Council Election 2007

SoupDragon · Post by **SoupDragon** » 04 May 2007, 17:19

Yeah but no instructions on what to do if a golf club weilding nutter lets loose.

But seriously. the two crosses on one paper.??
Why not just issue 3 ballot papers
A bit confusing
If you liked someone on the left hand side but no one on the right and didn't put a cross on the right did that mean the paper was spoiled?
Bet a few read "you have 2 votes " and put them both on RH side

(It all reminded me of Baby Dragon trying to choose 5th year subjects, if I put Physics in this column I can take Drama in this but dont like any subjects in that column there.. hmmm)

What about the poor old folk that couldn't see a colour diffrence between LH and RH columns?

And it wasn't all that clear if you had to number all the candidates on the PR paper, no one mentioned negative numbers if you really really disliked a candidate. Its still a number even if negative.

SoupDragon · Post by **SoupDragon** » 04 May 2007, 17:54

Mr Soupy was just telling me when he voted last night, the 1st booth didn't have any instructions, the 2nd had broken pencil & 3rd being used so how were you supposed to know how to fill in paper?

Post by **wangi** » 04 May 2007, 17:55

SoupDragon wrote:so how were you supposed to know how to fill in paper?

Use the power of speech and ask one of the many folk there to help? Just an idea.

SoupDragon · Post by **SoupDragon** » 04 May 2007, 18:07

Thats what irratated him. He did, they didn't seem impressed
Suppose it was at the end of a long day

My dad has done the polling clerk thing before, thought he was doing it this year as well but he didn't think he could sit in the hall for that length of time now, his arthitis getting worse.

Maria · Post by **Maria** » 04 May 2007, 18:23

Results in for the Council Elections:

Mike Bridgman SNP
Maureen Child LAB
Stephen Hawkins LIB/DEM

Maria · Post by **Maria** » 04 May 2007, 18:27

I am gutted for Lawrence Marshall who, IMHO, did not deserve to lose his seat.

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 04 May 2007, 19:59

I'm just back from the count. I was there as Lawrence's guest and I'm obviously very disappointed that he wasn't re-elected although happy for Maureen. More later.

Dadaist · Post by **Dadaist** » 04 May 2007, 20:12

I'm sure everyone will join me in congratulating POL's own Stephen Hawkins on the occasion of being elected to the new-look CEC.

Post by **wangi** » 04 May 2007, 20:48

The full results can be seen here for ward 17. Interesting to see the effect of the ranking system in this Single Transferable Vote election - In order of the number of first choice votes the Conservative candidate (Alison Miller) and Labour's second candidate (Lawrence Marshall) were ahead of the Liberal one (Stephen Hawkins) who got 3rd place:

Michael Andrew BRIDGEMAN Scottish National Party (SNP) 2654
Maureen CHILD*, Scottish Labour Party 2076
Alison MILLER, Scottish Conservative and Unionist 1041
Lawrence MARSHALL*, Scottish Labour Party 849
Stephen Ian HAWKINS, Scottish Liberal Democrats 791
Peter MCCOLL, Scottish Green Party 635
Norrie DAVIES, Independent 302
Archie BURNS, Independent 291
Margaret Lily MUNRO, Independent 244
Caroline Jane HOSKING, Solidarity - Tommy Sheidan 187
Massimo CIRCI, Liberal Party - Abolish Council Tax 114
Jan MORAN, Scottish Socialist Party - Independent Socialist Scotland 73
John SMART, Independent 19
Gerry KERR, Independent 5

Really does show the importance of the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, ... etc votes! See http://www.votescotland.com/stv/How_STV_Works.pdf for the maths behind it all.

Post by **wangi** » 04 May 2007, 21:23

Also interesting to see how the many independent candidates did - certainly didn't set things on fire! In particular it would be very hard to relate this result to the current local hot topic of Portobello High School. The vast majority of votes went to candidates from the established major parties, rather than those specifically focusing on local issues.

