The LDs will end up gaining S Cambs Three Rivers Richmond Kingston
All from the Tories
Mike do you know why South Cambs has surged to the yellow peril ?
Sorry to interrupt, but it voted 60% Remain, one of the highest outside the big cities. And it's next to Cambridge.
Clearly but whilst that explains a useful platform it would mean that the LibDems would sweep all remain areas with ease or come close to doing so, and that hasn't happened.
I think the difference was a brilliant LibD campaign,based I guess on the tried and tested formula devised by "Jones The Vote" and Lord Rennard.On fertile soil,a good LD campaign is hard to beat and then they have the habit of not being able to get rid of,like bindweed.
The only conclusion I'm drawing from these results is that Lib/Lab/Con all need new leaders. If any of them could crack the leadership issue, it would at least break the stalemate.
Stalemate? Sorry but given everything that has happened since GE 2017 exit polls, these results (8 years in to a tory govt) are pretty good for the Tories and bad for the main opposition in areas of the country that are not exactly tory strongholds.
The Lib Dems have not yet managed to find a response to the reality that the coalition was not popular.
It was popular with Conservatives. It wasn't popular with Lib Dem voters.
The absolute conviction of Lib Dem MPs (and obvioulsy lots of former MPs) that the Coalition was popular with its voters and that its voters were demanding, nay champing at the bit for, a coalition with the Tories is the most insane collective delusion who's power over them I cannot explain.
I think it's almost certain that if the Coalition had never happened I'd still be an unenthusiastic Conservative voter rather than an enthused and active Liberal Democrat member. The Coalition taught me that I'm a liberal without me actually changing any of my existing opinions.
Lib Dem's back within 3 of Labour for gains. Tories now -20. 7 Councils to go.
And the Lib Dems overtake Labour: 63:62. Remarkable.
Do we have a split of the performance showing inside and outside of London? It was certainly looking like a game of two halves and it would be good to see how it does breakdown.
Lib Dem's back within 3 of Labour for gains. Tories now -20. 7 Councils to go.
And the Lib Dems overtake Labour: 63:62. Remarkable.
Do we have a split of the performance showing inside and outside of London? It was certainly looking like a game of two halves and it would be good to see how it does breakdown.
I suspect the LDs relative success is split fairly evenly. Outside London, they did well in Winchester, South Cambridgeshire, and Three Rivers, as well as making a few odd gains in places like Sunderland. And they lost a little ground in Eastleigh, where they'd been dominant.
In London, they fell back sharply in Sutton, but not enough to lose the council, while they did very well in Richmond and have taken a few random seats elsewhere. I don't have any indication of the Kingston vote yet, but my guess is they'll take it.
Lib Dem's back within 3 of Labour for gains. Tories now -20. 7 Councils to go.
And the Lib Dems overtake Labour: 63:62. Remarkable.
Do we have a split of the performance showing inside and outside of London? It was certainly looking like a game of two halves and it would be good to see how it does breakdown.
I suspect the LDs relative success is split fairly evenly. Outside London, they did well in Winchester, South Cambridgeshire, and Three Rivers, as well as making a few odd gains in places like Sunderland. And they lost a little ground in Eastleigh, where they'd been dominant.
In London, they fell back sharply in Sutton, but not enough to lose the council, while they did very well in Richmond and have taken a few random seats elsewhere. I don't have any indication of the Kingston vote yet, but my guess is they'll take it.
I've been following the Kingston (my home town) results on the council's website. The LDs are giving the Tories (and Labour) the dockside hooker treatment. LDs now on 24 councillors against 6 Conservatives. One more win will give the LDs overall control.
I know SW London is Remainy but has the previously Tory-controlled council cocked something up spectacularly to get these results?
Lib Dem's back within 3 of Labour for gains. Tories now -20. 7 Councils to go.
And the Lib Dems overtake Labour: 63:62. Remarkable.
Do we have a split of the performance showing inside and outside of London? It was certainly looking like a game of two halves and it would be good to see how it does breakdown.
I suspect the LDs relative success is split fairly evenly. Outside London, they did well in Winchester, South Cambridgeshire, and Three Rivers, as well as making a few odd gains in places like Sunderland. And they lost a little ground in Eastleigh, where they'd been dominant.
