UPDATE: Labour storm to victory in Harper Green by-election

The Bolton News: Celebrating victory from left are Cllr Champack Mistry, Asha Ali Ismail, deputy leader of Bolton Council Cllr Linda Thomas and Cllr Mike Francis Celebrating victory from left are Cllr Champack Mistry, Asha Ali Ismail, deputy leader of Bolton Council Cllr Linda Thomas and Cllr Mike Francis

LABOUR scored a landslide victory at the Harper Green by-election — winning 51 per cent of the vote.

Asha Ali Ismail, an agency social worker of Gilnow Gardens, Bolton, was elected as councillor for the traditionally safe Labour seat after securing 744 votes out of 1,450 cast.

She is the first African-British councillor on Bolton Council.

Conservative candidate Robert Tyler came in second with 325 votes — 22 per cent — while Peter McGeehan, standing for UKIP, took third, securing 252 votes or 17 per cent.

The Liberal Democrats crashed into last place with just 53 votes cast for Wendy Connor — a four per cent share.

Kathy Sykes, standing for the Green Party, picked up 60 votes.

The by-election was called after Labour councillor Margaret Clare, who represented the Farnworth ward on Bolton Council for more than 20 years, died in October. The turnout was 14.1 per cent.

Asha, aged 33, said she was thrilled with the result, adding: “I think people voted for me because of the hard work my fellow ward councillors have been doing and I had a great team behind me.

“I’m looking forward to working with the residents and residents' associations, getting to know the local community and what their needs are.”

David Greenhalgh, leader of the Conservative group in Bolton, said he was pleased Mr Tyler had come second.

He said: “We fought the campaign on local issues and Robert would have been fantastic for the area.

“Now we have got to the message out there that what UKIP voters are doing is shoring up the Labour hold of Bolton.

“We understand the concerns of voters, especially over matters like immigration, but a vote for UKIP at a local election is a wasted vote.”

UKIP candidate Mr McGeehan, a former Mayor of Horwich, said: “I'm absolutely delighted.

“We have come third from nowhere and it’s a credible result.”

Wendy Connor said: “It’s always been a strong Labour ward so it wasn’t unexpected.

“People have voted on national issues and I think we are not getting across nationally what we have achieved in government.”

Green candidate Kathy Sykes said that to come fourth was an unexpected triumph.

She said: “We beat the Liberals so I’m delighted.

“I’ll be back in May — I’ve got a good team.”

Comments (29)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

1:29am Fri 20 Dec 13

Bob Shaftoe says...

To the people of Harper Green ward who didn't vote. (86%)

Don't complain about the result.
Don't complain that your local your councillor doesn't even live anywhere near your area.
Don't complain about your area being represented by someone you cant relate to or don't know.
Don't ever complain about the council.

BECAUSE OF YOUR APATHY YOU HAVE BEEN TOTALY STUFFED
To the people of Harper Green ward who didn't vote. (86%) Don't complain about the result. Don't complain that your local your councillor doesn't even live anywhere near your area. Don't complain about your area being represented by someone you cant relate to or don't know. Don't ever complain about the council. BECAUSE OF YOUR APATHY YOU HAVE BEEN TOTALY STUFFED Bob Shaftoe

7:01am Fri 20 Dec 13

BWFC71 says...

Bob Shaftoe wrote:
To the people of Harper Green ward who didn't vote. (86%)

Don't complain about the result.
Don't complain that your local your councillor doesn't even live anywhere near your area.
Don't complain about your area being represented by someone you cant relate to or don't know.
Don't ever complain about the council.

BECAUSE OF YOUR APATHY YOU HAVE BEEN TOTALY STUFFED
But they are allowed to as under the British Constitution the Right to Speech is NOT related to the Right To Vote!

That is what makes British Democracy the best in the world!!!
[quote][p][bold]Bob Shaftoe[/bold] wrote: To the people of Harper Green ward who didn't vote. (86%) Don't complain about the result. Don't complain that your local your councillor doesn't even live anywhere near your area. Don't complain about your area being represented by someone you cant relate to or don't know. Don't ever complain about the council. BECAUSE OF YOUR APATHY YOU HAVE BEEN TOTALY STUFFED[/p][/quote]But they are allowed to as under the British Constitution the Right to Speech is NOT related to the Right To Vote! That is what makes British Democracy the best in the world!!! BWFC71

8:25am Fri 20 Dec 13

thomas222 says...

2012 vote results:

Labour 1656 Conservatives 389 Libdems 222 Ukip not represented.

2013 vote result.

Labour 744 Conservatives 325 Libdems 53 Ukip 252

Looks to me like the only one who should be thrilled with this result is ukip our soon to be third party!
2012 vote results: Labour 1656 Conservatives 389 Libdems 222 Ukip not represented. 2013 vote result. Labour 744 Conservatives 325 Libdems 53 Ukip 252 Looks to me like the only one who should be thrilled with this result is ukip our soon to be third party! thomas222

8:37am Fri 20 Dec 13

Jackael says...

Good result for Ukip, Baby steps...
Good result for Ukip, Baby steps... Jackael

8:58am Fri 20 Dec 13

The Righteous One says...

thomas222 wrote:
2012 vote results:

Labour 1656 Conservatives 389 Libdems 222 Ukip not represented.

2013 vote result.

Labour 744 Conservatives 325 Libdems 53 Ukip 252

Looks to me like the only one who should be thrilled with this result is ukip our soon to be third party!
Funnily enough looking at ALL the figures from the electuon in 2012 and this by-election.....

People voted:
2012- 2267 (22.04%)
2013- 1438 (14.10%)
63.97% less people voted this time around

Labour 2012 - 1656 votes (73%)
2013 - 744 votes (51.31%)
if the 69% reduction had happened in Labour then it would have meant that only 1060 voted - therefore Labour has had the biggest reduction ion all the parties

Conservatives 2012 - 389 votes (17.1%)
2013 - 325 votes (22.41)
If the 69% reduction had happened in Conservatives then it would have meant that only 268 would have voted for them thsi time around - as it is the number is quite less BUT the percentage of people voting for them increased by over 5%

Lib Dems 2012 - 222 Votes (9.9%)
2013 - 53 votes (0.37%)
If the 69% reduction had happened in LibDems then it would have meant that only 154 would jave voted. As it is yes they have lost ground but not surprising given what has happened nationally (Labour fell by 30% whilst lib-dems fell by 96%)

Others/UKIP 2012 - 0%
2013 - UKIP 17.38% - OTHERS 8.53%
No reduction as there were no other parties involved in last years election so an increase of 100% for ALL minority parties involved. With percentage of votes taken from Labour and Lib-dems

Couple of questions....
1. Who voted this year that didn't vote last year?
2. What will happen in the next local elections in this ward in 3 years time?
3. More parties equates more choice so ultimately will mean less votes for the big 3 parties but can the ward take any other parties - and if so who would lose out?

