Hackney North & Stoke Newington

2015 Result:
Conservative: 7341 (14.7%)
Labour: 31357 (62.9%)
Lib Dem: 2492 (5%)
Green: 7281 (14.6%)
UKIP: 1085 (2.2%)
Others: 327 (0.7%)
MAJORITY: 24016 (48.1%)

Category: Ultra-safe Labour seat

Geography: Greater London. Part of the Hackney council area.

Main population centres: Stoke Newington, Stamford Hill, Dalston, Clapton.

Profile: A highly cosmopolitian and multi ethnic seat covering Stoke Newington, Clapton and Hackney Downs. This seat has one of the ten highest proportions of black residents, a significant Muslim population and also one of the highest Jewish populations because of the densely packed ultra-orthodox Hassidic Jewish community around Stamford Hill, one of the pockets of strength of the Conservative party in the seat, at least at local elections. Stamford Hill aside this is a Labour seat, there are the beginnings of gentrification and private house prices are rocketing, but this is mostly a seat of council and social housing, of estates, tower blocks, deprivation, high crime and drug problems.

Politics: Unsurprisingly this is a solid Labour seat and Diane Abbott increased her already healthy majority in 2015, pushing it to almost fifty percent.


Current MP
DIANE ABBOTT (Labour) Born 1953, Paddington. Educated at Harrow County Grammar School and Cambridge University. Former television researcher and press officer. Westminster councillor 1982-1986. First elected as MP for Hackney North and Stoke Newington in 1987. Shadow minister for public health until 2013. Shadow internationla development secretary since 2015. She is a left winger and prior to joining the frontbench was a regular rebel against the Labour whip, opposing Iraq, foundation hospitals, top-up fees and 90 day detention - she also branched out into television and regularly appeared on the BBC`s week politics show This Week in a double act with Michael Portillo. In 2010 she contested the Labour leadership, finishing last.
Past Results
2010
Con: 6759 (15%)
Lab: 25553 (55%)
LDem: 11092 (24%)
GRN: 2133 (5%)
Oth: 924 (2%)
MAJ: 14461 (31%)
2005*
Con: 4218 (14%)
Lab: 14268 (49%)
LDem: 6841 (23%)
GRN: 2907 (10%)
Oth: 1146 (4%)
MAJ: 7427 (25%)
2001
Con: 4430 (15%)
Lab: 18081 (61%)
LDem: 4170 (14%)
GRN: 2184 (7%)
Oth: 756 (3%)
MAJ: 13651 (46%)
1997
Con: 5483 (17%)
Lab: 21110 (64%)
LDem: 3806 (12%)
Oth: 1909 (6%)
MAJ: 15627 (48%)

*There were boundary changes after 2005

Demographics
2015 Candidates
AMY GRAY (Conservative) Educated at Oxford University. Government affairs manager.
DIANE ABBOTT (Labour) See above.
SIMON DE DENEY (Liberal Democrat)
KEITH FRASER (UKIP)
HEATHER FINLAY (Green)
JONATHAN SILBERMAN (Communist League)
JON HOMAN (Animal Welfare)
Links
Comments - 394 Responses on “Hackney North & Stoke Newington”
  1. Turnout here last night was apparently 146%

  2. Diane Abbot’s mysterious resignation as Shadow Home Secretary on the eve of polling day is revealed – she has been diagnosed with diabetes.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-40268505

    Apparently she has had the condition for two years. She has type 2, which is the more common form and tends to be associated with diet and obesity, whereas Theresa May has type 1, which is genetic. I can certainly see why they wanted to keep this a secret, particularly during her stint as Shadow Health Sec.

  3. Stat of the day: Diane Abbot receives ten times more abusive messages than any other MP. In the six months leading up to the election, she received 45% of all abuse aimed at female MPs.

    http://www.newstatesman.com/2017/09/we-tracked-25688-abusive-tweets-sent-women-mps-half-were-directed-diane-abbott

  4. It does seem that female MPs receive far more abuse than male ones. Especially female MPs who belong to ethnic minorities.

  5. One caveat about this study – it was conducted basically by searching for key slurs in a very large number of tweets. It just happens that there are more derogatory terms available for women, LGBT people and ethnic minorities than there are for straight white males (eg there is no male equivalent of “slut” – promiscuous men are “studs” or “players” but these words have desirable connotations). So it may be partly a measure of the state of the English language in 2017. (Then again, you could argue that the very fact that English has evolved this way demonstrates the Orwellian concept of newspeak, that language has developed to perpetuate certain kinds of bigotry. It’s a chicken & egg scenario.)

  6. It’s a tough one. I personally think that Abbott is a pretty useless MP, and is hopelessly overpromoted. She invites criticism, irrespective of her gender and race. But it is definitely apparent (particularly in the comments sections of certain newspapers, and on YouTube etc) that much of the criticism of her is horribly nasty and racist.

