Browse > Home / UK Politics / Is Bercow’s Buckingham now a marginal seat?

| Subcribe via RSS



Is Bercow’s Buckingham now a marginal seat?

June 22nd, 2009 Posted in UK Politics by

PD*4568006Following the election of John Bercow as Speaker, with the vast majority of his 322 votes coming from Labour MPs, it’s worth considering  the likely reaction of voters in Buckingham.

This is a seat about as rock solid Tory as they come. The result in 2005 was:

Bercow J.S.* Conservative 27,748 57.44%
Greene D.M. Labour 9,619 19.91%
Croydon L.J. LibDem 9,508 19.68%
Williams D.J. UKIP 1,432 2.96%

 

Assuming that the three main parties observe the protocol of not standing against The Speaker, this looks like a great opportunity for someone running as an Independent or possibly as an Independent Conservative.  After all, Bercow has been acting as a pseudo-Labour MP for some time.  He won’t have the Conservative Party label by his name next time round. There are a range of very serious expenses allegations against him which have yet to be justified or apologised for. The Cameroons would be delighted to see him defeated at the ballot box, and may dispatch him as Speaker after the next election anyway.

10 Responses to “Is Bercow’s Buckingham now a marginal seat?”

  1. Ziggy Encaoua Says:

    According he’s a qualified lawn tennis coach so we can blame him for the dismal performance of Brits at Wimbledon as well as any f**k up at parliament.


  2. Jock Says:

    I did suggest yesterday that LPUK ought to have a go at the seat of whoever wins.


  3. Mark Foster Says:

    Sorry, just to clarify electoral law…..someone CANNOT stand as an ‘independent Conservative’ or at least cannot have that description on the ballot paper.


  4. Bishop Hill Says:

    Someone told me that the speaker’s seat is not contested.


  5. Mark Littlewood Says:

    @Mark Foster – I oubt that the description on the ballot paper is that important.

    @Bishop – that’s by convention, not by law.


  6. burkesworks Says:

    By convention, the Speaker’s seat is not contested by Tories, Labour or Lib Dems. Michael Martin faced opposition from the SNP, a couple of minor parties and an independent last couple of GEs; before that Betty Boothroyd was up against an independent and a “National Democrat”, whatever one of those is. You have to go back to 1987 to see a major party challenge, when Jack Weatherill fought off competition from Labour and the SDP (remember them?) in Croydon NE, and even then that was the exception to the rule.


  7. Frank H Little Says:

    I bet UKIP, which shares many of the Monday Club views Bercow has now renounced, will put up a candidate and do well.


  8. Joe Otten Says:

    It betrays a very interesting view of what both the Labour Party and the Conservative Party stand for, that somebody interested in disabled children, gay rights, and democracy in Burma, is considered pseudo-Labour and not Conservative.

    Surely not all Conservatives are against disabled people, gays and democracy. And not all Labour people are for them.


  9. Ziggy Encaoua Says:

    ‘somebody interested in disabled children, gay rights, and democracy in Burma, is considered pseudo-Labour and not Conservative.’

    Because I’m pro life & pro gun Ppeople often mistakenly think I’m a conservative.

    Unfortunately people have stereotypes as to what political grouping you identify with.

    For instance if you class yourself as liberal people immediately assume you’re left of centre which as we all know isn’t necessarily true.


  10. Tom Papworth Says:

    Definitely a good seat for LPUK to have a crack at but the truth is that UKIP will not only stand but will have a good chance of winning.

    The question is, will the Tories help them? The local Conservative Association might be quick disenchanted with JB and some may decide to support (and even surruptitiously help) a UKIP challenger. Even Central Office might leak canvass data to UKIP.

    However, if UKIP win the seat they will gain their first MP and may then get a toe in the door. This would be a disaster for the Tories, just as the 1903 electoral pact was for the Liberals.