South East European Region

2014 Election
2014 Results
1. Nigel Farage (UKIP) 751439 32.1% (+13.3%)
2. Dan Hannan (Conservative) 723571 30.9% (-3.8%)
3. Janice Atkinson (UKIP) (375720)
4. Nirj Deva (Conservative) (361786)
5. Anneliese Dodds (Labour) 342775 14.7% (+6.4%)
6. Diane James (UKIP) (250480)
7. Richard Ashworth (Conservative) (241190)
8. Keith Taylor (Green) 211706 9.1% (-2.6%)
9. Catherine Bearder (Liberal Democrat) 187876 8% (-6.1%)
10. Ray Finch (UKIP) (187860)
. (Independence from Europe) 45199 1.9% (n/a)
. (English Democrats) 17771 0.8% (-1.5%)
. (BNP) 16909 0.7% (-3.6%)
. (Christian Peoples Alliance) 14893 0.6% (-0.9%)
. (Peace) 10130 0.4% (0%)
. (Socialist Party of GB) 5454 0.2% (n/a)
. (Roman Party Ave!) 2997 0.1% (-0.1%)
. (YOURvoice) 2932 0.1% (n/a)
. (Liberty GB) 2494 0.1% (n/a)
. (Harmony) 1904 0.1% (n/a)
Current sitting MEPs
Nigel Farage (UKIP) born 1964, Farnborough. Educated at Dulwich College. Former commodity broker. A former Conservative he was a founder member of UKIP in 1993. Contested Itchen, Test and Avon in 1994 European election. Member of the European Parliament for South-East England since 1999. Contested Eastleigh by-election 1994, Salisbury 1997, Bexhill and Battle 2001, South Thanet 2005, Bromley and Chistlehurst 2006 by-election, Buckingham 2010. Leader of UKIP 2006-2009 and since 2010.
Dan Hannan (Conservative) Born 1971, Peru. Educated at Marlborough College and Oxford University. Journalist and former speechwriter. MEP for South East England since 1999. 
Janice Atkinson (UKIP) Press advisor. Contested Batley and Spen 2010 for the Conservatives (as Janice Small). MEP for South East since 2014
Nirj Deva (Conservative) Born 1948, Sri Lanka. Educated at Loughborough University. MP for Brentford and Isleworth 1992-1997. MEP for South East England since 1999. Appointed Deputy Lord Lieutenant for Greater London in 1985.
Anneliese Dodds (Labour) Born 1978, Scotland. Educated at Oxford University. University lecturer. Contested Billericay 2005, Reading East 2010. MEP for South East since 2014
Diane James (UKIP) Healthcare consultant. Waverley councillor since 2006, originally elected as an independent. Contested Eastleigh by-election 2012. MEP for South East since 2014
Richard Ashworth (Conservative) Born 1947, Folkestone. Educated at Kings School Canterbury and Searle-Hayne College. Dairy farmer. Contested North Devon 1997. MEP for South East England since 1999. Leader of the Conservative group in the European Parliament.
Keith Taylor (Green) Born 1953, Southend. Brighton and Hove councillor 1999-2010. Contested Brighton Pavilion 2001, 2005. MEP since 2010, succeeding upon Caroline Lucas`s election to Parliament.
Catherine Bearder (Liberal Democrat) Born 1949. Educated at St Christophers, Letchworth. Former Cherwell councillor. Former Oxfordshire county councillor. Contested Banbury 1997, Henley 2001. Contested South-East region 1999, 2004. MEP for South East England since 2009.
Ray Finch (UKIP) Engineer. Hampshire councillor. Contested Eastleigh 2010. MEP for South East since 2014

Full candidates for the 2014 European election are here.