Biggest winner in this election is easily the Conservatives who actually gained more of percentage of votes than anticipated especially whjilst it is in ational Government. Biggest loser is LibDems which is no surprise whilst it is no surprise that tactical voting actually took place, especially as other parties took part on this occassion, but will that occur in a General Election wohich would ean another Hung-Parliament!!!

Thomas, a question for you... You proclaimed yesterday that 70% of the population would vote UKIP - so why is it only 17%?????
[quote][p][bold]thomas222[/bold] wrote: 2012 vote results: Labour 1656 Conservatives 389 Libdems 222 Ukip not represented. 2013 vote result. Labour 744 Conservatives 325 Libdems 53 Ukip 252 Looks to me like the only one who should be thrilled with this result is ukip our soon to be third party![/p][/quote]Funnily enough looking at ALL the figures from the electuon in 2012 and this by-election..... People voted: 2012- 2267 (22.04%) 2013- 1438 (14.10%) 63.97% less people voted this time around Labour 2012 - 1656 votes (73%) 2013 - 744 votes (51.31%) if the 69% reduction had happened in Labour then it would have meant that only 1060 voted - therefore Labour has had the biggest reduction ion all the parties Conservatives 2012 - 389 votes (17.1%) 2013 - 325 votes (22.41) If the 69% reduction had happened in Conservatives then it would have meant that only 268 would have voted for them thsi time around - as it is the number is quite less BUT the percentage of people voting for them increased by over 5% Lib Dems 2012 - 222 Votes (9.9%) 2013 - 53 votes (0.37%) If the 69% reduction had happened in LibDems then it would have meant that only 154 would jave voted. As it is yes they have lost ground but not surprising given what has happened nationally (Labour fell by 30% whilst lib-dems fell by 96%) Others/UKIP 2012 - 0% 2013 - UKIP 17.38% - OTHERS 8.53% No reduction as there were no other parties involved in last years election so an increase of 100% for ALL minority parties involved. With percentage of votes taken from Labour and Lib-dems Couple of questions.... 1. Who voted this year that didn't vote last year? 2. What will happen in the next local elections in this ward in 3 years time? 3. More parties equates more choice so ultimately will mean less votes for the big 3 parties but can the ward take any other parties - and if so who would lose out? Biggest winner in this election is easily the Conservatives who actually gained more of percentage of votes than anticipated especially whjilst it is in ational Government. Biggest loser is LibDems which is no surprise whilst it is no surprise that tactical voting actually took place, especially as other parties took part on this occassion, but will that occur in a General Election wohich would ean another Hung-Parliament!!! Thomas, a question for you... You proclaimed yesterday that 70% of the population would vote UKIP - so why is it only 17%????? The Righteous One

9:21am Fri 20 Dec 13

thomas222 says...

I said that 70% of the population want immigration stopped as it happens. This result is there and its FACT that they are all down and ukip is up from 0 to 252 coming third. Welcome to the new order!
I said that 70% of the population want immigration stopped as it happens. This result is there and its FACT that they are all down and ukip is up from 0 to 252 coming third. Welcome to the new order! thomas222

11:44am Fri 20 Dec 13

cliff4treasurer says...

The conservative voters are usually the ones who are more consistent than any other and the labour voters tend to vote more ad hoc so all figures are slewed.
It's the 85% who didn't vote that worry me and it's getting worse .
So much for us living in a democracy when the minority put people in power.
Voting should be made mandatory full stop.
The conservative voters are usually the ones who are more consistent than any other and the labour voters tend to vote more ad hoc so all figures are slewed. It's the 85% who didn't vote that worry me and it's getting worse . So much for us living in a democracy when the minority put people in power. Voting should be made mandatory full stop. cliff4treasurer

11:50am Fri 20 Dec 13

thomas222 says...

cliff4treasurer wrote:
The conservative voters are usually the ones who are more consistent than any other and the labour voters tend to vote more ad hoc so all figures are slewed. It's the 85% who didn't vote that worry me and it's getting worse . So much for us living in a democracy when the minority put people in power. Voting should be made mandatory full stop.
Toatally agree Cliff.... we would get who we want then and i think thats why they wont do it tbh...
[quote][p][bold]cliff4treasurer[/bold] wrote: The conservative voters are usually the ones who are more consistent than any other and the labour voters tend to vote more ad hoc so all figures are slewed. It's the 85% who didn't vote that worry me and it's getting worse . So much for us living in a democracy when the minority put people in power. Voting should be made mandatory full stop.[/p][/quote]Toatally agree Cliff.... we would get who we want then and i think thats why they wont do it tbh... thomas222

1:57pm Fri 20 Dec 13

WATOAOW says...

If this by-election had been held in summer the UKIP vote would've been a lot higher. Unfortunately for them, a lot of their supporters like to winter in Bongo Bongo Land.
If this by-election had been held in summer the UKIP vote would've been a lot higher. Unfortunately for them, a lot of their supporters like to winter in Bongo Bongo Land. WATOAOW

3:14pm Fri 20 Dec 13

Reality50 says...

Good result for UKIP but the bottom line is the Tories and UKIP across the country are cutting themselves up and allowing Labour to gain victories everywhere. The Tories are to blame for not understanding the public view on Europe. As for Harper Green,I would guess the Asian candidate won because of the large Asian population around Campbell Street,Cawdor Street and that section of the constituency. Asians currently according to recent national polls are 3 times likely to vote in local elections than whites and this is why Yasmin Qureshi currently serves the area as an MP. Also add to the fact Bolton has a large "I vote Labour because my dad votes Labour" braindead mentality,and you were always going to get a Labour victory.
Good result for UKIP but the bottom line is the Tories and UKIP across the country are cutting themselves up and allowing Labour to gain victories everywhere. The Tories are to blame for not understanding the public view on Europe. As for Harper Green,I would guess the Asian candidate won because of the large Asian population around Campbell Street,Cawdor Street and that section of the constituency. Asians currently according to recent national polls are 3 times likely to vote in local elections than whites and this is why Yasmin Qureshi currently serves the area as an MP. Also add to the fact Bolton has a large "I vote Labour because my dad votes Labour" braindead mentality,and you were always going to get a Labour victory. Reality50

3:20pm Fri 20 Dec 13

Reality50 says...

