Tuesday, 27 March 2012 22:48
45 Comments
Labour councillor Ellen Hurcombe, who represents the Canal ward covering parts of the north west of the city, has become the ninth Labour councillor to resign from the party in Glasgow within the past few months. Ms Hurcombe’s resignation comes just over a month before the crucial local elections. She has announced her intention to stand for the new rival party Glasgow First, composed of disaffected Labour councillors.
The resignation leaves Labour with just 38 councillors in the city, against a total of 41 for the opposition parties.
Speaking to STV, Ms Hurcombe confirmed that she had resigned from the Labour party and had joined Glasgow First. The grouping of rebel former Labour councillors is now the third largest party represented on the council.
The new party was established by former Labour councillors who were disaffected by Labour’s controversial reselection process, after which 20 sitting councillors were told that their services would no longer be required by the party. The bitter and ill-tempered fall out from the reselection process witnessed allegations of bullying and control freakery levelled at the Labour group’s ruling group.
Ms Hurcombe was one of those councillors who were deselected by Labour.
Councillor Tommy Morrison, leader of Glasgow First said: “I am absolutely delighted that yet another councillor has decided to join Glasgow First, putting the citizens of Glasgow before party politics and fighting for Glaswegians.”
A spokesman for Glasgow Labour said: “Being a Labour councillor is not a job for life, and Labour Party members in Glasgow made difficult decisions about who would and would not go forward for election.”
Comments
#
2012-03-27 23:01
“A spokesman for Glasgow Labour said: “Being a Labour councillor is not a job for life”.
How true in the new Scotland. Pity that Labour didn’t remember that when they put forward such poor calibre candidates in the past.
How true in the new Scotland. Pity that Labour didn’t remember that when they put forward such poor calibre candidates in the past.
#
2012-03-27 23:03
This cant be true as Iain Gray was saying ony yesterday that Glasgow was vibrant because of their up and coming council…
I’ll shut the door on the way out.
I’ll shut the door on the way out.
#
2012-03-27 23:09
I’m a bit concerned about this Glasgow First shower. Having seen the writing on the wall they have bailed so that they can tell the electorate that they have gone beyond party politics and that they only care about Glasgow, thereby splitting the vote and getting in, or ensuring the SNP don’t. After which any Glasgow First councillors elected will slowly and miraculously drift back to Labour. Am I being unduly cynical or crediting them with too much savvy – I hope not
#
2012-03-27 23:54
They have been declared effectively incompetent by Labour, but they could have the sympathy of their voters who may put them back in. So the awful reputation of the council is maintained for another round. Will it take another few years of infighting to persuade Glasgow voters that there is a better place for them?
#
2012-03-28 01:10
I think you’re quite right to be concerned. And cynical.
Every time I hear of a Labour defection, my first reaction is delight, then reality kicks in, and words like rat, sink, ship, spring to mind.
Call me a cynic, but I get the feeling these people are out there to save their own skins, or snouts in the through. And maybe to split the vote to keep the SNP out.
A couple of weeks ago there was a rumor that some Lab councillors in the SW would stand as independents, allowing in more Lab candidates and hoping to sweep the thing ahead of the SNP, then collaborating in the good ol’ Labour politics in their Council.
The only defector I can take at all seriously is the one who then joined the SNP and is not standing for election but canvassing for the SNP.
Every time I hear of a Labour defection, my first reaction is delight, then reality kicks in, and words like rat, sink, ship, spring to mind.
Call me a cynic, but I get the feeling these people are out there to save their own skins, or snouts in the through. And maybe to split the vote to keep the SNP out.
A couple of weeks ago there was a rumor that some Lab councillors in the SW would stand as independents, allowing in more Lab candidates and hoping to sweep the thing ahead of the SNP, then collaborating in the good ol’ Labour politics in their Council.
The only defector I can take at all seriously is the one who then joined the SNP and is not standing for election but canvassing for the SNP.
#
2012-03-28 07:29
I think it really depends on what Labour do in the future.
These people have ben deselected (Do we know how many more are in this position?) and are unhappy with the party.
That’s pretty much like me and a lot of other people who used to vote Labour because we believed in what they used to stand for. If Labour can return to that, they might get support, not ony from these councillors, but also from the voting public!
But I can’t see them turning back into a party that represents the common working class man or woman any time soon.
Pity.
These people have ben deselected (Do we know how many more are in this position?) and are unhappy with the party.
That’s pretty much like me and a lot of other people who used to vote Labour because we believed in what they used to stand for. If Labour can return to that, they might get support, not ony from these councillors, but also from the voting public!
But I can’t see them turning back into a party that represents the common working class man or woman any time soon.
