Progress by Endeavour- a Long Eaton TLIAF

Chapter 7: The Election of 1999

1999 was to be quite an eventual year for the Liberal Party- both local and national- and indeed for the country as a whole. For starters, the Treaty of Liége had finally been negotiated after separate referendum defeats in France, the Netherlands and the Denmark back in '94 had killed off Maastricht and this meant the election season was starting early as Kinnock had been forced to offer a national vote on the matter by the Euroskeptic left of the Labour Party. Being the parties of Europe, we in the Alliance naturally swung in behind the 'Yes' campaign and I ended up spending most of April running the boards for the campaign in Nottingham Road, my decade of experience in local elections now being put to use with managing the new volunteers. While Long Eaton narrowly voted 'No'[1], the country as a whole approved the new treaty, in retrospect probably because of the somewhat looser federalism proposed than had been seen in Maastricht.

Buoyed by the result, we were going into the UDC election with something of a spring in our step. The Euroskeptics within both the major parties had their blood up, leading to division and a perception of weakness with the public, and we had new campaigners who had joined during or after the vote and were eager to do their bit on the local side as well. Meanwhile the mood towards the Alliance in Long Eaton was generally positive- our councillors had been doing good work on local issues, the resolution of the boundary issue played well with our policy of 'moderate, concrete reform' among the few people who would vote on that sort of issue, and Colin Hayes had gotten some good publicity in the campaign to save Long Eaton Stadium which had had managed to secure its purchase by a local charity with council backing the previous year[2]. On the flip side, the concerns over local government were fading as Kinnocks 'Supercouncils' kept being delayed, which acted to slightly depress our voteshare.

For the first time in many years, I was spending my time in Nottingham Road ward- the early returns for Rodney were looking very good, Ian and Martin had plentiful troops in Derby Road and Colin looked to be with a strong chance at getting a seat if we worked the place hard enough. Walking the streets, I was struck by the changes that had occurred over the last 10 years- the population was slightly smaller and somewhat older, the Wagon Repair works on Main Street was gone and an extension to Fields Farm Road linked into a new roundabout, the Vida Elastics factory was clearly on its last legs and the Gas Works was being demolished in what had to be the biggest change to the town's skyline since Orchard Mill had burnt down in the great Teabag Factory Fire of 1971[3]. Several years of neglect had worn down our voter base in the ward, but with the Conservatives in a much worse position we were able to pull out the bar-charts and get the old two-horse race narrative running. This was, perhaps, secondary in effect to that of the collapse of voter turnout which on slipping down to 25% caused the Long Eaton Advertiser to pull out some headlines surprisingly similar to those of the 30s and disproportionately affected the main parties.

The results were notable for a number of reasons. For starters, both the Conservatives and Labour lost seats in different areas- Nancy Gough narrowly failing to keep the last Tory seat in Nottingham Road, while Valerie Durow dropped off the bottom of the elected list in New Sawley in a situation that only characterised the increasing polarisation of the town. Secondly it was the first appearance of the Ecology Party in our local elections, Ian Hollas standing in Derby Road and acting as a spoiler on the right-wing vote. And finally, it was the best result we in the Alliance had had in a long time, doubling our council representation overnight. In Derby Road, Ian and Martin swept to the top of the list, aided by the Ecologist, and Fred Davis only came short by a dozen votes. Colin took his seat in Nottingham Road, and Rodney was joined by Craig France in New Sawley. The most surprising results was in Sawley Road however. Rachel Allen- Rodney's wife- had decided to stand there to ensure we had a reasonably strong candidate in every ward, and because despite the earlier plans the move out to Sawley had eventually fallen through. There was also a candidate for the National Front- Steven Belshaw- standing in that ward and much to everyone's dismay he was able to pick up some of the anti-Europe voteshare that was particularly strong in that ward due to having seen the worst of the mill closures. With both Labour and the conservatives in the doldrums, and their voters either not turning out or being tempted by the Front, we received a call through that there might be an opening to pick up a seat in the ward. Colin by that point was doing well enough that it was felt a small reallocation of resources could be done, and Derby Road contributed a slightly larger amount - which led to a bit of grumbling that it may have cost Fred that last seat. My own contribution was an afternoon's campaign in the north after a morning's canvass of the nearby part of Nottingham Road, memorable mainly for the impromptu Liberal-SDP poker match in Brennan's that evening. On the day itself, Rachel managed, just, to get the last seat in Sawley Road and for the first time since the early 80s the Alliance had councillors in all four wards of the council.

