2015 Result:
Conservative: 30802 (57.1%)
Labour: 6534 (12.1%)
Lib Dem: 8354 (15.5%)
Green: 2558 (4.7%)
UKIP: 4774 (8.8%)
Others: 964 (1.8%)
MAJORITY: 22448 (41.6%)

Category: Safe Conservative seat

Geography: South East, Surrey.

Main population centres:



Current MP
ANNE MILTON (Conservative) Born 1955. Educated at Haywards Heath Grammar School and St Barts Hospital, London. Former NHS nurse. Reigate councillor 1999-2004. First elected as MP for Guildford in 2005. Shadow Minister for Tourism 2006-07, Shadow Health minister 2007-10. Under-Secretary of State for Public Health 2010-12. Government Whip since 2012, Deputy Chief Whip since 2015.
Past Results
Con: 29618 (53%)
Lab: 2812 (5%)
LDem: 21836 (39%)
UKIP: 1021 (2%)
Oth: 280 (1%)
MAJ: 7782 (14%)
Con: 22595 (44%)
Lab: 5054 (10%)
LDem: 22248 (43%)
GRN: 811 (2%)
Oth: 923 (2%)
MAJ: 347 (1%)
Con: 19820 (41%)
Lab: 6558 (14%)
LDem: 20358 (43%)
UKIP: 736 (2%)
Oth: 370 (1%)
MAJ: 538 (1%)
Con: 24230 (43%)
Lab: 9945 (17%)
LDem: 19439 (34%)
Oth: 694 (1%)
MAJ: 4791 (8%)

*There were boundary changes after 2005

2015 Candidates
ANNE MILTON (Conservative) See above.
RICHARD WILSON (Labour) Airline pilot.
KELLY-MARIE BLUNDELL (Liberal Democrat) Educated at Highworth Grammar School and Kent University. Fundraising manager.
HARRY ALDRIDGE (UKIP) Educated at Hurstpierpoint College. Entrepreneur. Contested Horsham 2010.
JOHN MORRIS (Peace) Born 1938, London. Contested Guildford 1997, 2001, 2005, 2010, South East region 2009, 2014 European elections.
SUSAN PARKER (Guildford Greenbelt)
Comments - 114 Responses on “Guildford”
  1. There will be no Conservative candidate in the Shalford division in the Surrey county council elections on May 2nd due to an error with nomination papers. The candidates are LD, Lab, UKIP.

  2. That is an absolute outrage. A 1500 Tory majority now lost …although on the plus side, probably to UKIP, because of local incompetance.
    Its about time we had a major reform of electoral law in this country. I don’t mean the voting system, but rather the nomination process. At present it is way too complicated and is often in the gift of local returning officers staff.

    In some boroughs, staff help to ensure that nomination papers are correct before filing them.
    But in others they simply take them, give no indication of anything being wrong-even if they know there is-and then the nomination is rejected when it is too late to do anything about it.

  3. My prediction for 2015:

    Con – 54
    LD – 30
    Lab – 9
    UKIP – 7

  4. Agreed- it’ll be like the David Howell days all over again. All we need is an early declaration on results night!

  5. How early was Guildford’s declaration in 2010? I don’t remember it being one of the earliest, unlike all the televised elections before 1997.

  6. I think Guildford was Conservative 55-33 in 1983,1987, and 1992- very static indeed.

  7. Hemmelig- no I was referring to the Howell years there, with regards to the early declarations.

  8. I don’t remember the Guildford declaration in 2010. Was it even televised?

  9. I wonder why Guildford, Cheltenham and Torbay have all lost their position as the earliest declarations.

    Maybe it’s because turnout in safe Labour seats is so much lower nowadays.

  10. I was watching election 1983 last night, and even checked this page. I began to muse about how in that era Sunderland wasn’t even a feature (I remember it sneaked up on Torbay in ’92 out of the blue and stayed that way ever since.)

    I always did like the race to declare, I guess it adds a little colour to the first dull hour or so of the election.

    I suppose Torbay pulled out of the race because of multiple recounts in ’97.

  11. Guildford wasn’t shown in 1997, 2001 or 2010. It was shown in 2005 when Gavin Esler was the BBC reporter at the count.

    Nick St Aubyn must be one of the most obscure Tory MPs of all time as member for the seat from 1997 to 2001. A bit embarrassing for him to lose such a previously safe Tory seat in 2001.

  12. Guildford did come through fairly early in 2010 but not as early as 1992 or earlier.
    I have seen a declaration of it after the event but you’re it did not appear on national TV overnight.

    h ttp://

  13. Additional points

    I’m not sure declaration time is always related to turnout.
    Torbay declared early in 1979 aswell – when it was a mamouth seat covering the whole district to the south aswell.
    I think some areas just arrange it differently in other ways or must simply employ more counters.
    (Ex) Mining seats seem to be rather slow counting

  14. The reason some seats have slipped down the league is that from 1997-2005 they’ve had county council votes to separate. 2010 was the first time the mets coincided and some of them really seemed to struggle, particularly London boroughs.