Pity.
#
2012-03-28 17:21
I think you might be. Surely they’ll split the labour vote…? Or am I being naive?
#
2012-03-28 17:24
Wont STV negate that though?
1st vote goes to Labour B
2nd to Labour A
And vice versa??
1st vote goes to Labour B
2nd to Labour A
And vice versa??
#
2012-03-27 23:10
Unfortunately a resignation for Labour Team A means a defection to Labour Team B. Labour Team B have promised to do everything to support Labour Team A.
The only difference seems to be under the voting system they will double their chances of election. They are up to no good trying to manipulate the Glasgow vote.
The only difference seems to be under the voting system they will double their chances of election. They are up to no good trying to manipulate the Glasgow vote.
#
2012-03-27 23:18
Aye some will have a reversible jacket with independent on the outside and a red lining with co-op pocket on the inside.
I hope they don’t split the SNP vote too much.
Good luck all you posters and canvassers in Glasgow.
I hope they don’t split the SNP vote too much.
Good luck all you posters and canvassers in Glasgow.
#
2012-03-27 23:55
It does appear to be a calculated attempt to determine the outcome of the vote by undemocratic means.
#
2012-03-28 13:26
Quoting call me dave:
These B List Labour rejects shouldn’t split the SNP vote in their various wards at all. They should split only the Labour vote, as surely no SNP supporters will vote for either Labour lot.
Aye some will have a reversible jacket with independent on the outside and a red lining with co-op pocket on the inside.
I hope they don’t split the SNP vote too much.
Good luck all you posters and canvassers in Glasgow.
These B List Labour rejects shouldn’t split the SNP vote in their various wards at all. They should split only the Labour vote, as surely no SNP supporters will vote for either Labour lot.
#
2012-03-28 01:14
Makes me sick to think of this.
Is there no depth so low they’ll stoop to? Is there no contempt so deep they wouldn’t hold the electorate to?
Is there no depth so low they’ll stoop to? Is there no contempt so deep they wouldn’t hold the electorate to?
#
2012-03-28 01:12
Where is thier funding coming from?
How will they get back if they dont have Labours crumbling machine to back them up?
Do these individuals have any real support in the constituencies in which they will stand?
As far as I can see Glasgow First = Me first!
How will they get back if they dont have Labours crumbling machine to back them up?
Do these individuals have any real support in the constituencies in which they will stand?
As far as I can see Glasgow First = Me first!
#
2012-03-28 01:30
There will indeed be a splitting of the vote in wards where Glasgow First candidates stand, but the split will be the Labour vote, thus increasing the SNP’s chances of winning. How?
May will produce a mammoth battle between Labour and the SNP for control over Scotland’s largest council.
And as happens when two giants meet smaller parties get squeezed and that will include Glasgow First.
These guys will take some of their own personal vote with them, which would normally go to Labour, but few SNP votes, if any will go to GF nor will many if any neutral votes go to GF.
No, Glasgow First will damage the Labour vote and help the SNP. Good luck to them.
VOTE YES
May will produce a mammoth battle between Labour and the SNP for control over Scotland’s largest council.
And as happens when two giants meet smaller parties get squeezed and that will include Glasgow First.
These guys will take some of their own personal vote with them, which would normally go to Labour, but few SNP votes, if any will go to GF nor will many if any neutral votes go to GF.
No, Glasgow First will damage the Labour vote and help the SNP. Good luck to them.
VOTE YES
#
2012-03-28 09:22
However you can have a situation where Labour voters unhappy with the current lot. See a “new Labour” party spring up which they think are different and may be tempted to vote for unaware its a con trick. On the voting paper you have Labour Team A and Labour Team B to put a 1 and 2 against 2 Labour parties to vote for who are working together. Effectively doubling their chances. Wont they also get double the media time in Glasgow?
The defectors have promised to do everything to support Labour. Hardly sounds like a disenfranchised lot. There appears to be no reason this wouldn’t continue after the election. There is also nothing to stop them rejoining the Labour group. It is only a split in the Labour vote if both parties were really seperate with different ideas. They’re not.
The defectors have promised to do everything to support Labour. Hardly sounds like a disenfranchised lot. There appears to be no reason this wouldn’t continue after the election. There is also nothing to stop them rejoining the Labour group. It is only a split in the Labour vote if both parties were really seperate with different ideas. They’re not.
#
2012-03-28 18:47
If this was a plot by Labour to somehow split the anti-Labour vote in Glasgow, then I think they would not have blocked Glasgow First from acquiring their preferred party name of Glasgow Labour.