This was not to be the last bit of good news for me that year for, after enjoying the delights of what turned out to be only the first of the Harrington Arms beer festivals[4] I found myself heading off to a conference where the biggest issue on the agenda was that, after long consultation, we were finally to vote on a national policy for local government reform. The debate was, as is typical in the Alliance, long, detailed, exhausting and full of both reasonable amendments and slightly nutty speakers. Beyond an affirmation of the policy to adopt STV for local councils, 4 concrete policies emerged from the end of it however- the creation of new devolved legislatures for Scotland and Wales to follow that which the Good Friday Agreement had established for Northern Ireland, devolution of powers to County councils or associations of County Councils as appropriate, the establishment of a new boundary commission to deal with electorate disparities in wards within councils and (the most contentious point) a policy that boundary reform should be a process of Parliamentary action opening the door to local decision making but with the general suggestion that the Scandinavian County and Municipality system represented a suitable framework for this to take place within[5].

[1] To get a vote otherwise would require an entirely different TL frankly.
[2] As opposed to being torched by arsonists and left derelict for a decade before being built over IOTL. The slower industrial decline means there's a bit more money in Long Eaton compared to OTL.
[3] This is a real thing. More widely, Vida Elastics went in the mid 90s IOTL but otherwise it's broadly the same.
[4] Started in 1999 OTL as well. Always enjoyable I must say.
[5] i.e. boundary reform should take the form of new central-place based municipalities but defining the municipal borders should be driven from below rather than dictated to from above.
 
Lies. The Long Eaton Advertiser never runs actual stories.

Right-Greens is always a nice touch to a TL.

If they had an ultra-local council to report on they might.

**************************

Chapter 8: The Boundary Commission

By 2000, the Kinnock government was looking rather tired- far beyond that which you'd expect for a mere five years in government. Divisions over Europe coupled to the effects of governing with a small majority and the fact that Kinnock had now been leader of the Labour party for nearly two decades (indeed had been intending to stand down during the preceding parliament until the Europe issue raised its head) meant that Labour soon entered into a self-fulfilling prophesy of looking like they were going to lose, and so spending so much time on infighting and recriminations that they became guaranteed to lose. This was not to say the Conservatives were in that much of a better position. Clarke had stepped down in 1996 after it became clear the party was no longer behind him, and a young Michael Portillo had been selected as leader as a modernising figure who still represented the right of the party, but her own problems with Europe had been papered over for the sake of winning a majority, rather than fully resolved.

Given the environment, a Hung Parliament seems, in retrospect at least, to have been an inevitability, and while the Conservatives were the largest party Portillo felt himself unable to govern without the security of some form of coalition support given the potential backbench rebellions. The coalition negotiations- overshadowed by the unfortunate death of the Princess of Wales in a car accident in Marseille- were both protracted and rather delicate. With the Nationalists generally out (the price of a full autonomous Scottish or Welsh Parliament being too much to swallow) and the Ulster Unionists alone unable to bring the government over the line (the DUP refusing to work with the UUP for the time being), it was to the Alliance parties that Portillo turned.

In this respect that was something of an interesting complication- a Labour/Alliance group would in fact have held a majority, and Kinnock technically had first choice of forming a government. But while this issue was resolved when Kinnock made it clear he wasn't going to try and hang on, another matter reared its head. For historic reasons the SDP had something of an aversion to coalition with Labour and preferred the Conservatives, but for even more historic reasons we were wary about forming a coalition with the Tories and preferred Labour. It was a decision which could have split the Alliance, but thankfully the more sensible heads prevailed and in the spirit of compromise we communicated that we would, collectively, be willing to provide supply and confidence but not a full coalition. The price would be some movement towards Local Government Reform and devolution. While the agreement in the latter case to allow MPs from the nations to divide each Wednesday to debate nation-specific policy[1] is both the better known and more constitutionally important, it was the successful push to get a Local Government Boundary Commission that would have the bigger effect for Long Eaton.

Fully established in September of 2000, the boundary commission naturally had rather a lot on her plate, even with separate commissions for Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland, and after a lengthy period of chaos it was divided into 4 separate bodies the following March- one each for the North, the Midlands, the South and the Metropolitan Region. Even with the more focused remit which prevented the many lost letters that had characterised the previous months, the Boundary Commission for the Midlands had rather restricted powers.

Unlike the Parliamentary constituency commissions, the Local Government commission had a more advisory and confirmatory role than the prescriptive role of that august body- whether this was because of the amount of work they had to do or a consequence in how they had been set up was long to be a matter of debate in the years afterwards. As a general rule, the commission would receive submissions for alterations from the councils themselves, and indicate any required alterations or make suggestions as to improvements[2]. The only requirements were that ward electorates should be roughly equal when adjusted for the number of representatives indicated, and that there should be a net reduction of councillors ( a move requested during the negotiations so that it could be argued as a cost saving mechanism to the Conservative back-benchers.)