I actually believe a "None Of The Above" box in local elections should be implemented. A 14pc turnout simply isn't acceptable and maybe any election where under 25pc vote should be declared null and void and the area not represented on the council.
I actually believe a "None Of The Above" box in local elections should be implemented. A 14pc turnout simply isn't acceptable and maybe any election where under 25pc vote should be declared null and void and the area not represented on the council. Reality50

3:50pm Fri 20 Dec 13

The Righteous One says...

The Righteous One wrote:
thomas222 wrote:
2012 vote results:

Labour 1656 Conservatives 389 Libdems 222 Ukip not represented.

2013 vote result.

Labour 744 Conservatives 325 Libdems 53 Ukip 252

Looks to me like the only one who should be thrilled with this result is ukip our soon to be third party!
Funnily enough looking at ALL the figures from the electuon in 2012 and this by-election.....

People voted:
2012- 2267 (22.04%)
2013- 1438 (14.10%)
63.97% less people voted this time around

Labour 2012 - 1656 votes (73%)
2013 - 744 votes (51.31%)
if the 69% reduction had happened in Labour then it would have meant that only 1060 voted - therefore Labour has had the biggest reduction ion all the parties

Conservatives 2012 - 389 votes (17.1%)
2013 - 325 votes (22.41)
If the 69% reduction had happened in Conservatives then it would have meant that only 268 would have voted for them thsi time around - as it is the number is quite less BUT the percentage of people voting for them increased by over 5%

Lib Dems 2012 - 222 Votes (9.9%)
2013 - 53 votes (0.37%)
If the 69% reduction had happened in LibDems then it would have meant that only 154 would jave voted. As it is yes they have lost ground but not surprising given what has happened nationally (Labour fell by 30% whilst lib-dems fell by 96%)

Others/UKIP 2012 - 0%
2013 - UKIP 17.38% - OTHERS 8.53%
No reduction as there were no other parties involved in last years election so an increase of 100% for ALL minority parties involved. With percentage of votes taken from Labour and Lib-dems

Couple of questions....
1. Who voted this year that didn't vote last year?
2. What will happen in the next local elections in this ward in 3 years time?
3. More parties equates more choice so ultimately will mean less votes for the big 3 parties but can the ward take any other parties - and if so who would lose out?

Biggest winner in this election is easily the Conservatives who actually gained more of percentage of votes than anticipated especially whjilst it is in ational Government. Biggest loser is LibDems which is no surprise whilst it is no surprise that tactical voting actually took place, especially as other parties took part on this occassion, but will that occur in a General Election wohich would ean another Hung-Parliament!!!

Thomas, a question for you... You proclaimed yesterday that 70% of the population would vote UKIP - so why is it only 17%?????
But you miss the simple fact that teh percentage of votes (per number of people who voted) was actually UP for the Conservatives!

Can you explain that, especially when a Party in power normally loses percentages?
[quote][p][bold]The Righteous One[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]thomas222[/bold] wrote: 2012 vote results: Labour 1656 Conservatives 389 Libdems 222 Ukip not represented. 2013 vote result. Labour 744 Conservatives 325 Libdems 53 Ukip 252 Looks to me like the only one who should be thrilled with this result is ukip our soon to be third party![/p][/quote]Funnily enough looking at ALL the figures from the electuon in 2012 and this by-election..... People voted: 2012- 2267 (22.04%) 2013- 1438 (14.10%) 63.97% less people voted this time around Labour 2012 - 1656 votes (73%) 2013 - 744 votes (51.31%) if the 69% reduction had happened in Labour then it would have meant that only 1060 voted - therefore Labour has had the biggest reduction ion all the parties Conservatives 2012 - 389 votes (17.1%) 2013 - 325 votes (22.41) If the 69% reduction had happened in Conservatives then it would have meant that only 268 would have voted for them thsi time around - as it is the number is quite less BUT the percentage of people voting for them increased by over 5% Lib Dems 2012 - 222 Votes (9.9%) 2013 - 53 votes (0.37%) If the 69% reduction had happened in LibDems then it would have meant that only 154 would jave voted. As it is yes they have lost ground but not surprising given what has happened nationally (Labour fell by 30% whilst lib-dems fell by 96%) Others/UKIP 2012 - 0% 2013 - UKIP 17.38% - OTHERS 8.53% No reduction as there were no other parties involved in last years election so an increase of 100% for ALL minority parties involved. With percentage of votes taken from Labour and Lib-dems Couple of questions.... 1. Who voted this year that didn't vote last year? 2. What will happen in the next local elections in this ward in 3 years time? 3. More parties equates more choice so ultimately will mean less votes for the big 3 parties but can the ward take any other parties - and if so who would lose out? Biggest winner in this election is easily the Conservatives who actually gained more of percentage of votes than anticipated especially whjilst it is in ational Government. Biggest loser is LibDems which is no surprise whilst it is no surprise that tactical voting actually took place, especially as other parties took part on this occassion, but will that occur in a General Election wohich would ean another Hung-Parliament!!! Thomas, a question for you... You proclaimed yesterday that 70% of the population would vote UKIP - so why is it only 17%?????[/p][/quote]But you miss the simple fact that teh percentage of votes (per number of people who voted) was actually UP for the Conservatives! Can you explain that, especially when a Party in power normally loses percentages? The Righteous One

4:34pm Fri 20 Dec 13

boltonchap says...