#
2012-03-28 02:34
Can anybody direct me to a source where I can get hold of a detailed list of the councillors who have been deselected and the candidates who have been parachuted in to replace them?
#
2012-03-28 07:35
David, Not sure mate. I think they’ll be keeping that kind of information pretty close to their chest. I certainly can’t find any details anyway…
#
2012-03-28 09:08
Look through the comments on older NNS articles covering the Glasgow Labour fiasco – a story about the Glasgow budget vote would be a good bet. Someone had a couple of lists and a link, I think.
#
2012-03-28 07:33
It’ll be interesting to see whether Glasgow First have any money to campaign, or get any significant publicity. If the likes of the Evening Times pay them much attention, I think we can start suspecting a scam.
#
2012-03-28 13:06
From the photo in the following article it appears that NuLabour are giving ‘Glasgow First’ a hand –
news.stv.tv/…/…
Whether intentionally or not your guess is as good as mine.
news.stv.tv/…/…
Whether intentionally or not your guess is as good as mine.
#
2012-03-28 18:04
Thanks for that link but it has made me wonder, and so I did a wee bitty homework.
According to the article they’re putting up 45 candidates. At the last election they put up 53 of which 45 got elected.
They had 2 or 3 candidates per ward, the exception being Pollockshiels where they only put up 1. (Maybe someone who knows Glasgow a lot better than I do can explain that).
Now some of those people have jumped ship, died, got de-selected so why are they putting up fewer candidates. They need 40 for a majority on the council. Seems to me they’re sailing a bit close to the wind on this or they know what we know. They might be getting a trouncing so they’re not wasting their money.
Perhaps.
According to the article they’re putting up 45 candidates. At the last election they put up 53 of which 45 got elected.
They had 2 or 3 candidates per ward, the exception being Pollockshiels where they only put up 1. (Maybe someone who knows Glasgow a lot better than I do can explain that).
Now some of those people have jumped ship, died, got de-selected so why are they putting up fewer candidates. They need 40 for a majority on the council. Seems to me they’re sailing a bit close to the wind on this or they know what we know. They might be getting a trouncing so they’re not wasting their money.
Perhaps.
#
2012-03-28 19:32
Have you combined Labour Team A and Labour Team B? Perhaps their combined candidates are more what you would have expected?
#
2012-03-28 20:57
Quoting edinburgh quine:
Pollokshields is probably the least typical ward in Glasgow – for a start 30% of the voters are Asian ethnic minority. The rest divide up into the very posh villas of West Pollokshields and High Shawlands, and the younger, livelier community of Shawlands. There’s very little “Old Labour” territory in the ward, so Labour in 2007 were relying on the Asian vote to get in here. Now that that vote is turning to the SNP, I think there’s a real chance it’ll remain a Labour-free ward after May.
They had 2 or 3 candidates per ward, the exception being Pollockshiels where they only put up 1. (Maybe someone who knows Glasgow a lot better than I do can explain that).
Pollokshields is probably the least typical ward in Glasgow – for a start 30% of the voters are Asian ethnic minority. The rest divide up into the very posh villas of West Pollokshields and High Shawlands, and the younger, livelier community of Shawlands. There’s very little “Old Labour” territory in the ward, so Labour in 2007 were relying on the Asian vote to get in here. Now that that vote is turning to the SNP, I think there’s a real chance it’ll remain a Labour-free ward after May.
#
2012-03-28 09:11
Any politician is entitled to alter their polical ethic as they might see it, but what they are not entitled to do is carry on as before.
Any decent honourable person would resign the post out of respect for the electors and stand again in their new political clothes.
Anything less makes them chancers and carpet-baggers.
Any decent honourable person would resign the post out of respect for the electors and stand again in their new political clothes.
Anything less makes them chancers and carpet-baggers.
#
2012-03-28 09:29
I think to be fair to these people, with just one month to go and electioneering already started (received my local SNP flyer the other day) it would be a bit pointless at this juncture to stand down and force a by-election.
#
2012-03-28 17:24
I’m still not entirely sure why these people were de-selected in the first place.
There was a hint they weren’t towing the party line, they we’ren’t ‘new labour’ enough (I thought that had died with blair).
Comment edited by NNS Mod Team
There was a hint they weren’t towing the party line, they we’ren’t ‘new labour’ enough (I thought that had died with blair).
Comment edited by NNS Mod Team
#
2012-03-28 17:50
I’m done commenting, it seems that saying something which is true, reported on television, and apt! is removed if the Mod wishes it so, and there seems to be no actual standard applied!