For Long Eaton this was a long overdue situation. When they had been established back in 1913, Nottingham Road, Sawley Road and Derby Road had been roughly equal in population, and while New Sawley had originally been undersized in comparison, it had swiftly caught up over the years. Now the expanded Derby Road and New Sawley had populations approximately double that of the other two wards, and yet all four were represented by 6 councillors apiece. The simplest resolution would have been to merge Nottingham Road and Sawley Road as a single 6 member ward[3], but this was obviously unpopular with the populations of those two wards. Slightly, though only slightly, more surprising was that there was a desire for geographically smaller wards in other parts of the council, most notably Old Sawley.

The debate on the matter raged on through 2001 and was the chief issue of the 2002 local elections, boosting the turnout up to the dizzying heights of 43%. We had, after lengthy consultation and canvassing, come down on the side of the split-ward policy, but calling for 4 councillors per ward as an end goal (this being suitable for a potential switch to STV at a later date without issue). The overall result was largely a return of the status quo in terms of party balance- though Rachel Allen lost her seat in Sawley Road- but was a firm majority in favour of the split-ward pattern.

While opening matters up to a complete redraw was the more radical choice, the council (with public backing) soon proved itself to be largely conservative in outlook when it came to actually drawing the new boundaries. After a really rather indecently short period of consideration, the decision was made to keep the existing Nottingham Road and Sawley Road wards unchanged, effectively reducing the question to how to divide New Sawley and Derby Road wards, and with the new 6-ward council set-up combined with the guidelines for reducing councillors we were able to get our 4-member ward guideline adopted.

Surprisingly the process of actually drawing the boundaries was to be relatively straightforward- Old Sawley had expressed a strong preference for a separate ward to anyone who would listen, backed by Bill Camm once it became clear that the split-wards proposal would go ahead, and despite a few suggestions to transfer streets for equal population balance, the railway line formed far too strong a boundary to allow for much argument over that. Derby Road was of more debate, with three boundaries proposed. The First was to use the old 1894 border of the council, proposed by a couple of historically inclined old romantics which utterly collapsed when it emerged that nobody could actually trace that boundary on the modern street map. Otherwise it was a question of whether College Street or Breedon Street was the better street for an East-West division. The former was a more major road and would give a neater division at the northern end of the ward, but the latter gave a more equal population division, albeit with the requirement for a short stretch on College Street at the north end. The simplicity of the former eventually won out, but this just opened up new matters- Sawley Road and two of the new wards were somewhat undersized, and names were required.

The resolution of both matters ended up requiring a flurry of letters (and indeed emails) to the commission as to what would be acceptable or not, and I rather fear I made a few enemies with the number of requests for information I made on behalf of the party. With a preference to retain the old ward names where possible, the New Sawley divisions were the easiest to resolve- the existing name was kept for the area above the railway line, and Old Sawley for the area below. Derby Road was, once again, more debated, but eventually the rather bland East/West proposal was dropped in favour of naming of the western division after the old halmet of Wilsthorpe[4]. Meanwhile in the spirit of keeping ward names when the boundaries were unchanged, the majority portion of the council managed to argue for retaining the Sawley Road name over a suggested change to Tamworth Road, which was how we ended up keeping a ward named for a road that had been itself renamed 60 years previously. Sawley Road and the new Derby Road and New Sawley wards were also reduced to three members as opposed to the four elsewhere, which fulfilled, if just barely, the reduction in councillors requirement.

The new wards were ready to be implemented in time for the 2005 elections, but first we were to find ourselves faced with the surprising rebirth of the Co-Operative party.

[1] Quite specifically using various rooms of the QEII Conference Centre rather than Parliament.
[2] As far as I can tell from the various reports of the period, this is largely how the commission dealt with the 1979 round of electoral reviews when every one of the 1972 councils was rewarded. The 1973 and 76 elections were done on a basis of the existing wards from the previous councils, merging where required.
[3] As indeed was done in 1973.
[4] Slightly confusingly this means that TTL's Wilsthorpe is essentially OTL's Derby Road West whereas OTL's Wilsthorpe is TTL's New Sawley.

pbe3_by_imperatordeelysium-daxb18l.png
 
Last edited:
Just to say I realised in the bath this morning I needed to make a very minor correction.

Sawley Road should also have three councillors rather than four.
 
This is fascinating.