Righteousone/BWFC71. Left a post for you on another thread but think you've moved on from there so have copied over. You'll see when you've read the below my puzzlement.
boltonchap wrote: Righteous one aka BWFC71 - a question for you. In almost every thread in which you submit comments you refer to your important job in Manchester. My question is this - when do you actually get any work done as you spend an inordinate amount of time posting long comments? Just a thought.
I work long hours, no lunch and have two screens open at same time (All thanks to Microsoft Windows 7 and 8) so I can do my work whilst keeping an eye as to what is happening on here. It is a concept you may not know about - Multi-tasking Plus with wifi I can be online via phone or laptop whilst travelling!!!
I am an accomplished multi-tasker, for instance while typing this I'm breathing and scratching my chin. Sometimes I can even walk and talk at the same time; isn't evolution amazing that we've evolved to become such a versatile species. You run windows 7 and windows 8 - unusual for a prestigious law firm to run the latest operating system and leave the old one on the system: never come across that before, very odd indeed. So you work while " keeping an eye as to what is happening on here ": hmmm. But you don't just keep an eye on here, you contribute. In fact you write long and complex contributions. Just occasionally you even make a good point. But whatever the merits or otherwise of your arguments they must take time. Sometimes you cut and paste content from web sites, that takes time too. Now I have a deep understanding of how professional practices work in the commercial sector, and you know what. Billable hours and customer service are priorities. So how can you reconcile what you do with these key performance indicators? Do your clients know about his? Just a thought. You see all my points above speak to your credibility on here. You don't appear to have much judging by the votes and comments you get. I'm only trying to help.
Righteousone/BWFC71. Left a post for you on another thread but think you've moved on from there so have copied over. You'll see when you've read the below my puzzlement. boltonchap wrote: Righteous one aka BWFC71 - a question for you. In almost every thread in which you submit comments you refer to your important job in Manchester. My question is this - when do you actually get any work done as you spend an inordinate amount of time posting long comments? Just a thought. I work long hours, no lunch and have two screens open at same time (All thanks to Microsoft Windows 7 and 8) so I can do my work whilst keeping an eye as to what is happening on here. It is a concept you may not know about - Multi-tasking Plus with wifi I can be online via phone or laptop whilst travelling!!! I am an accomplished multi-tasker, for instance while typing this I'm breathing and scratching my chin. Sometimes I can even walk and talk at the same time; isn't evolution amazing that we've evolved to become such a versatile species. You run windows 7 and windows 8 - unusual for a prestigious law firm to run the latest operating system and leave the old one on the system: never come across that before, very odd indeed. So you work while " keeping an eye as to what is happening on here ": hmmm. But you don't just keep an eye on here, you contribute. In fact you write long and complex contributions. Just occasionally you even make a good point. But whatever the merits or otherwise of your arguments they must take time. Sometimes you cut and paste content from web sites, that takes time too. Now I have a deep understanding of how professional practices work in the commercial sector, and you know what. Billable hours and customer service are priorities. So how can you reconcile what you do with these key performance indicators? Do your clients know about his? Just a thought. You see all my points above speak to your credibility on here. You don't appear to have much judging by the votes and comments you get. I'm only trying to help. boltonchap

5:12pm Fri 20 Dec 13

Greasy Chip Butty says...

Reality50, I was led to believe that the candidate's ethnicity, now that you mention it, is not Asian at all, it is Somalian.
Most people on this forum simply jump to assumptions, largely based on prejudices, which leads to the usual "politics of fear"
Reality50, I was led to believe that the candidate's ethnicity, now that you mention it, is not Asian at all, it is Somalian. Most people on this forum simply jump to assumptions, largely based on prejudices, which leads to the usual "politics of fear" Greasy Chip Butty

5:15pm Fri 20 Dec 13

thomas222 says...

The Righteous One wrote:
The Righteous One wrote:
thomas222 wrote: 2012 vote results: Labour 1656 Conservatives 389 Libdems 222 Ukip not represented. 2013 vote result. Labour 744 Conservatives 325 Libdems 53 Ukip 252 Looks to me like the only one who should be thrilled with this result is ukip our soon to be third party!
Funnily enough looking at ALL the figures from the electuon in 2012 and this by-election..... People voted: 2012- 2267 (22.04%) 2013- 1438 (14.10%) 63.97% less people voted this time around Labour 2012 - 1656 votes (73%) 2013 - 744 votes (51.31%) if the 69% reduction had happened in Labour then it would have meant that only 1060 voted - therefore Labour has had the biggest reduction ion all the parties Conservatives 2012 - 389 votes (17.1%) 2013 - 325 votes (22.41) If the 69% reduction had happened in Conservatives then it would have meant that only 268 would have voted for them thsi time around - as it is the number is quite less BUT the percentage of people voting for them increased by over 5% Lib Dems 2012 - 222 Votes (9.9%) 2013 - 53 votes (0.37%) If the 69% reduction had happened in LibDems then it would have meant that only 154 would jave voted. As it is yes they have lost ground but not surprising given what has happened nationally (Labour fell by 30% whilst lib-dems fell by 96%) Others/UKIP 2012 - 0% 2013 - UKIP 17.38% - OTHERS 8.53% No reduction as there were no other parties involved in last years election so an increase of 100% for ALL minority parties involved. With percentage of votes taken from Labour and Lib-dems Couple of questions.... 1. Who voted this year that didn't vote last year? 2. What will happen in the next local elections in this ward in 3 years time? 3. More parties equates more choice so ultimately will mean less votes for the big 3 parties but can the ward take any other parties - and if so who would lose out? Biggest winner in this election is easily the Conservatives who actually gained more of percentage of votes than anticipated especially whjilst it is in ational Government. Biggest loser is LibDems which is no surprise whilst it is no surprise that tactical voting actually took place, especially as other parties took part on this occassion, but will that occur in a General Election wohich would ean another Hung-Parliament!!! Thomas, a question for you... You proclaimed yesterday that 70% of the population would vote UKIP - so why is it only 17%?????
But you miss the simple fact that teh percentage of votes (per number of people who voted) was actually UP for the Conservatives! Can you explain that, especially when a Party in power normally loses percentages?
Get over it nothing stays the same........ You dont vote so you have given up your right to speak regarding this Election.
[quote][p][bold]The Righteous One[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The Righteous One[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]thomas222[/bold] wrote: 2012 vote results: Labour 1656 Conservatives 389 Libdems 222 Ukip not represented. 2013 vote result. Labour 744 Conservatives 325 Libdems 53 Ukip 252 Looks to me like the only one who should be thrilled with this result is ukip our soon to be third party![/p][/quote]Funnily enough looking at ALL the figures from the electuon in 2012 and this by-election..... People voted: 2012- 2267 (22.04%) 2013- 1438 (14.10%) 63.97% less people voted this time around Labour 2012 - 1656 votes (73%) 2013 - 744 votes (51.31%) if the 69% reduction had happened in Labour then it would have meant that only 1060 voted - therefore Labour has had the biggest reduction ion all the parties Conservatives 2012 - 389 votes (17.1%) 2013 - 325 votes (22.41) If the 69% reduction had happened in Conservatives then it would have meant that only 268 would have voted for them thsi time around - as it is the number is quite less BUT the percentage of people voting for them increased by over 5% Lib Dems 2012 - 222 Votes (9.9%) 2013 - 53 votes (0.37%) If the 69% reduction had happened in LibDems then it would have meant that only 154 would jave voted. As it is yes they have lost ground but not surprising given what has happened nationally (Labour fell by 30% whilst lib-dems fell by 96%) Others/UKIP 2012 - 0% 2013 - UKIP 17.38% - OTHERS 8.53% No reduction as there were no other parties involved in last years election so an increase of 100% for ALL minority parties involved. With percentage of votes taken from Labour and Lib-dems Couple of questions.... 1. Who voted this year that didn't vote last year? 2. What will happen in the next local elections in this ward in 3 years time? 3. More parties equates more choice so ultimately will mean less votes for the big 3 parties but can the ward take any other parties - and if so who would lose out? Biggest winner in this election is easily the Conservatives who actually gained more of percentage of votes than anticipated especially whjilst it is in ational Government. Biggest loser is LibDems which is no surprise whilst it is no surprise that tactical voting actually took place, especially as other parties took part on this occassion, but will that occur in a General Election wohich would ean another Hung-Parliament!!! Thomas, a question for you... You proclaimed yesterday that 70% of the population would vote UKIP - so why is it only 17%?????[/p][/quote]But you miss the simple fact that teh percentage of votes (per number of people who voted) was actually UP for the Conservatives! Can you explain that, especially when a Party in power normally loses percentages?[/p][/quote]Get over it nothing stays the same........ You dont vote so you have given up your right to speak regarding this Election. thomas222

