Winners and losers.....

We've had the best part of a week to digest the result of our by-election and now it is all but forgotten, except for us poor sods in the constituency who are now lumbered with a Tory MP. The result was trumpeted as a massive victory for Cameron's Conservatives, with Iain Dale typical of those with blue-tinted spectacles who focussed on the size of the swing (nearly 17%) and the 7000+ majority.

I have to assume that this was part of a propaganda effort and that the Tories own analysis will be more sophisticated. You could not have picked more favourable circumstances for the Conservatives had you tried. A blitzkrieg of MP's and shadow cabinet spokespersons and a blizzard of slick and sophisticated leaflets - with one estimate of the Tory spending for this put at £100k. Alongside that a cash strapped and demoralised Labour Party lacked confidence and substance, with a candidate that failed to inspire or excite. All against the backdrop of a the disgraceful and vindictive treatment handed out to the very popular previous MP, Ian Gibson - a name that apparently was thrown back time and time again by the good citizens to canvassers of all party's. With no glamour independent candidate and the other 'third parties' either campaigning feebly or selecting an odd candidate (or both!) all hopes of an upset evaporated with the close of nominations.

Despite Ian's left wing credentials his honesty and tenacity as a local MP did mean that some natural Conservative voters had given him a personal vote, guaranteed to return to the fold once he had gone. With his personal vote also taken from people who would normally vote for others, and traditional Labour voters punishing the Party by either staying away or voting for one of the third parties it would have been nothing short of a miracle had the Tories not won.. So, other than the obvious what are the real lessons of the result?

Firstly this wasn't the massive triumph for the Tories that was trumpeted. Against the circumstance described above they actually polled nearly 2000 less than in 2005 with the swing and majority accounted for by the total collapse of the Labour vote. Clearly the former Ian Gibson voters had not switched back to the Conservatives and they even failed to hang on to all their 2005 voters.

Secondly, nor was this the unmitigated disaster for Labour that it first appears. Staggeringly they did actually manage to come second, some 1500 votes above their nearest challengers. With a 'first past the post' voting system still certain for the General Election the Third Party challenge has passed its high water mark without altering the essential arithmetic for voters - vote other than Labour and you help elect a Tory. With two Tory wards, the subject of much attention during the by-election, moving out of the constituency at the General Election, IF Labour can get their act together young Chloe's reign could yet be brief. As incumbent, she will still need to hold good on her promise to put constituents first and ahead of Party - Ian Dale is right in suggesting that she will need to work hard in former Labour heartland areas - if she is to make good on the advantage this gives her.

Thirdly, the Green challenge failed to really materialise with the Lib Dems scare tactics and infantile campaigning disappointingly giving them enough benefit to hold third place. UKIP, picking up disgruntled voters from both Labour and Conservative even managed to finish ahead of the Greens. Whichever way Rupert tries to spin it this also serves to highlight that in a close campaign their intervention is really only likely to benefit the Tories.

Saying that this wasn't the unmitigated disaster for Labour is one thing, but them rectifying their mistakes and getting the seat back is something completely different. It will take changes both locally and nationally to stand a chance of success, and it is very unlikely that these changes will take place. Nationally Brown needs to go, and any replacement needs to find a way of apologising for the way the Party treated Ian Gibson - without this basic step the wounds from the debacle of the star chamber will continue to fester. Locally a more credible candidate than Ostrowski is needed, one with longer and more obvious local connections. It is unlikely Ian could be attracted back, but some rapprochement is necessary. As with an apology this is unlikely - the obvious source of a local candidate would be a prominent Councillor but so poor is the reputation of the City Council, and so few the number of County Councillors for the Party. Linked to this would be some step change in the local councils efficiency, with its poor reputation as much a function of poor management by officers and the perceived indifference of many front line staff as of weak political leadership it would take something very dramatic indeed to change the publics perception of City Hall in the time between now and the General Election

A depressing end

A Tory blitzkreig has been really galling, and the flood of canvassers and leaflets has probably done more to alienate than galvanise. It has been really hard to put up with all the Tory MP's - up to 40 in a day - treating the constituency as their own, and 6 visits by Cameron alone, have all gone to make it a very depressing by-election. Media interest was slow, probably reflecting a mood of initial indifference in the electorate that became more actively hostile as it progressed.

The massive Tory effort is, however, an interesting barometer of opinion. Young Chloe will win, but probably not increase her vote by much over the last election - and it will be the size of the vote more than the majority that should be scrutinised on Friday afternoon. Whilst any win will be acclaimed by a Tory celebration, in most parts of Norwich North that will be as welcome as an Ipswich team bus. Most people will have voted against the Tory but for them really to celebrate the massive effort should have gleaned much more for it to be a confident indicator that they are winning hearts and minds.