    There does seem to be something about Abbott personally that many people seem to take offence to. Let’s say that Oona King doesn’t lose her seat in 2005 and is still an MP today. There’s no way that she would be receiving the same level of vitriolic abuse that Abbott receives.

  7. She is definitely rather useless, but is locally popular and doesn’t deserve the nasty abuse directed at her. There is a big difference between criticising someone’s work, and attacking them personally.

  8. The thing is, that she uses her abuse victim status to shield herself from legitimate political criticism. The losers who send her rape threats are probably helping her politically.

  9. I disagree. I don’t think to much of Abbott as a politician but i dont believe this whole argument that its the victims fault. The genuine critcisms of abbott i agree with are clouded by the vile comments made not by abbott hiding behind them.

  10. I think Abbott does herself no favours because of her occasional veiled racist rant…

    She’s nowhere near as bad as Yasmin Alibhai Brown, who is frankly disgusting.

  11. I’m sorry no. Racism is inexcusable. Its unacceptable to attack someone personally regardless of what hateful views they hold.

  12. I agree. I’m anything but an Abbott fan, yet racism is not what we need in politics, regardless of the person to whom it is directed. It poisons the social atmosphere and steps outwith the bounds of acceptable personal attacks.

  13. A spokesperson for Diane Abbott has claimed that she was treated unfairly on last nights Question Time, and that her mistreatment was tantamount to racism.

    I am no fan of Abbott at all…indeed, I think I have stated on this board that I think she is one of the least talented high.profile politicians we have in Britain. That said- and I only watched about 10 minutes- I did find the atmosphere rather sour and she was interrupted a lot. It didn’t help that she was sitting next to the frankly horrible Isabel Oakeshott.

  14. I actually changed channel a couple of times last night when Abbott was responding to more than one question as it was Fri he worthy and I just ended feeling sorry for her against what was a fairly ‘ugly’ audience which you often get in these from post industrial Brexit towns like Derby, Wakefield and Grimsby

    She did herself no favours whatsoever and one wonders why she and her party agree for her to come onto such shows but she was always going to cone unstuck against oakeshott one of the more coherent spokespeople for the far Right

  15. I think most stats on abuse female MPs by party face on social media often doesn’t include Diane Abbott because it skews the data. The fact that one female MP experiences so much abuse that to include it in a data set would reduce the rest of the data to such a small share of the abuse, its just horrifying.

    People hate her in a way I just can’t understand. They are physically repulsed by this woman in a way that is beyond me. It gets normalised as if that should be how you feel when you see her. People look at her as if she isn’t human. I wonder if Isobel Oakshott thinks about these things before making a spectacle of her. From what I understand Isobel suffers from depression and anxiety so maybe she does think about it. But does that it worse

  16. ‘From what I understand Isobel suffers from depression and anxiety so maybe she does think about it’.
    I didn’t actually know that Matt but it does explain a lot. She is permanently angry,sour and petulant, despite having won life’s lottery handsomely (white, blonde, heterosexual,intelligent, attractive).

    Tim- I’d agree that she is more coherent than the likes of Hopkins, but she made a few statements last night which were just ppain wrong (factually). Surprising really.

  17. I suffer from depression, but it doesn’t make me angry, sour and petulant. I guess different people are affected in different ways, though I suspect part of what has happened is a kind of reverse method acting, where being mean-spirited in a professional capacity has leaked into her personal character.

  18. Prior the whole Brexit debate I remember Oakeshott as a sensible respected mainstream centre right political journalist so her conversion to the james goodard mentality she adopts now is striking

    Whether she suffers from depression or not is immaterial to the fact that she is currently the most coherent PR person the hard Right have so sadly I think we’ll be seeing and hearing much more from her

  19. Isabel Hardman (of the Spectator) suffers from depression but I can’t find any mention of Isabel Oakeshott suffering from depression.

  20. I’m on the Left and respect Abbott, but I think to complain about her treatment on QT is rather silly. A view that the Lab party are behind in the polls, contradicting her, surely can’t be bullying.

    She is the Shadow Home Secretary and must expect to be taken on, contradicted, chastised on national TV – even though she receives horrible treatment in other arenas.

  21. I think the point is that a panellist said something which wasn’t true and instead of contradicting Isobel Oakshott, Fiona Bruce supported the lie. Fiona Bruce doesn’t study polls as much as me so I’m not gonna attack her for being wrong but often Dimbleby used correct people when the fact checkers on the otherside of the feed told him they were wrong

  22. I agree with Matt. Oakeshott said (directing at Abbott) that Labour are ‘miles behind in the polls’…a ludicrous exaggeration. Abbott started to respond that Lab were pretty much ‘neck and neck’ (a summation that is far more accurate) before Bruce very swiftly interjected with ‘you’re behind, Diane’. I would expect Bruce to do better at getting her facts right in the future. That said, Abbott’s performance was poor so she also needs to shape up.