Sandra · Post by **Sandra** » 04 May 2007, 23:28

SoupDragon wrote:Mr Soupy was just telling me when he voted last night, the 1st booth didn't have any instructions, the 2nd had broken pencil & 3rd being used so how were you supposed to know how to fill in paper?

there were instructions on the top of the ballot paper

ifstar · Post by **ifstar** » 04 May 2007, 23:30

wangi wrote: Really does show the importance of the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, ... etc votes! See http://www.votescotland.com/stv/How_STV_Works.pdf for the maths behind it all.

Thanks for posting, still not 100% sure I understand how that works though!
So presumably, Miller and Marshall didn't get as many 2nd/3rd/4th etc place votes than Hawkins?

I very much doubt many people were able to understand how this method of voting worked before they voted so it doesn't really seem that fair that someone who has quite a lot more votes can miss out to someone with less because the voters might not have been aware of the significance of adding on a few extra numbers.

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 04 May 2007, 23:42

I don't think there was ever any danger of an independent candidate being elected, it was more a case of who they were taking votes away from. The candidates were given a more complete breakdown of the transferable vote results. I don't have a copy but from recollection Lawrence remained ahead of Stephen Hawkins through most of the stages but Stephen picked up more 2 and 3 places, ultimately at the expense of Alison Miller.

Lawrence and Maureen both lost many votes due to the scenario where people marked a cross against both names. Clearly, their intention was to vote Labour 1 and 2 but because they did not express a preference their votes were not counted.

This alone however does not explain the collapse in Lawrence's vote. The re-drawing of the wards meant that he lost half of his original ward, while in the internecine politics of Craigmillar he was unfairly branded as an ally of Paul Nolan.

Perhaps Lawrence's greatest error was that he never took the time to blow his own trumpet. Most people have little or no appreciation of the work their local councillors do. Maureen's monthly newsletters at least let her constituents know that she is working hard on their behalf. Indeed, most councillors are happy to take credit for what they have achieved, not to mention the credit for what others have achieved as well.

Lawrence lacked the gloss, the nous, the spin and the presentation skills of New Labour. For me, that was a reason for respecting him but I guess a lot of people thought they were voting for the new Joseph. Councillors are always accused of being on the take. Lawrence, famously, would never take a taxi if there was a bus available, even though he was entitled to. I imagine he must have been consistently at the bottom of the expenses claimed league. He rarely missed a meeting with the old folks at the Community Centre on a Saturday morning, even though most of them were unlikely to live along enough to vote for him. He loved his job and he cared passionately about Portobello and the people he represented. I could go on but I'm not qualified to write his tribute.

Suffice to say that we have lost a good man and I seriously question what we have gained in return.

Sandra · Post by **Sandra** » 04 May 2007, 23:47

Politics for you Bob, you win some, you lose some, its life.

Post by **wangi** » 05 May 2007, 08:59

Bob Jefferson wrote:Lawrence and Maureen both lost many votes due to the scenario where people marked a cross against both names. Clearly, their intention was to vote Labour 1 and 2 but because they did not express a preference their votes were not counted.

That's the sort of statement that really needs to be made by an impartial observer.

Bob Jefferson wrote:Suffice to say that we have lost a good man and I seriously question what we have gained in return.

Proportional representation. A council (and country) which isn't simply stuffed full of Labour representatives. Sure Lawrence done a good job, but how come you can't assume Micheal Bridgeman & Stephen Hawkins wont either?

timk · Post by **timk** » 05 May 2007, 09:22

I think Lawrence has done a good job in Portobello in the past but many people I spoke to didn't want a Labour run council and thus were not prepared to vote for Labour candidates, however good they were as an individual

Rather than complaining, lets welcome the new candidates. Perhaps Maureen will be a good influence in terms of providing communication for constituents. It was something I missed, not being within her constituency.

Perhaps we could ask them to introduce themselves on the Porty site, and maybe even collect signups for a local councillor mailing list on their behalf as a little encouragement

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 05 May 2007, 09:34

I think that there has been enough abuse of email distribution lists leading up to the election, and Archie Burns wasn't the only offender. For info, Stephen Hawkins hasn't posted on this forum for over a year.

