DOCSLIB.ORG

Local Elections 2008 12 JUNE 2008

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Local Elections 2008 12 JUNE 2008 RESEARCH PAPER 08/48 Local elections 2008 12 JUNE 2008 This Research Paper summarises the results of the local elections held on 1 May 2008. Elections were held in 137 local authorities in England and all 22 authorities in Wales. In England, one-third of seats were contested in 36 Metropolitan Boroughs, 67 Shire Districts, and 19 Unitary Authorities; and all seats were contested in 4 Shire Districts, and 2 shadow and 2 transitional Unitary Authorities. One-half of seats were contested in 7 Shire Districts. In Wales, all seats were contested on the 22 Welsh councils. The Conservatives made a net gain of 12 councils and 257 seats. Labour made a net loss of nine councils and 334 seats. The Liberal Democrats made a net gain of one council and 33 seats. The four ‘shadow’ and ‘transitional’ authorities are not counted in calculations of the net gain/loss of council control. The British National Party gained 10 seats in net terms while the Greens made a net gain of five seats. Estimates suggest that the Conservatives won 43% of the national equivalent share of the vote, Labour 24% and the Liberal Democrats 23%. Turnout was estimated to be 36%. Edmund Tetteh SOCIAL AND GENERAL STATISTICS SECTION HOUSE OF COMMONS LIBRARY Recent Library Research Papers include: 08/33 Unemployment by Constituency, March 2008 16.04.08 08/34 Special Educational Needs (Information) Bill: Committee Stage 16.04.08 Report 08/35 Food Products (Marketing to Children) Bill [Bill 19 of 2007-08] 16.04.08 08/36 Transport in London 21.04.08 08/37 Social Indicators 23.04.08 08/38 2001 Census of Population: Statistics for New Parliamentary 23.04.08 Constituencies 08/39 Parliamentary Involvement in Public Appointments 23.04.08 08/40 Energy Bill: Committee Stage Report 23.04.08 08/41 Planning and Energy Bill: Committee Stage Report 30.04.08 08/42 Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill [HL] [Bill 70 of 2007-08] 02.05.08 08/43 Economic Indicators, May 2008 06.05.08 08/44 Children and Young Persons Bill [HL] [Bill No 8 of 2007-08] 08.05.08 08/45 Unemployment by Constituency, April 2008 14.05.08 08/46 Regulatory Enforcement and Sanctions Bill [HL] 2007-08 16.05.08 [Bill 103 of 2007-08] 08/47 London Elections 2008. Elections for Mayor of London and London 20.05.08 Assembly: 1 May 2008 Research Papers are available as PDF files: • to members of the general public on the Parliamentary web site, URL: http://www.parliament.uk • within Parliament to users of the Parliamentary Intranet, URL: http://hcl1.hclibrary.parliament.uk Library Research Papers are compiled for the benefit of Members of Parliament and their personal staff. Authors are available to discuss the contents of these papers with Members and their staff but cannot advise members of the general public. We welcome comments on our papers; these should be sent to the Research Publications Officer, Room 407, 1 Derby Gate, London, SW1A 2DG or e-mailed to [email protected] ISSN 1368-8456 Summary of main points Elections were held in 159 local authorities on 1 May 2008 comprising: England (137 local authorities) • 36 Metropolitan Boroughs (one-third of seats) • 78 Shire Districts o 67 Shire Districts (one-third of seats) o 7 Shire Districts (one-half of seats) o 4 Shire Districts (all seats) • 19 Unitary Authorities (one-third of seats) • 2 “shadow” and 2 transitional Unitary Authorities (all seats) Wales (22 local authorities) • 22 Unitary Authorities No elections were scheduled in Scotland, Northern Ireland, London Boroughs, County Councils in England, or in the remaining Unitary Authorities and Shire Districts in England. The Conservatives won or retained control of 63 councils, a net gain of 12, comprising 14 gains and two losses. They gained one council from Labour (Nuneaton & Bedworth), one council (West Lindsey) from the Liberal Democrats and 10 seats from No Overall Control (NOC). They lost two councils to NOC (Colchester and Coventry). Following the elections, the Conservatives controlled 213 local authorities in Great Britain overall. The Conservatives also won the two ‘shadow’ authorities of Cheshire East and Cheshire West & Chester. Labour won or retained control of 17 councils, a net loss of eight councils, comprising nine losses and one gain. They gained one council from NOC (Slough), lost one council to the Conservatives (Nuneaton & Bedworth) and lost nine councils to NOC (including Torfaen where Labour lost 16 councillors compared to the