The major thing that jumps out at me is that the Alliance hasn't formally merged yet. Interesting.
 
Chapter 9: The Co-Operative Party

When the SDP had split from Labour back in 1981, there had been a general assumption that the Co-operative party would follow the majority of her nominated MPs in endorsing the new grouping. However, while the calls for an end to the historic partnership with the Labour party were loud, so too were those calling for the association to be maintained- sticking with the larger party of the left rather than taking the argument of the individuals who, after all, it had been their decision to endorse rather than being formed by them. As a result, the party was paralysed by indecision, and after a slightly farcical period of trying to maintain nominations for all existing MPs without actually picking a side, declined to nominate any candidates- joint or otherwise- for the 1987 or 1992 elections. A brief attempt to revitalise the movement in 1995 saw only a few MPs accept the nomination due to the perception of irrelevance, and by the dawn of the 21st Century the party was viewed as an irrelevance.

Long Eaton's history with the Co-Operative party goes back much further than this however. William Burns had effectively founded the Long Eaton Co-Operative Society in 1867, and after a few setbacks entered a period of exponential growth from the late 1880s. The New Central Buildings in the heart of Long Eaton were constructed as something of a superstore-cum-community centre, and after a series of territorial disputes resolved via mergers the Society had branches spanning an area from Borrowash to Castle Donington. The grand New Central Buildings had come to be local landmark and much loved venue, housing the People's Hall which had served as a venue for everything from concerts and society meetings, to formal dinners and bingo. The heyday of the Society had been in the 30s however, and since then it had been, if not unsuccessful, then not as culturally dominant as the years before the Second World War.

The events of 2004/5 represented a strange confluence of events both local and national. The governing body of the Co-Operative party had granted permission for local and regional branches to approve candidates in local elections (though not for Parliament). In itself this may have proven to be an empty gesture, if it wasn't for the aftermath of the 2004 election. Portillo, aided by a strong economy and a decline in the Alliance voteshare due to the Confidence agreement- especially outside our held and target seats- had managed to convert his minority into a small working majority. The immediate repercussions in the Alliance were notable- an excuse for a changing of the guard being identified which saw Alan Beith and Rosie Barnes replaced with Simon Hughes and Charles Kennedy for the Liberals and SDP respectively- but those for the Labour party were far more significant. John Prescott having been discredited among his opponents, the party lurched to the left with the election the controversial former London County Council leader Ken Livingstone, and with the days of Michael Foot appearing to return, many a local councillor decided to look to how stable his position was, both within the party and with the electorate. In the case of Long Eaton, while the Militant had never really been a notable force, the marginal nature of most seats, even with the new wards, meant that there were soon rumours reaching our colleagues in the SDP of potential defections.

Yet the local situation was to provide one more crucial element. New Central Buildings- now generally known either Co-Operative building- had fallen on hard times since the 70s. The rise of the supermarket in that era had led to a general decline in the movement, and the Long Eaton Co-Op Society had been forced to merge with Nottingham in 1972[1], itself merging into the Midlands Society the following decade. In the process, the large, expensive to maintain New Central Buildings had been first leased out, and then finally sold in 1981[2]. Since then the building had held a pub and various small shops, while People's Hall had ended up being used as a gym.

Sadly this was not to end up being a long term solution, and by 2003 the owners of the building were seeking new owners or threatening closure[3]. With a local campaign soon organised to try and save the building for the public, those involved locally in the Co-operative movement were looking for the sort of stand-out moment that would get them the attention they needed to boost the fundraising campaign. While the majority view in the Conservative and Labour local branches was that the only aid that could be given was in negotiations for a new owner, Jon Hemsley led several Labour councillors already concerned about their electoral success into negotiations with the local Co-operatives. Approval from the Regional body was swiftly organised, and thus in 2005, for the first time since the 1940s, the Co-operative party was standing separate candidates in Long Eaton.

[1] A few years later than OTL, essentially solely because the local focus is slightly greater.
[2] Again a few years later than OTL.
[3] IOTL this happened, and eventually failed leading to the building becoming empty in 2008 and eventually being converted to apartments in the last couple of years.
 
Chapter 10: The 2005 Election (and What Came Afterwards)

With the new boundaries and a reduced number of seats, the local election of 2005 was always going to be something of a confused affair, but while nobody really knew what to expect, what actually ended up happening was beyond anyone's expectations. The natural retirement of councillors and candidates meant that all the parties were at least able to prevent messy disputes over who was going to be forced to lose their seat by default, but this in no way prevented selection battles for the more favourable seats in the new wards.