2009 Election
2009 Results
1. Dan Hannan (Conservative) 812288 34.8% (-0.4%)
2. Nigel Farage (UKIP) 440002 18.8% (-0.7%)
3. Richard Ashworth (Conservative) (406144)
4. Sharon Bowles (Liberal Democrat) 330340 14.1% (-1.2%)
5. Caroline Lucas (Green) 271506 11.6% (+3.8%)
6. Nirj Deva (Conservative) (270763)
7. Marta Andreasen (UKIP) (220001)
8. James Elles (Conservative) (203072)
9. Peter Skinner (Labour) 192592 8.2% (-5.4%)
10. Catherine Bearder (Liberal Democrat) (165170)
. (BNP) 101769 4.4% (+1.4%)
. (English Democrats) 52526 2.2% (+0.9%)
. (Christian) 35712 1.5% (n/a)
. (No2EU) 21455 0.9% (n/a)
. (Libertas) 16767 0.7% (n/a)
. (Socialist Labour) 15484 0.7% (n/a)
. (UK First) 15261 0.7% (n/a)
. (Jury Team) 14172 0.6% (n/a)
. (Peace) 9534 0.4% (-0.2%)
. (Roman Party Ave!) 5450 0.2% (n/a)
Current sitting MEPs
Dan Hannan (Conservative)Born 1971, Peru. Educated at Marlborough College and Oxford University. Journalist and former speechwriter. MEP for South East England since 1999. 
Nigel Farage (UKIP)born 1964, Farnborough. Educated at Dulwich College. Former commodity broker. A former Conservative he was a founder member of UKIP in 1993. Contested Itchen, Test and Avon in 1994 European election. Member of the European Parliament for South-East England since 1999. Contested Eastleigh by-election 1994, Salisbury 1997, Bexhill and Battle 2001, South Thanet 2005, Bromley and Chistlehurst 2006 by-election, Buckingham 2010. Leader of UKIP 2006-2009 and since 2010.
Richard Ashworth (Conservative) Born 1947, Folkestone. Educated at Kings School Canterbury and Searle-Hayne College. Dairy farmer. Contested North Devon 1997. MEP for South East England since 1999. Leader of the Conservative group in the European Parliament.
Sharon Bowles (Liberal Democrat) Born 1953, Oxford. Educated at Reading University. Patent attorney. Contested Aylesbury 1992, 1997. MEP for South East England since 2005.
Keith Taylor (Green) Born 1953, Rochford. Brighton and Hove councillor 1999-2010. Contested Brighton Pavilion 2001, 2005. Principal speaker for the Green party 2004-2006. MEP for South East England since 2010, replacing Caroline Lucas upon her election to Parliament.
Nirj Deva (Conservative) Born 1948, Sri Lanka. Educated at Loughborough University. MP for Brentford and Isleworth 1992-1997. MEP for South East England since 1999. Appointed Deputy Lord Lieutenant for Greater London in 1985.
Marta Andreasen (Conservative) Born 1954, Argentina. Former EU chief accountant, fired in 2005 for criticising the EU’s accounting policies. MEP for South East England since 2009. Defected to the Conservatives in February 2013 after falling out with Nigel Farage.
James Elles (Conservative)Born 1949, London. Educated at Edinburgh University. MEP for Oxfordshire and Buckinghamshire 1984-1989, Buckinghamshire and Oxfordshire East 1994-1999, South East England since 1999.
Peter Skinner (Labour)Born 1959, Oxford. Educated at St Josephs Secondary Modern, Orpington, and Bradford University. Former business and economics lecturer. MEP for West Kent 1994-1999. MEP for the South East since 1999.
Catherine Bearder (Liberal Democrat)Born 1949. Educated at St Christophers, Letchworth. Former Cherwell councillor. Former Oxfordshire county councillor. Contested Banbury 1997, Henley 2001. Contested South-East region 1999, 2004. MEP for South East England since 2009.


Comments - 1,568 Responses on “Europe South East”
  1. I have been offline since the 23rd (things come in twos!) so apologies if this has been done on other threads but fascinated by the areas in the south which voted remain. You can get to Glos (Cheltenham, Cotswolds, Stroud) from London without going through any Leave areas and also to Brighton with a detour through Mole Valley because Reigate was v narrowly Leave.
    I noticed several Home Counties districts were very close.

  2. Just a gentle reminder of one reason people voted LEAVE – being ruled by angry unelected drunk not appealing –

    ‘Mr Juncker hit back at criticism of him in some parts of the British press, claiming he is not a “faceless bureaucrat” and “would like to be respected”.

    He also wagged his finger at MEPs from the UK Independence party, including Nigel Farage, who were attending the session:

    You were fighting for the exit. The British people voted in favour of the exit. Why are you here?’

  3. He might be an arrogant drunk but his question is a very pertinent one. I notice you haven’t answered it.

  4. I would have thought the answer is obvious. The UK is currently still an EU member, and that will be the case until we officially leave. Until then we’re entitled to the same representation in EU institutions that we had this time last week.

    But then his question was more a display of petulance than a proper enquiry.

    Add Juncker to the growing list of people throwing their toys out of the pram because 17m people didn’t vote the way they think they should.

  5. I assume Juncker’s comment at least partly referred to the fact that, having conned the country into voting to Leave, UKIP and the victorious side of the Conservative party are refusing to begin the process of so doing. It is a perfectly valid question, being asked across the whole continent. The answer of course is that they can see the stupidity of what they have done and nobody wants to go down in history as the gimp who pressed the nuclear button.

  6. Well UKIP don’t have the power to invoke A50 so not sure why Juncker would expect them to?

  7. “You’re not laughing now, are you?” Farage to MEPs.

    Yes, MP-R – we’ve been told by NW MEPs that they hope to see out their current 5 year term, but obviously it could be cut short by upto 9 months if we Leave in eg Sep 2018.

    2 are looking around for other jobs now, so it wouldn’t surprise me if a few go early, given that it doesn’t cause by-elections.

  8. That happened when the GLC was on its way out….perhaps in the other metropolitan county councils too.

  9. Farage really isn’t good at either winning or losing with dignity.

  10. ‘Farage really isn’t good at either winning or losing with dignity.’

    Bottom line, he;s just a nasty piece of work and one day even people with limited intelligence will wake up to that indisputable fact

    He’s a huge embarsssment to the UK

  11. I think even his most swivel eyed supporters would concede that class and graciousness don’t rank highly in his list of personal attributes.

  12. HH – yes, that’s true.

    There’s been talk of them all losing 10% of their pensions. No idea where it’s come from – were they final salary, annuity or do they just mean contributions-based, as they all expected to be MPs for another decade or more?