previous elections). Overall, Labour lost 334 councillors and they now control 51 councils in Great Britain. Labour won the ‘transitional’ authority of Durham. The Liberal Democrats won or retained control of 13 councils, a net gain of one, comprising four councils gained from NOC (Burnley, Kingston-upon-Hull, Sheffield, and St. Albans), two losses to NOC (Liverpool and Pendle), and one loss to the Conservatives (West Lindsey). The Liberal Democrats now control 26 councils in Great Britain. The British National Party won 10 seats in net terms, comprising 13 gains (Stoke-on-Trent (3), Nuneaton & Bedworth (2), Rotherham (2), Amber Valley (2), Three Rivers (1), Pendle (1), Thurrock (1), and Calderdale (1)) and 3 losses (Epping Forest (2) and Kirklees(1)). Following the elections, a further 64 councils went to No Overall Control (NOC), taking the total number of authorities under NOC to 124. The “transitional” authority of Northumberland also went to NOC. At the elections, the estimated national equivalent share of vote was Conservatives 43%, Labour 24%, and Liberal Democrats 23%. Estimated turnout was 36%. Elections were also held on the same day for Mayor of London and London Assembly. These are provided in Library Research Paper 08/47. CONTENTS I Introduction 7 II The results 8 A. Council control 8 B. Council seats 10 C. National equivalent share of the vote 11 D. Post-election council composition 12 III Reference tables and maps 15 RESEARCH PAPER 08/48 I Introduction Elections were held to 8,416 seats in 159 local authorities in Great Britain on 1 May 2008. In England, there were elections in 137 authorities and elections in a further 22 authorities in Wales, comprising: • 36 Metropolitan Boroughs (one-third of seats) • 78 Shire Districts o 67 Shire Districts (one-third of seats) o 7 Shire Districts (one-half of seats) o 4 Shire Districts (all seats) • 19 Unitary Authorities (one-third of seats) • 2 “shadow” and 2 “transitional” Unitary Authorities (all seats) • 22 Unitary Authorities in Wales The Government is in the process of implementing a programme of restructuring in English local government. A number of local authority proposals for unitary status which were judged to have met the Government’s criteria have been taken forward. Orders creating nine new unitary authorities in seven county areas from 1 April 2009 have now been approved by Parliament. A discussion document on implementation issues indicated that the Government wanted to avoid establishing shadow authorities except where it was unavoidable. Instead, where there was an obvious candidate, the existing authority would continue in existence, becoming transitional and, from 1 April 2009, the new unitary authority.1 County councils in five areas – Cornwall, Durham, Northumberland, Shropshire and Wiltshire – have continued in existence and are preparing to assume the responsibilities of district councils in those areas. Two of these “transitional” authorities – Durham and Northumberland – held elections in May 2008. Restructuring is also taking place in Cheshire and in Bedfordshire. In Cheshire, the existing county and district councils are being replaced by two new district unitary authorities - Cheshire East and Cheshire West & Chester. “Shadow” authorities have been established for both areas and elections were held for those on 1 May 2008. The four “shadow” and ”transitional” authorities are not counted in calculations of the net gain/loss of council control. This paper is intended as a provisional summary of the results, and is based on media reports and data supplied by the BBC’s Political Research department, and local authorities. The final compilation of the results, including votes cast at ward- and authority-level, shares of the vote, and turnout will be published later in the year by Professors Rallings and Thrasher of the University of Plymouth in their Local Elections Handbook 2008. Comparisons of net gains and losses are based on council composition immediately prior to the elections. Control is attributed on a simple numerical basis – minority 1 Department of Communities and Local Government,, Councils’ proposals for unitary local government: an approach to implementation (discussion document) , August 2007, http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/localgovernment/unitarycouncilsimplementation 7 RESEARCH PAPER 08/48 administrations and coalitions are not taken into account; they are regarded as the authority being under no overall (single party) control. II The results A. Council control The Conservatives won