While converting canvass returns into ward vote estimates is notoriously tricky, there were some conclusions that everyone had been able to draw. First, that Derby Road was now a firmly Labour ward- indeed the only ward in the council that could be said to be completely safe- which meant her three seats were in hot demand. Wilsthorpe on the other hand was perhaps a Conservative leaning marginal, but with a strong Alliance voting bloc to contend with- primarily for we in the Liberals as the SDP had historically not been able to get much traction here. New Sawley was now much the same but without the third-party aspect, making it the best seat for those Conservatives worried about losing out elsewhere, while Old Sawley's politics could best be described as 'individual' and remained dominated by Bill Camm and the Soggies- in effect forming the counterpart to Wilsthorpe in that respect. Nottingham Road and Sawley Road had remained unchanged of course, and their position as Lab leaning semi-marginals with an Alliance undercurrent was the easiest to draw conclusions from.

This made the campaign rather hectic to say the least, and complicated by the continuing desire to ensure that we had some degree of balance between the two Alliance parties in each ward. In this we were helped by the fact that Rachel Allen had decided to continue standing in Sawley Road rather than go for the fourth Old Sawley seat, and thus we could slot Geoffrey Daxer in with Rodney and Craig. The Allens managed to recruit daughter Susannah to join Rachel and Jacqueline Ward in Sawley Road, while Fred Davis elected to stand in his own home ward of the reduced Derby Road leaving Ian and Martin to be joined by Kevin Stevenson and Anthony Oldham in Wilsthorpe, while Colin remained in Nottingham Road. This left New Sawley as the only ward with no candidate standing with prior experience as a councillor, and Malcolm Barnes emerged as the strongest in a very weak field there.

Having spent most of the last few years involved in the business of negotiations and administration, I ended up being named as Agent for the three wards of Derby Road, Nottingham Road and Sawley Road- both Wilsthorpe and Old Sawley were getting their own agents and after putting my foot down the agent for the latter got responsibility for New Sawley as well. In effect, this made me Agent for the historic core of Long Eaton, but it also meant that I had a front row seat for the arrival of the Co-operators.

Having logically concluded that those closest to the New Central Buildings would be the ones who would most care about their future, Jon Hemsley had decided to stand in Nottingham Road together with fellow defectee Michael Grant, while Owen Llewellyn went to Derby Road and the Stevensons- Charles and Greta- stood for their old Sawley Road ward seats. A gaggle of minor players filled out the slates for those three seats, with Alison Cartwright's quixotic quest in Wilsthorpe being their sole candidate outside of them.

Having already thrown Labour into disarray merely by splitting off, the decision to mount an all-out attack focused on Nottingham Road, where for several years the only real difficulty for Labour had been our regular efforts to get enough of the Liberal vote out to get a candidate over the line, forced a reallocation of resources originally offered for elsewhere, and they had difficulty adjusting. The Conservatives were suffering from the usual issue of trying to fight an election while in power, and while we were no longer alone in targeting the third party vote, we were still going strong. Then the Co-operators managed the stupendous coup of getting an endorsement from Bill Camm- who was always willing to back a good locally focused campaign- and their prospects were only boosted by that.

It was a recipe for absolute chaos, at least in the eastern wards. While my counterpart in Old Sawley was reporting smooth sailing for a clean sweep of the non-Camm seats, and the noises from Wilsthorpe indicated the situation was much as it had been three years earlier, I found myself with a different prospective situation canvassing a street from one week to the next.

Labour were, in the end, the main losers out of all of this, reduced to a meagre three seats- two in Derby Road and one in Nottingham Road- while the Conservatives managed to gain a seat each in Sawley Road and Nottingham Road over a highly divided situation. This was not sufficient for a majority however, having 2 seats in Derby Road and the three in New Sawley. Martin hung on by a couple of dozen votes in Wilsthorpe, while only Colin was successful of the candidates in the three wards I had responsibility for. The co-operators meanwhile managed nearly a clean sweep of the defectors- Michael Grant being the only one to fail in his attempt.

I was to spend the weeks following the election in lengthy negotiations once again, but three points of common interest were to greatly facilitate matters. First was the fact that all of us- Liberal, SDP and Co-operative- were interested in the prospect of saving the New Central Buildings for the use of the public. Secondly there was a broadly similar outlook towards Portillo joining the international intervention to protect minorities in the United Arab Republic, where we were broadly in favour of limited intervention but felt that the actual operation had been badly planned. But more important in the long run was the mutual realisation that we were competing for many of the same voters, and this had almost certainly cost both of us councillors. Approval for a coalition government was soon forthcoming- the SDP in particular thought they would be able to absorb the Co-operators in time- and thus we were able to form a strong government.