  13. Heard Nigel Farage taunting MEPs in European Parliament never having proper jobs, etc. Must’ve felt a great moment for him (from his perspective) to gloat so much after the Brexit vote. Quite perplexing really.

  14. Maxim, any GE well short of 2020 will be fought on the old boundaries.

  15. BSE has now accepted the Referendum result (in an email to supporters) and Will Straw has given notice that he’s stepping down as Executive Director.

  16. How gracious of BSE

  17. Sorry for the long post but here is my attempt at the South East’s seats. There isn’t a great deal of change and there is only one cross county seat between East Sussex and Kent which is necessary. Let me know what you think :-).

    1.Banbury (Prentis)
    2.Witney (Vaizey probably as Cameron will retire and his seat is torn up)
    3.Abingdon and Wantage (Blackwood)
    4.Henley and Didcot (Howell)
    5.Bicester (New Tory MP)
    6.Oxford (Smith)
    7.Milton Keynes North East (Lancaster. Majority ~10,500)
    8.Milton Keynes South West (Stewart. Notional majority ~8,000)
    9.Buckingham (New Tory MP as Bercow will step down)
    10.Aylesbury (Liddington)
    11.Chesham and Amersham (Gillan)
    12.Wycombe (Baker)
    13.Beaconsfield (Grieve)
    14.Newbury (Benyon)
    15.Reading West (Sharma. Majority rises to over 7,000)
    16.Reading East (Wilson. Majority rises to ~9,000)
    17.Wokingham (Redwood)
    18.Maidenhead (May)
    19.Slough (Mactaggart)
    20.Windsor (Afriyie)
    21.Bracknell (Lee)
    22.Aldershot (Howarth)
    23.North East Hampshire (or Fleet and Alton. Jayawardena)
    24.Basingstoke (Miller)
    25.North West Hampshire (or Andover. Malthouse)
    26.Romsey (Nokes)
    27.Winchester (Brine)
    28.New Forest West (Swayne)
    29.New Forest East (Lewis)
    30.Southampton Test (or West. Whitehead. Majority cut to ~2,000)
    31.Southampton Itchen (or East. Smith. Majority rises to ~2,800)
    32.Eastleigh (Davies)
    33.Fareham (Fernandes)
    34.Gosport (Dinenage)
    35.Portsmouth North (Mordaunt)
    36.Portsmouth South (Drummond)
    37.Havant (Mak)
    38.East Hampshire (Hinds)
    39.South West Surrey (Hunt)
    40.Woking (Lord)
    41.Guildford (Milton)
    42.Surrey Heath (Gove)
    43.Mole Valley (Beresford)
    44.Chertsey and Staines (or Runnymede and Staines. Hammond)
    45.Sunbury and Walton (Kwarteng)
    46.Esher and Weybridge (Raab)
    47.Epsom and Ewell (Grayling)
    48.Reigate (Blunt)
    49.East Surrey (Gyimah)
    50.Bognor Regis and Littlehampton (Gibb)
    51.Chichester (Tyrie)
    52.Worthing West (Bottomley)
    53.Worthing East and Shoreham (Loughton)
    54.Arundel and South Downs (Herbert)
    55.Horsham (Quin)
    56.Crawley (Smith. Majority increases to over 8,000)
    57.Mid Sussex (Soames)
    58.Brighton North and Hove Park (Notionally Tory by ~2,300, Greens ~9,000 behind the Tories. Probably easier than it seems for Weatherley to win though as it contains the Northern half of Lucas’s seat though he may opt for the next seat.)
    59.Brighton and Hove Central (Lucas would have her work cut out to win this as it’s notionally Labour over Green by ~6,600, the Tories are a close third about 1,100 behind the Greens)
    60.Brighton East and Seahaven (Kirby. Majority ~7,500)
    61.Lewes and Uckfield (Caulfield. Essentially unwinnable for the Lib Dems)
    62.Eastbourne (Ansell)
    63.Bexhill and Battle (Merriman)
    64.Hastings and Rye (Rudd)
    65.High Weald (or Crowborough and the High Weald. East Sussex-Kent cross county seat. Ghani)
    66.Tunbridge Wells (Clark)
    67.Sevenoaks (Fallon)
    68.Tonbridge and Mid Kent (the left over bits seat, takes from Tonbridge and Malling, Maidstone and the Weald and Ashford but the most comes from the former. Tugendhat.)
    69.Dartford (Johnson. A bit better for Lab as it loses the Sevenoaks ward, not that that means a lot in this seat nowadays)
    70.Gravesham (Holloway. Tory majority rises to over 11,000)
    71.Rochester and Strood (Tollhurst)
    72.Gillingham and Rainham (Christi. Majority of over 12,000)
    73.Chatham and Aylesford (Crouch. Majority of ~12,500)
    74.Maidstone (Crouch. Whately could try to get the nomination as it contains a chunk of her old seat and Grant is pretty poorly regarded)
    75.Sittingbourne and Sheppey (Henderson)
    76.Canterbury and Faversham (Brazier. Tory majority of just under 13,000)
    77.Thanet West and Herne (Gale)
    78.Thanet East (Mackinlay. A bit more friendly seat to Labour whether they can ever take advantage of it depends on if they can get their act together in these parts which is far from certain. It picks up two of their better Thanet wards, Margate Central and Dane Valley)
    79.Dover (Elphicke)
    80.Folkestone and Hythe (Collins)
    81.Ashford (Green)

    The two MPs whose seats disappear are Hollingbery and Whatley though there should be enough retirements in this Tory dominated region for them to be able to find safe seats should they want them.