or retained control of 63 councils, a net gain of 12 comprising 14 gains and two losses. They gained one council from Labour (Nuneaton & Bedworth), gained West Lindsey from the Liberal Democrats and gained a further 10 councils from no overall control (NOC). They lost two councils to NOC (Colchester and Coventry). The Conservatives control two councils in Wales, gaining Vale of Glamorgan from NOC. Overall, following the elections, the Conservatives controlled a total of 213 councils in Great Britain. They also won two ‘shadow’ authorities (Cheshire East and Cheshire West & Chester). Labour won or retained control of 17 councils, a net loss of nine councils, comprising 10 losses and one gain. They gained one council from NOC (Slough), lost one council to the Conservatives (Nuneaton & Bedworth), and lost a further nine councils to NOC (including Torfaen where Labour lost 16 councillors compared to the previous elections).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Economic Cost of Invasive Non-Native Species on Great Britain F
    The Economic Cost of Invasive Non-Native Species on Great Britain F. Williams, R. Eschen, A. Harris, D. Djeddour, C. Pratt, R.S. Shaw, S. Varia, J. Lamontagne-Godwin, S.E. Thomas, S.T. Murphy CAB/001/09 November 2010 www.cabi.org 1 KNOWLEDGE FOR LIFE The Economic Cost of Invasive Non-Native Species on Great Britain Acknowledgements This report would not have been possible without the input of many people from Great Britain and abroad. We thank all the people who have taken the time to respond to the questionnaire or to provide information over the phone or otherwise. Front Cover Photo – Courtesy of T. Renals Sponsors The Scottish Government Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, UK Government Department for the Economy and Transport, Welsh Assembly Government FE Williams, R Eschen, A Harris, DH Djeddour, CF Pratt, RS Shaw, S Varia, JD Lamontagne-Godwin, SE Thomas, ST Murphy CABI Head Office Nosworthy Way Wallingford OX10 8DE UK and CABI Europe - UK Bakeham Lane Egham Surrey TW20 9TY UK CABI Project No. VM10066 2 The Economic Cost of Invasive Non-Native Species on Great Britain Executive Summary The impact of Invasive Non-Native Species (INNS) can be manifold, ranging from loss of crops, damaged buildings, and additional production costs to the loss of livelihoods and ecosystem services. INNS are increasingly abundant in Great Britain and in Europe generally and their impact is rising. Hence, INNS are the subject of considerable concern in Great Britain, prompting the development of a Non-Native Species Strategy and the formation of the GB Non-Native Species Programme Board and Secretariat.
    [Show full text]
  • UK Justice Policy Review
    UK Justice Policy Review Volume 2 6 May 2011 to 5 May 2012 by Richard Garside and Arianna Silvestri Justice Policy Review About the authors Richard Garside is Director and Arianna Silvestri is Research and Volume 2 Policy Associate at the Centre for Crime and Justice Studies. 6 May 2011 to 5 May 2012 Acknowledgements by Richard Garside and Arianna Silvestri Our thanks go to Roger Grimshaw, Research Director at the Centre, for updating the Expenditure and Criminal Justice Populations data sections as well as the Year in Numbers in this volume of our Justice Policy Review. Our thanks also go to Samantha Harding, Research and Policy Intern at the Centre during 2012/13, for her invaluable assistance in checking the data in this report and to our other colleagues Rebecca Roberts and Tammy McGloughlin for their input and useful comments during the drafting and production processes and to Steve Swingler, our designer. It would not have been possible to compile some of the figures in this report without the information and advice provided by the people who clarified the complexities of some of the data and helped us deal with the differences between jurisdictions. In particular we are grateful to Pól Callaghan, Head of Information and Policy at Citizens Advice Northern Ireland and Rachel Peto, Analysis Manager at Citizens Advice England and Wales for their assistance with regards to the Housing and wider social circumstances section; to Toby Cottrell, at the Probation and Contracted Services Directorate, National Offender Management Service for his assistance on Probation Trusts spending and to Mike Docherty, Intelligence Manager, Scottish Social Services Council, for his patient advice and insight into the intricacies of some of the criminal justice staffing data, both areas presented in our Staffing and outsourcing section.
