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