  18. OK my thoughts, obviously for the bulk of the plan there appears to be limited to no change and I’ll assume everything was in good faith since there is little to no partisan benefit to be had in most of the seats.

    Consequently I’ll focus on some of the more marginal areas, hard to make a complete judgment without knowing the wards involved so I’ll ask in each instance what wards you used to make the seats.

    1) Milton Keynes=This was discussed on another thread but I’m wary of how you managed to increase the majority in NE and basically maintain it in SW. Most sensible amalgamations reduce the majority in SW sort of in proportion to the increased majority in NE.

    2) Brighton=Your boundaries for B and H seem very unorthodox, will reserve judgment until I know the exact wards but a repeat of what the BC proposed last time would be much simpler.

    3) Gravesham/Dartford=Again what wards are being used in Gravesham to knock the majority up so much? I would have though the simple thing to do would be to just add Swanscombe from Dartford to Gravesham then you could leave them both alone.

    4) Reading East=As always what wards have been used, short of sprawling off into the countryside I don’t see how you increased the notional majority by that much, the seat only needs one additional ward.

  19. 1)Buckinghamshire is a mess and the boundaries don’t work at all well. I put Bletchley East and Bletchley Park into Buckingham and drew the two Milton Keynes seats (I think the same as Maxim). The rest of Bucks is a nightmare though due too the 7 seats needing to be on the large side and the fairly large rural ward size. I found the only way (and believe me I tried) to draw seven seat without palming off parts of Aylesbury into Buckingham was to add the rural Great Horwood ward to Milton Keynes South East which was stupidly small thus mucking up the other constituencies. If you have a way to do it I’d be interested to hear?

    2)I oppose adding Regency to Hove as it is essentially one of the central Brighton wards so really needs to be in a ‘Brighton’ seat. Thus I found the most sensible seat to draw was to put all of Central Brighton and all of Central Hove in one seafront seat while the rest of Hove (Portslade, Hove Park) and North Brighton get a seat in which they are both referenced (I was actually shocked it was notionally Tory but a lot of left voters in Pavilion voted for Lucas whereas in this seat they would probably vote Labour)

    The wards are:
    -Brighton and Hove Central: Hanover and Elm Grove, Queen’s Park, St Peter’s and North Laine, Regency, Brunswick and Adelaide, Goldsmaid, Central Hove, Westboune, Wish.
    -Brighton North and Hove Park: South Portslade, North Portslade, Hangleton and Knowle, Hove Park, Withdean, Patchan, Hollingdean and Stanmer, Preston Park.
    -Brighton East and Seahaven: rest of current Kemptown plus all Seaford wards and Newhaven Denton and Meeching.

    3)What in regards to North West Kent was Gillingham and Rainham gains Lordswood and Capstone from Chatham and Aylesford. Chatham and Aylesford gains River from Rochester and Strood (that ward contains bits of Chatham, Gillingham and Rochester but the vast majority is Chatham) as well as East Malling and West Malling and Leybourne. Rochester and Strood gains Higham from Gravesham. Gravesham gains Hartley and Hodsall Strett from Dartford as well as Ash and New Ash Green from Sevenoaks (the notional majority in Gravesham is on the high side as Electoral Calculus has Labour getting 0 votes in Hartley and Hodsall Street and although they would have been crushed there it wouldn’t have been by that much).

    4)Reading East switches the 3 Woodley wards (Bulmershe and Whitegates, Loddon, South Lake) for the 3 Earley wards (Hawkedon, Hillside, Maiden Erlegh) and Shinfield North. These boundaries actually make much more sense than the old ones as it adds the University of Reading to a Reading seat and keeps the seat close to the town proper. The Earley wards happen to be more Tory than the Woodley ones (particularly Bulmershe and Whitegates) thus the Tory majority rises.

  20. MK=Ok I see what’s going on but truth be told in that situation (mess as it is I agree) I do think the best bet is to take in part of Aylesbury, it is after all part of the same authority and it prevents pairing random swathes of countryside with MK proper creating additional cross authority seats, If you look at present boundaries there are very few instances (if any come to think of it) of neighbouring seats containing territory from the same two authorities (example seat A and B both containing wards from authorities Y and Z) its all about limiting the number of cross authority seats. I suppose all we can hope is that the BC pull some magic with ward splitting and create something nicer but otherwise I’d say dip into Aylesbury.

    B and H= Ok but is splitting Hove in two really any better than pairing it with part of Brighton? There is a reason the authority is called Brighton and Hove and not just Brighton, Hove still has something of an independent streak and I cant see the BC being keen on creating two seats that crosses the unofficial boundary between the two areas. Not to mention it requires a complete re-jig of the area when much less disruptive options are available. Really putting Regency in Hove is the simplest bet, anything else looks a bit “gerrymandery” whether intentional or not. I just can’t see the BC going for that idea. A more practical note though is on the Kemptown seat, I think you pretty much have to add Newhaven Valley, it after all contains the only crossing point across the river Ouse, without it the constituency is dissected. This obviously means splitting Seaford instead and decisions would have to made as to how many of its wards to add etc.

