5 May elections: the results so far

Follow the winners and losers from elections across the UK on our live blog.

Click refresh – F5 if you are using a PC – to update this page.

The AV referendum

5.55pm It's over. Well, according to Danny Alexander it is. "I accept that we're going to lose, quite handsomely," said Alexander, according to the Daily Telegraph's James Kirkup on Twitter.

5.48pm The Yes campaign has just broken the half-a-million votes barrier. Unfortunately, the No camp passed that barrier an hour ago and has now received over 1.2m votes.

5.46pm Results from the AV referendum are pouring in and they do not look good for the Yes camp. With 48 of 440 districts declared, the No camp is leading, 70.2 per cent to 29.8 per cent.

Turnout for the referendum was low across the country, with only Scotland being the only region to enjoy a turnout of more than 50 per cent.

Scottish Parliament

5.25pm Final results underlining the fact that the SNP will form Scotland's first ever majority government. Labour and the Liberal Democrats both suffered heavy losses, losing seven and 12 seats respectively. Here are the results:

  • SNP | 69 MSPs (+23)
  • Labour | 37 MSPs (-7)
  • Conservatives | 15 MSPs (-5)
  • Liberal Democrats | 5 MSPs (-12)
  • Others 3 MSPs (+1)

Who was voting and for what?
People who live in Scotland voted to elect members of the Scottish Parliament (MSPs). There are 129 elected MSPs.

Which voting system was used?
Scotland uses a mixed member proportional representation (MMS) system, a form of the additional member method of proportional representation. Under the system, voters were given two votes: one for a specific candidate and one for a political party. Thus, 73 of the 129 MSPs are constituency members, meaning they represent one constituency in the Scottish Parliament. The other 56 are regional members, meaning they represent one of the eight electoral regions of Scotland. Each electoral region includes a number of constituencies. So voters are represented by eight MPs – one for the their constituency, and seven for their region.

 

National Assembly for Wales

Result
The final result is now in and Labour has fallen one short of an overall majority, finishing with 30 out of the 60 Assembly members seats available. The party gained four seats, Plaid Cymru lost four, the Conservatives finished up one and the Liberal Democrats down one.

  • Labour | 28 seats | 2 regional AMs (+4)
  • Conservatives | 6 seats | 8 regional AMs (+2)
  • Plaid Cymru | 5 seats | 6 regional AMs (-4)
  • Liberal Democrats | 1 seat | 4 regional AMs (-1)
  • Others | 0 seats | 0 regional AMs (-1)

Who was voting and for what?
People who live in Wales voted to elect Assembly members (AMs). There are 60 elected AMs.

Which voting system was used?
The Welsh Assembly uses the same system as the Scottish elections. There are 40 constituency members, and the other 20 are regional members who represent one of the five electoral regions of Wales. Therefore, if you live in Wales, you are represented by five AMs – one for your Assembly constituency and four more representing your region.

 

Local elections in England

Results so far
At
5.31pm (243 of 279 councils declared)

  • Labour | 54 councils (+24) | 2,136 councillors (+715)
  • Conservatives | 131 councils (+5) | 4,012 councillors (+62)
  • Liberal Democrats | 8 councils (-9) | 909 councillors (-606)
  • Others | 49 councils (-20) | 599 councillors (-185)

Who was voting and for what?
More than 9,500 seats in 279 councils across England were contested. Among the 36 metropolitan councils electing a third of their seats are Birmingham, Manchester, Liverpool and Sheffield. In addition, elections were held in 49 unitary authorities and 194 district councils.

Which voting system was used?
Local elections in England use first-past-the-post.

AV referendum

Results so far
Counting will not start until Friday afternoon with a result not expected until around 9pm. We should know the turnout, courtesy of the Electoral Commission, before 3pm.

Who was voting and for what?
Everyone in the UK was able to vote in the referendum on the system we use to elect MPs to the House of Commons.

Which voting system was used?
The question posed was: "At present, the UK uses the 'first past the post' system to elect MPs to the House of Commons. Should the 'Alternative Vote' system be used instead?" It's a simple Yes or No vote – technically first-past-the-post, as whichever side gets the most votes will win.

Northern Ireland Assembly and local elections

Results so far
Counting was due to start at 8am on Friday.

Who was voting and for what?
People in Northern Ireland are electing 108 members of the legislative assembly (MLAs) to the Northern Ireland Assembly. Voters will also elect 582 councillors to the 26 local councils across the region.

Which voting system was used?
Members are elected under the single transferable vote (STV) system of proportional representation. Under STV, an elector's vote is initially allocated to his or her most preferred candidate, and then, after candidates have been either elected or eliminated, any surplus or unused votes are transferred according to the voter's stated preferences. The Assembly is based on the principle of power-sharing to ensure that both unionist and nationalist communities participate in governing the region.

 

Leicester South by-election

Results so far
Counting was due to begin at 7.30am on Friday.

Who was voting and for what?
People in the Leicester South constituency were voting for a new MP after Sir Peter Soulsby, their Labour MP, stood down from parliament to contest the first election for Mayor of Leicester.

Which voting system was used?
First-past-the-post.

