party</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Lothians</td>
<td>38,826</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Cleveland & Richmond</td>
<td>33,643</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Yorkshire West</td>
<td>32,070</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Birmingham West</td>
<td>30,860</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>London East</td>
<td>27,385</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Greater Manchester Central</td>
<td>27,284</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Staffordshire West & Congleton</td>
<td>20,090</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Coventry & North Warwickshire</td>
<td>20,002</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Lancashire South</td>
<td>19,856</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Staffordshire East & Derby</td>
<td>18,461</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Cheshire West & Wirral</td>
<td>16,858</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Cheshire East</td>
<td>16,805</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Scotland South</td>
<td>15,693</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>London West</td>
<td>14,808</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>London Central</td>
<td>11,542</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Wales Mid & West</td>
<td>11,527</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>London South West</td>
<td>10,723</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Wales North</td>
<td>9,378</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Bristol</td>
<td>7,715</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>London North</td>
<td>5,837</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Nottingham & North West Leicestershire</td>
<td>4,966</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Humberside</td>
<td>4,389</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Peak District</td>
<td>3,651</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Scotland North East</td>
<td>2,613</td>
<td>Scottish National Party</td>
<td>No - lost to Scottish National Party</td>
<tr>
<td>Cumbria & North Lancashire</td>
<td>1,610</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
</table></center><P>
<b>Conservative (35 seats)</b><P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>Constituency</th>
<th>Majority</th>
<th>Runner-up</th>
<th>Held in 1994?</th></tr>
<tr>
<td>Dorset & East Devon</td>
<td>51,621</td>
<td>Green</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Devon & East Plymouth</td>
<td>49,889</td>
<td>Green</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Buckinghamshire & East Oxfordshire</td>
<td>49,596</td>
<td>Green</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>North Yorkshire</td>
<td>45,176</td>
<td>Green</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>South Downs West</td>
<td>44,913</td>
<td>Green</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>East Sussex & South Kent</td>
<td>42,656</td>
<td>Green</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Somerset & North Devon</td>
<td>42,206</td>
<td>Green</td>
<td>No - lost to Liberal Democrat</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Surrey</td>
<td>42,112</td>
<td>Green</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Itchen, Test & Avon</td>
<td>39,047</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Hampshire North & Oxford</td>
<td>36,794</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Sussex South & Crawley</td>
<td>36,499</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Wight & South Hampshire</td>
<td>33,315</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>London South & East Surrey</td>
<td>32,100</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Essex West & East Hertfordshire</td>
<td>30,012</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>No - lost to Labour</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Cambridgeshire</td>
<td>29,878</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Cotswolds</td>
<td>29,760</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Hertfordshire</td>
<td>29,462</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>No - lost to Labour</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Essex North & South Suffolk</td>
<td>27,048</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Wiltshire North & Bath</td>
<td>26,912</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Worcestershire & South Warwickshire</td>
<td>26,635</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Thames Valley</td>
<td>26,491</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Kent East</td>
<td>23,108</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>No - lost to Labour</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Hereford & Shropshire</td>
<td>22,967</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>No - lost to Labour</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Lincolnshire & South Humberside</td>
<td>17,976</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>No - lost to Labour</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Suffolk & South West Norfolk</td>
<td>17,905</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>No - lost to Labour</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Cornwall & West Plymouth</td>
<td>16,746</td>
<td>Liberal Democrat</td>
<td>No - lost to Liberal Democrat</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Kent West</td>
<td>16,311</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>No - lost to Labour</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Norfolk</td>
<td>15,925</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>No - lost to Labour</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Essex South</td>
<td>12,753</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>No - lost to Labour</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Northamptonshire & Blaby</td>
<td>12,362</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>No - lost to Labour</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Bedfordshire & Milton Keynes</td>
<td>11,127</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>No - lost to Labour</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>London South East</td>
<td>10,694</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>No - lost to Labour</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>London North West</td>
<td>7,400</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>No - lost to Labour</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Leicester</td>
<td>4,057</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>No - lost to Labour</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Lancashire Central</td>
<td>2,068</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>No - lost to Labour</td></tr>
</table></center><P>
<b>Scottish National Party (1 seat)</b><P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>Constituency</th>
<th>Majority</th>
<th>Runner-up</th>
<th>Held in 1994?</th></tr>
<tr>
<td>Highlands & Islands</td>
<td>44,695</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
</table></center>Graham Pointerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03538991243769088600noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8004940586846099589.post-23393642003188405582015-10-20T03:58:00.000-07:002015-10-20T03:58:05.775-07:00The Last Sunday After Pentecost - Where The Alternative Service Book Got It RightThose who follow the <i>Book of Common Prayer</i> and/or <i>Common Worship</i> lectionaries will be aware that last Sunday was the <i>20<sup>th</sup> Sunday after Trinity</i>.<P>
If - like me - you became a Christian from a non-churchgoing background in the late 1980s or early 1990s and attended a Church of England church, then your first liturgical encounter would be with the <i>Alternative Service Book</i>. It would be confusing to hear older people reminisce about <i>Series 1</i>, <i>Series 2</i>, <i>Series 3</i> and <i>Series 2 & 3 Combined</i>.<P>
A key part of any service book is its calendar. The Church calendar plays a role in helping us remember parts of Jesus's life, death and resurrection, and the actions of God in His story of redemption - not just the familiar Easter and Christmas Day, but the Epiphany (6 January), Transfiguration (6 August), Ascension Day <i>etc.</i><P>
One of the ways that I feel <i>Common Worship</i> has improved on the <i>Book of Common Prayer</i> is its handling of November. In the BCP, you had Advent Sunday, which would be between 27 November and 3 December inclusive, with the Last Sunday after Trinity being the Sunday before that (<i>i.e.</i> between 20 and 26 November inclusive).<P>
November is a heavy month. The nights draw in, frosts appear, deciduous trees are bare, flowers die. There is this element of death and decay - and that month sees All Saints' Day (1 November) and All Souls' Day (2 November), as well as Remembrance Sunday (which, for obvious reasons, the Reformers would not have known about).<P>
<i>Common Worship</i> draws this together into its own little liturgical season, starting with All Saints' Sunday, 4 weeks before Advent - hence between 30 October and 5 November inclusive. This means that its Last Sunday after Trinity is 4 weeks before the one in the BCP (so will be between 23 and 29 October inclusive). Before we get into the rush of Christmas and our celebrating of the birth of Jesus, we reflect on our own mortality.<P>
Under the ASB calendar, <i>Common Worship</i>'s Last Sunday after Trinity would be <a href="http://grahampointer.blogspot.co.uk/2012/10/twas-9-before-christmas.html">9 Before Christmas</a>, as the Church of England bought into the secular idea that Christmas needed a nice long period of preparation.<P>
And so the Sunday between 16 and 22 October inclusive (<i>i.e.</i> last Sunday) would be on the calendar as the <i>Last Sunday after....</i><P>
No, not Trinity.<P>
Trinity Sunday can be as early as 17 May or as late as 20 June. There is that long period in the church calendar where Sundays are named after how many weeks they are after it.<P>
The <i>Alternative Service Book</i> used a different starting point - the Sunday before Trinity, which is Whit Sunday (in the BCP) and Pentecost (in <i>Common Worship</i>). This celebrates the day that the Holy Spirit came upon the Apostles and the others in the upper room, empowering them to bring the Christian Gospel across the known world.<P>
The <i>n<sup>th</sup> Sunday after Pentecost</i> is the <i>(n-1)<sup>th</sup> Sunday after Trinity</i>.<P>
This seems, to me, to be the better starting point. The Church's mission, and our individual lives, rely on the empowering of the Holy Spirit. Naming our Sundays after Pentecost puts the focus, correctly, on this.Graham Pointerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03538991243769088600noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8004940586846099589.post-39661171017698783562015-10-20T03:06:00.004-07:002015-10-20T03:06:54.926-07:00The Crossbench Senate - A Consequence Of The Canadian ElectionIt is now clear that <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-34578213">Canada's Liberals have gone from a poor third place to win yesterday's election</a> - which is an amazing turn around, given that at the previous election, in May 2011, the New Democrats had replaced them as the Official Opposition.<P>
What might be overlooked is the Senate, which has an upper size of 105 members. There are currently a rather large number of vacancies - 22 in all, just over one-fifth of the Senate. And this now gives the incoming Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, a golden opportunity.<P>
A couple of years back, I noted that <a href="http://grahampointer.blogspot.co.uk/2013/08/the-wrong-type-of-labour-peer-genius-of.html">former Prime Minister Tony Blair was a bit of a genius</a> by appointing loads of <strike>Blairite</strike> Labour peers, who would carry the flame for decades after he had left office. The situation in Canada is similar, as a Prime Minister can appoint his or her own people to the Senate.<P>
There are a couple of restrictions:<P>
<ol type="1">
<LI>Not only is there a maximum size of 105 - preventing the almost unlimited appointments that a British Prime Minister could do - but Canada's federal structure sets the number of Senators per province/territory, with Québec and Ontario being entitled to 24, while the Northwest Territories, Nunavut and Yukon are entitled to 1 each
<LI>Senators have to retire by their 75th birthday</li></ol><P>
One fundamental difference with the House of Lords is that a Canadian Prime Minister tends to make appointments from his own party, rather than the British-style inviting the Leader of the Opposition and leader(s) of major minor parties to nominate. The other fundamental difference is that there is no real equivalent of the Crossbench peers who are a key part of the House of Lords.<P>
The current composition is:<P>
<UL><LI>Conservative - 47
<LI>Independent-ish Liberal - 29
<LI>Independent - 6
<LI>Progressive Conservative - 1
<LI><i>vacant - 22</i></li></ul><P>
As with anything political, it is more complicated, and the non-Conservative Senators need to be explained in more detail.<P>
The Progressive Conservatives were an old party, similar to the Conservative party we know in the United Kingdom. The October 1993 election was a disaster for them, being reduced to fifth-party status with just 2 MPs, and the Prime Minister, Kim Campbell, losing <i>Vancouver Centre</i> to the Liberals.<P>
Something had happened a few years earlier which had been a factor in their decline. In November 1988, John Dahner, the Progressive Conservative MP for Alberta's <i>Beaver River</i>, died from cancer. March 1989 saw a by-election, with Deborah Gray becoming the Reform Party's first MP.<P>
The November 1988 election had been the last of the traditional 3-party (Progressive Conservative, Liberal, New Democrats) ones, with the Reform Party coming a poor fourth, with just over 2% of the vote and no MPs.<P>
In 1993, newcomers Bloc Québécois won 54 of Québec's 75 seats and became Canada's Official Opposition. Second in terms of votes - but with only 52 seats - was the Reform Party, eclipsing the Progressive Conservatives as the voice of the centre-right. The next election, June 1997, saw the Reform Party overtake Bloc Québécois in terms of seats, so its leader, Preston Manning, became Leader of the Opposition. The Progressive Conservatives increased to 20 MPs, but remained in fifth place.<P>
The Reform Party's seats were all in western provinces - Alberta, British Columbia, Manitoba and Saskatchewan. In all of these (apart from Manitoba, where the Liberals topped the poll), it was the largest party in terms of votes and seats. Apart from an MP from Manitoba, the Progressive Conservatives were winning seats in provinces where the Reform Party was failing to win any - Newfoundland (now Newfoundland & Labrador), New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Ontario and Québec. Indeed, in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia (where it was the New Democrats who won a majority of the province's seats), the Progressive Conservatives came first in terms of number of votes.<P>
November 2000 saw another election with the Canadian Alliance - the successor to the Reform Party - again forming the Official Opposition, and the Progressive Conservatives remaining in fifth place. Although the Alliance picked up a couple of seats in Ontario - where the Progressive Conservatives lost their sole seat - they were again winning seats in Alberta, British Columbia, Manitoba and Saskatchewan, failing to make real inroads anywhere else.<P>
In December 2003, the Canadian Alliance and the Progressive Conservatives mostly merged to form the Conservatives.<P>
However, not taking part in the merger were a few politician, including Elaine McCoy of Alberta, who would go on to be appointed to the Senate in March 2005. When she reaches retirement in March 2021, that will be the end of the Progressive Conservatives as a parliamentary party.<P>
There are 6 Independents - Pierre-Hugues Boisvenu (Québec), Patrick Brazeau (Québec), Anne Cools (Ontario), Michael Duffy (Prince Edward Island), Don Meredith (Ontario) and Pamela Wallin (Saskatchewan).<P>
Brazeau, Duffy and Wallin were all initially Conservatives, who subsequently resigned the Conservative whip, followed by suspension for breaking rules. The suspensions only last until the election, so all 3 will be able to take their seats again when the Senate next meets. Whether the Conservatives let them re-join is another matter.<P>
Boisvenu, Cools and Meredith are also ex-Conservatives (although Cools, currently the longest-serving Senator, was initially appointed to the Senate by Trudeau's father as a Liberal).<P>
The <a href="http://www.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?Language=E&Mode=1&DocId=3294668&File=4">current law</a> sets election day to be the third Monday in October in the fourth calendar year after the previous election - hence <a href="http://www.timeanddate.com/calendar/?year=2019&country=27">the next election should be 21 October 2019</a>. And, under the retirement rules, there will be other vacancies to be filled by the time this new Parliament is dissolved:<P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>Retirement</th>
<th>Senator</th>
<th>Province</th>
<th>Party</th></tr>
<tr>
<td>February 2016</td>
<td>Irving Gerstein</td>
<td>Ontario</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>April 2016</td>
<td>Céline Hervieux-Payette</td>
<td>Québec</td>
<td>Independent Liberal</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>May 2016</td>
<td>David Smith</td>
<td>Ontario</td>
<td>Independent Liberal</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>August 2016</td>
<td>Michel Rivard</td>
<td>Québec</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="3">January 2017</td>
<td>Jim Cowan</td>
<td>Nova Scotia</td>
<td>Independent Liberal</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Wilfred Moore</td>
<td>Nova Scotia</td>
<td>Independent Liberal</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Nancy Ruth</td>
<td>Ontario</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>May 2017</td>
<td>Maria Chaput</td>
<td>Manitoba</td>
<td>Independent Liberal</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>August 2017</td>
<td>Bob Runciman</td>
<td>Ontario</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2">September 2017</td>
<td>George Baker</td>
<td>Newfoundland & Labrador</td>
<td>Independent Liberal</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Libbe Hubley</td>
<td>Prince Edward Island</td>
<td>Independent Liberal</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>November 2017</td>
<td>Kelvin Ogilvie</td>
<td>Nova Scotia</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>April 2018</td>
<td>Pana Merchant</td>
<td>Saskatchewan</td>
<td>Independent Liberal</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>May 2018</td>
<td>Nancy Raine</td>
<td>British Columbia</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2">August 2018</td>
<td>Anne Cools</td>
<td>Ontario</td>
<td>Independent</td>
<tr>
<td>Betty Unger</td>
<td>Alberta</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>September 2018</td>
<td>Art Eggleton</td>
<td>Ontario</td>
<td>Independent Liberal</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>November 2018</td>
<td>Nick Sibbeston</td>
<td>Northwest Territories</td>
<td>Independent Liberal</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>December 2018</td>
<td>Colin Kenny</td>
<td>Ontario</td>
<td>Independent Liberal</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>April 2019</td>
<td>Ghislain Maltais</td>
<td>Québec</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>June 2019</td>
<td>Charlie Watt</td>
<td>Québec</td>
<td>Independent Liberal</td></tr></table></center><P>
So, from the maths it looks like Trudeau can have 22 Senators appointed in the very near future, and adding those to the 29 Independent Liberals gives him 51 Senators - just 2 short of an absolute majority when the Senate is at full capacity. In addition, during the course of this Parliament, he will be able to replace 8 Conservatives and 1 Independent with Liberals - bringing him to 60 Senators.<P>
The Independent Liberals - I didn't get round to them, did I? In January 2014, <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2014/01/29/liberal-senators-caucus-trudeau_n_4687088.html">Trudeau had all Liberal Senators removed from the Liberal caucus</a>. According to him:<P>
<i>The Senate is broken and needs to be fixed. If the Senate serves a purpose at all, it is to act as a check on the extraordinary power of the prime minister and his office, especially in a majority government. The party structure in the Senate interferes with this responsibility. Taken together with patronage (appointments), partisanship within the Senate is a powerful, negative force. It reinforces the prime minister's power instead of checking it.</i><P>
The article states:<P>
<i>If elected prime minister, Trudeau said he'd go further. He'd appoint only independent senators after employing an open, transparent process, with public input, for nominating worthy candidates — much the way recipients of the Order of Canada are chosen.</i><P>
It sounds like Trudeau is looking at something like the <a href="http://lordsappointments.independent.gov.uk">House of Lords Appointments Commission</a>, with its <a href="http://www.parliament.uk/business/lords/whos-in-the-house-of-lords/members-and-their-roles/how-members-are-appointed">function in recommending crossbench peers</a>.<P>
If Trudeau is going down this route, then the Senate at the time this Parliament is dissolved will look something like this:<P>
<ul><LI>Crossbench - 43
<LI>Conservative - 39
<LI>Independent Liberal - 17
<LI>Independent [ex-Conservative] - 5
<LI>Progressive Conservative - 1</li></ul><P>Graham Pointerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03538991243769088600noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8004940586846099589.post-28767336338093010732015-10-06T08:09:00.000-07:002015-10-06T08:09:07.833-07:00If David Cameron Resigns In 2019, What Is The Best Time?There was an interesting <a href="http://new.spectator.co.uk/2015/10/when-will-boris-take-the-plunge">article by James Forsyth</a> in <a href="http://new.spectator.co.uk"><i>The Spectator</i></a>, suggesting that Prime Minister David Cameron will resign in 2019:<P>
<i>Mr Cameron has chosen a date for his departure: his closest allies in Downing Street have been told that he intends to announce he’s leaving in the spring of 2019. The Tory leadership race would then take place over the summer, with the new leader introducing themself to the country at the party conference that autumn.</i><P>
Out of post-war Prime Ministers, Cameron has already served longer than Winston Churchill (considering solely his post-war premiership), Anthony Eden, Alec Douglas-Home, Ted Heath, Jim Callaghan and Gordon Brown. He overtakes:<P>
<ul><LI>Clement Attlee on 11 August 2016
<LI>John Major on 14 October 2016
<LI>Harold Macmillan on 16 February 2017
<LI>Harold Wilson on 14 February 2018
<LI>Tony Blair on 6 July 2020
<LI>Margaret Thatcher on 6 December 2021</li></ul><P>
A Conservative leadership race over the summer of 2019, with the new leader making his or her first appearance at the October conference, sounds intriguing. But there are a couple of problems with timing.<P>
A modern-style leadership race takes about 2 months, so this is time taken out while a party should be preparing for the next election - due on Thursday, 7 May 2020. If we look at how far in to a Parliament a Prime Minister has resigned (for whatever reason) we have:<P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>General election</th>
<th>Change of leader</th>
<th>Outgoing leader</th>
<th>Incoming leader</th>
<th>Time from election</th></tr>
<tr>
<td>October 1951</td>
<td>April 1955</td>
<td>Churchill</td>
<td>Eden</td>
<td>3y 5m</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>May 1955</td>
<td>January 1957</td>
<td>Eden</td>
<td>Macmillan</td>
<td>1y 7m</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>October 1959</td>
<td>October 1963</td>
<td>Macmillan</td>
<td>Douglas-Hone</td>
<td>4y 0m</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>February 1974</td>
<td>April 1976</td>
<td>Wilson</td>
<td>Callaghan</td>
<td>2y 1m</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>June 1987</td>
<td>November 1990</td>
<td>Thatcher</td>
<td>Major</td>
<td>3y 5m</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>May 2005</td>
<td>June 2007</td>
<td>Blair</td>
<td>Brown</td>
<td>2y 2m</td></tr>
</table></center><P>
