2015 Result:
Conservative: 22939 (42.8%)
Labour: 9354 (17.5%)
Lib Dem: 11951 (22.3%)
UKIP: 9338 (17.4%)
MAJORITY: 10988 (20.5%)

Category: Very safe Conservative seat

Geography: East Midlands, Leicestershire. Most of the Hinckley and Bosworth council area.

Main population centres: Hinckley, Barwell, Earl Shilton, Market Bosworth, Newbold, Desford.

Profile: The town of Hinckley, and a large part of rural western Leicestershire. There are three towns in the constituency, the large middle class commuter town of Hinckley, the former mining town of Earl Shilton and the tiny market town of Market Bosworth, best known for the pivotal battle that ended the War of the Roses that was fought just to the south of the town. The constituency covers part of the old Leicestershire coalfield, but is now increasingly made up of commuter villages rather than industry.

Politics: Demographic and boundary changes have moved Bosworth into the Conservative column over the decades. Until the 1960s its coal mining tradition made it a Labour seat, but the 1970s it was a marginal Conservative seat and has been held by them ever since, despite Labour coming very close to taking the seat in 1997.

Current MP
DAVID TREDINNICK (Conservative) Born 1950, Worthing. Educated at Eton and Oxford University. Former manager. Contested Cardiff and Penarth 1983. First elected as MP for Bosworth in 1987. PPS to Wyn Roberts 1991-1994. Resigned from office and suspended from the Commons for 20 days as a result of the Cash for Questions scandal, Tredinnick is now best known for his support for homeopathy and other alternative medicine.
Past Results
Con: 23132 (43%)
Lab: 8674 (16%)
LDem: 18100 (33%)
BNP: 2458 (5%)
Oth: 1910 (4%)
MAJ: 5032 (9%)
Con: 20212 (43%)
Lab: 14893 (31%)
LDem: 10528 (22%)
UKIP: 1866 (4%)
MAJ: 5319 (11%)
Con: 20030 (44%)
Lab: 17750 (39%)
LDem: 7326 (16%)
MAJ: 2280 (5%)
Con: 21189 (41%)
Lab: 20162 (39%)
LDem: 9281 (18%)
MAJ: 1027 (2%)

*There were boundary changes after 2005

2015 Candidates
DAVID TREDINNICK (Conservative) See above.
MICHAEL MULLANEY (Liberal Democrat) Contested Bosworth 2010.
Comments - 129 Responses on “Bosworth”
  1. I think Fylde and Folkestone and Hythe also saw Tory vote share decreases under first time incumbents as well.

  2. In light of recent Lib Dem byelection performances, I am just wondering what people’s thoughts are with regards to the party’s chances of coming close to winning here in 2020? Similar seats in my mind to this one that the Lib Dems have never won but could aim for at the next general election include The Cotswolds, Canterbury, Maidstone and The Weald and Ashfield.

  3. Don’t mention Maidstone, Results. You’ll get torn apart by the Lib Dem haters here within seconds.

    Personally, I think they’d fail to win this, Maidstone, etc in a general but if there were a by-election it would be a near-perfect target for them.

    Not so much on the others. Ashfield is never going to happen now. UKIP probably has a better chance now. Cotswolds also won’t happen, and I can’t see Canterbury, either. It’s a very odd list of seats you’ve put together there.

  4. How about South Cambridgeshire and South East Cambridgeshire where they’ve had some strong results over the years?

  5. Dear me – we are now in pre-2005 territory when the Lib Dems thought they were going to win every seat in the SW and beyond as well.

  6. Things can turn around very quickly in a short space of time and I think we now live in very a different political climate in the post-truth era of British politics. Think the issue of Brexit, think the electability or lack thereof of Labour, think a committed energetic leader who knows how to rouse the grassroots within the Lib Dems.

  7. I can see why Bosworth looks like a genuine silver lining for Lib Dems. It falls into a rare set of seats that they didn’t hold in 2010 but stayed in 2nd and within the realms of possibility of winning – either in one big swing, or two or three smaller swings.

    What makes this seat more remarkable than eg Montgomeryshire is that they have never held this seat, so it’s hard to see the Liberal tradition effect. Either some very good campaigning to hold the vote up in 2015, or some other one-off factors that I’m not aware of.