  15. Yes that’s an excellent point which I didn’t think of.

    Although 1979 coincided with district council elections and still Guildford, Torbay and Cheltenham were first to declare.

    2015 will most likely coincide with the major round of non-met district elections.

  16. In 1979 they were also putting the council and general election ballots in the same boxes so had more separation. Guildford must have just continued to try to be first but couldn’t or didn’t try to from 1997 although as I said it was relatively quick in 2010. In 1979 two regions had no local elections and reported first in many seats, scotland and london , at the opposite ends of the swing picture, requiring more from elsewhere for things to settle down

  17. Guildford of course was an exceptionally close result in both 2001 and 2005, which must have affected the speed of the result.

    In 2015 I wonder if councils will be trying to push many counts over to Friday, as they tried to in 2010. In the age of austerity it might be hard to save the traditional general election night.

  18. I really hope they are thwarted, as for me nothing beats the thrill of the results coming in during the night – and having worked at the Hounslow counts in the last two GEs it’s a real buzz on the night.

    I do wonder though whether some of the problems are linked to the people counting rather than the processes themselves – at the 2010 count my table was lumbered with people who frankly should not have been there. Totally incompetent (my partner and I ended up having to recount everything they did as their numbers never added up) and taking the whole process as something of a joke.

    It doesn’t help also that the numbers who seem to not know how to put a “X” in a box has increased substantially, leading to many more papers being put aside for consideration by the candidates.

  19. In the old days there were lots of clerks working in local authorities who were highly experienced at manually counting and processing bits of paper to a high degree of accuracy.

    In today’s world of mass computerisation of all tasks and dare I say it dumbed down educational standards, that’s no longer true, certainly not at the lower levels anyway.

    Sooner or later the change away from paper ballots and old-fashioned manual counting will be inevitable.

  20. Again it would be a crying shame.

    Mind, I’ve worked in front of a computer my whole working life and I’m still able to count votes effectively – but the incompetent ones were somewhat younger. That shouldn’t be a bar to effective working – my first count was in the 1998 Locals and London Mayor/Assembly referendum when I was a couple of weeks shy of 21, and I grasped it immediately and did a good job.

    It might, sadly, be a generational thing instead…

  21. The difference today is that kids have mass access to computers in lessons and don’t learn mental arithmetic to the same degree.

  22. Over night counting is not, however, something that always used to exist before.
    In 1979 about 510 seats counted over night (before about 7am) and this was considerably up on many of the elections before.

  23. Having previously worked as a counter in Wakefield, I can tell you that from what I witnessed, most tables seemed to be fairly efficient with the sorting and counting.

    It was the form filling by the table / section supervisors, the apparent double-checking, waiting for the candidates to gather, and waiting for the results to actually be declared which I found frustrating.

  24. UKIP did indeed win the Shalford division:

    UKIP: 1,411 (51%)
    LD: 1,023 (37%)
    Lab: 347 (12%)

  25. @H. Hemelig

    “The difference today is that kids have mass access to computers in lessons and don’t learn mental arithmetic to the same degree.”

    I’m totally baffled by that comment.

    Obviously it is possible to access the calculator function on a computer if you are unable to work out the answer to (say) 7 X 6.

    Do you think that it what actually happens in schools?

  26. Also….

    To what age would you expect children to learn ………………..’counting’?

  27. Shalford was a cock up.
    But I’d rather it went to UKIP rather than the Lib Dems.

  28. Kelly-Marie Blundell has been selected for the LDs. She unsuccessfully contested Guildford South-East in the local elections this year:

  29. Thanks to the Tory nomination cock up, UKIP polled their fifth highest share of the vote in Shalford out of 2,208 divisions/wards being contested.

    UKIP share of vote in local elections ranked by division/ward:

  30. At least it didn’t go LD.
    10 years ago – it would have done.

  31. Something interesting I noticed in that spreadsheet is that UKIP received at least 15% of the vote in 90.48% of the divisions/wards they were contesting: 1,511 out of 1,670 divisions/wards. That’s maybe a bit surprising given what we already know, which is that UKIP polled 20% overall and 24% in the divisions they contested.

  32. Kelley-Marie Blundell has been selected as the Lib Dem candidate.

  33. Lab selection: Richard Wilson.

  34. Not Richard Wilson of one foot in the grave? If so I fear his prospects are of similar vein to that of his best known TV show!