Click refresh – F5 if you are using a PC – to update this page.

Jon Bernstein, former deputy editor of New Statesman, is a digital strategist and editor. He tweets @Jon_Bernstein. 

Getty
Show Hide image

The Tinder dating app isn't just about sex – it's about friendship, too. And sex

The lines between sex, love and friendship are blurrier than ever, as I found out quickly while using the app.

The first time I met someone using Tinder, the free dating app that requires users to swipe left for “no” and right for “yes” before enabling new “matches” to chat, it was an unqualified success. I should probably qualify that. I was newly single after five years in a committed relationship and wasn’t looking for anything more than fun, friendship and, well, who knows. A few weeks earlier I had tried to give my number to a girl in a cinema café in Brixton. I wrote it on a postcard I’d been using as a bookmark. She said she had a boyfriend, but wanted to keep the postcard. I had no date and I lost my page.

My Tinder date was a master’s student from Valencia called Anna (her name wasn’t really Anna, of course, I’m not a sociopath). When I arrived at the appointed meeting place, she told me I was far more handsome IRL (“in real life”) than my pictures suggested. I was flattered and full of praise for the directness of continental Europeans but also thought sadly to myself: “If only the same could be said about you.”

Anna and I became friends, at least for a while. The date wasn’t a success in the traditional sense of leading us into a contract based on exclusivity, an accumulating cache of resentments and a mortgage, but it had put me back in the game (an appropriate metaphor – people speak regularly of “playing” with the app).

According to Sean Rad, the co-founder who launched Tinder in late 2012, the service was invented for people like me. “It was really a way to overcome my own problems,” he told the editor of Cosmopolitan at an event in London last month. “It was weird to me, to start a conversation [with a stranger]. Once I had an introduction I was fine, but it’s that first step. It’s difficult for a lot of people.” After just one outing, I’d learned two fundamental lessons about the world of online dating: pretty much everyone has at least one decent picture of themselves, and meeting women using a so-called hook-up app is seldom straightforwardly about sex.

Although sometimes it is. My second Tinder date took place in Vienna. I met Louisa (ditto, name) outside some notable church or other one evening while visiting on holiday (Tinder tourism being, in my view, a far more compelling way to get to know a place than a cumbersome Lonely Planet guide). We drank cocktails by the Danube and rambled across the city before making the romantic decision to stay awake all night, as she had to leave early the next day to go hiking with friends. It was just like the Richard Linklater movie Before Sunrise – something I said out loud more than a few times as the Aperol Spritzes took their toll.

When we met up in London a few months later, Louisa and I decided to skip the second part of Linklater’s beautiful triptych and fast-track our relationship straight to the third, Before Midnight, which takes place 18 years after the protagonists’ first meet in Vienna, and have begun to discover that they hate each others’ guts.

Which is one of the many hazards of the swiping life: unlike with older, web-based platforms such as Match.com or OkCupid, which require a substantial written profile, Tinder users know relatively little about their prospective mates. All that’s necessary is a Facebook account and a single photograph. University, occupation, a short bio and mutual Facebook “likes” are optional (my bio is made up entirely of emojis: the pizza slice, the dancing lady, the stack of books).

Worse still, you will see people you know on Tinder – that includes colleagues, neighbours and exes – and they will see you. Far more people swipe out of boredom or curiosity than are ever likely to want to meet up, in part because swiping is so brain-corrosively addictive.

While the company is cagey about its user data, we know that Tinder has been downloaded over 100 million times and has produced upwards of 11 billion matches – though the number of people who have made contact will be far lower. It may sound like a lot but the Tinder user-base remains stuck at around the 50 million mark: a self-selecting coterie of mainly urban, reasonably affluent, generally white men and women, mostly aged between 18 and 34.

A new generation of apps – such as Hey! Vina and Skout – is seeking to capitalise on Tinder’s reputation as a portal for sleaze, a charge Sean Rad was keen to deny at the London event. Tinder is working on a new iteration, Tinder Social, for groups of friends who want to hang out with other groups on a night out, rather than dating. This makes sense for a relatively fresh business determined to keep on growing: more people are in relationships than out of them, after all.

After two years of using Tinder, off and on, last weekend I deleted the app. I had been visiting a friend in Sweden, and took it pretty badly when a Tinder date invited me to a terrible nightclub, only to take a few looks at me and bolt without even bothering to fabricate an excuse. But on the plane back to London the next day, a strange thing happened. Before takeoff, the woman sitting beside me started crying. I assumed something bad had happened but she explained that she was terrified of flying. Almost as terrified, it turned out, as I am. We wound up holding hands through a horrific patch of mid-air turbulence, exchanged anecdotes to distract ourselves and even, when we were safely in sight of the ground, a kiss.

She’s in my phone, but as a contact on Facebook rather than an avatar on a dating app. I’ll probably never see her again but who knows. People connect in strange new ways all the time. The lines between sex, love and friendship are blurrier than ever, but you can be sure that if you look closely at the lines, you’ll almost certainly notice the pixels.

Philip Maughan is Assistant Editor at the New Statesman.

This article first appeared in the 26 May 2016 issue of the New Statesman, The Brexit odd squad