In London, they fell back sharply in Sutton, but not enough to lose the council, while they did very well in Richmond and have taken a few random seats elsewhere. I don't have any indication of the Kingston vote yet, but my guess is they'll take it.
LibDems have already won 27 seats in Kingston out of 48 so it is LibDem gain. Doesn't seem to be reported anywhere.
Lib Dem's back within 3 of Labour for gains. Tories now -20. 7 Councils to go.
And the Lib Dems overtake Labour: 63:62. Remarkable.
Do we have a split of the performance showing inside and outside of London? It was certainly looking like a game of two halves and it would be good to see how it does breakdown.
I suspect the LDs relative success is split fairly evenly. Outside London, they did well in Winchester, South Cambridgeshire, and Three Rivers, as well as making a few odd gains in places like Sunderland. And they lost a little ground in Eastleigh, where they'd been dominant.
In London, they fell back sharply in Sutton, but not enough to lose the council, while they did very well in Richmond and have taken a few random seats elsewhere. I don't have any indication of the Kingston vote yet, but my guess is they'll take it.
LibDems have already won 27 seats in Kingston out of 48 so it is LibDem gain. Doesn't seem to be reported anywhere.
I seemed to remember Dave saying "calm down dear" in PMQs and it being a national scandal....
That's impressively misleading reporting. McDonnell didn't say that, Perry complained about him making gestures.
and talking over her to be fair
He may well be a sexist, but politicians of any gender talk over each other all the time, so that is hardly evidence of it even if he is.
I truly don't like defending John McDonnell, and he has earned plenty of justifiable attacks for things he has said and done, but talking over Perry and holding out a hand is not really the same as him saying 'get back in your box, woman'. Do we seriously think if it had been a man saying the same things as Perry he would not have tried talking over them and holding out a hand?
The video doesn't show the 2 minutes leading up to this incident - it does help to view it in full context.
If the full context makes McDonnell look worse, then I do wonder why the Mail didn't include it - unable to?
It just shows what Perry was trying to say and what prompted him to get shouty and pointy. It makes it far clearly what he was trying to prevent being said live on air.
So nothing really to back up purported sexism, just the (entirely unsurprising) point that he's an arsehole, and would act to try to prevent people saying things he doesn't like?
As I said, he might be a sexist, but even for a newspaper headline I think the Mail have stretched the presentation a bit too much there, giving the appearance of a direct, blatantly sexist quote.
I didn't say it showed him as being sexist - but you see the sudden flash of anger and that is what is unacceptable.
I know you didn't say it showed him as a sexist - but that was the point of the Mail story, not about his flashes of anger. He's nastier than Corbyn for instance, we already knew that.
Lib Dem's back within 3 of Labour for gains. Tories now -20. 7 Councils to go.
And the Lib Dems overtake Labour: 63:62. Remarkable.
Do we have a split of the performance showing inside and outside of London? It was certainly looking like a game of two halves and it would be good to see how it does breakdown.
I suspect the LDs relative success is split fairly evenly. Outside London, they did well in Winchester, South Cambridgeshire, and Three Rivers, as well as making a few odd gains in places like Sunderland. And they lost a little ground in Eastleigh, where they'd been dominant.
In London, they fell back sharply in Sutton, but not enough to lose the council, while they did very well in Richmond and have taken a few random seats elsewhere. I don't have any indication of the Kingston vote yet, but my guess is they'll take it.
LibDems have already won 27 seats in Kingston out of 48 so it is LibDem gain. Doesn't seem to be reported anywhere.
Huge numbers of independents in Havering, I see - 8 Hornchurch Residents Association, 6 Upminster and Cranham Residents Association, and a couple more residents groups in the mix too, to prevent the Tories taking control.
It amuses me watching television on the election results and peoples interpretation of the results.
6 - 8 weeks ago I had convinced myself to vote Labour. Then Russia and Syria changed my mind, I thought I am not voting Labour after Corbyn's misguided comments and positions on these issues. The media coverage of Labour in the period before yesterdays vote indicated that Labour were likely to make sweeping gains. I therefore voted Tory despite my antipathy toward Brexit as a means of stopping Labour getting a massive boost through electoral success. I managed to persuade two more voters that I know well to cast a vote for the Tories despite Brexit reservations about the party as they too were remain supporters but wanted to make sure Corbyn did not truimph. My point being the only reason why I and two others voted Tory yesterday was to stop Corbyn. How many other Tories who voted remain in 2016 did likewise? All this nonsense about the Tories getting support for being the Brexit party seems misplaced IMO and the pundits might well be misreading the result in their attempts to form a narrative.