  23. Since 9oct the polls show* – (23polls)
    CON LEAD 14
    LAB LEAD 4
    TIE 5

    So surely quite reasonable to say – with regard to Labour in the polls: “you’re behind”….?

    *see ‘latest voting intention’ page

  24. Deepthroat: there does seem to be a little bit of a discrepancy between YouGov and the other pollsters, though. YouGov at the moment tend to give the Tories leads compared to the others, quite noticeably so. I’m not saying that YouGov are wrong, much less accusing them of deliberate bias, but the fact that the Tories have had more leads recently is largely down to the fact that YouGov produce polls more frequently than anyone else.

  25. A good point – yougov have done 10 out of the 23 polls I refer to above. All give a CON lead.

  26. The polling average for January is Lab 37.8% Con 37.7%. That is almost certainly not defo behind.

  27. Labour might have been 1-3% behind bit the 6+% seem like outliers.

    But when Javid or Boris faces Corbyn at the next election I expect the Tories to win by 6% and a smallish majority a la 2015.

  28. The last Corbyn vs Boris and Corbyn vs Jarvid was Lab 40 Con 40 and Lab 40 Con 29 respectively

  29. Last 24 polls…since 8 Nov
    12 CON
    11 LAB

  30. And the polling average for January, so far, is Lab 37.8% Con 37.7%. 

  31. Right. I’m glad we’ve all acknowledged that Ms Oakeshott was wrong.

  32. Question Time is like an elderly terminally ill animal writhing in agony at the vets, begging to be put out of its misery. Now they have found a new host who is as irritating, shouty, prone to interruptions and lightweight as most of the panellists, it’s the final straw for me. The staged whooping of the audience doesn’t come over well either.

    When will Diane Abbot learn that whining about racism every time she’s asked a difficult question is playing right into the hands of her opponents.

  33. It wasn’t even as if she was asked a difficult question. A member of the panel either wilful or ill in formed said something untrue and the presenter equally ill informed supported it.

  34. That’s my point. The panellists alleging the Tories were miles ahead in the polls were clearly in the wrong and this should be pointed out. I just don’t see any need to allege a racial angle to everything, which causes many people to tune Abbott out even when she’s right about something.

  35. I do agree with HH…the constant looking for the race angle with Abbott is boring, and she is basically crap at her job. That said, it’s a difficult one to handle as there clearly are people who plainly despise Abbott because she is black (add in the fact that she’s female, a leftie and pro Brexit, and you’ve got everything Big Dave from Derby hates in human form).

    I follow tennis quite a bit, and Abbott still has quite a way to go before she matches Serena Williams in the ‘poor little me’ act. It’s vomit inducing.

  36. Correction…I should’ve said that Abbott is a Remainer, not pro Brexit.

  37. Totally agree with HH and Tristan – Abbott has a track record of performing horrendously whenever publicly questioned and last week’s Question Time was just another case in point

    The Tories are – or at least were on Thursday – marginally ahead so trying to portray Bruce as some sort of Tory stooge is nothing but sour grapes

    And whilst it’s ridiculous to portray all Brexit voters as bighotedx thick racists, every bigoted thick racist did vote leave

  38. The Tories weren’t marginally ahead last Thursday. YouGov were the only poll in January to show a Tory lead as of last Thursday but no Fiona Bruce is not a tory stooge just not very good at her job.

  39. You’re right, they were 6% ahead.

    I’m always amused at some media, esp IPSO complaints. Some appear to believe if enough complain it makes their false belief true. When it’s usually simply a fact they didn’t like.

  40. ‘labour are behind in the polls…6 points behind…definitely behind’

    They are not facts. The facts are:

    Average polling Labour is ahead
    One pollster had Labour 6 points behind

  41. I knew Lancs would chime in with more misinformation.

    I suppose Lancs and Oakeshott aren’t interested in the numerous polls that have consistently put Remain ahead of Leave in recent months.

  42. I have to say Tristan I’m less than convinced by the polls which currently have Remain ahead of Leave. There’s a big, often under-estimated ‘the country voted Brexit so let’s get on with it sentiment amongst former Remain voters and whilst I’d expect this to be counter balanced by former Leave voters who know think better of it, I always thought Remain would shade it in the initial vote.

    The public got us is this mess and it’s naiive imo to expect them to help get us out of it

  43. Tim- I totally agree with you. My point was more that people like to crow about polls they agree with- unsurprisingly. I certainly wasn’t advocating for a second referendum or putting any great stock in the recent Brexit polls.

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)