The bottom line is that the Conservatives retained all their seats and with the postal votes counted it’s a reasonable turn-out and satisfying majorities in every ward.

Congratulations to the successful candidates and thanks to the electorate for not subjecting us to nuisance politics.

The numbers in Worthing are similarly reassuring with the Conservatives picking up one seat and the Lib Dems retaining their tally.

That said, I’m sure that Debbie Kennard has won Buckingham Ward in Shoreham. Based on our canvas data, though, there was an interesting stat I’d like to share.

Unfortunately Debbie wasn’t able to canvas the whole area due to a combination of factors including getting less help from people like me! Apologies Deb if you’re reading this.

But of the two-thirds of homes that were canvassed, over 20% turn-out was experienced, while the third that was not canvassed only showed a 10% turn-out. And our canvas records show that the turn-out was slightly higher among Conservative pledged voters who were canvassed than ‘Againsts’.

So this is a lesson to us all. Canvassing definitely helps increase turn-out!

Now, watch the first half of that video (and don’t get suckered in — religion and politics are separate things and I cannot condone the Christian parties that are united behind this candidate) and tell me whether you see anything offensive. I don’t.

Now, back on message:

Vote Boris in London
Vote Kennard in Buckingham Ward
Vote Conservative in Adur

A colleague disagreed with me about the tone of Yasmin’s piece. What follows are some extracts from my responses:

The colour of someone’s skin has absolutely nothing to do with their attitude to anything, any more than people with size nine feet all think the same or act the same, or make the same decisions.

There are stereotypes, of course, which is why one of my friends calls himself a ‘coconut’ and their half-Philipino friend once called himself a ‘banana’, but the same may be true of people with big noses. They’re likely to have a chip on their shoulder, no?

Yasmin has every right to say what she thinks, but that doesn’t change whether she’s wrong or not. And she is wrong: morally and when it comes down to whether something is true or not.

Race becomes an issue because people place so much emphasis on it — aside from some facial features its even more meaningless than skin colour. Compare, for example, Colin Powell’s skin hue with that of George Bush and Condoleeza Rice. Colin Powell is actually as pale as George Bush. Now lets suppose skin colour was somehow relevant to someone’s attitude or political outlook, how should Colin Powell behave? White or black?

And while she’s making these sweeping generalisations, are black people more left-wing or more right-wing? Is strong family a policy of the right or the left? I would say right, but how much stronger is the family unit in Italian, Hindu and Muslim families, those supposed Boris-haters? Is positive discrimination a sop to their guilt-ridden white population or is it a genuine attempt to help those people who are not given as many chances because of racism in the white-dominated management structures? I’ve yet to meet someone who has thought carefully about the situation who would benefit from positive discrimination (a non-white in other words) who supports it. But positive discrimination is a policy of the left (and Ken) and not of Mr Johnson. And what about homophobia? Mr Livingstone (and other left-wing extremists) welcome Islamic preachers who spout homophobic diatribe, while the right (and Boris) condemn them. Yasmin would claim this is a race issue, but I would argue that it is just bad manners: if you invite and welcome someone with openly hateful views without publicly criticising those views, you are implying support for them. It is not racist to condemn preachers of hate (and no-one outside the BNP to my knowledge has condemned Islamic preachers without referring to those among them who preach hate) but it is homophobic to embrace them.

So back to my point, is it left-wing or right-wing to be non-white? Is it reasonable to suggest that a particular colour would vote for Boris? And is it acceptable to label people that you are criticising by their skin colour?

And the answer is sort-of (in my humble opinion):

I believe the protests in London and Paris about the transportation of the Olympic flame through the cities on the way to Beijing was appropriate and laudable. If our government was abusing human rights I would expect us all to be protesting. Now that our government is supporting those that abuse human rights we should still be protesting.

Tibet should be free of oppression by China.

That all said, Britain should not withdraw from the upcoming Olympics because that would be unfair on a generation of athletes, achieve less than nothing and be an inappropriate way of protesting.

And the BBC’s Have Your Say on the subject is reassuring.

So, I was right yesterday then.

So here’s an extraordinarily brief bit on each of the things I’ve missed:

On May 1st there are local elections here in Adur. If you’re in Buckingham Ward, vote for Debbie Kennard. If you’re elsewhere in Adur or if you’re in Worthing, vote Conservative. And if you’re in another District, Borough, Unitary, Parish, County etc. then check out your local candidate and assuming they’re not insane (hey, I don’t know that their selection processes are perfect) vote for the Conservative one.

Ken Livingstone has five children… Who cares? And even if you do care, don’t read his responses because they’re far too clever. No, instead, ignore the story and vote Johnson anyway.

Car trouble has forced me to use public transport. Sort out the prices will you (whoever you may be) please?

A trip to London, and a savvy companion caused me to invest in an Oyster card. Say what you like about civil liberties (only applicable if they become compulsory in my humble opinion), but they’re fantastic. They just need to work on the rest of the public transport infrastructure and you may find people giving up on their cars (not likely given the infrequency of services to and from some locations).

Embyro Bill

Discussions about the so-called embryo bill set some dangerous precedents. Religions have no reason so claim the right to direct people’s ethics and MPs voting on religious grounds scares the bejesus out of me. If I don’t agree with the Catholic Church’s take on ethics (you know, the one where condoms are evil even if they protect African women from their promiscuous husband’s HIV) I am presumably forced to vote along religious lines. In some future where Islamic votes reach a critical point, will people start to find that Islam in the UK is politicised? Is this not the very thing we are fighting in Afghanistan and which Turkey’s constitution protects against?

MPs who wish to violate the whip because of religious reasons should be sacked from their party before the vote’s even taken place. Religious zealots who would put the country on the path to politicised religion in the House of Commons should not be welcome in mainstream parties.

That said, the gradual emergence of primaries in British politics may be the thing we look back upon as the reaon Britain didn’t fall into the politicised religion trap.

The trouble is, you see, almost everyone in my life is complaining they’re not getting a fair share of my time. Everyone, that is, except those that get the largest share (who wish they didn’t, no doubt).

My conscience requires that my employer and constituents get a reasonable share, and my proximity and convenience have a hand. What do you, my remaining, neglected readers, think is the answer?!

In science one tries to tell people, in such a way as to be understood by everyone, something that no one ever knew before. But in poetry, it’s the exact opposite.
- Paul Dirac

Poetry, as I said recently, has only just made sense to me and, of course, science always has been deeply important to me so I thought it appropriate that I share it with you.