The Tories have so got away with this. Lib Dems +69, Labour +60, Tories -23. On what planet are these good results?
For a government, they're pretty decent results after 8 years. Think how many seats Labour were losing in each round of local elections after 8 years in office.
The Tories have so got away with this. Lib Dems +69, Labour +60, Tories -23. On what planet are these good results?
For a government, they're pretty decent results after 8 years. Think how many seats Labour were losing in each round of local elections after 8 years in office.
The Tories have so got away with this. Lib Dems +69, Labour +60, Tories -23. On what planet are these good results?
For a government, they're pretty decent results after 8 years. Think how many seats Labour were losing in each round of local elections after 8 years in office.
It also gets the WHOLE (Not just thirds) of London & Birmingham out the way for another 4 years.
The Tories have so got away with this. Lib Dems +69, Labour +60, Tories -23. On what planet are these good results?
For a government, they're pretty decent results after 8 years. Think how many seats Labour were losing in each round of local elections after 8 years in office.
The Tories have so got away with this. Lib Dems +69, Labour +60, Tories -23. On what planet are these good results?
I really think you are overreacting. Yes, the conservative party is too, parties spin after all, but as Professor Curtice has said it is a credible performance for a party that is in government. Add in the holding of several councils that there was at least a decent chance they could have lost, and even though they also lost a couple in a big way, and it is decent.
So on planet earth those are relatively good results, considering they are 8 years in power and considering the sorts of numbers seen in some london polling. What they are not is great results. Like some Corbynites so overjoyed by Corbyn's good showing in June 2017 and saying things like he won the election, which he demonstrably did not, there was a kernel of truth in that it was a relatively good night for Labour, given the expectations, which are not irrelevant. And there is a kernel of truth that these numbers are relatively good results for the Tories, given the expectations.
The context of the Tory performance means they did ok overall, and decently in several places.
Lib Dem's back within 3 of Labour for gains. Tories now -20. 7 Councils to go.
And the Lib Dems overtake Labour: 63:62. Remarkable.
It's remarkable in the context of them being the only one of the big two and a half to be down in the opinion polls from 2014.
Shows what a focus on NIMBYISM and potholes can achieve!
In Richmond it was the Tories who focused on dustbins and potholes. They were desperate not to talk about national issues such as Brexit or even Heaathrow 3rd runway or the chaos in Downing St.
When knocking up, I was called over by one elderly gent who was in his garden. He wasn't on my supporters list. He said "I've always voted Conservative but how on earth can I vote for this Government. They're useless and falling apart. I've voted for you".
A bare handful of councils left to declare, any likely to change hands? The Tories would dearly love to at least be no worse than Labour in terms of overall council losses.
Is heidi Alexander stepping down tonight? overall results very much in line with the demographic shifts we've seen over recent years. Labour results in Redditch swindon Newcastle under lyme etc not good for a party aspiring to government.
The Tories have so got away with this. Lib Dems +69, Labour +60, Tories -23. On what planet are these good results?
For a government, they're pretty decent results after 8 years. Think how many seats Labour were losing in each round of local elections after 8 years in office.
It also gets the WHOLE (Not just thirds) of London & Birmingham out the way for another 4 years.
I thought all the metropolitan boroughs (the districts of the former metropolitan counties) elected by thirds, unless there's been a re-warding, and didn't have the option of election by whole.
Lib Dem's back within 3 of Labour for gains. Tories now -20. 7 Councils to go.
And the Lib Dems overtake Labour: 63:62. Remarkable.
It's remarkable in the context of them being the only one of the big two and a half to be down in the opinion polls from 2014.
Shows what a focus on NIMBYISM and potholes can achieve!
In Richmond it was the Tories who focused on dustbins and potholes. They were desperate not to talk about national issues such as Brexit or even Heaathrow 3rd runway or the chaos in Downing St.
When knocking up, I was called over by one elderly gent who was in his garden. He wasn't on my supporters list. He said "I've always voted Conservative but how on earth can I vote for this Government. They're useless and falling apart. I've voted for you".
