Wow. Latest Hartlepool polling...

"It is pitiful that no native pro-Brexit Labour candidate from a town with 100,000 residents could be found. Perhaps they were not sought. Labour’s man, Paul Williams, was born in Canterbury, educated in Cambridgeshire, worked in Stockton-on-Tees where he was an MP 2017-19, and was a Remainer, while 69.6% of this constituency voted to leave.

A former magistrate describes the main candidates: “One [Mortimer] is north Yorkshire and the other one [Williams] was the MP for Stockton. He didn’t represent the people of Stockton when they wanted to vote for Brexit [by 61.7%] so how can you trust him? He ignored the electorate so I wouldn’t vote for him if he was the only person standing. I’d tear my vote up. I really would”."

I'm a Labour member who knocked on doors for Paul in the GE2019, but I get this. It was so predictable and so avoidable.

Others highlighted it too but were dismissed. As the article says Labour are the establishment in Hartlepool, so there Paul is campaigning with Peter Mandelson who personifies the Remain Establishment.

I don't agree with Pog on Starmer (he needs more time) but he highlighted this on another thread which I've tried to search for and see him and the entire thread have been deleted from the forum.
I get what you are saying about williams being on the side of remain and ignoring 60% of his constituents. It's an odd one though. It would, probably, have been in stockton's best interests to stay in the EU, so you could argue that he was representing them. That said, is he elected to vote in parliament on their behalf or to represent them to the best of his ability. Those two things don't necessarily make good bedfellows.
 
You get what you vote for - if the Torys deliver thousands of jobs and better living standards across the area then fair enough. But if (when) they dont then the chickens will come home to roost.
 
I get what you are saying about williams being on the side of remain and ignoring 60% of his constituents. It's an odd one though. It would, probably, have been in stockton's best interests to stay in the EU, so you could argue that he was representing them. That said, is he elected to vote in parliament on their behalf or to represent them to the best of his ability. Those two things don't necessarily make good bedfellows.
I'm a Remainer. I think Stockton would have been better off in the EU.

But when your constituents tell you in a referendum how they want to be represented you have two choices - do it or resign.

If you chose neither they will kick you out of office, which is exactly what they did.

I wish they hadn't as he was a great MP for Stockton South. Much better than the current incumbent.
 
Given Hartlepool is one if the strongest Brexit areas in the country and the last election result there, the poll results shouldn't be surprising.

What does surprise me, although maybe it shouldn't, is how ignorant of the facts and swayed by the Brexit lie people are.

It's a very sad situation, because the most in need will suffer more because of it.
i don't think its just Brexit, the Tories with Houchen are perceived to have done more for the area including Hartlepool in terms of new investment and jobs, recently than labour did when last in power. Theres a lot of working class disenfranchisement with labour.
 
I'm a Remainer. I think Stockton would have been better off in the EU.

But when your constituents tell you in a referendum how they want to be represented you have two choices - do it or resign.

If you chose neither they will kick you out of office, which is exactly what they did.

I wish they hadn't as he was a great MP for Stockton South. Much better than the current incumbent.
The bit I am not sure about is whether as an MP you should blindly represent your constituents in the way they ask, if it's not in their best interests though. You could even argue that he followed his conscience and did so with integrity, knowing he would loose the seat.

I really don't know, I only raise it as a point because it seems relevant when faced with a difficult choice, parrot a bad decision or ignore your constituents. If you are going to ignore them, you have to then explain why you are ignoring them, but I don't suppose that would cut much ice with the voters.

The decision to then stand him in Hartlepool seems and odd one, you are right about that.
 
I have a concern that the general country will soon face up to the general damage of Brexit and that the tide will turn down south leaving Brexit constituencies like Hartlepool and other parts of Teesside even further left behind with a poor, politically backward looking out of date image.

I think Johnson is aware of this reality and is throwing a few scraps to the starving dog so he can say he did his best to keep it alive while he was in power.

Look at Scotland, the whole SNP campaign is now centred on rejoining the EU.

Wales and Northern Ireland will inevitably follow.

I fear the north will become an insular backwater temporarily given a bit of money by the Tories and owed little by any future Labour government because the seats which win an election are all down south along with the prosperity.
 
The bit I am not sure about is whether as an MP you should blindly represent your constituents in the way they ask, if it's not in their best interests though. You could even argue that he followed his conscience and did so with integrity, knowing he would loose the seat.