Who will be second will also be interesting, quite a few are punishing the main parties and I expect the Greens to do well in picking up those Labour voters who are angry enough about Ian's treatment to do more than sit on their hands. Labour could well find themselves behind both Greens and the Lib Dems with some side interest in whether the Lib Dems beat the Greens - 4th would not be good for them at all.

One factor that has not come through in all the reporting is the extent to which local residents are as fed up with the Council as they are the national parties. Traditionally Labour it was taken over by the Lib Dems after the infamous Chestnut tree incident, only for them to do so appallingly badly that they lost out to Labour and the Greens with a red/green coalition now in charge. Regardless of the Party in charge, the everyday experience of the council is one of incompetence and indifference by its employees - with honourable exceptions. It is that everyday experience that is doing so much to undermine democracy as people lose faith that voting will actually make a difference to their lives. That loss of faith is the real tragedy in politics, and in Norwich it is made all the more bleak because the honourable exception - the one person many came across who did seem to care and who did try to make a difference for peoples lives - was treated so badly. There will no real victors for all the smoke and mirrors that will be employed by the parties, but the people will have lost as a decent local MP is replaced by careerist insider.

After the weekend papers Norwich North will disappear from the national conscious. It is doubtful whether we will ever see Cameron here again after his weekend celebration. But we will still be here, the residents of Norwich North with our daily lives, our problems and struggles against bureaucratic inefficiency. Nothing much will change and life will go on, but something will have been diminished by the events of the last few weeks.

A bleak choice

Despite a poor candidate and the dreadful treatment of Ian Gibson, there does seem to be some movement back to Labour as we near polling day. It won't be enough to save the seat, but the prospect of young Chloe and a Tory MP has started to focus a few minds on how best to prevent it.

The Greens effectively blew their chance by persuading a perfectly good candidate (Adrian Holmes) that he didn't really want to stand and choosing Rupert instead, and then running a lacklustre campaign.

The LibDems have been dreadful, with scary April manipulated by the LibDem by-election machine into claims that have even driven the sober citizens of Aylsham to write into the local papers and complain about (her claimed single-handed saving of the local hospital came as news to local campaigners).

None of the independents have had the charisma or wider support of a Martin Bell, and UKIP have managed to generate the nearest thing to a joke locally with 'Don't mingle with Glen Tingle' adorning his third Reich era posters, undermining the Aryan poster boy impression they otherwise give.

In face of all this the Tories have given it their all, Cameron has made his fourth visit today and the area is flooded with party workers delivering leaflets. Cameron's obvious desire to specifically get Chloe elected does nothing to reduce the local impression of her as a Westminster insider. Her much vaunted Norfolk background has also aggravated a few locally to whom rural Norfolk and landed gentry might as well inhabit another planet. Working 'tirelessly' in the constituency since January 2008 doesn't really cut it either.

I suppose it could be a clever Tory strategy as it is in their interest for the Labour vote not to collapse and coalesce around one of the alternatives. Sadly, lessons of history aren't much in evidence in the Lidl queue and by this time next week we'll be a year ahead of the rest of the country as the Tories manage to neatly side-step their historic culpability for today's crisis.

LibDem crassness

A mysterious publication 'Snap!' was delivered 'free' to us today. Well. it would be mysterious were it not for its exceedingly crass and un-subtle promotion of scary April. In UKIP colours it is clearly designed for submission to the Pontiff for her sainthood candidacy. The main photo prominently features a pet dog whilst elsewhere in this 'publication' pages are filled with shamelessly raiding of the family photo album in a bid to out Norfolk everyone else and demonstrate her 'normal family' pedigree. Meanwhile 'Snap!' exclusives report on the shocking extremism of the Greens and parade the usual poor gullible ex-Labour supporter whose occasional leaflet delivery has been elevated into 19 years of active campaigning on doorsteps.

Never before having been in a constituency during a by-election, I've not come across the LibDems famed by-election machine at work until now. They really should grow up - a more juvenile, patronising and insulting clutch of election material I have yet to see. Ironically it is coupled with another favoured LibDem tactic - the 'clean campaign' pledge to 'fight on issues' and constant carping at others negative campaigning. Pot. Kettle. Black.

Education Monday

The photo-op by-election continued on Monday with Goves escorting young Chloe to Hellesdon High and Ostrowski blending into Balls contingent at Sewell Park College. Balls visit had the added spice of Michael Crick with a Newsnight crew shamelessly using the school as a backdrop for a Cricks' ambush - ironically taking the form of accusing Balls of doing the same. The student perspective was interesting - Crick was seen as a wally and getting in the way, and upon finding out his name he was then dubbed 'Crick the prick'. But for all the media in attendance there was very little reporting on local news media, demonstrating the law of diminishing returns works with photo-ops as well.

Choice of schools was interesting - Balls at Sewell Park, predominantly taking kids from Mile Cross and Catton Grove, two areas that would normally be Labour but with a lot of disgruntled Ian Gibson supporters. Meanwhile Goves was at Hellesdon, popular with parents in the northern suburbs. Traditionally Tory but with growing UKIP influence, it seems both visits were aimed at shoring up core voters against the disrupting impact of the minor parties.