Richmond Park though is an oasis of Remainia which voted over 70% Remain in a country which voted 52% Leave in other areas Brexit hampered the LDs. I know one voter here in Essex went up to the LD teller and told her 'Why is a so called Liberal Democrat Party unable to accept a democratic decision?' Round here it is stopping building on the greenbelt and potholes that gets LD voters out not stopping Brexit
The Tories have so got away with this. Lib Dems +69, Labour +60, Tories -23. On what planet are these good results?
I really think you are overreacting. Yes, the conservative party is too, parties spin after all, but as Professor Curtice has said it is a credible performance for a party that is in government. Add in the holding of several councils that there was at least a decent chance they could have lost, and even though they also lost a couple in a big way, and it is decent.
So on planet earth those are relatively good results, considering they are 8 years in power and considering the sorts of numbers seen in some london polling. What they are not is great results. Like some Corbynites so overjoyed by Corbyn's good showing in June 2017 and saying things like he won the election, which he demonstrably did not, there was a kernel of truth in that it was a relatively good night for Labour, given the expectations, which are not irrelevant. And there is a kernel of truth that these numbers are relatively good results for the Tories, given the expectations.
The context of the Tory performance means they did ok overall, and decently in several places.
I think these elections were the reverse of last years in that people voted to stop a party getting a runaway victory. Last year I am convinced that a Tory landslide being forecast by pundits prior to polling day enraged enough Labour support to turn out to stop it. This year I suspect the Tories benefited from it due to Corbyn's toxicity and likelihood of a triumph. Voters don't trust politicians and they seem to want to stop any party dominating like Labour did from 1997 onwards or the Tories in the 1980s IMO.
Perfect scenario for the SNP to scupper effective Govt. unless it gets another referendum....
Which Parliament would likely block but on these numbers Corbyn would need the LDs too
Almost half of the LDs seats are in Scotland, they probably wouldn’t dare block it.
Important to bear in mind that only a very slight fall in Tory vote in the next GE will see them removed from office, even if they are replaced with another minority administration
The Tories have so got away with this. Lib Dems +69, Labour +60, Tories -23. On what planet are these good results?
I really think you are overreacting. Yes, the conservative party is too, parties spin after all, but as Professor Curtice has said it is a credible performance for a party that is in government. Add in the holding of several councils that there was at least a decent chance they could have lost, and even though they also lost a couple in a big way, and it is decent.
So on planet earth those are relatively good results, considering they are 8 years in power and considering the sorts of numbers seen in some london polling. What they are not is great results. Like some Corbynites so overjoyed by Corbyn's good showing in June 2017 and saying things like he won the election, which he demonstrably did not, there was a kernel of truth in that it was a relatively good night for Labour, given the expectations, which are not irrelevant. And there is a kernel of truth that these numbers are relatively good results for the Tories, given the expectations.
The context of the Tory performance means they did ok overall, and decently in several places.
I think these elections were the reverse of last years in that people voted to stop a party getting a runaway victory. Last year I am convinced that a Tory landslide being forecast by pundits prior to polling day enraged enough Labour support to turn out to stop it. This year I suspect the Tories benefited from it due to Corbyn's toxicity and likelihood of a triumph. Voters don't trust politicians and they seem to want to stop any party dominating like Labour did from 1997 onwards or the Tories in the 1980s IMO.
It's possible, although I would have thought the impact would have been less for locals, since not all local labour parties are going to be in the Corbynite mould, if that is a concern for people
The Tories have so got away with this. Lib Dems +69, Labour +60, Tories -23. On what planet are these good results?
For a government, they're pretty decent results after 8 years. Think how many seats Labour were losing in each round of local elections after 8 years in office.
It also gets the WHOLE (Not just thirds) of London & Birmingham out the way for another 4 years.
I thought all the metropolitan boroughs (the districts of the former metropolitan counties) elected by thirds, unless there's been a re-warding, and didn't have the option of election by whole.
I know Birmingham is going to all up elections from now on. There seems to be a trend away from elections by thirds, although I'm not sure why. Perhaps a cost saving exercise?
The Tories have so got away with this. Lib Dems +69, Labour +60, Tories -23. On what planet are these good results?
For a government, they're pretty decent results after 8 years. Think how many seats Labour were losing in each round of local elections after 8 years in office.