I really don't know, I only raise it as a point because it seems relevant when faced with a difficult choice, parrot a bad decision or ignore your constituents. If you are going to ignore them, you have to then explain why you are ignoring them, but I don't suppose that would cut much ice with the voters.

The decision to then stand him in Hartlepool seems and odd one, you are right about that.
He did show integrity and inevitably paid the price.

The message on the door steps (rightly or wrongly) was "Paul is a good man, a good MP, but I voted to leave, Labour promised to respect the result and Paul is try to overturn it."
 
This from a 'potential Labour voter' again? I noticed you didn't reply to my last message a few days ago when I pulled you up on this ridiculous idea that you're a potential Labour voter when all you ever do is try to give false equivalence between Labour and the Tories and conveniently ignore any evidence put before you.

To suggest that Paul Williams wouldn't be a better, more pro-active and caring MP for Hartlepool than the Tory candidate that has barely even heard of Hartlepol is almost as crazy as you continually pretending you're a former Labour and potentially future Labour voter.
Quite frankly, I couldn't, and still can't be bothered arguing again with you on an internet message board, about who is the least **** between Labour and the Tories. It possible for someone to have a different opinion to yours.

Have a good day, and take a deep breath. Maybe go for a walk when the rain stops (y)
 
After reading that article and the comments on here, if you were part of the Labour 'think tank' what would you do to improve the parties image in the North East?

At present there are many towns in the area thinking the same as Hartlepool.
 
I would be very interested to see what the polls look like when retired people are taken out.

Labour would have won the last two general elections had only working age people voted.

The real divide in this country is not leave/remain or even old/young - it is those who live off work and those who live off assets (i.e.home ownership and pensions) however meagre those assets may be. This obviously tilts older.

It seems the Conservatives have incredibly strong appeal to people in the latter as they fulfil all their identity based concerns with their Brexit record and don't need to offer a proper policy platform. If you don't have a job then you can be satisfied with Johnson's torrent of PR over results as the fallout from his decisions won't really affect you.
 
I would be very interested to see what the polls look like when retired people are taken out.

Labour would have won the last two general elections had only working age people voted.

The real divide in this country is not leave/remain or even old/young - it is those who live off work and those who live off assets (i.e.home ownership and pensions) however meagre those assets may be. This obviously tilts older.

It seems the Conservatives have incredibly strong appeal to people in the latter as they fulfil all their identity based concerns with their Brexit record and don't need to offer a proper policy platform. If you don't have a job then you can be satisfied with Johnson's torrent of PR over results as the fallout from his decisions won't really affect you.
So, do you think pensioners shouldn't be allowed to vote?
 
I would be very interested to see what the polls look like when retired people are taken out.

Labour would have won the last two general elections had only working age people voted.

The real divide in this country is not leave/remain or even old/young - it is those who live off work and those who live off assets (i.e.home ownership and pensions) however meagre those assets may be. This obviously tilts older.

It seems the Conservatives have incredibly strong appeal to people in the latter as they fulfil all their identity based concerns with their Brexit record and don't need to offer a proper policy platform. If you don't have a job then you can be satisfied with Johnson's torrent of PR over results as the fallout from his decisions won't really affect you.
yep - boomer gets what boomer wants
 
I'm a Remainer. I think Stockton would have been better off in the EU.

But when your constituents tell you in a referendum how they want to be represented you have two choices - do it or resign.

If you chose neither they will kick you out of office, which is exactly what they did.

I wish they hadn't as he was a great MP for Stockton South. Much better than the current incumbent.
He represents everyone not just a minority of his constituents that voted leave.
 
He represents everyone not just a minority of his constituents that voted leave.
57% voted to leave.

He told them he would respect the result, he tried to overturn it.

I obviously like Paul enough to campaign for him, but he was wrong on this and it cost him his seat.
 
Thats not what he is saying, pensioners dont have the same stake in the economy that young people do - like voting for brexit based on sovereignty and an out dated idealistic view of the past instead of the damage it does to jobs, of which they dont have the same concerns
I totally get what you are saying but it all can't be heaped on to pensioners. For Brexit to have happened, a lot of younger people also had to be taken in by these lies.
 
57% voted to leave.

He told them he would respect the result, he tried to overturn it.

I obviously like Paul enough to campaign for him, but he was wrong on this and it cost him his seat.
No 57% of those eligible to vote voted leave, 30% of those eligible to vote didn't, he also represents all those who were under the voting age or not eligible to vote.
He didn't try and overturn it
 
Back
Top