The result

Here it is:

White (LibDem) 955 (43%)
Dokimakis (Labour) 573 (26%)
Chandler (Con) 567 (26%)
Purvis (Green) 71 (3%)
Morris (Peace) 38 (2%)
Buick (Socialist) 12 (1%)

The turnout was 29%, i.e abstentions got 71%. The Peace Party vote is down from 105 four years ago.

Our percentage (0.5) is par for the course. Scaled up to the size of a parliamentary constituency it's the equivalent of 150 to 200 votes.

It remains to be seen what replies we got to our leaflets.

More psephology

The London Elects site has now published the results by borough (and ward). Here are our results by borough:

Lambeth 729 (0.74%)
Southwark 604 (0.69)
Hounslow 504 (0.65)
Waltham Forest 496 (0.64)
Hackney 464 (0.60)
Kingston 293 (0.50)
Islington 333 (0.45)
Richmond 268 (0.35)

This confirms past experience that we do better in Labour areas than elsewhere, though the rather surprising result in Islington (where we have contested many elections over the years) would seem go against this.

Results in detail

Lambeth and Southwark
Florence Eshalomi (Lab) 96946 (51.63) -1.18
Robert Flint (Con) 34703 (18.48) -0.89
Rashid Nix (Green) 25793 (13.74) + 2.23
Michael Bukola (LD) 21489 (11.4) -0.2
Idham Ramadi (UKIP) 6591 (3.51) +0.72
Kevin Parkin (Soc) 1333 (0.71) -1.15
Amadu Kanumansa (APP) 906 (0.48) n/a

North East
Jennette Arnold (Lab) 134307 (58.7) +5.63
Sam Malik (Con) 32565 (14.23) -4.37
Samir Jeraj (Green) 29401 (12.85) -2.61
Terry Stacy (LD) 14312 (6.26) -0.64
Freddy Vachha (UKIP) 11315 (4.95) +1.5
Tim Allen (Respect) 5068 (2.22) n/a
Bill Martin (Soc) 1293 (0.57) n/a
Jonathan Silberman(Trot) 536 (0.23) n/a

South West
Tony Arbour (Con) 84381 (39.47) -0.37
Martin Whelton (Lab) 62937 (29.4) + 0.7
Rosina Robson (LD) 30654 (14.34) -2.34
Andree Frieze (Green) 19745 (9.24) -0.6
Alexander Craig (UKIP) 14983 (7.01) +2.11
Adam Buick (Soc) 1065 (0.50) n/a

We don't contest elections to get the maximum number of votes but we do hope to avoid a really derisory score. On this last our unstated aim was to avoid getting less than a four-figure vote. Which was achieved. 0.5% means that out of every 200 people who voted 1 voted socialist or, since there was a 49% turnout in South West, one in every 400 people you pass in the streets there (or watch Brentford play). In the other places we contested you'll have an even better chance of crossing a socialist voter.

Our vote in Lambeth and Southwark was down. This will be due to the fact that we changed our candidate. We do say that it's the case not the face that counts and rightly but we can't control how even our sympathisers see things. Danny Lambert, who has stood as our candidate many times in the Lambeth area (and in this GLA constituency last time), was well known as the candidate for socialism but this will have been name recognition and association with us rather than a personal vote. There was also one more candidate than last time and the number of candidates standing also affects things. That candidate was from the All People's Party, a breakaway from the Labour Party in Southwark. They can't be very pleased.

We didn't finish bottom in North East either where, after "Workers Power", the "Communist League" was the second Trotskyist vanguard to suffer the indignity, for them, of being beaten by the SPGB despite them standing on a programme of attractive reforms and us standing only on the maximum programme of socialism and nothing else.