6:29pm Fri 20 Dec 13

thomas222 says...

Greasy Chip Butty wrote:
Reality50, I was led to believe that the candidate's ethnicity, now that you mention it, is not Asian at all, it is Somalian. Most people on this forum simply jump to assumptions, largely based on prejudices, which leads to the usual "politics of fear"
Yes you are correct he should have wrote Islamic Candidate voted for by Islamist followers really.
[quote][p][bold]Greasy Chip Butty[/bold] wrote: Reality50, I was led to believe that the candidate's ethnicity, now that you mention it, is not Asian at all, it is Somalian. Most people on this forum simply jump to assumptions, largely based on prejudices, which leads to the usual "politics of fear"[/p][/quote]Yes you are correct he should have wrote Islamic Candidate voted for by Islamist followers really. thomas222

6:48pm Fri 20 Dec 13

Bob Shaftoe says...

Greasy Chip Butty wrote:
Reality50, I was led to believe that the candidate's ethnicity, now that you mention it, is not Asian at all, it is Somalian.
Most people on this forum simply jump to assumptions, largely based on prejudices, which leads to the usual "politics of fear"
If Labour had put someone up for election who couldn't speak a word of English he/ she would have had a good chance of being elected. (Ok maybe a tad preposterous) but this is because of the way the labour 'sheep' are encouraged to vote and by postal & proxy rigged voting.
Reality 50 commented :- "A 14pc turnout simply isn't acceptable and maybe any election where under 25pc vote should be declared null and void and the area not represented on the council"
I couldn't agree more.
[quote][p][bold]Greasy Chip Butty[/bold] wrote: Reality50, I was led to believe that the candidate's ethnicity, now that you mention it, is not Asian at all, it is Somalian. Most people on this forum simply jump to assumptions, largely based on prejudices, which leads to the usual "politics of fear"[/p][/quote]If Labour had put someone up for election who couldn't speak a word of English he/ she would have had a good chance of being elected. (Ok maybe a tad preposterous) but this is because of the way the labour 'sheep' are encouraged to vote and by postal & proxy rigged voting. Reality 50 commented :- "A 14pc turnout simply isn't acceptable and maybe any election where under 25pc vote should be declared null and void and the area not represented on the council" I couldn't agree more. Bob Shaftoe

8:20pm Fri 20 Dec 13

thomas222 says...

Just to sum up for the anti ukip people...... There were 10 elections yesterday and ukip averaged 27% of the vote just second to the Torys and well in front of Labour. That enough fact for you.
Just to sum up for the anti ukip people...... There were 10 elections yesterday and ukip averaged 27% of the vote just second to the Torys and well in front of Labour. That enough fact for you. thomas222

7:29am Sat 21 Dec 13

By George says...

Am I right in saying that this will have to be done again in 6 months time possibly with the same line up? If so why on earth could the election not have waited in the interest of saving council tax and other public taxes . The result only shows that the people of Harper Green are used to poor standards, if you drive through This deprived area you will see for yourselves what a tip it is, you would think this being the center of Bolton for casual visitors going to the hospital or Quinn to get on the Motorway to get out that the Councillors would clews it up. I suspect the Labour Candidate won not on the record of achievement by the existing Councillors but just because ipthe ballot paper had Labour on it and we are all fed up of the Coalition.
Am I right in saying that this will have to be done again in 6 months time possibly with the same line up? If so why on earth could the election not have waited in the interest of saving council tax and other public taxes . The result only shows that the people of Harper Green are used to poor standards, if you drive through This deprived area you will see for yourselves what a tip it is, you would think this being the center of Bolton for casual visitors going to the hospital or Quinn to get on the Motorway to get out that the Councillors would clews it up. I suspect the Labour Candidate won not on the record of achievement by the existing Councillors but just because ipthe ballot paper had Labour on it and we are all fed up of the Coalition. By George

9:33am Sat 21 Dec 13

Bob Shaftoe says...

By George wrote:
Am I right in saying that this will have to be done again in 6 months time possibly with the same line up? If so why on earth could the election not have waited in the interest of saving council tax and other public taxes . The result only shows that the people of Harper Green are used to poor standards, if you drive through This deprived area you will see for yourselves what a tip it is, you would think this being the center of Bolton for casual visitors going to the hospital or Quinn to get on the Motorway to get out that the Councillors would clews it up. I suspect the Labour Candidate won not on the record of achievement by the existing Councillors but just because ipthe ballot paper had Labour on it and we are all fed up of the Coalition.
What parts of Harper Green are a tip? Street names please and don't mention any area of Great Lever which has been tagged on to Harper Green for electoral purposes only.
For your information Harper Green is an area of Farnworth roughly bordered by Highfield Road, Plodder Lane, Harper Green Road and Bradford Road to Green Lane. It's nowhere near the centre of Bolton and some of your comments don't make any sense whatsoever.
[quote][p][bold]By George[/bold] wrote: Am I right in saying that this will have to be done again in 6 months time possibly with the same line up? If so why on earth could the election not have waited in the interest of saving council tax and other public taxes . The result only shows that the people of Harper Green are used to poor standards, if you drive through This deprived area you will see for yourselves what a tip it is, you would think this being the center of Bolton for casual visitors going to the hospital or Quinn to get on the Motorway to get out that the Councillors would clews it up. I suspect the Labour Candidate won not on the record of achievement by the existing Councillors but just because ipthe ballot paper had Labour on it and we are all fed up of the Coalition.[/p][/quote]What parts of Harper Green are a tip? Street names please and don't mention any area of Great Lever which has been tagged on to Harper Green for electoral purposes only. For your information Harper Green is an area of Farnworth roughly bordered by Highfield Road, Plodder Lane, Harper Green Road and Bradford Road to Green Lane. It's nowhere near the centre of Bolton and some of your comments don't make any sense whatsoever. Bob Shaftoe

6:08pm Sat 21 Dec 13

BWFC71 says...