True to the various campaign promises, the first order of business was the New Central Buildings, and between us we came up with a solution. Long running attempts to extend the Town Hall had run into problems of securing the necessary grant from Central Government to fund the matter- while some money was forthcoming, it would be insufficient to actually house offices for even the reduced number of councillors along with all the staff offices, call rooms, meeting rooms and so forth.[1] The solution was, in retrospect, blindingly obvious, and the proposal was made to purchase the NCB as a new annexe to the Town Hall. We took it to the public, and after assurances that People's Hall would be, once again, used for concerts and other public events rather than closed off as a private facility had approval from the SAVE charity who had been collecting the public donations. Combined with a small donation from the Duchess Theatre- who were looking to renovate their own building at the time and wanted to use the Hall as an alternative venue[2]- and the ground floor commercial space became a new space for the Job Centre, where the government was looking to make savings in the infrastructure budget.

The agreement soon became known, based on the long running proposals for a Labour-Alliance coalition- as the 'Progressive Alliance', a matter which was quite amusing for the more historically minded in the area who knew that this had also been the name of the first Liberal-Co-op alliance back in the 1890s. It was to be, after about 6 months of teething difficulties, a rather amicable relationship, and the decision was made to go in to the 2008 election as a united front as the 'Progressive Coupon'.

Despite being already fractured, that election was to produce the most divided council in Long Eaton's modern history. Taking place a month after Portillo had won a historic third term of Conservative-led government, and 2 weeks after Ken Livingstone had been ousted as leader of the Labour party, the Progressive government of the last three years meant that we in the Alliance and the Co-operatives were also looking at depressed poll ratings, not least because Craig France had decided to stand down in Old Sawley and Fred Davis wasn't standing again in Derby Road East. On the day, Labour gained the Conservative seat in Nottingham Road, but this was counterbalanced by the Conservatives managing to take Martin Prior's seat in Wilsthorpe after many attempts. Severe floods the previous year[3] meant that Malcolm's attempt to succeed Craig was thwarted by the victory of Jo Bonam under the 'Independent Sawley Flood Prevention' banner, while her counterpart Kristopher Watts in Long Eaton Central standing under the 'Independent Long Eaton Flood Prevention' label only narrowly lost. Finally Steve Holt managed to win a seat in New Sawley as the 'Veterans Association' candidate campaigning against the poor treatment of those invalided out of conflict in the Middle East. Our sole victory was Rachel Allen taking the last seat in Sawley Road- the only place where the Progressive Coupon had been a total success, though it had undoubtedly prevented further losses elsewhere.

The Progressive coupon remained able to form a majority government however, which meant that I was to have a better negotiating hand when Portillo announced further, more expansive reforms to Local Government in October that year.

[1] These were built in the 90s IOTL and opened by Michael Portillo in fact.
[2] IOTL they were the recipient of most of these donations after the theatre burnt down in 2003.
[3] Narrowly avoided IOTL
 
Last edited:
This is obviously quite a while back, but I think if I'd been submitting to the Boundary Commission, I'd have argued that the bit of Notts Road beside Toton Sidings would be better put in Derby Road, but that would obviously require rejigging all the others and embuggering the minimum change requirement.
 
This is obviously quite a while back, but I think if I'd been submitting to the Boundary Commission, I'd have argued that the bit of Notts Road beside Toton Sidings would be better put in Derby Road, but that would obviously require rejigging all the others and embuggering the minimum change requirement.

The bit behind the Town Hall certainly was shunted into Derby Road East IOTL of course (and would cause issues), but that long stretch along the border is literally uninhabited so doesn't actually make a blind bit of difference.
 
The bit behind the Town Hall certainly was shunted into Derby Road East IOTL of course (and would cause issues), but that long stretch along the border is literally uninhabited so doesn't actually make a blind bit of difference.
That's the bit I was talking about. What were the issues there?
 
That's the bit I was talking about. What were the issues there?

I'm actually going to have to check the exact details when I get home, but I do know that the railway line was only made the border of Nottingham Road all the way up in 2015. Asda and the bit behind it was definitely in Nottingham Road before then, and I think that all that area behind the Town Hall was only transferred at the same time.

In retrospect the bigger issue is that I think I've underestimated how much smaller this Derby Road is compared to Derby Road E, should perhaps have eliminated that dogleg over to College Street...
 
Chapter 11: The Local Government Act (2009)

In seeking standout policies for the 2008 manifesto, Portillo had turned to several different sources. There were his own thoughts and preferences of course, communicated to cabinet as suggestions to be investigated, and similarly there were the thoughts and preferences of the members of the cabinet. Then there were the thinktanks, local branches, donors and conferences which fed ideas and preferences through to the political coal face. And finally there were the policies he decided to pillage from the opposition manifestos.