After a team discussion we have decided that I made the wrong decision brusque and I can only apologise. Your post has been reinstated. NNS Mod
After a team discussion we have decided that I made the wrong decision brusque and I can only apologise. Your post has been reinstated. NNS Mod
#
2012-03-28 19:36
Hey brusque, mine just disappear altogether. I had made another comment at the bottom of this thread, and b*****r me, it’s gone. Never mind, there’s always Gerry Hassan and that fella Roy; they dont need us
#
2012-03-28 20:06
Quoting edinburgh quine:
So it would seem Ed quine. I’ve been a member of this site since it was just a 1 page email, and have never used foul language, or said anything which is not already in the public domain. Some Mods here are taking themselves way too seriously!! I’m giving up though, I have a sense of humour and it seems that is simply not on here any more.
Hey brusque, mine just disappear altogether. I had made another comment at the bottom of this thread, and b*****r me, it’s gone. Never mind, there’s always Gerry Hassan and that fella Roy; they dont need us
So it would seem Ed quine. I’ve been a member of this site since it was just a 1 page email, and have never used foul language, or said anything which is not already in the public domain. Some Mods here are taking themselves way too seriously!! I’m giving up though, I have a sense of humour and it seems that is simply not on here any more.
#
2012-03-28 21:32
If your comment is deleted by you or the mods all comments after yours are automatically deleted by default I’ve noticed. Your comment may vanish because it came after someones comment which was deleted.
To be honest brusque I’ve had comments deleted and I’ve been banned. At the end of the day it’s worth still being involved.
To be honest brusque I’ve had comments deleted and I’ve been banned. At the end of the day it’s worth still being involved.
#
2012-03-28 21:51
Quoting Islegard:
I would have no problem if I had actually breached the rules, but I haven’t. Light-hearted comments are part and parcel of a cohesive group of posters anywhere; it is ok for those people who “add value” to the site, but not for us commoners.
I will continue to read, and I will never stop supporting Independence, I just won’t be doing it on here:-)
If your comment is deleted by you or the mods all comments after yours are automatically deleted by default I’ve noticed. Your comment may vanish because it came after someones comment which was deleted.
To be honest brusque I’ve had comments deleted and I’ve been banned. At the end of the day it’s worth still being involved.
I would have no problem if I had actually breached the rules, but I haven’t. Light-hearted comments are part and parcel of a cohesive group of posters anywhere; it is ok for those people who “add value” to the site, but not for us commoners.
I will continue to read, and I will never stop supporting Independence, I just won’t be doing it on here:-)
#
2012-03-29 14:36
Quoting brusque:
I very much appreciate your gracious apology, and accept it with the same good grace. Thank you for restoring my faith in the Mod Team’s sense of fairness.
I’m done commenting, it seems that saying something which is true, reported on television, and apt! is removed if the Mod wishes it so, and there seems to be no actual standard applied!
After a team discussion we have decided that I made the wrong decision brusque and I can only apologise. Your post has been reinstated. NNS Mod
I very much appreciate your gracious apology, and accept it with the same good grace. Thank you for restoring my faith in the Mod Team’s sense of fairness.
#
2012-03-28 18:57
Since the Scottish council elections will employ the STV arrangements where we rank the candidates in the order of our preference.
Obviously our initial two or three votes will go to the SNP for most of us. But do we give our remaining votes to the Greens/Solidarity/Socialists in order to make it is difficult as possible for the British and Unionist parties to get in or will this make it more difficult for the SNP?
Obviously our initial two or three votes will go to the SNP for most of us. But do we give our remaining votes to the Greens/Solidarity/Socialists in order to make it is difficult as possible for the British and Unionist parties to get in or will this make it more difficult for the SNP?
#
2012-03-28 19:05
Quoting macdoc:
Yes. It won’t have any impact on the SNP. The ideal anti-Unionist vote is to put all the SNP candidates top, then Green/Solidarity/Socialist (depending on where you are – I’d say Green first out of these if it’s a fairly well-heeled area). Then don’t vote for Labour/Lib Dem/Tory/Glasgow First AT ALL – you don’t need to number every party.
But do we give our remaining votes to the Greens/Solidarity/Socialists in order to make it is difficult as possible for the British and Unionist parties to get in or will this make it more difficult for the SNP?
Yes. It won’t have any impact on the SNP. The ideal anti-Unionist vote is to put all the SNP candidates top, then Green/Solidarity/Socialist (depending on where you are – I’d say Green first out of these if it’s a fairly well-heeled area). Then don’t vote for Labour/Lib Dem/Tory/Glasgow First AT ALL – you don’t need to number every party.