The only example of a change of Prime Minister in the fifth year of a Parliament didn't work out well, but the two fourth-year changes did lead to the party winning the following general election. Interestingly, these were around the same point of a Parliament, and - if the change were at a similar point - then a new leader would present himself or herself at the <i>2018</i> conference. At this point, Cameron would have become the third longest-serving post-war Prime Minister.<P>
It is possible that the Conservatives will enter Opposition after the next election, and - if Labour wins decisively - the removal vans could be at 10 Downing Street by lunchtime on Friday, 8 May. Now consider the scenario of a new leader being unveiled and taking office at the 2019 Conference, which we can reasonably assume will be in October. If the new leader takes office on or after 11 October 2019, then he or she runs a real risk of having a shorter premiership than Bonar Law's. So, I think we can rule out a leadership change that late in 2019 - and remember this would involve the starting gun being fired in July or August.<P>
If the 2014 pattern is followed, then the European elections will be on Thursday, 23 May 2019. The <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/events/vote2014/eu-uk-results">2014 election</a> saw the Conservatives come third, on 23.93% of the vote - their worst result ever in a national election. Unless the Conservatives are <i>very</i> unlucky, then there will be a dead cat bounce, and Cameron can say that he increased the party vote. With general elections now being on a 5-year cycle, the European elections are the last major test of party support.<P>
Cameron <i>could</i> announce his resignation following the European elections, leaving on an electoral upswing, and a new Prime Minister being chosen in August, ready to face the House of Commons when the summer recess is over.<P>
Alongside the European elections, there would also be the local elections, and - due to these being on a 4-year cycle - those elected <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election/2015/results/councils">alongside the May 2015 general election</a> will face re-election.<P>
The European and local elections will be the major elections of 2019, and it would not do for the Conservatives to be in the middle of a leadership contest (although in 1994, Labour - by tragedy, not by choice - had to fight the local and European elections while its leadership contest was happening). Again, if we assume that a contest, from start to finish, is 2 months, then this would mean Cameron announcing in March (around the Budget?) at the latest that he would be going and setting the contest in process.<P>
In 1955, Eden decided to cut-and-run, with Parliament dissolved exactly a month after he took office. Major decided to take the opposite approach, and nearly finished the complete term that Thatcher had led the Conservatives to. An incoming Prime Minister wanting the same (or larger) gap between taking office and fighting his or her first election as Prime Minister - with enough time to establish a distinct style - would need to take office by 27 December 2018.<P>
Looking at the dates, I think that Cameron will either step down in 2018 or be leading the Conservatives into the 2020 election.Graham Pointerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03538991243769088600noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8004940586846099589.post-53112801182732391642015-09-30T03:23:00.001-07:002015-09-30T03:23:37.740-07:00The Lunar Eclipse Tetrads And The Jewish CalendarThe most spectacular thing I saw this week was the <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-34375868">total lunar eclipse</a> on Monday morning, which I observed from my parents' home in the New Forest - I could view it from the spare bedroom I was sleeping in.<P>
There has been a lot of fuss made in certain circles about a <i>tetrad</i> and <i>blood Moon</i> and how these tie into Biblical prophecy. The Moon's orbit is inclined and some time back I <a href="http://grahampointer.blogspot.co.uk/2013/03/the-moon-and-month.html">wrote a post about the various lunar months</a>. One of these is the <i>draconic month</i> of 27.21222 days, which is the time between successive crossings of the <i>ascending node</i>.<P>
Basically, as the Moon's orbit is inclined, it will spend half its time above the <i>ecliptic</i> (the projection of the Sun's path onto the starry background) and half its time below. When it moves from below to above (as the northern hemisphere would reckon it), this is the ascending node. The <i>synodic month</i> - from New Moon to New Moon - is longer, and on average is 29.530589 days.<P>
Now consider 6 synodic months - which is equal to 177.183534 days. This is 6.511 draconic months. So, if the Moon was crossing the ascending node at Full Moon, then 6 Full Moons later it would be near the descending node.<P>
So, what can happen if conditions are right are that there is a lunar eclipse, and then lunar eclipses 6, 12 and 18 synodic months later. If these are all total eclipses, then we have what is now termed the tetrad.<P>
And this week's was the fourth in a tetrad.<P>
What has caused some excitement is that this fell on the Jewish festival of <a href="http://www.jewfaq.org/holiday5.htm"><i>Sukkot</i></a>, and all the total lunar eclipses in this tetrad were on Sukkot or <a href="http://www.jewfaq.org/holidaya.htm"><i>Pesach</i></a>.<P>
Now, if you look at <a href="http://www.jewfaq.org/calendar.htm">the Jewish calendar</a>, then you will see that most years have 12 months - which are lunar months. So, a Full Moon will fall mid-month, every month. And the other obvious thing is that there is 6 months from <i>Nissan</i> (the month which Pesach falls in) to <i>Tishri</i> (the month that Sukkot falls in). And often there is 6 months from Tishri to Nissan.<P>
In a tetrad, the eclipses will be 6 Jewish months apart.<P>
So, if the first lunar eclipse of a tetrad is in the month of Nissan, then we will have the pattern:<P>
<i>Nissan-Tishri-Nissan-Tishri</i><P>
if the first eclipse doesn't fall in a leap year. If it does, then the pattern becomes:<P>
<i>Nissan-Tishri-Adar Beit-Elul</i><P>
Another pattern involving a leap year is possible, when the first lunar eclipse of a tetrad is in the month of <i>Iyyar</i>, which is the month that follows Nissan:<P>
<i>Iyyar-Cheshvan-Nissan-Tishri</i><P>
If the first lunar eclipse of a tetrad is in the month of Tishri, then we will have the pattern:<P>
<i>Tishri-Nissan-Tishri-Nissan</i><P>
if there are no leap years involved. If there are, then the pattern becomes:<P>
<i>Tishri-Nissan-Tishri-Adar Beit</i><P>
or<P>
<i>Tishri-Adar Beit-Elul-Adar</i><P>
depending on where the leap year is.<P>
Hence, it is possible in a tetrad for two total lunar eclipses to be in Nissan (and hence fall on Pesach) and the other two to be in Tishri (and hence fall on Sukkot).<P>
One factor in the excitement around this tetrad is that, apparently, whenever there is a tetrad where all the eclipses occur at Pesach and Sukkot, then there are significant events that happen relating to the Jewish people and/or the state of Israel - although as <a href="http://2fletchdr222.blogspot.co.uk/2014/04/the-history-of-8-blood-moon-tetrads.html">one list shows</a>, these can be very tenuous (interestingly, that website declares there was no tetrad around the Crucifixion of Jesus, which <a href="http://www.angelsonassignment.org/tetrads.html">not every tetrad fan agrees with</a> - and there is a <a href="https://answersingenesis.org/jesus-christ/crucifixion/did-the-moon-appear-as-blood-on-the-night-of-the-crucifixion">good article</a> on the <a href="https://answersingenesis.org">Answers In Genesis website</a> which demonstrates that references to a blood-red moon at the Crucifixion were not a lunar eclipse).<P>
As with <a href="http://ssd.jpl.nasa.gov/sbdb.cgi?sstr=1P">Comet 1P/Halley</a>, when you allow yourself to go a few years either side of an astronomical event, you can always find <i>something</i> important happening.<P>
We can use NASA's <a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/lunar.html">lunar eclipse page</a> (which has a <a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/LEcat5/LEcatalog.html">list from 2000 BC to AD 3000</a>)* to see where tetrads will be in the future, and a <a href="http://www.hebcal.com/converter">Hebrew calendar converter</a> to see which month these fall into.<P>
[* This also gives the number of tetrads in each century - interestingly it states there were no tetrads in the <a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/LEcat5/LE0001-0100.html">first century</a>, listing the <a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/0001-0100/LE0033-04-03P.gif">Pesach AD 33 eclipse as a partial</a> - the one <a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/0001-0100/LE0032-04-14T.gif">the previous Pesach is listed as total, but not visible from Jerusalem</a>]<P>
In the lists below, dates in <b>bold</b> are when the whole eclipse is visible from Jerusalem, and those in <i><b>bold italics</b></i> are where some of the eclipse is visible from Jerusalem.<P>
Begin by looking at the <a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/LEcat5/LE2001-2100.html">rest of the twenty-first century</a>:<P>
<b>2032/2033</b><P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>Date</th>
<th>Jewish month and year</th></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/LEplot/LEplot2001/LE2032Apr25T.pdf"><b><I>25 April 2032</i></b></a></td>
<td><b><I>Iyyar 5792</i></b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/LEplot/LEplot2001/LE2032Oct18T.pdf"><b>18 October 2032</b></a></td>
<td><b>Cheshvan 5793</b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/LEplot/LEplot2001/LE2033Apr14T.pdf"><b>14 April 2033</b></a></td>
<td><b>Nissan 5793</b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/LEplot/LEplot2001/LE2033Oct08T.pdf">8 October 2033</a></td>
<td>Tishri 5794</td></tr>
</table></center><P>
<b>2043/2044</b><P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>Date</th>
<th>Jewish month and year</th></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/LEplot/LEplot2001/LE2043Mar25T.pdf"><b><i>25 March 2043</i></b></a></td>
<td><b><i>Adar Beit 5803</i></b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/LEplot/LEplot2001/LE2043Sep19T.pdf"><b>19 September 2043</b></a></td>
<td><b>Elul 5803</b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/LEplot/LEplot2001/LE2044Mar13T.pdf"><b>13 March 2044</b></a></td>
<td><b>Adar 5804</b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/LEplot/LEplot2001/LE2044Sep07T.pdf">7 September 2044</a></td>
<td>Elul 5804</td></tr>
</table></center><P>
<b>2050/2051</b><P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>Date</th>
<th>Jewish month and year</th></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/LEplot/LEplot2001/LE2050May06T.pdf"><b>6 May 2050</b></a></td>
<td><b>Iyyar 5810</b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/LEplot/LEplot2001/LE2050Oct30T.pdf"><b><i>30 October 2050</i></b></a></td>
<td><i><b>Cheshvan 5811</b></i></td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/LEplot/LEplot2051/LE2051Apr26T.pdf"><b><i>26 April 2051</i></b></a></td>
<td><b><i>Iyyar 5811</i></b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/LEplot/LEplot2051/LE2051Oct19T.pdf"><b>19 October 2051</b></a></td>
<td><b>Cheshvan 5812</b></td></tr>
</table></center><P>
<b>2061/2062</b><P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>Date</th>
<th>Jewish month and year</th></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/LEplot/LEplot2051/LE2061Apr04T.pdf"><b>4 April 2061</b></a></td>
<td><b>Nissan 5821</b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/LEplot/LEplot2051/LE2061Sep29T.pdf">29 September 2061</a></td>
<td>Tishri 5822</td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/LEplot/LEplot2051/LE2062Mar25T.pdf"><b><i>25 March 2062</i></b></a></td>
<td><b><i>Adar Beit 5822</i></b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/LEplot/LEplot2051/LE2062Sep18T.pdf"><b>18 September 2062</b></a></td>
<td><b>Elul 5822</b></td></tr>
</table></center><P>
<b>2072/2073</b><P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>Date</th>
<th>Jewish month and year</th></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/LEplot/LEplot2051/LE2072Mar04T.pdf"><b><i>4 March 2072</i></b></a></td>
<td><b><i>Adar 5832</i></b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/LEplot/LEplot2051/LE2072Aug28T.pdf"><b><i>28 August 2072</i></b></a></td>
<td><i><b>Elul 5832</b></i></td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/LEplot/LEplot2051/LE2073Feb22T.pdf">22 February 2073</a></td>
<td>Adar Rishon 5833</td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/LEplot/LEplot2051/LE2073Aug17T.pdf"><b><i>17 August 2073</i></b></a></td>
<td><b><i>Av 5833</i></b></td></tr>
</table></center><P>
<b>2090/2091</b><P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>Date</th>
<th>Jewish month and year</th></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/LEplot/LEplot2051/LE2090Mar15T.pdf"><b>15 March 2090</b></a></td>
<td><b>Adar Beit 5850</b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/LEplot/LEplot2051/LE2090Sep08T.pdf"><b>8 September 2090</b></a></td>
<td><b>Elul 5850</b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/LEplot/LEplot2051/LE2091Mar05T.pdf"><b><i>5 March 2091</i></b></a></td>
<td><b><i>Adar 5851</i></b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/LEplot/LEplot2051/LE2091Aug29T.pdf"><b>29 August 2091</b></a></td>
<td><b>Elul 5851</b></td></tr>
</table></center><P>
When we move on to the <a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/LEcat5/LE2101-2200.html">twenty-second century</a>, there are 4 tetrads:<P>
<b>2101/2102</b><P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>Date</th>
<th>Jewish month and year</th></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2101-2200/LE2101-02-14T.gif"><b>14 February 2101</b></a></td>
<td><b>Shevat 5861</b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2101-2200/LE2101-08-09T.gif">9 August 2101</a></td>
<td>Av 5861</td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2101-2200/LE2102-02-03T.gif">3 February 2102</a></td>
<td>Shevat 5862</td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2101-2200/LE2102-07-30T.gif"><b>30 July 2102</b></a></td>
<td><b>Av 5862</b></td></tr>
</table></center><P>
<b>2119/2120</b><P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>Date</th>
<th>Jewish month and year</th></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2101-2200/LE2119-02-25T.gif">25 February 2119</a></td>
<td>Adar Rishon 5879</td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2101-2200/LE2119-08-20T.gif"><b><i>20 August 2119</i></b></a></td>
<td><i><b>Av 5879</b></i></td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2101-2200/LE2120-02-14T.gif"><b><i>14 February 2120</i></b></a></td>
<td><b><i>Shevat 5880</i></b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2101-2200/LE2120-08-09T.gif">9 August 2120</a></td>
<td>Av 5880</td></tr>
</table></center><P>
<b>2137/2138</b><P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>Date</th>
<th>Jewish month and year</th></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2101-2200/LE2137-03-07T.gif"><b>7 March 2137</b></a></td>
<td><b>Adar 5897</b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2101-2200/LE2137-08-30T.gif"><b>30 August 2137</b></a></td>
<td><b>Elul 5897</b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2101-2200/LE2138-02-24T.gif"><b>24 February 2138</b></a></td>
<td><b>Adar Rishon 5898</b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2101-2200/LE2138-08-20T.gif"><b><i>20 August 2138</i></b></a></td>
<td><i><b>Av 5898</b></i></td></tr>
</table></center><P>
<b>2155/2156</b><P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>Date</th>
<th>Jewish month and year</th></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2101-2200/LE2155-03-19T.gif"><b>19 March 2155</b></a></td>
<td><b>Adar Beit 5915</b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2101-2200/LE2155-09-11T.gif">11 September 2155</a></td>
<td>Elul 5915</td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2101-2200/LE2156-03-07T.gif">7 March 2156</a></td>
<td>Adar 5916</td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2101-2200/LE2156-08-30T.gif"><b>30 August 2156</b></a></td>
<td><b>Elul 5916</b></td></tr>
</table></center><P>
That is the last tetrad for nearly 300 years - there are none in the <a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/LEcat5/LE2201-2300.html">twenty-third</a> or <a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/LEcat5/LE2301-2400.html">twenty-fourth</a> centuries, but when we come to the <a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/LEcat5/LE2401-2500.html">twenty-fifth century</a>, there are 4 tetrads:<P>
<b>2448/2449</b><P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>Date</th>
<th>Jewish month and year</th></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2401-2500/LE2448-06-17T.gif">17 June 2448</a></td>
<td>Sivan 6208</td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2401-2500/LE2448-12-10T.gif"><b>10 December 2448</b></a></td>
<td><b>Kislev 6209</b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2401-2500/LE2449-06-06T.gif"><b>6 June 2449</b></a></td>
<td><b>Sivan 6209</b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2401-2500/LE2449-11-30T.gif"><b><i>30 November 2449</i></b></a></td>
<td><i><b>Kislev 6210</b></i></td></tr>
</table></center><P>
<b>2466/2467</b><P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>Date</th>
<th>Jewish month and year</th></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2401-2500/LE2466-06-28T.gif"><b><i>28 June 2466</i></b></a></td>
<td><b><i>Tammuz 6226</i></b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2401-2500/LE2466-12-22T.gif"><b>22 December 2466</b></a></td>
<td><b>Tevet 6227</b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2401-2500/LE2467-06-18T.gif"><b><i>18 June 2467</i></b></a></td>
<td><b><i>Sivan 6227</i></b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2401-2500/LE2467-12-11T.gif"><b><i>11 December 2467</i></b></a></td>
<td><i><b>Kislev 6228</b></i>
</table></center><P>
<b>2477/2478</b><P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>Date</th>
<th>Jewish month and year</th></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2401-2500/LE2477-05-28T.gif"><b><i>28 May 2477</i></b></a></td>
<td><b><i>Sivan 6237</i></b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2401-2500/LE2477-11-21T.gif"><i><b>21 November 2477</b></i></a></td>
<td><b><i>Kislev 6238</i></b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2401-2500/LE2478-05-17T.gif"><b><i>17 May 2478</i></b></a></td>
<td><b><i>Iyyar 6238</i></b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2401-2500/LE2478-11-10T.gif"><b>10 November 2478</b></a></td>
<td><b>Cheshvan 6239</b></td></tr>
</table></center><P>
<b>2495/2496</b><P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>Date</th>
<th>Jewish month and year</th></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2401-2500/LE2495-06-08T.gif">8 June 2495</a></td>
<td>Sivan 6255</td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2401-2500/LE2495-12-02T.gif"><b><i>2 December 2495</i></b></a></td>
<td><b><i>Kislev 6256</i></b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2401-2500/LE2496-05-27T.gif">27 May 2496</a></td>
<td>Sivan 6256</td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2401-2500/LE2496-11-21T.gif"><b>21 November 2496</b></a></td>
<td><b>Kislev 6257</b></td></tr>
</table></center><P>
When we come to the <a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/LEcat5/LE2501-2600.html">twenty-sixth century</a>, things pick up, with there being 7 tetrads totally within this century:<P>
<b>2506/2507</b><P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>Date</th>
<th>Jewish month and year</th></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2501-2600/LE2506-05-08T.gif"><b><i>8 May 2506</i></b></a></td>
<td><b><i>Iyyar 6266</i></b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2501-2600/LE2506-11-02T.gif"><b><i>2 November 2506</i></b></a></td>
<td><b><i>Cheshvan 6267</i></b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2501-2600/LE2507-04-28T.gif">28 April 2507</a></td>
<td>Iyyar 6267</td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2501-2600/LE2507-10-22T.gif"><b><i>22 October 2507</i></b></a></td>
<td><b><i>Cheshvan 6268</i></b></td></tr>
</table></center><P>
<b>2524/<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vdSqLfuRN18">2525</a></b><P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>Date</th>
<th>Jewish month and year</th></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2501-2600/LE2524-05-19T.gif"><b><i>19 May 2524</i></b></a></td>
<td><b><i>Iyyar 6284</i></b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2501-2600/LE2524-11-12T.gif">12 November 2524</a></td>
<td>Cheshvan 6285</td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2501-2600/LE2525-05-08T.gif"><b><i>8 May 2525</i></b></a></td>
<td><b><i>Iyyar 6285</i></b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2501-2600/LE2525-11-01T.gif">1 November 2525</a></td>
<td>Cheshvan 6286</td></tr>
</table></center><P>
<b>2542/2543</b><P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>Date</th>
<th>Jewish month and year</th></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2501-2600/LE2542-05-30T.gif">30 May 2542</a></td>
<td>Sivan 6302</td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2501-2600/LE2542-11-23T.gif"><b>23 November 2542</b></a></td>
<td><b>Kislev 6303</b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2501-2600/LE2543-05-20T.gif"><b>20 May 2543</b></a></td>
<td><b>Iyyar 6303</b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2501-2600/LE2543-11-12T.gif"><b>12 November 2543</b></a></td>
<td><b>Cheshvan 6304</b></td></tr>
</table></center><P>
<b>2564/2565</b><P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>Date</th>
<th>Jewish month and year</th></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2501-2600/LE2564-03-29T.gif"><b>29 March 2564</b></a></td>
<td><b>Nissan 6324</b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2501-2600/LE2564-09-21T.gif"><b>21 September 2564</b></a></td>
<td><b>Tishri 6325</b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2501-2600/LE2565-03-18T.gif"><b>18 March 2565</b></a></td>
<td><b>Adar Beit 6325</b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2501-2600/LE2565-09-11T.gif">11 September 2565</a></td>
<td>Elul 6235</td></tr>
</table></center><P>
<b>2571/2572</b><P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>Date</th>
<th>Jewish month and year</th></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2501-2600/LE2571-05-11T.gif"><b>11 May 2571</b></a></td>
<td><b>Iyyar 6331</b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2501-2600/LE2571-11-03T.gif"><b><i>3 November 2571</i></b></a></td>
<td><b><i>Cheshvan 6332</i></b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2501-2600/LE2572-04-29T.gif">29 April 2572</a></td>
<td>Iyyar 6332</td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2501-2600/LE2572-10-22T.gif"><b><i>22 October 2572</i></b></a></td>
<td><b><i>Cheshvan 6333</i></b></td></tr>
</table></center><P>
<b>2582/2583</b><P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>Date</th>
<th>Jewish month and year</th></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2501-2600/LE2582-04-09T.gif">9 April 2582</a></td>
<td>Nissan 6342</td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2501-2600/LE2582-10-03T.gif">3 October 2582</a></td>
<td>Tishri 6343</td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2501-2600/LE2583-03-29T.gif">29 March 2583</a></td>
<td>Nissan 6343</td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2501-2600/LE2583-09-22T.gif"><b>22 September 2583</b></a></td>
<td><b>Tishri 6344</b></td></tr>
</table></center><P>
<b>2589/2590</b><P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>Date</th>
<th>Jewish month and year</th></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2501-2600/LE2589-05-21T.gif">21 May 2589</a></td>
<td>Iyyar 6349</td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2501-2600/LE2589-11-13T.gif">13 November 2589</a></td>
<td>Cheshvan 6350</td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2501-2600/LE2590-05-10T.gif"><b><i>10 May 2590</i></b></a></td>
<td><b><i>Iyyar 6350</i></b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2501-2600/LE2590-11-02T.gif"><b>2 November 2590</b></a></td>
<td><b>Cheshvan 6351</b></td></tr>
</table></center><P>
Then there is a century-straddling tetrad:<P>
<b>2600/2601</b><P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>Date</th>
<th>Jewish month and year</th></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2501-2600/LE2600-04-20T.gif"><b>20 April 2600</b></a></td>
<td><b>Nissan 6360</b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2501-2600/LE2600-10-14T.gif"><i><b>14 October 2600</b></i></a></td>