Thus one of the planks of the 2008 Conservative manifesto was the announcement of a new bill to reform local government, to be driven by local agreements and negotiations. The first details of this were released in October and featured 3 elements. Firstly, the obstructionism of the Rural District Councils was recognised and the existing powers to negotiation minor border adjustments were extended to Parishes- though agreement from the relative County Council or Councils was still required. Secondly it was announced that government would pass through legislation to merge existing councils, providing that a fully worked out agreement had been passed by all councils involved and the relevant County Council- the exclusion of cross-border agreements from this was a notable omission and one which provoked much debate in Parliament. The third point was the least defined but was to be the most far reaching- government approval and oversight was given for sharing of resources between any combination of Principal authorities and parish councils, subject to the approval of the councils involved and the relevant county councils. There was also a suggestion that further powers made be granted to these 'Combined Authorities' in the future. The sole concession to the Rural District Councils (some of whom, it must be remembered, were in favour of mergers or sharing resources in any case) was that, despite much debate, creation of new councils through secession of parish councils, groups of parish councils or wards was ruled out.

The full consequences of the bill- passed in March of 2009- were not to be realised for some time, but the local effects were immediate. Sandiacre almost immediately pulled out the draft agreement to fix the county boundary to the Erewash that had fallen through the previous decade, and after an equally quick approval from Beeston and Stapleford UDC moved on to assisting with negotiations between Stanton-by-Dale and Trowell to sort out their mutual stretch that had been held up by the previous refusals to talk. Their joint agreement went into action in October of 2010.

Meanwhile we in Long Eaton finally had the opportunity to rectify the western boundary that had been proving so vexatious for so long. My long experience with these negotiations meant that I was named as the head of the Long Eaton negotiation team, but in truth I found Robert Parkinson and his team to be, if not perhaps personally amicable beyond common politeness, highly amenable to any suggested negotiation. The small land transfer to Risley parish meanwhile was passed through as a virtual afterthought.

It was a far cry from the situation to the north- Dale Abbey Parish was trying to transfer her small parts on the outskirts of Kirk Hallam to Ilkeston, but running into the latter's eternal obsession with large-scale expansion. While even Ilkeston would acknowledge Dale Abbey was something of a stretch goal, they were focused on trying to bully Stanton-by-Dale Parish into agreeing to a merger, while managing to successfully negotiate a deal with Shipley to transfer a number of fields nearly surrounded by the Municipal Borough.

Needless to say attitudes in South East Derbyshire RDC ranged from upset to concerned. The mere possibility of her parishes- especially those such as Breaston or Sandiacre which provided the much of the tax base outside the Derby suburbs- taking actions which could lead to secession was terrifying to consider. The fact that the suburban parishes might choose, or be pushed, into forming similar agreements with Derby County Borough did little to help this. The attitude in SEDRDCCG meanwhile was utterly livid- their entire raison d'être was the preservation unblemished of SE Derbyshire RDC and the government now seemed to be on an all out attack on its very principle of existence, while trying to circumvent any ability for the council to protest.

The result was a surprisingly modern and up to date campaign considering the average age of the group was 55, and the infamous Octopi were soon the stars of their own YouTube campaign video. This time, it was not simply Derby who was under attack- Long Eaton and Ilkeston were given their own cephalopods, with cameo roles for Beeston and Stapleford, Nottingham and even London itself. The sheer over-the-top outrage of the video caused it go viral, and the rather infamously bad photoshop of the 'Long Eaton' wrapping a tentacle around the spire of St. Michael's in Breaston like some sort of modern King Kong soon sparked a slew of internet memes referencing everything from the recent threats of the People's Republic of China to seize Hong Kong, to Inception's strong performance at the Oscars.

All the nominative animated octopi in the world couldn't stop our agreement with Breaston and Risley however, and after the western border was finally passed in 2010, it became clear that the 2011 local elections would be fought on the twin prongs of what to do with the newly gained territory, and on the still-unclear possibilities offered by the 'Combined Authorities.'
 
Well that's quite something. A politibrit meme becoming a real meme isn't something I've seen in a TL before, I don't think. I wonder if it's going to become a #trend.
 