#
2012-03-28 20:14
In Glasgow, I think it’s two candidates that the sNP are standing in each ward. As far as voting is concerned, it’s ‘one, two, that will do’ for Glasgow. (Both SNP candidates only) If in any other districts there are three SNP candidates in a ward, then it’s ‘one, two, three SNP. If you are an SNP voter, only give preference to sNP candidates to try to get them all in.
#
2012-03-28 20:52
Quoting Teri:
This will do nothing to stop Labour or other Unionist party candidates though.
Say you are voting in a 4-member ward, with 2 SNP candidates. STV works with a “quota” system, so it’s possible that the 2 SNP candidates get elected with votes to spare. If all you’ve done is say 1/2 SNP/SNP, then that’s it, your vote has no more effect.
However, if your vote becomes surplus to SNP requirements, you can help prevent Labour/LibDem/Tory candidates getting into the other ward seats by maximising the effect of any surplus. After giving 1/2 to the SNP, give 3/4/5 to other nationalist parties, like the Greens, SSP or Soldarity.
For a near-miss, see what happened in the Pollokshields ward in Glasow, in 2007 (my ward). Here we ended up with a Labour/SNP/Tory trio. However, the Green candidate only just missed out on transfers, despite being miles behind the Tory on the first count. By the time the last-but-one candidate was eliminated, the Green was only 4 votes behind the Tory!
Don’t waste that excess – give your lower-order preferences to the minor nationalist parties.
In Glasgow, I think it’s two candidates that the sNP are standing in each ward. As far as voting is concerned, it’s ‘one, two, that will do’ for Glasgow. (Both SNP candidates only) If in any other districts there are three SNP candidates in a ward, then it’s ‘one, two, three SNP. If you are an SNP voter, only give preference to sNP candidates to try to get them all in.
This will do nothing to stop Labour or other Unionist party candidates though.
Say you are voting in a 4-member ward, with 2 SNP candidates. STV works with a “quota” system, so it’s possible that the 2 SNP candidates get elected with votes to spare. If all you’ve done is say 1/2 SNP/SNP, then that’s it, your vote has no more effect.
However, if your vote becomes surplus to SNP requirements, you can help prevent Labour/LibDem/Tory candidates getting into the other ward seats by maximising the effect of any surplus. After giving 1/2 to the SNP, give 3/4/5 to other nationalist parties, like the Greens, SSP or Soldarity.
For a near-miss, see what happened in the Pollokshields ward in Glasow, in 2007 (my ward). Here we ended up with a Labour/SNP/Tory trio. However, the Green candidate only just missed out on transfers, despite being miles behind the Tory on the first count. By the time the last-but-one candidate was eliminated, the Green was only 4 votes behind the Tory!
Don’t waste that excess – give your lower-order preferences to the minor nationalist parties.
#
2012-03-28 19:26
Turns out this is now a non-story ?
Gerry Braiden @GerryBraiden
BREAKING #GCC rocked by another defection. Cllr Ellen Hurcombe who y’day quit Labour 2 Glasgow First has now defected to….Labour.
Gerry Braiden @GerryBraiden
BREAKING #GCC rocked by another defection. Cllr Ellen Hurcombe who y’day quit Labour 2 Glasgow First has now defected to….Labour.
Donate to Newsnet Scotland
Latest Comments
- Believe in yourself says Sturg...
I've never responded well to intimidatio... - David Cameron pleads with News...
Oh bugger! - Believe in yourself says Sturg...
It is interesting to note that only a fe... - Believe in yourself says Sturg...
What people need to realise is that it's... - Believe in yourself says Sturg...
Ex-BBC Newsnight correspondent Paul Maso... - David Cameron pleads with News...
You do realise Lynda that by not consent... - Believe in yourself says Sturg...
The BBC are leading with Deutsche Bank f... - Believe in yourself says Sturg...
Bullying,blackm ail and threats. Do we r... - Believe in yourself says Sturg...
Jim Sillars is simply giving vivid examp... - The Real IndyRef Division
One thing that is missing from this anal... - Believe in yourself says Sturg...
Mr Salmond must keep the pressure on abo... - David Cameron pleads with News...
Aye, they would have us swallow this. 'E... - RBS leak 'extraordinary' says ...
Funny I do not see any banner headlines ... - Believe in yourself says Sturg...
The saddest thing ever was that strong, ... - Miliband slammed for standing ...
I have been a member of the YouGov panel... - RBS leak 'extraordinary' says ...
I see that true to form our pals at BBC ... - New referendum poll confirms b...
Note that ICM are applying a weighting o... - RBS leak 'extraordinary' says ...
Doesn't Peston have form on this? Do I r... - RBS leak 'extraordinary' says ...
Two links to a couple of articles on the... - RBS leak 'extraordinary' says ...
The Nikkei would be open before the Lond...