It also gets the WHOLE (Not just thirds) of London & Birmingham out the way for another 4 years.
I thought all the metropolitan boroughs (the districts of the former metropolitan counties) elected by thirds, unless there's been a re-warding, and didn't have the option of election by whole.
I know Birmingham is going to all up elections from now on. There seems to be a trend away from elections by thirds, although I'm not sure why. Perhaps a cost saving exercise?
Presumably - though personally I think it’s a bad thing. Good to have some continuity in governance.
The Tories have so got away with this. Lib Dems +69, Labour +60, Tories -23. On what planet are these good results?
For a government, they're pretty decent results after 8 years. Think how many seats Labour were losing in each round of local elections after 8 years in office.
It also gets the WHOLE (Not just thirds) of London & Birmingham out the way for another 4 years.
I thought all the metropolitan boroughs (the districts of the former metropolitan counties) elected by thirds, unless there's been a re-warding, and didn't have the option of election by whole.
I know Birmingham is going to all up elections from now on. There seems to be a trend away from elections by thirds, although I'm not sure why. Perhaps a cost saving exercise?
Perfect scenario for the SNP to scupper effective Govt. unless it gets another referendum....
Which Parliament would likely block but on these numbers Corbyn would need the LDs too
Almost half of the LDs seats are in Scotland, they probably wouldn’t dare block it.
Important to bear in mind that only a very slight fall in Tory vote in the next GE will see them removed from office, even if they are replaced with another minority administration
They do seem to forget that sometimes. Corbyn's vote might go down, but the Tories don't have much wiggle room, and after 12 years in power might be reliant on the StopCorbyn factor being just as strong as before, or even stronger, to counter the inevitably stronger 'time for a change' factor.
Perfect scenario for the SNP to scupper effective Govt. unless it gets another referendum....
Which Parliament would likely block but on these numbers Corbyn would need the LDs too
Almost half of the LDs seats are in Scotland, they probably wouldn’t dare block it.
Important to bear in mind that only a very slight fall in Tory vote in the next GE will see them removed from office, even if they are replaced with another minority administration
Why not? 55% of Scots opposed independence remember including all the LDs Scottish seats.
Several Labour MPs would also likely vote against another independence referendum and almost all the Tories and the DUP
The Tories have so got away with this. Lib Dems +69, Labour +60, Tories -23. On what planet are these good results?
For a government, they're pretty decent results after 8 years. Think how many seats Labour were losing in each round of local elections after 8 years in office.
It also gets the WHOLE (Not just thirds) of London & Birmingham out the way for another 4 years.
I thought all the metropolitan boroughs (the districts of the former metropolitan counties) elected by thirds, unless there's been a re-warding, and didn't have the option of election by whole.
I know Birmingham is going to all up elections from now on. There seems to be a trend away from elections by thirds, although I'm not sure why. Perhaps a cost saving exercise?
Presumably - though personally I think it’s a bad thing. Good to have some continuity in governance.
That's the argument, but most colleagues of mine in local government find it a right hassle, particularly in closely fought councils like Swindon which means they are permanently on a war footing.
Ms. Apocalypse, true, but then, the Conservative leader is hardly the reincarnation of Alexander the Great.
Even the greatest of reincarnated-legends can have a crap spell you know. Corbyn is clearly Aethelred, and he's looked far too ready for anyone's liking. Mrs May will I'm sure shortly launch us upon a programme of expansion into the forsaken (Europe cut off by Brexit) territories, and Corbyn's preparedness will be seen as an utter sham when he confesses it's unlikely that he'll be able to tie his shoelaces by Xmas.
Westminster CC: Con 42.8% Lab 41.1%. Seats Con 41 Lab 19. Some gerrymandering !
The Local Government Boundary Commission for England makes decisions on such things (or rather recommends them to parliament, which can only accept or reject them, not amend them), and they accept representations from everyone, and will pick and mix from the submissions they receive, and the main factor is electoral equality (though community identity and cohesion is relevant up to a point) so no, not gerrymandering.
The Tories have so got away with this. Lib Dems +69, Labour +60, Tories -23. On what planet are these good results?
We're eight years into government, we've implemented austerity policies, we've cut local government grants quite significantly and in London we're implementing a locally very unpopular policy.