Chapter 12: The Election of 2011

By the time of the 2011 election, the mood within the various factions of the Progressive Coupon was one of slightly exhausted concern, with a general sense of impending defeat percolating throughout the entire group. There were a multitude of good reasons for this, both on the national and the local levels. For starters, Labour were rising in the polls having ditched Re d Ken for Jon Cruddas's more down-to-earth form of socialism, and with a slight majority of our seats in the Labour facing marginals of Nottingham and Sawley Roads this had the potential for severe difficulties. Secondly, the simple fact that we had now been the party of government for 6 years meant that we were suffering the effects of having to actually make decisions on funding and unexpected events, which inevitably annoyed some of our voters into either not voting or looking elsewhere. Compounding this were the number of old faces deciding to call it a day. Both Rodney and Rachel Allen were getting on a bit and wanted a quieter life- which would also allow their daughter Susannah a better shot at a seat of her own- while both Colin Hayes and Ian Neill were making noises about stepping down as soon as a suitable replacement could be found. Most notably it was to be the first Election in nearly 50 years without Bill Camm on the ballot as he stepped down for health reasons, sadly dying barely a month later. The only saving graces for the party were that our time in government had, thankfully, only left us more united as a grouping and in keeping with the national party the question of formally merging was in the air. Meanwhile Portillo, who for all his faults was certainly highly personable and well liked in many parts, had stood down as Prime Minister in 2010 and been replaced by the competent, but decidedly less charismatic, William Hague, which when combined with the effects of 11 years in government and a rising Labour party meant that we were more confident in victory in conservative facing Wilsthorpe.

Having managed to persuade Ian to stay on for one more election- the expectation that we would no long be in government being the largest factor in the success of this- and selected Andrew Reed as our best candidate for Colin's seat, the other major point was the selection in Old Sawley, where Susannah Allen and Geoffrey Daxer were joined by the young husband and wife team of Peter and Fiona Aaronson. Meanwhile we'd managed to persuade Kristopher Watts to join the party and he was standing in Sawley Road along with the Stevensons. The added resources of the Co-operative party were put to good use as they were able to pay for an agent for Sawley Road, and thus I merely had responsibility for Nottingham Road and the token campaign in Derby Road.

Policy wise there was a broad agreement on housebuilding in the newly gained territories, though both we and Labour emphasised the provision of social housing whereas the Conservatives favoured more private housing. The subject of the Combined Authorities was another matter however. Labour were against pursuing the matter- perhaps anticipating that the matter may be watered down at the expected Labour victory next election- while both we and the Conservatives were in favour. Where we differed was that we felt amenable to going cross-county border, but felt a tight local agreement could work very well as an interpretation of the municipality basis that was still federal policy. The Conservatives on the other hand were looking at agreements with a much wider area of the rural countryside to potentially set Long Eaton up as seat of government for a complete division of SE Derbyshire RDC.

It was a gruelling campaign, more so than any I had taken part in for about a decade, and I could fill an entirely separate volume on the many tricks and feats that were employed on all sides. The Conservatives ran a rather dirty campaign in Wilsthorpe to try and unseat Ian, or at least prevent any further losses, while Labour's two candidates in Nottingham Road were sent out on every possible occasion to boost their result. Halfway through the campaign, the grim reading of the canvass results told their own tale- Andrew was nowhere near as popular as Colin, while Jon Hemsley was inclined to rest on his laurels and assume he would be elected by default. I took consultations with the candidates- Andrew, Jon and a couple of old hands in the form of Kevin Stevenson and Andrew Oldham who had been arm-twisted into filling out the list- and made the suggestion that resources would be better off being redirected to Sawley Road where the prospects were looking better. Jon was fine with this, but Andrew felt rather betrayed and I ended up having to negotiate with the Liberal Exec that he would be given first refusal for Wilsthorpe next time (the Osemans are always happy to be shunted around if required).

I spent the rest o the campaign running a skeleton campaign using those campaigners who wouldn't ever leave the ward while directing people over to Sawley Road, which was turning into quite the epic defence. Eventually, and it definitely felt like an eventually, election day rolled around and after the first election count held in the restored New Central Buildings, we found ourselves looking at the casualty list. Ian had been very narrowly squeezed out in Wisthorpe, and as expected both Andrew and Jon had lost out in Nottingham Road. On the other hand, we had managed a clean sweep in Old Sawley and Kris had come through in Sawley Road to give us the three seats there as well. Labour's gain of 2 seats in Wilsthorpe put them as the largest party, though just short of a majority, while the Conservatives were pushed into third place, though still having all three New Sawley seats. We had, in fact, managed to finish on the same number of seats as before, but the fact that we were restricted to 2 wards suggested this might be a mixed blessing.

We were out of government, but for me at least there was to be no rest as the Combined Authority discussions only intensified.
 
Top