    Will respond to the other areas in another post.

  21. Kent=Ok assuming there were genuine reasons for most of that I’ll focus on the final transfer, why add Ash as well when Hartley alone puts Gravesham within quota?

    Reading E=You must surely admit that looks highly dubious, Its that old issue that I’ve pointed out to you before of trading wards, it looks very suspicious when you move wards a, b and c from seat 1 into seat 2 and replace them with wards y and z from seat 2. Removing a ward that just happens to have significant Lab strength and two wards where the Tories are irritated by the Lib Dems to be replaced with four solid Tory wards…it looks highly suspect. I agree about adding Maiden Erlaigh so as to place Reading Uni in the seat but the rest of the transfers are totally unnecessary.

  22. @rivers10

    re Gravesham, Sevenoaks is nearly at quota and Ash and New Ash Green is the spare ward which can go into Gravesham alongside Hartley.

    re Reading it largely had to do with what I had done further East which involved trying to move all of Wokingham back into the Wokingham seat and all of Bracknell back into the Bracknell seat. I have since undone it because it involved putting Sandhurst and Crowthorne in Windsor which demographically makes sense but the connections are extremely poor. Instead I have removed Loddon and added Maiden Erlegh and Hillside, is that better? Though this arrangement does require Windsor gaining Foxborough from Slough to top it up. You are limited with options in Berkshire the seats are required to be on the small side.

    re Brighton the Brighton East and Seahaven is exactly the seat the commission drew last time and will probably draw again. As for what I’ve done with Brighton and Hove yes you are probably right they will just move Regency into Hove but as I said I oppose moving part of the centre of Brighton into a non Brighton seat, I would have been happy to add Withdean to Hove but the numbers don’t work. this is why I prefer my option.

    re Bucks I’ll take another look but it is a complete mess, it would be easier if it were possible to keep all but one Milton Keynes ward in a Milton Keynes seat but it isn’t possible.

  23. I’ll have a bash at the South East this weekend albeit on my own idiosyncratic principles.

  24. Pepps
    Agree Buckingham is a mess, one of those areas where there are no good options.

    Re Brighton Kemptown it was what the BC proposed last time, I’m just throwing out my usual obsession with connectivity within seats, as far as I see it if your going to split a town anyway might as well add the crossing point.

    Re Reading its better in that you can longer really be accused of gerrymandering, the effects a that point are minimal beyond the initial Tory boost from gaining an additional safe ward. However I do think your making things difficult for yourself. Berkshire is a tricky area and unfortunately some kooky seats have to be drawn but as far as I see in this case the simplest action is the best. I’ll post my plan for Berkshire in another post explaining what I mean.

    As for the Kent area you’ll have to tell me exactly what you’ve done to Sevenoaks, the current Sevenoaks seat is slightly below quota so I don’t know why their are leftover wards?

  25. Right re Berkshire as I see it the simplest option is the best, some of these seats are a bit weird but you’re pretty much forced into them due to trying to avoid cross county seats, seats that cross three or more authorities and the general narrowness of the county. I did the following.

    Newbury=Lose Bucklebury and Aldermaston to Wokingham.

    Wokingham= As well as the above lose Burghfield to Reading West, Maiden Erlaigh to Reading East and Hurst to Maidenhead.

    Reading E/W and Maidenhead=Just explained above.

    Bracknell=Lose Crowthorne, Owlsmoore and College Town to Windsor, Probably rename as “Brackell and Sandhurst”

    Windsor=Explained above

    This is the minimal change approach, doesn’t require any cross county seats or three plus authority seats. The Windsor and Wokingham seats are a bit disjointed but the BC have proposed much worse before today.

  26. For Kent there has to be a cross county seat between it and East Sussex so I have chosen to cross at the High Weald meaning the East of the Tunbridge Wells council area including Paddock Wood is in this seat. Thus Tunbridge Wells shifts east to gain Edenbridge and surrounding areas from Sevenoaks so Sevenoaks gains 5 wards to its immediate east (Rotham, Borough Green, Downs, kings Hill, Wateringbury). Yes I know ths radical change (although this really isn’t radical) is not ideal but due to the necessity of a cross county seat more change than normal is required.

    Yeah its Brighton East and Seahaven is not my favourite seat (its a shame the electorate isn’t just a tad lower then you could add Newhaven Valley anyway) but its obvious that this is what the commission is going to do. It is obvious what they will do with Hove too but I just did something I prefer to provoke a discussion.

    re Berkshire I haven’t made a great deal of change really only a few wards are moving here or there. As far as I can see Windsor must gain Bray so Maidenhead must gain something thus Loddon.

  27. Well I’ve had a go at some proposals. The usual disclaimers apply: (1) I value community ties to a much greater extent than continuity/avoiding multi-borough seats so I do not accept the BCE’s criteria (2) I generally support the Conservatives.