Islington result

Junction ward result in: Labour win all three seats, taking one from the Lib Dems. Riddhi Bhalla​ (Conservative​) 320
*Janet Burgess​ (Labour​) 2,228
Michael Collins​ (Conservative​) 361
Giorgia Gamba​ (Liberal Democrats​) 297
Mick Holloway​ (Green​) 717
Daniel Hudson​ (Green​) 621
Stefan Antoni Kasprzyk​ (Liberal Democrats​) 333
*Kaya Makarau Schwartz​ (Labour​) 1938
Bill Martin​ (The Socialist (GB)​ 90
*Tim Nicholls​ (Labour​) 1,779
Jill Renwick​ (Green​) 720
Victoria Savvides​ (Liberal Democrats​) 245
Oliver Peter Jonathan​ (Conservative) 314

I make that about 2.6%, I'll need to read around to see what that says, but, as per last year, I think the signs are a swing to supporting Labour...

A bit of psephology

Here's the result with percentages:

Labour 1575 (69.3%)
Lib Dem 277 (12.2%)
Green 177 (7.8%)
TUSC 76 (3.4%)
Con 74 (3.3%)
UKIP 64 (2.8%)
Ind 20 (0.9%)
Soc 11 (0.5%)

Turnout: 20%.

Everyone knew that this was a one-horse race, but nobody predicted (see yesterday's blog) a landslide Labour victory of this proportion. It's the sort of percentage that Labour used to get in the mining valleys of South Wales when the pits were still open. It looks as if inner London is becoming a Tory no-go ahead like the Northern cities.

Although everybody was expecting Labour to win, there were other contests going on -- LibDems v Greens for second place; UKIP v the Tories, even us v TUSC) -- and it can be seen who won these. Whether we like it or not (and we don't), in the public perception where there are two candidates describing themselves as "socialist" they are seen as rivals for the votes of those who consider themselves socialist. But not just in the public perception, but also amongst those who consider themselves socialist. Although we don't attach all that importance to the number of votes we get, it is undoubtedly true that we get more when there is not another candidate calling themselves socialist. In fact the combined vote for TUSC and us is about the same here (3.9%) as it was in the Brixton Hill by-election in January (4.1%). That would seem to be the measure of the "anticapitalist" audience.

In any event, TUSC must be pleased with the result. Finishing ahead of both UKIP and the Tories, they have shown that they can consistently get about 3% in elections with their "anti-cuts" campaign. This will be a protest vote against the cuts rather than for Trotsky's transitional programme or for Militant's strategy for combatting them and, as such, will have some significance. But 3% is not enough to launch a general strike over the issue.

UKIP will also be disappointed. This time (compared with Brixton Hill) they ran a much more professional campaign (expensively produced glossy leaflets, etc) specifically aimed at winning over Labour voters. They got nowhere. It looks as if they really are just an external faction of the Tories in rural and seaside areas, especially those with a noticeable presence of migrants from East Europe. They are not going to make a breakthrough in the big cities. It is difficult to understand why they thought that their appeal to old-fashioned Britishness was going to have an impact in a ward where, in the 2011 census, only 5116 out of a population of 15,771 (a little over 32%) put themselves down as "White British" (see here). Parties such as the BNP and them are no threat in places like this despite the fuss made about them by "anti-fascists".

One of our reasons for contesting these by-elections (apart from the wards being in walking distance of our Head Office) was to get us known more locally in preparation for next year's full borough council elections in May next year (which are going to be held on the same day as the Euroelections, which should increase the turnout a bit). We will almost definitely be contesting the Larkhall and Ferndale wards as we did last time. Ferndale ward is also in Brixton (bordered by Brixton High Street and Acre Lane). In the meantime we'll be continuing leafletting them and adding the nearby parts of Brixton Hill and Tulse Hill wards.

The raw result

Lab 1575
LibDem 277
Green 177
TUSC 76
Con 74
UKIP 64
Ind 20
Soc 11

Turnout 2282 (20%).

Analysis follows tomorrow morning.

The people have spoken...