Jamesie · Post by **Jamesie** » 05 May 2007, 09:43

Bob Jefferson wrote: Suffice to say that we have lost a good man and I seriously question what we have gained in return.

Each to their own Bob - personally I think what has occurred overall in Edinburgh East is entirely refreshing.

I think it is unhealthy for any constituency to be as "safe" as Edinburgh East has been for so many, many years and therefore change can only be a good thing.

timk · Post by **timk** » 05 May 2007, 09:47

If a proper mailing list using Mailman or Majordomo was setup on porty.org.uk then there could be no abuse unless those running the site released the user list. Such lists can be setup to only allow a few people to post and to hide the list of members, yet allow anyone to signup online.

This avoids the problems I heard about from people not using bcc when sending emails out

A few lists would be a nice addition to the site. One could be council news/minutes and the other could be a general whats on / site updates list

Dadaist · Post by **Dadaist** » 05 May 2007, 09:54

That's a great idea, timk.

For a while now, I've subscribed to threads (or signed up to have email alerts) but what you suggest would be very good.

Someone would need to handle it and run it etc - why don't you contact the site admin and offer your services?

Post by **wangi** » 05 May 2007, 10:19

timk wrote:... setup on porty.org.uk ... A few lists would be a nice addition to the site...

porty.org.uk and talkporty.org are two separate and unrelated sites.

Thanks/L

Dadaist · Post by **Dadaist** » 05 May 2007, 10:26

unrelated?

mwahahahaha!

timk · Post by **timk** » 05 May 2007, 11:29

wangi wrote: porty.org.uk and talkporty.org are two separate and unrelated sites.

I know they are but lists should probably be managed from porty.org.uk as thats where the council minutes go

SoupDragon · Post by **SoupDragon** » 05 May 2007, 17:31

Sandra wrote:
SoupDragon wrote:Mr Soupy was just telling me when he voted last night, the 1st booth didn't have any instructions, the 2nd had broken pencil & 3rd being used so how were you supposed to know how to fill in paper?
there were instructions on the top of the ballot paper

Yeah but he never likes reading official forms, thats why I have to do fill in all the tax froms, child credit forms , pay the credit card bills, apply for car tax , do the karate club books....

I see a pattern emerging

Post by **wangi** » 05 May 2007, 17:37

timk wrote:
wangi wrote:porty.org.uk and talkporty.org are two separate and unrelated sites.
I know they are but lists should probably be managed from porty.org.uk as that's where the council minutes go

The community council minutes are posted on the Edinburgh Council website and also on porty.org.uk.

The responsibility of councillors maintaining an email distribution list really is their own. If they, or their support infrastructure, cannot get it right then they need to sort things out.

We have a forum here which can be used for passing on information etc too.

Post by **wangi** » 05 May 2007, 22:08

While searching for info on the Parly election ballot I came across this:

Single Transferable Vote Ballot
Paper for Scottish Local
Elections May 2007
Qualitative Research to
Inform Design

...

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc ... 041525.pdf

tom nimmo · Post by **tom nimmo** » 06 May 2007, 10:13

Sorry Bob, but I think we took part in different elections. My elections were not a disaster for Scotland, Edinburgh or Portobello so I am sorry to hear that yours were. If I felt as strongly as you do I would be preparing myself for candidacy at the next available opportunity in order to give the benefit of my wisdom to the people. Failing that, I would be packing up and moving out to somewhere that had not suffered a disaster and where all the enlightened people agreed with me. If this place exists, send me a postcard.

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 06 May 2007, 10:32

We survived Thatcher, we'll survive the SNP.

Jamesie · Post by **Jamesie** » 06 May 2007, 10:33

Bob Jefferson wrote:We survived Thatcher, we'll survive the SNP.

I don't think you can really group the two in the same sentence though can you?