    1. North Oxfordshire 75,528- Banbury, Chipping Norton, and their environs. Safe Con

    2. East Oxfordshire 76,784- Bicester, Kidlington, Thame and their environs and Marston and Barton from Oxford East. Safe Con

    3. Oxford 75,585- current Oxford East less Marton and Barton plus Jericho, North, St Margarets and Summertown (from Oxford W). A compact Oxford seat uniting the core areas of the city. Safe Lab.

    4. Witney 77,769- current seat less Chipping Norton area plus Yarnton and Wolvercote (from the old Oxford W) Thames and Faringdon from Wantage. Very safe Con.

    5. Abingdon- 77,965- Abingdon and environs plus Wantage, Uffington etc from the old Wantage seat. Safe Con

    6. Henley & Didcot- 77,963, Henley and its environs plus Wallingford and Didcot from the former Wantage seat. Very safe Con.

    7. Newbury 71,737- current seat less Bucklebury and Basildon

    8. South West Berkshire 72,820- a new creation stretching from Basildon in the north west to Shinfield in the south east and taking in villages like Theale and Burghfield as well as the suburbs west of core Reading.

    9. Reading 75,946- opted to unite core Reading into one seat. All of the ‘Reading’ wards of Reading East plus Southcote, Battle, Minster, and Whitley from Reading West. Con by only 1700 in 2015 and very winnable for Labour.

    10. North East Berkshire 74,726- reunites Woodley and Early plus the villages north, west, and south of Maidstone. Very safe Con.

    11. Wokingham 72,546- core Wokingham plus Sandhurst and Crowthorne from Bracknell. Safe Con.

    12. Bracknell 74,373- centre of gravity shifts east- loses Sandhurst etc to Wokingham but gains Ascot, Sunningdale etc from Windsor. Safe Con.

    13. Windsor & Maidenhead 76,986- reunites the two main towns in East Berkshire.

  28. Forgive me- have had to redo East Berkshire.

    SW Berkshire 72, 376
    Wokingham 74,199
    Bracknell 74,369
    NE Berks 71,784
    Maidenhead & Windsor (borrows Eton Dorney from South Bucks) 72,559.

  29. SURREY (and Spelthorne)

    I’ve only tinkered with Surrey as most seats are in quota and pretty logical.

    Spelthorne 73,703- current seat plus Colnbrook from Windsor- the best way of not crossing the Thames.

    Chertsey 76,790- current Runnymede & Weybridge plus Chobham and Windlesham from Surrey Heath

    North West Surrey 73,385- current Surrey Heath less wards that have gone into Chertsey plus Pirbrigght and Normandy from Woking.

    Woking 72,876- current seat less bits lost to Surrey Heath plus Lovelace and Send from Mole Valley.

    Guildford 71,051- a more compact version of the Guildford seat. Loses the Cranleigh area to a revived Dorking and loses Pilgrims to SW Surrey; gains Tilborn and Clandon from the former Mole Valley which are villages directly to the town’s east.

    South West Surrey 76,474- current seat plus Pilgrims

    Dorking 72,581- based on current Mole Valley but renamed out of a general aversion for using rivers in constituency names. Takes Oxshott from Esher and the Cranleigh area from Guildford but loses Tilborn and Clandon to Guildford.

    Epsom & Ewell 77,417- unchanged

    Reigate 71,778- unchanged

    East Surrey- unchanged.


    I found this area rather difficult and I’ve resorted to some maverick options here and there

    1. North West Kent 71,714- a new seat merging the largely rural stretch of Kent between Dartford/Gravesend proper and Sevenoaks. Very safely Con.

    2. Dartford 72,195- becomes more compact, losing rural southern wards to North West Kent and gains Northfleet from Gravesham. Becomes more marginal.

    3. Gravesham 72, 145- renamed- centre of gravity shifts eastwards. Loses Northfleet to Dartford and its rural hinterland to the south to North West Kent; gains Strood rural and Hoo Peninsula from Rochester & Strood.

    4. Tonbridge & Sevenoaks 77,383- the two towns plus the wards west bordering East Surrey around Edenbridge.

    5. Royal Tunbridge Wells 74,964- centre of gravity shifted eastwards- loses Edenbridge area to Tonbridge & Sevenoaks; gains Weald bits of Maidstone & the Weald.

    6. Aylesford 75,030- spent ages working on the Medway and still have my doubts. Have combined core Strood with Aylesford and Malling linking them via Snodworth. Not crazy about this seat but reasonably compact.

    7. Chatham 74,029- unites Rochester and Chatham in one seat- stretches south by taking on Boxley from Faversham but pretty compact.