Labour	1343	(61.9%)
Green	381	(17.6%)
Lib Dem	276	(12.7%)
Con	120	(05.6%)
BNP	31	(01.4%)
Socialist	18	(00.8%)

Turnout:2,181 (24.2%)

Analysis -- Merton & Wandsworth

A little examination of the breakdown by ward (available here). Some breakdowns are very interesting. We got 578 votes in Merton, as opposed to 765 in Wandsworth (averages of 28 and 36, respectively). Postal votes complicate the picture a little, as they aren't grouped by ward, and we got 66 in Merton and 159 in Wandsworth. Our highest vote in Merton was 38 in Merton Park and St. Helier wards. In Wandsworth it was 54 in Latchmere (1.8% of votes cast) -- this appears to be one of the few Labour wards in Wandsworth. Of the Merton wards, St. Helier is Labour, while Merton Park is Independent. Both are down in Morden, so we have votes at the end of the Northern Line.

In some ways these figures confound my expectations, I thought we'd do better in Labour held Merton (which also returns Labour MP's), as compared to squarely Tory Wandsworth. Then again, Battersea Parliamentary constituency used to be Labour, and that's the area we leafletted. Further, Latchmere appears to have been squarely in the area we leafletted, so maybe that sort of thing pays off (it might also account for the higher postal vote).

The main thing it emphasises, that although in aggregate it sounds an impressive number, by ward it is our usual fare at council elections. The trick will be to tap into this latent vote and turn it into something bigger.

Just by way of comparison, TUSC averaged 15 votes per ward (308 in total) in Merton on the list election, and 28 (596) on the list election, which is pretty consistently behind us. The question to ask, is where a lot of our voters as confused as the BBC? If, however, you take our vote and replicate it across all 627 wards in London, it means we would achieve about 18,000 votes, which is close to the TUSC vote anyway.

Update: A more statistically minded comrade has pointed me in the direction of our average percentage. By that measure we did do better in Merton (average 1.1% of the vote) than in Wandsworth (0.9%). It's also been suggested we did well in St. Mary's Park ward (Wandsworth) thanks to the work of a mysterious comrade there. By percentage, then, our best overall result was St. Hellier (Merton), with 1.76%.

Hang on...

Right, didn't attend the count, maybe some who were there will tell if anything fun happened, but here is the Beeb-Beeb-Ceeb's version of the count:

Kate Hoey	Labour	21,498	49.8%
Caroline Pidgeon	Liberal Democrat	10,847	25.1%
Glyn Chambers	Conservative	9,301	21.5%
Joseph Healy	Green	708	1.6%
Jose Navarro	English Democrats	289	0.7%
Lana Martin	Christian Party	200	0.5%
Daniel Lambert	Socialist Party of Great Britain	143	0.3%
Jeremy Drinkall	Anticapitalists - Workers Power	109	0.3%
James Kapetanos	Animal Protection Party, The	96	0.2%
Majority	10,651	24.7%
Turnout	43,191	57.7%	+9.3

That puts us down from 240 last time, and means we've been leapfrogged by the English Democrats (whop we beat last time), but at least we beat the animal rights feller.

Looking at it, if we add our vote and the Workers' Power character's vote together, we get about the vote last time, so maybe those 109 Drinkall got are left reformists who voted for us in 2005.

It will, of course, be interesting to compare with our council election votes.

The result

Party	Total vote	% votes
Conservative	479,037	27.4
Labour	372,590	21.3
Liberal Democrats	240,156	13.7
Green Party	190,589	10.9
UK Independence Party	188,440	10.8
British National Party	86,420	4.9
Christian Party-Christian Peoples Alliance	51,336	2.9
Independent - Jan Jananayagam	50,014	2.9
English Democrat	24,477	1.4
No2EU	17,758	1.0
Socialist Labour Party	15,306	0.9
Libertas	8,444	0.5
Jury Team	7,284	0.4
Independent - Steven Cheung	4,918	0.3
Socialist Party of Great Britain	4,050	0.2
Yes 2 Europe	3,384	0.2
Independent - Sohale Rahman	3,248	0.2
Independent - Gene Alcantara	1,972	0.1
Independent - Haroon Saad	1,603	0.1

From The BBC

Discussion of the counts and various ruminations to follow.

