So what do they mean?
Labour have had a good kicking. A really good kicking. But in the scheme of things, what does it mean?
Firstly, for all the hoohaw, a handful of councils have changed hands. Yeah, a few hundred councillors have lost their seats and a few hundred different ones gained them, but in most places, it didn't affect overall control. Secondly, this election was only a fairly small part of the total local councils. So in terms of actual on-the-ground differences, nothing has changed over who runs what for almost all of us .... except London.
Third, people don't necessarily vote the same way in a General Election. It's safe to say that there's been at least an element of tactical and protest voting. Also, signs are that a good percentage of core Labour voters didn't bother to vote. They may be cheesed off enough to do that at a few local elections, but that's a far cry from predicting they'll do it for a General Election .... if the result might be five years of Cameron running UK Ltd.
On the other hand, it's the worst Labour result in local elections for at least 40 years (and the relevant statistics weren't accurately recorded in the '60s so it may be longer than that. And when councils that have been Labour since before Thatcher became PM turn Tory, it's a VERY clear message about how a good proportion of Labour's core voters view current performance.
And if the percentage of the vote in the locals were extrapolated nationally and applied to a General Election, we'd have a Tory government with a very credible working majority of about 100 (according to the BBC).
So to me, two things come out of this. It's a very clear electoral warning short, and two challenges have been issued :-
1) To Brown and Labour - buck your ideas up. You cannot, as you have in the past, sit there smugly and gloat, arrogantly assuming that your position is unassailable and that the Tories are a political washout. They are a threat. You now have a leader regarded by many as an ineffectual ditherer who, far from being the magician of a Chancellor you've been boasting of for 11 years is actually the architect of a good percentage of our current woes, either by commission or omission.
2) To Cameron and the Tories - the time is approaching rapidly where you are not going to be able to exist in something close to a political vacuum. It's all very well making a strategic decision to hold off on many policy platforms while building the party machine, but before much longer, you have to present a wide-ranging and complete, and coherent, policy spread to the electorate. And David .... it needs to start NOW. You need to start looking less like a glib and personable PR exec, and more like a substantive and credible statesman. After Blair, pizazz and a nice smile is not going to be enough.
So back to my original question - what's changed?
Well, not much, really .... except the Mayor of London. And the fact that Labour have had the clearest warning they're going to get that come the next General Election, they are going to have a REAL fight on their hands for the first time in 15 years or so.
So, Gordon, when you say your going to "listen" to us, unlike last time (when you got the PMs job) damn well mean it!
Because if you don't, there's a VERY real chance that come the General Election, you're going to get your party booted out. And if that happens, your much-boasted-of reputation as a chancellor is going to be replaced as one of being the biggest Labour Prime Ministerial disaster in about 40 years ..... if not ever.