Considering all that, we've held on to 98% of our councillors. In the equivalent election in 2006 (9 years into the last Labour government) Labour lost 17% of all their seats and Dave led us to over 300 gains that night vs probably about 80 for Corbyn tonight.
Overall, we've got a C grade. It's a pass, but there is huge room for improvement.
Stunning result for the Lib Dems in Kingston. Zac is toast next time out.
Do we have details ? My vote obviously helped !
Pleasantly surprised to see all 3 Lib Dem’s have been elected in Chessington
Looking at the historical results on the RBK website, there's only been two instances of non-LDs (both Tories) being elected in Chessington (both in Chessington North and Hook Rise ward) since 2002.
Comments
And the Lib Dems overtake Labour: 63:62. Remarkable.
maybe they will learn....doubt it tho....
That's not something I would applaud.
We don't need to transpose those to NEV since the entirity of London is voting.
We can check the numbers vs opinion polls.
For instance even though Labour got nowhere near in Westminster they were actually only 2% behind on the vote.
In London, they fell back sharply in Sutton, but not enough to lose the council, while they did very well in Richmond and have taken a few random seats elsewhere. I don't have any indication of the Kingston vote yet, but my guess is they'll take it.
I see the affluent Haringey wards are all going LD - Muswell Hill etc.
I know SW London is Remainy but has the previously Tory-controlled council cocked something up spectacularly to get these results?
EDIT: LibDems now on 33 seats
https://moderngov.kingston.gov.uk/mgElectionResults.aspx?ID=17&RPID=15393990
https://www.londoncouncils.gov.uk/who-runs-london/london-local-elections/past-results
https://www.londoncouncils.gov.uk/node/33632
https://moderngov.kingston.gov.uk/mgElectionResults.aspx?ID=17&RPID=15393990
And the rest of the PB crowd standing yesterday of course?
6 - 8 weeks ago I had convinced myself to vote Labour.
Then Russia and Syria changed my mind, I thought I am not voting Labour after Corbyn's misguided comments and positions on these issues. The media coverage of Labour in the period before yesterdays vote indicated that Labour were likely to make sweeping gains. I therefore voted Tory despite my antipathy toward Brexit as a means of stopping Labour getting a massive boost through electoral success. I managed to persuade two more voters that I know well to cast a vote for the Tories despite Brexit reservations about the party as they too were remain supporters but wanted to make sure Corbyn did not truimph. My point being the only reason why I and two others voted Tory yesterday was to stop Corbyn. How many other Tories who voted remain in 2016 did likewise? All this nonsense about the Tories getting support for being the Brexit party seems misplaced IMO and the pundits might well be misreading the result in their attempts to form a narrative.
https://twitter.com/harrow_council/status/992437074312736770
So on planet earth those are relatively good results, considering they are 8 years in power and considering the sorts of numbers seen in some london polling. What they are not is great results. Like some Corbynites so overjoyed by Corbyn's good showing in June 2017 and saying things like he won the election, which he demonstrably did not, there was a kernel of truth in that it was a relatively good night for Labour, given the expectations, which are not irrelevant. And there is a kernel of truth that these numbers are relatively good results for the Tories, given the expectations.
The context of the Tory performance means they did ok overall, and decently in several places.
Time to open a bottle.
When knocking up, I was called over by one elderly gent who was in his garden. He wasn't on my supporters list. He said "I've always voted Conservative but how on earth can I vote for this Government. They're useless and falling apart. I've voted for you".
Important to bear in mind that only a very slight fall in Tory vote in the next GE will see them removed from office, even if they are replaced with another minority administration
8 years in to this Tory run, including the coalition, they've lost fewer than 400.
It can be dangerous to compare to expectations too much, but completely refusing to look at context is equally foolish.
Several Labour MPs would also likely vote against another independence referendum and almost all the Tories and the DUP
Considering all that, we've held on to 98% of our councillors. In the equivalent election in 2006 (9 years into the last Labour government) Labour lost 17% of all their seats and Dave led us to over 300 gains that night vs probably about 80 for Corbyn tonight.
Overall, we've got a C grade. It's a pass, but there is huge room for improvement.
https://i2.wp.com/commonslibrary.parliament.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Party-affiliation-of-local-councillors-in-Great-Britain.png
Edit: Just looked at the council website. It seems the LDs hammered the Tories.
29/31/13 (Con/Lab/LD) with UKIP on 17%