A day at the count

On Friday Bill and me spent nearly 12 hours at the count, from 11 in the morning till half-ten at night when the result for our constituency was announced (though I must admit to slinking off for a couple of hours in the afternoon). We could have stayed longer to hear Boris announced as mayor and the BNP announced as having an Assembly member.

The count took place at Olympia, not just for Lambeth and Southwark but for 5 other constituencies in the western part of London. Other counts were taking place in Alexandra Palace and the Millenium Dome (which we are now supposed to call the O2 dome after the mobile phone company). The mayor and party list votes were counted by constituency and then transmitted to city hall for collation (the old county hall is now an aquarium). So we saw these too.

As the count was to be done electronically we were met not by the traditional rows of counters seated at tables but by rows of people seated before computers and scanners into which they fed the ballot papers. This was supposed to be faster. May it was, but it wasn't fast enough for the media (too bad) as no results were ready for Newsnight let alone the 6 o'clock or the 10 o'clock news.

One fascinating side effect of this was that spoilt or unclear ballot papers were projected onto a large screen which anybody present could see. Previously, such papers were only seen by the election agents going into a huddle. So we spent much of the day sitting or standing in front of these screens (not just for Lambeth and Southwark and not just for the constituency election but also for the mayor and the party lists) looking at these papers as they came up, as did everybody else. In other words, these papers assumed more importance than the valid ones. Though there were other screens showing, as a bar chart, how each party was doing in each constituency (the equivalent of the old piles of ballot papers as a clue to who was in front).

Most of the papers were rejected because the voter had voted for more than one candidate. Some of these combinations were bizarre. People voting for both Boris and Ken or for the BNP and the Left List, but others were more logical, eg voting for the Greens and Labour or for the Liberals and Labour or for the Tory and the Liberal (there seemed to be quite a lot of these last ones, indicating what was going to happen, ie that more of the Liberal's second preference votes for the mayor were going to go to Boris).

Others deliberately spoilt their papers by writing "None of the above" (sometimes at the top of the paper) or "None of these represent me" or "Nobody" or "Void" or "spoilt paper" or "Bollocks, Crap to the lot of them". Others wrote in the name of some party not standing (as we do). We noticed a few for the BNP and one for the SLP (presumably the Scargill Labour Party not the DeLeonists , but you never know) and one for Anarchism. There was one paper in our constituency marked "SOCIALISM - SPGB" (perhaps some out of touch supporter, but perhaps a disgruntled ex-member). One person cast a write-in vote for Mugabe and others for various popstars and DJs and, I nearly forgot, for Jesus and Jehovah (not sure if these are the same person). There were quite a few blank papers.

All these must be regarded as deliberate abstentions but this is not the way non-valid papers are recorded. They are simply divided into "rejected votes" and "blank votes". It has to be admitted that most votes were rejected for voting for more than one candidate, which may well have been intentional but against the rules. Overall, there were 2,406,289 valid votes, plus 47,799 (2%) rejected votes and 39,894 blank papers(1.7%). In Lambeth and Southwark the figures were 163,762, 2583 (1.6%) and 1919 (1.2%).

In our constituency there was the scandal (recorded here in a previous blog) of the polling clerks in one polling station writing the elector's number on the ballot paper. What idiots. There were some 130 of these but, on legal advice, they were all ruled invalid on the grounds that this allowed the voter to be identified (again, against the rules). This, even though the vote was otherwise clear enough. This deprived us of at least 3 votes. 3 out of 130 is quite a lot (for us) but we know which ward was involved (Larkhall, turn right out of Clapham North tube station instead of left for Head Office). Maybe this has identified a ward to contest at the next borough elections. In fact, we are going to get a breakdown of votes per ward. Which will help us see if we got more votes in the wards we leafletted compared with the wards we didn't.