  35. Richard Wilson is indeed a strong Labour supporter but it isn’t THAT Richard Wilson.

  36. Can’t see anything other than a Conservative hold here. Might be a spike in the UKIP vote which reduces Anne Milton’s majority a bit though.

  37. I think Miltons majority will increase even if UKIP poll strongly. Guildford has a number of deprived council estates that have been naturally Labour but have voted Lib Dem in recent years. The shift of these areas back to their natural home would see the 2nd place Lib Dems fall by more than the Conservatives (if the Tory vote falls at all).

    Like most constituencies of this type…the most Conservative areas are the outer villages. The only exception is Cranleigh (a town that is part of Waverley BC) where the Lib Dems are stronger.

  38. I’m surprised to read that there are a number of deprived council estates. There are obviously council estates because it’s quite a big town but a number of deprived? Perhaps just one?

  39. The western outer portion of Guildford is fairly deprived but not exactly grindingly poor. I think the Labour Party campaigned quite hard in those areas in the CC elections this year – there was a Labour county councillor for many years there – and didn’t really get very far. I would be surprised to see a very large-scale Labour recovery but I can’t see Anne Milton losing either.

  40. I kind of know a Richard Wilson who lives in Guildford and fleetingly thought the Labour candidate might be him….it isn’t however, indeed it would be very surprising for an oil & gas executive to be a Labour candidate. I think Richard Wilson is quite a common name.

    This is a very uninteresting seat for us to be discussing, it’s quite plain that Labour have the potential to go up to 10-15% taken straight off the Lib Dems, it will be an easy Tory hold perhaps with a slightly higher majority.

  41. Prediction for 2015-
    Conservative- 54%
    Liberal Democrat- 33%
    Labour- 9%
    UKIP- 3%
    Others- 1%

  42. What is the definition of deprived here? If it was that dire one would have thought that the Labour vote would have been a lot higher…. were there any other constituencies that saw Labour fall by 50% between 2005 and 2010?

    why isn’t UKIP a factor here in the various estimations of 2015 results…? at 1.8% it was extraordinarily low in 2010… in the 2011 council elections they only fielded 5 candidates in 22 wards… they have become more organised in the area since then…they beat Labour’s vote in 8 of the ten CC seats in the May 2013 election..and even won one..

    Labour taking votes off the LibDems here is somewhat laughable.. (though the Libdems are looking somewhat battered).. it seems like UKIP might score 10% here and it seems to be coming from the Tories and Labour..

  43. I doubt very much that “deprivation” in Guildford is anything like what most people would usually associate with that term. Indeed, the word is overused even in connection to inner city areas IMO.

  44. The 3% unemployment number in the stats section (not sure when that dates from) would seem to belie abject poverty as an issue here….

  45. “Labour taking votes off the LibDems here is somewhat laughable..”


    We have been discussing about several similar seats which the Lib Dems have lost and look unlikely to be able to regain (Richmond Park perhaps the best example).

    It is obvious that the Lib Dems are unable to beat the Tories there and here now even with almost all Labour supporters tactically voting for them. So in the end why will Labour voters bother to vote tactically in this kind of seat? They might as well vote for their first choice because the Tories are too strong to be beaten by tactical voting.

    In other seats where the Lib Dems have remained in closer contention it will obviously be a different story.

    I’m puzzled why you think UKIP will get 10% here, to me this is not the kind of seat they’ll do all that well in, though even if they do I doubt it will lead to a Tory defeat.

  46. did you look at the CC results? They surprised me too… they were very disorganised and not standing in many seats in 2011 and they have surged. Obviously something has changed…

    UKIP squashed Labour here in the CC results

  47. We can perhaps agree then that Labour might not advance much if UKIP do well. That is a fair conclusion I think. The Lib Dems seem to have a strong historical base here in the low 30s so I would not expect them to fall lower than that.

    Perhaps something like Con 50, LD 34, Lab 9, UKIP 7
    (if you’re right that UKIP do quite well nationally)

  48. You are very generous to the Conservatives here.. you are implying virtually no swing against (ex-UKIP) and signalling that the UKIP increase is coming out of the LibDems… which doesn’t make sense…. the LDs are the least likely contributor to UKIP improvement..

    I don;t have any intell on Ann Milton, whether she is good bad or indifferent.. she seems to have failed the ministerial test though..

  49. Alternatively some Lib Dems could move to Labour and some old Labour voters to UKIP.

    I personally don’t think the Tories will be down nationally by more than 2% points.

  50. The public health brief has changed hands quite a bit in this Parliamentary term. Would’ve thought Anne Milton being a nurse puts her in a better position to be a minister in that department. Went to Anna Soubry (she said something about it being a “girly” job last year, which is sort of true given that public health has gone to female MPs overwhelmingly) and now it’s Jane Ellison.

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)