As election day approaches Labour are written off, with their candidate selection seen as contributing to the defeat. Choose from a national imposition of a poor candidate so that Brown can't be blamed (Newsnight) or a locally inspired two fingered gesture to the national party (local gossip). So with a certain Tory win, the real interest is in whether the Greens can beat the LibDems to third spot - or even beat Labour to second. Recent Green success in the County Council elections showed that the electorate are disgruntled enough to elect any muppet so long as they aren't representing a traditional party. I can't help thinking, however, that the Greens would have been better off sticking with their usual candidate rather than letting Rupert take the spotlight. I know I'm not the only Gibson supporter that was considering a Green vote in the by-election until they selected Rupert.

Photo-op's and Parties past

The war of the photo-op continues with more ministerial visits lined up, and presumably shadow ministers as well. The local media generally oblige by providing coverage, but only for known national names - this has the effect of marginalising the remaining parties competing in the election, in fact even the Lib Dems can suffer on this score, so they keep sending Nick Clegg - guaranteed a sympathetic interview from Archant and the BBC.

The BBC did manage a BOGOF today, with Charles Clarke hijacking yet another Cameron visit to give him a letter about Andy Coulson. The danger with this stunt is that your enemy retaliates and start to hijack your photo-opportunities - with two weeks to go it could yet get very silly with the Loony's and other Independents yet to start their photo-op hijacking campaign. Perhaps anticipation of this is why a lot of the visits tend to be secret, with only the organisations concerned and the press tipped off in advance.

Rumours about the past of candidates continues, with Ostrowski doing nothing to improve his standing and image by conceding that his much vaunted UEA past included time spent in the Conservative Students Society, and even standing for them as a candidate in NUS elections. Rupert on the other hand used to be a LibDem - hardly a surprise, especially given the venom those clean campaigning LibDem's have extended to him.

Meanwhile Mr Tickle the UKIP candidate denies a rumoured past association with the National Front - but did he really need to trot out the old 'some of my best friends are ......' defence? His posters, advertising and leaflets all continue to prominently feature his picture as an Aryan pin-up boy.

TV appearance by 4 of the candidates last night, 30 seconds each on education. In order of competence in delivery 1. young Chloe, clearly showing how well groomed she has been by Tory Central Office; 2. Rupert, sounding like a Rupert but stringing coherent sentences together, 3. Scary April (but almost as vacuous in content as young Chloe) 4 - by a long way, Ostrowski continuing to demonstrate support for the 'ironic gesture' theory behind his selection. Try getting any sentence from him that doesn't include the words 'SureStart centres'.

Also on TV last night was Harriet Harman, trying hard to smile and talk through gritted teeth. It does seem that Labour nationally really thought they could remove Ian from the candidates list and that he'd go quietly at the next election. I suppose if you are in the Westminster bubble and know nothing of either the person or the constituency you might just be able to delude yourself that at 70 and with a heart condition, Ian could retire gracefully at the next election and be presented as a sign that the party was being 'tough' on the expenses scandal. Instead they have a by-election they are going to get slaughtered at, a very disgruntled local party and just look pathetic bullies when Ian's expenses are compared with others against whom no action has been taken (Mandy, anyone?)

Norwich North's 12 choices of mediocrity

Nominations closed yesterday and two more have joined the fray. Sadly, no Ian Gibson and with a frankly uninspiring line-up of careerist hacks, local eccentrics and attention seekers it looks like I'll be spoiling my vote by adding Ian's name to the ballot. Two mysteries for me from the nominations :

• what is a plasterer from the West Midlands (Peter Baggs) doing standing as an independent with no publicly advertised affiliations? Guess we will have to await his election address
• could the A Pond and M Pond who nominated and seconded Anne Fryatt (the NOTA candidate from Leeds) have any connection to scary April (Pond) the Lib Dem candidate?

Two weeks to go, and still no canvassers - normally I'd be pleased, but I was quite looking forward to a good argument. Young Chloe's campaign put a sealed personally addressed envelope through our door tonight - claiming her team had apparently 'called to see you today'. Odd that they didn't knock and their envelopes were enclosed in a leaflet for 'Norwich City Kebab & Pizza House' .... seems it is proving hard to even find leafleteers since one of their London contingent went down with swine flu.

Labour's campaign continues to wobble along with local party workers still mostly sitting on their hands. It looks like a totally London based campaign of photo-opportunities, and having seen the candidate in action, I'm beginning to think he was voted for by the local party as an ironic comment, an impression underlined by seeing who signed their nominations.

So, it looks like the Tory by default. With no real campaign to report, guess I'll just have to devote the rest of the campaign to spelling out why - however bad things seem - the Tories are the problem.