    8. Gillingham 73,293- current seat plus Hartlip from Sittingbourne.

    9. Maidstone 76, 790- has an eastern tail rather than a southern one- losing Weald area to RTW but gaining Bearsted etc from Faversham

    10. Sittingbourne & Sheppey 71,235- current seat less Hartlip

    11. Canterbury 77,648- current seat less Whitstable plus Faversham proper and Little Stour and Sandwich from Thanet S

    12. Herne Bay 75,023- coastal seat stretching from Whitstable to Westgate-on-Sea

    13. Isle of Thanet 78,130- compact seat consisting of Margate, Ramsgate and Broadstairs. Semi-Safe Con

    14. Dover 72,940- unchanged!

    15. Folkestone- 72,940- loses Saxon Shore and North Downs West to Ashford

    16. Ashford- 76,352- gains Saxon Shore and North Downs West from Folkestone plus Harrietsham from Mid Kent. Loses its western edge to a new cross-county seat of High Weald

    17. High Weald 75,322- a part-Kent part-East Sussex seat- starts with a small part of the Ashford seat around Tenterden and runs due west to Crowborough via wards from RTW and Bexhill & Battle. Not a great seat by any means but there you go.

    18. Hastings- current Hatings & Rye seat plus Ewhurst and Rother Levels from Bexhill & Battle. Becomes a bit more safely Con

    19. Bexhill 76,640- current Bexhill & Battle less bits that have gone into High Weald but with Polegate added on from Lewes.

    20. Eastbourne 76,546 current seat plus East Dene from Lewes

    21. Lewes 78,195- radically reconfigured. Loses Polegate to Bexhill and Seaford/Newhaven to Brighton Kemptown. Gains Hailsham and Uckfield from Wealden and Woodingdean from Brighton Kemptown which is the least unsuitable ward from Brighton that can be tacked on. More safely Con as a result.

    22. Brighton Kemptown 71,305- current seat less Woodingdean and Moulscomb plus Seaford and Newhaven. More safely Con.

    23. Brighton Pavilion 71,527 current seat plus Moulscomb less Regency- ugly but it’s a question of numbers.

    24. Hove 74,716- current seat plus Regency- not ideal but the arithmetic is difficult in Brighton.

  31. MP-R- a perfect 10 in short.

  32. Nice work, Tory. I’d be reasonably happy with those boundaries if the commission proposes similar constituencies. I notice that you left out Slough. I presume that there would be no changes there? The outcome there would be in no doubt in any case.

  33. AKMD- no change at all in Slough.

  34. Thought not. Cheers for the clarification. Are you going to have another go at any other regions?

  35. I’ve already done the North West- see the corresponding regional page.

  36. West Sussex

    1. Crawley 74,325- current seat plus Copthorne

    2. East Grinstead 77,031- current Mid Sussex less Bolney which goes into Shoreham

    3. Horsham 77,819- current seat less Copthorne plus Cowfold from Arundel

    4. Shoreham 73,578- not dissimilar to 1974-1983 seat of that name- Shoreham, Lancing plus rural territory to their north which previously had been in Arundel (with one ward from Mid Sussex).

    5. Worthing 77,529- coterminous with the borough

    6. Arundel 75,059- centre of gravity shifts westwards and southwards and becomes more geographically compact. Loses north-western wards to Chichester and eastern wards to Shoreham. Gains Littlehampton from Bognor Regis.

    7. Bognor Regis- 71,639- loses Littlehampton to Arundel, gains coastal bits of Chichester.

    8. Chichester 71,569- loses coastal bits to Bognor Regis, gains wards around South Downs National Park from Arundel.


    Another challenging area, especially around the coast.

    1. North East Hampshire 78,155- current seat less Crookham which joins Aldershot plus Blackwater from Aldershot and Tadley from NW Hants.

    2. Aldershot 74,175- largely unchanged but see NE Hants.

    3. Basingstoke 78,026- unchanged.

    4. North West Hampshire 73,797- current seat less area around Tadley plus Harewood and Broughton which in my view fit better in this seat (specifically Andover) than in Romsey & North Soton.

    5. Winchester 74,301- some tinkering- expands eastwards taking on some wards from E Hants and Meon Valley- loses Chandler’s Ford to a new ‘Eastleigh & Romsey’ division.

    6. East Hampshire- 77,571- largely based on current seat- loses a bit of territory to Winchester but stretches south to take on Horndean and its environs from Meon Valley.

    7. Havant 71,820- tried tying with Waterlooville but the numbers don’t work so simply added on Rowlands Castle from Meon Valley which has been dismembered.

    8. Fareham & Waterlooville 75,748. Not an ideal seat but I can think of worse options. Consists of the two towns (or at any rate the core of Fareham) plus the intervening semi-rural wards. A more compact seat that you might have feared.

    9. Portsmouth North 73,736- current seat less Baffins plus the two Porchester wards from Fareham

    10. Portsmouth South 75,389- current seat plus Baffins

    11. Gosport 72,357- unchanged

    12. Hedge End & Hamble 77,810- a seat tying together the communities either side of the Hamble estuary. Therefore includes Hedge End, Hamble and the seemingly endless newbuild communities west of Fareham around Swanwick. I’m not thrilled about this seat but again I can think of worse.

    13. Southampton Itchen 74,822- current seat less Bargate which goes to Test plus Portswood from Test and Swaythling from Romsey. Little partisan effect- narrowly Con in 2015.

    14. Southampton Test- current seat less Portswood plus Bargate and Bassett from Romsey. Still Lab in 2015 but more narrowly majority c 2000.

    15. Eastleigh & Romsey 78,093- surprised this tie-up hasn’t been tried before- conmbines the two towns plus Bishopstoke and Chandler’s Ford. Would have been Con in 2015 but LDs would have been a pretty competitive 2nd.