    As a general comment, not to be emphasised on this specific seat too much, I do think that Lib Dems stand a greater chance of achieving the necessary swings in such seats than in a good many of those they lost in 2015, where the locals will see that the new Tory MP doesn’t eat babies after all and where I suspect that Libs will, often, fall back further in 2020.

    Obviously there are exceptions to this, likely regains have been discussed widely on this site so I won’t go into these again here.

  8. “buy stayed in 2nd” – in 2015 I mean.

  9. Yes, Bosworth, Maidstone and not too many others fall into a very odd combination for the Lib Dems:
    • Never won
    • Near(ish) misses in 2010
    • Still came second in 2015

    An odd collection of seats, to be sure.

  10. This is why I think, rightly or wrongly, that the seats where the Lib Dems retained second place in 2015 could be good for them in the long-run. A few are special cases but the very fact there are some the party have never even held I think is deserving of further analysis.

  11. Some of these seats are places where Labour were traditionally second but their voter base has gradually crumbled away, with part of it transferring to the Lib Dems as the latter have become a more likely receptacle for anti-Conservative votes.

    Occasionally you find this goes the other way. So for example in the 1980s the Lib Dems looked like becoming established as the Tories’ main challenger in the South Dorset seat, but their support collapsed in 1997-2001 and transferred to Labour – who remain second there now with the Lib Dems slumping to just 6% of the vote last time.

  12. Seats never won by the Lib Dems where they were second in 2015:
    Maidstone & the Weald
    Mole Valley
    North East Hampshire
    North Wiltshire
    South East Cambridgeshire
    West Dorset

    Seats previously won by the Lib Dems, but not in 2010, where they were second in 2015:
    Harrogate & Knaresborough
    Oxford West & Abingdon
    Newton Abbot
    Romsey & Southampton North
    South East Cornwall
    Truro & Falmouth

    Seats won by the Lib Dems in 2010 where they did not retain first or second:
    Berwickshire, Roxburgh & Selkirk
    Brent Central
    Bristol West
    Norwich South
    West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine

  13. Wow, that’s actually a really helpful list. Thanks, Iain.

    Of the first two categories, I’d put Bosworth, Maidstone, SE Cambridgeshire, Harrogate, Montgomeryshire, Oxford W, Truro and Winchester down as the Lib Dems biggest hopes, although for different reasons in each one.

  14. SE Cambs had a 16000 Tory majority last time. What are you smoking?

  15. Runnymede: you make (as you always do) the fundamental mistake of assuming that “good future prospect” is the same as predicting a gain at the next GE. It’s not.

    Since ’97, SE Cambs has had Tory majorities over LD of:

    So obviously a part of that is the LDs falling back in ’15. Then, it’s a remain-voting area to boot.

    No one here is suggesting that the LDs will take it in 2020. What I and others are saying is that it is worth looking into the seat for them. They have done decently and held second place even when everything fell apart for them. So please try to use your limited brainpower to understand that “future” does not inherently mean “2020.”

  16. So a good future prospect is losing by how much, exactly? 10,000?

  17. Politics is about the long game, Runnymede. You have to think in decades. If the Lib Dems get the seat back to where they were in ’10 next election, then suddenly it’s an incredibly plausible target for taking in the next general.

    It’s about demographics, history, current voting patterns, and plenty of other factors coming together to make seats winnable for parties. Bishop Auckland would never have been a Tory seat five, ten years ago, but in another five or ten years it very well could be. That’s a future prospect.

  18. Mr Pitt
    I wouldn’t bother trying to convince Runneymede, he/she seems to have blue tinted specs welded to their face, everything and anything is somehow spun into great news for the hard right and forces of global capital so much so he/she makes Con Estimate look like a brooding, defeatist. In fact I’d even go as far as to say Runneymede is essentially the Tory Gloy Plopwell of the site. Whenever things go wrong he/she tends to scurry away foe a few days before re-emerging as irritating as ever.

  19. As it happens I agree with what has been said on Cambridgeshire S and also Cambridgeshire SE. Both are seeing a large amount of new developments to accommodate the growth in Cambridge proper and the folks moving in “seem” to be very much of the liberal variety, hell even Lab have been making some good runs in traditionally rock solid Tory wards in the last few years.