By George wrote:
Am I right in saying that this will have to be done again in 6 months time possibly with the same line up? If so why on earth could the election not have waited in the interest of saving council tax and other public taxes . The result only shows that the people of Harper Green are used to poor standards, if you drive through This deprived area you will see for yourselves what a tip it is, you would think this being the center of Bolton for casual visitors going to the hospital or Quinn to get on the Motorway to get out that the Councillors would clews it up. I suspect the Labour Candidate won not on the record of achievement by the existing Councillors but just because ipthe ballot paper had Labour on it and we are all fed up of the Coalition.
Nope due to the fact that Local elections are split. 1/3 seats one year, 1/3 seat year after, 1/3 seats year after that and then there is a gap year and the cycle starts again.

As it is this seat was contested last year and as such will only be contested again in 3 years time!
[quote][p][bold]By George[/bold] wrote: Am I right in saying that this will have to be done again in 6 months time possibly with the same line up? If so why on earth could the election not have waited in the interest of saving council tax and other public taxes . The result only shows that the people of Harper Green are used to poor standards, if you drive through This deprived area you will see for yourselves what a tip it is, you would think this being the center of Bolton for casual visitors going to the hospital or Quinn to get on the Motorway to get out that the Councillors would clews it up. I suspect the Labour Candidate won not on the record of achievement by the existing Councillors but just because ipthe ballot paper had Labour on it and we are all fed up of the Coalition.[/p][/quote]Nope due to the fact that Local elections are split. 1/3 seats one year, 1/3 seat year after, 1/3 seats year after that and then there is a gap year and the cycle starts again. As it is this seat was contested last year and as such will only be contested again in 3 years time! BWFC71

6:14pm Sat 21 Dec 13

BWFC71 says...

For those who still think that the election candidates pampered a certain minority group to get the votes - yes these same minorities that a certain group of people, on here, call immigrants, then read below on who can vote....

Anyone who will be aged 18 or over on polling day and who is a national of the United Kingdom (all forms of British nationality but excluding British protected persons), the Republic of Ireland, a Commonwealth country (including Fiji, Zimbabwe and the whole of Cyprus]) or a European Union member state can apply to the Electoral Registration Officer in the district in the UK where they reside with a 'considerable degree of permanence' to be listed in that area's Electoral Register. The right of Commonwealth and Irish citizens to vote is a legacy of the Representation of the People Act 1918, which limited the vote to British subjects. At that time, "British subjects" included the people of Ireland — then part of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland — and all other parts of the British Empire. Though most of Ireland (see Ireland Act 1949) and the majority of the colonies became independent nations, their citizens have retained the right to vote if they live in the United Kingdom.

Well I hope you have learned something and know that what you have been saying is WRONG, as per usual! Not everyone can vote and there ARE regulations in place!!!
For those who still think that the election candidates pampered a certain minority group to get the votes - yes these same minorities that a certain group of people, on here, call immigrants, then read below on who can vote.... Anyone who will be aged 18 or over on polling day and who is a national of the United Kingdom (all forms of British nationality but excluding British protected persons), the Republic of Ireland, a Commonwealth country (including Fiji, Zimbabwe and the whole of Cyprus]) or a European Union member state can apply to the Electoral Registration Officer in the district in the UK where they reside with a 'considerable degree of permanence' to be listed in that area's Electoral Register. The right of Commonwealth and Irish citizens to vote is a legacy of the Representation of the People Act 1918, which limited the vote to British subjects. At that time, "British subjects" included the people of Ireland — then part of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland — and all other parts of the British Empire. Though most of Ireland (see Ireland Act 1949) and the majority of the colonies became independent nations, their citizens have retained the right to vote if they live in the United Kingdom. Well I hope you have learned something and know that what you have been saying is WRONG, as per usual! Not everyone can vote and there ARE regulations in place!!! BWFC71

7:50pm Sat 21 Dec 13

Bob Shaftoe says...

BWFC71 wrote:
For those who still think that the election candidates pampered a certain minority group to get the votes - yes these same minorities that a certain group of people, on here, call immigrants, then read below on who can vote....

Anyone who will be aged 18 or over on polling day and who is a national of the United Kingdom (all forms of British nationality but excluding British protected persons), the Republic of Ireland, a Commonwealth country (including Fiji, Zimbabwe and the whole of Cyprus]) or a European Union member state can apply to the Electoral Registration Officer in the district in the UK where they reside with a 'considerable degree of permanence' to be listed in that area's Electoral Register. The right of Commonwealth and Irish citizens to vote is a legacy of the Representation of the People Act 1918, which limited the vote to British subjects. At that time, "British subjects" included the people of Ireland — then part of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland — and all other parts of the British Empire. Though most of Ireland (see Ireland Act 1949) and the majority of the colonies became independent nations, their citizens have retained the right to vote if they live in the United Kingdom.

Well I hope you have learned something and know that what you have been saying is WRONG, as per usual! Not everyone can vote and there ARE regulations in place!!!
BWFC71. instead of supplying this nonsense, why don't you reply to boltonchaps very interesting observations about you? It appears you may have been well sussed.
I await with baited breath.
[quote][p][bold]BWFC71[/bold] wrote: For those who still think that the election candidates pampered a certain minority group to get the votes - yes these same minorities that a certain group of people, on here, call immigrants, then read below on who can vote.... Anyone who will be aged 18 or over on polling day and who is a national of the United Kingdom (all forms of British nationality but excluding British protected persons), the Republic of Ireland, a Commonwealth country (including Fiji, Zimbabwe and the whole of Cyprus]) or a European Union member state can apply to the Electoral Registration Officer in the district in the UK where they reside with a 'considerable degree of permanence' to be listed in that area's Electoral Register. The right of Commonwealth and Irish citizens to vote is a legacy of the Representation of the People Act 1918, which limited the vote to British subjects. At that time, "British subjects" included the people of Ireland — then part of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland — and all other parts of the British Empire. Though most of Ireland (see Ireland Act 1949) and the majority of the colonies became independent nations, their citizens have retained the right to vote if they live in the United Kingdom. Well I hope you have learned something and know that what you have been saying is WRONG, as per usual! Not everyone can vote and there ARE regulations in place!!![/p][/quote]BWFC71. instead of supplying this nonsense, why don't you reply to boltonchaps very interesting observations about you? It appears you may have been well sussed. I await with baited breath. Bob Shaftoe

9:21pm Sat 21 Dec 13

thomas222 says...