    [Show full text]
  • Association Between Provision of Mental Illness Beds and Rate of Involuntary Admissions in the NHS in England 1988-2008: Ecological Study
    BMJ 2011;343:d3736 doi: 10.1136/bmj.d3736 Page 1 of 8 Research BMJ: first published as 10.1136/bmj.d3736 on 5 July 2011. Downloaded from RESEARCH Association between provision of mental illness beds and rate of involuntary admissions in the NHS in England 1988-2008: ecological study Patrick Keown consultant psychiatrist and honorary senior lecturer 1 2, Scott Weich professor of psychiatry 3, Kamaldeep S Bhui professor of cultural psychiatry and epidemiology 4, Jan Scott professor of psychological medicine 2 1Tranwell Unit, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Gateshead NE10 9R, UK; 2Academic Psychiatry, Institute of Neuroscience, Newcastle University, Newcastle, UK; 3Health Sciences Research Institute, Warwick Medical School, Coventry, UK; 4Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Barts and the London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, UK Abstract Introduction Objective To examine the rise in the rate of involuntary admissions for http://www.bmj.com/ mental illness in England that has occurred as community alternatives Closure of beds for people with mental illness in high income to hospital admission have been introduced. countries has been part of policies to deinstitutionalise the care of people with mental illness, and there have been calls for this Design Ecological analysis. to be replicated in low and middle income countries where Setting England, 1988-2008. scarce resources are concentrated in large asylums.1 However, Data source Publicly available data on provision of beds for people with the rates of involuntary admissions have been increasing in 2 mental illness in the National Health Service from Hospital Activity some western European countries, including England since the 3 Statistics and involuntary admission rates from the NHS Information introduction of the Mental Health Act in 1983.
    [Show full text]
  • UK Zoonoses Report 2015
    Zoonoses Report UK 2015 June 2017 Zoonoses Report About Public Health England Public Health England exists to protect and improve the nation’s health and wellbeing, and reduce health inequalities. We do this through world-class science, knowledge and intelligence, advocacy, partnerships and the delivery of specialist public health services. We are an executive agency of the Department of Health, and are a distinct delivery organisation with operational autonomy to advise and support government, local authorities and the NHS in a professionally independent manner. Public Health England Wellington House 133-155 Waterloo Road London SE1 8UG Tel: 020 7654 8000 www.gov.uk/phe Twitter: @PHE_uk Facebook: www.facebook.com/PublicHealthEngland For queries relating to this document, please contact: [email protected] © Crown copyright 2017 You may re-use this information (excluding logos) free of charge in any format or medium, under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0. To view this licence, visit OGL or email [email protected]. Where we have identified any third party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned. Published June 2017 PHE publications PHE supports the UN gateway number: 2017098 Sustainable Development Goals 2 Zoonoses Report Contents About Public Health England 2 Contents 3 Preface 5 Executive summary 7 Anthrax 7 Hantavirus 7 Bovine TB 7 Gastrointestinal infections 8 Swine influenza 8 Introduction 10 Notification and reporting of zoonotic diseases 10 Surveillance
    [Show full text]
  • Consultation on Future Management of Risks from Phytophthora Ramorum And
    www.defra.gov.uk Consultation on future management of risks from Phytophthora ramorum and Phytophthora kernoviae July 2008 Forestry Commission Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Nobel House 17 Smith Square London SW1P 3JR Telephone 020 7238 6000 Website: www.defra.gov.uk Forestry Commission Silvan House 231 Corstorphine Road Edinburgh EH12 7AT Telephone 0131 334 0303 Website: www.forestry.gov.uk © Crown copyright 2008 Copyright in the typographical arrangement and design rests with the Crown. This publication (excluding the royal arms and departmental logos) may be re-used free of charge in any format or medium provided that it is re-used accurately and not used in a misleading context. The material must be acknowledged as crown copyright and the title of the publication specified. Information about this publication and further copies are available from: Defra, Plant Health, Ground Floor, Foss House, Peasholme Green, York, YO1 7PX Tel: 01904 455182 This document is available on the Defra and Forestry Commission websites: www.defra.gov.uk/corporate/consult/phytophthora-ram-kern/ http://www.forestry.gov.uk/website/fchomepages.nsf/hp/GBWT Jointly published by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and the Forestry Commission – 15 July 2008 Summary • Contributions are invited towards a review of the future management of risks from Phytophthora ramorum and Phytophthora kernoviae. • Comments are also sought on what would be an appropriate minimum EU control level for these diseases. • The review is important to ensure that we adopt the appropriate approach towards these diseases in the future. • Written views are requested on the key issues and a consultation meeting is offered to discuss the issue as a whole.
    [Show full text]