    This also has the effect of resulting in overseized seats which in future boundary changes will probably have to lop off the more conservative (small and large C) outermost wards, perhaps even leading to the creation of a semi urban doughnut “Cambridge Outer” where the Libs would be in serious contention.

  20. Haha, I’d agree on Runnymede. The Tory ramping isn’t my problem with him, though. It’s the massive, massive hatred for everyone and anything else.

    And yes, “Cambridge Outer” would be good for the LDs, but most of their county council seats (as memory serves) are south of the city, so not sure how much it would help.

  21. Depends how much the Lib Dems’ vote correlates with the referendum. I’m sure they’d rather have 48% than 8%, but that’s not how, well, anything works.

  22. “…perhaps even leading to the creation of a semi urban doughnut “Cambridge Outer” where the Libs would be in serious contention”.

    I don’t see the BC ever doing that. The only inner/outer split that exists in York came out of a combination of the perceived need to respect the York unitary authority boundary, and the particular geography of the city making an east/west or north/south split problematic. There will never be a similar situation where the commission has the boundaries of an entire county to work within.

  23. A welcome intrusion of facts over fantasy…

  24. Looking at the result here this time round, Bosworth now looks to have temporarily returned to its natural state in terms of the figures we now have here-
    David Tredinnick (Conservative)- 31, 864 (56.7%, +13.9%)
    Chris Kealey (Labour)- 13, 513 (24.1%, +6.6%)
    Michael Mullaney (Liberal Democrat)- 9, 744 (17.3%, -5.0%)
    Mick Gregg (Green Party)- 1, 047 (1.9%, N/A)

    Majority- 18, 351 (32.6%)

    I will from a psephological point of view say two things in Michael Mullaney’s defence here though- Firstly, he can’t have been helped by the national situation which effected seats neighbouring this one as well. Secondly, the Green Party stood a candidate this time which may have slightly reduced his potential vote share. Thirdly, he got such a good increase in 2010 that he still hasn’t collapsed dramatically back compared to where the Lib Dems were before he came in as the candidate. All the same though, a very good result for David Tredinnick and the Conservatives here and what appears to be a return to business as usual for them in this part of the world at long last…

  25. Again, a small town or rural constituency where the Tories did well.

    I can’t see this trend becoming of much benefit to the Tories in the long term, because there are not that many such seats which look competitive.

  26. In a frankly silly twist of fate the Tories have a problem reconciling their disparate voters desires. It was discussed at length before the election how do Lab reconcile the differences between its socially Liberal voters in metropolitan areas and its socially conservative voters in WWC industrial areas. I repeatedly said the answer was quite simple, focus on what unites them i.e their economically left wing views and that appears to have semi succeeded for Lab this time with its radical manifesto.

    The Tories now have a bigger problem, how do they reconcile their socially and economically liberal voters in places like London and affluent suburbia with their socially and economically conservative voters in WWC ex industrial areas and small towns. The Tories can’t please one without p**sing off the other and Mays reasonably successful pitch aimed at Labs Brexit backing WWC vote (which did win them several seats and some great swings in others) cost them elsewhere particularly in London and the younger/trendier cities and towns. As far as I can think there isn’t really a pitch the Tories can focus on that appeals to both groups unlike Lab who can just bang on about austerity as a uniting theme.

  27. Plops
    Problem is as we discussed before the election regarding Lab being unable to win an election with metropolitan urban seats alone the Tories can’t win an election with heavily Brexit backing areas alone especially when some such areas like the Welsh Valleys stubbornly refuse to vote for them (despite demographically being friendly to May’s pitch the Tories had a horrible time in the Welsh Valleys and indeed Wales as a whole)

  28. Burbage Sketchley & Stretton ward By-election, 05.10.17:

    Cons 39% (-5%)
    LD 37% (+8%)
    Lab 15% (+2%)
    UKIP 6% (-9%)
    Ind 3% (+3%)

  29. David Tredinnick has announced his retirement and has confirmed he will not stand at the next general election.

Leave a Reply

NB: Before commenting please make sure you are familiar with the Comments Policy. UKPollingReport is a site for non-partisan discussion of polls.

You are not currently logged into UKPollingReport. Registration is not compulsory, but is strongly encouraged. Either login here, or register here (commenters who have previously registered on the Constituency Guide section of the site *should* be able to use their existing login)