Bob Shaftoe wrote:
BWFC71 wrote: For those who still think that the election candidates pampered a certain minority group to get the votes - yes these same minorities that a certain group of people, on here, call immigrants, then read below on who can vote.... Anyone who will be aged 18 or over on polling day and who is a national of the United Kingdom (all forms of British nationality but excluding British protected persons), the Republic of Ireland, a Commonwealth country (including Fiji, Zimbabwe and the whole of Cyprus]) or a European Union member state can apply to the Electoral Registration Officer in the district in the UK where they reside with a 'considerable degree of permanence' to be listed in that area's Electoral Register. The right of Commonwealth and Irish citizens to vote is a legacy of the Representation of the People Act 1918, which limited the vote to British subjects. At that time, "British subjects" included the people of Ireland — then part of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland — and all other parts of the British Empire. Though most of Ireland (see Ireland Act 1949) and the majority of the colonies became independent nations, their citizens have retained the right to vote if they live in the United Kingdom. Well I hope you have learned something and know that what you have been saying is WRONG, as per usual! Not everyone can vote and there ARE regulations in place!!!
BWFC71. instead of supplying this nonsense, why don't you reply to boltonchaps very interesting observations about you? It appears you may have been well sussed. I await with baited breath.
you dont vote so you have no right to complain.......
[quote][p][bold]Bob Shaftoe[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BWFC71[/bold] wrote: For those who still think that the election candidates pampered a certain minority group to get the votes - yes these same minorities that a certain group of people, on here, call immigrants, then read below on who can vote.... Anyone who will be aged 18 or over on polling day and who is a national of the United Kingdom (all forms of British nationality but excluding British protected persons), the Republic of Ireland, a Commonwealth country (including Fiji, Zimbabwe and the whole of Cyprus]) or a European Union member state can apply to the Electoral Registration Officer in the district in the UK where they reside with a 'considerable degree of permanence' to be listed in that area's Electoral Register. The right of Commonwealth and Irish citizens to vote is a legacy of the Representation of the People Act 1918, which limited the vote to British subjects. At that time, "British subjects" included the people of Ireland — then part of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland — and all other parts of the British Empire. Though most of Ireland (see Ireland Act 1949) and the majority of the colonies became independent nations, their citizens have retained the right to vote if they live in the United Kingdom. Well I hope you have learned something and know that what you have been saying is WRONG, as per usual! Not everyone can vote and there ARE regulations in place!!![/p][/quote]BWFC71. instead of supplying this nonsense, why don't you reply to boltonchaps very interesting observations about you? It appears you may have been well sussed. I await with baited breath.[/p][/quote]you dont vote so you have no right to complain....... thomas222

12:27pm Sun 22 Dec 13

Malcolm Tucker says...

BWFC71 wrote:
By George wrote:
Am I right in saying that this will have to be done again in 6 months time possibly with the same line up? If so why on earth could the election not have waited in the interest of saving council tax and other public taxes . The result only shows that the people of Harper Green are used to poor standards, if you drive through This deprived area you will see for yourselves what a tip it is, you would think this being the center of Bolton for casual visitors going to the hospital or Quinn to get on the Motorway to get out that the Councillors would clews it up. I suspect the Labour Candidate won not on the record of achievement by the existing Councillors but just because ipthe ballot paper had Labour on it and we are all fed up of the Coalition.
Nope due to the fact that Local elections are split. 1/3 seats one year, 1/3 seat year after, 1/3 seats year after that and then there is a gap year and the cycle starts again.

As it is this seat was contested last year and as such will only be contested again in 3 years time!
Sorry mate, but that's not correct either.

Each councillor gets elected for 4 years. As this was a by election, you have to look at when the term of the previous councillor was to end. In this case it was Margaret Clare, and she was elected for a 4 year term in 2011, and was therefore up in 2015. This means that the new Cllr Ismail will be up for reelection in 2015.

The person who is up in 2014 is actually Michael Francis (elected in 2010). By his picture he is so white he looks like Santa. I therefore expect the Labour vote to swing right back up in 2014. Because what no-one has said, but its so obvious, is that the Labour vote did go down (proportionately) because of the ethnicity of their candidate. Harper Green is a very white working class area and when Champak Mistry (Hindu) was elected in 2008, he barely scraped in. However when he was back up in 2012 he got over 70%. Therefore if Cllr Ismail does a good job and her constituents get to know her, she'll be alright when her turn comes back up.

All of these details are available on Wikipedia

Finally, looking at the thumbs up and down on the various posts on this article as well as many others just confirms what many of us already know - that the typical poster/reader of this forum does not reflect the population in general.

For example, in May next year there will be an article on this website that will show Labour retaining control of the Council with around 50% of the vote in total, yet the comments that will be left on that story will not reflect that result.
[quote][p][bold]BWFC71[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]By George[/bold] wrote: Am I right in saying that this will have to be done again in 6 months time possibly with the same line up? If so why on earth could the election not have waited in the interest of saving council tax and other public taxes . The result only shows that the people of Harper Green are used to poor standards, if you drive through This deprived area you will see for yourselves what a tip it is, you would think this being the center of Bolton for casual visitors going to the hospital or Quinn to get on the Motorway to get out that the Councillors would clews it up. I suspect the Labour Candidate won not on the record of achievement by the existing Councillors but just because ipthe ballot paper had Labour on it and we are all fed up of the Coalition.[/p][/quote]Nope due to the fact that Local elections are split. 1/3 seats one year, 1/3 seat year after, 1/3 seats year after that and then there is a gap year and the cycle starts again. As it is this seat was contested last year and as such will only be contested again in 3 years time![/p][/quote]Sorry mate, but that's not correct either. Each councillor gets elected for 4 years. As this was a by election, you have to look at when the term of the previous councillor was to end. In this case it was Margaret Clare, and she was elected for a 4 year term in 2011, and was therefore up in 2015. This means that the new Cllr Ismail will be up for reelection in 2015. The person who is up in 2014 is actually Michael Francis (elected in 2010). By his picture he is so white he looks like Santa. I therefore expect the Labour vote to swing right back up in 2014. Because what no-one has said, but its so obvious, is that the Labour vote did go down (proportionately) because of the ethnicity of their candidate. Harper Green is a very white working class area and when Champak Mistry (Hindu) was elected in 2008, he barely scraped in. However when he was back up in 2012 he got over 70%. Therefore if Cllr Ismail does a good job and her constituents get to know her, she'll be alright when her turn comes back up. All of these details are available on Wikipedia Finally, looking at the thumbs up and down on the various posts on this article as well as many others just confirms what many of us already know - that the typical poster/reader of this forum does not reflect the population in general. For example, in May next year there will be an article on this website that will show Labour retaining control of the Council with around 50% of the vote in total, yet the comments that will be left on that story will not reflect that result. Malcolm Tucker