    16. New Forest East 72,520- expands a little northwards taking Dun Valley and Blackwater from Romsey- loses Boldre to New Forest West

    17. New Forest West 71,289- takes on Boldre from New Forest East.

  38. Pretty sure the locals here would prefer the Mid Sussex name to continue rather than renaming Tory’s almost unchanged seat “East Grinstead”. As an historic county enthusiast he will presumably be aware that East Grinstead was historically in East Sussex….as indeed was most of the pre-1974 East Grinstead seat, most of which is now part of Wealden. Mid Sussex was created in 1974 and describes the geography of the seat better (EG is in the far north of the seat which reaches down quite close to Brighton).

  39. ‘As an historic county enthusiast he will presumably be aware that East Grinstead was historically in East Sussex….as indeed was most of the pre-1974 East Grinstead seat, most of which is now part of Wealden. ‘

    Indeed – the old East Grinstead seat is effectively what is called today Wealden – and the only similarity between the new proposed seat and the old seat of that name is the town of East Grinstead itself

    Given the seat would still contain Haywards Heath and Burgess Hill – which aren’t that much smaller than East Grinstead, Mid Sussex would seem a far more obvious gain

    Don’t ;like the prposed new Shoreham seat either

    The old 1983-97 Shoreham seat was a geograpical oddity, taking in not only Shoreham, Southwick and the other grotty seaside towns to the West of Brighton & Hove, but also coastal settlements to the West of Worthing like the bleak industrial town of Durrington, and the more genteel Goring.

    Although geographically nonsenical (Worthing was a doughnut within it) it did actually work

    I’m not sure I like mixing such places with the more quaint and rural areas that currently make up the eastern part Arundel & South Downs seat, and I’m not sure the electorates would either as such places are very very different (dilapidated coast and scenic, leafy countryside) and wouldn’t sit together easily

  40. Tim- not every seat can be purely coastal so you are always going to have the kinds of seats you dislike!

  41. MPR- re not crossing E Sussex and Kent- good luck with that!

  42. Of course not – but to my mind the current Shoreham and East Worthing works quite well, because it’s a collection of similar, Tory-voting small urban coastal towns, whereas bringing wards from Arundel and Mid Sussex completely changes the nature of it – because away from Brighton & Hove the Sussex coast couldn’t be more different that most of the rest of the county – which is largely rural/suburban, middle class and affluent.

    The Sussex coast is nothing like that so it makes sense to keep them separate and I agree with MPR that merging East and West Sussex makes far more sense than merging East Sussex with Kent

  43. I don’t disagree with that Max but the numbers are difficult.

  44. Tory, your Berkshire in not complete. You have not included Slough. There is one ward of Slough Borough currently in Windsor Constituency and another will have to be added as Slough is too big. Windsor has to be matched with the villages of Eton, Datchet and Wraysbury north of the Thames. Thus the addition of Maidenhead would make the seat too large.

    Around Reading, the wards north of the Thames, make a safe Labour seat of urban Reading difficult to draw, as it would be too large, hence the current East/West split.

    From Labour’s perspective – one safe seat in Reading at the expense of never being able to gain a third Berkshire seat makes their prospects of a national majority harder. This will be dilemma for the parties at the boundary changes. The sitting MP’s want safe seats, but to gain power opposition parties need to create marginal. In 1997, the Conservatives plight was worsened by the concentration of votes in safe seats and the construction of marginal seats. The pressure on Labour backbenchers this time will be to create safe seats, and leave more Conservative leaning marginal.


  45. @GT it is not possible to create a safe Labour seat in Reading. You could draw a seat consisting of the borough of Reading south of the Thames which would be Labour by ~1,500 (which isn’t exactly safe) however this would not be allowed as it isolates the 4 wards north of the Thames (Caversham, Mapledurham, Peppard, Thames) and forces them to be paired with parts of Oxfordshire when this is not at all necessary (Oxfordshire is a perfect fit for 6 seats, Berks is a perfect fit for 8). Therefore the most sensible ‘allowed’ urban Reading constituency would be the whole borough of Reading except the wards of Kentwood, Norcot and Tilehurst however this seat would still be notionally Tory by ~1,750.

  46. Reading is one of those (actually rather common places) where Labour does a lot better locally than they do nationally.

  47. “East Sussex and West Sussex are artificial constructs created by administrative jacobins in the 1970s”

    They are ancient divisions, and have had separate county councils since 1889. The only change in the 1970s was a realignment of the border.

  48. ‘They are ancient divisions, and have had separate county councils since 1889. The only change in the 1970s was a realignment of the border.’


    In what way was the border realigned in the 70s?

  49. ‘East Grinstead, Haywards Heath and Burgess Hill were in East Sussex prior to 1974.’

    In which case what seat were Haywards Heath and Burgess Hill in, prior to the creation of Mid-Sussex

    ‘Living in Sussex I thought you’d know more about the administrative tinkering with the county(ies) than others on here’

    I didn’t move to Sussex until 1984, and have never been aware that the county was divided between East and West prior to the whole-scale changes in the 70s

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)