Local elections: Labour isn't where it needs to be to win

At this stage of the electoral cycle, the party needs to be performing much better to justify hopes of a majority in 2015.

Enough results are now in for us to conclude that this hasn't been Labour's day. The BBC's projected national share (which simulates what would have happened if elections had been held everywhere yesterday, rather than just in the Tory shires) has the party on just 29 per cent, a rise of only six per cent since the wipeout under Gordon Brown in 2009. The Conservatives are four points behind on 25 per cent, UKIP are on a remarkable 23 per cent and the Lib Dems are on 14 per cent (their worst ever showing in a local election, although, significantly, their vote held up in their parliamentary strongholds). Were these figures replicated at a general election, the result would be a hung parliament with Labour two seats short of a majority. Given that oppositions typically enjoy large poll leads at this stage of the electoral cycle (no modern opposition has ever won without being at least 20 points ahead), and that governments usually win back support in advance of the election (as even Brown did), Labour needs to be performing much better if it's to stand a chance of governing alone after 2015. 

As I wrote yeterday, for a "good" result, the party needed to win back most or all of the four councils it lost in 2009: Derbyshire, Lancashire, Nottinghamshire and Staffordshire. We're still waiting for a final result from Nottinghamshire, but so far Labour has gained only Derbyshire, with Lancashire reverting to no overall control and Staffordshire remaining Tory. After losing 291 councillors the last time these councils were fought, it's possible that Labour's gains won't even pass the 200 mark today.

Amid the gloom, there are some glimmers of hope: Labour gained 12 councillors in true blue Hertfordshire, gained nine in Norfolk and performed credibly in bellwether seats such as Harlow, Hastings and Stevenage, but the results do not suggest a party moving back towards power. 

After a troubled month, which saw the first hints of a Tory recovery since the 2012 Budget, Ed Miliband needed a strong set of results to give him some political breathing space. But while far from disastrous, his party's performance will only revive the question: why isn't Labour doing better? Its main centre-left challenger is locked in government with a right-wing Conservative Party, the economy has barely grown since 2010 and the Tory brand has been comprehensively retoxified. Yet Labour still appears incapable of generating popular enthusiasm among those who should be embracing it. Rather than assuaging Miliband's malaise, today's results will only deepen it. 

Update: Labour has just won control of Nottinghamshire, one of the four councils it lost in 2009 (it also regained Derbyshire), but this remains a below par performance. 

Update 2: With 291 gains (admittedly far more than I originally expected), Labour is roughly back to where it was in 2005 - a reasonable performance. But at this stage of the electoral cycle, a four point lead over the Conservatives in the projected natonal share (the Tories were 15 points ahead of Labour in 2009) is too small to justify hopes of a majority in 2015. We're still in hung parliament territory.

Ed Miliband addresses delegates at the annual CBI conference in November 2012. Photograph: Getty Images.

George Eaton is political editor of the New Statesman.

Getty
Show Hide image

A swimming pool and a bleeding toe put my medical competency in doubt

Doctors are used to contending with Google. Sometimes the search engine wins. 

The brutal heatwave affecting southern Europe this summer has become known among locals as “Lucifer”. Having just returned from Italy, I fully understand the nickname. An early excursion caused the beginnings of sunstroke, so we abandoned plans to explore the cultural heritage of the Amalfi region and strayed no further than five metres from the hotel pool for the rest of the week.

The children were delighted, particularly my 12-year-old stepdaughter, Gracie, who proceeded to spend hours at a time playing in the water. Towelling herself after one long session, she noticed something odd.

“What’s happened there?” she asked, holding her foot aloft in front of my face.

I inspected the proffered appendage: on the underside of her big toe was an oblong area of glistening red flesh that looked like a chunk of raw steak.

“Did you injure it?”

She shook her head. “It doesn’t hurt at all.”

I shrugged and said she must have grazed it. She wasn’t convinced, pointing out that she would remember if she had done that. She has great faith in plasters, though, and once it was dressed she forgot all about it. I dismissed it, too, assuming it was one of those things.

By the end of the next day, the pulp on the underside of all of her toes looked the same. As the doctor in the family, I felt under some pressure to come up with an explanation. I made up something about burns from the hot paving slabs around the pool. Gracie didn’t say as much, but her look suggested a dawning scepticism over my claims to hold a medical degree.

The next day, Gracie and her new-found holiday playmate, Eve, abruptly terminated a marathon piggy-in-the-middle session in the pool with Eve’s dad. “Our feet are bleeding,” they announced, somewhat incredulously. Sure enough, bright-red blood was flowing, apparently painlessly, from the bottoms of their big toes.

Doctors are used to contending with Google. Often, what patients discover on the internet causes them undue alarm, and our role is to provide context and reassurance. But not infrequently, people come across information that outstrips our knowledge. On my return from our room with fresh supplies of plasters, my wife looked up from her sun lounger with an air of quiet amusement.

“It’s called ‘pool toe’,” she said, handing me her iPhone. The page she had tracked down described the girls’ situation exactly: friction burns, most commonly seen in children, caused by repetitive hopping about on the abrasive floors of swimming pools. Doctors practising in hot countries must see it all the time. I doubt it presents often to British GPs.

I remained puzzled about the lack of pain. The injuries looked bad, but neither Gracie nor Eve was particularly bothered. Here the internet drew a blank, but I suspect it has to do with the “pruning” of our skin that we’re all familiar with after a soak in the bath. This only occurs over the pulps of our fingers and toes. It was once thought to be caused by water diffusing into skin cells, making them swell, but the truth is far more fascinating.

The wrinkling is an active process, triggered by immersion, in which the blood supply to the pulp regions is switched off, causing the skin there to shrink and pucker. This creates the biological equivalent of tyre treads on our fingers and toes and markedly improves our grip – of great evolutionary advantage when grasping slippery fish in a river, or if trying to maintain balance on slick wet rocks.

The flip side of this is much greater friction, leading to abrasion of the skin through repeated micro-trauma. And the lack of blood flow causes nerves to shut down, depriving us of the pain that would otherwise alert us to the ongoing tissue damage. An adaptation that helped our ancestors hunt in rivers proves considerably less use on a modern summer holiday.

I may not have seen much of the local heritage, but the trip to Italy taught me something new all the same. 

This article first appeared in the 17 August 2017 issue of the New Statesman, Trump goes nuclear