Dadaist · Post by **Dadaist** » 06 May 2007, 11:26

if they are tartan tories well find out soon enough - these people are now in charge of the nhs in scotland - it will be interesting to compare robison to the likes of chisholm and kerr

Dadaist · Post by **Dadaist** » 07 May 2007, 09:48

http://edinburghnews.scotsman.com/edinb ... =699092007

Councillors mull over the A-Z of failure

THE sheer chance of what letter of the alphabet their surnames start with has been blamed by senior councillors for them losing their seats.

The new Single Transferable Vote system, based on multi-councillor wards, saw many of the major parties putting up two candidates for the same ward.

Many candidates believe thousands of voters, confused by the new-style ballot papers, simply looked down the list until they saw a candidate representing their favourite party.

Those listed second may have missed out on many votes.

With the order the candidates appeared on ballot papers decided by alphabetical order, that may have been crucial to how they fared.

Liberal Democrat Tom Ponton and senior Labour figure Trevor Davies may have fallen victim to the phenomenon.

Mr Davies, who was the council's planning convener, said: "It's the alphabet that's really done it for me.

"We put up two candidates in the Leith Walk ward and her name begins with the letter B, meaning she comes higher up the list."

Another surprise Labour casualty, Lawrence Marshall, said: "I'm disappointed, but that's life. I do feel that I've been defeated because of the alphabet."

tom nimmo · Post by **tom nimmo** » 07 May 2007, 12:58

Losing Lawrence is without doubt a loss to Portobello. However, blaming the alphabet is a bit lame. If I had wanted to vote for ZZ Top I would look down the list until I found the name. It's a shame that so many people could not follow simple instructions but, as Lawrence says, "that's life". We can put it down to experience and improve the system in time for the independence referendum. What about France? 85% turnout!!!!! Now that's what you call a proper election.

Mrs Mangle · Post by **Mrs Mangle** » 07 May 2007, 19:07

Proportional representation. A council (and country) which isn't simply stuffed full of Labour representatives. Sure Lawrence done a good job, but how come you can't assume Micheal Bridgeman & Stephen Hawkins wont either?

Mike Bridgman is a good man and will do for the ward what the people ask of him. As for Mr. Hawkins I don't know the man, but he was honest at the hustings saying he knew nothing of much under the tunnel at Brighton Place.
I feel for Lawerence, Maureen is a god person also, I don't really think the party has much to do with it, it's how the individual will represent us surely.
I don't honestly think Lawerence will go away, I think he will still be very much around, you can do just as much or more when you are not a councillor.
The only Independant that got anywhere near a good result was Norrie Davies, another man who has been a community activist for 20 odd year just because he wasn't elected means he will continue the good work he has done for 20 odd year, that's the type of man I would have wanted representing me.
But lets all give Mike, Maureen, and Stephen a chance at least safe in the knowledge that if their best isn't good enough then in 4 years we get rid of them.

Mrs M

Epykat · Post by **Epykat** » 07 May 2007, 22:09

Well said Mrs Mangle. I was disappointed to lose Lawrence because he's a genuinely good person but I don't think for a moment he'll disappear. It might give him more time to get involved in other things. I think Stephen Hawkins deserves a chance and I'm glad he was voted in. It's time we had a shake up and I'm delighted to be rid of the Labour Council.

Mrs Mangle · Post by **Mrs Mangle** » 08 May 2007, 19:31

Seems that Stephen Hawkins wants nothing to do with the Craigmillar side of the ward, apparently said so up the Chambers on Saturday to another councillor.
Now does this mean that he doesn't want or doesn't have the time to get himself up to speed on that side, or he doesn't want to mix with the good people (of which there are many) of Greater Craigmillar ?

Lets assume it's one of the above..... So what if someone from that area voted for him or his party, is he not willing to represent them, for whatever reason....Give it a chance..you have hardly been elected. Time will tell, it's the first full council Thursday 17th May, he might just get handed a Chairmans posistion in Craigmillar....then what ?

Good luck to them all for next week.

Mrs M