<td><b><i>Tishri 6361</i></b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2601-2700/LE2601-04-09T.gif"><b><i>9 April 2601</i></b></a></td>
<td><b><i>Nissan 6361</i></b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2601-2700/LE2601-10-04T.gif"><b><i>4 October 2601</i></b></a></td>
<td><b><i>Tishri 6362</i></b></td></tr>
</table></center><P>
Like its predecessor, the <a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/LEcat5/LE2601-2700.html">twenty-seventh century</a> contains 7 complete tetrads:<P>
<b>2611/2612</b><P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>Date</th>
<th>Jewish month and year</th></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2601-2700/LE2611-03-20T.gif"><b>20 March 2611</b></a></td>
<td><b>Adar Beit 6371</b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2601-2700/LE2611-09-14T.gif">14 September 2611</a></td>
<td>Elul 6371</td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2601-2700/LE2612-03-09T.gif">9 March 2612</a></td>
<td>Adar 6372</td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2601-2700/LE2612-09-02T.gif">2 September 2612</a></td>
<td>Elul 6372</td></tr>
</table></center><P>
<b>2618/2619</b><P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>Date</th>
<th>Jewish month and year</th></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2601-2700/LE2618-05-01T.gif"><b>1 May 2618</b></a></td>
<td><b>Iyyar 6378</b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2601-2700/LE2618-10-25T.gif"><b>25 October 2618</b></a></td>
<td><b>Cheshvan 6379</b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2601-2700/LE2619-04-20T.gif"><b>20 April 2619</b></a></td>
<td><b>Nissan 6379</b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2601-2700/LE2619-10-15T.gif">15 October 2619</a></td>
<td>Tishri 6380</td></tr>
</table></center><P>
<b>2629/2630</b><P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>Date</th>
<th>Jewish month and year</th></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2601-2700/LE2629-03-31T.gif"><b><i>31 March 2629</i></b></a></td>
<td><b><i>Nissan 6389</i></b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2601-2700/LE2629-09-24T.gif"><b><i>24 September 2629</i></b></a></td>
<td><b><i>Tishri 6390</i></b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2601-2700/LE2630-03-20T.gif"><b>26 March 2630</b></a></td>
<td><b>Adar Beit 6390</b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2601-2700/LE2630-09-13T.gif"><b><i>13 September 2630</i></b></a></td>
<td><i><b>Elul 6390</b></i></td></tr>
</table></center><P>
<b>2640/2641</b><P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>Date</th>
<th>Jewish month and year</th></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2601-2700/LE2640-02-29T.gif">29 February 2640</a></td>
<td>Adar 6400</td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2601-2700/LE2640-08-23T.gif"><b><i>23 August 2640</i></b></a></td>
<td><i><b>Elul 6400</b></i></td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2601-2700/LE2641-02-17T.gif"><b>17 February 2641</b></a></td>
<td><b>Adar Rishon 6401</b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2601-2700/LE2641-08-13T.gif"><i><b>13 August 2641</b></i></a></td>
<td><b><i>Av 6401</i></b></td></tr>
</table></center><P>
<b>2647/2648</b><P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>Date</th>
<th>Jewish month and year</th></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2601-2700/LE2647-04-11T.gif">11 April 2647</a></td>
<td>Nissan 6407</td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2601-2700/LE2647-10-05T.gif"><b>5 October 2647</b></a></td>
<td><b>Tishri 6408</b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2601-2700/LE2648-03-31T.gif"><b><i>31 March 2648</i></b></a></td>
<td><b><i>Nissan 6408</i></b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2601-2700/LE2648-09-23T.gif"><b>23 September 2648</b></a></td>
<td><b>Tishri 6409</b></td></tr>
</table></center><P>
<b>2658/2659</b><P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>Date</th>
<th>Jewish month and year</th></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2601-2700/LE2658-03-11T.gif"><b>11 March 2658</b></a></td>
<td><b>Adar 6418</b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2601-2700/LE2658-09-04T.gif"><b>4 September 2658</b></a></td>
<td><b>Elul 6418</b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2601-2700/LE2659-03-01T.gif"><i><b>1 March 2659</b></i></a></td>
<td><b><i>Adar 6419</i></b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2601-2700/LE2659-08-24T.gif">24 August 2659</a></td>
<td>Elul 6419</td></tr>
</table></center><P>
<b>2676/2677</b><P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>Date</th>
<th>Jewish month and year</th></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2601-2700/LE2676-03-22T.gif"><b><i>22 March 2676</i></b></a></td>
<td><b><i>Adar Beit 6436</i></b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2601-2700/LE2676-09-14T.gif">14 September 2676</a></td>
<td>Elul 6436</td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2601-2700/LE2677-03-11T.gif">11 March 2677</a></td>
<td>Adar 6437</td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2601-2700/LE2677-09-03T.gif"><b>3 September 2677</b></a></td>
<td><b>Elul 6437</b></td></tr>
</table></center><P>
After this, there is another lengthy gap, with no tetrads in either the <a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/LEcat5/LE2701-2800.html">twenty-eighth</a> or <a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/LEcat5/LE2801-2900.html">twenty-ninth </a>centuries, while the <a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/LEcat5/LE2901-3000.html">thirtieth century</a> has just one:<P>
<b>2987/2988</b><P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>Date</th>
<th>Jewish month and year</th></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2901-3000/LE2987-07-02T.gif">2 July 2987</a></td>
<td>Tammuz 6747</td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2901-3000/LE2987-12-26T.gif"><b><i>26 December 2987</i></b></a></td>
<td><b><i>Tevet 6748</i></b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2901-3000/LE2988-06-21T.gif">21 June 2988</a></td>
<td>Sivan 6748</td></tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/2901-3000/LE2988-12-14T.gif">14 December 2988</a></td>
<td>Kislev 6749</td></tr>
</table></center><P>
So, these are the tetrads for the remainder of the third millennium. We can now look at which tetrads include eclipses occurring on Pesach or Sukkot:<P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th rowspan="2">Tetrad</th>
<th colspan="2">Number of total eclipses on:</th></tr>
<tr>
<th>Pesach</th>
<th>Sukkot</th></tr>
<tr>
<td>2032/2033</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>1</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>2061/2062</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>1</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>2564/2565</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>1</td></tr>
<tr>
<td><b>2582/2583</b></td>
<td><b>2</b></td>
<td><b>2</b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td><b>2600/2601</b></td>
<td><b>2</b></td>
<td><b>2</b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td>2618/2619</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>1</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>2629/2630</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>1</td></tr>
<tr>
<td><b>2647/2648</b></td>
<td><b>2</b></td>
<td><b>2</b></td></tr>
</table></center><P>
This means that in the third millennium there are 3 more occassions where there is a tetrad comprised of 2 total lunar eclipses on Pesach and 2 on Sukkot.Graham Pointerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03538991243769088600noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8004940586846099589.post-70468859264564753842015-09-12T12:31:00.002-07:002015-09-12T12:37:42.086-07:00An Overlooked Reason Why Labour Lost In 1983Ask almost anyone about the <a href="http://www.election.demon.co.uk/ge1983.html">June 1983 general election</a> and you will get standard replies as to why the Conservatives won a landslide and Labour did so badly:<P>
<i>The Falklands war</i><P>
<i>Michael Foot's leadership of Labour</i><P>
<i>The Bennite left</i><P>
<i>The Gang of Four splitting away</i><P>
<i>The Liberal/Social Democrat Alliance splitting the anti-Conservative vote</i><P>
There is another factor which always gets overlooked - and <a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2013/6/section/6/enacted">a little clause</a> in the <a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2013/6/contents/enacted"><i>Electoral Registration & Administration Act 2013</i></a> makes this reason relevant to today's political climate.<P>
And I suggest that even if in October 1980 the then Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer Denis Healey had been elected Labour leader, and was leading a united Labour party with Tony Benn and former Foreign & Commonwealth Secretary David Owen harmoniously working together in his Shadow Cabinet, former Education & Science Secretary Shirley Williams selected for a safe seat ready to resume her front-bench career post-election, and Labour's former deputy leader Roy Jenkins retired from the political world totally with his call for "some sort of centre party" forgotten - even in these circumstances, Labour would have faced an uphill battle to win in 1983.<P>
The <a href="http://www.politicsresources.net/area/uk/ge79/ge79index.htm">May 1979</a> election produced the following result:<P>
<ul><LI>Conservative - 339 (included 2 Deputy Speakers - <i>Croydon North East</i>'s Bernard Weatherill and <i>Rye</i>'s Godman Irvine)
<LI>Labour - 268 (included 1 Deputy Speaker - <i>Liverpool Toxteth</i>'s Richard Crawshaw)
<LI>Liberal - 11
<li>Ulster Unionist Party - 5
<LI>Democratic Unionist Party - 3
<LI>Scottish National Party - 2
<LI>Plaid Cymru - 2
<LI>Social Democratic & Labour Party - 1
<LI>United Ulster Unionist Party - 1
<LI>Independent Unionist - 1
<LI>Independent Republican - 1
<LI><i>The Speaker - 1</i></li></ul><P>
With 337 of the 631 voting MPs, there was a Conservative majority of 43, which - at first sight - sounds easy to overturn. Just 22 seats need to change hands....<P>
However, in early 1983 there was an event which hit Labour badly - the redrawing of constituency boundaries. The constituencies in use had been <a href="http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/commons/1969/nov/12/parliamentary-constituencies-orders">rejected by the House of Commons in November 1969</a>, so could not come into effect at the June 1970 general election. However, they were used for the February 1974 and October 1974 general elections, and again in 1979. By 1983 they were based on electoral data from 14 years ago.<P>
In addition, there were a few bits of legislation from the early 1970s that had ramifications. The <a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1972/70/pdfs/ukpga_19720070_en.pdf"><i>Local Government Act 1972</i></a> reformed local government in England and Wales, which included redrawing some county boundaries (<i>e.g.</i> that between Hampshire and Dorset) and creating "metropolitan counties". The <a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1973/65/contents/enacted"><i>Local Government (Scotland) Act 1973</i></a> did similar in Scotland.<P>
This left constituencies crossing county boundaries - such as <i>Christchurch & Lymington</i> (Dorset/Hampshire) or <i>Huddersfield West</i> (Greater Manchester/West Yorkshire).<P>
In March 1972, the then-Prime Minister, Edward Heath, <a href="http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/events/convention/back.htm">decided to suspend the Northern Ireland Parliament</a> and appoint William Whitelaw as the first Northern Ireland Secretary, followed by the <a href="http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/hmso/tpa1972.htm"><i>Northern Ireland (Temporary Provisions) Act 1972</i></a> which transferred executive power to the British Government.<P>
At the time, with regards to the House of Commons, Northern Ireland had a larger electoral quota (<i>i.e.</i> the intended average number of electors per constituency) than Great Britain, due to the <i>House of Commons (Redistribution of Seats) Act 1949</i> setting the number of Northern Ireland constituencies at 12. In early 1979, in order to <strike>get Unionist support</strike> ensure a fair representation for Northern Ireland, the Labour Government was responsible for the <i>House of Commons (Redistribution of Seats) Act 1979</i>, which raised this to 17.<P>
So, due to a combination of factors - redrawn local government boundaries, the increase in Northern Ireland seats, the length of time since the previous review of constituencies - early 1983 saw a new set of 650 constituencies drawn up for that year's election.<P>
The June 1983 election gave the following result:<P>
<ul><LI>Conservative - 397
<LI>Labour - 209
<LI>Liberal - 17
<LI>Ulster Unionist Party - 11
<LI>Social Democrat - 6
<LI>Democratic Unionist Party - 3
<LI>Scottish National Party - 2
<LI>Plaid Cymru - 2
<LI>Social Democratic & Labour Party - 1
<LI>Sinn Féin - 1
<LI>Ulster Popular Unionist Party - 1</li></ul><P>
We can then use <a href="http://www.election.demon.co.uk/changes.html">the list of the 72 seats changing hands</a> to calculate a notional result for the 1979 election (<i>i.e.</i> the 1979 election on the 1983 boundaries):<P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th rowspan="2">Party</th>
<th colspan="2">Gained from</th>
<th colspan="2">Lost to</th>
<th rowspan="2">Change</th></tr>
<tr>
<th>Party</th>
<th>Seats</th>
<th>Party</th>
<th>Seats</th></tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="3">Conservative</td>
<td rowspan="3">Labour</td>
<td rowspan="3">47*</td>
<td>Liberal</td>
<td>5</td>
<td rowspan="3">Up 37</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>4</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Social Democrat</td>
<td>1</td></tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="3">Labour</td>
<td rowspan="3">Conservative</td>
<td rowspan="3">4</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>47</td>
<td rowspan="3">Down 51</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Social Democrat</td>
<td>5</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Liberal</td>
<td>3</td></tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2">Liberal</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>5</td>
<td rowspan="2"></td>
<td rowspan="2"></td>
<td rowspan="2">Up 8</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>3</td></tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="3">Ulster Unionist Party</td>
<td>Democratic Unionist Party</td>
<td>1</td>
<td rowspan="3">Democratic Unionist Party</td>
<td rowspan="3">1</td>
<td rowspan="3">Up 2</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Independent Unionist</td>
<td>1</td></tr>
<td>Independent Republican</td>
<td>1</td></tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2">Social Democrat</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>5</td>
<td rowspan="2"></td>
<td rowspan="2"></td>
<td rowspan="2">Up 6</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>1</td></tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2">Democratic Unionist Party</td>
<td>Ulster Unionist Party</td>
<td>1</td>
<td rowspan="2">Ulster Unionist Party</td>
<td rowspan="2">1</td>
<td rowspan="2">Up 1</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>United Ulster Unionist Party</td>
<td>1</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Social Democratic & Labour Party</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td>Sinn Féin</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>Down 1</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Ulster Popular Unionist Party</td>
<td>Independent Unionist</td>
<td>1</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td>Up 1</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Sinn Féin</td>
<td>Social Democratic & Labour Party</td>
<td>1</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td>Up 1</td></tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2">Independent Unionist</td>
<td rowspan="2"></td>
<td rowspan="2"></td>
<td>Ulster Unionst</td>
<td>1</td>
<td rowspan="2">Down 2</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Ulster Popular Unionist Party</td>
<td>1</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>United Ulster Unionist Party</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td>Democratic Unionist Party</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>Down 1</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Independent Republican</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td>Ulster Unionist Party</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>Down 1</td></tr>
<tr>
</table></center><P>
[* One of these was <i>Cardiff West</i>, held in 1979 by George Thomas, the Speaker of the House of Commons, who retired at the 1983 election. However, there were significant boundary changes in Cardiff].<P>
Using these, we can calculate the notional result for 1979:<P>
<UL><LI>Conservative - 360
<LI>Labour - 260
<LI>Liberal - 9
<LI>Ulster Unionist Party - 9
<LI>Democratic Unionist Party - 2
<LI>Scottish National Party - 2
<LI>Plaid Cymru - 2
<LI>Social Democratic & Labour Party - 2
<LI>Independent Unionist - 2
<LI>United Ulster Unionist Party - 1
<LI>Independent Republican - 1</li></ul><P>
This looks different - the Conservative majority is up to 70, and Labour need to gain 66 seats (rather than 50) to gain an overall majority.<P>
The British Broadcasting Corporation and Independent Television News <a href="http://www.election.demon.co.uk/notional79.html">drew up a set of notional results</a> for their election night coverage.<P>
The most marginal seat was <i>Roxburgh & Berwickshire</i>, where the Conservatives had a notional majority of 18 over the Liberals. This was drawn from <i>Berwick & East Lothian</i> (which in 1979 had been won by Labour's John Home-Robertson) and <i>Roxburgh, Selkirk & Peebles</i> (which in 1979 had been won by David Steel, who at the time was the Liberal leader). Since the 1970 election, <i>Aberdeen South</i> had been held by the Conservatives' Iain Sproat (who had initially won it by unseating Labour's Donald Dewar, who would go on to become the first Scottish First Minister), but it was always marginal, and boundary changes reduced its notional majority to 541. For reasons best known to himself, Sproat decided to contest <i>Roxburgh & Berwickshire</i>, which he lost to the Liberals' Archy Kirkwood. Meanwhile, Gerald Malone (who had stood against Steel in 1979), increased the Conservative majority in <i>Aberdeen South</i>.<P>
A note on the Northern Ireland results, as the province had some interesting changes. Both <i>Down North</i> and <i>Strangford</i> are listed as Independent Unionist. This is James Kilfedder, who won <i>Down North</i> in 1979 - and the bulk of the <i>Strangford</i> created for 1983 was from his seat. In January 1980 he formed the United Popular Unionist Party. It never achieved much popularity. <i>Strangford</i> was won by the UUP's John Taylor, at the time one of Northern Ireland's Members of the European Parliament.<P>
The United Ulster Unionist Party was a breakaway from the Vanguard Unionist Progressive Party, itself a breakaway from the Ulster Unionist Party. Its sole MP was John Dunlop in <i>Ulster Mid</i> which he won (under the Vanguard banner) at the February 1974 general election - he left Vanguard and formed the UUUP in October 1975. The other Vanguard MPs eventually left - Robert Bradford (<i>Belfast South</i>) joined the UUP in November 1975 and the Vanguard leader, William Craig (<i>Belfast East</i>) wound the party up and joined the UUP in November 1977. Bradford and Craig both stood for re-election in 1979 as UUP candidates, with Bradford holding his seat and Craig narrowly losing to the Democratic Unionist Party's Peter Robinson - now Northern Ireland's First Minister - with the seat becoming a close 3-way marginal (Oliver Napier, then the leader of the Alliance Party of Northern Ireland, was in third place). Although boundary changes for 1983 flipped the seat back to being notionally UUP, Craig had left that party by that time, so didn't try to win back his old seat.<P>
Dunlop stood down at the 1983 election.<P>
In 1979, the sole Social Democratic & Labour Party MP was its leader, Gerry Fitt, in <i>Belfast West</i>, a seat he had held since the March 1966 election, when he had unseated Kilfedder, who at the time was the sitting UUP MP. In November 1979 he had resigned from the SDLP and was replaced as leader by SDLP MEP John Hume - who would win <i>Foyle</i> in 1983 (this seat was drawn largely from <i>Londonderry</i> with parts of <i>Ulster Mid</i>), and in 1983 stood for re-election as an Independent Socialist, but ended up in third place.<P>
The Independent Republican was Frank Maguire in <i>Fermanagh & South Tyrone</i>. He had won the seat in the October 1974 election by unseating the then-UUP leader, Harry West, and was re-elected in 1979 (the candidacy of the UUUP's Ernest Baird ensured that the Unionist vote was not united). In March 1981 Maguire died, and the following month's by-election was won by hunger striker Bobby Sands. Sands died 26 days after the by-election and in August 1981 the next by-election was won by Owen Carron on the banner "Anti-H Block/Proxy Political Prisoner". In 1983 Carron stood as the Sinn Féin candidate.<P>
One consequence of boundary changes is that MPs can find themselves standing for re-election in seats which have a negative majority - note that this ignores by-election victors as well as MPs who defected to the Social Democrats unless they had defected from Labour and were contesting a successor seat which was notionally Conservative (on the grounds that if they had never defected, they would be Labour MPs contesting a notionally Conservative seat).<P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>MP</th>
<th>Party</th>
<th>1979 constituency</th>
<th>1983 constituency</th>
<th>1979 notional winner</th>
<th>1979 notional majority</th>
<th>Won in 1983?</th></tr>
<tr>
<td>David Alton</td>
<td>Liberal</td>
<td>Liverpool Edge Hill</td>
<td>Liverpool Mossley Hill</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>9,086 (over Labour)</td>
<td>Yes (from third place)</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>John Corrie</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Ayrshire North & Bute</td>
<td>Cunninghame North</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>286</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Richard Crawshaw</td>
<td>Labour (Social Democrat)</td>
<td>Liverpool Toxteth</td>
<td>Liverpool Broadgreen</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>565</td>
<td>No</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Bob Cryer</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Keighley</td>
<td>Keighley</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>3,110</td>
<td>No</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Gwyneth Dunwoody</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Crewe</td>
<td>Crewe & Nantwich</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>3,634</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Tom Ellis</td>
<td>Labour (Social Democrat)</td>
<td>Wrexham</td>
<td>Clwyd South West</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>3,006</td>
<td>No</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>David Ennals</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Norwich North</td>
<td>Norwich North</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>3,371</td>
<td>No</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Harry Greenway</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Ealing North</td>
<td>Ealing North</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>1,421</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Warren Hawksley</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>The Wrekin</td>
<td>The Wrekin</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>1,382</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>John Horam</td>
<td>Labour (Social Democrat)</td>
<td>Newcastle-upon-Tyne Central</td>
<td>Newcastle-upon-Tyne Central</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>5,790</td>
<td>No</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Tom McNally</td>
<td>Labour (Social Democrat)</td>
<td>Stockport South</td>
<td>Stockport</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>4,382</td>
<td>No</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>John Maxton</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Glasgow Cathcart</td>
<td>Glasgow Cathcart</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>1,737</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Peter Robinson</td>
<td>Democratic Unionist Party</td>
<td>Belfast East</td>
<td>Belfast East</td>
<td>Ulster Unionist Party</td>
<td>550</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Ann Taylor</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Bolton West</td>
<td>Bolton North East</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>1,368</td>
<td>No</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Richard Wainwright</td>
<td>Liberal</td>
<td>Colne Valley</td>
<td>Colne Valley</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>2,239</td>
<td>Yes</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Frank White</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Bury & Radcliffe</td>
<td>Bury North</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>3,017</td>
<td>No</td></tr>
</table></center><P>
Crawshaw had resigned as Deputy Speaker in February 1981 and joined the Social Democrats when that party was set up the following month. <i>Liverpool Broadgreen</i> was one of just 4 seats that Labour gained in 1983, with Terry Fields winning. The local Liberal Association refused to support Crawshaw, and Richard Pine contested the seat as an Independent Liberal, leading to Crawshaw taking fourth place. In December 1991 Fields was expelled from the Labour party and contested the seat as an Independent at the April 1992 election, coming third.<P>
Dunwoody was the Shadow Health Secretary at the time, and the only member of the Shadow Cabinet to be defending a negative majority.<P>
Ennals had been Health & Social Security Secretary throughout the Callaghan Government.<P>
The Labour candidate hoping to hold <i>Ealing North</i> was Hilary Benn, now the Shadow Foreign & Commonwealth Secretary.<P>
The Labour candidate hoping to hold <i>The Wrekin</i> was Bruce Grocott, who had been MP for <i>Lichfield & Tamworth</i> from the October 1974 election until losing to the Conservatives' John Heddle in 1979. Grocott was elected for <i>The Wrekin</i> on his second attempt, at the June 1987 election.<P>
McNally's <i>Stockport South</i> was split between <i>Stockport</i> and <i>Denton & Reddish</i> - the latter was notionally a safe Labour seat, and was won by Andrew Bennett, who had been MP for <i>Stockport North</i> since the February 1974 election.<P>
Taylor had - as the table shows - been MP for <i>Bolton West</i>, which was affected by boundary changes. The revised seat had a notional Conservative majority of 5,602, so she followed part of her seat into <i>Bolton North East</i>, where she was defeated by Peter Thurnham (who would resign the Conservative whip in February 1996 and join the Liberal Democrats in October that year). Taylor returned to Parliament by winning <i>Dewsbury</i> from the Conservatives in 1987, and when Labour returned to power after the May 1997 election she sat in the Cabinet as Lord President of the Council and Leader of the House of Commons.<P>
The new county boundaries had - as I noted earlier - led to the Conservative/Labour marginal <i>Huddersfield West</i> being divided across the Greater Manchester/West Yorkshire border. The Greater Manchester part was combined with part of the Liberal <i>Rochdale</i> to form a Conservative seat, <i>Littleborough & Saddleworth</i>, with Geoffrey Dickens, the outgoing MP for <i>Huddersfield West</i> being elected there, while the West Yorkshire part was added on to the Liberal/Labour marginal of <i>Colne Valley</i>.<P>
With that out the way, we can now look at the effect of swings from the Conservatives to Labour based on the notional 1979 results. For each 0.5% increase in swing, the Conservative share of the vote decreases by 0.5% from the 1979 level (43.87%), the Labour share of the vote increases by 0.5% from the 1979 level (36.91%), and the Conservative lead over Labour decreases by 1%.<P>
Firstly, we begin with a 0.5% swing:<P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th rowspan="2">Constituency</th>
<th colspan="3">Winning Party</th></tr>
<tr>
<th>Notional 1979</th>
<th>On 0.5% swing</th>
<th>Actual 1983</th></tr>
<tr>
<td>Birmingham Northfield</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Bury South</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Roxburgh & Berwickshire</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Liberal</td>
<td>Liberal</td></tr>
</table></center><P>
Conservative 357, Labour 262, Liberal 10, Scottish National Party 2, Plaid Cymru 2, <i>Northern Ireland parties 17</i>. Conservative majority 64<P>
The defeated Labour candidate in <i>Birmingham Northfield</i> was sitting MP John Spellar, who had won the seat at a by-election in October 1982 - this was the only seat that Labour gained at a by-election in the 1979-1983 Parliament, their first gain at a by-election since winning <i>Merthyr Tydfil</i> from an Independent (who had been deselected by Labour prior to the 1970 election) in April 1972, and their first gain of a Conservative seat at a by-election since winning <i>Bromsgrove</i> in May 1971.<P>
Spellar would return to Parliament and served as Minister for the Armed Forces and then Minister for Transport when Labour returned to power in 1997. He is now MP for <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14001016"><i>Warley</i></a> and a Shadow Minister for Foreign & Commonwealth Affairs.<P>
Then a 1% swing:<P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th rowspan="2">Constituency</th>
<th colspan="3">Winning Party</th></tr>
<tr>
<th>Notional 1979</th>
<th>On 1% swing</th>
<th>Actual 1983</th></tr>
<tr>
<td>Aberdeen South</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Dulwich</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Hornchurch</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Liverpool Broadgreen</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Labour</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Luton South</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Moray</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Scottish National Party</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Nottingham South</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Stirling</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
</table></center><P>
Conservative 349, Labour 269, Liberal 10, Scottish National Party 3, Plaid Cymru 2, <i>Northern Ireland parties 17</i>. Conservative majority 48<P>
The Labour candidate in <i>Dulwich</i> was Kate Hoey, now MP for <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14001008"><i>Vauxhall</i></a>.<P>
The SNP candidate in <i>Moray</i> was Hamish Watt, who had won <i>Banffshire</i> at the February 1974 election and lost it to the Conservatives in 1979. <i>Moray</i> was drawn from parts of the 1979 <i>Banffshire</i> and <i>Moray & Nairn</i>. The successful Conservative victor in <i>Moray</i> was Alexander Pollock, who had won <i>Moray & Nairn</i> from the SNP's Winnie Ewing in 1979.<P>
The Labour candidate in <i>Nottingham South</i> was Ken Coates, who was MEP for <i>Nottingham</i> from the June 1989 European election until the June 1994 one, and then MEP for <i>Nottinghamshire North & Chesterfield</i> until the June 1999 one. He was expelled from Labour in January 1998 after joining the Green group in the European Parliament.<P>
The Labour candidate for <i>Stirling</i> was Michael Connarty, who became MP for <i>Falkirk East</i> at the 1992 election and <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/S14000043">lost his seat to the SNP in May 2015</a>. The Conservative victor was newcomer Michael Forsyth, who would go on to become Scottish Secretary.<P>
Then a 1.5% swing:<P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th rowspan="2">Constituency</th>
<th colspan="3">Winning Party</th></tr>
<tr>
<th>Notional 1979</th>
<th>On 1.5% swing</th>
<th>Actual 1983</th></tr>
<tr>
<td>Calder Valley</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Pendle</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr></table></center><P>
Conservative 347, Labour 271, Liberal 10, Scottish National Party 3, Plaid Cymru 2, <i>Northern Ireland parties 17</i>. Conservative majority 44<P>
Note that a 1.5% swing would have taken Labour to <a href="http://www.election.demon.co.uk/ge1992.html">the same number of seats as in 1992</a>. In 1992, the Conservative lead over Labour was 7.53% - so actually greater than it was in 1979, indicating that in those 15 years there had still been a swing away from Labour to the Conservatives. In 1979, Labour would have only needed to have been 3.97% behind the Conservatives to be in the same position (in terms of numbers of seats) that it was in at the 1992 election.<P>
What this suggests is that although the boundary changes that came into effect in 1983 hit Labour hard, by 1992 this impact had lessened.<P>
There is something else to note - at the 1983 election, the Conservative share of the vote fell by 1.45%. If this had been uniform, and had been simply due to Conservative voters switching to Labour, then <i>Calder Valley</i> would have fallen, but the Conservatives would have held on to <i>Pendle</i> (with a majority of 12 if turn-out had remained the same). The headline figure in the newspapers would have been Thatcher having increased the Conservative majority from 43 to 46.<P>
There is often the "separated brethren" argument made - namely that if only the Liberal/Social Democrat Alliance had not "split" the anti-Conservative vote, then Labour would have won handsomely in 1983. What this shows, however, is that if the Conservative vote had fallen - uniformly - to its 1983 level, and the Liberal vote remained steady, then Labour would have only made a small increase from 268 MPs after the 1979 election to 270.<P>
Now look at a 2% swing:<P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th rowspan="2">Constituency</th>
<th colspan="3">Winning Party</th></tr>
<tr>
<th>Notional 1979</th>
<th>On 2% swing</th>
<th>Actual 1983</th></tr>
<tr>
<td>Birmingham Erdington</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Labour</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Bolton North East</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Cambridge</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Cardiff Central</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Croydon North West</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Dudley West</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Fulham</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Welwyn Hatfield</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
</table></center><P>
Conservative 339, Labour 279, Liberal 10, Scottish National Party 3, Plaid Cymru 2, <i>Northern Ireland parties 17</i>. Conservative majority 28<P>
As noted above, Labour winning <i>Bolton North East</i> would have kept Taylor in the Commons.<P>
<i>Croydon North West</i> had been won by the Liberals' Bill Pitt in a by-election in October 1981.<P>
Then a 2.5% swing:<P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th rowspan="2">Constituency</th>
<th colspan="3">Winning Party</th></tr>
<tr>
<th>Notional 1979</th>
<th>On 2.5% swing</th>
<th>Actual 1983</th></tr>
<tr>
<td>Banff & Buchan</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Scottish National Party</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Edinburgh Central</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Erewash</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Glasgow Cathcart</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Labour</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Southampton Test</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Vale of Glamorgan</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Westminster North</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
</table></center><P>
Conservative 332, Labour 285, Liberal 10, Scottish National Party 4, Plaid Cymru 2, <i>Northern Ireland parties 17</i>. Conservative majority 14<P>
It is interesting to note that this result would have prevented a couple of high-profile Scottish politicians being elected in 1987. At that election, the SNP's Alex Salmond (who went on to become Scottish First Minister and is now MP for <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/S14000037"><i>Gordon</i></a> and Member of the Scottish Parliament for <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/special/election2011/constituency/html/36068.stm"><i>Aberdeenshire East</i></a>) won <i>Banff & Buchan</i>, while future Chancellor of the Exchequer, Alistair Darling, won <i>Edinburgh Central</i> for Labour.<P>
The SNP candidate for <i>Banff & Buchan</i> was Douglas Henderson, who had been MP for its one of its predecessor seats, <i>Aberdeenshire East</i>, between the February 1974 and 1979 elections.<P>
At the 1979 election, the only seat the Conservatives lost was <i>Glasgow Cathcart</i>, when Teddy Taylor, who - at the time - was Shadow Scottish Secretary, was unseated by Labour's Maxton. Boundary changes made this seat notionally Conservative, so Maxton is one of those rare politicians who has gained an identically-named seat from the Conservatives at two successive elections. The most recent example is the Liberal Democrats' Lorely Burt, who won <i>Solihull</i> from the Conservatives <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/vote2005/html/523.stm">at the May 2005 general election</a> and then <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/election2010/results/constituency/e06.stm">at the May 2010 general election</a>.<P>
The Labour candidate in <i>Westminster North</i> was Arthur Latham, who had been MP for <i>Paddington</i> from the February 1974 election until the 1979 one, when he was defeated by the Conservatives' John Wheeler. 1983 saw another Wheeler/Latham battle.<P>
Note that Labour would be on 39.41% of the vote - higher than the share of the vote which saw Harold Wilson "win" for Labour in the February 1974 and October 1974 election - but would be 47 seats behind the Conservatives, another indication that these boundary changes were not in Labour's interests.<P>
Then a 3% swing:<P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th rowspan="2">Constituency</th>
<th colspan="3">Winning Party</th></tr>
<tr>
<th>Notional 1979</th>
<th>On 3% swing</th>
<th>Actual 1983</th></tr>
<tr>
<td>Bury North</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Crawley</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Ilford South</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Peterborough</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Putney</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
</table></center><P>
Conservative 327, Labour 290, Liberal 10, Scottish National Party 4, Plaid Cymru 2, <i>Northern Ireland parties 17</i>. Conservative majority 4<P>
<i>Bury North</i> was another one of the notionally Conservative seats in which a sitting Labour MP was standing for re-election.<P>
The successful Conservative candidate in <i>Crawley</i> was Nicholas Soames, who went on to become Shadow Defence Secretary, but was better known for being a grandson of former Prime Minister Winston Churchill. <i>Peterborough</i> saw Brian Mawhinney - who would go on to be Transport Secretary and then Conservative Party Chairman - re-elected, while in <i>Putney</i>, David Mellor, who would become the first National Heritage Secretary, held his seat against the Labour challenger Peter Hain (who would go on to hold several Cabinet posts, including Welsh Secretary, Northern Ireland Secretary, Leader of the House of Commons and Work & Pensions Secretary).<P>
Next a 3.5% swing:<P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th rowspan="2">Constituency</th>
<th colspan="3">Winning Party</th></tr>
<tr>
<th>Notional 1979</th>
<th>On 3.5% swing</th>
<th>Actual 1983</th></tr>
<tr>
<td>Brecon & Radnor</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Bristol North West</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Crewe & Nanwich</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Labour</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Eltham</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Great Yarmouth</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Keighley</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
</table></center><P>
Conservative 321, Labour 296, Liberal 10, Scottish National Party 4, Plaid Cymru 2, <i>Northern Ireland parties 17</i>. Conservative minority 8<P>
It might seem very odd to see <i>Brecon & Radnor</i> in this list as a potential Labour seat, especially as even with a Liberal Democrat meltdown, <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/W07000068">Labour could only manage a poor third place this year</a>. However, it was continually Labour from the July 1945 election until the Conservatives' Tom Hooson won it in 1979. Hooson died in May 1985, and the <a href="http://www.election.demon.co.uk/by1983.html">subsequent by-election</a> began the era of Liberal dominance there.<P>
<i>Bristol North West</i> had been won by the Conservatives' Michael Colvin in 1979, but he had decided to contest <i>Romsey & Waterside</i> (where I lived) in 1983, and was elected there. The Labour candidate was Sarah Palmer, whose father was Arthur Palmer, who had been Labour MP for <i>Bristol North East</i> (which was divided into 3 parts for the 1983 election) since the February 1974 election.<P>
<i>Crewe & Nanwich</i> and <i>Keighley</i> were examples of sitting Labour MPs defending negative majorities. Dunwoody won the former on a swing of 3.20%, which - if repeated uniformly - would have reduced the Conservatives to 325 MPs and a notional majority of 0 (Cryer would have won <i>Keighley</i> on this swing) - although, with Sinn Féin's abstentionist policy, this would have been an effective Conservative majority of 1.<P>
Although Dunwoody was - on paper - the most vulnerable member of the Shadow Cabinet, she was re-elected while Shadow Transport Secretary Albert Booth and Shadow Attorney-General Arthur Davidson lost <i>Barrow & Furness</i> and <i>Hyndburn</i> respectively to the Conservatives.<P>
The loss of <i>Brecon & Radnor</i> on a 3.33% swing (which would see the Conservatives just 0.28% ahead of Labour in the popular vote) would have created a hung Parliament.<P>
Next a 4% swing:<P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th rowspan="2">Constituency</th>
<th colspan="3">Winning Party</th></tr>
<tr>
<th>Notional 1979</th>
<th>On 4% swing</th>
<th>Actual 1983</th></tr>
<tr>
<td>Birmingham Yardley</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Clwyd South West</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Edinburgh South</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Elmet</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Enfield North</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Gloucestershire West</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Hampstead & Highgate</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Hornsey & Wood Green</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Lancashire West</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Lincoln</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Medway</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Norwich North</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Ynys Môn</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
</table></center><P>
Labour 309, Conservative 308, Liberal 10, Scottish National Party 4, Plaid Cymru 2, <i>Northern Ireland parties 17</i>. Labour minority 32<P>
The Labour candidate for <i>Birmingham Yardley</i> was Roger Godsiff, who had to wait until the 1992 election to become an MP (for <i>Birmingham Small Heath</i>) and is now MP for <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14000562"><i>Birmingham Hall Green</i></a>.<P>
<i>Clywd South West</i> was a new constituency, built from <i>Denbigh</i> (whose Conservative MP, Geraint Morgan, who had held the seat since the October 1959 general election, was retiring), and from <i>Wrexham</i>, which had been held since the 1970 election by Ellis. He had originally been elected as Labour, but had been a founder MP of the Social Democrats in March 1981, and was contesting <i>Clywd South West</i> (while the safe Labour <i>Wrexham</i> was narrowly held for Labour by John Marek, who, by the May 2011 elections to the Welsh Assembly, <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/special/election2011/constituency/html/26703.stm">was a Conservative</a>. It is reasonable to assume that if the Social Democrats had never been formed, then Ellis, rather than Marek, would be the Labour candidate for <i>Wrexham</i>.<P>
The re-elected Conservative MP for <i>Edinburgh South</i> was Michael Kerr, who would go on to become Conservative deputy leader and Shadow Foreign & Commonwealth Secretary. He lost his seat in 1987.<P>
The Labour candidate in <i>Hampstead & Highgate</i> was John McDonnell, now MP for <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14000737"><i>Hayes & Harlington</i></a>.<P>
<i>Norwich North</i> is another seat where a Labour MP is defending a negative majority.<P>
It is the gain of <i>Lancashire West</i> on a 3.97% swing which makes Labour the largest party, but it would need the support of 16 more MPs to reach 325. The Liberals, Plaid Cymru and the Social Democratic & Labour Party would only be able to provide 13 of these. At this point Labour would be on 40.91% (so still behind its share of the vote in every election from 1945 to 1970 inclusive), while the Conservatives on 39.90% - above their share of the vote in the 1974 elections, and only a little above their share of the vote in their crushing defeat of 1945.<P>
Before that, however, there is a little milestone passed when the swing is 3.84% - which sees 9 of these (<i>Birmingham Yardley</i>, <i>Clwyd South West</i>, <i>Elmet</i>, <i>Gloucestershire West</i>, <i>Hornsey & Wood Green</i>, <i>Lincoln</i>, <i>Medway</i>, <i>Norwich North</i> and <i>Ynys Môn</i>) change hands. The significance of this is that it gives Labour the same lead over the Conservatives (0.73%) as at the narrow Labour victory of October 1964. This, however, based on a uniform swing from 1979, puts the Conservatives on 312 seats to Labour's 305.<P>
Next a 4.5% swing:<P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th rowspan="2">Constituency</th>
<th colspan="3">Winning Party</th></tr>
<tr>
<th>Notional 1979</th>
<th>On 4.5% swing</th>
<th>Actual 1983</th></tr>
<tr>
<td>Ayr</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Brentford & Isleworth</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Dartford</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Langbaurgh</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Rossendale & Darwen</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
</table></center><P>
Labour 314, Conservative 303, Liberal 10, Scottish National Party 4, Plaid Cymru 2, <i>Northern Ireland parties 17</i>. Labour minority 22<P>
Next a 5% swing:<P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th rowspan="2">Constituency</th>
<th colspan="3">Winning Party</th></tr>
<tr>
<th>Notional 1979</th>
<th>On 5% swing</th>
<th>Actual 1983</th></tr>
<tr>
<td>Chorley</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Dover</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Dundee East</td>
<td>Scottish National Party</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Scottish National Party</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Manchester Withington</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Stockport</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Tayside North</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Scottish National Party</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Waveney</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
</table></center><P>
Labour 320, Conservative 297, Liberal 10, Scottish National Party 4, Plaid Cymru 2, <i>Northern Ireland parties 17</i>. Labour minority 10<P>
<i>Dundee East</i>'s sitting MP was the then SNP leader, Gordon Wilson, while the SNP candidate for <i>Tayside North</i> was Alasdair Morgan, who went on to serve as MP and MSP for <i>Galloway & Upper Nithsdale</i>.<P>
One milestone that is passed is the swing of 4.81% from the Conservatives to Labour, which brings Labour to a lead of 2.69%, which was its lead in its narrow victory of February 1950. On this swing 4 of these seats (<i>Chorley</i>, <i>Dundee East</i>, <i>Stockport</i> and <i>Waveney</i>) would change hands, giving Labour 318 seats to the Conservatives' 300 - this lead of 18 seats (in a smaller House of Commons) is just 1 more than the lead Labour had over the combined Conservative, Scottish Unionist, National Liberal and Ulster Unionist tally at the 1950 election.<P>
Next a 5.5% swing:<P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th rowspan="2">Constituency</th>
<th colspan="3">Winning Party</th></tr>
<tr>
<th>Notional 1979</th>
<th>On 5% swing</th>
<th>Actual 1983</th></tr>
<tr>
<td>Coventry South West</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Delyn</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Montgomery</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Liberal</td>
<td>Liberal</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Newark</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Northampton North</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Richmond & Barnes</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Liberal</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Staffordshire South East</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Streatham</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Wallasey</td>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
</table></center><P>
Labour 327, Conservative 288, Liberal 12, Scottish National Party 4, Plaid Cymru 2, <i>Northern Ireland parties 17</i>. Labour majority 4<P>
The Liberal candidate in <i>Richmond & Barnes</i> was <a href="http://www.parliament.uk/biographies/lords/lord-watson-of-richmond/2487">Alan Watson</a>, with the successful Conservative being Jeremy Hanley, who went on to become Conservative Party Chairman.<P>
The Labour candidate in <i>Staffordshire South East</i> was <a href="http://www.parliament.uk/biographies/lords/baroness-crawley/3386">Cynthia Crawley</a>, who would be elected Member of the European Parliament for <i>Birmingham East</i> in June 1984 and hold that seat until retiring in June 1999. The successful Conservative candidate was David Lightbown, whose death in December 1995, <a href="http://www.election.demon.co.uk/by1992.html">led to a by-election which was won by Labour</a>.<P>
It is <i>Streatham</i>, on a 5.39% swing, which would see Labour on 326 seats, and hence forming an overall majority (<i>Delyn</i> is the seat that would increase the Labour majority to 4). This would require Labour to be 3.85% ahead of the Conservatives - which up till then it had only managed twice before.<P>
And if we look at post-war elections up to that point where there was a swing from the Conservatives to Labour, we have:<P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>Election</th>
<th>Swing</th></tr>
<tr>
<td>October 1964</td>
<td>3.12%</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>March 1966</td>
<td>2.71%</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>October 1974</td>
<td>2.07%</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>February 1974</td>
<td>1.29%</td></tr>
</table></center><P>
So, from its starting point at the 1979 general election, Labour would have needed a swing of:<P>
<UL><LI><b>3.33% for there to be a hung Parliament</b>
<LI><b>3.97% to be the largest party in a hung Parliament</b>
<LI><b>5.39% to have an overall majority</b></li></ul>
Even to deprive the Conservatives of an overall majority, Labour would have needed a larger swing than anything it had achieved in a post-war general election up to that point.<P>
Due to the boundary changes, the 1983 election was effectively unwinnable for Labour.Graham Pointerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03538991243769088600noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8004940586846099589.post-43030412965072310842015-09-06T07:50:00.000-07:002015-09-06T07:50:23.735-07:00County Senates - The Missing Element Of Devolution?Much of England is still covered by two-tier local government, where you have the higher-tier council (normally at a county level) and then lower-tier ones (which will be city, borough or district councils).<P>
The <a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1992/19/contents/enacted"><i>Local Government Act 1992</i></a> introduced the idea of unitary authorities in non-metropolitan areas, and as a result, the <a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1995/1775/contents/made"><i>Hampshire (Cities of Portsmouth and Southampton) (Structural Change) Order 1995</i></a> was signed by David Curry, then the Minister for Local Government, which stripped Hampshire County Council of any powers in Portsmouth and Southampton and turned their City Councils into unitary authorities.<P>
Where you have a two-tier system, the councils have responsibility for different matters. This can cause confusion among people who think in terms of a single entity - "the council" - and this leads to moaning newspaper letters about how your borough council is refusing to do something about a matter which is for the county council.<P>
A few years ago, Ken Thornber, then the leader of Hampshire County Council, came up with the "Hampshire Senate" idea. Currently, councils are unicameral - you elect councillors and they form the council's legislative arm. But what happens when you have a two-tier system?<P>
OK, there will be people with <i>dual mandates</i> who will be elected to both lower- and upper-tier councils. But you still have 2 councils, whose decisions can impact on the other's, but with no formal legislative connection.<P>
The Hampshire Senate idea was attempt to sort out this democratic deficit. Under it, Hampshire County Council would become bicameral, with an upper chamber being drawn from councillors from the lower-tier councils. From what I recall, each council would have the same number of representatives - the largest (Southampton) has about 2<sup>1</sup>/<sub>2</sub> the population of the smallest (Gosport).<P>
And Southampton and Portsmouth would be included - which would have made their statuses as unitary authorities untenable long-term.<P>
It has to be said that, at one level, this isn't highly original. The Labour Government at the time had introduced the <a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/45/contents/enacted"><i>Regional Development Agencies Act 1998</i></a> (we would be covered by the <a href="http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20120312093746/http://www.seeda.org.uk">South East England Development Agency</a>), which allowed the Environment, Transport & Regional Affairs Secretary to <a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/45/section/8/enacted">declare that a suitable body could be the "regional chamber" for the development agency</a>.<P>
In our case, this was the <a href="http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20100528142817/http://www.southeast-ra.gov.uk/index.html">South East England Regional Assembly</a>, which had <a href="http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20100528142817/http://www.southeast-ra.gov.uk/members.php">111 members</a>, 73 of whom would be drawn from councils in the region.<P>
Hence the idea that local authorities would play a role in regional government was established. Allowing lower-tier authorities to be involved in upper-tier local government is simply an extension of that idea.<P>
I now see that <a href="http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/news/13640914._Southern_powerhouse__plans_that_could_bring_thousands_of_homes_and_jobs_to_Hampshire_to_be_sent_to_Government">there may be a devolution of powers to Hampshire</a>. My slight problem with this is that there needs to be a legislative body to handle the new powers, rather than a hotchpotch of local authorities - some unitary, one top-tier, some lower-tier. It strikes me that resurrecting the Hampshire Senate idea would go some way towards solving this problem - powers would be exercised by Hampshire County Council, but with unitary and lower-tier authorities having legislative input and exercising oversight via the Senate.Graham Pointerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03538991243769088600noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8004940586846099589.post-39877195509725632762015-08-29T10:17:00.000-07:002015-08-29T10:19:42.476-07:00How Badly Would Boundary Changes Hit The Liberal Democrats?There is no denying that the <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election/2015/results">May 2015</a> general election was a bad one for the Liberal Democrats, reduced to just 8 seats - their worst result since June 1970.<P>
It is likely that the May 2020 general election will be for smaller House of Commons, with just 600 MPs, and - as far as I am aware - the Government's intention is for these to be the ones proposed in 2013.<P>
If these are used, then what is the impact on the Liberal Democrats?<P>
Fortunately, <a href="http://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/homepage.html">Electoral Calculus</a> has a set of <i>calculated</i> ward-by-ward breakdowns of general election votes. General election results are not announced at a ward level, but using local election results allows one to make a reasonable calculated breakdown at ward level.<P>
From these we can then build up <i>notional</i> results - <i>i.e.</i> what the result would have been if an election had been held on a different set of boundaries. It is important to emphasise that a notional result looks back to a previous election, and is not a prediction of a future election. People have a habit of ignoring this, so you end up with criticism along the lines of "Clearly he has not taken into account that <i>Trumptonshire West</i> changed hands at that by-election. PMSL" or "He puts the Elvis Loves Pets party winning <i>Camberwick Green & East Trumptonshire</i> - he does know that their support has fallen in the last opinion poll, does he?"<P>
<a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14000621"><i>Carshalton & Wallington</i></a> is held by Tom Brake, the Shadow Foreign & Commonwealth Secretary and Shadow Leader of the House of Commons. As the <a href="http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20140404084345/http://assets.boundarycommissionforengland.independent.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/2012_10_11_London_Region_Constituency_breakdown.pdf?9d7bd4">breakdown table for Greater London</a> from the <a href="http://boundarycommissionforengland.independent.gov.uk">Boundary Commission for England</a> shows, 88.48% of the seat would join with 23.90% of <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14000656"><i>Croydon South</i></a> to form <i>Carshalton & Coulsdon</i>, while the remaining 11.52% joins with the remaining 76.10% of <i>Croydon South</i> and 13.62% of <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14000654"><i>Croydon Central</i></a> to form an altered <i>Croydon South</i>.<P>
The <a href="http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20140404084345/http://assets.boundarycommissionforengland.independent.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/2900327_London_ACCESSIBLE-1.pdf?9d7bd4">more detailed report</a> gives the ward breakdown, and using this and the Electoral Calculus data, we can work out notional results:<P>
<b><i>Carshalton & Coulsdon</i></b><P>
<UL><LI>Conservative - 21,062 (37.00%)
<LI>Liberal Democrat - 16,275 (28.59%)
<LI>Labour - 9,569 (16.81%)
<LI>UK Independence Party - 7,757 (13.63%)
<LI>Green - 2,016 (3.54%)
<LI><i>Others - 250 (0.44%)</i></li></ul><P>
<b><i>Croydon South</i></b><P>
<UL><LI>Conservative - 32,661 (52.43%)
<LI>Labour - 17,059 (27.39%)
<LI>UK Independence Party - 5,879 (9.44%)
<LI>Liberal Democrat - 4,344 (6.97%)
<LI>Green - 2,087 (3.35%)
<LI><i>Others - 261 (0.42%)</i></li></ul><P>
<i>Carshalton & Wallington</i> loses one Borough of Sutton ward (<i>Beddington South</i>) to the revised <i>Croydon South</i>, while in return picking up two Borough of Croydon wards (<i>Coulsdon East</i> and <i>Coulsdon West</i>) from that constituency - hence the change in name. The Coulsdon wards are ones where the Conservatives (along with second-placed Labour) are well ahead of the Liberal Democrats and it is their arrival that flips Brake's seat to the Conservatives.<P>
<a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/W07000064"><i>Ceredigion</i></a> is held by Mark Williams, and is the Liberal Democrats' sole Welsh seat. The <a href="http://bcomm-wales.gov.uk/?skip=1&lang=en">Boundary Commission for Wales</a> <a href="http://gov.wales/docs/bcw/policy/mapdata/2013reviewoctober12/121024RevisedProposalsTextOnlyv2en.pdf">proposed</a> adding 24.25% of <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/W07000065"><i>Preseli Pembrokeshire</i></a> and 7.95% of <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/W07000067"><i>Carmarthen East & Dinefwr</i></a> to form <i>Ceredigion & North Pembrokeshire</i>, which - despite its name - would include a couple of County of Carmarthenshire wards (<i>Cenarth</i> and <i>Llangeler</i>), which form the western tip of that local authority area. This gives the following notional result:<P>
<b><i>Ceredigion & North Pembrokeshire</i></b><P>
<ul><LI>Liberal Democrat - 14,246 (27.22%)
<LI>Plaid Cymru - 13,548 (25.89%)
<LI>Conservative - 9,019 (17.23%)
<LI>Labour - 6,665 (12.74%)
<LI>UK Independence Party - 5,362 (10.25%)
<LI>Green - 2,589 (4.95%)
<LI><i>Others - 907 (1.73%)</i></ul><P>
So, notionally a Liberal Democrat seat, but one very vulnerable to an advance by Plaid Cymru.<p>
<a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14000780"><i>Leeds North West</i></a> is held by Greg Mulholland. The Boundary Commission for England's <a href="http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20140404084345/http://assets.boundarycommissionforengland.independent.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/2012_10_11_Yorks_Humber_Region_Constituency_breakdown.pdf?9d7bd4">breakdown table for Yorkshire & Humberside</a> shows 51.26% of this seat combining with 25.59% of <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14000779"><i>Leeds North East</i></a>, 25.08% of <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14000886"><i>Pudsey</i></a> and 13.37% of <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14000925"><i>Shipley</i></a> to form a new seat, <i>Otley</i>, while the remaining 48.74% joins with 18.48% of <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14000777"><i>Leeds Central</i></a> (held by Shadow Foreign & Commonwealth Secretary Hilary Benn), 25.06% of <i>Leeds North East</i> and 23.47% of <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14000781"><i>Leeds West</i></a> (held by Shadow Work & Pensions Secretary Rachel Reeves) to form <i>Leeds North</i>. As with Greater London, the Boundary Commission for England has a <a href="http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20140404084345/http://assets.boundarycommissionforengland.independent.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/2900323_YorkHumber_ACCESSIBLE-2.pdf?9d7bd4">listing of wards</a>.<P>
As before, we can calculate notional results:<P>
<b><i>Leeds North</i></b><P>
<UL><LI>Labour - 19,219 (45.47%)
<LI>Liberal Democrat - 8,014 (18.96%)
<LI>Conservative - 7,532 (17.82%)
<LI>Green - 3,934 (9.31%)
<LI>UK Independence Party - 3,129 (7.40%)
<LI><i>Others - 444 (1.05%)</i></li></ul><P>
<b><i>Otley</i></b><P>
<UL><LI>Conservative - 24,735 (41.12%)
<LI>Labour - 17,508 (29.10%)
<LI>Liberal Democrat - 10,891 (18.10%)
<LI>UK Indpendence Party - 4,707 (7.82%)
<LI>Green - 2,107 (3.50%)
<LI><i>Others - 211 (0.35%)</i></li></ul><P>
Neither of these represent a good choice for Mulholland - in addition, he could face sitting MPs in either. <i>Otley</i> would be the logical seat for Stuart Andrew, Conservative MP for <i>Pudsey</i>, and <i>Leeds North</i> represents the better choice for Reeves to contest as it leaves the slightly-less-safe-for-Labour <i>Leeds West, Pudsey & Tong</i> free for Judith Cummins, current Labour MP for <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14000588"><i>Bradford South</i></a>, who sees her current seat hacked apart.<P>
Remaining in the Yorkshire & Humberside region, we come to <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14000922"><i>Sheffield Hallam</i></a>, held by the former Lord President of the Council, Nick Clegg. 80.76% of his seat joins with 34.09% of <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14000876"><i>Penistone & Stocksbridge</i></a> to form <i>Sheffield Hallam & Penistone</i>, while the remaining 19.24% joins 80.25% of <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14000923"><i>Sheffield Heeley</i></a> and 18.58% of <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14000919"><i>Sheffield Central</i></a> to form a revised <i>Sheffield Heeley</i>.<P>
Using the ward listing as before, we can calculate notional results:<P>
<b><i>Sheffield Hallam & Penistone</i></b><P>
<ul><LI>Labour - 22,755 (38.08%)
<LI>Liberal Democrat - 17,634 (29.51%)
<LI>Conservative - 9,491 (15.88%)
<LI>UK Independence Party - 7,717 (12.92%)
<LI>Green - 1,562 (2.61%)
<LI><i>Others - 591 (0.99%)</i></li></ul><P>
<b><i>Sheffield Heeley</i></b><P>
<ul><li>Labour - 22,142 (42.78%)
<LI>Liberal Democrat - 10,788 (20.84%)
<LI>Conservative - 8,748 (16.90%)
<LI>UK Independence Party - 6,125 (11.83%)
<LI>Green - 3,530 (6.82%)
<LI><i>Others - 423 (0.82%)</i></li></ul><P>
Like Mulholland and Brake, Clegg has no notional Liberal Democrat seat to go for. His strongest ward (<i>Dore & Totley</i>) is transferred to <i>Sheffield Heeley</i>, where in May, the interesting battle was that between the Conservatives and UK Independence Party for second place (UKIP came second, but their strongest ward - <i>Richmond</i> - moves to a redrawn <i>Sheffield South East</i>). In return, picking up the City of Sheffield ward of <i>Stocksbridge & Upper Don</i> and the Borough of Barnsley ward of <i>Penistone West</i> - both from <i>Penistone & Stocksbridge</i> - helps Labour and (to a lesser extent) the Conservatives.<P>
Another problem for Clegg will be that South Yorkshire is a strongly Labour area, and with a reduction in seats, there will be a bit of musical chairs among Labour MPs. It seems logical that Angela Smith, the long-serving MP for <i>Penistone & Stocksbridge</i>, would stand in <i>Sheffield Hallam & Penistone</i>, freeing up <i>Sheffield North & Dodworth </i> for Harry Harpham, Labour MP for <i>Sheffield Brightside & Hillsborough</i>.<P>
Next is <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14000848"><i>Norfolk North</i></a>, held by Shadow Health Secretary Norman Lamb. The Boundary Commission for England's <a href="http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20140404084345/http://assets.boundarycommissionforengland.independent.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/2012_10_11_Eastern_Region_Constituency_breakdown.pdf?9d7bd4">breakdown table for Eastern England</a> shows that 87.12% of his current seat joins with 18.33% of <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14000603"><i>Broadland</i></a> to form a revised <i>Norfolk North</i>, while the remaining 12.88% joins with all of <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14000717">Great Yarmouth</a> to form <i>Norfolk Coastal</i><P>.
The notional results are:<P>
<b><i>Norfolk Coastal</i></b><P>
<ul><LI>Conservative - 21,323 (41.42%)
<LI>Labour - 13,603 (26.43%)
<LI>UK Independence Party - 11,499 (22.34%)
<LI>Liberal Democrat - 3,690 (7.17%)
<LI>Green - 1,195 (2.32%)
<LI><i>Others - 167 (0.32%)</i></li></ul><P>
<b><i>Norfolk North</i></b><P>
<ul><li>Conservative - 19,967 (35.78%)
<LI>Liberal Democrat - 16,940 (30.36%)
<li>UK Independence Party - 8,472 (15.18%)
<LI>Labour - 7,487 (13.42%)
<li>Green - 2,935 (5.26%)</li></ul><P>
From the <a href="http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20140404084345/http://assets.boundarycommissionforengland.independent.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/2900329_Eastern_ACCESSIBLE-2.pdf?9d7bd4">detailed ward listing</a> we see that the District of North Norfolk wards that are transferred to <i>Norfolk Coastal</i> are <i>Stalham & Sutton</i>; <i>Waterside</i> and <i>Waxham</i> - which are Liberal Democrat-leaning, where they add nothing to the historic battle between the Conservatives and Labour in that seat, while the District of North Norfolk wards that are transferred from <i>Broadland</i> (<i>Astley</i>; <i>Lancaster North</i>; <i>Lancaster South</i>; <i>The Raynhams</i>; <i>Walsingham</i> and <i>Wensum</i>) are strongly Conservative.<P>
Next is quite simple - <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/S14000051"><i>Orkney & Shetland</i></a>, held by Shadow Home Secretary (and former Scottish Secretary) Alistair Carmichael. This is a <a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2011/1/section/11/enacted">preserved constituency</a> under the <a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2011/1/contents/enacted"><i>Parliamentary Voting System & Constituencies Act 2011</i></a>, so remains unchanged.<P>
Next we have <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14000958"><i>Southport</i></a>, held by Shadow Education Secretary John Pugh. The Boundary Commission for England's <a href="http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20140404084345/http://assets.boundarycommissionforengland.independent.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/2012_10_11_North_West_Region_Constituency_breakdown.pdf?9d7bd4">breakdown table for North West England</a> shows this constituency taking on 14.41% of <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14000916"><i>Sefton Central</i></a> (which, as the <a href="http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20140404084345/http://assets.boundarycommissionforengland.independent.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/2900326_North-West_WEB-3.pdf?9d7bd4">detailed ward listing shows</a>, is simply the addition of the Borough of Sefton ward of <i>Harington</i>).<P>
The notional result is:<P>
<b><i>Southport</i></b><P>
<ul><LI>Conservative - 16,063 (30.78%)
<LI>Liberal Democrat - 13,652 (26.16%)
<LI>Labour - 11,764 (22.54%)
<LI>UK Independence Party - 8.272 (15.85%)
<LI>Green - 1,451 (2.78%)
<LI><i>Other - 992 (1.90%)</i></li></ul><P>
Finally, also in North West England, we have <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14001037"><i>Westmorland & Lonsdale</i></a>, held by Liberal Democrat leader Tim Farron. The breakdown table shows that 12.99% of <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14000877"><i>Penrith & the Border</i></a> and 0.30% of <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14000543"><i>Barrow & Furness</i></a> is added to this constituency.<P>
Currently the District of South Lakeland ward of <i>Coniston & Crake Valley</i> is split between <i>Westmorland & Lonsdale</i> and <i>Barrow & Furness</i> - the proposed boundary changes bring it all under <i>Westmorland & Lonsdale</i>. The District of Eden wards of <i>Appleby (Appleby)</i>; <i>Appleby (Bongate)</i>; <i>Brough</i>; <i>Kirkby Stephen</i>; <i>Orton with Tebay</i>; <i>Ravenstonedale</i> and <i>Warcop</i> are transferred from <i>Penrith & the Border</i>.<P>
The notional result is:<P>
<b><i>Westmorland & Lonsdale</i></b><P>
<ul><LI>Liberal Democrat - 25,828 (47.62%)
<LI>Conservative - 19,147 (35.30%)
<LI>UK Independence Party - 3,922 (7.23%)
<LI>Labour - 3,314 (6.11%)
<LI>Green - 2,027 (3.74%)</li></ul><P>
Hence, the Liberal Democrat seats are:<P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>Constituency</th>
<th>Majority</th>
<th>Over</th></tr>
<tr>
<td>Westmorland & Lonsdale</td>
<td>12.32%</td>
<td>Conservative</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Orkney & Shetland</td>
<td>3.59%</td>
<td>Scottish National Party</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Ceredigion & North Pembrokeshire</td>
<td>1.33%</td>
<td>Plaid Cymru</td></tr>
</table></center>
Graham Pointerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03538991243769088600noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8004940586846099589.post-2677758790514211922015-07-05T04:50:00.000-07:002015-07-05T04:50:35.847-07:00How Close is Clara To Becoming The Longest-Serving Doctor Who Companion?Recently, <a href="http://www.cultbox.co.uk/news/headlines/peter-capaldi-hopes-jenna-coleman-will-stay-for-season-10-of-doctor-who">Peter Capaldi said that he hoped Jenna Coleman would remain in <i>Doctor Who</i> through all of Season 36</a>. With Season 35 not yet screened, are we looking at Clara Oswald remaining in the TARDIS as late as November/December 2016 - over 4 years since her splinter persona, Oswin Oswald, appeared in <i>Asylum of the Daleks</i> and about 3 1/2 years after our Clara made her debut in <i>The Bells of Saint John</i>. To put this in perspective, just under 3 years separated Sarah Jane Smith's debut in <i>The Time Warrior</i> and her arrival in Aberdeen in <i>The Hand of Fear</i>.<P>
I have <a href="http://grahampointer.blogspot.co.uk/2015/02/as-clara-becomes-one-of-longest-serving.html">looked at how long Clara has been in the programme</a> and now I am looking at how close she is to becoming the longest-serving companion, and what milestones fall in Seasons 35 and 36.<P>
I have <a href="http://grahampointer.blogspot.co.uk/2012/09/the-longest-serving-doctor-who.html">previously defined</a> how I determine the notional number of episodes, to take into account episodes being different lengths in different eras, and the existence of the specials.<P>
Also, I assume there will be no returns from former companions which would increase their number of notional episodes.
So, as at the end of <i>Last Christmas</i>, Clara was on 56 notional episodes, putting her in tenth place.<P>
<a href="http://www.cultbox.co.uk/features/guides/doctor-who-news-summary-everything-we-know-so-far-about-series-9">Season 35 opens</a> with a two-parter, <i>The Magician's Apprentice</i>/<i>The Witch's Familiar</i>. By the end of the first episode, Clara has overtaken Rory Williams and is the ninth longest-serving companion.<P>
The third and fourth episodes form another two-parter. As the closing credits appear on the mid-story cliffhanger, Clara ties with Rose Tyler for the eighth longest-serving companion (and hence the second longest-serving 21st century companion).<P>
The fifth episode is <i>The Girl Who Died</i>, followed by <i>The Woman Who Lived</i> - these episodes may be a two-parter.<P>
The seventh and eighth episodes form a two-parter involving UNIT and the Zygons. By the end of this, Clara has overtaken both Amy Pond and Tegan Jovanka, to become the longest-serving 21st century companion, and the sixth longest-serving companion of all time.<P>
The eleventh and twelfth episodes form a two-parter. Clara enters the season's final episode having pushed Barbara Wright, Ian Chesterton and Jo Grant into joint-fourth place.<P>
Clara begins Season 36 on 83 notional episodes. The end of the fourth episode of Season 36 - if she is still there - would see her tie with Sarah Jane to become the joint-second longest-serving companion and the joint longest-serving female companion.<P>
Assuming that Season 36 has the same pattern of 12 episodes, and followed a 2016 Christmas special, then Clara has to wait until the fifth episode of Season 37 (autumn 2017?) to overtake Jamie McCrimmon and become the longest-serving companion.
Graham Pointerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03538991243769088600noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8004940586846099589.post-44341061719173859862015-06-21T12:05:00.003-07:002015-06-21T12:05:59.313-07:00What Would A Reformed House of Lords Have Looked Like?Last month, we <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election/2015/results">had a general election to determine the new House of Commons</a>.<P>
If things had turned out differently, then that would not have been the only election to Parliament. Go back 3 years and - <a href="http://grahampointer.blogspot.co.uk/2012/08/a-plague-on-both-your-houses.html">as I looked at then</a> - there was the <a href="http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/cbill/2012-2013/0052/13052.pdf"><i>House of Lords Reform Bill</i></a> (subsequently dropped) to bring in a part-elected element to the House of Lords.<P>
May 2015 would have seen the first "transitional" House of Lords. We would have elected 120 peers on party lists, and the House of Lords Appointment Commission would have appointed 30 Crossbenchers. These 150 new peers would have been elected/appointed to serve until May 2030.<P>
From the Church of England, the number of Lords Spiritual would have reduced from 26 to 21 - while the Archbishops of Canterbury and York, and the Bishops of London, Durham and Winchester would have been entitled to remain as "Named Lords Spiritual", the number of "Ordinary Lords Spiritual" would fall from 21 to 16. The Bill was unclear how this would be done, leaving it up to the General Synod's Secretary-General to inform the Clerk of the Crown, with the Bill explicitly repealing the <a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Vict/41-42/68/contents/enacted"><i>Bishoprics Act 1878</i></a>, which <a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Vict/41-42/68/section/5/enacted">introduced the seniority rule to determine who the Lords Spiritual would be</a>.<P>
If the Church decided to use the seniority rule to allocate, then under "last-in, first-out", <a href="http://www.parliament.uk/biographies/lords/bishop-of-leeds/4349">Nicholas Baines</a> (Bishop of Leeds), <a href="http://www.parliament.uk/biographies/lords/bishop-of-southwark/4345">Christopher Chessun</a> (Bishop of Southwark), <a href="http://www.parliament.uk/biographies/lords/bishop-of-ely/4319">Stephen Conway</a> (Bishop of Ely), <a href="http://www.parliament.uk/biographies/lords/bishop-of-salisbury/4350">Nicholas Holtam</a> (Bishop of Salisbury), and <a href="http://www.parliament.uk/biographies/lords/bishop-of-rochester/4318">James Langstaff</a> (Bishop of Rochester) would lose their seats.<P>
In addition, there would be 510 "transitional" members, and my guesstimate was:<P>
<Ul><LI>Labour - 156
<LI>Conservative - 147
<LI>Crossbench & Others - 145
<LI>Liberal Democrat - 62</li></ul><P>
I shall take a generous view, and assume that all the <a href="http://www.parliament.uk/mps-lords-and-offices/lords/?sort=1&type=other">minor party peers</a> were elected to be "transitional" members:<P>
<ul><LI>Democratic Unionist Party - 4 (Wallace Browne, William Hay, Maurice Morrow, Eileen Paisley)
<LI>UK Independence Party - 3 (Malcolm Pearson, David Stevens, Leopold Verney)
<LI>Plaid Cymru - 2 (Dafydd Elis-Thomas, Dafydd Wigley)
<LI>Ulster Unionist Party - 2 (Reg Empey, Dennis Rogan)
<LI>Green Party of England & Wales - 1 (Jenny Jones)
<LI>Independent Labour - 1 (David Stoddart)
<LI>Independent Liberal Democrat - 1 (Jenny Tonge)
<LI>Independent Ulster Unionist - 1 (Ken Maginnis)
<LI>Independent Social Democrat - 1 (David Owen)</li></ul><P>
When it comes to the <a href="http://www.parliament.uk/mps-lords-and-offices/lords/?sort=1&type=nonaff">non-affiliated peers</a>, and I shall assume that <a href="http://www.parliament.uk/biographies/lords/lord-boswell-of-aynho/352">Tim Boswell</a> (Principal Deputy Chairman of Committees), <a href="http://www.parliament.uk/biographies/lords/lord-collins-of-mapesbury/3886">Lawrence Collins</a> (former Supreme Court Justice), <a href="http://www.parliament.uk/biographies/lords/baroness-d'souza/3709">Frances D'Souza (Speaker of the House of Lords)</a>, <a href="http://www.parliament.uk/biographies/lords/lord-sewel/2124">John Sewel</a> (Chairman of Committees) and <a href="http://www.parliament.uk/biographies/lords/lord-smith-of-finsbury/186">Chris Smith</a> (former Culture, Media & Sport Secretary) all remained.<P>
So that gives the "transitional" members as being (roughly):<P>
<Ul><LI>Labour - 156
<LI>Conservative - 147
<LI>Crossbench - 124
<LI>Liberal Democrat - 62
<LI>Non-affiliated - 5
<LI>Democratic Unionist Party - 4
<LI>UK Independence Party - 3
<LI>Plaid Cymru - 2
<LI>Ulster Unionist Party - 2
<LI>Green Party of England & Wales - 1
<LI>Independent Labour - 1
<LI>Independent Liberal Democrat - 1
<LI>Independent Ulster Unionist - 1
<LI>Independent Social Democrat - 1</li></ul><P>
The Bill also set out the number of peers to be elected in each region. This would be the same for the May 2020 and May 2025 elections as well, although the Electoral Commission needs to produce a report by the end of April 2026 outlining what changes in allocation might be needed for the May 2030 (and May 2035 and May 2040) elections:<P>
<ul><LI>South East England - 16
<LI>London - 14
<LI>North West England - 14
<LI>Eastern England - 11
<LI>South West England - 11
<LI>West Midlands - 11
<LI>Scotland - 10
<LI>Yorkshire & Humberside - 10
<LI>East Midlands - 9
<LI>Wales - 6
<LI>North East England - 5
<LI>Northern Ireland - 3</li></ul><P>
The electoral systems would be identical to the European Parliament.<P>
Assume that at the first House of Lords election, people cast their votes the same way as they did at the contemporaneous general election. This gives us:<P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>Region/Nation</th>
<th>C</th>
<th>Lab</th>
<th>UKIP</th>
<th>LD</th>
<th>SNP</th>
<th>GPEW</th>
<th>DUP</th>
<th>SF</th>
<th>UUP</th></tr>
<tr>
<td>South East England</td>
<td>9</td>
<td>3</td>
<td>2</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>London</td>
<td>5</td>
<td>7</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>North West England</td>
<td>4</td>
<td>7</td>
<td>2</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Eastern England</td>
<td>6</td>
<td>2</td>
<td>2</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>South West England</td>
<td>6</td>
<td>2</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>2</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>West Midlands</td>
<td>5</td>
<td>4</td>
<td>2</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Scotland</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>3</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>6</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Yorkshire & Humberside</td>
<td>4</td>
<td>4</td>
<td>2</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>East Midlands</td>
<td>5</td>
<td>3</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Wales</td>
<td>2</td>
<td>3</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>North East England</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>3</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Northern Ireland</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>1</td></tr>
<tr>
<td><b>Total</b></td>
<td><b>48</b></td>
<td><b>41</b></td>
<td><b>15</b></td>
<td><b>6</b></td>
<td><b>6</b></td>
<td><b>1</b></td>
<td><b>1</b></td>
<td><b>1</b></td>
<td><b>1</b></td>
</table></center><P>
The Bill also allowed for up to 8 ministerial peers, who could serve for 3 terms. One feature of this was that no new ministerial peers could be appointed until a vacancy arose. While this might sound logical, if the Bill had come into force then David Cameron, the Prime Minister, could appoint 8 Conservatives to be ministerial peers - <i>and they would be there until May 2030</i>, unless death or resignation brought their terms to a premature end. They would still be there if there were a Labour Government in office. A future Labour Prime Minister would - prior to 2030 - be unable to appoint anyone to be a ministerial peer until a vacancy arose.<P>
So, what would the reformed House of Lords look like? We are looking at a House with 510 transitional members, 150 elected/appointed for 15 years, 21 episcopal and 8 ministerial - a total of 689, with 345 peers needed for a majority:<P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th rowspan="2">Party/Group</th>
<th colspan="3">Lords Temporal</th>
<th rowspan="2">Lords Spiritual</th>
<th rowspan="2">Total</th></tr>
<tr>
<th>Transitional</th>
<th>Elected/appointed in 2015</th>
<th>Ministerial</th></tr>
<tr>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>147</td>
<td>48</td>
<td>8</td>
<td>0</td>
<td><b>203</b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>156</td>
<td>41</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td><b>197</b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Crossbench</td>
<td>124</td>
<td>30</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td><b>154</b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Liberal Democrat</td>
<td>62</td>
<td>6</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td><b>68</b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Archbishops & Bishops</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>21</td>
<td><b>21</b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td>UK Independence Party</td>
<td>3</td>
<td>15</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td><b>18</b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Scottish National Party</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>6</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td><b>6</b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Democratic Unionist Party</td>
<td>4</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td><b>5</b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Non-affiliated</td>
<td>5</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td><b>5</b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Ulster Unionist Party</td>
<td>2</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td><b>3</b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Plaid Cymru</td>
<td>2</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td><b>2</b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Green Party of England & Wales</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td><b>2</b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Sinn Féin</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td><b>1</b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Independent Labour</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td><b>1</b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Independent Liberal Democrat</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td><b>1</b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Independent Ulster Unionist</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td><b>1</b></td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Independent Social Democrat</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td><b>1</b></td></tr>
</table></center><P>
With Sinn Féin not taking their seat, and D'Souza, Sewel and Boswell exercising the Speaker's neutrality, there would be 685 voting peers in such a House of Lords. To get the 343 peers needed for a majority, the Conservatives would need the support of 140 other peers - reaching out to the Liberal Democrats and the various Unionists would only provide 77 of them, hence there would be the need for a Conservative/Liberal Democrat Government to obtain the support of 63 of the other peers.Graham Pointerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03538991243769088600noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8004940586846099589.post-20578801157707793002015-06-21T09:55:00.001-07:002015-06-21T09:55:03.963-07:00How Many New Conservative Peers Should There Be?In the next few months, there should be a <i>Dissolution Honours List</i> and a list of <i>working peers</i>, while the Conservatives have already been adding new peers who have become Government ministers - such as <a href="http://www.parliament.uk/biographies/lords/baroness-altmann/4533">Ros Altmann</a> as Minister for Pensions, <a href="http://www.parliament.uk/biographies/lords/lord-keen-of-elie/4538">Richard Keen</a> as Advocate-General and <a href="http://www.parliament.uk/biographies/lords/lord-maude-of-horsham/115">Francis Maude</a> as Minister for Trade & Investment.<P>
One <a href="http://grahampointer.blogspot.co.uk/2013/08/is-dave-really-packing-house-of-lords.html">accusation that the former Conservative/Liberal Democrat Government had to face from Labour</a> was that it was somehow packing the House of Lords, with Labour coming up with concepts as "<i>de facto</i> majority" and "political peers".<P>
If the number of peers is supposed to reflect the votes cast as the previous general election, then how many peers should there be?<P>
The <a href="http://www.parliament.uk/mps-lords-and-offices/lords/composition-of-the-lords">current list</a> at the <a href="http://www.parliament.uk">Parliament website</a> gives:<P>
<ul><LI>Conservative - 228
<LI>Labour - 212
<LI><i>Crossbench - 178</i>
<LI>Liberal Democrat - 102
<LI><i>Bishops - 26</i>
<LI><i>Non-affiliated - 24</i>
<LI>Democratic Unionist Party - 4
<LI>UK Independence Party - 3
<LI>Plaid Cymru - 2
<LI>Ulster Unionist Party - 2
<LI>Green Party of England & Wales - 1
<LI>Independent Labour - 1
<LI>Independent Liberal Democrat - 1
<LI>Independent Ulster Unionist - 1
<LI>Independent Social Democrat - 1</li></ul><P>
Please note that I am using how peers self-identify, rather than how they vote. I am not getting into games that Lord X is Crossbench but votes with party Y z% of the time so is "really" one of party Y's peers.<P>
This gives the Conservatives a little over 29% of the House of Lords.<P>
We can look at the <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election/2015/results">result of the May 2015 general election</a> and compare the number of votes to the number of peers a party has:<P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>Party</th>
<th>Votes</th>
<th>Peers</th>
<th>Votes per peer</th></tr>
<tr>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>11,334,576</td>
<td>228</td>
<td>49,713</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>9,347,304</td>
<td>212</td>
<td>44,091</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Liberal Democrat</td>
<td>2,415,862</td>
<td>102</td>
<td>23,685</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Democratic Unionist Party</td>
<td>184,260</td>
<td>4</td>
<td>46,065</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>UK Independence Party</td>
<td>3,881,099</td>
<td>3</td>
<td>1,293,700</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Plaid Cymru</td>
<td>181,704</td>
<td>2</td>
<td>90,852</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Ulster Unionist Party</td>
<td>114,935</td>
<td>2</td>
<td>57,468</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Green Party of England & Wales</td>
<td>1,111,586</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>1,111,586</td></tr></table></center><P>
The party that gets the worst deal from this is the UK Independence Party, closely followed by the Green Party of England & Wales. The collapse of Liberal Democrat support means that they have the best votes-per-peer result.<P>
If we were to treat all the parties to the same votes-per-peer result, then we would get:<P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>Party</th>
<th>Current peers</th>
<th>Entitlement</th>
<th>New peers needed</th></tr>
<tr>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>228</td>
<td>479</td>
<td>251</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>212</td>
<td>395</td>
<td>183</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>UK Independence Party</td>
<td>3</td>
<td>164</td>
<td>161</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Liberal Democrat</td>
<td>102</td>
<td>102</td>
<td>0</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Scottish National Party</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>61</td>
<td>61*</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Green Party of England & Wales</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>47</td>
<td>46</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Democratic Unionist Party</td>
<td>4</td>
<td>8</td>
<td>4</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Plaid Cymru</td>
<td>2</td>
<td>8</td>
<td>6</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Sinn Féin</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>7</td>
<td>7**</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Ulster Unionist Party</td>
<td>2</td>
<td>5</td>
<td>3</td></tr>
<tr>
<td><b>Total</b></td>
<td><b>554</b></td>
<td><b>1,276</b></td>
<td><b>722</b>
</table></center><P>
[* Unlikely to accept any peerages offered]<P>
[** Very unlikely to accept any peerages offered]<P>
Even when we ignore the Scottish National Party's and Sinn Féin's entitlements, that is still 654 new peers needed to keep the House of Lords proportional.<P>
And it gets worse. The Crossbench peers and the Non-affiliated make up 202 of the membership of the House of Lords - which is 25.7%. To keep this ratio, there would need to be 428 - hence the creation of 226 new Crossbench peers.<P>
So, a proportional House of Lords would need 880 new peers created - bringing it to an unmanageable and bloated membership of 1,666.<P>
One way round this is to just accept that the Liberal Democrats will be over-represented. While the aim of a proportional House of Lords is laudable, there is no fixed end-term for membership - members, unless expelled or resigning, serve until death. So a party which has seen its support collapse will end up over-represented due to peers appointed during the good times remaining.<P>
<i>The Guardian</i> reports <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/may/15/vince-cable-four-senior-lib-dems-lords-nick-clegg-peerage-politics">that several defeated Liberal Democrat ministers</a> (Danny Alexander, Vince Cable, Simon Hughes and David Laws) have turned down peerages - although it is silent on whether Ed Davey (who, along with Alexander and Cable, was one of 3 Cabinet ministers to lose their seats) has refused. Or indeed, whether he was even offered one.<P>
In my opinion, there should be a small number of peerages granted to Liberal Democrats who retired (Annette Brooke, former deputy leader Malcolm Bruce and former leader Ming Campbell) and Ministers of State who were defeated (Lynne Featherstone, Steve Webb), former Scottish Secretary Michael Moore, and - along the lines of the peerages given to Clementine Churchill, Dora Gaitskell and <a href="http://www.parliament.uk/biographies/lords/baroness-smith-of-gilmorehill/3125">Elizabeth Smith</a> - a peerage for <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/liberaldemocrats/11647244/Charles-Kennedy-lost-his-life-as-he-stood-on-brink-of-new-career-as-peer-and-EU-campaigner.html">Carole MacDonald</a>. And for the Liberal Democrats, that's that - maybe a few after the May 2020 general election, but nothing like the large numbers created since the late 1990s.<P>
When we ignore the Liberal Democrats, the best votes-per-peer result is Labour's. If we give every party (except for the Liberal Democrats) the same ratio, then we get:<P>
<center>
<table BORDER="5" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="3">
<tr>
<th>Party</th>
<th>Current peers</th>
<th>Entitlement</th>
<th>New peers needed</th></tr>
<tr>
<td>Conservative</td>
<td>228</td>
<td>257</td>
<td>29</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Labour</td>
<td>212</td>
<td>212</td>
<td>0</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>UK Independence Party</td>
<td>3</td>
<td>88</td>
<td>85</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Scottish National Party</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>33</td>
<td>33</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Green Party of England & Wales</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>25</td>
<td>24</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Democratic Unionist Party</td>
<td>4</td>
<td>4</td>
<td>0</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Plaid Cymru</td>
<td>2</td>
<td>4</td>
<td>2</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Sinn Féin</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>4</td>
<td>4</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Ulster Unionist Party</td>
<td>2</td>
<td>3</td>
<td>1</td></tr>
<tr>
<td><b>Total</b></td>
<td><b>452</b></td>
<td><b>630</b></td>
<td><b>178</b>
</table></center><P>
From this, it is clear that - until the House of Lords is reformed - there can only be very limited peerage creations.
Graham Pointerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03538991243769088600noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8004940586846099589.post-45755252448525559792015-06-13T05:20:00.003-07:002015-06-13T05:21:58.314-07:00Church DisciplineJust because a church is meant to be a place of love and fellowship, doesn't mean that there should not be church discipline:<P>
<i><font face="arial"><blockquote class="indentedverse"><pre>And have you forgotten the exhortation that addresses you as sons?
“My son, do not regard lightly the discipline of the Lord,
nor be weary when reproved by Him.
For the Lord disciplines the one He loves,
and chastises every son whom He receives.”</pre></blockquote></font><P>
It is for discipline that you have to endure. God is treating you as sons. For what son is there whom his father does not discipline? If you are left without discipline, in which all have participated, then you are illegitimate children and not sons. Besides this, we have had earthly fathers who disciplined us and we respected them. Shall we not much more be subject to the Father of spirits and live? For they disciplined us for a short time as it seemed best to them, but He disciplines us for our good, that we may share His holiness. For the moment all discipline seems painful rather than pleasant, but later it yields the peaceful fruit of righteousness to those who have been trained by it</i>.
<a href="http://legacy.esvbible.org/Hebrews+12">(Hebrews 12: 5-11)</a><P>
The writer to Hebrews is clear that God's discipline is an act of love.<P>
Writing to Titus, the Apostle Paul informs him:<P>
<i>As for a person who stirs up division, after warning him once and then twice, have nothing more to do with him, knowing that such a person is warped and sinful; he is self-condemned.</i><a href="http://legacy.esvbible.org/Titus+3">(Titus 3: 10-11)</a><P>
With regards to the Corinthian church, Paul gives strong instructions:<P>
<i>It is actually reported that there is sexual immorality among you, and of a kind that is not tolerated even among pagans, for a man has his father's wife. And you are arrogant! Ought you not rather to mourn? Let him who has done this be removed from among you.<P>
For though absent in body, I am present in spirit; and as if present, I have already pronounced judgment on the one who did such a thing. When you are assembled in the name of the Lord Jesus and my spirit is present, with the power of our Lord Jesus, you are to deliver this man to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, so that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord.<P>
Your boasting is not good. Do you not know that a little leaven leavens the whole lump? Cleanse out the old leaven that you may be a new lump, as you really are unleavened. For Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed. Let us therefore celebrate the festival, not with the old leaven, the leaven of malice and evil, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.<P>
I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people — not at all meaning the sexually immoral of this world, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters, since then you would need to go out of the world. But now I am writing to you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of sexual immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or swindler — not even to eat with such a one. For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge? God judges those outside. “Purge the evil person from among you.”</i> (<a href="http://legacy.esvbible.org/1+Corinthians+5">I Corinthians 5</a>)<P>
There is a place for church discipline. This is quite strong, and not language you'd hear in church these days - "deliver this man to Satan".<P>
Basically, put him outside the church and the spiritual protection it provides. Let him follow the life he wants and see where it leads. Such exclusion is reserved for serious matters which will damage the church. Things <i><b>not</b></i> given in the New Testament as grounds for exclusion include not being cool, not being financially successful, being working-class, not being sporty, being in poor health <i>etc.</i><P>
But the aim is shown in Paul's follow-up letter to Corinth:<P>
<i>Now if anyone has caused pain, he has caused it not to me, but in some measure — not to put it too severely — to all of you. For such a one, this punishment by the majority is enough, so you should rather turn to forgive and comfort him, or he may be overwhelmed by excessive sorrow. So I beg you to reaffirm your love for him. For this is why I wrote, that I might test you and know whether you are obedient in everything. Anyone whom you forgive, I also forgive. Indeed, what I have forgiven, if I have forgiven anything, has been for your sake in the presence of Christ, so that we would not be outwitted by Satan; for we are not ignorant of his designs.
</i> <a href="http://legacy.esvbible.org/2+Corinthians+2">(II Corinthians 2: 5-11)</a><P>
Church discipline should have the endpoint of repentance, restoration and reconciliation.<P>
There are two ways church discipline is done. One is the formal, Biblical model, which meets the standards of justice, and provides excommunication (<i>e.g. </i>the Book of Common Prayer's rubrics do outline when someone should not be allowed to share in the Lord's Table) with the aim of reconciliation. The other is church discipline by a spiritual kangaroo court, with its whispers and gossip, with the target not being able to respond, and its excommunication by a thousand cuts, with the aim that the person gossipped about leaves and never comes back.<P>
If a church feels that the Biblical method of church discipline is somehow unworthy and unloving, then its discipline will be exercised by the other method. And the people who will end up being disciplined won't be the ones that the New Testament says should be disciplined.
Graham Pointerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03538991243769088600noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8004940586846099589.post-33752975576688391652015-06-06T12:53:00.001-07:002015-06-06T12:59:00.723-07:00My Encounter With The Most Illiberal, Nannying Act On The Statute BookWhile I am not a fully sold-out libertarian, I do have leanings that way. And one of them is that people have to take responsibility for their actions. Call me a Victorian Thatcherite, but I believe that this country has gone downhill because people no longer take responsibility, but instead think that everything that is self-inflicted is the fault of an individual called Someone Else.<P>
This is such a peculiar stance to take that the NHS assumes anyone holding this view must be mentally ill and needs nanny to step in.<P>
On Tuesday I was on my way in to work by train and I was starting to get strong chest pains and feeling dizzy. Now, anyone who knows me knows that this happens, and I have to make a judgment call on whether to seek help (as I do if it feels different to normal) or carry on. This time I decided to seek help so got off the train at the next stop, spoke to a member of the platform staff, who got a first aider. First aider called 999, first responder came, and an ambulance followed.<P>
This is fairly routine. My blood pressure was very high - 205/135 - and I was asked by the paramedics whether I had taken my tablets for this. I explained that I had been disorganised and had not got round to sending off my repeat prescription. The tests in the ambulance - the ECG and blood pressure test - simply showed that the only problem was my blood pressure being so high.<P>
So, when we got to A&E I had made the decision not to go in:<P>
<ul><LI>My being ill that day was self-inflicted. While not intentionally, it was still self-inflicted as I could have taken the steps not to have such high blood pressure but had not done so
<LI>We had established the cause - the NHS's resources are limited and I am not willing for NHS time and NHS money to be spent on unnecessary tests on me
<LI>I could go home, phone my GP surgery, get a "sit and wait" appointment that afternoon, and have new sets of tablets by the evening</li></ul><P>
I explained this, and started to leave, when the paramedics blocked me and started pushing me to towards the A&E entrance, while I was protesting that I wanted to leave. Then another healthcare worker came out, and he joined them in blocking me and pushing me. When he heard why I did not want to go in, he did something that shocked me and sums up the nanny state.<P>
Because I was refusing to go in, he diagnosed me as lacking "capacity" under the <i><a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2005/9/contents/enacted">Mental Capacity Act 2005</a></i>.<P>
I was reaching my shirt pocket to get my mobile, deciding I was going to phone the police. Even if diagnosing me as lacking "capacity" now gave them huge legal powers over my body, these powers did not apply prior to that point. As far as I was concerned this was both false imprisonment and assault.<P>
So, why didn't I phone the police? It's because it would have taken them several minutes to get there, and I had a feeling that the healthcare worker was looking for a reason to section me. So, if the police were to find a healthcare worker and a couple of paramedics detaining someone who has been sectioned, who would they listen to? Precisely.<P>
After I was forced in, I had to sit down and another blood pressure test was done against my wishes, and then taken to a side room. The healthcare worker told me he was going to do an ECG and ordered me to take my shirt off for that. He then left to get the ECG machine, and a few minutes later came back to find me sitting there, still shirted. I informed him that I did not trust him - he had been constantly speaking to me as if I were retarded, he had physically bullied me, he had abused his position, he was acting with no respect for my wishes and showing me no dignity - and walked out. A nurse outside the door asked me if I could allow him to do the ECG instead, but I said no, and that I just wanted to get away from that healthcare worker.<P>
I was walking out, the nurse asking me to stop, and the healthcare worker behind him. Near the exit of A&E, as I passed the security guard, I pointed out the healthcare worker to the security guard and asked him to keep that man away from me. After I left the nurse followed and asked me to come back, but I kept walking and got the next train home.<P>
When I got home, I made a doctor's appointment. My GP was quite surprised at all this, and mentioned that on my notes it is emphasised that I don't like needles - of course, if I had stayed, then there is no doubt that a blood test would have been forced on me against my will. He changed my prescription slightly, and so I got new tablets. End of.<P>
It could all have been avoided if I had been better organised.<P>
The whole experience is quite concerning.<P>
The <a href="http://www.echr.coe.int/Pages/home.aspx?p=home">European Court of Human Rights</a> has a <a href="http://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Guide_Art_5_ENG.pdf">guide to Article 5</a> of the <a href="http://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Convention_ENG.pdf">European Convention on Human Rights</a>.<P>
Now, the Convention guide is clear that detention of "a person of unsound mind" (as I now legally was, having been diagnosed as lacking "capacity") <i>is</i> acceptable in certain circumstances:<P>
<i>An individual cannot be deprived of his liberty as being of “unsound mind” unless the following three minimum conditions are satisfied....<P>
<UL><LI>the individual must be reliably shown, by objective medical expertise, to be of unsound mind, unless emergency detention is required;
<LI>the individual’s mental disorder must be of a kind to warrant compulsory confinement. The deprivation of liberty must be shown to have been necessary in the circumstances;
<LI>the mental disorder, verified by objective medical evidence, must persist throughout the period of detention.</i></li></ul><P>
This is followed by:<P>
<i>No deprivation of liberty of a person considered to be of unsound mind may be deemed in conformity with Article 5§1(e) of the Convention if it has been ordered without seeking the opinion of a medical expert</i><P>
It is hard to see how my belief in self-responsibility was a serious enough mental disorder for these exemptions on Article 5 to apply.<P>
The ironically-named <a href="http://www.nhs.uk/Pages/HomePage.aspx">NHS Choices</a> site, with its laughable tagline of "Your health, your choices", asks "<a href="http://www.nhs.uk/chq/pages/899.aspx?categoryid=68&subcategoryid=156">Do I have the right to refuse treatment?</a>", with the emphasis that:<P>
<i>Under the terms of the</i> Mental Capacity Act 2005<i>, all adults are presumed to have sufficient capacity to decide on their own medical treatment, unless there is significant evidence to suggest otherwise.</i><P>
The <a href="http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/Consent-to-treatment/Pages/Capacity.aspx">link</a> states:<P>
<i>If someone makes a decision about treatment that other people would consider to be irrational, it does not necessarily mean they have a lack of capacity, as long as they understand the reality of their situation. For example, a person who refuses to have a blood transfusion because it is against their religious beliefs would not be thought to lack capacity. They still understand the reality of their situation and the consequences of their actions.</i><P>
The <a href="http://www.scie.org.uk">Social Care Institute for Excellence</a> website notes <a href="http://www.scie.org.uk/publications/elearning/adultsafeguarding/resource/2_study_area_2_4.html">that the principles of the Act</a> <a href="http://www.scie.org.uk/publications/elearning/adultsafeguarding/resource/2_study_area_2_7.html">include</a>:<P>
<i>Adults at risk have the right to make decisions that others might regard as being unwise or eccentric <b>and a person cannot be treated as lacking capacity for these reasons</b>.</i> (emphasis mine)<P>
The healthcare worker might indeed believe that my decision was irrational. but he was wrong to treat this as meaning I lacked "capacity".<P>
For that reason - and the fact he was acting in violation of Article 5 when he diagnosed me - I do not accept his diagnosis as having any legal, medical or moral validity.<P>
The experience is deeply worrying, as it seems that if you refuse medical tests then it doesn't matter what the reason is - you will automatically be diagnosed as lacking "capacity" giving medical persons the right to carry them out.Graham Pointerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03538991243769088600noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8004940586846099589.post-12890417628097931462015-06-01T06:15:00.000-07:002015-07-05T03:40:32.100-07:00Your Theology When The Music Stops - Why I Am Now Uncomfortable Calling Myself An EvangelicalWhen I was on holiday in Scotland last September, I bought the book <i>The Blunders of our Government</i> to read. And one thing that struck me was the idea of "cultural disconnect". You can draw up policies which sound good on paper, but fail to understand the culture of the people in the United Kingdom that will be affected by it. You take for granted that your upbringing and lifestyle will be the template for other people's. You assume that if someone can't pay their Poll Tax they could always sell a painting.<P>
Cultural disconnect can lead to asking questions that are completely irrelevant - but the asker cannot understand <i>why</i> they are irrelevant. I once had a temp job where I was in the minority of people from a state school background. Asking me whether I hated Saturday morning detentions as well, or whether I still keep in contact with my "dorm mates" is simply asking me questions that do not apply to my background.<P>
Cultural disconnect is something that can affect the church too. We can assume that everyone out there had a church upbringing, and that Bible stories will be familiar from Sunday School.<P>
Indeed, when I became a Christian as an undergraduate (from a non-Christian background) this was one thing I had to battle against. There was the standard conversion story - brought up in a Christian household, church, Sunday school, boarding school chapel, Scripture Union/CYFA camp. That's fine - <i>if that is your background</i>. But don't assume everyone else is going to have the same.<P>
Don't become so sheltered and stuck in the evangelical bubble that you cannot understand other people.<P>
I have to say the worst Christian Union talk I heard was from a vicar who had a very odd view of <a href="http://www.gotquestions.org/parable-sower.html">the Parable of the Sower</a>. For him, when Jesus spoke about the seed sown on rocky ground, which had no root, well "root" meant the sort of upbringing I mentioned above. It was people like me, from non-Christian backgrounds, who didn't have the "root" and would fall away. The message came across that evangelism should really be a sort of mop-up exercise, focussed on people who went to church as children.<P>
A bit of context - this was the era of the Church of England's <i>Decade of Evangelism</i>, with the talking about what the Church tweely called "lapsed communicants".<P>
And you can see why the focus is on overseas - rather than home - mission. If we live in a Cozychristianland, only associating with Christians, then it is easy to see why some assume that, within the UK at least, the Great Commission is complete.<P>
You will find that oodles of non-Christians do not think they have a "God-shaped hole" in the middle of their lives and are not lying awake at night wondering if God exists or not.<P>
We can make assumptions about why people <i>don't</i> go to church, and <a href="http://grahampointer.blogspot.co.uk/2012/09/policy-x-and-sunday-morning-dad-dance.html">ignore the reasons they give, projecting the things we don't like onto them</a>.<P>
For example, a couple of years back there was the Disco-Dancing Deaconess showing off her moves at a wedding. I could not get caught up in the <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1VDgOXVsosg">squeeing</a> that Christianity had suddenly become relevant. I have non-Christian friends and I listen to what their objections are. What they need is solid apologetics that answers their questions, not the knowledge that a woman in a dog collar is busting her moves.<P>
I remember shortly afterwards mentioning on my old Twitter account this, and one woman responding with "Oh, come off it!" She <i>knew</i> that the objection that people she had never met had about Christianity was that church was not "participatory" enough - which, oddly, none of my non-Christian friends has ever raised as an objection to Christianity. Sorry, Ms Participatory, none of them could actually give two hoots about whether people in dog collars and frilly robes dance round the pews or not.<P>
I guess I was asking the sort of questions that only a miserable old git would ask - such as would it be a comfort to those in dark times wanting pastoral support to learn that the church was cool, and hip, and groovy, and above all, <i>relevant</i>?<P>
So, why do I feel uncomfortable calling myself an evangelical?<P>
I'll begin to explain what <i>aren't</i> the reasons - I know that in some circles it'll simply be "Hey, that Pointer says he's uncomfortable calling himself an evangelical", and people left to draw their own conclusions. It's OK; in certain circles I'm used to what I say and do being twisted, and I have given up the careful walking on eggshells where I always had to consider "if I say this, how will it be spun and what story will enthusiastically and hyperventilatingly be doing the rounds about me a few weeks down the line?".<P>
So, here goes.<P>
I still hold to the solid evangelical faith I adopted 25 years ago. I believe in the Trinity; I believe that Jesus is the Son of God, that He died on the Cross for my sins, that He rose again, ascended into Heaven and will return as Judge at the end of time; I believe the Bible is the inspired Word of God, for teaching, rebuking and correcting.<P>
I have not gone liberal.<P>
I am not going to hide a thurible in my rucksack on Sunday morning and suddenly run round church waving incense everywhere. (Actually, on second thoughts....)<P>
Neither is it because I fear the word "evangelical" has become too broad a term. Nor that it gets misused - for example, I remember once a vicar writing in the <i>New Forest Post</i> to make people aware of something that had come across the Atlantic, known as evangelicalism. His examples of evangelical groups were the Jehovah's Witnesses and the Mormons.<P>
It's the fact that evangelicalism is a sub-culture which I struggle to identify with. I am not middle-class enough or financially well-off enough to live the evangelical lifestyle of the annual skiing holiday and a week camping at a festival. I do not conform to the stereotypical blokey image that evangelical men are expected to conform to. So much has been added on to the basic evangelicalism these days.<P>
And I have found modern evangelicalism to be about a faith which is there to opt-out of reality, rather than engage with it. Yes, have your endless round of BBQs and church social events for the "church family", but there comes a time when the music stops, a time when disaster and tragedy comes.<P>
I know I am going to sound like a dour Puritan, but life can be tough. And I wonder whether the modern evangelical faith prepares people for this.<P>
The Christians I really respect are those who have walked with God through the valley of the shadow of death. Those who have cared round-the-clock for a dementia-ridden spouse or a disabled child. The Methodist couple who stayed in Singapore to minister to God's people when the Japanese moved in.<P>
What I find with modern evangelicalism is that it seems to be about fun-fun-fun with cool, successful people, and if anyone is a loo-zer then they can be ditched. After all, didn't our Lord Himself say "Verily, verily, I say unto thee, YOLO"? No, He didn't.<P>
One of the trickiest theological questions is that of suffering. And the modern evangelical faith doesn't say much about it - and, sorry to say this, but the way of tackling the issue of suffering is "out of sight, out of mind".<P>
I am not calling for evangelicalism to become miserable. But what I feel is that we need to see that life is serious, that it isn't all fun and have a theology which sees where God is when everything hits the fan. And have a compassion for those on the fringes, the sick, the lonely, the hurt, the vulnerable. A <i>real</i> compassion which involves including them rather than treating them as outsiders and loo-zers.Graham Pointerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03538991243769088600noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8004940586846099589.post-52851757169849883072015-05-31T15:40:00.001-07:002015-05-31T15:40:33.929-07:00Why Susan Foreman Should Never Return To Doctor Who - And Nor Should Several Other Sixties CompanionsI read recently that Peter Capaldi would like <a href="http://www.cultbox.co.uk/news/headlines/peter-capaldi-wants-classic-doctor-who-companion-to-return">Carole Ann Ford to return as the Doctor's granddaughter, Susan Foreman</a>.<P>
However fan pleasing this would be, I believe this is wrong.<P>
Time-travel can be horribly wibbly-wobbly and timey-wimey and complicated, but there is one principle established in <i>Pyramids of Mars</i>, where Sarah Jane Smith notes that they know that Sutekh didn't destroy the Earth in 1911, and the Doctor responds by taking her to 1980 to see the devastated Earth. Their failure to stop Sutekh would create a new timeline in which Sarah was never born. That wouldn't affect her on one level, as her birth was an event in her personal past, but would no longer be an event in the new timeline. If Sutekh won then she would have to explain to various aliens why she was born in 1950ish despite humanity being wiped out about 40 years before her birth.<P>
One fixed point in time was Adelaide Brooke's death in <i>The Waters of Mars</i> - and she was driven to become an astronaut by the events of <i>The Stolen Earth</i>/<i>Journey's End</i>. But in <i>Victory of the Daleks</i>, the Doctor is surprised that Amy Pond cannot remember those events - which implies that there is a new timeline in which the Davros never proceeded with his Reality Bomb plan. In this new timeline:<P>
<ul><LI>Davros wasn't killed in the destruction of the Crucible, as it was never destroyed - he is still out there somewhere.
<LI>Dalek Caan wasn't killed
<LI>The Void didn't collapse, so the events of <i>The Next Doctor</i> - including the Cyberking - never happened
<LI>Adelaide's parents weren't killed
<LI>Adelaide wasn't inspired to become an astronaut
<LI>The future of humanity among the stars which the Doctor told Adelaide about didn't happen</li></ul><P>
One of the key <i>Doctor Who</i> adventures was <i>Genesis of the Daleks</i>, where the Doctor manages to delay the Daleks' development. That means a new timeline was created in which the previous Dalek adventures - <i>The Daleks</i>, <i>The Dalek Invasion of Earth</i>, <i>The Chase</i>, <i>The Daleks' Master Plan</i>, <i>The Power of the Daleks</i>, <i>The Evil of the Daleks</i>, <i>Day of the Daleks</i>, <i>Frontier in Space</i>, <i>Planet of the Daleks</i>, <i>Death to the Daleks</i> - never happened.<P>
Now, from the Doctor's perspective, these are parts of his personal past. But they are no longer events in the current timeline.<P>
Think about that for a moment. Steven Taylor only escaped from the Mechanoids because the Doctor and his companions (Ian Chesterton, Barbara Wright and Vicki) arrived there fleeing the Daleks in <i>The Chase</i>. The Doctor can remember Steven's adventures from there up to <i>The Savages</i>, but in the current timeline these events were altered due to Steven's absence. From the universe's perspective, the Doctor, Ian, Barbara and Vicki never arrived and never met Steven. Also note that Ian and Barbara leave for London, 1965, in a Dalek time machine. The Doctor and Vicki see them leave, and from Ian and Barbara's perspective, they arrive in London.<P>
But as far as the universe is concerned....<P>
Well, if the Daleks' development was delayed, then the current timeline is one where the events of <i>The Chase</i> never happened, and - although this contradicts <i>The Day of the Doctor</i> and Sarah's comments in <i>Death of the Doctor</i> - from the universe's perspective, Ian and Barbara never returned and are just a couple of schoolteachers who went missing 52 years ago, with a cold crime squad maybe one day deciding to investigate.<P>
<i>The Daleks' Master Plan</i> - well, from the Doctor's perspective, Katarina was killed (and the same is true from <i>her</i> perspective), but if the current timeline is one where this adventure never happened, then her death is no longer an event in the universe. Doesn't mean she's alive - she just went missing from Troy at the end of <i>The Myth Makers</i> as far as the universe is concerned.<P>
Victoria Waterfield's debut was <i>The Evil of the Daleks</i>. Now, this is where it gets complicated. There is a Victoria who travelled with the Doctor and Jamie McCrimmon, whom he will remember. But if he went back to see Frank and Maggie Harris from <i>Fury of the Deep</i> and asked to see Victoria, they wouldn't have a clue who they were talking about. If <i>The Evil of the Daleks</i> never happened, then the Doctor could travel back to a time after 1866, meet Victoria (who would not know who he was), her father and Theodore Maxtible, and see how their continuing time-travel experiments using mirrors and static electricity were going (or rather, failing to go).<P>
And what about <i>The Dalek Invasion of Earth</i>? What went through the Doctor's mind as the Time Lord on Skaro handed him the Time Ring and sent him on his mission? Did he realise that his mission would necessarily mean that his previous encounters with the Daleks would no longer have happened due to the timeline changing, and the cost to him at a family level?<P>
Due to the rewriting of the timeline, there is no apocalyptic post-invasion 22nd century Earth for the Doctor to travel to to see Susan. The Dalek invasion - and its consequences - were removed from the timeline. From the universe's perspective, Susan no longer exists.<P>
And that is the cost to the Doctor of the Time War - permanent separation from his grand-daughter, getting on with her life in a world that doesn't exist.Graham Pointerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03538991243769088600noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8004940586846099589.post-5190549879871818032015-05-31T11:26:00.000-07:002015-05-31T11:26:52.839-07:00The Election Where The SNP Won More Seats Than The Liberal Democrats Despite Having Fewer VotesElectoral reform seems to be in the air at the moment - and I do agree that Single Member Plurality has had its day - and one common argument is that under SMP (or First Past The Post as it is often called) party X can win more seats that party Y despite having fewer votes.<P>
And indeed, not all that long ago on a May Thursday there was an election where the Scottish National Party won more seats than the Liberal Democrats despite having fewer votes.<P>
I am, of course, referring to <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/events/vote2014/eu-uk-results">the May 2014 elections to the European Parliament</a> conducted on a form of proportional representation (party lists with seats allocated by the <i>d'Hondt</i> system).<P>
The Scottish National Party won 2 seats on 389,503 votes, while the poor Liberal Democrats won just 1 seat on 1,087,633 votes- that is half the SNP's seats on 2.79 times as many votes. And to make things worse, the Greens won 3 seats on 1,255,573 votes - that is thrice the number of seats the Liberal Democrats won but with just 1.15 times the number of votes.<P>
How could this happen under <i>proportional</i> representation, which should do as it says on the tin?<P>
As for European elections we subdivide the United Kingdom into nations (and England is further subdivided into regions) then where a party picks up its votes is important - not just the total number of votes. The SNP's vote is focussed in one part of the UK, not spread around like the Liberal Democrats.<P>
In the discussions over electoral reform in the next few years, bear in mind that in any system, the SNP will be punching above their weight - even in the system of proportional representation we use for the European Parliament.Graham Pointerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03538991243769088600noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8004940586846099589.post-88192927841911775352015-05-31T03:06:00.002-07:002015-05-31T03:06:56.441-07:00Jump AroundToday is not going well, thanks to the Migraine Monster clambering in through my bedroom window during the night and putting my head in a clamp.<P>
Living in a block of flats, there is the problem of noise. And the flat above is very noisy.<P>
The boy in the flat is about 8 or 9 and lives with his mum. And from him there is a lot of noise. Running around, shouting...<P>
And the jumping.<P>
<i>Jump</i><P>
<i>Jump</i><P>
<i>Jump</i><P>
I appreciate he has energy to get rid off - so why can't his mum take him to one of the local parks for a runaround?<P>
The jumping is at the right noise frequency to make any headache or migraine worse.<P>
This can go on beyond midnight, which brings me to the real problem.<P>
On many evenings I hear this going on, the running around, jumping and shouting, and I cannot sleep while it goes on, even when wearing earplugs. And the thing is, there doesn't sound like an adult there. OK, one evening this week I did hear his mum yelling at him to stop and go to bed (this was around 1/2 past 11), and I realised how rare this is. He ignored her and carried on.<P>
But I have noticed this pattern - him running around, jumping, shouting, with no sound of any adult there. Then hearing the front door of the block of flats open and shut some point between 1/2 past 11 and 1/2 past midnight. Then the sound of the same with the door of the flat above. A woman's voice and him stopping shortly afterwards. If he is getting to bed that late on a school night, then his education is going to suffer.<P>
Something is clearly not right.Graham Pointerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03538991243769088600noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8004940586846099589.post-78379345791952445782015-05-21T11:21:00.000-07:002015-05-21T11:21:12.090-07:00The EU Negotiations & The West Minster Question - Why Can't We Become The EU's Scotland?It used to be said that Parliament could do anything except turn a man into a woman - a restriction on its powers that Labour removed under the <a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2004/7/contents/enacted"><i>Gender Recognition Act 2004</i></a>.<P>
However, there are times when Parliament has a self-denying ordinance - and this is thanks to the <a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/46/contents/enacted"><i>Scotland Act 1998</i></a>. When I looked at the <a href="http://grahampointer.blogspot.co.uk/2013/04/the-west-lothian-answer.html">West Lothian Question</a> I outlined that sovereignty still resides at Westminster, and that there are procedures where the British Government can prevent Bills passed by the Scottish Parliament from becoming law.<P>
There are 3 stances on devolution:<P>
<UL><Li>If you believe in <i>legislative devolution</i> then you think Scotland's schools system should be overseen by the Scottish Minister for Education answerable to the Scottish Parliament
<LI>If you believe in <i>executive devolution</i> then you think Scotland's schools system should be overseen by the Scottish Secretary answerable to the UK Parliament
<LI>If you believe in <i>integration</i> then you think Scotland's schools system should be overseen by the Education Secretary answerable to the UK Parliament</li></ul><P>
All major Unionist parties support legislative devolution.<P>
In the UK, devolution is <i>asymmetric</i> - the Scottish Parliament has more powers devolved to it than the Welsh Assembly or the Northern Ireland Assembly, and there is no English Parliament.<P>
Within the European Union, there are ways in which the United Kingdom is distinct, just as Scotland and Northern Ireland have their own distinctive characteristics within the United Kingdom.<P>
To begin with, there is the political centre-right. The British Government is composed of the European Conservatives & Reformists. Now, the ECR has led governments in both Poland (where their main rival is the European People's Party) and the Czech Republic (where it has shared power with the EPP), but the UK is different in having the ECR being able to form Governments on its own.<P>
Mentioning the EPP in the above paragraph brings me to the next distinctiveness. The EPP is the European Union's leading party, producing the Presidents of both the European Commission (Jean-Claude Juncker) and the European Council (Donald Tusk), and in the United Kingdom it is - well, where is it? 0 Members of the European Parliament, 0 MPs, 0 peers, 0 Members of the Scottish Parliament.....<P>
It's as if the Conservatives not only returned 0 MPs from Scottish constituencies but had 0 MSPs and 0 councillors in any of the 32 councils in Scotland.<P>
We accept that Westminster is sovereign, but in certain policy areas it allows its powers to stop at the border. So, why can't we push for the same in the European Union, arguing that we have a system in the United Kingdom that works and allows Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland to express their distinctive characteristics?<P>
What I think we should be arguing in any re-negotiations is that the heartland of the European Union - the Benelux countries, Spain, Italy, France, Germany, Austria and maybe others - is the European Union's "England". It is the dominant section. But just as there are circumstances where Westminster only legislates for England and Government ministers only have powers in England, then we could push for something similar in Europe. Have policy areas where the European Parliament only legislates - and the European Commission only has executive powers - within that European heartland.<P>
In Scotland, the Conservatives, Labour and Liberal Democrats hold that things like transport, health and education should be matters for the Scottish Parliament, not Westminster, to legislate for and have executive authority over - but they are still fully signed up to being in the United Kingdom. And the same way, the Government should emphasise to the other European Union governments that there is no contradiction between the United Kingdom playing a full part in the European Union while - in some policy areas - Brussels' powers stop at the English Channel.Graham Pointerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03538991243769088600noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8004940586846099589.post-52161398652658660712015-05-21T10:52:00.001-07:002015-05-21T11:02:43.571-07:00How Christians Disagree Well - Thoughts On The 20th Anniversary Of My Baptism20 years ago, something happened to me at <a href="http://www.central-baptist.org.uk">Central Baptist Church, Leicester</a> (sometimes referred to as "Charles Street Baptist Church".)<P>
Among evangelical Christians there are various stances on baptism. The two main ones are:<P>
<ul><LI>It is OK to baptise the children of Christians - baptism was is the sign of the New Covenant, just as circumcision was the sign of the Old Covenant, and as circumcision was performed on the sons of Israelites, baptism can be performed on the children of Christians. This is called "paedobaptism".
<LI>In the New Testament the call is "repent and be baptised", in that order, so baptism should be restricted to Christians. This is called "believers' baptism"</li></ul><P>
Then there is also the mode of baptism:<P>
<ul><LI>Some Christians believe it needs to be full immersion in water, symbolising Jesus's death and resurrection.
<LI>Others believe that sprinkling of water is sufficient.</li></ul><P>
Note that there can be a combination - there will be those who believe in "adult baptism" (even that is a confusing term when used to refer to "believers' baptism") can be done by sprinkling.<P>
To add to the mix, there is also the renewal of baptismal vows (which may include immersion in water, like baptism), with the Church of England's <a href="https://www.churchofengland.org/prayer-worship/worship/texts.aspx"><i>Common Worship</i></a> having services <a href="https://www.churchofengland.org/prayer-worship/worship/texts/christian-initiation/rites-of-affirmation-appropriating-baptism/affirmation-of-baptismal-faith-within-a-service-of-holy-communion.aspx"><i>Affirmation of Baptismal Faith within a service of Holy Communion</i></a> (which seems to be for a small number of candidates) and <a href="https://www.churchofengland.org/prayer-worship/worship/texts/christian-initiation/rites-of-affirmation-appropriating-baptism/a-form-for-the-corporate-renewal-of-baptismal-vows.aspx"><i>A Form for the Corporate Renewal of Baptismal Vows</i></a> (which seems more focussed on the whole congregation).<P>
Unfortunately, there is also the problem of a quasi-pagan view of baptism, which acts as if the Church of England's service book is the <i>1662 Book of Common Spells</i>. I recall one lady I knew - she was not too keen on her grandchildren spending time with their other grandparents as they were "religious", yet she pressed for them to be christened, "just in case something happens to them". She didn't want it in the main service as she didn't want her family to have "religion" rammed down their throats. And she felt it had to be done using what she called "the Old Bible". I have no idea where to begin with all that!<P>
The Church of England itself can get confused - <a href="https://www.churchofengland.org/about-us/structure/churchlawlegis/canons/section-b.aspx">Canon B21</a> states:<P>
<i>It is desirable that every minister having a cure of souls shall normally administer the sacrament of Holy Baptism on Sundays at public worship when the most number of people come together, that the congregation there present may witness the receiving of them that be newly baptized into Christ's Church, and be put in remembrance of their own profession made to God in their baptism.</i><P>
However, their <a href="https://www.churchofengland.org/weddings-baptisms-funerals/baptism/christening-faqs.aspx">FAQs</a> are quite fluffy, dealing with the issue of having a baptism outside the main service. Despite was Canon B21 states, the FAQs answer the question:<P>
<b><i>Can we arrange a Christening at a separate time to the Sunday service?</i></b><P>
by:<P>
<i>There may be opportunities to have a service at a different time, again usually on a Sunday, but talk to the vicar and ask their advice about what is possible at your church.</i><P>
There we are, you can make the baptismal promises without sharing in the corporate worship. The FAQs even tell you:<P>
<i> You do not have to have been a regular churchgoer</i><P>
Even if the early church practiced infant baptism, what would they have made of people wanting their children baptised as a social event, with no history of - or intention of - being involved in a worshipping community?<P>
Now, my background was having infant baptism in December 1972, when I was 5 months old. My baptismal present from my grandmother was a <i>Book of Common Prayer</i>, which I still have by my bedside. However, I did not have any meaningful Church connection growing up, and didn't become a Christian until I was 18. That was through the <a href="http://oiccu.org">Oxford Inter-Collegiate Christian Union</a>.<P>
Now, OICCU came across as predominantly Anglican - I assume because the big evangelical churches in Oxford city centre were Anglican. And from my background I wasn't really aware of anything much outside the Church of England - although my great-aunt and great-uncle attended a Baptist church (another great-uncle, my grandmother's and great-aunt's elder brother, whom I never met, was a Church of England vicar). So, baptism never came up as an issue. The first time I saw a believer's baptism was while I was in Oxford, when it was one of my friends at <a href="http://www.newroadbaptistchurchoxford.co.uk">New Road Baptist Church</a>.<P>
After Oxford there was a few months of living an ecumenical life - as a volunteer at <a href="http://www.mha.org.uk/care-homes/residential-care/cedar-lawn">Cedar Lawn</a> <a href="http://www.mha.org.uk">Methodist Home for the Aged</a> in Stratford-upon-Avon, while worshipping at <a href="http://www.stratforduponavonbaptist.org.uk">Stratford-upon-Avon Baptist Church</a>.<P>
After Stratford-upon-Avon it was a move to Leicester, and there I was introduced to a very different form of evangelical world to that I had experienced at Anglican-dominated Oxford or more small-town Stratford.<P>
When I moved to Leicester, just across from the end of my road was <a href="http://www.melbournehall.org">Melbourne Hall Evangelical Free Church</a> - the first time I had encountered an evangelical free church. The world of the <a href="https://fiec.org.uk">Fellowship of Independent Evangelical Churches</a> was completely new to me.<P>
Melbourne Hall has a positive dominance, as it is the father (or grandfather or even great-grandfather) church of other evangelical free churches in the Leicester area, giving the city and the region around it one aspect of its distinctive evangelical culture. One of the philosophies of the Melbourne Hall strand of evangelicalism is the <i>church plant</i>, where a church grows to the point where it is too big and splits positively (rather than the more sadder faction-driven splitting that occurs in churches) and one/some of the leadership team and some of the congregation form a new church elsewhere.<P>
As well as the conservative evangelical churches, there were also the charismatic ones - again, not something I had come across in any detail. The one I was most aware of was <a href="http://trinitylifechurch.org.uk/central">New Trinity Church</a> (now Trinity Life Church) - an <a href="http://www.aog.org.uk">Assemblies of God</a> church which was the second closest church to me.<P>
What connected the charismatics and the conservative evangelicals was a focus on believers' baptism. This was the first time I came across an environment where being baptised post-conversion by full immersion was seen as the norm. And this had got me thinking.<P>
At the time, as an Anglican, I was worshipping at <a href="http://www.holytrinityleicester.org">Holy Trinity</a>. And one day I mentioned to the vicar that I was thinking of getting baptised by full immersion. I had expected him to, as a good Anglican, inform me that I had been done as a baby. A few weeks later, he wrote to me to tell me that some people from Holy Trinity would be getting baptised at Central Baptist Church and would I like to join them? I did. This was pushing Anglican rules to the limit - after all, no-one holding any formal office in the Church of England would be doing the actual baptising. The vicar would be preaching, but again, this is different - a vicar cannot reasonably be expected to say to a Baptist church that he or she cannot preach a sermon at a service because there will be baptisms.<P>
Those of us wanting to be baptised met the pastor of the Baptist church on the Thursday evening for what we called the "dry run" and then on the Sunday were the actual baptisms.<P>
Since then, as I have - due to moving around - swung between Anglicanism and Evangelical Freeism. And I have had to work out what happened that day. Was I renewing my baptismal vows (as Anglicans would have it) with my real baptism in 1972, or was the 1972 event a sham and 1995 the real baptism? I guess I will never resolve that tension fully. To some extent, as one can only be baptised once, this is the same event from two angles - if we believe that infant baptism is a covenantal matter, then in 1972 God was making His side of a covenant, and in 1995 I was responding.<P>
There is a lot of ink spilled over the waters of baptism, but what I want to focus on are three things when we disagree:<P>
<OL><LI>We need to find out <i>why</i> someone holds a different viewpoint. I don't mean use the theological equivalent of "pop psychology", but find out what Bible verses they rely on, and accept that they may be correct
<LI>We also need not to major on minors. We should never place a secondary issue in the position of being a salvation maker-or-breaker. I am happy to discuss my views on the early chapters of Genesis - but not with a person who sees a belief that something happened over a period of 6 days in 4004 BC as something that separates true Christians from heretics.
<LI>In the Bible, the victory we focus on is Jesus' victory at Calvary. There should be no attitude of wanting a victory over other Christians. We should not seek to "own" (in the very modern sense of the word) other Christians. Driving someone out of a church should not be your ambition. I don't approve of the ordination of women, but what has impressed me about the way that Libby Lane, the Suffragan Bishop of Stockport, has gone about her work is that she has not given any indication that she sees her appointment and consecration as a victory over Christians like me or seeks to make the Church of England a cold house for us</li></ol><P>
Graham Pointerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03538991243769088600noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8004940586846099589.post-9761968066916510302015-05-16T01:27:00.001-07:002015-05-17T01:38:10.124-07:00Thanet South and the Local ElectionsI guess you've seen something doing the rounds - Nigel Farage, the former ex-leader of the UK Independence Party, <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14000948">failed to win <i>Thanet South</i></a>, yet UKIP won control of <a href="http://thanet.gov.uk">Thanet District Council</a>.<P>
And there is this "proof" from the man made that complaint to the police that the result was rigged - when they have real crimes to solve:<P>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgjTG_3ziMfD6swiQH70hW6IPzlS93qpSChRDivjdk7Y8-fkwKKG-aFZFzWHLF9dpPSgFuArSGFrqp1FHDopEpn_17GPFlTZ3WUYGyarNnII0aGmfAXvhpFJG8-QIhiPOuCU8IzDEbwU2I/s1600/CFBqrguWIAACJ0y.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgjTG_3ziMfD6swiQH70hW6IPzlS93qpSChRDivjdk7Y8-fkwKKG-aFZFzWHLF9dpPSgFuArSGFrqp1FHDopEpn_17GPFlTZ3WUYGyarNnII0aGmfAXvhpFJG8-QIhiPOuCU8IzDEbwU2I/s320/CFBqrguWIAACJ0y.jpg" /></a></div><P>
A few things to note:<P>
<ul><LI>That shows 149,034 people voting - 156% of the electorate. Before anyone thinks that is odd, in local elections with multi-member wards, the number of votes cast is much higher than the turnout as people cast more than one vote.
<LI>Hence UKIP vote (and other parties' votes) are going to be higher at local elections (with more votes cast) than at a general election - there is nothing at all suspicious about this for people with a basic grasp of maths
<li>People vote different ways at local and general elections - otherwise, the Liberal Democrats in <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14000827"><i>New Forest East</i></a> would be tweeting #newforestrigged every election
<LI>The Thanet constituencies contain more than Thanet - as the official description under the <a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2007/1681/made"><i>Parliamentary Constituencies (England) Order 2007</i></a> shows</li></ul><P>
So, what was the local election result in <i>Thanet South</i>? It takes 14 wards (<a href="http://democracy.thanet.gov.uk/mgElectionAreaResults.aspx?XXR=0&ID=185&RPID=9224755">Beacon Road</a>, <a href="http://democracy.thanet.gov.uk/mgElectionAreaResults.aspx?XXR=0&ID=188&RPID=9224770">Bradstowe</a>, <a href="http://democracy.thanet.gov.uk/mgElectionAreaResults.aspx?XXR=0&ID=189&RPID=9224776">Central Harbour</a>, <a href="http://democracy.thanet.gov.uk/mgElectionAreaResults.aspx?XXR=0&ID=190&RPID=9224782">Cliffsend & Pegwell</a>, <a href="http://democracy.thanet.gov.uk/mgElectionAreaResults.aspx?XXR=0&ID=191&RPID=9224800">Cliftonville East</a>, <a href="http://democracy.thanet.gov.uk/mgElectionAreaResults.aspx?XXR=0&ID=192&RPID=9224813">Cliftonville West</a>, <a href="http://democracy.thanet.gov.uk/mgElectionAreaResults.aspx?XXR=0&ID=194&RPID=9224819">Eastcliffe</a>, <a href="http://democracy.thanet.gov.uk/mgElectionAreaResults.aspx?XXR=0&ID=196&RPID=9224825">Kingsgate</a>, <a href="http://democracy.thanet.gov.uk/mgElectionAreaResults.aspx?XXR=0&ID=198&RPID=9224831">Nethercourt</a>, <a href="http://democracy.thanet.gov.uk/mgElectionAreaResults.aspx?XXR=0&ID=199&RPID=9224839">Newington</a>, <a href="http://democracy.thanet.gov.uk/mgElectionAreaResults.aspx?XXR=0&ID=200&RPID=9224845">Northwood</a>, <a href="http://democracy.thanet.gov.uk/mgElectionAreaResults.aspx?XXR=0&ID=202&RPID=9224854">Sir Moses Montefiore</a>, <a href="http://democracy.thanet.gov.uk/mgElectionAreaResults.aspx?XXR=0&ID=203&RPID=9224862">St Peters</a> and <a href="http://democracy.thanet.gov.uk/mgElectionAreaResults.aspx?XXR=0&ID=205&RPID=9224868">Viking</a>) from the District of Thanet, as well as 2 wards (<a href="http://www.dover.gov.uk/Council--Democracy/Elections/Election-Results/DistrictCouncil-7May2015.pdf">Little Stour & Ashton and Sandwich</a>) from the <a href="http://www.dover.gov.uk/Home.aspx">District of Dover</a>.<P>
As most of these are multi-member, we work out each party's vote by taking the candidate from that party with the highest vote in that ward.<P>
So, the local election result for <i>Thanet South</i> is:<P>
<UL><li>Conservative - 16,811
<LI>UK Independence Party - 14,980
<LI>Labour - 12,487
<LI>Green - 1,652
<LI>Liberal Democrat - 1,385
<LI>We Are The Reality Party - 793
<LI>Independent (Ralph Hoult) - 513
<LI>Independent (Ruth Bailey) - 230
<LI>Independent (Dean McCastree) - 201
<LI>Ramsgate First - 199
<LI>Independent (Peter Cook) - 168
<LI>Independent (Bayo Oyediran) - 104</li></ul><P>
So, no mystery here. The Conservatives topped the poll at both the local and general elections.<P>
One interesting thing to note is that - in complete reverse to the conspiracy theory - Farage actually won <i>more</i> votes than UKIP's local election votes in the constituency.
Graham Pointerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03538991243769088600noreply@blogger.com0