The fact that, with electronic counting, spoilt papers are now seen by many more people suggests that we should take our policy of writing "WORLD SOCIALISM - SPGB" across our ballot papers more seriously (looking at the rejected votes in the London South West constituency suggests that the 10 or so members living there didn't do this, but simply abstained). Even 10 of these in one constituency would be noticed and commented on.

Everybody was there, including the BNP (East End taxi drivers and barrow boys in suits) and the Christian Party (an African in robes). When there was a disputed BNP vote, the UKIP counting agents were in favour of accepting it, all the others were against. (We weren't involved as there was no BNP candidate standing in Lambeth and Southwark). I have to confess to talking civilly to a BNP agent and to making a gaffe when another African in robes asked for the result of the vote for his party in Lambeth and Southwark. I gave him the result of the Christian Party. It turned out he was the Left List candidate in the London West constituency (since the split with Galloway the SWP has turned to blacks rather than Muslims as their targeted minority but with hardly any success).

Galloway retained a following from Muslims in East London but everywhere else was beaten by the Christian party. Logical enough, I suppose, since it you are going to try to split the working class on religious lines there are more Christians than Muslims in this part of the world. In fact Galloway was also beaten by those who wanted to abolish the congestion charge. It's hard to think of an ambitious politician like him sticking for long with the electoral failure Respect is turning out to be for him.

Will Boris as mayor make any difference? Well, Ken's cronies will be kicked out of city hall . . . to be replaced by Boris's (under the US-style spoils system). Gas-guzzlers (or large family cars as Boris calls them) will not be charged extra for entering the congestion charge zone. It's doubtful that bendy buses will, as promised, be replaced by a new-style Routemaster with a conductor. After all, who's going to pay, and it is difficult to see the Tories imposing more costs on the bus companies. Otherwise life will continue as before.

The next elections will be those for the European Parliament in June next year where the constituencies are even bigger and when the count could last even longer. Anybody want to be the Party's Election Agent?

The list votes

Found the party list vote in the constituency:

The Labour Party 58554
Conservative Party 33466
Liberal Democrats 28071
Green Party 20711
British National Party 4945
The Christian Choice 4823
Abolish the Congestion Charge 4603
Respect (George Galloway) 2910
Left List 1846
UK Independence Party 1757
English Democrats 1255
Unity for Peace & Socialism 499
One London (Leader Damian Hockney) 254
Independent 68

Technical and Turnout for Lambeth and Southwark
Good votes 163762
Rejected votes 2583
Blank votes 1919
Total votes 166345

The term "good votes" is taken from the official "London elects" site and wouldn't be mine. I think they mean "valid votes".

More figures from Lambeth and Southwark

Here's how the electors of Lambeth and Southwark voted in the mayor election:

Livingstone LAB 80,172 48.92
Johnson CON 47,754 29.14
Paddick LD 20,530 12.53
Berry GRN 7,190 4.39
Craig CPA 2,838 1.73
Barnbrook BNP 2,448 1.49
German LL 1,199 0.73
Batten UKIP 848 0.52
O'Connor END 506 0.31
McKenzie IND 392 0.24

Figures for the party list votes were posted last night on a screen at Olympia where the count took place but I've not been able to find them anywhere else. All I noted were the percentages of the some of the lists and the votes given to Respect George Galloway and the Left List:

BNP 3.02%
Christian 2.91
Abolish Congestion Charge 2.81
Respect 1.78 (2910 votes)
Left List 1.13 (1846 votes)
"Peace and Socialism" (Old CP) 0.30 (499 votes)

Also perhaps relevant is that the Militant Tendency candidate in nextdoor Greenwich and Lewisham got 1587 votes.

Late, late result

Here's the result, declared an hour or so ago, at least 4 hours later than expected:

Labour 60 601
Liberal 36 953
Con 32 835
Green 18 011
Christian 4432
UKIP 3012
LeftList 1956
EngDems 1867
Animals 1828
Socialist 1588

Anecdotes and analysis follow tomorrow morning