4:20pm Sun 22 Dec 13

Sandra MacNeill says...

cliff4treasurer wrote:
The conservative voters are usually the ones who are more consistent than any other and the labour voters tend to vote more ad hoc so all figures are slewed.
It's the 85% who didn't vote that worry me and it's getting worse .
So much for us living in a democracy when the minority put people in power.
Voting should be made mandatory full stop.
totally agree, the people of Harper Green are so apathetic!
[quote][p][bold]cliff4treasurer[/bold] wrote: The conservative voters are usually the ones who are more consistent than any other and the labour voters tend to vote more ad hoc so all figures are slewed. It's the 85% who didn't vote that worry me and it's getting worse . So much for us living in a democracy when the minority put people in power. Voting should be made mandatory full stop.[/p][/quote]totally agree, the people of Harper Green are so apathetic! Sandra MacNeill

4:26pm Sun 22 Dec 13

Sandra MacNeill says...

Reality50 wrote:
Good result for UKIP but the bottom line is the Tories and UKIP across the country are cutting themselves up and allowing Labour to gain victories everywhere. The Tories are to blame for not understanding the public view on Europe. As for Harper Green,I would guess the Asian candidate won because of the large Asian population around Campbell Street,Cawdor Street and that section of the constituency. Asians currently according to recent national polls are 3 times likely to vote in local elections than whites and this is why Yasmin Qureshi currently serves the area as an MP. Also add to the fact Bolton has a large "I vote Labour because my dad votes Labour" braindead mentality,and you were always going to get a Labour victory.
I'd like to point out that Campbell Street and Cawdor Street are not in Harper Green Ward, they belong to Farnworth Ward. However, I agree that the ethnic minorities are more likely to vote because unlike the indigenous population, they value democracy more.
[quote][p][bold]Reality50[/bold] wrote: Good result for UKIP but the bottom line is the Tories and UKIP across the country are cutting themselves up and allowing Labour to gain victories everywhere. The Tories are to blame for not understanding the public view on Europe. As for Harper Green,I would guess the Asian candidate won because of the large Asian population around Campbell Street,Cawdor Street and that section of the constituency. Asians currently according to recent national polls are 3 times likely to vote in local elections than whites and this is why Yasmin Qureshi currently serves the area as an MP. Also add to the fact Bolton has a large "I vote Labour because my dad votes Labour" braindead mentality,and you were always going to get a Labour victory.[/p][/quote]I'd like to point out that Campbell Street and Cawdor Street are not in Harper Green Ward, they belong to Farnworth Ward. However, I agree that the ethnic minorities are more likely to vote because unlike the indigenous population, they value democracy more. Sandra MacNeill

7:59pm Sun 22 Dec 13

thomas222 says...

Sandra MacNeill wrote:
Reality50 wrote: Good result for UKIP but the bottom line is the Tories and UKIP across the country are cutting themselves up and allowing Labour to gain victories everywhere. The Tories are to blame for not understanding the public view on Europe. As for Harper Green,I would guess the Asian candidate won because of the large Asian population around Campbell Street,Cawdor Street and that section of the constituency. Asians currently according to recent national polls are 3 times likely to vote in local elections than whites and this is why Yasmin Qureshi currently serves the area as an MP. Also add to the fact Bolton has a large "I vote Labour because my dad votes Labour" braindead mentality,and you were always going to get a Labour victory.
I'd like to point out that Campbell Street and Cawdor Street are not in Harper Green Ward, they belong to Farnworth Ward. However, I agree that the ethnic minorities are more likely to vote because unlike the indigenous population, they value democracy more.
No.. Its all voting by postal and proxy voting... Women have no say and its very wrong. Women cant speak let alone vote. You should be ashamed.
[quote][p][bold]Sandra MacNeill[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Reality50[/bold] wrote: Good result for UKIP but the bottom line is the Tories and UKIP across the country are cutting themselves up and allowing Labour to gain victories everywhere. The Tories are to blame for not understanding the public view on Europe. As for Harper Green,I would guess the Asian candidate won because of the large Asian population around Campbell Street,Cawdor Street and that section of the constituency. Asians currently according to recent national polls are 3 times likely to vote in local elections than whites and this is why Yasmin Qureshi currently serves the area as an MP. Also add to the fact Bolton has a large "I vote Labour because my dad votes Labour" braindead mentality,and you were always going to get a Labour victory.[/p][/quote]I'd like to point out that Campbell Street and Cawdor Street are not in Harper Green Ward, they belong to Farnworth Ward. However, I agree that the ethnic minorities are more likely to vote because unlike the indigenous population, they value democracy more.[/p][/quote]No.. Its all voting by postal and proxy voting... Women have no say and its very wrong. Women cant speak let alone vote. You should be ashamed. thomas222

7:04pm Mon 23 Dec 13

hoboh2o says...

What I suspected actually, the fat controller and his cronies could slaughter Bambi and still be re-elected in the Bolton area.
Unless the silent majority actually get out and vote no one knows what the true feelings of the people are.
To stop what is becoming a waste of money it should be compulsary to vote, the local elections would make a good test bed for this and yes I agree with the 'None of the above' option.
What I suspected actually, the fat controller and his cronies could slaughter Bambi and still be re-elected in the Bolton area. Unless the silent majority actually get out and vote no one knows what the true feelings of the people are. To stop what is becoming a waste of money it should be compulsary to vote, the local elections would make a good test bed for this and yes I agree with the 'None of the above' option. hoboh2o

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree